Springbokke vs Wallabies @ Osfontein 30/9/2017

[Micheal]

Michael, there's a lot to like about your analysis, but just nit picking, where do you get the 18 matches where you allocate a proportion to each of the candidates. I total 27 more test matches from your figures, so at three locks per match, that gives another 81 caps to be distributed. Have I missed something? And there is no room in your analysis for a late comer to make his mark. The form of Matt Philip and Richie Arnold for example could conceivably bring them under notice before the RWC gets too near as well. In my crystal ball, I see the likes of Simmons, Carter and Douglas all dropping out, with Skelton, Richie Arnold and Matt Philip all coming into contention, so it becomes more important for the starting combination to now be decided and be given as much time together as possible.

What the potato. I don't know how I fluffed that. It's what happens when you write long-form GAGR posts over the period of an hour, alt-tabbing everytime your boss walks past.

I'll fix it up later.

I also think there's space for another player to enter the fray, and I agree that it could be at the expense of Rodda, Tui, Carter or Douglas, but as Derpus suggested, I think Simmons is almost locked in.

I don't think you can underestimate the importance of experience and a level head, especially at on a stage like the RWC final.

Simmons may not be a world beater, but he is a player that fulfills a role and generally does so well.

 

[BarneySF]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TSR]

Michael - just wanted to add my thanks for your efforts & thought.

An interesting and enjoyable read.

 

[dru]

No, it isn't. Cooper is around, next year Leali'ifano will be and who knows what Super Rugby might throw up. So, short term, maybe he sees Beale as his answer, longer term there are options. And I'm not a blind "Cheika fan", as you like to say, I am just trying to think over the options rationally.

Cyclo, I don’t think you are a blind Cheika fan. If my thread/connection did that I am happy to clarify. There are certainly others here who I think wear the comment though

 

[Brumby Runner]

What the potato. I don't know how I fluffed that. It's what happens when you write long-form GAGR posts over the period of an hour, alt-tabbing everytime your boss walks past.

I'll fix it up later.

I also think there's space for another player to enter the fray, and I agree that it could be at the expense of Rodda, Tui, Carter or Douglas, but as Derpus suggested, I think Simmons is almost locked in.

I don't think you can underestimate the importance of experience and a level head, especially at on a stage like the RWC final.

Simmons may not be a world beater, but he is a player that fulfills a role and generally does so well.

Probably the first time I've ever seen him referred to as a level head. He really has a reputation for severe brain farts giving away penalties as though they were a dime a dozen.

 

[cyclopath]

Cyclo, I don’t think you are a blind Cheika fan. If my thread/connection did that I am happy to clarify. There are certainly others here who I think wear the comment though

Fair enough.

 

[KAOPointman]

I think Cooper has been sent back to NRC to play himself back into form and to get on top of his injuries. I think if either Foley or Beale were to be unavailable he would be called into the squad but not necessarily into the 23. He has the experience so doesn't need to be a 'squaddie' at this point in his career, game time and personal management are the most important things for him right now.

Seeing as you guys bought up the Quade thing up again(not me)....I'll point out that quades form overall during the Super season was better than Foleys. Statistically that's a fact and that's been covered to death. Despite those stats including over half the season Quade carrying injuries!
But yes...all players are required to play NRC if your not on a wallaby rotation plan. Otherwise there's no match fitness. That's been one of the best things to come out of the NRC....all the fringe and rotated players can keep match fit.
personally I would love to see Quade get a start with one of the new NRC young bloods coming off the bench late in the game at least once this year. If nothing else to give Foley a rest as he's not had a break for along time! It's the "Joe Powell" test......Powell has been trialed, past and now we KNOW he can be relied on if players go down suddenly.
But that's my personal view and I know very few others believe we even need a back up specialist 10.

 

[KAOPointman]

Agree. We're scoring enough points that, historically, would have won most tests we played - tries scored this Test season compared to last is dramatically different. We're conceding too many, which needs to be tightened. So currently, ability to attack and score points is not a major deficiency.

This is where I don't think you are quite right my friend. The wallabies "attack" this year has been far from spectacular.(don't confuse that with scoring)
Nearly all our tries have come from individual brilliance or open play.....yes that's spectacular, BUT we have rarely scored points from structured attack phase or set plays. We have a very poor attacking setup with so many dangerous players. When was the last time you saw Our 10 receiving the ball phase after phase and distributing it to the guys in the holes or in space. NEVER. He truely is just a distributor or the ball(I see him as another 9)....but if that's what the coach wants....that's what he gets.
Personally I can't wait to see all these freakish backline wallabies running onto a legitimate attacking specialist 10 again! For now we've got Beale and Hunt as the only potential playmakers in the squad! Problem with being a playmaking centre tho, is by the time you get the ball....50% of your options are allready gone as the 10 has already gone openside for eg.

 

[cyclopath]

This is where I don't think you are quite right my friend. The wallabies "attack" this year has been far from spectacular.(don't confuse that with scoring)
Nearly all our tries have come from individual brilliance or open play...yes that's spectacular, BUT we have rarely scored points from structured attack phase or set plays. We have a very poor attacking setup with so many dangerous players. When was the last time you saw Our 10 receiving the ball phase after phase and distributing it to the guys in the holes or in space. NEVER. He truely is just a distributor or the ball(I see him as another 9)..but if that's what the coach wants..that's what he gets.
Personally I can't wait to see all these freakish backline wallabies running onto a legitimate attacking specialist 10 again! For now we've got Beale and Hunt as the only potential playmakers in the squad! Problem with being a playmaking centre tho, is by the time you get the ball..50% of your options are allready gone as the 10 has already gone openside for eg.

Did you watch any of the game on the weekend? That is a rhetorical question. You're just posting patent rubbish, and I for one wish you would stop. If you want to post more drivel, please don't bother quoting my posts in it.

 

[Gagger]

This is where I don't think you are quite right my friend. The wallabies "attack" this year has been far from spectacular.(don't confuse that with scoring)
Nearly all our tries have come from individual brilliance or open play...yes that's spectacular, BUT we have rarely scored points from structured attack phase or set plays. We have a very poor attacking setup with so many dangerous players. When was the last time you saw Our 10 receiving the ball phase after phase and distributing it to the guys in the holes or in space. NEVER. He truely is just a distributor or the ball(I see him as another 9)..but if that's what the coach wants..that's what he gets.
Personally I can't wait to see all these freakish backline wallabies running onto a legitimate attacking specialist 10 again! For now we've got Beale and Hunt as the only potential playmakers in the squad! Problem with being a playmaking centre tho, is by the time you get the ball..50% of your options are allready gone as the 10 has already gone openside for eg.

Yes, for example that set piece try you saw on the weekend didn't actually happen nor did the other two tries created by the 10's running and passing into space.

Let me get Rex Tillerson on the line to classify your post because I think you may have set a new bar

 

[KAOPointman]

Yes, for example that set piece try you saw on the weekend didn't actually happen nor did the other two tries created by the 10's running and passing into space.

Let me get Rex Tillerson on the line to classify your post because I think you may have set a new bar

I've already made it clear this was easily his best game this year....AND I clearly gave him credit for those moves in my analysis of his game!
Can NOT say the same about his other games......but maybe you should check your facts before I go an post all the try involvements from this year! Or just check my post history!

 

[KAOPointman]

Did you watch any of the game on the weekend? That is a rhetorical question. You're just posting patent rubbish, and I for one wish you would stop. If you want to post more drivel, please don't bother quoting my posts in it.

if you don't want your opinion challenged bud, why don't you go post in the under 12s forums! Grown ups know how to debate a topic without resorting to childish personal attacks!
You know full well I'm talking about the whole wallabies season....and it's actually a pretty common belief that I read in plenty of places!
Maybe your could finally put closure to this subject.....go back through all the wallaby attack phases and tries, and give us a brief description of them unfolding!
Instead of your personal attacks...put your money where your mouth is? (Sits here quietly waiting for the typical brilliant debating reply of "your not worth my time")
Don't make it about ME though mate...school everyone here and PROVE to us that our "playmaker" is the guy running the show in attack for the wallabies.......prove it to me and I'll retract my comment! I hate to come across all blunt, but you seem to respond to blunt.....

 

[cyclopath]

if you don't want your opinion challenged bud, why don't you go post in the under 12s forums! Grown ups know how to debate a topic without resorting to childish personal attacks!
You know full well I'm talking about the whole wallabies season..and it's actually a pretty common belief that I read in plenty of places!
Maybe your could finally put closure to this subject...go back through all the wallaby attack phases and tries, and give us a brief description of them unfolding!
Instead of your personal attacks.put your money where your mouth is? (Sits here quietly waiting for the typical brilliant debating reply of "your not worth my time")
Don't make it about ME though mate.school everyone here and PROVE to us that our "playmaker" is the guy running the show in attack for the wallabies...prove it to me and I'll retract my comment! I hate to come across all blunt, but you seem to respond to blunt...

You haven't posted analysis, you just post rubbish after each game shit-canning one player about whom you clearly have an unhealthy obsession. That doesn't make it analysis. You want analysis - read the front page where people actually provide it. You keep stating stat prove some point from Super Rugby - you've never shown any. You use the age old trolling technique of writing the same shit, then challenge others to provide proof to the contrary, and if they don't it somehow validates your shit. The fact most posters cannot be arsed replying to, or endorsing your rubbish should tell you something. Get it through your skull, I do not wish to converse with you any further on this subject - you're right, I do have better things to do than argue reason with a fool.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Yes, for example that set piece try you saw on the weekend didn't actually happen nor did the other two tries created by the 10's running and passing into space.

Let me get Rex Tillerson on the line to classify your post because I think you may have set a new bar

Gagger, it was a particularly pleasing piece of set play, granted, but I hope the forward pass to Folau is omitted when it's tried again. Might not get away with it with a different referee.

 

[Sully]

Gagger, it was a particularly pleasing piece of set play, granted, but I hope the forward pass to Folau is omitted when it's tried again. Might not get away with it with a different referee.

If you look at things relatively, that wasn't forward. Compared to the one the Saffas threw.

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

 

[KAOPointman]

You haven't posted analysis, you just post rubbish after each game shit-canning one player about whom you clearly have an unhealthy obsession. That doesn't make it analysis. You want analysis - read the front page where people actually provide it. You keep stating stat prove some point from Super Rugby - you've never shown any. You use the age old trolling technique of writing the same shit, then challenge others to provide proof to the contrary, and if they don't it somehow validates your shit. The fact most posters cannot be arsed replying to, or endorsing your rubbish should tell you something. Get it through your skull, I do not wish to converse with you any further on this subject - you're right, I do have better things to do than argue reason with a fool.

Just as I expected....nothing but insults to throw. Your happy to write a paragraph insulting me....but no respect whatsoever by debating my "opinion" with facts.
I've challenged you to be a grown up and pick apart my analysis of the games this year.....I still encourage you to do so as I'm quite possative they will stand up, as they have done allready.

And for your clearly unschooled advice.....the front page is just an opinion too......as they gave the SA v Aus GnGR motm to Foley....something from memory I think only 1 other forum poster agreed with in their voting!
Oh...and Fox Sports has a full website will all the Super Rugby stats....(which I quoted in my post you refer to about Quade vs Foleys season stats). I'd encourage you to use that moving forward so you can make an enformed opinion! Unless you prefer simply throwing insults to attract "likes"

 

[KAOPointman]

If you look at things relatively, that wasn't forward. Compared to the one the Saffas threw.

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

Relative too the Referees display that game.....or what an actual forward pass is?

 

[Slim 293]

Just as I expected..nothing but insults to throw. Your happy to write a paragraph insulting me..but no respect whatsoever by debating my "opinion" with facts.
I've challenged you to be a grown up and pick apart my analysis of the games this year...I still encourage you to do so as I'm quite possative they will stand up, as they have done allready.

And for your clearly unschooled advice...the front page is just an opinion too..as they gave the SA v Aus GnGR motm to Foley..something from memory I think only 1 other forum poster agreed with in their voting!
Oh.and Fox Sports has a full website will all the Super Rugby stats..(which I quoted in my post you refer to about Quade vs Foleys season stats). I'd encourage you to use that moving forward so you can make an enformed opinion! Unless you prefer simply throwing insults to attract "likes"

Just out of curiosity, I'm looking at the stats SANZAAR use provided through the Vodcam Super Rugby app......... And overall, with less minutes played, they mostly favour Foley.
In fact, Foley leads Cooper in pretty much every major stat in Super Rugby this year (carries, run metres, good passes, tackle %, points, less turnovers conceded etc) except for tackle busts (2 - 8 Cooper), but then linebreaks favour Foley 9 - 2.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think the last line from KAOPointman's review of Foley's performance from this match is why everyone thinks his opinions are, to put it very politely, not worth reading.

"For me.once again a terrible overall display for a playmaker"

Why would anyone take them seriously or think they show any objectivity whatsoever when the takeaway from a strong performance by the Wallabies at a difficult venue where as the 10, Foley set up all 3 tries and had perfect goal kicking was that?

It's a long rant after every game where it is clear the objective is to say how bad Foley was with absolutely no regard to anything else.

 

[cyclopath]

Just as I expected..nothing but insults to throw. Your happy to write a paragraph insulting me..but no respect whatsoever by debating my "opinion" with facts.
I've challenged you to be a grown up and pick apart my analysis of the games this year...I still encourage you to do so as I'm quite possative they will stand up, as they have done allready.

And for your clearly unschooled advice...the front page is just an opinion too..as they gave the SA v Aus GnGR motm to Foley..something from memory I think only 1 other forum poster agreed with in their voting!
Oh.and Fox Sports has a full website will all the Super Rugby stats..(which I quoted in my post you refer to about Quade vs Foleys season stats). I'd encourage you to use that moving forward so you can make an enformed opinion! Unless you prefer simply throwing insults to attract "likes"

You asked for blunt. Did you read the front page analysis by Brian Smith on the attack? Probably not. I wasn't talking about the MoM votes from several games ago, I was talking about analysis, from this game, where you thought Foley was "terrible" in attack. Try reading what I wrote more closely. Stats? There are many sites, conveniently one ,mentioned just above, which says otherwise to you. Yes, I do read them. You have to look at stats from multiple places, as they can be quite variable. Here's another - the Waratahs attack, strangely with Foley, scored far more points against the NZ teams than any other Aus team in Super Rugby (averaged near 30 points per game); indeed scored more tries and points than any other Aus Super Rugby team. Odd thing since they lacked any playmaker. Sure, their defence sucked, but you keep blathering about playmaking. I couldn't give a rats arse about "likes", but maybe they appear as a consequence of sometimes saying something worthwhile over a long period on this place. Who knows. All I am saying, quite simply is that the relentless bagging of Foley, when you discuss or address no other player, comes across as some sort of bitter rant, and seems to have very little real basis. It's not me saying he's ideal or perfect, but he is not even remotely close to being as crap as you think. It is also against the rules of the forum - you could read those too. At least one moderator has pointed this out in this thread. Think on that too.