Tri Nations - AUS v SAF 23rd July 2011.

[Tiger]

Don't like the idea of Higgers in the second row.

I think that if you're going for a 5/2 split it makes more sense to have a specialist openside on the bench rather than 2 x 6/8's. If it was a 4/3 bench I'd take Hodgson, if it was a 5/2 I'd take Higgers and Robinson.

Interested to see how McCalman does this weekend. He's got a great workrate but isn't bruising enough for my money but hope he proves me wrong.

 

[Godfrey]

I think the reason they are both on the bench is that Higgers will be coming on for McCalman sometime in the second half while Hodgson is there to cover potential injuries to Rocky, Cockers or McCalman/Higgers.

 

[Scotty]

The best reason I can see is that Higgers and Hodgson are going head to head for that bench spot along with Samo. Robbie is going to give them all a chance?

 

[fatprop]

I would be replacing McCalman and Rocky (he ain't fit enough for 80 minutes, let him do 60mins flat out) in the match

 

[Athilnaur]

Hodgson is 6, 7, 8 and Higgers is wing and if it came to it probably 4,5,6,8..

Fixed it for you

 

[Jets]

The only reason that Hodgson could be picked is to cover Pocock who is returning from injury. It would have made more sense in my eyes for Beau to be there.

In response to those that ask about state bias in the Wallaby selections I understand that it shouldn't exist if all teams were equal but if 2 teams made the finals, one of them winning the whole thing, and the other teams finished near the bottom of the table it is perfectly legitimate. I don't understand why there are so may Brumbies players in the starting team. If Deans wanted to build on the success of the Reds he is going about it the wrong way. He is building on the failings of the Brumbies and the failings of the Force.

 

[Scotty]

The success of the Reds was built on the back of an extremely high work rate pack, with brilliance from their playmakers.

Daly - High work rate but needs to improve in the scrum before being considered for another test match
Fa'ainga - He is on the bench, but see above in regards to getting a starting spot
Slipper - He would be in the team if he wasn't injured
Horwill - He is in the team and will make a big difference
Simmons - Can't say Robbie isn't rewarding his consistent performances. He is in the team despite many judging Sharpe better. He will be a work-aholic for the first 60, then get replaced by Sharpe.
Higginbotham - Robbie isn't ready to drop his captain just yet.
Robinson - No one in their right mind would play him before Pocock
Samo - High impact yes, but hardly high work rate, however I do think he should be on the bench.

So out of the possible Red forwards for the Wallabies, one is injured and the other is unlucky not to be on the bench.

Out of the possible Tah forwards for the Wallabies that are available, Baxter is the only one you could consider unlucky, considering how average Alexander has been.

However, if Alexander, Elsom and AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) all return to their top form, then we will all be hailing Deans as a magician.

 

[Scotty]

Fixed it for you

While some of the jokes of Higginbotham are warranted, I am surprised that everyone has forgotten how much time Elsom spends on the wing and at fullback. He certainly did a lot of ruck watching on the weekend, and he made a name for himself running wide in Ireland.

He isn't exactly the hard working in tight that many would have us believe.

 

[RugbyReg]

While some of the jokes of Higginbotham are warranted, I am surprised that everyone has forgotten how much time Elsom spends on the wing and at fullback. He certainly did a lot of ruck watching on the weekend, and he made a name for himself running wide in Ireland.

He isn't exactly the hard working in tight that many would have us believe.

From the weekend:

Higgers played 20 mins, made 3 runs (for 15m), made 3 tackles (no missed) and hit 3 rucks.

Rocky played 80 mins, made 5 runs (for 25m), made 5 tackles (1 missed) and hit 4 rucks.

Timani played 80 mins, made 4 runs (for 24m), made 4 tackles (1 missed) and hit 5 rucks.

Now obviously Higgers came on fresh, but its a disapointing workload from Rocky and Sitalecki.

 

[Ruggo]

From the weekend:

Higgers played 20 mins, made 3 runs (for 15m), made 3 tackles (no missed) and hit 3 rucks.

Rocky played 80 mins, made 5 runs (for 25m), made 5 tackles (1 missed) and hit 4 rucks.

Timani played 80 mins, made 4 runs (for 24m), made 4 tackles (1 missed) and hit 5 rucks.

Now obviously Higgers came on fresh, but its a disapointing workload from Rocky and Sitalecki.

That tells me Higgers was far more enthusiastic than our beloved skipper. In the context of that game, that is huge. Given how bad our forwards played, it would be fair to say that Rocky lead by example. I can not help but be inspired by a captain that hits a ruck on average once every 20 minutes. Forget the he is comming back from injury and is not fit excuse because that is the justification for not wanting him there in the first place.

An inform Rocky can justify his selection on his own merits. He should be playing shute shield building his fitness, form and maybe his confidence back and be in a genuine position to put his hand up for RWC selection. The deputy can captain the side through the tri nations (and RWC should Rocky not prove his worth). As it is, he is nothing more than a political selection and that is not doing the team any justice.

 

[Groucho]

The only reason that Hodgson could be picked is to cover Pocock who is returning from injury. It would have made more sense in my eyes for Beau to be there.

In response to those that ask about state bias in the Wallaby selections I understand that it shouldn't exist if all teams were equal but if 2 teams made the finals, one of them winning the whole thing, and the other teams finished near the bottom of the table it is perfectly legitimate. I don't understand why there are so may Brumbies players in the starting team. If Deans wanted to build on the success of the Reds he is going about it the wrong way. He is building on the failings of the Brumbies and the failings of the Force.

The Force played well this year. They were probably the second best Australian team, losing half a dozen games against higher ranked teams at the last gasp. Labeling them as failures because of their low chart position suggests you didn't watch them play.

 

[barbarian]

The Force played well this year. They were probably the second best Australian team, losing half a dozen games against higher ranked teams at the last gasp. Labeling them as failures because of their low chart position suggests you didn't watch them play.

Ummm....

No.

 

[Braveheart.]

The Force played well this year. They were probably the second best Australian team, losing half a dozen games against higher ranked teams at the last gasp. Labeling them as failures because of their low chart position suggests you didn't watch them play.

Are you serious? Second best Australian team? The ladder says different.

Can we all get over the apparent provincial biases going on in here? Why are there more Brumbies than Force? Why are the Reds under represented? Why are there so little Tahs?

WHO CARES THE SUPER 15 IS OVER!

The Reds won the Super 15 off the back of Genia & Cooper, the high work rate of their pack, and the unsung heroes in the backline adding defencive starch. They, collectively, played well. But being good at a provincial level does not necessarily translate to the test match arena.

You can see Dean's trying to emmulate to some degree the Red's team. The selection of the two centres is a prime example. He clearly wants two centres to work hard defensively and run strong hard lines in attack. This is similar to what Tapuai and Fa'ainga did for the Reds. BUT Dean's clearly sees more potential in AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and McCabe.

The Tah's ran into the semi's with 13 1st XV players out injured. Burgess, Horne, Mitchell, TPN and Fat Cat all would be in the or close to the starting 22 this week. It's clear why the Tah's are under represented - and that's because they're all injured!

The Force clearly had the best back row in the Australian conference (bar, maybe, the Reds - which seemed to be extremely well balanced) and thus they deserve their spots. I think a lot of the anti McCalman dribble on this forum is unwarranted. Yes, he lacks the brusing nature of Palu, but he does get through a mountain of work.

 

[mark_s]

From the weekend:

Higgers played 20 mins, made 3 runs (for 15m), made 3 tackles (no missed) and hit 3 rucks.

Rocky played 80 mins, made 5 runs (for 25m), made 5 tackles (1 missed) and hit 4 rucks.

Timani played 80 mins, made 4 runs (for 24m), made 4 tackles (1 missed) and hit 5 rucks.

Now obviously Higgers came on fresh, but its a disapointing workload from Rocky and Sitalecki.

I demand a recount, as Rocky and Sitaleki' stats are too awful to be true. What the hell were they doing? I guess Sita spent some time knocking the ball on. I don't understand the reluctance to Higgers, I am no reds fan but I thought he was strong this year.

 

[Athilnaur]

Deleted

 

[EVERYFWDTHINKTHEYREA6OR7]

I demand a recount, as Rocky and Sitaleki' stats are too awful to be true. What the hell were they doing? I guess Sita spent some time knocking the ball on. I don't understand the reluctance to Higgers, I am no reds fan but I thought he was strong this year.

I second that, but i fear that it is true however. Sita dropped the ball like 400 times too. That bloke has TERRIBLE hands.

 

[Jets]

The Force played well this year. They were probably the second best Australian team, losing half a dozen games against higher ranked teams at the last gasp. Labeling them as failures because of their low chart position suggests you didn't watch them play.

I didn't label them as failures. I said that they had failings that include not being able to finish off tight games. To say they were the second best Australian team is going a bit far.

 

[daz]

I call time for a group hug.


Ah...better now?

 

[Jets]

Are you serious? Second best Australian team? The ladder says different.

Can we all get over the apparent provincial biases going on in here? Why are there more Brumbies than Force? Why are the Reds under represented? Why are there so little Tahs?

WHO CARES THE SUPER 15 IS OVER!

The Reds won the Super 15 off the back of Genia & Cooper, the high work rate of their pack, and the unsung heroes in the backline adding defencive starch. They, collectively, played well. But being good at a provincial level does not necessarily translate to the test match arena.

You can see Dean's trying to emmulate to some degree the Red's team. The selection of the two centres is a prime example. He clearly wants two centres to work hard defensively and run strong hard lines in attack. This is similar to what Tapuai and Fa'ainga did for the Reds. BUT Dean's clearly sees more potential in AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and McCabe.

The Tah's ran into the semi's with 13 1st XV players out injured. Burgess, Horne, Mitchell, TPN and Fat Cat all would be in the or close to the starting 22 this week. It's clear why the Tah's are under represented - and that's because they're all injured!

The Force clearly had the best back row in the Australian conference (bar, maybe, the Reds - which seemed to be extremely well balanced) and thus they deserve their spots. I think a lot of the anti McCalman dribble on this forum is unwarranted. Yes, he lacks the brusing nature of Palu, but he does get through a mountain of work.

The Reds won off Genia and Cooper running the attack as well as a balanced backrow and great team defence. I don't want 22 Reds players picked but I feel that Samo, Higgers and Beau deserve more of a chance. I am just not sold on McCalman and Hodgson. Why have Hodgson on the bench when it's only to cover Pocock? Robinson deserves an opportunity. I do hope that McCalman has a big game this weekend otherwise he should be out of the 22 to play the AB's.

As for more Tah's in the team, yes please. I would love TPN, Mitchell, Benn Robo, Burgess and Palu to all be fit as they would be very close to being in the top 15 or 22. Horne I am still to be convinced but as there are no 13's in Australian rugby at the moment he may well be required. Part of the reason I would like these guys in the team is that they win more than they loose. These players should receive credit for how well their team did in Super Rugby.

 

[Braveheart.]

I call time for a group hug.


Ah...better now?

Only if we win this weekend... otherwise there may be some brawls on here judging by the last week.