Wallabies 31 Man Squad

[Scotty]

9 man rugby. Maybe we need a more direct halfback.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

We have Burgess the squad.

Another add to the list of 'not great at passing or setting up outside players but good at running hard and tackling'.

Burgess, JOC (James O'Connor), McCabe, Horne, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper).

Compare to the skills of the All Black options!

 

[KevinO]

All I can say is the advantage is clearly with the Lions as Robbie the "Trojan Horse" Deans is destroying Australian Rugby every day more and more.

How does Deans justify giving a guy who has played 3.5 games of rugby and had 2 contract breaches that has been suspended from club a place in his squad. If Beale had played for the Rebels in the last 2 games it might be different, but the guy has played less than a half of Rugby since the 8th of March.

I can already see Deans back line:

9: Genia
10: Barnes
11: JOC (James O'Connor)
12: McCabe
13: AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
14: Folau
15: Beale

Not the back line I would choose except for 9 and 13

 

[Scotty]

Even RD isn't that silly. Starting with Barnes, McCabe and Beale means we would need 4 backs on the bench for the inevitable required cover!

 

[Gnostic]

Has anybody stopped to think about the tactics employed by the Reds on the weekend in the light of what Deans told Cooper he wanted to see.
To my mind Link and Cooper (given Link's statements about Cooper's game plan inputs) totally ignored what Deans said he wanted and played what they thought could win and make best use of the resources they had available.

Imagine the rout it would have been if Qld had attempted to play a conservative risk averse game. I predict it would have been 40+ point margin.

 

[RoffsChoice]

KevinO Scotty I usually just skip over any post that has a go at Deans for little/no reason, but these ones were legitimately funny

 

[qwerty51]

Deans has said JOC (James O'Connor) is the 10.

 

[biggameplayer]

With the recent addition of MMM, its hard to keep a man with such physicality out of the side. However, I can envisage Deans picking Dennis, who in my opinion doesn't warrant selection. For mine Palu is past his best and I would much rather see Mowen in there, adding a valuable option come line out time. Tough call with Hooper and Gill but with Mick's recent form for the Tahs, again its hard to keep him out of the 7 jersey. Quite a good mixture in the backline, with size (albeit smaller than the lions), speed and versatility. I like Lilo at 12, playing as a 2nd playmaker, however, each time I see Tuilagi steamroll an opposition player, I slowly favour playing a defensive centre such as Horne or McCabe. I can see barnes getting picked at either 10 or 15, but I'd much prefer to play him off the bench.
1. Robinson
2. Moore
3. Slipper
4. Douglas
5. Horwill (C)
6. MMM
7. Hooper
8. Mowen
9. Genia
10. O'Connor
11. Folau
12. Lilo
13. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
14. Tomane
15. Beale
16. Sio
17. Alexander
18. Fainga'a
19. Simmons
20. Gill
21. Phipps (should be White)
22. Barnes
23. McCabe/Cummins

 

[RoffsChoice]

biggameplayer Slipper is a great player, but due to his faults at scrum time you shouldn't expect him to start - Deans is probably aiming for a safe, win our set piece with no risk team.
Hooper or Gill could go either way, we'll see.
Mowen won't be at 8, he's been called up as BSF and just as how we know JOC (James O'Connor) will be 10, this is how we know he won't be 8.
Chances are Folau will not start. If he does, it will not be on the wing.
I think Rob Horne both warrants selection and suits the game plan better than Lealiifano, but it could go either way. With McCabe in the mix, who knows.
Barnes will most likely be starting, if it isn't at 12 it will be at 15. Sorry Beale.

This is, as I have said for most teams named here, a good team for an attacking, risk embracing plan. That is not the plan we should expect from the Wallabies this year.

 

[KevinO]

Has anybody stopped to think about the tactics employed by the Reds on the weekend in the light of what Deans told Cooper he wanted to see.
To my mind Link and Cooper (given Link's statements about Cooper's game plan inputs) totally ignored what Deans said he wanted and played what they thought could win and make best use of the resources they had available.

Imagine the rout it would have been if Qld had attempted to play a conservative risk averse game. I predict it would have been 40+ point margin.

I have, these tactics that won the Reds the Super Rugby title and similar to the tactics that won the Wallabies the Tri Nations in 2011. Run your opponent as much as possible and counter as much as possible.

It will get Link the Wallabies job as fans would much rather watch a game of rugby like this than the three expected from the Wallabies v the Lions.

 

[RoffsChoice]

Surely the W column on the coach sheet is more important to the ARU than entertaining the masses - money from overseas unions >>> money from additional 2000 people at the game.

 

[Gnostic]

Surely the W column on the coach sheet is more important to the ARU than entertaining the masses - money from overseas unions >>> money from additional 2000 people at the game.

If that is the case they better stop playing home games because nobody will be there. Then let the players play in the Euro comps and select them from there. What a ridiculous statement!!

 

[RoffsChoice]

If that is the case they better stop playing home games because nobody will be there. Then let the players play in the Euro comps and select them from there. What a ridiculous statement!!

I never said I agree with it, I was refuting the line "It will get Link the Wallabies job". I want every game to be full with bars in Melbourne and Perth full of people wanting to watch the game.

 

[lewisr]

Surely the W column on the coach sheet is more important to the ARU than entertaining the masses - money from overseas unions >>> money from additional 2000 people at the game.

Why do we consistently assume that we cannot win with an entertaining style of rugby? Is there some universal law that says "If you play an exciting, attacking game plan, you will lose the match!"? Some of the best test matches ever played, including those won and lost by the wallabies, have been all about attacking rugby and a heap of tries. 2010 Hong Kong Bledisloe?? 2000 Bledisloe 1 - Sydney??

We can avoid it all we want but the Wallabies Facebook page tells a tale of distaste towards the ARU at the moment. If we think playing low risk rugby and going for the "let's not lose" approach is going to be succesfull in a country dominated by AFL and NRL, then the ARu have some serious thinking to do. Pulver said it himself - he wants "attacking, ball in hand, exciting rugby" and I hope to god he lives up to that statement.

 

[disco]

My Test 23 for the 1st test in Brisbane
1. Robinson
2. Moore
3. Slipper
4. Simmons
5. Horwill
6. Mowen
7. Hooper
8. Palu
9. Genia
10. JOC (James O'Connor)
11. Ioane/ Tomane
12. Barnes
13. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
14. Folau
15. Beale
16. Fainga'a
17. Alexander
18. Kepu
19. MMM
20. Gill
21. Phipps
22. LILO
23. McCabe

 

[RoffsChoice]

Playing exciting rugby does NOT make you lose matches, playing safe rugby just wins you more matches at international level. Risks screw you over more times than they set up the try at that level.

 

[lewisr]

Playing exciting rugby does NOT make you lose matches, playing safe rugby just wins you more matches at international level. Risks screw you over more times than they set up the try at that level.

The two times the wallabies have beaten the All Blacks we have played a high intensity style of game that they could not keep up with. 2010 in particular, we threw the ball around and used our fantastic wingers and runners (a.k.a JOC (James O'Connor)) to beat their undeniable talent. Do we want to beat the All Blacks? Or just hope that every time we lose it isn't as bad??

 

[jimmydubs]

Playing exciting rugby does NOT make you lose matches, playing safe rugby just wins you more matches at international level. Risks screw you over more times than they set up the try at that level.

Deans' winning % as a coach is possibly at odds to this statement.

yes that is a generalisation and it is probably the lack of any game plan as opposed to a 'safe' game plan. but anyway forums are made for sweeping generalisations.

 

[RoffsChoice]

Do we want to beat the All Blacks? Or just hope that every time we lose it isn't as bad??

Quade wasn't throwing stupid passes and three of our four tries came from a good set piece in Bledisloe 4 2010. That was an example of safe rugby at it's best.

I'm not saying safe rugby is taking the shot at 3, even if the penalty is on your own line. I'm saying it's built on winning your set piece and having players that position themselves well in defence, tackle very well and force defenders to stay near the breakdown. The brilliant attack you describe is the reward for having these things.

 

[Scotty]

Has anybody stopped to think about the tactics employed by the Reds on the weekend in the light of what Deans told Cooper he wanted to see.
To my mind Link and Cooper (given Link's statements about Cooper's game plan inputs) totally ignored what Deans said he wanted and played what they thought could win and make best use of the resources they had available.

Imagine the rout it would have been if Qld had attempted to play a conservative risk averse game. I predict it would have been 40+ point margin.

Yes, as I said before the game I think it was also Link playing a bit of politics.

He was really in a win win situation, provided the reds ran them close. Play an entertaining style that got the best out of his available talent, show off coopers skills and maybe even get a win.

He put up an alternative to the current coach that was not only credible but distinct in it's different style.

 

[Dumbledore]

ARU are being selfish in selecting Beale. Very Näive to think that Beale is suddenly ok and will cope on or off the field.

How do you know he isn't okay?