Wallabies 2020
- Thread starter A mutterer
- Start date
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
Holy crap
just shows that no value in this country is placed on tight forwards. Rugby AU really was fast asleep on the job.
KOB1987
John Eales (66)
that's fair but the general consensus here is he isn't a 6. He's much better suited at lock and has been going well there for the Reds this year.
KOB1987
John Eales (66)
more to the point a lot of value is placed on big units up north.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Not true - we just get priced out for the most part.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
The Saracens lineout has been just fine. Dominating and fine. Skelton is a walk into the Wallabies if there is a way to pick him. His form in the UK has been world class for multiple seasons. He has trimmed down and takes ball at 2.
Skelton and Rodda start, Arnold off the bench. Rodda more than athletic enough in that combination. That is the best option in my book. Pick a 6 and 8 that can secure lineout ball. No more unbalanced back row nonsense.
The 6 should be that. A real 6. I don't think Rennie will try any weird combinations.
Rodda is the first one of that entire group to leave whilst on a big contract (albeit receiving greatly reduced pay due to COVID-19).
Adam Coleman was somewhere in between. He would have just finished a decent contract and was presumably in line for another but got a huge offer from the UK.
All the rest were lower in the pecking order and the way Australian Rugby finances work is that if you aren't the starting option but aren't a lot worse, there is a huge discrepancy in earnings and you could do much better overseas.
A couple of them left when they would have been on the cusp of signing a big contract if they stayed (most notably Rory Arnold).
Adam Coleman was somewhere in between. He would have just finished a decent contract and was presumably in line for another but got a huge offer from the UK.
All the rest were lower in the pecking order and the way Australian Rugby finances work is that if you aren't the starting option but aren't a lot worse, there is a huge discrepancy in earnings and you could do much better overseas.
A couple of them left when they would have been on the cusp of signing a big contract if they stayed (most notably Rory Arnold).
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
Yeah - about half of those guys weren’t the sort of test locks that we needed to knock ourselves over to
keep.
And, based on what I keep reading about Skelton on here the best thing he did for his development was go to Europe. He may or may not ever feature for the Wallabies again but he certainly wasn’t the top level lock before he left that he seems to have become (not necessarily his fault though).
keep.
And, based on what I keep reading about Skelton on here the best thing he did for his development was go to Europe. He may or may not ever feature for the Wallabies again but he certainly wasn’t the top level lock before he left that he seems to have become (not necessarily his fault though).
upthereds#!
Peter Johnson (47)
With bigger backrowers with more running power then Cheika picked (Who insisted going with Hanigan and Dempsey), MAYBE we don't NEED the power of Skelton - but dang it would be pretty usefull
If you had Rodda and Arnold start as locks you would need a 6/8 combo featuring 2 of Valetini/Wilson/Naisarani.
It's a tough one. We need locks to get through the next year or 2 whilst the new crop develop. But saying that, the new crop will be SO young still come 2023. Hosea, Blyth, Frost - still be early 20's which is just NOT experienced/aged enough to be our core. They will star in 2027. For 2023, guys like Skelton and potentially Coleman and obviously Rodda and LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) will be in the prime of their tight forward careers.
If you had Rodda and Arnold start as locks you would need a 6/8 combo featuring 2 of Valetini/Wilson/Naisarani.
It's a tough one. We need locks to get through the next year or 2 whilst the new crop develop. But saying that, the new crop will be SO young still come 2023. Hosea, Blyth, Frost - still be early 20's which is just NOT experienced/aged enough to be our core. They will star in 2027. For 2023, guys like Skelton and potentially Coleman and obviously Rodda and LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) will be in the prime of their tight forward careers.
In fairness to Cheika, none of the potential 6s and 8s were really options when Cheika was coach except Naisarani who basically started every game once he was eligible.
upthereds#!
Peter Johnson (47)
Oh I know - i'm thinking more along the lines of the player pofile combinations. Cheika, who always wanted a power game, kept picking weird combos.
He would Start Simmons and Rodda, with Hanigan at 6, then ask Higgers to be the power 8, when everyone knows Higs strength was a a dynamic, wide channel 8/6. That means you need 1 or 2 meatbags at the coalface. None of what Hanigan, Simmons and Rodda are. Then he drops Higs and keeps Hanigan.
I mean cmon..Balance is essential and I'm sure Rennie will have the player profile combinations right, though he choices at lock are limited as it stands.
The Tahs had it good when the won, so did the reds. Set piece gurus, workrate grinders, hit men and dynamic runners.
Brumbieman
Dick Tooth (41)
Fardy went alright, and gave us a proper 3rd lineout option, so that the Pooper actually worked....
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
The story I got (third hand - so feel free to dismiss as idle gossip) was that after a test Higgers felt his post game review didn’t align with the role he was assigned and the coaching staff unfairly criticised him. The next test, Higgers adjusted his game based on the feedback but was assessed against different requirements again. So he told Cheika he wasn’t being treated fairly and that he played favourites with his players and allowed some far more latitude then others. From that time on Higgers was surplus to requirements.
That obviously came from someone who was a friend of Scott’s but I do recall that in two of Higgers last 3 tests he received votes on here as one of the best on ground and one of those games, from memory, he played a much tighter game then normally.
Sorry - a bit off topic from the Wallabies 2020 but I always thought it said a lot about what was going on in the background at the Wallabies (assuming you believe there is a reasonable level of accuracy in the story).
Mods - feel free to delete if you don’t want this all being RE-hashed.
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
Yeah - but my reference to ‘work horse’ isn’t meant to disparage the efforts of the guys who don’t fill that role.
I 100% agree that the work rate from Nasirani and Hooper is absolutely first rate. But they are both ball runners - Nasirani in the middle and Hooper on the edge. It doesn’t mean they can’t or won’t clean out - they both will - but hitting rucks isn’t their primary role. It’s not the role Wilson plays either and, to be honest, you’d waste him playing that role.
I think it’ll be especially important if Salakaia-Loto is one of the locks as I’d guess they will try and run him in the wider channels in attack at least where he is very effective in attack.
Certainly WrIght can fill that role. And many see it as a strength of Valetini’s game as well.
upthereds#!
Peter Johnson (47)
Set piece gurus, workrate grinders, hit men and dynamic runners.
I agree. Guys who make alot of tackles, get to alot of breakdowns, alot of the unsexy work. Guys who do that but won't necessarily make the dynamic runs or the bone shattering hits. Workrate > Impact. But in the last couple of years, we have been missing the guys with the dynamic runs and bone shattering hits! We need 1 or 2 where Impact > Workrate
It's easy to say 'we need a workhorse, not a power runner' but realistically that type of player just doesn't cut it at Test level any more. Ned Hanigan was that player - led tackle and ruck stats, got around the park OK but lacked the physicality with ball in hand.
Fardy is unfairly maligned as a 'workhorse' when his ball-running was actually bloody good and he had the pilfering ability of a 7. I think Valetini is the bloke who reminds me the most of him at the moment - doesn't take 20 carries a game, but when he does he is dynamic and physical. He also hits rucks, makes tackles, jumps in the lineout, and doesn't give away mindless penalties.
.
Fardy is unfairly maligned as a 'workhorse' when his ball-running was actually bloody good and he had the pilfering ability of a 7. I think Valetini is the bloke who reminds me the most of him at the moment - doesn't take 20 carries a game, but when he does he is dynamic and physical. He also hits rucks, makes tackles, jumps in the lineout, and doesn't give away mindless penalties.
.
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
I disagree with your first comment. Workhorse are very prolific at test level - but they need to have the physicality to match the role. It is essentially just he reverse of my comment above. Just because a guy is picked for his primary focus on shifting bodies at rucks doesn't mean he isn't expected to take the occasional hit up and or play his role in support.
I don't think Fardy was maligned at all (certainly not on here). The beauty of his game was that he has very capable of those other parts of the game whilst still getting through a mountain of work doing his core role. It's the reason he left such a hole when he left.
Ned was unfortunately picked too early. He may still get there because, despite being commonly derided due to his lack of physicality he actually has a lot of the characteristics that would be great for the role - big motor, high work rate, great in the lineout. But he needs to be able to shift bodies at the break down, not just make it there.
Modern test football players need to have as many strings to their bow as possible, but there is still a big place for those couple of locks and back rowers who play a really basic game, but do lots of grunt work and do it well.
I don't think Fardy was maligned at all (certainly not on here). The beauty of his game was that he has very capable of those other parts of the game whilst still getting through a mountain of work doing his core role. It's the reason he left such a hole when he left.
Ned was unfortunately picked too early. He may still get there because, despite being commonly derided due to his lack of physicality he actually has a lot of the characteristics that would be great for the role - big motor, high work rate, great in the lineout. But he needs to be able to shift bodies at the break down, not just make it there.
Modern test football players need to have as many strings to their bow as possible, but there is still a big place for those couple of locks and back rowers who play a really basic game, but do lots of grunt work and do it well.