Wallabies 2023

[Jimmy_Crouch]

I think a lot also has to do with physical development as well. Some players will come into their prime 26-27 then have a 3-4 window at their best.

We often let a 23 year old go who isn’t blowing us away. Then surprise surprise 4 years later we scratch our heads wondering what did we miss.

But also the fact that squad sizes in Australia are so small. Professional sport is a numbers game. If you are 23 and haven't improved for a couple of years they are going to punt you for someone with potentially a higher ceiling.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

So the Wallabies have arrived in Sth Africa, a country with no doubt an abundance of fields and it looks like they blew the cob webs off on a local lawn bowls green.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

So the Wallabies have arrived in Sth Africa, a country with no doubt an abundance of fields and it looks like they blew the cob webs off on a local lawn bowls green.

Deck at lords has more grass

 

[Namerican]

No doubt. Taking them on up front doesn’t mean we can’t go wide or play the angles. In a lot of ways you can wrong foot their big pigs by doing exactly that.

If you can put some points on the Boks they are usually screwed too. It's harder to kick, win a penalty, maul, your way back from a 14 point deficit. I'd feel way better being up on the Boks by 14 at half than I would against NZ or Ireland.

If they can get some go forward in tight hopefully they can utilize Valetini, Tupou, Holloway, Leota, Samu, Hooper a little bit wider and not running directly into Etzebeth, Marx, Kitschoff etc. You have to figure Big Will is a key to that first hitup. Then you add Kerevi, Koriobete, or Wright inserting themselves somewhere around Quade and your off to the races.

In an ideal world Skelton/Tupou smash it up, create space, then you have Quade/Kerevi/Valetini/Koriobete all as options on the next couple of phases. If they can pull it off that's about as dangerous a group in 2nd/3rd phase in the medium channel as you'll find in rugby.

 

[wamberal]

If they can get some go forward in tight hopefully they can utilize Valetini.

VALETINI.

 

[dru]

VALETINI.

Just to be clear for Namerican, count the letter "n"s.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

But also the fact that squad sizes in Australia are so small. Professional sport is a numbers game. If you are 23 and haven't improved for a couple of years they are going to punt you for someone with potentially a higher ceiling.

Good point. We lack the ability to tolerate slow development.

Slow development is also our problem a lot of the time when they get bugger all top level footy into them during those 18-23 years in most cases

 

[Froggy]

Obviously it's just an opinion Spamnoodle, but while Eales was undoubtedly a better player, I thought Farr-Jones was a better captain.

 

[Adam84]

Obviously it's just an opinion Spamnoodle, but while Eales was undoubtedly a better player, I thought Farr-Jones was a better captain.

Nobody disagrees

 

[stillmissit]

I meant which players. Which players did we not see the value in that went overseas and then were brought back for a lot more money?

That is the assertion I'm challenging. I don't think the cost to contract players coming back is substantially more than it would have been at the same stage if they'd just remained in Australia.

Maddocks was one of the highest profile Waratahs at the time he left and would have required a significant contract to re-sign him. It isn't a case of deciding that you're unwilling to let this guy remain at your team, it's the fact that the cost of re-signing them is significantly higher than their play on the field suggests they are worth. When he left he was absolutely nowhere near the form that saw him play for the Wallabies yet the cost to keep him is far more aligned with that pedigree than the form he was displaying.

Just read something and thought this is exactly what I think is wrong with Aus Rugby.

Meafou’s first love was rugby. He had appeared for the NRC’s Melbourne Rising in South Australia, Darren Coleman-coached Shute Shielders Warringah and the New South Wales Sea Eagles on two dozen occasions, and he had a burgeoning rugby portfolio.

But at 20 years of age, he had failed to secure a berth in any of the Super Rugby franchises in Australia: “Rugby was still a passion and dream of mine. The only reason I went down the NFL road was because I had no offers [at home]. For me, rugby was over.”

Emmanuel Meafou could have been a world-beater for the Wallabies

Emmanuel Meafou has been lost to Rugby Australia - and France look to be the beneficiaries.

www.rugbypass.com

 

[stillmissit]

I think a lot also has to do with physical development as well. Some players will come into their prime 26-27 then have a 3-4 window at their best.

We often let a 23 year old go who isn’t blowing us away. Then surprise surprise 4 years later we scratch our heads wondering what did we miss.

Ghost. We missed what we always miss, the ability to ID talent and stick with it on the 80/20 principle - assuming we had people who could ID talent.

 

[Adam84]

Ghost. We missed what we always miss, the ability to ID talent and stick with it on the 80/20 principle - assuming we had people who could ID talent.

I don’t agree that Meafou is a talent ID issue, he is an example of the squad size of Super Rugby clubs been too shallow, as well as lack of a proper 3rd tier system.

His talent was identified, but he was overweight and unfit, barely fit enough for NRC, he needed a professional team to invest 2 season of S&C into him to bring him up to standard. Super Rugby squad sizes don’t allow for carrying project players for a couple of years as the player load demands immediate returns, most Super Rugby clubs will use the entire squad and then some. Super Rugby squad sizes have even decreased in recent years due to financial issues.

French rugby has the squad sizes needed, ITM cup also allows this wider talent pool to get exposure to the next level of development. Super Rugby squads could easily expand to 40 for this issue, but that’s another $5million a year they need to find

 

[stillmissit]

I don’t agree that Meafou is a talent ID issue, he is an example of the squad size of Super Rugby clubs been too shallow, as well as lack of a proper 3rd tier system.

His talent was identified, but he was overweight and unfit, barely fit enough for NRC, he needed a professional team to invest 2 season of S&C into him to bring him up to standard. Super Rugby squad sizes don’t allow for carrying project players for a couple of years as the player load demands immediate returns, most Super Rugby clubs will use the entire squad and then some. Super Rugby squad sizes have even decreased in recent years due to financial issues.

French rugby has the squad sizes needed, ITM cup also allows this wider talent pool to get exposure to the next level of development. Super Rugby squads could easily expand to 40 for this issue, but that’s another $5million a year they need to find

I understand your argument, but not sure why they couldn't get anything out of a guy who has serious headroom and played NRC. I stand by my original statement, we cannot ID talent, all he was asking for was the ability to train with the Tahs. - No money involved.

 

[qwerty51]

Meafou wasn’t poorly managed, the fact is he wasn’t ready to play Super and we can’t afford to pay guys that don’t play or potentially will never. France can. It’s as simple as that.

 

[Adam84]

I mean he was playing NRC and asked to do a physical with the Tahs. I think the bigger issue is Australia really doesn't have a pathway for those players who aren't Super Rugby ready to play in the next 12-24months. The academy structures exist, but largely in an amateur format and targeted at the U18/U20s. What Australian needs is a semi-professional pathway like the ITM Cup or at least larger Super Rugby squads so they have time to work on S&C, it would allow greater investment on development players.

 

[qwerty51]

And the same people who want that will probably criticise the new Test comp which brings in more money..

 

[hifflepiff]

And the same people who want that will probably criticise the new Test comp which brings in more money..

You can accept that the new Nations League is good for Australian rugby's financials (at least in the short term) and also admit that it's terrible for the growth of rugby globally.

I also don't trust Rugby Aus to not waste any potential financial benefit the Nation's League might bring, so I'm somewhat ambivalent to the idea that its benefit is worth the damage it will do to the sport.

 

[qwerty51]

Why should any Australian care about the sport's growth outside Australia when the game needs to grow here (again)?
I completely understand not trusting RA to piss away the money but the money is money, so either you want them to have money or not and the source shouldn't matter.

 

[hifflepiff]

Why should any Australian care about the sport's growth outside Australia when the game needs to grow here (again)?

Because you should care about the future of rugby as a sport?

Anyway this isn't the forum for this discussion.

 

[qwerty51]

Because you should care about the future of rugby as a sport?

Anyway this isn't the forum for this discussion.

If you're South Africa or France, sure. The sport isn't solid outside the countries right now, they need to all look after their own interests.