When Michael Cheika named his extended Wallaby squad of 40 for the Rugby Championship, he gave himself plenty of room to move.
Surprisingly, he left George Smith, Liam Gill, Luke Jones, Benn Robinson, Ben Alexander, Nic Stirzaker, James O’Connor, and Nick Cummins out of the squad.
So my Wallaby line-up from the Cheika squad is:
1. Scott Sio will be proudly wearing the coveted No. 1 jersey for a long time.
2. Stephen Moore (c) to be given back the captaincy he lost through a serious knee injury last season after just five minutes at the helm.
3. Sekope Kepu played some of his best rugby late in the Super Rugby. He will be a tower of strength up front.
4. Will Skelton has become a rugby giant, not only in size. He will make his presence felt for the rest of the year.
5. Scott Fardy would be better suited on the blindside of the scrum, but with the standard of locks selected, and no Luke Jones, the Wallabies will be better served with the tireless Fardy at lock.
6. Michael Hooper out of position, but not out of mind. Sure there will be strong arguments about switching sides of the scrum, but think of the havoc he can cause in tandem with Pocock.
7. David Pocock is back to being the best forward in Australia after two seasons lost through knee reconstructions. Probably should be captain again, but the last time he had the job it told on his effectiveness, instead of just saying ‘follow me’.
8. Wycliff Palu played some of his best rugby in ages towards the end of the Super Rugby tournament. It’s vital he continues on that track for both the Rugby Championship and the Rugby World Cup. For mine, George Smith plays as No. 8 when he wins selection after the first two Rugby Championship games.
9. Will Genia (vc) will relish playing behind a pack going forward now that his confidence is back. By far the best halfback in the country when he’s right.
10. Matt Giteau is a selection with a question mark. Any sign of the old Giteau crap and he must be punted immediately. But if he’s on song, he can be a major pivotal plus in both the Rugby Championship and Rugby World Cup, with the added string to his bow as goal-kicker.
11. Joe Tomane goes from strength to strength. I admire his aggression, his speed, his ability to beat a man, and his white line fever to back up his defence.
12. Samu Kerevi is the bolter in my team, but I expect big things from this exciting and explosive 21-year-old who stands at 185 centimetres, and weighs 104 kilograms.
13. Tevita Kuridrani has made the 13 jersey his own, and in tandem with Kerevi expect them to cut Israel Folau loose to create his own special brand of havoc.
14. Henry Speight is under suspension, but he’s still in the squad so eligible to be named in my side. The thought of three Fijians setting up Tongan Folau is mouth-watering,
15. Israel Folau is simply the best. Full stop.
16. James Hanson deserves the back-up hooking job, where he will never let the Wallabies down in general play, or feeding the lineout.
17. James Slipper is a tireless propping wonder who can play either side of the scrum.
18. Rob Simmons gets a bench job because Luke Jones wasn’t picked, yet he can be a forceful element when he puts his mind to it.
19. Ben McCalman can fill the No. 6 and No. 8 jobs, or even at lock.
20. Scott Higginbotham is in the same boat, but the only reason why he’s not in the starting line-up is his hot head. The Walabies can’t afford to have him cop a yellow card, or worse.
21. Nick Phipps would not be on the bench if Nic Stirzaker had been selected.
22. Christian Lealiifano to be one of the back-up goal-kickers, who could fill the 10 and 12 berths if required.
23. Kurtley Beale is another goal-kicker who can fill the 12 or 15 berths, and is still the x-factor in the squad, who sets up Folau better than anyone else.
Franky
Guest
Palu sucks. I am tougher than he is, couldn't get his way out of a wet paper bag. Compare him to the top 5 #8's in NZ. Bigger and has way less impact
Hal V
Guest
That is an absolutely amazing reserve bench David ! The interchange is obviously here to stay. But will the Wallabies have the bulk, courage and speed to overcome the mighty Boks in this first round encounter? And are we looking forward to watching these international rugby players go at it hammer and tongs? Perhaps not ! All those Roarers who really prefer to watch some diminutive referee, who has never in his life put his own head into a real live scrum, give endless instructions on live TV to massive bull necked prop forwards about how to pack down and when to push PUT YOUR VOTE IN WRITING ONTO THIS BLOG NOW !!!
Johns
Guest
Pocock as captain and startin 7 lost to Scotland. Should we apply the same logic?
Franky
Guest
Mitchell is our second best player after Izzy and he has a massive boot
Franky
Guest
Gits should have always played halfback. Good pass and the speed to run into holes nest to the ruck when the pigs get tired. Fardy is massively overated, McMahon for me. Hooper shouldnt be in the squad. If he wants to run lines, play him at 12, if he wants to play openside than he needs to actually steal the ball. Palu - powder puff, Higs is infinity times better. McCalman on the bench, I never used to rate him but much better now. Speight is also overrated
Connor33
Guest
Gotcha -- thanks for that. And good to know Kerevi can play 13.
boomeranga
Guest
In 2011 SR he had Tapuia at 12 and Lance at fullback. Lance was put forward after the 31-5 game the other day as the only reason Foley had an impact in the second half. In the Tri-nations QC always had Beale and JOC out there as well.
cs
Roar Guru
Strewth, this is like fighting the Black Knight. No matter how clearly I explain, you ignore the severed limbs and pop back up as if you haven't suffered a flesh wound. The point of difference was the out of hand dismissal, i.e., 'Roche’s knowledge of the role of flankers is irrelevant.' When I asked for an explanation for such a curt dismissal, you went on about the compromise to the set piece, which, as I pointed out, is precisely what Chris referred to, after which you took him down further along with Mark Ella and Kearnsy, provoking a (too) lengthy response. Only after that did you directly engage with Chris's view (as I have fairly acknowledged). Now you pop back up repeating your initial post, claiming no injury to begin with! I mean ... *.. goes off muttering about blogging and blockheads and ..@#$! ... stuff like that ...#@!) ... and swearing never to try to communicate ... or even look upon a post ... by Train Without A Station ... ever again ...#@!& ... *
ThugbyFan
Guest
Wish Kane Douglas could be lured back to the Tahs. He was a huge loss.
ThugbyFan
Guest
The Ocacle Hath Spoken, All Kneel Before Him! I like the team TO, a nice run on for the 1st RC match. PK also hit a good one suggesting an all Queensland front row as a group, either as starters or subs. You hit the nail on the head with the wingers. You either go for fast runners who will run over the opponents (sadly the 123 kg Taqele Naiyaravoro is too slow) or someone who is safe cover for the guaranteed up-n-unders. Why I go for Rob Horne on one side is his tackling can cover for B.Foley or Q.Cooper's weakness in that area. To be sure, Drew Mitchell offers a left foot kick option. Would still like to see TN get a start somewhere in the RC as M.Cheika had him running at the ruck fringe and between half and 5/8 late in the season and he did lots of damage. Too late now but if he sheds 7-8 kg, it could increase his speed and he would still be a monster to tackle. Surely Aaron Smith has an aussie grandmum somewhere so the ARU can lure him from the Dark Side. He would look great in green and yellow. :)
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
You clearly fail to accept my point so I will quote the text of my comment: Train Without A Station said | July 5th 2015 @ 10:08pm | Report comment Roche’s knowledge of the role of flankers is irrelevant. The problem with Hooper and Pocock in the same team is it compromises the line out significantly. This may be acceptable. But it means that Skelton cannot be on the field and Palu cannot be at 8. It creates a further weaknesses to an area that will already be weakened by the top contenders in 2 positions. Now that is my first comment at 10:08pm yesterday on this matter. I can only recommend you get your computer looked at as you either cannot see it, or are reading something different to exactly what I wrote.
PeterK
Roar Guru
Sio, Moore and Kepu add more impact around the field and more power in general play.
PeterK
Roar Guru
IMO the Boks and English scrum is better than the AB scrum this year.
PeterK
Roar Guru
Cooper in 2011 super rugby title, and TN's with McCabe who is far more limited than Kerevi.
cs
Roar Guru
Whatever you say pal.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
No. I originally made the same argument. "The problem with Hooper and Pocock in the same team is it compromises the line out significantly. This may be acceptable. But it means that Skelton cannot be on the field and Palu cannot be at 8." Chris' view on if 2 7's can work is not relevant, because that's not the issue. The issue is, as I said "it compromises the line out significantly".
cs
Guest
Oh dear. To go back to the beginning, I haven't argued for the two open-siders to start (and didn't select them to start in my team), but rather think that the idea shouldn't be dismissed out of hand (as many have done on this thread), particularly as it has been supported, not only by David but also Chris. At this point, Trainee joined and did exactly that, i.e., dismissed Chris' view out of hand (as 'irrelevant'), and the argument went on from there. Among things I didn't say but (a poor reader (and poor typist)) has suggested that I did, are: [I have a ] desire to attack anything [Trainee] say[s] because [Trainee's] said it Incorrect. A delusion of grandeur. I have no desire other than to ignore and avoid Trainee as much as possible, but this time he rudely butted in with his out of hand dismissal. being a Wallaby does not make a person’s opinion instantly correct I never said it did, but I believe this qualifies the opinion as worthy of some respect. One further point before I go to the substance: It’s an assessment made based on the general consensus of many in depth followers of the game on the green and gold rugby forum In logic, this is a combination of fallacies known as argumentum consensus gentium, which literally translates as 'argument from the consensus of nations', and argumentum ad verecundiam which means argument to reverence. To express this less pretentiously, it's rude and out of order in a fair and civil debate to invoke an untestable consensus based on untestable 'in depth' knowledge by an unspecified 'many' to try to persuade someone to adopt a conclusion. Now, getting back to the issue, Peter and Hello (and even Trainee) have now made some arguments (as distinct from dismissals out of hand) that take CR's view into account and plainly have some merit. I'm still not entirely convinced, or at least not entirely convinced that these comments represent the full range of considerations, but be that as it may, I'm out of breath from making corrections and quoting friggin' Latin on a rugby blog. I'll rejoin this (actually very interesting in its substance) issue when I can.
PeterK
Roar Guru
My take is that Roche being a devout qlder would not select Skelton or Palu and the pointer was the comment re 4th jumper. When he is discussing Hooper and Pocock playing in tandem I am assuming he has , in his mind but not explicitly written it down, had Simmons and Horwill as locks, and Higginbotham as the no 8. So that would allow Pocock and Hooper at 6 and 7 as Eddy Jones thought as well having 3 lineout jumpers. So the tradeoff is between for most people would be - Skelton, Fardy, Higgs v Horwill, Hooper, Higgs v Skelton, Higgs / Fardy, Palu A reasonable tradeoff and discussion. I prefer not having both Pocock and Hooper on at the same time
Hello
Roar Rookie
The biggest thing there cs is if you have skelton in then you are already short a quality jumper. You need at least 3 jumpers in test. What would your back 5 be to have the dual 7's and keep 3 jumpers?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Nah mate. It's an assessment made based on the general consensus of many in depth followers of the game on the green and gold rugby forum, and the agreement that those 2 in particular fail to provide any insightful tactical analysis. You don't see me lumping Bob Dwyer into that group do you? Why? Because he offers insightful tactical analysis. And you in your desire to attack anything I say because I've said it ignore the fact that I merely not, being a Wallaby does not make a person's opinion instantly correct and have noted examples of some that appear to make bold calls without actually considering the tactical merit. Perhaps a former Wallaby does have more in depth knowledge, but not necessarily all do. Some were just skilled footballers, that's all. Chris' compromise does not discuss the fact that the form second rower would be selected based on the exact same trade off, preventing the luxury to enable to you to select a 6 without regard for the line out. Which is why it's irrelevant. If the best 3 second rowers were quality jumpers it would be relevant. Notice he talks about a 4th jumping option? That's because he hasn't discussed the fact that with Palu and Skelton in a team, the 6 would be the 2nd jumping option in fact.