Wallabies 2023

[Marce]

I agree that Holloway could be starting at 6... ticks all the boxes except perhaps over the ball... but makes up for it with those enormous choke tackles (which have resulted in at least half a dozen turnovers via maul collapse..) Probably the most improved player in the Oz conference IMO. Always had the skill and ability, but the work rate and physicality have massively increased. Big frame, speed, footwork, great hands and a huge lineout presence. Can play 4,5,6 & 8 so great bench option as well.

Always felt he was a player who never fulfilled his potential.... but geez he's been in red hot form this year.

Rennie has to pick players on form. This is the moment for Holloway to show his value

 

[fatprop]

Holloway playing in the backrow historically disappears - his involvements were never enough, when he was moved to lock he started playing tighter and getting more/better involvements

I can't see him in the backrow at test level, we have better, higher workrate options

Now as a test lock, he just isn't big enough, because his good field work at test level is expected, but a good test lock is just bigger and more effective

I rate him as a good super rugby standard lock, but we have better, more effective options at test level.

His only spot in a test team IMHO is a 5/6 bench option, and then he is competing against the Leota, Hanigan options etc

 

[Jimmyjam]

Holloway playing in the backrow historically disappears - his involvements were never enough, when he was moved to lock he started playing tighter and getting more/better involvements

I can't see him in the backrow at test level, we have better, higher work rate options

Now as a test lock, he just isn't big enough, because his good field work at test level is expected, but a good test lock is just bigger and more effective

I rate him as a good super rugby standard lock, but we have better, more effective options at test level.

His only spot in a test team IMHO is a 5/6 bench option, and then he is competing against the Leota, Hanigan options etc

You're correct about what historically happened with Holloway in the back-row, but it's chalk and cheese when comparing his form at the moment. This is just a completely different player compared to pre-Japan.... In current form he's crushing it. Looks fitter, stronger and far superior attitude. I'd be really keen to see him given a crack at 6. Form is better then the other blokes you mentioned.

 

[fatprop]

You're correct about what historically happened with Holloway in the back-row, but it's chalk and cheese when comparing his form at the moment. This is just a completely different player compared to pre-Japan.... In current form he's crushing it. Looks fitter, stronger and far superior attitude. I'd be really keen to see him given a crack at 6. Form is better then the other blokes you mentioned.

But isn't playing 6, and we have better backrowers

 

[Derpus]

I think despite being a little smaller his form warrants a run off the bench.

 

[Marce]

Holloway playing in the backrow historically disappears - his involvements were never enough, when he was moved to lock he started playing tighter and getting more/better involvements

I can't see him in the backrow at test level, we have better, higher workrate options

Now as a test lock, he just isn't big enough, because his good field work at test level is expected, but a good test lock is just bigger and more effective

I rate him as a good super rugby standard lock, but we have better, more effective options at test level.

His only spot in a test team IMHO is a 5/6 bench option, and then he is competing against the Leota, Hanigan options etc

If Rob Simmons was able to play at international level. Why not Holloway? Simmons was light to be a test lock. Holloway is heavier than him despite he's shorter, and he likes the contact.

Simmons used to lost the contact against ABs and Boks locks as I can remember. He was an excellent jumper too TBF

 

[Tomikin]

If Rob Simmons was able to play at international level. Why not Holloway? Simmons was light to be a test lock. Holloway is heavier than him despite he's shorter, and he likes the contact.

Simmons used to lost the contact against ABs and Boks locks as I can remember. He was an excellent jumper too TBF

and we use to lose to the Bok and AB's consistently... He needs to be compared to the current locks e.g. Rodda, Philip, Swain, Smith Neville, Frost .. He will be in the mix at Lock, probably first drop after last year's main 3 Rodda, Philip, Swain.

 

[Marce]

and we use to lose to the Bok and AB's consistently... He needs to be compared to the current locks e.g. Rodda, Philip, Swain, Smith Neville, Frost .. He will be in the mix at Lock, probably first drop after last year's main 3 Rodda, Philip, Swain.

Against ABs you are right but the contest against Bokke is pretty close:

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

Against ABs you are right but the contest against Bokke is pretty close:
View attachment 13538

Since re-admission to international sport or professionalism is probably a better marker.
Since 1992 (re-admission) Australia 31 SA 27 Draw 3
Since 1996 Australia 28 SA 25 Draw 3

 

[Marce]

Since re-admission to international sport or professionalism is probably a better marker.
Since 1992 (re-admission) Australia 31 SA 27 Draw 3
Since 1996 Australia 28 SA 25 Draw 3

So I'm right lol. A similar record against ABs and the Bledisloe would be HUGE in Australia, something like State of Origin

 

[fatprop]

If Rob Simmons was able to play at international level. Why not Holloway? Simmons was light to be a test lock. Holloway is heavier than him despite he's shorter, and he likes the contact.

Simmons used to lost the contact against ABs and Boks locks as I can remember. He was an excellent jumper too TBF

Simmons point of difference was his lineout work, at test level it was excellent, his challenges against the the big quality teams just reinforces my points, we have better test lineout options who are bigger and will be more effective against the other test locks

I am exceptionally happy to see Holloway doing great for the Tahs but I just can't see that being transposed into test rugby where they all play just as well while being bigger, mobile humans

In the tight 5, size matters

 

[Braveheart81]

Holloway is shorter than ideal but he has the bulk.

I think he's a strong chance of making the matchday 23 at lock based on his form. His lineout work is good enough that I don't think he'll miss out because he's a couple of inches shorter than the alternative.

Holloway is currently bringing the best ball running and ball playing of any options at lock and also excellent physicality. It's going to be hard to pass that up. I think Matt Philip is probably the guy he could potentially start ahead of (to play next to Rodda).

I'd be more concerned of picking Holloway if he was a chunk lighter than the alternatives, not a couple of inches shorter but just as heavy.

He also shouldn't be playing 6. Sure he could move there in a pinch but you're then taking him from being a dynamic lock who is a little short to being a big 6 who is less mobile than desired. You're taking away his best attribute which is how well he's carrying and his playmaking as a lock.

 

[Tomikin]

Holloway is shorter than ideal but he has the bulk.

I think he's a strong chance of making the matchday 23 at lock based on his form. His lineout work is good enough that I don't think he'll miss out because he's a couple of inches shorter than the alternative.

Holloway is currently bringing the best ball running and ball playing of any options at lock and also excellent physicality. It's going to be hard to pass that up. I think Matt Philip is probably the guy he could potentially start ahead of (to play next to Rodda).

I'd be more concerned of picking Holloway if he was a chunk lighter than the alternatives, not a couple of inches shorter but just as heavy.

He also shouldn't be playing 6. Sure he could move there in a pinch but you're then taking him from being a dynamic lock who is a little short to being a big 6 who is less mobile than desired. You're taking away his best attribute which is how well he's carrying and his playmaking as a lock.

Yeah, and at the moment you would think Valetini would be 6, if they play him where he's played all season.

Be interesting to see, I'm sure Hollaway will get his chance to impress at somestage, and if he does and takes his chance he'll get picked.

 

[Braveheart81]

Yeah, and at the moment you would think Valetini would be 6, if they play him where he's played all season.

I'm less convinced on this one because I think the Brumbies mix up how their 6 and 8 play versus a lot of other teams.

I could definitely pick Valetini and Wilson in the same backrow but currently they are both playing what the 8 role is for the Wallabies. Out of the two of them I'd probably pick Wilson at 6 and Valetini at 8.

 

[Derpus]

I'm less convinced on this one because I think the Brumbies mix up how their 6 and 8 play versus a lot of other teams.

I could definitely pick Valetini and Wilson in the same backrow but currently they are both playing what the 8 role is for the Wallabies. Out of the two of them I'd probably pick Wilson at 6 and Valetini at 8.

Valetini 8 and Leota 6

 

[Braveheart81]

Valetini 8 and Leota 6

Yeah, there's a strong chance that's the option and continues from where we finished last year.

 

[dru]

Simmons point of difference was his lineout work, at test level it was excellent, his challenges against the the big quality teams just reinforces my points, we have better test lineout options who are bigger and will be more effective against the other test locks

I am exceptionally happy to see Holloway doing great for the Tahs but I just can't see that being transposed into test rugby where they all play just as well while being bigger, mobile humans

In the tight 5, size matters

From recollection the prop world rated Simmons highly in the scrum too. It wasn’t just his line out work, it was his calling too.

 

[Tah Man]

Holloway playing in the backrow historically disappears - his involvements were never enough, when he was moved to lock he started playing tighter and getting more/better involvements

I can't see him in the backrow at test level, we have better, higher workrate options

Now as a test lock, he just isn't big enough, because his good field work at test level is expected, but a good test lock is just bigger and more effective

I rate him as a good super rugby standard lock, but we have better, more effective options at test level.

His only spot in a test team IMHO is a 5/6 bench option, and then he is competing against the Leota, Hanigan options etc

How do you determine he is not big enough?


He is both taller and heavier than Maro Itoje, who is widely considered one of the best locks in the world and incidentally plays for England, our 1st opponent.


His form warrants selection as one of our three locks. This not big enough rhetoric is garbage IMO

 

[dru]

How do you determine he is not big enough?


He is both taller and heavier than Maro Itoje, who is widely considered one of the best locks in the world and incidentally plays for England, our 1st opponent.


His form warrants selection as one of our three locks. This not big enough rhetoric is garbage IMO

For a lock Itoje is short. Hasn’t he also played 6? He reminds me of LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto).

 

[Marce]

How do you determine he is not big enough?


He is both taller and heavier than Maro Itoje, who is widely considered one of the best locks in the world and incidentally plays for England, our 1st opponent.


His form warrants selection as one of our three locks. This not big enough rhetoric is garbage IMO

Izack Rodda 202 cm
Rob Simmons 200 cm
Darcy Swain 200 cm
Matt Philip 199 cm
Jed Holloway 196 cm
Rob Leota 190 cm