France v Australia, Saturday 19 November

[dru]

No, it's OK. You can admit you think that.

OK. For the French v Australia B, with Cheika's apparent and strange lack of planning, and team training combinations apparently abrogated to the well known current Aussie coaching guru - Dingo Deans' Barbarians - and needing some element of consistency to guide the nascent Larkham structure (largely in the absence of Larkham coaching) - Foley was always going to be the better choice at play maker back line decision maker.

And of course, it's a brilliant example of the reason that we should be actively develop Phipps-Cooper for the A Team First 15.

 

[terry j]

If we could stitch the two of them together

been done, the human centipede.

think it was determined that it did not help rugby performance.

 

[Froggy]

For mine, I want Hooper's ticker in Skelton's body!!

 

[Scrubber2050]

For mine, I want Hooper's ticker in Skelton's body!!

And his brain - plenty of room in there for some grey matter.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Bernard Foley is looking better and better as the tour goes on. Maybe he's recovering more from his off-season stint in Japan?

I still think Foley looks better and actually plays better with a playmaker in the No 12 spot. He has certainly gone well with either of Hodge or Godwin playing 12, and if you look closely at the France match, Godwin took the ball at first receiver from the No 9 on many occasions.

If Cooper comes back into the side any time soon, then I'd prefer to see a strong running No 12 like Kerevi partner Kuridrani in the centres.

Either way, the combination of 10/12 is crucial to how the No 10 plays I believe. Still, it gives the coaches options and that's a very good thing.

 

[Scoey]

One thing that Foley has been doing that I'm loving is throwing some sweet inch perfect passes flat to runners as they hit the defensive line. This has always been something that Quade typically does well but I've not seen a lot of it from Foley. I admit to not watching heaps of Waratahs games though. Anyway, old or new skill, thumbs up to that!

 

[PeterK]

Bernard Foley is looking better and better as the tour goes on. Maybe he's recovering more from his off-season stint in Japan?

I still think Foley looks better and actually plays better with a playmaker in the No 12 spot. He has certainly gone well with either of Hodge or Godwin playing 12, and if you look closely at the France match, Godwin took the ball at first receiver from the No 9 on many occasions.

If Cooper comes back into the side any time soon, then I'd prefer to see a strong running No 12 like Kerevi partner Kuridrani in the centres.

Either way, the combination of 10/12 is crucial to how the No 10 plays I believe. Still, it gives the coaches options and that's a very good thing.

Foley needs a second playmaker either at 12 or at f/b like Beale provided.

The main issue I see is that Kerevi and TK would be great strike runners and deserve for both to be on. However Cheika does not see Kerevi as a playmaker when IMO he as much as Hodge is.

I would prefer QC (Quade Cooper) at 10 if that meant 12 Kerevi and 13 TK.

Won't happen.

So I can only wish for 10 Foley 11 Folau 12 Kerevi 13 TK 14 one of many 15 Beale.

 

[dru]

OK. For the French v Australia B, with Cheika's apparent and strange lack of planning, and team training combinations apparently abrogated to the well known current Aussie coaching guru - Dingo Deans' Barbarians - and needing some element of consistency to guide the nascent Larkham structure (largely in the absence of Larkham coaching) - Foley was always going to be the better choice at play maker back line decision maker.

And of course, it's a brilliant example of the reason that we should be actively develop Phipps-Cooper for the A Team First 15.

@Gagger, finally caught up to all the posts, including your asservation to constant negativity and trolling.

Sheesh, my post (above) seems churlish in retrospect. Hell bloke, I'm a "Quade for PM", "Link was stuffed by the Flower Conspiracy", hairy mono-eyed Red. But I do my best to attempt a balance to my own bias.

And bloke, I feel for you. Aussie rugby interactive sites have been undergoing a serious deliberate trolling atmosphere for some 6 months at least. I honestly, not just saying, am having major trouble dialling in to Roar these days, thank Christ for G&GR!

The negativity IS off-putting. But man, I cant help it, even with my "bias-adjustor rose coloured glasses" on, there are elements with this EOYT from Cheika that I'm just not happy with. Not happy.

Tell you something I under-estimated with Cheik though - his ability to motivate newbies. Hell, he has to take a bow with that France test. And for me, he stays with the mid-week team to work his magic. Let the structure stuff run with the coaching team - Gray, Larkham, Ledesma - for just a couple of days.

And from THIS France test, my positives:

1. No, Foley doesnt NEED a second playmaker, not at least with Larkham (another positive) getting more effective in his role.

2. We ARE building depth, I personally think its early days and plenty more building is required (hence Cheika to head the French Barabarians thing, long term play). So the France test for the newbies, was a bit like the second NZ test for the first 15. Hey, a getting together on the concept that maybe these structures can work.

3. Grrrrrrrr, Foley. Good. Not saying any more.

4. Simmo doesnt really deserve a slot in the first 15. But bugger me if he isnt actually knuckling under into the Cheika/Larkham structures. Keep on going boys, major boost for the Reds!

[Edit: But you're a bit slow in sorting out Douglas. Now if I am going to (attempt) to support your prefered 10, the least you can do is to put Douglas onto the Simmo programme. You getting me? The success of the EOYT could be tested, by me anyway, on whether BOTH Simmo and Douglas return to the Reds with an attitude ready to bite heads off bats.]

5. The inner pod (1, 2, 3) in the France test was poor, imo. But it was made up by the outer pod (4, 5, 8?). Not as structured as the pods agin Wales, but an interesting development, given the outer pod needed improvement (hell, go Simmo! The Red mono-eye must out sooner or later.)

6. Kurindrani, getting back to his best. Oh yeah, Karevi-Kurindrani, yeah yeah yeah. (See my earlier point about Foley and a second playmaker.)

7. We won.

 

[Lee Grant]

Some stray thoughts on the game:

• So much for my prediction that Les Bleues would win by 15. They were dangerous nearly always when the ball went wide and Ireland and England will be working out how they got the space out there. I reckon we had too many guys near to the ruck area - not rocket surgery, I know.

• France had the better of the scrums and (edit) the ref was kind to us a few times otherwise we could have lost the game. But Les Bleus were more passive than Scotland on the rush which was unaccountable.

• Guirado, Vakatawa, and skipper Guirado had exceptional games but the player they missed was flyhalf Francois Trinh-Duc. JM Doussain, who doesn't know if he's 9 or 10 was not influential, and reserve Camille Lopez was no FTD. Serve them right for playing so many foreign flyhalves in the Top 14.

• Their Fijian wingers were better than our Fijian wingers. France Sevens player Vakatawa showed his gamut of skills. Kuridrani was the best Fijian centre though He planted the ball in the right place for his try and I reckon the bottom of the corner post kept the ball still for a split second so the point of it hit the chalk.

• Another great shift from David Pocock. In the future people will be talking about him as one of our greats. Genia may not be considered in the same light but he will be right up there. He is a remarkable player and we old-timers can see a thread of extraordinary scrumhalves since WWII - Cyril Burke, Ken Catchpole, John Hipwell, Nick Farr-Jones and George Gregan. It's like a baton was handed on from those gents to Will Genia..

• Aussies are too naive. The remonstrations of players when a try is scored against them is a blight on our game, but other teams might have had a big whinge after Fofana took out Godwin when Doussain scored. The try could have been denied had it been referred and sometimes a loud whinge can work.

Likewise when Spedding tackled Naivalu near the line: he had already grabbed Naivalu's arm in the process of tackling, before he got the ball. It was in the act of scoring a try; so it could have been referred.

Take Spedding out of the equation and there is only Machenaud coming across and it was Paris to a brique that he would have scored in a tackle. At the very least a try was probable.

• Edit - The ref may have missed a few things that the Frogs did, but the Aussies got the rub of the green from him. I don't count the penalty try as one item though - the France 5 and 6 retreated and entered the maul without binding and went to ground as speed bumps - and the maul collapsed.

• Spedding wasn't a total bad guy for the Wallabies; with four minutes to go he had the ball on the Aussie 22 and had he passed Speight would have had three guys to mark including Vakatawa near touch. But he took the tackle and Australia won not long afterwards.

• Foley has picked the right games to kick well for the posts. He kicked all of them against Scotland and all but a sideline conversion against France, but was poor against Wales when it didn't matter.

Now he has to get his kicking from hand on the same track.

• Kyle Godwin had some good moments in his first test match and his stepping was seen to effect, but he needs to do more than just pass the ball on in a chain move. They should put him in front of videos of Brian O'Driscoll - who played outside centre, I know. BOD was always menacing because he did things before he got the ball - a half swerve, a head fake or an increase of speed. It happened in just a step or two, and that's what Godwin should learn to fix opponents to benefit the guy outside him.

And he should be more on the quest for the second touch.

• As many people have said probably, Morahan should be in the 23 next week. He finished well playing for the Barbarians against the Boks and backed that up in Paris. Its a pity that Jonno Lance didn't get on the park for a test cap; he's had some bad luck.

• Tolu Latu had a good game for his first test start, though he was a bit vague sometimes as is his wont. He could probably have never stopped Vakatawa in his lunge for the line from the ruck to score, but he would have given himself a chance if he was directly opposite him. At least he seems to have been cured of his habit of doing grass-cutter tackles with no arms.

• All that said above it was a remarkable effort from a scratch side and the coaching staff should be congratulated for providing the framework that players could slip in and out of.

• Sometimes the scrum was like the bad old days and the result of the tight-head scrum with a couple of minutes to go could have lost the game.

Not many of the props had a good day at the scrum office according to my untrained eye, but Allan Ala'alatoa, who has more A's than the school swot, got a pass mark from me.
.

 

[PeterK]

Lee Grant - The ref was Glen Jackson not Clancy.

Aussies and Moore are accused of whinging too much so I don't know if that would work.

They need to bring in a captains call 1 each half to have things checked, if you are wrong you lose it.

Foley kicked all the ones in front, missed the only hard one from out wide.

 

[Rip 'em a new one]

Foley kicked all the ones in front, missed the only hard one from out wide.

That's a disingenuous and convenient definition of "in front".

 

[Rip 'em a new one]

been done, the human centipede.

think it was determined that it did not help rugby performance.

Hell of a rolling maul though.

 

[ForceFan]

Ruck Involvements – France v Wallabies – Paris 2016
Another entertaining Test made even more so by the Wallabies team mix and the scoreline being locked at France 23: 25 Wallabies for the closing 16 minutes.
Very pleased that France’s last ditch field goal attempt went wide.

The Battle at the Breakdown was again a willing affair. According to ESPN, Wallabies won 94% of their rucks (96/102) and France 92% (92/99).

Once again I am disappointed by the lack of official policing of the blatant interference, including tackling, of players without the ball who are beyond or not connected to the ruck.

France was very selective in their ruck involvements (standing off 63% of Wallabies rucks) and averaged only 0.4 players per Defence Ruck. This is the same level of involvement as shown by Ireland in their win over the ABs in Chicago. 50% of their Defence Ruck Involvements (DRIs) were by Picamoles (9), Guirardo (8) and Gourdon (4).

The Wallabies were more consistently involved (standing off 48% of France rucks) and averaged 0.7 players per Defence Ruck. Over 60% of their DRIs were by Pocock (18), Fardy (10) and Latu (10) and McMahon (7).
Both teams showed a similar level of support for their ball carriers (France 2.4 players/Attack Ruck); Wallabies 2.5.

France had their offload game working (France26:4 Wallabies) with their Back Row just as willing to utilise this attack weapon as their Backs.

Jackson evened up the penalty count by the end of the game but the Wallabies 8 penalties in the opening 20 minutes limited their go-forward broken only by the penalty try and Ollivon’s sin-binning.

Remember:
1. Early means 1st or 2nd of player’s team AFTER the ball carrier has been tackled and brought to ground.
2. Impact means active engagement: strong physical contact, changed shape of ruck, clean-out, protecting ball etc. (more than hand on someone’s bum or arriving after the hard work has been done). Yes it’s subjective - but as I collect all data at least it’s consistent.
3. Impact DOES NOT equate to Effectiveness. I’ve concluded that coming up with an effectiveness measure is just too hard in the time that I have available – but open to suggestions.

Another impressive effort by Pocock with 24% of the Wallabies’ DRIs and the leading tackler (18 with only 1 missed).
Simmons and Douglas showed strong support for their ball carriers and had good tackle counts; Simmons (16/0) and Douglas (13/2).
Other leading tacklers: Godwin (12/0), Fardy (12/3) and Latu (10/3).


Ruck Involvements by Backs: Kuridrani – 13 Total (11 Attack/2 Defence); Foley – 11T (11A/0D); Speight & Godwin – 10T (7A/3D).

Ruck Involvements over Time

1st half leading DRIs
Pocock,- 10; Talu - 6; McMahon, Fardy & Slipper – 5; Ala'alatoa – 4.
2nd half leading DRIs
Pocock - 8; Fardy – 5; Latu - 4.

The post below includes some additional data.

Am going to be a bit busy over the next few weeks so will not be gathering ruck data for the Ireland and England Tests until over the Christmas-New year break.
Two more wins would be trific.

 

[ForceFan]

The distribution of Ruck Involvements across main player groups shows that France’s Tight 5 were more involved than their Wallabies counter-parts; a fairly consistent trend against the Wallabies.
The Wallabies Back Row continue to provide the bulk of the ruck workload.

Both groups of Locks showed minimal involvement in Defence Rucks but were very involved in the tackle counts for both teams.

France Front Row benefited from their very active Hookers (Guirado and Chat).

Both teams showed a similar level of support for their ball carriers (France 2.4 players/Attack Ruck); Wallabies 2.5.

France was very selective in their ruck involvements (standing off 63% of Wallabies rucks) and averaged only 0.4 players per Defence Ruck.

The Wallabies were more consistently involved (standing off 48% of France rucks) and averaged 0.7 players per Defence Ruck.

 

[Pfitzy]

No, it's OK. You can admit you think that.

Stage 7 is Acceptance and Hope

http://www.recover-from-grief.com/7-stages-of-grief.html

 

[Teh Other Dave]

I doubt a comment about the australian captain and how he managed the ref would come up in the Scot v Arg thread, allowing a comparison to be made..so, you know, umm, it is kinda about the aus v fre game, hope you can work that out.

Is it really necessary for people to get their little jabs in every time they get pissed off on a bloody forum? Is that where society has regressed to in todays bloody social media world. FFS get a life, and how about we all be just that tiny bit 'bigger as a person' and realise that no, actually, the world is NOT that fucking interested in our petty little opinions.

In most fucking cases, believe it or not, our opinions DON'T make the world a better place. Wanna see where the net is actually taking us.read the comments section on any damned youtube video.

God I hope G&GR does not end up there.

My comment was facetious. Perhaps you could take heed of your own diatribe.

 

[Lee Grant]

Lee Grant - The ref was Glen Jackson not Clancy.

Aussies and Moore are accused of whinging too much so I don't know if that would work.

Thanks for the correction.

On the whingeing thing I meant a spontaneous group whinge, which would make most referees take pause, although it wouldn't affect the likes of Nigel Owens. But don't take the comment too seriously.

You're right that Moore is a poor whinger. He doesn't have the skill of picking his moments.

He is certainly no McCaw who could be the ref's best mate. Kieran Read tries to copy him but he's not in the same class.

But I digress.
.

 

[Gagger]

3. Grrrrrrrr, Foley. Good. Not saying any more.

Everyone mark this moment when Foley was finally unanimously acknowledged as the best choice Wallaby 10........


.........because it probably won't last the week before the Quade fantasy usurps it!


More seriously. If like Dru we all acknowledge that we don't want GAGR to go to the dogs, then we all need to lift our game. Turning up week in week out to plug the same lines - "A, B and C are shit" because they don't play for your team - is incredibly tedious and basically means that your opinion means far less (if anything) around here and you're wasting your time and everyone else's.

Be smart, be like Lee

 

[PeterK]

On the whingeing thing I meant a spontaneous group whinge, which would make most referees take pause, although it wouldn't affect the likes of Nigel Owens. But don't take the comment too seriously.
.

It is distasteful but a common occurrence with the advent of the TMO.

Wallabies should do it more.

I agree on both instances the early tackle was clear on slo mo.
The clearing of Godwin near the ruck AND then holding him back created a hole, I have seen those called back before. Interesting the TMO / Ref neither picked up on it at all.
The ruck try through Latu it looked like the player reached back for the ball which puts him offside but not sure.

Since the TMO is here, I am all for a captain's call 1 per half to review incidents. The officials miss too much well frankly because so many illegalities occur so often, by all teams including the Wallabies.

 

[PeterK]

Everyone mark this moment when Foley was finally unanimously acknowledged as the best choice Wallaby 10....


...because it probably won't last the week before the Quade fantasy usurps it!


More seriously. If like Dru we all acknowledge that we don't want GAGR to go to the dogs, then we all need to lift our game. Turning up week in week out to plug the same lines - "A, B and C are shit" because they don't play for your team - is incredibly tedious and basically means that your opinion means far less (if anything) around here and you're wasting your time and everyone else's.

Be smart, be like Lee

Then as moderator you should censor / ban posts that include statements like
Too many waratahs
Wallatahs when referring to the Wallabies
Talk about a tahs conspiracy
Cheika favours tahs.

I honestly don't see the same ones i.e too many reds etc but all those as well.

State based parochialism is very tedious in discussions since it is not productive, it is not true debate or discussion since there is no chance of anyone changing their minds and the same statements repeat ad nauseuam.

Of course debates that QC (Quade Cooper) is better then Foley or visa a versa is fine as long as it is more than the bald statement i.e some supporting statements (and not because of state).

Anyway that's my take.