For me it was a game of two halves.
In the first half our D was superior to theirs and we kept them under enough pressure to lead them on the scoreboard. We built pressure and attacked their weakness. The pressure caused them to make errors and leave weak spots in their own D line. And because we only attacked their weakness the odds of success were on our side, allowing us to keep the pressure on for extended periods.
In the second half our D was inferior to theirs. We lost focus on applying pressure and started attacking them when they were still strong defensively. This is a bad idea because it involves taking big risks when the odds are low, and they were able to defuse our attack and make us look unorganized.
Guss pointed this out when
Johnson kicked dead in goal, right before they scored off the tap restart to seal the match. The option was a high risk one which would have needed to be perfect, as well as lucky, to avoid letting the Aussies off the hook. It wasn't perfect or lucky. They immediately took advantage of the pressure gap and got a roll on against us all the way to the try line.
If the team had kept the first half mentality that try to the Aussies doesn't get scored and we are a 50% chance of being camped down their end for another set. And maybe they crack under the sustained pressure allowing us to tie the game.
So from my armchair coaching manual I say focus on breaking the opposition structure before attacking. Keep applying pressure until a genuine opportunity to strike presents itself. When the opportunity presents then take some risks and let the ball sing. Very demoralizing.
If the Aussies D had gone as soft, as ours did during that last try, we would have carved them up just as brilliantly. The difference was that their D line never went soft. We cracked it early on through immense pressure, but it never went soft the way ours did.
Maybe that's the blessing origin footy gives the Kangroos. They can grind out games at intensity levels our players aren't at all conditioned for.
