Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Joe Schmidt and the undefeated Wallabies' July report card

joe Schmidt and the Wallabies. Photo by Morgan Hancock/Getty Images and Cameron Spencer/Getty Images.

If you’re a Wallabies supporter you’d have to be happy with three consecutive wins under new coach Joe Schmidt, with a relatively new-look squad.

ADVERTISEMENT

Schmidt and his team of assistants have certainly improved the Wallabies since their disastrous World Cup in France at the end of 2023 under Eddie Jones.

However, where do the three wins in 2024 leave the Wallabies heading into The Rugby Championship?

In July the Wallabies have absolutely made the pass mark, winning all three Tests, showing gameplay variation, and overall improvement.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

The Australian rugby public needed to see wins from the Wallabies and blooding 11 debutants in three matches was a bold and brave move from Schmidt, but it was a necessary risk to find out who his top squad is for the TRC.

Schmidt threw caution to the wind by doing it the hard way, resisting the urge to call upon experienced overseas players.

The lack of experience and cohesion were evident, and the quality of the wins reflected the missing edge only brought by a tight-knit unit.

The Springboks in Brisbane on August 10 will be a much tougher assignment than Wales and Georgia, so will Argentina and the All Blacks.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Wallabies are heading in the right direction, but is it at the pace needed to be TRC contenders?

As a fan, as an Australian, you have to take all the good energy, juju, and publicity surrounding the team at the moment, but as a rugby realist you have to accept the Wallabies have been below the standard necessary to compete with the other three TRC teams.

Unpolished performances where the Wallabies have been their own worst enemies typified the month of July, so where are they sitting?

Wallabies July Report Card 6.5/10

This grade has been collated based on a matrix of factors:
– Winning percentage
– The quality of the Wallabies’ wins
– Who the opposition were
– Where the Wallabies are ranked
– Where the Wallabies need to be to compete in TRC

ADVERTISEMENT

Winning Percentage

The Wallabies won 100 per cent of their matches let’s start there.

However, they were expected to do so, when hosting a Welsh side which was missing some big names and is undergoing a rebuilding phase of its own.

The Wallabies beat a rising Georgian side who were also missing some key forwards who did not make the trip from France.

Nevertheless, the Wallabies won all three Tests and it never truly felt as though they had lost control of the game in any of the matches.

This factor alone contributes the bulk of their grade above, for without the wins, the cracks that have been painted over would be glaringly obvious.

22m Entries

Avg. Points Scored
4.2
7
Entries
Avg. Points Scored
2.3
12
Entries

The quality of the Wallabies’ wins

Although the Wallabies never truly looked like losing any of the three matches, they looked far from convincing complete performances.

The first game against Wales showed the Wallabies had begun to absorb the Schmidt gameplan.

Hardworking forwards did the business in phase play and at the lineout which allowed the backs to execute Schmidt-style strike moves, resulting in line breaks and tries.

A dominant scrum and an oppressive breakdown presence set the tone as the Wallabies muscled up and scored in-tight, showing they were a changed team.

The glaring vulnerability was the Wallabies’ defensive maul which crumbled repeatedly, keeping Wales in both the first and second Tests.

It puts a target on Wallabies’ backs for the entire world to see, the Springboks will be licking their chops.

Schmidt and his assistants are acutely aware of it, improving the maul defence will be crucial to the Wallabies hopes of giving the TRC a shake.

The second Test against Wales optimised a workman’s performance.

Jake Gordon’s and Filipo Daugunu’s two tries were all about work rate. The Wallabies worked hard off the ball and were talented enough to seize the opportunities when they presented themselves.

The woes of the maul continued, however, keeping the Welsh well within the contest with two rolling maul tries.

The worries continued with the Wallabies caught too narrow in defence on several occasions and were lucky the Welsh didn’t distribute wider more often than they did.

Two tries were conceded by the Wallabies by being too passive and too narrow in defence in their own half.

Despite being too narrow on occasion, the Wallabies defence was almost impervious, tackling at 91 and 90 per cent against the Welsh.

The two first Tests were miles better than any of their World Cup performances and defence coach Laurie Fisher should feel he is doing his job well.

Then came the Georgia game.

The Wallabies made 11 changes to their side against a team they should’ve beaten comfortably on paper.

The win was anything but comfortable and they were their own worst enemy once again, with the cracks beginning to show.

Tackling at just 81 per cent, in a game where they had to make the least number of tackles of all three games is just not good enough.

They missed at least double the number of tackles they did against Wales in either Test and the Georgians had equal lowest possession in what was the highest-scoring game of the three-match campaign.

It was an entertaining game of rugby in Sydney on a blustery winter’s afternoon and the Georgians pounced on every opportunity they created.

The try to fullback Davit Niniashvili in the 42nd minute saw the Georgians cut the Wallabies backline to pieces.

The full-field try to the speedster Aka Tabutsadze in the 46th minute exposed the inexperience of the Wallabies side.

The two tries were a 14-point swing which should never have been allowed to happen and it represents exactly how much this Wallabies side must grow to be contenders in TRC.

The Wallabies forwards were solely responsible for the win; rolling maul tries, muscling over in-tight, dominant tackles and the full-field efforts must be commended.

A Wallabies side which has a dominant set piece and a backline which was outclassed against a Georgian side is unheard of, but it made for an entertaining end to the July Tests.

Defence

203
Tackles Made
138
25
Tackles Missed
18
89%
Tackle Completion %
88%

Who the opposition were

Georgia and Wales are not currently top 10 sides, let’s start there.

Wales are sitting in 11th on 76.04 points and Georgia are 12th on 74.10 points.

The lowest-ranked TRC side is Argentina who are 7th on 81.64 points.

This should put everything so far into perspective, giving the praise and criticism context.

Having said that, the margin between 12th and 8th is far smaller than between 7th and 1st, the Wallabies are a long way from where the psyche perhaps wants them to be.

Where the Wallabies are ranked

The Wallabies are ranked 9th on 78.96 points, one position below Italy.

This is an entirely fair and accurate description of where the Wallabies have been over the last 18 months.

But where is the Wallabies ceiling heading into the TRC?

Related

Where the Wallabies need to be to compete in TRC

Fixing the maul is paramount and the importance of being able to rob particularly South Africa of this weapon cannot be overstated.

A lineout offers the easiest opportunity to make gainline metres, they are almost guaranteed.

Taking away the three tries and the yellow card the Wallabies conceded against Wales, changes the aggregate points conceded from 44 to 23.

That is a world of difference.

It’s particularly a vulnerability for the Wallabies due to their slow connected linespeed defence, big ball carriers like Damien de Allende, Siya Kolisi, Jordie Barret, Ardie Savea will make easy gainline metres every time.

A positive has been Schmidt’s desire to imbue the Wallabies with a variation of tactics throughout the Tests, making them better prepared should they need to adjust tactically throughout the TRC.

It also makes it harder for oppositions to analyse the Wallabies so early in their run under Schmidt.

The short kicking game off no.9 and no.10 showcased in the first two games is vastly different from the Irish short passing game executed against Georgia in game three.

Interestingly, if executed well, both tactics can expose the Springboks’ rush defence.

Similarly, the Wallabies connected linespeed deals very well with the Springboks new high-passing attack.

There are rumblings about Will Skelton and Marika Koroibete being the two overseas picks Schmidt could turn to for the TRC.

This is encouraging to hear for a myriad of reasons: he thinks there’s enough talent to work with domestically overall, acknowledges there are some positions which could use bolstering and more experienced players are already back on Australian soil gearing up to return.

Powerhouse prop Angus Bell, experienced hooker Brandon Paenga-Amosa, and fellow rake Dave Porecki are all on the road back to peak fitness and have been training together in Sydney.

It bodes well for a steadily anchored scrum and a weaponizable set-piece.

Prediction for TRC

A general assessment of the Wallabies suggests there will be plenty of errors when the pressure is applied.

A pass mark for the TRC would perhaps be two wins, but three wins are achievable for a squad of players showing glimpses of the best rugby seen in years.

2024 is a year of growth, rebuilding, and cohesion, things which will all take time.

Schmidt will not be under any illusions, nor will his players, the hardest challenges and their first loss are coming, it’s about how they as a team navigate the troughs that will determine the future of this side.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

5 Comments
J
John 143 days ago

A fantastic coach will bring an immediate improvement in structure and style and great selections.
I’m blowed if I can any of this so far.

T
TO 143 days ago

I think the growing confidence installed in the players by Schmidt's attention to detail and simplifying of the game plan gives Aussie a good foundation from which to move forward and not be weighed down by their recent failings. Obviously early days with some stern examinations to face but I think there can be a certain amount of optimism with the quality of player(s) set to return with the likes of Bell, Faenga Amosa, Porecki and Skelton in particular to go with those already in the squad. Set piece is where it's at and in my opinion a forward pack of Tupou, Porecki, Bell, Frost, Salakaia Loto, McCreight, Valentini and Cale could foot it with any of the “big boys”.
NZ badly needs Aussie to “put the shit's up us” so we can both assuredly defend our territories and go north to battle confidently.
Go the All Blacks.

C
CR 144 days ago

I don’t think this Wallaby team is that weak at all. Inexperienced yes, but there are a few good players in that squad. Eddy was just clueless with his selections. Can already see a big improvement. Annoyingly they always bring their best against the Springboks and cower in fear when the AB’s show up. Lord knows why. I think they lose confidence against the kiwi teams in super.

Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 24 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?

46 Go to comments
f
fl 39 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.

46 Go to comments
J
JW 42 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.

46 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.

46 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.

46 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Will Bristol's daredevil 'Bears-ball' deliver the trophy they crave? Will Bristol's daredevil 'Bears-ball' deliver the trophy they crave?
Search