Scotland v Australia 12Nov16 Saturday

[Rugbynutter39]

Whilst not a fan of speight and always happy to prove me wrong (as wallaby supporter wants someone representing the wallabies to fail) I agree he did enough last game to get another start and more so as naivalu with limited game time had off the bench has not pressed the case he deserves a start ahead of speight. It would be crazy to make any changes to backline except with Genia and comfort that Phipps can offer good 40 mins of the bench based on his last game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Err that should read NOT wanting to fail


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Scotty]

I see your point, but when a team plays as well as we did against Wales, you'd be pretty tempted to pick the same line up again a week later.

Yes of course but this tour is a marathon and not a sprint. Not everyone is going to make it out the other end so some key rotations are going to be critical.

Foley was poor vs England so we need to see what point of difference Cooper can bring. He was trusted against the All Blacks, Boks and Pumas so why not vs Scotland?

Foley had a great first half vs Wales but dropped off in the second. Both second half tries came from turnovers and we didn't create much in the way of breaks.

Cheika missed a trick by not giving Cooper the last 20 minutes or so. Instead he got less than 5 and in that space of time you could see his increased organisation of the team.

Foley plays his best hitting the line at pace and like a ball playing fullback (similar to Slater in league), while Cooper is a more classical flyhalf (think Thurston). There is a time and place for both.

 

[amirite]

The best thing about our lineout against Wales is it shows that if Poey is injured we can pick McMahon at 6 and feel confident (he's a lineout net positive compared to Poey anyway).

I agree this hasn't always looked like the best decision, but now it just seems like a no brainer.

 

[Train Without a Station]

The best thing about our line out against Wales was that because we did ok against a team with a weakened line out and 2 7s in their starting team, we can feel confident doing it against team with good line outs?

I'd say that's the worst thing. Getting away with the negative impact of a tactic against another team with the same negative, thus creating unwarranted confidence in that tactic.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Fair enough. It does seem to be only his running that is missed.

That is true, but like TK in his post-injury period, I see signs of improvement in that facet as well as he gets more game time.

 

[Brumby Runner]

It was fairly obvious also that when Cooper came on for his few minutes at the end of the Wales game, the Wallabies looked to get their structures in place again after a relatively disorganised second half. However, if the weather is going to be a factor, cold and wet, then I think there's a good argument to keep the safer option in Foley to start against Scotland. On a fine day, I'd back Cooper to be able to pull off those cross field kicks that Foley did so well, but so out of character, against Wales, as well as adding a few extra skills as well.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Surely if we are playing the safe option then that is Cooper.

Lower error rate. Better territory kicking game.

 

[Highlander35]

Lineout wise?

Defensively Richie stays at 2, and Jonny shadows the caller.

Point being that in the ideal World, with the big bastard interrupting the short ones, and our best pressurising yours, longer throws to weaker jumpers are standard.

Consequently, I'd play Fardy, or Mumm at blindside, they'll be a class above any of our back row come lineout time bar Harley, and Cotter prefers the double big opensides plus an 8.

 

[gel]

As much as I think that Copper is a much better 10, I dont understand the logic of breaking up a winning team - particularly if it started to function properly at some level.

Foley to start at 10 and barring injuries keep the team the same.

I dunno what is happening at training, but Cheika clearly is more.confortable with Foley and Cooper simply needs to excel to regain a starting spot.

 

[Strewthcobber]

As much as I think that Copper is a much better 10, I dont understand the logic of breaking up a winning team - particularly if it started to function properly at some level.

Foley to start at 10 and barring injuries keep the team the same.

I dunno what is happening at training, but Cheika clearly is more.confortable with Foley and Cooper simply needs to excel to regain a starting spot.

I don't think it's a problem - but at this point I reckon there is literally nothing Cooper can do to regain a starting spot. The only way it would happen is if Foley was injured or had a catastrophic drop in form

 

[Viking]

To be fair I think Cooper would have done just as well against Wales. Wales made us look better than we are. Would have no issues with Cooper starting (if Genia starts).

It would be a little strange to drop a player after a MOTM performance. I think it would be wise to start Foley but bring on Cooper early.

I think Coopers kicking game, and Foley's lack-thereof, will be a factor against England, so I'd still much rather see Cooper start in that game, which means he needs game-time beforehand.

Unless Foley's combination with Hodge builds further, which means Hodge is taking all the kicks - but then again it only takes one poor kick from Foley and we are under pressure, and that is hard to avoid when he's the primary pivot not matter who is playing inside him.

Tough choices. If Foley could clearance kick and continue this form from last game he'd be close to the complete 5/8 we are looking for.

 

[amirite]

The best thing about our line out against Wales was that because we did ok against a team with a weakened line out and 2 7s in their starting team, we can feel confident doing it against team with good line outs?

I'd say that's the worst thing. Getting away with the negative impact of a tactic against another team with the same negative, thus creating unwarranted confidence in that tactic.

Lydiate is not a 7, and is quite tall.

 

[fatprop]

I think the structure used in attack suits Foley. It was very structured with a load of runners in motion on most back plays. I can't remember seeing Folau & TK run so many lines, sucking in defenders and creating space for others for quite a while.

Cooper is more prone to add lib; and that can workvery well, but sucessful Aus sides historically have had very, very structured attacks and Larkham seems to want that

 

[PeterK]

In that selection, who is captain and VC? I wonder if Cheika would revise to 6 Mumm captain?

Pocock captain and Genia VC

 

[PeterK]

Ive seen it mentioned that to have a balanced backrow you need Fardy and Pocock in the same team, but don't they play a very similar game?

We get an extra line out option but we lose hoopers 80 minute non-stop energy both in tight and in open play. Lose his ability to dart out of the defensive line and contract the offense, his kick chase amd carrying.

He may need a rest but i dont think he'll be dropped.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Good point.

Yes Fardy and Pocock are similar and it is not as balanced. Just like Mumm and Hooper are similar and not as balanced

Fardy and Pocock are hard on the ball and are ruck monkeys.
Mumm and Hooper run around a lot and attempt a lot of tackles.

In seriousness in a lot of cases I would choose Fardy, Hooper , Timani as a combination and if Mumm was the 6 then it should be Mumm, Pocock, Timani.

The main exceptions are
1) Use Pooper if the opposition has a weak lineout or is using 2 opensides (ours are better).
2) If in the wet wide ball carrying is not as important , there will be a lot of spilled ball, rucks, and kicking. So in that case Fardy, Pocock, Timani should be chosen.

Against Scotland it is forecasted to be wet so I would prefer
6 Fardy 7 Pocock 8 Timani.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Amirite I was more referring to Moriarty. Though interestingly Lydiate is really on the shorter end for international 6's in today's game. But that's another topic for another time.

Plays 6 for Gloucester, but at the same height and weight as both Warbuton and Tipuric, as well as Gloucester's 7's Kvesic, he really doesn't add much in the set piece as a threatening option.

He's no taller than Same Cane, Ardie Savea, Francois Louw, Chris Robshaw, Sean O'Brien or almost any other international 7. I know Robshaw plays 6 but from a LO perspective I consider him a 7 when paired with Haskell who is much taller.

 

[Pfitzy]

Surely if we are playing the safe option then that is Cooper.

Lower error rate. Better territory kicking game.

 

[PeterK]

Lydiate is not a 7, and is quite tall.

True but Moriaty and Tipuric at 188 cm are not tall (for jumpers) and neither are good or strong lineout options.

Timani at 193 cm is the same height as Lydiad

 

[Braveheart81]

In terms of Fardy he was certainly busy in his half against Wales but I'm not sure how effective he was. Clearly trying to get on the ball is a strength of his and so that is what he is tasked with doing but it definitely doesn't seem as effective as it was a season or two ago. I think he has lost a bit of speed in that area.

I think his performance is somewhere in between the highs and lows of what has been suggested in the match thread. To me it confirms why he has been on the bench a substantial amount this season. His form isn't close to what made him a certain starter over the last couple of years.

I won't be surprised which way Cheika goes in terms of the 6 jersey against Scotland. If Pocock is healthy then I'd imagine he will start. Otherwise it wouldn't be surprising to see Mumm return, Fardy to start or even McMahon to come into the side.

Fardy is definitely a very well liked player amongst fans, particularly relative to Dean Mumm. As it does with other players in those situations it definitely seems to influence general opinions of their play.

I can't help but feel the 6 jersey is wide open for a new(ish) Wallaby to make it their own in 2017. Fardy and Mumm are both 32 and certainly aren't compelling options in the starting XV.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Pfitzy, I consider errors to be things like charge downs, intercepts, missed touch finders and handling errors (though Foley's greater frequency in this it's so marginal that I wouldn't consider it by itself).

What do you consider a lower error rate to mean?