Australian rugby has fewer problems with depth and more problems with sharing around our wealth of talent.
Why do the Brumbies have four hookers who could conceivably play for the Wallabies in the 2023 World Cup? Why do the Reds have five backrowers, all of whom would start for any club team in Europe and have opportunities for higher honours?
The solution to this would be to implement a trading system whereby teams could have the opportunity to fill gaps in their squads, thereby strengthening the club teams and increasing opportunities for players stuck in logjams of talent, improving playing time for the current and next generation of players.
I have come up with four different trades I think would benefit everyone involved.
Liam Wright for Cameron Orr
This trade is a win for both the Rebels and the Reds. The Reds have a very strong forward pack everywhere, including five starting-calibre backrow options, except for loosehead. Dane Zander appeared to miss every tackle he attempted against the Waratahs, and I don’t recall him doing anything else.
If the Reds want to compete against a very well put together Brumbies outfit, they will need to dominate the set piece and play off the back of a dominant scrum. Plus, keeping in mind the Kiwi sides later this year, if New Zealand have a lack of depth anywhere, it’s in the prop department. Cameron Orr on one side and Taniela Tupou on the other and the Reds are in business.
The Rebels look a bit lost so far this season. The other Australian teams have clear structures and game plans to try and win games. The Brumbies dominate lineouts and mauls, the Reds have the best scrum (with Tupou), the Force have fast physical forwards and try to dominate possession, the Waratahs have the bluest jersey. But the Rebels don’t seem to have an identity, especially in the forwards.
Liam Wright is a proven commodity and a leader and would have the opportunity to start at his preferred No. 7 position without having Fraser McReight breathing down his neck.
Liam Wright of the Reds (Tracey Nearmy/Getty Images)
Matt Toomua for Izaia Perese
Carter Gordon doesn’t need or want a safety blanket. The Rebels lack punch in attack in the back row, so to counteract that weakness they need some punch in the centres or at No. 11. Instead they’ve given Gordon a ball playing No. 12 who can carry if he needs to and an elusive No. 11 who is better in open space than he is running into heavy traffic.
While I think Matt Toomua and Glen Vaihu are good players, the Rebels just don’t have the right team composition to fully utilise them. Enter Izaia Perese. He is the definition of punch, and with Rennie preferring a physical No. 12 with a skilful No. 13, his best opportunity to get minutes for the Wallabies is to beat Hunter Paisami as the second choice No. 12 behind Samu Kerevi. Plus, he’ll give the Rebels much-needed go forward, especially off set pieces, and bring some physicality and aggression to an otherwise stagnant outfit.
As a sidenote, when Andrew Kellaway comes back from injury, please shift Reece Hodge to No. 13 and leave him there. He’s big, can tackle and has good hands but isn’t quite elusive enough to be dangerous on the counterattack. He’s the prototypical No. 13. For reference see Henry Slade from England.
The Waratahs are in the opposite situation. Both wingers are strong, powerful runners, Will Harris will keep getting better and better at No. 8 and Angus Bell is a bonus backrow-like carrier at loosehead. But once they start going forward, they have no idea what to do.
Matt Toomua at No. 12 would work for the Waratahs because he could play like Irae Simone does for the Brumbies, a primary distributor at first receiver who still can threaten to run or kick. This would allow Ben Donaldson or Will Harrison to inject themselves when needed and play more heads-up rugby to get the ball into space and capitalise on the go forward.
(William West/AFP via Getty Images)
Billy Pollard and Scott Sio for Suliasi Vunivalu
This one is a bit more far-fetched, but hear me out. Vunivalu is a luxury for the Reds, between Filipo Daugunu, Jordan Petaia, Mac Grealy, Floyd Aubrey, and Jock Campbell the Reds have plenty of depth and youth in the back three. The Brumbies are also a better-suited team for the skill set of Vunivalu.
Tom Banks had a good game against the Drua but tends to go missing against the Kiwi teams or in games when he’s up against a compressed rush defence and the opposition wingers put pressure on him in counterattack.
At the Reds, Vunivalu couldn’t shift to No. 15 because they play with the fullback as a second ball player more than as a strike weapon – and yet they still pick tiny centres, but don’t get me started.
At the Brumbies Irae Simone is the second ball player, while the fullback is more of a strike option in the wider channels or against over folded defences in the middle. Vunivalu would thrive in that system. At fullback he could also be the answer to the big, physical presence that Rennie appears to want for the Wallabies at No. 15.
As for the Reds, I’ve already spoken about the problems at loosehead prop, and Billy Pollard would run rings around Josh Nasser for the second-string hooker spot and would get consistent minutes not being stuck behind three other capped Wallabies hookers at the Brumbies.
Mark Nawaqanitawase and Carlo Tizzano for Fergus Lee-Warner
Why the Waratahs aren’t starting Nawaqanitawase and Tizzano I have no idea, but Nawaqanitawase would start at No. 15 for the Force, no question, and Tizzano would head back home to Perth and not have to compete with the incumbent Wallabies captain for minutes and be inexplicably behind Charlie Gamble in the pecking order.
They would inject some youth and X factor into a Force side that will surprise a lot of people this year.
Fergus Lee-Warner would give the Waratahs a good-calibre starting second-rower who can shift to blindside flanker when Lachlan Swinton inevitably gets banned for six weeks after trying to fight a corner post or headbutting a puppy during the post-game interviews.
Join experts Brett McKay, Harry Jones and Jim Tucker for Episode 2 of The Roar Rugby Podcast.
Tooly
Roar Rookie
Loto to the Brumbies !
speedy
Guest
Canes juniors I think. So was Sam Whitelock.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Hodge doesn’t want to play centre. He wants to focus on 15 because that’s where his best chance is with the wallabies. So if you force him to play 13 you likely lose him. To answer your last question, we don’t because we used our resources to sign those 20s. Even Hansen wasn’t a sure thing. Before last year he had a few caps in 3 seasons. I think he’s better than Newsome, but with a young team they definitely have more of a need for an experienced pro than another young and promising but inexperienced player. And also the Tahs only signed him after Hansen had committed to Connaught anyway. And comparing the two is comparing them based on what we saw after he committed, not before. A big issue is that Hansen is another case of a player that signed overseas and then proceeded to show the best form of their career, that would have warranted a much better offer and opportunity.
Greysy
Roar Rookie
Ok fine, you sign Hansen he could play fullback for the Rebels and Hodge could fill a centre position vacated by Magnay rather than Ili or Nu'u. I think this debate we're having of who is first choice and where people fit is kind of getting away from what my point was (which I expressed pretty badly, so largely my fault). To put it a different way, there are two Australian teams which could definitely use Hansen and where I reckon he would be a starter (Rebels as we've discussed and at fullback for the Tahs - he's better than Newsome and that position at the Tahs is a ? long term). Neither of these teams attempted to sign him. Absolutely, even if they had attempted to he may have declined and ended up at Connacht anyway. But I thinks it's a problem that they never even bothered to try and I think it would be of benefit to Australian rugby to have RA at least look out for good players who are underutilised and attempt to keep them around. Back when Castle was CEO there was a big push by RA to sign up as many of the good crop of u20s players as possible which RA was involved in directly. Why don't we do something similar in this situation?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Yet neither of those players are first choice. Anderson, Kellaway and Hodge are probably their first choice back 3. George Worth based on his selection in 23 last week is seen as behind Young T and Vaihu. That’s also before you consider where Joe Pincus from Aus 7s fits it as he appears to also be out injured. So there’s a good chance Worth and Vaihu aren’t in the best 23. Worth only played on the weekend because Anderson was ruled out after the team was named. Hansen left because he was stuck behind players to make the starting team at the Brumbies. That’s exactly where he was going to be with the Rebels having Kellaway, Anderson and Hodge. The only difference is 2 out of those 3 were injured for the rebels last week.
Greysy
Roar Rookie
Well no, I'm also basing my assessment of their depth based on the fact that they have an English journeyman in George Worth as one of their options in a position Hansen plays. Or that they're depth is limited enough that they're starting Glen Vaihu on the wing who certainly doesn't look ready for super rugby. As I said, Hansen may have not signed anyway and the size of the offer the rebels made could have been part of that. But it certainly feels like there are players who slip through with no real effort made to retain them and then worse players end up filling up space in our squads. I don't think having some kind of centralised process in place to try and identify quality players who are underused and then to attempt to facilitate player movement to sure up depth in weaker franchises is a bad idea. And the Rebels are rubbish enough that I think RA needs to be stepping in to oversee some of their processes anyway (across more areas than just player signings).
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Because there’s no value in retaining a player who doesn’t want to be there. They can be a disruptive influence. And if they are a player who is 2 injuries away from your best 23 you can recruit a player that fills a more urgent need with that money. Also somebody you may develop and then keep beyond their current contract.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Are players stuck though? Look at the Brumbies hooker situation? 2 and 3 on the list recommitted last year, and 4 is likely to overtake one of them during their contracts. Australian teams release players from contracts to go both interstate and overseas all the time. There’s actually very little appetite for retaining players who don’t want to be there.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
That’s pretty out of touch. We already struggle to compete for player salaries. A solution is to make it less desirable for players to stay in Aus by having less autonomy over where they played? If players had the sole focus of more opportunity then Lachie Lonergan and Connal McInnery wouldn’t have committed to the Brumbies last year while they knew Fainga’a was around. There’s a number of factors that go into the decisions of players. But the fact anyway is, nowhere in Rugby has a contracting structure where players can be sent to a new club without any say in the matter, and that won’t happen here either.
Doc
Roar Rookie
Why would they do that? He’s currently not playing for any direct opposition and it doesn’t cost the brumbies more or less money if he plays or doesn’t. If I were the brumbies I wouldn’t release him for nothing.
Doc
Roar Rookie
That’s the difference with the proposed changes is the clubs would hold the cards not the agents. Why would the brumbies let Pollard go if they weren’t getting anything in return. The current model only works if it’s a one for one agreement otherwise it’s too many moving pieces. The agents would work more towards the deals themselves ie compensation rather than who with and the clubs would figure out personnel and value of the players.
Doc
Roar Rookie
It’s less what the players want and more what they clubs and Australian rugby want. And if the players end up with more opportunities elsewhere I doubt they’d complain.
Iain
Guest
The other factor not mentioned is that classy players stuck in clubs where they are well down the list for game time are the most likely to look overseas - just saying. Maybe RA needs to step in and show some leadership here; suppose they could organize & manage a system where good players not getting game time can be transferred on loan to clubs where they will get game time. The club they go to pays their wages - which benefits the club they are otherwise contracted to. It would most likely lead to a more competitive competition & therefore be better for spectators & the holders of the TV rights. What would be the downside? Oh yes the club with the over stocked player ranks would cry foul - because even if they are not utilizing them at least they are keeping them out of the hands of their competition!
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Youve highlighted right there the reason why nothing is needed to be done on this issue. No other team tried to recruit Hansen. Regardless of any window available seems unlikely he was going to end up at another Aus franchise. The Rebels likely wouldn’t have made a huge offer. You’re basing your assessment of their depth on who played on the weekend, not who was out injured, so who they actually would have considered his recruitment against. Rebels actually are actually really light on midfield options, not so much outside backs. Not sure RA intervening and trying to make clubs recruit players is the way to go. And Rennie and co would already be encouraging players of national interest to move where best suits their development for wallabies purposes.
fiwiboy7042
Roar Rookie
Thanks for that. I had some wired notion he may have started at the Canes! Don't ask me why!
Greysy
Roar Rookie
Yeah I get that. I guess some ability for RA to be more interventionist in squad management is really the option that's needed and more how I think of it over a one for one swap. I guess the example of Hansen and his not being given an offer by any team other than the Brumbies is the one that sticks out to me. That that could happen when you look at the depth of some other squads (i.e. the Rebels) is nuts. He may have not signed anyway but there should at least have been some attempt to find a place for him.
dazell
Roar Rookie
"when Lachlan Swinton inevitably gets banned for six weeks after trying to fight a corner post or headbutting a puppy during the post-game interviews." :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
And I bet if Pollard said “I want to be playing super rugby, if you won’t pick me I want to leave” they would release him to sign elsewhere.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Yeah whenever this topic comes up players are discussed like commodities, not people with roots laid down, potentially partners and families.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
By guarantee, I mean guarantee of the contract signed. I don’t know the numbers but I understand that even if the Chiefs signed 40 players, they can only be guaranteed to retain the rights to the 25 they choose (or whatever numbers they are) and if anybody outside that 25 has an opportunity come up at another franchise they can leave to take that offer, if the player wants to. As I said the numbers are a guess but that’s my understanding how it works. Essentially eroding the franchise’s rights under the contract for those players they choose not to prioritise.