Wallaby 31 players for 2015 RWC

[choco7]

Who do people think for 8? I'd like to think higgers has played pretty dam well lately. Just has the ability to cross the line. But then again there are a lot of hands going up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[qwerty51]

Higginbotham will be lucky to make it on the plane..

 

[Viking]

McCalman has been playing well - but how many super xv seasons has he played well then was fairly pedestrian at international level. Higgers might be worth a shot, he hasn't had a real chance to prove his worth at Test level since he started playing tighter and tougher at super xv level for the Rebels.

Palu and Vaea offer strong impact but Palu might be passed it and Vaea too fresh.

So its a tough call all round. McCalman probably the form player though.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Big Dog was outstanding on the EOYT last year, but your general point is pretty valid. I hope he can continue to play like he has been this season at test level, because it would solve a selection conundrum.

 

[choco7]

I think it will come down to whether they go with poey and hooper, cause we will need a jumping 8 then


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Grandmaster Flash]

Higgers lucky to make it on the plane? Get real. He's a good in the lineout, and a genuine line-breaking backrower with leadership, mongrel, and x-factor, something the Wallabies need in spades.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Higgers lucky to make it on the plane? Get real. He's a good in the lineout, and a genuine line-breaking backrower with leadership, mongrel, and x-factor, something the Wallabies need in spades.

Plus he could cover blindside at a pinch. May not be the starting no8, but a very valuable squad member in my view.

 

[qwerty51]

Let's see.. Pocock, Hooper, Fardy, McMahon, Palu, McCalman, Higginbotham/Jones.

I'd probably take him over Jones so he'd be my last backrower picked. He's not a certainty.

 

[hammertimethere]

Jones has no claim to be picked as a backrower, he's played 2nd row all year. I'd be cool with him being picked in that role. If you want to cut down the no. of locks to fit more backrowers then Fardy already gives you that

 

[Slim 293]

If you were going on form alone Palu wouldn't be near the squad...........

Right now McCalman is my starting no. 8.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Ahead of McMahon as well who right now is a bit of an inbetween player.

 

[BDA]

I think if you take McCalman and Higgers you cover your bases pretty well. Both can cover 6 and 8, but are polar opposites. McCalman - impressive workrate and plays very tight. Higgers, questionable workrate, but quite effective playing wide.

But so Long as Hooper is in the 23, it's hard to find a place for Higgers. You don't want two backrowers playing wide of the ruck. If you go for Pocock in the starting 15, then Higgers' skill set becomes more enticing.

Given that Cheika is big on Hooper playing 80 minutes (or close to) It's hard to see how Higgers will factor in the side, regardless of his line-out ability. Jones is a decent line-out option, but plays tight and I believe he's the type of no.6 that Cheika is looking for.

It's a 50/50 call on Higgers atm imo.

 

[No4918]

Higgers lucky to make it on the plane? Get real. He's a good in the lineout, and a genuine line-breaking backrower with leadership, mongrel, and x-factor, something the Wallabies need in spades.

And when have we ever seen this at test level? McCalman and Palu for 8. Really tough call as to who who should be the last backrower. Assuming the previously mentioned as well as Pocock, Hooper and Fardy are locked in.

 

[BDA]

Higgers has demonstrated that he's a useless bench option in years past. My memory of him is that he generally makes some line breaks if he's injected late in the game.

I'd prefer to concentrate on winning the breakdown.

 

[choco7]

Sean mcmahon is a real potential for 6. He is an animal in his workload and quite good around the ruck,this is what compliments higgers and allows him to play a bit wider. Cheika likes him aswell and wouldnt of taken him on EOYT otherwise. The experience for mcmahon at a world cup would be great for the future world cup as well... if you want to think that way

 

[Slim 293]

Unfortunately not quite big enough for a starting test 6...............

 

[KOB1987]

It's probably getting to the point where we need an AUS v SAF thread because this discussion I think is heading towards selecting a team for that game rather than the 'RWC Optimum 23' discussion.

I think it's universally accepted that at some point prior to the RWC we are going to see Hooper and Pocock on the field at some time, but the division is with regards to whether it will be at the start of a game, the end of a game, versus a big gun team, or versus a minnow.

With regards to the selection of the best starting #8, that could be influenced by the choice of the flankers and/or the locks, and the prioritization of those choices.

If the starting locks are (as widely accepted) Simmons and Skelton, then we probably aren't going to see Palu & Fardy in the same back row. So if Fardy is 6, then Hooper is a better fit for 7, and McCalman would be the #8 (the incumbent back row).

Further, assuming the same starting locks, if Pocock is the preferred choice at 7, then Fardy may not be the best choice at 6. So we could even see Palu at 8 and the in form McCalman at 6.

Food for thought

 

[qwerty51]

I've read the Wallabies will go from the US to London, does that mean only players in the RWC squad will play vs the US? I remember last WC the RWC squad had to be named before our final match vs NZ at Suncorp.

Anyone know the cut-off date for the squad to be announced?

Last RWC was August 22 so maybe similar.

Aug 15 vs NZ
Sept 5 vs USA
Sept 23 vs Fiji

 

[ACT Crusader]

It's probably getting to the point where we need an AUS v SAF thread because this discussion I think is heading towards selecting a team for that game rather than the 'RWC Optimum 23' discussion.

I think it's universally accepted that at some point prior to the RWC we are going to see Hooper and Pocock on the field at some time, but the division is with regards to whether it will be at the start of a game, the end of a game, versus a big gun team, or versus a minnow.

With regards to the selection of the best starting #8, that could be influenced by the choice of the flankers and/or the locks, and the prioritization of those choices.

If the starting locks are (as widely accepted) Simmons and Skelton, then we probably aren't going to see Palu & Fardy in the same back row. So if Fardy is 6, then Hooper is a better fit for 7, and McCalman would be the #8 (the incumbent back row).

Further, assuming the same starting locks, if Pocock is the preferred choice at 7, then Fardy may not be the best choice at 6. So we could even see Palu at 8 and the in form McCalman at 6.

Food for thought

You seem to be implying that Fardy and Pocock aren't a good combo for test rugby.

I don't see any issue with:

4. Skelton
5. Simmons
6. Fardy
7. Pocock
8. McCalman/Palu/Higginbotham

It's got work rate, ball carrying, lineout, ball winning.

If what you say is the case KOB, then it's a little concerning for the Wallabies that there is not a clear starting XV heading into the test season of a WC year.

 

[KOB1987]

If what you say is the case KOB, then it's a little concerning for the Wallabies that there is not a clear starting XV heading into the test season of a WC year.

When do we ever have agreement on a clear starting XV on here???

In actual fact it's not concerning at all that for the first time in an age we have several choices in the back row to work with and you could argue that they could all be good choices.

I wasn't meaning to imply that Pocock and Fardy couldn't work well together, only that it's not necessarily the best 6/7 combo taking everything in to consideration. I am merely nutting it out..