Some Olympic venue, Sydney
7:00pm Sat 29 June 2002
Referee: Paul Honiss
Wallabies 31:25 France
Enter into normal quick bitch about the commentators. As it is embarrassing that the ĎHome of Rugbyísí dribble squad canít even get the Australian players names right. Yes I know we all acknowledge that they are crap but it doesnít mean I canít stay on my soapbox and keep crowing about it. I just hope that they do not get the coverage rights of the RWC 2003. As you can imagine that no games apart from the Wallabies would be live, they still wouldnít know the rules and that bloody kicking angle diagram would still be used. Is anyone from the ARU listening? No! Of course not!
Iím not going to spend much time actually reviewing the game as I think the French should feel really pissed off by poor refing by a Kiwi. Havenít you blokes got over the Rainbow Warrior incident yet? Or the Frogs nuking our back yard? (I mean the radiation will be gone in the next millennium) I put his performance on par with Wayne the Whistle Eriksson and his lack of controlling the infringements by SA. The lack of yellow cards for numerous deliberate professional fouls close to the try line was criminal. The Pumas should feel really pissed off with him.
Sorry now where was I? Thatís right. Now Chucky what the ###$ are you doing still accommodating Burke in the centres? This is the second game in a row that Mortlock has shown his class with everything except his kicking (are you after the points spread or what?) in that position. If you still want Burke on the paddock then move him to the wing or allow Rogers to get on for a full game and allow him to take the shots. As that boy can run and I would enjoy watching him play in the 5/8 spot for NSW next year (where he played at Australian schoolboy level). Cause we all know you wont drop Larkham for Flatley.
Mortlock was dynamic in the centres again and he should be starting there and not on the wing. While Iím delivering this written tirade about position placements. Can someone please tell me why there was not a genuine replacement for no. 7 or 8 on the Wallaby reserve bench? This is the second week in a row that once George Smith gets replaced that any parity (and I use the word loosely as the French forwards were on a whole far better than the Aussies again) at the breakdown is lost.
I know Kefu is injured but I would have thought that a player who can genuinely cover 7 or 8 might have been a good idea especially with the number of injuries that were occurring. But perhaps I was missing something? I would hate to mention Croft who is now sitting proudly on the shrine with Flatley as a backup no. 7 or Scotty Fava (6, 7 or 8) or John Roe (6 or 8) instead of both Vickerman (4 or 5) and Cockbain (4, 5, or 6) on the bench.
Sorry but we have to cover the player who is responsible for half of the Amazon being logged and who single hand is making the turnstiles spin. (Sorry for that but I lost my patience with the media hype machine before Qld thrashed NSW last year) Sailor was dynamic in attack in the first half. He showed potential but it was the second half grabbing display that was pathetic. Hell you would think by now that someone would have told him to use the shoulder when attempting the tackle and not just rely on the jersey throw. Be prepared to welcome back Tune when they take the ABís apart!
Sorry not much in the game coverage its just Chucky and his bag of tricks are starting to worry me. Position placements, when reserves are used, who gets replaced and who gets picked are looking as suspect as his choices in the NH tour last year. And we all know how that turned out!
Look donít quite know what happened to the game review but the above issues are of greater concern. Well to me anyway.