Wallabies v Pumas, GIO Stadium, Canberra, Sat 16th September

[Up the Guts]

We are so badly mismatched what's the point?

We were three minutes away from setting up a decider.

I would quite easily put preparation for a world cup over losing another Bledisloe any day.
.

Yeah nah I'd take a Bledislode 8 days a week.

 

[dillyboy]

Haven't won the Bledisloe in years and as i can barely remember the last time it happened i long since stopped caring about it. It's an anachronism. We are so badly mismatched what's the point?

I would quite easily put preparation for a world cup over losing another Bledisloe any day.

Edit: I wonder if, statistically, we are more likely to win a World Cup or a Bledisloe Cup.

Stop caring about it????? It's like a NSW league supporter saying they stop caring about Origin - it's the bloody pinnacle of our game.... Also the two often go hand in hand - whilst we can win a world cup without winning a Bledisloe I'd say it's highly unlikely that we'd win a WC unless we first have the cattle to win a Bledisloe

 

[dru]

Stop caring about it????? It's like a NSW league supporter saying they stop caring about Origin - it's the bloody pinnacle of our game.. Also the two often go hand in hand - whilst we can win a world cup without winning a Bledisloe I'd say it's highly unlikely that we'd win a WC unless we first have the cattle to win a Bledisloe

Nup. You can win a RWC by only having to beat ABs once. Bled is much harder. And it's on every year. It's time we started respecting it.

 

[KOB1987]

Nup. You can win a RWC by only having to beat ABs once. Bled is much harder. And it's on every year. It's time we started respecting it.

Or in the case of 1999 by letting the French beat them for us

 

[cyclopath]

Nup. You can win a RWC by only having to beat ABs once. Bled is much harder. And it's on every year. It's time we started respecting it.

Who do you think doesn't respect it?

 

[dru]

The WB mode under Cheik has been to build for a one in four year comp. Selections have no appearance of being the strongest available, but theoretically (unprovable) the strongest at the RWC.

The absence of players like Higgers and Fardy in 2017 is an example. Especially when replaced by kid rookies.

It is a lack of respect for the supporters and certainly holds the RWC as more important than the Bled.

But I guess it's OK if Olympic-like you only wish to dial in once every four years.

 

[Derpus]

The WB mode under Cheik has been to build for a one in four year comp. Selections have no appearance of being the strongest available, but theoretically (unprovable) the strongest at the RWC.

The absence of players like Higgers and Fardy in 2017 is an example. Especially when replaced by kid rookies.

It is a lack of respect for the supporters and certainly holds the RWC as more important than the Bled.

But I guess it's OK if Olympic-like you only wish to dial in once every four years.

i suppose it's a tactic that's hard to judge until the results are borne out. I won't be complaining if it snags us a World Cup. If it snags us a group stage exit, perhaps it was the wrong tac.

 

[kiap]

i suppose it's a tactic that's hard to judge until the results are borne out. I won't be complaining if it snags us a World Cup. If it snags us a group stage exit, perhaps it was the wrong tac.

It's not going to snag us the next World Cup.

But it's free to dream. I s'pose the Wobs have always got a puncher's chance, although we might need a judge like Adalaide Byrd in our corner to make it happen.

She can be our tooth fairy.

 

[dru]

It's not going to snag us the next World Cup.

But it's free to dream.

TBF not snagging the next RWC but doing well should still be considered a very good thing.

Just not at the expense of constantly putting out "development teams" in the RC.

 

[Scrubber2050]

I love RWC's - thy go for about 4 weeks, every 4 years.

It's no different to the Olympics. We win fuck all there as well.

I like my rugby team (in the case of the Wallabies) playing 12-15 tests per year. I therefore want the best players playing each test so we have the best possible chance of winning. Don't have problem blooding a few younger guys off the bench but they shouldn't start until they are genuinely good enough.

 

[barbarian]

The WB mode under Cheik has been to build for a one in four year comp. Selections have no appearance of being the strongest available, but theoretically (unprovable) the strongest at the RWC.
.

Is it though? Really all of this debate is over one position - blindside flanker.

Every other position you could argue Cheika has it more or less right. Our backline is stable and settled, and apart from the merry-go-round rotation of three or four locks into one spot, the tight five is also pretty settled.

But because we always need a selection OUTRAGE on here, we've latched onto Hanigan at 6. Which is fair enough, but hardly evidence of a widespread policy by Cheika that hands the Bled to the ABs and treats the fans as mugs.
.

 

[Braveheart81]

I agree completely that Fardy should have been in the equation if we were to put our best possible team on the park.

I still disagree about Higginbotham though. Even his most ardent supporters agree that he would only operate well with a different backrow to the one we currently have and it is also plainly clear that our best two backrowers are Hooper and McMahon and the third member is being picked to work around them.

The assumption that somehow this one selection suggests we are not valuing the Bledisloe is a huge stretch though.

 

[dru]

Is it though? Really all of this debate is over one position - blindside flanker.

Every other position you could argue Cheika has it more or less right. Our backline is stable and settled, and apart from the merry-go-round rotation of three or four locks into one spot, the tight five is also pretty settled.

But because we always need a selection OUTRAGE on here, we've latched onto Hanigan at 6. Which is fair enough, but hardly evidence of a widespread policy by Cheika that hands the Bled to the ABs and treats the fans as mugs.
.

Barbar - have I pushed a selection outrage? Apologies OUTRAGE.

It isnt simply hanigan. Hanigan, Dempsy, Korczyk, Uelese, Robertson etc. You can argue who does or doesnt look goo (all have potential), but all are the result of a development team.

It's not selection so much I have an issue with, it is the strategy of using one comp each 4 years as a KPI, and the very important (or should be considered) very important tests that occur every year. Especially the Bled.

 

[dru]

I agree completely that Fardy should have been in the equation if we were to put our best possible team on the park.

I still disagree about Higginbotham though. Even his most ardent supporters agree that he would only operate well with a different backrow to the one we currently have and it is also plainly clear that our best two backrowers are Hooper and McMahon and the third member is being picked to work around them.

The assumption that somehow this one selection suggests we are not valuing the Bledisloe is a huge stretch though.

BH you may well be right on Higgers - though I might also disagree. I'm happy to accept Hooper and cast in concrete. But it doesnt matter - it's the process that sits behind it behind the comp management.

I've been watching nothing but a development team since the RWC.

 

[Braveheart81]

Who should be selected ahead of Uelese and Robertson? For all the criticism of Robertson, it's hard to pick a LHP that is a substantially better candidate right now. Smith played in June and also got dusted up. Roberston has been pretty solid at scrum time and had a good workrate around the park through the Rugby Championship.

Whilst we'd all like them in the squad, it's hard to argue that RHP or Matt Philip wouldn't also be development selections if they were playing right now.

 

[Braveheart81]

BH you may well be right on Higgers - though I might also disagree. I'm happy to accept Hooper and cast in concrete. But it doesnt matter - it's the process that sits behind it behind the comp management.

I've been watching nothing but a development team since the RWC.

What process?

A development team since the RWC? Because we've had a lot of debutantes?That happens pretty much everywhere after a RWC because veterans hang on for a RWC and new players are delayed in lieu of experience for the tournament and then afterwards players retire and new players come in.

 

[dru]

What process?

A development team since the RWC? Because we've had a lot of debutantes?That happens pretty much everywhere after a RWC because veterans hang on for a RWC and new players are delayed in lieu of experience for the tournament and then afterwards players retire and new players come in.

I have no doubt it happens elsewhere and I dont care. I do care about the Wallabies.

 

[Braveheart81]

I have no doubt it happens elsewhere and I dont care. I do care about the Wallabies.

What does this even mean?

We should prevent players from retiring after the RWC or moving overseas?

Players base their career decisions on RWC cycles. Teams work in with that planning building for the biggest event in the game.

It's a natural outcome that a lot of the new players debut in the two years after the RWC because older players move on and then in the two years leading up to a RWC teams become more settled.

I'm not sure how anything could be really changed to do something different. Make players consider the RWC less important?

 

[Derpus]

What does this even mean?

We should prevent players from retiring after the RWC or moving overseas?

Players base their career decisions on RWC cycles. Teams work in with that planning building for the biggest event in the game.

It's a natural outcome that a lot of the new players debut in the two years after the RWC because older players move on and then in the two years leading up to a RWC teams become more settled.

I'm not sure how anything could be really changed to do something different. Make players consider the RWC less important?

I think this is where the argument that 'the Bledisloe is the pinnacle of our game' comes in. Players should rate winning the Bledisloe as more important than the World Cup. Rugby's version of State of Origin i suppose.

 

[barbarian]

It isnt simply hanigan. Hanigan, Dempsy, Korczyk, Uelese, Robertson etc. You can argue who does or doesnt look goo (all have potential), but all are the result of a development team.

It's not selection so much I have an issue with, it is the strategy of using one comp each 4 years as a KPI, and the very important (or should be considered) very important tests that occur every year. Especially the Bled.

I find your argument a bit strange here. Regardless of the year, all coaches of all teams look to blood good young players when they can.

What Cheika has done this year is pretty standard practice IMO - Link did it, Deans did it, Knuckles did it etc.

Having one started and a few bench youngsters hardly makes it a 'development team'. And the one that is a legitimate development guy (Uelese) could well be sensational. Would you prefer he be left out and an older guy like Hanson get the nod?
.