RWC 2015 Semi Final 2 - Australia v Argentina Twickenham, Monday 19 October, 2:45 AEDT

[Groucho]

Foley barely touched to ball in all 5 tries against Scotland.

I'm not sure what that means. In try 1 Foley passed to Kuridrani, who passed to Cooper, who scored. In try 2 Foley passed to Beale, who passed to Mitchell, who scored. Try 3 was a maul. Tries 3 and 4 were due to short passes down the blindside by Genia. That's a pretty decent involvement. A few weeks ago, Seb, we were ciriticising Foley for *not* setting up his outsides. Now we seem to be criticising him *for* setting up his outsides.

 

[Viking]

You guys are dreaming if you think Cooper and Foley's recent games has suggested anything but Foley to start. I will accept debate on Cooper over Foley if Foley has really poor game in semi final, but to replace Cooper with his last game against Urugray versus Foley's last 3 games against top tier nations and when 2 out of those 3 performances have been very good.

You guys on the Cooper must start for semi game are just delusional if you think there is any chance of that happening. There is no case for that what so ever.

I can't believe we are debating this.

Who are the posters calling for Coopers inclusion?

I think most are just criticising Foley's performance.

 

[Lee Enfield]

I am not advocating for Cooper to replace Foley, that ship has sailed at this point of the tournament. All I am saying that it would be nice for those defending Foleys game to judge him by the same standards they judge Cooper by. There is no way on gods green earth would those defending Foley be so level headed about this if it was Cooper who had that game.

In terms of Foleys performance at the RWC.
Fiji: Average
England: Excellent
Wales: Average (Good with boot)
Scotland: Very Poor

 

[Groucho]

All I will say about the Cooper v Foley thing going on is this. There is a blinding hypocrisy when discussing any mistakes Cooper makes and mistakes Foley makes. When Cooper makes them, he is criticised and hung, drawn and quartered in the public forum, with absolute no lee way given for any good he does in the same game and there are no excuses for any of his poor play.
When Foley makes the same mistakes or other mistakes, he is cut slack, blame is often passed to others, excuses are given and in complete contrast to Cooper, it is standard practice to, as much as possible, ignore the bad plays and focus on the good plays, even though things like kicking a match winning goal at the death wouldn't have been needed if he hadn't made those poor plays.

The rule around here is - Cooper does bad, ignore the good, focus on the bad
Foley does bad, ignore the bad, focus on the good

It is clearly too much for some to judge all players by the same standards.

How can you say that with a straight keyboard, when approximately half the posts here are criticing Foley? Are you only reading the ones defending him? The same cardinality applies in reverse when Cooper makes mistakes.

 

[Lee Enfield]

Given that defense wins world cups then Foley picks himself.

I agree, therefore To'omua should have been the starting 10 from the get go.

 

[jollyswagman]

Given that defense wins world cups then Foley picks himself.

I am not taking the piss here, I promise, but I would like to ask a quick question.......does anyone have some reliable stats on Foley's defense from the last match they can share? I can't recall the article I read today but they had noted that Foley was 1 tackle from 1 attempt.....surely this is incorrect?

 

[Brumby Runner]

I'm not sure what that means. In try 1 Foley passed to Kuridrani, who passed to Cooper, who scored. In try 2 Foley passed to Beale, who passed to Mitchell, who scored. Try 3 was a maul. Tries 3 and 4 were due to short passes down the blindside by Genia. That's a pretty decent involvement. A few weeks ago, Seb, we were ciriticising Foloy for *not* setting up his outsides. Now we seem to be criticising him *for* setting up his outsides.

Splitting hairs here Groucho, but I can't agree that Foley set up Kuridrani's run for AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)'s try. Sure he made the pass to Tevita but the defense was up in his face as soon as he received the ball. It was purely down to TK's strength and leg drive that he made the crucial break to set up AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) with, I might add, a perfectly weighted and directed pass. Pity AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) didn't make the effort to run the ball a bit closer to the posts. We might not then have been talking about the last penalty at all.

 

[Braveheart81]

How was Foley struggling? Seriously? His first half was riddled with errors and poor kicking.

When Cooper did the same he was pulled at close to half-time on both occasions but when Foley does it it's fine? Like we should give him the second half to find his feet?

It would make sense to me to inject To'omua for Foley early in the second half and let Gits kick the remaining goals. I think Cheika missed his window early in the second half, then he had no option to but keep it the way it was - with the logic in your post coming into play, but then in that case I don't think Gits was playing well-enough to not let To'omua on. Gits was solid, but not exactly a constant threat.

I can understand Cheika not having faith in Cooper but not having faith in To'omua as well is a big surprise to me.

His first half had one bad error and poor goal kicking. If you were going to hook him it was at half time. We'd also scored 3 tries by half time and our backline was threatening regularly.

The point I was making was that by the time Cheika would generally bring on the finishers, Foley had got his goalkicking together and the team looked good. He then made the shocking error and it was clear that the game was likely to go down to the wire. Do you then decide that you're going to switch your goal kicker?

Which games are you talking about where Cooper was pulled at close to half time? In the 2nd Bledisloe he came off at the 57 minute mark after his yellow card expired. The game was also lost by that point.

Against South Africa this year he was replaced at the 65 minute mark.

Your memory of the treatment of Cooper doesn't seem to reflect reality.

You're also suggesting that Cheika should have reshuffled his backline at halftime by bringing on To'omua on the basis of one bad dropped ball and three missed kicks.

What coach is going to make that decision after his team has scored three first half tries and enjoyed a strong possession and territory advantage?

The first half riddled with errors comment is a complete fallacy outside of his goal kicking.

 

[Viking]

I'm not sure what that means. In try 1 Foley passed to Kuridrani, who passed to Cooper, who scored. In try 2 Foley passed to Beale, who passed to Mitchell, who scored. Try 3 was a maul. Tries 3 and 4 were due to short passes down the blindside by Genia. That's a pretty decent involvement. A few weeks ago, Seb, we were ciriticising Foloy for *not* setting up his outsides. Now we seem to be criticising him *for* setting up his outsides.

Yeah I originally thought it was Gits who gave the pass to Beale. It was indeed Foley. He did well in that try to direct play.

The try to Kuridrani, Gits was directing play at first receiver but it was realistically all Kuridrani who makes the break. You summed up the other tries.

Foley has a vast different of style of play compared to other fly-halves who seem to be better at having direct involvements in scoring tries. Cooper the prime example of coarse.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

So if we accept the ship has sailed about Cooper over Foley for remaining RWC matches - time to get behind Foley and look for the blinder he had against England. As that sort of game will help us win the RWC would it not?

 

[Lee Enfield]

How can you say that with a straight keyboard, when approximately half the posts here are criticing Foley? Are you only reading the ones defending him? The same cardinality applies in reverse when Cooper makes mistakes.

There sure are people criticising Foley, there are people criticising and defending Foley at the same time, but the one thing there isn't is the bile, vitriole and "Dross" that accompany posts criticising Cooper. The other thing that happens when Foley has a bad game and gets criticised, posts are deleted, despite the fact those posts are nothing compared to the dross written about Cooper. Cooper played better against Uruguay than Foley did against Scotland, yet the criticism of Cooper was far greater even though he only made two mistakes and didn't nearly cost the game.

 

[Braveheart81]

I am not advocating for Cooper to replace Foley, that ship has sailed at this point of the tournament. All I am saying that it would be nice for those defending Foleys game to judge him by the same standards they judge Cooper by. There is no way on gods green earth would those defending Foley be so level headed about this if it was Cooper who had that game.

In terms of Foleys performance at the RWC.
Fiji: Average
England: Excellent
Wales: Average (Good with boot)
Scotland: Very Poor

How would you rate Cooper's matches this year?

 

[Groucho]

Splitting hairs here Groucho, but I can't agree that Foley set up Kuridrani's run for AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)'s try. Sure he made the pass to Tevita but the defense was up in his face as soon as he received the ball. It was purely down to TK's strength and leg drive that he made the crucial break to set up AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) with, I might add, a perfectly weighted and directed pass. Pity AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) didn't make the effort to run the ball a bit closer to the posts. We might not then have been talking about the last penalty at all.

I'm not saying he set up the tries, Brumby Runner. I'm saying he played his role correctly. Seb was saying he "barely touched the ball" in those tries. What should he have done differently? If he'd thrown a 20m cutout pass, then Kuridrani wouldn't have scored.

 

[Groucho]

There sure are people criticising Foley, there are people criticising and defending Foley at the same time, but the one thing there isn't is the bile, vitriole and "Dross" that accompany posts criticising Cooper. The other thing that happens when Foley has a bad game and gets criticised, posts are deleted, despite the fact those posts are nothing compared to the dross written about Cooper. Copper played better against Uruguay than Foley did against Scotland, yet the criticism of Cooper was far greater even though he only made two mistakes and didn't nearly cost the game.

There are people criticising Foley, and people defending him. When Cooper makes mistakes, there are people criticising Cooper, and people defending him. The bile runs both ways. Your hyperbolic accusations of a complete one-way bias on this forum for Foley are off the mark.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

His first half had one bad error and poor goal kicking. If you were going to hook him it was at half time. We'd also scored 3 tries by half time and our backline was threatening regularly.

The point I was making was that by the time Cheika would generally bring on the finishers, Foley had got his goalkicking together and the team looked good. He then made the shocking error and it was clear that the game was likely to go down to the wire. Do you then decide that you're going to switch your goal kicker?

Which games are you talking about where Cooper was pulled at close to half time? In the 2nd Bledisloe he came off at the 57 minute mark after his yellow card expired. The game was also lost by that point.

Against South Africa this year he was replaced at the 65 minute mark.

Your memory of the treatment of Cooper doesn't seem to reflect reality.

You're also suggesting that Cheika should have reshuffled his backline at halftime by bringing on To'omua on the basis of one bad dropped ball and three missed kicks.

What coach is going to make that decision after his team has scored three first half tries and enjoyed a strong possession and territory advantage?

The first half riddled with errors comment is a complete fallacy outside of his goal kicking.

That has been my point - as goal kicking aside there were only two real clangers coupled with a good running game by Foley. The 2 clangers and poor goalkicking was why he was a 4 out of 10. No clangers and good goal kicking in first half he would have been a 7 out of 10.

 

[jollyswagman]

There sure are people criticising Foley, there are people criticising and defending Foley at the same time, but the one thing there isn't is the bile, vitriole and "Dross" that accompany posts criticising Cooper. The other thing that happens when Foley has a bad game and gets criticised, posts are deleted, despite the fact those posts are nothing compared to the dross written about Cooper. Copper played better against Uruguay than Foley did against Scotland, yet the criticism of Cooper was far greater even though he only made two mistakes and didn't nearly cost the game.

I am not trying to stoke the fire here but this is very true.

 

[Lee Enfield]

So if we accept the ship has sailed about Cooper over Foley for remaining RWC matches - time to get behind Foley and look for the blinder he had against England. As that sort of game will help us win the RWC would it not?

I genuinely want Foley play the house down each game and hope he does for the Semi and hopefully the Final to, as I want a Wallabies win.
Would just like some objectivity and for the same standards to be evenly applied when analysing a players performance.

 

[Groucho]

I am not trying to stoke the fire here but this is very true.

Except it's not. The majority of posters on here like Foley and Cooper. They're just not as loud as the people who shreik "bias" while stroking their favourite Pokemon doll.

 

[Braveheart81]

There sure are people criticising Foley, there are people criticising and defending Foley at the same time, but the one thing there isn't is the bile, vitriole and "Dross" that accompany posts criticising Cooper. The other thing that happens when Foley has a bad game and gets criticised, posts are deleted, despite the fact those posts are nothing compared to the dross written about Cooper. Copper played better against Uruguay than Foley did against Scotland, yet the criticism of Cooper was far greater even though he only made two mistakes and didn't nearly cost the game.

Posts get deleted because the general vibe of the posts about Cooper are that if Foley did the same negative thing he wouldn't be judged as harshly or if it's about Foley that if Cooper did that he'd be torn to shreds. They are the definition of playing the man because they don't actually engage with the issues. They just speculate about how the treatment would have been different.

People supporting Cooper regularly lose the plot and start complaining of conspiracies, anti Qld bias and all manner of rubbish. There is a long line of posters who get more and more angry about this supposed treatment of Cooper until they start abusing other users, authors of articles and Matt Rowley for having some sort of vendetta against Cooper. They take it to the point where there is no choice for the moderators but to delete the posts and ban them,

When people try to bring up issues such as repeated yellow cards they get accused of clutching at straws and having a vendetta against Cooper.

There is also a significant crossover of posters on the front page of this site and The Roar who pretty much only engage on this issue.

Most of their posts relate to speculation of how the author of an article or a commentor's response would have varied if it had been Cooper rather than Foley.

 

[Straith]

You guys on the Cooper must start for semi game are just delusional if you think there is any chance of that happening. There is no case for that what so ever.

I can't believe we are debating this.

No one is putting a case forward for Cooper to start we are just comparing the two.

As far as I personally see it. Both have their solid areas of the game and are more or less equal.

On one hand you have Foley who isn't exactly excelling in terms of a traditional play maker role. Yeah, He catches, he passes, he runs at the line some times. But I don't see him organizing multiple runners during phases, putting people through gaps, unlocking defenses and creating holes like Dan Carter and Cooper. There's no denying Cooper is better at playing this style of 10 which is more true to Australia's beloved 'running rugby'.

On the other hand, you have Foley who is better than Quade at defending and goal kicking hands down.

So you have Bernard who has the edge in utility and defense and Cooper who has the edge in play making. Not to say Foley is bad at play making just not as good.

I guess that's really why I like Cooper so much more because that's the was I feel 10 should be played. (My own personal opinion no need to bash it) Still, no one would change Foley for Cooper this late in the World cup.