• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Wallaby 31 players for 2015 RWC

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
Its funny that even though it has been mentioned numerous times, Argentina has only taken two Hooker to each of the World Cups and the hysterical debate doesn't touch their decision. To my eye it is an example of the reputation of the Australian Scrum again coming into play. It looks like no matter what actual results are produced the perception of Australian teams acting to the detriment of the set piece is just going to hang around and taint every single decision.
 

No4918

John Hipwell (52)
Its funny that even though it has been mentioned numerous times, Argentina has only taken two Hooker to each of the World Cups and the hysterical debate doesn't touch their decision. To my eye it is an example of the reputation of the Australian Scrum again coming into play. It looks like no matter what actual results are produced the perception of Australian teams acting to the detriment of the set piece is just going to hang around and taint every single decision.

That did not enter my thoughts at all when I was critical of the decision. Of course other countries have done it, and is it any wonder that an Aus rugby site isn't concerned about the Argies not doing it? Wales also has two hookers and Gatland was open about the risk of doing so. To my knowledge Cheika has not commented at all about the decision. I think you are stretching on all counts taking this line of argument.
 

RedsHappy

Tony Shaw (54)
I think Hanson will be "holidaying" in the UK during the RWC and will be available if one of the two squad hookers are crocked.

I certainly hope L Gill is as well.

I've said before: if Poey goes down, or Hooper, I don't think we've got the right essential skills in the 31 to adequately replace them without very high risk that our breakdown capability is dangerously weakened vs the best RWC teams.
 

KOB1987

John Eales (66)
I certainly hope L Gill is as well.

I've said before: if Poey goes down, or Hooper, I don't think we've got the right essential skills in the 31 to adequately replace them without very high risk that our breakdown capability is dangerously weakened vs the best RWC teams.
I'm sure he is the next 7 in line, but he is better off staying here playing NRC. He doesn't need to be requisitioned as readily as Hanson.
 

Jagman

Trevor Allan (34)
I'm sure he is the next 7 in line, but he is better off staying here playing NRC. He doesn't need to be requisitioned as readily as Hanson.
I suspect one George Smith is ahead of him and already in England.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Highlander35

Steve Williams (59)
If any player went down after the Fiji game, unless it was a prop or a Scrum half, Hanson would be in I reckon.

The teams been selected specifically to counter the playing 3 games in 11 days. With Fardy and Mumm Capable of playing lock and 6, they can be a backrower down without much issue, and with a buttload of backs, outside or otherwise, one of them going down wouldn't require external coverage.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
That did not enter my thoughts at all when I was critical of the decision. Of course other countries have done it, and is it any wonder that an Aus rugby site isn't concerned about the Argies not doing it? Wales also has two hookers and Gatland was open about the risk of doing so. To my knowledge Cheika has not commented at all about the decision. I think you are stretching on all counts taking this line of argument.


Chieka has commented briefly. Ladesma commented extensively.

As for making it a stretch, I don't think so, have a look at the English sites and the comment is all Australian focussed about the risks of only carrying two hookers. Very little mention of the Welsh and no mention of the Argentines. Is it reaching to think there is a reason why that focus is?
 

Dai bando

Charlie Fox (21)
I suspect the two hooker saga is because you might have struggled in that area before, but your coaches must have talked it through and opted for cover elsewhere,
I did say earlier that we have only two hookers but, it seems Jarvis one of our props can play hooker too,
Looking forward to it, in fact I cant wait.
 

hammertimethere

Trevor Allan (34)
The difference between our gamble and Wales' is that they have Richard bloody Hibbard in camp within 3 hours or so if one of their hookers has a sniffle
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
It's a stupid risk. But absolutely no less stupid for Wales or Fiji.

But somebody else being moronic doesn't justify your own stupidity.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
It's a stupid risk. But absolutely no less stupid for Wales or Fiji.

But somebody else being moronic doesn't justify your own stupidity.


No, it is a calculated risk that has been clearly detailed to be not unusual in a RWC squads over the years.

And with all calculated risks, they get to look like geniuses if it works or fools if it doesn't

But that is why they get paid the big money, to make those decisions; and they will live by those decisions

But personally, I think it is a side show, having a third hooker in the squad is unlikely to win us the RWC or even win us a game; no matter how many outrageous scenarios we can devise
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Ok, you know more than Mario Ledesma (4 World Cups)

Being a good player absolutely does not mean somebody is a good coach.

How insightful is some of the commentary from the Fox Sports commentary team for example?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gel
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
FP, Cheika thinks of his bench as "finishers". Any time the term is mentioned people south of the Tweed jizz their pants. This risk affects the bench in the case of one minor injury, and leaves you planning not to replace your hooker.

We have 2 hookers. One has missed 50% of the tests since his debut, the other about 33%. Both have averaged playing less than 60 minutes per game all season.

So now in the event of a very likely injury you are going to expect a guy who hasn't played 80 all year at Super Rugby level to do so at test level, or you lose work rate around the ground, line out and potentially hurt the scrum due to players shuffling out of position (I'm sure that Sio, Moore, Kepu is a strong row than Slipper, Sio, Kepu for example).

And what for? To apparently have 2 full teams for opposed training. First game is played and like every game, a couple of guys pick up niggles and they can't train anyway. There goes your whole benefit.

Either that or it it's about backing up for short turn arounds your still stretching both the hookers anyway because neither have been 80 minute players recently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top