Wallabies 2023

[Marce]

Winning, no one wants to support a loser. If the All Blacks lost the Bledisloe for 20 years in a row I’m sure the kiwis living here would support the Wallabies a little easier.

We support the Wallabies despite the last 20 years, mate. So I'm not sure about it

 

[Tomthumb]

Gel, I enjoy any Aus team playing a kiwi one but I could never become a supporter of a kiwi team.
I came here 45 years ago and dumped my pommie heritage (not too difficult) and supported Australian rugby. The big change came around 87 when we did a trip out into the country and there was nothing on the radio apart from cricket, forget the old guy's name but he was giving pointers to positions etc and I became hooked on the internationals.
The two foes I enjoy seeing beaten in rugby are AB and Poms, AB's only slightly more than the Poms. My old mates in the UK can't understand it.

It’s a club competition, not and international one so why does it matter where the clubs are based? It’s like saying anyone not in New York can’t watch the Yankees, or anyone not in Manchester can’t watch Man Utd

it’s a weird attitude and continues to hold super rugby back

 

[Brumby Runner]

^^^^ But it's not saying that at all Tomthumb. Anyone who likes to and wants to watch a NZ team or two involved in a match are perfectly at liberty to do so. I certainly won't stop them while I will be very likely to not watch the match if one Aussie team isn't involved. My personal preference.

My attitude might be harming SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) in some eyes, but I still hold that a purely domestic comp would be better in the Australian landscape. And that's not envy - the Brumbies did very well against the Kiwi sides last year and probably should have reached the final. It is because I would rather see an Aussie comp leading to an Aussie championship. The games in 2020 (?) were the most exciting and most interesting in this country for eons. The crowds and viewer support proved that.

 

[Adam84]

^^^^ But it's not saying that at all Tomthumb. Anyone who likes to and wants to watch a NZ team or two involved in a match are perfectly at liberty to do so. I certainly won't stop them while I will be very likely to not watch the match if one Aussie team isn't involved. My personal preference.

My attitude might be harming SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) in some eyes, but I still hold that a purely domestic comp would be better in the Australian landscape. And that's not envy - the Brumbies did very well against the Kiwi sides last year and probably should have reached the final. It is because I would rather see an Aussie comp leading to an Aussie championship. The games in 2020 (?) were the most exciting and most interesting in this country for eons. The crowds and viewer support proved that.

Having an Aussie GF can't be understated, for media coverage, tv ratings, general fan engagement. At the very least having Aussie players in the grand final, if super rugby actually encouraged a scenario where wallabies could play for NZ teams and vice verse, it would give greater cross-tasman interest.

 

[Dan54]

Winning, no one wants to support a loser. If the All Blacks lost the Bledisloe for 20 years in a row I’m sure the kiwis living here would support the Wallabies a little easier.

Mate, I my daughter's partner is an Aussie, has lived here since about 2000, and still supports Wallabies, same with my Nieces husband, been here about12 -15 years, still very much a Walaby supporter, and he gets a corner of clubrooms he involved in to be little Aussie in Bled or any AB/Wallaby tests. I am bloody pleased they do too!
I think you fellas have to remember how to support your team!!!

 

[rodha]

Coopers latest interview on the Bloke at the Bar podcast this week, he talks a bit about this. Saying he was in a bad head space and probably wouldn't have picked himself in the team either.

So looks like he has changed his tune a bit to the words Rodha has posted. Doesn't mean those aren't untrue either though.

I imagine it was a bit of both to why he was dropped. Coopers attitude and Cheika's perception/bias.

No, the frustration stems from the misperception issue which resulted in people not measuring/assessing Quade's abilities in a fair manner.

There seemed to be a common misconception among rugby circles that Quade was purely a skillful 'maverick', he plays too much as an individual, he can't play in unison for the team, i.e play to a structured gameplan. I think the fact Quade is Maori contributed to the fallacy that he was just a individual brilliance merchant - who lacked in the wider game understanding, tactics, strategy, bigger picture detail, etc..

This kind of creeping perception of Quade's game was an irrational pig-headed fallacy - and unfortunately even his Wallabies coaches (Cheika, Deans) succumbed to this delusion. But it really couldn't have been further from the truth. If you ask anyone who knows Quade they will inform of just how outstanding his level of game understanding is. His in-game rugby intelligence has always been an exception & a unique point of difference for him amongst his peers in Australian rugby. There's a reason Ewen McKenzie once said that Quade had the potential to become an excellent coach.

McKenzie always stressed how gifted Quade was in regards to his ability to execute a gameplan and also read the situation in a game. The key to the 2011 Red's success was that McKenzie & McKay entrusted Quade with the responsibility of leading the gameplan himself. Quade ran the attack sessions in the lead up to the Red's games during the week. McKenzie acknowledged a critical component which Cheika & Deans failed to understand, that the only way to properly facilitate Cooper's abilities was to give him full ownership & authority over the gameplan and let him control proceedings as he sees.

The simply reality is that Deans & Cheikas ego's would never accommodate for this.

They wanted to reign him in and play it 'their way' or nothing.

It was their way or the highway, that's why Cooper was discarded, because he had an uncomfortable level of game understanding & rugby IQ that resulted in conflict/tension with Deans and Cheika because he was forthright & outspoken in how they could be doing things differently.

And as we know, Cheika & Deans certainly weren't the type to be challenged.

 

[Lightblue]

No, the frustration stems from the misperception issue which resulted in people not measuring/assessing Quade's abilities in a fair manner.

There seemed to be a common misconception among rugby circles that Quade was purely a skillful 'maverick', he plays too much as an individual, he can't play in unison for the team, i.e play to a structured gameplan. I think the fact Quade is Maori contributed to the fallacy that he was just a individual brilliance merchant - who lacked in the wider game understanding, tactics, strategy, bigger picture detail, etc..

This kind of creeping perception of Quade's game was an irrational pig-headed fallacy - and unfortunately even his Wallabies coaches (Cheika, Deans) succumbed to this delusion. But it really couldn't have been further from the truth. If you ask anyone who knows Quade they will inform of just how outstanding his level of game understanding is. His in-game rugby intelligence has always been an exception & a unique point of difference for him amongst his peers in Australian rugby. There's a reason Ewen McKenzie once said that Quade had the potential to become an excellent coach.

McKenzie always stressed how gifted Quade was in regards to his ability to execute a gameplan and also read the situation in a game. The key to the 2011 Red's success was that McKenzie & McKay entrusted Quade with the responsibility of leading the gameplan himself. Quade ran the attack sessions in the lead up to the Red's games during the week. McKenzie acknowledged a critical component which Cheika & Deans failed to understand, that the only way to properly facilitate Cooper's abilities was to give him full ownership & authority over the gameplan and let him control proceedings as he sees.

The simply reality is that Deans & Cheikas ego's would never accommodate for this.

They wanted to reign him in and play it 'their way' or nothing.

It was their way or the highway, that's why Cooper was discarded, because he had an uncomfortable level of game understanding & rugby IQ that resulted in conflict/tension with Deans and Cheika because he was forthright & outspoken in how they could be doing things differently.

And as we know, Cheika & Deans certainly weren't the type to be challenged.

Rodha…. your summation seems spot on of Quade, and McKenzie understood him. That season when the Reds won in 2011 saw some amazing rugby played. Maybe Jones needs to have Cooper as the backs attack coach, whether he makes it successfully back from injury to play or not? Thorn was another coach who brushed Cooper too…. another my way or the highway coach…

 

[fatprop]

Rodha…. your summation seems spot on of Quade, and McKenzie understood him. That season when the Reds won in 2011 saw some amazing rugby played. Maybe Jones needs to have Cooper as the backs attack coach, whether he makes it successfully back from injury to play or not? Thorn was another coach who brushed Cooper too…. another my way or the highway coach…

So three coaches have brushed him, but it was the coaches problem?

It is like the guy divorced 3 tines, possibly he is the problem

 

[stillmissit]

It’s a club competition, not and international one so why does it matter where the clubs are based? It’s like saying anyone not in New York can’t watch the Yankees, or anyone not in Manchester can’t watch Man Utd

it’s a weird attitude and continues to hold super rugby back

TT, I too find your attitude odd. We are Australians and I believe we should incline towards supporting our country, I have no issue with you supporting who the hell you want, but I don't agree with it, assuming you are Australian.

 

[Tomthumb]

TT, I too find your attitude odd. We are Australians and I believe we should incline towards supporting our country, I have no issue with you supporting who the hell you want, but I don't agree with it, assuming you are Australian.

It’s not your country though, it’s a club

 

[dru]

No, etc etc etc

rodha, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you have said here. But can you give it a break, mate? This is the Wallabies thread and we are in 2023. If you want to talk Quade, try these themes.

1. Can Quade recover to match fitness in time for RWC?
2. Would that justify his selection as necessarily other choices have had their chance to lock in selection?
3. Would his maturity lend to a RWC squad leadership role anyway?
4. If not Quade, 10 is up for grabs - is the next generation ready or are we back to Lolesio?

It's just exhausting having to reconsider what might have been with Quade (he aint guilt free, mate) and Dingo, Cheika, Thorn.

 

[Tomthumb]

^^^^ But it's not saying that at all Tomthumb. Anyone who likes to and wants to watch a NZ team or two involved in a match are perfectly at liberty to do so. I certainly won't stop them while I will be very likely to not watch the match if one Aussie team isn't involved. My personal preference.

My attitude might be harming SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) in some eyes, but I still hold that a purely domestic comp would be better in the Australian landscape. And that's not envy - the Brumbies did very well against the Kiwi sides last year and probably should have reached the final. It is because I would rather see an Aussie comp leading to an Aussie championship. The games in 2020 (?) were the most exciting and most interesting in this country for eons. The crowds and viewer support proved that.

We need to stop being so worried about “Nz teams” or “aus teams” if you want super rugby to be relevant. They are all club teams playing for the same trophy

 

[dru]

We need to stop being so worried about “Nz teams” or “aus teams” if you want super rugby to be relevant. They are all club teams playing for the same trophy

Back to the same earlier discussion and "the thread that shall not be named".

 

[fatprop]

Quade played some of his best rugby in an Aus jersey under Rennie because he was finally prepared to under play his hand

Hopefully he can do the same for Jones because none of the other options look like a test player at the moment

 

[stillmissit]

the only way to properly facilitate Cooper's abilities was to give him full ownership & authority over the gameplan and let him control proceedings as he sees.

And as we know, Cheika & Deans certainly weren't the type to be challenged.

So McKenzie abandoned his coaching role and left it up to a narcissist, I'm told that is the only way to get on with one.
Never saw Deans as an authoritarian and I knew a couple of guys around his set up at the time, if anything they thought he went too far in the opposite direction and kept hoping/working to bring them to a responsible adult POV.

 

[stillmissit]

Let's assume for a moment you are Eddie Jones and you have a major problem, the RWC is around the corner and prior to the first game v Argentina it's confirmed that QC (Quade Cooper) will NOT recover in time for the RWC. Keeping in mind his preference is for a 10 who can control the game, who do you go with?

 

[stillmissit]

Would be a great candidate if ever ended up on the board of Rugby Australia compared to some of the others that have campaigned to in the past

IF the ARU ever put their politics and ego's to one side and worked for the betterment of rugby.

 

[Braveheart81]

that the only way to properly facilitate Cooper's abilities was to give him full ownership & authority over the gameplan and let him control proceedings as he sees.

This was primarily the problem though. It was awesome when he was in great form but like every other player on the planet, he went through periods of good form and bad form. When he wasn't in good form, this style of play meant the game of one person had a monumental impact on the success or failure of the whole team.

The reason why 2021 with Quade was so good is because he didn't try to do everything. He did his job as the 10 and didn't try and overplay his hand. He contributed substantially to the team's success but didn't play in a manner that meant the team lived or died on his form.

Ultimately I think Deans moved on from Cooper because he didn't want the play of one player to have such a huge influence on whether the team (and Deans) succeeded or not.

 

[fatprop]

Let's assume for a moment you are Eddie Jones and you have a major problem, the RWC is around the corner and prior to the first game v Argentina it's confirmed that QC (Quade Cooper) (Quade Cooper) will NOT recover in time for the RWC. Keeping in mind his preference is for a 10 who can control the game, who do you go with?

Both the Ponies and Tahs are running playmaking from the 9, I think that will continue until after the RWC with White and Gordon our best bets at that style of play

In the interview I posted earlier in this thread, Jones talked about needing to have the leadership group grow and flourish as fixed game plan from the coach fails at various hurdles, with so many YCs, RCs & injuries the leaders need to adapt and lead quickly.

He talked about most modern pro rugby players as being incredibly talented athletes, but no longer students of the game and his role was to see them grow into those leadership roles by learning to be that student

 

[Viking]

No, the frustration stems from the misperception issue which resulted in people not measuring/assessing Quade's abilities in a fair manner.

There seemed to be a common misconception among rugby circles that Quade was purely a skillful 'maverick', he plays too much as an individual, he can't play in unison for the team, i.e play to a structured gameplan. I think the fact Quade is Maori contributed to the fallacy that he was just a individual brilliance merchant - who lacked in the wider game understanding, tactics, strategy, bigger picture detail, etc..

This kind of creeping perception of Quade's game was an irrational pig-headed fallacy - and unfortunately even his Wallabies coaches (Cheika, Deans) succumbed to this delusion. But it really couldn't have been further from the truth. If you ask anyone who knows Quade they will inform of just how outstanding his level of game understanding is. His in-game rugby intelligence has always been an exception & a unique point of difference for him amongst his peers in Australian rugby. There's a reason Ewen McKenzie once said that Quade had the potential to become an excellent coach.

McKenzie always stressed how gifted Quade was in regards to his ability to execute a gameplan and also read the situation in a game. The key to the 2011 Red's success was that McKenzie & McKay entrusted Quade with the responsibility of leading the gameplan himself. Quade ran the attack sessions in the lead up to the Red's games during the week. McKenzie acknowledged a critical component which Cheika & Deans failed to understand, that the only way to properly facilitate Cooper's abilities was to give him full ownership & authority over the gameplan and let him control proceedings as he sees.

The simply reality is that Deans & Cheikas ego's would never accommodate for this.

They wanted to reign him in and play it 'their way' or nothing.

It was their way or the highway, that's why Cooper was discarded, because he had an uncomfortable level of game understanding & rugby IQ that resulted in conflict/tension with Deans and Cheika because he was forthright & outspoken in how they could be doing things differently.

And as we know, Cheika & Deans certainly weren't the type to be challenged.

I agree with your post. McKenzie was the only one who knew how to use Cooper. Give him more control and leadership not less.
But at the end of the day, if Cooper wanted to be picked then he should have "reigned it in" to keep the coaches happy. Not that it would have been the right strategy to win or get the best out of him but it would have helped his selection.
His ego got in the way of that. He wanted to do it his way not the coaches way. Just as much as Chieka and Deans ego got in the way they wanted to control Cooper instead of giving him a leadership role.

To blame 100% of it on the coaches is just wrong. Cooper even admitted he was in the wrong. He openly said in the podast "I wouldn't have picked me" . So if what you're saying is 100% correct, then Cooper is probably the least adaptive player in world rugby, not many coaches are going to give a player free-reign like McKenzie (especially at Test level). Coopers inability or lack of desire to play structured rugby was his downfall.

Seriously, listen to the bloke at the bar podast with Cooper. He says he loved working under McKenzie but he realises now that there is more than one way to play the game.

Sometimes a structured game works. At Test level it is probably preferred these days.

I am a huge Cooper fan by the way. Always wanted him to be at 10. Still do.