Your move next, Robbie Deans

get rid of Dingo, please

"Lions tours are an average 10 years apart, this one is 12. I’ve scoured the record books and can’t find a Wallaby who has played in two Lions’ series" Really?? When was the last tour and tour before that?? 2001 & 1989 Lions tours are every four years, spread across 3 countries. So it's every 12 years.

The point is that if we are not going to pick the best players we are seeting ourselves up for failure. Applies not just to Geo Smith but right across the team.

Why are Qaude and Beale essential? High on the list of pre-requisites should be blokes who can tackle. In the past, we had to put up with having a bunch of bernard tomics in the team (see the 3 amigos) because there was a lack of depth. To balance out the dickhead factor you had to have guys like McCabe and Berrick who have a fraction of the talent but are great blokes who will die for the team. But now there is depth and you don't need to pick the 3 amigos because there are credible alternatives. And because of those credible alternatives you don't need the solid but limited guys like Berrck and McCabe. I also don't understand Deans and others justifying selections like Berrick and McCabe on the basis that they have done it before. We're not playing in the tardis, we're playing in a few months time. If blokes are good enough to outperform the best of the Jappies and Kiwis, they're good enough. Pick on form. And don't pick JC at 5/8 when his distribution isn't up to it. My team: 1. Robinson 2. Moore 3. Alexander 4 Simmons or Carter 5 Horwill 6 MMM 7 Gill 8 Palu 9 Genia 10 Toomua 11 Ioane 12 JC 13 Ashley Cooper 14. tomane or folau 15 Mogg

Very good. :)

Making them eligible probably wouldn't make much difference to the number of players (likely to be wanted for wallaby duty) who go O/S. The players we want have good money here, and the O/S contracts on offer, if the clubs knew they would have to release for internationals, wouldn't be so attractive.

I agree with giving new guys ago is usually good for their development, but what i cant agree with you is the issue of sharpe. This is because we were very limited on experience during those test matches and they weren't the normal end of year tours. They were the world cup qualifiers. This is unfortunate because the lions are this yr and not in 4 years time when we could have experience. I think the experience players can add a lot more in times of hard play than when its against easier opposition. The point i make, is look at australian cricket and the handling of katich, hussey etc. Dropping these players for youth is great in theory but all of a sudden, the best player for the job, with experience is gone and the young guys dont learn from them. Thats why we start to get losing cultures because we give guys time to find there feet and hope they will eventually start winning, if this doesn't happen, we crucify them. I think making quality players is a two fold effect. One is to have the talent already and two is to develop that talent in an experienced and winning team. This is more often common with the better teams and why young guys seem to perform straight away(swans, geelong, reds, crusaders, melbourne storm, ye old australian cricket team etc). I really do think gill should be there, but i also believe Smith is the best person for the job and the teams development over these three game series. Winning this series could kickstart a winning culture and confidence that players thrive off and i think gill would only benefit from that

I think that experience has its value but it also has drawbacks when you pull a guy in for ‘one last tour’. Look at Nathan Sharpe. Yes he lead the side well, and I personally love the guy as a player so was happy to see him rewarded, but he was not supposed to be playing and now he is gone we are still none the wiser as to who has what it takes in the second row for the Wallabies. Simmons, Pyle, Neville, Jones, Douglas are all young and improving but none has really stamped their authority, and the leading contender is another returned veteran in Hugh McMeniman. Would it not have been better to use to EOYT to see if Pyle had what it takes to lead the Australian lineout and play against the NH locks? We parachute G.Smith in for the Lions and then Pocock’s rehab goes awry and we’re left having to play Gill or Hooper against Brussow and McCaw later in the year anyway. Isn’t it better to harden them in the cauldron of a Lions series? I don’t see that it is irrelevant that George Smith played the Lions as his 4th, 5th and 6th tests – I have no doubt that Gill is good enough to play Lions, I see no upside to playing George Smith – tickets are already sold out and he won’t be here for the Rugby Championship. We will not win or lose based on the very small difference in skill between Smith and Gill; we are however far more likely to lose based on the absolute smashing Healy and Jones will dish up to the two Bens up front.

Speaking of evil bro, I actually played a little footy with Bruce Deans in Ireland. Man he had a bullet of a pass on him.

Ha, his outgoing, cards on the table brother, Bobby Deans.

The Highlanders have been struggling with their backrow all season. It would take a bit more than Smith feasting on a weak backrow to convince people he can still dominate at test level. He ate Daniel Braid alive in 2008 in Sydney and then struggled against the All Blacks for the rest of his career, though Deans did screw around playing him at 8.

will deans evil twin come back from the dead and take over the AB's?

My, my, aren't we fickle? From being in bed with Deans to jilting him over an ex-lover, it's like a soap opera in here.

That's difficult to disagree with, although there would be one less big body shifter in the backrow, which may cause problems against the Lions, depending on how mobile the pack they select is.

I think you're right RK, however if somebody has played over 100 tests with distinction, I reckon they deserve special consideration (not if he were playing overseas, but irrespective of who he is contracted to he's playing in Aus and coupled with his 100+ tests, should be accommodated). I don't think this will set a dangerous precedent, as there aren't many 100+ test veterans with his form and in his situation.

He has one, but kafer has a world cup too. :) He was on the bench to robinson and He played very little of that year. He was really young so im not holding that against him. What do you think about the rest of what i said red kev? could it be that these players are just unlucky in the timing of when the tour is on? or that the unsettled team just makes it more difficult to be sure in trusting a young up and comer?

Certainly a fit Beale, Cooper and Smith would seem to offer the Wallabies an enhanced chance of victory, but like all coaches Deans seems to have his favourites and there is something not happening in his relationship with Beale and Cooper, and he may not want to change his line up for the short term inclusion of Smith. Rightly or wrongly, Deans' selection group have to choose who they want in the team, if it is to fit the style of play Deans hopes will help Australia win. Many in Australia will disagree with some of his actions, including myself, but he's in charge and its his head that will fall if his choices are wrong....well at least I hope so unless the ARU are senseless and myopic.

Go and tell the Highlanders that Smith is yesterday's man. Smith was best on field against them, and by a decent margin. I'll bet the Highlanders would have loved to have a yesterday's man like Smith playing for them last weekend.

I have to disagree. There is nothing yesterday about the way George Smith is playing NOW. What matters is beating The Lions. I also disagree about him being 2nd best. I believe he has always been at least equal to McCaw.

Liam Gill has a Super Rugby title to his name as well.