The Wallabies Thread

[Derpus]

I think Higgers played a hell of a lot better in June then people give him credit for, he actively assisted in try scoring situations where few loose forwards could. Cheika forced a round peg into a square hole and got the shits when it didn't work out. His lack of impact at the breakdown was only easy to spotlight as Hooper and Hanigan were also absent. He played a hell of a lot better then Hanigan and has a lot more to offer then Dempsey and Korzyck..just like Moore has more to offer then Latu, Kepu has more to offer then Ainsley etc.

If the situation were reversed and Higgers was selected, under- performing, and someone advocated trying out Hanigan they would be shouted off the forum for provincialism.

Higgers is most definitely not the answer to our backrow problems. The heart grows fonder in absence.

 

[TOCC]

If the situation were reversed and Higgers was selected, under- performing, and someone advocated trying out Hanigan they would be shouted off the forum for provincialism.

Higgers is most definitely not the answer to our backrow problems. The heart grows fonder in absence.

Nah. If the situation were reversed and Higgers were playing as Hanigan has been, I would have no drama advocating for a player from another province..As I've done with Simmons and Douglas all year..

My dream Wallaby team barely has 1 Reds player in the starting XV, provincialism isn't the issue here.

 

[cyclopath]

I suspect Higginbotham has suffered from not really being used the way he might best be used. At least at test level. I reckon he really should have been our Kieran Read style 8, but that requires a 6 like Kaino / Messam / Squires and maybe a larger 7. I don't really think Higgers is / should be a 6, and I don't think it works as well without the right combo. I think he's often been in bad combinations, and people expect things of him that aren't necessarily his strength. And we probably didn't use his strength as well as we should have.
For example, a hard-nosed 6 (maybe Fardy, maybe someone "heavier"), Pocock and Higgers. Certainly trying to play him with Hooper won't work so well as they both play more wider / linking. And it's not necessarily having an "pilferer" 7 - look at the All Black combo of Kaino / McCaw (later career when he was more of an everyman player, less going at the ball) / Read. Works fine.
I think Higginbotham was pretty good earlier in the Test season. But playing him with, say, Hooper and McMahon wasn't going to work so well.
All that said, given Fardy is gone, and Pocock is not yet back, I'm not sure we can really find that sort of combo right now. I think he'd still be better than Hanigan but he might have needed his sat-nav reset to a more local setting!
6 and 8 at top level are real opportunities for the next year or two for someone to really stake a claim.

 

[Brumby Runner]

If the situation were reversed and Higgers was selected, under- performing, and someone advocated trying out Hanigan they would be shouted off the forum for provincialism.

Higgers is most definitely not the answer to our backrow problems. The heart grows fonder in absence.

Higgers may not be the answer to our backrow problems (but that is a subjective judgement anyway), but Hanigan surely is our back row problem atm.

 

[Derpus]

Higgers may not be the answer to our backrow problems (but that is a subjective judgement anyway), but Hanigan surely is our back row problem atm.

Definitely. 6 is our problem in general.

At 7 we could have any of Hooper, Pocock, McMahon even Hardwick. 3 test standard, Hooper and Pocock with genuine claims to being best in the world.

6 and 8? Nothing. It's bullshit

 

[Brumby Runner]

In the June tests, Higgers made quite a few breaks and half-breaks down the blind side of the ruck, and even off the scrum. No other No 6 nor No 8 has had that type of impact on any of the test matches this year. If he failed to reach any requirements of the position, that was because he was playing out of position imo, should be No 6 not No 8, and was hamstrung by having two light weight partners i the back row. The combination of Higgers at 6, Hooper at 7 and Timani at 8 should have been persevered with. But too late now. Higgers is lost to the cause and Timani has been untimely discarded. In truth, I blame the Rebels for Timani's lack of development, playing him in the second row all year when he is definitely a back rower.

 

[drewprint]

Higgers may not be the answer to our backrow problems (but that is a subjective judgement anyway), but Hanigan surely is our back row problem atm.

Exactly. I'm not saying he's the messiah by any stretch. I just want someone there, for the here and now not for two years down the track, who's going to do a job. I think he offers us more upside at the present. It really shouldn't be that difficult to comprehend.

 

[TOCC]

I suspect Higginbotham has suffered from not really being used the way he might best be used. At least at test level. I reckon he really should have been our Kieran Read style 8, but that requires a 6 like Kaino / Messam / Squires and maybe a larger 7. I don't really think Higgers is / should be a 6, and I don't think it works as well without the right combo. I think he's often been in bad combinations, and people expect things of him that aren't necessarily his strength. And we probably didn't use his strength as well as we should have.
For example, a hard-nosed 6 (maybe Fardy, maybe someone "heavier"), Pocock and Higgers. Certainly trying to play him with Hooper won't work so well as they both play more wider / linking. And it's not necessarily having an "pilferer" 7 - look at the All Black combo of Kaino / McCaw (later career when he was more of an everyman player, less going at the ball) / Read. Works fine.
I think Higginbotham was pretty good earlier in the Test season. But playing him with, say, Hooper and McMahon wasn't going to work so well.
All that said, given Fardy is gone, and Pocock is not yet back, I'm not sure we can really find that sort of combo right now. I think he'd still be better than Hanigan but he might have needed his sat-nav reset to a more local setting!
6 and 8 at top level are real opportunities for the next year or two for someone to really stake a claim.

I agree, and it all comes as assessing the players as a combination and finding that balance rather then just individuals. Some like Timani, as an individual isn't that great, but he presents other attributes which balance out the weaknesses of other players, specifically his mass at scrum and ability to get over gain line. If you choose shorter backrowers then you need to consider the lineout accuracy of your hooker. It's not a simple case of Player A been better then Player B.

Right now it just seems the backrow balance of the Walalbies is off, and that's exacerbated further when you swap players like Arnold for Simmons.

 

[Derpus]

I agree, and it all comes as assessing the players as a combination and finding that balance rather then just individuals. Some like Timani, as an individual isn't that great, but he presents other attributes which balance out the weaknesses of other players, specifically his mass at scrum and ability to get over gain line. If you choose shorter backrowers then you need to consider the lineout accuracy of your hooker. It's not a simple case of Player A been better then Player B.

Right now it just seems the backrow balance of the Walalbies is off, and that's exacerbated further when you swap players like Arnold for Simmons.

Anyone got his gain line stats anywhere? i don't think i've actually seen him get over the gain line this year.

 

[drewprint]

It seems like people are still holding out the same hope that Higginbotham becomes a dynamic test backrower now at age 31 as when he was 26.

Nope. I know that's not happening. But I bet you penny to a pound that an average Higgenbotham would be offering us more right now than Hanigan.

 

[Braveheart81]

We'll never know.

What seems fairly clear is that his play in June didn't demand his ongoing selection and whilst it would have been interesting to see if his play at 6 was better, he's certainly not of a standard at 31 to suggest that shaping the rest of the backrow to work around his skill set makes any sense.

 

[upthereds#!]

Yeh absolutely not saying he is the solution to all our problems, the messiah or becoming more dynamic at 31 then 26....simply stating that he would be adding more value to the team at this stage then Hanigan, Dempsey and Korczyk..

Also, a key part of development and learning is mentoring.....our backrows (mainly 6 & 8) have noone

Fafita and Squire have Read and Kaino, Cane had Mccaw. Who does Hanigan have? Dempsey?

 

[upthereds#!]

A Higs, Timani, Pocock Combo would cover bases nicely in terms of looking at how Higs would best be utilised.

However for this Rugby Championship

Fardy, Timani, Hooper would have done it for me with Mcmahon off the bench

 

[Derpus]

A Higs, Timani, Pocock Combo would cover bases nicely in terms of looking at how Higs would best be utilised.

However for this Rugby Championship

Fardy, Timani, Hooper would have done it for me with Mcmahon off the bench

I don't really get it. If you are going to compensate for a loosy seagulling then why not just let Hooper do it as he's way better at it anyway.

 

[Ignoto]

What seems fairly clear is that his play in June didn't demand his ongoing selection and whilst it would have been interesting to see if his play at 6 was better

Applying the same criteria to Hanigan, what about his performances warrants his continued selection there? Is it just his 'defensive workrate', if so, is that contributing in a positive manner or is he just wrapping a blokes legs up after he's made 5 metres past the game line>?

 

[Derpus]

Applying the same criteria to Hanigan, what about his performances warrants his continued selection there? Is it just his 'defensive workrate', if so, is that contributing in a positive manner or is he just wrapping a blokes legs up after he's made 5 metres past the game line>?

Nothing, literally no one is saying he should be there.

 

[drewprint]

Cheika is.

 

[drewprint]

Anyway, I've side tracked this thread by talking about someone who isn't a project player. Carry on.

 

[Braveheart81]

Applying the same criteria to Hanigan, what about his performances warrants his continued selection there? Is it just his 'defensive workrate', if so, is that contributing in a positive manner or is he just wrapping a blokes legs up after he's made 5 metres past the game line>?

I would have benched or dropped Hanigan for this game.

I thought his two games against the All Blacks were the best of his career to date but he was poor against South Africa.

 

[upthereds#!]

I don't really get it. If you are going to compensate for a loosy seagulling then why not just let Hooper do it as he's way better at it anyway.

not 100% clear on what you mean but the first backrow is just an indication of covering a balance including front jumper in lineout. IMO Higs is a way better seaguller then Hoops mainly due to his ball handling skills, whereas Hoops is a much better link man. Last Backrow (which would be my preferred without pocock) would have Fardy as the fetcher and seaguller, with Hooper as the ball runner linkman and Timani as the blunt instrument. Fardy, Pocock and Hooper IMO are our best backrowers even today with fardy being a bit older but it's a combo that doesnt tick enough boxes, though the boxes it does tick it REALLY ticks. It's a tough call in any direction but I think Hanigan, Dempsey and Korczyk are coming up short and I can't wait to have Pocock back and I don't think Fardy (even being old) should be left out even to the WC. Hanigan should be his apprentice. I mean look at how much value Samo added and he was older then Fardy. Kaino is still pretty old but he will still at least be a valuable squad member WC time.