D
David
Guest
Yeah agreed, the backline was exposed badly in defence in the 2nd test against England, imagine what the AB's or Bok's would do to us. This isn't helped by out forward pack either.
Wallabies V Ireland, Brisbane
- Thread starter MrTimms
- Start date
- Status
Yeah agreed, the backline was exposed badly in defence in the 2nd test against England, imagine what the AB's or Bok's would do to us. This isn't helped by out forward pack either.
Hawko
Tony Shaw (54)
This morning has put paid to that hope I think.
Groucho
Greg Davis (50)
Indeed. The 2015 squad are playing for the Wallabies now:
Robinson, Nau, Slipper, Simmons, Douglas, Pocock, Genia, Cooper, Ioane, Turner, Davies, Horne, Beale, JOC (James O'Connor). Add Higginbotham and you have a quality team right there for 2015, most of them around 25.
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Groucho! Now you're talking! May I lend my support to this perspective, and I am yearning (no doubt like others) for a positive new view towards the light.
I think we must now accept that there is a serious risk that, for whatever reason (being nice here), the Deans period could disappoint.
In my own mind, my rugby patriotism and love the the game is turning to new envisaged pastures, namely: what is needed to ensure the 2012-2015 period is prepared in a manner that could take us back to, say, No 1 or 2 in global rankings for a minimum of 3 years straight (maybe we could live with 2). (Surely anything less aspirational than this is to confirm Australia's position as perpetually a middle-ranker.)
I do agree with your analysis above that there are grounds for optimism that the forward-looking player stock is encouraging in relation to the objective above.
The good accompanying question to your thoughts is: what else has to happen in say 2010-11 within all key aspects of Australian rugby (coaching, team investments, depth-creating, competitions, skills development, whatever) in order to ensure we meet the objective. (I must say I am very worried about the long-term future of the game in Australia if we cannot meet this objective...we will run out of chances and possibly become a version of the Socceroos of world rugby.)
Would you be willing to start a thread on this challenging but positive topic and just lead the debate on it a bit? And let's all be positive about it - what is going wrong today on the field is rather clear, no need for a rehashing of that.
We need good ideas and fresh approaches for the future.
Scarfman
Knitter of the Scarf
I'd go further - I think we need to dump Polota-Nau and Pocock now!. We need to blood new talent. We need to expose the next tier to top level rugby. We need to build depth and good ideas and fresh approaches for the future. Slipper might hang around until 2011 but then get rid of him. I saw a fat kid in Year 9 running around for Randwick High that really looks the goods. Scored 5 tries. I don't know if he can scrum, though, but that's OK, we can teach him. And JOC (James O'Connor), you must be kidding? The bloke is nearly 20! He's gone! In fact, I think we should write off 2015 and start building for 2019. Sure, we might lose a few games, but think of the squad that we'll be building.
Ash
Michael Lynagh (62)
Scarfy; I call reductio ad absurdum on you!
I have to say I don't agree with all selections of Deans. I would've recalled Baxter for instance, and chucked Ma'afu.
But I can't see how Deans could wave his magic wand fix our problem of lack of top second rowers and front rowers (apart from the above decision of his I disagree with), or lack of real fullbacks (outside of the slow and always crocked Shepherd).
I have to say I don't agree with all selections of Deans. I would've recalled Baxter for instance, and chucked Ma'afu.
But I can't see how Deans could wave his magic wand fix our problem of lack of top second rowers and front rowers (apart from the above decision of his I disagree with), or lack of real fullbacks (outside of the slow and always crocked Shepherd).
Reddy!
Bob Davidson (42)
Ah Groucho, the flamboyant Robbie Deans fanboy. I honestly hope that comment was tongue in cheek and you are sincerely not serious. Also please don't take that first comment personal, I think I would have opened with that for anyone.
Who cares if these players could be around for 2015, who cares? It is really a non-issue it's not funny. Any of those players could be dead, retired, injured, out of form, or dead...yeh they'll probably jsut be dead. Let's try and win the next game before we start thinking about the Wallaby team in 2 World Cups time.
Okay here is a thought for those of you enthralled by the current losing (but developing) Wallabies side. Have you considered that a large number of juniors who are comtemplating taking up a sport to play through school are not going to choose rugby because:
A) the Wallabies are a losing team and they want to play a game that winning teams like Collingwood play.
B) there are no well known Wallabies anymore because the team keeps changing every half second. Kids are more likely to play a sport because their favourite well known sportsman does, like Darren Lockyer.
C) The Socceroos beat NZ
I honestly think the Wallabies are a damaged brand and people just don't care anymore. In such a competitive market the Wallabies HAVE to win, there is just no other option.
Groucho
Greg Davis (50)
No offence taken, Reddy! I have my Robbie Deans Pokemon doll in my hand as we speak and am stroking it in anticipation of a big win against the Oirish.
But seriously, that is a good list of young players with enormous potential. If you don't like Robbie Deans (and many don't) then consider what Link might do with the same roster.
One of the several problems we face now (perhaps (perhaps!) including those you've listed) is our lack of experience due to a large turnaround of players. Those guys will have over fifty caps each in 2015.
That's not to say I'm aiming at 2015 in preference to now, by any stretch of the imagination. I was only responding to an earlier post suggesitng that we are stuffed in 2015 due to the loss in the junior RWC. I agree that we have to win now. I'd be playing the Fuse for example, and maybe Deans will as well when the real squad is selected after the Oireland game.
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
As the Deans era is (at last) being hotly debated here and elsewhere, we are soon going to enter one or more of the following states:
(a) the Deans critiques will be done and there won't be too much left to say (until things get much worse or a lot better);
(b) we'll just get angrier and angrier as either Deans doesn't resign (unlikely) or he just keeps doing a Deans every match (we know stubborn is RD's middle name);
(c) we'll quickly drift away from caring much and assume many others are doing the same - GAGR will save on server storage;
(d) we'll start to focus on how the whole Oz rugby set-up should be done MUCH better next time with the future in mind (this is NOT the same as accepting the current w-l debacles, it's just trying to be positive instead of depressed and totally disillusioned).
I liked what Groucho was trying to do with the 2015 squad idea as I felt like a blast of (d) to avert (c). I was certainly not endorsing in any form Deans' 'develop and experiment for the RWC model'.
D
daz
Guest
Actually RH, I think you have pretty much detailed a sequence of events rather than a series of options. a) leads to b), c) then d).
Hawko
Tony Shaw (54)
Its not just the world cup. Its how our team will be in 2014 to 2016.
The baby blacks have won for the last three years. That's 66 squad members who have played (or at least been on the sheet) and won a world cup. Does anyone seriously think that they won't get a really good 22 from those 66 plus some ring-ins for 2015? I don't think that we understand just how difficult the next 5 years are going to be. The New Zealand system continues to grow and develop talent year after year. That talent will be refined in the NPC and the super teams until its ready for AB duty. Then and only then the AB selectors will call them up when they are ready.
This year our U20 team was the youngest at the tournament. Why? Were our 19 year olds all crap? Or was it that Nucifora has the same crazy delusions as Deans and picked the team for "developing depth" for next year. Our forwards had talent clearly, but had not developed the hard edge to their forward play that is required for top level football. People want Gill to play 7 for the Reds next year. I'll bet that if he was a Kiwi he would not have even made that team, or if he had he would have been taken as the last squaddie to give him experience for next year.
Our test pack shows this same irrational lack of respect for experience. Sharpe and Humphries were the two best Aussie locks from the S14, so why not pick them for the trinations. Van is 35, so's Brad Thorn. Yes he's a journeyman, but he has learnt from his experience and is now better than all the available alternatives. If Horwill or Vickerman come back and displace him next year so what. Right now he's the best so pick him. Holmes is 27, peak age for a prop, he's got 17 caps but has been discarded because he is too old. Ditto Baxter. Instead we take a front row up against England that's got 2 caps combined and we get monstered. Twice. Our pack has not learnt to play as a pack - they don't clean out at the breakdown, they don't counter-ruck, they don't play with the required intensity. And so we lose to a very poor England and might possibly lose this weekend. Then comes the trinations.
Experience is all about learning to do what's required as a forward. If you don't pick experienced players in the pack you get inconsistent results because people haven't learnt from experience what is required to control the game. Its bad enough that we don't have an NPC to properly school people along the way, but to throw away the talent we have because they are too old just makes it worse.
We dropped to 4th in the ratings and could easily drop another place by the end of the trinations. To get back to number 1 we need to develop the kind of forward play that can take on the AB's and SB's. That requires a rethink on what we are doing now, bringing people along more slowly so when they get to the WB's they are ready to be worthy of the jumper. Our selectors need to be told to do that, they obviously can't figure it out for themselves. And it requires much more concentration on forward training than we are doing. And that's a task for JO'N to make happen, right across the board.
Hear, hear, Hawko. The mere fact that George Smith, for example, was left in no doubt he was being considered as "getting on" is another blight. Sure, Pocock is great, but he is not yet George Smith, and the backups are nowhere near either of them.
HOWL AT THE MOON #1: "We're losing too many games! Where are the old heads? Why are we playing youngsters? I don't give a fuck about development, we need to win NOW! Bring in Baxter, Van Humphries, Mortlock, Smith, Tuqiri, Larkham.....and sack the coach!"
Old players get injured or retire, as they inevitably do.
HOWL AT THE MOON #2: "Where's the fucken depth? We've got no fucking depth in this country! How are we supposed to beat the Saffas and Kiwis when they've got all these guys with 50/60 caps, and we've got jack shit!! Sack the coach!"
Younger players introduced, go back to step one and repeat ad nauseam
Old players get injured or retire, as they inevitably do.
HOWL AT THE MOON #2: "Where's the fucken depth? We've got no fucking depth in this country! How are we supposed to beat the Saffas and Kiwis when they've got all these guys with 50/60 caps, and we've got jack shit!! Sack the coach!"
Younger players introduced, go back to step one and repeat ad nauseam
D
daz
Guest
That's true Gagger, but it may be worth noting that the Kiwi's and Saffa's also have players that get old, injured and/or retired, yet they still manage to stay at #1 or #2 in the rankings and win silverware on a regular basis.
It's called depth
They both have a natural wave of talent that pushes up due to numbers, and the processes/competitions to put it on show and refine it.
We don't, and if we're realistic, never will to the same extent. We all know the arguments why - 4 winter codes, yadda yadda.
So we've got to somehow manufacture an amount of talented depth at the highest level that can at least put us in the same ball park.
Having worked within one of these systems that keeps kicking our arse, Deans and Nucifora have obviously looked around at what we had, saw it wasn't good enough (as our lack of silverware since 2000 proves) and decided radical measures were needed to generate this depth.
In this whole discussion the "Deans defenders" have been labeled the ones that are blinkered and over loyal/patriotic. I think it's actually the reverse.
The truth is that for the last 10 years, we just haven't been good enough in our talent depth and many of those against Deans' approach can't admit to this and want instead to blame the "poor motivation" by some freakin Kiwi, rather than our good Aussie stock.
The harder but truer path to walk is to admit that the crop we've had haven't been up to it, and radical surgery is needed to generate a new and deeper crop who can be in the next few years.
There's risk involved, and no guarantees we'll ever get there. But I'm sure as fuck sick of what we've won with a 60% win\loss ratio (nothing), and ready to build to get back to a 70-80% ratio over time, and win some proper shit.
They both have a natural wave of talent that pushes up due to numbers, and the processes/competitions to put it on show and refine it.
We don't, and if we're realistic, never will to the same extent. We all know the arguments why - 4 winter codes, yadda yadda.
So we've got to somehow manufacture an amount of talented depth at the highest level that can at least put us in the same ball park.
Having worked within one of these systems that keeps kicking our arse, Deans and Nucifora have obviously looked around at what we had, saw it wasn't good enough (as our lack of silverware since 2000 proves) and decided radical measures were needed to generate this depth.
In this whole discussion the "Deans defenders" have been labeled the ones that are blinkered and over loyal/patriotic. I think it's actually the reverse.
The truth is that for the last 10 years, we just haven't been good enough in our talent depth and many of those against Deans' approach can't admit to this and want instead to blame the "poor motivation" by some freakin Kiwi, rather than our good Aussie stock.
The harder but truer path to walk is to admit that the crop we've had haven't been up to it, and radical surgery is needed to generate a new and deeper crop who can be in the next few years.
There's risk involved, and no guarantees we'll ever get there. But I'm sure as fuck sick of what we've won with a 60% win\loss ratio (nothing), and ready to build to get back to a 70-80% ratio over time, and win some proper shit.
- Status