Rank our props

[JJJ]

I'm particularly ignorant of the dark arts, so I was wondering if the more knowledgeable people here could rank the Aussie props in terms of pure scrummaging ability (particularly those starting for their S15 sides). Please keep your looseheads and tightheads separate. If they play both sides put them in both lists where they'd rank. Cheers! :thumb

 

[RugbyReg]

I'll have a crack:

THPS:

1) Dan Palmer
2) Tim Fairbrother
3) Al Baxter
4) Laurie Weeks
5) Ben Alexander
6) Salesi Ma'afu
7) James Slipper (haven't seen him start enough at 3 to properly gauge)

LHP:

1) Benn Robinson
2) daylight
3) James Slipper
4) Sekope Kepu
5) Ben Daley
6) Ben Alexander
7) Greg Holmes
8) Matt Dunning

That's my perspective on scrumming alone.

4)

 

[fatprop]

on scrummaging ability?


THPS:

1) Dan Palmer
2) Al Baxter
3) Tim Fairbrother
4) Laurie Weeks
5) Ben Alexander
6) Salesi Ma'afu
7) James Slipper

LHP:

1) Benn Robinson
2) Ben Alexander
3) James Slipper
4) Greg Holmes
5) Tilse
6) Sekope Kepu
7) Jerry
8 ) Ben Daley
9) Matt Dunning

 

[Proud Pig]

I agree with most of what is stated above, however on pure scrummaging ability I would have Big Al as the number one Tighthead with the rest pretty much in the same order. As for Loosehead I think it is a little unkind to Dunning I would move him up a couple and Kepu up a couple of spots too.

 

[JJJ]

I didn't realize Dan Palmer was so highly rated as a scrummager. Looks like from both lists so far 3 of our top 5 scrummaging THPs are either non-starters or non-THPs at S15 level. That's assuming Weeks would start behind Somerville?

Edit: care to hazard a guess where Rodzilla might fit in?

 

[RugbyReg]

Edit: care to hazard a guess where Rodzilla might fit in?

the back of a maxi-taxi.

 

[fatprop]

I didn't realize Dan Palmer was so highly rated as a scrummager. Looks like from both lists so far 3 of our top 5 scrummaging THPs are either non-starters or non-THPs at S15 level. That's assuming Weeks would start behind Somerville?

Edit: care to hazard a guess where Rodzilla might fit in?

Many coaches in Aus are more worried about work rate than scrummaging effectiveness.

We all know most players are a compromise, but in our props, that balance has been skewed for years with too many converted backrowers being preferred because of their workrate around the field whilst ignoring the fact that they can't scrum for shit.

 

[Lindommer]

...I would have Big Al as the number one THP...

Like most refs I know fuck all about the dark arts of the front row (well, I was a back) but having watched the Tahs for nearly every Super match the last 15 years I've seen Al collapse on impact far too many times. Why? Various experts have commented about his crouch/reach/angle but he doesn't seem to get it right enough. If referees see the Tahs/Wallabies scrum continue to collapse when Al's there they'll continue to ping him.

 

[cyclopath]

I am not surprised to see Palmer ranked so high, given what those knowledgeable about scrummaging have posted on this site over time.
Given we seem to do poorly at getting bad scrummagers to become good, rather than just serviceable, might it not be easier to get a pot-plant to grow some legs and turn into a triffid? How many teams lose a match because one of their props doesn't make enough runs? He doesn't need to go far, just around the rucks to smash people in defence, occasionally truck it up a few yards. On the other hand, I could quite easily see us lose a match because we fold like a card table, and end up with 14 men on the field.

 

[fatprop]

I reckon Al is damn cynical, but knows what he is doing, if he doesn't get the hit right he will collapse and try again.

He dances around with the ref each game, sometimes he wins, sometimes he loses.

He tries to de-power the LHP by packing very low and it takes a technically good prop to go with him (like his real nemesis Woodcock who can scrum that low so we see a shit load of collapses)

But he doesn't get rolled backwards most of the time

 

[Cutter]

I am not surprised to see Palmer ranked so high, given what those knowledgeable about scrummaging have posted on this site over time.
Given we seem to do poorly at getting bad scrummagers to become good, rather than just serviceable, might it not be easier to get a pot-plant to grow some legs and turn into a triffid? How many teams lose a match because one of their props doesn't make enough runs? He doesn't need to go far, just around the rucks to smash people in defence, occasionally truck it up a few yards. On the other hand, I could quite easily see us lose a match because we fold like a card table, and end up with 14 men on the field.

The lack of mobility is more noticeable when they get isolated in defence (eg Moore v Nonu) or when the opposition props are at the ruck pilfering our ball (Gethin Jenkins) and our props are still in back play from the previous scrum.

 

[Scotty]

Tilse can play THP as well, can't he?

 

[RedsHappy]

I am not surprised to see Palmer ranked so high, given what those knowledgeable about scrummaging have posted on this site over time.
Given we seem to do poorly at getting bad scrummagers to become good, rather than just serviceable, might it not be easier to get a pot-plant to grow some legs and turn into a triffid? How many teams lose a match because one of their props doesn't make enough runs? He doesn't need to go far, just around the rucks to smash people in defence, occasionally truck it up a few yards. On the other hand, I could quite easily see us lose a match because we fold like a card table, and end up with 14 men on the field.

Excellent points IMO Cyclo.

 

[cyclopath]

The lack of mobility is more noticeable when they get isolated in defence (eg Moore v Nonu) or when the opposition props are at the ruck pilfering our ball (Gethin Jenkins) and our props are still in back play from the previous scrum.

Fair point, Cutter. I don't think having a complete pot-plant is ideal at all. I just wonder if that aspect (work-rate) can be learned / trained more easily, than the mystic science of scrummaging? I think the last thing we need going into 2011 is a run of very poor scrummaging efforts against teams that we really want to keep down.

 

[fatprop]

Tilse can play THP as well, can't he?

Not very well

 

[Joe Blow]

So it looks as though we have some pretty handy talent coming through the ranks.
Slipper is starting to show his worth and with Dan Palmer, Tilse and Daly improving all the time we have some good back-up to the current props who are still early on in their respective careers.
Is it possible the Big Al has received unfair treatment on the basis of a generally weak scrum for the most part during his test career? He has looked good when the scrum has been strong and when he first burst onto the test scene during the RWC 2003 he held his own.
Maafu has looked pretty ordinary this year but so has Alexander since he returned to TH.
I think Baxter still has something to offer if the rest of the scrum can get its act together?

 

[vidiot]

Not if he keeps getting unfair treatment when wearing yellow.

 

[RugbyFuture]

I still think Laurie Weekes has a greater ability than most people rate him to have, he's going to blossom at the rebels i think, and in other areas on the field he's good and would make a good poster boy for australian rugby too.

 

[Gnostic]

on scrummaging ability?


THPS:

1) Dan Palmer
2) Al Baxter
3) Tim Fairbrother
4) Laurie Weeks
5) Ben Alexander
6) Salesi Ma'afu
7) James Slipper

LHP:

1) Benn Robinson
2) Ben Alexander
3) James Slipper
4) Greg Holmes
5) Tilse
6) Sekope Kepu
7) Jerry
8 ) Ben Daley
9) Matt Dunning

Agree with FP's rankings except perhaps Kepu moves up a spot or two given he outscrummed Fairbrother and Alexander in the Shute Shield.
Paddy Ryan (Sydney Uni) come in at 8 on the THP stakes FP? I think he is a real prospect over the next couple of years, technically seems very strong.

 

[Gnostic]

I am not surprised to see Palmer ranked so high, given what those knowledgeable about scrummaging have posted on this site over time.
Given we seem to do poorly at getting bad scrummagers to become good, rather than just serviceable, might it not be easier to get a pot-plant to grow some legs and turn into a triffid? How many teams lose a match because one of their props doesn't make enough runs? He doesn't need to go far, just around the rucks to smash people in defence, occasionally truck it up a few yards. On the other hand, I could quite easily see us lose a match because we fold like a card table, and end up with 14 men on the field.

Hence my arguments on the Scrums thread. There is also a factor of choosing the best player for the conditions. If the game is played in the wet or on a heavy track against a very strong scrummaging side would a "pot Plant" be as much of a disadvantage as on a dry free flowing pitch? For quite a few years we have seen the same team picked week in week out regardless of the strengths/weakness of the opposition and the game plan called for on the day.