The Wallabies Thread

[Strewthcobber]

Strange example to pick though, given Tui's suspension and injury

 

[Brumbieman]

RE the Cheika debate.....

Nothing will improve IMO, he's an emotion based coach. A coach who comes in, introduces a few new things and fires everyone up so much that they work for the first couple of years. After that, everything is stale, people get desensitised to the rev ups, and here we are.

Add to that the dictatorial control where no one seems to be capable of challenging him or offer new ideas (Larkham hasn't ever proven capable of coaching a backline despite his ability to run one, Grey's defence has been rubbish for 3 years) and it's a bad combination.

We won't win away against either the Boks or Argies, and I reckon we might even lose one of them at home. Should that happen, I cant see how his position is defensible.

ESPECIALLY considering the increase in quality players available - Dingo never had a forward pack of this potential quality. Depth in the 2nd row and front row hasn't been this good since Eales retired.



Problem is, who the hell could replace him? KB (Kurtley Beale)'s antics ensured we lost the only other high quality coach in Aussie rugby, so there really isn't a single Aussie going around who could take it.

I reckon (and i know this will cause outrage) we should throw what's left of the sink at Jake White. The Brumbies really were not boring under him, they scored more tries than the other Aussie sides. The boring happened after he left, when Larkham and Fischer were given control. We scored lots of tries from set piece, we counter attacked well, played in the RIGHT parts of the field, our set piece was spot on and there was clear direction and progress.

Under White, the Brumbies went from 2nd last to 8 mins away from a title in two seasons with a bunch of absolute nobodies at the time. It was after he left that the plan fell apart and the Brumbies became a rolling maul only team, because Larkham was in charge. McKellar finally seems to have made progress on the run the ball front, but we'd have no chance of doing that without the foundations of upfront power White instilled.

He's the only possible option other than Cheika.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Strange example to pick though, given Tui's suspension and injury

What Wamb really means is that the Brumbies should be playing Pocock at No 8 so that there will no longer be the argument that we don't play our best No 7 in the 7 spot for the Wallabies.

 

[amirite]

One of the answers to our current mess is for RA to pay for (and appoint) all coaching and support staff for the Soup franchises.



We have very sparse elite playing resources, we simply have to find a way to optimise our playing strengths.


Knuckles apparently quoted in today's Rupert saying that the national coach should have more influence over the Soup coaches. He uses the example of Tui being needed as a 6 at national level, but having virtually no experience there at the Soup, and it would have been nice if Chubby could have asked Thorn to play him there. Thorn, of course, does not give a shite about what Chubby wants, he needs to do what he deems best for the Reds in the short term, not what might be best for the Wobbs.



The only way for this sort of thing to be rationalised is not through cooperation, but through a chain of command, with the national coach being able to intervene and request a player be played in a position that suits the national requirements.

Tui playing 6 or lock for Reds isn't a big deal, his attacking role is fairly similar in both structures.

The only different thing is his running line off scrums defensively, and I never looked at the game on Saturday and thought "they scored because the 6 fucked up his line".

 

[Strewthcobber]

There's a pretty major difference in the locks role and Tui's current role as 6 in Cheika's 1-3-3-1.
The reds don't use the same pod system in any case so he's not really going to be getting the experience he needs.

 

[amirite]

There's a pretty major difference in the locks role and Tui's current role as 6 in Cheika's 1-3-3-1.
The reds don't use the same pod system in any case so he's not really going to be getting the experience he needs.

Tui plays in the 3s in the 1331 though, not on the edge like most 6s in the shape. He actually usually plays in the locks' pod anyway (in most 1331s the 8 would be here).

Much like at the Reds where he's used as a mid field carrier.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Tui plays in the 3s in the 1331 though, not on the edge like most 6s in the shape. He actually usually plays in the locks' pod anyway (in most 1331s the 8 would be here).

Much like at the Reds where he's used as a mid field carrier.

I reckon he's one of the 1s - which is why he is on the wing when the do the ABs do the transition at turnover.
Poey is with the locks

 

[amirite]

I reckon he's one of the 1s - which is why he is on the wing when the do the ABs do the transition at turnover.
Poey is with the locks

It's situationally tied to what the origin of the ball is (scrum, line out, turnover, etc.) but he's mostly with the 3s. It makes more sense from him to stay edge off line outs for example, as he's basically always involved in the lift or jump and Poey/Hooper are in a better spot to get out earlier.

I also think you'll find when the ABs scored off turnovers a lot of the times they weren't in their 1331 but the phase shape they use when they're a bit further up field, which is a bit more of your classic "forwards have a bash between the 15m lines" kinda shape.

 

[wamberal]

^^^^
How the hell do we implement it though? You'd have to get people agreeing to relinquish power which seems somewhat unlikely.

Money opens all doors. Or most of them, anyway.

 

[Strewthcobber]

It's situationally tied to what the origin of the ball is (scrum, line out, turnover, etc.)

Mostly kick-offs

 

[amirite]

Mostly kick-offs

Not unfair

 

[Up the Guts]

I reckon he's one of the 1s - which is why he is on the wing when the do the ABs do the transition at turnover.
Poey is with the locks

Who was with the locks against Ireland, Pocock? Seem to remember BPA with them at some point.

 

[Bobby Sands]

The players have spoken.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/rugby...r/news-story/f4335c6f8b35193ebf50c7f18a55b931

 

[Strewthcobber]

Who was with the locks against Ireland, Pocock? Seem to remember BPA with them at some point.

Looked that way in the first game - but might have just been a way to ease Timu into things. Can be a bit hard to tell (see Amirite's very true situational post above)

 

[amirite]

Who was with the locks against Ireland, Pocock? Seem to remember BPA with them at some point.

Maybe off turnovers and kickoffs, but even then I don't think so unless play breaks down. Obviously if stuff's a mess they've got to work it out on the fly.

With most 1331s the hooker would be with the front row off scrums and lineouts he'd be on the edge. This is because the front row are up last at scrum time and on line outs it makes sense for the hooker to hang out because he's already there.

I could be wrong, but this seems to be how the Wobs coach it.

 

[Lorenzo]

RE the Cheika debate...

Nothing will improve IMO, he's an emotion based coach. A coach who comes in, introduces a few new things and fires everyone up so much that they work for the first couple of years. After that, everything is stale, people get desensitised to the rev ups, and here we are.

Add to that the dictatorial control where no one seems to be capable of challenging him or offer new ideas (Larkham hasn't ever proven capable of coaching a backline despite his ability to run one, Grey's defence has been rubbish for 3 years) and it's a bad combination.

We won't win away against either the Boks or Argies, and I reckon we might even lose one of them at home. Should that happen, I cant see how his position is defensible.

ESPECIALLY considering the increase in quality players available - Dingo never had a forward pack of this potential quality. Depth in the 2nd row and front row hasn't been this good since Eales retired.



Problem is, who the hell could replace him? KB (Kurtley Beale)'s antics ensured we lost the only other high quality coach in Aussie rugby, so there really isn't a single Aussie going around who could take it.

I reckon (and i know this will cause outrage) we should throw what's left of the sink at Jake White. The Brumbies really were not boring under him, they scored more tries than the other Aussie sides. The boring happened after he left, when Larkham and Fischer were given control. We scored lots of tries from set piece, we counter attacked well, played in the RIGHT parts of the field, our set piece was spot on and there was clear direction and progress.

Under White, the Brumbies went from 2nd last to 8 mins away from a title in two seasons with a bunch of absolute nobodies at the time. It was after he left that the plan fell apart and the Brumbies became a rolling maul only team, because Larkham was in charge. McKellar finally seems to have made progress on the run the ball front, but we'd have no chance of doing that without the foundations of upfront power White instilled.

He's the only possible option other than Cheika.

Without a doubt.

Chiek's most frequent supporter cry is that he took a bunch of scrubs (who were performing exactly as the team is now, though that is never mentioned) to the RWC final. Sadly, since that final, Chieka is 41.2%. putting us begind NZ, SA, Eng, Ire, Wal, SA and Sco on that metric.

Two of the 3 sides below us have seen fit to replace their coaches in that time.

It's just pathetic now, honestly.

 

[Bobby Sands]

Without a doubt.

Chiek's most frequent supporter cry is that he took a bunch of scrubs (who were performing exactly as the team is now, though that is never mentioned) to the RWC final. Sadly, since that final, Chieka is 41.2%. putting us begind NZ, SA, Eng, Ire, Wal, SA and Sco on that metric.

Two of the 3 sides below us have seen fit to replace their coaches in that time.

It's just pathetic now, honestly.

It's pathetic because we are not changing our protocol. It is the same thing, week on week, with the same predictable result.

 

[Tomikin]

Strange example to pick though, given Tui's suspension and injury

And when he was back played a shocker at 6

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[RoffsChoice]

We don't have a head coach, we have an extremely powerful sports psychologist who just so happens to pick the lineup. Cheika's strength is getting the players to believe in themselves and the plan. When it comes to tactics and skills, he's not an idiot, but his ceiling in those areas is B-. And obviously we need a head coach with that ability to interact with his players, given what happened with McKenzie and Deans.

Basically, unless we get super lucky and find ourselves another Rod Macqueen or Jake White or Graham Henry, we're going to keep losing. And we can't afford to pay out Cheika anyway, so we just have to accept that things are pretty shit and they won't get better for a few years.

 

[amirite]

We don't have a head coach, we have an extremely powerful sports psychologist who just so happens to pick the lineup. Cheika's strength is getting the players to believe in themselves and the plan. When it comes to tactics and skills, he's not an idiot, but his ceiling in those areas is B-. And obviously we need a head coach with that ability to interact with his players, given what happened with McKenzie and Deans.

Basically, unless we get super lucky and find ourselves another Rod Macqueen or Jake White or Graham Henry, we're going to keep losing. And we can't afford to pay out Cheika anyway, so we just have to accept that things are pretty shit and they won't get better for a few years.

This is a pretty fair comment matching my read too, but I don't think the man selects his side in the vacuum.