Social Media Response to Wallabies Squad

[cyclopath]

Of course it doesn't, however I don't consider you one of the defenders. What is your response to the below:

Is Deans doing a good job?
Is Deans the best man for the job?
Is the ARU handling the management of our game well?
Do you have the utmost respect for the work they are doing?

No, not the best, but not as demonically evil as some would say.
I don't know, having no experience as a sports administrator. I don't think I could really say who's the best candidate, but Deans has had enough time I think. Time for a change.
Probably some things reasonably - I suspect Pulver inherited a bag of cats from O'Neill, and is trying to make the best of it. Overall, they could be doing more.
I have the utmost respect for very few individuals or groups, and I wouldn't put the ARU at the top of that list.
When do I get my results of this mid-thread assessment?

 

[Scotty]

No - because in the main they play to their potential when they play for anyone other than the Tahs.
Still: do you really think there is a ocnspiracy to not select Reds etc?
How did Deans, a kiwi, become involved in the conspiracy?

Conspiracy? No, but I do find it overly coincidental that the 50-50 choices seem to always go one way.

The Tahs do not play to their potential for the wallabies at all.

Timani has had maybe one good game
Dennis largely average
Horne average
Burgess up and down
Turner up and down
Barnes generally well but with limited skills

The ones I think play 'up' - Douglas, TPN, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), Hooper (who is only just a Tah now)

 

[p.Tah]

a lot of noise on Facebook

There are a lot of very upset 15 year olds out there...

 

[Braveheart81]

Conspiracy? No, but I do find it overly coincidental that the 50-50 choices seem to always go one way.

The Tahs do not play to their potential for the wallabies at all.

Timani has had maybe one good game
Dennis largely average
Horne average
Burgess up and down
Turner up and down
Barnes generally well but with limited skills

The ones I think play 'up' - Douglas, TPN, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), Hooper (who is only just a Tah now)

Aside from the stars you could say similar things about most Wallabies.

You could say that all the following non-Waratahs Wallabies have been largely average, up and down or had maybe one good game for the Wallabies:
Higginbotham, Simmons, S Fainga'a, Tapuai, Shipperley, Phipps. I could easily list more names.

There aren't a lot of players that have really excelled in a small number of tests. Those that have in one or two tests have generally struggled to do it consistently (Timani for example).

 

[Happy]

If there really are people who aren't going to support the Wallabies because of the team selections and ticket prices, I had better start wearing my Wallabies jersey now instead of waiting till the Lions are here. I wouldn't want anyone to think everyone had that opinion.

 

[gel]

Aside from the stars you could say similar things about most Wallabies.

Indeed, you could say that - and in almost every case you have listed (player outside of NSW) the player has been repeatedly or is currently dropped, whilst the Waratah example given is repeatedly picked irrespective of the form or reasons being present NOT to pick them.

Thus the 50/50 call Scotty may be referring to.

 

[Richo]

Conspiracy? No, but I do find it overly coincidental that the 50-50 choices seem to always go one way.

Who are those in the squad, Scotty? Maybe Barnes was chosen "over" Cooper, but let's leave aside Quade since everyone has their own pet theory on his selection or non-selection.

In my reading, the following Waratahs are contentious selections, at least for a reasonable proportion of posters here:

Barnes
Horne
Timani
Dennis
Kepu

I can completely understand people being frustrated by the selection of Barnes, but I also think BH is right about the reason for it: last year, Barnes was our best and most reliable back. My guess is that he was on the cusp of the 25 and might have been held back for the 6 if he hadn't played the house down against the Brumbies.

Horne -- who was he selected over? Godwin? Fainga'a? I think that the ordering of 12s over the last 6-8 weeks of his season is Lilo > Horne > Godwin > Finger, although I haven't managed to sit through enough Force games to be really sure. But Godwin is very green and I don't see many here calling for his inclusion over Horne. Would you prefer McCabe, just to even out the numbers?

Timani -- absolutely a contentious choice, but I'm guessing he was picked after Douglas's concussion ruled him out for a few weeks. So that was probably a Tah-for-Tah swap. Hugh Pyle has a good case and after his performance over the last few weeks, I would have picked him for the squad over Timani. But Pyle and Timani are very different players, so was this a 50-50 call where being a Tah put someone over the line?

Dennis -- also contentious. I wouldn't have picked him, even with his lifted involvement in recent weeks. But he does have one attribute that distinguishes him: he is a legitimate lock/6. The only other option is MMM on that front. But he's been injured for two months and it makes absolute sense to wait to see him. If he comes good, I fully expect to see him in the 23. Again, who is the other player in the 50-50 proposition here?

Kepu -- given that Palmer is hurt, who is the player who missed out in the 50-50 call? Ma'afu? Cowan? Greg Holmes? Ryan (who is also a Tah)?

In my view, few one dispute the selection of the following Waratahs:

Robinson
Hooper
AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
Folau
Palu

And just by the way, that makes 10 Waratahs. Obviously TPN would have been selected instead of Fainga'a, but there are -- in fact -- 10 Waratahs in the actual squad.

 

[Scotty]

No, not the best, but not as demonically evil as some would say.
I don't know, having no experience as a sports administrator. I don't think I could really say who's the best candidate, but Deans has had enough time I think. Time for a change.
Probably some things reasonably - I suspect Pulver inherited a bag of cats from O'Neill, and is trying to make the best of it. Overall, they could be doing more.
I have the utmost respect for very few individuals or groups, and I wouldn't put the ARU at the top of that list.
When do I get my results of this mid-thread assessment?

A+

 

[Scotty]

Who are those in the squad, Scotty? Maybe Barnes was chosen "over" Cooper, but let's leave aside Quade since everyone has their own pet theory on his selection or non-selection.

In my reading, the following Waratahs are contentious selections, at least for a reasonable proportion of posters here:

Barnes
Horne
Timani
Dennis
Kepu

I can completely understand people being frustrated by the selection of Barnes, but I also think BH is right about the reason for it: last year, Barnes was our best and most reliable back. My guess is that he was on the cusp of the 25 and might have been held back for the 6 if he hadn't played the house down against the Brumbies.

Horne -- who was he selected over? Godwin? Fainga'a? I think that the ordering of 12s over the last 6-8 weeks of his season is Lilo > Horne > Godwin > Finger, although I haven't managed to sit through enough Force games to be really sure. But Godwin is very green and I don't see many here calling for his inclusion over Horne. Would you prefer McCabe, just to even out the numbers?

Timani -- absolutely a contentious choice, but I'm guessing he was picked after Douglas's concussion ruled him out for a few weeks. So that was probably a Tah-for-Tah swap. Hugh Pyle has a good case and after his performance over the last few weeks, I would have picked him for the squad over Timani. But Pyle and Timani are very different players, so was this a 50-50 call where being a Tah put someone over the line?

Dennis -- also contentious. I wouldn't have picked him, even with his lifted involvement in recent weeks. But he does have one attribute that distinguishes him: he is a legitimate lock/6. The only other option is MMM on that front. But he's been injured for two months and it makes absolute sense to wait to see him. If he comes good, I fully expect to see him in the 23. Again, who is the other player in the 50-50 proposition here?

Kepu -- given that Palmer is hurt, who is the player who missed out in the 50-50 call? Ma'afu? Cowan? Greg Holmes? Ryan (who is also a Tah)?

In my view, few one dispute the selection of the following Waratahs:

Robinson
Hooper
AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
Folau
Palu

And just by the way, that makes 10 Waratahs. Obviously TPN would have been selected instead of Fainga'a, but there are -- in fact -- 10 Waratahs in the actual squad.

I actually don't have an issue with Barnes being selected. He is the best kicker and a good fullback and 12.

I don't have a huge issue with this squad either except for Kepu, Dennis and Timani (which I would swap for Douglas). The issue is more that many of these players have gotten experience at international level in previous years when they may not have totally deserved it and are now the only experienced options.

I agree with your assessments and you are more or less supporting my proposition that Tahs have been favoured in 50-50 decisions.

 

[Dumbledore]

How do know if it is a minority (which by the way could be 49%) of supporters?

And in any case we aren't talking about an election, we are talking about losing or gaining supporters. If there is any significant number of supporters that are losing faith it should be taken seriously.

I'm guessing by your views that you don't run a business.

That's a good point, but then it comes down to the reasons for the loss of faith. From where I'm sitting in a relatively rugby neutral environment - Melbourne - it seems to be largely a case of mob mentality. I just can't see how there's that much to be unhappy about with the squad, there certainly doesn't seem to be enough contentious decisions for the outrage it seems to have generated. I'd say these selections/non-selections are contentious.

Cooper - we've done this to death. We all know the pros and cons.
Timani - Probably a like-for-like swap with Douglas. Not sure what the other options were. Pyle? Has no big-game experience, has never been involved in a Wallaby camp. Different type of player as well.
Dennis - Has lifted in recent weeks. Has lifted his workrate and is actually making an impact both in attack and defence. Still, very ordinary season up until a few weeks ago. On his side, he's expereinced and does bring leadership. Can play 4/5/6 - the only other players you'd really be able to say the same for are MMM and Jones. MMM is broken. Jones has a genuinely phenomenal workrate, but is still very green and has awful hands.
Kepu - Probabably only got in because of the injury to Palmer. Lucky, but again there aren't a whole lot of options. He can play both sides of the scrum, who else have we got who can do that? Holmes, Sio at a pinch? I'd have him as the luckiest squad member, but I can understand why he got in.
Cummins/Tomane - I think you could argue that either one of these guys are lucky to get in, not sure we needed three wings. Deans is clearly looking for proper hard-bastard wingers who aren't going to take a backward step. They're both hard, straight, runners. Personally, I'd have liked to see Mogg get the spot ahead of one of them - but I'd imagine the coaches feel he still has some defensive issues to work through.
Horne - Has actually been in great form. For a long while when Cooper was running the show there was a bit body of supporters advocating a straight running, strong tackling, 12 outside him. Deans thought the same, thus the McCabe experiment which obviously didn't work. Horne, however, is playing like that 12 that so many people originally wanted. He's straightening the backline, breaking the line and is actually picking up his teammates with passes. I don't think it's a coincidence that AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is having his best season for... well, a long, long, time. I'd still have Lilo starting, especially if JOC (James O'Connor) is flyhalf, but Horne has earned his place.
No scrumhalf - I guess the selection panel feel no scrumhalf has done enough to date to get the shot. There's been a lot of love for White, but he's had a pretty ordinary few weeks in fairness. I don't have a problem with Deans and co. waiting a couple more weeks for someone to really grab the spot.

Anything there you disagree with? Serious question.

 

[Scotty]

A few things:

Kepu - if Deans has picked him Alexander as a THP as he has previously then we could have had a LHP instead. Kepu has been average and doesn't really deserve to be in the wallabies - he is in the right side of a 50-50.

Dennis - I would have waited until the next lot of 6 to see if MMM was available. Again, he has been average over the season and doesn't deserve to be rewarded with a wallaby squad place

Folau - got the 50-50 ahead of Mogg.

Timani - should be Douglas

I would also postulate that had Smith been ok, that Hooper would have got a 50-50 over Gill.

 

[Richo]

I actually don't have an issue with Barnes being selected. He is the best kicker and a good fullback and 12.

I don't have a huge issue with this squad either except for Kepu, Dennis and Timani (which I would swap for Douglas). The issue is more that many of these players have gotten experience at international level in previous years when they may not have totally deserved it and are now the only experienced options.

I agree with your assessments and you are more or less supporting my proposition that Tahs have been favoured in 50-50 decisions.

I absolutely think Barnes should have been selected in the final squad too.

I don't think my assessments assert "Tah favoritism" in 50-50 situations. I think they show that there weren't many 50-50 situations at all.

As for years past, I don't quite see the issue here. Vuna, Hodgson, Davies, and many others have had a shot and not seized there moment.

Why would there be Tah favoritism? What would Deans's motivation be?

 

[Dumbledore]

A few things:

Kepu - if Deans has picked him Alexander as a THP as he has previously then we could have had a LHP instead. Kepu has been average and doesn't really deserve to be in the wallabies - he is in the right side of a 50-50.

Dennis - I would have waited until the next lot of 6 to see if MMM was available. Again, he has been average over the season and doesn't deserve to be rewarded with a wallaby squad place

Folau - got the 50-50 ahead of Mogg.

Timani - should be Douglas

I would also postulate that had Smith been ok, that Hooper would have got a 50-50 over Gill.

Alexander has been pretty shoddy at THP though. Great around the park, but weak in the scrum. I'm not sure Kepu is on the right side of a 50-50, who's the other side? Holmes, Sio, or someone else? Palmer is injured, if he's fit he'll be one of the final six.

Dennis - Similar argument as with Kepu. MMM will definitely come into contention if he's fit, which is the point of the final six places. If MMM is fit I think Dennis will be a bench player at best.

Folau - I think he's edged ahead of Mogg. Not by much, they have different strengths and weaknesses, but ahead.

Timani - I reckon he was picked ahead of Douglas because of the presumed concussion from Douglas getting absolutely poleaxed. People were talking about Douglas being out for 3 weeks. Again, I won't be even a little bit surprised if Douglas comes in as part of the final six.

I have no idea whether Hooper would have got the 50-50. Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. Would it be surprising if he did though? He was Australia's best player last year and offers a point of difference as a player. Gill is closer in playing style to Smith, Hooper offers something that neither Gill nor Smith can. I'm not going to get angry about possible speculation though, because Smith did get injured and Gill did get selected.

 

[lewisr]

As for years past, I don't quite see the issue here. Vuna, Hodgson, Davies, and many others have had a shot and not seized there moment.

Surely you can't say that Dennis has 'seized his moment' nor has Rob Horne. I understand the selection of Horne on recent form but that is clearly creating a double standard considering the number of other players in form that were left out for those who have a better reputation. On top of this, why was Tapuai not selected? He has always performed solidly at test level for the Wallabies and if Deans is going on experience and reputation, surely he should be in contention in the way that Timani, McCabe and Dennis are.

As much as I love Berrick, he is injury prone and has not even played 80 minutes of rugby yet. Those 77 minutes were fantastic, yes, but I'm more concerned about his match fitness and not getting reinjured. He's going to be slammed back into the test arena against an enormous Lions team and I hope he does not experience another issue as it will affect not only the team but also himself.

As you've said, he should've been picked in the 6 and then reserved in the first test.

Deans has always had a tendancy to select Waratahs. You only have to look at the past squad selections to see that he has. Whether there is politics behind it, I don't know. But I can see why he may think that the individual performances of each players have warranted selection in the past. They always seemed to perform so well but were snubbed at the end of the game for whatever reason. So I do see the logic behind what he has done.

The issue is, there is more to a team than the individual performances of the players. There was CLEARLY an issue with the culture at the Waratahs that was translating to their games and then to the Wallabies. Say what you want but it just didn't feel right. So whether or not the reds and brumbies players were actually any better than the tahs players selected is absolutely open to debate, but I wonder whether the culture they would have brough would have been more beneficial. As they say "they know how to win!".

So we are now in a situation where Deans can only select his favourite, experienced Waratahs because he's backed himself into a corner with them having the only significant amount of caps. This year, they have shown theyre a winning team. But in the past one really has to question whether Dingo needed to do more thinking about what he was bringing to the Wallabies, in terms of culture that is.

 

[Braveheart81]

Surely you can't say that Dennis has 'seized his moment' nor has Rob Horne. I understand the selection of Horne on recent form but that is clearly creating a double standard considering the number of other players in form that were left out for those who have a better reputation. On top of this, why was Tapuai not selected? He has always performed solidly at test level for the Wallabies and if Deans is going on experience and reputation, surely he should be in contention in the way that Timani, McCabe and Dennis are.

As much as I love Berrick, he is injury prone and has not even played 80 minutes of rugby yet. Those 77 minutes were fantastic, yes, but I'm more concerned about his match fitness and not getting reinjured. He's going to be slammed back into the test arena against an enormous Lions team and I hope he does not experience another issue as it will affect not only the team but also himself.

As you've said, he should've been picked in the 6 and then reserved in the first test.

Deans has always had a tendancy to select Waratahs. You only have to look at the past squad selections to see that he has. Whether there is politics behind it, I don't know. But I can see why he may think that the individual performances of each players have warranted selection in the past. They always seemed to perform so well but were snubbed at the end of the game for whatever reason. So I do see the logic behind what he has done.

The issue is, there is more to a team than the individual performances of the players. There was CLEARLY an issue with the culture at the Waratahs that was translating to their games and then to the Wallabies. Say what you want but it just didn't feel right. So whether or not the reds and brumbies players were actually any better than the tahs players selected is absolutely open to debate, but I wonder whether the culture they would have brough would have been more beneficial. As they say "they know how to win!".

So we are now in a situation where Deans can only select his favourite, experienced Waratahs because he's backed himself into a corner with them having the only significant amount of caps. This year, they have shown theyre a winning team. But in the past one really has to question whether Dingo needed to do more thinking about what he was bringing to the Wallabies, in terms of culture that is.

How is selecting Horne a double standard? He wasn't great at test level last year and he got dropped for it. He has a reasonable amount of test experience (14 tests) and has been in excellent form in recent weeks. Tapuai didn't get selected because he has lost form and there are several 12s in substantially better form than him, all of which are also more experienced in test rugby except for Lealiifano.

The likelihood is that Barnes will in the 23 and probably the starting XV in the first test. If that is the case you don't want to only bring him into camp a week before the first test. That just makes things difficult to train for.

Personally I think it is a load of crap that Waratahs players have been favoured. The only player I really think should have played for the Wallabies before but hasn't is Ben Mowen. It hasn't been until this season that he has stood out above Higgers and Dennis though. Two years ago when he was still at the Tahs Dennis was better than Mowen. Last year it was probably line ball but as we've covered, Dennis improves his selection chances because he can also cover lock.

Which other players have been robbed of the chance to play lots of tests for the Wallabies in the last couple of years?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Conspiracy? No, but I do find it overly coincidental that the 50-50 choices seem to always go one way.

The Tahs do not play to their potential for the wallabies at all.

Timani has had maybe one good game
Dennis largely average
Horne average
Burgess up and down
Turner up and down
Barnes generally well but with limited skills

The ones I think play 'up' - Douglas, TPN, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), Hooper (who is only just a Tah now)

If you ask me those assessments definitely mean they do play better for the Wobbs!!!!!

 

[Richo]

A few things:

Kepu - if Deans has picked him Alexander as a THP as he has previously then we could have had a LHP instead. Kepu has been average and doesn't really deserve to be in the wallabies - he is in the right side of a 50-50.

Dennis - I would have waited until the next lot of 6 to see if MMM was available. Again, he has been average over the season and doesn't deserve to be rewarded with a wallaby squad place

Folau - got the 50-50 ahead of Mogg.

Timani - should be Douglas

I would also postulate that had Smith been ok, that Hooper would have got a 50-50 over Gill.

I think you're putting this stuff into isolation too much. Palmer is injured, so who is the prop left out because Kepu was selected? If Deans wanted a lock/6 to train with the squad, then it makes sense to pick Dennis -- who was the alternative? Timani over Douglas does not support your Waratah favouritism argument. As for your postulation about Hooper, you might well be right but again I don't think that has anything to do with him being a Waratah and everything to do with the style in which he plays. Hooper wasn't even a Waratah until this season and last year he was the best player for the Wallabies so I'm not sure how his selection over Gill would constitute Tah bias.

Folau over Mogg is probably the closest to 50-50, but I'm not sure how that is Waratah favouritism. If anything, it's "the-ARU-just-spent-$450k-on-a-bloke-itism" and the broader interest of the code in retaining Folau into the future.

 

[Richo]

FWIW, I would not have selected Dennis or Timani. I would have taken Kepu, because he's a decent scrummager and you need 4 props in the initial camp. I would have taken Horne, Barnes and Folau.

To prove bias, you really need to show some kind of motivation. I'm yet to see a single argument for WHY he would be favouring Waratahs.

 

[Lindommer]

I would also postulate that had Smith been ok, that Hooper would have got a 50-50 over Gill.

Dunno if you've run yer eye over my posts, Scotty, but in my opinion (only watched rugby for 48 years, that's all) Smith and Gill are better scavengers than Hooper while Hooper's better with ball in hand. Not that Hooper's crap attacking the ball or Gill can't run with it, I reckon one's a bit better when his team's defending while the other's a bit better on attack. Hooper's try on Saturday night when Smith tried to get to him sorta summed up my judgement.

If I was selecting this squad I'd pick one of Smith or Gill and start with that player. For mine, Hooper's perfectly skilled to come on some time in the second half. There was no way Hooper was in a 50-50 contest with Gill, Michael was a definite (he is the incumbent 7 after all); Gill was a 50-50 against Smith. Now, who would you pick, Smith or Gill?

 

[Bowside]

I don't think Deans is biased towards the Waratahs, I just think he is a shit selector.