Which 5/8 should he have developed? It’s worth noting that he got more out of Cooper at 10 than anyone at test level. The rest of them were kids in nappies - only one of whom had any level of super rugby experience to support him being up to test footy. But, ultimately, he wasn’t. And who was the fullback he let down. He gave guys opportunities and they didn’t take it. Why is that all his fault. Who is the person he missed. Koroibete and Kellaway came along leaps and bounds with Rennie.He did indeed create this by developing a grand total of zero halfbacks, zero first fives and zero fullbacks
He had 3/4 of a World Cup cycle, and instead of developing younger players, he was scouting Japanese rugby for the next mid 30’s guy he could beg to come back
I’m a huge Samu fan but I agree with you. I’m all for Gleeson getting a shot. His velocity into contact is up there with the bestDon't know what we gain from having Bobby at 6 when he's been our anchor at the back of the Wallabies scrum for the past few years. Have Gleeson at 6, technically less for him to do.
But yes I'm so ready for Gleeson. The people on here upset at his inclusion over Samu are nuts. Do we watch the same player? Gleeson is a freak and is sitting down so many players at the age of 22. Genuinely a player with a point of difference that Australia has been dying for. Get him, Skelton, Bell, Tupou and Bobby V on at the same time, Australia actually has some potential.
Personally, I think Quade is very hard done by. The first game he had only recently come back from injury, he was playing behind a beaten pack, the game plan was new and territory focused, and frankly, Nic White was playing more out of 9.
Second game he had a hand in nearly ALL the points in that game. He was a link player in almost all the tries and kicked 5/5.
Last game he kicks a long range kick under pressure BUT drops a critical ball. If they had scored off that play, they would have won and he’s a hero. But his career is over because he drops one poor pass?
I honestly cannot accept the notion that Eddie is not picking the best possible squad now for this World Cup.
To do otherwise goes against everything that I have ever believed about professional sport.
He picked the best XV. Not much argument about that.
Everyone is literally arguing about injury cover selections.
Accept Eddie is risking injury cover selections for impact players or youth. It’s really not that bad.
Plus given our lack of depth we probably needs to take some big risks to win.
Ireland, France are now genuine contenders for the worlds best.I think Robbie Deans was consistent, things were much rosier when he was coach tbh. Constantly beat SA, the occasional once a year win v NZ (even if it was 1 from 3 or 4). Never lost to Wales - Ireland and Scotland only once. Destroyed France. Beat Eng a few times, record was 4-2 against Eng I think?
A Beale slip from winning the Lions series. Won in SA, won at Twickers twice.
We were #2 and IMO, the 2nd best side in the 2011 RWC.
edit: Scotland twice
Depends how you look at it, since injuries are common so you say, and I bet more common in the forwards, then there will be plenty of opportunity to bring in more options later. (Unless that one injury is Gordon of coarse - but any other player will be okay) So your odds are 33-1 the injury is not Gordon.It's fairly high-risk given how common injuries are in rugby, especially with the Wallabies. I also don't think they can afford to take Georgia lightly and field a team of backups. The Georgian pack is legit.
The other approach seems to be: fuck it, they are probably going to lose anyways so who cares. I don't that's an acceptable approach for a RWC. You should be giving yourself every opportunity to do well.
You're 100% spot on,Ireland, France are now genuine contenders for the worlds best.
Argentina on there day can beat anyone.
SA, England still can too.
Even Japan and Fiji, can cause an upset on there day and aren’t easy beats.
Wales, Scotland aren’t easy beats.
The world stage is so much more competitive since the Deans era.
It is like he jettisoned all the players who would have stood up to him and call him a fuckwit.From the outside it seems like Eddie has got shot of more senior players - and whatever off-field "baggage" or agendas they may have - and picked the younger more malleable players who he hopes to convince to run through walls for him. He is quite good at that come RWC time. Did it for Aus before, then Japan, then even England..
I think it’s pretty unlikely that Cooper and Hooper agree to tour with the Australian A squad, and I don’t blame them..With the 48hr rule it will be cutting it very close for replacements at the pointy end of the tournament. Maybe that is EJs plan and we will see Cooper, Hooper and Ikitau in the knockout stages? This assuming we lose a backrower and two inside backs at some point.
Yeah this is still a concern, will be only 2 recognized lineout jumpers in the starting 8. However I did notice Skelton and Valetini both won lineouts during the bledisloe though so it is not like they are completely written off as options. Should have enough to get bySo it’s safe to say Skelton is starting. Unless THooper starts at 7 again, our line out options are pretty low.
I’d much prefer McReight to start, and he should have been Captain.
As a lazy, handsome winger I always wondered how hard it was to learn to jump in a lineout. Do you even do anything? Don't you just get launched by your props into the sky?
Anyway my point is, why can't Valetini be more of a lineout option? would be pretty useful.