Returning Hunt eyes Bledisloe selection

Hunt straight into that backline- Foley out of 23

Rob Malcolm , Who`s the second playmaker Beale and ?

There's still better options even on current form.

that would be unfair on current form, he is now playing well enough to retain his spot, of course he should have been dropped after the june series

Foley.

My 5 year old has huge energy and couldn't hit the side of a barn with an elephant either - perhaps he should be the back up scrumhalf for the Wallabies?

I wouldn't be worrying about the wallabie backline, it's the forwards they need to be sorting out. Because unless they front up like the boks did you can forget about the backs.

Beale can play the same role in attack popping in from the back three. The difference is, we won't concede as many tries ourselves. Beale cannot defend at 12 (Dunedin excepted) and is a total liability off of turnover ball. Phipps has energy, sure, but he can't hit anyone with his passes. There's a reason he often didn't even start for his Super Rugby team, and those reasons apply to internationals also. Why would we want a 6-2 split?

Only Tahs are Foley, Beale and Folau in this backline. Which would you be dropping so a Qlder can be in?

In attack Beale plays 12 - it gives us the 2 playmakers which has consistently troubled every defence. Hodge has played his attacking wing role very well, coming in on the angles etc. In defence Beale goes to the wing and Hodge defends the inside channel, which he does really well. KB in the back 3 as "2nd fullback". Plus Hodge has the kicking game to complement Foley. It has taken us a long time to find this combination, and I wouldn't change it for Hunt - as good as he is. Hunt on the bench optimises his versatility, perhaps giving us an extra piggy on the bench for those last 20 minutes when the ABs crank up? You may not like Phipps, but Powell isn't really a game-changer yet is he? Personally I like the energy and versatility Phipps brings to the bench. Combined with Hunt it definitely opens up a the opportunity for a 6-2 split.

Sure, man or woman.

Wow, you are ‘soooo deep’ Cynical Play If you’re not a Tah fan boy or a kiwi, are you an android ?

...and why do you assume I am a man...strange

For what it's worth I don't particularly enjoy arguing with you, so if you just follow me around making snide comments or non sequiturs I won't reply in the future. That being said while I disagree with you on many things I respect you as a man based on the positions you've taken on various issues—such as standing out against some of the morally reprehensible comments made by certain people—as well as the fact that you've shown the maturity to admit when you think you've been wrong in the—which is a skill not many of us have. And so if you actually post serious comments designed for discussion or debate I will reply.

Clearly I was referring to Marto and I, CP, and I think you're well aware that he and I would share an opinion on that. I suppose the difference is that were I Wallabies coach I would at least try my non-favourites to see how they go. If they didn't perform they'd stopped being my favoured players - whereas I don't think you could argue that Phipps has earned his place on the bench through demonstrated form or ability at present. Cheika selects guys like Phipps, Speight and Hanigan and Moore far longer than their form warrants, indicating it's more about Cheika being biased towards them.

You said "we can hope for" suggesting you feel you represent "us". Wrong sunshine. 500 posts a day does not vote you in. And no, you said "Cheika and his favourites".

Did that comment have a point? Clearly I'd prefer the players I think are better to be in the team.

As opposed to your favourites?

I'm sure he'll perform well. Stay injury free? Less sure. And poor old Beale will be busy in that backline!

He's most likely to come off the bench. Cheiks will pick the same lineup again.