Wallabies 2019 Thread

[Derpus]

Only taking one winger to the world cup is dumb as shit.

Taking a player who hasn't played a second of rugby in nearly 6 months is dumb as shit (applies to Petaia and Pocock)

Leaving your form backrower behind is dumb as shit.

Taking AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is dumb as shit.

Some selection panel.

 

[Braveheart81]

One of our wingers was always going to be a second fullback kind of option. We were never going to play two strike wingers in our best XV.

Whilst another one should have probably been in the larger squads prior to the RWC squad being named, my guess is they thought that was always going to be Petaia.

I don't think a strike winger who was the backup for Koroibete and never going to make our best 23 unless there was an injury was ever going to fit into a 31 man squad.

What we don't know is how much of the various shadow squads have involved Speight or Naivalu or similar. There have been lots of additional players spending lots of time at training.

 

[Derpus]

So we ditch a winger for a second full back and leave our form fullback out for one who can't tackle or catch and one who singlehandedly shipped two tries in his last match and is slow as fuck.

I don't buy into this second full back stuff. If one of your wingers can drop back and perform as a secondary fullback, great. But that shouldn't be your selection criteria. First they ought be fast, strong finishers who can defend a wing.

Ben Smith used to get away with it because he could do all the core winger things as well as being a natural full back.

 

[Slim 293]

So we ditch a winger for a second full back and leave our form fullback out for one who can't tackle or catch and one who singlehandedly shipped two tries in his last match and is slow as fuck.

If it was just that one test match I'd give DHP the benefit of the doubt, even with his poor form all year with the Rebels.........

But he was just as bad last year on the EOYT, and his match against England was possibly worse than the Bok test.

 

[Tomikin]

Banks has not really been considered a winger from what I've heard. If Petaia was withdrawn from the RWC squad I'd expect Maddocks to get called up.*

* not suggesting that is what I'd personally do.

Its funny we all talk that Banks can play wing, but Im not so sure he knows what his doing out there, his a 15 with that freedom, maybe his just really not that great on the edge.

 

[Braveheart81]

This is absolutely the reason they have picked DHP over Banks.

Banks needed to be first choice fullback or he wasn't going to make it.

 

[Viking]

Its funny we all talk that Banks can play wing, but Im not so sure he knows what his doing out there, his a 15 with that freedom, maybe his just really not that great on the edge.

Can't be much worse then Hodge and DHP though. Which makes it even more frustrating.

Do you really want to leave home the best FB we have because he's only the 7th best winger ahead of those who are only the 5th and 6th best winger. That's the way I'm looking at it.

I can see Hodge ahead for versatility, but DHP... well i'd take Bank over him at either FB or wing anyday. Don't even get me started with AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper).

 

[Viking]

This is absolutely the reason they have picked DHP over Banks.

Banks needed to be first choice fullback or he wasn't going to make it.

I think many still see him as first choice over Beale and all his deficiencies.

He must be tremendously bad on the wing.... but given he only played 15min there seems a bit bizarre they didn't at least give him more minutes to prove himself.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think many still see him as first choice over Beale and all his deficiencies.

That's personal preference though, not reality.

If it was the reality he'd have been picked in the squad.

 

[Tomikin]

Can't be much worse then Hodge and DHP though. Which makes it even more frustrating.

Do you really want to leave home the best FB we have because he's only the 7th best winger ahead of those who are only the 5th and 6th best winger. That's the way I'm looking at it.

I can see Hodge ahead for versatility, but DHP. well i'd take Bank over him at either FB or wing anyday. Don't even get me started with AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper).

Not saying I agree with it, I think Banks should have gone, but if his seen as just a fullback then I could see why he didn't get a gig. I would have taken him ahead of Petita, DHP, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and probably on part with Hodge.

 

[Bobby Sands]

One of our wingers was always going to be a second fullback kind of option. We were never going to play two strike wingers in our best XV.

Whilst another one should have probably been in the larger squads prior to the RWC squad being named, my guess is they thought that was always going to be Petaia.

I don't think a strike winger who was the backup for Koroibete and never going to make our best 23 unless there was an injury was ever going to fit into a 31 man squad.

What we don't know is how much of the various shadow squads have involved Speight or Naivalu or similar. There have been lots of additional players spending lots of time at training.

When did this idea of a "strike" winger become a thing? Why would a team not expect all wingers to have "strike?"

What does the other winger do if he isn't "striking (sic)?"

My understanding is that we are just retrofitting players who are not wingers to play wing and then justifying the selection.

Does NZ subscribe to this philosophy of not having too much strike? What happens if you you have too much strike? Do you score too many tries?

 

[Bobby Sands]

That's personal preference though, not reality.

If it was the reality he'd have been picked in the squad.

Banks > Beale.

Sameway as Lilo > Foley before it happened.

Just because the selection hasn't happened, doesn't mean it isn't the case. The ARU selectors dont have a secret meritocracy machine, they are riddled by cognitive bias like anyone else.

 

[KOB1987]

When did this idea of a "strike" winger become a thing? Why would a team not expect all wingers to have "strike?"

What does the other winger do if he isn't "striking (sic)?"

My understanding is that we are just retrofitting players who are not wingers to play wing and then justifying the selection.

Does NZ subscribe to this philosophy of not having too much strike? What happens if you you have too much strike? Do you score too many tries?

It might not be a term that you like but it is what it is.

Strike winger/jet shoes/specialist winger, whatever you want to call it is the winger in the team who generally doesn't play any other position, is fast as fuck (relative to the other options), and he's usually the other player in the side besides the 10 who's a bit limited in defence and therefore is there primarily for attack. Or to strike.

Every international side generally has one of these (usually #11), and the other wing is occupied by a player with a more diverse skill set. George Bridge is actually a fullback, but just happens to be fast as fuck as well.

I think there has been a need to differentiate between a strike winger and the other one recently, because it seems odd that there hasn't been a back up for ours (Koroibete) in any of the announced squads, although it is now apparent that is actually Petaia. SO it's just helped people talk about it.

 

[Derpus]

When did this idea of a "strike" winger become a thing? Why would a team not expect all wingers to have "strike?"

What does the other winger do if he isn't "striking (sic)?"

My understanding is that we are just retrofitting players who are not wingers to play wing and then justifying the selection.

Does NZ subscribe to this philosophy of not having too much strike? What happens if you you have too much strike? Do you score too many tries?

Banks > Beale.

Sameway as Lilo > Foley before it happened.

Just because the selection hasn't happened, doesn't mean it isn't the case. The ARU selectors dont have a secret meritocracy machine, they are riddled by cognitive bias like anyone else.

Lilo's performance at Eden Park was worse than any of Foley's, ever.

That said, his performance at Perth was better than anything Foley has done in years.

 

[Bobby Sands]

It might not be a term that you like but it is what it is.

Strike winger/jet shoes/specialist winger, whatever you want to call it is the winger in the team who generally doesn't play any other position, is fast as fuck (relative to the other options), and he's usually the other player in the side besides the 10 who's a bit limited in defence and therefore is there primarily for attack. Or to strike.

Every international side generally has one of these (usually #11), and the other wing is occupied by a player with a more diverse skill set. George Bridge is actually a fullback, but just happens to be fast as fuck as well.

I think there has been a need to differentiate between a strike winger and the other one recently, because it seems odd that there hasn't been a back up for ours (Koroibete) in any of the announced squads, although it is now apparent that is actually Petaia. SO it's just helped people talk about it.

Ok so let me get this straight, we picked a fast winger (strike) and a more balanced winger (read: slower, maybe has played fullback, has better ball-skills etc) even when we have the option of another "strike" winger?

Who else is using this tactic? NZ aren't, England certainly aren't (May, Cokanasiga) Ireland no (Stockdale, Conway) South African absolutely do not?

Is it a myth?

Or is it actually a pattern?

Or is it just us picking Reece Hodge on the wing?

What are the strategic advantages of this non-strike winger?

 

[Strewthcobber]

Or is it us just not having very good wingers at the moment?

 

[Derpus]

Or is it us just not having very good wingers at the moment?

Any of Pulu, Speight, Naivalu or even Maddocks would be better on the wing than Hodge.

 

[KOB1987]

Any of Pulu, Speight, Naivalu or even Maddocks would be better on the wing than Hodge.

If you wanted a fast winger with the skills of a fullback you'd pick Beale or Banks there. Or said another way, if you wanted a second fullback on the wing who was also fast..

 

[Bobby Sands]

Or is it us just not having very good wingers at the moment?

That fine, and more accurately defines the landscape, but lets not paint a pig in makeup here.

We are essentially picking Hodge because we feel he is 'too good not to be in the side.' But we are not using him in anyway that makes use of his 'non-traditional' wing skillset, ie to come into first receiver, defend in the centres or some other machination. He sits on his wing, kicks for touch, and tries to finish backline movements.

In my opinion there is no strike winger or non-strike winger, we are either making this term to make up for the skill shortfall that say a Naivalu/Daugunu/Pulu has (kicking, tackling, passing whatever) or we are trying to justify picking players out of position Hodge/DHP - but we are not picking them because of their non-ability to "strike".

I think Petaia will takes Hodge's position if fit, and then we will do away with our "one-strike" winger strategy and low and behold have two wingers who like "striking", or in other words are adept at playing wing.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Hodge is probably in the team to kick for touch after penalties.

I know that sounds ridiculous, but it's probably one of the most important roles in any international team these days