The Wallabies Thread

[amirite]

That's true and it's probably more a function of not wanting to move Folau from 15 than it is about desperately needing to have Foley at 12. Alternatively an in-from Folau to 13.

So:

9. whoever
10. Cooper
11. Folau/Hodge
12. Kerevi
13. TK/Folau
14. DHP
15. Foley

Obviously we're playing hypothetical armchair selector and having some fun, but if I was to cart this combination out I'd probably rather Folau on the wing because Foley is not great at those shorter and higher kicks some teams put up. This would give him the opportunity to 'help out' as necessary.

Also, on the wing, he could easily run at 13 off set piece.

 

[wamberal]

I think it was Kafer who made the point that Folau looks a lot more of a threat in attack on the right hand side of the field.


Or was it the left? Anyway, you get the drift.

 

[Viking]

10. Cooper - we need a flyhalf who can set-up and manage a back-line first and foremost
12. Kerevi - distributon getting better
13. Kuridani / Hodge - both hard in attack and defence
14. Folau - I've always liked him on a wing with a roving commission.
15. Beale - there's your second playmaker

Now Beale is obviously not an option. I wonder if DHP can be a second-play-maker from fullback?

Or even Hodge can be developed into one, as he has played 10 a lot in his amateur career. If so, he could be either a fullback where his boot will come in handy, or in the centres where his defence will. He needs to choose and stick with it.

Foley at 12 will never be a strong defender, the best possible ceiling he can reach is a Gits style defender given his size. And he is poor under the high-ball so I don't like him as a fullback either.

Although a great runner of the ball, and very versatile, he'd be my first bench option.

 

[Highlander35]

I think it was Kafer who made the point that Folau looks a lot more of a threat in attack on the right hand side of the field.


Or was it the left? Anyway, you get the drift.

Right. Left Hand Fend is stronger. Right to left pass is Stronger, Right hand offload is stronger. Plus Right Wing/Right Center is where he played all his League Career.

 

[amirite]

14. Folau - I've always liked him on a wing with a roving commission.

Note: I am not saying this is you Seb V

I've always hated when low level coaches and fans say stuff like 'a winger with a roving commission' or 'just get off your wing and find work'. To me it reeks of 'I don't really understand rugby'.

For example to say Digby Ioane at his best came off his wing a lot is correct, but to say it's because his coach gave him a roving commission is incorrect. He had a very specific set of jobs that were coached into him, they just didn't involve him staying on his wing.

 

[Viking]

Note: I am not saying this is you Seb V

I've always hated when low level coaches and fans say stuff like 'a winger with a roving commission' or 'just get off your wing and find work'. To me it reeks of 'I don't really understand rugby'.

For example to say Digby Ioane at his best came off his wing a lot is correct, but to say it's because his coach gave him a roving commission is incorrect. He had a very specific set of jobs that were coached into him, they just didn't involve him staying on his wing.

Great point. I'd like to see Folau given those same jobs. Eg. Getting off his wing and getting into position for inside balls off Quade - similar job as Digby.

Further to that he can stay on the wing on occasion and get himself into position for cross-field kicks (more frequently then from fullback or centre).

Would also have him line-up at 13 on attacking set-pieces as it was so effective for the Tahs this year.

He would also drop to back to fullback (like most wingers do) and counter-attack often.

Seems like he'd fit all those roles very very well. His weakness of kicking and defensive positioning (potentially at 13) is less exposed but his strengths of attacking, counter-attacking, and taking high balls are still utilised.

Further to that, DHP will be at fullback where his weakness of defensive positioning/tackling on the wing is less exposed and his kicking abilities are more utilised. He has been strong under the high ball recently too. Also potentially leaves Beale, Hodge and to a lesser extent Foley as option for 15 who all have much needed kicking abilities.

 

[amirite]

Completely agreed mate.

Though, I actually think DHP is a good defender who embarrassed himself early on in his career on the big stage.

As an aside - crappy rugby truisms shit me. 'We've got to spread it out wide', 'the boys didn't want it enough', 'we got beat because we didn't go low in contact'.

It's not that these are ever 100% false, but they're just half truths with no substance that people parrot to make them sound like they know something. Frustrating!

 

[TSR]

Note: I am not saying this is you Seb V

I've always hated when low level coaches and fans say stuff like 'a winger with a roving commission' or 'just get off your wing and find work'. To me it reeks of 'I don't really understand rugby'.

For example to say Digby Ioane at his best came off his wing a lot is correct, but to say it's because his coach gave him a roving commission is incorrect. He had a very specific set of jobs that were coached including to him, they just didn't involve him staying on his wing.

To be fair I distinctly recall McKenzie referring to Digby as having a 'roving commission' & Digby referring to getting off his wing. Your point about what the coach wants is fine - but it's not as if the casual rugby fun invented the term. Some wingers are harder workers & instinctively better at reading broken play and getting themselves involved then others which makes them more suited to doing it.

 

[Mr Doug]

I can sympathise Mr D, but Cheika is signed for the next three years. It won't happen. But there might be moves against Grey and Larkham if things don't improve.

Brumby Runner, given that my post was made some time ago, when Cheika was standing down Wallaby squad members to "learn how to better contribute to the Wallaby ethos, or to learn how to get fit, or to learn how to run faster", I thought that Pulver should "do a Cheika on Cheika", and stand him down from the EOYT "to learn how to be a better national coach, and to do a better job of making the Wallabies a united group in which the fans could be proud"! At the time, Groucho asked me who I would put in his place...... my thinking at the time was that I would have elevated Mick Byrne to joint Skills Coach/Head Coach, whilst Cheika was "cooling off"!! It was at a time when we had used 6 different pairs of starting locks in seven tests, which has now increased to 8 from 9?! Mick Byrne must have picked up some Head-Coach skills whilst he was employed by the All Blacks, and his contribution would have been no less-valuable than Cheika's! I think a national coach (whatever the sport), should "inspire the fans". Michael Chieka doesn't inspire me, or anyone I talk to! I know Reds supporters, who, after 10 years of supporting the Reds and the Wallabies, have "tuned out", and have either gone to another sport, or have switched their support to the Australian Sevens team! IMO, Cheika is like his 'mate' Will Skelton ...... very good at Super Rugby level, but not up to a National Rugby standard!

 

[Mr Doug]

On the topic of players and their best positions: My mate "Richo" called in for a chat three weeks ago. (I've mentioned Richo before, he is a former Wallaby and former Kangaroo, and has a very good insight into the 'modern game of Rugby')! Richo's suggestions were: Haylett Petty and Folau should swap places (personally, I wouldn't have Folau in my 15, given his current poor form). Timani should be #8, and McMahon is a #6. Richo's most interesting comment was, that when David Pocock returns to the Wallabies, it should be as #2!

 

[Highlander35]

Pocock could have been a very very good Hooker. Far too late in his career to make that switch though, and besides, he's an amazing openside regardless.

Maybe if he had done it straight after the first knee injury, when the new scrum laws came in.

 

[gel]

Brumby Runner, given that my post was made some time ago, when Cheika was standing down Wallaby squad members to "learn how to better contribute to the Wallaby ethos, or to learn how to get fit, or to learn how to run faster", I thought that Pulver should "do a Cheika on Cheika", and stand him down from the EOYT "to learn how to be a better national coach, and to do a better job of making the Wallabies a united group in which the fans could be proud"! At the time, Groucho asked me who I would put in his place.. my thinking at the time was that I would have elevated Mick Byrne to joint Skills Coach/Head Coach, whilst Cheika was "cooling off"!! It was at a time when we had used 6 different pairs of starting locks in seven tests, which has now increased to 8 from 9?! Mick Byrne must have picked up some Head-Coach skills whilst he was employed by the All Blacks, and his contribution would have been no less-valuable than Cheika's! I think a national coach (whatever the sport), should "inspire the fans". Michael Chieka doesn't inspire me, or anyone I talk to! I know Reds supporters, who, after 10 years of supporting the Reds and the Wallabies, have "tuned out", and have either gone to another sport, or have switched their support to the Australian Sevens team! IMO, Cheika is like his 'mate' Will Skelton .. very good at Super Rugby level, but not up to a National Rugby standard!

i think head coaches of representative teams need to be more along the inspirational and the 'on the fly' analysis type coaches - and I am unsure that a skills coach is going to be that kind of person.

Cheika has demonstrated an ability to get guys to buy in to what he's pitching, but has been hampered by unbelievably unskilled individuals to pick from (that is not his fault - it is the franchises and players themselves that are entirely at fault). The players clearly (if slowly) develop well under him as time goes on and they respond well to him.

I think he also responds in a timely manner to what is happening on the field - but the skill levels being so unbelievably poor doesn't allow for the players to carry through his instructions. When he talks about the game, it's clear he knows why he's saying (or he says it in a way that makes sound like its clear), as opposed to other individuals who leave people more confused after they speak.

I think he is the best guy to have at the moment, and I can't see any alternative willing to take on the job. Being from Sydney is a bit of an impediment, but I don't care about that as I think he is miles above anyone else available that I can think of.

 

[Dave Beat]

Pocock could have been a very very good Hooker. Far too late in his career to make that switch though, and besides, he's an amazing openside regardless.

Maybe if he had done it straight after the first knee injury, when the new scrum laws came in.

Is it though???
There are fewer and fewer scrums in our game now, some games go over 20 minutes without one.
Then there is one, and then then there is a penalty / free kick and the scrum is never completed.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy scrums.

The Hooker was often referred to as the third loosey any way.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I don't disagree BR, I was just extrapolating out what armirite said which assumes a requisite selection of foley somewhere.

The biggest curve ball Cheika got thrown was the injury to Beale. As a second playmaking option he easily trumps all the others, whether at 12 or 15.

100% true IMHO. With Kurtley in the backline you can play K-Squared in the midfield and KB (Kurtley Beale) chiming in from wing or full back. Attacking threats all over the park. Without him a lot falls to the 10 as almost the only passing option when guys like Giteau and To'omua aren't available. I'm not in love with Cooper/Foley as the inside back combo but neither am I with two crashers.

 

[Dave Beat]

100% true IMHO. With Kurtley in the backline you can play K-Squared in the midfield and KB (Kurtley Beale) chiming in from wing or full back. Attacking threats all over the park. Without him a lot falls to the 10 as almost the only passing option when guys like Giteau and To'omua aren't available. I'm not in love with Cooper/Foley as the inside back combo but neither am I with two crashers.

That is also why I'm against K & K.
Hodge being a former 10 could provide what is required @ 12.
Then having the right 13 and a back 3 that complement each other we could be very formidable.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I'm with you Dave on Hodge being a midfield option in the future. Could we see him at 12 and Kerevi at 13? Or the other way round actually, I've always said that your combo of distributor and crasher can be either/or in terms of their jersey numbers. Both need to be able to tackle though, that's my one condition.

 

[amirite]

Do people remember WC Chieka? That was 14 months ago. Why do people hate him now?

He's obvious pegged this as a development year behind closed doors. We're not the ABs, like most teams we genuinely need years like this to reset and get a lot of new blood in at one time.

 

[mst]

Do people remember WC Chieka? That was 14 months ago. Why do people hate him now?

He's obvious pegged this as a development year behind closed doors. We're not the ABs, like most teams we genuinely need years like this to reset and get a lot of new blood in at one time.

Sorry, where did you get the "pegged for development behind closed doors" from?

Of the 10 players brought in this year the vast majority ( I would go as far as to say all) have been to cover injures or players returning to Europe.

 

[amirite]

Sorry, where did you get the "pegged for development behind closed doors" from?

Of the 10 players brought in this year the vast majority ( I would go as far as to say all) have been to cover injures or players returning to Europe.

I don't think that's true mate, he could've easily stuck with Douglas, Mitchell, and Kuridrani if he was 100% a loyalist to his boys.

A case can be made for both sides - but the fact is a lot of new guys have been brought in.

 

[Braveheart81]

You can't really say that the only reason 10 players have made their test debuts this year is because the coach had no other option due to injuries etc.

The only reality we have is that 10 players debuted this year. If an adequate number of opportunities hadn't presented themselves for new players to have a crack then decisions may have been made to ensure they did happen.

As it stands, there have been plenty of capped players who have been left out when available and new players selected.