Wallabies v. Springboks, 18th July 2015, Suncorp, Brisbane

[Brumby Runner]

Two teams were playing like that last night. Ask the Canes how good the attack at all costs game plan went for them.

Sure, there's always a winner and a loser (barring draws) but the intent of both teams was to try to score points and win the game, rather than just trying not to lose it. The history of ABs v Wallabies matches over recent decades makes a very strong argument that the team that tries to win will prevail over the team that tries not to lose (which I believe was the Aus style under Connolly, Jones and Deans) more often than not.

 

[emuarse]

Sure, there's always a winner and a loser (barring draws) but the intent of both teams was to try to score points and win the game, rather than just trying not to lose it. The history of ABs v Wallabies matches over recent decades makes a very strong argument that the team that tries to win will prevail over the team that tries not to lose (which I believe was the Aus style under Connolly, Jones and Deans) more often than not.

This has to be possibly the most in-depth revelation I've ever come across for rugby insight - I just didn't know

 

[Blue]

Thats pretty easy even for your standards. Compare the exodus of chicken running and injuries to what Snor had 4 years ago, 4 years before what Jake White had.

They haven't forced players breaks from S14 franchises.

So let me try.

Meyer asks Super coach to rest Player X.
Coach rests Player X
Player X goes "Fark this shit. Nobody is resting me. I am going to leave now. Just after I do my knee."

Do you seriously believe the shit you write. Seriously?

 

[Brumby Runner]

This has to be possibly the most in-depth revelation I've ever come across for rugby insight - I just didn't know

Lowest form of wit. It was an appropriate though obvious retort to @Scoey's rather lame comment about asking the Canes if their game plan delivered them the win.

 

[KOB1987]

Cheika values incumbency so I reckon the starting XV for this game will be the team that started v England on the EOYT with the strongest players subbed in for those that weren't selected or are unavailable. I don't want to hazard a guess for the bench as it will probably depend on what strength of team the Boks send out and all 31 players will get a run during the first 2 games. The second row /back row combo isn't ideal but we will get away with it if we are playing the Springbok U20s or B team or whatever. Otherwise we'll probably have to look at a 6 with a bit more height.

That team is (with changes in bold):
1. Slipper
2. Moore - C
3. Kepu
4. Skelton
5. Simmons
6. McMahon
7. Hooper
8. McCalman
9. Phipps
10. Foley
11. Horne
12. To'omua
13. Ashley-Cooper
14. Tomane
15. Folau

 

[qwerty51]

Alright given the squad I'd play these two teams for the first two matches and give everyone a run in the squad.

1. Slipper
2. Moore (c)
3. Holmes
4. Mumm
5. Simmons
6. Pocock
7. Hooper
8. Higginbotham
9. Genia
10. Cooper
11. Tomane
12. Kerevi
13. Kuridrani
14. Naiyaravoro
15. Folau

16. Hanson
17. Smith
18. Faulkner
19. Skelton
20. Fardy
21. Phipps
22. Lealiifano
23. Mitchell

Vs Argentina

1. Sio
2. Moore (c)
3. Kepu
4. Dennis
5. Horwill
6. McCalman
7. McMahon
8. Palu
9. White
10. Foley
11. Horne
12. Giteau
13. Ashley-Cooper
14. Cummins
15. Mitchell

16. Polota-Nau
17. Smith
18. Holmes
19. Arnold
20. Pocock
21. Phipps
22. To'omua
23. Beale

 

[Brumby Runner]

Cheika values incumbency so I reckon the starting XV for this game will be the team that started v England on the EOYT with the strongest players subbed in for those that weren't selected or are unavailable.

That team is (with changes in bold):
1. Slipper
2. Moore - C
3. Kepu
4. Skelton
5. Simmons
6. McMahon
7. Hooper
8. McCalman
9. Phipps
10. Foley
11. Horne
12. To'omua
13. Ashley-Cooper
14. Tomane
15. Folau

@KOB what is the evidence for saying that? And if it is from his time as Tahs' coach, how can we say that will translate also to the Wallabies? More posters than otherwise seem to be of the opinion that he will change up the team because the one he had for the EOYT wasn't one of his choosing.

If he is foolish enough to go with the backrow from last year then he will be very likely to lose a lot of his credibility, I'd say. I am expecting at least two of the backrow, and maybe all three of them, to be replaced in the starting side.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Wow. They're a couple of second rows that will put the fear into the opposition. Fear of laughing themselves to death I think.

Skelton must start in at least one of the tests, and I'd put him in against the Saffas.

A backrow containing both Hooper and Higgers is probably a bit of overkill in going for a running game against the Saffas. In my opinion, Hooper should start with Palu in whichever game they play, and Higgers to start with Fardy and Pocock in the other.

I do agree that McMahon is better used as a 7 than a 6, but with both Hooper and Pocock in the squad, I don't think he'll get to start there.

 

[qwerty51]

I was making an effort to give Fardy, Hooper, Skelton, Folau the Argentina leg off. All played big mins during Super Rugby and are too valuable this year to overplay.

 

[Fireworks]

Would like to see:
1. Slipper
2. Moore (c)
3. Kepu
4. Skelton
5. Simmons
6. Hooper (vc)
7. Pocock (vc)
8. Higginbotham
9. Genia
10. Foley
11. Horne
12. To'omua
13. Kuridrani
14. Speight/Mitchell
15. Folau

16. TPN
17. Sio
18. Holmes
19. Horwill / Arnold
20. McMahon / Fardy
21. McCalman
22. Giteau / Phipps

23. Beale / QC (Quade Cooper) / Kerevi / Tomane

 

[Marcelo]

Alright given the squad I'd play these two teams for the first two matches and give everyone a run in the squad.

1. Slipper
2. Moore (c)
3. Holmes
4. Mumm
5. Simmons
6. Pocock
7. Hooper
8. Higginbotham
9. Genia
10. Cooper
11. Tomane
12. Kerevi
13. Kuridrani
14. Naiyaravoro
15. Folau

Kerevi and Naiyaravoro at the same backline is a kamikaze attack

 

[oztimmay]

Looks like you will see the (c) next to Moore at this match.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/r...es-in-tournament/story-e6frf4pu-1227429751057

 

[Viking]

I'm actually tossing up who should start at half-back. Phipps was my clear favourite but his last few games were horrible. I wouldn't be opposed to see Genia start this one, especially if Cooper gets the nod for flyhalf.

 

[KOB1987]

@KOB what is the evidence for saying that? And if it is from his time as Tahs' coach, how can we say that will translate also to the Wallabies? More posters than otherwise seem to be of the opinion that he will change up the team because the one he had for the EOYT wasn't one of his choosing.

If he is foolish enough to go with the backrow from last year then he will be very likely to lose a lot of his credibility, I'd say. I am expecting at least two of the backrow, and maybe all three of them, to be replaced in the starting side.

I don't have any evidence, it's just my opinion. Much like the posts of others' are theirs also.

I may well be wrong, that's cool. That team is as good a starting point as anyone else's.

By next Wednesday I'll probably have an entirely different opinion.

 

[Scoey]

Sure, there's always a winner and a loser (barring draws) but the intent of both teams was to try to score points and win the game, rather than just trying not to lose it. The history of ABs v Wallabies matches over recent decades makes a very strong argument that the team that tries to win will prevail over the team that tries not to lose (which I believe was the Aus style under Connolly, Jones and Deans) more often than not.

The history of the Wallabies v ABs matches over the recent years makes a very strong argument that the ABs are simply a better outfit and nothing more.
Playing high risk, loose Rugby against the All Blacks will not give you a greater chance of success over them at all. They are the best team in the world at building pressure and punishing errors. Employing a high risk strategy will result in more errors and more punishment. Using a Super Rugby final where both teams have adopted the same style as evidence to suggest that the Wallabies could use the same style to beat the All Blacks in a Test Match is extremely flawed logic. The plan worked for one team and didn't for the other.
Don't get me wrong here either, I am certainly not advocating a conservative game plan at all, just pointing out why Chieka and Larkham won't have watched the final and decided to adopt the same style against the ABs.

 

[Groucho]

Two teams were playing like that last night. Ask the Canes how good the attack at all costs game plan went for them.

That's no indication of anything. The Canes might well have lost by more if they changed to an attritional style. How did all the other teams go?

 

[Scoey]

That's no indication of anything. The Canes might well have lost by more if they changed to an attritional style. How did all the other teams go?

That's pretty much my point. Just as you can't attribute the Canes loss to the loose style, you can't put the Clan's win down to the same style either.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The history of the Wallabies v ABs matches over the recent years makes a very strong argument that the ABs are simply a better outfit and nothing more.
Playing high risk, loose Rugby against the All Blacks will not give you a greater chance of success over them at all. They are the best team in the world at building pressure and punishing errors. Employing a high risk strategy will result in more errors and more punishment. Using a Super Rugby final where both teams have adopted the same style as evidence to suggest that the Wallabies could use the same style to beat the All Blacks in a Test Match is extremely flawed logic. The plan worked for one team and didn't for the other.
Don't get me wrong here either, I am certainly not advocating a conservative game plan at all, just pointing out why Chieka and Larkham won't have watched the final and decided to adopt the same style against the ABs.

I didn't specifically nominate the ABs as a target for the Wallabies to play an expansive, attacking mindset game against. Rather, I am advocating an approach to all test matches. I don't expect the Wallabies, or any other test team, to consistently beat the ABs this year either in the Rc or the RWC.

Examples of what I don't want to see are the Brumbies and Reds this year. The Brumbies focussed too much on defense and were the best defensive side in the SuperXV comp, but arguably to the detriment of their attack. Instead of developing an expansive, attacking structure, they relied probably too much on their mauling prowess with the occasional backline move.

The Reds on the other hand, were one of the best at set piece but had no, or little, discernible attacking or defensive structure otherwise.

A good defensive structure will get a team some success as per the Brumbies, but that needs to be complemented by a willingness to attack through the backs with ball in hand, as per both the Canes and Clan game plans, to enjoy a better rate of success, but probably not against the ABs unfortunately. I am not sure that Steven Larkham had that attacking structure working through the Brumbies' backline this year, and I really want to see the combination of Cheika and Larkham work on bringing some noticeable improvement to the national side.

 

[Scoey]

You did specifically mention the ABs in your reasoning but whatever.

What you're failing to consider though is that Super Rugby is a different scenario to Test Rugby. To enjoy any sustained success at Test level you need to be on top of all aspects of the game. Simples.

At the end of the day, the Wallabies won't be playing Rugby like we saw in the GF on the weekend. I also doubt they will be playing a conservative game either. It will be somewhere in the middle and that's where it needs to be.

 

[Blue]

Duane Vermeulen is gone.

Out for ten weeks. Requires ned surgery.

4 weeks ago the Stormers said he needed a week's rest. Now the Bok doctors say he has to have surgery. How the feck doe that work?

They are going to try anf get him back for the World Cup but he will be underdone.

Thanks a lot Stormers and Alistair Coetzee. He could have been four weeks into recovery already. The incompetence out of Stoemrs Rugby continues. I never thought it would hurt the Boks but now it really has. Coetzee's legacy didn't take long to kick in.

We will not win a World Cup without Vermeulen. There is no replacement for him.