The five Wallabies who'll win us the World Cup

MCDUB's won the meat tray

A caveat on my last post: Harinordoquy was fairly slight for an eightman, about the same as Hoiles I believe. And Jamie Heaslip also weighs in at about 110 kg, about the same as McCalman. Both are superb players so perhaps I am overreacting a little about the weight thing.

"Aust has 6 better no 8’s imo" That is really reassuring to hear, and I wish I could believe so. But its one of the positions that worries me most. I have heard you before on Palu's deficiencies and frankly you give the impression that you haven't watched any of his tests. But put that to one side. I am still concerned that we don't have other potential number 8s, and I note you don't actually name any. I agree with you that Hoiles is playing really well and I would certainly keep him in mind. 33 is not too old to play RWC - just. Re McCalman, up until the last few games I felt he was rather mercurial, mixing awesome passages of play with patches of flakiness. I admit that he seems to be showing a hard attitude through 80 minutes recently, and perhaps he has hit the turning point. But both of those players are rather slight for a number 8 - they give away 15-20kg to Palu. Not that one needs to be 120kg to base the scrum, but every current 8 man I can think of is well over 110kg - Read, Vermeulen, Easter, Vunipola etc. So was our last great number 8, Toutai Kefu, and a very good fill-in (considering his age) Radike Samo. And in any case, once you get past Hoiles and McCalman, who is there?

In his last FULL season you say. When was that - 2007. And as previously stated players are in no position to vote on best player. The reality is that PALU is not worthy of a place in the Wallaby squad last year or this year. Aust has 6 better no 8's imo, including Hoiles. And for anyone to suggest he's a potential world cup star is laughable & sad. Mr Invisible has played in 2 previous RWC and been W's worst player - the biggest single weakness. The rest of your article is also silly imo. The entire Squad will have to play their best ever even to make it out of the pool. But most important are ALL the tight 5 forwards imo. Singling out a few players is silly imo.

hahahaha - who cares what the Tahs players voted. When you're playing you're not closely watching the performance of other players. Most of the forwards have got their heads in a ruck/maul/scrum anyway. PLUS no one said anything about PALU's Tah form - he's ok at provincial level (though Hoiles is much better imo). This was all about him being Mr Invisible at TEST LEVEL. The only weird thing here is your continued support for a player that has always been the W's biggest single weakness. It's even stranger you think he's capable of being a match winner. I don't hate Wycliff - I just watch him objectively and see how totally ineffective he always is at Test level. You can't fairly blame his lack of form over 50 Tests on injuries - if he was unfit he should not have been playing at all. Plus he's never played a good game at Test level - he's ranged from being Mr Invisible to almost useless. W's have always had better alternatives at No 8 anyway. You need to start watching players without bias and your articles will improve.

I don't think Pocock is the messiah, but neither is he just a naughty boy. I think its only fair to say that, if any single player won the QF for us in 2011, it was Pocock. (mind you, that shows the fallacy of talking about a single player winning games - if any of about a dozen players had been awry in their defensive technique in that match, we would have gone down). On the other hand, he couldn't make much of an impact in the following game vs ABs, and that had more to do with the style of the ref than anything else. When you say games since then, well he hasn't been fit to play for many of them so its hard to judge. i agree he has to prove himself like every other player this season, and he hasn't yet booked his ticket on the plane. I expect he will do so, but its up to him.

Since no-one else is a CURRENT prospect, what is the point of this?

Michael, I am cheered to read your assessment that he hasn't had a problem with injury recently. That has always been my biggest worry about him. The second worry is depth in the No 8 position. Watching people argue about the relative merits of Hooper and Pocock is reassuring, in that they can. i.e. there are two very good No 7s to squabble over. But if we want to have a fight about No 8, then its Palu and.... who? A couple of years ago I would have said it was Mr Indestructo himself, Radike, but surely he has had his test day now. So who is the other contender or contenders for 8? :|

Kuridrani's good point was that in 2014 he learned to play more like AAC. That's when he became competitive as a test No 13, and less like a flaky running back masquerading as a 13. We are now well off for No 13s, but we need both to be fit - AAC and TK. Crossing fingers that TK's injury heals fully.

Unfortunately that's not what happened four years ago. Although, we were able to pile on 10+ tries against the USA and Russia.

Good piece Michael, although the article headline should be " The 5 players to give us a chance " rather than win it. Agree those 5/6 players are absolutely crucial for us getting out of the group. I'd say the next most important players are Genia & Cooper, however I'm not sure they're going to get a start the way the Reds are playing. These two are our best halves combo hands down but will they get an opportunity. To be honest I think us entertaining thoughts of winning it all is a pipe dream. I'd be happy getting out of the group. There is just too much work to be done in too little time for the team to come right.

Michael Essa, As Foghorn Leghorn remarked about the young, pesky chicken hawk: "Ah say, he's a nice boy, but he's only got one oar in the water." It's difficult to have a meaningful discussion with you when you can't even get my original comments right. Either you're struggling with your comprehension or simply only wish to fuel your prejudices.

Negativity is often a word thrown about by people who resent not being agreed with. You know what I say about those half-full & half-empty discussions? Just fill the bloody glass up! BTW, get it right. Take me back to 1984. 1985 was a dud year.