Wallaby 31 players for 2015 RWC

[fatprop]

I can't understand the Carter's pick. Big Kev deserves the spot

As I said before (and it appears Cheika confirmed this at selection)

Carter has been selected for a different role

Cheika phoned Horwill on Thursday night to break the news and said it was a "a very difficult conversation".
He said Horwill almost played himself into the squad with his performances during the Rugby Championship after being a bit further away at the start of the series. But Cheika said other options gave him a better mix for the squad.
"We just needed two jumping-oriented guys and we've got those," Cheika said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-21/wallabies-omit-horwill-and-white-from-world-cup-squad/6714196

 

[Beer Baron]

Big bruisers are not always effective. I guarantee a Hooper or Pocock (or McMahon) going full tilt hitting the line with legs pumping makes more ground then a lumbering skelton (as he is rarely at anything near his top speed when running with the ball) p=mv or KE=mv2/2 (i think....) Now we just need to make sure we are playing front foot ball which requires flat play by the 10, put a 0 in for v in any of the above and it makes no difference.

 

[Braveheart81]

Big bruisers are not always effective. I guarantee a Hooper or Pocock (or McMahon) going full tilt hitting the line with legs pumping makes more ground then a lumbering skelton (as he is rarely at anything near his top speed when running with the ball) p=mv or KE=mv2/2 (i think..) Now we just need to make sure we are playing front foot ball which requires flat play by the 10, put a 0 in for v in any of the above and it makes no difference.

It's a different equation though. Skelton draws more defenders so the principal idea of using him as a ball runner is that he should create space on the next phase if you get a quick recycle.

The smaller forwards naturally draw less defenders but you're relying on them punching through the defensive line and giving you front foot ball to create the opportunity.

I tend to think Cheika will go for McCalman on the bench rather than McMahon or Carter. It will certainly be interesting if he goes for McMahon. It probably offers the most upside but also creates the greatest risk.

 

[Beer Baron]

Agreed - unfortunately year 10 physics and billiard ball problems weren't concerned with defenders.

 

[kiap]

As I said before (and it appears Cheika confirmed this at selection)

Carter has been selected for a different role

What role is that, mate.

Lineout capable, high workrate + low impact ... So a like-for-like swap for Skelton, then. Amirite?

The article quoted is great. Y'know, I even used it myself yesterday. But it doesn't mention Carter.

 

[Ignoto]

As I said before (and it appears Cheika confirmed this at selection)

Carter has been selected for a different role

Weird, I would have thought it'd be the otherway around. Horwill was more the lineout/jumping lock while Carter was more running/ruck based.

 

[qwerty51]

Against England, McCalman but against Wales who bring on Tipuric we'll go for McMahon.

 

[kiap]

Weird, I would have thought it'd be the otherway around. Horwill was more the lineout/jumping lock while Carter was more running/ruck based.

TBF, I think that is what Fatprop is trying to say.

i.e. Cheika sees Horwill as basically another "jumping oriented" guy and is therefore not needed. Carter, as a ruck machine, is better placed to fill the Skelton role...

Blimminell. I just hope some of our younger locks step up next year.

Lock is now such a weak position for the Wallabies.

 

[Scoey]

But apart from Simmons, who is the other 'jumping oriented' lock? Horwill's biggest strength is probably his lineout work and I'd go as far to say that he would be our second best lineout jumper amongst the available guys.
I really don't think that based on recent form that Carter offers any more in the collision and ruck than Horwill does either.

I think this is the biggest furphy to the debate. I don't think the coach considers who deserves the spot at all.

They are quite correctly picking the players that they think provides them with the best squad. The public also aren't privy to exactly the reasons why they have picked someone and why they haven't picked someone else.

Clearly Cheika could be wrong and Horwill could be a better pick than Carter. We'll probably never know. It doesn't really matter who theoretically deserves to be selected more.

It's not a furphy at all, you're just arguing semantics to be dismissive because you don't agree. Disagree by all means but do it better. The one that gets the spot is the most deserving in the coaches eyes regardless of the criteria. MCHS thinks that Horwill is the most deserving based on his own criteria.

If none of us discussed things about the Wallabies that we aren't privy to then GaGR would be redundant by lunchtime.

 

[Braveheart81]

But apart from Simmons, who is the other 'jumping oriented' lock? Horwill's biggest strength is probably his lineout work and I'd go as far to say that he would be our second best lineout jumper amongst the available guys.
I really don't think that based on recent form that Carter offers any more in the collision and ruck than Horwill does either.

The other jumping lock is Mumm. Mumm's ability to run a lineout hasn't been good so far. I guess he has added versatility and workrate compared to Horwill.

We obviously don't have a like for like replacement for Skelton but it would seem Carter has been selected on the basis of being the ruck cleanout guy who gets through a lot of work.

It's not a furphy at all, you're just arguing semantics to be dismissive because you don't agree. Disagree by all means but do it better. The one that gets the spot is the most deserving in the coaches eyes regardless of the criteria. MCHS thinks that Horwill is the most deserving based on his own criteria.

If none of us discussed things about the Wallabies that we aren't privy to then GaGR would be redundant by lunchtime.

It is absolutely about semantics and I don't think I'm being dismissive.

I stand by my point that I don't think the coach considers who is deserving of the spot.

Deserving has a specific meaning and that is what I was discussing from MCHS's post. I agree with him that Horwill was more deserving of a spot based on his Rugby Championship form, service to Australian rugby and whatever else.

If you were looking at 2015 you could say that Luke Jones was the most deserving of a spot in the squad because he was the best Aussie lock in Super Rugby.

The point I was getting at is deserving of a spot in the squad and the best player for that spot in the squad in the eyes of the coach are two different things.

Surely the sophistication of the discussion has to involve taking words for what they mean rather than taking a whole bunch of words with different meanings to mean the same thing.

 

[Sword of Justice]

As I said before (and it appears Cheika confirmed this at selection)

Carter has been selected for a different role

IMO that logic would make sense only if Carter's recent form was better than Horwill's in any way across the park - which it hasn't been. In any case Horwill is fighting fit for the first time in ages and Carter isn't. Not doubting Carter's potential but it makes no sense to me. I agree with whoever said that Horwill must have been caught in bed with Cheika's wife.

 

[Sword of Justice]

From another perspective I agree with BH and many other posters that the most deserving lock to have been picked as the last in the pecking order would be Luke Jones.

 

[fatprop]

What role is that, mate.

Lineout capable, high workrate + low impact ... So a like-for-like swap for Skelton, then. Amirite?

The article quoted is great. Y'know, I even used it myself yesterday. But it doesn't mention Carter.

Yesterday

The omission of Horwill was perhaps the biggest surprise in coach Michael Cheika's squad.
And the second row said: "I don't know about shocked - I was disappointed I didn't make the squad. I had a good number of conversations with Michael after it. He explained to me his decision, and I understand that and I respect that. That's just the reality of rugby. There are people you have to leave out - you can only bring 31 guys.
"He likes to play two types of lock - a big ball-carrying lock and more of a line-out orientated forward. I think the fact that a guy like Dean Mumm can cover No 6 and second row was one of the reasons I didn't get in."

http://www.skysports.com/rugby-unio...ision-says-ex-australia-captain-james-horwill

 

[fatprop]

Weird, I would have thought it'd be the otherway around. Horwill was more the lineout/jumping lock while Carter was more running/ruck based.

I thought that was what the article said, Horwill ended up behind Simmons & Mumm as the one of the two selected "lineout/jumping locks", he wasn't being considered for the role filled by Douglas, Skelton and now Carter

If Simmons or Mumm go down, I expect Horwill to be called in to the squad

 

[kiap]

Yesterday

Still no mention of Sam Carter.

He must presumably be the best big ball-carrying lock, in form and uninjured.

Seriously dunno about that, but good luck to the bloke.

 

[Mr Doug]

Still no mention of Sam Carter.

He must presumably be the best big ball-carrying lock, in form and uninjured.

Seriously dunno about that, but good luck to the bloke.

You obviously weren't watching ABC TV Midday news today, and Fox sports, and Facebook, which all had a segment on Sam Carter, including handshakes with his team mates when he arrived at training in London, and comments by Cheika including "he was almost first choice before he was injured"!
Time for you and the other 19 "Sam Carter doubters" to get over it.
I would have been happy if "Big Kev" had been chosen, but he wasn't.

 

[kiap]

Time for you and the other 19 "Sam Carter doubters" to get over it.

Well, given the opportunity, hopefully he goes well.

I wouldn't begrudge a player that, regardless of whether he was second choice or fourth choice.

It could even be said that some of the "first choices" in this case were lucky to be there.

 

[Joe Blow]

The fact remains that Horwills form in the RC displayed both a good lineout game(and the ability to run it) and a reasonable running/ruck moving game. At least better than Carters at any time in his short Wallaby career.

It shouldn't be so simplified as to categorize them into two specific types of lock. The best locks in world rugby can fill both roles. Certainly Horwill has filled the Skelton/Douglas role at the Reds and with the Wallabies alongside Simmons and others. When Simmons has been out he has been able to step into his shoes as well.

Cheika must see something else. Probably Carters potential. He will no doubt get better.

 

[qwerty51]

Cheika must see something else.

Yes, it's probably all the times attackers flew past James while lumbering behind trying to catch them.

 

[TOCC]

Cheika must see something else. Probably Carters potential.

Its gotta be potential, because its not form based on 2015 form.

I like Carter as a player, but even prior to his injury he was a shadow of his 2014 form and i don't quite see the reasoning for his selection. Cheika selected Palu on past form and ignored his injury runs, some gambles come off and some don't so we will just have to wait and see.