Yoda
Colin Windon (37)
Ha. Well, some would say that would 'never' happen, but then again? Would he have got a gig at the Reds if he was Tommy Jones?
Wallabies v Lions - 3rd Test, Accor Stadium, Saturday 2 August
- Thread starter rugbyAU
- Start date
Hogan
Ward Prentice (10)
My backline for Game 3.
Let’s go all out attack which worked very effectively in the 1st half last Saturday but unfortunately the team put the cue in the rack in the 2nd half and only scored 3 points. Way too conservative for mine. Keep doing what was working so well. We have troubled the Lions in all games this tour when we have got the ball to width.
9. McDermott
10. Donaldson
11. Sua’ali’i
12. Paisami (a second ball player and kicking option)
13. Ikitau (back in his rightful position)
14. Jorgensen
15. Wright
21. Gordon
22. Lynagh
23. Pietsch
Let’s go all out attack which worked very effectively in the 1st half last Saturday but unfortunately the team put the cue in the rack in the 2nd half and only scored 3 points. Way too conservative for mine. Keep doing what was working so well. We have troubled the Lions in all games this tour when we have got the ball to width.
9. McDermott
10. Donaldson
11. Sua’ali’i
12. Paisami (a second ball player and kicking option)
13. Ikitau (back in his rightful position)
14. Jorgensen
15. Wright
21. Gordon
22. Lynagh
23. Pietsch
Yoda
Colin Windon (37)
We play that backline from the get go we would be 2 nil up!
The Red Baron
Chilla Wilson (44)
This has been done to death in other thread, and these sorts of ridiculous assertions have continually proven to be false. We get it, you don't like the bloke and you have an axe to grind, but you are repeating the same disingenuous talking points ad nauseam.
Find something else to talk about or at least stop trying to bring this ridiculous nepotism bullshit up and find another, more constructive talking point.
Slim 293
George Smith (75)
Nah, I don't think so...
Ignoto
John Hipwell (52)
It's honestly a backline that you would run in the Autumn 3 test series we have or EOYT.
As a collective unit, I do not think that starting backline has played a single game together.
If you're changing that much in such a short period, you should be leaving Lynagh as is due to the amount of games he's played with Tate and Hunter. But that will go against your narrative.
Yoda
Colin Windon (37)
Red Baron. I actually do think Lynagh is a talented flyhalf. Just not a starting one yet at Test level, when we have another guy that hasn't had a good run of starts, and is pretty handy. As an ex fly half Shute Shield player, I take a keen interest in the Flyhalf role that's all. The position does definitely draw a lot of criticism, and I will admit most of it unfairly. All players reaching the level of Test status are great rugby players. Frustration of us not winning I guess sees us all often comment negatively. So a constructive talking point? The Wallabies need to really concentrate on lifting another gear from the 30 minute mark until half time and then come out in the next ten after halftime at the same level. I'd like to see less pick and drives on attack and look to getting the ball wide quickly to our weapons such as Sua'ali'i,Jorgo and Wright more. That's where we look the best
and that is playing to our strengths.
TSR
Steve Williams (59)
Of course there was particular interest in him because of his name and the connection with the Reds. And also the fact that Michael was his dad was no doubt a big factor in him wanting to play for the Wallabies so being willing to travel across the World and come here.
But are you honestly going to add your name to a suggestion that Kiss & Schmidt - two pro coaches with more than 20 yrs experience, plus Thorn and everyone else involved are prepared to stake their reputation on picking someone at Super/Test level because their dad was a Wallaby. Were Harlequins Rugby doing the same. Is Italian rugby doing the same with Louis? Why would these people give a fuck? Why didn’t Tim Horan’s son get a contract with the Reds? I’m sure there are others. Do you realise how stupid that sounds. I don’t agree with everything you write but you seem like a perfectly decent rugby fan. Why would you put your moniker to this shit, even on an online forum?
Running_rugby_1954
Vay Wilson (31)
I’ve been involved in selecting rep teams myself, and while selection should always be based on merit, it’s naive to think that background and connections don’t sometimes play a role - subconsciously or otherwise.
When you know a player is someone’s son, especially someone well-known, it naturally brings a level of attention. You start to watch them more closely, and whether you mean to or not, you’re more likely to notice the positives. That kind of familiarity can give them an edge others of similar ability might not get.
I’m not saying that’s the sole reason anyone gets picked, or that Kiss, Schmidt, Thorn or others are making poor decisions -but to deny the influence of a name or legacy in elite sport is to ignore a long and very real history of how perception and opportunity often intersect.
It’s not necessarily about nepotism - it’s about privilege, profile, and the reality of how humans assess talent. And then the reality is that will come with more scrutiny on the selection based on how humans perceive bias.
It is simple psychology.
Hogan
Ward Prentice (10)
A fair point re combinations as successful teams have great combinations and years and years of playing time together. I simply chose a backline with a view to all out attack.
Lynagh will only get better with time but I read somewhere that he only ran for 4 metres in 80 mins last weekend. Imo all your backs need to be running threats to keep the defence guessing. Lynagh simply shovelled the ball all night putting undue pressure on his centres. Now that may have been the gameplan? but standing still and shovelling the ball plays right into the hands (and shoulders
) of the opposition's defence. Having said all of that coach Schmidt might prefer a 10 to simply catch and pass which is his perogative.
Running_rugby_1954
Vay Wilson (31)
And to build on that - when you consider that Les Kiss is now the successor to Joe Schmidt and they’re known to be close professionally, it’s natural for people to perceive there may be influence or alignment in selection preferences, whether or not that’s actually the case.
The challenge is that once a player with a high-profile surname like Lynagh is fast-tracked and then performs well below expectation in his first two starts, it reinforces the perception of favouritism or nepotism. It becomes a self-fulfilling cycle in the public eye.
What’s interesting is that the exact same game footage leads different people to opposite conclusions. Some will say he played poorly, others will highlight promising moments. But both groups are responding from their own cognitive bias - those wary of legacy selections will see errors, those supportive will see potential. Either way, it entrenches their existing worldview.
That’s not to say either side is wrong - just that it’s important to recognise how perceptions form, and why transparency and consistency in selection matters, especially when reputations and relationships are part of the picture.
The challenge is that once a player with a high-profile surname like Lynagh is fast-tracked and then performs well below expectation in his first two starts, it reinforces the perception of favouritism or nepotism. It becomes a self-fulfilling cycle in the public eye.
What’s interesting is that the exact same game footage leads different people to opposite conclusions. Some will say he played poorly, others will highlight promising moments. But both groups are responding from their own cognitive bias - those wary of legacy selections will see errors, those supportive will see potential. Either way, it entrenches their existing worldview.
That’s not to say either side is wrong - just that it’s important to recognise how perceptions form, and why transparency and consistency in selection matters, especially when reputations and relationships are part of the picture.
JRugby2
Nev Cottrell (35)
For how long and in what state? i have a bone to pick
Running_rugby_1954
Vay Wilson (31)
If we’re being honest about his performances so far, there are some clear concerns - none of which help dispel the perception of preferential treatment.
In both games, he’s looked hesitant. Hes missed crucial opportunity to kick the ball out and relieve pressure. He’s dropped a couple of routine catches, and when passing, he often looks static - almost like he’s catching and shoveling rather than directing play. There’s no deception, no real threat to the line, and his kicking - both for touch and for goal - has been inconsistent at best.
These aren't small details - they’re fundamental areas of responsibility for a 10 at this level. And when someone with a famous name is picked ahead of others who might offer more dynamism or control, it's understandable that people start to question whether he’s there on merit or on surname.
Again, everyone sees what they want to see. Supporters will point to his composure or ‘potential’ - but for most observers, especially neutral ones, the early evidence doesn’t back up the selection. And that’s why the conversation about perception and bias isn’t going away. The reds posters calling any conversation about it as ridiculous need to consider their own bias in the context of what is taking place and the impact this will have on the team and the individual.
In both games, he’s looked hesitant. Hes missed crucial opportunity to kick the ball out and relieve pressure. He’s dropped a couple of routine catches, and when passing, he often looks static - almost like he’s catching and shoveling rather than directing play. There’s no deception, no real threat to the line, and his kicking - both for touch and for goal - has been inconsistent at best.
These aren't small details - they’re fundamental areas of responsibility for a 10 at this level. And when someone with a famous name is picked ahead of others who might offer more dynamism or control, it's understandable that people start to question whether he’s there on merit or on surname.
Again, everyone sees what they want to see. Supporters will point to his composure or ‘potential’ - but for most observers, especially neutral ones, the early evidence doesn’t back up the selection. And that’s why the conversation about perception and bias isn’t going away. The reds posters calling any conversation about it as ridiculous need to consider their own bias in the context of what is taking place and the impact this will have on the team and the individual.
Thanks mate. Yeah Ireland with more depth.
Yoda
Colin Windon (37)
Running Rugby. Eloquently put. My thoughts exactly.
KOB1987
John Eales (66)
This, and the ridiculous caterpillar maul in the 'pic needs a caption' thread, and deliberately collapsing scrums, and the stupid not forming a maul play that sometimes gets played off lineouts, let alone some of Rassie's creations, and many more, show that much of the game nowadays is about exploiting loopholes in the laws instead of actually playing rugby. Which, to me at least, is not why I watch the game and is problematic. Like it or not, this is where league has the advantage, they have simple, easy to adjudicate rules and disputes can usually be resolved by watching one replay, not 50 of them. On the other hand, rugby's advantage is it's complexities and every play being a competition, and that is why it enjoy it so much more. I don't have an answer and I'm in no position to implement it if I did, but it's a problem that's not going away anytime soon.
Yoda
Colin Windon (37)
Pick and driving relentlessly going nowhere is my bugbare Hardly exciting stuff.
TSR
Steve Williams (59)
Serous question - selecting at what level?
Who you know opens doors in every single industry. Rugby is clearly the same. I don’t doubt Sam Cordingley wasn’t running the rule over every young 10 playing in the UK. I don’t doubt that through junior ranks sone kids aren’t benefiting from being from a rugby family. And I don’t doubt some of those guys get benefit down the track from getting an early foot in the door.
There are several enormous steps from there though to him being picked for the Wallabies. That sort of stuff may get you some club jerseys or junior rep - it doesn’t get you in the Wallabies.
I’m not suggesting coaches always get it right. And, whilst I think the level of criticism from some is regrettable Lynagh is going to have to live with it. (I still raise my eyebrows at the suggestion he isn’t getting enough scrutiny). For the record before the series it was my view that they should pick Donaldson - not because I thought he was a better player but because I was worried about Lynagh’s lack of experience.
But I just think it’s really poor form some of this rubbish that is being rolled out.
Running_rugby_1954
Vay Wilson (31)
Appreciate the thoughtful reply - we’re probably closer in thinking than it seems.
I agree: knowing the right people opens doors in every industry, rugby included. I’ve seen it firsthand, and I don’t think there’s anything inherently sinister about that - until it starts to affect selections at the elite level without performance to back it up. That’s where perception matters.
No one’s saying a famous surname gets you a Wallabies jersey by default. But when someone with that surname is elevated quickly and then delivers hesitant, error-prone performances, it inevitably feeds that perception. Not because people want to tear him down - but because the standard is (and should be) high.
Bias works both ways. Some will overpraise because of the name, others will over-scrutinise. But right now, based on what we’ve seen, it’s fair to question whether the performances justify the opportunity. That’s not rubbish - it’s part of holding high-performance environments accountable.
Spamnoodle
Ted Thorn (20)
If you couch experts could get behind a young player instead of trying to tear them down maybe we'll get one to stick around long enough to become as good as Finn Russell has become.
I've been around long enough to see this happening to every young Aussie 10 since Larkham. Pull ya fucking heads in!