Strewthcobber
Andrew Slack (58)
Great shots HJ. Love that middle one of Foley jumping between the two props.
Wallabies v Springboks - Suncorp, Brisbane, 10th September 2016
- Thread starter KOB1987
- Start date
- Status
T
TOCC
Guest
Agree with nearly all that, but it like to see Kerevi given more time at 13, his defence is fine at Super Rugby level which makes me think it's adjusting to the Wallabies defensive patterns rather then technical deficiencies.
I also think Folau and DHP should swap, we need a fullback who can kick and Folau could be given a roving commission from the wing.
9. Genia
10. Cooper
11.
12. Hodge
13. Kerevi
14. Folau
15. DHP
As for the forwards, agreed I'd like to see a 7/8 of Pocock/McMahon
Pfitzy
George Gregan (70)
Put your truthing aprons on, ladies, because Pfitzy has now seen the game.
I stand by my opinion of last night: that was a win, and in those conditions, having executed our set piece the vast majority of the time, it was a good win.
So let me take a moment for this:
Because your arguments are opinions, and like a climate change denier, conspiracy theorist, or Brumbies fan, you can't ever be convinced you're wrong.
However, in good news, I took the liberty of finding you a new avatar:
===============================
Back to the truthing.
No, this probably wasn't a high quality game if you'd just watched the ABs rip the Argies apart for the preceding 40 minutes of rugby. I hadn't, so it didn't bother me. They're two different universes, so put that shit away and start thinking about what we can take away from the game.
Add in two inches of rain in Brisbane and you're on a sticky wicket. Literally.
But, by almighty fuck, we sure hung in there and played some Test footy, with our brains mostly intact, and our shoulders doing the work instead of our mouths, for the most part.
Negatives first up: decision making.
I see a few people giving Kerevi a pat on the back, and definitely he's a physical threat who had a solid game. For me, he's a crashball 12 with a bit of handling, and not a 13. His defensive setup and lateral speed isn't good enough but he can hurt people closer in.
His biggest problem, having made a break, is running away from his support, or holding the ball way too long instead of letting it do the work. All those breaks he made came to very little except field position, where better teams are putting it through the hands. Look at the Boks' first try: light fingers, looking for supporting. Two hands, most importantly. Something for Kerevi to work on.
Kane Douglas had what you'd call a quiet game, and I'll reserve my full judgement on the "workhorse" stuff until I've seen some stats about ruck involvements. What I did NOT like about his game was, just before the Boks try, waving his arms at the ref when an attacking player without the ball got in the way. Don't wave your arms - smash the ***t! At least give away a penalty for taking someone off the ball rather than getting caught being a pill in our defensive zone.
Attacking rucks in the first half were simply not physical enough to secure ball. Owens was letting people fly in off their feet, due in part to the conditions giving people some leeway, and we didn't take advantage of that. Too hesitant; the only thing big voortrekkers respect is if you smash the fuck out of them. It won't hurt them, but they'll smile and pat you on the shoulder afterwards and say "Ja, nice effort bru!"
Some of the kicking was shit BUT in those conditions a bit of skid was probably not a bad thing.
Time for the positives.
Reece "Boomstick" Hodge - someone said that earlier on the thread. Perfect. He has a boot that Morne Steyn was probably getting a little stiff over, that kid. And he fucking slammed someone on defence late in the game. Whole-hearted, absolute machine of a kid who understands what is required. Compare that to some kids who come through head of the class and think the flashy shit that made them stand out at junior level is what will work as a man.
Invariably, the game is won in the top two inches, and Hodge understands that you fight for that headspace and make the other guy not want it any more. When he plugged that touch finder from our 30, 15 in, to just outside their 22, the Boks would have been grimacing a little.
Lineout worked this week, except for one total shit show when TPN came on and threw to 2, but Douglas didn't jump. Not sure what happened there.
And we were up against some handy operators, even if they don't have the smarts of a Matfield. That showed in the fact we didn't steal any ball, but there was some sublime throwing even if it wasn't 100% clear.
I will point out to the lineout numpties here: The Boks mostly beat as at lineout time with speed, not the number of jumpers or the centimetres or any of that shit. To these numpties I say: the sooner you let go of the calculator, ruler, and protractor, the better off we'll all be. Just stop.
Scrum was a treat, though the caveat is looking at the benches of both sides. Think Slipper had more caps than the Bok replacement forwards put together, so even with rookies like Alalaatoa and Arnold coming off the bench, we were always going to munt them.
In general play we showed flashes of brilliance, but also a bit of hesitance. Having been bitched at home and away the last two games by those black-shirted bastards, you can kind of understand that. New combinations, wet paddock, running lines a little suss. We were lateral way too often, but that isn't the playmaker's fault if no-one is running the inside line.
Kerevi could come unders much more often off the set piece, and use his size and pace to break back against the drift. His hands are good enough to put the blindside winger into space on a scissor as well. Anyone who has coached knows what I'm talking about. Simple moves, but they're the money shots.
Quade and Foley started to find that space similar to Foley and Beale in gold. I thought both had good games, but the lateral shit and those two short balls to Strauss. Jeez.
In any case, Genia was the standout of the backline. Into everything, had a hard night on a slippery pitch, and made very few mistakes. His kicking saved us more than once. Great game.
The forward pack I'll mostly address as a unit, and because I'm getting some shit from Mrs Pfitzy about being on the computer when she wants to go out:
Get rid of those first 15 minutes of passive shit, and we'll start beating everyone. The Pooper still has to really justify itself, but the amount of shit put Pocock's way allowed Hooper to finish strongly IMHO. The two turnovers in the back half of the game were crucial.
Coleman was great for putting it up the Boks. Just love this bloke. So Wallaby. Much hurtness.
Arnold was very effective when he came on. Bent the line, helped the scrum engage in some serious traction, and put in a few big efforts on defense.
Moore was better in captaincy, and I couldn't fault his decision making EXCEPT for getting involved in some scuffle. Stand up for your team, but all means. But do it with a cool head.
Overall, the physicality was better, and that is attitude. You can add all the flash harry bullshit the ABs do once you get the basics right.
We might be a way off that, but for now this was a good game of Test Rugby, and a good win by our blokes.
I stand by my opinion of last night: that was a win, and in those conditions, having executed our set piece the vast majority of the time, it was a good win.
So let me take a moment for this:
Because your arguments are opinions, and like a climate change denier, conspiracy theorist, or Brumbies fan, you can't ever be convinced you're wrong.
However, in good news, I took the liberty of finding you a new avatar:
===============================
Back to the truthing.
No, this probably wasn't a high quality game if you'd just watched the ABs rip the Argies apart for the preceding 40 minutes of rugby. I hadn't, so it didn't bother me. They're two different universes, so put that shit away and start thinking about what we can take away from the game.
Add in two inches of rain in Brisbane and you're on a sticky wicket. Literally.
But, by almighty fuck, we sure hung in there and played some Test footy, with our brains mostly intact, and our shoulders doing the work instead of our mouths, for the most part.
Negatives first up: decision making.
I see a few people giving Kerevi a pat on the back, and definitely he's a physical threat who had a solid game. For me, he's a crashball 12 with a bit of handling, and not a 13. His defensive setup and lateral speed isn't good enough but he can hurt people closer in.
His biggest problem, having made a break, is running away from his support, or holding the ball way too long instead of letting it do the work. All those breaks he made came to very little except field position, where better teams are putting it through the hands. Look at the Boks' first try: light fingers, looking for supporting. Two hands, most importantly. Something for Kerevi to work on.
Kane Douglas had what you'd call a quiet game, and I'll reserve my full judgement on the "workhorse" stuff until I've seen some stats about ruck involvements. What I did NOT like about his game was, just before the Boks try, waving his arms at the ref when an attacking player without the ball got in the way. Don't wave your arms - smash the ***t! At least give away a penalty for taking someone off the ball rather than getting caught being a pill in our defensive zone.
Attacking rucks in the first half were simply not physical enough to secure ball. Owens was letting people fly in off their feet, due in part to the conditions giving people some leeway, and we didn't take advantage of that. Too hesitant; the only thing big voortrekkers respect is if you smash the fuck out of them. It won't hurt them, but they'll smile and pat you on the shoulder afterwards and say "Ja, nice effort bru!"
Some of the kicking was shit BUT in those conditions a bit of skid was probably not a bad thing.
Time for the positives.
Reece "Boomstick" Hodge - someone said that earlier on the thread. Perfect. He has a boot that Morne Steyn was probably getting a little stiff over, that kid. And he fucking slammed someone on defence late in the game. Whole-hearted, absolute machine of a kid who understands what is required. Compare that to some kids who come through head of the class and think the flashy shit that made them stand out at junior level is what will work as a man.
Invariably, the game is won in the top two inches, and Hodge understands that you fight for that headspace and make the other guy not want it any more. When he plugged that touch finder from our 30, 15 in, to just outside their 22, the Boks would have been grimacing a little.
Lineout worked this week, except for one total shit show when TPN came on and threw to 2, but Douglas didn't jump. Not sure what happened there.
And we were up against some handy operators, even if they don't have the smarts of a Matfield. That showed in the fact we didn't steal any ball, but there was some sublime throwing even if it wasn't 100% clear.
I will point out to the lineout numpties here: The Boks mostly beat as at lineout time with speed, not the number of jumpers or the centimetres or any of that shit. To these numpties I say: the sooner you let go of the calculator, ruler, and protractor, the better off we'll all be. Just stop.
Scrum was a treat, though the caveat is looking at the benches of both sides. Think Slipper had more caps than the Bok replacement forwards put together, so even with rookies like Alalaatoa and Arnold coming off the bench, we were always going to munt them.
In general play we showed flashes of brilliance, but also a bit of hesitance. Having been bitched at home and away the last two games by those black-shirted bastards, you can kind of understand that. New combinations, wet paddock, running lines a little suss. We were lateral way too often, but that isn't the playmaker's fault if no-one is running the inside line.
Kerevi could come unders much more often off the set piece, and use his size and pace to break back against the drift. His hands are good enough to put the blindside winger into space on a scissor as well. Anyone who has coached knows what I'm talking about. Simple moves, but they're the money shots.
Quade and Foley started to find that space similar to Foley and Beale in gold. I thought both had good games, but the lateral shit and those two short balls to Strauss. Jeez.
In any case, Genia was the standout of the backline. Into everything, had a hard night on a slippery pitch, and made very few mistakes. His kicking saved us more than once. Great game.
The forward pack I'll mostly address as a unit, and because I'm getting some shit from Mrs Pfitzy about being on the computer when she wants to go out:
Get rid of those first 15 minutes of passive shit, and we'll start beating everyone. The Pooper still has to really justify itself, but the amount of shit put Pocock's way allowed Hooper to finish strongly IMHO. The two turnovers in the back half of the game were crucial.
Coleman was great for putting it up the Boks. Just love this bloke. So Wallaby. Much hurtness.
Arnold was very effective when he came on. Bent the line, helped the scrum engage in some serious traction, and put in a few big efforts on defense.
Moore was better in captaincy, and I couldn't fault his decision making EXCEPT for getting involved in some scuffle. Stand up for your team, but all means. But do it with a cool head.
Overall, the physicality was better, and that is attitude. You can add all the flash harry bullshit the ABs do once you get the basics right.
We might be a way off that, but for now this was a good game of Test Rugby, and a good win by our blokes.
Highlander35
Andrew Slack (58)
Hodge-Kerevi centre partnership for Japan 2019.
The torpedo
Peter Fenwicke (45)
Naivalu on the left wing?
KOB1987
John Eales (66)
not next week, but for the away games, yep!
The torpedo
Peter Fenwicke (45)
With a bit more luck, we win 44-10 (intercept pass by Foley becomes a try for us along with Kerevi and Sio scoring)
Micheal
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
I don't understand it all. For reference, thus far in the 3-2-1 thread as nominated by this forum:
1.Genia - 37
2.Hooper - 30
3.Cooper - 16
=4.Coleman - 12
=4.Hodge - 12
...
6. Pocock - 2
Genia and Hooper are huge outliers. I initially decided to only include the top 5, but seeing as the point of my post was to defend Hooper, I thought I'd include Pocock aswell.
Big big big difference there. Yet you want to drop him after that performance? Sends a bad message to the wider playing group ("Perform and you can still get dropped") which can erode culture.
I think for next week v the Argies, the team will be have few changes, and will look like this:
1. Sio
2. Moore (c)
3. Kepu
4. Douglas
5. Coleman (if not out with a concussion - Arnold if so)
6. Mumm
7. Hooper
8. Pocock
9. Genia
10. Cooper
11. Hodge
12. Foley
13. Kerevi
14. DHP
15. Folau
16. Robertson (Allan is out)
17. TPN
18. Slipper
19. Arnold (or Timani / Fardy if Coleman is out)
20. McMahon
21. Phipps
22. Kuridrani (I'd prefer To'omua though, if fit)
23. Mitchell (I think its time to let Mitchell go but I presume he'll be picked)
The torpedo
Peter Fenwicke (45)
Swap Folau and Hodge and that team looks even better
Strewthcobber
Andrew Slack (58)
Fardy just can't end up in the second row next weekend. Timani isn't much better. The Argies will smell blood and destroy us if it happens.
We've worked too hard on our scrum of late to risk having non-specialts in at lock at any stage.
It means Simmons probably has to be in the bench
Edit - forgot about Mumm. Might just get away with it.
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
Honest question - why not? Is he still not eligible. I thought his time came after the Bokke test.
Strewthcobber
Andrew Slack (58)
He's not eligible for a couple more weeks
Micheal
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
If Fardy got on I'd shift Mumm to 2 row with that bench.
Realistically, Simmons offers nothing outside of a lineout option and a bit of non-domineering / impactful grunt work. Even then, his lineout work of late has been poor. Hes gone missing in the NRC and I really don't think he deserves a call up.
I wouldn't want Skelton in the side for the same reasons as above, except he occasionally has an impact but doesn't provide anything at the set piece.
Neither are complete enough players to be representing the Wobs in my opinion.
Thinking about it again, I'd probably have McMahon / Timani on the bench to come on at the same time.
McMahon provides another jumper, Timani provides .5 of another jumper. The lineout will be fine and Timani is strong in the scrum.
swingpass
Peter Sullivan (51)
Except that one of the "props" is Drew Mitchell. But i suspect you knew that!
- Status