Wallaby Locks - The Future

[daz]

Really get sick of that line. Test rugby isn't a development arena.

Absolute bollocks. Of course it bloody is. Every game at every level is a learning and development opportunity.

Every man and his dog tells us that there is a significant difference between Super Rugby and Test rugby. Very few people come in and smash it from game 1.

John Eales was famously told after his 4th test that he wasn't cutting the mustard. Pretty sure he ended up doing ok in the end.

Coaches also talk about "experience" being critical for certain games.

So based on all that, you tell me; Do you think it is reasonable to allow a player time to find his feet when transitioning from one level to the next?

How the hell does one get Test experience without playing tests?

Don't confuse skill level with experience level.

Do I expect a bloke in his first Test to pass, catch and have half a clue how to play his position? Of course.

Do I expect a bloke to get MoM and slot into a world XV in his first Test? Of course not.


EDIT: I agree with BH that if you are a star in Provincial rugby, the odds are that you are good enough for Test rugby.

 

[Joe King]

Wow. I love this web-site! so many threads and interesting topics. So this is where the rugby community comes to chat.

Be great to find another John Eales!

 

[Zander]

Hugh Pyle is not good at Super Rugby. He scores a shitload of tries but where are his other core skills? Zero maul application. Remember that carve up in Durban? He was the main factor.

 

[Braveheart81]

Hugh Pyle is not good at Super Rugby. He scores a shitload of tries but where are his other core skills? Zero maul application. Remember that carve up in Durban? He was the main factor.

Pyle is a very effective Super Rugby player. Yes he scores tries, but he is excellent in the lineout and a strong ball runner and tackler.

What works against him is the relative weakness of the Rebels scrum. This has probably been a black mark against him and Neville in terms of selection. Whilst the front row obviously has a bigger impact on that, locks don't escape without scrutiny.

You are plumbing new depths of idiocy if you are claiming that a lock was the main factor in a team losing 64-7.

 

[Zander]

The maul defence in that game was atrocious, locks are the main maul defenders so yes Pyle should take some blame.

 

[Brumby Runner]

One bloke who I reckon shows some promise as lock and eight cover is Luke Jones. I've seen him playing for Manly in the SS (as well as the Rebels) and I like the kind of in close go forward he brings. He doesn't mind the tough stuff and is a good size. I wouldn't have him starting at lock, but he provides good back five cover.

Luke can cover lock and 6, but I would consider starting him at 8. Very Hooper-like in his ability to make ground in traffic, and keeps going for the full 80 minutes. Also very good as kick-off receiver.

 

[daz]

Hugh Pyle is not good at Super Rugby. .

And with that statement, you have zero credibility.

 

[Gnostic]

Daz and Braveheart are spot on. The only measure to inform on selection for the test side should be performance at the immediate lower level and very occasionally exceptional performance and complete skills at a lower level. For years people have said that the current Australian Captain was not up to Test Rugby. Well he has played every test this year and whilst the Wallabies have been poor he has been one of the better forwards, and certainly the lineout depends on him greatly.

Many people decry other making comparisons with Wallaby sides of the past and former greats, often wondering how they would go in the "modern game". Well my take is that these things are all relative. My point is that in limiting the selection of potential test players to the ARU "top up" list and more widely the Super starting sides a vast number of good players could be overlooked. In 1995 Gorge Gregan's form was absolutely dire and so many of the alternatives were in very poor form. Bob Dwyer looked about again and selected Steve Merrick from the NSW Country/ Singleton sides without have played rep level Rugby (the last time this happened). Merrick showed in the next two tests against the ABs (so much for players not making their debuts against the ABs, how about making their rep level debut) that he was a test level halfback. On the eve of professionalism he decided against a Rugby Career in favour of driving his trucks. The point is given the limitted rugby played in the Super competition and the narrow foxus of those squads the Test side is relying on a small number of talent scouts with fixed briefs to select the possible player pool for the test squad. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that a large number of potential test players have fallen through over the years because they didn't fit the pre-requisites for the Super sides.

The entire point is that much of Australian Rugby's issues are founded in the ridiculous player contracting and payment systems. The ARU pays a select group and hopes that they can perform because they cannot afford to pay anybody else and it is difficult to select from outside that group. Those players are then relatively safe in their selection in at least the squad, especially if they are an incumbent. I am not attempting to take this thread off topic, but really serious consideration must be given to reform in this area to allow true form selections, and encourage true competition for spots.

 

[Brumby Runner]

You are correct that it isn't a development arena.

The way to call for selection in test rugby however is to stand out in Super Rugby.

Pyle has done that in spades in 2013.

I agree completely with daz that you can't say someone isn't suited to test rugby until they've had that experience.

Players who are good enough should be able to succeed at both.

If we're talking about whether players have done enough at Super Rugby level to deserve a chance at test rugby then I would say that Pyle has. He's essentially a loose head lock so should be competing with players like Simmons. Obviously Pyle is injured at the moment, but if that wasn't the case then I would certainly say that it is worth trying Pyle over Simmons.

Neville on the other hand I wouldn't say has done anywhere near enough to force selection. If you're looking at Neville as a TH lock then you are comparing him with people like Douglas and Timani. I wouldn't say that Neville has shown anything at Super Rugby level to suggest that one of those players should be shelved to make way for him. He certainly has plenty of promise but he hasn't been consistently good enough for the Rebels yet.

BH I agrre with everything you've said re Hugh Pyle. IMO he has done enough at Super level to warrant a try at test level when fit, and I fully expect him to be significantly better than Rob Simmons after palying as many tests.

I am more of a fan of Neville than you. I agree that he had issues starting for the Rebels during the 13 Super season, but iirc he had re-established himself in the starting lineup by the end of the comp. And his form since for Manly I think has been very strong. I have always judged him to be the equivalent of Douglas, only better in attack and maybe not so strong in defence but no problems there either. I rate both of them as better value than Timani as they have much higher workloads imo. They are also both comparable to Timani in height/weight so should be just as effective in the scrum given correct tuition. Both are better at lineout securing our own ball and competing on opposition ball. All this said, I am of the opinion that Neville is also ready for a go at test level, and would really like to see him on the EOYT.

 

[Dave Beat]

I am more of a fan of Neville than you. I agree that he had issues starting for the Rebels during the 13 Super season, but iirc he had re-established himself in the starting lineup by the end of the comp. And his form since for Manly I think has been very strong. I have always judged him to be the equivalent of Douglas, only better in attack and maybe not so strong in defence but no problems there either.

Pyle and Neville - they even look similar with their bloody headgear on, both of then deserve a shot. Not saying they are better but they a dimensions to the game that Douglas, Horwill, Timani and Co don't.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Really get sick of that line. Test rugby isn't a development arena.

That is why we need to get Australia A/Australia Barbarians/Australia Swagmen some games against Tier 1 A Teams, and Tier 2 Test teams.

Give them a taste of the top level. Introduce some challenge to the Wobs, by having 23 Aust A players breathing down their neck for their turn in Wallaby Gold.

Not just about playing at quasi-test level, but seeing how the players go in a National Team environment on tour. The group dynamic and an individuals contribution to that is very important.

 

[Dave Beat]

That is why we need to get Australia A/Australia Barbarians/Australia Swagmen some games against Tier 1 A Teams, and Tier 2 Test teams.

Give them a taste of the top level. Introduce some challenge to the Wobs, by having 23 Aust A players breathing down their neck for their turn in Wallaby Gold.

Not just about playing at quasi-test level, but seeing how the players go in a National Team environment on tour. The group dynamic and an individuals contribution to that is very important.

Or maybe if our best were playing in a comp against each other now they would be fit and ready.

 

[Lee Grant]

Lee - I agree with nearly all your post except the need for the TH Lock to be huge.

Just as well I didn't say that, because it would be just as silly as saying a prop has to be huge to be any good.

It's just that I have noticed a difference sometimes when Skelton and Timani have packed down in a game compared to when they haven't—not always, worse luck. They just happen to be big men.

The quintessential TH lock is Brad Thorn, who is of average weight for a test lock and a tad shorter. What is uncommon in his scrummaging is his brute strength. I can't judge his technique and say that it is above the average, but THPs speak to his strength and the effect of it.

Outside of the scrum is his joy of of the tight battle, face-to-face with opponents, as though for life or death.

One could imagine a Thorn born in the olden time, earning his freedom through exploits as a gladiator in the Coliseum.

Oz rugby needs more gladiator locks who are strong and put everything on the line, even if they can't score 50-metre tries.
.

 

[Brumbieman]

Just as well I didn't say that, because it would be just as silly as saying a prop has to be huge to be any good.

It's just that I have noticed a difference sometimes when Skelton and Timani have packed down in a game compared to when they haven't—not always, worse luck. They just happen to be big men.

The quintessential TH lock is Brad Thorn, who is of average weight for a test lock and a tad shorter. What is uncommon in his scrummaging is his brute strength. I can't judge his technique and say that it is above the average, but THPs speak to his strength and the effect of it.

Outside of the scrum is his joy of of the tight battle, face-to-face with opponents, as though for life or death.

One could imagine a Thorn born in the olden time, earning his freedom through exploits as a gladiator in the Coliseum.

Oz rugby needs more gladiator locks who are strong and put everything on the line, even if they can't score 50-metre tries.
.

I'd sacrifice all of our current outside backs to Jupiter's cock, for Brad Thorn (5 years younger) and Brodie Retallick to be in the Wallaby set up.

 

[Richo]

I'd sacrifice all of our current outside backs to Jupiter's cock, for Brad Thorn (5 years younger) and Brodie Retallick to be in the Wallaby set up.

I wish I could un-see this post.

 

[Lee Grant]

Richo - you are identifying yourself as somebody who doesn't watch the "Spartacus" TV series and the connection with my gladiator comment.

I like the show though I appreciate that there may be some who are offended at seeing attractive naked ladies getting rodgered.

I look beyond that at the artistic merit of the series and the superb acting.
.

 

[Bairdy]

Richo - you are identifying yourself as somebody who doesn't watch the "Spartacus" TV series and the connection with my gladiator comment.

I like the show though I appreciate that there may be some who are offended at seeing attractive naked ladies getting rodgered.

I look beyond that at the artistic merit of the series and the superb acting.
.

The show was never the same without Andy Whitfield, but Liam McIntyre nearly reached that level of acting by the end of Season 3.

 

[Brumbieman]

So what is our Australia A team?


Excluding the current touring squad to SA, who's left?

Sio
Siliva? Anyone else still standing?
Ruan Smith? Paddy Ryan?
Neville
Carter
Quirk?
Fainga'a
Jones

Prior
Holmes
Rathbone
Horne (Godwin injured)
Andrew Smith? Tapuai?
Shipperly?
Morahan

 

[Forcefield]

Paddy Ryan > Salesi Manu > Ruan Smith

Cottrell > Quirk

Hodgson, Robinson > Fainga'a (But for development reasons you'd go Fainga'a)

Ben Lucas > Holmes

 

[Brumby Runner]

Paddy Ryan > Salesi Manu > Ruan Smith

Cottrell > Quirk

Hodgson, Robinson > Fainga'a (But for development reasons you'd go Fainga'a)

Ben Lucas > Holmes

I agree Cottrell > Quirk (at least more potential imo).

Don't agree re Hodgson and Robinson. Both have seen their best days imo. Robinson mostly injured last year and not much chop when he did play. Hodgson has very good games from time to time but is not as good as he was. Colby has always been in the same class as Hooper, vying with each other since the U20s. After a horror injury year off in 2012, he made a strong comeback this year, but was understandably understudy to Pocock and Smith. He is next best after Gill atm.

I liked Ben Lucas as half back in the ARC for Gold Coast, but he hasn't really kicked on in my book, probably due to being selected all over the shop and not being able to specialise. I would rate Holmes better and expect him to shine at the Force next year.