Wallaby Watch 2014

[ChargerWA]

I thought there was some quite interesting points from link

He talked about lineout calling and maul defence a lot.

He also talked about forwards going hard and not picking their moments

Yeah, he certainly made it clear the importance of the line out caller. His comments about Neville in the training squad were partially based on that he is also a lineout caller.

Bit of a clusterfuck considering Mowen, Wykes, and Dennis are all primary lineout callers for their super teams and for various reasons arent in consideration for the Wallabies.

 

[ChargerWA]

I'm really looking forward to Higgers being named captain.

Not that I agree with that, this thread just needs a lot more outrage and drama. It's about the only thing I miss from the Deans era really.

Nah, while boring rugby will drive the occassional fan away, Dean's selections were nearly enough to drive away the died in the wool supporters.

 

[fatprop]

Correction. You mean his defence is in the same style as Larkham's. Not standard. He is no-where near Larkhams standard. Beale misses wayy to many tackles and often is left looking bamboozled.

No, same standard, I always find it interesting to see what foreign fans/pundits think of a player, whilst Larkham was playing I was frequented another forum with a lot of Poms, Welsh, Irish and Kiwis. They always loved his attacking threat, but thought he was a defensive weakness of the side.

 

[USARugger]

Larkham was brave as anyone but not the biggest guy and did get run over his fair share of times.

 

[Scrubber2050]

To my mind:

1. James Slipper (certainty)
2. Steven Moore (certainty)
3. Ben Alexander (certainty)
4. Luke Jones (certainty)
5. Rob Simmons (probably)
6. Scott Fardy (certainty)
7. Michael Hooper (certainty) - + probably captain
8. Wycliffe Palu (certainty)
9. Nic White (certainty)
10. Beale (likely)
11. Adam Ashley-Cooper
12. Matt Tooma (certainty) + probably vice captain
13. Tevita Kuridrani (certainty)
14. The Badger (certainty)
15. Israel Folau (certainty)
16. TPN (probably)
17. Pek Cowan (certainty)
18. Sekope Kepu (certainty)
19. Skelton (certainty)
20. Scott Higgenbotham(certainty)
21. Will Genia (certainty)
22. Foley (certainty)
23. Pat McCabe (probably) if not then Rob Horne

Would love to slot in Hodson, depending on bench makeup betweenj forwards and backs.

think that is a well balanced team of performing incumbants + some newer guys (back in the jersey after a bit of time away from the Wallabies) like Cowan, Higgers, Hodson + Skelton - he is the smokey for me to get a start.

 

[Slim 293]

17. Pek Cowan (certainty)

Sio > Cowan

 

[Gnostic]

Larkham was brave as anyone but not the biggest guy and did get run over his fair share of times.

Also had shoulder issues which as somebody with the same issues it has effected grip strength significantly, and I always wondered if that was a contributing factor as he seemed to just fall off at times.

But whilst in effect Beale has the same positioning and results he has never exhibited the defensive class that other options have.

It isn't defence that concerns me with Beale though, its his penchant for individualistic play. On the wing that isn't such a problem, from your play maker his tendancy to look for all the options for himself first and foremost is why he crabs more often than not and opts for the no percentage kicks etc etc. I do not want an individual at 10, I want a skillful ball player that is always looking to set up players around him. He needs to offer an attacking threat himself and the other players need to work hard off the ball to create doubt in the defence with multiple targets, but all I have ever seen consistently from Beale is the play of a highly skilled individual.

 

[Slim 293]

It isn't defence that concerns me with Beale though, its his penchant for individualistic play. On the wing that isn't such a problem, from your play maker his tendancy to look for all the options for himself first and foremost is why he crabs more often than not and opts for the no percentage kicks etc etc. I do not want an individual at 10, I want a skillful ball player that is always looking to set up players around him. He needs to offer an attacking threat himself and the other players need to work hard off the ball to create doubt in the defence with multiple targets, but all I have ever seen consistently from Beale is the play of a highly skilled individual.

Yes x1000.........

 

[Inside Shoulder]

No, same standard, I always find it interesting to see what foreign fans/pundits think of a player, whilst Larkham was playing I was frequented another forum with a lot of Poms, Welsh, Irish and Kiwis. They always loved his attacking threat, but thought he was a defensive weakness of the side.

What I find interesting is our national requirement for 10's who can/will tackle when I would not really class any of the many excellent NZ 5/8s as entirely or even acceptably reliable defenders: sometimes I think that they actually don't want their 10s doing the heavy lifting in defence.
The Saffers are usually more physical in that department but not invariably so.

 

[Pfitzy]

Foley is a quality defender and quite often brings down blokes bigger than him with a good bootlaces effort. You can talk about the ones he misses, but its the ones he makes now that the Tahs' defensive problems are sorted out that mean more.

Really happy with the Squad the only outrage I have is Ryan being in the extended training squad in place of Longbottom. The last thing we need to be doing is spending time developing a TH that cant scrummage.

They're not going to be training on the West Coast, so I suspect its a case of Paddy being around and not having to pay as much to fly him places.

Cyclo, Internet Explorer with Windows 7 Home premium. Wasn't there previously a command "reply to post", which no longer exists?

Seriously - fuck IE. Go get Chrome or Firefox.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Call me crazy, but I want my 10 being as fresh as possible in attack.

I'd rather a back rower trying to cover for them because not many back rowers are going to construct tries.

I know it's odd but I want a player generally picked for his hard work, working his hardest, and one for his creativity and ability, fresh to focus the most of that.

Unless they are an absolute turnstile, defence shouldn't even come into the discussion about a flyhalf unless 2 players are absolutely equal and it's the only thing that separates them.

 

[Scotty]

I'll be shocked if the captain isn't Hooper. He's the obvious stand out to me and I can't see a decent reason for anyone else. Seems to me the only reason against him is youth but McCaw captained his country at 22. Warburton got the captaincy for Wales at the WC, worked out pretty well.

Left field selections:

- Slipper
- To'omua
- Fardy

 

[tigerland12]

With the captaincy/vice-captaincy, it is easy to label the best player/s and certain starters as captains, but it is much more to it then that.

Hard for anyone to answer this, but can anyone 100% say that Hooper and To'omua are captaincy material, ASIDE from their on field performances?

 

[Braveheart81]

Hard for anyone to answer this, but can anyone 100% say that Hooper and To'omua are captaincy material, ASIDE from their on field performances?

In Hooper's case, everything we know about him suggests that he is a good choice for captain. In limited opportunities he's done a good job of it at the Tahs.

 

[qwerty51]

Hooper has only captained one Super rugby game and the odd few minutes Dennis has come off. To'omua/Fardy have 0. So it's only Genia and Horwill who have proper experience. Slipper falls into the same category as Moore for me, unlikely to play 80.

 

[Benaud]

Hooper has only captained one Super rugby game and the odd few minutes Dennis has come off. To'omua/Fardy have 0. So it's only Genia and Horwill who have proper experience. Slipper falls into the same category as Moore for me, unlikely to play 80.

And Genia and Horwill are both very long odds to be in the starting side. Which leaves it open again. And we come back around to Hooper.

 

[Viking]

It isn't defence that concerns me with Beale though, its his penchant for individualistic play. On the wing that isn't such a problem, from your play maker his tendancy to look for all the options for himself first and foremost is why he crabs more often than not and opts for the no percentage kicks etc etc. I do not want an individual at 10, I want a skillful ball player that is always looking to set up players around him. He needs to offer an attacking threat himself and the other players need to work hard off the ball to create doubt in the defence with multiple targets, but all I have ever seen consistently from Beale is the play of a highly skilled individual.

Summed up perfectly. If the decision for Foley or Beale came down solely to attack I'd still prefer Foley.

When I think about Kurtley's strength's and weaknesses as a player I always come back to the conclusion his best position would actually be wing. Similar individualistic style to JOC (James O'Connor).

 

[Benaud]

Foley has a significant edge in the goal kicking department too. It's hard to see them relying entirely on White for that.

 

[Viking]

No, same standard, I always find it interesting to see what foreign fans/pundits think of a player, whilst Larkham was playing I was frequented another forum with a lot of Poms, Welsh, Irish and Kiwis. They always loved his attacking threat, but thought he was a defensive weakness of the side.

That's an interesting point about the perception of Larkham by foreign countries. And I guess a valid perception given Larkhams lack of physicality.

But take perception away from both players, then Kurtley's missed tackle rate alone sets him far apart from Larkham, and/or any other international flyhalf that I can currently think of.

And as mentioned earlier by Gnostic and others, defence isn't the only issue with Kurtley at 10.

 

[Train Without a Station]

And Genia and Horwill are both very long odds to be in the starting side. Which leaves it open again. And we come back around to Hooper.

I think that's a pretty uninformed comment that doesn't really consider the factors at play.

Firstly the differences in the packs white and genia play behind. Though for the record, I'd go white.

As for Horwill you have to consider the competition.

Simmons is the only genuine line out centric LH lock so he'd be close to a certainty for one spot.

Jones has been immense and extremely effective for the Rebels. But he isn't a great line out technician. The line out would be weaker for it to replace Simmons so it likely rules him out of a LH lock position.

He also also been best effective used as a slightly wider runner (I believe Lee Grant calls it the loose tight, or the tight loose) with his running being a big part of his work rate. Will this translate to the tighter runner whose work is made up more of hitting rucks and tackling?

As a player who is physically a 6 and being played at lock, there has also been questions over his scrummaging. Would be be detrimental to the scrum as a tight head lock?

Carter is probably the best comparison. Line out is slightly inferior but still very good, and better around the ground at the moment. Slightly smaller so could this count against him?

Skelton. Likely not to start and everybody would agree currently, he's an impact player.

Not saying Horwill is better or that others won't start, just saying to say he is long odds to start is quite wrong.