TYS Oz Player of the Year: v NZ (Hong Kong)

[RugbyReg]

Ok, as suggested previously, this is our answer to the John Eales medal. It'll probably end up more prestigious, so make it count.

Just give us your 3-2-1's for the test (Wallaby players only), I'll keep a track and come the end of next years domestic series we'll name the official TYS Wallaby Player of the Year.

Mine:

3 George Smith
2 Benn Robinson
1 Dean Mumm

Happy with most of the forwards (except Sharpe and that bloody pass to Gits). Throw in Burgess and Gits too I guess. The rest of the backs in patches.

Yours?

 

[naza]

3 Burgess
2 Mitchell
1 Mumm

Forwards were solid enough with nobody really standing out. Good to see a Wallaby blindside who isn't a seagulling show pony.

Mitchell's finishing is stuff CostaLote can only dream of. Burgess, with half a dozen tests under his belt, is suddenly the Wallabies most important player.

 

[Pfitzy]

3 Burgess
2 Robinson
1 Smith

One thing about our breakdown work - we got hammered by the ref (unfairly, just like the scrum) but we weren't smart enough to back off and try a new angle. This is what separates McCaw from Smith IMHO - reading the ref instead of just trying to make him read us. For the record I thought Smith was slightly better than McCaw on the night, but Burgess and Robinson have proved they both are the best in their positions for now.

 

[Sully]

burgess
mumm
morty

 

[ben]

3 George Smith
2 Benn Robinson
1 Luke Burgess

 

[naza]

Are people ranking George Smith highly out of habit ? I thought he had an underwhelming game, spending too much time in the backline, and that Richie Brown was more hardnosed on the ball than Smithy. Not up to his usual standard.

 

[disco]

3.Ben Robinson
2.Richard Brown
1.Luke Burgess

Nobody played exceptionally poor last night except the ref but it was typical Wallabies last night, score two really good tries with good lead up work & then let the AB's stroll in with simple numbers play.

I was going to give Giteau a point but why he ran in off the wing to let McCaw score I'll never know.

Giteau was very dangerous ball in hand last night & made a couple of nice half breaks.

Special mention for Drew Mitchell, George Smith & Dean Mumm.

 

[RugbyReg]

Naza, Smith is (and was last night) our most agressive forward. Both with ball and without. Sure his highlights were the deft touches with the ball but he is also our best forward runner since Kefu. He was just as busy at the breakdown as McCaw.

As for Brown he was busy. But let's not overhype him. I thought he was weak in the tackle (fell off a few) and the 'spin and win' move he puts on won't last long.

When I talk agression too, you watch the ABs and when they clear out. That physically man handle the opposition away. None of our forwards do that, with Smith the exception, IMHO.

 

[disco]

As for Brown he was busy. But let's not overhype him. I thought he was weak in the tackle (fell off a few) and the 'spin and win' move he puts on won't last long.

When Palu is fit I think Brown should start & Palu should play the last 30 off the bench I would love to see Cliffy running at tired opposition defences at the end of a game.

I think Palu's ball running was really missed last night if he had come on fresh in the last 20 minutes he would of made a huge difference.

 

[Scarfman]

Ok, I'm doing this without looking at all the posts above.

Um, let's see.

Front row played pretty well. Got penalised, but not their fault.
Lineout? Average.
Ruck? Got smashed off the ball when we weren't getting penalised off the park.
Inside backs? Probably the most penetrating area in attack. not bad, with Rodney and Richie all over it.
Outside backs? Ran straight, found holes, kicked poorly.

I guess:

3. Robinson
2. Hynes
1. Moore

EDIT: Just read all the above and forgot about the halfback.

3. Burgess
2. Robinson
1. Hynes

 

[naza]

When I talk agression too, you watch the ABs and when they clear out. That physically man handle the opposition away. None of our forwards do that, with Smith the exception, IMHO.

Fair point, its just that he wasn't up to his usual standard for mine.

Our problem at the breakdown is everyone thinks they are a pilferer. We need to imitate the Kiwis and drive OVER the ball.

As a ball runner he has nothing on Palu, who as disco points out, would have given us some much needed momentum. Instead Mortlock was our go-forward option.

 

[naza]

3. Robinson
2. Moore
1. Hynes

:lmao: :lmao: Hynes ? Hynes ?

That'll do me. Why do you think everyone kicks to Hynes ? He's Australia's answer to Caleb Ralph.

 

[Sully]

3. Robinson
2. Moore
1. Hynes

:lmao: :lmao: Hynes ? Hynes ?

That'll do me. Why do you think everyone kicks to Hynes ? He's Australia's answer to Caleb Ralph.

and how many did he drop?

 

[Scarfman]

3 Burgess
2 Mitchell
1 Mumm

Forwards were solid enough with nobody really standing out. Good to see a Wallaby blindside who isn't a seagulling show pony.

Mitchell's finishing is stuff CostaLote can only dream of. Burgess, with half a dozen tests under his belt, is suddenly the Wallabies most important player.

Oh no, not another naza thrashwank. So now we have FOUR players who will be world beaters each and every week: Moore, Palu, Burgess and now Mitchell. Well, if your idea of the best back is a guy who can't hold onto the ball in contact, and will kick or pass 9 times out of 10 rather than be tackled, that's up to you.

 

[naza]

3. Robinson
2. Moore
1. Hynes

:lmao: :lmao: Hynes ? Hynes ?

That'll do me. Why do you think everyone kicks to Hynes ? He's Australia's answer to Caleb Ralph.

and how many did he drop?

How many breaks did he make ?

Even he knows how shit he is - he constantly looked to pass instead of taking on the defence. His days are numbered.

 

[cyclopath]

Burgess, Robbo, Moore. Maybe not that exact order, but close.
Hynes? Sorry, pretty one-dimensional I thought. Ball security was an issue with several backs.
Thought Mumm was good - a bit invisible just doing the proper stuff.

 

[naza]

Burgess, Robbo, Moore. Maybe not that exact order, but close.
Hynes? Sorry, pretty one-dimensional I thought. Ball security was an issue with several backs.
Thought Mumm was good - a bit invisible just doing the proper stuff.

I feel completely vindicated in campaigning for Mumm for 6.

I'm a huge Moore fan but I thought he could have been smarter in handling the ref and his lineout throwing was a bit rusty.

 

[cyclopath]

Burgess, Robbo, Moore. Maybe not that exact order, but close.
Hynes? Sorry, pretty one-dimensional I thought. Ball security was an issue with several backs.
Thought Mumm was good - a bit invisible just doing the proper stuff.

I feel completely vindicated in campaigning for Mumm for 6.

I'm a huge Moore fan but I thought he could have been smarter in handling the ref and his lineout throwing was a bit rusty.

Really, you a Moore fan? Me too actually. He isn't too clever though, and seems to have the unhappy knack of being spotted in all the wrong places.

 

[Scarfman]

You Mumm lovers (I could phrase that differently) should think about the Wallabies getting smashed off the ball at the ruck. I like Mumm and Brown, and hope that they can keep improving as they have. But they lost the fight pretty badly.

 

[naza]

You Mumm lovers (I could phrase that differently) should think about the Wallabies getting smashed off the ball at the ruck. I like Mumm and Brown, and hope that they can keep improving as they have. But they lost the fight pretty badly.

The ruck isn't just about loose forwards.