Wallabies v Wales (Cardiff)

[Joe Blow]

I guess EJ (Eddie Jones) is the obvious choice if we want an Aussie after the RWC. If the change needs to be made beforehand and/or if nationality is not an issue then Jake a White is the obvious choice. He’s got runs on the board at test level and intuitively knows how to put together a coaching team

 

[Slim 293]

Like or lump it, that's not seen as the Australian way.

Nah, just lack of skills......... the NRL would suggest otherwise.

 

[Dave Beat]

I'd take England's recent record ahead of ours any day of the week.

Must have missed the cliff that England fell off. They looked much more creative and dangerous in torrential rain against the All Blacks than we looki in a bone dry covered stadium against far lesser oppoosition. We didn't even loook like scoring a try.

Yep,
England invested heavily in pathway, and it is now paying dividends.
Call it grass roots or pathway - our governing body has neglected it for many many years now.

I support Hoops call, go for try - that is way rugby is played. Unfortunatey the game plan lacked the attack to score try's.
That was like soccer 3 goals to 2.

 

[liquor box]

Hooped won’t see out a 5 year contract in his current role. no one really knows what’s is the detail of his contract. and it’s his business anyway

The next Quade Cooper, play cub rugby for a million a year and then to the Rebels?

 

[barbarian]

Oh how I remember being pilloried on these threads for suggesting that Eddie Jones was a better option than Michael Cheika all those years ago.

Yes, yes, what a genius you are. This is the Wallabies/Wales thread, but really we don't need to discuss something as trifling as 'rugby' do we. Instead we can spend the next three pages fawning over your Nostradamus-like qualities.

Oh wise one, we were so wrong! We strayed in not heeding your words!

But seriously, what you pose is such a bizarre hypothetical that it doesn't merit a second of consideration. Who's to say what would happen if we appointed your suggestions? Given the low talent base I would actually posit the results would be similar.

Eddie Jones is a rocks-or-diamonds coach. You can point to England, but you could also have a look at what happened when he was at the Reds. His style of mental trickery is not too dissimilar to Cheika, and I'd actually wager it would have similar results - an initial boost but a slow decline when the mental powers start to lose their lustre.

The recent run of poor results doesn't mean the initial decision was wrong. If I had a time capsule I would still appoint Cheika to the job - he had just won a Super title to add to a Heinken Cup, and had players chomping at the bit to play for him.

To go full revisionist history and say we should never have appointed him is just bizarre.

You know what would have happened? He would have probably been picked up by England or Argentina and led them to a year or two of domination, and you would be on here going 'HOW did we let Cheika get away?'.

See - I can do pointless hypotheticals too.......
.

 

[wamberal]

Yep,
England invested heavily in pathway, and it is now paying dividends.
Call it grass roots or pathway - our governing body has neglected it for many many years now.

I support Hoops call, go for try - that is way rugby is played. Unfortunatey the game plan lacked the attack to score try's.
That was like soccer 3 goals to 2.

Dave,


The game started in England. They have always had huge numbers of players compared to just about everybody else. The RFU had the finances to own Twickenham, which sells out more often than not. Rivers of gold.


The question should be, with all their natural advantages, why are they not perennial winners of everything?

 

[Derpus]

Dave,


The game started in England. They have always had huge numbers of players compared to just about everybody else. The RFU had the finances to own Twickenham, which sells out more often than not. Rivers of gold.


The question should be, with all their natural advantages, why are they not perennial winners of everything?

Best athletes go to Football/Soccer.

The only country in the world where Rugby is first choice is New Zealand and it shows. Sometimes the simplest answer is the right one.

 

[Lorenzo]

Yes, yes, what a genius you are. This is the Wallabies/Wales thread, but really we don't need to discuss something as trifling as 'rugby' do we. Instead we can spend the next three pages fawning over your Nostradamus-like qualities.

Oh wise one, we were so wrong! We strayed in not heeding your words!

But seriously, what you pose is such a bizarre hypothetical that it doesn't merit a second of consideration. Who's to say what would happen if we appointed your suggestions? Given the low talent base I would actually posit the results would be similar.

Eddie Jones is a rocks-or-diamonds coach. You can point to England, but you could also have a look at what happened when he was at the Reds. His style of mental trickery is not too dissimilar to Cheika, and I'd actually wager it would have similar results - an initial boost but a slow decline when the mental powers start to lose their lustre.

The recent run of poor results doesn't mean the initial decision was wrong. If I had a time capsule I would still appoint Cheika to the job - he had just won a Super title to add to a Heinken Cup, and had players chomping at the bit to play for him.

To go full revisionist history and say we should never have appointed him is just bizarre.

You know what would have happened? He would have probably been picked up by England or Argentina and led them to a year or two of domination, and you would be on here going 'HOW did we let Cheika get away?'.

See - I can do pointless hypotheticals too...
.

It's been three years of 'poor results'. I don't know that I'd call that 'recent' in the context of his four years at the helm. I mean, it's most of it, right?

Personally, I had no issue with the appointment. It was the extension that rewarded him as if he had won the RWC (when he hadn't) that I didn't (and still don't) like.

 

[Quick Hands]

Yes, yes, what a genius you are. This is the Wallabies/Wales thread, but really we don't need to discuss something as trifling as 'rugby' do we. Instead we can spend the next three pages fawning over your Nostradamus-like qualities.

Oh wise one, we were so wrong! We strayed in not heeding your words!

But seriously, what you pose is such a bizarre hypothetical that it doesn't merit a second of consideration. Who's to say what would happen if we appointed your suggestions? Given the low talent base I would actually posit the results would be similar.

Eddie Jones is a rocks-or-diamonds coach. You can point to England, but you could also have a look at what happened when he was at the Reds. His style of mental trickery is not too dissimilar to Cheika, and I'd actually wager it would have similar results - an initial boost but a slow decline when the mental powers start to lose their lustre.

The recent run of poor results doesn't mean the initial decision was wrong. If I had a time capsule I would still appoint Cheika to the job - he had just won a Super title to add to a Heinken Cup, and had players chomping at the bit to play for him.

To go full revisionist history and say we should never have appointed him is just bizarre.

You know what would have happened? He would have probably been picked up by England or Argentina and led them to a year or two of domination, and you would be on here going 'HOW did we let Cheika get away?'.

See - I can do pointless hypotheticals too...
.

For something which doesn't merit a second of consideration, you seem to have spent a while churning out this post.

Get that bile out of your system, you'll feel better for it.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Yes, yes, what a genius you are. This is the Wallabies/Wales thread, but really we don't need to discuss something as trifling as 'rugby' do we. Instead we can spend the next three pages fawning over your Nostradamus-like qualities.

Oh wise one, we were so wrong! We strayed in not heeding your words!

But seriously, what you pose is such a bizarre hypothetical that it doesn't merit a second of consideration. Who's to say what would happen if we appointed your suggestions? Given the low talent base I would actually posit the results would be similar.

Eddie Jones is a rocks-or-diamonds coach. You can point to England, but you could also have a look at what happened when he was at the Reds. His style of mental trickery is not too dissimilar to Cheika, and I'd actually wager it would have similar results - an initial boost but a slow decline when the mental powers start to lose their lustre.

The recent run of poor results doesn't mean the initial decision was wrong. If I had a time capsule I would still appoint Cheika to the job - he had just won a Super title to add to a Heinken Cup, and had players chomping at the bit to play for him.

To go full revisionist history and say we should never have appointed him is just bizarre.

You know what would have happened? He would have probably been picked up by England or Argentina and led them to a year or two of domination, and you would be on here going 'HOW did we let Cheika get away?'.

See - I can do pointless hypotheticals too...
.

My hypothetical Barb, is that Beale should have been dropped after the Patston affair and McKenzie kept on in charge of the Wallabies. In my universe, the Wallabies would still be ranked at least in the top 5, perhaps still as high as 3 had that happened.

 

[barbarian]

Maybe so. Maybe not. It's all a bit pointless at this stage. That whole saga was ugly enough, I'm not particularly keen to rake over the coals yet again.

 

[Mudslider]

Maybe so. Maybe not. It's all a bit pointless at this stage. That whole saga was ugly enough, I'm not particularly keen to rake over the coals yet again.

Fare enough barbarian however a few of us prepared to discuss these ideas... ax we are appalled by the aimless play under this coach...

 

[The Nomad]

Think Beale came back from his stint in the UK a much improved rugby player , he had seemed to learn a fair bit about game management and game tempo.

Unfortunately , it hasn't taken long at all back in our system/ national team to regress to a level below what he was at before he left our shores...... first movement sideways , standing too deep , aimless kicking, panic passing ...... ( I could go on ) . You can't play him at 12 against a modern rush defence, particularly outside Foley, as you get too much of what I've mentioned above.

Rocks and diamonds at best, but looks like the current set up is producing a quarry not a diamond mine.

 

[emuarse]

Cheika’s time is up. This may simply be not continuing after his contract is up but it is clear to close to 100% of pundits that it has not worked. He’ll take a reputation with him that reflects his actual performance. He has also very much ch determined the immediate future of his assistants. That is probably not 100% but it seems a growing g majority.

Really don’t think RA are keen to call it early though.

Looking to the next phase you’d be mad not to be considering EJ (Eddie Jones). I’m not sure he is the right choice but he sure as hell must be on the short list.

Why would Eddie vacate his existing position when it probably pays four times what he'd earn coaching the Wallabies?

 

[dru]

Why would Eddie vacate his existing position when it probably pays four times what he'd earn coaching the Wallabies?

Do you think Eddie will stay in the role after RWC? I just thought RU and Eddie would be moving on. Presumptuous perhaps.

I’m not really saying he’s the right bloke, just that you’d have to consider possibly the most successful Australian coach going round.

 

[wamberal]

Fare enough barbarian however a few of us prepared to discuss these ideas. ax we are appalled by the aimless play under this coach.

The only thing I can think of is that the players are getting too many conflicting instructions. Either that or we are just not good enough.

 

[Dan54]

Best athletes go to Football/Soccer.

The only country in the world where Rugby is first choice is New Zealand and it shows. Sometimes the simplest answer is the right one.

You obviously don't know the Welsh Derpus! Actually probably the main reason it No 1 in NZ, is because the ABs keep winning (actually more kids play soccer in NZ anyway), it the old story people follow winning teams I think.

 

[wamberal]

Do you think Eddie will stay in the role after RWC? I just thought RU and Eddie would be moving on. Presumptuous perhaps.

I’m not really saying he’s the right bloke, just that you’d have to consider possibly the most successful Australian coach going round.

You could coach the Poms and do better than most of their national coaches. I have always been fascinated by the fact that the most successful English coaches in the modern era have been Woodward and Johnson, both of whom spent considerable time playing in the Antipodes, where they would have learned what teamwork means.


To generalise, the Poms are not too good at coaching team sports. I suspect that is because of the class system, which is less significant than it was, but still a big factor in society.

 

[Derpus]

You obviously don't know the Welsh Derpus! Actually probably the main reason it No 1 in NZ, is because the ABs keep winning (actually more kids play soccer in NZ anyway), it the old story people follow winning teams I think.

Ive been. They like soccer and Gareth Bale.

 

[Gnostic]

Yes, yes, what a genius you are. This is the Wallabies/Wales thread, but really we don't need to discuss something as trifling as 'rugby' do we. Instead we can spend the next three pages fawning over your Nostradamus-like qualities.



Oh wise one, we were so wrong! We strayed in not heeding your words!


……….



See - I can do pointless hypotheticals too...

.

Well you certainly aren't Nostradamus, you aren't even able to learn from past events of similar nature. Just like when you posted this exact same thing to me when Hickey/Foley and then Foley came to the predictable end to be replaced by Cheika.

You derisive condescension, just like when it was directed at me shows you are a small man of mean intellect. Hand in the moderators duties you numpty, yet again you fail to show the leadership required, you don't have the ethics or integrity for the role and that isn't a hypothetical.