Wallabies 2023

[Braveheart81]

Rob Simmons is the worst player to ever be in the top 3 locks in the country for 106 times when we needed to pick a test match 22 or 23.

 

[Braveheart81]

BH, Is there any list of who is available and when? Would be interesting but I don't expect there to be such information.

No.

But for instance, LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) was released basically as soon as Super Rugby finished. Scott Sio was released at the end of the Rugby Championship. Tom Banks hasn't been released yet. All of them originally had a contract that ran until the end of the year.

 

[stillmissit]

The old "you can't comment unless you have reached a level as awesome as me, set by me" ruse.
I'm assuming you coached at a higher level than all those coaches who selected him, and kind of know rugby too?
Of course Eales and Vickerman were better - few would argue otherwise, but that's not the point, is it?

Nah, It's more to do with the lineout, although I would have played someone with more go in them. Why did you turn my 10 levels below Vickerman to, of 'course he wasn't as good'? That is likewise a silly twist to my comment.
The locks for RWC 2019 Rory Arnold, Izack Rodda, Adam Coleman, Rob Simmons, I'm assuming you would play Simmons over the other 3? All three of them are players capable of doing the work - Simmons is the exception.
I have opinions based on playing the position but you think this is of no value, I think you're accepting his selection as proof he was a good lock, seems of no value to me.
I think your opinions are no more valid than mine. I hope we never see his like again in a Wallabies team.

 

[Slim 293]

Nah, It's more to do with the lineout, although I would have played someone with more go in them. Why did you turn my 10 levels below Vickerman to, of 'course he wasn't as good'? That is likewise a silly twist to my comment.
The locks for RWC 2019 Rory Arnold, Izack Rodda, Adam Coleman, Rob Simmons, I'm assuming you would play Simmons over the other 3? All three of them are players capable of doing the work - Simmons is the exception.
I have opinions based on playing the position but you think this is of no value, I think you're accepting his selection as proof he was a good lock, seems of no value to me.
I think your opinions are no more valid than mine. I hope we never see his like again in a Wallabies team.

This seems like a massive strawman, completely irrelevant to Cyclo's point...

However, I definitely would've played Simmons over Coleman... Simmons was easily the better lock, and I would have not selected Coleman for the squad.

 

[cyclopath]

Nah, It's more to do with the lineout, although I would have played someone with more go in them. Why did you turn my 10 levels below Vickerman to, of 'course he wasn't as good'? That is likewise a silly twist to my comment.
The locks for RWC 2019 Rory Arnold, Izack Rodda, Adam Coleman, Rob Simmons, I'm assuming you would play Simmons over the other 3? All three of them are players capable of doing the work - Simmons is the exception.
I have opinions based on playing the position but you think this is of no value, I think you're accepting his selection as proof he was a good lock, seems of no value to me.
I think your opinions are no more valid than mine. I hope we never see his like again in a Wallabies team.

Not really sure what point you're trying to make. He played over 100 Tests, clearly pretty good. You disagree and think he has no value - fine. And no, I would pick the other 3 above in preference (at their best) currently, apart from the fact Coleman wants too play for Tonga, Rodda is injured and Arnold may not be available. Or any of the other good locks we have available - wait, apart from all the injured / suspended / unavailable ones. Which is about the only reason Simmons' name came up.

 

[griffins]

bikepath, it's only silly if you never played in the row. If you did, at a reasonable level, you would recognise that for most of his career he avoided the tough stuff, attacking the breakdown, driving the maul and taking the ball up. He was a perennial pillar if not a post. I have no time for locks who do not do the hard work. I agree that his lineout ability was OK and given the ball was quick for a lock but it struck me that it was mostly his side going backwards at difficult scrum time.
I rate him about 10 levels below Dan Vickerman who is the best lock I have seen play for Australia, Eales was a freak in terms of skill set but against a tough forward pack give me Vickerman every time.
There again maybe you played lock at a higher level than me?

I am actually John Eales, so am more qualified to comment than you. I was better than Vickerman too btw, he couldn't even kick a torpedo. I played with Link and he said Simmons was a good workhorse too.

 

[Braveheart81]

Most of us have been critical of Simmons at many points over his career but the reality is that he was consistently one of our best locks for a decade.

Most of the other locks that have played for the Wallabies over that decade have had a higher ceiling but none have shown it for more than short periods of time.

Nathan Sharpe was much the same. He often wasn't our best lock when he played but he was one of our best locks for a really long period of time.

 

[John S]

Most of us have been critical of Simmons at many points over his career but the reality is that he was consistently one of our best locks for a decade.

Most of the other locks that have played for the Wallabies over that decade have had a higher ceiling but none have shown it for more than short periods of time.

Nathan Sharpe was much the same. He often wasn't our best lock when he played but he was one of our best locks for a really long period of time.

Yep, I can't recall the amount of times I've heard him (and other locks he's played with) being called "powder puff locks" but realistically, they were the best we had - and they were able to match it with the best of them on their day.

 

[dru]

Yep, I can't recall the amount of times I've heard him (and other locks he's played with) being called "powder puff locks" but realistically, they were the best we had - and they were able to match it with the best of them on their day.

Simmons was a set piece master. Line out calling as well as jumping. Huge reputation in the scrum as discussed by the props. That is two of the three key characters required by a lock. Unfortunately the third is digging deep in attack leading it up through the heavy stuff. Simmons constantly worked very hard in that area and mostly his engagement in the role was quite active.

Unfortunately the "pick and flop" was not always a silly criticism. On it's own it doesn't change the fact he was consistently one of Australia's best and he certainly had excellence in the other key areas.

We really shouldn't diss his service.

We are now actively discussing Skelton returning to the WBs. Big Will is never going to excel at all three key characters. While we expect him to provide excellence in taking it up in the heavy, and hopefully he has built a better reputation in the scrum, he aint ever going to be solid in the line out. And this has many implications in the team set up, impacting certainly the selection of the back row. Of course he also offers maul wrecking. Great opportunity with Will, but how it works through team selections will be interesting.

 

[John S]

Simmons was a set piece master. Line out calling as well as jumping. Huge reputation in the scrum as discussed by the props. That is two of the three key characters required by a lock. Unfortunately the third is digging deep in attack leading it up through the heavy stuff. Simmons constantly worked very hard in that area and mostly his engagement in the role was quite active.

Unfortunately the "pick and flop" was not always a silly criticism. On it's own it doesn't change the fact he was consistently one of Australia's best and he certainly had excellence in the other key areas.

We really shouldn't diss his service.

We are now actively discussing Skelton returning to the WBs. Big Will is never going to excel at all three key characters. While we expect him to provide excellence in taking it up in the heavy, and hopefully he has built a better reputation in the scrum, he aint ever going to be solid in the line out. And this has many implications in the team set up, impacting certainly the selection of the back row. Of course he also offers maul wrecking. Great opportunity with Will, but how it works through team selections will be interesting.

You're not wrong.

 

[stillmissit]

Not really sure what point you're trying to make. He played over 100 Tests, clearly pretty good. You disagree and think he has no value - fine. And no, I would pick the other 3 above in preference (at their best) currently, apart from the fact Coleman wants too play for Tonga, Rodda is injured and Arnold may not be available. Or any of the other good locks we have available - wait, apart from all the injured / suspended / unavailable ones. Which is about the only reason Simmons' name came up.

The point is obvious and I assume you are being disingenuous. There are almost certainly guys here who played at a senior level with strong ideas about the position they held and some insights into what makes a good centre or a backrower. I have little idea what makes a good centre although I played with some excellent ones. Do you ignore all those here with a background playing the game? Are the thoughts of selectors and journalists (most of which are opinions as well) the only ones who's opinions you want to hear? Sounds like the herd instinct to me.

 

[stillmissit]

Simmons was a set piece master. Line out calling as well as jumping. Huge reputation in the scrum as discussed by the props. That is two of the three key characters required by a lock. Unfortunately the third is digging deep in attack leading it up through the heavy stuff. Simmons constantly worked very hard in that area and mostly his engagement in the role was quite active.

Unfortunately the "pick and flop" was not always a silly criticism. On it's own it doesn't change the fact he was consistently one of Australia's best and he certainly had excellence in the other key areas.

We really shouldn't diss his service.

We are now actively discussing Skelton returning to the WBs. Big Will is never going to excel at all three key characters. While we expect him to provide excellence in taking it up in the heavy, and hopefully he has built a better reputation in the scrum, he aint ever going to be solid in the line out. And this has many implications in the team set up, impacting certainly the selection of the back row. Of course he also offers maul wrecking. Great opportunity with Will, but how it works through team selections will be interesting.

Dru, I agree with your comments regarding the lineout. I have never heard any props stating his efforts in the scrum. My main complaint was his poor efforts at the breakdown where he mostly stood in the pillar/post position, often leaving Pocock and others to do the work alone, taking the ball up and his maul work. Just a difference of opinion. Skelton was average when he left and I was looking forward to seeing a big effort in his last cameo. Hopefully, he can live up to the hype and be a force for the Wallabies this year. Pity we can't afford, nor do we have the skills base, to develop forwards in Australia. Excellent article on the roar regarding Skelton by Nick Bishop, pity we can't get him or some one similr to do analysis here.
This is the end of my statements about Simmons.

 

[dru]

Dru, I agree with your comments regarding the lineout. I have never heard any props stating his efforts in the scrum. My main complaint was his poor efforts at the breakdown where he mostly stood in the pillar/post position, often leaving Pocock and others to do the work alone, taking the ball up and his maul work. Just a difference of opinion. Skelton was average when he left and I was looking forward to seeing a big effort in his last cameo. Hopefully, he can live up to the hype and be a force for the Wallabies this year. Pity we can't afford, nor do we have the skills base, to develop forwards in Australia. Excellent article on the roar regarding Skelton by Nick Bishop, pity we can't get him or some one similr to do analysis here.
This is the end of my statements about Simmons.

I won't find any quotes for you but definitely Simmons had a rep in the scrum.

Love Nick's work and his review of Big Will is to his usual standard. What it doesn't achieve though is how to handle the impact on the back row selections, change in game plan once the nature of the back row has changed, etc. OR what happens if we simply continue but minus a jumper. I don't think we are anywhere near demonstrating organisation around this sort of decision. It surely could come, but the combinations and organisations are going to be without any experience or familiarity as we hit Europe - if in deed we do it.

In my view it's a high risk call which could have been accommodated if Will was in Australia where the game plan could have been developed with his skills and to develop remedies to the consequences. Rennie will decide and of course sort of has simply by including Will in the squad.

The opportunity is pretty belated in my opinion.

 

[stillmissit]

Dru, agree but Rennie is between a rock and a hard place. I found it interesting Nick talked about Skelton's lifting in the lineout. Assuming Rennie goes with a big back row against France and Ireland then Skelton with Swain or Neville with Hanigan/Holloway, Bobby V, and Samu at 7 we should be able to hold our own. The Bench is where the big games will be won or lost.
Almost forgot my mantra - the games will be won or lost at the breakdown.

 

[stillmissit]

We need to seriously do Scotland to set this tour up. If we fart around with them then it will be a very tough tour.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I would love to see Skelton go out there and tear the opposition a new one. Nothing would give me more pleasure than seeing the same output at test level as he's shown in the UK and France. I hope Rennie plays him and we settle the question once and for all.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

We need to seriously do Scotland to set this tour up. If we fart around with them then it will be a very tough tour.

Yes agreed. We need to go out there and make a statement at Murrayfield.

 

[cyclopath]

The point is obvious and I assume you are being disingenuous. There are almost certainly guys here who played at a senior level with strong ideas about the position they held and some insights into what makes a good centre or a backrower. I have little idea what makes a good centre although I played with some excellent ones. Do you ignore all those here with a background playing the game? Are the thoughts of selectors and journalists (most of which are opinions as well) the only ones who's opinions you want to hear? Sounds like the herd instinct to me.

Not at all. Im not saying your opinion is worthless, I was just disagreeing with it. There is a difference. I remember hearing quotes from within the Wallaby camp, and also from the props at the Tahs when Simmons was there, that they noted the shove they got from him in scrums. Hence, I just don't accept that he was poor. That's all.
As you said above, probably enough on that.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I would love to see Skelton go out there and tear the opposition a new one. Nothing would give me more pleasure than seeing the same output at test level as he's shown in the UK and France. I hope Rennie plays him and we settle the question once and for all.

I think I recall the "once and for all" comment being posted before his selections last year on the EOYT. I fear if he doesn't perform the same comment will be made before the RWC next year to justify some poster's urge to have him in the WC squad.

 

[Braveheart81]

If he does indeed start 3 games on this tour as has been suggested it shouldn't leave much doubt whether he is still in consideration for the RWC.