Some thoughts.
There seems to be a problem or issue with our structured backline attack. Much the same as it's been for the Brumbies over the past couple of years, and I really don't understand it because I'd expect much better from having Larkham as backs coach. But there is little (it seems to me) creative play that forces errors in the defensive line that would allow our outside backs to break the line. I wonder if the combination of Foley, Giteau, Kuridrani is not as effective as it ought to be. We generally accept that Foley isn't as creative as someone like Cooper or Beale, but has there been even one instance where Matt Giteau has opened up a backline defense with some creative move or pass putting Kuridrani into open space. I can't remember any, but even if there were a couple of instances, they are rare and ought to be on show at least once or twice each match.
I get that Giteau is seen as the second play maker and as commented by others is often in first receiver position when Foley has been defending out wide. But to me, he hasn't been performing a playmaker role. More often than not, he trucks it up himself. In previous games, he has usually tried to beat tacklers on their outside, and in this game he did play straighter more often, but I still don't remember him actually putting anyone into a hole. If we want a 12 who can hit it up, then we would get more benefit from playing Matt To'omua imo. But it really looks to be too late now to make any changes to the starting backline. It is what it is now, and we are committed to going with the status quo I believe. I just query whether the Foley/Giteau combination is working the way we might want it to.
The second issue as I perceive it is with the use of the bench last night. I think it gave the lie to the notion that we have a squad of starters and finishers. As none of McMahon, To'omua or Cooper made it onto the ground, they could hardly be called finishers. It looked to me that they were simply injury cover.
