RC4 - Australia v Argentina

[Quick Hands]

And of course KOB, you will say that anyone in a Tahs jersey is the best option for the Wallabies. That statement has as much merit as yours about the Brumbies and Waratahs. I might remind you that Matt To'omua is not a Brumby and hasn't been for two or three years and won't be into the future.

Specifically, though, To'omua :

1. will take the ball to the line better than both of them;
2. has substantially better distribution skills than Beale, and the equal of Foley (did you notice how many hospital passes Beale gave to his supports last night?);
3. has a decidedly better kicking game in general, for line and for goal than either of Beale or Foley;
4. is way more composed than Beale (who isn't?); and
5. cannot possibly be less creative than Foley and will be much more stable than Beale.

KB (Kurtley Beale)'s time as a test standard player is now well behind him. The sooner this is recognised, the better for the Wallabies.

You've stolen my thunder here BR.

You forget the fact that his defence is also miles better than either Beale or Foley and thus he can defend at 10 without needing to be hidden in the tram tracks at lineout time.

 

[Quick Hands]

To'omua will be on the plane back to Leicester (to play 12) at the moment won't he?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

He's actually listed on their website as a flyhalf.

If he was to play at 12 he'd be outside Joe Ford - a significantly better 10 than either Foley or Beale.

https://www.leicestertigers.com/team/senior

 

[barbarian]

I'd argue Beale's best work in his test career has been on the wing (under Deans circa 2010), and off the bench in the 23 jersey (circa Cheika 2015), where he played at fullback or on the wing.

I want to see him back in those roles, and I think it's a bit silly to put the pen through him based off a couple of sub-par efforts in a position he's never been good at.
.

 

[Strewthcobber]

He's actually listed on their website as a flyhalf.

If he was to play at 12 he'd be outside Joe Ford - a significantly better 10 than either Foley or Beale.

https://www.leicestertigers.com/team/senior

Think you mean George Ford QH. Joe Ford is the reserve 10 they generally play when George isn't available and To'omua is playing 12

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Brumby Runner]

You've stolen my thunder here BR.

You forget the fact that his defence is also miles better than either Beale or Foley and thus he can defend at 10 without needing to be hidden in the tram tracks at lineout time.

I missed it in my response, but I have not forgotten it. Nor the flow on effect that not having to tie up one of our pack in open play to cover for the deficiencies means we can pit 8 men full time against the opposition 8 in forward play.

 

[KOB1987]

Well, you're sitting in an armchair just like mine. You're twisting and distorting and argument to suit your own view.

Beale has played more than enough professional rugby at 10 for everyone to know what he can do in that role. His past two games have followed a similar pattern. He's been paired with Foley at super and test level for some time. So it's a different situation from someone who has just come into the squad because he's been playing professional rugby in Europe.

I would say the same thing if Quade was brought back, that he deserves two of three tests to settle in.

By all means disagree with what I say, you're just as entitled to say Beale, Foley, Cooper or anyone else should play 10 as I am to advocate To'omua, but please spare me the deliberate distortion of any argument.

You're normally better than that.

I think you know I like throwing in a bit of sarcasm from time to time. Much like I like having a dig at BR's selections all being pro Brumbies and/or anti Waratahs - on that, funny that all the players he thinks should be thrown out with the bathwater above are all Waratahs, hey ;-)

Matt's been given ample time at both the Brumbies and the Wallabies to stamp his authority as a 10. He's been preferred as a 12 at both, and add Leicester to that. I'm totally in favour of giving him a run there purely because none of the other options are working out. But to say he should be given the rest of the season to settle in there is just favouritism over a less preferred option. Try it and see if it works out, hopefully it does. If not, not sure what to do.

 

[KOB1987]

I'd argue Beale's best work in his test career has been on the wing (under Deans circa 2010), and off the bench in the 23 jersey (circa Cheika 2015), where he played at fullback or on the wing.

I want to see him back in those roles, and I think it's a bit silly to put the pen through him based off a couple of sub-par efforts in a position he's never been good at.
.

I'd agree with that. He obviously got thrown in close as a kid so he could smash everyone off the first phase and never really got moved. He's got a ton of speed and works best with a bit of space. The masses will tell you we have better wing options though.

 

[Quick Hands]

I think you know I like throwing in a bit of sarcasm from time to time. Much like I like having a dig at BR's selections all being pro Brumbies and/or anti Waratahs - on that, funny that all the players he thinks should be thrown out with the bathwater above are all Waratahs, hey ;-)

Matt's been given ample time at both the Brumbies and the Wallabies to stamp his authority as a 10. He's been preferred as a 12 at both, and add Leicester to that. I'm totally in favour of giving him a run there purely because none of the other options are working out. But to say he should be given the rest of the season to settle in there is just favouritism over a less preferred option. Try it and see if it works out, hopefully it does. If not, not sure what to do.

The rest of the season equates to three games

 

[KOB1987]

The rest of the season equates to three games

In that case fair enough, I read it as the spring tour as well. I'd include the Japan Bledisloe as part of that tour, meaning your rest of season is only 2 games.

 

[Quick Hands]

I think you know I like throwing in a bit of sarcasm from time to time. Much like I like having a dig at BR's selections all being pro Brumbies and/or anti Waratahs - on that, funny that all the players he thinks should be thrown out with the bathwater above are all Waratahs, hey ;-)

Matt's been given ample time at both the Brumbies and the Wallabies to stamp his authority as a 10. He's been preferred as a 12 at both, and add Leicester to that. I'm totally in favour of giving him a run there purely because none of the other options are working out. But to say he should be given the rest of the season to settle in there is just favouritism over a less preferred option. Try it and see if it works out, hopefully it does. If not, not sure what to do.

I'd like to think that I don't advocate selections based on which super side guys play for. People can judge me on that at their leisure.

He hasn't really ever been given the chance to cement a spot at 10 for the Wallabies. When he first came into the team he was given two tests - both against the ramapantly succesful All Blacks and then pidgeon-holed as a 12. Contrast this to the time that Foley has been given and the number of chances that Beale has had.

I'm not advocating that Beale should be out of the side or the squad. I don't mind him at 12 and I also think he's great as a backline super sub. I don't think he's a 10 at professional level, not because he doesn't have the talent, it's actually that I don't think that he has the temperament to run the game from 10 for 80 minutes.

In regards Foley, I think that he is a solid player but weaknesses in his kicking game and defence in particular mean that he's just not in the category of a top-flight international 10. We know what he offers, we know his strengths and limitations, so we need to see what someone else can do. If To'omua wasn't available I'd advocate that Quade play the remaining tests of the season on this basis.

As I see it, Australian rugby has a significant issue in key positions. Many years ago, when I was running around as a kid and then a young adult the best player in the team wanted to play 10 - and I played with and against some really good ones. Now, the best players want to play 7 or out wide, so we have the situation where there is very little depth at 5/8 across Australian rugby. Foley may well be the best moving forward, but there's no doubt in my mind that To'omua is a better player - runs straight, good vision with his passing game, excellent tactical kicking game, runs well, defends well and kicks goals better than anyone else in the squad. He's may have his faults, but he's the closest thing I've seen to an international 10 in the gold jersey for a while.

 

[Quick Hands]

I missed it in my response, but I have not forgotten it. Nor the flow on effect that not having to tie up one of our pack in open play to cover for the deficiencies means we can pit 8 men full time against the opposition 8 in forward play.

You see, not every Waratah supporter is against you.

 

[ACT Crusader]

You get the sense that something is going to give and there will be a big announcement or media ‘tell all’ or controversial leak coming very very soon. And not a Quade facilities to facilitate moment with Deans. Probably bigger.

 

[KOB1987]

I won’t quote QH because it’s a long post, but:
- in general agreement re To'omua. I don’t rate him as highly as you in some of those areas, mostly tactical kicking, but I do think it’s worth a shot.
- having been involved with juniors for a number of years, I’m hearing you with regards to the best kids not being utilised. But I’d also add that it’s fairly frequent that the coach thinks his son should be the 10. Usually to the detriment of the one that should be.

 

[ACT Crusader]

I'd argue Beale's best work in his test career has been on the wing (under Deans circa 2010), and off the bench in the 23 jersey (circa Cheika 2015), where he played at fullback or on the wing.

I want to see him back in those roles, and I think it's a bit silly to put the pen through him based off a couple of sub-par efforts in a position he's never been good at.
.

Was a damn good 1st 5 at schoolboy level

But just as he did at schoolboy level (for OZ) would drop back to fullback where he was more effective.

 

[Quick Hands]

You get the sense that something is going to give and there will be a big announcement or media ‘tell all’ or controversial leak coming very very soon. And not a Quade facilities to facilitate moment with Deans. Probably bigger.

It will probably hold until RWC 2019. Then i'm predicting/hoping for a seismic explosion across the professional game, which hopefully re-establishes its links with the amateur levels of the game. A big part of this is the administration being swept aside at French Revolution level.

 

[Gnostic]

You get the sense that something is going to give and there will be a big announcement or media ‘tell all’ or controversial leak coming very very soon. And not a Quade facilities to facilitate moment with Deans. Probably bigger.

​

Or we will see the new political age of management in Australia, an incident or something will be manufactured to take a headline or two and the friendly PR machine will happily and compliantly give the air time over and supress the attention to the Wallabies bad stories until the momentum is lost.

Problem with this approach in a niche sport (in Australia) like Rugby is that the care factor and following is falling at an increasing rate. I would hazard a guess that there are very few casual fans attending tests or Super games now and only the truly rusted on as home supporters. The rust is getting cleaned away now to find there is no bright strong steel under it, just a diminished, ever weaker base.

 

[Joe Blow]

I'm gonna comment on the Tui fan situation:

As posters on forums (and attending games) we're obviously all passionate fans of something and we do say stupid shit and criticise/hurl totally inappropriate abuse at players sometimes. I've done it before and I regret it, and I'm sure everyone here whose done so has, whether it be here, reddit, twitter and so on. The point is before you tear into someone over something, think before you speak, and if you post criticism of someone's performance, try and do it in a way that doesn't make you look like a twerp. I need to do this and I reckon all of us (including myself) need to do it.

I agree with that. After all it is a game and these guys play it professionally because they want to be successful and they are selected by someone else.
On the flip side of this Tui situation it does illustrate the sense of entitlement that exists within Oz rugby. Here is a young bloke who has just recently come into the national setup and he is choosing to step down and take a break from the game. I understand that he has had a personal loss and whatever labour/bereavement law exists in this regard should be followed. However, he is employed by RA to play rugby for his country. If chosen in the squad he should tour, no questions asked unless he is clinically depressed or has other medical issues including mental health issues.
Being a young player in the test frame he should want to be selected and the fact that he wants to sit out the tour also reflects serious issues within the current national setup, most likely being coaching and attitude of the playing group in general.
BTW, I hope it was just a knee jerk reaction to that unfortunate incident and he does go ahead and tour.

 

[notapatrioticboneinme]

...I’d also add that it’s fairly frequent that the coach thinks his son should be the 10. Usually to the detriment of the one that should be.

That got an emphatic head nod and laugh, so true; it's universal code wise
in soccer 'best' kid is played as a striker, which is the foundation for the hypothesis that the reason so many defences stuff up the far post is that the defenders are ball watching (often to the sidelines) instead of 45 degreeing covering side and WHAT'S COMING AT THEM! because they played their juniors up front scoring goals for the coach / parents

 

[liquor box]

OK, so which is more likely?

That in the last 3 years, 3 or 4 nations got their act together at the exact same time? I.e numerous independent events fell the same way during that period?

Or that we chose the wrong coach?

We were the best in the world, and were obviously happy with that.

When you are the best you need to still have a desire to get better, or the opposition will overtake you.

We have the talent in Australia to get near the top again but if we continue to do the same thing with the same people why would we expect improvement?

 

[liquor box]

The whole Beale at 10 thing was pulled out of thin air a few weeks ago after a year of trying to manufacture a back up 10.

I saw this as an attempt to deflect attention from poor planning for the future.

The speculation over the coaches job were getting louder and I always suspected Beale was given the job to show that Cheika did not need to develop a spare ten as we already had one.