Wallabies 2020

[molman]

Not sure who was responsible for implementing the change, but the U18’s was more than just allowing 18 year olds who were out of school play .

RA controlled the whole pathway through the Academies. Each Super franchise + WA ran an U18 squad for fairly large chunks of the year and then played games over a 3 month period.

Every lad in the U18 Australian team that beat NZ came from an Academy. Peter Hewitt , with Super Rugby coaching experience, appointed as HC and Jason Gilmore ran shotgun. Gilmore spent the whole time with them from the team being announced right through to running the kicking tee on against NZ .

Scot Johnson even flew back from Japan to be there for the game against NZ .

Gives you some perspective hopefully on how highly RA are valuing the pathway.

It leaves me with some optimisim that they are making positive changes. It does seem that they are still benefiting from some particularly good talent at the moment irrespective of the RA changes.

Peter Hewitt I think is one to watch for the future. He's slowly developing his coaching credentials.

 

[Spruce Moose]

Cue World Rugby tightening the Test Window criteria to make sure NH pro comps aren't affected too much.

That will hurt the home nations and South Africa far too much to fly. Tests are still a huge bread winner for RFU etc.

 

[molman]

I get what you’re saying - but I doubt that will be the net outcome.

I concur. I think any changes in this area need to be managed very carefully and within the context of what the Super Rugby comp might look like in the future. There is also practical constraints to consider. The amount of time in camp teams like England, Japan etc.. had is just not viable with internationally based players, so there are also disadvantages to such an approach. I can see some form of accomadation perhaps for the RWC being worth some thought. For non RWC years.. I'm less sure.

 

[upthereds#!]

I feel we are thin at 12 too. Unless JOC (James O'Connor) plays there and performs well. Who else is there but rookies?

Will be interesting to see how the recent league converts come across (Moeroa & Kata), coz apart from Simone, there really isn't anyone close to being a 12 contender, though Foketi is a likely starter for the Tahs and captained Sydney @ 12.


Reality, as sad as it is, is that in 2020 and probs 2021, we still call upon foley as a 10 with someone like Deegan (keeping in mind you usually have 3 options with To'omua) until a youngster like Harrison, matures by 2022 for a run at 2023 WC. In That case, To'omua and JOC (James O'Connor) are main 12's,

(2020)
Hk: Fainga'a, Uelese, Mafi?
Prop: Sio, Ala'alatoa, Slipper, Thor, Robertson
Lk: Simmons, Rodda, LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto), Hockings/Philips/Jones?
BR: Wright, Hoops, Valetini, Naisarani, Dempsey
hb: White, Powell, Mcdermott
fh: Foley, Deegan
Centres: To'omua, JOC (James O'Connor), Petaia, TK
OB: Beale, Banks, Maddocks, DHP, Koroibete

P.S Also think we really need to see Vunivalu at the Tahs.

 

[molman]

Not sure who will end up coaching but the talent is certainly there to build through this next RWC cycle.
I would imagine that developing a couple of decent test 10s will be a priority.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/.0/news-story/6ee5575432c05f42354410a43c7e5e7e

I'm really keen to see how Harry Wilson goes next year. He's been great to watch in the NRC.

 

[Lorenzo]

I reckon opening up selection to anyone is inevitable and positive.

For one thing, it would increase the number of test eligible Australians playing legit pro rugby. There are 92 (4 * 23) match day spots in Super Rugby. If a bunch of players go OS because the selection criteria constraint was holding them back, then their old Super Rugby spots are up for grabs (for the next best guys, guys in NRC or whatever). For mine, that is a good thing. We now have more eligible players playing pro rugby. We go on about lack of depth, but we only have 92 match day spots. And the national side needs 23. That's not a great ratio. England has 12 top tier sides. France 14. Saffas will pick from anywhere. NZ has 5 plus the NPC, which is basically Super Rugby standard anyway. Wales have a complicated system that is a bit of a hybrid.

It would also take some pressure off RA's finances.

At least when it comes to Europe, it might actually benefit some of our guys to play in the NH leagues so they can broaden their rugby experiences a bit.

 

[Show-n-go]

I reckon opening up selection to anyone is inevitable and positive.

For one thing, it would increase the number of test eligible Australians playing legit pro rugby. There are 92 (4 * 23) match day spots in Super Rugby. If a bunch of players go OS because the selection criteria constraint was holding them back, then their old Super Rugby spots are up for grabs (for the next best guys, guys in NRC or whatever). For mine, that is a good thing. We now have more eligible players playing pro rugby. We go on about lack of depth, but we only have 92 match day spots. And the national side needs 23. That's not a great ratio. England has 12 top tier sides. France 14. Saffas will pick from anywhere. NZ has 5 plus the NPC, which is basically Super Rugby standard anyway. Wales have a complicated system that is a bit of a hybrid.

It would also take some pressure off RA's finances.

At least when it comes to Europe, it might actually benefit some of our guys to play in the NH leagues so they can broaden their rugby experiences a bit.

I think it would increase the Aus super team finances though, I believe there would be an influx of NRL players. The state unions arent interested in fostering large portions of squads that will be ameatuer or semi-pro athletes with what I imagine would be a high turnover rate. They have stakeholders and fans to impress, they would need ready made pro athletes eg NRL players, which will cost them more than a dirt tracker union player

 

[Lorenzo]

Subject of course to what happens with Super Rugby, I don't think opening it up would have that effect. We aren't talking about 100 players here. There's only so many Japanese / English / French jobs going because they cap their foreign player numbers. I definitely don't think it would warrant poaching NRL players. Didn't we set up the NRC for pretty much this reason? To expand our pool of talent to feed full-time pro rugby jobs?

 

[Dctarget]

What about K. Hunt?

 

[dru]

What about K. Hunt?

Interesting. He was building some form last season too.

 

[Viking]

What about K. Hunt?

He's already 32. Doubt he will make it the next RWC. At his age his form will have to be superb to warrant selection (it has only been solid without being outstanding), otherwise your better off developing younger players.

 

[Lorenzo]

Ive no view on hunt, but are we seriously still hyperfocused on the RWC? Sacrificing 4 years for the RWC seems foolish when you only need one bad game to ruin it.

I don't agree that Hunt should need to be superb simply because of his age. He should simply be the best. There's 4 years to go, for one thing, and don't we kinda wanna with that bledisloe cup, too?

Identifying who is the best, is another thing lol

 

[barbarian]

My worry with the Giteau law is what it means for our Super teams.

At present, playing in Europe is pretty appealing. You can earn good coin, have a great life experience and it could even help your rugby. But it means you can't play for the Wallabies, which is a pretty big draw for a great portion of our local players.

Now if we remove that one drawback, if you were a guy like Fraser McReight, what's to stop you from accepting a big overseas offer? You can have all the above experiences, AND still play for the Wallabies. It's pretty appealing.

It's hard to see how relaxing the Law wouldn't lead to more of our players leaving. Yes, we can be savvy with our contracting and it wouldn't necessarily be a mass exodus, but our Super sides are hanging on by a thread as it is.

So it likely leads to poorer Super performance. Which in itself makes local teams less appealing for local players, which leads more to accept overseas offers.

Now I haven't studied it in great detail, but on the face of it I can't see how removing the Law makes much sense. Dropping it to 40 or 50 caps, maybe, or time served, or removing the cap requirement but keeping the 'must have a future local contract' requirement.
.

 

[Lorenzo]

So it likely leads to poorer Super performance. Which in itself makes local teams less appealing for local players, which leads more to accept overseas offers.

I did try to address this: there's not unlimited positions available overseas, and there are players from other countries competing for them. In terms of competitions that actually pay better than Super Rugby, it's really only France, England and Japan, and they have foreign player limits.

What I really like about it is that it prevents us from overpaying for people. Maybe we'd have more genuine depth if Beale and Folau weren't getting paid the salary of 3 good players each?

I'd say the future of Super Rugby and the next broadcast deal will have an influence on this.

But yeah, you would expect Super Rugby to weaken a bit. It's a tough one.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

Who knows. I haven't seen much of them at their new clubs so I have no idea if we'd even want them back? I mean how is Liam going at Lyon? and what's McMahon even doing - wasn't he having surgery/recovering recently? Based on past form and potential it'd be interesting to see them both come back and run around in Super rugby, but I'm not sure either would be a shoe in for the Wallabies, but maybe people who have been following them more closely could say?

My comment wasn't that they should be selected for the Wallabies. It was purely if they now have more interest in coming home due to Cheika not being the coach. No player should be selected from overseas and brought straight into the Wallabies match day 23 (even Skelton). I do or did like however how Cheika regularly travelled to Europe/UK etc to talk to players and encourage them to come home. Also how he brought players into the squad environment to have a look at them but also to give them a taste of what they are looking for and what they need to do.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

I feel we are thin at 12 too. Unless JOC (James O'Connor) plays there and performs well. Who else is there but rookies?

Agree. Thin on depth. Will be interesting to see where Penney plays Beale. Will Karmichael be re-signed by an Australian team? Two options/stop gaps measures.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

My worry with the Giteau law is what it means for our Super teams.

At present, playing in Europe is pretty appealing. You can earn good coin, have a great life experience and it could even help your rugby. But it means you can't play for the Wallabies, which is a pretty big draw for a great portion of our local players.

Now if we remove that one drawback, if you were a guy like Fraser McReight, what's to stop you from accepting a big overseas offer? You can have all the above experiences, AND still play for the Wallabies. It's pretty appealing.

It's hard to see how relaxing the Law wouldn't lead to more of our players leaving. Yes, we can be savvy with our contracting and it wouldn't necessarily be a mass exodus, but our Super sides are hanging on by a thread as it is.

So it likely leads to poorer Super performance. Which in itself makes local teams less appealing for local players, which leads more to accept overseas offers.

Now I haven't studied it in great detail, but on the face of it I can't see how removing the Law makes much sense. Dropping it to 40 or 50 caps, maybe, or time served, or removing the cap requirement but keeping the 'must have a future local contract' requirement.
.

My position on this would be for RA to build formal relationships (I've been banging on it for a longtime and the Rebels have done something similar) with a club in each of the major competitions. Share IP, share players and share coaching staff. Give players and staff the opportunity to experience different rugby environments/conditions but also make sure they don't just flog the imports like they do in France. Workloads could be managed. Experience gained. More money potentially earned by the players. Limit it to one season in their contract window and it must be taken in in three years post a world cup cycle (so they must be in Australia for the whole super season prior to a RWC).

 

[Viking]

Ive no view on hunt, but are we seriously still hyperfocused on the RWC? Sacrificing 4 years for the RWC seems foolish when you only need one bad game to ruin it.

I don't agree that Hunt should need to be superb simply because of his age. He should simply be the best. There's 4 years to go, for one thing, and don't we kinda wanna with that bledisloe cup, too?

Identifying who is the best, is another thing lol

I don't think it necessarily has to be RWC focused, but a medium to long-term approach is necessary. If he's not outstanding and the next best player's form is only slightly behind but has more potential to grow over the season then your better off taking a risk and building his skills rather then playing Hunt when he's likely not going to get much better.

Then there's the argument of having these developed players learn off experienced ones - in which case in Hunts view, I don't see him as a mentor type player either. I think players like To'omua would fit that role better.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

All of those guys are possibilities UTG, I agree - and I would expect guys like Maddocks & Banks to continue to improve as well.

In a year or two a guy like Mark Nawaqanitawase will hopefully come into the reckoning as well.

But at the moment none of those guys are anything more than guys with potential.

Nawaqanitawase hasn't even been in a professional system yet (just signed with the tahs). Cool your jets on that one. Lets see if he gets any super rugby time and if he goes any good first.

 

[Viking]

Agree. Thin on depth. Will be interesting to see where Penney plays Beale. Will Karmichael be re-signed by an Australian team? Two options/stop gaps measures.

I hope Beale is fazed out. He's had plenty of chances and still the same weaknesses. I hope the new coach builds his team around players with solid basic skills and then works up from there.

It seems we do things backwards. Pick players on one outstanding attribute and then try (and often fail) to develop their shortcomings.