• 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.

Wallabies vs England, Sydney, 3rd Test, 25 June @ 8:00pm

Status
Not open for further replies.

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
The complete dropping of Kerevi is a joke. He should have at least been on the bench.

Sends a pretty shit message to the fringe players - you can try your guts out and be one of the best performers only to get thrown out of the 23 all together while under performers are kept in.

Not only that but he has the potential to be a great wallaby centre - the more time he gets the better.

Cheika has really fucked this one up.

Have heard that one before. I'd say it's because of the pre-existing Brumbies combination more than anything. And we need a Lilo on the bench to cover more than one position, I'm sure that would have been explained and understood by him. He'll be back, if TK doesn't put in a bottler this game we will likely see a swap for the RC.
 

Pfitzy

George Gregan (70)
Cry havoc! And let slip the dogs of shrill outrage!


Most puzzling for me is McMahon at 8 again. We have an 8. His name is Palu. Regardless of his shortcomings, he's still an 8, and can play 8.

The rest is now just Cheika looking for game time out of his squad. The way things have been rotated. . . . . . . Look, if there wasn't ever a series on the line you'd think this was a series of internal trials against some big blokes in white shirts who talk funny.

Would love to see Coleman get on at the end of the game to see what happens. Mumm can have a rest.

Moore, Simmons, Fardy, McMahon: cover rucks
Slipper, Kepu, Skelton, Hooper: run the ball

Other than that, let's see what happens if we win brilliantly, and everyone outside NSW can still say Foley is shit and it was To'omua who rescued him.
 

Simon.

Bob Loudon (25)
Good to see Rob Simmons force his way back into the side. His form has really been fantastic since he was dropped.

After that shocker he had in the first test he deserved to be dropped. He had what, 20 minutes' game time? Touched the ball at least twice and didn't produce a single intercept try.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
It annoys me that our greatest prospect at 12 is being "rested" to accommodate Foley's lack of kicking ability.


Is it really about general play kicking or is it about wanting more distribution?

We have dominated territory and possession. I really doubt the main purpose of the selection was in regards to kicking.

Kerevi and Kuridrani have hardly excelled together. Personally I would have given Kerevi a crack at 13 but Kuridrani does have the runs on the board and the partnership with To'omua.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Front Row: yeah alright, Moore is Captain I suppose can't really drop him
Locks: Yeah alright they all suck why not try something new
Backrow: Fardy, Hooper - yeh alright, McMahon - WTF.
Halves: Getting another shot, I can live with that
Centre pairing - Great to see To'omua back but hard to see Kerevi dropped.
Back three - yeah, nah

Bench:
Where's Gill?
Coleman - yeah why not - lets try all the locks out.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Is it really about general play kicking or is it about wanting more distribution?

We have dominated territory and possession. I really doubt the main purpose of the selection was in regards to kicking.

Kerevi and Kuridrani have hardly excelled together. Personally I would have given Kerevi a crack at 13 but Kuridrani does have the runs on the board and the partnership with To'omua.


I thought Kerevi's distribution was fine though, and it will only get better. I think kicking was the main issue.
 
T

Tip

Guest
So he's gone with To'omua/Kuridrani & Phipps/Foley.

Am I the only one here that doesn't buy into this provincial level "combination" prerequisite?

It seems like we're selling ourselves short half the time. Kerevi was one of our best on the weekend and now he's gone.
 

Joe Blow

Peter Sullivan (51)
It annoys me that our greatest prospect at 12 is being "rested" to accommodate Foley's lack of kicking ability.

Lets be fair. It really is not Cheikas fault that both Beale and Gits were not available and that To'omua was also injured.
However, it may be a real eye opener for Cheika that letting To'omua go is not such a great idea. How much longer will Matt Giteau be available? Who is coming through at 10 and 12 that has not yet played a test?

If Kurtley was not injured would we be looking at a different result for the series? I reckon he could have been the key to unlocking the poms defense and taking the pressure off Foley, not to mention his ability to put Folau into space.

That's all woulda coulda and the result will never change. Cheika can only work with the players he has and it's good to see him change tack having realised that the single playmaker deal was not working.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I thought Kerevi's distribution was fine though, and it will only get better. I think kicking was the main issue.


I disagree.

If Beale or To'omua had been healthy, or Leali'ifano hadn't missed the lead up to the first test because of the birth of his child, chances are Kerevi never would have been picked.

It's not like the centre pairing of Kerevi and Kuridrani was particularly threatening in either test. They were fairly easily contained by England.

But of course, it must be Foley's fault that someone else got replaced by an experienced Wallaby who is now available after being out with an injury.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
However, it may be a real eye opener for Cheika that letting To'omua go is not such a great idea.


Do you think there was much more Cheika could do?

To'omua's move seems as much about opportunity for his wife as it a change of scenery for him.

He's been a consistent part of the Wallaby setup for a few years now. He'd be on a pretty high end deal as far as the Wallabies are concerned.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
I disagree.

If Beale or To'omua had been healthy, or Leali'ifano hadn't missed the lead up to the first test because of the birth of his child, chances are Kerevi never would have been picked.

It's not like the centre pairing of Kerevi and Kuridrani was particularly threatening in either test. They were fairly easily contained by England.

But of course, it must be Foley's fault that someone else got replaced by an experienced Wallaby who is now available after being out with an injury.


Kerevi was threatening. Bar Folau he was the most threatening player on the team. Made plenty of ground and plenty of half breaks.

The fact is Foley NEEDS a second playmaker so we can't accommodate a 12 that isn't an out-and-out distributor and kicker.

Jamie Roberts, Manu Tuliga, to lesser extent Nonu would also struggle outside him. These are great players.

I'm not even saying it's the wrong option. To'omua is the right one. I'm just saying it's an annoying one.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Whilst we play a style of game with plenty of width, every Australian 10 needs a second playmaker outside them.

There aren't a whole lot of games where Cooper was the 10 and our attack looked good without playing a distributing 12.

The period with McCabe at 12 was a good one defensively but not a good one in attack.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Lets be fair. It really is not Cheikas fault that both Beale and Gits were not available and that To'omua was also injured.
However, it may be a real eye opener for Cheika that letting To'omua go is not such a great idea. How much longer will Matt Giteau be available? Who is coming through at 10 and 12 that has not yet played a test?

If Kurtley was not injured would we be looking at a different result for the series? I reckon he could have been the key to unlocking the poms defense and taking the pressure off Foley, not to mention his ability to put Folau into space.

That's all woulda coulda and the result will never change. Cheika can only work with the players he has and it's good to see him change tack having realised that the single playmaker deal was not working.


But we did unlock the England defense in the first Test. The second was an absolute fail - but in the second Kerevi was the standout.

I agree he most likely would not have been picked if it wasn't for injury but he was picked - and he did very well - better than I expected.

The double play-maker strategy was implemented because we simply did not have any other 12's who could crash-ball and distribute at the same time.

I guess my argument is, I am annoyed we are going back to the double play-maker system when we now have a 12 prospect that can play a different structure. A structure similar to the successful All Blacks backline.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
I thought Kerevi's distribution was fine though, and it will only get better. I think kicking was the main issue.

I disagree, we had a million opportunities to win that last game and couldn't leverage a shit load of goal line moments.

I think To'omua is selected to try to unlock the defense through stopping the poms being able to concentrate solely on stopping Foley

Whilst I do think Kerevi was the better of the two centres, neither was making tries, if it wasn't To'omua, I think Lilo would have been starting 12.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
I guess my argument is, I am annoyed we are going back to the double play-maker system when we now have a 12 prospect that can play a different structure. A structure similar to the successful All Blacks backline.

The ABs had Smith at 13 as the second playmaker with Nonu, now they have Crotty as the second playmaker
 

Brumby Runner

David Wilson (68)
Inviting the wrath of Pfitzy, the last word in player selections so long as they are all Tahs, but I really do think Cheika has gone backwards with this team selection.

The locks will be a problem. Starting Skelton with a backrow including Hooper and McMahon leaves the Wallabies with two lineout operators only. That will be an issue at some time(s) during the game. Rob Simmons must be filling the England players with extreme fear. If he's true to form, he will give up a penalty or two at the lineout and also probably in general play for his lazy, ineffectual flopping over the ruck and generally getting in the way of the England play. And for those who say he's reformed, remember that he played about 20 minutes only in the first test and gave away one of his typical penalties in a lineout. On top of that, he is a powder puff in defense.

The solution, imo, would have been to bring Horwill in to partner Carter who had a much stronger game in the second test than Simmons has put in for many a year.

The backrow stays the same regardless of how they were beaten in the second test. Sean McMahon doesn't have the presence needed of a test No 8. And if Hooper and Fardy play extensively on the wings as they have in the first two tests, then our ability to win the breakdown or to stop the England forwards in the middle of the field will again be compromised. Either of Palu (for the first half) or Houston should start with the other on the bench.

Now, here's the outrage;). Retaining Foley at 10 means we have to break up the most promising centre pairing we've had for a long time. To drop Kerevi altogether is unfathomable. He was one of the few shining lights in the first two tests and really should be persevered with. And, it also means we have to keep Rob Horne at 11 to defend in the 10 channel. All this compromise just to stick with a player who has amply demonstrated he can't control a game against a rush defense, and actually just doesn't have the arsenal to combat the England game. He may (may) be the best running option at 10, but he will get next to no opportunities to play that game against the England side playing as they did in the first two tests. As much as I'd like to see To'omua start at 10, that would leave us bereft of a goal kicker (although not much worse off than in the earlier tests - Foley's goal kicking was below par, and the Captains both demonstrated a disinclination to take penalty goals in any case), so it would mean that Lealiifano should come in at 10. For all the naysayers, Christian really does have a better passing and kicking game than Foley, and those look to be the crucial elements missing from the Wallabies' game plan atm.

I think, in summary, based on the way both sides played in the first two tests, that our set piece will deteriorate with Skelton in the starting side, our defense in the middle of the park will be deficient with Fardy and Hooper both playing outside the wingers, our breakdown work will be dominated by England, our halves pairing will again be less than club standard and we won't have any real strategy or options to break the England defense. It will need a significant change up in the game plan for the Wallabies to prevail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tip
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top