Wallabies 2019 Thread

[Derpus]

Interesting Pocock is nowhere to be seen.

 

[fatprop]

I wonder if Ned got called in. Would’ve thought we have some good alternatives.

If he keeps up his efforts of Saturday night (and this year IMHO) he will be. Added physicality with a strong workrate and a being dominant lineout boss is a compelling mix, especially when Samu, Pocock & Hooper will be in the selectors consideration

 

[Braveheart81]

Did Meakes get a call up to this Wallabies mini-camp?

I wonder if Ned got called in. Would’ve thought we have some good alternatives.

I think it's pretty safe to assume that incumbent squad members are all involved so that includes Meakes and Hanigan.

 

[Derpus]

Both Hanigan and Meakes deserve a call-up at this point.

 

[Up the Guts]

We’re building a bit of sneaky depth at 6 with Samu (probably the best Australian Super Rugby player thus far bar Genia), Valetini, Jones, and even Ned (who I ragged on the last few weeks, definitely proved me wrong on Saturday).

 

[wamberal]

Sorovi?????? I thought he was absolutely dreadful on Saturday.

 

[Derpus]

McCaffrey and Naisarani should offer us some real options at 8 as well.

Hopefully this puts an end to the situation where our two best backrowers by leagues are sevens.

 

[Braveheart81]

McCaffrey and Naisarani should offer us some real options at 8 as well.

Hopefully this puts an end to the situation where our two best backrowers by leagues are sevens.

I still don't think McCaffrey will be there. He started last season with a bang too and fizzled out.

I think Dempsey and Naisarani are far more likely.

 

[barbarian]

Yeah we certainly look far more balanced. A few bigger ballrunners, a few lineout/workhorse types, and a guy like Dempsey who could play both roles if needed.

I'd still put money on Cheika playing the Pooper in the World Cup though. Something about sticking with the formula that has worked for you in the past, etc etc.

Hooper/Pocock/Naisirani might hurt our lineout but it's certainly a mobile backrow with great ball-running capability.
.

 

[Up the Guts]

Forgot Dempsey in my list of guys at 6.

 

[Derpus]

Yeah we certainly look far more balanced. A few bigger ballrunners, a few lineout/workhorse types, and a guy like Dempsey who could play both roles if needed.

I'd still put money on Cheika playing the Pooper in the World Cup though. Something about sticking with the formula that has worked for you in the past, etc etc.

Hooper/Pocock/Naisirani might hurt our lineout but it's certainly a mobile backrow with great ball-running capability.
.

It worked for probably 4-5 games, let's be honest. By the final the Kiwis had already nullified it.

I was not too unhappy with their continued selection due to the dearth of other options, but now that we have a few options it ought to be shelved.

Based on last year, we can not afford to weaken our lineout.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

After watching both Australian games this weekend there is no possible way you could not select both Pocock and Hooper. They are by far and away our best players. Backrow balance is great however not when there is such a step down to the next level of player.

 

[Up the Guts]

Samu should be at least a sub based on his form. Where do we play him when he comes on?

 

[barbarian]

It worked for probably 4-5 games, let's be honest. By the final the Kiwis had already nullified it.
.

To be clear, I wasn't advocating for it, just saying that I think Cheika will do it.

The Kiwis nullified it, though I'd argue that it was still our best option at the time. We've lost plenty of games with the Pooper, but in the vast majority of cases they've been keeping us in the game, rather than hurting us.
.

 

[Derpus]

After watching both Australian games this weekend there is no possible way you could not select both Pocock and Hooper. They are by far and away our best players. Backrow balance is great however not when there is such a step down to the next level of player.

I think there is a fairly compelling argument that the whole is less than the sum of its parts with those two.

Why shouldn't we go with Pocock/Naisarani/Hanigan which covers a lot of bases. Pocock is fairly mobile, great over the ball etc. Naisarani has huge work rate and can carry strongly, Hanigan has huge workrate, is improving his physicality and is gun in the lineout.

Any combination of Hooper/Samu/Dempsey/Jones/McCaffrey/Valetini off the bench. Hooper can provide a similar burst of energy that Savea does for the Darkness.

 

[Derpus]

To be clear, I wasn't advocating for it, just saying that I think Cheika will do it.

The Kiwis nullified it, though I'd argue that it was still our best option at the time. We've lost plenty of games with the Pooper, but in the vast majority of cases they've been keeping us in the game, rather than hurting us.
.

Yeah as i said i never had a real problem with it as it was our best option. I'm not sure it is anymore.

 

[Braveheart81]

The Kiwis nullified it, though I'd argue that it was still our best option at the time. We've lost plenty of games with the Pooper, but in the vast majority of cases they've been keeping us in the game, rather than hurting us.
.

I find the whole "opposition nullified it" narrative strange. It's coming at it from the angle that we're playing a completely different game plan devised around those two players when the reality is we're not really trying to do anything different to when we have different personnel.

Ultimately it's about trying to pick our 4 best backrowers and working out which 3 should start and which 3 should finish. The number of people critical to playing both Pocock and Hooper almost all advocate for having Hooper on the bench and playing both of them together for 30 minutes but seem to think it's disastrous if they play together for 80.

I also question who of the two can be a bigger impact player. I would have thought a fresh Pocock is more likely to have a higher turnover rate playing against tired players in the last half hour if he is fresh than in the first half hour when everyone is fresh.

Likewise is Hooper's ability really as a high impact player or is it his ability to go at a very high pace for 80 minutes?

 

[Derpus]

^^^^
I suppose when you say that the Kiwi's nullified the 'Pooper' they just figured out how to stop Pocock from getting as many turnovers as he ordinarily would with that double cleanout bullshit.

 

[barbarian]

I think besides the backrow the other area of interest for the Wallabies is the centres.

We ended the season with Foley at 12 and Kerevi at 13, outside of To'omua at 10.

We also played variations that included To'omua and Beale at 12, and Hodge and Folau at 13. Kuridrani would have had a run if it weren't for injury, you would assume.

This season we have a few more options at the present time. Karmichael Hunt, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), Jordan Petaia (doubtful now), Billy Meakes have all put in decent turns so far this season.

I'd suggest the 12 battle may end up between To'omua, Beale, Meakes, Kerevi and Hunt.

13 is pretty open too, and I'd nominate the chances as Kerevi, Kuridrani, Hodge, Hunt and AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper).

I wonder what Wessels will do with To'omua once he returns, as that may shape Meakes' chances in particular.

At the moment I'm fond of a 12. To'omua 13. Kerevi combination, but it's so open and plenty will happen in the next few months.
.

 

[Derpus]

I reckon it depends who's at 10. If it's Foley i think it's dead certain Cheika will opt for a second playmaker being Beale or To'omua (Meakes an outside shot).

If it's Quade he might be more inclined to try two running centres i.e. Kerevi and TK.

Regardless of what happens at 10 & 12 i don't think anyone will displace TK at 13.