RC4 - Australia v Argentina

[Quick Hands]

What if it doesn't work any better than Beale at 10 after a game and half of it? I'm still haunted by the game against the Boks a couple of years ago where he kept kicking it straight down their throat. Maybe he's improved the relevant parts of his game but we were hoping Beale had as well.

Beale in the last two games has been no different from Beale in every other game he's played at 10. It was never going to work.

To'omua needs game time to settle into the role.

 

[Brumby Runner]

What coach could potentially fix the Wallabies? Jake White? Nucifora? The Crusaders coach?

Ok, I'll have a go.

Lord Lawrie in as a temporary head coach until after RWC 2019. If Larkham is considered to be inadequate (and that is an unknown in my eyes because he has surely been restrained by Cheika's overall strategies/plans) then Simon Cron in as attack coach. Someone who understands defensive patterns (pity Ryano has left for Fiji) to replace Grey, and the sooner the better. This all means Cheika has to be promoted out of the HC role into some meaningless role like Director of Coaching. This all has to happen before our next test match.

 

[Up the Guts]

Holy shit, you moan about 'negative bullshit' whilst claiming the whole thing is totally fucked and there's fuck all we can do to fix it?

When are people going to get that those of us for a swift coaching change:

A) already understand that we have no national structure.
B) already understand we've no depth.
C) already understand that a) and b) aren't going to improve for a generation.
D) also think that the wallabies could perform better with Cheika and his assistants gone.

WE ARE the positive ones. You doom and gloom people that think everything is hopeless ARE the negative ones.

The problem is you were beating the drum for player changes when we lost to the ABs in Auckland telling us that we would improve if we just got rid of Foley, had a traditional backrow, sent Folau to the wing etc. Now the personnel changes have failed to make a difference you've moved onto saying we need to sack the coach and just hoping that we find someone who can drag us up the rankings again while ignoring all the structural issues.

It doesn't really matter if we sack the coach, we'll find ourselves discussing the same problems in five years time if we don't change the other issues alongside the coach.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I would actually have no problem with that approach. The problem the powers would have with it is that it’s going to cost a lot of money and they’d need to be absolutely sure the chosen one is going to yield an improvement in results.

Are the selections that random? The main areas of dispute are the 10-12 axis where we literally have no other options. Watch the NRC games if you don’t believe me. Putting To'omua at 10 is no less random.

Tho other area is the back row where we have stacks of talent but no big fuckers. Again, going with your preferred options is merely tinkering around the edges.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry KOB, but To'omua is a much better footballer than either of Foley or Beale. Right now, he probably should be filling the 10 spot, but with few suitble No 12s (and Beale is not one) going round, then it looks like Foley at 10 and To'omua at 12. When does Kerevi come back. Can't be soon enough, but unfortunately, we'll probably see him at 13 rather than 12 where he should be developed as the long term occupant.

 

[Brumby Runner]

What if it doesn't work any better than Beale at 10 after a game and half of it? I'm still haunted by the game against the Boks a couple of years ago where he kept kicking it straight down their throat. Maybe he's improved the relevant parts of his game but we were hoping Beale had as well.

Even in that worst case situation, at least the ball travels forward, not 30 - 50m sideways.

 

[KOB1987]

Beale in the last two games has been no different from Beale in every other game he's played at 10. It was never going to work.

To'omua needs game time to settle into the role.

Oh I see, if it's a selection you don't agree with it gets a game and a half, if you do agree with it it get's till the end of the season to settle in. It's easy from the armchair isn't it

Sorry KOB, but To'omua is a much better footballer than either of Foley or Beale. Right now, he probably should be filling the 10 spot, but with few suitble No 12s (and Beale is not one) going round, then it looks like Foley at 10 and To'omua at 12. When does Kerevi come back. Can't be soon enough, but unfortunately, we'll probably see him at 13 rather than 12 where he should be developed as the long term occupant.

Of course he is, they're both Waratahs and he's a Brumby ;-)

Whilst I have no problem with trying it, and I agree that it should, I just think that at the end of the day we'll find out that Matt has no less deficiencies as a test 10, just different ones.

1. He'll take the ball to the line better than both of them
2. His distribution skills will be below both of them
3. His kicking game will be worse than both of them
4. His composure will be about the same as Foley's and better than Beale's
5. His creativity will be below both of them

I'm more than happy to be proven wrong. To'omua is a more similar to player to Tim Horan than he is to any of our most successful 10's, only nowhere near as good. Remember when Horan played 10 for a couple of tests? It was neither here nor there and I'd expect the same.
I think your last sentences have more merit, the absence of Kuridrani and Kerevi is affecting us more than we give credit for. But I'd play neither of them at 12, Beale is far better there.

 

[KOB1987]

Even in that worst case situation, at least the ball travels forward, not 30 - 50m sideways.

No the worst case situation is they exploit their overlap and score at the other end. Which is what happened, twice from memory.

 

[Strewthcobber]

To'omua will be on the plane back to Leicester (to play 12) at the moment won't he?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Lorenzo]

The problem is you were beating the drum for player changes when we lost to the ABs in Auckland telling us that we would improve if we just got rid of Foley, had a traditional backrow, sent Folau to the wing etc. Now the personnel changes have failed to make a difference you've moved onto saying we need to sack the coach and just hoping that we find someone who can drag us up the rankings again while ignoring all the structural issues.

It doesn't really matter if we sack the coach, we'll find ourselves discussing the same problems in five years time if we don't change the other issues alongside the coach.

Ive wanted Cheika gone for a while mate. Personally I don't need 3 straight years of 45℅ to know that a coach inst the answer. I understand that others ate more patient.

Ive addressed your bullshit claims about the impact of playing different players elsewhere. Its odd that when we suck for 20 tests with a certain combination, you are OK with that, but when another combination doesn't improve things drastically after 1 or 2 tests, we should never have changed.

I was an advocate for Toomuas inclusion (preferably at the expense of Beale) and I've actually defended Foley on here. I still think Folau is better on the wing and still think Hooper shouldnt start. Maybe we should try these things for more than an hour, given how bad things are otherwise?

If we followed your logic, Connolly would still be coach.

 

[Brumby Runner]

And of course KOB, you will say that anyone in a Tahs jersey is the best option for the Wallabies. That statement has as much merit as yours about the Brumbies and Waratahs. I might remind you that Matt To'omua is not a Brumby and hasn't been for two or three years and won't be into the future.

Specifically, though, To'omua :

1. will take the ball to the line better than both of them;
2. has substantially better distribution skills than Beale, and the equal of Foley (did you notice how many hospital passes Beale gave to his supports last night?);
3. has a decidedly better kicking game in general, for line and for goal than either of Beale or Foley;
4. is way more composed than Beale (who isn't?); and
5. cannot possibly be less creative than Foley and will be much more stable than Beale.

KB (Kurtley Beale)'s time as a test standard player is now well behind him. The sooner this is recognised, the better for the Wallabies.

 

[tragic]

I reckon the two k’s would be a formidable long term midfield combination.
Kerevis distribution is improving.
But that would require a playmaker at 10.
Now I wonder who could fill that role....

 

[KOB1987]

And of course KOB, you will say that anyone in a Tahs jersey is the best option for the Wallabies. That statement has as much merit as yours about the Brumbies and Waratahs. I might remind you that Matt To'omua is not a Brumby and hasn't been for two or three years and won't be into the future.

Specifically, though, To'omua :

1. will take the ball to the line better than both of them;
2. has substantially better distribution skills than Beale, and the equal of Foley (did you notice how many hospital passes Beale gave to his supports last night?);
3. has a decidedly better kicking game in general, for line and for goal than either of Beale or Foley;
4. is way more composed than Beale (who isn't?); and
5. cannot possibly be less creative than Foley and will be much more stable than Beale.

KB (Kurtley Beale)'s time as a test standard player is now well behind him. The sooner this is recognised, the better for the Wallabies.

I think we'll find out soon enough but:
1. We're in agreement
2. Beale was a shocker last night, but he's normally OK
3. General - no and no. Line, yes Foley, no Beale. Goal, equal Foley, Beale not enough info.
4. We're in agreement
5. OK but you're referring back to point 4 for Beale.

We'll see how all that pans out under pressure in the 10 jersey which he isn't used to.

 

[Up the Guts]

Ive wanted Cheika gone for a while mate. Personally I don't need 3 straight years of 45℅ to know that a coach inst the answer. I understand that others ate more patient.

Ive addressed your bullshit claims about the impact of playing different players elsewhere. Its odd that when we suck for 20 tests with a certain combination, you are OK with that, but when another combination doesn't improve things drastically after 1 or 2 tests, we should never have changed.

I was an advocate for Toomuas inclusion (preferably at the expense of Beale) and I've actually defended Foley on here. I still think Folau is better on the wing and still think Hooper shouldnt start. Maybe we should try these things for more than an hour, given how bad things are otherwise?

If we followed your logic, Connolly would still be coach.

My claim never was that Bledislode I and II combinations were necessarily good just that we had nothing better to go with and changing the personnel alone wasn't the answer--as we've now seen.

Nor am I saying that we have to keep Cheika on, just that changing the coach and expecting anything to improve in the long term is folly without addressing the underlying issues.

 

[Lorenzo]

Beale is not normally OK. His defence is still frequently awful.

 

[KOB1987]

Beale is not normally OK. His defence is still frequently awful.

Yeah that was in reference to his distribution specifically. We could add in point 6 though:

6. To'omua's defence will be better than both Foley and Beale

 

[The torpedo]

I'm gonna comment on the Tui fan situation:

As posters on forums (and attending games) we're obviously all passionate fans of something and we do say stupid shit and criticise/hurl totally inappropriate abuse at players sometimes. I've done it before and I regret it, and I'm sure everyone here whose done so has, whether it be here, reddit, twitter and so on. The point is before you tear into someone over something, think before you speak, and if you post criticism of someone's performance, try and do it in a way that doesn't make you look like a twerp. I need to do this and I reckon all of us (including myself) need to do it.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Well said Torp

 

[Brumby Runner]

So, if we get a new coaching outfit, then the first thing they should do is remake the squad in their image. With an eye to the RWC 2019, I'd suggest they should be confirming a few of the fringe squad members who are now up and down in Cheika's antics and introducing a few new faces. These types of players should be rotated through the bench to give them time on the field and those who show the most promise elevated to the starting side with the view to having them right come WC time.

The players I'd like to see either come into the squad or to have more game time, especially for the EOYT, are the likes of, Banks, Maddocks, Petaia, Meakes, Paia'aua, Powell, Gordon (maybe Ruru who outplayed Gordon on the weekend), Valetini, Timu, Cottrell, Philip, Scott-Young and Johnson-Holmes. Leaving the squad should be Koroibete, Beale, Phipps, Simmons, TPN, all yesterday's men.

 

[Quick Hands]

Oh I see, if it's a selection you don't agree with it gets a game and a half, if you do agree with it it get's till the end of the season to settle in. It's easy from the armchair isn't it

Well, you're sitting in an armchair just like mine. You're twisting and distorting and argument to suit your own view.

Beale has played more than enough professional rugby at 10 for everyone to know what he can do in that role. His past two games have followed a similar pattern. He's been paired with Foley at super and test level for some time. So it's a different situation from someone who has just come into the squad because he's been playing professional rugby in Europe.

I would say the same thing if Quade was brought back, that he deserves two of three tests to settle in.

By all means disagree with what I say, you're just as entitled to say Beale, Foley, Cooper or anyone else should play 10 as I am to advocate To'omua, but please spare me the deliberate distortion of any argument.

You're normally better than that.

 

[Pfitzy]

That was shit