Wallabies 2024

[TSR]

Schmidt’s choice of 9 will have a bearing too. IMO McDermott is the best option there, but Lonergan does have the better pass and is also a strong goal kicker. If Schmidt goes that way it will be easier to pick Gordon.

With regards to Valetini/Wilson I think Wilson is showing at the moment he has plenty of ability play a wider running role and complement Valetini playing in the middle. He is also pretty handy in the lineout. He has good hands and seems to get up easily. But he isn’t on par with guys like Holloway & Wright who have been in excellent form and are both very good on defensive lineouts. I feel like the most likely scenario is Valetini getting the first gig at least but I think Wilson will be a strong contender with guys like Leota and Hooper/Wright/Holloway/Uru for that bench spot (depending on who makes the starting team). At least we are talking about players in form putting their hand up.

To change focus - what would the current power rankings be for lock? In terms of likely Wallaby selection rather than just who is in form at the moment?

Something like -
- Holloway
- Smith
- Frost
- Salakai-Loto
- Uru
- Williams
- Neville
?

 

[Wilson]

Lonergan has generally been a strong goal kicker, but if he's not kicking week to week for his super side it's difficult to make the argument he should start for the wallabies off the back of that skill.

 

[Omar Comin']

Does anyone know (or know where to find) goal kicking stats? It'd be interesting to know the career (and say last 2 year) goal kicking % for each of the potential 10's.

I feel like Gordon has decent talent when it comes to kicking, and that he actually makes an acceptable amount of kicks from the sideline. His problem is he sometimes misses the really easy shots. I'm not sure if this is due to mental lapses or some technical shortcoming, but you'd think this would be something that could be improved easier than if he could never make a challenging kick.

And if you have a 65% kicker who's a good defender, and a 75% kicker who's not, who do you pick?

 

[Wilson]

And if you have a 65% kicker who's a good defender, and a 75% kicker who's not, who do you pick?

At 10? You pick the 75% kicker every day of the week if that and defence is the only difference between them. A bit different if you're comparing a 75% kicker to an 80% or 85% kicker, but 65% is just too low for test match rugby when you've got reasonable alternatives.

 

[Tomikin]

To change focus - what would the current power rankings be for lock? In terms of likely Wallaby selection rather than just who is in form at the moment?

Lock Wallaby selections
- Frost
- Salakai-Loto
- Neville - Smith (same same)
- Uru

See the following two as 6's
- Holloway
- Williams

 

[Tomikin]

Lonergan has generally been a strong goal kicker, but if he's not kicking week to week for his super side it's difficult to make the argument he should start for the wallabies off the back of that skill.

Yeah tough when he doesn't kick to then go straight to kicker, I think his a gun boot but probably doesn't do it enough to be 1st choice Wallaby kicker. I also think Tate's playing much better then him, actually think White is as well atm

 

[Wilson]

To change focus - what would the current power rankings be for lock? In terms of likely Wallaby selection rather than just who is in form at the moment?

Lock Wallaby selections
- Frost
- Salakai-Loto
- Neville - Smith (same same)
- Uru

See the following two as 6's
- Holloway
- Williams

You're bang on with a few of them really competing for the 6 spot from lock, but I'd probably swap Uru and Williams on your lists.

It's those hybrids (alongside the 6/locks like Leota, Hooper, Hanigan and Lee-Warner) that are really pushing for the bench spots in particular, where their ability to cover lock in an emergency is really valuable.

 

[Omar Comin']

At 10? You pick the 75% kicker every day of the week if that and defence is the only difference between them. A bit different if you're comparing a 75% kicker to an 80% or 85% kicker, but 65% is just too low for test match rugby when you've got reasonable alternatives.

75 vs 85 is the same difference as 65 vs 75. How many kick attempts in an average game, less than 10? If it was 10 the expected value of that extra 10% success rate is 2-3 points. I think it's at least arguable that you just pick the best 10 in general play and then work out the goal kicking after that.

 

[Wilson]

75 vs 85 is the same difference as 65 vs 75. How many kick attempts in an average game, less than 10? If it was 10 the expected value of that extra 10% success rate is 2-3 points. I think it's at least arguable that you just pick the best 10 in general play and then work out the goal kicking after that.

It's not just the difference in points you earn from the kicks they both would've taken, there is a flow on effect. Different confidence intervals effect your decision making around taking the 3, and as a result affect the way other teams while police their own discipline in their own half. 75% is more or less standard in international rugby and if an opponent is kicking lower than that the team knows they can go harder at the breakdown and not risk conceding as many points from penalties.

Additionally play makers kicking poorly can often effect their confidence in the rest of their game, particularly younger play makers with a bit more appetite for risk. Even if you feel you've already baked in the drop in percentage when selecting them, that doesn't stop them over playing their hand or getting knocked off their game when they have a bad run of kicks. It happened plenty for someone like Quade who was a relatively good place kicker, I expect it would be just as much a risk for Gordon at the moment.

 

[dusk]

I personally think there is more upside with Gordon at 10, though the goal kicking is a worry because it's critical at test level. Who else could we pick in the back line to cover that requirement?

I really don't see the hype over Gordon, I get he isn't playing behind the best side but as far as I'm aware Donaldson is in a 'worse' team and looks to be the form 10. He's also a somewhat reliable kicker.

 

[Omar Comin']

It's not just the difference in points you earn from the kicks they both would've taken, there is a flow on effect. Different confidence intervals effect your decision making around taking the 3, and as a result affect the way other teams while police their own discipline in their own half. 75% is more or less standard in international rugby and if an opponent is kicking lower than that the team knows they can go harder at the breakdown and not risk conceding as many points from penalties.

Additionally play makers kicking poorly can often effect their confidence in the rest of their game, particularly younger play makers with a bit more appetite for risk. Even if you feel you've already baked in the drop in percentage when selecting them, that doesn't stop them over playing their hand or getting knocked off their game when they have a bad run of kicks. It happened plenty for someone like Quade who was a relatively good place kicker, I expect it would be just as much a risk for Gordon at the moment.

I agree with this, but it actually makes me think 10 is not the ideal position for a goal kicker. 10 is the most important and influential position in general play so it makes more sense to pick the 10 that's best in general play. Maybe we need to think about coaching more wingers and blind side flankers to kick goals.

 

[TSR]

To change focus - what would the current power rankings be for lock? In terms of likely Wallaby selection rather than just who is in form at the moment?

Lock Wallaby selections
- Frost
- Salakai-Loto
- Neville - Smith (same same)
- Uru

See the following two as 6's
- Holloway
- Williams

I won’t be surprised if you are right about Holloway, but I reckon he can play lock at test level. He has all the right attributes IMO and the only down side is maybe a touch shorter than your average lock. But given he does very well in the lineout that doesn’t seem a limitation we should be worried not in his case. In his current form I reckon he’ll be considered there.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think it's at least arguable that you just pick the best 10 in general play and then work out the goal kicking after that.

We did that last year and ended up compromising the team elsewhere to pick a better kicker.

When Gordon's form wasn't outstanding as the 10 he lost his spot.

I agree with this, but it actually makes me think 10 is not the ideal position for a goal kicker. 10 is the most important and influential position in general play so it makes more sense to pick the 10 that's best in general play. Maybe we need to think about coaching more wingers and blind side flankers to kick goals.

Sure, but the situation we have ourselves in at the moment is that the only high level goal kicker in Australia who isn't a 10 is Ryan Lonergan. It absolutely effects Gordon's ability to be selected.

As it stands he needs to be significantly better than the next best option to be the starting 10 because you're probably going to compromise the side elsewhere to pick a goalkicker.

 

[Highlander35]

I wouldn't be picking Gordon to be my first XV stand off if I'm Schmidt. While still playing fairly well, he's not hitting the same highs as last season, and the same sort of issues remain, particularly around goalkicking. Lolesio deserves first crack.

But presuming a reasonably large squad of 40-45, I think he should be in there, and doing heavy work with a kicking consultant and spending time training at 15. Not necessarily to be considered a starting option there, but because the current makeup doesn't really have a Barnes/Giteau/To'omua/Beale/JOC (James O'Connor)/Hodge you can slide from FB, Wing or IC to cover 10, and you may be obligated to carry a second one into the 23.

 

[scrans21]

A lot of chat about whether or not Uru could crack into the Wallabies as a lock despite his size, but it's worth recognising that smaller more mobile locks paired with a big bruiser is the current trend with most of the top teams having adopted it. Tadhg Beirne and Maro Itoje are two prime examples of guys who excel as locks on the international stage whilst being of a size that means they can easily cover 6. It's still early days but to me if Uru can keep up his current form he should rightly be given first crack at lock for the Wallabies, as long as he's paired with a monster in either Skelton or Salakai-Loto. The style of play he brings is basically like having a fourth backrower on the field without sacrificing the physicality you need from your locks. Considering we are at the start of the current world cup cycle it's the perfect time to give someone like Uru a run to see if he has what it takes, especially against Wales and Georgia.

 

[dru]

A lot of chat about whether or not Uru could crack into the Wallabies as a lock despite his size, but it's worth recognising that smaller more mobile locks paired with a big bruiser is the current trend with most of the top teams having adopted it. Tadhg Beirne and Maro Itoje are two prime examples of guys who excel as locks on the international stage whilst being of a size that means they can easily cover 6. It's still early days but to me if Uru can keep up his current form he should rightly be given first crack at lock for the Wallabies, as long as he's paired with a monster in either Skelton or Salakai-Loto. The style of play he brings is basically like having a fourth backrower on the field without sacrificing the physicality you need from your locks. Considering we are at the start of the current world cup cycle it's the perfect time to give someone like Uru a run to see if he has what it takes, especially against Wales and Georgia.

Geez, I really like Uru but he’s got a way to before talking in the same sentence as Itoje.

 

[drewprint]

He'd be an interesting prospect in that loose forward bench role though.

 

[RugbyReg]

Geez, I really like Uru but he’s got a way to before talking in the same sentence as Itoje.

Really? What if the sentence is about locks with more vowels on their name than consonants?

 

[Brumby Runner]

We don't.

My point is that you can't use Valetini playing a lot of 6 at the Brumbies and Wilson playing 8 at the Reds as a reason why they would fit well together in the same team. They're playing largely the same role despite the different jersey numbers.

That is somewhat moot now given they are both playing 8 for their respective Super Rugby side.

But will Rob V continue at 8 when Charlie Cale is fit to resume? Personally, I think so with CC on the bench at least for a while, but it will also be impacted by the availability of locks at the Brumbies. Hooper might well find himself back in the second row if injuries continue. Not that this has a lot of influence on whether Rob V and Harry W play similar roles or not. But it could see Rob playing 6 and being in contention for the 8 spot when the tests come around.

 

[stillmissit]

And with Tom Hooper moving to 6, Rob is playing 8. You can't really have 2 backrowers who can't really jump in the lineout at test level.

I thought Hooper was a jumping option?