By Greg Mumm

As the smoke clears from Sunday’s fireworks display against Wales, and the final games have provided clarity around the knock out stages, the questions on many Australians lips is can we do it…can we go the whole way?

With such a rousing defensive effort filling every fan’s patriotism account to the brim, is it time to start contacting Bob Hawkes tailor and ordering Wallaby jackets all round?

There is now a genuine belief amongst Australian rugby fans that we have the culture, the do or die attitude, the ‘for your mates’ approach that we all love to rally around.

Our scrums performance over the last two weeks and the performance of Bernard Foley at 10 have for many answered the questions as to whether we have the team.

So, the question that the real rugby enthusiasts will now turn to is; do we have the game plan?

Michael Cheika was measured in his praise on the weekend highlighting that the team had plenty to ‘work on’ before Scotland. Not quite yet confident enough to share these with the media or opposition, here are a couple that I think he will be worried about.

1. Contestable kick receptions

Teams wary of trying to run out of their own half against Australia’s double threat at the breakdown (which is really a triple threat with Fardy), will follow Wales lead and put contestable kicks up. Australia is currently playing a two fullback system, so long kicking isn’t a smart option, but dropping a ball in front of either the fullback and just behind the No.9 creates confusion and potentially turns this in to a 50/50 as well as disrupting Australia’s defensive system.

With Izzy’s ankle looking suspect and neither Foley or Beale being renowned for their height, this is one area the Wallabies will need to strengthen.

1. The lineout

Firstly – it’s not terrible, but rewind 12 months and it was head and shoulders above the performance of our scrum. There is still the odd confusion on Mumm’s calling, one each against both Uruguay and Wales where no-one gets in the air – this shouldn’t happen at this level.

However, the real ‘work-on’ I believe is in gaining a wider array of attacking options and delivery methods. Mauling is great, but limited off the top ball makes it difficult to really challenge the gain line. We seem hesitant to throw to the back, very interested in throwing to the middle (possibly due to maul set-up) and reluctant to use the front at all. At this level opposition teams will be able to defend two out of the three channels well, and put late pressure on the third. So speed of call and a practical approach to winning it where we can will serve Australia well in the knock-out stages.

Now in the shadow of such a fantastic team performance, this analysis could be accused of nit picking, and it largely is. A performance such as that against Wales should be celebrated for all that it was, a powerful display of will and resilience.

But in a tournament where you have to play 7 games back to back after a season of heavily scrutinised warm-ups, there is one remaining question.

Can Australia can get though without a ‘Plan B’?

Now I can hear the true Cheika fans (of which I am one) reciting the current team’s mantra…’We just focus on ourselves and one game at a time’. This approach works on so many levels for simplicity, unity and process not outcome psychology. But do we have enough tactical flexibility to adapt to a defence like the Welsh on the weekend, or the USA in Chicago – A rushing defence that takes out our wide attacking options off us?

The ‘Plan B’ I talk of is an ability to mix direct rugby, with wide-wide attack, do we have the ability to ‘earn the right to go wide’?

We have shown glimpses of it with forwards scoring direct tries against South Africa, USA & Uruguay. Inside balls also worked for Foley in the same matches, eventually allowing the pivot to break the line when the defence was distracted by threats both inside and out wider of him against England, but can we use it as a prolonged approach against the stronger defences?

Having failed to get around Australia’s defence in the first Bledisloe, the All Blacks used this more direct approach with lethal effect in Auckland, and showed again against Tonga that they can be both brutal and brilliant when they need to be. South Africa have long been feared for their bludgeoning abilities and the French know how to rumble as well as anyone.

Though with a light backline and the absence of a wrecking ball in the backrow, it may well be that Australia has rolled it’s dice and are all in on the attack or perish approach.

The exciting thing for us as fans is that whilst the Wallabies may have areas to ‘work on’, the current coaches are difficult to ‘work out’ and have kept us guessing so far. If we believe in them like the players believe in each other, then they just may have the answers we are looking for.