Wallaby 31 players for 2015 RWC

[Tomikin]

I'm not sure anyone (maybe 1 poster??) seriously suggested removing Kuridrani from 13 and putting Folau there provided both were fit and firing, and still the outrage continues that anyone should suggest anyone else could play 13. Maybe. Possibly.
To recap - Kuridrani is out for many weeks with a shoulder injury. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is yet to return. Both will need to regain match fitness and form. Speight has exactly 1 game at 13 and does well, so he should be considered a back-up (booked his ticket on the basis of it apparently, eh Slim 293? ); Godwin has 1 good game at 13 so he's OK. It's beyond stupid apparently to even theorise that Folau could ever play 13, but fine to nominate other rookies in that position. I think it would be nice to know all the potential options in a RWC year. Options if players are injured on tour. Options if players get subbed in a game.
I just can't see the problem some people have with considering possibilities without getting all outraged that their favourite 13 is being discriminated against. Somehow. Or that it's beyond stupid.

Only because it weakens fullback and While Izzy is a great footy player his not a natural Union player. Slim said Speight is going to play there and may add a string to his bow and we have other good wingers.

Sent from my D6503 using Forum Fiend v1.3.1.

 

[KOB1987]

You blokes place too much emphasis on what number is actually on the back of the jerseys. Cheika operates a different backline in defense as he does in attack for the Tahs and it's likely we will see variations like this in the Wallabies.

For example, the numbers on the teamsheet would be:
10. Foley
12. To'omua
13. TK
15. Izzy

But I'll bet my bottom dollar we'll see them set out on the field at some point like this:
10. To'omua
12. TK
13. Izzy
15. Foley

It could just be a variation based on field position and/or who we are playing.

 

[cyclopath]

Only because it weakens fullback and While Izzy is a great footy player his not a natural Union player. Slim said Speight is going to play there and may add a string to his bow and we have other good wingers.

Sent from my D6503 using Forum Fiend v1.3.1.

Slim said, so that seals it I guess, that should be the only option to be explored. Anyway I give up.

 

[Tomikin]

[quote uid=11026 name="Tomikin" post=729567]Only because it weakens fullback and While Izzy is a great footy player his not a natural Union player. Slim said Speight is going to play there and may add a string to his bow and we have other good wingers.

Sent from my D6503 using Forum Fiend v1.3.1.

Slim said, so that seals it I guess, that should be the only option to be explored. Anyway I give up.[/quote]

Don't take it personally mate, you took him out of context. And all I said was that we don't want to weaken fullback to cover 13. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and TK will be their if not Izzy and Speight become options.

Sent from my D6503 using Forum Fiend v1.3.1.

 

[Slim 293]

I'm not sure anyone (maybe 1 poster??) seriously suggested removing Kuridrani from 13 and putting Folau there provided both were fit and firing, and still the outrage continues that anyone should suggest anyone else could play 13. Maybe. Possibly.
To recap - Kuridrani is out for many weeks with a shoulder injury. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is yet to return. Both will need to regain match fitness and form. Speight has exactly 1 game at 13 and does well, so he should be considered a back-up (booked his ticket on the basis of it apparently, eh Slim 293? ); Godwin has 1 good game at 13 so he's OK. It's beyond stupid apparently to even theorise that Folau could ever play 13, but fine to nominate other rookies in that position. I think it would be nice to know all the potential options in a RWC year. Options if players are injured on tour. Options if players get subbed in a game.
I just can't see the problem some people have with considering possibilities without getting all outraged that their favourite 13 is being discriminated against. Somehow. Or that it's beyond stupid.

I think someone has overreacted to something that wasn't said...........

 

[Gnostic]

I think someone has overreacted to something that wasn't said.....

Yes, but it's been fun.

 

[BDA]

I must say I thought Speight was impressive in his first game at 13. Looking forward to seeing whether he can continue to impress at 13 until TK returns. I do like the idea of having him as an option at 13. He does have that ability to bust tackles that i like in a 13, and with the options we have on the wing, I wouldn't mind him moving in one, if injuries require it. Folau is obviously another option, for the same reason, but personally I'd like to see him stay at 15 if possible. He's our only player that's really dominant under the high ball, and for that reason alone i like him at the back on defence

 

[Godfrey]

I really prefer the TK, Kerevi* and apparently now Speight style of 13 that can hit it up strong and put people away with an offload if need be, particularly with a more distributive 12 in To'omua. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is good but is generally just going to go to ground with the ball. If he's not offering the penetration he used to then he's just rugby's Brent Tate.

*Not proposing Kerevi right now (one day), just that style.

 

[Brumbieman]

You blokes place too much emphasis on what number is actually on the back of the jerseys. Cheika operates a different backline in defense as he does in attack for the Tahs and it's likely we will see variations like this in the Wallabies.

For example, the numbers on the teamsheet would be:
10. Foley
12. To'omua
13. TK
15. Izzy

But I'll bet my bottom dollar we'll see them set out on the field at some point like this:
10. To'omua
12. TK
13. Izzy
15. Foley

It could just be a variation based on field position and/or who we are playing.

I cant think of a better way, to have a backline that is confused about their correct position and gets exposed very badly by a team that can change it's gameplan to exploit that.

If you're a 12, 13 or whatever, that's your god damn position. We will never get any higher than an average third until we start rewarding specialisation and long term experience in ONE position.

FFS Nonu never moves from 12, Smith never moves from 13, Savea is a wing and Aaron Smith never moves from 9.

Enough of average versatility, more of unyielding specialisation.

 

[wamberal]

Not much point comparing us with the Darkness, old chap. They have strength in depth, we don't.

They can pick specialists because they have them, in sufficient depth and quality. They also have a very strong third tier competition where players have to learn their craft against very strong competition.

We don't.

That is why we have to be creative - both in our selections, and in our strategies and tactics.

We used to be able to match it with the buggers, pretty much man for man. That was then, this is now.

 

[Braveheart81]

I cant think of a better way, to have a backline that is confused about their correct position and gets exposed very badly by a team that can change it's gameplan to exploit that.

If you're a 12, 13 or whatever, that's your god damn position. We will never get any higher than an average third until we start rewarding specialisation and long term experience in ONE position.

FFS Nonu never moves from 12, Smith never moves from 13, Savea is a wing and Aaron Smith never moves from 9.

Enough of average versatility, more of unyielding specialisation.

I think you two got your wires crossed.

I think KOB was just saying that at some point in general play our backline will not be lined out in order (indeed you'd probably expect that at most times aside from off set piece).

The hallmarks of the best teams whether that is the All Blacks at test level or numerous Super Rugby sides is that all 15 players can do their job in attack with ball in hand. The best teams will still score a try with a big overlap even if a couple of those players are front rowers.

I agree with you that we want as many of our players playing the same position week in week out to become specialists but part of being a good player is being able to contribute in general play wherever you are on the field.

Nonu always wears the 12 jersey but to say that he is always standing one pass away from the 10 would be completely inaccurate.

 

[KOB1987]

I would venture to say that the ONLY times during a game everyone is aligned in their 'correct' positions are at the times that the ball goes in to a non-centrefield scrum and a 7 man lineout. I'll take the player who can play 12 OR 13 any day over the one who can only play 12, all other things being equal.

I think the crux of this specific argument is the 12, and in this case Matt To'omua. As someone has already pointed out, the bloke that is effectively going to be in charge of the Wallabies back line is the same bloke that won't play him at 12 for the Brumbies.

 

[Brumbieman]

I think you two got your wires crossed.

I think KOB was just saying that at some point in general play our backline will not be lined out in order (indeed you'd probably expect that at most times aside from off set piece).

The hallmarks of the best teams whether that is the All Blacks at test level or numerous Super Rugby sides is that all 15 players can do their job in attack with ball in hand. The best teams will still score a try with a big overlap even if a couple of those players are front rowers.

I agree with you that we want as many of our players playing the same position week in week out to become specialists but part of being a good player is being able to contribute in general play wherever you are on the field.

Nonu always wears the 12 jersey but to say that he is always standing one pass away from the 10 would be completely inaccurate.

I mean that I'm sick of teams going into a game with an actual plan to have people switching positions in attack and defence etc.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Nonu always wears the 12 jersey but to say that he is always standing one pass away from the 10 would be completely inaccurate.

And how many tries has Read scored over the years standing/running on the wing?

 

[wamberal]

The Darkness can call on two or three good half-backs, who all have good, fast, passes, and who can all execute a box kick. Radical stuff, I know.

They also have several fly halves who can all kick the bloody ball, out of hand, and from the spot. Stunning stuff!

Their front rows can scrum (except for the Crock), their locks are tough and good at the set pieces. Their back rows -' again, they could pick two sets of back rowers, maybe three, who can all do the job.

The back three is maybe their strongest area at the moment.


Nonu or SBW? Not a bad choice to have to make. 13 is an area where they are slightly weaker comparatively, but their two best can both play, tend not to drop the ball, know how and when to pass, and can tackle effectively.

They can do the simple stuff well. We cannot. That is why Cheika has to throw caution to the winds, and go for broke.


What that means in practice, I do not know. But I do know that if the same tired old (and young) faces are on the plane I for one will not bother getting my hopes up.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The Darkness can call on two or three good half-backs, who all have good, fast, passes, and who can all execute a box kick. Radical stuff, I know.

They also have several fly halves who can all kick the bloody ball, out of hand, and from the spot. Stunning stuff!

Their front rows can scrum (except for the Crock), their locks are tough and good at the set pieces. Their back rows -' again, they could pick two sets of back rowers, maybe three, who can all do the job.

The back three is maybe their strongest area at the moment.


Nonu or SBW? Not a bad choice to have to make. 13 is an area where they are slightly weaker comparatively, but their two best can both play, tend not to drop the ball, know how and when to pass, and can tackle effectively.

They can do the simple stuff well. We cannot. That is why Cheika has to throw caution to the winds, and go for broke.


What that means in practice, I do not know. But I do know that if the same tired old (and young) faces are on the plane I for one will not bother getting my hopes up.

I think your comments are generally on the ball, except for the ABs' props. Not only Crockett, but as far as I can see, Ben Franks and McIntosh also have scrummaging problems. Front row looks to me to be their weakest spots (maybe their only weak spots).

 

[Marcelo]

Front row looks to me to be their weakest spots (maybe their only weak spots).

Yeah, that's good for Europeans, Saffers and Argies. Wallabies can't take advantage of that

 

[KOB1987]

Their front rows can scrum (except for the Crock), their locks are tough and good at the set pieces. Their back rows -' again, they could pick two sets of back rowers, maybe three, who can all do the job.

Meanwhile we have to contemplate playing our best 6 at lock to compensate for the inefficiencies of our 'specialists'....

 

[fatprop]

Meanwhile we have to contemplate playing our best 6 at lock to compensate for the inefficiencies of our 'specialists'..

We lack athletic, jumping locks. I have no issue seeing Fardy finishing a session at lock with say Huggers coming on at 6.

I would be concerned to see him start at lock

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[Wilson]

There are some games it might work, but Fardy shifting to lock when our reserve tighthead is on the field against England sounds like a nightmare situation for us.