PeterK's Roar Profile

However being brutally honest I don’t see him as an upgrade on Porecki, and Porecki was just adequate at intl level. I see Nic Dolly and Porecki at the same level.

I hope BPA shows his previous form, he would be my 1st pick for the wallabies.

Bench spot is wide open really.

I would have Kerevi and Koroibete in the squad and then after competition in the squad they could easily be the best choices still

Scrap the Giteau Law: Rugby Australia should look to Rassie's 'Boks RWC recipe if it wants to re-join the big boys' table

rubbish Koroibete, Mitchell under Cheika at the minimum

lets remmember you started this thread by saying the exeter scrum was really bad, i was providing evidence it wasn’t.

Sio has always been better in general play than Slipper but not as good in the scrum, it seems his scrumaging has improved now and yes I contend he is probably better than an aging slipper now.

the 2 omitted were just before white and during professionalism
white was the first to get them back to that 65% mark
besides the main point is the current boks played a b team often in that 4 year cycle, and if they played the best team each time they would have been better than 65%

a lot more to poor / good forward play than running lines.

The o/s locks did well in set piece and mauls. It was clearing/securing the breakdown quick enough was an issue as it has been for a long time even with domestic based locks.

yes he got 4 because of lack of carries, remember this is a game they got smashed all their players scored low. You overlook the point that his main job of scrumming which we are talking about was solid.
Also once again Sio only has to be better than Slipper to start, or better than Gibbon (or whomever is bench prop) to make the bench.

selective stats

just before White
Straeuli – 52%
Viljoen – 53%

He does have 25 tests which is more than most 23/24 year olds, and he did go very well in tests, he proved he could step up.

Wallabies really need him, I hope he stays uninjured.

Wallabies star set to make timely return against Crusaders in must-win clash for Force

https://www.planetrugby.com/news/exeter-chiefs-player-ratings-england-trio-can-hold-heads-high-after-sobering-champions-cup-loss

held up a stable scrum

the scrum has really improved
https://www.devonlive.com/sport/rugby/rugby-news/exeter-chiefs-best-xv-202324-8825046

besides doesn’t have to be world class, just better than slipper to start.

BBR – Won’t happen.

There are only so many o/s positions available.
There are a lot of PI, SA, NZ players as well as local players wanting to fill them.

Already a lot are going, I don’t see the number going dramatically increasing.

I do see RA saving money and not being broke, and letting mega dollar ones going and getting back seasoned 26 year olds with that saved money.

yes under ej which was also the wallabies worst year for decades

exactly

you do realize that in those 4 year windows boks used a lot of tests to experiment, and evaluate players, often choosing ‘b’ teams. I have no doubt if they chose what they considered their best team every test they would have won more.

no the point is, fans still didn’t expect brumbies to win the comp, how often did they get semi finals at home? Yes qf’s but then had to go to nz.

But will they?

Are there that many places available o/s for aust players?
There aren’t better players from SA, NZ , PI nations?
There isn’t a limit on o/s places?
There isn’t a limit on finances of o/s clubs?

There are just so many positions available for aust players o/s
RA can’t fight the dollars anyway.

So let the young go, let them get developed better, play more games, then entice them back with more money who are 26 yrs+. You would be paying what you are now but have more seasoned players.

Let the players earning mega bucks go, don’t try and compete since you afford it.

Cooper and Kerevi WERE the difference in 2021 though, no way would we have beaten the boks.

They key point is when the domestic depth is low in any position it is clear that an o/s player should be used. This was the case at 10 and i/c.

Currently that is the case at LHP, I/C, O/C, Lock.

However locks don’t look particularly better o/s anyway.

The other main point is when it is clear an o/s player is better they should always be selected , even if that means 10 o/s players are selected.

I am arguing that there is no limit to how many o/s can be looked at in a squad situation, compare who is better , the best domestic v best o/s and the better player wins.

Why limit yourself.

You have given no reason why you shouldn’t select the best player.
You have zero evidence a domestic player would be better.

why limit it though.
If they are considered better pick them, if as a lot of posters are saying most arn’t better then they don’t get selected so it isn’t an issue.
I don’t see the need for an artificial limit.

when he was picked from australia the wallabies were stronger overall, cheika had a much better record than dr or ej’s since then.

You keep excluding the tests under cheika , what were the o/s players records under cheika?

fair point

However what was SA’s win / loss ratio from professionalism to before Rassie took over and they went to being selected from anywhere.

A lot lower than 65%. So 65% IS a better record for SA during professionalism.

the point is brumbies are close to insolvency probably because they have not been successful for 20 years

how do you know?

Your proposition only has merit if you could show that if a domestic based player was chosen for the test that the wallabies would have won where they lost before.

You have zero evidence that a domestic player would have been better.

Also I would not include any tests from last year with ej’s assistants and his coaching so poor.

Older Comments