Wallabies V Samoa - Test 2011

[DPK]

Where/why did you get/post that, fp?

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

Wow, a decent line up. Very good for a warm up game, the defence should get tested.

 

[Lance Free]

It's Pek Cowan who has been selected on the bench for the test.

From Press Release:

Pek Cowan Joins Qantas Wallabies Bench

The Qantas Wallabies match day squad for Sunday’s Castrol Edge Rugby Test against Samoa has been confirmed this morning, with Western Force prop Pekahou Cowan joining the seven-man bench for the one off Test.

His presence means the Wallabies will go into the game with a five-forward, two-back split among the substitutes.

The 25-year-old, who was the team’s internal Player of the Day on Test debut against Italy at Melbourne in 2009, made the most recently of his four Test appearances at the start of last year’s domestic Test programme beginning against Fiji in Canberra.

He held a regular starting position in the Force front row as part of a much improved Western Australian scrum, during this season’s Super Rugby competition.

Cowan comes into the Qantas Wallabies squad after NSW Waratahs prop Benn Robinson tore the anterior cruciate ligament in his right knee at training on Tuesday.

 

[rugbysmartarse]

bugger. was hoping for a fairytail ending for Baxter

 

[vidiot]

Cowan is a smidgen more versatile, isn't he? While being predominantly a loosehead.

I think Al is still odds on for more caps, even in this abbreviated season. The chances of no more injuries and everyone recovering to plan seem slim.

 

[fatprop]

bugger. was hoping for a fairytail ending for Baxter

Highlights a major concern to me, if there is a choice between a scrummager and a ball runner. Deans is prone to go for the ball runner.

That may work in S15, but not test rugby.

Palmer has no chance of playing for Aus under this criteria.

 

[DPK]

Palmer has time on his side, unlike Baxter, though. Still, you never know; Deans may yet pick a strong scrummager for a wet game.

 

[BDA]

Highlights a major concern to me, if there is a choice between a scrummager and a ball runner. Deans is prone to go for the ball runner.

That may work in S15, but not test rugby.

Palmer has no chance of playing for Aus under this criteria.

I partly agree because it would have been nice to see at least one scrummaging specialist in the squad as a 'just in case'.

However to be fair to Deans in this particular game Deans has made the right choice I think given that Samoa shouldn't really pressure us at scrum time.

 

[Richo]

I partly agree because it would have been nice to see at least one scrummaging specialist in the squad as a 'just in case'.

However to be fair to Deans in this particular game Deans has made the right choice I think given that Samoa shouldn't really pressure us at scrum time.

It shouldn't matter whether we have a pot plant or a ball runner in this game -- we should win regardless. For the front row, it should be a chance to work on building rusty combinations in a game setting.

 

[fatprop]

I partly agree because it would have been nice to see at least one scrummaging specialist in the squad as a 'just in case'.

However to be fair to Deans in this particular game Deans has made the right choice I think given that Samoa shouldn't really pressure us at scrum time.

Samoa isn't the issue, the philosophy is the issue.

The same arguments that haunts Burgess, his lack of core skill (passing under pressure), is just as critical for a winger (scoring tries) and just as important for a prop (holding up the scrum)

 

[Scotty]

We can't afford to have a pot plant anymore than we can afford to have a poor scrummager. A potplant will be found out just as much in defense - see Guy Sherpherdson for the Reds this year.

Someone that is passable at both is the answer.

 

[#1 Tah]

Someone that is passable at both is the answer.

Unfortunately, the first name that springs to mind is Benn Robinson.

 

[tigerland12]

I'm still confused to why Greg Holmes wasn't called up

 

[barbarian]

Holmes was OK for the Reds. Can you concretely say he played any better than Cowan this season? I don't think so. His name is only being considered due to the success of the Reds, which IMO he was a very small part of. The Reds scrum largely went backwards, his around play work was not brilliant. Cowan's work with ball in hand and at the set piece are on the whole better than Holmes in my view.

 

[MrTimms]

We can't afford to have a pot plant anymore than we can afford to have a poor scrummager. A potplant will be found out just as much in defense - see Guy Sherpherdson for the Reds this year.

I raised this with Andrew Blades last time I had a chat with him. He said (paraphrasing), and it made a lot of sense to me as he said it, that may be true in some games, but in others, you need to do some simple maths. How many points will a weak scrum cost you compared to some additional work around the field.

With all the dynamic players we have in our pack, surely we can afford a tighthead that can at least sure the scrum up for us? especially against the Englands/South Africas/Argentinas of the world where our backline can score enough points and we want to limit the penalty opportunities for the opposition.

 

[Scotty]

Unfortunately, the first name that springs to mind is Benn Robinson.

I've give him more than passable.

But the next two cabs off the rank are Slipper and Kepu. So it seems Deans might be heading in the right direction.

 

[Grandmaster Flash]

Holmes was OK for the Reds. Can you concretely say he played any better than Cowan this season? I don't think so. His name is only being considered due to the success of the Reds, which IMO he was a very small part of. The Reds scrum largely went backwards, his around play work was not brilliant. Cowan's work with ball in hand and at the set piece are on the whole better than Holmes in my view.

He was massive around the park against the Chiefs, a close second as best forward on the park behind Gill IMO. He stepped up big time in the final few games of the season where he came into a starting spot for Slipper.

 

[Scotty]

I raised this with Andrew Blades last time I had a chat with him. He said (paraphrasing), and it made a lot of sense to me as he said it, that may be true in some games, but in others, you need to do some simple maths. How many points will a weak scrum cost you compared to some additional work around the field.

With all the dynamic players we have in our pack, surely we can afford a tighthead that can at least sure the scrum up for us? especially against the Englands/South Africas/Argentinas of the world where our backline can score enough points and we want to limit the penalty opportunities for the opposition.

We need all the pack to work together both in the set piece and general play. We can't carry one guy that we can't trust to make the tackle in defense (which I was more referring to in the potplant comment, rather than being a dynamic runner of the ball). We also can't afford to carry a guy that can't make a breakdown and if he does get there, doesn't have an impact.

In addition to that I don't think changing one average tight head for one great tight head is going to all of a sudden improve the scrum out of sight.

 

[Groucho]

Cowan was more than decent this year for the Force, and he knows the Wallaby systems.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Indeed. The Force in the latter half of the season tipped over more than a few pretty handy scrums. It shocked the hell out of me.