Australia v Argentina - 21 November, Newcastle

[Up the Guts]

ESPN stats have Pumas 12 Chocobares as making 1 pass with no runs. Don't think I've ever seen an inside centre play nearly the whole game and not make a single run.

 

[barbarian]

On the face of it, both TT and Hooper looked to be below par on the attacking stats. But did they make up in their defensive efforts, I wonder? I think that TT was probably given an instruction to hit everything that moved, and Hooper generally plays wider which probably accounts for his poor looking stats. But probably also highlights why some here think he doesn't play as a forward but more as an extra back.

One thing I take away from the numbers is that Sio is playing better in general than a lot of posters are giving him credit for.

TT was below his best, doing the things that he does when he's off his game - soft penalties (at least two offsides), getting involved in niggle, just generally off the pace. I wonder if the bench role is better for him long term.

Sio was good until his last 10 minutes where he conceded those two critical scrum penalties.

The eye test wasn't great for Hooper either.
.

 

[Braveheart81]

We seemed to play down the left edge with our forwards a lot more particularly in the first half which was a lot of carries from Philip etc.

Hooper was generally out on the right edge in attack.

 

[Dctarget]

Philip has spoken in the past about how he's really only filled out his body recently. Always had a huge motor, now just attached to a 120kg behemoth of a man. Would love him to work on his hands in lineouts, still missing a few deft touches. Nearly a perfect old school lock.

 

[Pfitzy]

One thing I take away from the numbers is that Sio is playing better in general than a lot of posters are giving him credit for.

He was going well but probably stayed on the field a bit too long as his shape at scrum time fell apart.

That said, I don't know why some LHPs have taken up this habit of binding short, and then pulling in - your elbow is then pointing at the ground and looks bad when things collapse. You could hear the AR call "gold gold" when it went down on the second one and Sio didn't look at be any more guilty than the Argie bloke.

From the look of it, Sio and a couple of other guys need to work on their joint flexibility so they can get up and over the THP's back and take that out of the equation.

 

[Pfitzy]

ESPN stats have Pumas 12 Chocobares as making 1 pass with no runs. Don't think I've ever seen an inside centre play nearly the whole game and not make a single run.

Playing most of the game in their own half wouldn't have helped his stats. The Pumas play territory then strike only when things are overwhelmingly in their favour.

They've gone 2 games in this series with only 1 try, but they haven't lost yet.

 

[Joe Blow]

It shows once again that TT is better off finishing in serious tests at this stage unless AAA is injured. AAA is more technically correct and also has a big motor. Let him play for 40-45 to blunt the enthusiasm of the opposition.Our bench on the weekend offered nothing. We need impact and to come home strong. TBF Valetini looked pretty good.

 

[Viking]

It shows once again that TT is better off finishing in serious tests at this stage unless AAA is injured. AAA is more technically correct and also has a big motor. Let him play for 40-45 to blunt the enthusiasm of the opposition.Our bench on the weekend offered nothing. We need impact and to come home strong. TBF Valetini looked pretty good.

Interesting Rennie doesn't seem big on impact players on the bench. He seems to be picking players to "have a look at them" or based on overall skillset over 80mins i.e. Gordon over Tate.

I like Rennie and don't mind the majority of his selections and tactics, but my one big criticism is his use or lack thereof of impact players from the bench.

You would think both Samu and Tate would be consistent impact bench players (if not starting).

 

[cyclopath]

Cyclo, I reckon there is a fair bit of variation in players' involvements disclosed in those figures. What it all means though is anybody's guess.

On the number of runs, I'd say that Sio, BPA, TT and Hooper look to be slackers. However, the game plan might have been for the front rowers to concentrate on defense and that might explain their low numbers.

On metres gained, TT and Hooper look to be poor. But I understand a lot of the metres gained occur before reaching the defense, in which case it's not a very good measure imo. The measure of metres/run that you allude to suffers the same problem imo.

Post contact metres is probably the most telling measure, and on that score BPA, TT, Simmons and Hooper performed relatively badly.

On the face of it, both TT and Hooper looked to be below par on the attacking stats. But did they make up in their defensive efforts, I wonder? I think that TT was probably given an instruction to hit everything that moved, and Hooper generally plays wider which probably accounts for his poor looking stats. But probably also highlights why some here think he doesn't play as a forward but more as an extra back.

One thing I take away from the numbers is that Sio is playing better in general than a lot of posters are giving him credit for.

Not really. When you're looking at small numbers, the data becomes almost meaningless - one good run with PCM skews your data more. For those with higher numbers of runs, the average metres / run and average PCM / run look pretty similar. Simmons aside.
Hard to say any have been "poor" given that we have no idea what their remit was from the coaching team. That said, I'd be very surprised if Simmons was sent out to "make a lot of runs and metres", given that has never been his strong suit, rather the set piece. I'd also be surprised if Tupou was told to just target defence, given he is likely to play 40 mins only, and is usually a pretty effective ball runner.
I think the issue most posters have with Sio is in the scrum.

 

[Joe Blow]

Interesting Rennie doesn't seem big on impact players on the bench. He seems to be picking players to "have a look at them" or based on overall skillset over 80mins i.e. Gordon over Tate.

I like Rennie and don't mind the majority of his selections and tactics, but my one big criticism is his use or lack thereof of impact players from the bench.

You would think both Samu and Tate would be consistent impact bench players (if not starting).

I’m sure Tate will be back next week. I’d also guess that we will not see L.Wright or Jake Gordon again any time soon in the Wallabies 23.
Also, Uelese is a good finisher. He brings impact and speed. Hopefully we see Hosea on the bench next week as well, or LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) if fit.

I think Rennies selections were OK outside of not having a specialist lock replacement. The problem was the bench players brought nothing. They should have been chomping at the bit. We just limped to a draw compared to the previous game where we stepped it up in the last quarter.

 

[barbarian]

The thing that really pleased me in the first half was our backline play, especially off set piece.

Like Brisbane there is clear evidence of thought in everything we do. So refreshing that they have thought about a tactic, practised it and implemented it on Saturday. Sadly we were just an inch out otherwise we would have had a few tries - Paisami's grubber was almost great, but it also planted the seed that saw the opportunity for Koro which we didn't quite nail.

Essentially we were moving the chess board in our favour on every play, and perfectly set up the opportunities to strike. The sad thing was we didn't take those opportunities but the fingerprints of Scott Wisemantl are already really easy to see.
.

 

[wamberal]

Considering that we had a make shift 10, and a 12 who has played a few games at 13 in the Soup, I would say our backline functioned very well indeed.

 

[Brumby Runner]

TT was below his best, doing the things that he does when he's off his game - soft penalties (at least two offsides), getting involved in niggle, just generally off the pace. I wonder if the bench role is better for him long term.

Sio was good until his last 10 minutes where he conceded those two critical scrum penalties.

The eye test wasn't great for Hooper either.
.

That second off side penalty against TT was pure bullshit. He came from an onside position and was even behind two or three other Wallabies in the defensive line in front of him. Makes me wonder about all of Williams penalties against him. Do they have history from TT's time in Auckland? Think he was also pinged twice in scrum sets as well.

Spot on about Sio. Strong first half and quite poor in the 10 minutes or so leading to his replacement. I have seen some posters suggesting the Pumas' TH prop should have been penalised for collapsing, but I reckon Williams got those couple of penalties right. Scott reverted to his poor technique of binding under his opposite and pulling him down. Seems to happen as he gets more weary. I still wonder if he has some sort of weakness in the left arm/shoulder left over from a previous injury. In any case, he ought to be replaced at half time regardless while he continues to tire by half time. If required due injury, he can come back on later in the game when presumably he will have been a bit more rested.

 

[Viking]

Considering that we had a make shift 10, and a 12 who has played a few games at 13 in the Soup, I would say our backline functioned very well indeed.

Absolutely, it is pretty amazing how little experience many of the players have.

We have the remember this year there was no real super XV comp, so they barely played 1 game against a professional NZ or SA opposition in there lifetimes.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Not really. When you're looking at small numbers, the data becomes almost meaningless - one good run with PCM skews your data more. For those with higher numbers of runs, the average metres / run and average PCM / run look pretty similar. Simmons aside.
Hard to say any have been "poor" given that we have no idea what their remit was from the coaching team. That said, I'd be very surprised if Simmons was sent out to "make a lot of runs and metres", given that has never been his strong suit, rather the set piece. I'd also be surprised if Tupou was told to just target defence, given he is likely to play 40 mins only, and is usually a pretty effective ball runner.
I think the issue most posters have with Sio is in the scrum.

I agree, and I was trying to say that there are many other factors affecting the numbers that show up in the stats, and we cannot just look at them in isolation, maybe not even worth looking at them at all. Better to go with one's own overall impressions, even though they will vary from one viewer to the next.

Sio's issue really is in the scrum where he gets pinged for hinging as tiredness sets in. But there are quite a few posters who seem to criticise his whole game for apparent lack of involvement. Just their impressions I suppose. I think Pfitzy is on the mark in a post above about Sio's problem with binding short and pointing his elbow to the ground. Eliminate that and he is quickly back to being regarded the top line prop he was/is.

 

[Derpus]

Interesting Rennie doesn't seem big on impact players on the bench. He seems to be picking players to "have a look at them" or based on overall skillset over 80mins i.e. Gordon over Tate.

I like Rennie and don't mind the majority of his selections and tactics, but my one big criticism is his use or lack thereof of impact players from the bench.

You would think both Samu and Tate would be consistent impact bench players (if not starting).

He's probably still feeling out his players but man some options i don't get. I think a player like Valetini is far more likely to have an impact starting. Same with L. Wright. These guys don't seem like amazing bench options. And no Samu, who is the perfect bench player?

Gordon has disappointed me off the bench a bit. I thought he'd offer a bit more.

 

[TSR]

It shows once again that TT is better off finishing in serious tests at this stage unless AAA is injured. AAA is more technically correct and also has a big motor. Let him play for 40-45 to blunt the enthusiasm of the opposition.Our bench on the weekend offered nothing. We need impact and to come home strong. TBF Valetini looked pretty good.

I don’t get this take. TT & Ala'alatoa played the same minutes. They had the same number of runs with Ala'alatoa getting 5 more metres. Tupou made 4 tackles/1 miss v Ala'alatoa 2 tackles no misses. Tupou’s tackles helped set the tone in the first half when we were noticeably better. The scrum was also noticeably stronger when Tupou was on and he forced a penalty and was close to getting two more. There is no evidence, and there has been none all year that Ala'alatoa has a bigger motor - actually the opposite with the consistency of Tupou’s explosive efforts above anything Ala'alatoa produced. I know Nick Bishop wrote a very good piece outlining the value of Ala'alatoa on the tight but Tupou is a better runner, tackler, scrummager and ball player and he was a key contributor in the first half when we were well on top. We didn’t perform as well in the period Ala'alatoa was on the field.

Tupou also gave away 2 penalties (Ala'alatoa none) and I’d assume his penalty count is higher than Allan’s - so if you argued he needed to be benched to give him a kick up the bum I’d disagree but i think you’d at least have an argument.

But IMO even allowing for the 2 penalties his net contribution was positive.

I like Ala'alatoa and we are fortunate to have two such good props - but if Tupou was off his game in the weekend Ala'alatoa must have been even more, so why reward him with a start?

At the end of the day Tupou is our best THP and he showed on the weekend his dynamic play is just as valuable in the opening exchanges as it is at the end.

 

[Viking]

I don’t get this take. TT & Ala'alatoa played the same minutes. They had the same number of runs with Ala'alatoa getting 5 more metres. Tupou made 4 tackles/1 miss v Ala'alatoa 2 tackles no misses. Tupou’s tackles helped set the tone in the first half when we were noticeably better. The scrum was also noticeably stronger when Tupou was on and he forced a penalty and was close to getting two more. There is no evidence, and there has been none all year that Ala'alatoa has a bigger motor - actually the opposite with the consistency of Tupou’s explosive efforts above anything Ala'alatoa produced. I know Nick Bishop wrote a very good piece outlining the value of Ala'alatoa on the tight but Tupou is a better runner, tackler, scrummager and ball player and he was a key contributor in the first half when we were well on top. We didn’t perform as well in the period Ala'alatoa was on the field.

Tupou also gave away 2 penalties (Ala'alatoa none) and I’d assume his penalty count is higher than Allan’s - so if you argued he needed to be benched to give him a kick up the bum I’d disagree but i think you’d at least have an argument.

But IMO even allowing for the 2 penalties his net contribution was positive.

I like Ala'alatoa and we are fortunate to have two such good props - but if Tupou was off his game in the weekend Ala'alatoa must have been even more, so why reward him with a start?

At the end of the day Tupou is our best THP and he showed on the weekend his dynamic play is just as valuable in the opening exchanges as it is at the end.

I agree with this. Even as a Brumbies fan, Tupou is better then AAA in almost every facet besides discipline and maybe leadership if count Captaincy skills.

Tupou should be regarded as first choice. But given props usually only play 40mins, it still can make sense for Tupou to come on exactly at half time to finish the game. As long he comes on at half time to play more minutes.

It just depends if Rennie wants to start with his strongest prop or finish with it. The scrum is notably weaker once Tupou is gone by the way.

EDIT: I'd even consider bringing Tupou on at say 35mins in the first half. That would more impact out of him.

 

[TSR]

I just didn’t get the point.

Start your best 15. Give them the most minutes.

Even if two players are line ball the reality is they want to start and it makes guys off the bench fight for their spot. Tupou clearly had more in him in the weekend and we weakened when Ala'alatoa came on.

 

[Joe Blow]

The best team is not necessarily the best 15 players. There are combinations, different skill sets and game plans. You choose your 15 and then reminding 8 players based on a 40 minute strategy. We have two excellent THs. We need to use them both as neither is an 80 minute player. TT is still a work in progress.
AAA, BPA and Slipper was an excellent starting front row. It would be great if AAA could play both sides? Sio is serviceable but he has flaws. It’s too soon for Bell to start.