Marce
John Thornett (49)
It has been the main issue for Aussie Rugby in recents years
Wallabies 2023
- Thread starter RugbyReg
- Start date
Doritos Day
Johnnie Wallace (23)
Selecting yet another player who isn't playing games? No thanks
Highlander35
Andrew Slack (58)
BPA is someone I wouldn't understand the reasoning behind selecting. Thinking back to the April training squad, I see:
Kerevi and Koroibete selected as proven, ongoing performers at international level.
Arnold & Skelton selected because of the point of difference that they provide over existing domestic options.
Foley, Cooper and Banks selected due to the uncertainty of starter quality or experience of existing options.
I don't see where BPA fits in those categories.
Kerevi and Koroibete selected as proven, ongoing performers at international level.
Arnold & Skelton selected because of the point of difference that they provide over existing domestic options.
Foley, Cooper and Banks selected due to the uncertainty of starter quality or experience of existing options.
I don't see where BPA fits in those categories.
Last edited:
rugbyAU
Nev Cottrell (35)
You could argue similar to Arnold & Skelton that BPA offers a point of difference over our existing options
Members Section
John Thornett (49)
Because he had 2 lineouts in a row once 3 yrs ago that went straight
PhilClinton
Geoff Shaw (53)
No Cooper?
TSR
Mark Ella (57)
The argument for BPA is that he is better than any of the domestic options by a fair margin in a position of weakness.
The problem I have is whether that is true. IMO he is a better scrummager than all bar Latu (is Latu even still in the mix?). And his work around the field is probably also the best. Not quite as mobile as Lonergan but stronger in the carry & defence. He also has a pilfer game which would be a big bonus in our pack - although a couple of the others do too.
He certainly had some off days throwing though.
I definitely don’t think he gets picked if there are only 3-4 OS picks. For me first 4 picked are Cooper, Kerevi, Koriobete and Skelton. If Jones gets 5 picks then either he or Sio would probably be next pick for me. But that is mainly because all bar Porecki (and maybe Faessler) have their own issues throwing so the door is left open for him.
However, to my memory, he hasn’t been included in any squads since he went OS, has he. On that basis it seems unlikely he is in the plans.
The problem I have is whether that is true. IMO he is a better scrummager than all bar Latu (is Latu even still in the mix?). And his work around the field is probably also the best. Not quite as mobile as Lonergan but stronger in the carry & defence. He also has a pilfer game which would be a big bonus in our pack - although a couple of the others do too.
He certainly had some off days throwing though.
I definitely don’t think he gets picked if there are only 3-4 OS picks. For me first 4 picked are Cooper, Kerevi, Koriobete and Skelton. If Jones gets 5 picks then either he or Sio would probably be next pick for me. But that is mainly because all bar Porecki (and maybe Faessler) have their own issues throwing so the door is left open for him.
However, to my memory, he hasn’t been included in any squads since he went OS, has he. On that basis it seems unlikely he is in the plans.
Highlander35
Andrew Slack (58)
It ultimately depends on limits. I think in an unrestricted pool of players there's a strong enough argument for him to be included.
But at 4, I think it's Kerevi, Cooper, Skelton & Koirobete, then Foley at 5 and Arnold at 6, and at that point you have almost 20% of your squad playing outside Australia: unless the ongoing call is made that World Cup years are lassez faire I don't think that will be viewed as an acceptable amount.
To put that into perspective: if there are no further injuries or drastic changes in form over the warm up tests, Scotland, despite an open selection policy, will likely only have 9 "non-domestic" players in the RWC training squad under RA rules: 7 of which are likely to be selected, and a further 3 others meet the Dean Mumm rule where they are signed for the upcoming season, of which only 1 is likely to be picked.
But at 4, I think it's Kerevi, Cooper, Skelton & Koirobete, then Foley at 5 and Arnold at 6, and at that point you have almost 20% of your squad playing outside Australia: unless the ongoing call is made that World Cup years are lassez faire I don't think that will be viewed as an acceptable amount.
To put that into perspective: if there are no further injuries or drastic changes in form over the warm up tests, Scotland, despite an open selection policy, will likely only have 9 "non-domestic" players in the RWC training squad under RA rules: 7 of which are likely to be selected, and a further 3 others meet the Dean Mumm rule where they are signed for the upcoming season, of which only 1 is likely to be picked.
Mr Pilfer
Bob Loudon (25)
Banks broke his arm again and I don't think would be in the picture anyway. I think we can manage without Arnold but would like to see Sio there
Eyes and Ears
Bob Davidson (42)
I often wondered whether we could have used Folau as a lineout jumper
He's 1.93M (6'4) and lord knows he can jump and has great hands, I suspect also long arms. He wouldn't be Etzebeth up there, but he'd be a viable option. Whether you'd want him stuck in the middle of a maul or not available in the backline: that's another story!
I still wish they'd consider using someone other than hookers for throwing the ball in (in rugby as a whole, not Wallabies specifically). It will never make sense to me that all three front row don't train this and you don't then you use whomever is better. If James Slipper was an amazing line out thrower it would have saved the Wallabies years of grief.
Same as having a 9 or 15 kick for points. Train them, see how they fare, pick the best guy.
If a hooker is amazing but their throwing is iffy you don't have to bench them either.
dru
Tim Horan (67)
This is the Wallabies thread though and by the time the players get here that kind of decision is baked in. EJ (Eddie Jones) would be off his tree to suddenly include throwing from the backs into his RWC campaign.
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
Maybe he could be a good goal kicker?? Not as silly a suggestion as it sounds. Many years ago England had a hooker who was a really good kicker. His name was John Gray. He switched to league and played for North Sydney in the old NSWRL. He was pretty mobile.
The Ghost of Raelene
Andrew Slack (58)
League Hooker though is different to Rugby. Cameron Smith was a Hooker and is the leading point scorer all time in the NRL. Gray was one of the first kickers to not Toe Poke right? Changed the game completely.
You do see at Club and School Boy level Props throwing into the Line Out quite a bit. It's something that should be encouraged through the development process.
You do see at Club and School Boy level Props throwing into the Line Out quite a bit. It's something that should be encouraged through the development process.
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
Gray was a goal kicker for England in rugby before he switched to league.
It's about players being interchangeable. If you've got a prop that throws the ball into the lineout then the hooker needs to become a lifter. If the hooker has only ever been a thrower then they have an entirely new role to learn.
Then when you sub players during a game players have to switch around again.
While a player can practice throwing on their own to get to a point that they can consistently hit a target, practicing with a full lineout requires an organised session. How much time do you dedicate trying to upskill more players in that role when you've still got to work with the existing hookers who are doing that role?
I don't see it being at all feasible in the professional game.
The Ghost of Raelene
Andrew Slack (58)
Take Tom Robertson off your squad lists.
Torn ACL.
Torn ACL.