For practical purposes, Richard's Pippit = Australian Pippit in this region. Opinions differ as to the status of the Australasian pippits: are they the local representatives of that widespread species Richard's Pippit? Or is specific rank deserved? The current official position upholds a split, meaning that there are no Richard's Pippits in Australia, but plenty of Australasian Pippits.
Me, I've been calling them "Richard's Pippit" since well before the split, and habit is a powerful thing.
So is this bird Richard's Pippit/Australian Pippit? Clearly, yes. Can't really be anything else with those long, pinkish legs.
But with pippits and the several other very similar-looking birds of the grasslands and open country (skylarks, songlarks, bushlarks, grassbirds), plumage really isn't a very helpful guide in the field. Here is a simple, practical way to narrow down your choices:
Wagging its tail a lot? Pippit for sure.
Rich rufous patch on the rump, not always visible but obvious when you see it: Rufous Songlark.
Obvious crest: European Skylark.
Short, thick bill like a finch: Singing Bushlark. (But beware female House Sparrow.)
Little Grassbird and Clamourous Reed-warbler both unlikely in dry habitats, common in reeds and rushes, both best recognised by song, which is in each case unmistakable.
Problems with the above: Brown Songlark and Tawny Grassbird. If there is an easy way to nail those two, I don't know it.