2nd Test Wallabies v France 8pmTuesday 13th July,

[Zero_Cool]

Really shocked so many people are overlooking To'omua's massive lack of form. He was pretty awful in the first game, didn't really make any real positive contributions. Then add to this his major decline across first Super Rugby AU and then Super Rugby TT. He's not had a good game in months. He didn't even do the job of calming/controlling the backline.
Yet Rennie retains him, presumably on reputation.

I think we've really missed a trick by not at least shuffling a few players to the bench, or perhaps giving a few guys some rest. This game would have been the one to roll the dice and take some risks on a few guys (Lachlan Lonergan Kaitu’u, Fa’amausili, McReight, Swain, Ryan Lonergan, Ikitau/Simone). If you lose game 2 that sucks but you're still in the hunt for a series win, AND you can take whatever learnings we get out of trying some guys, maybe Simone is a gun at test level and is 2021's Hunter, then we can take that into game three that might be a series decider.
Plus by starting our 'A Team' in game 2 it puts us under enormous pressure to win game 2, because if we don't it means we are taking massive risks with our 'A Team' guys in game 3 who will play 3 games in 11 days or whatever it is, or we have to take a risk on our unknown and unproven B Team guys.

I think really really poor selecting methodology, unless you are sure all of your guys are up for 3 games in 11 days, and even then it's needlessly risking injuries especially to someone like Slipper who you can't afford to lose.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

Too much risk for a coach to gamble with selections in the 2nd Test when your A Team barely won the first game, then pick a weaker team and put yourself under pressure to win the series in Game 3 when the opposition has momentum.

 

[TSR]

Plus by starting our 'A Team' in game 2 it puts us under enormous pressure to win game 2, because if we don't it means we are taking massive risks with our 'A Team' guys in game 3 who will play 3 games in 11 days or whatever it is, or we have to take a risk on our unknown and unproven B Team guys.

I think really really poor selecting methodology, unless you are sure all of your guys are up for 3 games in 11 days, and even then it's needlessly risking injuries especially to someone like Slipper who you can't afford to lose.

Okay - I have two problems with this bit.

Firstly - you don’t want a coach who is prepared to out enormous pressure on himself to win?

Secondly, you think it’s a better to give yourself more chance in game 3 by putting less emphasis on winning game 2?

I feel like I must be misunderstanding - but I’ve read what you wrote several times and you seem to be clearly advocating employing a seleection policy which gives the French a better chance of squaring the series. For a coach for whom some people in the wider media already seem to be calling for him to be replaced.

Fuck that - go all out in this way one. Deal with everything else Wednesday morning.

 

[Derpus]

I feel like I must be misunderstanding - but I’ve read what you wrote several times and you seem to be clearly advocating employing a seleection policy which gives the French a better chance of squaring the series. For a coach for whom some people in the wider media already seem to be calling for him to be replaced.

Surely not already..

 

[Zero_Cool]

I'm advocating giving yourself the best chance to win the series, and to win all 3 games. I think ZERO load management is dumb. I'm not saying play all those guys I listed, but acknowledge taking the same team into 3 games in 11 days is going to risk injury to your players, and will leave all your guys very tired in game 3.

I think (and if people think I'm wrong I'll accept that) guys can't be playing 240 mins (3x80) of Rugby in 11 days, no teams (where possible) do it at the World Cup. So if we accept at some point we need some kind of load management then game 2 is not the game to go for continuity. We could have done stuff that doesn't even bring in outside players, say Valintini who played 80 goes to the bench for Isi, while Wilson comes off at 60ish like he did in game 1 (and Hooper is one of the few guys who you anticipate can play all 3 games).

I'm not saying play a whole B team. But shuffle a few guys around on the bench, give a few of those might guys a start (like a McReight or Pone), while resting some of the guys who probably won't be able to go 3x80. I'm advocating for a team that gives the best chance to win the most games.

We can't pick the same team for game 3 without risking serious injury, so why not make game 3 your change up game (if only swapping guys around on the bench).

 

[dru]

I think (and if people think I'm wrong I'll accept that) guys can't be playing 240 mins (3x80) of Rugby in 11 days,

What we are talking about right now is 160 mins (2x80) in 6 days, near as damn it a week and very normal. Then a short turn around. We have #1, now take #2.

Then look at the rest of the squad for #3.

 

[Zero_Cool]

So you are completely happy to sacrifice any chance at winning game 3?

I totally agree 2 games in 6 days is tight but fine, but that's not the full situation, because after those two games in 6 days, they then have ANOTHER game in 4 days. I would rather we at least move a few guys to the bench (start the second front row, swap LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) and Swain, as well as Isi and Rob as a minimum, the backs probably can manage that workload).

I think that approach, the approach Rennie and co have taken is very foolhardy, and short sighted. Like we don't even need to take any/many risks, Swain came on and played well, Isi is an experienced test player and gave us good mins off the bench, the second front row did well (probably you retain BPA starting)... that's very conservative, doesn't give an inch, and gives us a much better chance to try to win game 3.

More oever we really ought to be taking every chance to test and trial our guys with an eye on the 2023 RWC, obviously it's a balance, but saying 'just pick the best team' is daft, and we aren't even doing that! We've got O'Connor fit but we aren't picking him... Sure I do understand and truthfully agree with holding him out a week to make sure he's right, he's too important for us to risk, but we are either risking everyone who we have play 3 games in 11 days, or we are risking having to select a few guys who we'd probably rather not, in a high pressure must win game...

You can't tell me you think that's actually good strategy?

 

[dru]

So you are completely happy to sacrifice any chance at winning game 3?

No, I want a strategy that targets 3 wins. But we should start with winning the first two. That I'm completely happy with.

I do think you are correct about not currently picking our best side but your example isn't really it. As you say JOC (James O'Connor) has been injured and would apparently be returning underdone for test #2.

The strategy as presented by Rennie? Yes I think it's a good strategy. I'm completely happy with it.

 

[KOB1987]

I think that the most plausible explanation is that it was already decided that the same teams will be largely run out for the first two tests, and players knocking on the door will be given an opportunity to make their case in the third test. The quick turnaround between the second and third, and the more normal one between the first and the second has basically dictated this situation. The other alternative would have been to send the 'A' team out tonight, but I can understand for the start of the season that Rennie wants to give his chosen players/combinations an opportunity to develop, rather than changing things up tonight and then reverting back in 4 days time. There's no chance of creating cohesion under that model. ZC I'm pretty sure that tonight is the night many of those fringe players' positions are on the line.

 

[Zero_Cool]

Like I said, we don't win this game we're going to be in a world of hurt got game 3.

 

[KOB1987]

I think (and if people think I'm wrong I'll accept that) guys can't be playing 240 mins (3x80) of Rugby in 11 days, no teams (where possible) do it at the World Cup. So if we accept at some point we need some kind of load management then game 2 is not the game to go for continuity.

It can certainly be done in this instance as there's no games afterwards for about a month. The odd player does do it in the RWC but the load management is more important there for the top teams as they have to survive up to 3 finals games in 15 days afterwards.

 

[Derpus]

Is three tests in 11 days really not feasible? These guys are highly conditioned, professional athletes and they'll have a big rest afterwards.

I wouldn't be that shocked if Rennie just rolls out more or less the best team he has each game.

 

[PhilClinton]

Is three tests in 11 days really not feasible? These guys are highly conditioned, professional athletes and they'll have a big rest afterwards.

I wouldn't be that shocked if Rennie just rolls out more or less the best team he has each game.

If the under15 local metropolitan rugby carnivals can belt out 5 games in a weekend per team, I don't see why the Wallabies shouldn't be able to get through 3 games in 11 days

 

[John S]

SpecSavers are offering specials for rugby fans this month (not)

That special is only for Refs

 

[barbarian]

I wouldn't be that shocked if Rennie just rolls out more or less the best team he has each game.

It's stating the obvious, but a lot will depend on what happens tonight. If we win the game, I'd think he would be more tempted to rest some of our players, particularly those that have had heavier workloads this year (eg. Tongan Thor, Valetini).

But if we lose then I think he'd be pulling out all the stops to win the series.

France have already signalled they will be making mass changes for game 3, to give every tourist a run. I think there's 11 or 12 of them yet to get on the park.

 

[rugboy]

Is three tests in 11 days really not feasible? These guys are highly conditioned, professional athletes and they'll have a big rest afterwards.

I wouldn't be that shocked if Rennie just rolls out more or less the best team he has each game.

Completely agree. The majority of league SOO players played the equivalent of 3 games in 11 days, some (Panthers) 3 games in 9 days. Im sure they will be fine.

Rennie will be no doubt keen to win all 3 and develop a winning culture, if that requires the majority if not all the same players across the 3 games then so be it.

 

[Up the Guts]

aybe Simone is a gun at test level and is 2021's Hunter, then we can take that into game three that might be a series decider.
Plus by starting our 'A Team' in game 2 it puts us under enormous pressure to win game 2, because if we don't it means we are taking massive risks with our 'A Team' guys in game 3 who will play 3 games in 11 days or whatever it is, or we have to take a risk on our unknown and unproven B Team guys.

I think really really poor selecting methodology, unless you are sure all of your guys are up for 3 games in 11 days, and even then it's needlessly risking injuries especially to someone like Slipper who you can't afford to lose.

Good point, reduce the pressure on game 2 by deliberately throwing it and shifting all the pressure to game 3.

I also fail to see why pressure, a priori, is a bad thing. Surely it's better to try and have as high stakes a contest as possible to prepare you for the first Bledisloe.

 

[Tex]

Really shocked so many people are overlooking To'omua's massive lack of form. He was pretty awful in the first game, didn't really make any real positive contributions. Then add to this his major decline across first Super Rugby AU and then Super Rugby TT. He's not had a good game in months. He didn't even do the job of calming/controlling the backline.
Yet Rennie retains him, presumably on reputation.

I think really really poor selecting methodology, unless you are sure all of your guys are up for 3 games in 11 days, and even then it's needlessly risking injuries especially to someone like Slipper who you can't afford to lose.

Good to know that the national coach and selectors, armed with data and actual insights into the team and players and balance etc. are ignoring that and making decisions based on the vibe.

What's the alternative? Throw another rookie into the backline?

 

[Hookerbytrade]

Tonight's game - attacking breakdown cleanout accuracy and stronger ball carrying/retention will be critical to providing some front foot and cleaner ball in all parts of the field will be critical. There were numerous times players became isolated and the French capitalised on this to steal ball which shouldn't have been lost in the first place.

Accuracy at the breakdown coupled with stronger carries into contact/making metres post contact will negate this issue. It's an area that's been constantly mentioned by people for a number of years. Rob Valetini we all saw was excellent during Super Rugby AU and Super Rugby TT with ball carries and I hope to see him retain that confidence and form in his second start. Across the board it will be an important one to watch. Hopefully if the team can deliver this, it will provide a much more stable foundation to play football from.

Good luck to the team tonight and here's to another win for the men in gold.

 

[Joe Blow]

It’s a big game for both Gordon and Lolesio. Forwards need to consolidate what they achieved last week and put it on a platter for these two with a lot of time and space.