April Wallaby 30 Man Squad

[en_force_er]

Now that GS is a potential selection it's interesting to think how Deans will handle it, he notoriously makes poor decisions with 7s in my eyes.

For example, not bringing 2 7s to a WC but he also named 2 7s in most of his match day squads last year. Why?

If you think they're both good enough for the 22 but one is better then rotate him in on occasion. Don't waste a spot.

 

[Braveheart81]

For example, not bringing 2 7s to a WC but he also named 2 7s in most of his match day squads last year. Why?

If you think they're both good enough for the 22 but one is better then rotate him in on occasion. Don't waste a spot.

This is purely based on the quality of those players.

Pocock and Hooper or Hooper and Gill represented a far different equation than Pocock and Hodgson in 2011.

 

[fatprop]

Now that GS is a potential selection it's interesting to think how Deans will handle it, he notoriously makes poor decisions with 7s in my eyes.

For example, not bringing 2 7s to a WC but he also named 2 7s in most of his match day squads last year. Why?

If you think they're both good enough for the 22 but one is better then rotate him in on occasion. Don't waste a spot.

I think a lot of the two being selected last season was about the time being budgeted. If Pocock was starting you can comfortably budget 80 minutes from him, the same with Smith. So Deans could back up the bench to cover other spots.

Hooper & Gill? They ain't 80 minute test players yet.

So if Smith starts, do you provide cover for him or do you rely on him for 80 and provide cover for other spots. Now with Smith in the mix the cover for 8 maybe Smith himself with Hooper or Gill (probably Gill for balance) moving to 7

 

[suckerforred]

From what I have seen George is still not available for the Wallabies. See - http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/co...should-he-play-against-the-lions.12612/page-7

And not just because I think that I am right....

 

[Brumby Runner]

If you are keen to play a player in a Jono Lance role then McCabe would be amazing. He's played plenty at fullback (for when we're on attack) and he's a good defender in the line (for when we're on D).

Why not name him at 15 but use Quade for counter attack?

I think Pat will be the next 15 on the rank for the Brumbies if Moggy is injured in the future.

 

[en_force_er]

I think Pat will be the next 15 on the rank for the Brumbies if Moggy is injured in the future.

If played as a standard 15 he'd certainly snuff out a few linebreaks with his cover defending.

 

[Brumby Runner]

JOC (James O'Connor) should only be considered for a wing position.

9 Genia
10 To'omua
11 Digby
12 Lilo
13 AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
14 JOC (James O'Connor)
15 Mogg


Would be my starting backline against the lions. Yes To'omua is inexperienced at test level but I think he is worth the punt. Really rate his defensive capabilities and his combination with Lilo.

Matt To'omua is the best defensive No 10 by far in the Aust conference. Don't think he will make the tests for the Lions though. IMO has to be Cooper for his attacking skills.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Good article, but I think the question is wrong. I don't think Quade is held to a higher standard, I think there is a narrative that says Quade is mercurial and Carlos Spencer-ish, so that writers assume things have happened because a dropped ball near QC (Quade Cooper) must be carelessness or lack of focus. Or nerves, or whatever.

I think you see the reverse happen with players like Genia, where their errors are rarely noted unless they have a particularly poor game. Preconceived narratives have enormous power on how people make sense of sports.

(Another example would be the numerous "Folau was in crap position and that's why the Hurricanes scored all those tries" statements. As Scott Allen showed in going back to the tape, Folau's positioning was actually fine in all four Canes' tries, even if he didn't execute his defense well in the Savea juggling one. But because he's a code-hopper, it must be his positioning (i.e. rugby knowledge and experience) that is at fault.)

So right. From another angle, Will missed at least two, maybe more, important tackles against the Chiefs, but was not criticised anywhere I saw probably because he wasn't expected to miss them so they went rather unnoticed. Nevertheless, Will was still MOM imo.

 

[Bullrush]

I don't know what the fuss is about with RD taking 3 half-backs to the RWC. I thought this was pretty common practice because if your first-choice 9 goes down, you only have 1 who will play and no cover on the bench.

If RD had only taken 2, in the event Genia got injured the day before the game, Phipps would have started - who would have been cover?

It's the same reason most teams take 3 hookers I thought?

 

[Braveheart81]

I don't know what the fuss is about with RD taking 3 half-backs to the RWC. I thought this was pretty common practice because if your first-choice 9 goes down, you only have 1 who will play and no cover on the bench.

If RD had only taken 2, in the event Genia got injured the day before the game, Phipps would have started - who would have been cover?

It's the same reason most teams take 3 hookers I thought?

Absolutely.

Burgess would have been the second halfback though.

If you went through every RWC squad I think you'd struggle to find a team without 3 hookers and 3 halfbacks.

Australia could have potentially left Phipps at home and considered JOC (James O'Connor) as the third choice halfback but it would have been a risky move. It was maybe considered that having McCalman as the backup 7 was less of a risk than having a non halfback or hooker as the third string halfback/hooker.

 

[USARugger]

There is some sort of irony behind the fact that Giteau would have been great as third scrum half cover.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Yet there was enough room in the squad to take 3 specialist scrumhalves, even though Blind Fredie could tell you that the only reason Genia would play every minute of every game unless he suffered a catistrophic tornument ending injury.

To me forwards, all forwards, should be covered with back ups in a squad because they are more likely to be putting their body on the line and therefore be injured.

But you are right, been done to death...

Given two halfbacks are selected very single test it doesn't seem that outrageous that a team would select 3 for a tourney squad. I think only 4 sides didn't have 3 halfbacks and a couple of those sides had 10s that could play at 9 if need be.

 

[Richo]

I was referring to retrospective transparency, should have been more specific. The fact that Deans doesn't have to face a tribunal every time he does make these self-evidently poor selection choices while individual players get hung out over the fire is my main issue. I reckon an All Black coach would be drawn and quartered through the streets of Christchurch if they had made selections like Deans has in the past few years.

I think he cops a bit of stick, but the paucity of quality rugby journalism over here doesn't help. He was certainly slammed in the press for the 7 issue being discussed here. But you're right about him not copping the crap he would have in NZ. Part of the problem, too, was his reappointment pre-RWC and how that leant itself to a lack of criticism - what was the point if he was around for 2 years anyway?

But all this has been done to death...

I do think that coaches are more answerable in your part of the world, USAR. Probably a good thing overall.

 

[RedsHappy]

I think he cops a bit of stick, but the paucity of quality rugby journalism over here doesn't help. He was certainly slammed in the press for the 7 issue being discussed here. But you're right about him not copping the crap he would have in NZ. Part of the problem, too, was his reappointment pre-RWC and how that leant itself to a lack of criticism - what was the point if he was around for 2 years anyway?

But all this has been done to death.

I do think that coaches are more answerable in your part of the world, USAR. Probably a good thing overall.

I think what can be said with both high concern (for Australian rugby) and factual accuracy is this: the degree to which, over 5+ years, Deans has never been held accountable by his masters, the ARU, against not only their own firmly and publicly pre-stated Wallaby KPIs (AB wins, 3Ns wins, a RWC win or Final, w-l% ratios) but equally against any other normal metric for a highly paid national coach, is quite unprecedented and extraordinary in the professional era. The latest and most startling example being Hawker's and Pulver's early 2013 declarations that (a) they are 'very happy' with RD and (b) he will be held in position throughout 2013 irrespective of results to the end of 2013 and (c) RD will definitely be a candidate for a further contract renewal through RWC 2015.

As another extraordinary aspect of this indulgence and near-parental protectiveness was the fact that post-RWC the ARU totally removed all of Dean's then Assistant Coaches (all appointed by Deans), then designed and selected for Deans the immediate replacements, yet Deans was left wholly untouched and (by them) un-criticised as further evidenced by the non-publication of the promised 'independent" post-RWC review by the ARU of Wallaby performances in that event.

This entire process end to end, 2008-2013, remains one of the inexplicable mysteries of modern Australian rugby.

 

[RedsHappy]

So right. From another angle, Will missed at least two, maybe more, important tackles against the Chiefs, but was not criticised anywhere I saw probably because he wasn't expected to miss them so they went rather unnoticed. Nevertheless, Will was still MOM imo.

If you look closely at WG's ruck-base work vs the Chiefs you'll see an old, familiar flaw creeping back just a little into his play: mini-meerkating for a second or two too long when the ball was free enabling the opposition to grasp the pill and (on one occasions at least IIRC) turn the ball over whilst Will had his periscope out.

 

[RedsHappy]

No, a lot of the hate comes from him going on national TV and saying he might not accept if selected for the "yellow jersey".

I was a 100% bolted-on Quade supporter before that.

Since then, no way.

Just out of interest, how did you (and others here) feel when the ARU itself decided to entirely dispense with any pretence of actually providing our Wallabies with a gold jersey, but inexplicably (as far as I know) moved to various yellow-ey shades from daffodil to near-canary?

Could this not be protested as something of an unjustified abrogation of a deeply-rooted national symbolism?

 

[RedsHappy]

I think part of that stat is that the Chiefs seemed able to release their outside backs at will. The Reds hauled them in.

It's a story of the Supe so far. The Kiwi teams seem to be easily able to get their wide men into space. They always seem to be on the verge of breaking through, but it doesn't happen.

And then they lose games, because they currently have none of the proverbial "Plan B".

Is it not perhaps also the case that it's been a long while since Australia had at least three S14/5 teams all in the same year with very high (and consistently so) standards of all-of-80 defence, namely the Brumbies, Reds and Force.

 

[Pete King]

Matt To'omua is the best defensive No 10 by far in the Aust conference. Don't think he will make the tests for the Lions though. IMO has to be Cooper for his attacking skills.

Matt To'omua is the best defensive No 10 by far in the Aust conference. Don't think he will make the tests for the Lions though. IMO has to be Cooper for his attacking skills.

If (n probably won't be) To'omua isn't picked I'd go with cooper as well.

 

[Pete King]

Is Braveheart Robbie Deans???

 

[suckerforred]

Just out of interest, how did you (and others here) feel when the ARU itself decided to entirely dispense with any pretence of actually providing our Wallabies with a gold jersey, but inexplicably (as far as I know) moved to various yellow-ey shades from daffodil to near-canary?

Could this not be protested as something of an unjustified abrogation of a deeply-rooted national symbolism?

I had to get my dictionary out there............

Personally I don't mind the yellow. The shepherd's crook however........