Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Fiji player ratings vs Australia | Rugby World Cup 2023

Josua Tuisova of Fiji scores his team's first try during the Rugby World Cup France 2023 match between Australia and Fiji at Stade Geoffroy-Guichard on September 17, 2023 in Saint-Etienne, France. (Photo by Catherine Ivill/Getty Images)

After the tight loss to Wales last week, Fiji responded with an emphatic 22-15 win against the Wallabies in Saint Etienne to shake up Pool C.

ADVERTISEMENT

The crowd favourites took at 12-8 half-time led with four penalties off the boot of livewire No 9 Simione Kuruvoli, before a key try to Josua Tuisova early in the second half blew the game open.

Fiji’s superior breakdown effort kept Australia at bay as they held on for a famous 22-15 win.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Here’s how the Fijians rated:

1. Eroni Mawi – 8

Monstered Carter Gordon in a ball-and-all tackle on a blind side switch that will give the Wallaby No 10 nightmares, forcing a knock-on in the process. Led the Fijian front row with a high work rate, completing 9 tackles in the first half alone. Produced two big turnovers. Off at 50.
The scrum & maul was firing for Fiji. It collapsed often but the ref allowed plenty of resets. Fiji didn’t concede any scrum penalties in the first half and won a penalty on their first scrum in the second half, while the first maul drew a penalty for collapsing. Overall the starting pack really had the upper hand over Australia, particularly at the breakdown as the match wore on.

2. Sam Matavesi – 8.5

Matavesi was one of the best on the field during his 50 minutes on. Gave away a penalty with a high shot on Petaia early, but was critical in a solid Fijian set-piece. Completed his first six throws at the lineout and showed magnificent skill on a lineout play to rip a long pass out to the backs. Still finished with a team-high six carries. The biggest blemish was two key lineouts late in the first half as Fiji turned down points for the corner. Off at 50.

3. Luke Tagi – 8 
The powerful prop gave Fiji good gain line with four carries. He put in a mammoth effort after being recalled into action. Off at 50 but back on from 58, Tagi finished with nine tackles, anchored a strong Fijian scrum & maul throughout his time on.

4. Isoa Nasilasila – 7

Was the most reliable jumping lineout option for Matavesi. Defensively a workhorse with 11 tackles. Off at 67.

Involved in the dirty work with plenty of clean outs and tackles. Came up with a big turnover with 20 minutes to go on Jordan Uelese forcing a holding on penalty. Finished with 10 tackles.

Didn’t have the impact as the others with his carries but toiled away in defence making 10 tackles. First throw to the No 6 was tipped and turned.

7. Levani Botia – 9
Ever-present at the breakdown, competing hard for Fiji both on attack and defence. His elevation into the starting line-up proved to be a masterstroke as he was everywhere. Forced a key strip on Valetini carrying on first phase with the Wallabies in good field position. Came up with another key penalty at the breakdown over Nawaqanitawase with the Wallabies pressing into Fiji’s 22. His only error was a bobbled transfer on a big chance to peel from the lineout late in the first half. Finished with 14 tackles and three turnovers won after a demolition job on Australia. Off at 59.

ADVERTISEMENT

8. Viliame Mata – 5

A rather quiet night for the skillful No 8 who parked out on the left side in Fiji’s attack early and looked to attack in the wide channels. Took some thundering carries with a massive wind-up into the Australian defence. Finished with five tackles and three tackles.

Points Flow Chart

Fiji win +7
Time in lead
11
Mins in lead
59
14%
% Of Game In Lead
73%
37%
Possession Last 10 min
63%
0
Points Last 10 min
0

Electric and zippy halfback who brought speed and tempo for Fiji. Looked dangerous with ball-in-hand with every touch. Took over the kicking duties and nailed his first penalty from 40m out and second from about 44m. Kicked 4/4 off the tee in the first half and nailed his fifth from the sideline early in the second.
Box kicked well out of exit situations. Was putting together a man-of-the-match performance before he came off after 47 mins shortly after going down with cramps.

10. Teti Tela – 6

Cleared the lines for Fiji and sent runners into the green and gold wall as the distributor in Fiji’s pattern. Kicked his restarts well and provided an error-free performance to drive Fiji around the park.

ADVERTISEMENT

11. Semi Radradra – 6

Another off night for Radradra but he came up with a clutch play towards the end to help seal the win. Threw a forward pass during a wave of Fiji’s attack early. Had an opportunity down the left side from a Fiji scrum but was cleaned up by Samu Kerevi in cover.
Caught napping a bit after a 50-22 by Australia with a quick throw-in which led to Nawaqanitawase’s try. Lost his first couple of high ball contests but was involved in the chase leading to Tuisova’s try. Knocked-on at the base of the ruck just after Fiji won possession from a strong counter-attack. Looked his best when he carried in the midfield. Came up with a big breakdown penalty to stop a Wallabies raid with seven to go.

12. Josua Tuisova – 8

Was a little bit of a mixed bag for Tuisova but ultimately proved to be a difference maker. He was penalised attempting to wrap Valetini high which gave the Wallabies their first three points. However, he proved to be a handful at No 12 any time he carried. He ran at Kerevi with his first powerful carry. Ran straight over Gordon with his next. Scored a breakaway try after Carter Gordon let a box kick bounce with the midfielder getting the dream bounce and run away try.

Missed a big opportunity in the 51st minute with an overlap advantage, went for the cutout pass to Radradra which sailed forward over the touch line. Gave away a penalty for a high shot at 63 mins but made up for it moments later by winning a breakdown penalty.

Defensively was strong in the midfield with Botia providing cover inside in the 10 channel. Off at 67.

13. Waisea Nayacalevu – 7

His first touch looked like slicing through the Wallabies midfield on a wide strike from the lineout. Didn’t get much quality ball in the first half. Was strong defensively when needed, looking to hold up Wallaby runners and force collapsed mauls. The captain made his presence felt with a great cover tackle on Koroibete late.

Broke the line with minutes to go and found Habosi for a would-be game-winner but the Wallabies covered.

14. Jiuta Wainiqolo – 5

Showed a dangerous right foot step but threw a mistimed offload for a turnover on one scrum play to the right. Had a well-timed kick chase on a box kick where his two-man tackle put Gordon over the sideline. Came off early in the second half with an injury after pushing an offload in the tackle.

15. Ilaisa Droasese – 6.5

His kicking game at the back was key to relieving pressure for Fiji. Linked well with his wingers giving them the space by drawing the last man on multiple occasions. Cleaned up in the backfield on the few occasions he was required to. Marshalled a Petaia kick wisely over the dead ball line early in the second half, but got turned and penalised on a kick return.

Substitutes

16 Tevita Ikanivere4 – On at 50. Set-piece fell apart for Fiji with the entire new front row. Missed multiple throws as the lineout malfunctioned. Wallabies managed to win their first scrum penalty.

17 Peni Ravai N/A – On at 50. Limited opportunities with one carry and two tackles.

18 Mesake Doge N/A – On at 50 but back off at 58 with injury.

19 Temo Mayanavanua N/A – On at 66.

20 Albert Tuisue – 4 – Big platform carry on his first effort in the midfield. Lost a couple of breakdown battles.

21 Frank Lomani – 5 – On at 42. A nervous start dropping an offload from Matavesi. Missed his first penalty attempt after replacing the ace goal kicker. Kicked his second attempt which proved crucial.

22 Vilimoni Botitu – N/A- On at 67. Replaced man-of-the-match Tuisova.

23 Vinaya Habosi – 6 – On at 43 min – Took two key kick-off restarts and saved Fiji. Got called offside on a key kick chase which had Vunivalu pinned over the sideline. Almost had the game-winner in the 78th.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 31 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Would I'd be think"

Would I'd be think.


"Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?"

Did you even read what you're replying to? I wasn't arguing for excluding south africa, I was pointing out that the idea of quantifying someone's fractional share of european rugby is entirely nonsensical. You're the one who was trying to do that.


"Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side"

What proportion of european rugby are they though? Got to make sure those fractions match up! 😂


"Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in."

I don't know if Championship sides want to be commuting to Georgia every other week.


"my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to"

a middle ground between the current system and a much worse system?

47 Go to comments
f
fl 46 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Huh? You mean last in their (4 team) pools/regions? My idea was 6/5/4, 6 the max, for guarenteed spots, with a 20 team comp max, so upto 5 WCs (which you'd make/or would be theoretically impossible to go to one league (they'd likely be solely for its participants, say 'Wales', rather than URC specifically. Preferrably). I gave 3 WC ideas for a 18 team comp, so the max URC could have (with a member union or club/team, winning all of the 6N, and Champions and Challenge Cup) would be 9."


That's a lot of words to say that I was right. If (e.g.) Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.


"And the reason say another URC (for example) member would get the spot over the other team that won the Challenge Cup, would be because they were arguable better if they finished higher in the League."

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.


"It won't diminish desire to win the Challenge Cup, because that team may still be competing for that seed, and if theyre automatic qual anyway, it still might make them treat it more seriously"

This doesn't make sense. Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't. Under my system, teams will "compete for the seed" by winning the Challenge Cup, under yours they won't. If a team is automatically qualified anyway why on earth would that make them treat it more seriously?


"I'm promoting the idea of a scheme that never needs to be changed again"

So am I. I'm suggesting that places could be allocated according to a UEFA style points sytem, or according to a system where each league gets 1/4 of the spots, and the remaining 1/4 go to the best performing teams from the previous season in european competition.


"Yours will promote outcry as soon as England (or any other participant) fluctates. Were as it's hard to argue about a the basis of an equal share."

Currently there is an equal share, and you are arguing against it. My system would give each side the opportunity to achieve an equal share, but with more places given to sides and leagues that perform well. This wouldn't promote outcry, it would promote teams to take european competition more seriously. Teams that lose out because they did poorly the previous year wouldn't have any grounds to complain, they would be incentivised to try harder this time around.


"This new system should not be based on the assumption of last years results/performances continuing."

That's not the assumption I'm making. I don't think the teams that perform better should be given places in the competition because they will be the best performing teams next year, but because sport should be based on merit, and teams should be rewarded for performing well.


"I'm specifically promoting my idea because I think it will do exactly what you want, increase european rugyb's importance."

how?


"I won't say I've done anything compressive"

Compressive.

47 Go to comments
J
JW 49 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Generally disagree with what? The possibility that they would get whitewashed, or the idea they shouldn't gain access until they're good enough?


I think the first is a fairly irrelevant view, decide on the second and then worry about the first. Personally I'd have had them in a third lvl comp with all the bottom dwellers of the leagues. I liked the idea of those league clubs resting their best players, and so being able to lift their standards in the league, though, so not against the idea that T2 sides go straight into Challenge Cup, but that will be a higher level with smaller comps and I think a bit too much for them (not having followed any of their games/performances mind you).

Because I don't think that having the possibility of a team finishing outside the quarter finals to qualify automatically will be a good idea. I'd rather have a team finishing 5th in their domestic league.

fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen.


The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime.

47 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Well I was mainly referring to my thinking about the split, which was essentially each /3 rounded up, but reliant on WCs to add buffer.


You may have been going for just a 16 team league ranking cup?


But yes, those were just ideas for how to select WCs, all very arbitrary but I think more interesting in ways than just going down a list (say like fl's) of who is next in line. Indeed in my reply to you I hinted at say the 'URC' WC spot actually being given to the Ireland pool and taken away from the Welsh pool.


It's easy to think that is excluding, and making it even harder on, a poor performing country, but this is all in context of a 18 or 20 team comp where URC (at least to those teams in the URC) got 6 places, which Wales has one side lingering around, and you'd expect should make. Imagine the spice in that 6N game with Italy, or any other of the URC members though! Everyone talks about SA joining the 6N, so not sure it will be a problem, but it would be a fairly minor one imo.


But that's a structure of the leagues were instead of thinking how to get in at the top, I started from the bottom and thought that it best those teams doing qualify for anything. Then I thought the two comps should be identical in structure. So that's were an even split comes in with creating numbers, and the 'UEFA' model you suggest using in some manner, I thought could be used for the WC's (5 in my 20 team comp) instead of those ideas of mine you pointed out.


I see Jones has waded in like his normal self when it comes to SH teams. One thing I really like about his idea is the name change to the two competitions, to Cup and Shield. Oh, and home and away matches.

47 Go to comments
f
fl 2 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Yes I was the one who suggested to use a UEFA style point. And I guessed, that based on the last 5 years we should start with 6 top14, 6 URC and 4 Prem."

Yes I am aware that you suggested it, but you then went on to say that we should initially start with a balance that clearly wasn't derived from that system. I'm not a mind reader, so how was I to work out that you'd arrived at that balance by dint of completely having failed to remember the history of the competition.


"Again, I was the one suggesting that, but you didn't like the outcome of that."

I have no issues with the outcome of that, I had an issue with a completely random allocation of teams that you plucked out of thin air.

Interestingly its you who now seem to be renouncing the UEFA style points system, because you don't like the outcome of reducing URC representation.


"4 teams for Top14, URC and Prem, 3 teams for other leagues and the last winner, what do you think?"

What about 4 each + 4 to the best performing teams in last years competition not to have otherwise qualified? Or what about a UEFA style system where places are allocated to leagues on the basis of their performance in previous years' competitions?

There's no point including Black Lion if they're just going to get whitewashed every year, which I think would be a possibility. At most I'd support 1 team from the Rugby Europe Super Cup, or the Russian Championship being included. Maybe the best placed non-Israeli team and the Russian winners could play off every year for the spot? But honestly I think its best if they stay limited to the Challenge Cup for now.

47 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Former All Blacks coach offers progress report on Joseph Manu's preseason Former All Blacks coach confident in Joseph Manu's progress
Search