Wallabies vs Russia - last game before the QFs!

[Scarfman]

Plus, if we are playing a forward on the wing, shouldn't it be Higgenbatty? He looks a bit fitter to me. One or two long chases from Radike will give him a stroke.

I always think that you pick the best 10, the best 12, etc. I don't believe that backs are easily switched around, as Deans does. He'll play any permutation except JOC (James O'Connor) at 12.

Maybe I'm being excessively conservative, but I'd have these crocked guys on the plane and bring out the next best player in his position.

 

[Apostle]

I agree with Scarfman.

Playing Samo on the wing and a 6-1 reserve split - it really shows they are not taking the Russians seriously despite Growden's article saying:

"Deans stressed to the players yesterday that they have to treat the Russia match - their easiest in the pool stage - as seriously as any other Test they've been involved in, because they have not yet qualified for the finals."

I mean, he can say that all he likes, but the fact is his players won't believe it if he goes ahead with these selection. Would we ever choose a backrower to start on the wing against NZ, SA, ENG, etc? No! So, if HE is not treating it like a serious test, how can he expect the players to? And not taking a team seriously has worked out so well for us in the past (see Samoa).

Crazy idea, but how about get a replacement from OZ to replace the injured players?

 

[Joe Mac]

The fact that Deans can't make a decision and is forcing us to play a forward on the wing shows me how out of his depth he is... His actions at this world cup are unfathomable.

 

[Apostle]

They could injure Nick Phipps if they need to.

 

[Tangawizi]

I think Robbie just needs to stress to his players that anything less than a bonus point win over Russia will see them forced to remain in New Zealand permanently as they won't be welcome in Australia anymore.

That should do the trick to fire them up for it.

 

[Braveheart81]

I still think that the overall decision is that sending home a player who is likely to be in the 22 for the quarter final or if we make it, the semi final and replacing them with a player who hasn't trained with the squad lately is more damaging to his chances than winging it (excuse the pun) against Russia.

I only view it as a minor gamble.

 

[RedsHappy]

Plus, if we are playing a forward on the wing, shouldn't it be Higgenbatty? He looks a bit fitter to me. One or two long chases from Radike will give him a stroke.

I always think that you pick the best 10, the best 12, etc. I don't believe that backs are easily switched around, as Deans does. He'll play any permutation except JOC (James O'Connor) at 12.

Maybe I'm being excessively conservative, but I'd have these crocked guys on the plane and bring out the next best player in his position.

By not replacing this week in any form, either backs and/or a 7 etc, the other significant downside risk embedded in such a delay is the required acclimatisation period factor for a new incoming Test-level player. The entire environment in NZ, especially at RWC time, is radically different to that say a Ben T or Beau R etc will have been in recently. There's now a 3 hr time difference affecting immediate sleep pattens, the temperature, rain, grounds softer etc, and psychologically it takes time to comfortably build into a new team environment, the unique RWC pressure factors are there, and then there's the actual training into effective playing combinations, and so forth.

We will certainly beat Russia. We then have possibly the single most important match in Deans' Wallaby period in the QF just 7 days hence. There will almost certainly be at least one more new injury v Russia. We are bringing no replacements in now. So let's say 3 crucial replacements are announced on Sunday. I think IRB regulations are such that these new players cannot then join the squad until 48 hrs after they are announced, which if so makes their practical joining period say Tuesday p.m. So they thus will have only 3-4 full days to effect a complete acclimatisation program spanning all the above dimensions before the do-or-die RWC QF.

Given the above, this process of replacement delay until into sometime next week appears highly risky, indeed outright daredevil reckless, to me. Then couple that assessment with what must be the high risks associated with predicting a real recovery of match fitness point of key players with quite serious ailments like dislocated shoulders and cheek fractures. I cannot believe that with these medical issues, as of today the ability of McCabe and Horne to play in a QF 10 days from now is any way assured.

 

[Jnor]

Madness? THIS... IS.... 'STRAYA!

Fucking Gold!

 

[Braveheart81]

An injury replacement isn't allowed to play for 48 hours following their call up. There is nothing stopping them from arriving and training with the team.

 

[hedgo]

does anyone think the reluctance to replace injured players is uncomfortably similar to the reluctance to use the bench during games? speaks to me of real stubbornness bordering on delusion/denial. ie i see things going one way and one way only, and if they don't turn out that way i will pretend it isn't happening

 

[Braveheart81]

I think the delay in calling for a replacement for Palu is to see how Pocock pulls up after the Russia game.

If Pocock struggles a bit, they'll call up Hodgson. If he pulls up fine they won't call up a 7 that Deans wouldn't use in his 22 in the quarters with a fit Pocock.

 

[Mr Doug]

From all reports, this RWC has seen unprecedented use of hookers right across New Zealand.

Is that due to the absence of large numbers of WAGs on tour?!!!!!!!

 

[Braveheart81]

With the NZ dollar being what it is, most tourists get plenty of bang for their buck.

 

[RedsHappy]

An injury replacement isn't allowed to play for 48 hours following their call up. There is nothing stopping them from arriving and training with the team.

Thanks bh81. You may be right and my calcs above/below were perhaps too cautious, though this does appear (to me) a somewhat confused area of IRB regs. Regardless, I stand by my comments. If replacements will be needed for a must-win QF (and potentially beyond), then the maximum possible acclimatisation and squad integration period to the total set of NZ/Wallaby/RWC conditions is highly important to the successful use of the replacements. But not replacing - if we do replace at all - until say early next week must be high risk re the QF outcome. There is also the possibility that the replacements might well perform better than those they replace, so why not maximise their impact value through the best possible squad/local conditions integration process.

 

[fatprop]

they are three hours way, they were in the 40 man squad and have played in NZ plenty of times before, what acclimatising do you think they will need to do

 

[RedsHappy]

they are three hours way, they were in the 40 man squad and have played in NZ plenty of times before, what acclimatising do you think they will need to do

- you have said many time fp that you rate Deans 'a great coach' and you endorse most of his decisions, so we typically disagree on these sorts of issues;

- I have lost track of the 40 man squad precisely (was Ben T in it?), but it was disbanded many weeks back and both Genia and Deans (extraordinarily) said after Ireland that 'we're now understanding what WC rugby really is all about, it's been a hard lesson and we'll learn from it' etc., so it's not as though being in the 40 man squad automagically prepares all such players for what they are now encountering, and what they need to do about it, in the WC real world in situ NZ;

- I listed below/above the types of dimensions I consider applicable to optimal acclimatisation to NZ/Wallaby/RWC conditions, you clearly think these are not too relevant, fair enough, time will surely be the master of that debate;

- generally, I think that now is the time to be reducing risks in relation to having the absolute best Wallaby 22 for a QF, and if replacements are needed for that 22 (which they likely are), then I would advocate maximising in all possible respects their utility to that 22.

 

[fatprop]

Unless the proposed replacement for the quarter is to cover a wounded Pocock, the replacement will be watching the match from the stands.

 

[Braveheart81]

- I have lost track of the 40 man squad precisely (was Ben T in it?)

Taps wasn't in the 40 man squad. He only played the Baa Baas game because Giteau pulled a heart string.

 

[Slim 293]

I'd hate to be that guy...

But earlier in the year I stated that we required a 16/14 split in the squad due to the rate of backline injuries, and I reiterated this point following the Bok test when we had forwards out in the backs.

Deans has dug himself a hole here with too many forwards, too many unfit players, no openside backup, and no Giteau (who did deserve to be there on 2011 form).

 

[DPK]

- you have said many time fp that you rate Deans 'a great coach' and you endorse most of his decisions, so we typically disagree on these sorts of issues

That shouldn't be an issue. I'd hate for the lines to be drawn up in a way that prejudices all following arguments.

Anti-Deansers should be able to criticise Deans and Pro-Deansers should be able to commend him.