By Spiro Zavos
June 17th 2009 @ 4:28am
Robbie Deans shows a little of his 2011 RWC hand
Wallabies coach Robbie Deans talks to the team during the Wallabies Captain's run in Sydney on Friday, July 25, 2008. AAP Image/Jenny Evans
The Wallaby team that Robbie Deans has announced to play Italy at Melbourne on Saturday night has been called “a radically experimental team.” I’d be more inclined to say that Deans is cautiously trying out a few players in slightly different positions with a view to the 2011 Rugby World Cup squad.
Another consideration is to give other players some experience in positions that are not at risk (first five-eighths, second five-eights, centre, the props, second row), so that when the inevitable injuries occur, the quality of the cover is known.
For some time I’ve been advocating looking at George Smith as a Toutai Kefu-type of number 8. One reason for this is that the openside flanker position is a sort of kamikaze type of role that exposes the player to continual injuries.
The case of Richie McCaw is an example of this.
Smith has been fortunate in that he hasn’t suffered from injuries, but they are more likely if he plays in the number 7 jersey than in the number 8 jersey.
The Wallabies, moreover, have a very good young openside flanker in David Pocock. Pocock is 183cm, which makes him taller than Smith (180cm) and Phil Waugh (175cm).
If the experiment of the Pocock/Smith combination works, and with Rocky Elsom/Dean Mumm providing the third lineout jumper, the Wallabies would have a very creative, quick, skilful and hard-running backrow that would match even the Springboks (who will be much taller) in impact.
Playing Berrick Barnes at first five-eights and Quade Cooper at second five-eights is also interesting, and correct in my opinion. The Queensland Reds tended to use the two players the other way around, which was wrong.
But Cooper, like Carlos Spencer, a player he resembles a lot in style and skills, plays too often like a headless chook when given the frontline playmaking role. But at inside centre, with service from the steady Berrick Barnes, Cooper can challenge the fatties in the middle of the field after the first phase play.
Matt Giteau has played splendidly at first five-eighths in both the Wallabies matches this season. But, aside from a brilliant performance against England at Twickenham some years ago, he has rarely been dominant, in the Daniel Carter mould, at first five-eighths for the Wallabies.
Barnes plays more like the five-eighths that Deans likes.
He underplays his hand but sets up the outsides intelligently, kicks well and defends his inside channel very strongly against the charging opposition loose forwards.
Last season Nathan Sharpe was dropped from the Wallaby squad. He was brought back and has started in the first two games this season. But I can’t see him playing a big part in Deans’ 2011 RWC plans.
The search is on for a tall timber, jumping and scrummaging second-rower to partner James Horwill. Peter Kimlin seems to have the inside running. His performance on Saturday night will be closely observed, for future reference.
The intriguing omission is Lote Tuqiri, not only from the starting side but from the reserves as well. Deans has said that he wants everyone to get a game in the early-season Tests so we should see Tuqiri in the squad, at least, to play a fascinating Test against France.
Peter Hynes has been given a chance to make a claim for his wing position. He impressed this season for the Queensland Reds with his attack of the ball at kick-offs, and also his energy around the field.
The back-three of James O’Connor, Lachie Turner and Hynes has a Crusader look about it, with brilliance, skills and importantly (for Deans) hard work on and off the ball showing out.
Although this side is being called experimental, my guess is that most of the players in it will feature strongly in the RWC 2011 squad. There is, of course, something of Mrs Beetson and her rabbit pie recipe in this: “First, catch your rabbit.”
For this team to be the prototype of the 2011 RWC squad, it has to perform well against Italy, something that should not be taken for granted.
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(72)
Dexter William said | June 17th 2009 @ 2:00am | Report comment
Cross – Slow on the break and does not hit hard enough in defence. Not sure why Deans giving him a go. I have to agree with Redone that Tyrone Smith would have been the better choice. My first choice is to see Rob Horne developed in the centre backing up Mortlock. Tahu did not have a good season until the last few games, and like Lote, they both do not deserve selection. Good to see how they react to non selection. The league boys can’t keep walking into the Wallabies team like when Jones allowed them to. It really sends a message to any Leagies who are contemplating a switch to Rugby for easy money – and in their heads for a “softer” game. Who would have imagined that both Tahu and Lote are being left out for a guy like Cross. But the selection of Cross in this team is the weakest decision so far by Deans. But nonetheless when Digby and Rob Horne come back, I can’t see Cross ever getting selected again – I hope.
Cooper – I think he is coping too much flak at Roar. Even Reds Fan does not like him, which is a real worry. I have seen him playing like a genius in few of the games he played in SA. He has a good long pass that is as sharp as anyone in the team can throw. He is a bit inexperienced that is all, and if given the opportunity to bloom in a structured team, he is the one that will surpass both Gits and Barnes. Barnes is steady, but Cooper can do the exceptional stuff. A bit like Carlos Spencer on a good day, but let’s hope that he is more consistent than Carlos.
Burgess – His running game and defence is pretty good, but he does a Gregan when he is in the back of the ruck. He takes an unnecessary step every time he clears the ball and is slow at clearing the ball. By taking the extra step, he is actually signaling to the ops the direction the ball is going. Valentine does not do that at the back of the ruck, but is not as good at line breaks. Perhaps Genia is the more complete player when we see him fighting for a spot next year. The thing I like to see Burgess do is to be more calm (he looks disorientated at times) and direct the ruck with more authority.
Mortlock – There were a few doubters at Roar about Sterlo at the end of the S14, but IMO he should be the first one picked every time. The Wallabies lack power and heart without Sterlo. Other than Moore and perhaps Horwill, we lack a bit of grit. It is good that Deans is working to keep him around till 2011. Also with smaller players in the backline of Gits, O’Connor and Barnes, Mortlock’s power is paramount in the middle. He is a great decoy runner and a magnet in pulling players off the defensive line. As great as Barnes, O’conner and Gits are, they will only attract one defender. I often wonder when we will get a big Centre again. Rob Horne is not that big is he? And Digby is also classed as small even though he is the most tenacious back we have based on the S14 showing. Deans knows the importance of Mortlock – He was there when the Wallabies beat the AB in 2003 semi. Guess what happened? Tana Umunga was injured and he had MacDonald playing at centre. As good as MacDonald was, he lacks the power and presence of someone like Umunga and Mortlock.
Kimlin – An unknown quantity as he is only new at S14. How tall is he? Why are we not getting tall timbers these days? Sharpe is nowhere in the league of world class Locks – just compare him to B Bortha, Alli Williams and V Mattfiled. Vickerman was, maybe Horwill in the mold of Rob Thorne will in time to come. So I am not sure why Deans is keeping Sharpe except for the sake of winning our lineouts. Perhaps it is reason enough for now. Mum has nor shown why he should be picked yet at test level. He needs to step up. Very unfortunate that McMenemen is not playing for us. He would have been just what the “doctor” ordered. “Doctor” in ” ” as we know why he has done what he did.
Alexander – Yes he is not a “test” tighthead yet, but we need to develop this talent somehow. Maybe in time when he bulks up and gets trampled in the scrum a few times, he will come good. he is only young and he has plenty of time to become a great Prop who can play on both sides. It would be interesting to have him at No 8 as he does continually break tackles.
Can’t wait to see how these new crop of players perform this weekend.
Cheers to all.
Ed said | June 17th 2009 @ 3:37am | Report comment
Sprio I agree for the most part, but George Smith is hardly builty for number 8. He doesn’t get anywhere near the go forward a traditional 8 can make. I noticed on the weekend that the wallabies at on stage had only made the advantage line 40% of the time. Playing smith at 8 will only compound this problem.
Comparing him to Toutai Kefu is a bit of a stretch in my opinion, pretty different really:
Kefu
Height: 191cm Weight: 110kg
Smith
Height 1.80 m (5 ft 11 in)
Weight 107 kg (240 lb)
Why make a world class 7 an average 8?
Besides George Smith is renowned for his resilience. It seems a bit like jumping at shadows to rejig the backrow in order for him to avoid injury. How exactly is that supposed to save him from injury anyway. Do you really think he will much differently. He will still put himself in those dangerous positions scavenging for the ball like the fetcher he is.
How about playing Pockock at 6 or 8 instead, if you would like to accomodate the both of them? He had a huge workload running the ball up in the S14, and he is a little bit taller and will only get bigger.
Knives Out said | June 17th 2009 @ 6:41am | Report comment
‘For some time I’ve been advocating looking at George Smith as a Toutai Kefu-type of number 8. One reason for this is that the openside flanker position is a sort of kamikaze type of role that exposes the player to continual injuries.’
This old chestnut again. It may just be me but I find it particularly hard to parallel one of Australia’s most punishing ever ball carriers with a player who is simply not a ball carrier, and for good reason. Smith’s instinct is to play over the ball, not carry it. Further, and I may be imagining this, but the 8 man slot is pretty damaging too. Kefu, Dallaglio, Scott Quinnell (all world class number 8s) suffered very badly with injuries.
‘If the experiment of the Pocock/Smith combination works, and with Rocky Elsom/Dean Mumm providing the third lineout jumper, the Wallabies would have a very creative, quick, skilful and hard-running backrow that would match even the Springboks (who will be much taller) in impact.’
How is this even measurable? I think this is rather excessive poetic licence.
mother teresa said | June 17th 2009 @ 8:06am | Report comment
spiro,your copy comparing the respective coaches was the real issue confronting the roar ;astoundingly the focus was on peripheral secondary points The rwc,and now two incompetent starts to seasons has me concerned with henrys tactical awareness.was dannie craven 60 years ahead of time;dont think so.A BASIC understanding and ramifications of new rules and homework on a french team asked to be full strength by tew should underpin any strategy and selection.agree?
reds fan said | June 17th 2009 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Right. I’ve been quoted as a Quade hater on a couple of threads. Let me set things straight.
Quade has great attacking instincts. Quade also has lousy decision-making.
Quade pushes at players when tackling and lets his team mates do the real tackle.
He also makes hair brained decisions that leave his team mates exposed and scrambling to fill the gap. Poor Barnsey having to play next to him. The reason Barnes plays 12 for the Reds is so that he can mop up after Quade. If Quade was at 12, it would be impossible for Barnes to cover. And furthermore, the mistakes when made at 12 would be made further from the support of the forwards who also do a fair bit of covering work for him.
I dont make these comments lightly. I, of anyone, would love to see him ripping up defenses week after week. I couldn’t believe that the player I saw perform for the Wallabies vs the Baabaas in England last year, was the same guy getting booed by his own supporters this year.
I go every week to watch the Reds, and let me tell you…. i’m not alone. The other season ticket holders who sit and watch him game after game are also not happy.
Having seen him interviewed I think he is a humble young man who is aware of his flaws, and who genuinely seeks to improve and to be a great player.
But I’m not sure how long Reds supporters can keep on waiting for him to “arrive”.
Jecker Bonds said | June 17th 2009 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Different pack, different coach, but Eddie Jones thought Smith would make a good No.8 and the results were only so so. George isn’t a gainline powerhouse like Heaslip (6′4″, 240 lbs), he’s not a flyer like Spies, and not a lineout option like Harinordoquy. He’s a terrific 7, so is Deans playing him at 8 strictly because he’s just too good a forward to leave out?
The Giteau/Barnes discussion remains the most contentious. I’m not a big fan of the constant kicking game so it doesn’t thrill me to have an IC who can kick outside of a 5/8 who can kick – a la Aaron Mauger. Playing Barnes at 10 (Ella was a southpaw and he did just fine) and Giteau outside him will, on paper at least, give Gits more room off an attacking scrum and a better chance at making a break. If, as many commentators claim, he has the chance to become another Horan, he has to play in Horan’s old position.
All the top rugby coaches have 2011 in the back of their minds, and I believe Deans might be happy with Gits at 10 if he had a dangerman at 12. Some people are wondering if Deans might move Sterlo to 12 for the RWC, play O’Connor at 13, and consider Barnes at FB.
When you have enough talent available, the permutations are considerable.
LeftArmSpinner said | June 17th 2009 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Spiro, I agree. This is not a radical team. More a process of developing more experienced starting team players (width) and more players in each position (depth).
I make three points:
1. It is a clever team selection, but we have come to expect this from Deans. The front line team set the standard in the past two weeks, and particularly last week. The Challengers get their chance this week to raise the bar. Good pressure.
2. How does Robbie Deans get a backline to click in two weeks when the Waratahs coaches told us that it takes months to achieve the same? The Waratahs coaches dont know their craft and misled the dwindling Waratahs fans!!!!
3. Overall, I think we should be less precious about the numbers on their backs.
4, 5 and 6: Mumm, Sharpe and Kimlin will play similar games, except that Sharpe will distribute the ball more with offloads and hopefully Mumm will use his extraordinary pace more.
7 and 8: Smith and Pocock will play similar games. Pocock has not yet had the stand out game for the Wallabies that he is clearly capable of.
10 and 12: Cooper and Barnes will interchange between 10 and 12.
11, 14 and 15: Hynes, O’Connor and Turner will also play similar games.
Smith plays over the ball and carries the ball as a ball distributor, using grubbers, etc. Smith’s longevity and continuity has been remarkable.
Barnes was more of 5/8 until Giteau’s outstanding form in the past two games, particularly his kicking. Can Giteau still kick this well against more pressure from the opposition such as AB’s and Boks? Time and Space. If he can, the Wallabies will have gained a very important weapon in their team arsenal. Barnes doesnt have the linebreaking ability that Giteau, Cooper and Beale have.
Tuqiri needs to hope that Deans didnt see him beaten for pace in grade rugby last weekend. His lack of speed is a real issue and has been for years. Tuqiri either does something about it or he dusts off his passport and starts taking french lessons. Tuqiri is finally paying for not using 6 years to develop his rugby skills, kicking in general play, running straight, straight line speed, playing full back and recycling the ball once tackled. He reminds me of a naturally gifted student who doesn’t study for the 6 years of highschool and then subsequently fails his HSC.
Cross’s inclusion is a depth selection. He is an honest, effective and reliable performer, but probably behind Mortlock, AAC and even Rob Horne when selection for the RWC Wallabies Outside Centre position comes around.
MikeN said | June 17th 2009 @ 9:30am | Report comment
One area of concern, and one that Deans noted, was the lack of physicality in the rucks and malls. None of the locks in the current selection is really an ‘in the trenches’ type lock. They are runners and play makers. Horwill is powerful and agressive but still on the play maker side of things. I would like to see Will Caldwell added to the locking stocks as I think we will need a tough, combative lock in the mix when we play the physical Springboks. Caldwell is also a good lineout jumper.
I have been saying it for a while, but until Tuquri learns to run straight and hard, I can’t see him as a legitiate option in the team. Now someone is in charge who does not care how much he earns, the spotlight is on how he uses the ball. He tends to stop and dance around on the spot or run across field, negating his core attributes of size and speed.
I do not see Smith as a number 8. Lack of size and he is not a dominator in physical clashes. He dominates at the breakdown and he is a distributor. Moving him to 8 meansd we either lose the use of his breakdown skills or we focus on the breakdown and rely on the other forwards to cover the other number 8 duties. I think number 8 is the position that Australia is weakest at the moment. Take Palu and Brown out of the picture and what have we got?
Hoy said | June 17th 2009 @ 9:36am | Report comment
I don’t like Cross. I think he is a bit soft in contact, and still crabs a hell of a lot. It is a mammoth pity that Diggers is injured. Would have been picked here for this game, and done good I think.
Cooper is one I can’t decide about. On one hand, I love his ability, yet the other hand, I fear his decisions, and lack of defence, especially at 12. He has the best long ball in the team I think.
Smith at 8 has been tried before, with bad results from memory. I also don’t think Palu is fantastic at Wallaby level either though. He is too slow and lumbering. It is like Willie Mason. Someone so big should do a lot more damage. He seems to put in at super level, but not internationals. I would love a cross between Brown and Palu. Someone with faster footspeed, and hits it up harder. I might be being a bit tough on Palu though.
If Tatafu was a bit taller, Hello new number 8.
Marty said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:08am | Report comment
Interesting points Spiro.
Surely Palu is the Man for the back of the scrum though…
Will_Red said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:12am | Report comment
I agree that Smith cannot deliver the regular hard hitting carries required of a no8 at test level. His selection in this position will only compromise his work over the ball.
Is it too late for Tuquri to consider a switch to no8? He’s a great athlete with the height, weight and (enough)speed who currently shows plenty of mongrel in the tackle and a desire to be involved in the contest. Admittedly he has none of the positional and technical skills required but these could be developed. There is no way he will be around on the wing for the next RWC but if he still has the desire maybe he could be somewhere in the back row mix.
Brett McKay said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:16am | Report comment
I wonder where Stephen Hoiles fits or ranks in Aussie Rob’s thinking, if he wants ball carrying No.8s?? Ben Mowen has played a bit at No8 too if memory serves correct..
WA said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment
“First five-eighths” – I’m growing to love rugby, but I have no idea what that position means, and why it is called something so ludicrous.
Even looser said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:38am | Report comment
A little of track perhaps. However…Lote has been mentioned a few times now & like others I wonder about his future.
Robbie has ’sent him back to school’ so to speak to play at club level while still training with the Wallabies. Can’t find the damn report now but it was along the lines that Robbie wants LT to play as a traditional winger and not as he was playing at the Tahs. Fair enough. However, clearly the Tahs had instructed or at least endorsed LT’s roving role for the S14 as part of their crap backline play strategy.
Reports of LT killing them at club level are not filtering through. Instead he seems to be exposed for his speed & handling. One would think that Robbie was banking on Lote making all kinds of improvements at club level & then rewarding him with say a position on the bench for the Froggies. But this has not transpired so what will RD do now? I mean do you reward failure?
JF said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:42am | Report comment
According to this, lote is not going too well at club level, at least now we will see if he is serious about his rugby or not.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25633050-23217,00.html
ohtani's jacket, said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:14am | Report comment
This is pretty funny.
Where’s the outrage about rotation and guys playing out of position? Deans bringing the NZ rugby disease across the ditch?
Even looser said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:16am | Report comment
Mmm let me try that again as I don’t wish to jump on the ‘kick Lote while he’s down’ band wagon.
I actually want LT to succeed. Yes I want him to feel the kick in the guts from being dropped but then work his freckle off to prove us all wrong. No one will be cheering louder than Moi here.
Hopefully RD doesn’t see him as a spent force & has a plan for him. But I would suggest that maybe Robbie didn’t quite get it right by just sending him back to Club Land and leaving the rest to Lote, in the same way that he didn’t get it right by throwing Tahu in the deep end in the high velt.
From Robbie point of view (and LT’s) It would have been great for LT to have had a blinder. Sadly that didn’t happen. So what does our Master Chef do now?
Didn’t see the club game but I’m sure that LT, as the tall poppy, would have got plenty of attention from the opposition. The questions are: Did he do enough to show RD that he has what Robbie is looking for? Is Robbie doing all he can to improve Lote in the same way he helps Burgess?
What would Roarers do to get the best out of Lote?
MikeN said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:39am | Report comment
Brett, yes Stephen Hoiles should be in the picture. The problem then is once again we have another ball player with less crash tackling and mongrel in the forwards. Palu brings some big hits as well as some crushing runs. I agree he sometimes goes missing. With Smith, Brown or Hoiles at number 8, TPN is the only other big hitter at the moment (when he is on the paddock). We lack an impact number 8 to back up Palu at the moment. Willie, Toutai and Cliffy can and could hammer the oppostion and that is where I think Spiro is wrong about Smith.
I am a great supporter of Deans and am thrilled with the direction we are heading at the moment. But I am concerned about the lack of phycial confrontational type forwards we have in the squad at the moment and fear we will regret it when we come up against the AB’s and the Springboks (maybe even the French now).
I watched the Wallabies for years where we had great backlines but lost in the forwards. I think the backs are looking good now, the scrum is looking better but still lack that agression in the forwards.
I don’t think it is worth spending so much time on Lote in this blog. He either get’s it right and is welcommed back or doesn’t and sets off into the sunset. We got plenty of other wingers now so….
Dexter William said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:48am | Report comment
Tahu is out injured a lot with hemmie problems that may ruin his playing career. He is potentially good, but I do not see him as top five (world ranking) Centre. Do you – even if he reaches his potential. Rob Horne has more potential than Tahu and he is only young with lots in front of him. It brings back the same old sissue regarding the Wallabies pinching already established Leagies over. If they make a move at 26 years old, it would takes at least 2 years to be good at what they do, by then they will be in injury prone age.
MikeN, you sum it up pretty well: “until Tuquri learns to run straight and hard, I can’t see him as a legitiate option in the team. Now someone is in charge who does not care how much he earns, the spotlight is on how he uses the ball. He tends to stop and dance around on the spot or run across field, negating his core attributes of size and speed.”
What is the point of having LT in the team? Is he (even if he improves) going to improve on what we already have in Turner, Hynes, Mitchell and Digby? If the answer is a slim yes, we are splitting hairs aren’t we. He should go back to League like Gwendal Sailor. I would even rate LT behind Stanifiord who had an excellent final year at S14. Perhaps Japna is the way forward for him.
MikeN again: “None of the locks in the current selection is really an ‘in the trenches’ type lock. They are runners and play makers. Horwill is powerful and agressive but still on the play maker side of things. I would like to see Will Caldwell added to the locking stocks as I think we will need a tough, combative lock in the mix when we play the physical Springboks.”
In fact I would like to go a bit further with “in the trenches type” comment of our tight five. Owen Finegan and Willie O are the type of Wallabies we need most. AB have their hard man like Ali Williams, Brad Thorne, MaCaw ans even Leonard their half back. And for the Boks, all of their Tight Fives have that hard edge which is what the Springsboks are about. Compared to them, the Wallabies tight five are “most polite.” Elsom, perhaps Moore and Horwill are just border line cases of what we would like to call hard men.
Like a few have already commented, Smith at No 8 is a so so call.
Hoy may have something regarding Poloto Nau at 8. I think Alexander may also be a good choice as he is quite fast, a good workload and penetrative which is what is needed at 8.
Thurston Fallout said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:51am | Report comment
What would Roarers do to get the best out of Lote? For my money I’d play him at 13. I know, I know, it’s been tried. Under another coach. But pull out your old discs/tapes/PVRs and take a look at those games. On offense, he wasn’t that bad for a guy who hadn’t played union in that position before. And he was first rate on defense – a big, tall guy rushing up at speed – he terrified his opposite number. If he played 13 he wouldn’t have to field the high or long kicks, and wouldn’t have to return them. And he’d make a great decoy if the play wasn’t designed around him. Plus, once he got the ball in his hands, he wouldn’t have the sideline hemming him in. We all like the guy and he wants to do well, and I think he’d bust his butt if given a shot, under Deans, at OC coming in from the bench.
True Tah said | June 17th 2009 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
MikeN
I would have Brown over Palu. Palu might make big hits, but he has no venom or anger and he goes MIA a fair bit. Maybe Deans needs to get in his ear and get him to stop being a slacker. Brown gives 100% and whilst he is smaller than Cliff, he runs like he is as large as Palu.
I read the foxsports article, and seeing Lote getting outpaced by club wingers is hardly encouraging, I hope LT takes it on and fires up big time, need him to fire against the All Blacks.
Justin said | June 17th 2009 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
I have no idea why Brown is not playing unless he is injured. he should be playing at 8 as much as possible while there are no fit alternatives. Smith is NOT an 8, play him at 7 or rest him.
Please, o’please forget about Lote. He is yesterdays man, way down in the pecking order of AUS wingers. Hooray for that I say.
Most other options are fine, it gives some of the back ups a chance to get some Test experience.
I think Mumm would want to play well or it could be bye-bye for the 3N squad.
Did anyone else read Brett Harris in The Australian about how Gower should be playing halfback, like he did in league? Fark you couldnt make it up…how does this bloke write about Rugby, absolute classic article.
Greg Russell said | June 17th 2009 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
Re Tuqiri, it is reported that he is now behind Turner, Hynes, Mitchell, Ioane and possibly even Ashley-Cooper in the pecking order for wingers. If this is true, then it makes no sense that Deans even retains him in the Wallaby squad. I mean, why retain someone if they are 6th-ranked, nearly 30, and have played nearly 70 tests? So I suspect that Deans must be trying to change Tuqiri, most obviously into a faster player (by shedding some kilos?), but probably also in the way he plays the game. Is there anyone who has been to Wallaby trainings and can shed some light on this?
Greg Russell said | June 17th 2009 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
“Robbie Deans shows a little of his 2011 RWC hand”, “Barnes plays more like the five-eighths that Deans likes.”
There is an obvious implication here re Giteau. Spiro, we are going to have to agree to disagree on Giteau. I am not quite as effusive as your colleague Wayne Smith at The Australian, but I am certainly far closer to his view than I am to your more sceptical one. Here is a recent extract from Wayne Smith. I deliberately include the bit about halfback, because I think it is very relevant to the suggestions that Giteau has not been a matchwinner in tests: it’s not easy when one isn’t getting very good service! I think it’s also relevant that Giteau is getting better and better (a process in which Deans is intimately involved), and that his best days probably still lie ahead of him. He has simply taken much longer to get to where Dan Carter got to at an earlier age.
Anyway, here’s (the Australian) Wayne Smith:
“Lately, writing about Matt Giteau has become a hazardous affair because every time he plays he nudges the superlative bar ever higher. At the start of the Super 14, he was Australia’s best five-eighth. By the end of it, he was the best in the world. Now, on the admittedly contestable evidence of his display against a composite team, he merits consideration among the greatest playmakers the game has ever seen.
Yet even reining in the hyperbole and simply restricting ourselves to comparing Giteau to the Australian greats Phil Hawthorne, Mark Ella, Michael Lynagh and Steve Larkham, it is apparent he is missing something. Or, more correctly, someone. Hawthorne had Ken Catchpole as his halfback, Ella and Lynagh bookended Nick Farr-Jones’s career while Larkham’s name forever will be linked to George Gregan’s. In short, great five-eighths had great halfbacks inside them.
Luke Burgess isn’t a great halfback – yet – and neither is Josh Valentine. But if the Wallabies are to squeeze every last drop of advantage out of Giteau’s abilities, as they will need to do if they are to reclaim the Tri-Nations, Bledisloe and World Cups, they must find themselves a halfback whose job, quite simply, is to make his five-eighth look good.
Burgess has so many admirable traits. His running game is outstanding and, as Sonny Bill Williams would ruefully attest, his defence is ferocious. But his passing, while mostly crisp and accurate on Saturday night, remains hit and miss.
What good will it do the Wallabies if Giteau detects an opportunity out to his left if the pass coming to him forces him to bend low to his right? Valentine doesn’t offer nearly what Burgess does around the field but at least Giteau knows where his pass is going.”
The Other Reds Fan. said | June 17th 2009 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
I wouldn’t be surprised if the back up for Mortlock for the World Cup ended up being Mark Gaznier although he is running out of time.
Worlds Biggest said | June 17th 2009 @ 1:47pm | Report comment
Dexter – I agree with you regarding Cross. Once Ioane and Horne are fit they will be the backs up / eventual successors to Mortlock. I would have like Tyrone Smith getting a run. It appears now our 2nd Row stocks are a bit thin if Sharpe according to some not featuring at the next RWC. Haven’t seen much of Kimlin. Chisholm is often injured. Hopefully Vickerman will be back in 2011 although he would have not played top level rugby for 2 years. I don’t mind Smith being tried at Number 8. Why has Elsom’s name not come up as a Number 8 option. He fits the prototyope physically compared to the shorter Smith.
mother teresa said | June 17th 2009 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
GREG, TUQIRI a bit like your beehive ,looks good ,political body and redundant.does that awaken the senses in toi
fox said | June 17th 2009 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
Thurston fallout – nice idea, but Tuquiri can’t pass well on both sides and may not have the rugby brain to make the right decisions. His defense is first rate, but I like either Ioane or Tahu there for their all round attacking skills (Ioane preferred for his defense and work rate). For now, Mortlock is going nowhere. He’d have to be crippled not to be selected and while a little short on pace these days, he still commands great respect from opposition coaches and players alike.
Virgil said | June 17th 2009 @ 4:43pm | Report comment
Yeah the halfback issue is a worry. I really wish Cordingly had stayed in oz. He’s a bit injury prone but his service and initiative on the field were superlative.
Dexter William said | June 17th 2009 @ 5:06pm | Report comment
Greg Russel: “Burgess has so many admirable traits. His running game is outstanding and, as Sonny Bill Williams would ruefully attest, his defence is ferocious. But his passing, while mostly crisp and accurate on Saturday night, remains hit and miss.”
The best pass from the 30 selected is Cooper. Long straight and crisp. He can also find gaps around the fringes with his footwork, perhaps he should be tried at 9.
Peter K said | June 17th 2009 @ 5:12pm | Report comment
Smith would be a poor no 8, at best an average one.
Palu and Elsom are the best options there, we need someone who can make hard yards around the ruck and from the scrum. Smith simply does not have the power. Brown does have a high work rate but little impact at this level. Not powerful enough. We only have Horwill and Elsom making hard yards, so can not afford a lightweight 8.
I have been saying for years that Giteau is a far better 12 than 10. Gives him more time and room to use his feet. Barnes at 10 and Giteau 12 is better than the other way. Cooper can only throw long passes in one direction , the other with his weak hand are short or like a harbour bridge. Also he cannot tackle.
Burgess is easily our best halfback option. He keeps improving so I think his service will improve his flaws. Genia is a one season wonder. Needs to have at least 2 good S14 seasons before he can be considered.
With Elsom back Sharpes time might be up, especially if Kimlin does well here.
onside said | June 17th 2009 @ 6:35pm | Report comment
The most exiting factor for me is Robbie Deans himself.
He’s terrific. We are so fortunate to have his services.
Even if we do not lift BILL,Robbie Deans has given so much.
This is not the thrust of Spiros article, but Deans is the reason.
TommyM said | June 17th 2009 @ 7:36pm | Report comment
I think Will Genia would have to have been given a shot at 9 if he was fit. He has a very dangerous running game like Burgess, great aggro and a superb pass…
Spencer said | June 17th 2009 @ 7:37pm | Report comment
Peter K – Burgess was selected for the Wallabies after 5 solid performances for Tahs. I will remind you in 12 months of your comments about Genia. He made enormous progress this year, and after S14 next year will be selected as the Wallaby 9. Burgess is just a holding option, and I am sure Deans knows that by now.
Chris, syd - Aust said | June 17th 2009 @ 8:38pm | Report comment
Not according to Nick far jones spencer…. still gotta love the behind the back flick pass that genia and Ioane have got going together.
pitty about aust against nz in the jnr wc semi…. haylet petty was the best for aust i think.
Mike said | June 17th 2009 @ 9:53pm | Report comment
Left Arm Spinner,
Excellent analysis. I would just emphasise even more your point about “more players in each position” – my observation of Robbie is that this is a very important factor in his thinking.
I think Smith was put in No 8 because it was a useful spot to park him – Deans wanted to try out Pocock at No 7, and he wanted Smith in as captain, for a number of reasons.
I also wouldn’t read too much into Barnes at No 10. Robbie is from South Island and he was always going to give his IC a run at 5/8 whenever there was a quiet game. Its not for nothing they call them 1st 5/8 and 2nd 5/8.
Yeah, Onside, we are lucky to have Robbie – he is making everyone sit up and think. Thank God for Auckland/Christchurch rivalry
Maxxy said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:17pm | Report comment
If the Wallabies get out scrummed and mauled up front and the game is similar to the one in Rome last year and heaven forbid the wallabies lost – What will you guys be saying next week? Clever, Intelligent selection? How is our depth looking?
Do we really have more players in each position? I get stuck on selection sometimes over the years with Deans, starting with his refusal to use Tana in the 2003 semi against the Wallabies, to the resting of key players in SA over the s14 years that saw losses to the Lions and Stormers and almost upsets against the Force. I admire his risk taking but as we saw only last year the win against South Africa was quickly replaced by a record loss only seven days later after 5 or 6 selection changes – the record books was the only thing to benefit as we already knew how to lose in SA but not by a record margin
Here’s hoping the Wallabies get up and I can ditch my anxiety
OldManEmu said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:29pm | Report comment
There is only one way to solve this ridiclous Radovan Sharpe speclation on the Roar – I will give anyone who wants to lay their money down 5 to 1 that Radovan Sharpe will be in the 2011 RWC squad. He is an outstanding second rower and what he brings to the team cannot be replaced in the current crop of others.
To suggest that Smith should play No 8 because he might get injured at No 7 is a seriously wacky idea.
No comments so far on the selection of Pek Cowan….an absolute howler in my opinion. Deans sees something. I hope it is not another Tai McIsaac type selection.
mother teresa said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:42pm | Report comment
maxxy,you make valid criticism and i for one remember vividly the 2003 strategic blunder as sometimes deans tends to get bogged down on some issue and steadfastly boxes on instead of reevaluating.wouldnt it be nice to get paid for such bumbles and stumbles and still have the mantle of the guru.depends on the spin i guess or would you call it a pirouette
mother teresa said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:05pm | Report comment
OME,DO YOU THINK DEANS SELECTIONS HAVE A TINGE OF “MADE IN NZ” mentality .perhaps we will do the haka too
bennalong said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:15pm | Report comment
Everyone making assumptions about rankings. It seems obvious, and Deans has actually said it, that if you’re in the squad you’re part of the plan.
This side is not significant in terms of the World Cup ! it’s about playing a ‘dead rubber’ and having a look at combinations before the big stuff.
Having reassured himself that we could easily handle the Italians Robbie is making good on his plans to create a flexible squad where injury will be less of an impact.
He did it with the Crusaders. They could win without Carter, they could even win without McCaw. You can make all the excuses you like, but a loss still dents your progress toward invincibilty.
The AB squad has been found wanting. What of the famed depth of talent ?
Robbie wants everyone hungry to contribute to the success of the team. He wants to see how Cooper goes outside Barnes —totally logical. He wants to see if Tuquiri can accept a brief to change to a more classical style of play, something many of us have wanted. Not complicated or calculating eh?
Now regards speed : Drew Mitchell was quoted as saying Lote is second only to Turner. Now !
Regards style of play : this evolved years ago with McKenzie, who defended his instructions with stats to demonstrate how damaging Tuquiri and Sailor were. Lote was encouraged to play this roving style as Even Looser indicated, and his seniority and the lack of a coaching vision this season at the Tahs meant it was the only way he got to see the ball.
I’d pick Lote over Joe Roco anyday (and he’s still in the AB squad), and certainly ahead of Drew. I think we’ll see him against the French. Certainly he’s shown himself to be a team player by being ‘mentioned in despatches’ and he’s respected by younger players.
Above all, Robbie Deans seeks to create an ethos where the team is all, and where the individual is measured by his contribution to the team. If no-one is indispensible every player in the squad is hungry for a sniff. That’s how he wants it.
A team that’s greater than the sum of its parts.
Katipo said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:19pm | Report comment
Ohtani,
Where is the rage at Deans rotation policy? The rage will come if the Wallabies are knocked out at the quarter finals of the 2011 World Cup and he is reappointed to the coaching role (while there is a champion coach and ex-test player waiting to take over who ends up coaching your rival).
Graham Henry is under the microscope because he should have resigned after the 2007 disaster and never have been reappointed. That’s why he is treated differently. Ted has made his bed. Now he has to have sleepless nights in it.
Sam Taulelei said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:35pm | Report comment
Katipo
I may be speaking out of turn but I think what OJ was referring to is the amount of criticism directed at Graham Henry when he implemented his rotation policy during the Grand Slam tour in 2005 and continued it unabated. There were many former players, coaches and public outraged at the notion of “devaluing the All Blacks test jersey by giving it away”.
It’s ironic that on this side of the ditch most people don’t realise that Henry and Deans share similar coaching philosophies and the “playing what is in front of you” edict is exactly what Henry introduced when he took over in 2004. Deans quote yesterday “Not only would it be unrealistic to focus that entire workload on the same players, a policy like that would also deny us the opportunity to develop others” is no different to what Henry has been preaching about player welfare and the intent to develop greater depth within NZ rugby.
I sense that you are clearly not a Graham Henry fan and disagreed with the NZRU’s decision to reappoint him after our results in 2007. Fair enough, I was shocked and dismayed at the decision as well but it’s history now. However I remember vividly the posturings of many on this site as to the reasons for the All Blacks failure and top of the list was the unpopular rotation policy.
I’ve realised that Deans can never do wrong in the eyes of Wallaby supporters and everything he does is genius, brilliance and masterful coaching. He is the Barack Obama of rugby coaches.
onside said | June 18th 2009 @ 7:56am | Report comment
Sam Taulelei
Its not so much that Deans can do no wrong but rather he is respected.
Peter K said | June 18th 2009 @ 8:45am | Report comment
Sam – I am a Wallaby supporter. However I think Deans has erred. The current squad lacks tightheads. The team to play Italy will be shown up in the scrums. I cannot see any good come from this. He made similar incorrect selection mistakes last year in the tight 5 and we were shown up.
Also I see prople are way over the top saying he has moulded a new team etc. Once Elsom and Palu are back then the top starting XV is team is the same as last years model except for JoC and Turner, if Lote does not get back in. 2 backs changes is not that much.
What may have improved is the skills and attitude and tactics. However yet to be proven. Let us see how they go against France and Boks and AB’’s before we trumpet how much we have improved.
Dexter William said | June 18th 2009 @ 8:58am | Report comment
Maxxy
Tana did not play in the 32003 semi because he was injured after the first round, and was probably not match fit to take the field in the semi.
Tana was captain and would be the first picked if he was fit. It was not a selection error I don’t think, unless you have inside info that we (the public) don’t know about.
OldManEmu said | June 18th 2009 @ 9:37am | Report comment
Mother T – I dont think Deans has that on his agenda, at least I hope he does not.
Sam Taulelei said | June 18th 2009 @ 10:05am | Report comment
Onside
I think it goes beyond respect and for many it is outright fanboy worship. Alan Jones, Bob Dwyer and even Rod MacQueen weren’t above criticism from the press/public and they were three of Australia’s most successful coaches. Even as Crusaders coach Deans wasn’t immune to criticism, maybe it’s just the different attitudes towards the game between Kiwis and Aussies.
My last sentence was a sweeping generalisation and there are some like Peter K and Maxxy among others who are questioning selections and decisions.
Even looser said | June 18th 2009 @ 10:14am | Report comment
Some great discussion on here about Robbie & his selections. It’s all good.
I guess what I’m waiting for, and maybe it’s starting to happen already, is for the critics of Robbie to start gaining momentum. There’s already a view that some of see RD as some kind of ‘walk on water’ style of coach. Perhaps some of us do but I for one just see him as mostly pretty ‘normal’ in his decision making & selections. Or to put in another way, he’s doing things the way most of us wish we could.
I also like his straight talk and prepareness to make the tough decisions and even Blind Freddy could see that he has the Wallabies playing better and heading in a good direction.
Just as players make mistakes so too will coaches. It’s inevitable that Robbie will make the occassional clanger. This weekend against Italy could be just such a case as I expect Italy to see our scrum as an opportunity to roll us.
Has Robbie underestimated the Azzuri? Most of us are concerned but it’s his call. All will be revealed.
onside said | June 18th 2009 @ 10:55am | Report comment
Sam Tauleiei
I dont take issue with your overview.You are right.There’s a touch of Deans being his own man in
all this,a quality others seem to lack ,most seen as either a real or imagined appendage of the ARU.
Wayne Bennet is held is similar high regard.Furthermore its refreshing to see a coach who is not
all that media savvy,who is uncomfortable infront of a microphone.Tim Verbeek is dreadfull in front
of a camera but people recognise his integrity.Deans a New Zealander ,Bennet an Aussie ,Verbeek
a Dutchman ,all awkward with the media,all respected, and all three of them fair dinkum. It works.
Blinky Bill of Bellingen said | June 18th 2009 @ 11:11am | Report comment
“Has Robbie underestimated the Azzuri?” As was said “all will be revealed”.
One thing these selections have done is make the match a lot more compelling to watch. It may well be a close one and maybe that’s what Robbie is hoping for. Something to make the boys step up to the plate and to force them to lift their game.
Mallett will see this as definitely winable. Yes it’s a gamblefor Mr. Deans but if he’s to bring through hardened forwards they need to be exposed to some tough contests starting now.
If it all goes pear shaped and we see no ball…well……….. it’ll be like England in the RWC all over again.
Has Noriega started coaching them yet? Maybe a few surprises coming our way. I like surprises.
Ben C said | June 18th 2009 @ 11:42am | Report comment
My main concern is Alexander at tighthead. A great runner of the ball but he struggles occasionally at loosehead in the scrums, yet he is expected to play tighthead in an international on the back of (apparently) having played tighthead years ago?
Also I agree with Sam T that Deans and Henry are closer than people might think. You only have to look how both are picking backrowers to play out of their natural position to see that. This comes of trying to find the best athletes rather than the best players, which is a difficult temptation for any coach to resist.
OJ regarding the lack of outrage to the changes, I suspect that grumbling may appear if the Wallabies lose matches or if the wholesale changes persist throughout the Tri-Nations. Rotation is needed to build depth but it has to be used somewhat sparingly. I prefer that Deans experiment during the June/July inbounds but if he doesn’t have a settled first XV (barring injuries) and use it fairly consistently throughout the Tri-Nations I will be worried about the lack of stability and settled combinations. Deans is definitely getteing an easier ride than Henry although Henry tends to make a rod for his own back sometimes (the reconditioning program in 07).
fox said | June 18th 2009 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Bennalong, your take on the tuquiri situation is perhaps the most sensible I have read in any forum or newspaper for that matter. Spot on in my opinion.
onside said | June 18th 2009 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
Bennalong
I agree with fox.I had not read your contribution but the post by fox lead me to it.
As a matter of interest it would be a great coaching feat if Deans managed to get
Lote to play to a standard that reflected his paygrade.Lets hope Deans can do it.
AndyS said | June 18th 2009 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
We don’t have the luxury of outrage. We have no elite level competition or even ‘A’ program, so rotation is the only option for blooding players and building some depth. It is a risk, but it is the bed that was made for us.
Sam Taulelei said | June 18th 2009 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
Genuine question and one that has been asked in another thread. Does anyone see any difference between “experimentation” with this selection and the criticisms levelled by JON and others about the relative strengths of touring sides from Europe in the past?
It appears that Kiwis and Aussies take great umbrage at inbound tours featuring Nigel Nobodies and yet we explain our rotation policies away as player welfare and building depth. We obviously place greater value on the Tri Nations and Bledisloe Cup games much as Europe value their Six Nations tournament more.
There are complaints about the damage to the credibility of international rugby tests by the impact of the world cup and yet by our own actions we are complicit in encouraging it’s demise. Shall we all just come clean and admit that inbound June tours and outbound November tours are revenue generating exercises and nothing more. Results are meaningless and perhaps they would be better served as a competition for the likes of Australia A, Junior All Blacks and the English Saxons etc than the test teams.
Chris, syd - Aust said | June 18th 2009 @ 4:21pm | Report comment
dosen’t a grand slam tour even excite you a little Sam T? I can’t wait!
Katipo said | June 18th 2009 @ 4:29pm | Report comment
A 4 nation grand slam is great but I’d like to see someone try the 4 home nations plus France. That would be exciting. Or even a 6 nations “royal flush”?
Working Class Rugger said | June 18th 2009 @ 4:50pm | Report comment
I’d like to see a Australia A side to travel with the main squad and play ‘tests’ against the lesser emerging nations on a yearly basis. So whilst Australia play England,Ireland,Scotland and Wales the ‘A’ side could play Georgia, Russia, Romania Spain/ Portugal. Throw in a game against Canada and USA every 2nd or 3rd year.
AndyS said | June 18th 2009 @ 5:03pm | Report comment
Mate, I’d just like to see an Australia A side again…
True Tah said | June 18th 2009 @ 5:09pm | Report comment
Sam T
in respect of our views of Deans, you have to remember our two most recent coaches.
Steady Eddie started with a full trophy cabinet and proceeded the lose the lot. I know there are a fair few Eddie supporters on here, but he didnt do much apart from overanalyze the game to death and had poor man management skills as well.
John Connolly – well he was a caretake at best, but under him we bombed out at the quarter finals, I see the Reds are considering bringing him back into the fold, as usual the QRU is 20 years behind the time.
Relative to these guys, Deans is the Great Redeemer of Australian Rugby.
TommyM said | June 18th 2009 @ 5:11pm | Report comment
Don’t forget that Deans has Giteau, Sharpe, Waugh, Moore, AAC and Benn Robinson on the bench to bring on en masse if it all gets too pear shaped…
Working Class Rugger said | June 18th 2009 @ 5:14pm | Report comment
So would I. I just think when the program does return it should be expanded to play in a few more games or tournaments like the Churchill Cup or IRB Nation’s Cup along side it previous comittment to the Pacific Nations Cup. Hopefully the Jnr AB’s and Emerging Boks could run a similar program. As Tier 1 nations we should do alot more in the development of the targeted Tier 2 Nations like USA, Canada, Russia, Japan, Romania, the PI’s, Georgia, Spain, Portugal and judging from their recent promotion into the top division of FIRA’s U18 Euro Championships Germany and even Belgium in the Future.
Peter K said | June 18th 2009 @ 5:31pm | Report comment
Sam – I do see a difference re rotation , B teams etc. When the SH teams do it they EXPECT to still win the game. At the minimum there will still be a real contest, not so with the NH B teams. The NH teams when they send a B team have no delusion of expecting to win the game. Their A team wins few when they tour as it is so let alone a B team.
Sam Taulelei said | June 18th 2009 @ 5:32pm | Report comment
Chris yes a grand slam tour is something to get excited about but if the Wallabies play experimental teams it diminishes the achievement.
True Tah understand your point but hold off on proclaiming anyone a great redeemer until they achieve something.
ohtani's jacket, said | June 18th 2009 @ 6:56pm | Report comment
What I wanna know is why he’s playing that sort of a side a week before your first real Test of the season against France. That team he picked in Jo’berg last year certainly didn’t help you win the Tri-Nations in Brisbane.
The Wallabies may match-up better against France than the All Blacks do, and it’ll be interesting to compare the three Tests, but do you really thinking that your pack is playing well or that he has exactly the right backline?
I’m sure they’ll beat Italy, and they may even score more than the Wallabies did last week, but if you compare this team to the All Black side that played France last weekend, I can’t see how one is genuis and the other scorned.
Some of the changes I think are worthwhile (Barnes and Pocock. Others seem like an attempt to keep Australian players in Australia.
Knives Out said | June 18th 2009 @ 8:17pm | Report comment
‘What I wanna know is why he’s playing that sort of a side a week before your first real Test of the season against France.’
Swine flu?
bennalong said | June 18th 2009 @ 11:34pm | Report comment
OJ
You ignore my point about lack of leadership. The AB’s were directionless.
George Smith will lead from the front and Barnes will be superior at pivot to Donald
As individuals I thought the AB’s would win. As a team they couldn’t put it together. The scorn if you call it that was deserved. They didn’t look as though they were giving their all for their country. More like jet lagged Chiefs.
This Wallabies team weren’t genius and this ‘new’ team will be tested up front on Saturday. But its Les Bleus that I’m looking foreward to the following week. Despite the soulless stadium and the quiet and restrained Sydney fans, we should be able to beat them.
But you can’t call Robbie spineless, can you?
Frank O'Keeffe said | June 19th 2009 @ 12:33am | Report comment
Deans’ selections are incredibly dangerous if you ask me. He’s picked an inexperienced front-row. I like Polota-Nau, but his throw is terrible and the Wallabies line-out has fallen to shambles when he’s played. He’s picked an untried, untested, mid-field combination. I actually don’t mind Ryan Cross at 13 as I didn’t think Mortlock was that brilliant against Italy. But Copper at 12? It’s just mindless experimentation.
Barnes might make a better 10 than Giteau, but after Giteau has played 10 all year (and improved in some areas) maybe they should just stick with him. It’s interesting though because while Barnes doesn’t have the playmaking skills of Giteau, he seems to command the game more than Giteau. Barnes, to me, was Australia’s best player against Italy. Much of what he did went unnoticed. I like James O’Connor a whole lot, but he got two tries on a platter and got MOTM, while Barnes did a lot of the unseen work.
I REALLY LIKE POCOCK AT #7. This is especially since I didn’t think Smith played very well against Italy. Smith made some errors that were just ill-diciplined. They weren’t errors made by pressure. Often he did the hard work and then would do something silly. Australia will look better when Rocky comes back.
I think there’s an outside chance Australia will lose this game. I’m serious! I think Australia will win, but gosh why upset the side so much by interfering with the side so much. I can’t understand changing the front row and the mid-field combination (unless it’s just Cross with Giteau).
Remember what happened when Deans last screwed around with the midfield against South Africa? Mortlock at 12 was a horrid failure and Tahu was unleashed wayyyy to early and was exploited… BADLY.
Frank O'Keeffe said | June 19th 2009 @ 12:36am | Report comment
“(unless it’s just Cross with Giteau).”
Means to say “Unless it’s Barnes with Cross”. That’s a good 12-13 combination.
Just off topic for a short instant. Am I alone in thinking that Berrick Barnes was Australia’s best player last year until he got injured?
OldManEmu said | June 19th 2009 @ 10:02am | Report comment
Sam – I draw a huge distinction between understrength touring teams and experimental home teams. These people are our guests and should be polite. My mother would never let me wear a tracksuit to a persons home for dinnner.
ohtani's jacket, said | June 19th 2009 @ 8:22pm | Report comment
The Wallabies have leadership? When did that happen?