Who Should Run The Wallabies Attack in 2013?

[emuarse]

Beiber should not even be in the frame for 10. Nor should Beale.

The only options are Cooper (incumbent). Lealiifano bench, and god forbid, Barnes after that. Everyone else is either not a 10, or hasn't demonstrated any consistent form at club level, let alone Super rugby.

Besides which, Beale plays an outstanding game at 15, when he is fit. Wasn't he regarded as the world's best 15 in 2011 before the RWC, when everything went to shit.

 

[REDinCPT]

I'm surprised at the amount of debate on this threat regarding the centre pairing. I thought it was widely agreed that the centre pairing we finished 2012 with was our best for a very long time, and probably the best we have had under Dean, albeit by chance rather than design. I think it would be unfortunate to change this combination coming into 2013 and I struggle to see any reason to do so, irrespective of who is pulling the strings at 10.

 

[Bernie_Larkham]

One thing from Scott's video was how utterly horrendous AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is with ball in hand. He just plays league, runs until he is tackled nearly every time. He is a winger only in my team.

Cooper is the man for the job but it all depends on Deans game plan. That's where this falls down, big time. Digby isn't the same without Cooper either, his form this year was hugely disappointing.

Glad to see someone else appreciate Ants attacking talents, he can play in the right set up.

 

[Quick Hands]

The fact that this discussion is taking place is an indictment on the poor coaching and planning at Wallaby and Super level. ABs can go through 4 x 5/8s at RWC without changing their game plan/style. We're in the position where there isn't even a standout 1st choice if you had to pick a team tomorrow. We'll have to wait until Super season unfolds.

I'm not a QC (Quade Cooper) fan, although I appreciate that many are, but I'm not sure that his laissez-faire style and defensive weaknesses can make the jump from super rugby to tests.

In confess to being an RD supporter when he was first appointed, as I mistakenly believed that he would bring the Crusaders style of rugby to the Wallabies. How wrong I have been. I can't detect any form of game plan or style of play in his selections or in what happens on the field. The continued use of ineffective chip kicks, lack of ability to score tries (even after multi-phase possession) and selection chaos seem to continue unabated.

My fearless prediction is that unless we whitewash the Lions and win the RC, he will step down before the spring tour. He may already be sounding out jobs in Europe for all I know. (I know I would be).

 

[fatprop]

If the pigs can't compete with the Lions physicality, whilst being more athletic and mobile, we won't be able to find any space out wide or have the available units there to leverage those outside runners at that next phase.

So who do we pick with expectation of limited, pressured ball?

Do we accept Cooper and hide him in defense or play him in the line?

Will the the Lions use AB's approach and work to find him if hidden?

 

[I like to watch]

The fact that this discussion is taking place is an indictment on the poor coaching and planning at Wallaby and Super level. ABs can go through 4 x 5/8s at RWC without changing their game plan/style. We're in the position where there isn't even a standout 1st choice if you had to pick a team tomorrow. We'll have to wait until Super season unfolds.

If each franchise had a high performing 10 you might have a point.But we don't. NZ 3rd & 4th pick are well established Super players.
How highly performed are our franchises 10's?
He can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

 

[wamberal]

If the pigs can't compete with the Lions physicality, whilst being more athletic and mobile, we won't be able to find any space out wide or have the available units there to leverage those outside runners at that next phase.

So who do we pick with expectation of limited, pressured ball?

Do we accept Cooper and hide him in defense or play him in the line?

Will the the Lions use AB's approach and work to find him if hidden?

I would probably go with Cooper, even if we are playing with limited ball. That is because he is about our only player who can make something out of nothing. His defensive limitations are worth it, in my opinion, for his attacking genius. I doubt that the Lions will have the tactical nous - and the experience of executing tactics - as the ABs.

That said, if Lilo performs as well this season as he did last year, I would like to see him starting, with Quade coming off the bench when the game opens up, as it will.

 

[I like to watch]

Do we accept Cooper and hide him in defense or play him in the line?

Will the the Lions use AB's approach and work to find him if hidden?

Put your house on it.

 

[Quick Hands]

If each franchise had a high performing 10 you might have a point.But we don't. NZ 3rd & 4th pick are well established Super players.
How highly performed are our franchises 10's?
He can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Which is why I included super rugby coaching and planning in the post.

"The fact that this discussion is taking place is an indictment on the poor coaching and planning at Wallaby and Super level."

 

[Braveheart81]

Which is why I included super rugby coaching and planning in the post.

"The fact that this discussion is taking place is an indictment on the poor coaching and planning at Wallaby and Super level."

Maybe you need to go back further.

If you look at the last few U19 RWC, New Zealand has had Cruden, Bleyendaal and Anscombe playing 10 for them. Colin Slade was in their U19 team a year or two before Cruden.

These guys have been quality 10s from a very young age. It's not like Australia's Super Rugby coaches have been presented with similar quality talent in such quantity.

 

[fatprop]

Which is why I included super rugby coaching and planning in the post.

"The fact that this discussion is taking place is an indictment on the poor coaching and planning at Wallaby and Super level."

It is a factor of cattle, not coaching.

You can polish a turd, but it is still a turd. Coaching won't turn a turd into a diamond, just a shinier turd.

 

[Quick Hands]

Maybe you need to go back further.

If you look at the last few U19 RWC, New Zealand has had Cruden, Bleyendaal and Anscombe playing 10 for them. Colin Slade was in their U19 team a year or two before Cruden.

These guys have been quality 10s from a very young age. It's not like Australia's Super Rugby coaches have been presented with similar quality talent in such quantity.

Perhaps you're right. We've had elite programmes in place, national talent squads, etc for a number of years. Hasn't Nuci run this and the JWC programme for the past 4-5 years?

 

[Quick Hands]

It is a factor of cattle, not coaching.

You can polish a turd, but it is still a turd. Coaching won't turn a turd into a diamond, just a shinier turd.

So with 5 professional rugby outfits, 4 of which have been going for 5 years or more, we can't identify and coach 4 or 5 guys who can play 5/8? If this is so, there are quite a few people not doing their jobs properly.

Planning, talent identification and coaching are all part of it. I'll bet the players are out there somewhere. They've always been out there, if we can't find them, we're not looking in the right places or we have the wrong people looking.

 

[Braveheart81]

So with 5 professional rugby outfits, 4 of which have been going for 5 years or more, we can't identify and coach 4 or 5 guys who can play 5/8? If this is so, there are quite a few people not doing their jobs properly.

Planning, talent identification and coaching are all part of it. I'll bet the players are out there somewhere. They've always been out there, if we can't find them, we're not looking in the right places or we have the wrong people looking.

I think it's swings and roundabouts though. We've currently got several superb 7s (Pocock, Hooper, Gill), our best propping stocks in years, several good TH lock options but a weakness at LH lock (whereas normally it has been the other way around).

I think the cattle argument is more likely than the talent identification one. It's not exactly hard to identify a good 10. More talented juniors will be playing 10 and then move to other positions later than the other way around.

 

[fatprop]

So with 5 professional rugby outfits, 4 of which have been going for 5 years or more, we can't identify and coach 4 or 5 guys who can play 5/8? If this is so, there are quite a few people not doing their jobs properly.

Planning, talent identification and coaching are all part of it. I'll bet the players are out there somewhere. They've always been out there, if we can't find them, we're not looking in the right places or we have the wrong people looking.

Oh, we can coach what is out there, there just ain't much out there.

We are a third tier sport, there are plenty of other codes well into talent identification, at a level we can't/won't compete at.

When we have 16yro's on S15 scholarships, being brought into the cities, billeted and put into professional development systems we may get enough churn to find those 4 or 5 diamonds.

While we rely on privates schools and semi pro/amateur clubs to do that development? Unlikely

 

[Quick Hands]

I'd agree that there are swings and roundabouts and you will always have weak spots across the 15 players. I prefer to take an optimistic view and from what I've seen around colts, schools and juniors over the past 10-15 years, we have players who have the talent to play 5/8 at the top level. What I think has happened is that they have been overcoached or poorly coached to the point of being confused with what they need to be doing. Add to this constant movement of players from 10 to 12 to 15 and it makes it worse.

A crucial part of backline play is knowing where your team mate will be and what he will do in most situations. This is done by playing people in the same position with the same combination as often as possible, not by constant swapping of roles. So if your 5/8 gets injured, you don't move your fullback or centre there, you bring your next best 5/8 up. It's a position in which you need to be playing in all the time as you have to run the game and make decisions quickly or even unconciously. This, I believe is part of the problem which we are facing at super, test and JWC levels, players hesitate for a moment because last week they were playing fullback and the opportunity is lost and they look like they can't play, but it's their preparation and coaching which has let them down.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think there is a vast difference between some of the New Zealand 10s mentioned and saying that there are guys in colts, schools and juniors who have the talent to play at the top level.

Seeing Cruden and Bleyendaal at the U19 RWC it was obvious that they were going to be superstars. That is a long way ahead of seeing a young player and saying that with the right coaching they have the talent to make it at the top level.

Australian teams are definitely all guilty of moving players around and playing people out of their best position but I think it is partly a response to having less depth. We want to put our best rugby players on the field at the same time even if several of them would ideally be playing the same position. We also move people around more because picking your fourth string 10 after there have been a few injuries is probably a worse option than moving a player there from another position (e.g. Beale from 15 to 10 for the Wallabies).

 

[Jets]

I disagree about the comment that NZ used 4 10's in the RWC and it didn't effect the way they played. Carter is the man when it comes to a well rounded 10. Colin Slade was a fairly inexperienced player who was a bit of a shock inclusion in the RWC squad. Aaron Cruden was no better than many Aust players and Stephen Donald is Stephen Donald. The difference these guys had was they cam into a stable team that had solid structure in place. They played a much more conservative style when Carter wasn't on the field, apart form the Canada game.

When the Wallabies change their 10 they normally change about 3 other guys in the backline too. This isn't helping anyone. The other issue is that Australians, especially those from NSW, are looking for the next Mark Ella or Stephen Larkham. Sometimes a team can play good rugby without a dominant 10, as long as he does his job well.

We have a heap of talent in Australian Rugby at the moment at 10. We just need to nurture it better. Cooper, Lilio, To'omua, Lane, Foley et al are all players who need the opportunity to develop and not have the expectation that they can never make a mistake. We place far too much pressure on these guys to early and are to quick to give up on them when they don't reach the incredibly high standards that we have set.

 

[Quick Hands]

I disagree about the comment that NZ used 4 10's in the RWC and it didn't effect the way they played. Carter is the man when it comes to a well rounded 10. Colin Slade was a fairly inexperienced player who was a bit of a shock inclusion in the RWC squad. Aaron Cruden was no better than many Aust players and Stephen Donald is Stephen Donald. The difference these guys had was they cam into a stable team that had solid structure in place. They played a much more conservative style when Carter wasn't on the field, apart form the Canada game.

When the Wallabies change their 10 they normally change about 3 other guys in the backline too. This isn't helping anyone. The other issue is that Australians, especially those from NSW, are looking for the next Mark Ella or Stephen Larkham. Sometimes a team can play good rugby without a dominant 10, as long as he does his job well.

We have a heap of talent in Australian Rugby at the moment at 10. We just need to nurture it better. Cooper, Lilio, To'omua, Lane, Foley et al are all players who need the opportunity to develop and not have the expectation that they can never make a mistake. We place far too much pressure on these guys to early and are to quick to give up on them when they don't reach the incredibly high standards that we have set.

And many people would be surprised how well an average player will go when placed in a top class, settled backline. Your comments on NZ support my point. When the new guy came in everyone around him knew the calls and knew what they should do and the new 5/8 was used to playing in that position and it all flowed. It didn't affect the way they played, it's just that individual players all bring different qualities to a position and the quality and style of the opposition team also have an effect.

I look at some recent Waratahs and Wallabies matches and the word which comes to mind when looking at the backs is "confused". These guys are talented, they might not be the best ever in their positions, but they play in different positions and/or in different combinations almost every match. This unfortunately gives the impression that they don't know what they're doing and leads to simple mistakes like passing to noone or behind someone, or to the wrong person, etc. Last year's JWC was another example, I watched the Aust v France match and the Aussie backs looked totally confused and unsure of what to do. Again, these guys have some talent, but you wouldn't have thought so watching them.

It points to a problem in coaching (which includes selections) rather than an absence of talent.

Think of some of the recent great Wallaby backlines and the common factor is consistency in position and combination.

 

[I like to watch]

Put Cruden at 10 with the AB's and he looks like a champ.
Put Cruden at 10 with the Wob's and he would be average.
The difference?
In black he get front foot ball all day, and arguably the best players in the world outside him. The defence are worried about every player around him.
He is spoiled for options when in Black,in gold he is in survivor mode.
That has nothing to do with coaching,everything to do with cattle.