The test match is what we have to loseI don't see any reason not to start Donaldson at 10 in this test. After everything else that has gone down, what have we got to lose.
Will Wales also be missing some of their players who play in England?
Unfortunately we have to change a lot with Foley, Kellaway and Paisami all unavailable.It’s been a long year for Dave Rennie’s side and history shows that victory against Wales this weekend is unlikely. Here’s why.www.smh.com.au
Yeah, we want to win this match as you say @Tomthumb
@Dctarget I'd try to change as little as possible. We don't have the ability to chop/change and experiment as was shown v Italy. I'd keep that back three also and slot Hodge in. We know he will get a job done. Can think of it as poor guy but his versatility is what makes him valuable in the current squad.
Yeah TBH I'm not sold on Gleeson entirely either.And you think a rookie with barely half a season of Super rugby behind him can? Pete Samu doesn't hit it up hard like Valetini but is one of the very few Wallaby forwards who consistently makes ground in contact and has the ability to break the line. Give me someone I know over a promising but very inexperienced novice in test match rugby any day.
For the hitups, I can see the load falling on Holloway, and perhaps Frost if they play him a bit wider.
Who moved to fullback when Paisami went off? Was it Wright or Petaia?
Why would Wilson be there if Rugby were healthier? Naisarani I get. But Rennie could've taken Gleeson or Wilson and he took Gleeson.Yeah TBH I'm not sold on Gleeson entirely either.
If the state of rugby wasn't what it is we'd have Naisarani and Wilson lining up to take Valetini's spot. Alas.
I dunno, Ikitau is such a cornerstone for us now, I’d be loath to move him from 13. I’d have Hodge at 12.
I don't have an issue bringing on players from the bench. My question is why do it with 5 minutes to go for what wasn't an injury replacement.
I reckon once you get to about 65 minutes the bench player should either be on the field or your plan should be that they don't get on the field. Maybe extend that out to 70 minutes.
It seems pretty pointless to give someone only 5 minutes on the field and is more likely to be detrimental to that player and the team than the opposite.
You've answered the question in your first sentence. We're looking for someone to replace Valetini's ball running in the middle of the field, not complement him.
Derpus and myself (and potentially others) are suggesting that Gleeson should start because we are sorely lacking ball running ability with the players available.