• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Wallaby 31 players for 2015 RWC

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brendan Hume

Brendan Hume

Charlie Fox (21)
The Wallabies will make a good team out of that squad. Set piece should be good, defence should be good, I'm hopeful Mitchell starts on a wing to improve our kick options and I'm hoping if we can get some front foot ball our attack will fire. The team I would pick for the first test:
Slipper
Moore
Kepu
Simmons
Skelton
Higginbotham
Pocock
Palu
Phipps
Cooper
Tomane
To'omua
Kurindrani
Mitchell
Folau

Res:
Hanson
Sio
Holmes
Horwill/Dennis/Fardy (not sure about this one)
Hooper
Genia
Foley
Ashley-Cooper


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tex
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Joe Brian said:
He would walk straight in to all those teams. For his own standards, I can agree with your statement that he wasn't very good, but class is permanent and he is a world class rugby player. But that is just my opinion, and you are entitled to your own.
Click to expand...
The trouble with that logic is that it would give about 20 or more players a strong claim to being in the top 10 centres in the world.

At his best for, sure but not on 2015 form. He did have a couple of very good games though.

Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk
 
Westie

Westie

Sydney Middleton (9)
Scrubber2050 said:
It is going to be a good balancing act as Skelton is sure to start.

I think the front abd second row are certain with Slips, Squeak and Keps and Skelton and Simmo. It is the 6, 7 and 8 positions will need the tweaking.

I'd still pick Fardy at 6, probably Pocock at 7 and fuck knows at 8. (cannot decide)
Click to expand...

He's had a great year that fuck knows.
 
KOB1987

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
So it seems mumm was picked strategically for his knowledge of the UK players. Arnold I suspect is there for developmental reasons. Their inclusion allows 3 complete sets of tight 5s to bash each other around and work on the set piece which fundamentally sounds like a great idea. The selection decision therefore was for Dennis over jones which I don't think in isolation would have been as controversial. Jones hasn't performed in his 2 appearances in gold and I think that perhaps the view is that he maxes out at super level. I also think that Sam carter is still part of the RWC plans.

Of the uncapped players I think that Toby smith is a great choice and is probably the only one that will make it through the first round of cuts.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
The_Brown_Hornet

The_Brown_Hornet

John Eales (66)
KOB1987 said:
So it seems mumm was picked strategically for his knowledge of the UK players. Arnold I suspect is there for developmental reasons. Their inclusion allows 3 complete sets of tight 5s to bash each other around and work on the set piece which fundamentally sounds like a great idea.
Click to expand...


The above I can totally get on board with, especially the three sets of tight forwards smacking seven shades of shit out of each other at training. We're really up against it in our pool and having that kind of training will be invaluable (always train like you mean to play I reckon)
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Nope. Not copping that.

Horwill, Moore, Kepu and Palu would have played 30+ test matches against NH teams in their career.

Would Mumm's 2 seasons against the same players spread much thinner give him some amazing insight that these others lack? Very doubtful.
 
Benaud

Benaud

Tom Lawton (22)
Tough pool but if we win it, New Zealand, South Africa and England are all on the same side of the draw, so we're a huge chance at a spot in the final. The pool match against England is shaping as the big one - winner likely to make the final, loser all but out of the competition.
 
Scrubber2050

Scrubber2050

Mark Ella (57)
On the George Smith ommission: Fabulous player BUT yesterday's man

On Captaincy:
I would think like most others that Moore will be captain for this year. Whilst certainly untested at national level, he brings a conservative approach with no bullshit. He's a veteran and well liked by the playing group.Reckon Chek and Squeak would work well together.

Others possible:
Hooper - thrown into the position and while a fantastic performer in his position the job seemed a little above him. Well respected by team-mates. Also a few poor decisions.Still very young and will be around for several years. Now his position in the start team is under serious threat from Mr Pocock. Chek and Hooper would also work well together.
Pocock: back to playing very good rugby. Previous stint as captain poor, particularly his decision that lost the game to fucking Scotland (in Newcastle). Not well liked by most of players as he has his OWN agenda on certain issues. However in a contest with Michael Hooper for a run- on spot . "It's all about David" Pocock would be unlikely IMO. Don't think Chek and Poey would be on the same page nor would the ARU want their captain taking stands on certain personal issues
Slipper: Young (just turned 26), certain starter, captains Reds (is that a plus or minus - seemed to deal with the issues at the reds pretty well with Journos), seems well respected by peers , very experienced at test level. He may be a "captain in waiting" for after Squeak's appointment. Think Chek and James would operate on the same level.

I don't think there would be other bolters other than Hooper, Poey or Slipper. Cannot think of any backs that could be considered other than Matt To'omua.

At the end of the day, Moore to regain the captaincy from Michael Hooper.
 
Viking

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Train Without a Station said:
Nope. Not copping that.

Horwill, Moore, Kepu and Palu would have played 30+ test matches against NH teams in their career.

Would Mumm's 2 seasons against the same players spread much thinner give him some amazing insight that these others lack? Very doubtful.
Click to expand...


I'm not supporting Mumm's position I would take Jones any day. But yes it would bring more insights.

Don't teams spend quite a bit of time studying their domestic rivals?

Which means whilst super xv teams are spending time looking at other super xv teams Mumm is spending time looking at other Top 14 (or where-ever he plays). 2 years extra of being consistently exposed to these players IS an advantage.

Given teams are actually spending a lot of time studying opposition.
 
Viking

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Scrubber2050 said:
On the George Smith ommission: Fabulous player BUT yesterday's man

On Captaincy:
I would think like most others that Moore will be captain for this year. Whilst certainly untested at national level, he brings a conservative approach with no bullshit. He's a veteran and well liked by the playing group.Reckon Chek and Squeak would work well together.

Others possible:
Hooper - thrown into the position and while a fantastic performer in his position the job seemed a little above him. Well respected by team-mates. Also a few poor decisions.Still very young and will be around for several years. Now his position in the start team is under serious threat from Mr Pocock. Chek and Hooper would also work well together.
Pocock: back to playing very good rugby. Previous stint as captain poor, particularly his decision that lost the game to fucking Scotland (in Newcastle). Not well liked by most of players as he has his OWN agenda on certain issues. However in a contest with Michael Hooper for a run- on spot . "It's all about David" Pocock would be unlikely IMO. Don't think Chek and Poey would be on the same page nor would the ARU want their captain taking stands on certain personal issues
Slipper: Young (just turned 26), certain starter, captains Reds (is that a plus or minus - seemed to deal with the issues at the reds pretty well with Journos), seems well respected by peers , very experienced at test level. He may be a "captain in waiting" for after Squeak's appointment. Think Chek and James would operate on the same level.

I don't think there would be other bolters other than Hooper, Poey or Slipper. Cannot think of any backs that could be considered other than Matt To'omua.

At the end of the day, Moore to regain the captaincy from Michael Hooper.
Click to expand...


I could understand why the ARU or even Cheika wouldn't pick Pocock because of the "own agenda" argument - although I highly doubt that should be taken into account, but I agree it COULD be a possibility.

I completely disagree with your statement that Pocock is not liked by other players? WHO? He was highly respected at the Force and is highly respected at the Brumbies. His history at the wallabies is the same.

Who the hell doesn't respect Pocock? Why do you think this? This I believe this theory has been built from the Hooper V Pocock propaganda, or the Tahs V Brumbies propaganda.

Complete bullshit.
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
You only study your opposition as much as you play them though.

He would know every single player in England much better than our local based guys.

But we aren't playing every single player.

We are playing their test team. James Horwill and Rob Simmons have probably played England's test players as much, or more than Mumm. Most importantly, they've also played Wales' in that time. Simmons and Horwill have probably played Wales 10 times since Mumm last represented the Wallabies. How many times has Mumm played the Welsh test forwards?

So my point is he isn't consistently exposed to English test players. He plays each individual probably once or twice more than the Australians do. He just also plays against the ones that couldn't make it in between that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top