Bledisloe 1 - Wallabies vs All Blacks, ANZ Stadium, Sydney, 8:05pm

[waiopehu oldboy]

This whole Skelton debate reminds me of the one NZ used to have re. Mark Cooksley (2.05m & 125+ kg) through most of the '90s. We really, really wanted him to be this SA-style man-mountain we could build a pack around but he just wasn't quite there so we picked smaller guys who offered a better all-round package.

Has he ever be tried at 1? A guy that size would have to be a disruption on opposition throws, even if he just stands there waving his arms, a pretty decent target for a fast & flat throw on your own ball, a lifter/ blocker for the guy at 2, or just a decoy.

I'm guessing teams will be named tomorrow & that Chieka will keep us waiting until the last minute, probably name 24 or 25 as seems to be his MO?

 

[RugbyReg]

I didnt know where to post it, but just wanna say what a great podcast it was this week (as it always is)

this is as good a place as anywhere! Thanks mate.

 

[Pfitzy]

Fuck's sake this ongoing "THE LINEOUT IS ALL ABOUT NUMBERS!" and "MORE OPTIONS AND MORE CENTIMETRES = BETTER LINEOUT!"

It fucking doesn't. Sure, it helps, but if you've got no subtlety, technique, or understanding it doesn't mean shit.

The ABs had a great stock of tall timber in the late 90s / early noughties but it didn't mean shit because their timing was fucked and their throwers were questionable.

Forget about the fucking lineout on our ball. There are enough options if we're smart enough - and we're Australian rugby so we'd BETTER be fucking smart enough, because we're certainly not tough enough.

What we SHOULD be concerned about is how we go about disrupting the AB lineout, because denying them ball at all opportunities is the only way we're going to win this thing.

Possession and territory, but possession in the RIGHT territory.


Honestly, some of you think you know better than the national coaches. Where do you coach again? How's your level 2 accreditation going, getting you into Test footy is it?

 

[No4918]

Classic Pfitzy post. Ridiculing others for expressing their opinion and not being a national coach so how dare they. Then expressing his opinion as though he knows how to fix the problem. Irony.

Possession in the right territory? Yes, that was definitely the missing ingredient verse England. Not that we had absolutely no clue how to use the possession.

When is the team announced?

 

[Pfitzy]

Classic Pfitzy post. Ridiculing others for expressing their opinion and not being a national coach so how dare they. Then expressing his opinion as though he knows how to fix the problem. Irony.

DELETED

The point which you so eloquently missed DELETED is: stop worrying about pissy little stats. We should be more worried about how we out-smash them and you can't measure that on anything except the scoreboard.

I, and I'm sure others here, coach senior rugby. You don't worry about any centimetres in park footy except the ones between the ears of your players. No reason that can't apply to Test footy.

 

[No4918]

DELETED

The point which you so eloquently missed DELETED is: stop worrying about pissy little stats. We should be more worried about how we out-smash them and you can't measure that on anything except the scoreboard.

I, and I'm sure others here, coach senior rugby. You don't worry about any centimetres in park footy except the ones between the ears of your players. No reason that can't apply to Test footy.

No Pfitzy, your point was not missed. I just find your regular telling of others that their opinion is cat vomit tedious. Your opinion is no more valid than theirs despite what you may think.

Probably because you are a Tah fan. Sorry just added that because it is obvious on this forum anyone who disagrees with you soley does so because of a different franchise affiliation as though that has any bearing on them getting your point. That isn't tedious at all either.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Close to 50% of test tries come from line outs don't they?

If that still remains true surely you'd be a fool to disregard that attacking platform, and not wanting disrupt that attacking platform for the opposition.

 

[Viking]

To be fair Pitzy, when it come to the Wallabies V All Blacks numbers matter. We should have the same standard of jumpers otherwise we put unnecessary pressure on ourselves.

2 jumping locks (Douglas & Simmons), Fardy, and Hooper/Poey is even enough to compete with Rettallick, Whitelock, Read and Kaino.

As soon as you lose a solid jumper it's create's a huge imbalance compared to the All Blacks. Basically, there is no room for Skelton unless you want to give the All Blacks a clear advantage.

 

[fatprop]

Yeah, I don't think we can have Skelton as a lock option with our expected back row. His upside this year hasn't been enough to justify his weaknesses

 

[wamberal]

To change the subject, did anybody notice that Matthew Burke picked Giteau at 10 in his team in the Hurled?

 

[Ignoto]

What we SHOULD be concerned about is how we go about disrupting the AB lineout, because denying them ball at all opportunities is the only way we're going to win this thing.

I'd dare say that there's a strong correlation between how many players you have above 6'3 and how disruptive you are on the oppositions line out.

Otherwise, why don't we just throw Phipps, Foley and Giteau into the line outcome lineout time and just tell them to out sudoku the Aye-Bee's.

 

[Braveheart81]

Assuming Cheika goes with a 5:3 bench split, it becomes interesting as to what his options are.

I'm going to assume the starting forward pack is two of Simmons/Douglas/Coleman and Fardy, Hooper, Pocock.

Mumm was the reserve lineout caller during the England series and RWC. Does someone else have that role now or does he need to play? Otherwise whoever misses out from Simmons, Douglas and Coleman would make sense.

Presumably your other player is McMahon, McCalman or Timani. Unless you select McCalman you cause more issues with the lineout at the back end of the game assuming it will be Fardy who gets replaced.

You could pick both Mumm and another lock and figure that Mumm is your replacement backrower but ideally both locks will get replaced at some point during the game. This gives them a chance to go harder for less time to hopefully catch up a bit in what is a weak position comparably.

A 6:2 bench obviously provides more options in the forward pack but I'm not sure we have the right options in the backline to cover that. Without Beale we don't have as much versatility. Only 2 back reserves is always something of a risk and I don't think we should take that punt.

 

[Pfitzy]

For the record: I wouldn't pick Skelton either. Only partly for the lineout, but mostly because he's been shit around the park except for the odd nice touch.

Someone like Coleman is a preferred bench option for me, and Simmons has form and runs on the board. Douglas probably takes the last spot but that is only based on his RWC performances - and we are completely unaware of his ability to reproduce them.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Assuming Cheika goes with a 5:3 bench split, it becomes interesting as to what his options are.

I'm going to assume the starting forward pack is two of Simmons/Douglas/Coleman and Fardy, Hooper, Pocock.

Mumm was the reserve lineout caller during the England series and RWC. Does someone else have that role now or does he need to play? Otherwise whoever misses out from Simmons, Douglas and Coleman would make sense.

Presumably your other player is McMahon, McCalman or Timani. Unless you select McCalman you cause more issues with the lineout at the back end of the game assuming it will be Fardy who gets replaced.

You could pick both Mumm and another lock and figure that Mumm is your replacement backrower but ideally both locks will get replaced at some point during the game. This gives them a chance to go harder for less time to hopefully catch up a bit in what is a weak position comparably.

A 6:2 bench obviously provides more options in the forward pack but I'm not sure we have the right options in the backline to cover that. Without Beale we don't have as much versatility. Only 2 back reserves is always something of a risk and I don't think we should take that punt.

Reckon it will be a "war" up front. Would rather have that extra piggie

 

[Lindommer]

For the record: I wouldn't pick Skelton either. Only partly for the lineout, but mostly because he's been shit around the park except for the odd nice touch.

+1. Big Willie's not nearly fit enough. This was painfully obvious when he had to play more minutes than intended in the Pommie series.

Could those rugby supporter from north of the Tweed please take note two Tahs supporters advocate NOT picking a Tah player for the Wallabies.

 

[Braveheart81]

Reckon it will be a "war" up front. Would rather have that extra piggie

Let's say our backline is:

9. Genia, 10. Foley, 11. DHP/Mitchell, 12. Giteau, 13. Kuridrani/Kerevi 14. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), 15. Folau

22. Phipps, 23. ???

If you only have the two back reserves, it creates a big potential shuffle if there is an injury.

Let's say 23 is To'omua. He covers 10/12. If 13 or one of the back three goes down, who plays there? It probably means To'omua on the wing because anything else is a big reshuffle. You could potentially move Foley to fullback and To'omua or Giteau to 10 but moving your 10 due to an injury elsewhere is a pretty big reshuffle.

If 23 is Kerevi you could say that he covers 12, 13, 14. Giteau becomes your reserve 10, and DHP/Mitchell/AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) your reserve fullback.

That could be a decent option in this scenario.

 

[wamberal]

Personally I would be happy if Skelton never pulls on a Wallaby jersey ever again.

 

[Slim 293]

Let's say our backline is:

9. Genia, 10. Foley, 11. DHP/Mitchell, 12. Giteau, 13. Kuridrani/Kerevi 14. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), 15. Folau

22. Phipps, 23. ???

If you only have the two back reserves, it creates a big potential shuffle if there is an injury.

Let's say 23 is To'omua. He covers 10/12. If 13 or one of the back three goes down, who plays there? It probably means To'omua on the wing because anything else is a big reshuffle. You could potentially move Foley to fullback and To'omua or Giteau to 10 but moving your 10 due to an injury elsewhere is a pretty big reshuffle.

If 23 is Kerevi you could say that he covers 12, 13, 14. Giteau becomes your reserve 10, and DHP/Mitchell/AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) your reserve fullback.

That could be a decent option in this scenario.

If Kerevi doesn't make the starting team I would expect him to miss out on the 23 altogether, with either To'omua/Giteau and one out of Mitchell/AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)/DHP to fill two of the bench spots.

 

[Wilson]

I'm expecting to see quade in the 23, probably in Beale's role as a "finisher". The time he's spent at fullback for toulon may end up working in his favour...

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

 

[Braveheart81]

Foxsports saying that Cooper could have a bench spot.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/b...rss&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

If Kerevi doesn't make the starting team I would expect him to miss out on the 23 altogether, with either To'omua/Giteau and one out of Mitchell/AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)/DHP to fill two of the bench spots.

I agree if they go with the standard 3 back reserves. Kerevi doesn't work too badly if you have a 6:2 bench.