He’s 63 years old and convinced he’s the smartest guy in the room. He’s not going to change, he’s going to do what he always does: double down. Australian rugby has two choices: 1) stick with him exactly as he is, or 2) make the change.

McKellar would be great but he hasn’t even started his first season with Leicester yet. Knowing the man, he’d consider it dishonorable to walk out on them so soon. They’d also charge Aus rugby the earth as they’ve just let Borthwick go to England a few months ago.

Yes, its head-to-head. However, if Wales, Fiji and Aus all finish equal the head-to-heads will cancel out and it would then go to points difference. Given Wales’ small margin over Portugal and Australia’s big-ish margin over Georgia, Aus would still be in a pretty good spot in that scenario.

Its not that extreme. Wales conceded a losing bonus point to Fiji and Fiji conceded one to Aus. If Aus concedes one to Wales its not the end. Aus also got a bonus point against Georgia neither Wales nor Fiji is guaranteed, and Aus will probably beat Portugal by a lot more than Wales did. The key is to win first and then work the points where you can. There is enough stress and pressure going around without them being too absolutist about what is needed.

Couldn’t agree less. This side isn’t going to win by out-Walesing Wales. You’d just confuse and demoralise a young team even more by changing the gameplan AGAIN and taking most of the players away from their instincts/skillsets. It would just feel to them like a Super Rugby match they are expecting to lose to the Crusaders. Playing a dynamic game is the best chance – Wales don’t like being stretched as SA, and NZ last year, showed. Australia have to go in with the gameplan that best suits these players which has a little enterprise. Quade would be perfect for the controlled width style they need, but that ship has sailed and I’d go back to Carter to salvage his pride and confidence.

Its a poor draw because they did it too far out. The draw was made three years before the tournament when England and Wales were in the top four and France and Ireland weren’t. There was then bad luck with Ireland and France happening to go into SA and NZ’s pools by chance. If they had waited until two years out, the top four would’ve been as they are now and Ireland, France, SA and NZ would have all headed a pool each, as they should have. The rules have been changed to make it so for all future tournaments the draw will be made two years out.

How is this a bombshell? If he wants to go for a 6/2 bench to counteract Georgian forwards game he needs a second 10 in the 23, and having him on the bench means no room left for a centre/outsides impact player. He hasn’t picked Donaldson over Kellaway, in Eddie thinking he’s picked Vunivalu as a finisher over Kellaway as a starter.

In the immortal words of the man himself Tony: give yourself an uppercut. For it to be a truth bomb it has to be true. Most ABs are Pasifika heritage born in NZ or who came over as young children. Our rate of getting developed players over is no higher than that of most European teams or Australia, Japan, and practically any top side other SA and Argentina. FAR more NZ-based and developed players play for Tonga and Samoa than the reverse. This persistent nonsense is pedaled by lazy-minded people who think NZ is just a land of white farmers. Take your ignorance bomb someplace else.

Every half back looks bad when their forwards are beaten up and are going backwards. Aaron is no more a one trick pony than any other. If Cam started and our forwards got smashed they’d shut down his sniping game just as easily as Smith’s passing game. They’d also have more time to target him while they were fresh. He’s going great as a finisher – I say let him shine there.

From hearing Hansen and Jones’ comments sounds like he’s been brought in to take a look at Eddie, more than the team. I think that’s wise if the case. EJ has had to come in, made a million and one decisions, at extreme pace based on limited data, and is now surrounded by people he hired and selected five minutes ago. He’s also copped a lot of criticism from people he doesn’t respect. What better thing to do than bring in a fellow heavy hitter he knows and trusts to look at him and say: “Eddie, I think A, C and E are great, but B is pointless and D is too much too fast. Also, you’re falling into your bad old habits here and here, and there is no one else around who knows you well enough to notice or is comfortable telling you to your face”. That could be hugely useful to him.

I reckon he’s looking at it as the equivalent of tacking away when you’re behind in a sailing race. He’s thinking: I could go for all the metrics I myself have said for years are critical (age, test caps, proven combos), with inferior stocks to the big four who are doing the same thing, and probably do okay but not win. Or I could head out in a completely different direction which might blow up in my face but also might catch lightning in a bottle. I’m Eddie Jones: I choose door #2.

I get worried with this whole “they were good for the first 20-30min, just more of that” talk from Eddie. Was similar after the Boks. The problem is he is picking a side to play a very abrasive and fatiguing style. His team is basically designed to beat the other team up then fade mid match. Its like picking a sprinter who runs the first 100m of a marathon in 10sec and then saying “gee that was good, all he needs to do is more of that for the next 42.1km and we’re golden”, then being surprised when that doesn’t happen.

“Yes, he fluffed 50% if what being a 10 is, but…” A missed easy penalty And a missed penalty touch finder And a missed restart And 2-3 misdirected bombs is more than a bit of a wobble. I saw what you saw as well And I saw some significant problems. This article could be summarised as: “If we pick the 10 who can’t kick and the 9 who can’t pass, our running game could get really good.” Good luck beating the best in that path.

Not to forget it would have been 5-0 had an outplayed England not been saved by the rain at the SCG. It all balances out in the end.

When some other bloke has been losing his line was: “You can’t lose too much. It becomes a habit and gets into your bones. We can’t afford to be losers.” When justifying his own loses: “It doesn’t really matter how much you lose, you can lose heaps and its fine, as long as you learn”. Classic Eddie: says things made up of statements that sound pretty reasonable on the face of them, and yet wildly contradicts himself based on what it suits him to pretend is true that week.

Interesting challenge, although the argument that the Boks only being 7-6 with Du Toit suggests he hasn’t been effective is lazy (the same accusation you level against the ‘We Haven’t Replaced Kaino’ club, so please practice what you preach there if you’re going to be pointing the finger). Also, all of those loses were to a top 3 side or the Lions, and some were in matches he came on late. Its also fair to point out the dependence on a lock/flanker hybrid has potentially been intensified by Kolisi’s injury. Had he been fit they may well have played a faster, more dynamic loose trio (although I accept in that scenario Kwagga might have been the one to miss out). I agree with the overarching point however, which seems to be have the freedom and flexibility to play different ways. Will be interesting to see what they do for the return match at Twickers in a few weeks.

You make some great points. I don’t fully agree with the size and athleticism bit: yes Oz has some great specimens, but we get so worried about dimensions we bring in guys who have the physical attributes but less substance behind them. E.g. I’m 6ft 8 and 130kg, but am I actually particularly good at rugby? This is why I fear France so much over the years ahead: they have such a big volume of huge X factor athletes coming through they will have the luxury of picking the 1-in-10 who are actually extremely good rugby players for someone with their genetic lottery gifts. My main point however is more a question. This article is titled: “Why the Wallabies discipline is so hard to fix”, which is what attracted me over. I don’t quite see an answer to that specific and intriguing question in the body and was interested in your view? I get that point about the league influence maybe meaning they are not doing the little ‘clever-dirty’ things, but I’d be interested in a view on why its been such a struggle to weed out the ‘your own worst enemy’ infringing?

I’d say use Ennor if Jordie got injured in the first half when the hits are at their hardest and its still likely feeling like an arm wrestle, and bring up BB if he got injured in the second when players are a little more tired and the game is starting to break up.

Pierre Berbizier springs to mind, but that was two wins. I’m sure Nienaber feels pretty good about his chances of going 1-0 this weekend, and fair play to him for it. Also Jacko: Nienaber lost the second test to NZ in SA last year at Ellis Park.

“Fullback is Jordan’s best position” is only true if all you can see is ball-in-hand attacking running. His tactical kicking is just okay and his defensive awareness and one-on-one last line tackling are inconsistent at best. I much prefer him on the wing where his strengths can be injected at the right times and his (significant) weaknesses can be managed. BB will have 15 on his back but will sometimes slot in at first receiver. Jordie will have 12 on his back but will sometimes drop to use his monster boot at the back. Jordan will have 14 on his back but will sometimes drop for kick return from broken field. Done well all will be able to do what they do best when it is needed.

He’s focusing on the big picture. If he gets his side humming and overperforms at the WC, early poor results will be quickly forgotten. Send Tupou off to do whatever gets him right for the world cup, and make do now with whatever you can cobble together if that’s what it takes. Fans are goldfish – most of us can only ever see last week and/or next week – coaches don’t have that luxury.

No 10 looks like the answer when you’re beaten that comprehensively up front.

Will’s focus should be on his health. There are other days to focus on his place in the ABs. Also, most people saying BB has been in bad form are looking past the important point that most of that bad form has been at 10. He’s looked much better, if below his usual high standards, at 15.

Yep. Another funny stat: NZ has beaten Aus in a test in every year there has ever been a WC!

Wait and see what happens next week. There is a lot of “if not now, when for SS or X player?” The answer might be: more than two weeks after a long and intense SR season ended with a big final. Its clear Crusaders and Chiefs are less present, particularly in the starting side, as others are more rested and ready. If they had decided to play SS next week when he’s had an extra few days to recover and longer in the AB systems to learn things like defensive patterns which are absolutely crucial for a fullback, I’d say that is fairly reasonable. This week play BB who knows the systems well and is highly experienced so can slot in more easily for first test of the year. Not saying I’d do it that way but I can grasp the reasoning.