Wallabies v Ireland, Saturday 16th June, 8.00pm, AAMI Park, Melbourne

[Dan54]

Perhaps overly safe to stick with the same 15. Not a bad decision by any means, but a little bit of tinkering (like the Kiwi's often use) is by no means a bad thing. I feel like Cheika is a little too hesitant to make any changes after a win. Looking at the best teams in the world (mostly the Kiwi's) they are always tinkering, always searching, always trying different things. Cheika almost never does this he's very cautious to make unnecessary changes. Not really a criticism just an observation but it's getting close to the window closing where you can't be searching for players this close to the World Cup.

I tend to think Chuckles,( like Hansen with the ABs) will be trying to bed in a starting team and style looking ahead to WC, and I think he (or they both) are correct to get team playing as you want, then tinker a bit so players are coming into good and established patterns if possible, and hopefully with a winning confidence.

 

[Braveheart81]

15. Rob Kearney
14. Andrew Conway
13. Garry Ringrose
12. Robbie Henshaw
11. Keith Earls
10. Johnny Sexton
9. Conor Murray
1. Cian Healy
2. Niall Scannell
3. Tadhg Furlong
4. Devin Toner
5. James Ryan
6. Peter O’Mahony (captain)
7. Dan Leavy
8. CJ Stander
Replacements:
16. Rob Herring
17. Jack McGrath
18. Andrew Porter
19. Tadhg Beirne
20. Jordi Murphy
21. John Cooney
22. Joey Carbery
23. Jordan Larmour

 

[Derpus]

My point is Cheika doesn't have answers for a lot of these questions. You ask the same questions about the Kiwi's and they have a lot less question-marks and have explored a lot more of those combinations.

I think, at this point, you are just trolling. Just as an example, Cheika debuted Kerevi at 12. You know this.

 

[Zero_Cool]

I think, at this point, you are just trolling. Just as an example, Cheika debuted Kerevi at 12. You know this.

4 positions I asked the question of, you have ONE answer for one of them, and that's taking our 13 playing them at 12 and ignoring the hole that leaves at 13.

 

[Derpus]

4 positions I asked the question of, you have ONE answer for one of them, and that's taking our 13 playing them at 12 and ignoring the hole that leaves at 13.

fine.

AAA started his career at LHP, he can probably go back. It's fine though, because we also have Sio and the impressive Robertson.

Flyhalf we are fucked and that is well documented. Hardly Cheika's fault we don't have another Super quality fly-half available. And no, Stewart is not good enough. He's barely ready to start for the Reds at 10.

Scrum-half we have heaps of depth. Genia is world class, Phipps is passable, Powell, Gordon, etc.

Can Tupou start? who cares? He's played two tests and is 22. That's an infant in front row years. Ease him into it. Let him have impact off the bench.

Our best backrow combination is probably Pocock, Hooper, Timu. They certainly tore the Irish a new one.

TK or Rona obviously come into 13 if Foley goes down. If it's during the match i think Hodge would slot in at 12 as a place-holder.

 

[Braveheart81]

4 positions I asked the question of, you have ONE answer for one of them, and that's taking our 13 playing them at 12 and ignoring the hole that leaves at 13.

Pretty clearly we have fullback covered with Haylett-Petty as the next option given that is his usual position. We also have Tom Banks and Jack Maddocks in the squad.

We have Kuridrani who isn't in the 23 who has started 48 tests in the 13 jersey. We have Curtis Rona who has been very good in Super Rugby this season.

We have two experienced halfbacks and a third player who has played a few tests.

We debuted a new hooker last test, have another uncapped one in the squad, a 5 cap player on the bench and our experienced first choice player to come back in the Rugby Championship.

Just because you want to see other things tried doesn't mean it is a good idea.

You prepare people to play test rugby so they're ready to go when you need them. You don't pick them to see if they're ready. It's pretty clear Tupou is good enough to start a test. That's part of what makes him so good off the bench. It doesn't mean you need to start him in a test to show that.

We don't have a lot of backup at 10 but Cheika has pretty clearly spelled out his plan of who plays in that position if Foley is unavailable.

 

[cyclopath]

Pretty clearly we have fullback covered with Haylett-Petty as the next option given that is his usual position. We also have Tom Banks and Jack Maddocks in the squad.

We have Kuridrani who isn't in the 23 who has started 48 tests in the 13 jersey. We have Curtis Rona who has been very good in Super Rugby this season.

We have two experienced halfbacks and a third player who has played a few tests.

We debuted a new hooker last test, have another uncapped one in the squad, a 5 cap player on the bench and our experienced first choice player to come back in the Rugby Championship.

Just because you want to see other things tried doesn't mean it is a good idea.

You prepare people to play test rugby so they're ready to go when you need them. You don't pick them to see if they're ready. It's pretty clear Tupou is good enough to start a test. That's part of what makes him so good off the bench. It doesn't mean you need to start him in a test to show that.

We don't have a lot of backup at 10 but Cheika has pretty clearly spelled out his plan of who plays in that position if Foley is unavailable.

 

[RedsHappy]

View attachment 10025

^^^^ Perhaps pinched from the 'What did Robbie Deans Do for the Wallabies' thread/essay of..........many years ago?

= a trip down nostalgia lane

 

[tragic]

Last week was the best I've seen the pooper play. It's fallen short against the ABs and Eng more than it's worked.
I really hope game 1 was the new norm but I fear Ireland will be much wiser in negating its strengths and exposing its deficiencies.
Many have said our line out woes from game 1 are easily fixed but the corollary is that Ireland have had another's week to work on killing the short line out with quick ball to number 2 tactic.
Stoked Cheiks rewarded the first performance with an unchanged lineup but equally a little nervous.

 

[Blue]

Rodda.

Ugh.

Does not offer much. This pack is begging for a good 4.

Irish will be much better. Ringrose is a fantastic player. A little bit scary actually. With him and Sexton in the backline they will play with a lot more width in attack.

Oirish by 7. Sorry.

 

[drewprint]

Eh. I reckon Rodda is quality already and is only going to get better. Not worried about that position whatsoever.

 

[Braveheart81]

He's played 5 tests so I'm happy to let him have a few more.

 

[cyclopath]

Last week was the best I've seen the pooper play. It's fallen short against the ABs and Eng more than it's worked.
I really hope game 1 was the new norm but I fear Ireland will be much wiser in negating its strengths and exposing its deficiencies.
Many have said our line out woes from game 1 are easily fixed but the corollary is that Ireland have had another's week to work on killing the short line out with quick ball to number 2 tactic.
Stoked Cheiks rewarded the first performance with an unchanged lineup but equally a little nervous.

We should be nervous. Ireland are #2 for good reason. They're arguably putting a better side out this week. Gonna be tough to beat.

 

[Derpus]

We should be nervous. Ireland are #2 for good reason. They're arguably putting a better side out this week. Gonna be tough to beat.

I don't think there are any arguments about it. Sexton is certainly better than Carbery, Ringrose is great, etc. We will need to step it up.

 

[Braveheart81]

Last week was the best I've seen the pooper play. It's fallen short against the ABs and Eng more than it's worked.

They were great last week for sure.

Is it really fair to say that when we lose to NZ or England that it's because the Pooper hasn't worked or that we got beaten by a better team?

It would be great if it was as simple as making a particular selection and that resulted in getting a win.

 

[Tomikin]

They were great last week for sure.

Is it really fair to say that when we lose to NZ or England that it's because the Pooper hasn't worked or that we got beaten by a better team?

It would be great if it was as simple as making a particular selection and that resulted in getting a win.

Its like drop Hooper and Poey and play..errrrgggg Timu Samu and Hanagian..jesus christ

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[Strewthcobber]

Pooper + Genia >>>> Pooper +AN Other

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[tragic]

They were great last week for sure.

Is it really fair to say that when we lose to NZ or England that it's because the Pooper hasn't worked or that we got beaten by a better team?

It would be great if it was as simple as making a particular selection and that resulted in getting a win.

It’s not that we lost to them. It’s that they nullified the on the ball work of the pooper and exposed our lack of physicality and aggression at the breakdown. And exposed the lack of a third jumper in our lineout.
We didn’t see any of that game 1 against the Irish.

 

[TSR]

Hooper will no doubt be pleased he has managed to keep Angus Scott-Young at bay for another week.

 

[Braveheart81]

It’s not that we lost to them. It’s that they nullified the on the ball work of the pooper and exposed our lack of physicality and aggression at the breakdown. And exposed the lack of a third jumper in our lineout.

These are common failings for the Wallabies (and I'd say any team really) in losses regardless of the team we have selected.

I just don't think selecting Hooper and Pocock means that unless that gives us a big advantage at the breakdown it has failed. Pocock had a huge game in particular against Ireland but across the park we outmuscled and were more aggressive than Ireland.

I think it mostly comes back to winning the contact zone. If you're doing that with ball in hand it's far easier to protect your own ruck ball and conversely a fetcher has far less opportunity. Even if you have a monster pack it's hard to be aggressive with your counter rucking if the opposition is winning that contact zone and getting over the advantage line.

The foundation for everything the Wallabies did against Ireland was largely down to our physicality in my view. We stifled their attack by making big tackles and a lot of our ball carriers regularly got over the advantage line in attack.