Without wanting the discussion to descend into acrimony, which the Cooper/Foley controversy often does, I see that the two 9/10 pairs have developed very differently since 2010. They play entirely differently: Phipps clears quickly to the playmaker, Foley or Beale, while Genia often acts as playmaker himself and only releases to Cooper when he calls for it.
I argue that the Phipps/Foley system is superior but that's because my roots are in the Randwick rugby way of playing. Lots of teams down the years, very successful teams, have played with the Genia/Cooper system and have won world cups doing so. There are, of course, many variations on the Genia/Cooper system - there is no one set way.
The Phipps/Foley system fits into the Tah gameplan. When the Reds had one back in 2011/12 Genia/Cooper fitted that gameplan. To say one combination of players is more effective than another without understanding the gameplan that underlies it is to me a nonsense. I would argue du Preez/Steyn is probably the most recent successful example of the Genia/Cooper system and for all the problems with SA rugby, those two were very, very successful.
If the Wallabies are to play Cheikaball, a variation on the successful Randwick method, then this gameplan will require fast clearance by the halfback to one or two playmakers. For this reason I would choose Phipps and White as the test halves and hold Genia in reserve. The halfback as playmaker is so ingrained into his system that he struggles to do anything else.
But for me Cooper appears to have the abilities and instincts to play like Foley does and perhaps with even more effectiveness. He is such a mercurial 10 that I believe he can quickly adapt to the "Foley" system and make it his own. I want to see Phipps/Cooper start in at least one of the RC matches to see how this combination can work. I also want to see a White/Foley combination to come on at 55-60 to see how that pairing goes.
Which is all a long way from the subject of this thread, but the game on Saturday, for me, clearly illustrated the differences in gameplan and combinations between the two teams. Whether one was more effective than the other because of its own intrinsic properties or whether the real difference were in the two packs providing a platform I'll leave you to judge.