Australia Vs Argentina, September 13, Gold Coast

[Brumby Runner]

But we don't know whether this is part of their plan or not, and THAT was the point in the first part of my post, which was specifically about quick taps. Has McKenzie, or anyone else come out and said "No, we don't want players taking quick taps."? Given that half-backs invariably are the ones who get their hands on the pill more often, he'll do it. I think it's happening too much, but I don't believe it is, in and of itself, an inherently bad play, if used judiciously.
The rest was a point about playing a faster attacking style overall, and the potential benefits thereof, not particularly about quick taps. You'll note I was talking about kicking the ball away which is clearly more in general play, not giving up kicks at goal, which I clearly would prefer they take.
In any event, I doubt anything would dissuade you from your antipathy to Phipps' play, whether he's doing this under a plan or not.

It's true that I don't rate Phipps as highly as some, including yourself. I do think he has improved a whole lot in the past twelve months or so, but still has quite a few issues with his game, including it appears to me a certain level of hot headedness which is often as not detrimental to his game and the team's game. Others have posted here that Hooper was heard to say "No" when Phipps took the second quick tap.

I can readily accept that there may be some lenience allowed in Link's game plan, just as Nic White's kicking may also have accorded with the game plan but that doesn't stop people criticising him for doing it and doing it rather ordinarily. I am deeply critical of both the incessant kicking that Nic White did (as I was in the Brumbies' games as well) and the pointless quick taps taken by Nick Phipps. If they were both playing to a plan, then the plan has a lot to answer for.

 

[tragic]

I was just responding to the point that we were in free fall before Link's arrival.
I'm not a critic,just not a disciple that thinks he is the oracle.

So Link is not and old coloured woman with cunning foresight and sapience... Got it.

 

[Scrubber2050]

It's true that I don't rate Phipps as highly as some, including yourself. I do think he has improved a whole lot in the past twelve months or so, but still has quite a few issues with his game, including it appears to me a certain level of hot headedness which is often as not detrimental to his game and the team's game. Others have posted here that Hooper was heard to say "No" when Phipps took the second quick tap.

I can readily accept that there may be some lenience allowed in Link's game plan, just as Nic White's kicking may also have accorded with the game plan but that doesn't stop people criticising him for doing it and doing it rather ordinarily. I am deeply critical of both the incessant kicking that Nic White did (as I was in the Brumbies' games as well) and the pointless quick taps taken by Nick Phipps. If they were both playing to a plan, then the plan has a lot to answer for.

If Phipps is going against the captains on-field directions then fuck him off. We have one captain. If it was the game plan then fine I can live with that (but still disagree in that taking the points when on offer is paramount). If not, then Link should bring out the retractable hook

 

[barbarian]

It seems James Slipper is to 2014 as Scott Fardy was to 2013. All he has to do is go out, scratch himself and make a tackle to be ranked in the top 3 on the ranker thing.

He was good, sure, and I love the way he plays. But he wasn't number 1, or even in the top 3.

Simmons, on the other hand, could score 5 tries, win every lineout and deliver a baby mid-match and still only come 7th.
.

 

[Train Without a Station]

If Phipps is going against the captains on-field directions then fuck him off. We have one captain. If it was the game plan then fine I can live with that (but still disagree in that taking the points when on offer is paramount). If not, then Link should bring out the retractable hook

Scrubber I think some of the fossils on here can't remember far enough back to when they played and how things went on the field.

I can remember plenty of times when my team was intending to take an option no matter what, and if it didn't suit somebody they would say "oh let's not". The fact of the matter is, it's very likely Link said, "if we get it, just fucking tap and go" and suddenly Hooper and a few of the boys were blowing hard from tearing shit up and thought "oh, maybe we can just have a breather and take the 3 for this one", but Phipps just stuck to the plan as he was instructed.

Sometimes on the field when fatigue sets in, people forget that a disorganized attacked is better off than the disorganized defense.

But my point is it's not as cut and dry as Phipps just going against the captain's on field directions, because those directions might be going against the coach's directions.

 

[Train Without a Station]

It seems James Slipper is to 2014 as Scott Fardy was to 2013. All he has to do is go out, scratch himself and make a tackle to be ranked in the top 3 on the ranker thing.

He was good, sure, and I love the way he plays. But he wasn't number 1, or even in the top 3.

Simmons, on the other hand, could score 5 tries, win every lineout and deliver a baby mid-match and still only come 7th.
.

Barbarian, can I just ask, when in the second half, Simmons and Hooper absolutely smashed an Argie in a dominant tackle, and Simmons proceeded to immediately get back up, charge out of the line and chop down another defender 4m back from the advantage line the very next phase, did that qualify as those little extras in addition to work rate that a player needs to offer?

 

[KOB1987]

I think the ranker works on a bit of an accrual basis..using Simmons as the example, he played bloody well but people still have in their minds his previous games so not all are prepared to shower him with accolades..similarly, Carter and Fardy, whilst not terrible, have both been sub-par for the past 3 games and therefore sit at the bottom.

So it probably represents a weighted scoring of the last 3 games or so (the most recent game carrying the most weight), which isn't necessarily a bad thing with regards to working out where a player sits..but not representative entirely of its purpose, which is meant to be ONLY the most recent game..

 

[Tangawizi]

I have zero problems with Phipps going for the quick tap. We needed tries not goals.

The Wallabies needed a bonus point win to retain even a slim chance of winning the Rugby Championship. And with 3 tries in the bank with 20 minutes to play it's really quite appalling that we're now still 3rd on the ladder & sitting 6 points adrift of the ABs who we now need to slip up twice. That won't be happening so it's farewell to another trophy for 2014.

That last 20 minutes just wasn't good enough from us.

 

[KOB1987]

I have zero problems with Phipps going for the quick tap. We needed tries not goals.

Me either..particularly at the stage of the game that it was..he backed his judgement, you need to do that is this level if you see an opportunity..if we are 2 down with 2 to go, different story..

 

[Wilson]

It seems James Slipper is to 2014 as Scott Fardy was to 2013. All he has to do is go out, scratch himself and make a tackle to be ranked in the top 3 on the ranker thing.

He was good, sure, and I love the way he plays. But he wasn't number 1, or even in the top 3.

Simmons, on the other hand, could score 5 tries, win every lineout and deliver a baby mid-match and still only come 7th.
.

I think the fact that the only options for rankings are up, down or nothing has an effect, so one or two silly mistakes can have disproportionate effects on ranking. Also peoples thinking can be effected by the rank of a player when they come to it seeing them as over or under rated and moving to correct it. It'd be interesting to compare it to a ranker which asks for a score out of 5 or 10 for each player.

 

[barbarian]

Barbarian, can I just ask, when in the second half, Simmons and Hooper absolutely smashed an Argie in a dominant tackle, and Simmons proceeded to immediately get back up, charge out of the line and chop down another defender 4m back from the advantage line the very next phase, did that qualify as those little extras in addition to work rate that a player needs to offer?

Of course. Simmons (finally) played the way we all know he can.
.

 

[fatprop]

Me either..particularly at the stage of the game that it was..he backed his judgement, you need to do that is this level if you see an opportunity..if we are 2 down with 2 to go, different story..

Especially when the Argies set defense was so effective, we needed to try to break it up

 

[Train Without a Station]

Of course. Simmons (finally) played the way we all know he can.
.

Haha I was just trolling. Your first comment about Slipper was spot on too.

 

[farva]

No he didn't. He played well between Larkham and Mortlock and otherwise was the same flavour of mediocre that we've seen with every other implementation since. He played a lot of tests but was never part of anything more successful than what we have going at the moment.

Hmm. No.
Giteau was a great player. He wasn't a great flyhalf. I can still remember his performance against the Boks in 2006 (49-0). As a playmaker in the 12 jersey between Larkham and Mortlock he was a success. The post I quoted before suggested that we hadn't had any successes with a play maker at 12 this century. I disagree with that. And I think To'omua is fine, but a touch too conservative. I don't think KB (Kurtley Beale) is the answer there. I also don't think a crashballer like a Kuridrani is the answer either.

 

[Mr Doug]

Good on them. Unfortunately not all of us have the ability to fly at will around the country to go to rugby matches. Some of us have work and other committments which involve things other than sport. I'd love to live a life of leisure and have nothing else to do with my time than go to sporting fixtures. Sadly I have a mortgage to pay off, a family to feed and various other committments. I hope these "excuses" meet with your approval.

I'm sure that those who went to the match made the effort, that's not the point. The point is that there wasn't enough of them to make it worth while in the larger scheme of things.

Rugby is in the entertainment business and the customer is always right. If the customers aren't coming to a particular venue, then it's not worthwhile playing there. I assume that you want Australian rugby to be profitable in order to keep the best players and coaches in the country and allowing the maximum of money to be spent on junior development. Playing test matches in front of 14,000 people won't allow any of that to occur.

Quick Hands, I was a bit hard on you with the 'lamb-brain' reference, and I also didn't wish to offend any lambs viewing this site! I am a passionate Wallabies supporter, as is my family, which won the Australian final of the "Show Your True Colours" competition (to decorate your home and front garden), leading up to the 2003 Rugby World Cup.

I agree that "Rugby is in the entertainment business", but equally important is the fact that Rugby is also in the promotion business. As Australia's sixth-largest city, located on the boundary of the two strongest "Rugby states" in Australia, it is logical that the ARU should wish to grow the game in our city. Whilst there were ads on local commercial radio for Saturday's match here on the GC, I doubt that there was much promotion in Brisbane.
When I was managing a colts club team here on the coast, (16 years ago), the ARU had 5 "Development Officers" to cover all the schools and Rugby clubs in Queensland. At the same time, the AFL had 25!
If a crowd of 14,200 for a city of 600,000 is deemed as being disappointing, if you use crowd size as the only criteria, then any crowd under 115,000 at a Sydney test should be described similarly.
I know it's about generating dollars, but it also about the future, and "taking risks" along the way.
Most successful entrepreneurs, business icons, inventors, entertainers, etc will tell you that you usually don't succeed if you haven't first experienced several failures.

The ARU has to have "the balls" to work harder at promoting next year's Gold Coast test, (the last one on it's current contract).

 

[Brumby Runner]

But my point is it's not as cut and dry as Phipps just going against the captain's on field directions, because those directions might be going against the coach's directions.

I would be surprised if Link's instructions were to take the tap kick in all circumstances or indeed in any circumstance where points were otherwise almost guaranteed. I think it is probably more so a problem of interpretation rather than the instruction. But it would be good to have some insight into the matter rather than just our speculation.

 

[Train Without a Station]

We need to remember we were chasing a 4 Try bonus point and by that point were in a strong position on the scoreboard.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Barbarian, can I just ask, when in the second half, Simmons and Hooper absolutely smashed an Argie in a dominant tackle, and Simmons proceeded to immediately get back up, charge out of the line and chop down another defender 4m back from the advantage line the very next phase, did that qualify as those little extras in addition to work rate that a player needs to offer?

If this dual tackle by Hooper and Simmons is one I'm thinking about, I noticed that Simmons went very low around the lower legs (shades of TPN) - and from directly front on. He did that on a couple of occasions I noticed. Seems an odd way for a 2m lock to tackle. If this is a new technique he's adopted, I hope he doesn't have the same head injury issues the TPN suffered over the years.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Give him a break. he'd just read all pfitzy's comments bagging the fuck out of him and was trying to fire up!

 

[Pfitzy]

Give him a break. he'd just read all pfitzy's comments bagging the fuck out of him and was trying to fire up!

If he keeps reading my comments, he'll go far.