The Wallabies Thread
- Thread starter KOB1987
- Start date
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Well that's no more satisfying than the inverse. Irrational justification is as bad as irrational criticism.
True though i suppose. If you are doing your job no one cares how or why.
T
TOCC
Guest
When he selects players who underperform people will criticsise... in this case, Dempsey and Hanigan are two whose selections and performance attracts heat.. their selections were questioned from the June test series, it's not news or just because the team have lost, it's because fans don't see what justifies their selection and losing compounds this issue
I feel like Hanigan is so slated by the fans that there isn't much that he can do to win them over now at least this season.
He's there for workrate and to provide the one solid lineout option in the backrow.
I completely agree that he needs to improve and he missed too many cleanouts in the last test which have to be his bread and butter. I would be switching him out now but I think a solid game from him will still be perceived as being poor by the fans.
I think Tom Robertson is in a similar boat. People didn't think he should be selected to begin with and he gets slated every game even though empirically he's producing good workrate in his minutes on the field and is holding up his side of the scrum as well as our other options have this season. There's also no obvious replacement at LHP. It doesn't really matter what he does at this point he will still be judged negatively.
He's there for workrate and to provide the one solid lineout option in the backrow.
I completely agree that he needs to improve and he missed too many cleanouts in the last test which have to be his bread and butter. I would be switching him out now but I think a solid game from him will still be perceived as being poor by the fans.
I think Tom Robertson is in a similar boat. People didn't think he should be selected to begin with and he gets slated every game even though empirically he's producing good workrate in his minutes on the field and is holding up his side of the scrum as well as our other options have this season. There's also no obvious replacement at LHP. It doesn't really matter what he does at this point he will still be judged negatively.
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
BH, In a mediocre side, and on their results over the past two years the Wallabies are a mediocre international side, if you don't at least try some of the alternatives, you are compelling the team to remain mediocre. Or, if you deliberately ignore the better alternative for confected reasons, then you are arguably culpable in driving the poor performances.
IMO Cheika suffers from both afflictions.
He has a tendency to persist with failed or poorly performing players or combinations of players and apparently will not contemplate changing his ways, eg poor back row combination at present, poorly performing Nos 9 and 10, as well as certain players consistently selected last year when their contributions were very minimal at best. He has also deliberately ignored experienced in-form players on the argument they would not be starters in his side when he inconsistently has now included Steve Moore back in the squad but doesn't even put him on the bench.
Before the usual suspects just come in and accuse me of Brumbies bias, let me say that right now I would rather see Matt Philip (Force via Tahs) in place of Hanigan, Holloway (Tahs) or Timani (Rebels) in place of Dempsey, Beale (Tahs) in place of Foley, and Meakes (Force) or Hunt (Reds) in place of Beale at 12. The Brumbies who should be there are Arnold to start and Powell on the bench.
As we all know, statistics don't tell the full story, but some figures are very telling. The two poorest performing Super Rugby sides in this country have between them 15 of the 23 players in the current game day 23. That leaves just 8 spread over the three better performing sides. Something stinks in the State of Denmark.
IMO Cheika suffers from both afflictions.
He has a tendency to persist with failed or poorly performing players or combinations of players and apparently will not contemplate changing his ways, eg poor back row combination at present, poorly performing Nos 9 and 10, as well as certain players consistently selected last year when their contributions were very minimal at best. He has also deliberately ignored experienced in-form players on the argument they would not be starters in his side when he inconsistently has now included Steve Moore back in the squad but doesn't even put him on the bench.
Before the usual suspects just come in and accuse me of Brumbies bias, let me say that right now I would rather see Matt Philip (Force via Tahs) in place of Hanigan, Holloway (Tahs) or Timani (Rebels) in place of Dempsey, Beale (Tahs) in place of Foley, and Meakes (Force) or Hunt (Reds) in place of Beale at 12. The Brumbies who should be there are Arnold to start and Powell on the bench.
As we all know, statistics don't tell the full story, but some figures are very telling. The two poorest performing Super Rugby sides in this country have between them 15 of the 23 players in the current game day 23. That leaves just 8 spread over the three better performing sides. Something stinks in the State of Denmark.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
All of the criticized players have no real viable alternative:
Phipps --> Powell? maybe but he's young and he had a chance earlier and looked shaky at best.
Foley --> literally no alternatives. Quade is now well off the pace and Lance only just cuts it at Super level. Maybe Beale but he's never been any good at 10 before.
Hanigan --> We all agree that Fardy should have been in but Cheika clearly determined not to include him as he went overseas. That leaves us with Hanigan or Timani. Timani can't even put in an NRC performance.
Robertson --> is there any alternative here at all?
Obviously, Kepu, Taf and Hooper are there on merit. Who does that leave? I'll grant you Dempsey shouldn't be there, but again it's in a position where we don't have a lot of options
Which coach has ever turfed out players they view as being amongst their best based on their Super Rugby side having a bad year because they feel they have to meet some quota system?
They pick who they think are their best players.
They pick who they think are their best players.
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
It's not a fucking quotas argument - that's pure straw man and should be below your level of contribution. We have two franchises who failed miserably all year, where none or very few of their players were in the sort of form that warranted elevation to the national team. We have three franchises who were more successful but who between them are under-represented on the basis purely of form of their players and results in the one competition leading into the international season. This has nothing to do with previous years, previous coaches and their selections. It is all about Cheika and 2017. IMO he has lost the plot big time.
T
TOCC
Guest
Philips and Carter demonstrated more this season then Douglas and Simmons.
Alcock and Fainga'a displayed much better form then Dempsey
Timani should be starting ahead of Hanigan, although I think Hanigan should be in the 22 for versatility off the bench.
Alcock and Fainga'a displayed much better form then Dempsey
Timani should be starting ahead of Hanigan, although I think Hanigan should be in the 22 for versatility off the bench.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
He wasn't actually given a chance - he had a total of maybe 10 minutes in 3 tests........ one shaky pass early in his first start and looked fine from then.
Two players from those franchises who barely played this year are in the 23 this week. Sean McMahon and Jack Dempsey (I wouldn't pick Dempsey). Not selecting them because they spent a lot of the year injured is reasonable but they can't also be blamed for their franchise being shit.
Two of the Waratahs players in the 23 weren't Waratahs this season (Beale and Simmons).
One of the Western Force players would be in the starting XV but is injured (DHP).
The players who were easily the best in a very poor Waratahs team this season are the ones in the test side.
Hodge and Korobeite were easily the Rebels two best backs this season and are in the test side.
Phipps' form is miles ahead of where it was early in the season (when it was disastrous).
One of the best Reds players, Karmichael Hunt is injured. He would be in the side if fit.
Aside from the Rebels who won 1 game, you are comparing two sides that won 6 games against two sides that won 4 games. It's hardly a massive difference.
Two of the Waratahs players in the 23 weren't Waratahs this season (Beale and Simmons).
One of the Western Force players would be in the starting XV but is injured (DHP).
The players who were easily the best in a very poor Waratahs team this season are the ones in the test side.
Hodge and Korobeite were easily the Rebels two best backs this season and are in the test side.
Phipps' form is miles ahead of where it was early in the season (when it was disastrous).
One of the best Reds players, Karmichael Hunt is injured. He would be in the side if fit.
Aside from the Rebels who won 1 game, you are comparing two sides that won 6 games against two sides that won 4 games. It's hardly a massive difference.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Alcock and Fainga'a play in a different position to Dempsey. Timani and Hanigan are as bad as each other. This is such a stupid argument.
T
TOCC
Guest
You seem offended by the idea of anyone suggesting anyone besides those who wear light blue?
I said Hanigan should be on the bench, not Dempsey..
Timani is better suited for the Wallabies at 8 then Hanigan
Isn't Hanigan playing 6? So, if Timani goes to 8 then 6 is still under debate, with McMahon now in that mix, I guess?
T
TOCC
Guest
Yes.. based on his form and Fardy been released, you can't really drop McMahon.
What number they wear is largely irrelevant these days, getting the balance across the backrow is key, the only time it really matters is at the scrum with different roles assigned to different positions reflecting attributes.
Timani at 8 to anchor the scrum, he also provides the ability to get across the gain line.
McMahon at 6 to provide the high work rate and hit the rucks, Hooper at 7 to do what he does.
eastman
John Solomon (38)
Was that a sneaky dig at Hooper? If so well done.
Brumbieman
Dick Tooth (41)
Still trying to workout why Alexander was never considered this year. As a tighthead, no, but he was in great form finally playing back on the losehead side, and had trimmed up a bit to bring back his around the field work.
Much fucken better option than Robertson.
Much fucken better option than Robertson.
Probably because he is 32 and no one is likely to bring back an option that is a decade older than the alternative and quite possibly no better.
I think he'd have to be substantially the best option to be a chance of a recall which he isn't.