Wallabies v Pumas - Saturday 17 September, nib Stadium Perth

[Froggy]

I find it hard to support the idea of Lance as back-up inside back. I mean, the guy has been good at NRC level, two levels below test rugby, but he's yet to win a permanent spot in a Super side (okay he's been injured this year, but couldn't nail down a spot at the Tahs or the Reds)

As I've said previously, I would be prepared to give Hodge a run at 12, but that's a risk given that in his test rugby to date he's shown great defence, but not a lot of attack or ball playing. Given we are without Lilo, To'omua, Beale and Giteau, Foley is a reasonable option in my opinion if you are not prepared to risk Hodge.

 

[barbarian]

Barbar - with Quade at 10 the Wallabies have had two reasonably convincing wins in TRC and have shown an attacking capacity that hasn't been obvious in any of the games that BF has played 10. Do you think that the improvement is all down to Bernie Larkham and that it would have happened if Bernard Foley had played 10 the last two games?

I may be in the minority here, but I thought our attack was fairly average last night. We never got into any real flow, and made a shitload of errors.

That said, we won quite comfortably and scored 5 tries in the process. Rugby is a head scratcher sometimes, hey, because broadly I thought we looked better against SA and England than we did last night.

I think Cooper's passing and game reading ability is superior to Foley's, and he's been building for the last few weeks (albeit against easier opposition than what Foley faced at 10). But the holes are still there.

I'm a Quade fan, and I'd keep picking him at 10. If I had to drop one of the players I'd pick Foley. But for me it's a really close run thing right now, and neither player has really stepped up and stamped their class on a game in the way Genia has.
.

 

[kiap]

neither player has really stepped up.

Cometh the hour, cometh the man:

Give him a go at twickers against the argies.

 

[A mutterer]

ill take the win, but with the amount of points left on the park and to my mind a bit of mental shirking with easy early points i think there are still points to prove for a number of players. i've said it before but chieka's teams have consistently over the years demonstrated that piling on too many early points and they take the foot off the accelerator and try and give the lead away.

i agree that quade looked more like his old self, but that's always been a mixed bag. and if quade won't take on the line then that forces foley to pick up the slack and perhaps limits the playmaking options when we need go forward. we're lucky that genia looks like hes building into some spectacular form.

 

[Pfitzy]

Barbar - with Quade at 10 the Wallabies have had two reasonably convincing wins in TRC and have shown an attacking capacity that hasn't been obvious in any of the games that BF has played 10. Do you think that the improvement is all down to Bernie Larkham and that it would have happened if Bernard Foley had played 10 the last two games?

Nothing to do with the quality of the opposition, of course.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Great to see another win, and a few old faces and some new ones played very well. We saw a few glimses of the future there as well.

Another 31 missed tackles last night though!

Our defence has had plenty of plaudits over the last day or two, and the Argies were held well with all of that possession, and a lot of it has to do with the rush defense but, that's still pretty worrying.

Since game 2 against England the missed tackle stats have been nothing short of embarrassing. Thankfully it didn't matter on Saturday night. Defence held up, but at times the tackling didn't

 

[Hawko]

I find it hard to support the idea of Lance as back-up inside back. I mean, the guy has been good at NRC level, two levels below test rugby, but he's yet to win a permanent spot in a Super side (okay he's been injured this year, but couldn't nail down a spot at the Tahs or the Reds)

As I've said previously, I would be prepared to give Hodge a run at 12, but that's a risk given that in his test rugby to date he's shown great defence, but not a lot of attack or ball playing. Given we are without Lilo, To'omua, Beale and Giteau, Foley is a reasonable option in my opinion if you are not prepared to risk Hodge.

Cheika/Gibson thought Horwitz would develop into something special and so let Lance go. It was a bloody awful decision at the time and one that time has already proved was a turkey. This year at Super level Lance looked a cut above every other Australian 10, although he was surrounded by some pretty poor performers (Mathewson, Godwin, etc.), until he got badly injured. Now he's recovered and he's killing it in another also-ran team. He'd be in the Wallaby squad for mine, and pushing Foley hard for his spot.

He won't be because Cheika doesn't rate him; but his form says he should be there and Godwin shouldn't. Godwin's form has been poor to awful, as the Brumbies are about to find out.

 

[cyclopath]

I agree while also stating two of those YC's were the most pussy cards I have ever seen.

True, he's copped the somewhat rough end of a couple of calls. But as we know, perception in Test rugby is a big thing. To have 4 YCs in 8 Tests (as someone posted earlier) is an issue - missing a tackle or two can be a problem, missing 10 minutes is a real problem. Cooper can tackle fine, but as Pfitzy said, his technique has regressed of late and I hope they're onto it. Rather see him on the field than off it.

 

[Hawko]

Great to see another win, and a few old faces and some new ones played very well. We saw a few glimses of the future there as well.

Another 31 missed tackles last night though!

Our defence has had plenty of plaudits over the last day or two, and the Argies were held well with all of that possession, and a lot of it has to do with the rush defense but, that's still pretty worrying.

Since game 2 against England the missed tackle stats have been nothing short of embarrassing. Thankfully it didn't matter on Saturday night. Defence held up, but at times the tackling didn't

There are different sorts of missed tackles though. One of Simmons' misses was where he dashed up trying to put the full-back on his arse and got stepped. The next two tacklers got up and knocked the ball carrier down. Yeah he missed a tackle but in doing so he closed down a kick and slowed down the runner. Had the others kept up with him so they were in a close line. one of the three would have knocked him down. I liked it that Simmons busted his arse to get to the man quickly; I wished his mates had done so too.

But Simmons missed another tackle say the stats.

The tackles I hate seeing missed are more the one-on-one misses in a defensive line where there was just minimal effort by the tackler.

The real issue is that the Argies were still able to get the ball away in the tackle situation. That meant we just had to do tackle after tackle. The tackles were effective but when the offload got away to a player with momentum we had to make another under-pressure tackle. Watching the game I didn't see heaps of missed tackles letting the Argies waltz through our lines and score. I saw committed defence where any misses were immediately covered up. The NZ team had similar problems for 50 minutes the week before.

For NZ, committed defence reduced the opposition score last week. This week for Australia the missed tackles were "embarrassing". In my opinion we are not applying the same pass mark. When the Argies get their offload game going they are bloody hard to stop. NZ, SA and Australia have all found that to be the case. Sometimes stats just have to recognise that the other team was doing some good things.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I thought our D was bloody excellent last night, considering the amount of possession the Argies had. We also didn't get the rub of the green at the breakdown and on another day Pocock and Hooper might have been looked on more favourably by the ref. Had that been the case we would have run up 50, because we would have been able to counter attack more and beat them on the break.

 

[KOB1987]

Cheika/Gibson thought Horwitz would develop into something special and so let Lance go. It was a bloody awful decision that time has already proved was a turkey. This year at Super level Lance looked a cut above every other Australian 10, although he was surrounded by some pretty poor performers (Mathewson, Godwin, etc.), until he got badly injured. Now he's recovered and he's killing it in another also-ran team. He'd be in the Wallaby squad for mine, and pushing Foley hard for his spot.

He won't be because Cheika doesn't rate him; but his form says he should be there and Godwin shouldn't. Godwin's form has been poor to awful, as the Brumbies are about to find out.

I don't know a lot about him TBH but he seems like a late bloomer. He had a blinder today for the Spirit, his defence was awesome. I recognise that he was mostly coming off the bench but he had 21 games for the Reds and scored 8 points, and 13 games for the Tahs and scored 5 points. Compare that with 6 games for the Force this year and he scored 44 points. Do you know for sure that Cheika doesn't rate him, or was it just a case of backing the wrong horse, given the player quotas and that they already had Foley, Beale, Folau, Horne, Kellaway as coverage for 10/12/15 and they just went with the young promising guy for the last spot with the future in mind? If it was just that, couldn't MC realise he's a better player now and include him in the squad, or do you think ego would kick in and he'd see that as admission of a past mistake?

He should be a consideration for the EOYT you'd think, notwithstanding that he's 26.

 

[Strewthcobber]

For NZ, committed defence reduced the opposition score last week. This week for Australia the missed tackles were "embarrassing". In my opinion we are not applying the same pass mark. When the Argies get their offload game going they are bloody hard to stop. NZ, SA and Australia have all found that to be the case. Sometimes stats just have to recognise that the other team was doing some good things.

There's a lot of truth in your post, but I'm not holding the teams to different standards. The ABs missed 13 tackles last week - 10% of their attempts. The Wobs missed 31 - at nearly twice the percentage.

Now obviously there is not a huge correlation between missing tackles and losing games - but it sure doesn't help, and it's currently a feature of this Australian team that is worth noting amidst the (deserved) praise for the defensive efforts

 

[Gnostic]

My thoughts on the game after a day of rumination.

1) Argentina appeared to be stuffed physically and mentally after the ABs game. They really lacked the intensity we saw in the first 50 last week. I seem to remember the same thing happening last year.
2) The Wallabies executed their attacks pretty well and were accurate. A lovely change to see.
3) The defensive structure seemed a bit different last night, less drift and more up and in. Maybe I was imagining it? The individual defence was also far better excepting two glaringly poor attempts in the lead up to Argentina's first try, the turnstile efforts of both Foley and Cooper. Just really weak efforts.
Kerevi got caught once that I saw coming in instead of drifting out.
4) Coleman really put in, massive effort. Accurate and dominant.
5) Lineout - Coleman and Mumm have been the common factor in two weeks of very greatly improved lineout performances. They still have absolutely no threat on opposition but at least Wallaby ball is generally clean and they can throw long.

They won the game and scored more tries than they did in the rest of their tests this year, or close enough to it.

For the negative :-
1) Foley appears to be suffering from the effects of non-stop rugby. He is still great with his running game but his passing game has dropped away.
2) It is really difficult to judge how much was the improvement of the Wallaby side (and I do think they improved) and how much was the Argies being off colour. They certainly didn't have the same fire they had in NZ.
3) The Argies really need to stop watching soccer. The number of players with apparently life threatening injuries requiring play to stop only for them get up and run on with absolutely no ill effects is a joke. Very soccer like and I'd like to see them warned. My old man used to say to me without looking up when I was complaining "Is there blood? No. Well you aren't hurt, so stop whinging or I'll give you something to whinge about." The broken collarbone sorted that , but you get the gist.

 

[Alex]

"Barbar - with Quade at 10 the Wallabies have had two reasonably convincing wins in TRC and have shown an attacking capacity that hasn't been obvious in any of the games that BF has played 10. Do you think that the improvement is all down to Bernie Larkham and that it would have happened if Bernard Foley had played 10 the last two games?"

or it could have been because England and New Zealand are better teams than Sth Africa and Argentina - or it could all be just down to Quade?

 

[TOCC]

or it could have been because England and New Zealand are better teams than Sth Africa and Argentina - or it could all be just down to Quade?

Quade also played 5/8 against the All Blacks, whom I'm sure are just as good if not better then England and New Zealand

 

[Groucho]

Cometh the hour, cometh the man:

View attachment 8486

Give him a go at twickers against the argies.

I've been prevaricating kiap, but if you say so then I'm prepared to give it a run. Give him a shot.

 

[Groucho]

There's a lot of truth in your post, but I'm not holding the teams to different standards. The ABs missed 13 tackles last week - 10% of their attempts. The Wobs missed 31 - at nearly twice the percentage.

Now obviously there is not a huge correlation between missing tackles and losing games - but it sure doesn't help, and it's currently a feature of this Australian team that is worth noting amidst the (deserved) praise for the defensive efforts

It must be noted how many tackles the Wobs had to make. Missed tackles rise as a function of the tackles that have to be made. There's a limit to defense, and exhaustion sets in.

 

[Groucho]

I find it hard to support the idea of Lance as back-up inside back. I mean, the guy has been good at NRC level, two levels below test rugby, but he's yet to win a permanent spot in a Super side (okay he's been injured this year, but couldn't nail down a spot at the Tahs or the Reds)

As I've said previously, I would be prepared to give Hodge a run at 12, but that's a risk given that in his test rugby to date he's shown great defence, but not a lot of attack or ball playing. Given we are without Lilo, To'omua, Beale and Giteau, Foley is a reasonable option in my opinion if you are not prepared to risk Hodge.

Hodge has shown plenty at Supe level, including a hat trick and twofer. Every new player is picked on their Supe form.

 

[kiap]

I've been prevaricating kiap, but if you say so then I'm prepared to give it a run. Give him a shot.

JL is great at releasing the players around him. Noticeably seemed to have stepped up last year while playing under Darren Coleman for NSW Country. Continued on in Super Rugby before his season was shortened through injury but is back where he left off. He's matured into a very good inside back at the young age of 26.

We won't know if Lance can translate that to the top level until he gets onto a few rungs of the national ladder. The Argie test in London is just my possible target but there should be more of a chance on the EOYT with an enlarged touring squad being taken for the first time in several years.

This bloke is a better player than other fringe inside backs included in recent national squads IMO.

 

[Groucho]

JL is great at releasing the players around him. Noticeably seemed to have stepped up last year while playing under Darren Coleman for NSW Country. Continued on in Super Rugby before his season was shortened through injury but is back where he left off. He's matured into a very good inside back at the young age of 26.

We won't know if Lance can translate that to the top level until he gets onto a few rungs of the national ladder. The Argie test in London is just my possible target but there should be more of a chance on the EOYT with an enlarged touring squad being taken for the first time in several years.

This bloke is a better player than other fringe inside backs included in recent national squads IMO.

Only 26? Get him in there.