• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Wallabies vs England, Sydney, 3rd Test, 25 June @ 8:00pm

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
When NZ selected Julian Savea on the wing he couldn't catch a high ball or kick. Nonu also couldn't kick very well when he burst onto the scene. How did they miraculously grow those skills. They must be doping with some miracle compound because surely professionals are what they are and don't develop on their own. Oh wait... there is something there in that statement...


I don't know what you're getting at. Players do improve over time, but shouldn't the best 10 in the country be able to kick the ball into touch reliably (whilst gaining more than 15 metres) by the time has played 25 tests for the national 1st XV?

Nonu's kicking was a good compliment but it was never used as the first clearance option because the 10 wasn't good enough at it.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
All of the other recent options - To'omua, Quade, Lilo - have had significantly better kicking than Foley. I feel like we've been lead to believe that Foley's backline management and ball running is so amazing that we are to overlook his deficiencies, and I've concluded that it isn't.



I'd go with To'omua (if he is fit) because of his kicking and defence.



So you'd substitute an average inconsistent kicker from hand who is a good distributor and a genuine threat with ball in hand for an above average kicker from hand who has less of the other attributes. What happens when the opposition does what they did to Foley and have three fast closing defenders pressuring every kick? Probably the same outcome.

The problem isn't in the players, its in their skill levels to start with, but also in selections and tactics that leave only one option to exit. DHP was only in position once that I saw to offer a second exit kicker. Nobody is going to be effective with those structures, especially when the base skills just aren't up to scratch.
 

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
We can't afford to have shitty kickers at 10 AND 15. I don't care who plays where so much as that some of them out there can do it. Put To'omua at fullback and Folau on the wing.
 

The torpedo

Peter Fenwicke (45)
He is injured I do believe, and in any event I would have thought Beale was first choice for the old game plan. This one I would think either Kerevi or Horne.

Having a look around he had surgery on his groin in January and was out for 3 months so he should be back by now
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
I don't know what you're getting at. Players do improve over time, but shouldn't the best 10 in the country be able to kick the ball into touch reliably (whilst gaining more than 15 metres) by the time has played 25 tests for the national 1st XV?



Nonu's kicking was a good compliment but it was never used as the first clearance option because the 10 wasn't good enough at it.



What I am getting at is exactly in my last reply. Foley is the best 10 by far in Oz at the moment. The coaching in Australia is just not up to scratch and I cannot name a single player in the backline that has improved on their skills from the time they entered the test/super scene to the time they left. My oft quoted example of AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) will now be trotted out again, a Pro player who played over 100 tests and he still couldn't reliably pass from both hands despite playing every number in the backline except 9 and 10.

Phipps is the fastest 9 and the best defending 9 in Oz but his passing remains erratic and inconsistent.

Horne has been moved from 12/13 to wing but cannot kick with effect and so offers nothing except a running player and as such has nothing to offer as an exit strategy.

These are professional players who do nothing but train and play yet I find that their base level skills aren't as good as many of the amateurs. Why. I do not accept that they do not have the ability, or the ability to learn (though some will have that limitation just as it is in life) so what it comes back to is lack of coaching and critique and development. The NZ 10s who you laud laso had massive options outside of them to balance their skills and take the pressure, skills are complimentary and in so many instances with NZ rugby the whole is far greater than the sum of the parts.
 

The torpedo

Peter Fenwicke (45)
We can't afford to have shitty kickers at 10 AND 15. I don't care who plays where so much as that some of them out there can do it. Put To'omua at fullback and Folau on the wing.

Would rather DHP because I don't think To'omua's ever played at fullback
 

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
What I am getting at is exactly in my last reply. Foley is the best 10 by far in Oz at the moment. The coaching in Australia is just not up to scratch and I cannot name a single player in the backline that has improved on their skills from the time they entered the test/super scene to the time they left. My oft quoted example of AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) will now be trotted out again, a Pro player who played over 100 tests and he still couldn't reliably pass from both hands despite playing every number in the backline except 9 and 10.

Phipps is the fastest 9 and the best defending 9 in Oz but his passing remains erratic and inconsistent.

Horne has been moved from 12/13 to wing but cannot kick with effect and so offers nothing except a running player and as such has nothing to offer as an exit strategy.

These are professional players who do nothing but train and play yet I find that their base level skills aren't as good as many of the amateurs. Why. I do not accept that they do not have the ability, or the ability to learn (though some will have that limitation just as it is in life) so what it comes back to is lack of coaching and critique and development. The NZ 10s who you laud laso had massive options outside of them to balance their skills and take the pressure, skills are complimentary and in so many instances with NZ rugby the whole is far greater than the sum of the parts.

Why? I feel like I've covered this. Kicking isn't valued in this country because as a place influenced by the overpowering influences of rugby league, we're obsessed with what people think is 'entertaining' and that is the 'ball in hand'. Watch some of the junior rugby from South Africa online/foxtel and then go watch some Australian junior rugby. They aren't in the same galaxy when it comes to kicking prowess. Am I suggesting we want 10 man rugby? No, but kicking is a rude word in many rugby circles in this country and it's just bloody stupid.

If you think that Foley - even on an empty training ground - can match Dan Carter or Morne Steyn or any of the other 10s that the other big two - or even England and Wales - have trotted out this century then you're delusional. You can't attribute every good quality the other teams have have to 'but they're surrounded by quality'. What about goalkicking? We're shit at that too. That doesn't depend on you having several other people to alleviate the pressure.

You can expect the coaching at the pro/national levels to improve the skills of the players but for goodness sake, shouldn't they have the basics nailed by the time they are getting 500k a year to do it at the highest level??
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I don't really see what the options are for next week.

Leali'ifano came on the field and made mistakes and did nothing to improve the way we played. In many ways we went backwards. Foley had a poor game but there's no way he'll be dropped next week as there just aren't alternatives.

It's very hard to see To'omua being selected to start having not played a game for a couple of months. Leali'ifano has done nothing over the last two weeks to show that he is in any sort of form.

Hooper won't be dropped. He was close to our best player again.

Fardy had an uncharacteristically error-filled game but he will be persisted with. His quality over a long time is unquestionable.

Moore could be dropped to the bench for TPN. He was poor and his early ill-discipline set the tone for the match where England constantly got under our skin and made us lose composure. He is not playing well and he isn't leading the side well.

I'm surprised DHP got MOTM votes. I thought he was poor making multiple unforced errors and again missing tackles. He's made 2 tackles and missed 5 in his first two tests. Whilst his kicking is important to us, he also made several really poor kicks.
 

mst

Peter Johnson (47)
How did he go?

I haven't watched the game yet but apparently he played the full 80 and went ok, Not much running (1 run) but directed the traffic well and defended well (10 tackles). 2x tries each way so the difference (ironically after last night) was Halfpenny's boot.

Another irony is Mogg is a scoring machine atm scoring all of his teams tries.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
I'm surprised DHP got MOTM votes. I thought he was poor making multiple unforced errors and again missing tackles. He's made 2 tackles and missed 5 in his first two tests. Whilst his kicking is important to us, he also made several really poor kicks.



Agreed....... he looked like a different player to last week.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Lilo is barely Super level this year and wouldn't be in the squad except for injuries. He is not a viable alternative to Foley and IMO is only on the bench because there is nobody else.


His super xv has been very average, but even Cheika stated he would have been the front-runner for the 12 jersey if he wasn't committed to seeing his baby come into the world.

Kerevi's decent hit out in the first test meant he earned another shot.

So he is a viable option. I wish we had better but we don't - in comparision players like Mumm or Carter wouldn't have been a viable option given their average super xv form but they got a shot, so should Lilo.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
So he is a viable option. I wish we had better but we don't - in comparision players like Mumm or Carter wouldn't have been a viable option given their average super xv form but they got a shot, so should Lilo.


Maybe Lilo will start at 12 next week but so far he's come off the bench in both tests and played poorly.

He's certainly not going to start at 10 next week.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Maybe Lilo will start at 12 next week but so far he's come off the bench in both tests and played poorly.

He's certainly not going to start at 10 next week.


Like i said before it should be
9. Frisby
10. Foley
12. Lilo

You got 3 kickers their instead of 1. Kerevi can play 13.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
I do like Kerevi at 13.


Me too. We actually do have options in the backline.

I'm more worried about the locks, we've already tried them all and none have done anything worthy of a recall.

Backrow also an issue. Who to replace Poey is a hard one.
 

Brumby Runner

Jason Little (69)
Foley has been one of the poorest performers over the two tests. His management of the backline plays is almost non-existant, he cannot do anything to stop the England rush defense and he cannot reliably kick the ball, in general play, for the sideline nor for penalty goal. The only way he will survive for next week is if Lealiifano or To'omua are put in at 12.

12 and 13 are not the Wallabies' problem areas atm. The proper solution in the short term is to replace Foley. It might work or it might not, but we must be saved the frustration of watching him put in another sub-par effort. The same can be said of Phipps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top