England v Australia

[Braveheart81]

Who's got a comment on how Jones handled the 2nd row.
I haven't seen the game due to CH10 being muppets.

He was fine around the park. Gave away a silly penalty as soon as he came on for pulling down a maul and got demolished in every scrum where England had the feed (same as every member of the scrum at pretty much all points in the game).

 

[Cardiffblue]

He's playing for the Queensland Reds next year so no changes to policy are required for him to be in the RWC squad.

Ok I see

 

[chasmac]

I see good things in Jones.
He has enough speed to keep up in a game, he looks for work and he works hard.
Also, he made mistakes early on in the Irish game but seemed to correct himself. His 2nd half was bettert than his 1st.

 

[Brumby Runner]

In the games I saw Mogg was barely up to it in the NRC. You can't honestly think he's a chance to unseat Folau.

Not at all. I was thinking about the situation if Izzy was to be played on the wing (or in the centre) as has been suggested by many here. ATM not too many options for No 15 otherwise. We would need Moggy to come back willing to make his tackles or either of JOC (James O'Connor) or KHunt to prove they are up to it. All I said was he would be in contention.

I agree he was way off the pace in the NRC. Looked quite disinterested imo but it might simply be that he was playing in considerable pain.

 

[Brumby Runner]

It's folklore. Skelton played 55-odd minutes on test debut so, in a literal sense, the statement is untrue.

However, that doesn't mean everthing is neatly wrapped up and goes away. He was blowing harder than James Morrison's ear-shattering Double C. No other authority needed on that.


Fat tourists with the right money have climbed Mt Everest. Fat rugby players play full test matches. There's no law against walking.

Skelton may not be in that category but he is never going to be an AFL-style 100 minute runner. He brings other attributes. A test player, yeah; a test starter, not yet. His lineout and scrummaging are also not at test level.

And coaches take risks all the time. Sometimes it works for them.

I think it's more a matter that the Wallabies can't afford to have his poor scrummaging on for more than the last 20 minutes or so rather than his lack of fitness. With those problems, I don't think he is a test player atm.

 

[boyo]

Who's got a comment on how Jones handled the 2nd row.
I haven't seen the game due to CH10 being muppets.

Highlights (30 min.).

Highlights (60 min.).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episod...-international-highlights-england-v-australia

 

[Braveheart81]

I think it's more a matter that the Wallabies can't afford to have his poor scrummaging on for more than the last 20 minutes or so rather than his lack of fitness. With those problems, I don't think he is a test player atm.

To be fair to Skelton, our scrum got demolished on England's feed from go to whoa on Saturday night.

He scored a try utilising his size which is exactly what he's there for.

I agree with you that we need to dramatically improve our scrummaging to have a chance, particularly against England, but let's not pretend that was just down to Skelton.

At least he provided some upside whilst our scrum was getting smashed.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Just rewatched the game and took particular notice (and count) of the number of times Foley, To'omua and Cooper took the ball at first receiver from set piece or ruck/maul.

In the time Foley was on the ground, he took the ball at No 10 17 times in which he kicked on 5 occasions. Matt To'omua took it at No 10 18 times and kicked it once (clearing kick from his in-goal to about 10m from halfway). Almost 50/50 between them playing No 10 when in possession.

After Quade came on, he (Cooper) took it at No 10 on 13 occasions and Matt on 9 occasions. Quade I think kicked it 3 times in general play.

Make of this what you will, but I believe it demonstrates the game changed once Cooper replaced Foley, and it is my impression at least that the Wallabies' attack was more directed and more threatening to the defense. In this period, we saw a few occasions where the backline actually worked in their nominated positions and made some very good ground, See eg the backline move White > Cooper > To'omua > Folau> Speight which made about 30 - 40 m down the right hand side, and a couple of occasions White > Cooper > To'omua > AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) down the LHS, also making good ground.

And it's probably unnecessary to say that Matt To'omua did not on any occasion defend on the wing.

This was only one game, and I accept that Foley has had better games especially in the series against the French. He is not rubbish, but my preference would be Cooper at 10 and To'omua at 12.

 

[Brumby Runner]

To be fair to Skelton, our scrum got demolished on England's feed from go to whoa on Saturday night.

He scored a try utilising his size which is exactly what he's there for.

I agree with you that we need to dramatically improve our scrummaging to have a chance, particularly against England, but let's not pretend that was just down to Skelton.

At least he provided some upside whilst our scrum was getting smashed.

Happy to be fair and acknowledge the scrum was being overpowered by the Poms from go to whoa. But in terms of the Wallabies' test season as a whole, that was a bit of an aberration. Generally, the starting scrum has held its own or even dominated against other sides. As someone else mentioned, Slipper and Kepu have played something like 17 test each. I think they were at the point of exhaustion in this game. Over the whole season they can hold their heads high.

In respect of Will Skelton, the scrum has gone significantly backwards each time he has come onto the field. It was noticable from overhead shots in this game that it was his side that first gave way again. Credit to him for his try, but I don't think that compensates for the poor technique he has at the set piece atm. Hopefully another Super season will see the required improvement, but I think it may take longer. Incidentally, I wouldn't be surprised if his main problem has someting to do with the size of his head (and not being facetious). He seems to have a real problem getting his head between the prop and hooker and if he can't do that I'm sure he can't be pushing with all of his immense strength and weight. Is he binding too high, trying to get between the buttocks when perhaps he should be getting lower? If so, maybe it's his stuture more than anything that is causing difficulties. In any case, it needs to be sorted.

 

[Braveheart81]

I'm not sure how you can read anything into those stats.

They seem to say that To'omua receives the ball at first receiver roughly half the time regardless of who is playing 10.

Given he played more minutes, it doesn't really suggest Foley opted to kick more than Cooper.

I think this game again showed that it's not a cut and dry decision between Cooper and Foley. I agree that Cooper offers more when he's at peak form, but we're yet to see him regain that. His play is a long way short of where it was on the 2013 EOYT.

Hopefully they both have excellent Super Rugby seasons and make it a really difficult choice. It would seem quite likely that one will start and one will be on the bench in our best RWC team.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Agree that the starting scrum has generally been OK, and I think now that slipper and kepu have experienced England's shift to the left tactics they will be better at countering it next time.

Provided they have decent locks behind them.

It been pretty noticeable that when we have to improvise - Fardy against NZ, Jones against England, Skelton against everyone, the scrum drops several levels.

I really don't think we can afford to hit the pointy end of a rwc without three genuine scrummaging locks in the 23.

Where that leaves Skelton is the question....

 

[Tomikin]

As I said earlier and got a smack for super form will mean alot in the 10 stakes. At the moment Foley's got the gig and Coopers right on his hammer a great super campaign can swap them.

 

[swingpass]

. Incidentally, I wouldn't be surprised if his main problem has someting to do with the size of his head (and not being facetious). He seems to have a real problem getting his head between the prop and hooker and if he can't do that I'm sure he can't be pushing with all of his immense strength and weight. Is he binding too high, trying to get between the buttocks when perhaps he should be getting lower? If so, maybe it's his stature more than anything that is causing difficulties. In any case, it needs to be sorted.

i said this earlier on. he is just so huge that he splits the prop from the hooker, his locking partner can't get his arm around him to grip properly and the 8 can't get either arm around his bum. have a look at the overhead shots and also against ireland and france.

 

[Pfitzy]

I agree that Cooper offers more when he's at peak form, but we're yet to see him regain that. His play is a long way short of where it was on the 2013 EOYT.

And let's also remember he's been in Wallaby colours for 6 years now, while Foley is in his 2nd year + a bit of 7s. So its very hard to analyse Foley's "peak" form because he lacks experience.

Make of this what you will, but I believe it demonstrates the game changed once Cooper replaced Foley, and it is my impression at least that the Wallabies' attack was more directed and more threatening to the defense.

Totally different game situations too - tired defenders, different tactical situation.

Its a difficult comparison you're drawing.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Just rewatched the game and took particular notice (and count) of the number of times Foley, To'omua and Cooper took the ball at first receiver from set piece or ruck/maul.

In the time Foley was on the ground, he took the ball at No 10 17 times in which he kicked on 5 occasions. Matt To'omua took it at No 10 18 times and kicked it once (clearing kick from his in-goal to about 10m from halfway). Almost 50/50 between them playing No 10 when in possession.

After Quade came on, he (Cooper) took it at No 10 on 13 occasions and Matt on 9 occasions. Quade I think kicked it 3 times in general play.

Make of this what you will, but I believe it demonstrates the game changed once Cooper replaced Foley, and it is my impression at least that the Wallabies' attack was more directed and more threatening to the defense. In this period, we saw a few occasions where the backline actually worked in their nominated positions and made some very good ground, See eg the backline move White > Cooper > To'omua > Folau> Speight which made about 30 - 40 m down the right hand side, and a couple of occasions White > Cooper > To'omua > AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) down the LHS, also making good ground.

And it's probably unnecessary to say that Matt To'omua did not on any occasion defend on the wing.

This was only one game, and I accept that Foley has had better games especially in the series against the French. He is not rubbish, but my preference would be Cooper at 10 and To'omua at 12.

Those stats are akin to the days of when Carter and Aaron Mauger played 1st and 2nd 5/8 for both the Saders and ABs. Both genuine playmakers with different skills receiving lots of ball as a first receiver.

I noticed that they were split (left and right) on a number of occasions and that's pretty important.

 

[Lindommer]

Your comments about where they're at RIGHT NOW is accurate, NtA, but I can't help thinking Cooper's got more upside than Foley. Foley does the simple things very well, what more could one ask of a test five-eighth? But I fear that's all he's ever going to be; Cooper has the potential to unlock a defence Foley doesn't, WHEN HE'S PLAYING AT HIS BEST. It's heartening for Oz rugby to see Quade mature into a sober citizen who accepts his responsibilities in rugby, and life. The one thing I'd dearly like to see is considerably more prudent use of the wide ball (ie. less of), one intercept and he's marked down in my book.

Like most sensible Oz rugby supporters I hope Quade has a stellar season next year, with an off game or two against the Tahs, resulting in Cheika having genuine selection problems working out who should wear number 10. Cooper's play SHOULD fit well with the quick recycling game Cheika likes.

Enough of the pretty boys, WTF we gunna do about numbers 1 to 5 & 16 to 20 next year?

 

[ForceFan]

He was fine around the park. Gave away a silly penalty as soon as he came on for pulling down a maul and got demolished in every scrum where England had the feed (same as every member of the scrum at pretty much all points in the game).

He gave away 2 silly penalties - one resulting in 3 points - and could easily have been penalised more.
Trying too hard, if that's possible the way that we're playing, and repeatedly "cleaned out" English players not attached to the ruck. In fact anybody even close to the ruck.
His ruck stats are some of the Wallaby's best.
Probably offering more as a No 6 than a Lock as he appears lost in the Test lineout space. Maybe just more experience required but reportedly he's not good at remembering too many plays/calls.

 

[Lorenzo]

Foley's an honest tradesman who has a ceiling of what he's doing now, which is excelling in supe and playing in losing test sides. He doesnt have a decent enough boot (out of hand) to be a top tier game manager 10 at test level and isn't individually brilliant enough to be a wildcard style 10. At the rate we are going and the way we are doing things we are likely fucked regardless of who plays 10, though I suspect he will be the first choice as cheika will stick to what he knows which is fair enough

The above is obvious to all but the waratah homers, at this point

 

[ACT Crusader]

Your comments about where they're at RIGHT NOW is accurate, NtA, but I can't help thinking Cooper's got more upside than Foley. Foley does the simple things very well, what more could one ask of a test five-eighth? But I fear that's all he's ever going to be; Cooper has the potential to unlock a defence Foley doesn't, WHEN HE'S PLAYING AT HIS BEST. It's heartening for Oz rugby to see Quade mature into a sober citizen who accepts his responsibilities in rugby, and life. The one thing I'd dearly like to see is considerably more prudent use of the wide ball (ie. less of), one intercept and he's marked down in my book.

Like most sensible Oz rugby supporters I hope Quade has a stellar season next year, with an off game or two against the Tahs, resulting in Cheika having genuine selection problems working out who should wear number 10. Cooper's play SHOULD fit well with the quick recycling game Cheika likes.

Enough of the pretty boys, WTF we gunna do about numbers 1 to 5 next year?

I think 1-3 are sorted Lindo, but huge issues with 16-18.

4-5 are an issue but I think there are at least options. Problem has been that Link never really settled on a duo, so it seems Cheika is still 'searching'.

 

[Pfitzy]

Foley's an honest tradesman who has a ceiling of what he's doing now, which is excelling in supe and playing in losing test sides. He doesnt have a decent enough boot (out of hand) to be a top tier game manager 10 at test level and isn't individually brilliant enough to be a wildcard style 10. At the rate we are going and the way we are doing things we are likely fucked regardless of who plays 10, though I suspect he will be the first choice as cheika will stick to what he knows which is fair enough

The above is obvious to all but the waratah homers, at this point

People forget so quickly how average Quade was at Test level too. He changed for the better with time and experience.

Therefore, saying Foley is at his ceiling in his second year of Test rugby is akin to saying my 10 year old is never going to get a job because he doesn't have the necessary qualifications and doesn't interview well.