Wallabies v Springboks - Suncorp, Brisbane, 10th September 2016

[Braveheart81]

When the team announced is posted on the front page on Thursday look how many comments are made complaining about Dean Mumm's selection on the bench. If he goes a step further and gets named in the starting team the volume and tone of comments will be much greater.

That's despite the fact that objectively he's been one of our better players this test season.

 

[KOB1987]

When the team announced is posted on the front page on Thursday look how many comments are made complaining about Dean Mumm's selection on the bench. If he goes a step further and gets named in the starting team the volume and tone of comments will be much greater.

That's despite the fact that objectively he's been one of our better players this test season.

Yeah I know. I did ponder on the fact that it wouldn't be received particularly well. That said, I don't think Cheika really gives a fuck about the sewer pit on the GAGR front page after team announcements.

http://www.rugby.com.au/News/2016/09/07/07/53/Mumm-stat-standout

 

[gel]

I'm getting the impression that ticket sales might have been a little slow to this match.

The ARU have not done wonders for marketing this match, but the QRU's utter destruction of the reds has certainly killed off a lot of interest in the sport as a whole.

(no one in my office even new there was a test on this weekend - there is simply no awareness of the sport anymore.)

 

[BarneySF]

He was given the opportunity and he put in a forgettable performance...

The Fardy-Pooper was installed soon afterwards and there was no need for him in the squad.

IIRC a kick ahead in Bled game spelled the death knell - at least was symbolic of an overall poor performance

 

[Slim 293]

There certainly wasn't any objection back then for Higgers not receiving more game time and being left out of the RWC squad..........

It's complete historical revisionism for anyone to now suggest that it was wrong.

 

[Twoilms]

Whether or not the Pooper is succesful is in no way determinative of the Wobs performances, at all, in any way. We have a poor captain, a front row lacking work ethic, terrible locks in every facet, no wingers, not a single player capable of kicking out of hand, a 70% at best goal kicker, no genuine 8 on the bench who can cut the mustard (no, McCalman cannot), no 12 and in a more general sense, no tactical nous or creativity.

The Pooper are two of our best three players. We only lose a 'genuine 8', whatever that is, if we actually had one to put in. Timani is neither an 8 nor test level. Why don't we try fixing the other 12 problem positions before we decide the Pooper has failed.

 

[Viking]

In sport, as in life, that's generally the wrong approach. Success comes from getting better at things, not from trying new things. The best new thing to try is better execution. The worst way to improve execution is major change. With a few exceptions, where we simply lack players of sufficient quality, we pretty much know what our best team is. That team has to perform better.

This is a great point and is exactly why I'm against the Pooper. Its the best it can currently be. It can't get any better.

Hooper is never going to be great at the line-out, his height will always make him an okay option at best. His weight means he will never be that bullocking number 8. Whereas Timani has more potential.

So I'm terms of improving execution - wouldn't it be easier, or more importantly, simpler to train an 8 to execute the role of an 8 rather then getting two 7's to execute all the roles of a 7 and 8?

Improving execution not only in the most efficient way, but also sustainable way should be considered. What I mean by that is training your 7's to play a certain way and training your 8's to play a certain way - then if either gets injured you simply slot in the next best who is also training in the same way!

One injury to Hooper/Pocock and their goes the entire structure of the forward pack. Line-outs will change, scrum will change, general play will change.

Hooper plays wide, but If Poey is injured he should switch to playing a tighter game - except he's so used to playing wide it's become his natural game so as soon as another 8 comes in eg McCalman, problems arise.

Don't you think that it is fairly disruptive to team patterns? rather then just replacing one player with another instead of shifting around players and patterns.

Sure we can get the best players on the field, but there also needs to be balance - like not play the Pooper every single god damn game. Why not try using it in the last 30mins?

 

[PaarlBok]

Ysterbeth creating history, youngest Bok to get a half century. Must be special for a lock

 

[upthereds#!]

A world XV starter. will be for many years to come. What a weapon and benchmark for enforcer locks around the world. Oh and is a lineout stealing kingpin also thanks to his ability to get in the air so quick.

 

[Joe Blow]

Whether or not the Pooper is succesful is in no way determinative of the Wobs performances, at all, in any way. We have a poor captain, a front row lacking work ethic, terrible locks in every facet, no wingers, not a single player capable of kicking out of hand, a 70% at best goal kicker, no genuine 8 on the bench who can cut the mustard (no, McCalman cannot), no 12 and in a more general sense, no tactical nous or creativity.

The Pooper are two of our best three players. We only lose a 'genuine 8', whatever that is, if we actually had one to put in. Timani is neither an 8 nor test level. Why don't we try fixing the other 12 problem positions before we decide the Pooper has failed.

I'm not sure i agree with that. The reason we were totally outclassed by the ABs was that we were outmuscled up front, at the set piece, at the breakdown and in the collisions. We had very little go forward and almost no good clean front foot ball for the backs. Putting out a smaller pack with one less genuine lineout option and/or ball carrier had a lot to to do with that.
Certainly Hooper and Pocock are pretty much always our best alongside Folau but it does not mean they have to play every minute of every game. We have had a history of having multiple test 7s at the same time but have rarely started both at the same time successfully over any period of time. Sure it has worked well at times but it is not difficult for more conventional packs to counter it when they know whats coming.
Where it does have a place is at the back end of games. NZ have Cane and Savea on for the last 20-30 minutes these days so they can up the tempo and defend their line ferociously.
Funnily enough it may be more effective against a side likes the Boks.

 

[Marcelo]

(no one in my office even new there was a test on this weekend - there is simply no awareness of the sport anymore.)

Really?? Are all of them Broncos and Lions supporters?

 

[Brumby Jack]

Bokke

15: Johan Goosen 14: Bryan Habana 13: Jesse Kriel 12: Juan De Jongh 11: Francios Hougaard 10: Elton Jantjies 9: Faf de Klerk 8: Warren Whiteley 7: Oupa Mohojo 6: Francois Louw 5: Eben Etzebeth 4: Lood De Jager 3: Lourens Adriaanse 2: Adriaan Strauss 1: Tendai Mtawarira

Replacements: 16: Bongi Mbonambi 17: Steven Kitshoff 18: Trevor Nyakana 19: Pieter-Steph Du Toit 20: Franco Mostert 21: Jaco Kriel 22: Morne Steyn 23: Lionel Mapoe

 

[PiXeL_Ninja]

Easy Win for your boys. We cannot compete with political interference. No credible coaches want to be hamstrung by having to select a team based on predefined number of players of colour.

Instead of blooding Malcolm Marx at reserve hooker and allowing him to gain experience, we have to carry a complete passenger. Same goes for our blindside. Our best Centre (statistically from Super rugby is back in SA playing Currie Cup)

Our Assistant (backline) coach's CV includes 1 year with the Kings as a backline coach. Such talent, such knowledge.

RIP Bok rugby

 

[gel]

Really?? Are all of them Broncos and Lions supporters?

Not all, no.

 

[fatprop]

There certainly wasn't any objection back then for Higgers not receiving more game time and being left out of the RWC squad....

It's complete historical revisionism for anyone to now suggest that it was wrong.

Higgers has\had the same issues as Holloway, their best work is running on the fridges, and while laudable, we have a coach who needs\wants\expects more consistent effort in defense & grunt work cleaning out than either will consistently provide.

 

[fatprop]

Easy Win for your boys. We cannot compete with political interference. No credible coaches want to be hamstrung by having to select a team based on predefined number of players of colour.

Instead of blooding Malcolm Marx at reserve hooker and allowing him to gain experience, we have to carry a complete passenger. Same goes for our blindside. Our best Centre (statistically from Super rugby is back in SA playing Currie Cup)

Our Assistant (backline) coach's CV includes 1 year with the Kings as a backline coach. Such talent, such knowledge.

RIP Bok rugby

You guys have your best attacking 10 for years being hamstrung by a coach who hasn't had an idea how to play expansive rugby in his life time

 

[Dave Beat]

Game one - attitude, didn't have any. Our prep was on the training park, I've been told the AB's had 2 games.

Game two - attitude, we cared more about that than playing rugby. I have no idea how many times we hit 7 plus phases, or how many times we crossed the ad-line consecetively so we had real go forward ball.

They play different games, and are consistently our better performers. BUT, having them both what are we missing and is that missed more?
> Height - yes, are we loosing our games because of height, we are loosing the pill which is effecting the possession stats, you need the pill to score tries. So looking a little further

So lets go back to the June tests, lost all 3 - against an English team that was on a good winning streak, that had stability, game plan, and endeavors. They new what they wanted, and they had a mission.

So is our problem confusion, I'm a bit confused.
Scary thought, but if i was coach - well I'm not so lucky i don't have to continue.

Lastly
Last year I thought Pockock was contributing more to the team.
This year i think Hooper is contributing more to the team.
So if it was either or now, yeah I'd go Hooper.
But, that may only be because the AB's nulified him, and completely took him out of the game.

 

[TOCC]

2 combinations I don't want to see this week:

7. Hooper
8. Pocock

&

10. Cooper
12. Foley

 

[Dan54]

2 combinations I don't want to see this week:

7. Hooper
8. Pocock

&

10. Cooper
12. Foley

By the sound of Ceika last night, it 2 combos we going to see this week TOCC

 

[TOCC]

They could be described as 'treading water' selections...