The Roar
The Roar


VOTE: Wallabies DIY player ratings vs Wales

Kurtley Beale of Australia celebrates scoring his sides fourth try during the Under Armour Series match between Wales and Australia at Principality Stadium on November 11, 2017 in Cardiff, Wales. (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)
11th November, 2017

The Wallabies are winners again, for the thirteenth time in a row over Wales and building some nice momentum with a streak of four international wins in a row.

The team’s form in the early parts of the year was enough to give you a headache, and there’s still improvements to be made of course, but they look to be in good touch ahead of a high-profile match against England next week.

More Wallabies vs Wales
» Match Report: Wallabies hold on
» Quiqley: Wallabies discipline a concern
» Five talking points from the match
» Team changes for the match vs England
» Re-live the match with our live blog

Who have been the key players in the Wallabies return to form, more specifically, who was it that lifte the team up – or didn’t – this week? We want to know what you think.

And for that reason we’re opening up our DIY Player Ratings to you, Roarers. Have a vote and let us know what you thought of each player’s performance.

If you’ve not done our DIY player ratings before, it’s a simple enough process. Hit up the form below and rate each player from 1 to 10 based on their performance. We’ll keep track of the results and publish our findings tomorrow.

You’re free to rate players as you like with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest – or toss an NA on any player not worth rating – but if you’re looking for a bit more detail than that, our handy little guide might help you make your judgments…

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.