Staniforth's amazing comeback

[inactive]

Staniforth's amazing comeback

By Jon Geddes

July 26, 2007 12:00am

THREE years ago a disillusioned Scott Staniforth quit Australian rugby to play out his career in England.

After three Tests and 61 Super games for the Waratahs, he was fed up, believing he had run his race at home.

But in one of rugby's great comebacks, the powerhouse 29-year-old three-quarter this week earned a spot in the Wallabies squad for his second World Cup after previously playing in the 1999 tournament.

"I didn't think I would play for the Wallabies again, I was going away indefinitely to finish my career OS," the utility back from West Wyalong said.

"I had been at the Waratahs for a while and couldn't see my football going forward without a change."

Despite being one of NSW's most reliable players, Staniforth often appeared to be treated rather shabbily.

"I found I started every season with NSW having to prove myself. I suppose I was disillusioned with rugby in general," he said.

"If they put faith in you then you start playing better and have a bit more belief in yourself. I started to wonder what was going on so I decided to leave and try somewhere else."

The move to London Irish for two years proved the tonic Staniforth needed.

"I got back to what I enjoyed doing and started playing better football because of it. The change really worked for me," he said.

"Looking back, the last three years have probably been the best rugby I have played."

After the birth of his third child, Staniforth decided to return to Australia. And the Western Force shrewdly left a spot open for him in their Super 14 roster last year.

"I realised how good the lifestyle was in Australia. You have a winter over there locked inside watching DVDs. That's not what it is all about," he said.

When he linked up with the Force, Staniforth's first goal was to win the respect of his new teammates. A recall to the Wallaby squad was the furthest thing from his mind.

But his performances were so impressive that the national selectors could not ignore him.

His ability to play equally well at centre and on the wing made him more valuable.

And Staniforth is fired up to make the most of the opportunity he has been given after playing one Test against the US at the 1999 World Cup.

"I've been there and done that. Over time you realise how important it is to try and get into the starting side or top 22," he said.

"After missing out in 2003 I thought that was my last chance.

"A World Cup has a special feel to it and I just can't wait to get over there and be a part of it."

Assistant Wallaby coach John Muggleton said that in many ways Staniforth reminded him of former Wallaby No. 12 Nathan Grey, one of Australian rugby's most wholehearted players.

He said Staniforth's versatility means he would push strongly for a spot in the top 22, especially as the Wallabies have been going with only two backs on the reserves bench.

"Scotty is one of those ideal guys who can cover a number of positions for you," Muggleton said.

"He can fill either of the centre roles or wing."

Staniforth said inside-centre was his favourite position, a spot he could well fill in France.

"You are always involved in the game and calling plays, which I have enjoyed over the last couple of years," he said.

[Flamethrower]

Go Stanners!!! Show them what they were missing out on by passing you over for all those years.

[goony]

i hope spanners gets some decent game time at the world cup, he is a great player and gives his all every chance he gets!

[Burgs]

And that is the type of article that should be coming out of the WA Media, not from Jon Geddes! What's the bet it will be abridged in either weekend paper?

Well done Stanners

[shasta]

If there's one thing better than an "Eastern Stater" moaning about the lousy press coverage, it's a born 'n' bred Sandgroper doing same.

But the sentiment is spot-on. I wonder whether any of the local scribes understand just what an achievement this has been for Spanner? I won't forget that try in Melbourne for a long time, if ever.

I just hope he slays them in France and leaves Mitch no choice but to play him at 12 or 13 next year.

[Jehna]

I just hope he slays them in France and leaves Mitch no choice but to play him at 12 or 13 next year.

As awesome at it would be to see him at 12 or 13 do you really think it's likely given Giteau and Mortlock's form? I mean Gits is probably one of if not the best inside centre in the world atm and movng him out of that position would be crazy. But then with no gregan and no larkham next year maybe they'll move Giteau to 9 or 10 and play staniforth at 12 to test new combinations...who knows? But you're right...i hope he gets a decent run

[Jess]

Well given Knuckle's recent decisions it would surprise me to see stanners run out as #1. hehe. Nothing surprises me anymore.

Still, I'm proud as punch that the Wallabies coaching staff finally came to their senses and gave him a chance to showcase his ability.

He'll make us so proud... I'm sure of it.

[Burgs]

To be perfectly honest (and running for my bunker) I have been pretty underwhelmed by Gits this International season.
As a Coach of that Wallaby Squad I would have him on the bench as either replacement Scrummie or replacement Inside Back (10,12,13) with Stanners doing the grind of the first fifty minutes.

[Jehna]

To be perfectly honest (and running for my bunker) I have been pretty underwhelmed by Gits this International season.
As a Coach of that Wallaby Squad I would have him on the bench as either replacement Scrummie or replacement Inside Back (10,12,13) with Stanners doing the grind of the first fifty minutes.

Lol hell i'm a massive fan of Gits and i'll almost...almost second you on that one His last two games have been very average. I probably wouldn't stick him on the bench for them but i think his drop goal last weekend is fairly indicative of some desperate play on his part. I still think he is probably the best inside centre we've got and I'm hoping he's just suffering a little from exhaustion/niggling injuries. Don't forget he did black out a few weeks back and he's been under the pump for a good few months now. I guess we'll see what happens over camp but i simply can't imagine knuckles (despite his random decisions) kicking him back to the bench.

I honestly think Connolly has his favourites (Gits, Larkham, Mortlock, Tuquiri) and his not so favourites (Gregan, Hoiles, Mitchell) and he often picks starting lines on that basis alone rather than the form of the players in question at that time...annoying but i guess we have to have faith

[shasta]

As awesome at it would be to see him at 12 or 13 do you really think it's likely given Giteau and Mortlock's form?

Well unless Mortlock signs for The Force before next year MITCH won't need to worry about that dilemma.

[Jehna]

Well unless Mortlock signs for The Force before next year MITCH won't need to worry about that dilemma.

Ha...fair point...though hell you never know…they seem to be pretty good at raking in the players Apparently money does mean something

[Burgs]

I think much of the stigma has gone out of "starting" on the bench now days, at least at International level.
Rugby is now very much a 22 man game and if you can time your substitutions into the right "scene of the play" then those players can be very destructive and can determine the outcome of the match.
Consider the average modern Test Match:

0-5 mins, huge hits in defence as players ride the emotion and feel each other out, trying to exert some physical dominance. A danger time for lighter bodies and weaker defenders and normally the cause for compromise in team selections.

5-20 mins, one team slowly takes some points to edge ahead, but it normally comes from penalties at the breakdown or returning a turnover ball against the flow of play.

20-40 mins, the team behind is slowly settling and starting to compete for the lead, perhaps not quite in touch but there or there abouts.

Halftime normally a margin of 0-15 points and still very winnable for either team

40-45 mins, as for the first 5 fresh from the sheds except the tight five might not be quite so quick. Again big hits as the trailing team lifts the tempo to try and break some holes.

45-55 mins, the same attitude continues however the big fellas are starting to tire from the frenetic pace. Both Coaches are trying to wring that extra few minutes out of their starting forwards however, they do this at the risk of defensive structure. The ball is ripe for the picking in the rucks for good players. Inevitably this period ends with a try to one side to break up the game.

55-65 mins, When the try comes invariably the defending team will bring on a couple of fresh forwards and maybe a fresh Wing or Flyhalf. The remainder of the period is spent either trying to get the ball back or settling the new players into their positions. The leading team will look to consolidate their lead by going into a hard grind style of play to chew up a good ten minutes. In the process this can lead to gaps opening up out wide for the trailing team to exploit if they can just get the damn turnover.

65-75 mins, another try is leaked by the defenders after a brief rallying burst comes to nothing. Normally from an ordinary kick or fumbled pass.

75-80 mins, in a desperate throw of the dice the losing Coach, who has already left it too late for the rest of his bench to achieve the two scores required, throws them on anyway so as to be seen as having "tried everything". A couple of scrums, a lineout and a few rucks later the ball is hoiked into touch and it's all over.

Sure there are exceptions but the majority of Tests would run something similar to that.
The key aspects being the majority of the first half is just hard slog and pretty much an arm wrestle, even if there are scores. There are a couple of opportunities leading into half time but following the break it is back into trench warfare. Around the 50-60 minute mark the astute Coach should be able to time injecting "first touch" players such as George Smith and Matt Giteau into the match to open up the defensive patterns of the tiring opposition.
Why risk a player of Gits ability and maneuverability to the ravages of a fresh Jerry Collins or Victor Matfield?
Why not keep them bottled up ready to unleash when the big fellas will be left like round-abouts and make the most of their every touch?
In "My Wallabies" I would start with #7 Phil Waugh & #12 Scott Staniforth and around the 50-60 minute mark change both (having weathered the storm and perhaps scored in the process) at the same time for Smith and Giteau to tear it up.

[Flamethrower]

I've always felt that George Smith has his best games from the bench. Let him off the leash with about 20 to go and he's like a mad Pit bull.

[Jehna]

Oh i don't know...Smith has been pretty phenomenal of late playing in the starting line up.

I like your game plan Burgs but i honestly don't think that's how the Wallabies play. That would be the ideal but i think if the last few matches have shown us anything, its that the Wallabies are fairly inconsistent in their build up and attack. I mean there have been games where it goes more like this:

0-5 mins, huge hits in defence as players ride the emotion and feel each other out, trying to exert some physical dominance, yet we fail to do so.

5-40 mins, we get our arses kicked...

40-50 mins, after a good yelling at we get our shit together, lift the tempo to try and break some holes.

50-60 mins, winning team start to freak out that we are playing reasonably well and start making errors which we cash in on

60-70 mins, the fans start to have hope

70-80 mins, the test as to whether its too little too late to win..

On that game plan, the use of your reserves becomes a totally different story. I dunno...i am a matt giteau fan so evidently biased but i just think that even when he's not on fire he's consistent in a reliable/dependent sort of way which is necessary given the upsets out backline has suffered over the last few months.

But you're right...rugby is def a 22 man game

[frontrow]

I tend to believe that jehna has a more accurate recount of current wallabies strategy, lets call it the connolly clause....