Roar Wallaby form teams after Round 18

While our opinions might differ, we all love rugby.

Toutai Polotau-Nau!!!! Now that would be a beast

Yes please! Can we have three?

And by the way PeterK, thanks for doing these every week. They're very thoughtful and fair. Regrettably, I only seem to respond in order to point out some perceived inaccuracy which detracts from the fact that I usually agree with almost all of your observations. I look forward to your other articles.

the number of points for a try*/penalty. I'm thinking 4 points a try, maybe 2 a penalty and 1 a drop goal. Thoughts?

Interesting analysis and output. Of course the issue with these type of statistically driven selections based on individual performance is that it doesn't take into account combinations and test match experience and overall team fit. Interesting process all the same.

I feel that this would make tries easier to score though jeznez, after all there are 2 less players on the field. Maybe we should drop the number of points for a goal/penalty, improve it that way? :)

Peter I get your point but what SANZAR did was discuss those issues with World Rugby and how to deal with them. My point is that no body affiliated to World Rugby can unilaterally change a sanction for an infringement within the game. If that was the case then we could end up with different laws wherever rugby is played. I refer you to a Spiro Zavos article on Roar in which Lyndon Bray is said to have worked closely with World Rugby so as to achieve alignment over maul issues. http://www.theroar.com.au/2015/05/01/spiro-brumbies-waratahs-battle-illegal-rolling-maul/

A good team. Shame Inman didn't get in the squad.

At least one thing your analysis, with its differing teams might do PK is to get people to start thinking along the lines of horses for courses and to focus on the opposition and how to beat them as much as we do on our best favourite players.

Most recognise that Palu's game has become progressively tighter over the years, but when he was in backrows with Mowen then Fardy I think they wanted the ball-running Palu of yesteryear. I see Fardy, Hooper, McCalman as less balanced and actually more like picking too many of the same type of player as you mention. It would provide a huge work rate but less impact in attack and a lot less impact at the breakdown. Higgs Palu and even Pocock cover Hooper's attacking game between them, but Fardy and Hooper do not come close to covering Pocock's over the ball game.

But it's not fair. If at half time the coach told you he was keeping you on for 20, you're going to work at a higher rate than somebody who knows they are there for 40. Have you not wondered that despite this being his 4th year with a Super Rugby franchise, Timani has struggled to get game time in the back row? Whilst not having the worst stats of all, his error rate is still high.

Well I there's almost a consensus on here about Stirzaker. Good on the Rebels for giving him the time and opportunity to develop. He and Debreczeni have the makings of a very good provincial combo. Bit early to call them future Wallabies but if they did get into the national side, it wouldn't be a surprise. McMahon on the other hand is obviously destined for greatness.

I've already read it and just completed a review of locks for the same site for editing. Comparing equal time is not comparable though. If it was Dean Mumm and Caydern Neville would look like our best locks because they have had a number of bench cameos. In 9 of his 15 games Timani has been subbed no longer than 15 minutes into the 2nd half. Only 4 of those 15 has he played longer than 65. Don't you think this allows him to work in more concentrated bursts, as opposed to a player who is required to play the entire 80?

Well if he's playing lock it's not really. You're comparing players doing 2 different jobs around the field.