VOTE: Wallabies DIY player ratings vs Scotland

Bring in George Smith or Richie McCaw and it wouldn't have made any difference to that game. Lack of a good fetcher was not our problem. Although Richie as a captain would have made a lot of difference.

I don't see a problem with ball-in-hand styles, so long as the execution is good. But the execution was awful, in so many areas. That puts the focus back on the coaching team. We can argue about replacing a few of the cattle, but that's not the main problem. Its not even game plan, but basic drills, co-ordination and structures. We had three or four genuine opportunities to win in the last 10 minutes, and we couldn't put basic moves together under pressure. I think we should think about someone like Jake White. And the coach, whoever he is should maybe think about someone like Adam Coleman as captain - I don't know if he has the goods, but none of the others are cutting it so worth a try. When the team is losing focus, the captain is the one who steadies the ship with a few words, and his example. The coach can't do anything except at half time.

Yes, that is a more important issue than individual selections.

This - your last sentence.

I think Foley is a very good player, but that is different to having a good game. I think Quade deserves to start based on their respective performances. Quade to 10, Foley on the bench, for Italy. I wouldn't shift Hunt from 12. He is starting to get a handle on that position, on the space and timing. Leave him to develop. We know he can cover other positions in a pinch but let him specialize in one. Wallabies have to get into their heads that tactical kicking is a TEAM EFFORT. The kicker, the players who protect him, the players who chase, and the ones who support the chasers, must all be working to a plan. Even park rugby players can do this better than WBs last night. I think Coleman did well, yet Arnold seemed absent. I would take this back to the training and the game plan - this can happen when a player isn't entirely sure where he should be or why. We know he has talent and can be an enforcer so someone has to work on the mental side.

the scots were talking about missing 8 to 10 potential starting players. if that is true, and i suspect someone far more familiar with the scottish team than i am could tell you how valid that is, then i reckon "close to a second string team" is not too far from the mark. but leave that aside, there was a time not that long ago when playing a full strength scottish side, and playing them anywhere let alone home, would hardly be considered the greatest test of a wallabies team. whether they were 2nd string or full strength hardly matters. we were seriously dismal. the comments about not caring are far too close to the mark to make anyone feel happy. during the game, talking to a mate and we were wondering who amongst today's wallabies would make any of the great wallaby teams (thinking current form, rather than what they might have done in the past). indeed, who amongst them would make any of the great reds teams from the 70s, 80s and 90s? izzy probably. hooper on the bench? anyone else? maybe coleman? very hard to remember when australian rugby has been in such depths.

The best example was the left-footed kick from about 20 mins in where they went from their own side of halfway over Folau's head before it dribbled out and they forced a line-out from inside our 22. It was a beautiful kick, but Folau was too shallow and it went right over his head,

I thought he was pretty good with limited support

missing a couple of players but hardly "2nd string" ?

Foley played solidly until he let the team down by doing something stupid and being sent off. Dumb! He should be benched next game as a result of that act of stupidity. Genia made a lot of mistakes in the first half. You have to wonder where his head was at. maybe too many WB's thought they were going to have an easy game and got caught out?

Apart from a few exceptions they just don't really seem to care which breaks my heart

Not sure what Cheika sees when he reviews the match tape. What I see is a team that spends too much time in the weight room. Forwards are too slow to the break down and in too few numbers. They must be aerobically fitter and must dominate the break down in numbers and ferocity to recycle the ball quicker. Too many criticisms to list here. Backs looked docile (apart from Hunt who played his heart out). For god sake, respect the jumper. You are playing for far more than just a pay cheque.

please enlighten me as to what is entertaining about losing. getting done at home by what was close to a second string scottish side - if that doesn't set off alarm bells, what will? must say i really didn't find it particularly entertaining watching the wallabies resemble headless chooks.

folau was not poorly positioned on kicks they kicked deep into the corner when he was midfield, o winger back. DHP and Nabuli were poorly positioned. Show me examples of where he was poorly positioned instead of a rote answer. I person cannot cover the whole backfield.

Just run him at 10 - the Foley/Quade combo is terrible and incompetent. Either Quade starts at 10 or on the bench. I would prefer at 10.

He did his core roles in scrummaging, clearing rucks, etc. The only other player who did all his core roles were Hunt. Folau was great on attack but poorly positioned when the Scots kicked, but he was very good too. Those three are the only starters who can come out of the match with their heads held high.

EXactly!

Phil Kearns = 1.

I only saw the wallabies doing lots of one up running - player goes to ground painfully slow recycle and then try to get the ball to Izzy. What is cheika doing at training ?

I'm interested to know...What 7 duties did he fail at yesterday?