G&GRs Wallaby Player ratings vs Boks first test

[Moses]

BaxTAH was awesome, best game I've seen him play, and I've seen him play a few.

Hopefully he's on a good contract at the Tahs, don't want you westies getting any ideas...

[GIGS20]

Takes more than one game to prove he has a spine Mose!

[KenyaQuin]

15 Adam Ashley-Cooper - I thought ACC had an average game. No serious cock-ups but nothing "wow". He is a strong runner no doubt and simply needs to back himself cleverly. I give him a 5, Gagger's a 4

14 Peter Hynes - Another strong runner, competent however not a game breaker (not from what I've seen thus far). If a selector I could afford to drop in favour of Drew. Given him a 5, Gagger's a 6

13 Stirling Mortlock (c) - Thought he had a decent game, some signature runs and not too shabby on defense. A 7 from me, Gagger's a 6.

12 Berrick Barnes - Didn't think much of his game this time round. Showed some initiative by taking pressure off Gits. Solid performance but nothing more. A 6 from me, Gagger's a 7

11 Lote Tuqiri - Love his work rate and like Gagger, his attitude. Went to ground a little easy on a few balls and getting pinned for holding the ball, would suggest he work on his drive prior to hitting the deck. A 7 to Gagger's 8.

10 Matt Giteau - Think he was defended against pretty well and this along with crazy passes (will come to that in a moment) stifled his game. Other aspects of his game (defense) and support play were still up there. A 6 from me, Gagger's a 5.

9 Luke Burgess - Again, I thought a poor shocking performance from a test scrummie. Gagger, I suspect you think passing a ball accurately to hands is not overly essential of your scrummie. In my view, its akin to having a phenominal fullback who drops 25% of the ball (ie 1 in every 4) however when he catches it. I'd suggest to you that any self-respecting coach would drop the fullback in favour of boring but surer hands. Now, I'm not suggesting that Lukey be dropped, I'm simply highlighting that his wayward passing will continue to negatively impact Giteau's game and reduce good attacking options. Further more, he didn't have his attacking game with him so this performace may possibly have been his worst. A 3 from me, Gagger's a 4.


For the forwards, I think they put in a superb performance. Held the scrums well, matched the Boks in agro, cleverly attacked the ruck and created a number of turnovers. On a whole I think its the pack that won the game (thats a no brainer, we knew that he with the dominant pack would win the game). I don't see any need for changes to be made to the starting 8. An average of 7 from me.

[greenandgoldrugby]

KQ, perhaps they should change the term "Wallabies back line" to "Giteau support team" ?

[KenyaQuin]

Gagger..touché.

Giteau is simply the incumbent fly..could be Luke passing to Burgess for all I care.

[gustafsl]

KQ, perhaps they should change the term "Wallabies back line" to "Giteau support team" ?

Well when you are one of the best players in the world that's exactly what other players are there for.

I agree with KQ, I don't care how quick Burgess is to the ball, if every 5th pass is crap, I'd rather have the slower more consistent player in there. Players like Giteau and Barnes can make stuff happen even with slow ball. But there isn't a player in the world that can make stuff happen when the ball isn't in their hands.

[pruc]

well robbie deans cares.
the new way australia play is quick fast attack
not letting the opposition set their defensive structure
to slow the ball down allows them to set and our small 10, 12 combo will get targetted a whole lot more

[greenandgoldrugby]

I agree with KQ, I don't care how quick Burgess is to the ball, if every 5th pass is crap, I'd rather have the slower more consistent player in there. Players like Giteau and Barnes can make stuff happen even with slow ball. But there isn't a player in the world that can make stuff happen when the ball isn't in their hands.

Gustafsl, I'd wager that they'd swap that 5th pass for another 4 that put them in front of holes rather than defenders in their faces.

Cleaning up a ball that's gone to ground is about the same as slow ball anyway, it usually means no go forward and another breakdown.

On top of that, these 5th passes aren't even going to ground necessarily, just a little high or low, which TWF sun-gods like Gits can handle well.

More important to any of that though, is how this fast clearance neutralises counter-rucking and breakdown spoilage. Aussie Robbie & Big Jim would have watched

1. the poms at the RWC, the Irish and even the French stuff up our breakdown at will, and
2. the Saffas do the same to the ABs the week before

and figured that it doesn't matter if Bakkies or Burger walks through a ruck if there's no ball there to spoil.

[TOCC]

KQ, perhaps they should change the term "Wallabies back line" to "Giteau support team" ?

haha, thats what i was thinking..

i think it was pretty unfair to go through and individually guage each backline member, but then just lump the forwards into one paragraph...especially considering it was the forwards who did the most work.

[KenyaQuin]

i think it was pretty unfair to go through and individually guage each backline member, but then just lump the forwards into one paragraph...especially considering it was the forwards who did the most work.

I guess this is directed at me. At the end of the day I'm a back and having played in a few backline positions would like to think its the backs I would understand better. It would be presumptuous of me to rate The Engine Room and as a scrummie, my loyalty and respect towards the forwards as a unit is unwavering.

Finally, I've acknowledged that the victory is owned by the forwards..how many times do I have to say it?

[GIGS20]

KQ, perhaps they should change the term "Wallabies back line" to "Giteau support team" ?

Well flyhalf and first reciever does carry a bit of that responsibility with it, If it were Barnes or anybody else in that position, the playmaker is there to create stuff, at the momnet that's matt's job. At 12 his job would be different, he wouldn't be recieving passes from scrummie that often and somebody else's name would be in the post.

That being said, I'm falling a bit more on the quick ball beats a good pass side of the coin, that's what won the the game on Saturday they ran the Bok forwards off their feet, to the point that they pinched several baals out of defensive rucks just through being fresher. You can't suggest that our forwards were that much fitter than theirs at this level, some credit has to go to the ball being removed earlier.

Also if the ball's out quick and the pass goes to ground, you've got more time to clean it up. I know we'd all prefer a quick, clean pass every time but if there's a choice between a perfect pass and a quick pass (which there is with Cordingley on the bench) I'd stick with the quick ball!

[greenandgoldrugby]

I guess this is directed at me. At the end of the day I'm a back and having played in a few backline positions would like to think its the backs I would understand better.

Just commenting on stuff you actually know about?

That's a new and dangerous idea, but I don't think it'll catch on. The internet would collapse!