April Wallaby 30 Man Squad

[Groucho]

Interesting stats from last weekend with all the talk about the importance of defence for a #10 and defending in the line or not.

To'omua defended in the front line v Highlanders and made 7 tackles whilst missing 1.

Cooper didn't defend in the front line v Chiefs and made 7 tackles whilst missing 2.

JOC (James O'Connor) made 5 tackles and missed none v Kings.

SNK made 12 tackles and missed 1 v Crusaders.

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".

 

[en_force_er]

Yeah, Groucho.

There's a known tactic that works really well on Kiwis which France used to good effect in the World Cup Final.

We all know the winger and sometimes 13 defend at a 45 degree angle to the rest of the line so that if the opposition get the ball to the outside backs near the wing they can force them towards the touch line. Basically, Kiwis always spread so when you play them you let them get into the space and dominate them in it.

Easier said then done but it can work and it's a risk many deem worth taking.

 

[Groucho]

Yeah, Groucho.

There's a known tactic that works really well on Kiwis which France used to good effect in the World Cup Final.

We all know the winger and sometimes 13 defend at a 45 degree angle to the rest of the line so that if the opposition get the ball to the outside backs near the wing they can force them towards the touch line. Basically, Kiwis always spread so when you play them you let them get into the space and dominate them in it.

Easier said then done but it can work and it's a risk many deem worth taking.

You have to be very accurate on D. Perhaps, like Beale, Kurtley is actually quite good away from the line.

 

[USARugger]

Perfect example.

That was a good piece. If you're looking at the raw stats out of context from Cooper's first few touches they look pretty poor. But then toss in the context of Shatz throwing a pass at his feet, Simmons running directly into him and killing the play, etc, the picture becomes a bit more clear, doesn't it?

Richo is totally on point about preconceived notions and the resulting distortion of perception. This is an incredibly well documented phenomenon amongst humans. It literally permeates everything you can think of. It even goes as far as eating. If I describe a meal one way you may find it utterly repulsive when it comes out, even if it is something you would normally enjoy, the fact that it doesn't match up with your preconceived notions of what it should taste like could ruin it for you. I've done a lot of work in different Pre-Prohibition era cocktail bars in Philadelphia to support myself through college and I've seen that particular situation happen countless times. Toss in the fact that 'perception' is a largely subjective thing and it all gets that much more complex.

I'd say the vast majority of the criticism of QC (Quade Cooper)'s play comes from a vitriolic emotional response based on what they have been told about the man by the impeccably high quality rugby journalism in so many daily papers. Naturally if you get told a player is going to screw this or that up you will absolutely notice when it happens.

Funny how you rarely, if ever, see anyone criticizing the walk around the park Gregan liked to take before passing the ball most of the time. Completely in spite of the fact that there are plenty of times where it wasn't the right option and just resulted in the drift defense being able to get to the outside backs quicker. Not to attack Gregan but it's definitely a prominent example of the way a player's public image can absolutely shape the way their play is perceived and analyzed.

 

[kiap]

Jim Tucker is now reporting that St George will be available.

I'm loving it!

George Smith to play out season with ACT Brumbies, now available for selection against the British and Irish Lions​

​

Jim Tucker, The Courier-Mail: April 17, 2013 12:00AM​

​

An extended clearance to play on for the ACT Brumbies should now make George Smith an irresistible target for a Wallabies comeback against the British and Irish Lions.​

​

Smith's Japanese club Suntory Sungoliath last night gave the crucial all-clear for the 110-Test great to be selected for the three-Test series if the Wallabies want him.​

​

..... Suntory told Jake White they can utilise Smith's services until the end of Super Rugby in early August after overtures from the savvy Brumbies coach. The mouthwatering spin-off is that Smith is now physically available for the three blockbusters against the Lions on June 22, June 29 and July 6.​

​

Last month, Smith said there had been "no direct or indirect conversations with the ARU.'' That may soon change. It's not that the ball-pilferer supreme will nudge young guns Liam Gill and Michael Hooper out of the picture for the Lions series. He will be a weapon in tandem for the Lions to fret about.​

​

It sets the scene for a fascinating Gill-Smith duel in Saturday night's Super Rugby showdown between the Reds and Brumbies at Suncorp Stadium.​

​

Those concerned about the bending of the ARU's long-held rule of not allowing the selection of overseas-contracted players might now accept a loophole. Smith will be playing almost a full Super Rugby season which is commitment enough for a special exemption because it is no longer a "quickie solution'' to David Pocock's injury. .....​

Read More: Here

 

[Groucho]

I'd say the vast majority of the hate for QC (Quade Cooper) comes from a vitriolic emotional response based on what they have been told about the man by the impeccably high quality rugby journalism in so many daily papers. Naturally if you get told a player is going to screw this or that up you will absolutely notice when it happens.

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.

 

[USARugger]

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.

True. Being non-Australian I forget about that incident pretty regularly. Edited my post to bring the focus on his play, not perceptions of him as a person. To be totally frank I'm still 50/50 on that entire incident. I'll never have the gut emotional response to it which everyone here had. I didn't grow up in Australia or with the Wallabies in my life for ~18 years. While it was horribly stupid and in incredibly poor taste for him to say what he did, at the same time the absolute lack of transparency from the Wallabies camp under Deans is equally frustrating, for me at least.

Quade got absolutely sledged for what he said on television yet Deans has held his position largely unchallenged now even after years of clearly trying to force a game-plan which has not worked and after countless dubious selections for which he was never once called to answer for, at least not in any official capacity. On one hand you have Quade disrespecting the G&G through his words, and on the other hand you have Deans bringing the G&G to their lowest point in over a decade (seemingly largely) through his actions. Yet one of them is still undoubtedly an active part of the Wallaby setup while the other may not be, just a little bit funny to me.

That complete lack of transparency also makes it pretty much impossible to know whether Quade was acting as a whistle-blower or was just making a complete jackass of himself. Doesn't make up for the "yellow jersey" comments though. I know some people have anecdotes about the internal state of the Wallaby camp but it's important to remember that those are only the perspective of single, or a small group of players. Everyone knows that their head would be on the chopping block if they actually came out and spoke about their own experiences in the Wallaby camp, yet Deans can go into the Ireland RWC match with no fetcher and effectively kill our chances at winning yet still retains his job unscathed.

 

[Sully]

Some Australians don't give a shit what colour the Wallaby jersey is called and think that people who go on and on about a "gold" jersey that's really yellow are .....

Or so I've heard

 

[fatprop]

You post a lot about what you think Deans will do, but we want to hear your opinion.

On playing to the game plan, the Reds probably have the most diverse of game plans in the super rugby comp, and Quade doesn't seem to have an issue playing to them. So would that be a QC (Quade Cooper) or Deans issue?

Personally I would play Cooper, that is who I put in my team a few pages back. I would play him with either a 15 or a 10 on his back sharing the rotation with Lilo

As for game plans, the Wobs play one way and have played that way since the RWC; and the issue appears to both Cooper's and Dean's as far as I care. Dean's wants players committed to "his" way and Cooper's "toxic" comments highlight that he hadn't bought into it.

 

[kiap]

Some Australians don't give a shit what colour the Wallaby jersey is called and think that people who go on and on about a "gold" jersey that's really yellow are .....

..... entitled to their opinion?

Cooper saying he "didn't want to be involved" in that kind of "toxic environment" and his "yellow jersey" comments were stupid statements.

For me they are not irredeemable, but I can see why others think this indicates an untenable relationship between the player and coach.

I would select QC (Quade Cooper) because IMO he can provide a better attacking platform and a better of chance of winning. But if Deans can't work with him then it's not going to produce those results, and he's unlikely to be selected anyway.

And it's looks to be heading that way at the moment, while Deans remains coach.

 

[Sully]

... entitled to their opinion?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Dave Beat]

True. Being non-Australian I forget about that incident pretty regularly. Edited my post to bring the focus on his play, not perceptions of him as a person. To be totally frank I'm still 50/50 on that entire incident. I'll never have the gut emotional response to it which everyone here had. I didn't grow up in Australia or with the Wallabies in my life for ~18 years. While it was horribly stupid and in incredibly poor taste for him to say what he did, at the same time the absolute lack of transparency from the Wallabies camp under Deans is equally frustrating, for me at least.

Quade got absolutely sledged for what he said on television yet Deans has held his position largely unchallenged now even after years of clearly trying to force a game-plan which has not worked and after countless dubious selections for which he was never once called to answer for, at least not in any official capacity. On one hand you have Quade disrespecting the G&G through his words, and on the other hand you have Deans bringing the G&G to their lowest point in over a decade (seemingly largely) through his actions. Yet one of them is still undoubtedly an active part of the Wallaby setup while the other may not be, just a little bit funny to me.

That complete lack of transparency also makes it pretty much impossible to know whether Quade was acting as a whistle-blower or was just making a complete jackass of himself. Doesn't make up for the "yellow jersey" comments though. I know some people have anecdotes about the internal state of the Wallaby camp but it's important to remember that those are only the perspective of single, or a small group of players. Everyone knows that their head would be on the chopping block if they actually came out and spoke about their own experiences in the Wallaby camp, yet Deans can go into the Ireland RWC match with no fetcher and effectively kill our chances at winning yet still retains his job unscathed.

Well written -
2 completely different individuals handling Deans in different ways;
Deans is possibly the problem.
George dealt (sabatical), is dealing with it his way (now on the park showing quality).
QC (Quade Cooper) dealt with it his way.
Attending a world cup with one specialist 7, and constantly kicking away possession.
Number of trys scored last year.
Who seems to be the problem.

 

[jay-c]

in deans' defense- everything he built the last 5 years has relied on quade being 10
mccabe was brought in to tighten a midfield which is horribly exposed with quade at 10
he didnt count on cooper malfunctioning at the world cup> i think he knows deep down that the wallabies attack relies on quade at 10 but understandably he needs to look at other options>
the lions, like the world cup will be defensive and won by the team that makes the less errors i believe. if between now and then deans can come up with a side which can attack without leaking points he will run with it>
oconners weight gain means he has lost the blistering pace that got him recognised as one of the top 6 players in the world> he will perform well at 10, but he could have been a best in the world winger
in saying that i do worry that mccabe stiffles the backline at 12- exactly what we saw a couple of weeks ago at the brumbies>
combinations are everything with limited game time before the first test>> for me its genia, cooper, tapuai as inside backs

 

[Dave Beat]

he didnt count on cooper malfunctioning at the world cup> i think he knows deep down that the wallabies attack relies on quade at 10 but understandably he needs to look at other options>

Game plan set by Deans was very questionable, and even in QC (Quade Cooper) absence last year there was no change.

 

[Richo]

That complete lack of transparency also makes it pretty much impossible to know whether Quade was acting as a whistle-blower or was just making a complete jackass of himself. Doesn't make up for the "yellow jersey" comments though. I know some people have anecdotes about the internal state of the Wallaby camp but it's important to remember that those are only the perspective of single, or a small group of players. Everyone knows that their head would be on the chopping block if they actually came out and spoke about their own experiences in the Wallaby camp, yet Deans can go into the Ireland RWC match with no fetcher and effectively kill our chances at winning yet still retains his job unscathed.

Why would there need to be transparency in a sports team? Almost all teams keep their cards pretty close, because the last thing you want is to give the opposition too much information about what you're doing. I have no problems with Deans not explaining his selections, for example, particularly before a match. But I do have a problem with those selections being self-evidently poor on the field.

Let's hope that we see some better results and better play this year. IMO, the selections for the jersey-fitting camp are a nice change. I hope that the more balanced, attacking approach carries through to the squad itself and the match-day side.

 

[USARugger]

Why would there need to be transparency in a sports team? Almost all teams keep their cards pretty close, because the last thing you want is to give the opposition too much information about what you're doing. I have no problems with Deans not explaining his selections, for example, particularly before a match. But I do have a problem with those selections being self-evidently poor on the field.

Let's hope that we see some better results and better play this year. IMO, the selections for the jersey-fitting camp are a nice change. I hope that the more balanced, attacking approach carries through to the squad itself and the match-day side.

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.

 

[Braveheart81]

This whole second 7 issue at the RWC has been done to death, but with a limited squad size it was difficult to cover for all possible injuries. If you look at most other teams, they didn't have a backup 7 either.

Matt Hodgson was the obvious second choice if we had included a second 7 in the squad. He'd had limited test match experience and in his only test that year he was completely ineffective against Samoa in a forward pack that got belted.

Our forward pack also got belted against Ireland. Why would Hodgson have made any difference?

Clearly if we were picking a RWC squad today, we'd have more than one 7 because it just so happens that now we have excellent depth in that position and Pocock, Hooper and Gill (and potentially Smith) are all world class players. The same can't be said for 2011 when Hodgson was the second best.

It's not like we left a world class 7 at home in 2011.

 

[USARugger]

You don't think much of Phil Waugh for a Waratahs fan, I guess?

 

[Braveheart81]

You don't think much of Phil Waugh for a Waratahs fan, I guess?

I was a massive Phil Waugh fan, but he was pretty crocked through most of the 2011 season after tearing his bicep and it was highly unlikely that he was going to get recalled to the Wallabies. Particularly after announcing his retirement from rugby.

Hodgson was easily the most likely choice if we'd taken another 7.

 

[suckerforred]

This whole second 7 issue at the RWC has been done to death, but with a limited squad size it was difficult to cover for all possible injuries. If you look at most other teams, they didn't have a backup 7 either.

Our forward pack also got belted against Ireland. Why would Hodgson have made any difference?

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.....