The Wallabies Thread

[Zero_Cool]

Fainga'a is about the most traditional 7 we have. I'm not sure how he fits into any Wallaby side where people are arguing we shouldn't be selecting both Pocock and Hooper.

Difference with Finga'a is he can jump in a line-out, and has some ball running. Not the total package, but would give more balance.

A friend had a crazy idea, (maybe crazy like a fox) could you play Tupou at 8, I mean wouldn't help your line-out at all, but would help the ball running.

 

[Joe Blow]

BH, my understanding is that both McMahon and Fardy left because they were no longer offered a top up from RA.
If that was the case then you could hardly blame them could you? They had little choice.

 

[TSR]

A friend had a crazy idea, (maybe crazy like a fox) could you play Tupou at 8, I mean wouldn't help your line-out at all, but would help the ball running.

No

 

[Derpus]

While I accept they are all untested we really should be exploring options because my point is we need an alternative.
Guys we should be looking at:

• Higginbotham Old
• Valetini Injured
• Tui A second rower/ Injured?
• Holloway Terrible
• Fainga'a another 7? Same flaw as Pooper but less upside
• Hardwick See above
• Scott-Young Honestly don't know enough about the bloke
• Wells Not test quality
• Korczyk Not test quality
• Cottrell Maybe

Assuming fit Higgers obviously, Valetini has shown he might have the capacity to be a genuine test option. By constantly selecting Pocock and Hooper together and refusing to consider alternatives we have driven away guys like McMahon, Gill, Fardy, Schatz. a few of those guys might be useful right about now.

 

[Derpus]

BH, my understanding is that both McMahon and Fardy left because they were no longer offered a top up from RA.
If that was the case then you could hardly blame them could you? They had little choice.

Not sure about Fardy but not at all the case for McMahon. He left specifically because he could earn 3-4 times as much in the same space of time O/S as in Aus. He said, given injuries and his play style, that he felt he would not be able to sustain his best form for very long and it would be prudent to make hay while he still could. Which was fair enough. No fault of the ARU's.

Fardy i don't remember. His form didn't warrant a top-up.

 

[Zero_Cool]

Fardy i don't remember. His form didn't warrant a top-up.

Mostly because he wasn't being picked for the Wallabies, he was killing it with the Brumbies and offered everything we need.

Tui has been mooted as a potential solution to our Pooper issues, as he bends the line and would be a genuine line-out option. He's got the capacity to play at test level, at 6 is another question. Scott-Young is probably a season away from being able to start but sometimes with those young kids your throw 'em in and turns out they know how to swim.
Another guy who's another 7 but could help with the balance is Wright, he and ASY (Angus Scott-Young) are both 194cm and genuine line-out options.

 

[Braveheart81]

Difference with Finga'a is he can jump in a line-out, and has some ball running. Not the total package, but would give more balance.

Fainga'a has ball running? I would rate him as the worst ball runner on the list you made above. He is 1cm shorter than Pocock. He has taken 5 lineouts all season.

BH, my understanding is that both McMahon and Fardy left because they were no longer offered a top up from RA.
If that was the case then you could hardly blame them could you? They had little choice.

Fardy produced his worst season of test form in 2016 and was turning 32 that year. If you were RA would you have prioritised him for a big contract heading towards the 2019 RWC? I think that would have been crazy.

My understanding is McMahon was on a top up but he wanted a bigger one. I'm not really sure that could be justified. Were RA in a position to make that offer when they already had Pocock and Hooper signed?

 

[RugbyReg]

Difference with Finga'a is he can jump in a line-out, and has some ball running. Not the total package, but would give more balance.

A friend had a crazy idea, (maybe crazy like a fox) could you play Tupou at 8, I mean wouldn't help your line-out at all, but would help the ball running.

you call playing Hooper and Pocock together "bullshit" and "fucking dumb" and then propose picking a tight head prop there?

shees...

 

[Derpus]

My understanding is McMahon was on a top up but he wanted a bigger one. I'm not really sure that could be justified. Were RA in a position to make that offer when they already had Pocock and Hooper signed?

He was certainly worth a bigger top-up. Sad reality is we can't pay players what they are worth. Beggars can't be choosers.

 

[Braveheart81]

He was certainly worth a bigger top-up. Sad reality is we can't pay players what they are worth. Beggars can't be choosers.

Of course, it would be great if we could pay all our players their market salary. The reality is that paying McMahon more would have meant sacrificing elsewhere.

It seems that we might be pretty fortunate here and have him available for the RWC. The only period we will miss him for is this year.

 

[Derpus]

Well played by all if that's the case.

 

[southsider]

i think Tui longterm is the perfect second row/6 hybrid. Think Mumm or Simmons but actually not a powderpuff

 

[Tomikin]

i think Tui longterm is the perfect second row/6 hybrid. Think Mumm or Simmons but actually not a powderpuff

Tui has been injured and suspended. His not starting for the Reds but we are going to play him out of position in the wallabies.. I'm not sure who's available at the moment or has a decent amount of game time at 6 - 8 to accompany the Pooper..

Sent from my HTC 2PS6200 using Tapatalk

 

[dru]

Tui has been injured and suspended. His not starting for the Reds but we are going to play him out of position in the wallabies.. I'm not sure who's available at the moment or has a decent amount of game time at 6 - 8 to accompany the Pooper..

Sent from my HTC 2PS6200 using Tapatalk

We may well have to play someone out of position in order to fill the weakness created by playing someone out of position. Stop the rot with the first out of position selection, or be prepared to throw the dice. The double 7 selection creates a need for a jumping ball carrier in the back three. You are not particularly likely to find it in an 8, and our 6 options are unproven.

 

[Braveheart81]

Again, what backrow option do we have that doesn't have significant weaknesses?

Michael Wells has won more lineouts than any other Aussie number 8s this season but I wouldn't suggest selecting him creates a more balanced backrow because he's good in the lineout. He's got weaknesses in other areas.

Scott-Young or McCaffrey are more traditional 6s height wise but would a backrow or one of them, Timu at 8 and Pocock or Hooper at 7 be better? I would take Pocock and Hooper (with Timu) over ASY (Angus Scott-Young) or McCaffrey instead of Pocock or Hooper without a second thought.

Most of the specialists might not have a specific weakness but are instead weaker in most aspects of the game.

 

[Tomikin]

We may well have to play someone out of position in order to fill the weakness created by playing someone out of position. Stop the rot with the first out of position selection, or be prepared to throw the dice. The double 7 selection creates a need for a jumping ball carrier in the back three. You are not particularly likely to find it in an 8, and our 6 options are unproven.

But his not even starting or playing for the Reds which was more my point. I understand but maybe its Philips from Melbourne or possibly Cottrell as his at least starting at 6.. Timu possibly if his fit..

Sent from my HTC 2PS6200 using Tapatalk

 

[Tomikin]

Again, what backrow option do we have that doesn't have significant weaknesses?

Michael Wells has won more lineouts than any other Aussie number 8s this season but I wouldn't suggest selecting him creates a more balanced backrow because he's good in the lineout. He's got weaknesses in other areas.

Scott-Young or McCaffrey are more traditional 6s height wise but would a backrow or one of them, Timu at 8 and Pocock or Hooper at 7 be better? I would take Pocock and Hooper (with Timu) over ASY (Angus Scott-Young) or McCaffrey instead of Pocock or Hooper without a second thought.

Most of the specialists might not have a specific weakness but are instead weaker in most aspects of the game.

It's going to be the Popper it's who we select with them is the issue.. If only we had a big beard 6 who was experienced..

But we don't what's Dean Mumm up-to..



Sent from my HTC 2PS6200 using Tapatalk

 

[RugbyReg]

8 Timu
7 Hooper
6 Pocock

#Poopermu

 

[fatprop]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Douglas selected in the squad

 

[Brumby Runner]

Pocock has probably played half a dozen or more tests as a number 8 that are better than any test Higginbotham has played. That is why he will be starting with Hooper.

Suggesting we look at Holloway is laughable. The guy will probably struggle to still have a Waratahs contract next year. Fainga'a is about the most traditional 7 we have. I'm not sure how he fits into any Wallaby side where people are arguing we shouldn't be selecting both Pocock and Hooper.

I agree that some inferior players have gone overseas because we kept selecting our best players. That's how it works. Unfortunately those players who aren't regularly in the test side can earn more money overseas. Suggesting we give everyone more of a go is ridiculous.

McMahon made a decision to go overseas because he could earn a lot more money. That was a shame but he was a starting Wallaby when he made that decision.

Fardy made a decision to go overseas because he was getting towards the end of his career and wanted to test himself in Europe. He has specifically said that. He was selected most of the time at least on the bench in the season before he announced he was leaving. It was probably his worst year of test rugby and this year he has probably produced his best form since the 2015 RWC. It's a shame he isn't here to be playing for the Wallabies still.

You tend to make some very dogmatic statements at times BH and present them as unarguable facts. Here's one in return. Even were it his worst year, Fardy would still have been huge step up on Hanigan and just might have been enticed to stay through to the RWC. I am as sure as you are not, that Fardy knew his future with Chieka before he committed to overseas.