• 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.

Australia v Argentina, Sept 14th in Perth

Status
Not open for further replies.

Brumby Jack

Steve Williams (59)
Staff member
I don't know much about the Argies but hopefully this is how it ends up for them on Saturday night.

Puma1.png
 

PiXeL_Ninja

Bill Watson (15)
I thought that, during the 10min period where Hooper was binned, the Wobs were actually playing better rugby as they were playing the percentages. Before that they were trailing by 7 and were turning down 3 points to go for the corner - definitely not percentage rugby.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
I understand why everyone is running around looking for options in selection, especially at the scrum. I think however that people are really forgetting the factor of the new scrum laws when trying to compare the scrumaging abilities and form of players prior to the RC and now. IMO all bets and form in this area were off when the new laws came in. The only aspect that could/should have been reliably looked at was technique pre and post hit. All aspects to do with the hit are irrelevant. This I think is the key to the exclusion of Robinson. I would however question what the hell Blades has been doing with the Wallabies in the weeks since the Lions series because the set up of the Wallaby scrum is technically poor from the set up to my admittedly unqualified eye. I also understand the push for Timani but as has been discussed and shown in various video analysis his set up is just as poor as any of the other players, and anybody believing in his ability to assist overmatched props to hold a faltering scrum really must look at Southern Districts getting reemed by Uni last Saturday (the form cannot be more recent than that) though admittedly those scrums were under the old laws, which to my mind makes the situation worse as it is my belief that the new laws expose poor technique to a much higher degree as the scrums are now more of a contest than just being about the hit. That is without even considering all the disadvantages he brings to a side in terms of work rate, predictability and lineout.

After deliberating on other aspects of forward play away from the set piece I honestly think that these were the tactics that Link went into the matches with. Commit minimal players to achieve a desired effect and then run it around. Hence the selection of Hooper over Gill, as the breakdown was to be avoided rather than competed in. As with Blades saying the GAGR podcast last year about conceding many defensive lineouts I find not competing in any facet of play an anathema. Rugby is unique in that while the ball is between the lines players can compete for it, that a coach has it in mind that it isn't worth competing, especially at a major component like the set piece or the ruck just goes against the whole idea of the game to my mind and a side doing such will be duly punished. This is not to say that a side need contest every ruck or set piece, but can pick and choose their times. However to select a side and develop tactics to concede and entire facet of play in its entirety is just ....... well defeatist.
 

Richo

John Thornett (49)
Scott Allen showed pictures of Timani packing poorly and too high a year ago in his analysis of our scrums last week. All of our locks seem to be not providing the support our props need.


Much as i respect Scott's work, we don't have to treat his word as gospel. My understanding has always been that the other forwards love Timani in the scrum. Although I suppose they could just be spinning shit for some reason.
 

No4918

John Hipwell (52)
Much as i respect Scott's work, we don't have to treat his word as gospel. My understanding has always been that the other forwards love Timani in the scrum. Although I suppose they could just be spinning shit for some reason.

Why does only one option have to be right? He may well have poor technique and still be the best of a poor lot in the scrum. So imagine if he improved this aspect of his game.

Maybe it is this attitude that they are already the best so don't spend enough time on the small things that is the problem.
 

mark_s

Chilla Wilson (44)
Changes I would make to the starting team:

Front Row: Slipper, Moore & Alexander. Robinson isn't even in the squad (a bad mistake) so he wont be in the team. Kepu is poor around the park and now in scrums also. Sio and Kepu on the bench. IF the scrum goes pear shaped (likely) I would move slipper to TH and bring Sio on as LH.

Locks: Fardy & Douglas (with Douglas at TH). Fardy has been one of our better players. He gives something away in size to Simmons but I think its worth the change. Douglas is lucky to keep his position but there is no better option this week.

Loosies: Gill, Macalman and Mowen. Gill is better on the ball, thats what we need now. I also thought Ben M looked ok on the weekend. Mowen for lineouts.

Halves: White & Cooper I reckon Link has stuffed up the 10 selection. He should have started with Cooper in the first bled and transitioned Toouma in. Either Quade would have earned his place, or To'omua would have had a more gradual introduction to test football plus mlink would have been able to see the white-To'omua combo during the game. But Link went the otherway and I think we need to give Quade his chance (plus I don't think Quade was as terrible on the weekend as being made out), if he does perform great. If not then Toouma gets an extended run on the away legs.

Centres: No change
Back 3: JOC (James O'Connor), Folau, Mogg I'm not sure of the exact order but I think we need Mogg's left boot to get out of our own half better, JOC (James O'Connor) and Folau have been ok for us and Cummins made some pretty bad mistakes on the weekend. I would put Mogg on the wing as I don't think the argies will test his defence too much there.
 

Brumby Runner

David Wilson (68)
EDIT: Totally forgot about Timani.


Best thing you or anyone else could do imo.

Robbo should be, but won't be, back for this test. Horwill and Pyle would be a strong second row, but both are injured. Other likely candidates like Neville and Carter aren't in the squad, similarly Jones.

From the players available in the squad, I'd like to see

Sio, Moore, Slipper (or Slipper, Moore, Alexander)
Fardy, Douglas
Mowen (at 6), Gill (7), Dennis (8).

Douglas and Dennis are not really test standard to my thinking, but are better starters than Simmonds and McCalman. Simmonds on the bench with Hooper, Fainga'a, Alexander and ? Is Anae still with the squad? Anyone would be better than Kepu.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Has Kepu ever been dusted up that badly in the scrum before?

Has Simmons ever played tight head lock for the Wallabies before?

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems like a little bit too much of a coincidence for my liking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BPC

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
He got dusted badly in a scrum the weekend before when he came on as a replacement for Randwick against Souths.

Yes. I saw that game and remember what you're talking about.

I just think we are taking a very shortsighted view of the scrum if we limit the analysis to purely the props.
 

Brumby Runner

David Wilson (68)
Funny seeing the myths of size and alleged power coming out again.

Timani FFS. I am assuming those pushing this mean Sitaleki. Those people obviously didn't watch southern systematically destroyed in all facets of play on the weekend. Timani x 2 in the side and both made little ground right up until the last 10 minutes when running at 13 (that is THIRTEEN in case you missed where he was positioned) he made a huge run of 15 metres. In the tight he was constantly tackled at best on the gain line. As for the scrum the less said for the Rebels boys the better, though in fairness they packed against a Super level front row. The moral to the story is that Timani x 2 were very far from dominant in those aspects that those pushing for Sitaleki's selection would have him selected on, and at the lowest semi-pro level in Australia.

As I said on the SA V Aust. match thread, the problem with this side has little to do with personnel and everything to do with lack of technique, execution of basic skills and application to the task (such as working off the ball in both attack and defence).

Hear, hear! Sitaleki was no more than a spectator (admittedly with the best seat in the house) against Uni. He has failed to rise to the occasion in test matches in the past. Why is he anywhere near the Wallabies again? There are far better options in either Neville (playing very strongly for Manly) and Carter (part of the consistently strongest scrum in the Aus conference).
 

mark_s

Chilla Wilson (44)
BH, I don't think anyone is. There are few options for both the front and second row and I think most people are considering changes in both.

I will admit I have been biased against Kepu for a while, probably since bled 3 of last year. For the tahs, I prefer Ryan to start over Kepu.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Hear, hear! Sitaleki was no more than a spectator (admittedly with the best seat in the house) against Uni. He has failed to rise to the occasion in test matches in the past. Why is he anywhere near the Wallabies again? There are far better options in either Neville (playing very strongly for Manly) and Carter (part of the consistently strongest scrum in the Aus conference).

This could be said about Simmons, Douglas, and even Horwill this year. All of these players have had excellent test matches, average test matches and poor test matches.

He is near the Wallabies again because we lack options and the options we have are not performing consistently well.

I certainly think Neville and Carter (let's add Pyle to that list as well) are worthy of squad selection and potentially test selection in the next couple of years (or this year) but to say they are far better options surely just ignores the fact that now two Wallaby coaches have decided that isn't the case.

Previously everyone blamed Deans for not selecting these players but now McKenzie has reached similar conclusions. Either all the coaches are idiots and can't tell which players are more suited to test rugby than others or perhaps the evaluations made by fans shouldn't be taken as gospel.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
BH, I don't think anyone is. There are few options for both the front and second row and I think most people are considering changes in both.

I will admit I have been biased against Kepu for a while, probably since bled 3 of last year. For the tahs, I prefer Ryan to start over Kepu.

Ryan is substantially better around the field but weaker in the scrum. In the scheme of things I agree with you when the Tahs are playing a side that isn't a chance of bettering the Tahs in the scrum (which is most sides). Against the best scrums, Kepu is a better option still.
 

Brumby Runner

David Wilson (68)
Changes I would make to the starting team:

Front Row: Slipper, Moore & Alexander. Robinson isn't even in the squad (a bad mistake) so he wont be in the team. Kepu is poor around the park and now in scrums also. Sio and Kepu on the bench. IF the scrum goes pear shaped (likely) I would move slipper to TH and bring Sio on as LH.

Locks: Fardy & Douglas (with Douglas at TH). Fardy has been one of our better players. He gives something away in size to Simmons but I think its worth the change. Douglas is lucky to keep his position but there is no better option this week.

Loosies: Gill, Macalman and Mowen. Gill is better on the ball, thats what we need now. I also thought Ben M looked ok on the weekend. Mowen for lineouts.

Halves: White & Cooper I reckon Link has stuffed up the 10 selection. He should have started with Cooper in the first bled and transitioned Toouma in. Either Quade would have earned his place, or To'omua would have had a more gradual introduction to test football plus mlink would have been able to see the white-To'omua combo during the game. But Link went the otherway and I think we need to give Quade his chance (plus I don't think Quade was as terrible on the weekend as being made out), if he does perform great. If not then Toouma gets an extended run on the away legs.

Centres: No change
Back 3: JOC (James O'Connor), Folau, Mogg I'm not sure of the exact order but I think we need Mogg's left boot to get out of our own half better, JOC (James O'Connor) and Folau have been ok for us and Cummins made some pretty bad mistakes on the weekend. I would put Mogg on the wing as I don't think the argies will test his defence too much there.
Think you're getting close with the available players. I'd consider Dennis in place of McCalman. I don't particulary like either of them at test level, but think Dennis has a bit more go forward than Ben.

I'd probably now go back to To'omua at 10 and try Foley on the bench. Foley's game is a little like Quade's but with less propensity for error. He sits somewhere between Matt and Quade in the way he plays.

I'd also keep Cummins on the wing for another game or two. He is better than his start last week. If a kicking game is required, I'd then consider Moggy on the wing in place of JOC (James O'Connor) or at 15 with Folau moving back to wing.
 

Grandmaster Flash

Johnnie Wallace (23)
From ARU Twitter:

Slipper, Moore, Alexander, Simmons, Douglas, Fardy, Hooper, Mowen (c)

White, Cooper, Cummins, Leali’ifano, Ashley-Cooper (vc), O’Connor, Folau

BENCH – S.Fainga’a, Sio, Kepu, Timani, McCalman, Genia, To'omua, Kuridrani

Kepu still getting a gig?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top