England v Australia, Saturday 3 December

[dru]

It gets interesting.

TBF there seems to me to be evidence of a plan well thought out coming to fruition. The selections have worked through to what we have and most fans picked the team pretty convincingly well before Cheika announced it. We are not all in favour, but there is a predictable direction. Genia and Coleman not available are pretty much the only issues, otherwise we really have the first choice selections.

The structures are coming together, both in attack and defence. A clear strategy and players who understand and gel within those structures. And the new blood is settling in.

Set piece remains a point to prove. Two primary jumpers does not leave me enthused but England are at their C choice locks (we are with our B choice). Scrum really should be with us, but god knows these days.

Handling and kicking has improved, ditto aggression in the pigs. Not where we want it, but definitely improved.

This is where Cheika has been guiding the Wallabies - I cant imagine a more important test.

Go gold!

 

[fatprop]

I'm not familiar with English domestic rugby but the pommy bench doesn't look too flash either.

Lock and backrow are a drop off, but the rest are pretty good (and I reckon Slade is a bloody good)

16 Jamie George, 17 Joe Marler, 18 Kyle Sinckler, 19 Charlie Ewels, 20 Teimana Harrison, 21 Danny Care, 22 Ben Te’o, 23 Henry Slade

 

[Lindommer]

Richard Lowe in 1992 maybe? Don't think he was sent off for "elbowing" Carossa but got 26 weeks afterwards.

Loe got 26 weeks for gouging a fellow Kiwi in a subsequent match, not for the Carozza incident.

 

[amirite]

An interesting team, in that is very uninteresting and sensible . Can't fault any of the decisions.

I know there's a lot of Fardy-related noise, but I'd like to see take Mumm's bench lock/6 role. According to the interwebs he's taller and heavier than Mumm and he's played plenty of high-level 2nd row.

Points of interest from this line-up:

• Will Sefa play Speights 'defend in the line' role? He could, but he is green, so I wonder if we'll rock the same D system.
• Will our lineout be undone? England are excellent there and our lineup is not lineout-friendly.
• Arnold looked burnt out after a long season, but do we really have the locking depth to drop him out of the 23?
• How will Chieks manage the back subs? He's decisions here have been very gun shy compared to the forwards.
• Could Mumm play a good enough game that people don't shit on him? I think if he comes on and concedes even a penalty then people cry bloody murder and if he doesn't people will say he did nothing.
  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[A mutterer]

None of that.

really? i thought that reply rather smooth.

 

[Pfitzy]

I know there's a lot of Fardy-related noise, but I'd like to see take Mumm's bench lock/6 role. According to the interwebs he's taller and heavier than Mumm and he's played plenty of high-level 2nd row.

A lot of things according to the interwebs is misleading.

What matters is that we've seen Fardy in the second row, mostly in a scrum going backwards.

Love his niggle at blindside, but he's not a second rower.

 

[amirite]

The internet is a strange place.
When Teflon Hooper plays loose and wide with little impact he is playing to the coaches plan and when higgers does the same (except with more impact and tries) he gets shitcanned for being a seagull

Hooper gets shitcanned plenty, but I completely agree!

Most coaches are running either a 1-6-1 or 2-4-2 forward split nowadays, and armchair fans hate it because that's not the way footy was played in there days. The game has moved on!

Coaches do this to get big athletic carriers on the outside and because those blokes are great at ruck work. As we know, the wide channels are the number 1 place for turnovers.

The game has moved on, but that won't stop people shitting on the guys you've mentioned (and others like Holloway) for playing to structures.

 

[amirite]

A lot of things according to the interwebs is misleading.

What matters is that we've seen Fardy in the second row, mostly in a scrum going backwards.

Love his niggle at blindside, but he's not a second rower.

I agree re: interwebs numbers, but he's still in the ballpark.

Has a Wallaby scrum gone backwards with Fardy at lock? I can only remember him playing there through injury/card issues, so that can be put down to a systems failure.

The Brumbies scrum always went well with him there.

 

[Tex]

An interesting team, in that is very uninteresting and sensible . Can't fault any of the decisions.

I know there's a lot of Fardy-related noise, but I'd like to see take Mumm's bench lock/6 role. According to the interwebs he's taller and heavier than Mumm and he's played plenty of high-level 2nd row.

Points of interest from this line-up:

• Will Sefa play Speights 'defend in the line' role? He could, but he is green, so I wonder if we'll rock the same D system.
• Will our lineout be undone? England are excellent there and our lineup is not lineout-friendly.
• Arnold looked burnt out after a long season, but do we really have the locking depth to drop him out of the 23?
• How will Chieks manage the back subs? He's decisions here have been very gun shy compared to the forwards.
• Could Mumm play a good enough game that people don't shit on him? I think if he comes on and concedes even a penalty then people cry bloody murder and if he doesn't people will say he did nothing.
  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Sefa is a great read of his tackles. He's got the speed to nail guys who try him on the outside, and when he properly lines up an attacker, they stay tackled.

 

[PeterK]

The bigger problem to me in this side is the selection of McMahon on the bench. Cheika won't be likely to replace either of Hooper or Pocock, so we'll finish with 3 No 7s on the field at the same time. We will be over-run at scrum time and maybe shot down in the lineout.

I would be looking at Timani lasting 80 mins as he has before and replacing either Pocock or Hooper (whomever is having less impact) with McMahon.

Timani has had a good rest after all did not play against Ireland or France.

I know Cheika probably won't do this though.

 

[PeterK]

Man, you can see why Cheika has dropped the finishers rhetoric. That is one piss-weak bench. Robertson, Latu and Frisby should be no where near that team. They all have potential to be decent but damn man they are not high impact players to be bringing on at the ass end of a tight test. No Taf, Beale or To'omua etc. Bout the only player of that lot i'd back to have impact is McMahon but by all accounts hes half crocked.

IMO Latu adds the same impact as TPN, he is the same type of hooker, physical and very good scrumager.

QC (Quade Cooper) is also a good impact player except he will be lucky to get 5 mins.

McMahon if he is injured should not be there so I assume he is fit and is an impact player, however the big english forwards handle him well.

So 3/8 bench players are impact.

 

[PeterK]

Lock and backrow are a drop off, but the rest are pretty good (and I reckon Slade is a bloody good)

the whole tight 5 are a big drop off

backs strong though

 

[PeterK]

Sefa is a great read of his tackles. He's got the speed to nail guys who try him on the outside, and when he properly lines up an attacker, they stay tackled.

sefa is a well over due choice.

Better all round than speight in attack and defence.

 

[amirite]

Sefa is a great read of his tackles. He's got the speed to nail guys who try him on the outside, and when he properly lines up an attacker, they stay tackled.

Nobody would argue he isn't a great tackler, but he would be however playing a new role in a more challenging environment than he's played before.

Good tackler =/= good defender, and even good defenders (which he is) can find difficulties in new high-pressure environments.

 

[PeterK]

Overall I am happy with the team, better than the one put out against Ireland.

Timani and Naivalu great choices, Timani should never have been dropped and Naivalu starting is well over due.

I do not like the Pooper , either Pocock or Hooper should be on the bench and Fardy starting. If Mumm was starting at 6 then Hooper would have to be the on on the bench.

Locks are light weight and Mumm is backup caller but time to take a risk. Assume Simmons gets through 80, Arnold on the bench and Mumm out.

 

[Twoilms]

Overall I am happy with the team, better than the one put out against Ireland.

Timani and Naivalu great choices, Timani should never have been dropped and Naivalu starting is well over due.

I do not like the Pooper , either Pocock or Hooper should be on the bench and Fardy starting. If Mumm was starting at 6 then Hooper would have to be the on on the bench.

Locks are light weight and Mumm is backup caller but time to take a risk. Assume Simmons gets through 80, Arnold on the bench and Mumm out.

Risk is too high. You can't have no lineout caller in a match. If simmo copped an injury that'd be the game.

This is why Coleman is so damn great. He's learning to call lineouts and he can pull his own weight elsewhere. He's not a burden.

 

[Tex]

Nobody would argue he isn't a great tackler, but he would be however playing a new role in a more challenging environment than he's played before.

Good tackler =/= good defender, and even good defenders (which he is) can find difficulties in new high-pressure environments.

Yeah no doubt. I hedged on the tackler/defender call because of some early stats someone posted after one of the recent tests, where he missed a few tackles. In my time watching him at the Rebels he's been a defensive asset, hopefully he shines on the test stage.

 

[KOB1987]

Overall I am happy with the team, better than the one put out against Ireland.

Timani and Naivalu great choices, Timani should never have been dropped and Naivalu starting is well over due.

I do not like the Pooper , either Pocock or Hooper should be on the bench and Fardy starting. If Mumm was starting at 6 then Hooper would have to be the on on the bench.

Locks are light weight and Mumm is backup caller but time to take a risk. Assume Simmons gets through 80, Arnold on the bench and Mumm out.

Do we know for sure he was dropped v Ireland? It was certainly unexpected and he's now back in favour after playing an enormous game from the stands last week. I think it's entirely possible and very Cheika-ish that if he had a niggle and was rested last week that the Dodgers don't know the nature of said niggle so it was in our interest to say nothing about it and let the world speculate and bang our heads about him being unjustifably dropped.

 

[Braveheart81]

Mumm was selected over Timani for lineout ability. Cheika said that very clearly in his presser.

 

[fatprop]

Overall I am happy with the team, better than the one put out against Ireland.

Timani and Naivalu great choices, Timani should never have been dropped and Naivalu starting is well over due.

I do not like the Pooper , either Pocock or Hooper should be on the bench and Fardy starting. If Mumm was starting at 6 then Hooper would have to be the on on the bench.

Locks are light weight and Mumm is backup caller but time to take a risk. Assume Simmons gets through 80, Arnold on the bench and Mumm out.

This is the perplexing question to me, both are 80 minute players, so you won't need to\want to budget for their replacement.

So playing the other on the bench just delays the "Pooper" to later in the match as they will replace one of the other backrowers, not the starting "Pooper".

So you are essentially just delaying the "Pooper"; and I don't see Fardy or Mumm contributing any better than having the "Pooper" starting in the first place.