What’s in a Name? Reputation, Respect, and the Rise of the Wallabies.
“Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?”
Most people misread that iconic Shakespearean line, believing Juliet is asking where Romeo is. But in truth, she’s questioning what he is. What does it mean to be a Montague? What does a name carry, if not weight built by history, allegiance, and perception? To Juliet, the name means nothing without substance. A name, a reputation, is not intrinsic. It’s inherited, built, and often unfairly judged.
This same logic applies to international rugby. Reputation, like a name, shapes perception, and perception influences decisions, even in the most objective arenas, like a Test match.
Let’s talk about the Wallabies.
In the recent Test against the British & Irish Lions, there was a moment, a clear-out that, in any other context, involving any other player from a more historically respected side, might have been penalised without hesitation. Imagine if that hit had landed on someone like Maro Itoje, Ellis Genge, or Owen Farrell. Would there be even a pause? Would the whistle stay silent? Probably not.
But this time, it was Carlo Tizzano, a Wallaby, in an era where Australian rugby is clawing its way back from the depths of form and faith. The penalty wasn’t given, and while no one likes to say it out loud, the decision likely wasn’t made in a vacuum. It was shaped by legacy, by what has come before, and by the reality that a European referee knows how ruthless the UK press can be, and how toothless the Australian press has become in comparison.
There’s a growing sentiment among fans that the Lions, for all their brilliance and tradition, are treated as a protected species. That they benefit from the calls when it matters most. And some argue, perhaps fairly, that they’ve earned that status. When you’re consistently the best, you get the benefit of the doubt, you get the calls, you carry a name with weight.
But what then for the Wallabies? A team in transition, on a path to resurgence. In the first two Tests, they’ve shown heart, courage, and noticeable growth. The second Test might not have gone their way in the end, but the signs are clear — this is a team on the rise.
Will Skelton stood tall, a mountain in the middle of the park. Tate McDermott, shifted to the wing, adapted with grit and intent. There were doubts around Tom Lynagh stepping in at 10, but he showed composure and a willingness to take risks. These aren’t just performances, they’re statements.
And yet, a few errors after halftime — small moments, perhaps lapses in focus or fatigue — cost the Wallabies dearly. It was reminiscent of last year’s painful clash with Argentina, where early dominance gave way to a dramatic collapse. Maintaining pressure, keeping the boot on the neck, is a skill in itself. One the Wallabies are relearning, game by game.
But this isn’t just about one missed penalty. It’s about perception. It’s about how teams build not just their game, but their name. And like Juliet said, a name means nothing until you decide what it should mean. The Wallabies, in this Lions series, are not just playing for points, they’re playing for respect, for recognition, for the right to have the calls go their way because they’ve earned them.
As the third Test approaches, everything is on the line. This Wallabies side has shown pride, passion, and real promise. They’re not asking for favours, just fairness. And with continued growth, their name will start to carry the weight it once did.
Because in rugby, as in Shakespeare, a name only matters if the story behind it earns its place, and the Wallabies they’re writing theirs, one play at a time.