The Wallabies Thread
- Thread starter KOB1987
- Start date
I don't have this issue on Chrome. I don't use any third party adblocker or anything like that.
ACT Crusader
Jim Lenehan (48)
Carter is the best I've seen in terms of reading the play, the textbook technique and desire to get the tackle. Honiball probably the the hardest hitting 10 I've seen but did get beat a bit as he led in the shoulder. Wilko pound for pound the most fearless.
Foley doesn't shirk, but his technique is poor and he often gets fended easily or run over.
No4918
John Hipwell (52)
From my analysis it seems the only way to stop ads is being a mod or a Tahs fan. I thought the stuff i saw when i traced that website to the Pitcairns was horrifying but i bet it has nothing on what you Tahs lot get up too. Protectionist racket the likes of which the CBA would be most proud. And like the CBA, your house will come tumbling down sooner or later. MWHAHAHAHAHA.
It is true that there is a custom setting applied to each member for how annoying and invasive the ads on the website are.
mudskipper
Colin Windon (37)
Carter's Super Rugby statistics were better than Rob Simmons, Kane Douglas, Izack Rodda and Adam Coleman, but Cheika opted to cut the 27-year-old before the Bledisloe Cup opener.
He played 3 tests in June and didn't deliver what Cheika was looking for from the third lock.
I think it is reasonable that Cheika is now looking at other options to join Coleman and Arnold.
If ultimately it's determined that Carter is the best of them and that none of them can produce what Cheika is after I expect Carter will get recalled.
Brumby Runner
David Wilson (68)
I would have to agree that Sam probably didn't offer what Cheika wanted, but then to go back to others who haven't delivered over quite a few years now is surely a giant backwards step. I am happy to see Rodda get his chance and believe he will one day be pushing for a Wallabies' starting spot. But there are other options he could have tried without reverting to the tried and failed options he has; maybe Philip or Enever, but of course Cheika wouldn't want to be introducing too many new players at the same time, unless their names happen to be Hanigan or Dempsey.
So what do you think caused Cheika, despite Carter's good efforts, to look elsewhere? The easiest approach was to select him and not hope that he can drag other players through
What wasn't Carter doing that Cheika wants from his locks?
from the SMH
It was an interesting\surprising comment, I thought he didn't look great live vs Scotland
Douglas was playing well for Australia less than 2 years ago. Cheika obviously backs himself to get him back to that position.
Simmons is an interesting one. I wonder whether Cheika is toying with the idea of giving him a crack at 6 again at test level?
The squad named is for the first two Bledisloes. I wouldn't assume that Simmons and Douglas are now rusted on for the rest of the season and Carter has no prospect of being included again.
what stats exactly?
He played more minutes than all of those players and took more lineout catches, no doubt.
He didn't steal a lineout though. Simmo took 4, Coleman took 3, Rodda took 1.
His metres per carry (1.4m) was below both Simmons (2.08) and Coleman (1.58).
His tackle success %age (87.3%) is below Coleman (88.6%) and Simmons (87.7%)
He also conceded the most turnovers (15) even when extrapolated to a minutes per turnover state (73) it shows he turned over the ball more than the others.
Brumby Runner
David Wilson (68)
But he (Cheika) has been playing ducks and drakes with the locks for the past couple of years. First Simmons is in and then he's dropped. Carter gets a go and is discarded. Douglas doesn't even get a look in iirc. In the meantime, a couple of new blood replacements come in and prove to be the real deal, Arnold and Coleman. It is time that the present group of triers is either dispensed with, or that he just settles on which one he is willing to wear as the third string player and go with it.
Run metres (for the Brumbies)
Metres per carry (for the Brumbies)
Tackle success (for the Brumbies)
Least turnovers (for the Brumbies)