Well, another week, another victory – this time for the Wallabies over the Pumas in Mendoza, a venue where they failed to get it done in the last Rugby Championship.
Sure, two late tries made the scoreline flatter Australia, but they finished the game stronger, and generally had the best of the battles.
Some more accurate goal-kicking would have made things even more blown out, and maybe even a fairer reflection of the game. I’m not going to editorialise it though. That’s your job.
Anyway, here’s The Roar’s DIY Wallabies player ratings – where you get to tell us who got what score, and why. Note that you have to use the comments section if you want to tell us why.
Here’s how the game works:
1. Fill out the form below, giving a player a rating between 1 and 10.
1.5. Tell me why my process sucks, or why my haircut is bad in the comments section.
2. I collate the votes over the day.
3. Tomorrow, the results will be out, and you all get to see exactly how bad our ratings are, and can lambast me for it.
Fun for the whole family.
Due to popular demand, I’ve put together a brief description of what I think the ratings should reflect. Use it as a guide, rather than a set of rules I stand by rigorously.
1. Had he not played, the team would have been better off. Negatively affected the performance of the side. May God have mercy on his soul.
2. Anonymous. Was he even there?
3. Did some things that you expect a player to be able to do, but did a whole bunch of other things that sucked.
4. Was passable in patches, but not up to standard in a squad of such depth.
5. Performed his role without anything really noticeable happening.
6. Good
7. Pretty good, actually
8. Very good
9. Excellent
10. Might as well have been John Eales
Happy voting everyone!
redheavy
Roar Rookie
Sorry, 1.5 got me confused - I thought we were voting on haircuts...
Harry Jones
Expert
I'd need to watch the game again, because I was blogging it and it's hard to watch off the ball. But I think I'd go this way: Folau 8 AAC 8 Tomane 7 Kuridrani 7 Toomua 8 (Beale 8) (Cooper 4) Phipps 7 Slipper 5 Moore 6 Holmes 6 (Bench front row 7) Skelton 7 Simmons 7 Pocock 9 Fardy 7 McCalman 7 (Mumm 7) (Hooper 6)
Brian USA
Guest
1. Slipper (5): Looked good around the park, but not so great in the scums. Scrums went much better after he went off. 2. Moore (C) (7): Looked very good all night. Lineout throws went well, had an impact around the field. 3. Greg Holmes (6): Looked decent in the scrums, better than Slipper. Didn't have the impact I was expecting, but hard to say Kepu would have done better in the 3 jersey. 4. Skelton (7): Had a very high impact on the game both running hard, and hitting hard in defense. Very impressed with his bounce back after last weekend. 5. Simmons (7): Great to see he has added physicality to his game. 6. Fardy (6): Was solid without being spectacular. 7. Pocock (8): Very impactful game from start to finish. A nuisance at the breakdown, and a tackling machine. 8. McCalman (7): Very surprised at his running power and defensive impact 9. Phipps (7): Not as good as his cameo last week, but was good enough this week to help secure the win. 10. Foley (5): Goal Kicking started out very rough. I noticed during Super Rugby, that as a 10, he plays the second playmaker role out wide a lot, allowing his 12 to take first receiver. When Toomua was on the field, it seemed designed that MT was first receiver, with BF the second play maker. 11. Tomane (6): Looked threatening with ball in hand, but came off his wing defensively a lot. Granted, he was facing an over load virtually every time due to poor defensive set-up. 12. Toomua (5): Looked good straightening the attack when he was on, but it was a very brief amount of time. 13. Kuridrani (7): Looked better in attack over all this week. Defensively was one of the standouts 14. AAC (7): Didnt do a whole lot in attack (aside from his try at the end), but defensively was stout and was one of the main reasons (IMO) Argentina struggled 15. Folau: (7): Could be swayed to go higher or lower here. 16. TPN (7) Scrums improved dramatically when he and Sio came on. 17. Sio (8) Improved the scrum by leaps and bounds. Hard runner, good in attack. 18. Kepu (7) Again, scrums went better when the reserves came on. 19. Mumm (7) How impressive was that try. Very surprised by his physicality and lineout work. 20. Hooper (7): Didn't have the impact of last week, but he helped tremendously in defense when he came on. 21. White (5): Wasn't good, wasn't bad 22. Cooper (5): Came on early at 12, defended at weak side wing. Had a few good kicks, a few bad ones. A few good moments in attack, a few bad ones. Seemed that the defensive system was thrown out of whack when he came on. 12 is not a good spot for him, especially outside Foley. 23. Beale (6): Good ball movement in the brief time he was on the field.
Alex Wood
Roar Guru
Honestly, you would think that when it never lasts more than 10 minutes he would just give it up? Maybe he's going for a "look" - like Chris Lathan never pulling up his socks. Or George Smith with his dreadlocks....
Handles
Roar Guru
all me. But Confucius was my inspiration.
Geoff Parkes
Expert
Mate, I may have voted multiple times. Or not at all. It wasn't obvious that the form submitted properly...
Love a World Cup
Guest
I would give QC a ten out of ten, if he is suspended. That would be a great result. He needs to be trimmed from the squad.
Patrick Effeney
Editor
Glad to see at least a few people picked up on the heavily tongue-in-cheek nature of these ratings guidelines.
Patrick Effeney
Editor
I stole Michael Hooper's silly headtape during a game. I was pleased with myself, yes.
Existentialist
Guest
I like that Handles!! ... an original of yours?
Machooka
Roar Guru
Thanks Patrick for making this fly... as it's very interesting to see what our 'experts' rate this or that Wallaby on their last game. Regards the invitation to your haircut in da photo... was the offence committed of a serious nature as you look well pleased ?
Handles
Roar Guru
This one made me chuckle: "4. Was passable in patches, but not up to standard in a squad of such depth." Confucius (should have) said - a swimming pool always has depth, even when there is no water in it.
Targa
Guest
Hooper and Cooper might be getting zeroes if they've got themselves banned for the Bledisloe.
Who?
Guest
Pat, you need to provide a better photo. I can't make a call on your haircut from that one, it's too small. Process isn't perfect, but it's the best crowd aggregator I've seen getting round... Keep it up.
Andrew
Guest
Haircuts passable but you're going to have to shave if you want to be my latex salesman.
PeterK
Roar Guru
well people who would like to score a player 6.5 could submit the scores twice
pick & go..!!
Guest
The explanation of the points should bring opinions a little closer. Great work Pat & team.!
Patrick Effeney
Editor
Perhaps. I'm kind of willing to take the risk, as I think there would be ways, even if I didn't allow a resubmit on the same page, to get around it. People seem to take it in the right spirit so far.
El Gamba
Roar Guru
Cheers Paddy, sorry I disappeared after my mini offer, would like to have had more time to help!
Patrick Effeney
Editor
No worries! My (our) pleasure.