The Wallabies Thread

[cyclopath]

So far about 45 players have gone from the NRC to Super Rugby.

Whether or not that competition is directly improving the players involved can only ever be based on opinion but it is clear that it is improving the pathway for club players around the country to play at a higher level with more of the Super Rugby players and show how they fare in that environment.

It is impossible to say how many of those same players would have got Super Rugby contracts regardless but it does seem to open up the opportunities for older players who might have missed the boat through the traditional pathways (such as Ben Matwijow) as well as giving younger guys the chance to show that they are ready to move to the next level (e.g. Andrew Kellaway or Junior Laloifi).

This is the nub of it, I think. I'm not sure the NRC is truly for developing players' skills per se, but it is a next level at which to expose them and see which ones are more likely to step up. Skills development should be occurring at a lower level. It might improve their skills.

 

[wamberal]

The NRC is a lot better than nothing.

 

[Scrubber2050]

The NRC is a lot better than nothing.

Exactly right !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The omly thing I'd like to see is that franchises can only play 2 forwards and 2 backs from their regular squads, at least blokes that have played the majority of Super games.

I don't want to see blokes like a Daley or Gill or Holmes ( not this year) taking a spot and chance of a developing player who needs the experience .

I see the NRC as a development pathway.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

For all the criticism leveled at the ARU, I think some of the recent moves are the right ones. The NRC, even though some here think it's being done wrong or a waste of time, is a good and necessary step. What would be the alternative anyway, do nothing? A domestic comp under Super rugby to provide the bridge between first grade and rep is needed and even though it will lose the ARU money I don't see a lot of better ideas. The second one is Mick Byrne as national skills coach and that will help immensely IMHO. I saw from the press kit that his job won't just be with the Wallabies, but also at the levels below too. That is excellent news.

 

[Strewthcobber]

This is the nub of it, I think. I'm not sure the NRC is truly for developing players' skills per se, but it is a next level at which to expose them and see which ones are more likely to step up. Skills development should be occurring at a lower level. It might improve their skills.

Yep. being the most skillful player in World Rugby won't mean anything if you haven't developed the strength, fitness and discipline to play professional rugby.

Exposing more guys to the standards required in the pros must be helping to prepare more of them for the higher levels.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Exactly right !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The omly thing I'd like to see is that franchises can only play 2 forwards and 2 backs from their regular squads, at least blokes that have played the majority of Super games.

I don't want to see blokes like a Daley or Gill or Holmes ( not this year) taking a spot and chance of a developing player who needs the experience .

I see the NRC as a development pathway.

You don't think Holmes' NRC opponents develop more packing down agaisnt a test standard font rower?

Playing agaisnt top level guys is a feature of the NRC, not a bug

 

[Train Without a Station]

I find it interesting that Gnostic criticizes the NRC.

Considering all the comments he makes saying how much better the NZRU do certain things, not sure how he comes to the conclusion that mimicking the NZ system is the wrong path, and that spreading players across 5 different suburban competitions is equal or better.

 

[Scrubber2050]

You don't think Holmes' NRC opponents develop more packing down agaisnt a test standard font rower?

Playing agaisnt top level guys is a feature of the NRC, not a bug

But if too many then it is a continuation of super rugby. I don't think that happens but examples like that are probably a good one (for your case)

 

[Braveheart81]

But if too many then it is a continuation of super rugby. I don't think that happens but examples like that are probably a good one (for your case)

It's 8 teams vs 5 from Super Rugby and then you take out the Wallabies and the players going overseas and you've basically got 4 whole teams to fill with non Super Rugby players.

Unless the number of teams kept dropping I don't think you could ever have a problem with having too many Super Rugby players.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Scrubber you are looking at this the completely wrong way.

The competition is only supposed to include the best club rugby players.

It's not there just to give everybody a crack.

With 8 teams there are 184 players that will take the field each week in the NRC.

There is something like 175 total Super Rugby squad members.

So immediately there's 9 spots for the best club rugby players to try and step up.

Take out international marquee players that won't play in the NRC like Tui, Goromaru, Thomson, etc. and another 10 spots open up. Suddenly the best 19 club rugby players are getting a chance.

If 3 players from each Super Rugby team miss the entire tournament due to Super Rugby injuries, another 15 spots open. up.

Now the top 34 club rugby players in Australia are getting their chance.

Take out the Wallaby 30 man squad. Top 23 players won't play and there's no certainty on the top 23 so a larger number will not play as they team is tweaked.

Now the top 64 club rugby players in Australia are getting a game every single week of the competition.

That's before we get any injuries or squad rotation.

How many more should be playing?

The competition has shown how far off the pace club players who are not in the U20s programs, or Super Rugby squads are. If anything there's too many bringing down the standard, and therefore quality of the opposition for the better club players.

 

[wamberal]

The biggest benefit of the NRC is as a showcase for potential Soup players.


I doubt that a competition like the NRC can of itself develop players, but it can let them shine. Very few, if any, part-timers are physically ready to play Soup, no matter how skillful or talented they are.

 

[swingpass]

on development, it was interesting hearing Murray Mexted talk on saturday about IRANZ. the emphasis there is on skills and mental toughness. learning how to focus.

oh and they also coach coaches ! (mst post above)

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Certainly the NRC has been a good proving ground for WA players. The likes of Scoble, Hardwick, van Wyk, Koteka and RHP wouldn't have come into the Force squad as quickly were it not for the opportunity that the NRC affords. It means that we have a more self-sustaining development system and reduces the amount that we have to reach into the Shute Shield to fill out the squad. In the long term it will be to our benefit to provide this pathway. Also from a selfish point of view it means that I can spend more games standing on the hill at McGillivray Oval watching some good footy.

 

[Froggy]

I think it's essential to take good players out of the level they are currently in and see how they respond to a higher standard, it can sometimes be surprising.

I am mindful of a certain country area in the 70's where two clubs each had an exceptional centre, with A a more dominant player at club level than B. At zone level the scenario was the same, but when they then stepped up to NSW Country level A suddenly lost his dominance, and never really progressed beyond that. B, on the other hand, still looked good at that level, as he did playing for NSW, and then with the Wallabies until injury cut his career short.

The message here is clearly the big frog in the little pond has to be exposed to a bigger pond to see how he will respond.

 

[dru]

The biggest benefit of the NRC is as a showcase for potential Soup players.


I doubt that a competition like the NRC can of itself develop players, but it can let them shine. Very few, if any, part-timers are physically ready to play Soup, no matter how skillful or talented they are.

Another benefit are the players on the fringe of the WBs. It keeps them game fit and available if injuries crop up. And guys like Quade, who you would imagine Cheika wants to keep watching but probably wont make the 23.

 

[gel]

God I hope this is the year the 'Phipps can't pass' myth dies and never comes back.

It's patently false, and doesn't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.
.

It hasn't because it isn't a myth.

You are just wrong in your assessment.

He has a significant deficiency in that area of his game and he needs to work hard to improve it. There has been little evidence this season to suggest that he has.

 

[No4918]

The message here is clearly the big frog in the little pond has to be exposed to a bigger pond to see how he will respond.

Nice frog metaphor there Froggy.

 

[Viking]

Plus Phipps off passes are WAY off. They put us on the back foot and cause huge amounts of pressure. Refer to RWC15.

Even it is only one every 2 games or so, they can be turning points in games.
Other half-backs in Aus don't seem to make nearly as many.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Plus Phipps off passes are WAY off. They put us on the back foot and cause huge amounts of pressure. Refer to RWC15.

Even it is only one every 2 games or so, they can be turning points in games.
Other half-backs in Aus don't seem to make nearly as many.

Well Genia is in Sydney now, maybe he'll get a shot before Phipps?

 

[Viking]

Well Genia is in Sydney now, maybe he'll get a shot before Phipps?

If he is fit enough, I'd bet my house Genia will be selected in front of Phipps.