- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Your constituents are restless. Your most recent selections confused many of us, dismayed some of us, and made a few of us very, very unhappy.
The consensus coming out of the Tri-Nations was/is that things are looking up for our team. Selections for the spring tour were much anticipated. We expected a view (not just glimpses) of the bold vision for the path to 2011.
What happened?
Here at the pub we’d discussed the options thoughtfully, rigorously, heatedly, and ad nauseum. Nothing definitive, but we generally agreed that a variety of changes were obvious and there would be bolters – we’d speculated that some of them would be real surprises.
The 23rd has come and gone. We’re recovering, and the focus has changed from ‘who?’ to ‘why?’
What happened?
The most plausible and popular answer to ‘why?’ is the upcoming World Cup seeding. Plausible perhaps, but it is does not ring true.
That narrow objective would leave little or no room for experiment in the Tests and virtually doom 10-15 travelers to mid-week matches and bench duty.
However, if that is the case, then why all the usual suspects?
Perhaps you can answer a few questions and save us a lot of frustrating and pointless second-guessing.
We may not like the answers, but we’d like them nonetheless.
PROPS:
Dunning seems unlikely to start as long as Robinson and Baxter are healthy. He may be a good bloke to have along for a laugh, but if he is only going as a backup, we’d like to know why you didn’t select another bolter. We’d also like to know what the plan is to produce some world class props – if there is one.
HOOKER:
Polatu Nau has been at best a mixed bag all year. His throwing is atrocious and he knows it. It impacts the rest of his game and the defensive discussions of his ‘potential’ are wearing very thin. He and his number 8 mate Palu both appear to need a shrink more than match time at the Wallabies’ expense. Moore and Frier will fill the bill. Couldn’t you have found another bolter here or perhaps another prop?
SECOND ROW:
No one here would have been really surprised to see Sharpe stay home. He is up and down, but mostly down. Now at the tail end of his international run, he’s a high risk of being a no-show for any match. One clunker and you will bench him again. So, what would have been the risk of selecting another bolter with youth and everything to prove, such as Kimlin?
BREAKAWAYS:
The surprise here was your persistence with Waugh. On recent form, you cannot afford to start him, so he is at best a passenger. He cannot jump, pass, or create anything. He plays his heart out but really provides nothing in terms of options. If you only expect to get 20 minutes out of him as an impact player, haven’t you wasted another development opportunity here? Were there no options?
Number 8:
Generally speaking, we are rather disenchanted with Palu – particularly after the showing Brown made when he came in as a replacement. Brown was easily more effective and showed far more of the ‘ticker’ that is so often the subject of our discussions. As noted earlier, the bloke needs a shrink, not more match time. Even Baxter has shown more aggression (keep it up mate!) in recent matches. Palu has had his chances. We may not have many options, but Brown clearly showed that there are bona fide investment grade players out there looking for a run. Why didn’t you take a punt on Salvi or a dark horse that we weren’t looking at, such as Sydney Uni’s Davidson?
SCRUM HALF:
Cordingley? Why, why, why, why? With Burgess healthy, Sheehan on the bench and Cordingley on his way North anyway, why wasn’t this slot used for a bolter?
FLY HALF:
No real questions here. We think the rationale for not taking Beale is clear. Not everyone agrees with Cooper’s selection (this writer does) but we could argue (and have) about almost all of them.
IC/OC:
Bit of a conundrum this. We’d like to know how Horne rated but cannot really say the selections were a surprise. O’Connor was well received.
WINGS:
Same as for the centers. However, there would not have been much grousing here at the pub if you’d found a way to leave Tuquiri at home. It is difficult not to reflect on the performance of newcomers such as South Africa’s Nokwe and wonder what it would be like to have a real finisher in the up-and-coming mix instead of a closet nunber 8 loitering near the touch line.
FULLBACK:
This is a position we’d like to hear about. Since we do not seem to have a natural fullback in the mix, selecting Ashley-Cooper (presumable as a fullback), Turner, and Mitchell make sense to us. But we cannot see a master plan here. They all have better natural positions. What happened to Shepard? Still injured. No match time. Most of us don’t want to hear about Tuquiri as a fullback. So what is the plan? You have Fly halfs and Inside Centres to burn. Have you thought about Barnes as fullback?
We spend far more time thinking and arguing about these issues than we do watching the sport.
With that in mind, we’d greatly appreciate explanations for a lot more than we are given now. This is a serious request, so before you dismiss it, stop to consider who foots the bill.
Humour us with a little transparency. It will add value for us out here in the bush. Call it marketing or whatever makes it seem important to you.
Thanks.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.