England v Australia

[tragic]

Apart from 10,I reckon only spot in the backline under contention is on the wing.

For now. I think JOC (James O'Connor) and Speight will be locked in well and truly next year.
Will be interesting to see what Cheiks does if Cooper has a blinder season in 2015 as he clearly sees QC (Quade Cooper) as a final 20 player in the build up to RWC.

 

[Moono75]

There is usually a game against Scotland or Italy

Could of at least played in the Barbarians game.

Hope he enjoyed his European Vacation...hotel buffet was a highlight of the tour I hear.

 

[Quick Hands]

Actually Beale did most of the playmaking. Which is why he was chosen at 10 before Foley against the ABs.

Actually no he didn't, in fact when the Foley/Beale dual playmaker thing first started, it was a disaster because Beale overcalled too often. It worked when Foley ran the game and Beale only became first receiver when the line was broken (which happens less in test rugby than it does in super rugby). Go back to the match threads, Waratahs fans were scathing.

And what happened last time Foley was replaced as Wallaby's 10 for someone more flamboyant?

 

[Braveheart81]

Could of at least played in the Barbarians game.

Hope he enjoyed his European Vacation.hotel buffet was a highlight of the tour I hear.

I think he probably would have if there wasn't such a question mark over who should be the 12 between Leali'ifano and To'omua.

Godwin definitely suffered from being an out and out 12 which realistically means he needs to start or he won't be in the 23.

He probably needed an injury or two to get a run and it hasn't happened.

 

[Tomikin]

Interesting from Hooper on the roll of the 7 basically saying it's about getting the best players on the field.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/w...n-michael-hooper/story-e6frf55l-1227138271979

I'm still worried about the size of our Backrow, we got slaughtered at the breakdown by the French, because we went in with the small pack then had the oddest bench and then the odd substitutions.

I put that blame on Cheika for that game and he got the balance better against the Irish, in the starting pack, but think the back bench players weren't the best, I don't believe you need both Cooper and Beale on the bench. Horne would have been better last week for Beale.

This week I hope he gets a big bodied backrower (Jones/Shaltz) and a big bodied reserve back (Tomane/Godwin/English/Lealifianio) preferably for Beale

 

[BDA]

I wouldn't have minded seeing him start against England, but in my opinion that would have come from Cheika deciding that Foley wasn't up to it rather than Cooper demanding selection.

To me its not about demanding selection. We still don't really have a great idea on whether the wallabies are better off under Cooper or better off under Foley.

It is at least worthwhile considering the following:-
1. Who is our most experienced test no.10?
2. between Foley and Cooper, which no.10 has the better win/loss ratio for Australia?
3. Have Australia's recent results been good?

With Cooper back to full fitness, we need to seriously be questioning whether Foley should still be the first choice 10, which is what a lot of people on this board are doing.

The idea that Cooper hasn't done enough to displace Foley is not exactly a fair view imo. He's the more experienced player and the more successful. The onus should probably be on Foley and if we lose again this week, Cheika needs to serious consider whether Foley should continue to be chosen at 10 at the start of next year's test season.

 

[Tomikin]

Cooper Vs Foley is a complicated question, Cheika has stuck with Foley, I thought Cooper deserved a chance based on skill set and to see how he goes in the new attacking system.

That's all, maybe giving him 40 mins this week to see what his got. I think Foley has been good, not great but good, with things to work on.

Mainly I want to see his kicking from hand improve, or share it around more, eg getting To'omua to do clearance kicks.

Come on boys lets get excited about smashing the soap dodgers. !!!

 

[Tomikin]

To me its not about demanding selection. We still don't really have a great idea on whether the wallabies are better off under Cooper or better off under Foley.

It is at least worthwhile considering the following:-
1. Who is our most experienced test no.10?
2. between Foley and Cooper, which no.10 has the better win/loss ratio for Australia?
3. Have Australia's recent results been good?

With Cooper back to full fitness, we need to seriously be questioning whether Foley should still be the first choice 10, which is what a lot of people on this board are doing.

The idea that Cooper hasn't done enough to displace Foley is not exactly a fair view imo. He's the more experienced player and the more successful. The onus should probably be on Foley and if we lose again this week, Cheika needs to serious consider whether Foley should continue to be chosen at 10 at the start of next year's test season.

If the Red's have another Mare of a season like this year, I would seriously wonder how many of them should be selected in the team at all.

 

[Moono75]

I think he probably would have if there wasn't such a question mark over who should be the 12 between Leali'ifano and To'omua.

Godwin definitely suffered from being an out and out 12 which realistically means he needs to start or he won't be in the 23.

He probably needed an injury or two to get a run and it hasn't happened.

Good luck to the guys on the weekend against the Poms.....I hope we smash them.

But as far as this EOYT goes all we have discovered is that the usual suspects are still the usual suspects.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I just checked.
Apparently Cooper started at 10 against the Barbarians.
Can people please stop saying or implying that he has not been given a start on this tour or has not been given enough game time.
Frankly, if he was going to press a claim for selection what better way to do so than in a game against the least well organised opposition you would meet on tour?
Thos calling for his selection do not cite his performance in the Baa Baa's game in support of their argument. Surely that is the end of it: given a chance didn't do enough.
[Leaving aside the time he has been given since]

 

[Braveheart81]

Good luck to the guys on the weekend against the Poms...I hope we smash them.

But as far as this EOYT goes all we have discovered is that the usual suspects are still the usual suspects.

I think we could have expected more experimentation and a more egalitarian approach to selections if we hadn't had a new coach appointed onto a few days before the tour.

We've still had three players make their test debuts on this tour and a one test player get a second cap.

 

[I like to watch]

I just checked.
Apparently Cooper started at 10 against the Barbarians.
Can people please stop saying or implying that he has not been given a start on this tour or has not been given enough game time.
Frankly, if he was going to press a claim for selection what better way to do so than in a game against the least well organised opposition you would meet on tour?
Thos calling for his selection do not cite his performance in the Baa Baa's game in support of their argument. Surely that is the end of it: given a chance didn't do enough.
[Leaving aside the time he has been given since]

Yep, you are right about Cooper starting 10 v the baas,and that they are an easier assignment than most Test matches.
However,I don't think you have taken into account that our 2 starting props who are grades above their replacements,did not start.
The captain who is judged one of our better forwards in most games did not play at all.
Additionally Genia started,who IMO is not playing nearly as well as The incumbent.
I am certainly not suggesting Foley should be banished from Test Rugby,but I would love to properly compare their performances on the tour.
I have been unable to do that yet.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I would love to properly compare their performances on the tour.
I have been unable to do that yet.

You never could: there would always be different opposition and very often team changes.
The winning margin v Baa Baa's was the largest of the tour (either way) so one might think that there must have been more opportunities for a ball player/runner in that game than the other tests.
BTW: i was being facetious in relation to having to check to see if he had played -I was having a dig at convenient memories or whatever

 

[Quick Hands]

You never could: there would always be different opposition and very often team changes.
The winning margin v Baa Baa's was the largest of the tour (either way) so one might think that there must have been more opportunities for a ball player/runner in that game than the other tests.
BTW: i was being facetious in relation to having to check to see if he had played -I was having a dig at convenient memories or whatever

Like the notion that the alleged spiral into the abyss began when Michael Cheika took over.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Like the notion that the alleged spiral into the abyss began when Michael Cheika took over.

just after he conspired to dethrone link

 

[Viking]

Actually no he didn't, in fact when the Foley/Beale dual playmaker thing first started, it was a disaster because Beale overcalled too often. It worked when Foley ran the game and Beale only became first receiver when the line was broken (which happens less in test rugby than it does in super rugby). Go back to the match threads, Waratahs fans were scathing.

And what happened last time Foley was replaced as Wallaby's 10 for someone more flamboyant?

You mean when Cooper replaced him last game? He put in a nice grubber and threatened the line 2-3 times. Did more in 20 minute then Foley did all game.

I will say this again, Foley's game is limited. It works at super rugby because he is next to Beale and he is not limited. It doesn't work at Test level because both Beale and Foley have too many weaknesses.

Foley isn't in the gold jersey because he's the best, he's there because he's the last man standing. We only have 3 flyhalves who play in that position consistently all season in To'omua, Foley, Cooper. One is covering our lack of depth of at 12, and the other is injured (returning from injury now). All other options would be considered experimental given lack of game-time/experience in the position.

 

[Viking]

For now. I think JOC (James O'Connor) and Speight will be locked in well and truly next year.
Will be interesting to see what Cheiks does if Cooper has a blinder season in 2015 as he clearly sees QC (Quade Cooper) as a final 20 player in the build up to RWC.

I'm not buying into this Cheika thinks Cooper is only a 20 minute impact player. I think it is a lack of game time and match fitness that is keeping him on the bench.

At least I hope i am right!

 

[BDA]

If the Red's have another Mare of a season like this year, I would seriously wonder how many of them should be selected in the team at all.

Cheap shot

 

[tragic]

I just checked.
Can people please stop saying or implying that he has not been given a start on this tour or has not been given enough game time.
Frankly, if he was going to press a claim for selection what better way to do so than in a game against the least well organised opposition you would meet on tour?

So you're happy to ignore his last few games and write him off based on a his first international game for back from injury. Yet you support foley who has been solid but not really looked the goods over the whole tour? That seems fair to me.

 

[Tomikin]

Cheap shot

Sorry but it's the truth, Hopefully they come out firing, and I still would have picked Quade if he wasn't injured, but the form they came into June with was shocking..