Club Troppo

It was a sign of things to come perhaps. As the All Blacks performed their pre-match war dance with its stamping, grunting, eye-bulging and tongue lolling, the camera cut away to a shot of Australia’s Radike Samo. His face shiny with perspiration, was framed by a ‘do that looked at that moment like a fright wig or the result of an unusually positioned Van De Graaff generator. The effect, to say the least, was comical. At the Pub I was in, the crowd burst into laughter. It was a bad omen for the Wallabies, and no-one in the Pub even attempted a chorus of Aussie Aussie Oi Oi Oi to counteract the bad mojo. It was a lost cause.

It’s been a problem for years. What to do about the Haka. Countering strategies have been tried. The turning of the back, or the Campese gambit, but this is often condemned as unsportsmanlike, and that’s not an accusation that at least we Aussies are willing to wear.

(Continued)

I grew up playing rugby union and rugby league in northern beaches Sydney.  But you couldn’t call rugby (union) Australia’s national game, especially after tonight’s depressing tryless loss by the Wallabies to Ireland.  A top class rugby game exhibits all the skills, as we saw in the last Bledisloe Cup fixture where Australia actually beat the ABs.  But the current rules of rugby mean that the majority of games are boring, grinding affairs fascinating only to boofhead afficionadoes (any suggestion that I’m thinking of Chris Sheil is emphatically if unconvincingly denied).  Moreover, in Australia at least, rugby is an elitist game for private school self-appointed toffs, whose administrators made little or no effort to broaden the game’s appeal in the wake of previous lucrative World Cup successes.

Soccer doesn’t cut the mustard either, despite having far more players at junior level than any other code.  At senior level it still doesn’t seem to have severed the noxious ethnic allegiances that have always blighted the code.  And a sport that thinks it’s a great idea to pin its fortunes to the signing of a geriatric  self-obsessed superstar like Harry Kewell has truly lost its way, even leaving aside the sleaze and dodginess of the Frank Lowy-inspired dual World Cup bid dissected in last week’s Four Corners program.  Moreover, at international level most soccer games exhibit all the excitement, tension and blood and guts of a chess game (no offence Nicholas).  The most exciting thing about most soccer games is judging which player pulled off the most convincing if spurious Dying Swan Act in or near the penalty box.

For Australians at least, the award for most truly national footie code comes down to a contest between rugby league and Australian Rules, and this weekend’s sudden death finals highlight just how close that contest really is.  In rugby league,  last night’s match where the NZ Warriors overhauled Benji Marshall’s Wests Tigers with a fluky try with only a couple of minutes to go, and then tonight’s game where retiring superstar Darren Lockyer won the game for Brisbane against last year’s premiers St George Illawarra with a wobbly field goal in extra time, both showed NRL at its best.

On the other hand, in AFL Sydney Swans left their run too late against Hawthorn last night and then, when it seemed a crippled Adam Goodes might nevertheless conjure a miracle, an equally crippled Buddy Franklin saved the Hawks’ feathers at least for another week.  In a sense, tonight’s sudden death final was almost a carbon copy, with the Weagles looking like relatively comfortable winners for most of the night until a late surge from Carlton got them within three points at the death.

You can make a plausible case that the makeup of the final four makes NRL more truly national (deeming New Zealand to be part of greater Oz – which may be the least depressing way to look at the rugby World Cup after tonight’s game).   The Weagles is the only non-Melbourne club left in the Aussie Rules finals race.  By contrast,  Brisbane, NZ Warriors and Melbourne Storm are all still in the NRL contest with Manly Sea Eagles the sole contender holding up Sydney’s honour as the home of rugby league.  Will the rest of Sydney swing in behind the team once known as the “Silvertails” until they spent all their cash reserves loyally fighting to save rugby league from the Murdoch Anti-Christ?  Don’t count on it.

Despite growing up with the rugby codes, I can’t help concluding after an intensive weekend of footie watching that Aussie Rules is a better game to watch than rugby league, with a wider range of skills regularly on display. Even so, I’ll be watching the remaining finals in both codes with equal fascination, and hoping against hope that the Wallabies stop reading their own publicity and start playing consistently to their potential.  Go Manly! Go Geelong!  Go Wallabies!

A few weeks ago, on the 30th of Sept to be precise, I gave a speech to ‘science leaders’ in CSIRO. Science leaders are early mid career scientists from around the world whom CSIRO have recruited. As the speech explains, Jim Peacock, the Chief Scientist whom I met when on the Innovation Review asked me to speak. I sent this to Don Arthur, who enjoyed it, so I thought I’d post it for those who might like to read it on Troppo.

I must confess to some trepidation as I stand before you.

Ive never thought of myself as an after dinner speaker. But there I was working away I was going to say innocently working away but some people who know me might find that unconvincing.

Anyway, at that point, the nations Chief Scientist rang.

He said that hed come to think of my contributions to the Innovation Review where we both sat as members as so witty that he thought that if I turned up here tonight everyone could have a good laugh.

I note he didnt say witty and wise, but then thats just as well as it halves the level of performance anxiety I might otherwise feel.

Now naturally enough, those on the Innovation Panel regard a gentle request from the Chief Scientist in the same way that members of the US Military regard a gentle request from the Commander in Chief. So I accepted his kind invitation.

Anyway, immediately I got off the phone the saying that came to my fevered and terrified mind was the one attributed to Abraham Lincoln. You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time (I think in these circumstances thats a reference to the Chief Scientist), but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

On thinking about that I nearly rang back and cancelled, but then I realised, that from what the Chief Scientist had said, all I really needed to do was fool all of the people in this room for fifteen minutes or so.

So here I go. Please dont refrain from having a few more drinks as I speak. A couple of minutes already gone! (Continued)

What a lot of nonsense has been talked about the defection to French rugby of rugby league star Bobby Sue Billy Jo Sonny Bill Williams! 

First, the NRL isn’t going to succeed in getting an injunction to restrain Sonny Bill’s defection, still less get a French court to enforce it.  Injunctions generally aren’t granted to enforce contracts of personal service (employment contracts) nor where money damages would be an adequate remedy (as they certainly would be here).

Nor is Sonny Bill likely to be able to successfully challenge the NRL salary cap system.  It’s just an empty threat. ¹1. KP: What is really in prospect, despite all the hot air, is a common law damages action for breach of contract by Sonny Bill.  Canterbury Bulldogs will certainly win, but Sonny Bill presumably calculates that he stands to make much more in France even after subtracting the damages and costs Canterbury will certainly get awarded.  Once everyone gets their legal advice to that effect, the dispute will probably settle before trial.  [↩]  First, the Trade Practice Act isn’t available because its relevant competition/restrictive practices provisions don’t cover “contracts of service” or employment contracts (as opposed to “contracts for services” or independent contractor arrangements).  Common law action seeking a declaration that the salary cap is an unreasonable restraint of trade is slightly more likely.  Way back in 1971 Balmain player Dennis Tutty successfully challenged the then RL transfer fee system on that basis, while more recently Penrith player Phil Adamson successfully challenged the then internal draft system in 1991, and in other sports various courts have ruled that zoning and residential rules, and restrictions on transfers within a league and between leagues  were all unreasonable restraints of trade.  

(Continued)

Robbie Deans’ tweaked team lineup for the upcoming second rugby test against France seems pretty sound to me.  Neither speedster Lachie Turner for the injured Tuqiri nor Stephen Hoiles for Wycliff Palu will weaken the team, and Turner might even add desirable speed on the flank instead of Tuqiri’s power.

The unforced changes seem equally solid choices.  Adam Ashley-Cooper will add some Latham-style power at fullback.  Cameron Shepherd didn’t impress last week, although Ashley-Cooper’s past line-kicking performances have sometimes been just as ordinary as a couple of Shepherd’s efforts against France.  Phil Waugh certainly deserves a place in the starting lineup with George Smith off the bench.

However I’d like to see a slightly more adventurous approach.  Berrick Barnes was a plodder in rugby league and he’s not much better in union.  It’s time he was dropped in favour of the exciting Timana Tahu, who by contrast was a champion in league and has been going great guns for Australia A since returning from injury.  I predict Tahu will be our most successful league convert if they’d only give him a go in the top team.  What a potent backline we’d have with Giteau at 5/8, the power of Mortlock and Tahu in the centres and speedsters Hynes and Turner on the wings!

But I’m seriously unconvinced that Luke Burgess is the answer to Australia’s halfback problems.  He certainly made a couple of good runs last week, but his service to the backs was every bit as slow as Gregan in his waning years and inaccurate to boot.  The problem is that neither of the obvious alternatives, Sam Cordingley or Brett Sheehan, inspires much confidence either.  Both are ageing and fairly undistinguished journeymen, but I nevertheless think one of them should be considered if Burgess’s passing game doesn’t improve in the next test against France.  Our inside backs will get massacred by either the All Blacks or Springboks with that sort of service.

For rugby fans who’ve been watching with increasingly frustrated bemusement Ewen McKenzie’s bizarre coaching of the NSW Waratahs to play stereotypical 10 man rugby despite boasting one of the most potent backlines in the Super 14 and despite the fact that the Crusaders and even the Western Force provide clear examples that this just isn’t a sensible strategy under Stellenbosch rules, here’s a question:

Has there been any ex-prop or hooker in the modern era who hasn’t been a complete bonehead as a coach?  I can think of one some years ago in Tony “Slaggy” Miller, but how about since the advent of the World Cup and Super 12/14? 

Sadly, the most unpredictable of World Cup tournaments has come down to a damp final between the world’s two most widely disliked teams. Apart from all its cultural baggage, England is disliked because it specialises in the grimmest of rugby spectacles, the 10-man game of territory and goal kicks. South Africa is disliked for its rough-house approach to the game, for a take-no-prisoners attitude to the rules and the violent boundaries of the contest.

Still, as the discussion has turned toward all week, the Springboks are an all-round rugby team, embodying attacking prowess, along with forward strength and a kicking game. Thus, the Springboks enter the 2007 final finding themselves in the unaccustomed position of being the crowd favourites among fans worldwide.

The implicit challenge for both teams is to provide an exhibition of rugby that proves them worthy of the title of world champion. Oh yes, the winner will have legal rights, but will this convince anyone? Will anyone really accept that a grim, percentage England victory will entitle the Poms to anything but technical bragging rights? Can anyone seriously believe that England has a better rugby team than the All Blacks?

England has a better chance of winning the game than it does of convincing people that it warrants the crown that comes with the territory. On what we’ve seen so far, only South Africa can save the credibility of the World Cup. On form, the Springboks should win. For the good of the game, they must win.

Update: With a 15-6 victory, South Africa has lifted the William Webb Ellis Trophy to claim the 2007 Rugby World Cup. Congratulations to the Springboks. Bugger you Crazy Eddie. Thanks referees, linesmen and ballboys. Bring on the Tri-Nations!

In some ways, watching rugby on television is more enjoyable than the live experience. At half-time these days, for example, you discover that, without warning and not so much as a how’s your father, beg your pardon or thank you very much, the code’s money-grubbers have sold off the rights to your ears. At the ground, we have no protection from the inanities of the evil contemporary pollution that we too politely call advertising being poured into our earholes, from where it makes its way to offend whatever grey matter and aesthetic sensibility we might still possess. With television, at least you can mute the flood of this modern junk.

On the other hand, some aspects of the game itself don’t translate onto the small screen, such as the rolling maul. Nothing in rugby can attract, mesmerise and thrill a crowd like a rolling maul. Perhaps it’s the surprise of its appearance that grabs stadiums. Many plays have the potential to become rolling mauls, but usually you’re lucky to see a single good maul per match. At the ground, you can feel the crowd focusing when one of these rolling monsters begins to take shape and go forward. If the pack make a few metres, the applause will also begin to roll, and it will rise, metre by metre. If the maul rolls long enough, it cannot but provoke the whole house into a mighty roar, the like of which can never be conveyed by television.

I’ve not been alone in favouring the rolling maul as one of the weapons that the Wallabies should have developed to defeat the All Blacks. It’s obvious that France and South Africa have put enormous work into perfecting the extraordinary feat of teamwork, strength, discipline and skill that is required to get one of these things off the ground, and then keep it that way. The logic appeals, because a good maul will draw all the opposition’s forwards in, creating space for line breaks when the ball is finally let out. Thus, this weekend we’ll see two teams that are among the best exponents ever of one of rugby’s unique features, having practised it to a very high degree as an integral part of the thinking they’ve put in over the last four years to defeat a standard that’s already flown home to New Zealand.

How will the RWC semi-finals go? Everyone in the world bar their own supporters would love to see the Springboks go down to the Argies, as unlikely as that prospect seems. No doubt each and every tragically hollowed-out Wallaby fan will be barracking for France over England. Whatever the results, I expect to see more of those great rolling mauls, even though it’s a real pity that this will only be on television.

Update: Another bleak result, with the Poms winning 14-9 in a close contest that could have easily gone the other way. The tragedy of it was that the French completely forgot they were French, and tried to beat the English at their own game. With this crazy thought in their heads, they blighted their attacking skills, surrendering their superb rolling maul and clever running backs to the field-goal option, which kept returning rested Pommie forwards to the mid-field. What a sad state of affairs we’ve come to, given that we look like being reduced to supporting the Springboks to deny England an unthinkable sequence of Cups. Can the Argies save the world at the 11th hour with a miracle finish? I wouldn’t put my house on it. Woe.

Update: South Africa won 37-13. I didn’t see the game, but the reports suggest I didn’t miss much. Going into the final, I guess we’re all Springboks now.

Australia’s rugby record against England starkly confutes the notion that ability is a simple function of resources. England has over 700,000 rugby players; Australia has fewer than 70,000. Yet, more often than not, we flog the place on the field. Of the 33 Tests decided over the last 100 years, the Wallabies have won 20. Despite a playing pool 10 times our size, England’s First 15 hasn’t been much more than half as good as the Wallabies.

Along with everyone else in the rugby world, bar those poor unfortunates who actually live in the place where the sun don’t shine, I expect the Wallaby victory roll to reach 21 on Saturday night. The dangers are the English scrum, Jonny Wilkinson’s boot and the Pommie propensity to go the niggle. If the Poms are good for anything at all, they’ll give us a fair measure of how far our scrum has come since that dark day when we fell apart at Twickenham in November 2005. We’re also likely to get an idea of the tactics Knuckles has dreamed up to counter the field goal, which will be just as vital against the Springboks, should we manage to go all the way.

To see Australia crush England into the French dust would be a joy to behold. Such a result is not beyond the realm of possibilites. But, as hopeless as they have been in the pool games, I don’t expect the reigning World Champions to bow out without a decent fight. Nor do I think a walloping is necessarily the World Cup winning way for the Wallabies. Remember 1999 dear fans. Gradually, Australia lifted through the tournament, rising to the challenge of each match, but rising no further than necessary. I’ll be happy, so long as we’re not on the plane home Sunday.

Go the Wallabies!

Update: Some great rugby reading in today’s paper. Wayne Smith has a pearler of an overview (Knuckles is doing a star turn – if the Wallabies win the Cup, he should start his own tv show). Mark Ella is spot on, as usual, with a perfect summary of the form so far. And then there is this strange one from Simon Barnes, an Englishman who climbs up on his high-horse to declare that he is not “neo-colonial, possessed of a born-to-rule mentality, a racial supremacist, a little Englander, a snooty bastard, an avoider of baths, an oppressor, a cultural elitist, a snob … a racist, Pope Hadrian IV, a Black and Tan, Oliver Cromwell, the Duke of Cumberland, an anti-Catholic, an anti-Protestant, Edward I, a silencer of Celtic languages”. He concludes that the “England-hating O’Neill is (a) pathetic, (b) a bigot and (c) locked in the past,” therein disclosing that he has missed the bleeding obvious, which is that John O’Neil is a headline hunter and Simon Barnes’ scalp is now in his trophy bag. Go the Wallabies!

Update: I wish I could say that the better team lost. Or that we wuz robbed. Or that they were lucky. I wish I could say anything at all, except the dreaded truth, which is that England outplayed Australia. Even worse, the 12-10 result doesn’t reflect how much better the Poms played. Hats off to their forwards in particular, who dominated, not so much in the scrum, where we sort of hung on, but at the breakdown, in a way that I would have never believed possible. So comprehensively did they throw the Wallabies off their game, it seemed as though they had an extra player, or two or three, on the field. Well done and deserved England. Four more years of gloating Pommies. Oh, the pain, the pain. It’s only a game, right? Oh, the pain …

In the biggest scandal since Phar Lap, Australia’s chance of a third rugby World Cup may have sunk this week, thanks to some Dirty Pierre infecting the great Bernie Larkham. Australia was always only an outside chance, assuming our champion 10 would be on the paddock, on song. Without Larkham, a Wallaby World Cup is not impossible, only unimaginable.

For Australia to be good enough to take the tournament, sans Bernie, the Wallabies will have to become something that we have literally not seen before. New forces will have to emerge. The players who still have latent potential will have to stand right up, fully realising themselves, immediately.

We do have guys still developing. Think of Matt Dunning, who has made so much progress. No question, there is more to come from Berrick Barnes. Adam Ashley-Cooper could fully arrive, or turn up like he did against the All Blacks earlier this year. Wycliffe Palu is growing through the tournament. Giteau is having the time of his life. There will come a day when Rocky Elsom will defeat one of the rugby superpowers single-handedly, as could Morts. Can Nathan Sharpe pull another finger out? George Smith is, perhaps, the only Wallaby who we definitely know can’t get any better, since he’s already the best.

The Wallabies can’t be written off. But the news of Bernie’s nobbling will have put a big smile on the face of every sheep in New Zealand, which has never defeated Australia in a World Cup match. In the meantime, Knuckles’ boys have a meaningless game against Canada this weekend, a hiatus, an effective gap in the schedule, into which we have sent the reserves, to break their cabin fever and get their names on the list of participants. There’s no point in even running any moves, as few of these players will be executing them, come the big time.

More interesting is England vs Tonga. Will the Poms become the first Cup holder to die in the following pool? A delicious humiliation may loom. The other hot game is Argentina vs Ireland. If the Argies get up, the Dirty Pierres will face the Blacks in a quarter-final in Cardiff, in their own World Cup! Think of Bernie, and call it Karma.

Go Tonga! Go the Argies!

Update: Rugby is a demanding template, and fans must endure many desulatory exhibitions, as we did last night in Australia’s horrible 37-6 win over Canada, about which the less said the better. With my spirit low, I met a friend for a drink afterwards, where I saw most of the Fiji-Wales game. From the mind-numbing to the utterly sublime. If you missed it, read Stephen Jones’ match report, which begins: “Well, how many greats do you want? Perhaps the greatest World Cup game ever played, perhaps the greatest feast of rugby and the greatest range of attacking palletes. Perhaps the greatest upset, and perhaps the final condemnation of all those who would rather that great rugby nations such as Fiji were given their own minor-countries tournament to mess about in. This was one of those games that you will need to sit with the video in a darkened room to believe that it ever happened.” And that’s just for starters. It was an epic. If it’s replayed, don’t miss it for quids.

Update: The quarter-finals are, in order of playing times: (1) Australia vs England; (2) New Zealand vs France (at Cardiff); (3) South Africa vs Fiji; (4) Argentina vs Scotland. As anticipated, this means that the sequence facing the Wallabies is: (1) England; (2) the All Blacks (or France); and (3) the Springboks, assuming that the Boks can get past supercharged outsiders, Fiji and Argentina. The end of the pools also means that the first consolation prizes have been distributed, with Tonga, Wales, Italy and Ireland securing automatic qualification for the 2011 World Cup. Go the Wallabies!

Bernie Watch: In comments, Fred Argy advises that, writing in todays (i.e. Monday’s) Canberra Times, Bernie says he is now jogging!