TBH, I think all the ratings for the players are low. It seems all of the negative media is getting into everyone’s heads.
You might immediately argue with me out of hand, but image every Aussie player performed high enough to get an 8. We might have won by 50 points in that case!

Seriously. No-one rated higher than 7.74. No one got an 8. Not one player! Despite us playing the “Greatest team in the world” and almost winning. No 8’s to be seen?

No wonder the All Black win all the time when even our supporters can’t find a golden lining in this result. The Kiwis said they were going to beat us by 100 point and they didn’t get close. Yet still we can’t find a silver lining.

For the record. The Lions scored 6 tries in 3 games against the AB’s and everyone rated them for their effort. The Wallabies have scored 9 tries to 10 for the AB’s in 2 games.

When was the last time anyone put 5 tries on the ABs? Seriously, when did that last happen? Heck, even in the hey days of Aus rugby I can’t remember us putting 5 tries on them.

OK, So I challenge you all. 5 tries on the AB’s. When did it last happen? There are more Kiwis on this forum than Aussies. Surely you know the answer. I bet it was long before they became “The greatest team in the world”

I am not saying that Aus is better than the Kiwis. We aren’t. What I am saying is that we are not as bad as what the media are saying. What I am saying is that sheep vote on this poll. The media says we are crap and you all believe it. Get on the Wallaby hate bandwagon. We can go on to beat SA and Argentina, finish second in the championship and still we will be crap in your eyes.

You all bag the players for having no heart. Get some heart yourselves.

Why do people seem to overlook the obvious here. The pass from Smith into Hannnigan was forward. Have a look at the video again. The pass was forward.
It was certainly a Gregan style penalty pass. I think Nigel knew that, but he couldn’t go back on his call after it was made. But that is also the reason why it wasn’t a penalty try.

I personally would have Timani at #8 given he choices. We need the muscle.

However, my point is that there is no competition for positions. I actually rate Timani, and the person that beat him to #8 at the Rebels (Mafi) is probably the best ball running #8 in world rugby right now. Mafi might even be the best #8 in the world right now, but we will never know because he plays for Japan. For my mind, Mafi was far and away the best player in an Australian team this year, and he isn’t an Aussie.

I say again that Timani was the second choice #8 for the side that finished on the bottom of the ladder. Yet he commands 70% of the vote to be the Wallabies #8.

My biggest problem (and the Wallabies as well) is that we have no decent #9’s or #10s. The ones we have are good, but not special. And if we lose them, we are right royally screwed. I have never seen such poor depth in those 2 positions in the 25 years that I have watched rugby.

What this shows more than anything is a lack of competition for positions.

Take a look at #9 (71%) and #10 (74%) as an example. Imagine Foley and Genia get injured. I can’t even remember the names of the second placed players right now. What’s even worse is that I think Foley is a very good player (at best) and Genia is also very good, but past his best. Genia was once a special player, but Foley never was and never will be.

Take a look at #8. Timani hasn’t even pulled on the shirt at #8 for Aus (Not sure that is true), but he is far and away the #1 choice. Timani wasn’t even the first choice at #8 for the Rebels yet he is the first choice for the Wallabies.

I went to the Rebels season launch yesterday. Saw Koroibete out the front of Crown choking down a smoke. Hey, I love a hard man that thumbs his nose to convention. I smoked while I was playing Rugby but I was never a Super Rugby player either. I probably would have given up if I was in contention.
Give up the ciggies mate. You have awesome talent. But those ciggies won’t help you run around the park.

Look, I am not completely stupid and at least a part of what I said above was a wind up. However, there are 2 points that I don’t understand. Last year, the English came to Aus for 3 tests. Wales went to NZ for 3 tests. Surely it would have been more profitable if England had played 2 tests here and one in NZ, while Wales did the opposite. I have a few Welsh friends that could barely bring themselves to watch the third test in NZ last year. One of my Welsh freind flys the world to watch them, but wouldn’t fly over the ditch to watch them play NZ because in his words “It’s going to be a bloodbath”. BUt I am sure he would have flown to across Australia to watch them play anywhere here. I am sure the English loved all 3 tests in Australia this year, but that isn’t the norm.

My point is that if it was all about money, then there is surely more money in playing 2 nations while you are down here than playing just the one. Australia and NZ still get 3 tests against the NH teams, but we play more than one of them. In addition to that, a one off game of England in Argentina would probably also command big money. A 3 test series in Argentina isn’t worth it though. Play SA twice and Argentina once. Or tour NZ, Australia and Argentina/SA. England are much more likely to command higher fees for 3 tests in 3 different countries than 3 tests in Australia. We couldn’t even pack the stadiums for every game here. But if there was only one English test, the stadium would be full. If the game was in Sydney, the Brits would fly from Melbourne Brisbane and Perth to be there. And the same goes for a one off test in NZ, Argentina and SA.

You might say, what is in it for England to visit the 2-3 countries. If we get more bums on seats, we are also prepared to pay more to the NH teams to get them down here. I was at the Melbourne game and it was played at AAMI Park. The stadium wasn’t full and there is only about 18k seats there. Had England played in Sydney for 1 game, the stadium would have been full. Had Wales played in Melbourne, they possibly could have packed Etihad Stadium. Ireland could have filled Suncorp too. In total numbers, there could have been twice the amount of bums on seats. The ARU would have made 4 times the money and paid a lot more to the touring teams. Also, viewer numbers would have been higher in the NH because of the variety.

Look, I know there is more to it than this. But I also kind of feel like it is just same same kind of stuff. We have done it for 40 years, so why change now.

It will be an interesting match up. But one thing I note is that England get to face the ABs in England. When is the next time that England face the ABs in NZ. Is it even on the cards?

I find the November tests as a throw back to the times when GB ran the SH countries. Now we must travel each year to the NH to contest their teams on their turf. Every so often, they decide to turn up and travel down here. But that only happens once in a while and they never ever challenge SA, Australia, NZ and Argentina in one series Hey I wouldn’t either if I was them, but it begs the question. Why do we do it when they are to scared to try?

Instead, every November, the SH teams tuck their tails between their legs, bow down to their masters and travel north. We then play multiple teams on their turf. Has England or any other NH team ever attempted the “Grand Slam” of the SH teams. Come on England. You think you are awesome now. Give it a go next year. You might start with a win in SA, follow it up with a close win in Australia, but then fall short in NZ and finally get humiliated by a loss in Argentina. If you start in Argentina and work your way back, they may walk away 1 from 4.

I know distance is a factor. We go to the the NH and all 5/6 NH teams are located in the same proximity as Sydney and Auckland in distance terms. Well then, come to the antipodes and play 2 games in Aus and two in NZ. I know money is a factor as well, but surely they will make more money from a grand slam tour than a tour of one country only. Wales an England play 4 games in NZ and Aus while Scotland and Ireland ply Argentina and SA. Throw in France and a Paciific islander team or two and we have a proper SH tour

England have had a great year and the deserve their second ranking. But they didn’t once play the ABs anywhere let alone at Eden park. They played the WB’s it is true and they beat us well and deserved it.

Yes, well written article Nick. Good stuff!

I am going to put my rose coloured glasses on now. As much as the Wallabies offloads didn’t stick, I still take pride in us trying them even if we failed. It was only a few months ago that I believed that the ABs were the only team in world rugby that could actually offload. And as a result, the ABs have dominated everyone. Now we are trying it too and we look dangerous as a result. The difference between us an the ABs right now is that they offload and the passes actually stick. Ours don’t. But my rose coloured glasses show me that it is only a matter of time until our skill level rises and we start matching (ok, getting close to) the ABs in this area. Practice makes perfect.

I have watched rugby for a long time and it’s also been a long time since I saw the Wallabies looking like they were really dangerous in attack. We have always tried to “construct” tries, but you have to go back to the Larkham days to find a time when we were truly dangerous every time the ball was in our hands. The ABs are dangerous ever time the ball is in their hands. Way back when Larkham was playing, we were illusive and dangerous. I know we lost the Irish test, but we are starting to look truly dangerous again. I would prefer to lose that test to Ireland while looking dangerous and more potent every week than to win a boring territory game.

It certainly beats being a Springboks supporter right now. We still have our rose coloured glasses. Someone stood on top of theirs and crushed them! P.S. I hate saying that. It so pains me to see them so crap right now even though I would be happy to never lose to them again.

I may be one of the few people out there, but I do get the fascination with Mumm over Fardy. I love watching Fardy play and I think Fardy has been awesome for Australia in the past. He’s one tought MF. He’s also much better that Mumm has ever been. The problem is that Fardy isn’t awesome right now. Mumm has delivered more in a Wallabies Jersey that Fardy has this year. Neither have been awesome. I saw the game this morning against the French Barbaians and if ever there was a game for Fardy to stamp his name on the jersey, it was there. But he didn’t do it.

I would prefer McMahon to have taken that #6 jersey, there is a lineout to win and McMahon can’t do that. McMahon is better around the field than Mumm (and Fardy), but lineouts are important. Fardy can do the lineout, but recent performances have McMahon and Mumm in front of him unfortunately.

Seriously, stop jumping on the bandwagon that all the people present on here in having a go at the usual suspects. Think for yourself and have a look at the current performances. You have had a go at Hooper, Foley, Mumm and Skelton.

Firstly, you question the selection of Hooper. Do you live in a tortoise shell? He may not be a traditional #7, but he still may be the best #7 in the world right now. I am a massive Pocock fan and he is still the best at the breakdown. But the game has changed again and Pocock hasn’t been as dominant this year as a result. Right now, Hooper deserves that #7 jersey more than Pocock. I know Pocock can pilfer much better than Hooper and that changes games, but in every other aspect of the game, Hooper is a better player right now. They play Pocock at 8, but Hooper gets across the gain line way more times than Pocock ever does and that is the role of a #8. So Pocock playing at #7 (or #8) is failing right now. Pocock is still world class, but Hooper is the better all round player. I know people say Sam Cane is the next Richie McCaw, but seriously, I would look like a good #7 in that All Black team and Hooper would be a god in the way Richie McCaw was. Sam Cane does his job very very well, but he is nothing special. Hooper and Pocock are miles better and both would be sainted if they were born in NZ and played for the ABs. McMahon is not far behind either. Actually, Gill is probably also a more complete player than Sam Cane right now. I don’t want to bag Sam Cane because he is very very good. However I want to address your argument that Hooper is no good. Hooper runs rings around all the other number 7s in the game right now for all out skills and involvement in the game. In fact, as a Pocock fan, I would go as far as saying that Hooper is one of the top 5 players in the world right now. He just delivers all the time. Pocock may have been robbed of player of the year last year, but 2016 is a new year and Hooper has been better this year.

Next you say Foley is no good. I have long been on the same bandwagon. For me, Foley is a dependable player, but is nothing special. Long have I advocated for anyone else to take his position. But lets be fair to Foley. He has straightened his running lines and is actually been a world class 10 for most of the year. He’s actually been really good for most of the year as much as I hate to say it. His place kicking could be better though.

As much as I want to agree with you on Mumm being crap (Seriously, I really want to agree with you here), he’s actually been ok when he has gotten on the field. I love the hardness that Fardy brings and rate him higher usually. But lets be fair, Fardy hasn’t brought his A game for at least a year. I would prefer to see Shaun McMahon on the field at #6, but he is short, so we do need Mumm for the line outs.

Then you mention Skelton. No arguments there except that if he does figure things out, he could be devastating, so I can see why they keep trying with him.

You seem to say that Godwin deserves the position before Foley. I ask you “on which tier 1 performance?” Maybe Godwin is really good and in the long run will be awesome for the Wallabies. But right now, I see nothing that shows he will be better than Foley.A few good runs in tier 2 games and all of a sudden he is tier 1 class. Your argument seems to be based around the same old lines. “The current player isn’t to my liking, so replace him with someone else who might be good”. What if Godwin is merely ok if he enters the world scene? History suggests that he will struggle if he steps up. Heaps of people are awesome at the lower lever and then don’t deliver on the world stage or take years to be really good. Hardly anyone just comes in and delivers and lots never deliver. If he fails,will you then advocate for the next tier 2 player who shows some promise to play there? The next Kyle Godwin!

At the end of the day, the Wallabies have been beaten by NZ and England this year. It seems like people decide that since that has happened that everyone in the Wallabies camp is crap. But that just isn’t the case. Yes, it hasn’t been a great year so far, but that doesn’t mean everyone is crap. All it means is that we didn’t do well enough as a team.

Finally, you say that the Wallabies fans must endure crap decisions like Mumm and so on while the ABs don’t have to do that because their decisions are so much better. What a load of crap. The ABs have a higher winning ratio than us. They are better than us and as a result, their selections aren’t scrutinised like ours because they are winning. But they are better than us because they are a “better team” with better skills al around. However, individually there are plenty of players in the AB squad that would be scrutinised if they were dumped in a Wallabies jersey and asked to compete against our current players. In fact, their entire backline (apart from Barrett) seems incapable of scoring a try from any kind of structured play. Their forward pack is all class, but their backline only has one trick. The offload. They are really good at it. but it is a 1 trick pony and teams will figure out how to beat it. Actually, they defend awesomely well too.

However would Savea even make it into the Wallabies team? Yeah, he can run over people, but that is the entire limit of his skills. And their centres right now. I mean they can tackle, but they rarely make any inroads into a defensive line in structured play. Yes, in broken play they are awesome, but only because of the offload. The ABs dominate, because they are awesome at defence and all the forward aspects of the game and they are even better in broken play. However, if the Wallabies learn to offload as well as the ABs do, and we will in the next few years, maybe some of the ABs players might be scrutinized more closely. Maybe Savea will be they Mumm?

So what the F am I saying in this silly rant. I guess what I am saying, and it goes to everyone out there. Stop having a go at everyone in the Wallabies squad. They aren’t all crap. Stop putting some players on pedestals and others under the table. Judge all the player on their current performance, not on something you saw in the past, and certainly not on what the other sheep are saying.

I am not sure “Waste” is being evaluated the right way here. We can’t see a full picture of what was actually wasted by looking at the P&L in a given year. If money was spent on dinners and flights for the top dogs, then that is truly waste, but if it was spent on Grass roots with a view to develop the game in the long run, then it is money well spent. I place no assertions here as I have no idea where the money actually went, but my point is that looking at a profit figure on a P&L tells us nothing.

I would be happy if the ARU lost money every year for 10 years if it meant that it built rugby into a powerhouse in Australia. But let’s face it, that hasn’t happened and I personally feel that the money hasn’t been well spent. A better evaluation would be to look a playing numbers and on field success. And that paints a more horrid picture than the P&L statement.

People look at money spent as the sole problem, but it is only part of the picture. Internal politics and poor management are the other parts of the picture and they go hand in hand. Those two parts are also the deciding factor in where the money is spent.

For me, the biggest problems are that you can’t watch rugby on TV and that almost no-one outside private schools plays the game. Those two also go hand in hand as one influences the other.

I can’t help but cringe every time the ARU signs a player from League and spends a millions dollars on it. I always feel that if they had diverted that $1m into local clubs, that in 10 years, we would reap much better benefits. And by local clubs, I don’t mean the already established ones either. They should be in the schools that don’t play now, not the ones already established. Imagine dumping $20k into a school in Punchbowl to set up a club. Imagine the pride in their players knocking off the rich boy schools. You could dump that kind of money into 50 schools a year and build a truly national comp off the back of that. In 5 years, you might have helped 200+ schools/clubs and 5000-20,000 players join our game. And that is 5000-20,000 players that won’t play AFL, soccer and League. And all that by not signing one high profile League player that provides possible short term benefits.

How can a country like Fiji provide so many good players (to Australia and other nations) given their small population. They do it by engaging the entire community. Why is NZ so good. Same reason. We need to try the same thing here as well.

Hey Jokerman. I don’t actually think they have no chance. I put their chances at about 5%. Very low but possible. Winning 2 in a row is 0.1% I would have thought, but winning one isn’t. Hey, I am hardly talking up their chances here. 5% is pathetic.
But that’s the problem with complacency and also sports and world rugby. Sometimes it just doesn’t go your way. And that is why there is always a chance. Take Japan Vs SA last year. 5% odds for the win would have sounded good before the game.

Look, the Wallabies will almost certainly lose. But there is always a chance and only a loser says they have no chance at winning. As much as the Wallabies aren’t in the same ballpark at the All Blacks (I am not even sure they are playing the same game), sometimes the sun shines out of a dogs bum. Records like 13 wins in a row and 31 in a row at Eden Park are made to be broken.

‘carn the Wallabies. Win. (Or at least don’t lose by heaps)

Yes we do have the depth to drop him. It’s that kind of protectionist thinking that is hurting us.

Haylet Petty to FB. He is the form FB right now.
For wing, you have Niavalu, Kellaway, Shipperley, Speight, Coleman, Morahan. None of these are awesome, but all are good. And we all know that Wings are just there to run straight, score tries and style their hair anyway 🙂

But seriously, we can drop Folau right now. At his best, he is world class and better than all the above names. But he isn’t there right now. Dropping him would only be good for him long term.

Folau came in and performed very well. I know people say he has been hyped up by the media (and he was), but it was deserving at the time. Unfortunately the opposition has caught up with him and he hasn’t changed enough. He still thinks that if he trains and practices hard that the games will come to him. They won’t. He needs to evolve as a player. The 20yr old McCaw was nothing like the 30yr old McCaw. He adapted. Izzy need to follow suit. However, Izzy does have the skills to do it and become a powerhouse again. He is a rare talent.

So Sefa Niavalu. I like him. As a Rebels supporter, I always thought he was a strong ball runner. I always thought that if he worked on his game, he would make the Wallabies. Damn he is quick and strong. But he was still a year or two off. He had an ok year this year, but it wasn’t spectacular most of the time.
Then he signed for the Waratahs. All of a sudden out of nowhere, there were articles in the media about how good he was. Super Sefa. And now he is in the Wallabies squad. What happened in such a short space of time for him to go from good player to a Wallaby?
I rate him, but I do smell a rat. Why did he move from the Rebels to the Waratahs? Was he offered a Wallabies spot if he moved? Or was there more to it. Maybe Koroibete to the Rebels allowed Niavalu to the Waratahs in some secret ARU deal. Koroibete is also being named as someone going on the end of season tour to the Northern Hemisphere. Having never played a game for the Rebels.

Three months ago, Niavalu wasn’t even named as a possible player in the Wallabies 40 man squad let alone the 23 man playing squad. No-one mentioned that he missed out and was hard done by. But now he is “Super Sefa” and he might be the next player to earn a Wallabies cap. If he does, I sincerely hope he does well.

Don’t take this as some slight on Niavalu. I like his game. However, I am aiming this at the rugby fraternity and the politics that go with it. If we want the Wallabies to beat the All Blacks, stop the politics. You win the local battle, but we lose the war. Again. And again. And….

As a Melbournite and an avid Rebel supporter, I watched Niavalu closely. Great speed and a powerful runner. However, he was far from the polished winger. Too many mistakes and he didn’t have a great reading of the game. I looked on at him thinking that in a year or two, he may be a Wallaby. Learnt he skill and he has the potential to be an awesome winger.
Then the Waratahs signed him and suddenly he was gods given best winger. And now he is in the Wallabies squad!

Nothing against Niavalu. He has potential to be great and as a former Rebel, I will always support him. But last year, he was barely in the top 10 for best players at the Rebels.

Toby Smith gets dropped and Niavalu gets brought in. Stupid! Toby Smith was awesome all year. I am not bagging Niavalu, just the selection choices right now which favour the Waratahs and not the form players.

Tom Robertson did OK this year in his first year. But Toby Smith was better. I am sorry, but he just plain was. Tom Roberston may turn out to be better in the long run, but who knows. Toby Smith may go on to be one of the all great props for Australia as well. Give the guy in form the position, not the guy who might deliver given the chance.

I am a biased Rebels supporter, but Cheika is missing a trick here.
– Hodge at inside centre. There are no inside centres in Australia and Hodge is the only player in Australia putting his hand up as a potential good player. (Foley isn’t an inside centre and Cooper is better right now at 10 than Foley)
– Timani at 8. (Not yet the finished product, but McCalman and Timani are our only 2 options here and McCalman is injured. Pocock is lucky to be injured as he isn’t an 8 and his form has dropped too. Hooper is a better #7 right now)
– McMahon at 6. (Fardy’s form has dropped and McMahon is on fire)
– Toby Smith on the bench. (Robertson need another year to prove himself)

Instead, we might have McMahon at 8 (The smallest 8 since Zinzan) but who knows, Cheika might decide to play Skelton at 8 instead.

What this article fails to mention is that Cheika has left out the biggest signing this year. Mick Byrne. Former skills coach to the All Blacks (the most skilled team in rugby). Cheika’s reasoning for not bringing him in even though he is all signed up. “We want to take the stairs, not the lift”. Are you freaking serious. Is that the dumbest thing you have ever heard? The All black are on floor 21 and we are on ground floor. No one ever take the stairs to climb 21 floors.

Next comment from Cheika. “Maybe it’s cheap, that’s not why we wanted Mick to come over. We wanted Mick to come over and coach with us because he’s brilliant at helping develop skills.” OK, lets be nice to the All Blacks then. Let’s wait until Mick is so old and senile that he can’t remember what the All black are and then ask for his help so he doesn’t give away any secretes. Why not give them a 10 point start for every game as well? WTF.

This is the most disappointing thing I have ever heard come out of a coaches mouth. If you want to beat the All Blacks, you get the best players and coaching staff you can find. Otherwise, you do what we have always done. Lose.

Hey let’s sign up Jarrod Hayne as skills coach. I bet he would be rushed in to the Wallabies next weekend and Mick Byrne can watch from the sidelines.

Sam Newman is a fool. However as much as I hate to say it, sometimes it is nice to have him around. I rarely if ever agree with his opinion. I don’t on this issue for the most part either. But I will defend his right to say it. Often he goes to far and I find it hard to find a reason that he is allowed to talk at all. Mostly I cringe at his comments. However in this case, his response was measured however provocative it may have been. There are always many sides to a coin. His side might not be my side, but without his droll, we would not have an argument.

In this case, I applaud him for having the guts to come out and say something that is against the tide. But not in a Trump, “offend everyone” way just to earn points, but in a “This is my point” kind of way. It may be his finest hour.

I still disagree with him for the most part.

You want self interest. Watch F1. Rugby has nothing on that.

Having said all of that, maybe the SA teams not playing the Kiwis is a good thing. At then end of the day, SA is a rugby powerhouse with money, player depth and status of the sport like no other nation. Maybe not playing against the Kiwis is a good thing. It will allow them to develop their game the way they want and it may turn them into the leading nation. The Kiwis are dictating the way the game is played right now. Why can’t the SA teams turn that on its head? They play a power game and always have. It was very successful for many decades. If they develop that to a fine art, the Kiwi’s might not get a chance to run the ball. There are many ways to play the game.

On paper, SA should be the best rugby nation or maybe second to England. But there is the point. England is hopeless despite having so many resources. Maybe SA can take the time away to develop the game and do what the Kiwis have done? Change it.

The SA teams are like the Aussie teams. The Kiwis have developed the defend, counter attack and offload game to a fine art. Everyone else has been left behind for now. Despite SA looking to be in the same boat as the Aussies, this is the first time I have seen an article even looking at the form of the SA teams. There are 10 a week about the poor form of the Aussies against the Kiwis. I am sure that is because the Aussies play the Kiwis more.

The Aussie teams are copping a flogging both on and off the field and I am sure that some deep thought is going into how to change that. Gameplans change. Only a few weeks ago I remember reading an article about how the Chiefs won’t lose another game this year. Only 2 weeks later, they still look strong, but beatable. The Hurricanes showed the other teams some ways to beat the Chiefs. The season is long from over and the Aussie teams may develop their game to negate some of the Kiwi gameplan. The Brumbies are a class outfit with talent across the park. In their losses, they didn’t look poor, they just looked outplayed on the day. I can’t image a class outfit still looking poor at the end of the season.

The problem for the SA teams is just that. They don’t play the Kiwis enough anymore. Just like Argentina has gotten better for being in the Rugby championship, the Aussie teams will get better because they have to play the Kiwi teams. The SA teams aren’t facing the Kiwi teams enough and I think their form will suffer as a result.

I share your frustration with the media. Last week everyone was saying the Tahs were not looking good. This week they are title contenders. A bit fanciful if you ask me. For my mind, they have looked poor all season despite all the talent on offer.

I think “Zero Gain” was trying to say that no-one is saying Gibson is good even after the win. I have heard in the media that “The Tahs are back”, but nothing much positive about Gibson.

In fact, I think even the wind blown up the Tahs bums after last weekend is just that, wind. The media need something to focus on and smashing the bottom of the ladder is just what they needed. But everyone knows it is over this year for them and has moved on to next year. The only thing the Tahs are fighting for this year is to beat the Rebels. It’s embarrassing if the don’t.

I don’t blame Folau though. The sign of a poor coach is to take a good player and try and make him play somewhere else to field a hole in your team. The thinking goes, the team isn’t going well and we are crap at 13, so lets take our top class 15 and make him play there because he is an excellent 15 so he must be good at 13.

The problem with Folau over the last few seasons is that he doesn’t get enough good ball. So to fix that, they take him away from his best position. It is stupid. Find another 13. And and while developing someone there, find a way to get Folau more ball. At 15! Don’t throw him in the deep end and expect him to deliver. I don’t see anyone thinking Ben Smith should play 13 just because he is a good 15. Jed Holloway has done well running the ball up recently. Why not put him at 13. Or how about Hooper. He’s probably more suited to the position. But all of that would be dumb.

As for your final question. Do the Gibson thing. What, take a team of top athletes and turn them into losers. I could do that without trying!
Cheika left him a poisoned chalice. Seriously! Cheika left him a top 2 side with belief in itself. A couple of players left the Tahs. Woo freaking hoo. The Crusaders lost some of the greatest rugby players ever to play the game and guess what. They are still spanking other teams. The Tahs lost a few very good players, but so what. (I am not a Kiwi). What the Tahs lost was a good coach.

The Tahs are poorly coached. Stop making excuses. The Tahs are in a rebuilding phase right now. By that, I mean that they are waiting for the next good coach to come along and turn them into something decent. History suggests it will take a while…. Maybe 10 more years at the current historical rate. And the more you write about it being anything different, the more people will gloss over the facts staring them in the eyes. The Rebels are a better team than the Tahs right now on merit. Their players aren’t better, but the team is. Deny it all you like, but it is a fact. Need I say more. The Rebels shouldn’t even be close. The Tahs could win the flag with their talent and the Rebels are no hope. But the Rebels top the Aus comp right now. The Tahs and especially the Brumbies and probably the Reds have much better players across the park, but…… the Rebels top the Aus comp right now. Seriously. The Rebels! The 5 point byes top the comp in Aus. Pffft. I am flabbergasted and I am a Rebels fan.

However, you are right about the Anzac test matches!

You say consistency is lacking in Australia, but forgot to mention the Reds and Force.

I would argue that the Force are the most consistent team in Super rugby over the last 7 years. They always field a team of mostly no namers and rejects from other clubs. They usually have a decent, but second rate coach. They are always guaranteed to try hard for the full 80 minutes. They often run a game close, even against the big boys, but they end up losing (often by small margins). They never threaten to be title contenders. You want consistency, what more could you want. No team in Super Rugby is that consistent over such a long time!

Not the kind of consistency you are looking for though 🙂

Don’t get me wound up about the Reds. What a waste that is. Actually, throw the Tahs in that basket this year. What a waste of talent. I would prefer to be a Force supporter than a Reds or Tahs supporter right now. At least they try and I can be proud of that! The Reds and Tahs are just a waste of talent. When are we going to realise that the problem isn’t players or playing depth, it is coaching that is the biggest problem.

Let’s not forget that the SA teams are useless too. It’s just they don’t have to play the Kiwis as much that makes them look ok now. The SA teams are every bit as bad as our teams right now but the spotlight isn’t on them. The Kiwi’s beat us because they are coached better. The Kiwis have changed the gameplan. Defend well and wait for errors and then attack and offload. The Aus and SA teams are playing catch up.

A clinical team with a good gameplan will deny the Kiwi teams the chance to attack. Right now we lack the clinical credentials and our gameplan gives the ball to the Kiwis. i.e. Brumbies Vs Highlanders. Don’t kick it just out when going for touch. Put it well out so they can’t get a quick throw in.

The Aussie teams will get better this season. They can’t get worse. The Kiwis have developed the game further and good for them. But as the season goes on, we will adapt. We won’t win the comp though. However, at national level, it is a different beast. Skill levels are high and game plans are better thought out. Don’t write of the Wallabies yet. I bet Cheika is watching and learning right now. The Saffas will also bring their own game plan and it will be different from ours and it may disrupt the Kiwis yet. I kind of feel like we both won’t catch up fast enough and that the Argies are in for a very tough year as they don’t have the resources to throw at the development of their players like the Aus and SA teams do.

One last note on coaching and why the Kiwis are so good at it. SA, England and France have massive playing numbers and money to burn. SA is a match for Aus over the last 20 years, but nothing more despite a massive difference in both player numbers and the fact it is a top sprot in SA. As for the French and England. Bah! But why? On numbers alone, England should win every world cup with France and SA fighting it out for second. Aus, NZ and Japan should fight it out for 3rd best nation. But that isn’t what happens. The Kiwis lead the game because they think more and innovate. Aus punches above our weight for the same reason. It just isn’t a sport played here in any significant numbers and all the best athletes and money go elsewhere.

The answer is coaching. And not just at the highest level. It is too late by then. Kiwi players join Super sides ready to go with skills to burn. They learn it in the NPC. Our players don’t have that. It is similar in SA, but for different reasons. They have the Currie cup, but but that is the problem. By the time their players make the big time, they are already indoctrinated into playing rugby the SA way and it is hard to change that mindset. My favourite SA team is the Cheetahs. They may be hopeless, but at least they try to do something different. The rest of SA still thinks it is 2007.

Pocock clearly agrees with you that it was wrong. That is why he pleaded guilty. Heck, it was wrong. Look at the footage. I can understand that he got in there and just grabbed what he could. However, he had ample time to let go of his neck and reset. But he didn’t. It’s not like he wouldn’t have known he had a neck.

However, I kind of feel he could have argued it with good lawyers and gotten a lesser penalty. “I didn’t really have him around the neck Sir. I actually had hold of his left testicle. It just looks bad in that camera angle.” SANZAR is a fickle beast and plenty of worse things have gotten less time in the past. Many would have tried to argue, but he didn’t. And nor should he have.