'Made for international rugby': Gleeson stands out as Australia A make heavy weather of victory in Japan

On game 2 against the boks I'd argue that's a failing of the cleanout and or hunter receiving the pass in the first place. Tom wright from memory was very poor at supporting hunter in those instances. To counter, hunter also played 12 against SA in game 1. That lolesio/slipper try came from a dominant tackle, turnover and then kick from hunter. Abs centres have struggled and been dominated by bigger centres. I totally agree no one has stood up at 12 outside kerevi, but I don't think there is anyone Rennie is missing. It's easy to point out a problem, much harder to create a solution

I agree with you that’s the way the games going. And when you get big gainline presence with distribution skills it’s irresistible. Nonu, de Allende, SBW. For the theory to work you must get quick ball from the tackle. But I’d argue that if you don’t have a freak, it’s a losing strategy. I still haven’t got over Deans passing over Giteau/Barnes for McCabe at the 2011 RWC. Total failure. If you go back to 2010 and watch the Wallabies back line destroy France in France by running around them not through them (with those 2 sharing 12 duties) you wonder what possessed Deans to make the change. We also beat the ABs in HK that year by moving the ball. The ABs haven’t had a freak since SBW and have played distributors at 12 to great effect. As you say Hunter is small for the role. If you look at the loss to the Boks in Sydney this year I think it shows the limitations of the dominant runner at 12 theory. Hunter gets turned over 3 times after making a cannon ball run. It was obvious they were waiting for him. De Allende chopped. Kolisi pounced. Our strategy was predictable and naïve. I see turnovers from these kinds of kamikaze runs happening more and more in test rugby. What’s equally vital if you’re going to do that is to run with good cleaners behind you. That’s where we have a big problem imho. We need to play with what we’ve got and we are better with distributors at 12 then we are with second rate crash ballers. I do think DR is bordering on obsession with collisions. He talks about it all the time and we’ve seen it on his whiteboards. I get that he is trying to teach us what’s wrong with the game in Australia. He is a teacher and we need it. But I can’t see any evidence that the strategy is working at 12.

I’d suggest that most professional rugby coaches now select a big presence at 12 (or would prefer it), not just Rennie (noting that hunter is also on the small side). Although hunter is far from a complete player, I think he was picked on potential and to be honest has shown decent progress. Once again, there wasn’t really many other options. Simone was tried and failed as you said and I don’t think hamish has a future at 12 at international level as much as I rate him. Foketi now may have surpassed hunter but he wasn’t even in the equation in 2020 when hunter was first picked…

I would’ve picked Simone or Stewart ahead of Paisami at 12. They have been the best 12s in SR for about the last 3 years. Both are better defensively, better distributors, better kickers, and far better decision makers. But I do understand that DR doesn’t want to play distributors there. DR gave Simone one test against the All Blacks outside Noah and then banished him until injury forced him to pick him recently. Stewart has never even made a squad. In moving Paisami to 12 over them 2 years ago, DR was sending a message. I think that message was test rugby is about collisions and Australian SR coaches should start playing line benders at 12, not distributors. With the exception of Kerevi 2.0 (who learnt to pass in Japan) I think the evidence would suggest that the collision policy isn’t working. Just look at the losses. Foketi who is a distributor not a crash baller, and Simone in his brief outing this year have both been better for the team than Hunter. I like Hunter but he’s an outside back.

To a degree, but paisami has largely been the least worst option most of the time... Rennie wanted Toomua initially but that didn't work out. Hunter was the only real viable option. Foketi has only just announced himself on the scene. Who else is there? I'd also argue hunter isn't as bad as some critics suggest, much of it is down to the fact there are just too many inexperienced players in key positions (McDermott, lolesio, ikitau, hunter etc) that makes it hard for them to develop. They have no one to guide them.

Agree with the gist of this Phil. I think it’s both skills coaching and game plans. Daugunu has definitely improved from when he started. He’s got much more rugby nous now, can pilfer, better tackler etc. still not finished but better. Jordys development was botched from the get go. Big powerful runners can excel at School level because they can run over kids. It’s not a great way to learn the subtleties of the game. So to pitch him straight in after school was not ideal. I think at the time they were frightened he would be poached by League so had to make it attractive. But if he’d gone to the Brumbies I’m sure he wouldn’t have played in his first year and only been off the bench in his second and spent those two years learning the game at club level. He would be so much better now. I do wonder if there’s a sharpener in his shed though because he hasn’t come on at test level. On game plans, McKay wants a superstar running jinking flyhalf rather than a facilitator / general. McKay and Thorn have backed JOC playing to his instincts which is hard for support runners to mind read! When Creighton took over it was clear the backs really didn’t have a structure to rely on and without JOCs individual brilliance they were wet lettuce against the kiwi sides. Why Stewart didn’t go into flyhalf I will never know. That plus the experiment with what Rennie wanted. Jock was flying until Thorn moved him to the wing and put Jordy at fb. The back line was scoring good tries until Thorn moved Paisami to 12. Both of these moves upset the rhythm of the backs and I don’t think they have ever really got it back. Stewart and Campbell were in the right positions at 12 and 15 to keep the ball alive with the power runners around them. But when the balance was restored JOC became even more individual, Stewart stopped going to first receiver and just became a screen for JOC to runaround the back of. It all seemed to lose its punch. Not all the time obviously but not the same over the course of a game. They were very good defensively of course. Re coaching, Campbell has really been developed in club football (under Heenan who is coming to the Reds next season), and Daugunu was sent back to club several times to work on defense and discipline. It’s a shame now in the pro era the relationship between club and rep side has changed. In the old days you could play your way into the team the next week with a good showing at club. That sort of hand in hand structure isn’t the same now.

Paisami being a case in point. I’m still not convinced he can be the kind of 12 that can maximize the gifts of the outside backs.

It says alot aout the reds coaching team that Jock, Suli, Dalgunu, and Jordy haven't progressed as footballers in the last 2 years.

I am aware of those changes, but in each instance a safer option was generally available. I actually think Noah would've been the conservative option in a sense not Foley (as Quade was last year). Rennie could've opted for a more traditional backrow with Holloway and/or mcreight starting over Wilson, he picked a ball running trio purposefully. I agree these changes are somewhat forced and due to pressure, I just don't think they're necessarily conservative in nature. To be honest I wouldnt pick any of those bolters you suggest as I think the team needs stability and to gel. I'd pick and stick Noah and keep the incumbents in place for the most part.

Exactly

Not suggesting it was a Wallabies trial. However, there's always a chance, especially with the run of injuries the Wallabies have had plus some very poor team showings, that a player can show enough in these games to get a run at the top level. I don't see anything wrong with that.

He could have stuck with Noah but has continued to look for more experienced players whose age is such that their future is limited. I think he has become more afraid of losing than he dares to win because he feels the pressure of his win loss record. He wouldn’t be human if he didn’t. He has really only start3d Noah when other more experienced flyhalves have been injured. He keeps passing him over for more conservative less risky choices. But i don’t think Noah has been that bad. Sure he hasn’t set the world alight but he has played some very solid games against France and England. He didn’t experiment with Foketi. He was forced into choosing him due to injuries to Kerevi and Paisami. Foketi played so well when given his chance that he had to select him again. Wilson too was a forced change as a result of Leotas injury. The spring tour will be a massive test of Rennies mettle and appetite for risk. Perhaps being away from domestic media will be a blessing and he might risk more. Will he start Noah over Foley? Will he choose Gleeson and give him a run off the bench or will he make a safer choice of Hanigan? Will he start Vunivalu? Will he choose Marky Mark or Peitsch for the tour and give one of them a run off the bench? Will he blood another 12 in case Paisami goes down? It’s going to be a fascinating tour!

Is it just me or did Vunivalu look a bit lazy? Seemed like he couldn't be bothered in defence, making the extra chase etc. I thought his work ethic looked poor.

That Morgue is a dead loss Tooly.

Exactly, and Folau is the perfect example. Whereas a Ben Smith or George Nepia stopped the opponents.

I don't think that's the case, he has experimented with a number of new players or combos in recent games - foketi at 12, Foley at 10, Wilson in the backrow etc where more settled options existed. In fact I think he is trying to force the issue a bit rather then picking and sticking and trusting in the players and system.

And Rennie grows more conservative with each passing day as his winning percentage gets smaller. It will be interesting to see if Marky Mark gets a touring jersey. He's green but good in the air.

Yeah fair comment. Lets hope JB stays at 12. It might be less likely. A contest between DMac and Campbell would be fairer! The worlds against the small guys now!

No but if that's the main reason you're picking a fullback then you're being defensive not offensive. And it says you're not confident in your front line defence. Full backs get beaten in defence all the time. Folau was a turnstile. One on one with the opposing player having all the speed its very easy to be side stepped.

A proper ball playing 10 needs a pack properly giving ball, space and time inside, and runners properly getting pay from the ball he plays. One saving grace of this game, which was good, but not great, is that it had some pressure. Some individuals earned ticks against their names. Some earned ticks and crosses. Another benefit is that Rennie is gathering data in the semi visible side of development. Apart from Benny D vs Tane E type comparisons, there are those of a more ‘chemical’ variety, such as between Donaldson’s first and second half differentials, including centre partners . If so, why so will be Rennievation questions. Which playmaker is made more by which play receiver? Rennie is building a template, not just a squad. A few ticks does not a summer make, but some players are certainly warming the place up. Gleeson has not even won a starter spot at the Tahs yet, but a bolter he may yet be. Looking forward to seeing Edmed next game. He who loses flaws fastest, and serves templates smoothest, wins.