The torpedo
Peter Fenwicke (45)
Then you're sadder than I thought.
It was meant for a bit of a laugh.
Then you're sadder than I thought.
I'm not sure a faded and ripped Brisbane Broncos jersey will ever go out of fashion in Queensland.
Who needs invisible socks when you're wearing thongs?
Agreed. I hope to see that sometime this year. But surely if you made that decision you'd take the opportunity to pick a player at 15 who could kick. Like DHP, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), or hodge.
Foley doesn't have to be in the side if he's not picked at 10.
Arnold isn't injured he's been named for the Vikings
Sent from my FP2 using Tapatalk
Getting a bit sad if you have to bag the guy for wearing the team sponsor's gear.
I agree. Cooper and to a lesser extent Kerevi are on a hiding to nothing. While Foley picked out of position has a built in out. ie: but he's out of position and has never played there.I can't help but be a little pessimistic about this team - deckchairs, titanic and all that......
Individually, Kerevi could provide a bit more attacking spark than Kuridrani, but he's part of a brand new 10-12-13 combination (obviously injuries have forced Cheika's hand at 12) that collectively could be a disaster.... together with DHP on the wing we could be exposed defensively.
Simmons and McCalman had to go, but I'm skeptical that the lineout will improve, particularly if it's now being run by Coleman...
I at least hope that Fardy is given that role as he at least had some success with it in Super Rugby....
Here's hoping for a miracle.
I',\m not convinced Foley is the defensive disaster many here seem to think. He's not an in-you-face knock-em-down type defender, but is pretty solid these days, certainly a lot better than we he first came to Super rugby.
Who had the bright idea to bring QC (Quade Cooper) back in NZ when he's had little rugby and they loathe him over there: setting him up for a fall, IMO.
Should be Ok though because its not like we weakened two positions to cover 1 or anything.
We've got a noted non-tackler in 12, a 10 who tries but who for most of his career has been shunted to right wing in defence, a 12 playing 13, an arguable 13 at 15, an arguable 15 at 11.
When Marto suggested we should play McMahon at 12 i thought he thought that was a joke but that will be next on this bizarre ride we've signed up for now.
We re no longer the wallabies we are the headless chooks.
It literally blows me away.
I don't understand the basis of it at all. Especially when you see comments in these threads and the front page saying something like "Put Quade at 10, atleast you won't have to hide your flyhalf in defence".
Unless I'm watching different games to you lot, Foley is quite a competent defender for a flyhalf. Like his offensive support game, hes often the one chasing a linebreak in defence and makes many critical, try-saving tackles. When facing an attacker front on, hes not as strong, but hes not bad by any means. He gets low with textbook technique and often pulls the tackle off.
Thats a lot more than you can say about Quade "Around the shoulders, one yellow card please, Ref" Cooper, although his physicality has certainly improved over the years as well.
I read a few other international forums as well, and they read Foley in a far different light to many of his antagonisers here, and many of them rate him a lot higher than we do from his international performances, which I find pretty interesting (some female posters also wont shut up about how attractive he is??? To me, that just further proves that women will never be understood).
The team looks good to me, the forward pack is one of the most physical we've offered in a long time without compromising workrate. We really, really need the lineout to fire though. We can't keep on forfeiting set piece ball against a team as dangerous as the All Blacks. I think with Fardy, Coleman and Douglas as our main jumpers and Hooper as an auxiliary we should be fine. It helps if I tell myself that anyway.
The backline likewise has a good mixture of attacking threats and defensive capability, with competent kickers across Foley, Quade, Two-Dads and Two-Dads 2.0. I also love the Quade / Foley combo, although I'll get to that later.
In terms of the bench, I wouldn't have had Skelton, Mumm or Kuridrani riding the pine. Kuridrani is too one dimensional and before any mentions it: I've seen the stats. Tom Carter was (perversely) often statistically the best centre in Australia at the height of his career, but we all know numbers can't tell the whole story. I want workrate and I want impact: one of the two won't cut it.
My complaint re: Mumm is that he is a powderpuff lock - he doesn't offer the physicality I want from my forwards. Skelton on the other hand offers the physicality I love, but he doesnt have the workrate required for an international lock. On the bench together, they could be the ying to the others yang. Who knows? We'll find out on Saturday.
Re: Quade at 10 and Foley at 12, I like it and I've suggested it for a while due to the success that the Foley / Beale combination had at the Waratahs and in the Wallabies during the RWC.
Both have good distributing games and can find a gap when they need to: whether its for themselves or for others. I'm also a huge fan of the dual playmaker set-up. I've had a good laugh at people suggesting that "no other country in the world uses it" throughout this thread. England just gave us a jolly good spanking by resolving their "Ford or Farrell at 10" dilemma by whacking them both on the field at the same time.
Why? Because flyhalf is a position endowed with huge amounts of pressure. Pressure can make diamonds, but it more often makes dust. Knowing that the other can slide into first receiver, both Quade and Foley will be able to play a man wider on the weekend, injecting themselves into the attacking line where they see opportunities. This is very different to trying to inject an opportunity into the attacking line.
For that very reason I think Quade, if he ends up at the Reds next year, will play best with a Paia'aua / Kerevi 12-13 combo. Too often he tries to change a game with every play. When the pressures off, he relaxes and he plays his natural game as he shows us the world class attacking genius he can be.
When I posted that on the Reds 2017 thread, many agreed with the logic but somehow the merits of the dual playmaker set up got lost in this thread. Rage often inhibits a person's clarity of thought and we Wallaby fans certainly have a lot to be miffed about.
However, I, for one, am quite optimistic about the future.
Quade may make some mistakes on sat......but it'd be impossible to make more then Foley did last week. Not to mention how dull,slow and unimaganitive he often is.....and has been for ages for the wallabies. Foley even was poor for the Tahs all year. Oh and his kicking sucks.Throwing QC (Quade Cooper) back in makes be very nervous. We've seen it before, the merry-go-round is spinning too fast and I want to get off.
I predict QC (Quade Cooper) will put in his usual mixed bag, with enough mistakes for the haters to jump on but a few good flashes for the fanbois to claim "he's awesome but Phipps can't pass" or whatever. We're going to lose, changing the 10 will just add more fuel to this shitty debate. I wish QC (Quade Cooper) and Foley would both retire.
In reality, Quade isn't going to have a massive influence. He's a solid player, just a different style to Foley. Even if you believe the hype about his ability to throw no-look quadruple cutout dummies to himself while moonwalking through half-gaps, that kind of shit doesn't win test matches against the Blicks. It's the other 101 areas we absolutely sucked at that makes the difference, the most important of which start in the forward pack.