The Wallabies Thread

[Braveheart81]

So if Foley goes down - KB (Kurtley Beale) moves to 10 and Hodge to 12? How long since KB (Kurtley Beale) has played 10 at test level? Why do we make 3 changes - possibly on the run? I think every other tier 1 nation carries a spare 10 who has been playing there because 3 changes to a backlit in a test probably is not the way to go. Still Foley is incredibly durable.

Hunt might be the guy to come into 12 now. Meakes is another option at 12 with Hodge remaining on the wing.

If you think your second best 10 is a guy somewhere else in the XV then it makes sense not to carry a backup 10 on the bench.

If Cooper is a couple of injuries outside the matchday 23 then it is reasonable for him not to be in a quad of 32 or thereabouts.

You can disagree with what Cheika thinks the pecking order of his 10s are but once he's come to the conclusion that Cooper is 4th in line, there's not a lot of point having him in the squad.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Hunt might be the guy to come into 12 now. Meakes is another option at 12 with Hodge remaining on the wing.

If you think your second best 10 is a guy somewhere else in the XV then it makes sense not to carry a backup 10 on the bench.

If Cooper is a couple of injuries outside the matchday 23 then it is reasonable for him not to be in a quad of 32 or thereabouts.

You can disagree with what Cheika thinks the pecking order of his 10s are but once he's come to the conclusion that Cooper is 4th in line, there's not a lot of point having him in the squad.

The answer to the primary question is 3 years and 2 months: how could Cheika possibly have a rational view about whether Beale is his 2nd best FH given that lapse in time? Hell QC (Quade Cooper) was in form back then and this kid form Queensland was at pre-school. The difficulty with my criticism is that its unlikely Foley will get injured so we'll never know.

 

[Braveheart81]

The answer to the primary question is 3 years and 2 months: how could Cheika possibly have a rational view about whether Beale is his 2nd best FH given that lapse in time? Hell QC (Quade Cooper) was in form back then and this kid form Queensland was at pre-school. The difficulty with my criticism is that its unlikely Foley will get injured so we'll never know.

I would assume that Foley isn't the only person in the squad who has run at 10 in training.

Beale stands at first receiver plenty in phase play in the tests and does more of the general play kicking than Foley.

I don't think Cheika is making the decision that Beale is his second choice 10 based on the last test match he played there.

 

[Derpus]

We can't even be sure Cheika has made that decision, we are speculating. Beale, as much as i rate him, has never once put in an above average game at 10. Never clicked in the spot for the Tahs and has only played a handful for the Wallabies.

He is significantly better suited to 12 or 15. If we lose Foley and shift Beale we are losing out in two positions rather than one.

 

[Braveheart81]

We can't even be sure Cheika has made that decision, we are speculating. Beale, as much as i rate him, has never once put in an above average game at 10. Never clicked in the spot for the Tahs and has only played a handful for the Wallabies.

He is significantly better suited to 12 or 15. If we lose Foley and shift Beale we are losing out in two positions rather than one.

He got the Waratahs to a Super Rugby final playing 10 as teenager and has had a couple of draws with the All Blacks.

I'd play him at 12 or 15 as well but I don't think deciding he is your reserve 10 in your matchday 23 is a crazy decision with the options available right now.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I don't think Cheika is making the decision that Beale is his second choice 10 based on the last test match he played there.

no. he wasn't playing there in the UK or for the Tahs so what else is there to base it on? Training? Meh. Thats part of the problem.

 

[Braveheart81]

no. he wasn't playing there in the UK or for the Tahs so what else is there to base it on? Training? Meh. Thats part of the problem.

I would say Beale's play in the test matches this season is terms of standing in at first receiver, kicking and organising the backline have given Cheika confidence that his decision makes sense if he had to move Beale to 10 in a game or select him in the 10 jersey if Foley was unavailable for a game.

 

[Up the Guts]

Cheika hasn't been helped in the whole 10 situation by the fact that we're lacking serious depth. Only real specialist alternatives to Foley are Lance who is going overseas and Cooper who's just never been able to sustain playing st his potential. What we'd do to have some 10s as good as NZ's fourth or fifth pick.

 

[RoffsChoice]

This story about Peyton Manning seems to apply to Foley too:
"As we watched, we were surprised to see Manning taking virtually all the reps in the session. Jon [Gruden] asked Tom [Moore, the Colts offensive coordinator,] why he wasn’t giving some snaps to Peyton’s backups…He looked at us both in the eye, paused for a moment, then said in that gravelly voice of his, “Fellas, if ‘18’ goes down, we’re fucked. And we don’t practice fucked.”

 

[dru]

This story about Peyton Manning seems to apply to Foley too:
"As we watched, we were surprised to see Manning taking virtually all the reps in the session. Jon [Gruden] asked Tom [Moore, the Colts offensive coordinator,] why he wasn’t giving some snaps to Peyton’s backups…He looked at us both in the eye, paused for a moment, then said in that gravelly voice of his, “Fellas, if ‘18’ goes down, we’re fucked. And we don’t practice fucked.”

And yet strangely enough that is exactly what he was doing.

 

[cyclopath]

Holy shit, sorry that was a wall of text.

Tldr: no, you guys from NSW need to realise that the coaching team sucks a bit.

Yeah, thanks for the broad sweep. Shit post really.

 

[jimmydubs]

Kerevi can't even defend the 13 channel mate, his preferred position.

It kinda fits. Grey can't coach Defence, his preferred speciality.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I don't particularly like the two No 10s playing at the same time, based on the experience of To'omua and Lealiifano both starting at the Brumbies in 10 and 12, and both being the nominal replacement for the other. The Foley/Beale situation is much the same. If one goes down, then the other shifts in and a reserve for the second spot comes on. As pointed out by others (Derpus?) this weakens both positions and also weakens the structures the team is playing to. And if both go down, then there is also a hole to the next best in one of the spots as it probably won't be someone who has been getting game time in most match day 23s.

I thought then it was a mistake by the Brumbies. and I think now it is a mistake by the Wallabies. Foley should be the No 10 and Beale the No 12. If one goes down, a nominated other replacement should be used rather than weakening the two positions.

Just my opinion.

 

[Slim 293]

I guess Dan Palmer wasn't too busy after all..........

One-Test prop Dan Palmer is poised to become the Wallabies' scrum coach on the spring tour just three years after retiring from professional rugby and dropping 20 kilograms from his front-row frame.

Fairfax Media can reveal former Brumbies prop Palmer has joined the Wallabies camp on the Gold Coast in advance of the third Bledisloe Cup match on Saturday night.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...abies-camp-on-gold-coast-20171017-gz2elz.html

 

[TSR]

This story about Peyton Manning seems to apply to Foley too:
"As we watched, we were surprised to see Manning taking virtually all the reps in the session. Jon [Gruden] asked Tom [Moore, the Colts offensive coordinator,] why he wasn’t giving some snaps to Peyton’s backups…He looked at us both in the eye, paused for a moment, then said in that gravelly voice of his, “Fellas, if ‘18’ goes down, we’re fucked. And we don’t practice fucked.”

I am mindful that whoever this guy he is probably paid 50 times what I am. But that must be one of the dumbest things I have ever heard from a coach. I don’t like our contingency, so we’re just no going to have one????

With regards to the option of Beale playing 10 I wouldn’t like it as a long term option, but it appears to be Cheika’s best of a bad bunch of options choice. If he has to fill in for part of a game or even a game or two I am okay with it. I know others don’t agree, but IMO there is nothing Foley does at 10 that Beale isn’t capable of. The big issue is that Beale tends to drift out, whereas one of Foley’s real strengths is running square. But it is conceivable that this can be addressed through training.

The reality is whatever people’s thoughts on Foley at present any of the alternatives come with their own issues.

 

[RoffsChoice]

To be fair, it's not that Beale can't play at 10. We've started him there against the All Blacks three times and come away with two draws, he played well in the role on the EoYT in 2012, and I have no doubt that Cheika is giving him extra training for the role with that in mind.

That said, we have other 10s, and should be considering them instead of the idea of moving our best 12 to 10.

 

[dillyboy]

I am sure Quade has been made well aware of what he has to work on

Sign for the 'tahs???

 

[mst]

I guess Dan Palmer wasn't too busy after all....



http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...abies-camp-on-gold-coast-20171017-gz2elz.html

So, bit of a funny story with this and the Mst's.

Post Vikings game Mr Mst was having a chat to the CBR Vikings scrum coach, Ruaidhri Murphy (Rory) after the game on Sunday (with a Dan Palmer within earshot) and I was talking with him (Rory) about the good job he was doing and joked with him that if he could convince Palmer to go off to the Wallabies it might open up an opportunity at the Brumbies for him............

 

[fatprop]

I don't particularly like the two No 10s playing at the same time, based on the experience of To'omua and Lealiifano both starting at the Brumbies in 10 and 12, and both being the nominal replacement for the other. The Foley/Beale situation is much the same. If one goes down, then the other shifts in and a reserve for the second spot comes on. As pointed out by others (Derpus?) this weakens both positions and also weakens the structures the team is playing to. And if both go down, then there is also a hole to the next best in one of the spots as it probably won't be someone who has been getting game time in most match day 23s.

I thought then it was a mistake by the Brumbies. and I think now it is a mistake by the Wallabies. Foley should be the No 10 and Beale the No 12. If one goes down, a nominated other replacement should be used rather than weakening the two positions.

Just my opinion.

With a "2nd 5" playing at 12, Foley can play flatter, squarer and take on the line because Beale effortlessly slots into 10 on the next phase.

Play a 12 without that skillset and you lose one of Foley's core skills of keeping the defense more honest and not drifting. And when they do drift, he dummies and makes yards.

You may dislike the approach, but it works and is very effective. We aren't the only side in the world that uses it

 

[Brumby Runner]

With a "2nd 5" playing at 12, Foley can play flatter, squarer and take on the line because Beale effortlessly slots into 10 on the next phase.

Play a 12 without that skillset and you lose one of Foley's core skills of keeping the defense more honest and not drifting. And when they do drift, he dummies and makes yards.

You may dislike the approach, but it works and is very effective. We aren't the only side in the world that uses it

My point was that I dislike having the starting No 12 being the backup No 10. I am not saying Beale shouldn't be starting at No 12 and he certainly does seem to have a positive effect on the way Foley plays. I am saying that there should be another back up No 10 who can slot in if Foley goes down so that Beale doesn't have to shift and then be replaced himself. One change is better than having to make two.