Sam Warburton says, "forwards didn't want the ball kicked".

Sam Warburton said that Wales wanted to keep the ball for the final minute of Australia after previous experiences of previous defeats and last minute losses. He said, "The plan was to keep the ball"

"The plan was to keep the ball".

“When the ball was kicked, I remember Ryan Jones shouting ‘No’ at the top of his voice".

“It wasn’t what the forwards were planning. Just a little bit of composure and patience was what was needed".

“I thought we had learned the lessons of that when we lost against the Barbarians last summer".

This goes to show how much of a Donkey Priestland is and that I was right all week. He must go now. He can't stick to a simple game plan and he loses all composure and mental toughness when the heat is on. Things got tough in Twickenham, so he kicked a shocking clearance kick then got himself sent off, but that obviously wasn't enough as he is the cat with 9 lives.

Let's try the pole again.

Does it show that, or maybe Sam hadn't communicated the message as captain to his halfback? Why did the ball even get passed out to Rhys? Maybe Rhys assumed that they could defend better in Oz's half?

I dont think you can blame individual players. I said before this game that Wales had the quality to beat Australia, but not the mentality and once again that proved to be the case. Wales simply dont have the mentality to see out victories over the SH sides. This is a collective failing, not an individual one.

Would have been far more beneficial defending the ball on the half way line with the forwards.

They would have drained enough time that IF Australia had been given a penalty, there wouldn't have been enough time for a kick to touch and a goal kick from halfway would have been far more difficult.

rhonddasmackhead wrote:Would have been far more beneficial defending the ball on the half way line with the forwards.

They would have drained enough time that IF Australia had been given a penalty, there wouldn't have been enough time for a kick to touch and a goal kick from halfway would have been far more difficult.

Maybe Rhys thought that up against the greatest jackal in the game, a kick and hard chase down to the Oz 22 was the answer, and that Oz could be contained there more easily?

Surely by now even Priestland realises that anything he "thinks" is a potential disaster.

Gordy wrote:I dont think you can blame individual players. I said before this game that Wales had the quality to beat Australia, but not the mentality and once again that proved to be the case. Wales simply dont have the mentality to see out victories over the SH sides. This is a collective failing, not an individual one.

1. It's not only Wales and the SH issues. All NH sides seem to share them. 'Not just as good as' might be a different way of putting it though rather than clutching to the 'mental' issues.

2. In reality too though, it was a game of 25 to 23. It didn't need big end-of-game psychological efforts to take Wales over the line, just a tiny bit better of a score. Wales could just as easily have lost by that tight a margin to any European side and they'd just have put it down to tight margins not mental frailty.

3. Australia are a good side.... which can sometimes be easily forgotten in the rush to perpetuate the idea that Wales have some right to be superior to them.

Would Wales be better off droping Priestland and starting with Biggar?

Although i do not like Pristland that much, he was only doing what he was told to do and that was try and keep Australia in their own half and out of Wales own half.

If that was not the game plan then some one should of told Priestland what the game plan was.

I haven't slated Priestland like others have but I do think he needs to be dropped for next week.

With regards the kick I don't think the option was a bad one just the execution.

If that had been say ROG kicking that then in would have rolled into touch just short of the Aussie line not straight down the fullbacks throat

"Im captain so I take accountability for decisions of my team on the pitch, thats why Im blaming the loss on a scapegoat"

It may be honest, but its unprofessional to make comments to the press that effectively hang a team member out to dry.

Say it in private by all means of course. I do think Preistland has to get the chop, although does Biggar have that much more experience and a reputation for a cool head and sound decision making skills?

This is one of the problems you get from picking sides full of kids and constantly chopping and changing, a lack of players who have been in the situation before and know how to deal with it.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:This is one of the problems you get from picking sides full of kids and constantly chopping and changing, a lack of players who have been in the situation before and know how to deal with it.

Yeah, but then are you playing the young ones for present wins or to create the players for future campaigns who will "have been in the situation before and know how to deal with it"?

I'd guess plans are for the best they can do for now against Australia but very much with eyes on perhaps Lions, Six Nations and certainly on next WC. We all tend to forget the future when dealing with the present until, that is, the future becomes the present and we criticise our coaches for not doing the developing of replacement players when they had the opportunities - a few years or months before the present!

If the forwards didn't want the ball kicked away, why the hell didn't they tell Rhys Webb so he didn't pass the ball to Rhys Priestland in the first place? That's the question that really needs answering.

I agree with RD where was the communication, then?

Perhaps if the forwards had fronted up in the first half we wouldn't be discussing this one particular option that didn't work out.

Perhaps if the forwards could defend a maul we wouldn't be discussing it.

We lost narrowly another game away to a good side, and we lost it while playing maybe 60 - 70 % of our ability.

Singling out one player is very unfair and very childish.

We need to move on now.

If her didn't want theball kicked it should have stayed with the forwards. Poor show Sam

Sounds like miscommunication between the back row, Webb & Priestland, who was standing so deep that kicking was the only option.

Some people have criticised Priestland. But the reason why we ultimately lost that game in the last minute or so is is not beacasuse Priestland kicked it deep, but because of what happened at the ruck that resulted in a pen, which was kicked to touch, which led to the lineout and the subsequent pen. Hibbard came into the ruck from the side and also flopped onto the other side of the ruck -- you can hear the ref referring to 16 as he gave the pen. You'd think that all players are primed in the dying minutes of a match they're winning to be ultra-disciplined -- this is not the first time Hibbard has given away stupid pens at rucks, flopping over the side or not keeping his footing. But it's a pretty awful way to give away a Test match. At rucks, people should keep their hands out, stay onside, and keep their footing -- everyone arriving at the ruck should be thinking the same way and be really switched on about it.

How hard is it for players not to infringe at rucks in the dying minute and a half of a game? Obviously, for some, it's too hard and they should be dropped to think about it.