No doubt he does, I was hoping for a little more in terms of his selections but let’s see what he has cooked up this time.

Thanks Nick! Nice breakdown for folks like me who aren’t so ofay with the subtleties of back-play. From curiosity, what do you think of the idea of Godwin and Hodge as 12 and 13 respectively?

Thanks for a great read Geoff, really enjoyable.

From the view of a former player (who would still play if his knees could handle it) I would rather take the risk and keep the fabric of rugby intact than ruin our game in the name of absolute safety. I’ll add that comment that if my knees were perfect, and I had to option of starting over again today in the knowledge that they would be ruined in 10 years I would do so without hesitation.

Many elite sports are risky. Equestrian causes more deaths than any other, should they take Shetland Ponies to the Olympic instead? Perhaps cricket should use a tennis ball. Or boxing should outlaw the part where you punch your your opponent.

I have absolute respect for player safety particularly in junior grades but every player who sets foot on the field should understand the risk they are taking, and should expect that play within the extant laws of the game will expose them to that risk. Rugby is contact sport, we can’t expect our athlete to end their careers in the manner they started it. Bureaucracy has no place in making laws in rugby.

Thanks for an entertaining read Brett, much appreciated.

My only thought is that Skelton’s yellow card was perhaps only the second dumbest on-field act of the weekend.

My submission for first-dumbest would see big Will Skelton capture a miraculous and exceedingly rare 1-2 double . Having been yellow-carded a matter of minutes after taking the field, Skelton returned with less than three minutes to go with Scotland behind by a point and within range of a penalty goal should they have been afforded the opportunity.

You would think Skelton might play the best three minutes of his life, desperate to make up for an exceedingly stupid yellow card. Instead he proceeded to start to push and shove and, in general, engage illegally with Scottish players who were not in the ruck but behind it. As it turns out he got away with it but Joubert could easily have penalised us and so having risked costing us the game Skelton returned to the field only to try and (almost) cost us the game. I’ve been a fan of his over the years but dear god that was a poor effort…

Haven’t really thought this though, but something like this:

Wallabies team versus France
1. Scott Sio
2. Stephen Moore (c)
3. Sekope Kepu
4. Rory Arnold
5. Adam Coleman (if available, KD to be promoted if not)
6. David Pocock
7. Michael Hooper
8. Lopeti Timani
9. Will Genia
10. Bernard Foley
11. Henry Speight Sefa Naivalu
12. Reece Hodge
13. Tevita Kuridrani
14. Dane Haylett-Petty
15. Israel Folau

Reserves
16. Tolu Latu
17. Tom Robertson
18. Allan Alaalatoa
19. Rob Simmons Kane Douglas (Simmons to be promoted if Coleman unavailable)
20. Will Skelton Scott Fardy
21. Dean Mumm Nick Phipps
22. Nick Phipps Kyle Godwin
23. Quade Cooper Henry Speight or Marika Koroibete (select on form)

Speight and Skelton must go, Arnold and Douglas need to step up. And someone needs to get Nayaravoro back into Australian rugby ASAP.

G’day Paddy. 100% supportive of this piece and more like it being featured on the Roar.

Technical pieces are great, but rarely offer the reader anything beyond an understanding of what’s happening this week and next. Pieces like Harry’s help us stitch together the fabric of the sport in a way that is often not given focus by journalists in the professional era, it adds depth, and intrigue and (dare I say it) colour into our understanding of the game and the world in general, it leaves the reader richer for having read it.

Harry – This is my personal favourite piece of yours. A ramble perhaps, but a fascinating one particularly for someone like me with only a loose understanding of the dynamics of modern day South Africa. It seems your writing has taken on a more reflective and history-focused character of later and it’s very, very enjoyable. Thanks for pulling this together, I’m sure it was a lot of effort.

Here here! Thanks Mr McGregor, well-written piece and very much along the lines of the message I’ve been trying to convey of late. It baffles me that certain media ‘experts’ seem to think Cheika is a bull-headed moron who waltzed into the role on account of getting lucky by winning the major Northern and Southern Hemisphere tournaments within the space of a few years…

Michael Cheika is a very intelligent individual and, like many intelligent individuals, he understands that the character he portrays needs to serve a purpose. Yes, he’s straight-talking, no BS and at times a bit hot-tempered (incidentally all characteristics of people with high EQ) but some of it is pantomime as well – perhaps to draw media attention off his players, perhaps to instil the requisite amount of respect and much more likely because he knows, over all, it’s best for the Wallabies.

Really looking forward to the rest of the Spring tour, bring it on!

Nice article NV. Enjoyable read, thanks.

Try being well-mannered and gracious when you have poured your heart and soul into preparing a team for battle only to watch them give their all and come up short. Of course, it’s what we all – as rugby people – should aspire to but it’s oh so much easier said that done.

It’s easy for Hansen to be gracious, his team have won 18 matches straight! What so many people are failing to see in Cheka is that much of his bad behaviour is by virtue of his extreme passion for Australian rugby and unrivalled will to win – you take the good with the bad, many great coaches have been hot-headed at times.

Thanks for the compliment and comments sandgroper, and agree with what you’re saying. It baffles me that people think that Cheka has achieved what he has by just being lucky.

Outside of rugby his achievements in business and ability to speak, from memory, 6 languages make it very clear he’s an exceptional intellect and it seems like some people can’t make the connection between that and the fact that he probably cultivates the persona we all see because it serves him well as a head-coach. I’ve known plenty of people who are immensely intelligent but choose to hold that part of their personality back because it doesn’t serve them well to flaunt it, I suspect Cheka is the same except perhaps without the polish of some others given his background.

He has a plan, no doubt, and while it’s not my plan or your plan it does seem to be slowly coming together and for every Dean Mumm there is an Adam Coleman right around the corner. I’m enjoying watching it take shape, and hope that his plan is as good as it has been coaching elsewhere.

There’s an expression I’ve heard used a lot in coaching, I can’t recall the origin but for some reason I want to say it’s the NFL: “The best coaches are athletes who worked hard as hell to get to the top level, and didn’t quite make it” or something along those lines.

Interestingly, though I had never thought about it, Cheka probably falls into that category.

Jokerman, I neither condone homophobia nor think that Rebellion’s comment was in good taste. Again, referencing Owens’ sexuality and disparaging him because of it are not the same thing.

Normally I wouldn’t get pulled into these kinds of comments but there’s a big gap between poor taste and homophobia (or any other kind of discrimination) and it annoys me when an accusation of this nature is thrown out without thought. You may well be right about Rebellion, to be honest I’ve never noticed him or her before, but I can’t see anything other than an ill-advised joke in that particular comment.

My gut feel is that there’s plenty of support for Cheka, and the commenters, journalists and fans calling for his head the vocal minority rather than the majority. Unfortunately the vocal minority all too often control political agenda, which is why I try to write balanced pieces, bring perspectives into focus and force discussion on these topics. Thanks ORN

Cheers Chooka, see comments above re: Cheka being the only coach available. Thanks for commenting and supporting my pieces, always a pleasure.

It’s funny, we say that but the truth is does any country really have a glut of talented coaches lining up for the top job? No. Why? Because the only coach who appears to be a superstar is the one who is winning. Hansen signed on for four more years because it ‘was in the best interests of the team’ which basically translates as ‘was the only man qualified’, England hired an Aussie and Wales and Scotland are coached by Kiwis.

Even the great New Zealand doesn’t have particular depth in their coaching ranks, as the failed experiment with the Blues and the great John Kirwan proves. By definition, the in-demand coach is the one who wins the flag, and there’s only one of those at every level.

Thanks Rob, always enjoy your contributions.

Amen.

Agree with most of that. Cheek’s seasons with the ‘Tahs and in 2015 WC could have gone either way, the fact is he put his team in a position to get that ‘luck’ and they were able to capitalise, it’s very rare that a coach has a team so strong than victory is never in doubt, the ABs are as close as we’ll ever see to that at the top level.

Fingers crossed. Michael Cheka, unlike Trump, is not seeking to be the leader of the greatest military super power the world has ever known. I wouldn’t want either to have their finger on the nuclear button but if I was forced to pick one Trump wouldn’t get a look in.

He’s a hell of a lot more successful than your or I, even before coaching the Wallabies and Kool Aid is delicious.

It’s an odd joke and in odd taste to be sure, but would it be hetrophobic to suggest the same if Owens were a woman? Referencing Owens’ sexuality and disparaging it are not the same thing.

Thanks Akari. Skelton is an interesting case and while, habitually, I think it’s bad practice to question the will of a player who makes it to the highest level it seems to me he just doesn’t want it badly enough – he has had a dozen opportunities to get into shape and never capitalised. Nothing would make me happier than to be proven wrong, but I don’t suspect I will; however, the idea of Coleman and Skelton (at the peak of his physical potential) is an appealing one! Having said that I truly believe the strength and conditioning regiment across the Super Rugby teams in Australian is severely deficient and will be putting pen to paper on that topic once the season is over.

Cheik’s selection policy certainly leaves me with more questions than answers. However, for every time I’m critical of one of his selections and proven right, there’s another time where I’m critical of his selections and he proves me wrong. Cooper playing at 10 this year, Kerevi playing at 13, Reece Hodge being started on the wing are all examples of this.

And I agree with you completely about his post-match antics. No one is more of a supporter of the spirit in which the game should be played than I am but sometimes you take the good with the bad. Ultimately I swing back and forth in my opinion all the time, and this article just captures what it is at this point in the time – such is the luxury of writing sports opinion!

Thanks for reading and for your constructive comments, enjoy the rugby!

Potgieter is one of my favourite players of all time, he is also not an international standard player having only played a handful of tests for the ‘Boks and to suggest he single handedly lifted a team full of international superstars to a Premiership is ridiculous. Equally baffling is the concept that Cheika’s is just a thick-headed thug who has lucked his way to one of the most impressive coaching resumes on the face of the planet.

All coaching requires luck, there are an enormous number of key determinants outside of the head-coach’s control (talent availability, budgets, injuries, draws etc.) and it’s far more art than science. If that statement wasn’t true there would be one coach who, regardless of where he was stationed, would leads team to victory every year. Even the greats like Lombardi, Dwyer and Bennett don’t win all the time without a lot of other things going in their favour.

I’m not sure how being the third best team in the world would warrant a coach receiving his walking papers…

Judging Australia by their ability to beat the current-generation of All Blacks would be like comparing your basketball team to the Harlem Globetrotters and while, of course, the prize should always be to equal or exceed their level anyone with even a basic understanding of athletic/skills development should appreciate that’s never going to happen overnight.

Not perfect, but undoubtedly effective. Cheers Fin.