In selecting his Wallabies squad, Michael Cheika will have to deal with all the parochial interests, and he will have quite a few selection issues. One which stands out as being critical is who to pick at number 12.
Once he decides on a 12, or the type of 12 he wants, he can pretty much work backwards – other positions will fall into line with this decision.
If Cheika selects Kurtley Beale at 12, that means he has to put Bernard Foley at 10, as he needs a cool head beside Beale. If he puts Quade Cooper at 10 to Beale’s 12, then he ends up with two mercurial players side by side in the backline, and anything could happen.
Having Beale at 12 means he would also need to select Michael Hooper at 7 as he needs someone quick enough to get across to cover that channel in defence (missed tackles) and in attack (dropped or spilt balls). Hooper at 7 then means he needs to have someone like Scott Fardy at 6 to cover for Hooper being absent at ruck time.
With Matt Giteau at 12, Cheika could play either Foley or Cooper inside him, but he’s probably still going to need the Hooper/Fardy flanking combination – less so with a Cooper/Giteau combination.
Putting either Matt Toomua or Samu Kerevi at 12 completely changes the dynamic. He could play Cooper inside both of these (providing Cooper continues his recent good form), otherwise with Foley there he ends up with two conservatives side by side and thus no sparkle or balance.
Selecting Toomua or Kerevi also means he is free to play Scott Higginbotham at 6, David Pocock at 7 and Wycliff Palu at 8, which would be my preferred back row combination. Higginbotham would play like a true 6, Pocock would just be a damn nuisance and pilferer, and Palu can truck it hard up the middle.
Once Cheika is no longer on the payroll of the NSWRU, will he see things differently or stick with the tried and trusted players he knows so well? I’m betting (and hoping) he is his own man and is used to making his own decisions.
Of course the gods of form and injury will no doubt play a part in some of his decisions. Thankfully he has a few lead-up games to tinker and experiment in before we get to the big dance.
Vhavnal
Roar Rookie
i thot it was 60 caps or more?, genia might get in after TRC but Quade still has 7 more caps to get ..
Hoqni
Guest
It is time that WBs go with Kerevi at 12. And then pick the best 10, from Cooper, Toomua, Foley or Beale. We have to trust the 10 to do his job and not second guess him, just in case. If WB needs a 2nd 10, at 12, operating 30 percent at 10, then it will not only be a painfully RWC, it'd be a painfully RC too. Kerevi is raw, and that's why there are Coaches
Harry Jones
Expert
T-Man, I think you've raised some valid points.
dane
Guest
Not sure if the selection of process needs to start with 12. Especially in English conditions against British teams, the back row should be selected first and the centres selected to compliment. For me, I think pocock, mccalman and fardy/McMahon provides the best combat at the breakdown. This means a ball crashing 12 is needed (toomua/kerevi) which means, according to the the authors logic, QC at flyhalf.
Muzzo
Guest
Honestly, to even consider Quade Cooper over Bernard Foley would be sheer madness, after watching his substandard performance against an injury ridden Chiefs last night. His long forward passes that he just seems to be able to get away with, along with his constant head high tackling, routine, that resulted in only one penalty against him. His handling of the ball as though it were a "hot potato" are not part of the skills that are required of an international No.10. He needs to take the ball to the line a lot more & set it up. Foley, after progressing through a "seven's" campaign, has developed the required skills for the international arena, & would be a far better asset to Australian rugby, moving forward. Even the Fox Sports team, noticed as to how Cooper was completely outplayed. & was more than hopeless on defense.
Not Bothered
Guest
Folau has shown over and over that his kicking is horrible. Its probably the worst in the Tahs backline. I reckon he has kicked the ball about 15 times all season and I reckon half of those were very bad kicks.
Not Bothered
Guest
Aus has Folau at FB. Has halfbacks that could not play 10. It would be unwise imo to have 1 playmaker of note in a backline for Aus. Australia is best served with a playmaker at 12 or 15 and because Folau wont budge... AAC to the wing imo.
Not Bothered
Guest
He could have put Beale on the wing or Potgeiter at halfback but that doesnt make sense and was never going to happen. Deans used a ball carrier at 12 and then switched back to a playmaker in his last few tests. NZ use Nonu at 12 who is not a crash and bash player but a guy who has been asked to develop his skills to become more of a playmaker. Cheika will want 2 playmakers in his backline, most coaches do. Wales hasnt used one and their play has been direct, predictable and has not won them as many games as it should have imo. SA has le Roux at fullback. Eng have tried desperately to get a 2nd playmaker but none have secured the position. NZ has Dagg, Nonu, C.Smith and B.Smith in the backline who all read the game well and contribute to ball-playing. Arg have hernandez. France have greatly lacked creative spark and guidence from their playmaker. Aus have had Beale, Toomua, Lealiifano and Giteau filling the role. So to say that top teams dont use a ball player at 12 is wrong tbh because Aus have been a top team with one, just because they are not right now does not mean that top teams dont use them, they do. Also top teans have creative players in the team if they have them. Imo Giteau, Lealiifano and Toomua should be 12. Kerevi 13 and I would consider Kuridrani for a wing spot.
Not Bothered
Guest
Kerevi isnt like Nonu. Im sick of hearing all these nonsense calls about who uses what and Aus must do this and cant do that. Its just nonsense and continues to be proven so when selections are made. Eng wanted a 2nd playmaker but nobody stepped up. Ire used a 2nd playmaker until 2015. Nonu is a playmaker and so is SBW. Aus uses a 2nd playmaker. Arg does. France, not really. Wales not really. And ffs, to say Aus isnt successfull is completely absurd. With a 2nd playmaker they have mainly been in the top 3 for decades.
RobC
Roar Guru
Yup, I saw that Daz thanks. My comment was mostly re the title, which normally is edited by someone else
Daz
Guest
Thanks Rob and I couldn't agree more. It's a sad day when we have to pick the forwards around the backs. Know the opposition, decide on the game plan, pick the forwards first and the backs should fall into line with that. My purpose was just to try and highlight some of the dynamics.
Daz
Guest
Tman that idea, AAC at 12 is not so left of field. The thought has crossed my mind too. AAC could be a great 12 if only he could learn to pass the damn ball. I don't mind that his first instinct is to go himself but his second and third instinct is the same. He never looks for support. It's like he has no peripheral vision. A more left of field idea would be to play Folau at 12. He would bring way more than AAC does and in my opinion the pluses would outweigh what we would lose in not having him at the back. AAC to 15 and Folau to 12 but I can't see it happening.
Daz
Guest
If I do another "best of comments" all three of you are in for sure.
Glenn
Guest
I wouldn't like to see AAC at 12 - nil passing intent. Yes AAC on wing and coming in off the half or 12, bu not 12. Presence is outer backs not inner backs.
Taylorman
Guest
That for me Dave...? I know what you mean though, i'm thankful too, I mean I'd hate to be responsible for an AB loss... :-)
Dave
Guest
Words cannot describe how happy I am that you are not part of the wallabies selection process
HarryT
Guest
I don't think you understand Cheik-ball. Cheika, who after all will be selecting the team, wants a playmaker at 12. When he wants a powerful mid field charge he uses his mobile forwards, such as Skelton, who also has silkier hands than your suggestions of Inman and Kerevi, and he also uses the power and speed of Hooper who also is a very good promoter of the ball. For years the ABs killed our backline by rushing up on AAC at 13. To combat this Cheika's plan is to have his 9, 10, 12 and a mobile forward, all attacking the line, running straight. The ball skills of Beale can promote the ball straight to 15 or the winger running outside the 13. This is a lot of attack, right across the park. The problem is that Beale is the only 12 that can play this game and Skelton and Hooper must be in the team. Without them Cheik-ball isn't that great.
Rob9
Guest
I don't think we have too many 'average' players 9 to 15 these days. I think most countries would be pretty happy to have the width and breadth of our backline talent. It's our personnel up front that has let us down- that place where games are won. As I said, I can tell you Toomua's, AAC's etc best positions. Doesn't make them average that they can play in more than one.
Johnny Boy Jnr
Guest
That's ridiculous. How could you suggest selecting a player at 12 who refuses to pass the ball? I'd love to see Beale in the team. Such an underrated player who is defensively & mentally strong, loyal & sober
Taylorman
Guest
The other thing about the playmaker role is the World Cup is likely to be on slower pitches with a lot of one ups and the 12 role is going to be a puncher up type, with lots of one up stuff and I think AAC is perfect for that, do it all day and keep recycling off pococks presence. Just don't see a second playmaker being effective, and in pool A wil be asked to tackle the English and Welsh coming at them all day in the one ups. At least AACs defence is of the type that can knock them back. Small gains but consistent outcomes in the midfield.