Ioane - Where Does He Fit In?

[Scotty]

Ioane has never played better for the Wallabies than the current back three have. Test form outweighs Super Rugby form. He has to earn his place.

Are you serious? Mitchell has been up and down so much that many have suggested he get dropped for Turner prior to last week. JOC (James O'Connor) has been blamed for numerous opposition tries and many have suggested he isn't a winger's arsehole.

They've had two good games now and are working well together, but it is a overstating the facts saying that Ioane has never played better than the current back three.

 

[vidiot]

It only works with Cooper at 10! Neither of the two have an acceptable passing game and the only way our wingers will see the ball is via a double cut-out.

Whats new? I admit sometimes Gits runs to the sideline and kind of drops the ball in the general direction of other players, but at the moment he is so busy trying to beat the defense by running at the corner flag, or giving up and kicking, that you could stand Maafu there without doing anything more than Cooper a bigger target to cut-out.

 

[Scotty]

Not really. With Beale and JOC (James O'Connor) slotting in pockets in the midfield they have plenty of options. Having two powerful runners in AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and Digby would let them be more creative in some of the decoy/lines they can run.

Beale would be very good in leading a second line of attack behind AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and or Ioane as runners.

 

[Running Rugby]

I think when fit Ioane has to be a starting winger. He plays the ultimate roving roll and is a damaging line breaker. I am not sure that a wing combination with JOC (James O'Connor) is completely beneficial to the Wallabies though because it lacks a specialist finisher on the end of the backline.

 

[Godfrey]

Ioane beats Mitchell at his biggest strength, which is strength in the tackle. There is some loss in kicking game but I don't think that should keep Drew in the team above Diggers.

 

[cyclopath]

Ioane beats Mitchell at his biggest strength, which is strength in the tackle. There is some loss in kicking game but I don't think that should keep Drew in the team above Diggers.

I would have agreed hands down a year ago, but one thing that has surprised (and pleased me) this year has been the strength in the tackle Drew has shown - he fends very well and quite often bumps off one or two players. Not to say he is better at it than Digby, but he has improved that aspect of his game, as it has improved in general.
I am a big Ioane fan, but I really feel with his lack of big game time, he has to show a lot in mid-week type games to displace an incumbent at the moment. As would any outside back contender at the moment. The back 3 are doing really well, notwithstanding that one of them isn't really a winger!

 

[TOCC]

I don't think you can take to much out of the Wales games in terms of Mitchells strength in the tackle...Wales are probably one of the few top international sides to have a lighter back line then Australia

 

[cyclopath]

I don't think you can take to much out of the Wales games in terms of Mitchells strength in the tackle...Wales are probably one of the few top international sides to have a lighter back line then Australia

I wasn't basing my statement on one game, I said "this year". Super rugby and Tests, it has struck me that he does better at this than he used to. That's all.

 

[TOCC]

Alright, well I haven't seen him do it enough to other international wingers, can't say I've seed him manhandle any of the all blacks wingers yet

 

[Richo]

I reckon Mitchell is one of the hardest backs in world rugby to bring down when he has a little steam up. But he doesn't quite have Ioane's ability to break tackles early in the run nor the offload skills.

I'm about as big a Drew Mitchell fan as there is, but I'd guess that if both are in top form, Diggers would be the clear starter and Mitchell more useful off the bench. He could really tear apart a tired defense and can cover multiple positions, albeit not as well as Turner.

 

[Lindommer]

...(Ioane)...Still, I think that any concerns about the overflowing talent pool for our backs is a little premature. It seems remarkably unlikely there won't continue to be a procession of injuries through 2011, and I'm sure that (unless he is one of the casualties - again) he will get his chance.

And here we go again: rabbitting on about which back plays where and who gets the good-looking girl at the after-match party while our forwards get mullered in the scrums at the same time convincing referees we're crap at scrummaging and should be whistled off the park. Even though for one good scrum we turned the Welsh scrum through 90 degrees and should've had the put-in at a reset. But no, those Wallabies are crap, just go on, place that pill next to the posts while I find my whistle. TRY! It's going to bite us on the arse next year.

How many times does His Ancientness have to pull our gaze back to things more important. Ioane? He can try for a spot when he's fit. But our coaches' gaze should be firmly on the pigs.

 

[Groucho]

And here we go again: rabbitting on about which back plays where and who gets the good-looking girl at the after-match party while our forwards get mullered in the scrums at the same time convincing referees we're crap at scrummaging and should be whistled off the park. Even though for one good scrum we turned the Welsh scrum through 90 degrees and should've had the put-in at a reset. But no, those Wallabies are crap, just go on, place that pill next to the posts while I find my whistle. TRY! It's going to bite us on the arse next year.

How many times does His Ancientness have to pull our gaze back to things more important. Ioane? He can try for a spot when he's fit. But our coaches' gaze should be firmly on the pigs.

Why can't people who are interested in back play talk about Ioane on a thread devoted to that purpose?

The Wallabies' scrum won't degrade further if we take our Delphic eye off them for a moment.

 

[cyclopath]

Exactly, Groucho.
If we wait till the scrum comes good until we are allowed to discuss any back positions, JOC (James O'Connor) will probably have facial hair. And children.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Geez Lindo, we're just a bunch of armchair critics, not at the helm steering the Wallaby ship. I doubt Deans and Williams and co are stargazing on "I wonder if's and when's". Although as an AB supporter I can only hope they are.....

The topic seems a fair point of discussion given a fit Digby has been a starter over the last year or so

 

[slasher]

gits has been playing poorly in my opinion, but a lot of that I believe can be put down to how the team is playing. It seems (as a 2nd ball player at 12) he never gets front foot ball.... If we get good ball early in phase QC (Quade Cooper) dances his feet and attempts (probably sucessfully) to hit a runner at the line in 1, 2 or inside channel. It would be a fucking nightmare as a ball playing 12 (not a punch runner) trying to align off QC (Quade Cooper). At present it seems Gits only gets the shit ball and for some reason heads to the sideline (we may as well have a unit at 12 taking a switch off QC (Quade Cooper) when the shits on and getting belted closer to our previous breakdown)...
With Gits in the team I would like to see QC (Quade Cooper) be more selective when he takes the play on in his channel. Some good ball shifted quickly to gits would allow him to hit ACC on an overs or hit Beale round the back, but it has to be early good phase ball when the outside channels are on....It seems we just want to exhaust same way same way or play sideline to sideline and with a midfield set up having a forward running a blocker on his mate to a sweeping back with centre aside if the numbers are on. If thats the case have QC (Quade Cooper) and the 15 sweeping and have a line runner at 12 not a ball player.....Summary of rant I guess would be if you going to have a ball playing 12, then use him as such.

 

[vidiot]

And here we go again: rabbitting on about which back plays where ...

Yeah, maybe my way of saying who cares, he's injured and by the time he's not someone else will be was a little longwinded.

Still, Pato apparently has the pigs well in hand (?) (thank you Gnostic). I think our coaches should use their free time to keep an eye on @giteau_rugby and try to prevent a fashion faux pas like his purchase of these shoes.

 

[Scotty]

gits has been playing poorly in my opinion, but a lot of that I believe can be put down to how the team is playing. It seems (as a 2nd ball player at 12) he never gets front foot ball.... If we get good ball early in phase QC (Quade Cooper) dances his feet and attempts (probably sucessfully) to hit a runner at the line in 1, 2 or inside channel. It would be a fucking nightmare as a ball playing 12 (not a punch runner) trying to align off QC (Quade Cooper). At present it seems Gits only gets the shit ball and for some reason heads to the sideline (we may as well have a unit at 12 taking a switch off QC (Quade Cooper) when the shits on and getting belted closer to our previous breakdown)...
With Gits in the team I would like to see QC (Quade Cooper) be more selective when he takes the play on in his channel. Some good ball shifted quickly to gits would allow him to hit ACC on an overs or hit Beale round the back, but it has to be early good phase ball when the outside channels are on....It seems we just want to exhaust same way same way or play sideline to sideline and with a midfield set up having a forward running a blocker on his mate to a sweeping back with centre aside if the numbers are on. If thats the case have QC (Quade Cooper) and the 15 sweeping and have a line runner at 12 not a ball player.....Summary of rant I guess would be if you going to have a ball playing 12, then use him as such.

They do use him as a ball player. He goes to first receiver on occasions to allow QC (Quade Cooper) to roam wider!

 

[Lee Grant]

And here we go again: rabbitting on about which back plays where and who gets the good-looking girl at the after-match party while our forwards get mullered in the scrums at the same time convincing referees we're crap at scrummaging and should be whistled off the park.

Well put. On a scale of 10 of current importance the backs are are 1 out of 10. The forwards are a 9, but discussions of them can be in the opposite ratio. This was true even when our forwards were playing well and the importance was 2 to 8; and for any team at any time it should not get higher than 3 to 7.

But backs stuff is easier to watch and the strengths and weaknesses of them are more easily spotted. It has taken me decades trying to understand forward play and I reckon I understand 25% of it fairly well now.

But so long as people are having fun - you can't knock that.

 

[Richo]

Lee, if you're at 25%, what hope for the rest of us... ever?

 

[Tiger]

Put Diggers in the front row