Three fullbacks or two wingers and O’Connor?
By Brett McKay, 29 Jun 2010 Brett McKay is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- James OConnor, Quade Cooper, robbie deans, Rugby Union, wallabies

New Wallabies signings James O'Connor, Quade Cooper, coach Robbie Deans, David Pocock and Sekope Kepu at ARU headquaters, Sydney. (AAP Image/Dean Lewins)
It’s not been a good week and a bit for Australia’s national teams. While the Wallabies are riding their annual international form roller-coaster, our cricket team is taking it’s time to get into the one-day series against England over in Blighty.
And, as Murphy’s Law dictates, just as I announced my presence on the Socceroos World Cup bandwagon, it was ripped out from underneath me by an inferior goal difference, due mainly to a dud Pim Verbeek plan in the first game.
Therefore, it’s back to rugby this week, as I search for a win somewhere. Anywhere.
Going into the Ireland Test, the Wallabies had to defend some selections, with plenty of pundits suggesting changes in certain positions. Without doubt, squad injuries saved several players from the axe after the loss to England.
The ‘back three’ unit was certainly one area in which change was expected, but save for Adam Ashley-Cooper coming onto the left wing for the injured Digby Ioane, fullback James O’Connor and right winger Drew Mitchell held their spots.
Ashley-Cooper, thought to be entrenched as a fullback at the end of last year, is quickly falling back into that Mr Fix-it role that he used to play regularly, but neither he or Wallaby coach Robbie Deans seemed overly worried in the lead-up.
Deans was non-committal about where Ashley-Cooper now fits, explaining “most of his recent rugby has been on the wing so there’s a fair bit of continuity to that end, but I’m sure it won’t be the last position you will see him in this year.”
Ashley-Cooper trotted out the line that Deans has wanted to instil in the Wallabies back three for some time, “I see it as three fullbacks rather than winger, fullback, winger.”
So knowing this is what Deans wants, and with a key player in this combination seemingly on board, I decided to watch the Test against Ireland with a close eye on this ‘three fullbacks’ arrangement.
As a lead-in, I kept an eye on the New Zealand-Wales Test with this same focus, as the All Blacks back three would probably sit as the benchmark at where Deans wants the Wallabies’ equivalents to operate.
The game didn’t really lead itself to a lot of counter-attacking rugby, but what was obvious is that there was definite ‘unity’ between fullback Mils Muliaina and Cory Jane and young Zac Guildford on the wings, despite not playing together the previous week.
On the kick returns, the three of them were almost always back in position ready early, and the ball was rarely returned without at least two of them playing a part. If the return was via an All Black kick, you could be assured the other two were leading the chase.
I was quite interested to see if the Australian back three had the same sort of harmony.
Sadly, they did not.
It all started so promisingly, too. The first kick return for the Wallabies saw Mitchell claim the catch, who then passed to O’Connor in midfield, who himself had Ashley-Cooper in support. Great stuff, just what I wanted to see.
Not a minute later though, O’Connor was penalised for advancing on Ashley-Cooper’s clearing kick; the first of two of these inexcusable Wallaby infringements for the night.
For the rest of the first half the back three rarely combined, mainly due to Bryce Lawrence’s incessant and infuriatingly pedantic refereeing; they didn’t get much chance to. In reality though, the back three rarely played in their named formation anyway.
O’Connor seemed to be spending most of his time on the left wing, with Ashley-Cooper playing fullback. And O’Connor seemed to prefer linking with good mate Quade Cooper anyway.
The lack of obvious linkage between the back three was already worrying. They weren’t so much playing as ‘three fullbacks’ but as two wingers and James O’Connor.
After the break, and with shuffling of the backline required after outside centre Rob Horne stayed off with a gluteal complaint, the back three combination saw no improvement. Ashley-Cooper was now playing at outside, O’Connor was formally moved to the wing, and Kurtley Beale was at fullback for the second half.
In Beale and O’Connor, we now had a former flyhalf/inside centre only this year converted into a fullback, and a still developing inside centre/fullback playing on the wing.
Not long after half time Beale bombed a near-certain try with a wasted grubber kick to the in-goal that ignored a two-on-one overlap. But the unmarked man was Matt Giteau; where was Mitchell?
Shortly after that, O’Connor was rightly penalised for taking out the legs of Irish winger Andrew Trimble in the air, which begged the question that if O’Connor was there to crudely take Trimble’s legs from under him, why wasn’t he contesting the high ball?
With Mitchell having another off night, the back three was a decent barometer on how disjointed the rest of the Wallaby backline looked. Apart from Luke Burgess servicing Cooper well all night, and Ashley-Cooper running strongly in midfield as he always does, there was little to like.
In Cooper, and especially Giteau, O’Connor and Beale, the Wallabies were way too lateral, and overplayed the one-off runners.
There was little or no backline play from scrum-half all the way out to the wings, and there were no clear signs anyone knew what anyone else was doing. Smarter, fresher, and quicker defensive lines than Ireland will demolish this sort of ‘attack’ with ease and regularity.
Captain Rocky Elsom was spot on in the post-match, saying that the Wallabies had “a lot of work to do” in the three weeks before their first Tri-Nations match against South Africa.
Midfield combinations will rightly be examined and questioned, but I’d be looking at who can properly fill the ‘three fullbacks’ function as a matter of priority.
Follow Brett McKay on Twitter: @BMcSport
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Victory beat Mariners with Kewell winner
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (202)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- James OConnor, Quade Cooper, robbie deans, Rugby Union, wallabies

Sam Taulelei said | June 29th 2010 @ 7:45am | Report comment
Excellent summation Brett, I share the same thoughts with you on the harmony with the Wallaby back three last Saturday. I mentioned a few weeks ago that I believe the Wallaby backline is unbalanced and I”ve seen nothing to make me change my mind. Their attack is too lateral but without a powerful runner like Mortlock to be more direct and hold the defence in check they don’t have the pace or room to get on the outside and can be easily shepherded into touch. They don’t have enough strong ball running forwards to carry the ball over the advantage line to support Elsom and they don’t offload in the tackle enough to maintain continuity. The return from injury of some of their front line forwards will strengthen the team but the sum of the parts is not as strong as the whole yet.
Who Needs Melon said | June 29th 2010 @ 8:15am | Report comment
Sam I think at least some of us thought Rob Horne would be that powerful runner for the backs. Who would you be suggesting we try from our current crop? Or is it a matter of game plan / training rather than personnel?
As for the forwards, surely it’s time to try Hodgson SOMEwhere in the mix.
Sam Taulelei said | June 29th 2010 @ 8:47am | Report comment
I thought Adam Ashley Cooper was going to be Mortlock’s successor at centre but he’s been played in so many different positions that I fear he’ll be labelled with the unwanted utility tag. A backline comprising of Cooper, Giteau and O’Connor and then Beale as a substitute has too many players cut from the same cloth. That would be like the All Blacks playing, Cruden, Carter, Colin Slade and then bringing on Robbie Robinson as a substitute.
It’s less personnel and more tactics, Conrad Smith is not as powerfully built as Fourie, O’Driscoll, Mortlock and Umaga but he does straighten the line and Rob Horne can certainly do that as well. Ioane’s injury is unfortunate as he was one player who had the physical presence to hold the opposition in two minds whenever he had the ball in his hands. If you’re going to play a backline like that then they need to run onto the ball as they’re not going to bust the line from a standing start or in a flat alignment. If they’re going to play flat then someone has to take the ball to the line and then pass accurately into the gap where the support player is running into, it’s risky but it does place a lot of pressure on the defensive team to react correctly.
If the forwards aren’t getting the ball over the advantage line then the Wallaby backs will be much easier to defend against and they’ll be forced to kick more often and chase.
Brett McKay said | June 29th 2010 @ 5:48pm | Report comment
Cheers Sam. Late in the game, I noticed both Beale and O’Connor – playing wing and fullback at the time – both trying to get into the backline to try their fancy stepping and miracle passing. Trouble was, Cooper and Giteau were already doing that, and so you had the situation of four blokes wanting to run the play, and with only Ashley-Cooper and Mitchell (when it suited him) to hit gaps. It was no wonder they looked “disjointed”.
If the team was playing again this weekend, Hynes on the wing and Ashley-Cooper at 13 (presuming Horne is sitting out the week) would be a must if I were holding the clipboard, but I’d then still want another straight runner at fullback. If Chambers is indeed out, then perhaps Turner could push Hynes to 15. And then I’d tell the back three that they have to combine between at least two of them every time they return the ball. Unity doesn’t come over night, so start getting used to it.
Be more direct, guys, the only way to truly draw defence is to force them to make a decision. Currently they’re just standing back watching you run sideways…
kingplaymaker said | June 29th 2010 @ 8:12am | Report comment
‘In Beale and O’Connor, we now had a former flyhalf/inside centre only this year converted into a fullback, and a still developing inside centre/fullback playing on the wing.’ Of course, a shame there isn’t room for them in their natural positions. Or is there? Maybe they are actually better than the likes of Giteau and Barnes.
It’s sad to see Digby Ioane try and produce the entire Australian outside attack.
What a catastrophe: remember five years ago when Mortlock and Tuqiri would batter holes all day long.
Until another seriously dangerous runner is found to support Ioane the Wallabies cannot be at the top of world rugby.
What Robbie Deans would give to have Muliaina, Jane, Ranger, Rokocoko, Sivivatu.
Mr Saunders said | June 30th 2010 @ 10:38pm | Report comment
I’m confused? You’re talking about how Australia lacks a physical battering ram, so to speak, and then go on to list players that are more known for their elusive running and skill. Why would Deans want these players if he doesn’t have a physical runner for them to play off?
Mals said | June 29th 2010 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Good summation Brett. To be fair to O’Connor he was being blocked by a Irish defender moments before trying to contest the high ball but yes he still did take out Trimble’s legs. In my opinion O’Connor is not consistent enough in performance to be a regular starter for the Wallabies. I think he would better serve the team as a utility on the bench.
For the test against the Saffas in the outside backs I would like to see Ashley-Cooper back at outside centre (give Horne a rest) & Beale at fullback. If Ioane is fit he takes one wing & it can be a fight between Hynes/Mitchell/Turner for the other wing spot.
Justin said | June 29th 2010 @ 9:29am | Report comment
I agree with Sam. The back-line is too similar and I have been critical of Deans continued policy of 2 playmakers. Nothing I have seen so far has changed my mind. The way Cooper is dominating the playmaking role shows that we do not need another PM outside of him like Gits or Barnes. We need a runner and strong defender. Genia/Cooper takes all responsibility for QLDs back play and I think it should be the same with the Wallabies. Once Genia gets back but even now it is superfluous to requirements.
There were a number of occasions on Saturday where Anthony Fainga would have added to the backline. I also think it may be a reason we sometimes kick the ball away so much. We dont have someone at 12 who we know is strong enough to take on the defence and get the ball back. At one stage Cooper made a lovely half break on halfway and had the arms free waiting for Gits to come charging. He was another 6 or 7 metres away looking wide. Also Gits defence (and possibly Horne) badly missed O’Driscoll. You can clearly see Gits step in for a moment and then try to pick BOD up late but he was gone. Cooper had the short man covered and we had the numbers but it was poor defending.
While Horne and Chambers are good footballers they are not Mortlock and will not punch holes at will like he did for so long. They prefer to use their feet and speed most of the time. Just another reason we need to have a strong running 12 to keep the defence guessing. At the moment not much of the attack is going through this channel which is crazy considering most 10s arent great defenders.
Despite his shocking grubber (he should have just gassed for the line and scored or drawn BOD and passed to Gits to score) Beale was pretty good and added alot of energy to the Wallaby counter. I think he has a future at this level. Mitchell was poor again. His problem is clearly mental. He did not looked switched on at any stage and that is a huge concern. His spot must be under plenty of pressure.
formeropenside said | June 29th 2010 @ 9:57am | Report comment
I think that Chambers (now out injured for the year with a shoulder reconstruction) could well be the “next Mortlock”. He is big and fast, and is fitting in well to 13 for the Reds. Morgan Turinui can feel hard done by – he did nothing wrong – but Chambers offered more in terms of power (although Morgs is over 100kg) and speed. Ioane is also a 13 option – and I would like to see him tried at 12 a la Nonu sometime in a midweek game to see how that went.
AAC though is the current best choice at 13 for mine, although I can see a case for running him at 15 or the wing on occasion.
I’m also not sure that the two playmakers structure is suiting Australian rugby. A.Faingaa was perfect in partnership with Cooper (who he also plays with at Souths, on occasion) for the Reds, and his role was somewhere between distributor and Tom Carter truck it up for 5m.
But really, until the forwards learn to ruck and counter-ruck better, who plays in the backs is irrelevant.
Jiggles said | June 29th 2010 @ 10:48am | Report comment
I also noticed that Giteau/Horne defencive blunder. Im not sure why it happend, maybe Gitaeu didnt trust Cooper inside him to take his man so he moved in? what ever it was, it was a rookie mistake and not something you want to see in a test match.
As I have stated on other threads, I feel Horne has been picked for what he could do more so then what he has done at Super 14. he definatly has potential, but I have not seem him play a game in which he completly dominated.
In saying all this however, I think Horne would be a great compliment to Cooper as an Inside Centre. I dont think we need the Double playmaker inside centre anymore as Cooper is more then compitent enough to run the backline. as shown at the Reds with Faainga, a hard hitting, straight running no BS IC worked a treat. Horne and Faainga should battle it out for this spot in the wallabies.
for 13, I disagree that Chambers cannot be up to Mortlocks standard. He is big, Hard and has great offloading skills. I remember when mortlock first came onto the scene (played a bit on the wing), I thought he was rubbish, however after a few years he really hit his straps. Chambers, after a wobbly inital few games is better then mortlock at the same stage of his carrer, and he has had to unlearn all those bad league habbits. No reason why he cannot be better then the fantastic mortlock.
Justin said | June 29th 2010 @ 1:32pm | Report comment
Jigs – not saying that Chambers cant be a very good player but what I am saying is he is not the type to bash and crash through defences. He has more gifts than that with beautiful feet and an ability to offload and also geton the outside. Mortlock is probably the best 13 over the past 20 years to run brilliant lines that cut or bashed through defences.
So without that I think we need more at 12. I have heard Horne played a lot of 12 at school. Can anyone confirm this? If it is the case then it could be another option.
formeropenside said | June 29th 2010 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
I dont know if Horne will ever fulfil his potential due to injury – unfortunately for Australian rugby, he looks to be the next Cameron Shepherd.
How about we convert Hoiles to a 12? Its where he has always wanted to play. God knows he doesn’t play like a forward.
Justin said | June 29th 2010 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
Just because Barnes was in the side doesn’t mean he had an influence in the backline clicking. He defended well in that match, granted but did fark all in attack. So how you can justify his inclusion as a way to get the backline going is a little hard to swallow.
If you want someone who plays eell with QC then the answer is obvious. But he isn’t getting shot. More of Deans playing favourited…
Roger said | June 29th 2010 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
I think everyone will find that at QLD, Faingaa oly got the ball from Cooper when a hit up was required…Quade inevitably cut 12 out and passed ball long to the outside backs…with Wobblies however, Gits demanded the ball and he got it, the problem was he was so wide that the opp 12 and the 13s, 14s and 15s for both teams were also there and there was no space. Horne needs early ball as his fotwork is out of this world if he has some time on the ball. With Gits runing play at 12, Horne is a crash baller and gets ball on advnatge line and not in space
If BArnes plays alonside Cooper he will be cut out of most set pieces then wrap around on wide blind sides, or go to first receiver if quade gets caught in a ruck…Quade needs a foil and Gits it not it.
How about we have a 5 forward bench with 2 backs – Gits covering 9,10 and 12, and O’Connor covering oustide backs (and if Horne injured, move Ione during game to 13).
Brett McKay said | June 29th 2010 @ 5:53pm | Report comment
Justin, I’m happy enough with the Cooper-Giteau setup, but Giteau probably just needs to trust Cooper’s ability to put him into space a bit more. Admittedly, Cooper has delivered him some classic hospital ball this season so far, and so he’s probably a touch anxious. But he’s got to learn to trust his 10 the same way he used to trust Stephen Larkham, and the sooner he does, the sooner he’llresmue that dangerous running 12 role he used to play..
el gamba said | June 29th 2010 @ 9:59am | Report comment
Good article Brett – the back three certainly seemed disjointed and a good Irish kick/chase shut them down effectively.
A few people have noted, as you did, Rocky Elsom’s “we have a lot of work to do over the next few weeks”. Following both Quade Cooper and James O’Connor on twitter they have both indicated their excitement of now having a two week break, How does this gel with Rocky’s comment?
Rugbywits said | June 29th 2010 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
I completely agree with you there. I follow both of them on Twitter as well and I thought the same.
Where is the improvement going to come from? They’ve played a few games granted but none of them was especially taxing and we didnt seem to expell enough energy to need a break!
Brett McKay said | June 29th 2010 @ 5:57pm | Report comment
El Gamba, that’s a worry isn’t it. I got the impression from the way Elsom spoke that they might have been given a week off and then would be in for a good old fashioned training track flogging. Maybe that will still be the case when they resume..
Ben C said | June 29th 2010 @ 10:10am | Report comment
I will also join the Brett McKay/Sam Taulelei bandwagon. All aboard!
As I posted elsewhere on the Roar, I think Australia should ditch the twin playmaker formation at 10/12. NZ traditionally do it well (Nonu is a bit of a departure) but most other teams seem to struggle with two backline generals. Maybe because NZ has produced some very dominant 10s that leave the 12 in no doubt that they are in the secondary role eg Carter, Merthens, Spencer etc. Giteau is not a 10 and is probably too senior (ie set in his ways) to underplay his hand and accept a secondary role outside someone like Cooper. I would like to switch to an inside/outside centre combination. The trouble is, as others have mentioned, we haven’t had a big, powerful midfield runner to crack the defences since Mortlock/Tuqiri. Ioane could do it but he has slightly suspect hands and tends to die in the tackle. A powerful runner who could offload (Polota-Nau for 13?- just joking) would be ideal. Chambers might fill the role but is a bit callow. Ashley-Cooper might have if given more time at 13 but he rarely passes and usually goes to ground with the ball.
I suggest:
9 Genia
10 Cooper
11 Mitchell (get him back on the left wing where he plays well, he is anonymous out on the right wing)
12 Horne
13 Ashley-Cooper (Chambers perhaps as a long term option)
14 Ioane (or Ioane at 11, AAC at 14 and Chambers at 13)
15 Hynes
Brett McKay said | June 29th 2010 @ 6:00pm | Report comment
Sam, we have a bandwagon!! Cheers Ben, though as I’ve mentioned elsewhere here, I’m still a fan of the NZ 10-12 system and think it’s the way forward. But that doesn’t meant that a lot of improvement isn’t required, and that the rest of the backs know how and where to run off and at…
ohtani's jacket said | June 29th 2010 @ 8:12pm | Report comment
Why does everyone think New Zealand second five eighths are dual playmakers? It’s completely and utterly untrue.
Brett McKay said | June 29th 2010 @ 8:50pm | Report comment
OJ, that’s certainly true of teams like the ‘Canes, or even the ABs with Nonu at 12, but there’s still plenty of instances this last Super Rugby season of second-fives being genuine playmakers too (Bowden, McAlister to name a couple). I don’t know it’s “completely” untrue of us to see it this way..
ohtani's jacket said | June 29th 2010 @ 10:42pm | Report comment
The halfback and the first five are the playmakers in NZ rugby. Rarely do you see the second five set-up the play. In fact, a lot of what the second five does in NZ is invisible.
Sam Taulelei said | June 29th 2010 @ 11:29pm | Report comment
Brett I think that many people confuse the selections of players like Aaron Mauger and Luke McAlister at 12 with their ability to kick as qualifying them as playmakers. McAlister certainly prefers to force a play and will sometimes adopt the lone ranger role if nothing is on. Mauger would simply provide another pair of eyes to Carter and assist with kicks if Carter was out of the game but Carter was the bossman and when Umaga was captain he would call the shots. Bowden was the backup first five and replaced Bateman and Crotty who were out of form but he’s not a specialist 12 and he didn’t call the shots in the Crusaders backline.
Ben C said | June 30th 2010 @ 8:05am | Report comment
OJ, I will admit that it is an oversimplification but there is an element of truth to it. I will admit that dual playmakers doesn’t mean the silly system we adopted for a while of letting 10 and 12 swap and completely bugger the backline. As I understand it, 12 is a playmaker and often could play 10 in his own right, but underplays his hand and adopts a ‘facilitating’ role rather than a ‘creative’ role.
Perhaps the problem is, like I said, the NZ 12 knows to underplay his hand and let Carter, Merthens, Fox etc run the backline. Giteau doesn’t seem to be able to accept the “lesser” role and let Cooper dictate the play. To put it in Sam’s words, Giteau seems unable to be invisible and support Cooper’s control of the backline.
Rusty said | June 29th 2010 @ 10:15am | Report comment
Observation from random Saffer
9. Genia – better than Burgess by a mile.
10. Cooper – creates space and indecision in the opposition
11. Ioane – given he hardly passes its probably better having him scorch up the wing. Will deped on the others in the back 3 for kick returns
12. Barnes – defensively better than Giteau. Whom I might add is sliding into mediocrity with every game. Also offers excellent tactical kicking variation
13. AAC – Barnstorming player who also runs exceptional lines for someone who can just realy on his power
14. Hynes – solid as a house with great positional play
15. O’ Connor – Havent always been a fan but he has come on and isnt afraid to have a go
Bear said | June 29th 2010 @ 11:24am | Report comment
I don’t think you can have Cooper and Barnes in the same team.
It never worked at the Reds last year.
If you were to pick the team on form there is no way that Barnes would be there. He had a very ordinary year. It is funny, as soon as he went to the Waratahs, he started playing typical Waratah’s football – negative and boring. How many times did we see him kick this year when the better option would have been to run and have a go.
We seem to be lacking a big, strong Inside Centre that can take the ball up. Anthony Fianga did that admirably for the Reds this year, and his defence was fantastic. He also combines well with QC. In a few years time he might be able to fill this roll for the Wallabies. In the mean time, I think this is a real problem position.
BennO said | June 29th 2010 @ 12:45pm | Report comment
And yet the only game in which the wallabies played well this year we had Barnes at 12. Cooper and Barnes could be a perfect mix in the same team as long as they know each others’ roles and stick to them (like they did against the Poms). And as long as you have a big hard running 13 like AAC or Ioane. It’s Cooper and Giteau who should not be in the same team. Thse days I see Gits as a very useful bench player.
Justin said | June 29th 2010 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Barnes doesnt work outside Cooper, he isnt a penetrating runner and likes to sit deep and then decide what to do.
Cooper is the most creative 10 in world rugby (watch that comment get people going) and creates so many holes that you need strike runners off him for it to have its greatest effect.
Just because we beat England in one match doesn’t mean anything. Look at how poor he has been all year including the Baa Baas matches. He tackles and offers nothing else at this level.
BennO said | June 29th 2010 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
I don’t think his form at the Tahs or midweek internationals is relevant to how he plays outside Cooper.
He played one match this year outside Cooper and the backline worked better than at any other time. It’s not like he has to run off Cooper at every play, he would fill a role in the backline (tactical kicking, defence being two advantages). With Cooper and Gits the backline hasn’t done well, with Cooper and Barnes it has. But apparently that doesn’t mean anything?
If I’m not mistaken the only changes between the first and second test were Genia and Gits coming in. The back play since then has been lacklustre. I think that speaks volumes.
Dexter William said | June 30th 2010 @ 12:25am | Report comment
Maybe it is Gits coming in.
Brett McKay said | June 29th 2010 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
G’day everyone. I’m not in a postion today to follow the conversation as I normally would, but will hopefully come back tonight and answer some posts individually. But some brief points, quickly, for you all to carry on with this afternoon:
- in my mind, Peter Hynes has to come back in somewhere, either on a wing or at fullback (if Ashley-Cooper is going to play 13). I don’t think the Wallabies can afford to have part-timers in these positions come TNs;
- I’m not sure there’s room for O’Connor AND Beale in the same side currently. As plenty of you have said, there’s too much similarity between them and Cooper and Giteau;
- and on that subject, O’Connor needs to stop trying to be so damn cute with everything he does. Look where you pass, James, for starters. There’s no doubting his talent, but using it cleverly and completely overplaying your hand are two different things..
- I’m still a propenent of the dual playmakers, but Giteau needs i). space to operate, and ii). straight runners inside and out. I think too often on Sat night, Cooper had all the runners coming off him, which in turn left Giteau with no room to use Horne.
(and apoligies if ‘proponent’ isn’t a word – it sounds right, at the moment)
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | June 29th 2010 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
Totally off subject Brett, but are you going to the presentation dinner on Friday?
Brett McKay said | June 29th 2010 @ 6:01pm | Report comment
Guru, I’m not mate, no. I’m only back in town on Thursday anyway, but never really gave it much consideration anyway…
CK said | June 29th 2010 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
In Iones’ absence I’d like to see:-
9. Genia
10. Cooper
11. Hynes
12. Barnes
13. Horne
14. Turner
15. Two-Dads
with Beale and O’Connor on the bench. Clearly Mitchell needs to find himself again and Git’s is just off his game.
Turner in parrticular is strong in defence, rarely ever out of position, is a strong runner of the ball who is prepared to chance is hand and has a good kicking game. Isn’t it time he got another run at it?
Worlds Biggest said | June 29th 2010 @ 1:49pm | Report comment
My Wallaby backline for first Tri Nations game IF everyone is available,
9. Genia
10. Cooper
11. Ioane
12. Gituea
13. Horne
14. O’Connor
15. AAC
AAC need to be perservered with at 15 for this year. JOC has the makings of a very good winger. Mitchell has gone off the boil completely for some reason. If Horne isn’t available I would pick Ioane at 13 and Hynes onto the wing. Ioane is our only real physical intimidator in the backs. AAC is strong as an Ox but doesn’t have the bulk of Ioane.
Peter K said | June 29th 2010 @ 7:15pm | Report comment
AAC weighs more and is taller than Ioane.