Is it better to be occasionally brilliant or consistently good? Ask the Wallabies | Daniel Gallan
Is it better to be a consistently good team or an occasionally brilliant one? We’ll find out by the end of Australia’s European tour.But now, after a 26–19 loss to Italy in Udine – their second defeat in as many matches on this crucial trip – the answer seems obvious.Because despite the Wallabies’ flashes of brilliance throughout the Joe Schmidt era, their inability to deliver steadily could yet prove costly.At present, the Wallabies are ranked seventh on World Rugby’s charts.If that doesn’t change, the hosts of the 2027 World Cup will be drawn alongside one of the top six teams in the group phase.
Even if they progress, Australia would likely face another stiff challenge at the first knockout stage.That’s not the kind of jeopardy a rugby nation of this pedigree should be flirting with.Anyone who has regularly watched Australia over the past 18 months will be baffled by all of this.They have been magnificent in patches – at times one of the best sides in the world.They were blistering against South Africa in Johannesburg in August, claiming a remarkable 38–22 comeback through slick interplay and bravery with ball in hand.
They were equally proficient in the final Test against the British & Irish Lions, grinding out a dogged 22–12 win to deny the tourists a whitewash.They chanced their arm against Argentina in Townsville, turning down kickable points to snatch a stunning 86th-minute victory.If you only watched the highlights, you’d see a fluent team that spirals the ball wide, attacks the breakdown with fanatic fervour and strikes from first-phase play.When the initial wave dissipates, they show composure and patience, cycling possession as they methodically build towards their goal.This is a good team.
A well coached team,A team that knows what it’s about,But between those famous victories and moments of triumph lie performances that challenge the idea of a renaissance,There was an abject showing against the Lions in the series opener,A shoddy outing against the Springboks in Cape Town.
Two predictable implosions against the All Blacks.And a sorry display at a soggy Twickenham against England last week.One step forward and one step back is better than two steps back, but it’s hardly the stuff of revival.Schmidt’s pragmatic influence has steadied a ship once full of holes, and improved results.He’s also inspired recruitment of talent from rival codes, including the returning Carter Gordon, who scored with a nifty side-step.
But is it enough? Are the Wallabies truly back, or merely searching for a previously trodden path?That depends on what “back” means.Are they World Cup contenders as they were in 1991 and 1999 when they lifted the trophy, or in 2003 and 2015 when they reached the final? No.Not yet.Not even close.So, what are they?Against Italy they were neither great nor dreadful.
They bagged two tries through front-rowers in the first half – Matt Faessler and Angus Bell burrowing over from close range – and largely rectified their sloppiness under the high ball that they showed against England.But the game was a microcosm of their broader malaise: moments of energy offset by costly lapses.The most tangible of those came just before half-time, when Taniela Tupou collected a pass on the gallop, skipped around a defender, rode another challenge and surged forward.The Wallabies were on the front foot and looking to orchestrate something from unstructured play.Then, inexplicably, the ball spilled forward.
Italy countered.The danger passed when Australia won a penalty on the floor soon after, but the sense of frustration lingered.They led 12–9 at the break after 40 minutes of hard graft, but the feeling was of something half-finished, a tune played out of key.That mood hardened midway through the second half.With Italy leading after Monty Ioane’s try, Australia pressed again.
They pounded the line on 68 minutes, phase after phase, bodies piling in.But they were held up over the line; another chance gone.It was the story of the night: plenty of possession, little incision, and no spark of invention beyond one-up runners and short passes around the corner.Sign up to The BreakdownThe latest rugby union news and analysis, plus all the week's action reviewedafter newsletter promotionWhen full-time came, it was difficult to know exactly what to make of it.Australia had competed.
They had shown intent,But they had not convinced,The outlines of a proper team are there – an improving set-piece, improved defensive structure, a handful of genuine match-winners – yet the brushstrokes remain uneven,Schmidt has clearly given the Wallabies a plan, but plans need execution, and execution requires habit,The best teams make the extraordinary seem routine; the Wallabies too often make the routine look extraordinary.
So, is it better to be consistently good or occasionally brilliant? Australia remain trapped somewhere in between, capable of beauty, vulnerable to chaos, and still searching for the kind of steady excellence that turns potential into power.Until they find that rhythm, they’ll remain a team of flashes, not finishes.
Tesla shareholders approve $1tn pay package for Elon Musk
Tesla shareholders approved a $1tn compensation plan for CEO Elon Musk on Thursday, awarding the world’s richest person what would be the largest corporate payout in history if he meets the goals necessary to receive it.The pay package, which several high-profile investors opposed, demonstrates that shareholders still believe Musk can lead the automaker in an era dominated by robotics and artificial intelligence.The result of the vote was announced at the annual shareholder event in Austin, Texas, with more than 75% of investors voting in favor of the plan. Chants of “Elon” erupted in the room at the news of its approval.“Thanks, guys,” Musk said, after briefly dancing on stage alongside the company’s Optimus robots
Amazon sues AI startup over browser’s automated shopping and buying feature
Amazon sued a prominent artificial intelligence startup on Tuesday over a shopping feature in the company’s browser, which can automate placing orders for users. Amazon accused Perplexity AI of covertly accessing customer accounts and disguising AI activity as human browsing.“Perplexity’s misconduct must end,” Amazon’s lawyers wrote. “Perplexity is not allowed to go where it has been expressly told it cannot; that Perplexity’s trespass involves code rather than a lockpick makes it no less unlawful.”Perplexity, which has grown rapidly amid the boom in AI assistants, has previously rejected the US shopping company’s claims, accusing Amazon of using its market dominance to stifle competition
Google plans to put datacentres in space to meet demand for AI
Google is hatching plans to put artificial intelligence datacentres into space, with its first trial equipment sent into orbit in early 2027.Its scientists and engineers believe tightly packed constellations of about 80 solar-powered satellites could be arranged in orbit about 400 miles above the Earth’s surface equipped with the powerful processors required to meet rising demand for AI.Prices of space launches are falling so quickly that by the middle of the 2030s the running costs of a space-based datacentre could be comparable to one on Earth, according to Google research released on Tuesday.Using satellites could also minimise the impact on the land and water resources needed to cool existing datacentres.Once in orbit, the datacentres would be powered by solar panels that can be up to eight times more productive than those on Earth
LOL: is this the ultimate texting faux pas (and what should you use instead)?
From abbreviations to happy poos, gen Z has strong opinions on appropriate texting behaviour. But can anyone keep up with the ever-changing rules?Name: “LOL”.Age: The Oxford English Dictionary first included LOL in 1997.Not to be confused with: Loll, which is what dogs sometimes do.So as in “laugh out loud”? Or laughing out loud, though David Cameron thought it stood for “lots of love” and used to sign off to Rebekah Brooks, the former Sun and News of the World editor, with a LOL
Elon Musk’s $1tn Tesla pay deal to be rejected by huge Norway wealth fund
Norway’s sovereign wealth fund has said it will vote against a $1tn (£765bn) pay package for the Tesla chief executive, Elon Musk.The fund, which is the biggest national wealth fund in the world, said that while it appreciated the “the significant value created under Mr Musk’s visionary role” it would vote against his performance award.“We are concerned about the total size of the award, dilution and lack of mitigation of key person risk – consistent with our views on executive compensation,” it said. “We will continue to seek constructive dialogue with Tesla on this and other topics.”The warning from Norges Bank, which is the seventh biggest single shareholder in Tesla with a stake worth $17bn, comes two days before the carmaker hosts its annual shareholder meeting
Apple Watch SE 3 review: the bargain smartwatch for iPhone
Apple’s entry level Watch SE has been updated with almost everything from its excellent mid-range Series 11 but costs about 40% less, making it the bargain of iPhone smartwatches.The Guardian’s journalism is independent. We will earn a commission if you buy something through an affiliate link. Learn more.The new Watch SE 3 costs from £219 (€269/$249/A$399), making it one of the cheapest brand-new fully fledged smartwatches available for the iPhone and undercutting the £369 Series 11 and the top-of-the-line £749 Apple Watch Ultra 3
Three big problems with ITV’s talks to sell television business to Sky: price, politics and regulation | Nils Pratley
Stock markets drop amid jitters over US economy and tech valuations – business live
China poised to lift ban on chips exports to European carmakers after US deal
ITV shares soar as it holds talks to sell television business to Sky
Qantas business lounge passenger set on fire after power bank explodes in his pocket
Driving competition: China’s carmakers in race to dominate Europe’s roads