South Africa 33 defeated Australia 31
Johannesburg - 17 August 2002

It's been one hell of a Tri Nations series this year, and in keeping with the buzzer-beating tradition of Tri Nations encounters, the Wallabies and the Boks produced another action-packed test match that was decided in its dying minutes.

Wallaby fight backs have become so commonplace in recent times that it came as no surprise when they started clawing back at the Springboks' sizable 17 point lead. But even we true believers would have been more than a little astonished when they took the lead with only a couple of minutes left to play. Surely, we thought, we can't lose it from here. Chalk up another improbable escape to the green and gold. And then...well, Werner Greeff kind of buggered things up. Mind you, it wasn't a soft try. He hit the ball at pace, and at a decent angle, and he picked his mark beautifully, right in the corridor to the side of the ruck, an area where Australia's defence seems increasingly frail.

Now if we're honest, the Springboks probably deserved the win. They outplayed the Wallabies for most of the match, and managed to come back with only 14 men on the field for the better part of twenty minutes - a situation of their own making, mind you. The Boks were certainly up to their old tricks with cheap shots, head highs, and general niggle every other minute. They paid a price for this, of course, but were good enough to win anyway. And whilst we thankfully didn't see a replay of the Brisbane antics of Messers Harrison, Paul, et al., the negative tactics of the Springboks most certainly still got under the skin of the Wallabies and conspired to disrupt their rhythm.

That said, this was a game that South Africa won, rather than Australia lost. The broken play running of Russell, Greeff, Paulse and van Niekerk was exceptional, and exposed the soft underbelly of the Wallabies' defence when confronted with slippery, pacey opposition backs (much the same as Jason Robinson caused them so many difficulties on last year's Lions' tour).

Our backs - so often touted as our strength - were shown up to be somewhat cumbersome and lacking in sheer blistering speed. They are big and strong, but they these positives can become negatives, as they are capable of being far from dynamic in the face of resolute defence, such as that proffered by South Africa.

Which brings us to Mat Rogers, the form back in Australian rugby at the moment, and seemingly unable to crack it for a starting spot. A place simply must be found for him in the starting side, be it at fullback, wing, or preferably at inside centre. The present Wallaby backlines has loads of experience, but just isn't quite there yet. Rugby journalist Spiro Zavos has since made the comment that, at home, the current Wallaby backline might be able to bluff its way through to a World Cup victory, but a canny opposition will find it out at some stage. Really, for the reigning World Champs, that situation is just not good enough.

We may boast an impressive trophy cabinet, and pulled out some wonderful victories, but we have also lost quite a few matches that could have been won. In the past two years - the Lions outplayed us for four out of six halves; the Boks drew with us and beat us last year, and beat us again this year; if not for that last minute penalty goal, the All Blacks would have swept us this year; not to mention last year's disastrous European tour with defeats against England and France.

The Wallabies need to start dominating their opposition, and to do that it would appear that some restructuring is required and some painful decisions need to be made. If I slip my selector's cap on for a moment, I would be inclined to move Rogers to inside centre, Mortlock to outside centre (where he belongs), Burke to fullback (where he belongs), Wendell to the wing (let's see what he can do given a decent chance), and Walker to the bench. Latham and Herbert are solid, but they're not spectacular. Latham, in particular, has disappointed this test season. Neither player brings to the team that X factor that can win matches, even though Latham seems capable of playing that role at provincial level. In my books, they don't cut it, so out they go. And for the love of God, someone - please! - tell George to run the ball every now and then.

In the forwards, I would move Finegan into lock in place of Harrison. Sharpe would retain his place because he has been quite outstanding this season. Smith stays at openside for the time being, though the selectors will have one eye on Phil Waugh's likely return. If David Croft has another excellent Super 12 season in 2003, he will also deserve an opportunity, as he is currently probably the most underrated forward in the country at the moment. Lyons moves to blindside, with Croft coming onto the bench. Cockbain remains an impact player off the bench. Cannon will likely see more second half minutes if he keeps playing to current form. Noriega gets the nod over Ben Darwin as starting tighthead. All other positions remain the same.

You may well now be thanking your lucky stars that I am not now, nor will I ever be, in a position to select the Wallabies. Any traditionalists out there, opposed to the fast-tracking of Big Dell will be shaking their heads in dismay. Nevertheless, I would very much like to see that team get a run. Plus, Lote Tuqiri remains a very, very interesting prospect for next year. And, of course, Joe Roff will be back from France. Who knows - Braith Anasta might even be running around for the Reds!

Whatever the make-up of the team, there is much to be done between now and the World Cup. Europe must be used as a laboratory. We need to find the right combination of mobility and power in the forwards, and size and pace in the backs. All doable, if the selectors and Eddie Jones are prepared to be adventurous.

Perhaps the most telling part of the rugby year for interested observers begins in Buenos Aires on the 2nd of November...

- Dan Fowell