• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Wallabies v Wales, Principality Stadium, Sun 27th November, 2.15am AEST

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dctarget

John Eales (66)
Rennie has confirmed what others have suggested here, that Wright was chosen over Campbell because of his experience and voice. Makes sense, with Petaia and Nawaqanitawase on the wings, it's an incredibly inexperienced back three with Campbell. Also noting that the starting back three are the back three who played 60 minutes together against Ireland. Makes sense to me.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
Rennie has confirmed what others have suggested here, that Wright was chosen over Campbell because of his experience and voice. Makes sense, with Petaia and Nawaqanitawase on the wings, it's an incredibly inexperienced back three with Campbell. Also noting that the starting back three are the back three who played 60 minutes together against Ireland. Makes sense to me.
"voice" was one of the reasons Ramm kept being selected at the Tahs
 

drewprint

Colin Windon (37)
Just keep Wright on the wing then if you want his voice. Campbell at 15, Petaia on the bench. The horse has bolted, and I hope the named back three have great games, but the logic just doesn’t stack up for mine.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Campbell should be starting 15 imo. The back 3 selected are all strike wingers, Campbell is a fullback... the guy with game nous, the vision and ability to set up those players around him. He also has significantly more experience at 15 than Wright, so you can put that to bed.

One of those 3 should have been on the bench with Jock starting at 15 and controlling the game at the back from the onset. I'd also think Campbell offers more assistance as a 2nd ball player to Donaldson than Wright.

Rennie clearly sees something in Wright beyond his obvious athletic gifts. I hope his persistence pays off in the long run.

I agree with almost everything in this post, except I think Wright is a better 2nd ball player compared to Campbell. I actually think this is one of the big reasons he remains in the squad.

Despite that thought, I would still prefer Campbell, he is just an out and out solid fullback and Wright still makes me nervous every time he touches the ball. I suspect Campbell is better under the high ball too.

I am hoping they get 40mins each with Campbell finishing the game.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Just keep Wright on the wing then if you want his voice. Campbell at 15, Petaia on the bench. The horse has bolted, and I hope the named back three have great games, but the logic just doesn’t stack up for mine.

After last match, Petaia and Marcy Marc are very hard to drop. They were very good in almost all departments.

This might trigger a few, but Petaia and Marcy Marc may even offer more then Koro, it is certainly more balanced as both are very good under the high ball and can also play as second fullbacks.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
Just keep Wright on the wing then if you want his voice. Campbell at 15, Petaia on the bench. The horse has bolted, and I hope the named back three have great games, but the logic just doesn’t stack up for mine.
I honestly don't see Campbell as an upgrade on Wright
 

Dctarget

John Eales (66)
This might trigger a few, but Petaia and Marcy Marc may even offer more then Koro, it is certainly more balanced as both are very good under the high ball and can also play as second fullbacks.
I was waiting for this take. Mark, who has played once for Australia, might be better than Koroibete who was the only Aus named in the World XV, has been capped 50 times, saved entire Wallabies games singlehandedly multiple times and won the John Eales medal.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Just keep Wright on the wing then if you want his voice. Campbell at 15, Petaia on the bench. The horse has bolted, and I hope the named back three have great games, but the logic just doesn’t stack up for mine.

It's been mentioned a few times now, but it's based on how well the three of them worked as a unit last week...

I don't think there was any surprises in selection there for that reason.
 

Rob42

John Solomon (38)
I was waiting for this take. Mark, who has played one for Australia, might be better than Koroibete who was the only Aus named in the World XV, has been capped 50 times, saved entire Wallabies games singlehandedly multiple times and won the John Eales medal.
But Marky Mark (Nawaqanitawase) is better in the air.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
huh? Yeah he does - Harrison was toe to toe with him before he got injured but it's been exclusively Donaldson since then

Will it be exclusively or even primarily Donaldson at 10 next year at the Tahs. I'm not so sure and that worries me. Makes me think it could be a bit of a waste playing him this game.
 

Purce

Jim Clark (26)
Rennie has confirmed what others have suggested here, that Wright was chosen over Campbell because of his experience and voice. Makes sense, with Petaia and Nawaqanitawase on the wings, it's an incredibly inexperienced back three with Campbell. Also noting that the starting back three are the back three who played 60 minutes together against Ireland. Makes sense to me.
But is it? They have played a similar amount of pro rugby games(at super level) and I'd argue that Jock has more of a test match temperament than Tom. Pretty much all of Campbell's appearances have been at 15 where as Wright's are mainly on the wing. I'd argue that the game time at a specialist position like 15 holds more weight than playing test match footy on the wing. I think they're both great players however my thoughts are that Campbell would bring more to the team at 15 than Wright would.

I'd have gone Wright on the sting and Campbell at 15 with Petaia to come off the bench 5 mins in when someone inevitable gets injured.
 

Purce

Jim Clark (26)
I agree with almost everything in this post, except I think Wright is a better 2nd ball player compared to Campbell. I actually think this is one of the big reasons he remains in the squad.

Despite that thought, I would still prefer Campbell, he is just an out and out solid fullback and Wright still makes me nervous every time he touches the ball. I suspect Campbell is better under the high ball too.

I am hoping they get 40mins each with Campbell finishing the game.

Fair points Viking. From what I've seen Jock brings more calmness than Wright though. Wright brings more physicality when he wants to. He does surrender in contact a fair bit which I don't like, the bloke is obviously strong and I'd love for him to drive through contact a lot more than he does.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
I was waiting for this take. Mark, who has played once for Australia, might be better than Koroibete who was the only Aus named in the World XV, has been capped 50 times, saved entire Wallabies games singlehandedly multiple times and won the John Eales medal.

Not saying he is better, just saying they are more balanced wingers.

It's like comparing Jonah Lomu to Ben Smith. Smith obviously much more well-rounded, offers more around the park, but we would all still take Lomu as what he does well is just too good not to pick.
 
Last edited:

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
But is it? They have played a similar amount of pro rugby games(at super level) and I'd argue that Jock has more of a test match temperament than Tom. Pretty much all of Campbell's appearances have been at 15 where as Wright's are mainly on the wing. I'd argue that the game time at a specialist position like 15 holds more weight than playing test match footy on the wing. I think they're both great players however my thoughts are that Campbell would bring more to the team at 15 than Wright would.

I'd have gone Wright on the sting and Campbell at 15 with Petaia to come off the bench 5 mins in when someone inevitable gets injured.

My take on fullback is the same. I think experience in the position trumps a few test matches there.

I don't like the idea of starting both Wright and Campbell in the back-three. It just seems small and a defensive weakness, I think Italy proved that. I would have started Campbell with Wright on the bench.
 

stillmissit

Desmond Connor (43)
My take on fullback is the same. I think experience in the position trumps a few test matches there.

I don't like the idea of starting both Wright and Campbell in the back-three. It just seems small and a defensive weakness, I think Italy proved that. I would have started Campbell with Wright on the bench.
V. It is Wright's defence that worries me. A fullback who can't take down an attacker in a 1-1 is a liability in my book. Although he's smaller I prefer Jock at 15 but I understand the arguments and agree it is a good working group - without a fullback.
 

dru

Tim Horan (67)
I agree with almost everything in this post, except I think Wright is a better 2nd ball player compared to Campbell. I actually think this is one of the big reasons he remains in the squad.

Despite that thought, I would still prefer Campbell, he is just an out and out solid fullback and Wright still makes me nervous every time he touches the ball. I suspect Campbell is better under the high ball too.

I am hoping they get 40mins each with Campbell finishing the game.

Pfft. I've been starting to see some advantage in Wright. That's not one.

This said, Wright, Petaia, Nawaqanitawase > Campbell + 2 of the others.

For now.
 

Derpus

Jason Little (69)
Wright is fast, has an excellent step and is relatively strong in contact.

A good fullback also needs great decision making, good positional awareness, a decent boot, a bit of a distribution game and a good cover tackle. Wright doesnt have any of this (at test level, anyway).
 

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
Rennie has confirmed what others have suggested here, that Wright was chosen over Campbell because of his experience and voice. Makes sense, with Petaia and Nawaqanitawase on the wings, it's an incredibly inexperienced back three with Campbell. Also noting that the starting back three are the back three who played 60 minutes together against Ireland. Makes sense to me.

Reckon Jock would have way more experience than Wright at fullback. He's also a calm head at the back which is what you really want. Not a tempestuous one.

Both have played pretty much the same number of Super Rugby games, having debuted the same year, but obviously Jock has a heap more at fullback (a number with Petaia on the wing).

Wright has more test caps obviously but the same number as test starts at fullback.

Jock is also a couple of years older too.

Rennie is just trying to justify a gut decision.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top