The other important point its we need to solve for a kicker first; in other words if you pick Gordon, then it’s Longeran at 10. Same goes for Donaldson. Noah gives you the option to choose either Tate, Lonergan or White. In other words, whilst Gordon or Donaldson are first choice, both are the most destabilizing, when it comes to combinations..

Combinations and cohesion. It couldn’t be any clearer. It’s why the retention of Gordon and relocation to QLD will happen ahead of retaining Petia and Paisami (the more valuable of the two). It’s why Toole and Wright will be chosen at the back. It’s why Mcreight and Wright go together. It’s why the piecemeal (but super expensive) Waratahs back line is hard to fit into the national team. Here’s hoping for some RA forward planning and strategy.

The Carter to Brumbies is another good option IMO – at 12.

I think you keep one and move the other. None of this warehousing ie Tahs where you have up to 4 young blokes fighting for what should be a bench seat. Master and apprentice.

While this wreaks of good player management – it does raise an interesting question of RA strategically: Retain the scatter gun approach of overvaluing flashy outside backs vs harvesting cohorts in order to develop combinations and genuine cohesion. In effect, a more centralised player management model. Assuming the Rebels go, RA should ensure that Gordon returns to QLD, with a view to a long term partnership with Tate, Henry and Flook. Paisami is more important than Jordy because he matters more to the former group in terms of combination value (although suspect we loose both). The Brumbies need to retain Lonergan, Noah, Len, and decide on a 12 (Tua is playing well – but when is he eligible?). The Tahs have gone the other way – making their bed in the expensive outside backs and so its Sualli (13), Jorgo (14) and Kellaway (15) that need to find a way to coexist. If they get the ball… The strategy couldn’t be any starker, and obviously doesn’t just apply to the backs..

You’re aware that he’s played there for the Tahs and has little to no chance of making the Wallabies at 15 ahead of Wright or Kellaway?

Incredible match. Test match intensity. Reds are quality, just not quite mature enough – lacking killer instincts. Toole, Lancaster, Jorgo and Sualli are all officially on notice. This kid is dynamite.
Paisami, Flook, Wright all raised their stocks. Competition in the inside mids is particularly encouraging.

Great piece. Market value has fallen significantly so at the right price, I think he’s worth a shot at 12 (or bust) as its become THE glaringly obvious national positional weakness (2, 10 and 15 all much improved). Problem is, it needs to be a good deal for the ARU financially (I’m trying to look forward) and that means a pay cut for a shot at Wallaby redemption. The alternative are beajolais with Jack or Sake with Quade; both sound pretty good to me and may well suit his colourful disposition.

The Lomani ban is shockingly lenient. If he does that outside the stadium its assault and he’s likely jailed. Player is defenseless – its virtually a king hit. I saw it live and was appalled – couldn’t believe DM didn’t call it immediately. There are no mitigating circumstances – and halving the ban shows how partisan the ruling body is. I’m all for growing the game but not at the expense of sanity and in this case player welfare.

Agreed – fantastic on both side of the ball. And another hooker to the list!

Great article Harry. Simultaneously witty & constructive. Life’s too short – Australian Rugby needs more of that.
I’m in furious agreement on “The Ed” trio – Hannigan and Tane in particular look to have been undervalued for their ability in the contact zone; Ned brings a unique versatility; Tane has been prodigious on the boot out of hand. In no particular order here are my additional nominations for players that have seen their stocks risen ytd & fill a positional deficiency:
1. Gamble
2.Flook
3. Lynagh
4. H Wilson
5. Faesler
6. Nonggor
7. Toole
8. Lolesio
9. Kemney
10. Daagunu
10. Potter
11. Horton

Thanks again for a great contribution.

Geez its hardly a massive cost out. These execs (I’m guessing $2m max in aggregate) are rounding error against the Moore Park cost base. It does raise the question though – just because PE walked, this doesn’t preclude its methods from being employed. Cyclically, the timing also makes sense to aggressively attack the cost line with solid medium term revenue tailwinds ahead (B&IL in 2025 and RWC in 2027). Centralisation (Waratahs) and transparency (Rebels) form part of this equation. Focus on the controllables is what’s presently required, not this misguided obsession with “Grass Roots’ which isn’t really even the issue (for men it’s the retention or transmission into credible pathways b/w 15-20yrs).

Johnson is spot on. Warner is a better player than his ~45ave suggests (he’s won more games – particularly in the 2nd innings) but there’s an uncomfortable sanctimony about his retirement. Thank you legend – but your input is irrelevant. Similarly, Bailey appears too close..

This is outstanding Harry. Have the ARU called you? I’m serious btw..
Two things that spring to mind – you mentioned Darwin/cohesion across the playing element, but I think if there was one clear disconnect under Eddie’s dictatorship it was the lack of the aforementioned that hurt. He had a (bad) game plan, communicated it poorly (or in his case not at all), didn’t trust his supports and then acted incredulously when it blew up. Channeling my unbridled love for Ted Lasso (you do look a bit like Beard – just sayin) I’m of the view that whoever we get should bring “a team” with them, circumventing friction and petty parochialism in the process. To that end, I take your “Galaticos” list for what it is – a thoughtful list of winners in a town that has forgotten how to do exactly thus..

Good article. Great points on Jones – completely flawed selections, but worse, he then employed a game plan the group was completely incapable of executing. Blades has sat across the entire value chain over his career and based on this commentary seems more stakeholder aware than anyone else right now. The ARU should bring him into the tent, ASAP.

Another hoot Harry (Harrys Hoot??) A few observations:

1. The beer thing is real – the lines are nuts, much of its presold (meaning people still line despite outlets being sold out) and the punters are justifiably cranky. I didn’t bother..
2. No pies.. but don’t underestimate the virtues of fresh baguette loaded with deli quality ham & fromage
3. Refs should be seen and not heard, but we know them all my name and style which equates to overreach (as well as overly complicated and ambiguous laws)..
4. Georgia & Portugal (game of the tournament?) validate your argument for additional tiers and are doing what Japan have done for years. Whilst converting Tier 3 to Tier 2 is probably the next growth leg, more exposure to Tier 2 is warranted (e.g. expanding 6 nations to 8 or similar).
5. 4 rounds in, I’m probably more confused as to the likely winner – my head still says SA, my heart France but NZ and ARG have momentum (which is what wins tournaments).

Thanks again Harry.

Many thanks Geoff – a sobering and highly accurate appraisal IMO.

Without getting into the weeds on Governance, pathways, domestic competition et al, I think the immediate aftermath needs to focus on 1) Timelines – which as you highlight appear self serving and can be manipulated as both a defense and/or expectation management (the data clearly supports experience as the key determinant to RWC success) and 2) Continuity, which I think extends to both the coach and and playing group. E.g. Donaldson v Gordon etc. Looking forward, (and call me crazy), but I think the fastest way to redemption involves both Eddie staying, and getting consistent game time into our best 23 (less concerned as to who that actually is). In summary, pick & stick.

Great piece Harry. The Roar is indebted to your global perspective and rapier wit!

Agree entirely with your rankings – albeit IMO the Wallabies remain the biggest wildcard – if Gordon has (another) bad day then all bets are off.. but their back three is arguably #1 or #2 in the world right now – Marika makes any team, Marky is playing as well as anyone (and brings complimentary aerial gifts) and Kellaway slows the game down with an error rate and dependability such that he should change his name to Smith (like Ben and Conrad its his acceleration that catches teams off guard).

Thanks again.

Great article Brett. But lets be clear – THERE IS NO DEBATE. Put another way, on what possible ground would you select NL or BD ahead of Gordon? Its not passing, tackling, running or kicking so it can only be the more intangible “experience” or “combinations” and given neither have established themselves as first choice Wallabies, that undermines the former. I think you make EXCELLENT point re game style & Cooper – its the most fungible and least disruptive. Hodge probably makes it on form also, so consider him the alternate “shoveller” at 10 (injury etc) and has experience, kicking and tackling strength vs both NL and BD. Finally, your point around compeition for positions is relevant – see also 4/5, 9, wings and FB.

Some sensible banter here.
I think Wrights far lower error rate, and line breaking ability demand first crack.
Similarly Kellaway is absolutely tailored made for test rugby. Super smart footballer, deceptively quick, strong hips etc. Critically, his influence is almost agnostic to opposition quality.
That leaves one of Marika, Marky and Jordy. Marika offers a unique skill set and work rate – how many times does he inject himself into the line from nowhere? Cover tackles etc. M & J offer far superior aerial skills with the much improved kicking. In summary, that remaining wing is actually very tactical/strategic and should be partly opposition dependent.

Nick this is a typically insightful piece. Thank you as always. A few observations from the Ireland game:

1. Game management – we took a very tactically different approach vs Italy where we arrogantly tried to blow them off the park. This meant far more kicking etc (I though Foley had a solid game, particularly in the 2H). The bull case is this reflects a new found tactical awareness i.e. a different approach based on the opponent. We never saw this under Cheika (Plan B, C, D and E were the same as A) and similarly Italy feels like an aberration caused by a lack of cohesion (too many changes). Game management vs France was also well executed.

2. We won the collision zone – its hardly been mentioned but Valentini and later Skelton in the forwards appeared to lay the platform. Hooper was seriously immense on the other side of the ball. Bobby has arguably been our best player this year and his better games have coincided with the best Wallabies performances. You were spot on re Skelton. Surely Langi Gleeson and Gamble add valuable (untapped depth). I also struggle to see Leota and Swinton fitting into this mix with Holloways much improved mobility.

3. Points of difference – Lots on the back 3 already but what stood out to me was the acceleration into contact, aerial improvement and critically THE LOW ERROR RATE. Wright and JP are prone to mass brain explosions but both held the ball in contact vs throwing the miracle pop pass (this is why Kellaway is such a good test player i.e. great decisions and minimal errors). Marky looks a special talent and improves as his opponents raise in stature (an incredibly +ve sign).

Brett,
Thanks for this – an excellent analysis of a disappointing “result”. After the initial shock of Beale kicking away with 60 secs to go, I too have reconciled the unwillingness to rollover, and our excellent centre/halves pairings as being (almost) more important. Regarding the knockdown, its clear to me that the “intention” or cynicism is what the law is trying to dissuade. This is proven by the fact that a deliberate knockdown (Beale) is deemed a yellow card and not simply a penalty. To this end, whether the ball goes slightly forward or back should be seen as largely irrelevant (the Beale incident highlights this in the extreme). In both cases on Sunday the argument is strongest for neither player being in a realistic position to gather the ball. That’s either two cards or two penalties (the problem with the latter being you would arguably encourage it).

100% agree. If there is one Cheika legacy that we can learn from its to play whats in front, to the strengths of the best cattle available. That’s changed in the past week and so must the game plan. SA or NH style, in tight, Nick White box kicking himself stupid and JOC or QC probably turning them round when possible.

Hi Nick
Many thanks as always for your insights.
I completley agree with your analysis. The direct running of SK also sets up the next context cleanout so there is an implicit link between the good excessive work and direct running etc. Looking forward I don’t feel Paisami is the answer – he’s prone to a cut out miracle ball, kicks to frequently and yet doesnt quite have the power to play the crash ball style game being asked of him. Proposed solutions – interested in your thoughts.
1. Perese to 12 – more expolosive, stronger in contact, better offloader, won’t kick. Looks to be more “like for like” if you ask me.
2. JOC to 10/Ikitau to 12 and Petitia to 13 – far more disruptive, but the inference being Cooper needs an effective crash ball merchant outside of him and I’m not sure we have one.
3. JOC to 12 – which is an acknowledgement that you will be playing more laterally, kicking etc.

Thanks again Nick.

Great insights thanks Geoff.
I felt the tone of saturday arvo was somewhere between the wallabies forgetting the basics when it became obvious they had some initial physical ascendency and Japan being a rapdily improving (and still underrated) rugby nation. The backline looked terribly unbalanced with at 10/12 IMO – Paisami and Cooper just didn’t gel at all, Kellaway’s influence missed/diluted etc. Absent SK and Hodge, I would like to see the following with JOC the sub.
9. White
10. Cooper
11. Wright
12. Perese – stronger than HP in contact, wont kick, better offloading game
13. Ikitau
14. Kellaway
15. Petia