Wallaby 31 players for 2015 RWC

[Teh Other Dave]

Aside from the hooker issue, there weren't too many surprises. Maybe Horwill deserved to come in over Douglas, but that doesn't fall into the category of 'rude shocks' so much as 'coaches' call'.
As has been shown time and again, defense wins world cups. If we keep our heads on the field and not try to chase the game (something notably absent against the All Blacks), we're in with more than a good shot at the title.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Yeah as WOB touched on the fox article states that injury replacements must be signed off by the tournament chief medical officer and tournament director.

Independent assessment required to bring a new player in.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

I'd actually like to see Cooper outside Phipps, with Pooper, Mumm, Fardy, and Simmons up front.

The only downside to the 'ten to back three' defense is that it leaves either Foley or Cooper susceptible to the high ball with a good chase. That, the line out, and errant kicking were our biggest weaknesses against NZ.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

Yeah as WOB touched on the fox article states that injury replacements must be signed off by the tournament chief medical officer and tournament director.

Independent assessment required to bring a new player in.

And I'm guessing we can't cover for suspension?

 

[Froggy]

I reckon Douglas will start! Can't see why he'd be selected otherwise. I agree Horwill had done enough to be selected and would have picked him, but Cheika has done what he thinks will win the WC, and it's his nuts on the line, not ours. I don't think Mumm's selection is relevant, he won't start but covers 6 if Fardy has to miss a game.
I think the halves may be Phipps/Foley, as Cheika seems reluctant to separate them, but I'd play Phipps/Cooper.
A lot of anger here about selections, fair enough too, I'm perplexed about some, but it's a done deal, let's back them and hope Cheika's gamble comes off!

 

[kiap]

This'd be my personal A-team if everyone was fit and at their best:

Sio
Moore
Kepu
Simmons
Horwill
Fardy
Hooper
Pocock
Genia
Cooper
Speight
To'omua
Kuridrani
JOC (James O'Connor)
Folau

Slipper
Nau
Holmes
Higginbotham
Skelton
Phipps
AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
Beale

Very handy lineup (I'd possibly tinker with a few spots but only because it's fun)

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

And I'm guessing we can't cover for suspension?

Yeah nah..... which would make it kinda interesting should Moore or TPN cop a suspension rather than an injury.......

On the question of possible suspensions, do Quade's 2 x cards in two matches carry over, even in a demerit point kinda way?

 

[Groucho]

Yeah, couldn't face wading through all the pages of comments but not surprised someone(s) else thought of it as it's so obvious in the context of Australia's pool draw, an "A" XV to play Fiji, England & Wales & a "B" for Uruguay.

But you can't just draft them in, they have to come in to replace players who're going home with two-week-plus injuries, verified by World Rugby's medical panel. You sure as shit don't wanna get caught trying to pull a swiftly with them. So unless someone almost literally takes one for the team, it ain't gonna happen.

There's no 2 week stipulation, old boy. People are adding that for extra spice. The player simply has to be injured sufficiently not to play.

Anyone speculating that the Wobs haven't confirmed this with the tournament organisers is wrong.

 

[Train Without a Station]

There's no 2 week stipulation, old boy. People are adding that for extra spice. The player simply has to be injured sufficiently not to play.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/rugby-union/a/29316137/horwill-misses-aust-world-cup-squad/

Perhaps Cheika considered such a scenario because, under World Cup rules, the Wallabies can only draft in a replacement if a player suffers a tournament-ending injury.

Now I cannot find the actual world rugby source online. There is no link and it may not even be published online. But this is what the papers are reporting.

 

[Groucho]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/rugby-union/a/29316137/horwill-misses-aust-world-cup-squad/



Now I cannot find the actual world rugby source online. There is no link and it may not even be published online. But this is what the papers are reporting.

No one has to believe me, but 5 props including one who plays hooker satisfies Law 3.5; an injury to two front rowers in the 48 hour period constitutes mitigating circumstances; and any player unable to play in the next game due to injury can be replaced in the squad; and the Wallabies have asked all those questions of the tournament committee.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I agree with your point but do you see the RWC organisers buying that a prop who has never played a single game of hooker at professional level was a viable hooker alternative?

 

[Groucho]

I agree with your point but do you see the RWC organisers buying that a prop who has never played a single game of hooker at professional level was a viable hooker alternative?

My understanding is that we asked the organisers whether the selection satisfies Law 3.5 and it does. I fully accept that's at odds with what the papers are saying.

 

[southsider]

I agree with your point but do you see the RWC organisers buying that a prop who has never played a single game of hooker at professional level was a viable hooker alternative?

scott sio has played hooker, not sure if professionally or not (youd imagine so seeing as he was a backrower at high school and pretty much went straight into pro rugby) but laurie Fisher seemed to think he was capable when he was coach of the brumbies

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/the-fifteen-best-young-players-in-super-rugby/2/

 

[KOB1987]

No one has to believe me, but 5 props including one who plays hooker satisfies Law 3.5; an injury to two front rowers in the 48 hour period constitutes mitigating circumstances; and any player unable to play in the next game due to injury can be replaced in the squad; and the Wallabies have asked all those questions of the tournament committee.

My understanding is that we asked the organisers whether the selection satisfies Law 3.5 and it does. I fully accept that's at odds with what the papers are saying.

Maybe Michael Cheika is the first coach to actually ask the question. That being the case, it's a very smart and understandable decision.

 

[Slim 293]

scott sio has played hooker, not sure if professionally or not (youd imagine so seeing as he was a backrower at high school and pretty much went straight into pro rugby) but laurie Fisher seemed to think he was capable when he was coach of the brumbies

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/the-fifteen-best-young-players-in-super-rugby/2/

It's not really ideal to have our #1 loosehead prop covering hooker though..........

 

[southsider]

It's not really ideal to have our #1 loosehead prop covering hooker though....

im not agreeing with the decision......just stating that sio can play hooker, and in our favour there isnt a huge gulf between our first string and second string loosehead prop

 

[saulityvi]

I wouldnt like to see Sio at hooker, for the exact reason that I think he is our best LHP at the moment.

There was a case in Aviva last season where a team had their both hookers injured and one of the reserve props jumped in as the hooker and the commentator stated that he had played at hooker in school or something. So atleast there the officials bought it when the coaching staff said we have a hooker.

 

[KOB1987]

It's not really ideal to have our #1 loosehead prop covering hooker though....

no it's not, but it's a contingency plan, not a strategy. By the sounds of it if we lose two front rowers the 'accentuating circumstances' rule kicks in. If @Groucho is right they have checked the rules, ticked the boxes, and got other people to check they've ticked the right boxes.

 

[southsider]

no it's not, but it's a contingency plan, not a strategy. By the sounds of it if we lose two front rowers the 'accentuating circumstances' rule kicks in. If @Groucho is right they have checked the rules, ticked the boxes, and got other people to check they've ticked the right boxes.

exactly its a last resort, thats providing we are even close to what cheika is thinking. With a brains trust of cheika, larkham and grey they would have left nothing to chance, theyve either found a loophole in the rules or have multiple contingency plans to see them through injuries etc

 

[BDA]

I reckon Douglas will start! Can't see why he'd be selected otherwise. I agree Horwill had done enough to be selected and would have picked him, but Cheika has done what he thinks will win the WC, and it's his nuts on the line, not ours. I don't think Mumm's selection is relevant, he won't start but covers 6 if Fardy has to miss a game. I think the halves may be Phipps/Foley, as Cheika seems reluctant to separate them, but I'd play Phipps/Cooper.

If that's the case, why the Fk is McMahon in the squad? The backrow consists of 2 number 7s (more than enough) and 2 number eights. McMahon's selection suggest that he will be a back up 6/7 cover. If Cheika plans to play Mumm at 6 if Fardy is injured then McMahon's inclusion seems unnecessary. If Cheika sees Mumm as Fardy's back up then why not select Horwill (as a lock) and Mumm (as a back-up 6 / bench lock/6).

If Mumm is indeed the man to take the 6 jersey if Fardy goes down, I'm trying to foresee a situation where McMahon will actually be selected in any games other than to give Hooper or Pocock a rest. That's not a great justification for his selection.