Scotland v Australia 12Nov16 Saturday

[swingpass]

Chasmac, personally i would like him to clean out effectively, not give away any stupid penalties for being "hard", disrupt a maul or two, make a half break and possibly give an off load with the wonderful soft hands he's supposed to have. but as alluded to above he makes a very effective decoy runner. What Cheika expects might be different.

 

[disco]

Not a fan of Skelton but must say I was impressed by how fit he did look during training footage so good on him for shredding the 8 kilos.
He will only get 20 minutes Max anyway so in that 20 minutes I'd like to see him play exactly how Coleman and Arnold did last week.
The way Arnold and Coleman played last week should be the blueprint for all Australian Locks, It will be interesting to see if they can back it up.

 

[PeterK]

I don't think Skelton looks fit at all, not for a professional athlete.

He still has excess weight around his waist.

Also his muscle tone is almost non existent. Look at his legs , chest, shoulders, biceps very little muscle development.

So fine he went on a diet but needs to work a lot hard in training, at the gym and running.Losing weight is not enough.

 

[Dalai Ninja]

Or maybe when he got his first major professional injury and he suffered from the black dog and all those "dark arts" were lost in malaise

Every internet hard man knows that depression is an attitude problem, fatprop.

 

[Brumby Runner]

If I was privvy to any of the training data kept on each of the players then I could possibly answer your question.
Question for you.
If he is given 20 minutes, what would you like him to achieve?

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Assuming the conditions are going to be fairly poor, I won't have unrealistic expectations, but as posted above, a bit like Arnold/Coleman last week would be good. Get over the gain line and make a few metres each time he handles the ball, no dropped ball, certainly no diving into the rucks as he is wont to do, and to keep the scrum stable and hopefully moving forward. I don't expect him to win lineout ball, except for maybe a surprise throw to the front, and I don't expect him to be making 20 - 30m runs ball in hand. I do expect he will up the intensity if one of the locks is replaced because of exhaustion - no good if he offers nothing over a tiring player who otherwise could have stayed on the ground.

Not his total responsibility, but because of his history of lack of lineout ability, I will not be satisfied if the lineout goes to pieces because he is on with Pocock and Hooper still playing. That I will lay at the feet of the coach.

 

[PeterK]

I was thinking where are the strengths of this Wallaby team and what is it's potential.
As a different way to measure it I compiled a team of Wallabies based on most caps per position.

01 Slipper - 83
02 Moore - 113
03 Kepu - 74
04 Sharpe - 116
05 Eales - 86
06 Elsom - 75
07 Smith - 111
08 Kefu - 60
09 Gregan - 139
10 Larkham - 102
11 Campese - 101
12 Giteau - 103
13 Ashley-Cooper - 116
14 Roff - 86
15 Burke - 81

The Wallaby frontrow is very experienced. This is an area of relative strength for the Wallabies compared to previous years. Additionally Sio has the potential to overtake Slipper depending on how many more caps Slipper gets.
Sio at 25 years and 26 tests is within reach but Slipper is only 27 himself.

In the locks Coleman has the possibility to overtake Eales since Coleman is only 25. Along with Arnold this looks good for the future.

6 and 8 have been a weakness for a long time and this shows that the top caps are Elsom and Kefu. I honestly see Timani has a great likelihood overtaking Kefu as the Wallabies most capped 8.
6 there are many potential players as always but none proven in the baptism of fire that is test rugby.

As to the backs it is clear to me that the wings which are normally a strength are currently a significant relative weakness for the Wallabies. Perhaps if genuine wings with gas get a go that may change.

Kerevi and TK are very early in their careers but they have a long way to go to make 116 caps. The main issue is they are both young and both contesting the same position. Still it is an area of strength.

Inside centre is clearly a perennial area of weakness for the Wallabies. Definitely one with little depth. This continues to this day. Hodge is clearly young enough to overtake Giteau however he has a lot to prove to me that he can hold onto the 12 jersey. He has not done enough.

Folau will overtake Burke as the most capped F/B by the next RWC when his contract is up, provided injury does not get in the way.

I am leaving out the halves since too much has been written about Cooper / Foley, Genia / Phipps. Sufficient to say none of these will reach the marks set and whilst on their day they are very good none are in the top echelon for the Wallabies.

 

[Twoilms]

To point out but one flaw in your above analysis, come world cup our centres will be bristling with talent. Kerevi, kuridrani, hodge, To'omua (assuming he returns), beale plus whoever else is unearthed in the meantime (simone?). None of them will become highest ever capped because there is competition.

So much negativity on these forums.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[PeterK]

To point out but one flaw in your above analysis, come world cup our centres will be bristling with talent. Kerevi, kuridrani, hodge, To'omua (assuming he returns), beale plus whoever else is unearthed in the meantime (simone?). None of them will become highest ever capped because there is competition.

So much negativity on these forums.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

So that is all you could get my write up, attack one perceived flaw.
Nothing you liked about , but just saw it as a negative piece did you?

Well you even got that wrong IMO.

I said centre was an area of strength with TK and Kerevi vying for the position.

Hodge is not proven, has a long way to go. He had a shocker just 2 games ago.
To'omua is way over rated, he is a solid journeyman 12 that's all. Beale has many flaws at 12 (F/B his best position) and requires the defence move around him.

How many really good 12's have been unearthed since Horan? Just like 6 and 8 it is a perennial weakness for the Wallabies. There have been many as seen with potential but need to prove it at test level.

 

[Micheal]

So that is all you could get my write up, attack one perceived flaw.
Nothing you liked about , but just saw it as a negative piece did you?

Well you even got that wrong IMO.

I said centre was an area of strength with TK and Kerevi vying for the position.

Hodge is not proven, has a long way to go. He had a shocker just 2 games ago.
To'omua is way over rated, he is a solid journeyman 12 that's all. Beale has many flaws at 12 (F/B his best position) and requires the defence move around him.

How many really good 12's have been unearthed since Horan? Just like 6 and 8 it is a perennial weakness for the Wallabies. There have been many as seen with potential but need to prove it at test level.

It wasn't a shocker PK, it just wasn't a great game. Don't overweight the negatives.

 

[Twoilms]

Yeah i couldnt be bothered to breakdown your entire analysis when my point is simply that you ought to perk up a bit.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[PeterK]

It wasn't a shocker PK, it just wasn't a great game. Don't overweight the negatives.

Unlike people who way over rate people, new players barely played any games and they the next best great. Rated far too early as world class or even world's best in position etc. They are over hyped.

Cooper, JOC (James O'Connor), Beale

Now Hodge , Coleman, Timani.

Hodge has holes in his game. He has not delivered one great game. His best against Wales was very good that's all.

 

[Scrubber2050]

On the Skelton debate.

There is only one reason big Will is still in the frame, despite
all his failings / criticisms over the past 2 / 3 years.

Excuses flourish on these pages by a lot of posters.

He is one of Cheika's men and I reckon Chek will do almost anything to make him successful (in the long run)

Bring it on !

 

[tragic]

It wasn't a shocker PK, it just wasn't a great game. Don't overweight the negatives.

Nah it was a genuine shocker.
Great player -I rate him highly and think he has a big future.
But it was a shocker.
I'd still like to see him at 15.
Kerevi's the future at 12 imo.

 

[chasmac]

Assuming the conditions are going to be fairly poor, I won't have unrealistic expectations, but as posted above, a bit like Arnold/Coleman last week would be good. Get over the gain line and make a few metres each time he handles the ball, no dropped ball, certainly no diving into the rucks as he is wont to do, and to keep the scrum stable and hopefully moving forward. I don't expect him to win lineout ball, except for maybe a surprise throw to the front, and I don't expect him to be making 20 - 30m runs ball in hand. I do expect he will up the intensity if one of the locks is replaced because of exhaustion - no good if he offers nothing over a tiring player who otherwise could have stayed on the ground.

Not his total responsibility, but because of his history of lack of lineout ability, I will not be satisfied if the lineout goes to pieces because he is on with Pocock and Hooper still playing. That I will lay at the feet of the coach.

I would like to see him with a significant auxiliary role in the line out. If he's never going to be a primary jumper then he has to carve out a job in the lineout that makes up for the lack of jump.
The lack of jump is a major issue and leaves him a long way behind Arnold and Coleman.
As we saw with the AB's last week the second row has become a crucial position on the paddock.


Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[gel]

If I was privvy to any of the training data kept on each of the players then I could possibly answer your question.
Question for you.
If he is given 20 minutes, what would you like him to achieve?

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Justify his selection by being ballistically better than the encumbents who have done nothing at all wrong to warrant this even being a discussion.

 

[Micheal]

Justify his selection by being ballistically better than the encumbents who have done nothing at all wrong to warrant this even being a discussion.

Interesting comment that. Shame its already got two likes.

Last week on the bench we had Simmons and Fardy to act as our 2nd row and backrow replacements.

This week we have Simmons and Mumm. Mumm replaces Fardy for reasons extensively covered in this thread. Like it or not you can understand his decision and its a marginal call. Simmons unchanged.

So who are the incumbents that Skelton is unfairly usurping?

Obviously, Skelton has replaced Naivalu on the bench. Whys that? Because we're playing Scotland in Scotland and being Scotland in Scotland its going to be a miserable, wet, cold, physical forward-oriented encounter.

Cheika wants to win the battle upfront and wants to continue to win it once all subs have been deployed in the 2nd half. This decision then clearly finds its basis within the fact that Cheika thinks that carrying an extra forward on the bench provides greater benefit for the team than carrying an extra wing on the bench. This decision is justifiable due to the immense versatility of the backs we have in our arsenal at the moment.

So really gel, there no incumbents that have been unfairly shafted after doing 'nothing at all wrong'.

I personally don't mind it given Arnold and Coleman are big, big men and big men are known to tire easily. They're also physical, which can take its toll and their still largely fresh.

Besides, with

4. Simmons (1)
5. Skelton (0.5)
6. Mumm (1)
7. Hooper / Pocock (0.5)
8. Timani (0.5)

We have 3.5 viable jumpers and the set piece should survive. Of course there are also other permutations of subs that could occur as well.

Lets blast the game plan after it fails (if it fails) but theres no point to have a big cry about it now. Skelton could impress for all we know. We haven't seen much of him recently, and the stuff we have seen was when he wasn't in top shape. Apparently he's closer to that now.

 

[tragic]

Interesting comment that. Shame its already got two likes...
So who are the incumbents that Skelton is unfairly usurping?
So really gel, there no incumbents that have been unfairly shafted after doing 'nothing at all wrong'.

Fardy for starters.
Hell, I'd even have Douglas over him.
Skelton has done absolutely nothing all season to justify his selection, and in fact has looked decidedly pedestrian.
Who knows, maybe he's training the house down. But his performances on the park this year don't justify his inclusion.

 

[The torpedo]

Musings on the test team:

Forwards - Don't like the Pooper and Timani. Scotland will target the lineout and will hammer us there. Tight 5 is good.

Backline - CAN WE PLEASE FOR ONCE PUT IZZY @ 14 AND DHP @ 15? Other than that, backline is pretty good

Bench - For fucks sake does Skelton have dirt on Cheika? He hasn't been good at all this year and he gets a cap? if so, then Jake McIntyre should be in contention for 10 if Cheiks wants to be consistent. Would rather Skelton replaced by an outside back. Rest of bench is good.

 

[Micheal]

Fardy for starters.
Hell, I'd even have Douglas over him.
Skelton has done absolutely nothing all season to justify his selection, and in fact has looked decidedly pedestrian.
Who knows, maybe he's training the house down. But his performances on the park this year don't justify his inclusion.

Yeah but Fardy isn't a....

Skelton plays in the....

Fardy hasn't been great eithe....

Its actually Mumm who took Fardys....

Skelton.... Naivalu.... Ahhhhhhh fuck it.

Its not worth it. Enjoy the game tragic hopefully Skelton proves you wrong.

 

[KOB1987]

Fardy for starters.
Hell, I'd even have Douglas over him.
Skelton has done absolutely nothing all season to justify his selection, and in fact has looked decidedly pedestrian.
Who knows, maybe he's training the house down. But his performances on the park this year don't justify his inclusion.

Fardy? Anyone who suggests Fardy be used in the row even as a contingency plan gets shot down pretty quickly. Mumm took Fardy's spot like it or not, but not Will.

I think it's fairly unanimous that the expectation and the reason for the 6:2 split is that Arnold and Coleman will do a ton of work and will need to be replaced. Douglas or Skelton it was between for the bench spot. I think everyone would prefer an out of condition Douglas to an out of condition Skelton but let's just see how he performs before assuming that he's not going to.

Leaving Douglas out and utilising the 'incumbents', the only variation would have been a bench of Simmons, Mumm and Fardy. But that feels a bit light on sizewise.