The Roar
The Roar

Francis Foo

Roar Pro

Joined August 2014







PLayed rugby union for university in mid 1960s to mid 70s.



Why was Liam Wright not in the Wallabies call-up?

Bad move.

Liam Wright is like a raw diamond that will shine bright with continued polishing at training.

Dave Rennie reveals his Wallabies squad to take on France

Andrew Kelloway is good choice. I had watch him closely his style of play and concluded he is an effective attacking full back. But he needs close back up when he is on the run with the ball as he tends to get isolated.. very effective his kicking and running. Love to see him play against the fast running French Les Bleus.

Dave Rennie reveals his Wallabies squad to take on France

Tom Wright is good for Wallabies. Exciting player with good acceleration and explosive run. His team mates must be able create space for him to run with the ball.

Rugby Australia and Brumbies to get two more years of the Wright stuff

That is sad. Very sad.
If that is the csse, coach Rennie had just cut one finger on his own hands.

Back to back row: When the going gets tough, the tough get going

In ball carrying and withstanding gang tackles, Hooper is not as effective as Peter Samu. In line out Peter can be an extra surprise jumper and adds more kilos to the scrums.

Hooper’s advantage is he has high workload and pretty effective at #7 and in loose scrums. In terms of full package, I would still have Peter Samu in the mix, if Hooper is in for whatever reasons, such as a grubber for the ball in a ruck.

Back to back row: When the going gets tough, the tough get going

What about Brumbies Melbourne-born Peter Samu, for either # 6, or 7 ( or #8 as replacement player) in the Wallabies?
He is explosive with ball in hand, he has great acceleration ( something needed in Aus rugby) , a reliable ball handler, and a tougher nut to bring down in a gang tackle. The same playing style adopted by Valetini.
Perhaps what he needs to do more is to find for himself more workload in the run of play to help bring the backs to the advantage line more often. Brumbies using him at #8 is under utilising the full package of his skills he can bring to the team.
I would love to see Valetini and Peter Samu at 6 and 7, interchangeably depending on the configuration of the opponent’s forwards, in the starting line-up to fully exploit both their explosive power and aggressive tackling.
Something for coach Rennie and McKellar to chew on.

Back to back row: When the going gets tough, the tough get going

I believe coach McKellar has the right attributes ( B&B) ie brains and b… to wield the Wallabies’ forwards into shape to be an aggressive attacking and defensive force to take any team.

The way the Brumbies came back during the game with the Hurricanes after two humiliating outings in Kiwi-land, shows coach McKellar means business with those under his charge.

I believe coach Rennie will give him a free hand to sort out the Wallabies forwards and their game.

But that is onlly one half of the story.

The primary task of the backs is to SCORE TRIES and not to move around the paddock like peacocks with nothing substantive to show. The TT competition haf actually exposed the weakness in the Aussie backs… not only with lack of acceleration but also lack of inventiveness/ creativeness and needing the required presence of mind when with ball in hand, the uncanny ability to see opportunities in gaps of the opponents’ defence coupled with the willingness to go off from the coaches’ script. In tandem, for others to have the prescience to back up accordingly.

I don’t know whether this mental attribute can be learnt or taught in field training, simy because it requires split second mental visualization with ball in hand and then very quickly to determine the right option to succeed. Jordan Petaia showed he has that ability and that is why he is an exciting player to watch.

But IF this attribute is something inherent to the person, then perhaps we should find that person(s) in the Australian universe and then enhance other aspects of his rugby skills eg ball handling etc on the field.

Dan McKellar joins Wallabies coaching team for 2021

Val Saunders
True what you said.
Pride in wearing the Wallabies jersey was greatly sought for when rugby was an amateur sports. You fought for a place to represent your country for one prime reason. Pure pride.
Today the motivation is money and it is ticket to chase more dollars overseas.
It is a rational reason to choose chasing dollars ( going overseas) over pride ( to continue to represent the country) . I would.
However, the expectation that by turning rugby into a professional sport, it will enhance the country’s status in that sport. Didn’t quite happen that way in Australia…. we lose players to overseas clubs.
And Australia Rugby has not done a good job to arrest the declining standard of Aussie rugby ever since the sport turned professional, instead it pays overly attention to the bottom dollar sign and bending over backwards for advertising money while there is the more urgent need to sustain, or get more fans into the game and have more fans through the gates of rugby games.

Too little, too late: What we needed to see more of from the Aussies in Super Rugby Trans-Tasman

Val Saunders:
“ The Wallabies jersey (as to a lesser extent even the NZ one) no longer is enough to combat wages that can be obtained overseas.
So give the rugby public what they want – a SR AU competition (with maybe one more team from Fiji), a final series and then the AU finalists play NZ finalists ie two semi- finals plus a final which will be easy to promote and will draw plenty of attention (at ground and TV) and then the Wallabies.”

It makes a lot of sense to me.

Too little, too late: What we needed to see more of from the Aussies in Super Rugby Trans-Tasman

Now that the Trans Tasman competition is, for all intent and purpose, over for the Australian teams, so the question in the minds of the fans is this: What has coach Dave Rennie learnt from the TT competition in preparation for his Wallabies team?

What are the top 5 take aways for coach Rennie to rebuild his team.

Any ideas?

For starters, coming from the top of my head, we need to have backs with good
speed acceleration when they get the ball and runners who can run as though they have one leg shorter by 2 inches so they weave around and away from the opponent. Skills like Damien McKenzie or Jordie Barrett and other AB backs have.

And secondly we need forwards to be brainwashed to not voluntarily fall on the ground with the ball BEFORE they are being tackled and brought to the ground by the opponent. Perhaps one option is to send these forwards who got selected to wear the gold jersey, to a qualified hypnotist to get rid of that bad habit. Oh, one more thing, and also the forwards got to learn how to position themselves to off load the ball cleanly.

I must presume coach Rennie is aware he is handicapped in one aspect; We don’t have depth in our teams unlike the NZ teams. By the time we hit the 4th international match, we will be scraping the bottom of the barrel to find replacements for injuries and what-not,
oartly because the Australian Rugby brain trust has not come up over the years an effective grooming structure like that the NZ Rugby has, to choose and develop players with potential ti become Wallabies stars,

More interestingly, is whether the skills of some of the up-and-coming players can be re-tooled to fit into coach Rennie’s game plan to meet the different needs to confront different international teams.

Too little, too late: What we needed to see more of from the Aussies in Super Rugby Trans-Tasman


Great analysis, Enjoyed reading it.

Too little, too late: What we needed to see more of from the Aussies in Super Rugby Trans-Tasman

Len Ikitau was looking for glory instead of looking for the grass between the goal posts.
He is not the only one.
Many who crossed the line for a 5 point try seldom think of the kicker who is given the task to boot in between the posts for 2 points for the team. These chaps who crossed the line thought their job was over, forgetting the more difficulty task of his fellow kicker trying to get another two points for his team with his boots from a ridiculous angle.
Nothing to do with lack of skill, just lack of right attitude after getting the 5 points.
Of course, there are times when reaching to be nearer to tha goal posts can be a tough call when being chased down. Folks like Len Ikitau had all the time during that try.

Make it two! Barrett misses twice as Brumbies pip the Hurricanes

I agree 100% . Stoppage is WHEN the referee ACTUALLY blew the whistle. He did that only after the denied try.
That was my point. Somebody argued
the ref should discount the knock-on and restart the game at the subsequent infringement because that was the stoppage. The ref did NOT blow the whistle at the subsequent infringement to the knock-on. That was the point. It was not a stoppage because the whistle was not blown for infringement before the denied try.
The TMO and ref was correct to restart the game at the earlier knock-on infringement, instead of the subsequent penalty infringement as both incidents were in the same run of play.
As I tried to emphasise, an infringement is NOT stoppage UNTIL
the ref blows the whistle, as you rightly said. He only blew AFTER the denied try, not before.

The Wrap: So where was TJ when the Hurricanes needed him?

The point is a knock on also is a penalty with a remedy of a stoppage for a scrum and the subsequent penalty called by the ref also has a remedy of stoppage of a free kick. UNTIL the ref called for actual STOPPAGE, both incidents remain INFRINGEMENTS in the run of play to be determined by TMO.
So there is no reason why the TMO and the Ref cannot call out the knock-on and instead on the LATER infringement. Both were infringements during the same of RUN OF PLAY without any precedent actual stoppage.
The TMO and Ref made the right call on the knock on prior to the subsequent penalty to deny the try.

The Wrap: So where was TJ when the Hurricanes needed him?

Re: the Brumbies v Hurricanes game on the disallowed try in the 73rd minute by the Hurricanes.
The question turns on the word “ Stoppage”. Stoppage and Infringement are two different things.
Infringement of a knock-on following a stoppage of the run of play such as a scrum, line-out or awarded penalty as against an infringement of a knock-on in a run of play. The latter is NOT stoppage.
The infringement of the penalty AFTER the knock-on by Savea was during the RUN OF PLAY , not within the ordinary meaning of the word STOPPAGE as used in the rules. Unless of course if the Rule Book clearly defines what is meant by Stoppage for the law. In Law, under rules for statutory interpretation, words used should be interpreted based on its ORDINARY meaning eg dictionary meaning, and not to add other meanings to it, unless clearly stated otherwise in the rules.
The penalty AFTER the knock on by Savea occured in a run of play and not arising from a STOPPAGE of play such as like from a scrum.
Thus, the TMO and Ref ‘s to call out the earlier knock-on, is correct as the subsequent infringement of the penalty did not arise from stoppage (if the word “Stoppage “ was used in the rules).
This is one view unless the rule book has other qualifiers to say otherwise,

The Wrap: So where was TJ when the Hurricanes needed him?

I agree.
An infringement of penalty while ball is still in a run of play without actual stoppage taking place CANNOT constitute and interpreted as Stoppage.
An infringement at scrum or line out are ACTUAL stoppages and are not in a run of play.
Technically, the TMO and ref were correct to call the Knock On and denied the try by the Hurricane.
The rules did not define the word STOPPAGE. In law, you have to take the ORDINARY meaning of the wordS in the rule and you are not to add additonal meaning to the words used in the rules. ( called Statutory Interpretation rules)
And that is how Golf Rules are interpreted. The ordinary meaning of the words are used in the Rules to adjudicate an infringement unless the particular words are specifically defined. For example, in golf rule, a clear distinction is made between “THE ball” and “ A ball”.
In this case the call for the knock on by Hurricanes before the penalty during the run of play and denied the try by the Hurricane is correct.
The infringement of PENALTY while ball is still in the run of play AFTER the knock on is not a STOPPAGE as a fact,

Make it two! Barrett misses twice as Brumbies pip the Hurricanes

I agree.
The buck stops at the Board. Perhaps change the Board members. Give them the perks and let them retire in Spain.
I say give the present set of coaches another season to reset and remold this young team so as to prove whether they have the ability to think deeper and more strategically than they had been during this season to take the Tah out of the current bottomless pit the team is in right now.

Michael Cheika dismayed by shoddy Waratahs defence

There is the rule that allows automatic award for under the post penalty try for persistent infringement inside ths 5 m line
The same rule applies for blatant deliberate infringement when a try is becoming obvious if the mischievous infringement has not occurred .
No need to have all the players yellow carded.

Make it two! Barrett misses twice as Brumbies pip the Hurricanes

Waratah’s embarrassing loss is due in part to laziness on the field. By the second half, most of the players were just going through the motion playing their positions and waiting for the 80 minutes to be over. Perhaps the players started off already thinking they can’t win the game. Not much commitment as opposed to that shown by the gutsy Brumbies against the Hurricanes.
The Tah players might as well be sitting in the pub talking about rugby in that 80 minutes.

Michael Cheika dismayed by shoddy Waratahs defence

In Brief….
Professional players do use infringements deliberately to disturb or break run of play of attacking play such as within the 5 m of touchline when a try seems inevitable. Its an often used trick. AB’s Ritchie McCaw is an expert in this.
At the 5 m line, the rule should be changed to allow ONLY ONE WARNING ( not two) for infringement for off side or ruck infringement. The next infringement at the 5 m in the same run of play by the defending team should be a compulsory 10 min sin-bin for the defending side.
Head infringement of a red card when ths head of the victim is lowered ABOVE the shoulder of the offender. When the head of the victim is lowered BELOW the
shoulder line of the offender, that would be covered as a mitigating circumstance but subject to whether the head is touched deliberately or with severity.

Make it two! Barrett misses twice as Brumbies pip the Hurricanes

After watching the replays several times, I have to agree with many commenters in here that the refereeing of the game is left much to be desired.

Too many wrong calls for both sides.

In particular in the rucks and in loose scrums, where often legs are off the ground and hands are on the ball by the Canes’ forward are not called out.

OK, one or two errors calls can be excused as innocent misjudgments, more than that can’t be an excuse.

Yet these refs know that how they use the whistle will reflect their knowledge of the game’s rules, and if that is not the case, then the unsavoury accusations of biasness by the referee would pop immediately into the spectators’ mind And this is what happened in this game. All of this add up to the perception of incompetence or some would say, some refs need to wear glasses during the game to see clearly.

Nothing is worse than to see a good game muddied by questionable refereeing.

Make it two! Barrett misses twice as Brumbies pip the Hurricanes

Good game and credible performance by the Brumbies despite the scorelines.
Both teams were put under the pump: Brumbies by Aussies fans ( not just ACT) to stop the rot, and the Canes, to go to the top of the ladder with a bonus point. Jodie, usually Mr Reliable with his boot, fell under pressure.
A win that is well worth watching unlike the win by the Reds earlier.
Waratahs should join the club rugby competitions next year after today’s match.

Make it two! Barrett misses twice as Brumbies pip the Hurricanes

True… but the Crusaders-B still win, didn’t they?

Crusaders hit snag in close win over Force

A bit insulting though… that the Crusaders basically put up a B team… and rumours had it, it is partly under the instructions of AB management to try out different players for coming international matches. The Trans Tasman is a practice round to try out potential AB candidates. After all, Crusader is alreadys #1 team aamong Kiwi teams… bolstered by the fact oue Aussie teams had been roundly humiliated all Kiwi teams except one, and even then, that one Kiwi team had lost its exciting star player with a red card … worst, the Aussie team almost lost to that ONLY losing Kiwi team ( so far) despite that.

Fact: Inconvenient Truth really hurts especially for Australian Rugby…And it is better that way for us NOW so that Australian Rugby can take “ the bull by the horns “ to re invent itself to climb back to its glory days to be a serious challenger across the chaps in black jerseys across the ditch when the rugby season starts each year.

Sorry if this hurts our enlarged Aussie ego.

Crusaders hit snag in close win over Force


Well said. Can’t agree with you more.

To paraphrase Shakespeare, the fault lies not in the players, but in their coaches.

The Trans-Tasman showed a glaring weakness in Australian rugby