• 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.

Waratahs V Force - Superugby Rd 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Given that Ben Seymour isn't considered ready now, he shouldn't have been signed. If there were any doubts over Ripia, which there were, Harvey should have been signed in Seymour's place. Harvey would have also made a good cover option for Cam Shepherd too.

Excellent post. I was surprised that Seymour was given a contract when his performances for the Junior Tahs a year ago were unexceptional and some who saw Manly play more than I did, held a similar opinion of his play for them. I said at the time:

Well done to Ben Seymour for getting a spot at the Force. He's done well for a fellow who has just turned 21. I wouldn't be putting him on the park too soon because he still has to learn how to run a back line at the Grade level.

The rebuttal was that Stannard could play there, as he did in 2011, and so could Fairbanks; therefore they were good enough back up for Ripia. It was a fair comment, though if they wanted to give a young flyhalf a contract they could have given it to Perth local, Kyle Godwin, who is at least as good as Seymour IMO.

If Godwin was not to be promoted pending proof of his fitness after a shoulder operation, Harvey was always a better alternative to Seymour. Warts and all he was ready to go and, like Seymour, he could play fullback.


PS - Not to the point but It was an odd irony that Ripia departed the Force the way he did when it was he that displaced Seymour as the Manly flyhalf.
 

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
What's the word on Fairbanks? To me, he's an out and out 12, and the kind of player the Force need to have at 12, instead of continually playing two running 13s.
 

ChargerWA

Mark Loane (55)
What's the word on Fairbanks? To me, he's an out and out 12, and the kind of player the Force need to have at 12, instead of continually playing two running 13s.

Fairbanks has never shown anything at S15 level. He wouldn't make the match day 22 in any other S15 franchise.
 
W

Waylon

Guest
............and he's as old as the hills

fairbanks was a dashing player with zip in his early days but he was a bit small. He probably would have been a good Leaguie (mungo)

He has lost a yard of pace and is still too small for 12 in pro rugby

The Force have developed poorly. They have recruited poorly. They have let great young players go and clung to dead wood. The management is a clusterf--k

....................................................................................

Force by 10 V tahs (with the heart)
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Excellent post. I was surprised that Seymour was given a contract when his performances for the Junior Tahs a year ago were unexceptional and some who saw Manly play more than I did, held a similar opinion of his play for them. I said at the time:



The rebuttal was that Stannard could play there, as he did in 2011, and so could Fairbanks; therefore they were good enough back up for Ripia. It was a fair comment, though if they wanted to give a young flyhalf a contract they could have given it to Perth local, Kyle Godwin, who is at least as good as Seymour IMO.

If Godwin was not to be promoted pending proof of his fitness after a shoulder operation, Harvey was always a better alternative to Seymour. Warts and all he was ready to go and, like Seymour, he could play fullback.


PS - Not to the point but It was an odd irony that Ripia departed the Force the way he did when it was he that displaced Seymour as the Manly flyhalf.
Lee you're way ahead of me on this....but surely the Force's reality is: with a limited quality comp in Perth the Force have to look to the east for their players. if they wait until someone is ready they wont get him because someone will take a punt on him or offer him a gig closer to home.
All the provinces seem to me to have players who when signed might not be ready - some step up and some dont. Given the revelation about certain Tahs being shown the door at the end of 2012 Im predicting that there'll be more unready players with them in 2013.
 

RedsHappy

Tony Shaw (54)
Rate him too. The fact that he is on the SA tour with the Reds at the moment suggests that Link and crew might as well.

Agree, he's a tremendous talent in the making.

The Force are getting so desperate to repair their obvious backline train wreck that DM could well be in their sights...and it's proven that they prefer Queenslanders ;-)...
 

Forcefield

Ken Catchpole (46)
Lee you're way ahead of me on this....but surely the Force's reality is: with a limited quality comp in Perth the Force have to look to the east for their players. if they wait until someone is ready they wont get him because someone will take a punt on him or offer him a gig closer to home.
All the provinces seem to me to have players who when signed might not be ready - some step up and some dont. Given the revelation about certain Tahs being shown the door at the end of 2012 Im predicting that there'll be more unready players with them in 2013.

That's mostly true. But the Force's focus should be on Kyle Godwin. In a position where the Force have a history of dramas, you can't afford to have two development players and you've got to go with the local.

There will be a lot of quality players who can play 10 on the market at the end of the season. Hopefully our situation won't be so dire next season.
 
M

Moono75

Guest
Are the Force's backline woes a result of poor talent or lack of opportunity due to a poor halves pairing not distributing the ball to them. I don't think Cummins and Nalaga are that bad, put them in a top team and they would probably shine. Still plenty of the season to go and hopefully they refine their style of play. If the weather is bad today I don't see that as an advantage to the Tahs. The Force forwards will be more than handy. Go the Force
 

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Inside Shoulder

Agree - it will be an ongoing problem for the Force unless there is a quantum step in the rugby population there.

Some players really want to go there and get out of the big smoke like Cam Shepherd and Lachie Mackay did, back in the day, and there are others like Pek Cowan who go there to get a gig, then fall in love with the joint. The attraction of 3rd party sponsors is always available but the Force have had a spotty record in that area

The reality is that they have to offer something to players that other franchises can't. Their only currency is contracts that players can't get further east.

Even with the constraints that the Force has had, it has made some poor choices. One could excuse them at startup as their only pickings were from players who did not already have a contract or had contracts that had just expired, but they still hired some plodders after that. I was amazed when so many scrubbers from my local Rats team got a gig and some even started in games.

In recent years we have seen them contract youngsters like Luke Jones and Ben Seymour to get them to go west and have them learn on the job; then hope fondly that they would stay there. Luke Jones, an elite schools player, shot through to the Rebels as soon as he could and whilst Seymour could stay he has none of the promise that Jones had.

The Force have to choose their eastern recruits better, but it isn't easy to judge players playing in the Sydney or Brisbane comps. This will always be the case which won't be resolved until we have a national semi-pro competition between the club level and the Super level. It is an old song, I sing.

I wouldn't mind too much if we used the 2007 model or the England and French club model (which would have to have Super Rugby A type teams for Perth and Melbourne added in). Some people will shriek about setting up elite rugby clubs but they shouldn't bother on this thread. I probably know their arguments against it better than they do,

I don't really care how it is done as long as a national comp is established because if we don't change things everything will stay the same.

How will this benefit the Force? We will see in this ARC Phase II, good players, including Super players not in the Wallaby squads, playing against and with each other.

The Reds and Tahs will know a lot more about the guys they want, but the Brumbies, Rebels and Force will be able to assess players better than they can now. How can they compare player A from a strong Sydney club team against player B from a weak Brisbane team, without seeing both play at a higher level than (virtually) amateur club rugby?

The Force will always be disadvantaged in this process but it will be a better situation than now: making a punt on young players coming good, and staying, or choosing apparently good senior club players who end up being not so good at all.
.
 

No4918

John Hipwell (52)
That's mostly true. But the Force's focus should be on Kyle Godwin. In a position where the Force have a history of dramas, you can't afford to have two development players and you've got to go with the local.

Forget the local, go for the best man for the job. The Force need success, feel good stories won't win them any matches.
 
M

Moono75

Guest
In year 7 of the Force story we can't afford to do a restart. By all means inject local talent into the team but these players need to be surrounded by experienced heads. If the Force want to get more bums on seats, more media support, more kids playing rugby in local comps they simply have to win. Everyone likes a winner. More attractive to come across to the West if you see there is a successful team and program in place and maybe a top line coach. That isn't evident at the moment.
 

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Forget the local, go for the best man for the job. The Force need success, feel good stories won't win them any matches.

My point in an earlier post was that there was no evidence in Seymour's playing for the Junior Tahs and Manly, that he was better than Godman.
 

RedsHappy

Tony Shaw (54)
In year 7 of the Force story we can't afford to do a restart. By all means inject local talent into the team but these players need to be surrounded by experienced heads. If the Force want to get more bums on seats, more media support, more kids playing rugby in local comps they simply have to win. Everyone likes a winner. More attractive to come across to the West if you see there is a successful team and program in place and maybe a top line coach. That isn't evident at the moment.

100% right Moono.

Just look at the Force's year-on-year mediocrity of outcome as per Bret Harris' article in the The Australian today. TOCC last year supplied the crowd figures to show the annual year-on-year decline in Force gate numbers. And good/great players have left or are leaving faster than they are replenished. The 'we're on the up and a new side' line that worked OK for recruiting in 2006-9 etc is fully bankrupt now.

As Waylon has noted, the wealth level and natural local rugby-loving base population in WA are both well on the up. But the Force is clearly on the down.

The board of Rugby WA and, partly, the ARU standing by wringing its hands but doing nothing effective, are wholly responsible for this outcome.

There won't be an ARC II any time soon, forget that as the apparently saving mechanism.

What is required is this IMO:

1. The whole Rugby WA model must be urgently opened up to a radical infusion of local private equity and the dynamic, ambitious business competence that would come with this complete reconstruction of board and management. The money and State-rooted pride in WA is absolutely there to do this easily.

2. A world-class coaching group must be appointed from 2013, at the latest. Look at what White is achieving already and ditto Link in his first year. Top notch specialist support coaches are just as important, and the money must be found via 1 above to hire them. Hiring RG was the moment of truth for the current WA rugby board - if they could not do what the ACT RU has so laudably done and have the corporate vision, honesty and guts to go for proven class, not an ARU hand-me-down with wholly unproven credentials and at best a medicore record at national level, then all was revealed as to their own notable lack of class as competent guardians of our great code in a key state for Australian rugby.

3. The ARU salary cap and squad size caps are worst imaginable excellence-of-achievement constraints for all but NSW and QLD. They will kill the Force's ability to recruit the elite team and related depth of back up needed. They must be abolished or seriously modified if the ARU has any hope of building an S15 Conf where, say, any one of 4 teams could genuinely vie for Finals or a GF, and this must surely be the goal, not the current '...2 teams maybe can just get there, maybe...'. The core problem with the ARU is that it is more interested in preserving its own elite and their requisite privileges and outmoded prejudices than they are in strategically revitalising Australian rugby out of the long-distance memory of the glory days and into the brilliant sunshine of where modern Aus rugby really could sit if the right structural and management competencies were applied (with suitable urgency).

In short, nothing short of radical structural change is needed in WA rugby. Incremental tinkering and Pocock-hugging symbolism will gradually mutate the Force into a local joke and may irrevocably remove the chance to rebuild soon enough to achieve something far greater and something capable of a good w-l ratio and the credible S15 Finals opportunities that the proud sports lovers of the great State of WA so rightly expect, and indeed could have with the right actions being taken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom