Eddie Jones has the first and last laugh on the 2016 Wallabies

Agree 100%

Most ridiculous comment I've ever read on this forum...and that is really saying something.

Folau as captain?! Based on what. I believe he should be in the team - probably on the wing. But as captain? Doesn't he have enough to worry about? The guy isn't even playing in the correct position. But at least Folau seems mellow - probably a little too mellow. I don't see him having a chat to the ref in a convincing way when some dodgy scrum penalty is awarded and he has to talk the finer points of the front row. Aus rugby shouldn't have let Genia go - he's a cool head, calm talker and has respect of opposition and referees. He isn't cheap, a hot head or a whinger. As an AB fan - these are the reasons I don't want Dane Coles as captain - he can be all three. Every time he approaches the ref a cold shiver runs through me. It's like making Ali Williams captain. It's a pity Hooper isn't more of a calm player - because he would be the obvious choice. But he seems very reactionary both In terms of tactics and temperament.

Ii is my understanding the definition of a flat track bully is one who performs well against second rate opposition, but doesn't when they come up against top level opposition. That, shirley, describes Folau rather than B Smith, i.e. a solid Super Rugby performer, but mediocre against top flight, i.e. international class, opposition.

Mick!! I had no idea Australians living on the Gold Coast can now qualify to be a NZ citizen! Congrats mate!

Last time he scored a test try was when ?

Refreshing structured comments Cliff - worth some consideration on all - such a contrast to the relentless oral diarrhoea often discharged in this forum, particularly by the likes of kpm.

Yes Jerry, I mean NZ rugby keenly awaits for the day that KPM gives his approval of one of our players. Until then we'll just have to make the same mistakes and keep picking Smith anyway. No idea...?

Thanks, regarding the ABs I think that they have change and play more defense and counter attack from that position when they recover the ball these days, but they have more talent than England and will do more damage with the ball in hand. However imo it will be a more tactical game than the one AUS played.

Lack of melanin.

I think these are v good points. it could easily have gone a different way had we got the ball down in those two potential tries I wonder if there is scope for a more conservative approach after the 20 min blitz. Recollect the ABs did this to the Pumas this year - faced the onslaught with conservative % rugby and then capitalised on ur mistakes I am interested to see how England will fare against The Darkness. I think they may struggle against a team that runs at them but makes no mistakes.

Maybe, but virtually all combinations and teams suggested by the last three posters have appeared in some form and failed.

He has never had PHYSICAL impact. Again you miss the point. Even when his running it at its best, it's not power but speed and elusiveness that he brings. And he hasn't been at his best for a long time.

I have posted the same in other words in different articles on the roar. The mistake is the strategy and not the players, you may have your preferences but it will not change the outcome of the game. Think for minute and be objective about it: For a team that has been on the road for a month and has to face the unbeaten team of the year, which is ranked number two, and is playing at home, would you consider smart to play a so frenetic pace during the entire game as the Wallabies did in the beginning of the game? England looked lost for the first 15 minutes of the game but knew if they have a defense that play in an orderly manner it was a matter of time that the Wallabies will run out steam , the heavy legs will start missing tackles and opening holes and be able to take advantage and score points. As an Argentine I follow the Pumas, with a bunch of less talented players than Australia, make the same mistake. They try to play from everywhere in the field and make many phases , the opposite team plays pressure and float defense until you make a mistake , loose the pill and then you are just to tire to reposition on time . This strategy is not only a leg-burner, also plays mind games when your are not able to translate the fast pace and many phases into points , doubts start to show and the players make more mistakes in their decision and then happens what you saw in the second half yesterday. When you are tire your scrum start to fail at the time that you have more scrums because of the higher frequency of mistakes, your maul is not the same and you start to give the ball away by kicking not tactically but desperate , and worst of all you start making more penalties. I think the concert of backs running the ball showing great skills , making plenty of off-loads, ect .. is great for the show but England did not show anything closer to that but end up clearly winning the game, and so did Ireland against the ABs and the Wallabies. The question is if you have to change the coach or the coach can adjust the game plan, in the case of the Pumas you have to change it because he openly insists in keep playing this way, but is MC capable of adjusting his game strategy or will insists with the same? PD: I do not consider the players to be unfit , it just impossible to sustain the pace the Wallabies and Pumas (first half against the ABs in NZ) intent to play during the 80 minutes of game.

"I am a great believer in luck. The harder I work, the more of it I seem to have".

Technically it was a 'no arms' late hit but you are right about the player milking it - at first he clutched his leg in a vain attempt to show pain and then changes his source of discomfort to his upper body.

Lost - the frantic pace is an interesting one. I believe last night was a classic example. The Wallabies had a great start but didn't turn their dominance into enough points. Getting a great start & scoring from it will put pressure on the opposition but not scoring allows the other team to think 'we have taken a their best shots & are still in this'.

So if a player is always in the midfield, he can appear in the midfield & surprise defenders? What are you on about? Folau has played in the centre on attack nearly the whole tour. He doesn't go there for particular backline moves so there s no telegraphing.

KPM - what limitations do you see in Ben Smiths game that should keep him out of the AB squad?

You seem to have missed the most likely issues 1) Fitness England have been fitter than you all year but because you guys thought that you where fitter than us in the summer it has been ignored but was crystal clear yesterday. 2) Nous you don't have much. England looked fitter stronger faster and more in control of themselves than the Aussie. Once England changed from passive to aggressive defence you lacked effective ball carriers and needed a good kicking game to relieve the pressure but you just kept trying to run from your own 22. England on the other hand changed their game plan exerted control to slow your game down and that took away Aussie momentum and then they raised their own tempo and the Aussies struggled to live with them. Australia just stuck to the same plan and experienced first hand the law of diminishing returns. 3) You really missed Genia