Can Cheika ball work for the Wallabies?

[Pfitzy]

But atm there are only two Tahs forwards in the starting pack and potentially only TPN and Palu to come back in.

Which is going to bring me to an excellent point if I do say so myself - looking at that Tahs pack:

1) Robinson - Slipper is better no doubt.
2) TPN - injured but a guaranteed selection in the XXIII
3) Kepu - playing and so far ahead of all the other options
4) Potgeiter - ineligible
5) Douglas - discarded
6) Dennis - injured, and effectively discarded (for now)
7) Hooper - playing
8) Palu - injured, slighted, underrated

What is reeeeeeeeally interesting about your point is that the Tahs pack wasn't just comprised of massive demigods who smashed everyone out of their way. People only see TPN, Palu, and Potgeiter (Kepu to a lesser extent) ripping it up with the ball and think "yep its because they were the best ball runners at Super level" and then go on to say things like:

The Tahs had the players to implement this game plan at Super level, but it is debatable that the Wallabies have appropriate players to run it at test level.

The word in bold is the key thing - people keep talking about "players" that can implement this plan. Not a "team" that can implement this game plan.

And a lot of people in this category will write off a player because he doesn't "do" enough. What they are saying, in effect, is that the player isn't visible to them because they don't see him run with the ball or score tries or kick goals. They're not even good enough to get noticed making huge mistakes!

I suspect many of the people making these calls are backs, because backs only give two shits about three things: tries, beauty products, and showering with other backs.

Back to the point: its not about "players" who can implement the game plan. What you need is a big pool of players who can make the benchmark for attitude and fitness to implement a game plan, and then pick the right balance.

Yes, we will welcome back Moore and TPN. Not just because they're better players than what we have now, but they have the experience and aggression needed to complement and lift the other players.

If you put one of those two back in, and add a hard working back rower like Fardy, along with a suitably powerful second row pairing, then guys like Palu aren't singled out as the only ball running option and can be more effective.

Its all balance.

I've no doubt if Fardy was on the plane, we could have won both those Tests - with a bit of squeak - but not because Fardy is vastly superior to Higgers or Jones or McMahon. Its because Fardy's skill set complements Hooper's better, and allows Benny Mac or Palu or any other 8 to be the ball runner. Dennis is a similar player - his skill set at 6 is right up there with the other options in Australian Rugby, but people are too busy shitting on him for not being good enough.

In fact, a lot of people are lining up to shit hard on Cheika right now, and NSW players in general.

This can be attributed as someone said above to the selection of Beale in part, but mostly I think there are a lot of people coming out angry just because Link and Patston got shafted. Its understandable, its just not helpful.

 

[Pfitzy]

I should add: if Horwill was in the kind of form he showed last year, we'd have a lot less issues too.

 

[Braveheart81]

Considering there was already a squad of 32 with numerous utility players with test caps yeah.

Foley (10 & 15)
To'omua (10 & 12)
Lealiifano (10, 12, 13 & 15)
AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) (12, 13, 14 & 15)
Horne (12, 13 & 14)

Many seem to think a specialist winger or outside back would have been the correct, balanced selection.

It seems you're trying to find a legal loophole that Cheika has broken by adding a player to the squad without sending someone home first.

Maybe just accept that the coach wanted Beale as part of his squad so he selected him to join the tour.

Obviously many people disagree with that decision. The tribunal made the initial decision that everyone disagrees with and subsequently people have tried to move the argument to the next decision maker along the chain to overrule that decision. It's not going to happen.

 

[Parse]

It's pretty simple guys, Cheika wants the Wallabies to play his game plan and there simply isn't enough time to teach players unaccustomed to his style of game how it's played. Thus the Wallabies for the RWC will mainly be Waratahs, there will be a few players not from the Waratahs in the Wallabies starting side, but very few.

Unfortunately this means a couple of things. A number of very good players will not be included in the Wallabies starting squad, and, the Wallabies won't do well at the RWC as they will be up against test quality teams where the defenses are much better then super rugby.

I think everybody already knows this. We just don't want to believe it, we want to have hope that the team will do well next year.

It may be a totally different thing in a couple of years as Cheika gets time to get his style going for everyone, but it won't be in the near future.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I haven't said he should be picked regardless. I've said he should be looked at. My biggest gripe as that for all bar 10 minutes of these test matches only one option has been used.

Oh well I guess you have to sometimes play it safe and be conservative to win test matches. What? The Wallabies have lost 2 in a row anyway? Guess that hasn't worked well.

Cheika was always (rightly) going to be given leniency due to the circumstances and the time he has to prepare. It would have been the perfect opportunity for him to try options - not just where injury has forced them.

He has given Speight a go, and gone back to To'omua after giving Lilo first chance. Hardly giving him a chance to learn to much that he didn't know already.

One would argue that Quade Cooper is the most talented 10 in Australia. He may not be the best selection, but surely you'd want to see how the most talented 10 can perform there.

Personally given the circumstances I would have thought the smart option would be to aim to give him 10 minutes against Wales, 20 or more against France and depending on the performances look to possible start him in at least one of the two remaining matches.

But then people said Foley needed to be kept despite his errors and lack of ability leading the back-line and constructing attack due to his great goal kicking (never mind the fact he only is called on for high percentage kicks). How did that work out on the weekend? He missed two kicks that you would consider easy for a player who should supposedly be picked on his goal kicking.

If anybody has backed themselves into a corner is Cheika. He's had a 4 test tour where the knives will be holstered and with 1 game to go and now knows that To'omua is a better 12 than Lilo (seems like deja vu - as if we knew this exactly 12 months ago, that one player (McMahon) who trailed off at the end of his first Super Rugby season is not quite ready yet and that Luke Jones is still a work in progress. First up he has South Africa in 2015 and after 6 months to prepare that's when the knives will be out.

 

[Tip]

To answer the threads title, no. Not with Chieka persisting with Foley as our 10. He is literally incapable of relieving pressure
The team is horribly underbalanced and it seems as though Chieka is taking a month to realize that Ewen McKenzie already worked it out...

By worked it out I mean

4. Carter 5. Simmons
10. Cooper 12. To'omua

All we need is for Chieks to go 6. Hooper 7. Hodgeson (c) and suddenly we'd be a force to be reckoned with.

My two cents anyway.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I should add: if Horwill was in the kind of form he showed last year, we'd have a lot less issues too.

Nah last year was when his form hit a real low.

 

[Tip]

I should add: if Horwill was in the kind of form he showed last year, we'd have a lot less issues too.

You got a laugh out of me with that one!
One less player to chose from means one less potential issue with team selections!

 

[Braveheart81]

It's pretty simple guys, Cheika wants the Wallabies to play his game plan and there simply isn't enough time to teach players unaccustomed to his style of game how it's played. Thus the Wallabies for the RWC will mainly be Waratahs, there will be a few players not from the Waratahs in the Wallabies starting side, but very few.

Unfortunately this means a couple of things. A number of very good players will not be included in the Wallabies starting squad, and, the Wallabies won't do well at the RWC as they will be up against test quality teams where the defenses are much better then super rugby.

I think everybody already knows this. We just don't want to believe it, we want to have hope that the team will do well next year.

It may be a totally different thing in a couple of years as Cheika gets time to get his style going for everyone, but it won't be in the near future.

This post seems to ignore the fact that the Tahs were the best Australian franchise in 2014.

It also ignores the fact that in the current starting XV, there are only 6 Waratahs (Kepu, Hooper, Phipps, Foley, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and Folau). Of those players, Foley is under pressure from Cooper and AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is just now coming under pressure from a combination of Kuridrani, Speight, Tomane and the prospect of JOC (James O'Connor) next year. No one can fairly argue that Kepu, Hooper, Phipps and Folau are being selected because they're Waratahs. Making that argument about the other two is also tenuous.

People seem to be ignoring the fact that Cooper started against the Barbarians and looked short of a run. He's looked good off the bench the last couple of games but perhaps that is where he is at currently; an excellent bench option but not ready to take the reins from Foley. Alternatively, he might be named at 10 this week to take on England.

Who are all the non-Waratahs players being left out of the side because there is limited time before the RWC? It seems that this argument is being trotted out solely in relation to Quade Cooper.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Quade Cooper is just the best example.

Come next year the wings, and potentially wherever Beale is selected will come under heavy discussion.

Also right now the Waratahs first choice locks, 6 and 8 are not available for selection, so of course they aren't there.

Of course the best franchise will have at least close to the highest representation. That's common sense. It's when players that 95% of the population agree are inferior are selected over interstate alternatives it's where the issues will start.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

This can be attributed as someone said above to the selection of Beale in part, but mostly I think there are a lot of people coming out angry just because Link and Patston got shafted. Its understandable, its just not helpful.

Let it not be forgotten that they weren't shafted - they each walked.
Neither gave reasons.
Funnily enough despite all this insane criticism of Cheika for, essentially, maintaining the status quo no one has said he shouldn't have been appointed. I take that as an admission that we had no real choice but to appoint him, recognising as most on here do that it is not a good look to have a provincial coach coaching the national team.
I reckon its time to lay off the conspiracy theories and accept the reality that we had no choice and this is the team Link picked, more or less.

 

[Braveheart81]

Of course the best franchise will have at least close to the highest representation. That's common sense. It's when players that 95% of the population agree are inferior are selected over interstate alternatives it's where the issues will start.

Well, that doesn't sound like something you've completely made up at all.

 

[Gagger]

Quade Cooper is just the best

It's when players that 95% of the population of my bedroom agree are inferior are selected over interstate alternatives it's where the issues will start.

Fixed

 

[Train Without a Station]

So the vast majority of posters here would not agree that for example, Quade Cooper is a better 10 than Bernard Foley?

Pftizy don't bother replying. As I know you'd probably say Sam Norton-Knight was a better fullback than Latham too.

 

[Tip]

Who are all the non-Waratahs players being left out of the side because there is limited time before the RWC? It seems that this argument is being trotted out solely in relation to Quade Cooper.

I'd like to think that this argument is trotted out due to the feeble performances of Bernard Foley over the past 3-9 matches.
The signs were there in the Wales game that he was out of form. However he kicked straight from between the two 15m lines and the 40 so everyone was happy to overlook it....

Then there was France.

Then there was Ireland.

And Regarding "non-waratahs players being left out of the side".

Kyle Godwin.
Matt Hodgeson.

 

[fatprop]

So the vast majority of posters here would not agree that for example, Quade Cooper is a better 10 than Bernard Foley?

Pftizy don't bother replying. As I know you'd probably say Sam Norton-Knight was a better fullback than Latham too.

Nah, Latham was a great Waratah and Randwick boy

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I'd like to think that this argument is trotted out due to the feeble performances of Bernard Foley over the past 3-9 matches.
The signs were there in the Wales game that he was out of form. However he kicked straight from between the two 15m lines and the 40 so everyone was happy to overlook it..

Then there was France.

Then there was Ireland.

And Regarding "non-waratahs players being left out of the side".

Kyle Godwin.
Matt Hodgeson.

which one do you want at 10?

 

[Tip]

which one do you want at 10?

Matt Hodgeson

True Grit.

ATM Wallabies have none.

 

[Braveheart81]

So the vast majority of posters here would not agree that for example, Quade Cooper is a better 10 than Bernard Foley?

Pftizy don't bother replying. As I know you'd probably say Sam Norton-Knight was a better fullback than Latham too.

I think most people agree that Cooper at his best is better than Foley. I doubt that would be 95% of posters here. Regardless, you've just plucked that figure out of thin air. It's meaningless.

We don't know whether Cooper is close to his best. He wasn't when he started a few weeks ago against the Barbarians but he's been good in the last two games off the bench.

I don't think anyone would mind him getting a start against England but the way you've framed it is that the coach was a moron for not selecting Cooper to start against Ireland and it will be the worst decision of all time not to select him to start against England.

Foley also had a substantially better game against Ireland than he did the week before against France despite his goalkicking being worse.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I think most people agree that Cooper at his best is better than Foley. I doubt that would be 95% of posters here. Regardless, you've just plucked that figure out of thin air. It's meaningless.

We don't know whether Cooper is close to his best. He wasn't when he started a few weeks ago against the Barbarians but he's been good in the last two games off the bench.

I don't think anyone would mind him getting a start against England but the way you've framed it is that the coach was a moron for not selecting Cooper to start against Ireland and it will be the worst decision of all time not to select him to start against England.

Foley also had a substantially better game against Ireland than he did the week before against France despite his goalkicking being worse.

Ok. let me rephrase that to "the vast majority". Probably a bit too technical and more so in the work mindset when plucking that figure out.

I haven't framed it as the coach being a moron for not selecting him to start BH. As I have previously said, Cheika's failing is that he has only used a single flyhalf, who most punters, pundits and coaches would agree may not be the best option, for all but 10 minutes of the test matches so far. My issue is Cheika being seemingly reluctant to look at anybody else.

So we've got Foley who is inconsistent? Either plays average and kicks well (from low difficulty attempts), or plays better and kicks average?