Wallabies 2024

[The Ghost of Raelene]

I think beating Wales is proving to be as we knew deep down not impressive at all.

 

[Yoda]

All the winning in that game came after he was replaced by Noah, just like the shellacking by Argentina came after he was replaced. But the game was well and truly lost while he was on the ground.

Australia had no ball in first half v Wales. When Noah came on we then had the majority of possession. A ten’s job a lot easier with possession. V Argentina 24-20 when subbed? A 10 though needs to manage game. In that regard both Noah and him have more to learn. I just like an attacking 10 with a big boot and pace.

 

[dru]

The Rebels this year were an average to good side. Only just made the top eight and went out of the finals series at the first hurdle. Not a lot of their players will add to the quality of the other four teams. Canham and LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) at the Reds will strengthen their chances, while Tupu and Kailea will give the Tahs a big boost. The Force are probably not improved by their gains while the Brumbies will be weaker through the losses of Swain, Tua and Brown with only Tuilima (?) and Feliuai coming in.

The Reds will probably be in the top 4 next year. I hope the Brumbies can also make it but their depth in the forwards has been significantly weakened. The Tahs will show improvement (perhaps only for the 30 minutes each game Tupou is on the field) while I don't think the Force will make any significant improvements. I am not at all confident that rugby in this country will reach greatness with the exclusion of the Rebels.

The Rebels top-up is just a sugar hit anyway. Once it settles we will be back to the same squad sizes with a club-worth of players having moved on, a smaller footprint to generate talent, and smaller pathways for development. Season 2025 had better do it for the shrink supporters as after that it is simply a shrink.

 

[Hogan]

I think we saw a good game (relative to the rest of the team) by Donaldson on the weekend and the 321 votes are fair but in my mind it’s only solidified my view that Lolesio is the number one option at 10 currently.

Don’t get me wrong, Lolesio has had some genuinely awful games this year.

IMO though the turning point on the weekend was from minute 35 to 50 when we had several consecutive poor exits and Donaldson looked very powerless to release the pressure valve that was building up. Obviously other players getting hammered contributed to that but our 10 needs to be able to play at least somewhat decisively from a beaten pack which I think Lolesio does a bit better than Donaldson.

Donaldson was replaced by Lynagh at the 55min mark with the score at 20-24 and the game still in the balance. Up until then I thought he was one of our better players. Lynagh made no impact whatsoever which was disappointing considering the hype around him. One of Donaldson’s exits he did well just to kick it out after being pressured by 3 Argies raining down on him with absolutely no protection/wall from his forwards. He could have easily been charged down. Thought he kicked well otherwise. His goal kicking was excellent.

Imo Donaldson is definitely our best attacking 10, but like Noah, needs to show more consistency. I guess that comes with regular game time and experience playing at the highest level where time and space is at a premium. I’d be sticking with Lolesio and Donaldson and giving Lynagh more time to develop his body and game at Super Rugby level.

 

[Hogan]

I think Kellaway is better suited to fullback

Agree. A very calm and astute player. Too slow for the wing imo.

 

[Sword of Justice]

‘Lost some bad Tests with him’? Won v Wales in 2022. Wales at the RWC … yes lost… forwards were smashed and no one played well. Had a coach with no game plan. Won v Portugal. Won v Georgia. Lost v Argentina and all the carnage happened after he was replaced? Aussies looked great early. They are all his starting Tests at 10. So disagree after looking at the facts. That’s ok. I Hope all our young 10’s improve.

I would counter to say that 2022 Italy and that the turning point this weekend was while he was on the field. But I’m walking away from this now because I actually do think he was one of our better players last match.

 

[dru]

In terms of world rankings - you gain more points for an away win, but a loss greater than 15 points also gets more ranking points. The result in Argentina is that we have been trading places with Italy and are back to #9, while it has costed Argentina who drop from #6 to #7.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Australia had no ball in first half v Wales. When Noah came on we then had the majority of possession. A ten’s job a lot easier with possession. V Argentina 24-20 when subbed? A 10 though needs to manage game. In that regard both Noah and him have more to learn. I just like an attacking 10 with a big boot and pace.

The score might still have been close but the flow of the game certainly wasn't. The Pumas gained the ascendency towards the end of the first half and never looked in doubt after that. Saying that though, the Wallabies' chances were not helped by Lynagh coming on in the second half. He is currently the most over-hyped player in the squad and I have my doubts he has the potential to rise to the necessary level for test match playing.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I would counter to say that 2022 Italy and that the turning point this weekend was while he was on the field. But I’m walking away from this now because I actually do think he was one of our better players last match.

What caused the turning point is probably a mixture of a lot of elements, but it was marked (not caused) by a woeful box kick by Jake Gordon. Uncontestable, the Pumas simply took possession and scored. It is unfortunately a feature of Gordon's kicking that none are contestable by the Wallabies invariably being much too long and hence result in simple turnover of possession. I am not in Schmidt's camp on apparently regarding Jake to be our No 1 halfback.

 

[Slim 293]

It would be great if we could eventually have Bell and Tupou playing more minutes...

I know there was random on here who thought Bell didn't belong in the team, but he's consistently been one of our best players in every game he's played over the last couple of years.

Anyways, having Bell, Tupou, as well as Valetini, and Donaldson, who was playing pretty well, all coming off so early in the match was certainly not ideal.

 

[Braveheart81]

What caused the turning point is probably a mixture of a lot of elements, but it was marked (not caused) by a woeful box kick by Jake Gordon. Uncontestable, the Pumas simply took possession and scored. It is unfortunately a feature of Gordon's kicking that none are contestable by the Wallabies invariably being much too long and hence result in simple turnover of possession. I am not in Schmidt's camp on apparently regarding Jake to be our No 1 halfback.

No issues with the Pumas player kicking 25 metres downfield and none of our player's contesting it?

I'd suggest that had a far bigger impact on us conceding the try than the clearing box kick. It was from 5 metres inside out 22 and was caught 10 metres inside the Pumas half. It was never meant to be contestable.

 

[Sword of Justice]

It would be great if we could eventually have Bell and Tupou playing more minutes...

I know there was random on here who thought Bell didn't belong in the team, but he's consistently been one of our best players in every game he's played over the last couple of years.

Anyways, having Bell, Tupou, as well as Valetini, and Donaldson, who was playing pretty well, all coming off so early in the match was certainly not ideal.

It would be, but on the other hand imagine if we lost one or both of them to injury by over playing them. Our prop depth has seemingly vanished overnight and we are stuck in between a rock and a hard place, I feel.

Kailea and Nonggorr are the future. Hopefully they are both available for selection pronto.

 

[kiap]

It would be great if we could eventually have Bell and Tupou playing more minutes...

45 would be nice.Then 50, 55 ( ... 60?)

Unless my memory is playing tricks, Tupou at one point could just about play a full 80.

Into the latter part of his career though now, he'll never get near that again.

 

[Linerunner2023]

88 - 92 kg mark. That's Donaldson, Paisami, Stewart, Ikitau, Kellaway, Koroibete, Daugunu, and more. This is our current backline and by popular acclaim is overall undersized. Where are the bigger bodies? Lolesio, Lynagh and Toole are even smaller.

Nrl seems to have a lot of 6”3’ plus tall and 105kg players
Think turbo, Latrell, Stephen critchon, Lomax, Cobbo, Tuilagi and Coates
Playing centre or wing would help the wallabies backline size
Other ones like Bradman best 6” and 105kg would be a gun centre
We don’t seem to have a lot of bigger centres

 

[Brumby Runner]

It would be great if we could eventually have Bell and Tupou playing more minutes...

I know there was random on here who thought Bell didn't belong in the team, but he's consistently been one of our best players in every game he's played over the last couple of years.

Anyways, having Bell, Tupou, as well as Valetini, and Donaldson, who was playing pretty well, all coming off so early in the match was certainly not ideal.

Any injuries reported among that lot Slim do you know?

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

45 would be nice.Then 50, 55 ( ... 60?)

Unless my memory is playing tricks, Tupou at one point could just about play a full 80.

Into the latter part of his career though now, he'll never get near that again.

Anywhere between 50-60 should be the goal with 60 being ideal to really hit the last 20 with fresh legs. The depth other nations seem to have it doesn't make sense to keep a guy for 80 even if his lungs are up to it. They'll get done at a scrum and cost you points or a turnover.

Nrl seems to have a lot of 6”3’ plus tall and 105kg players
Think turbo, Latrell, Stephen critchon, Lomax, Cobbo, Tuilagi and Coates
Playing centre or wing would help the wallabies backline size
Other ones like Bradman best 6” and 105kg would be a gun centre
We don’t seem to have a lot of bigger centres

This is one of the reasons it seems crazy the Force have let 21 year old O'Donnell go and sign back with the Tahs. Maybe he really waned to head home but hes 6'1 and 97kg now. By what 23-24 hes going to be 100+ and he's a genuine Centre with skills not just a bulldozer.

 

[LeCheese]

45 would be nice.Then 50, 55 ( ... 60?)

Unless my memory is playing tricks, Tupou at one point could just about play a full 80.

Into the latter part of his career though now, he'll never get near that again.

He was consistently playing 70+ in the '19, '20, '21 seasons (with many full 80 performances) - but, if rumours are to be believed, it absolutely ruined him and contributed to the breakdown in relationship with Reds staff (incl. Thorn).

As you say, he'll probably never get back to anywhere near that, and realistically he probably should never have in the first place.

 

[Brumby Runner]

No issues with the Pumas player kicking 25 metres downfield and none of our player's contesting it?

I'd suggest that had a far bigger impact on us conceding the try than the clearing box kick. It was from 5 metres inside out 22 and was caught 10 metres inside the Pumas half. It was never meant to be contestable.

I find this statement to be bewildering BH. If a box kick is not meant to be contestable, then it is simply handing over possession to the other team. What would you say to a linebreak where the ball carrier runs from inside his 22m and simply hands the ball to the opposition fullback (or winger) near the half way line? Because that is the effect of that bax kick.

There are really only two types of kicks that should be used from inside the 22m. One is a contestable box kick hoping to regain possession near the half way line, and the other is a kick for touch that should go as far as the kicker can hoof it.

I really don't get the question about the Pumas' kick.

 

[Bullrush]

Ala'alatoa played a couple of games last year up in the 70-odd min mark. Such a shame he got that injury...

 

[Braveheart81]

I find this statement to be bewildering BH. If a box kick is not meant to be contestable, then it is simply handing over possession to the other team. What would you say to a linebreak where the ball carrier runs from inside his 22m and simply hands the ball to the opposition fullback (or winger) near the half way line? Because that is the effect of that bax kick.

There are really only two types of kicks that should be used from inside the 22m. One is a contestable box kick hoping to regain possession near the half way line, and the other is a kick for touch that should go as far as the kicker can hoof it.

I really don't get the question about the Pumas' kick.

How many clearance kicks from within the 22 are ever designed to be contestable?

It was a 45m kick. It was fielded by the Pumas player 10m inside their half.

I can't think of the last time I have seen a team try and kick a contestable kick from inside their own 22.

The Pumas caught the ball, kicked it back 25+ metres and caught the ball on the full with no Wallabies player contesting it. If you want a reason why the try was scored I'd look at allowing the Pumas to catch their own kick about 25 metres out from our try line with no one from the Wallabies getting close to it.