1. Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Wallabies squad for Ireland series

Discussion in 'Rugby Discussion' started by Brumby Jack, May 30, 2018.

  1. Ruggo Mark Ella (57)

    Likes Received:
    4,694
    Wallabies won't have a decent back row until this pooper nonsense is done with. Making Hooper captain was a terribly short sighted. Coleman should be the Wallaby captain. Pocock is truly world class and we have this nonsense where we have to retain the captain who shouldn't be in the starting 15. Hooper would be a fantastic impact player of the bench but Pocock should start and cramping both in just screws the back row dynamic.
    Joe Blow, Brumby Runner and Zero_Cool like this.
  2. barbarian Nick Farr-Jones (63)

    Likes Received:
    9,932
    Who's the alternative Ruggo? We've been over this ground 100 times before, and while Pooper isn't perfect I still think it's the best we've got at the moment. We don't have Totai Kefu waiting in the wings, sadly, or Matt Cockbain or Rocky Elsom.

    And given we got to a World Cup Final playing Hooper and Pocock I believe we can easily cope with any limitations playing them may present.
    .
  3. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    24,476

    Who is this better backrow we can name otherwise?

    Hooper and Pocock are two of the best players we have full stop and pretty much all of our best tests in the last 3 years have involved an unconventional backrow combination involving either Hooper and Pocock or Hooper and McMahon. In many of those games both of them have been in our top few players.

    People have been raving about how good a captain Coleman would be but it hasn't been a seemless start in the role at the Rebels. I don't think he's close to being ready to be test captain at all.

    Our best test last year featured a backrow involving 3 guys who have all played a fair amount of 7 (Hooper, McMahon and Dempsey).

    Everyone who wants Hooper on the bench isn't suggesting he comes on to replace Pocock so they're perfectly happy to run with that backrow for half an hour or so but somehow it is a ridiculous situation to start the match with it.
  4. Derpus Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:
    3,918
    It's such a moot point, while we are struggling to find a third back-rower at all let alone one who creates 'perfect balance'.
    fatprop likes this.
  5. Brumby Runner John Eales (66)

    Likes Received:
    5,508
    I hear what you say Barbarian, but why do those comments not apply equally to any or all of the other locks shown in the list? On the matter of team stats, do you have the comparative figures for each of the Aussie franchises to support the argument that the Tahs are clearly a standout?
  6. fatprop David Wilson (68)

    Likes Received:
    9,641
    Yeah they are daylights ahead of the other backrow options, they are must picks; and the other two backrowers (starter & bench) can then be selected to compliment their skills.

    Now if we had a number of world class 6s & 8s the decision maybe different, but we don't, we don't have any world class 6s & 8s so we go with what we do have (two great 7s who play very different styles of games) and work it out
  7. Brumby Runner John Eales (66)

    Likes Received:
    5,508
    No, but I know that after 10 games Simmons had made 65 tackles and missed 11 for a 73% success rate. Carter on the other hand had made something like 77 tackles, missed 12, at a success rate of 83%.

    In general play, Simmons is ineffective and arguably lazy and if the engine room is missing that many tackles, then time for a new motor I say.
  8. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    24,476

    The Tahs lineout is ranked second in Super Rugby this year according to SANZAAR. Rebels 5th, Brumbies 9th and Reds 11th.
    cyclopath likes this.
  9. barbarian Nick Farr-Jones (63)

    Likes Received:
    9,932

    They apply to all lock options, I agree.

    And the figures that I have from Foxsports:

    Own ball win % - Waratahs 91% (2nd), Rebels 88% (7th), Brumbies 88% (8th), Reds 87% (10th)

    So they are fairly close, but enough to indicate that as a lineout caller/operator, Simmons is pretty good.
    .
    fatprop, cyclopath and Zero_Cool like this.
  10. Zero_Cool Vay Wilson (31)

    Likes Received:
    207
    As a lock no doubt, but as a 6 it's close.
  11. Zero_Cool Vay Wilson (31)

    Likes Received:
    207
    I was saying it while Simmons was at the Reds, and think it now that he's moved to the Waratahs too. But suffice it to say I'm very sure Simmons isn't out pushing Rodda in a scrum, and while it might be closer with Coleman I am doubtful on that one too.

    I don't think anyone (maybe other than me) is saying Simmons doesn't push at all, just that he's not going to provide as much go-forward as the alternatives. I mean he's no Dean Mumm (maybe he's the new Dean Mumm -- and that's scary).
    Brumby Runner likes this.
  12. RedsHappy Tony Shaw (54)

    Likes Received:
    5,303

    The other related point being of course that the Tahs have IIRC often very effectively scored 5/7 points right off well-executed and designed set plays from line out wins. Set plays of a type that befuddle opposition defence in their wake.

    This of necessity requires not only line out control but equally very fast, clean ball down to the 9 or whomever off the line out.

    The point being that a great line out caller/operator can be worth their weight in gold - way beyond what other 'weak' stats re their non-line out skills may show - if they consistently make crucial first move contributions to good set piece plays off the line out that result in fast tries or enhanced field position.
    barbarian, The Pirate and USARugger like this.
  13. cyclopath Phil Waugh (73)

    Likes Received:
    15,545
    I wasn't saying he's better. I was saying he was not crap. They are different things. I'd go with Coleman and Rodda too.
    fatprop likes this.
  14. RedsHappy Tony Shaw (54)

    Likes Received:
    5,303
    Just relating to my post re Simmons above...we seem to want to pick players that somehow must have compelling measured stats in many dimensions of play whereas not infrequently the truth is that it is one outstanding skill that may create very high yield gains for the team as a unit and that really matters the most in a 'total team yield of points or game control' sense.

    The classic example was (maybe still is?) Pocock. Wonderful ruck controller, oppo ball-slower, pilferer. Poor-ish link to backs and ball-running player.

    What can really matter most - and this is the fatal flaw in so many isolated, over-used rugby stats - is the yield for the team in exceptional player effectiveness in one crucial skill vs a particular opposition, or when that one key cog in the wheel enables set plays that work to gain points in combination with other skills and players and not necessarily the more visible 'gains in metres and 'time in possession'' and so on.
  15. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    24,476

    Alloutrugby lists the following as the current tackle stats:

    Simmons 107/11 = 90.7%
    Arnold 70/12 = 85.4%
    Carter 79/14 = 84.9%
    Rodda 106/20 = 84.1%
    Coleman 97/8 = 92.4%
    Douglas 115/10 = 92%

    All the stats sites have a reasonable amount of variation but certainly Simmons seems to stand up there.

    Anyway, he's going to be one of our three locks this weekend and I don't think Arnold will be an automatic selection for the second test unless one of the locks has a poor game.

    I look forward to you still complaining about Rob Simmons when he plays his 100th test.
    Wilson, TSR and wamberal like this.
  16. Zero_Cool Vay Wilson (31)

    Likes Received:
    207


    See I thought this was interesting, until I dug into the numbers (Link). The Reds (10th) are still within 5% of the Waratahs (2nd). To give context are talking about around 10 throws (if my maths is correct, I don't trust it as far as I can throw it but I think it's correct). The Brumbies have the most throws at around 170, the Reds at 150, and then the Rebels on 145, and Waratahs on 140 (numbers aren't exact because I had to work backwards from the percentage and the number of own throws won).

    So I think saying 'the Waratahs are most efficient' is kind of a non-starter, perhaps they are more efficient because they throw less, perhaps because they are better, perhaps it's a meaningless number because there are too many factors to say the difference of 5% (again around ten throws) is really significant or indicative of anything more than the line-outs from all the Aussie sides are all working well. (Also for some more context the 'worst' line-out side in Super Rugby is the Highlanders on 82% so were literally splitting 10% into 15 bit. So really it's everyone is winning their own ball.)
  17. Derpus Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:
    3,918
    Yes, so if analyzing the statistical performance of a teams lineout as a unit is difficult, it follows that analyzing the statistical performance of a single component of that unit ought to be an order of magnitude harder.

    Stats are shit. They are shit in simpler games like Soccer and League and they are even worse in Rugby because things are too difficult to quantify and too context dependent.
  18. Zero_Cool Vay Wilson (31)

    Likes Received:
    207
    I'm not saying Stats are shit, I'm just saying we need to keep in mind what they are telling us, and what conclusions we are drawing from them. Where we have a 10% difference between the best and worst teams, and are working off less than 200 throws (I think like 205 for the Lions, and 135 for the Highlanders IIRC), we are dealing with at most a 20 throw difference.

    Trying to say what line-outs are better or worse of these kinds of numbers is like looking at only tackle percentage or run meters and saying the team with the best in those is 'the best'.
    Stats are good because they give you a fairly objective view of the world but don't try to take them too far.
  19. Derpus Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:
    3,918
    No, but i am.
    Silverado, USARugger and RedsHappy like this.
  20. Sully John Eales (66)

    Likes Received:
    8,843
    Different club same bullshit arguements about Simmons.

    1. The Tahs loosehead side of there scrum is the weak side not the tighthead.
    2. The Tahs have one of the lightest and shortest packs in super rugby and hold there own at both scrum and lineout.
    3. The Tahs play a fast and wide game suited to there light forwards. not suited to Simmons at all.
    4. Simmons carries like shit but most of the time the ball comes back for next phase fairly quickly.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
    Wilson, wamberal, ShtinaTina and 5 others like this.

Share This Page