Hitlist
- Thread starter louie
- Start date
- Status
R
Rugby Rat
Guest
There I was thinking Mitchell's kicking had improved 10000 % until the absolute shocker.
Sagerian
Allen Oxlade (6)
Brown and Sharpe should be the first to go. Mitchell wouldn't be fair behind. The only times he's been involved have been kicking, which is woeful. I'd be included to get rid of Pocock too and get Waugh more time.
Giteau to 12, Barnes to 10 (seriously, this isn't rocket science)...
And I'd probs bring Tuqiri into the squad... oh wait....
Giteau to 12, Barnes to 10 (seriously, this isn't rocket science)...
And I'd probs bring Tuqiri into the squad... oh wait....
Scotty
David Codey (61)
It is easy to have a hitlist, but much hard to have a list of replacements. Sweeping changes are almost impossible given our playing stock.
My Hitlist & Replacements:
Pocock - Waugh
Moore - TPN
Baxter - Alexander
Burgess - Genia (not because of the recent game, but past inconsistencies)
Brown - Palu (tell Palu to go nuts for 50mins, then we might have to play Smith at 8)
My Hitlist & Replacements:
Pocock - Waugh
Moore - TPN
Baxter - Alexander
Burgess - Genia (not because of the recent game, but past inconsistencies)
Brown - Palu (tell Palu to go nuts for 50mins, then we might have to play Smith at 8)
R
rugbywhisperer
Guest
Nope - can't see it happening.
No matter who get bumped and who get upped, the same will happen - I do not think there is any player other than Smith, Waugh, Pocock and Morts who actually have an ability to play with the intensity and sheer physical presence of the AB's or the SAffers - both teams are another 5 levels above us - it's called mongrel and we do not have it - oh also - our backs are just plain old fasioned dumb but gees they are cute as a button.
Australian rugby has been fantastic at breeding athletes - what we need now is rugby players.
We need 5 of the 8 forwards to be bordering on the insane. Have a look at Thorn and his drive and enthusiasm - then look at Sharpie or MMM - gees - where did we go wrong. We need the front 3 to scare babies, knockover forests with their gaze - to want to hurt.
The back 3 - what have we got - used to have 3 there who could carry a team - now we have 3 mommies boys - all great athletes but none of them a rugby player. Would Mitchell, Turner or O'Connor have made the 2001 side that beat the Lions or the team that won the 1999 RWC or the 1991 RWC - I tend to think they would be so far left out of Australia they would be classed as immigrants.
the 9 and 10 - this used to be our main gear - the point from which it all happened. Now we have a mismash of crosed gender thought, liberal thinking, human rights and absolutely no bloody action - all great athletes - very few of them a real rugby player.
What about the three quarters - Horan, Little and co could knock over a whole team in their rampage to the line (which by the way they knew very well where it was) - what we have now are players more content to take the easy kick, too affraid, to get a torn fingernail would ruin their night.
Please ARU - stop this nancy boy fancy recruitment of kids that look good - clean looks and flowing hair - give me a hungry mongrel bordering on phychotic with some athletic ability who would rather die than lose a game or concede a point. I am sick of watching pretty boys get thumped by players with more nouse and courage and a desire to win for their country.
While we are at it - lets ditch that walla madness and teach our kids to tackle and scrummage from age 7 like they do in NZ and SA - or are we too afraid of the mommies still to make a stand for our game.
That is why Elsom made that hit off the kick off - to make a statement - no one else in the team can or is prepared to do the same.
Best we go out and get them all some frilly dresses and dolls because that is all they deserve right now.
I havent seen an Aussie side so bereft of committment raw ability to score and drive since the forlorne days of mid 70's.
No matter who get bumped and who get upped, the same will happen - I do not think there is any player other than Smith, Waugh, Pocock and Morts who actually have an ability to play with the intensity and sheer physical presence of the AB's or the SAffers - both teams are another 5 levels above us - it's called mongrel and we do not have it - oh also - our backs are just plain old fasioned dumb but gees they are cute as a button.
Australian rugby has been fantastic at breeding athletes - what we need now is rugby players.
We need 5 of the 8 forwards to be bordering on the insane. Have a look at Thorn and his drive and enthusiasm - then look at Sharpie or MMM - gees - where did we go wrong. We need the front 3 to scare babies, knockover forests with their gaze - to want to hurt.
The back 3 - what have we got - used to have 3 there who could carry a team - now we have 3 mommies boys - all great athletes but none of them a rugby player. Would Mitchell, Turner or O'Connor have made the 2001 side that beat the Lions or the team that won the 1999 RWC or the 1991 RWC - I tend to think they would be so far left out of Australia they would be classed as immigrants.
the 9 and 10 - this used to be our main gear - the point from which it all happened. Now we have a mismash of crosed gender thought, liberal thinking, human rights and absolutely no bloody action - all great athletes - very few of them a real rugby player.
What about the three quarters - Horan, Little and co could knock over a whole team in their rampage to the line (which by the way they knew very well where it was) - what we have now are players more content to take the easy kick, too affraid, to get a torn fingernail would ruin their night.
Please ARU - stop this nancy boy fancy recruitment of kids that look good - clean looks and flowing hair - give me a hungry mongrel bordering on phychotic with some athletic ability who would rather die than lose a game or concede a point. I am sick of watching pretty boys get thumped by players with more nouse and courage and a desire to win for their country.
While we are at it - lets ditch that walla madness and teach our kids to tackle and scrummage from age 7 like they do in NZ and SA - or are we too afraid of the mommies still to make a stand for our game.
That is why Elsom made that hit off the kick off - to make a statement - no one else in the team can or is prepared to do the same.
Best we go out and get them all some frilly dresses and dolls because that is all they deserve right now.
I havent seen an Aussie side so bereft of committment raw ability to score and drive since the forlorne days of mid 70's.
spectator
Bob Davidson (42)
Have to disagree with some of what you write RW, just not sure how to articulate it, or where to start?
Maybe I will stick to comments on the backs for the moment. I think many of us who recall 'the golden days' tend to view history through rose coloured glasses. Horan was fantastic, and I was always a fan of Little, but to suggest that their success was borne off the back of 'hungry mongrel behaviour, bordering on psychotic', is a bit of a stretch. They were great athletes with great rugby skills. Tough, granted, but I've seen the backs of today repeatedly take knocks from much bigger guys as well.
O'Connor's only drawback at this stage may be his youth. He is an extremely gifted rugby player who can step off both feet, has shown strength through the tackle and is capable of first class defence (witness the tackle on Spies). Mitchell, whilst having Campo like moments, did debut sensationally, and was arguably one of the better backs at the last world cup. I'm yet to be convinced by Turner, but wouldn't doubt his toughness.
With respect to 'pretty boy labelling', Horan and Little endured a few taunts in their time, as did a few of their peers.
I'm tipping a few of the young guys going around now to be superstars of the future. It's not rocket science. Guys like Latho were disparaged early in their careers, but came through in the end.
Maybe I will stick to comments on the backs for the moment. I think many of us who recall 'the golden days' tend to view history through rose coloured glasses. Horan was fantastic, and I was always a fan of Little, but to suggest that their success was borne off the back of 'hungry mongrel behaviour, bordering on psychotic', is a bit of a stretch. They were great athletes with great rugby skills. Tough, granted, but I've seen the backs of today repeatedly take knocks from much bigger guys as well.
O'Connor's only drawback at this stage may be his youth. He is an extremely gifted rugby player who can step off both feet, has shown strength through the tackle and is capable of first class defence (witness the tackle on Spies). Mitchell, whilst having Campo like moments, did debut sensationally, and was arguably one of the better backs at the last world cup. I'm yet to be convinced by Turner, but wouldn't doubt his toughness.
With respect to 'pretty boy labelling', Horan and Little endured a few taunts in their time, as did a few of their peers.
I'm tipping a few of the young guys going around now to be superstars of the future. It's not rocket science. Guys like Latho were disparaged early in their careers, but came through in the end.
Shees:
Burke v JOC (James O'Connor)
Tune v Tune
Herbie v AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
Horan v Berrick
Roff v Mitchell
Bernie v Gits
Gregan v Burgo
Kef v Brown
Wilson v Smith
Cockbain v Rocky
Eales v Sharpe
Giffen v Horwill
Blades v Al
Foley v Moore
Harry v Robinson
Rocky the closest I guess. Possible arguments for Moore and Robinson. Possibly.
Burke v JOC (James O'Connor)
Tune v Tune
Herbie v AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
Horan v Berrick
Roff v Mitchell
Bernie v Gits
Gregan v Burgo
Kef v Brown
Wilson v Smith
Cockbain v Rocky
Eales v Sharpe
Giffen v Horwill
Blades v Al
Foley v Moore
Harry v Robinson
Rocky the closest I guess. Possible arguments for Moore and Robinson. Possibly.
Nostalgia was much better in my day too.
When you think of the legends on that list, do you remember them getting pantsed all over the shop in 97? Or like me do you just remember the best parts of their careers, notably 99?
Unless you're able to see to the end of this crops playing career and know what they've won, such comparisons are apples and oranges.
When you think of the legends on that list, do you remember them getting pantsed all over the shop in 97? Or like me do you just remember the best parts of their careers, notably 99?
Unless you're able to see to the end of this crops playing career and know what they've won, such comparisons are apples and oranges.
disco
Chilla Wilson (44)
:thumb
I agree with some of the points that RW has made, when you look at the team of 98-01 (glory days) there was no real flashy players who used a big step or had real jet shoes to blow an opponent away but what they did do well was run straight & hard into the gaps & never ran at shoulders they always had that ability to glance of tackles rather step around the defence.
Best game to watch was in 1998 in NZ when Burke scored that try after 2000 phases.
R
Rugby Rat
Guest
Sharpie, Barnes, Horwill, Robinson, Moore have been the standouts.
Horwill working his way back to his best after injury. Barnes almost there.
Gitts is spent after 65 minutes. Need a replacement for last 15.
Horwill working his way back to his best after injury. Barnes almost there.
Gitts is spent after 65 minutes. Need a replacement for last 15.
Scotty
David Codey (61)
I was thinking Smith.
Regarding question no. 2 I was thinking no-one.
As Gagger says, it isn't a fair comparison, but I expect that by the ends of their careers we might only see the likes of Robinson, Moore, Horwill, Elsom and Smith mentioned in the same breath as their 99 counterparts. Shows how weak our current backs are compared to the glory days. What we wouldn't give to have just one of the likes of Horan, Tune or Larkham out there at the moment!
G
Geronimo
Guest
There is absolutely no doubt that the current team could not hold a candle to the team mentioned. However some are at the early stages of their career and comparisons are unfair but others SHOULD be at the end of their representative career. And I'm not talking Smith or Morty
- Status