Wallabies v Pumas, Bankwest (Parra), Sat 5th December

[Dan54]

The last couple of pages of this thread sums up the state of Australian Rugby. Arguing over 2 rookie fly half’s with one season of Super Rugby (Australia at that). Or in Swinton who had a 30 minute stint and is the next saviour of Australian Rugby and it wasn’t that long ago Jordan Petaia was the saviour of the month for Australian Rugby. Not to say that these guys aren’t the future and have a lot of potential. But that is exactly what it is potential.

Michael Hooper a guy who has delivered on his potential with consistently high performances at Super and Test level season after season is the favourite punching bag of many. I don’t get it. Not a couple of good games season after season he performs.

I don’t care how they played last year, I don’t care how big a schoolboy rockstar they were, they don’t have the runs on the board to use a cricket term, they would be lucky to have 500 career test runs and Michael Hooper would be plus 10,000. All that matters is how they play next season in Super Rugby and the season after that.

This in my opinion is one of the best posts I have seen, or one that I agree with the most. I did post when Petaia first came on scene that we have to learn to let players develop before they become the great saviour. I said the same about Tupou, and I am now happy to say he is a very good player, as he is showing the consistent ability. Let's give them time to develop.

 

[barbarian]

Agree D54, I think we've got the raw ingredients for a really good team here. We just need to let them grow over time.

I think Rennie is the right coach, and our tactics have been as good as they could be. Our team looked well drilled on Saturday, the lineout was greatly improved and we had a few nice touches in the way we moved around the field. Was it Rennie's fault we kept dropping the pill? I don't really think so.

I wonder if the long season took it's toll a bit this weekend. Especially on the young guys. From pre-season to now it must be about 11 months, and Petaia, Wilson, Paisami in their first or second full season of pro rugby. In and out of bubbles, quarantine, the whole works.

My hope is next year we see the real jump, as our debutants grow in their second year. Guys like Hosea and Lolesio keep coming through. It's blind optimism in parts but at the moment this team is light on talent but much bigger on smarts and heart than we've seen in the past. If and when the talent catches up we will be something.

 

[wamberal]

When we get a reliable goal kicker we will be something.

 

[Derpus]

When we get a reliable goal kicker we will be something.

It would really change everything. Hooper can comfortably go for the sticks. Points pressure mounts and the Argies are forced to actually try and do something other than defend their 22.

Edit: oh and we go 4/6 and have an extremely successful year. Fine margins.

Been one of our growing number of Achilles heels for a long, long time.

 

[Pfitzy]

When we stop the perennial stupidity we will also be something.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

The last couple of pages of this thread sums up the state of Australian Rugby. Arguing over 2 rookie fly half’s with one season of Super Rugby (Australia at that). Or in Swinton who had a 30 minute stint and is the next saviour of Australian Rugby and it wasn’t that long ago Jordan Petaia was the saviour of the month for Australian Rugby. Not to say that these guys aren’t the future and have a lot of potential. But that is exactly what it is potential.

Michael Hooper a guy who has delivered on his potential with consistently high performances at Super and Test level season after season is the favourite punching bag of many. I don’t get it. Not a couple of good games season after season he performs.

I don’t care how they played last year, I don’t care how big a schoolboy rockstar they were, they don’t have the runs on the board to use a cricket term, they would be lucky to have 500 career test runs and Michael Hooper would be plus 10,000. All that matters is how they play next season in Super Rugby and the season after that.

Trouble with the season structure is that you can't just drop 'em to the Shield after giving them a taste of the intensity and quality of a test match.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The last couple of pages of this thread sums up the state of Australian Rugby. Arguing over 2 rookie fly half’s with one season of Super Rugby (Australia at that). Or in Swinton who had a 30 minute stint and is the next saviour of Australian Rugby and it wasn’t that long ago Jordan Petaia was the saviour of the month for Australian Rugby. Not to say that these guys aren’t the future and have a lot of potential. But that is exactly what it is potential.

Michael Hooper a guy who has delivered on his potential with consistently high performances at Super and Test level season after season is the favourite punching bag of many. I don’t get it. Not a couple of good games season after season he performs.

I don’t care how they played last year, I don’t care how big a schoolboy rockstar they were, they don’t have the runs on the board to use a cricket term, they would be lucky to have 500 career test runs and Michael Hooper would be plus 10,000. All that matters is how they play next season in Super Rugby and the season after that.

Joe Burns v Will Puvcoski (spelling?). Even 10,000 run veterans finish their cricket careers sometime. Not a particularly relevant comparison.

In my view, we are not about to improve if we persist with the team that has taken us from a regular top 2 or 3 ranking to 7 and maybe lower if we cannot find and develop better players.

 

[Braveheart81]

In my view, we are not about to improve if we persist with the team that has taken us from a regular top 2 or 3 ranking to 7 and maybe lower if we cannot find and develop better players.

By the same token, maybe we'll be even worse if we select players who look worse at the level we are selecting from because we want to pick players who haven't been unsuccessful at test rugby previously.

We have a whole host of new players in the test team this year and have won 1 game, drawn 2 and lost 3 times and only managed to score 7 tries at an average of 1.17 tries a game which is unprecedented.

Maybe the problem is that we don't have better players?

 

[Adam84]

The players I mentioned have been generally poor performers and there are others in the pipeline right now who can do their jobs. Others with more potential, higher ceilings who will be the future for the Wallabies. Specifically, McReight for Hooper who is clearly on the wane, Hosea for Simmons who couldn't run through wet tissues without falling over, Swinton or Valetini for Hanigan who has never reached test standard in any aspect bar the lineout, Lolesio for JOC (James O'Connor) who really is not a No 10 and likely won't make it to the RWC in 23, and Ramm for Koroibete who makes too many mistakes and has deficiencies in his skillset. Now, please take off your Brumbies hating glasses and tell me where I am biased in these observations.

Nah, Reds fans which you called overly parochial aren't even calling for McReight ahead of Hooper, he is one for the future, but McReight was not at Hooper standard this year and didn't warrant replacing him in the squad.

I've said it all year, but I just don't understand the Valetini hype, Hannigans best this year was far better then Valetinis best IMO. And had Swinton not been red carded, I would have liked to see more of him. I said the same thing about 4 months ago and my opinion has not changed this series.

Lolesio had his opportunity to cement a starting position and missed it, you cant ignore how out of his depth Lolesio looked in that match. Give him another year of super rugby, work on his defence and come back next year. They're all starting from scratch in 2021 and the fly-half position is wide open.

Koroibetes best is still far better then anything I've seen from Ramm and don't think he earned a spot. But another 12 months and it might be a different story.

 

[Slim 293]

I've said it all year, but I just don't understand the Valetini hype, Hannigans best this year was far better then Valetinis best IMO.

Hopefully this Nedd Hanigan can inject some more physicality than his lightweight doppelgänger.........

 

[Adam84]

Hopefully this Nedd Hanigan can inject some more physicality than his lightweight doppelgänger...

solid response Slim

 

[Viking]

Right now yes. Harrison is a more natural fly half and has a higher ceiling. I would not be surprised at all to see 10. Harrison 12. Lolesio evolve as the future pairing.

Why does Harrison have a higher ceiling then Lolesio?

 

[Brumby Runner]

It’s the skew that is disappointing BR. I’m thinking that swapping Brumbie jersies for gold is possibly not our strongest answer and it is hardly dissing the Brumbies.

I’ll let you be frustrated by my thoughts on Simmo, so be it. Probably the same for Hooper.

So far Valetini is overhyped, indeed ditto to McReight over Hooper (it may change) and I really hope Hosea gets more exposure. Hanigan has not been around at international level for 5 years. Swinton I want but another red and he can stuff off. And Hanigan might go to 20. Lolesio got nothing, not just not better than than JOC (James O'Connor) but not better than Hodge. (Think it through.) Next year who knows, especially considering the young talent becoming available. Ramm?

I don’t hate brumbies, I’m irritated by basically unabashed Brumby bias when we have much bigger issues to skin. The answer to all our problems is not a Brumby. Not necessarily anyway.

Dru, not to get into too much back and forward, and accepting we have different opinions about individual players, I want to pick you up on just one aspect. Have a close look at my suggested inclusions; Swinton and Ramm, 2 Tahs; Hosea a Rebel; McReight a Red; and Valetini and Lolesio, 2 Brumbies. What could be fairer? Or more even handed? Hardly any cause to claim I am wanting to swap Brumbies jerseys for gold.

 

[Braveheart81]

Dru, not to get into too much back and forward, and accepting we have different opinions about individual players, I want to pick you up on just one aspect. Have a close look at my suggested inclusions; Swinton and Ramm, 2 Tahs; Hosea a Rebel; McReight a Red; and Valetini and Lolesio, 2 Brumbies. What could be fairer? Or more even handed? Hardly any cause to claim I am wanting to swap Brumbies jerseys for gold.

It was probably more that none of the 8 players you listed as wanting to get rid of were Brumbies.

Some of the Brumbies players like Sio, Fainga'a, White and Banks have hardly done much to show that they're taking this team forward yet they don't rate a mention.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Right now yes. Harrison is a more natural fly half and has a higher ceiling. I would not be surprised at all to see 10. Harrison 12. Lolesio evolve as the future pairing.

That's one view and a legitimate one, but I can't see the Brumbies playing Noah at 12 in front of Simone. Then, there is also a chance of Tom Wright moving closer to the play which could put him in the competition for the 12 jersey too. On top of that, both Keunzle and Pasitoa have people calling for them to play 12. Noah is the front runner for the Brumbies No 10 spot, so I reckon he will always be in competition with Will Harrison for his the test 10 spot.

EDIT : I'm interested in how you measure a player's ceiling. Will was the first choice No 10 in the U20s and Noah played in 12. After one year of Super where both played 10, Noah has been elevated to bench No 10 for the Wallabies. Seems to me that Noah has improved more in the past year than Will has which could be a indicative of a higher ceiling whatever that might mean.

 

[Brumby Runner]

By the same token, maybe we'll be even worse if we select players who look worse at the level we are selecting from because we want to pick players who haven't been unsuccessful at test rugby previously.

We have a whole host of new players in the test team this year and have won 1 game, drawn 2 and lost 3 times and only managed to score 7 tries at an average of 1.17 tries a game which is unprecedented.

Maybe the problem is that we don't have better players?

The world must look terribly dull to you BH. Always the voice of balance and reason. Are you really content to defend the management line at all costs? Where is your little rebellious streak?

 

[Adam84]

EDIT : I'm interested in how you measure a player's ceiling. Will was the first choice No 10 in the U20s and Noah played in 12. After one year of Super where both played 10, Noah has been elevated to bench No 10 for the Wallabies. Seems to me that Noah has improved more in the past year than Will has which could be a indicative of a higher ceiling whatever that might mean.

Different teams and different circumstances.
Stepping into a team with less squad stability, less experience and overall lower quality is arguably more difficult for a young player then a team of higher quality.

I don’t know who has the higher ceiling, but I don’t doubt Lolesio benefited from playing in the better team.

 

[Braveheart81]

The world must look terribly dull to you BH. Always the voice of balance and reason. Are you really content to defend the management line at all costs? Where is your little rebellious streak?

No, I think there is plenty that needs to be improved and I'd certainly make some different selections.

I just don't connect the fact that the Wallabies have been pretty unsuccessful over the last few years as being a reason to get rid of the more senior players who have played through that era. It's a non sequitur.

By your logic we should ditch guys like Harry Wilson because he has a winning percentage of 33% which is way lower than all those older players.

Let's try and select our best players each season. It makes little sense to think that a player who looks worse at Super Rugby level is going to be a better test player than the experienced test player who outperforms them at Super Rugby level as well.

 

[Quick Hands]

B

Maybe the problem is that we don't have better players?

Undoubtedly we don't. The ongoing problem is that our best arrive at super and test level with significant deficiencies in some of the core skills of the game and a lack of rugby smarts in pressure situations. I mean in the first quarter of this game the Wallabies had about 80% of territory and possession and couldn't score - and didn't even look like scoring either.

That is down to the system which produced them, rather than the individuals themselves. Noting that we are now onto about the 3rd cycle of players who all have displayed the same traits, coupled with the glaringly obvious point that our systems can't produce elite coaches either. Rennie, Penney, Gibson, Thorn and Deans have all come through the NZ system and Wessels through the SA system.

 

[Braveheart81]

Undoubtedly we don't. The ongoing problem is that our best arrive at super and test level with significant deficiencies in some of the core skills of the game and a lack of rugby smarts in pressure situations. I mean in the first quarter of this game the Wallabies had about 80% of territory and possession and couldn't score - and didn't even look like scoring either.

That is down to the system which produced them, rather than the individuals themselves. Noting that we are now onto about the 3rd cycle of players who all have displayed the same traits, coupled with the glaringly obvious point that our systems can't produce elite coaches either. Rennie, Penney, Gibson, Thorn and Deans have all come through the NZ system and Wessels through the SA system.

Maybe a significant part of the problem is that we're not attracting the caliber of athletes necessary to compete at the highest level?

We need players that are both incredibly skilled and fantastic athletes and a lot of our players aren't both those things.