0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
Wallabies blow lead as All Blacks storm home to take final Tri Nations clash
By Ed Jackson
September 11, 2010
The Wallabies fail to hold on to a big lead as the All Blacks stormed home in the second half to win the final match of the Tri Nations series 23-22 at ANZ Stadium.
Australia appeared set for victory holding a 22-9 lead with 20 minutes to go but two All Blacks tries broke the hearts of the 70,288 fans at ANZ Stadium.
The win means the All Blacks end the Tri Nations with a 100 per cent record and haven't lost a Test to their trans-Tasman rivals since 2008.
The first half's only try came in the 15th minute when No.8 Ben McCalman broke clear from the back of a scrum to release young winger James O'Connor, who crashed over in the corner.
The All Blacks could only manage two penalty goals in a disjointed first-half display by the visitors as the Wallabies took a 14-6 lead into the sheds.
Recalled winger Lachie Turner also had an eventful return to Test rugby, nearly scoring in the game's sixth minute only to be denied by a great last-ditch tackle by Cory Jane.
Just four minutes after that Turner turned defender, hauling down All Blacks' fullback Mils Muliaina with the line beckoning.
Matt Giteau's boot proved inaccurate on the night, the centre missing two conversion attempts and two penalty goals to cost the Wallabies 10 vital points.
But that didn't look like it would matter when Adam Ashley-Cooper went over just seven minutes into the second half to extend the Wallabies lead to 13.
The teams traded penalties before All Blacks skipper Richie McCaw found space off the back of a scrum to give the visitors hope with a try in the 66th minute.
Piri Weepu's pressure conversion brought the margin within a converted try and the Blacks scented blood against a tiring Wallabies outfit, who were playing their third Test in as many weeks.
And when No.8 Kieran Read crashed over next to the goalposts six minutes later, Weepu converted to put the All Blacks ahead for the first time in the second half - a lead they wouldn't relinquish.
The numbers still aren't flattering, but Wallabies coach Robbie Deans is adamant Australia have definitely improved at the end of their Tri Nations campaign.
While they finished a distant second to New Zealand on the Tri-Nations table, Deans was adamant the Wallabies were moving forward.
"There's no doubt we've made progress but in the terms of the benchmark we are just under the brow.''
He pointed to the benefits gained by the increasing international experience of youngsters like backs Kurtley Beale, James O'Connor and Quade Cooper, the last of whom was playing his first Test against New Zealand.
"If we can all make little incremental gains then collectively that will be significant and clearly we are not that far away,'' Deans said.
The coach highlighted the crafty play by the All Blacks that ensured McCaw's try when the skipper appeared to disengage early from a scrum as a key moment.
"They're clever, the way they stay a step ahead,'' Deans said.
"You've only got to look at the numbers to see they're smart, good luck to them.''
His New Zealand counterpart, Graham Henry, acknowledged Australia pushed his team hard in their last two encounters but was non-committal about whether the Wallabies had improved since this time last year.
"The game in Christchurch was a difficult game and tonight was a difficult game, the Wallabies have been playing some very good football,'' Henry said.
Replacement All Blacks hooker Corey Flynn felt the Wallabies scrum was continuing to improve.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,...016959,00.html
The second half choking is now as predictable as the sun will come up tomorrow.
It disturbs me to hear Deans describing the allblacks as clever.
Clever isn't selecting O'Connor on the wing. Perhaps it is Deans masterplan to turn him into the super sub covering 12, 15 and wing so he can run 5 forwards on the bench in the RWC finals?
Clever isn't telling his men to kick for the corners when ball in hand was winning the test.
Clever isn't persisting with Giteau as goal kicker. He can't handle the pressure of the big matches. His kicking costs us test matches and he is sure to get the butterflies on the biggest stage at Eden Park.
The set piece let us down again last night. We were second best in the scrum. The lineout implosion at the death robbed us of a last chance to nail a droppie or win a penalty or score a try.
The effort was again outstanding. We mustn't underestimate the physical drain of a 3rd straight test match afer a long haul flight from RSA. The weary legs were showing at the 30 minute mark when the dropsies started. There was a certain inevitability about the implosion. The obviously tiring legs, the missed chances and missed goal kicks. The lead never felt comfortable.
Close but no cigar
It is clear that the allblacks are very beatable without Carter. I thought they were ordinary. We blew it
To kick 3/7 at this level is unacceptable.
Steyn and Carter consistently nail the difficult kicks.
The Wallabies have apparently just recruited a kicking coach, lets hope he starts earning his money.
I am not an expert on goal kicking but there must be something fundamentaly wrong when Gits can have his eye in one week and kick them from all over the park and then in a game like last night only kick 3 out of 7.
There is a wealth of talented kickers in the squad - Beale, Cooper, JOC and Barnes.
The new coach should use the EOYT to establish a new goal-kicker for the Wallabies,
someone who has the mental strength to kick accurately under pressure week in week out.
Must be those damn Northern Hemisphere referees again. If you had good SH refs then you'd probably win.
They just have different interpretations of the rules up there and don't understand how the game is played down here and that's the reason you lost this time.
The AB's were terrible and were there for the taking. No excuses for that loss. Intimidated by the school yard bully again...
At about 4.09 of this clip when McCaw scores, is it legal for the flanker to break away like that before the ball is out? If rocky had broken away before Keiron reid picked the ball up it would be a blatant penalty. Would have thought same rules apply to the attacking flanker or do we allow benefit of the doubt for the richie factor?
[YOUTUBE][ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70LrE5cvpIU"]YouTube - All Blacks vs Wallabies Game 9 Trinations[/ame][/YOUTUBE]
WRF- Mark Lawrence is from SA.
Absolutely and completely illegal Haji. Although none of them actually do, all flankers must stay bound with their full arm (not just holding on with a hand) until the ball comes out. Richie was already broken off when he received the ball from the scrum from Read. It's a shame Ben McCalman didn't force him to ground it that far out- it would've made the conversion attempt pretty tricky. Ahh well these things happen.
I'm just happy we didn't get hammered.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.
Last edited by travelling_gerry; 13-09-10 at 16:34.
well,maybe we are just like the Welsh:never get beaten,just that sometimes other teams score more points than us!
bring back the pontypool front row
bring back barry John
Things that make you go hmmmmmmmm............
ill pretend im not seeing rocky not bound properly either but at least he's connected i guess.
[YOUTUBE]rAKA6r5sjcc[/YOUTUBE]At about 4:05 there's a ruck, in the leadup to the Read try. The #19 clleans out, and then picks up the ball from behind his own feet.
My question (since the Force were done in the same way this season) is....does the halfback (or whoever is doing the pick and drive) have to be behind the ball to pick it up, or is simply not bound the law?
Think I've found it,
Law 24 Offside
C. Off-side at Ruck or Maul
The term "off-side line" means a line parallel to the goal-lines through the hindmost foot of the player's team in the ruck or maul.
(1) Ruck or Maul otherwise than at line-out
While a ruck or maul is taking place (including a ruck or maul which continues after a line-out has ended) a player is off-side if he:-
...
(d)
unbinds from the ruck or leaves the maul and does not immediately retire behind the off-side line or once he is on side, if he rejoins the ruck or maul in front of the hindmost player of his team, or
(e)
advances beyond the off-side line with either foot and does not join the ruck or maul.
They would cover it I think!
I actually thought it was in the ruck where the try came from that the offside occurred, but it was a couple before.
So the way I read it, he's either bound and not able to use hands, or offside..........is that right?
C'mon the![]()
![]()