Can The Wallabies Beat The Lions Without Quade Cooper?

Back in form Cooper is the star 10 in Super Rugby, and making a star combination with Genia who is also in lethal form.

Deans looks set to ignore him for political and personal reasons. Is this rift between star player and coach handing the series to the Lions?

The Wallabies would most likely lose with Cooper put it that way. Aus never missed him and they have JOC and Barnes.

It doesn't matter anyway. The 'Welsh' Lions will destroy all before them. So I hear.

Crazy that Aus & Robbie Deans can discard such talents as Cooper & Giteau.

Australia don't need Cooper, they'll win the series with or without him.

It wasn't hard to discard Giteau. He was pretty average by the time he left and each team he was in seemed become a bit toxic.

He is a top player, the best pivot in AUS by far so it will certainly dampen their chances.

However with Barnes whilst you don't have that creative streak he will have players like Mogg, O'Connor, Beale etc in his backline to sparkle for him.... Barnes is also a superior defender and a better tactical kicker so if they play someone like O'Connor at first five-eigth then I think they will compliment each others styles well.

Could be a better combination (Barnes & O'Connor) then Cooper & O'Connor.

I suspect the wallabies will take a bit of a hiding in game 1 and come back with a very different looking side in game 2. A lot of discarded players will get a look in.

When did anyone from the home nations last give AUS a hiding?

fa0019 wrote:When did anyone from the home nations last give AUS a hiding?

Twickenham 2010

I certainly think the Wallabies can win without Cooper, the question should be can they win without Genia.

Then again no team is a one man show. There are three teams who are playing good rubgy in OZ at the moment, OK, the Waratahs are on and off, but when they switch it on, they are a decent side.

This series is going to be close. I don't think the Lions have the flair the Ozzies do in the back, but I know the Ozzies don't have the grunt the Lions will have.

Biltong wrote:I certainly think the Wallabies can win without Cooper, the question should be can they win without Genia.

Then again no team is a one man show. There are three teams who are playing good rubgy in OZ at the moment, OK, the Waratahs are on and off, but when they switch it on, they are a decent side.

This series is going to be close. I don't think the Lions have the flair the Ozzies do in the back, but I know the Ozzies don't have the grunt the Lions will have.

Remember how the Brumbies tore into the Sharks at the beginning of the season? They showed a lot of grunt there.

fa0019 wrote:

Biltong wrote:I certainly think the Wallabies can win without Cooper, the question should be can they win without Genia.

Then again no team is a one man show. There are three teams who are playing good rubgy in OZ at the moment, OK, the Waratahs are on and off, but when they switch it on, they are a decent side.

This series is going to be close. I don't think the Lions have the flair the Ozzies do in the back, but I know the Ozzies don't have the grunt the Lions will have.

Remember how the Brumbies tore into the Sharks at the beginning of the season? They showed a lot of grunt there.

True, but the Sharks weren't a the races in that first half, so difficult to judge it based on 40 minutes. The shrks also didn't have their Taislmen, in Bismrack, Deysel and Alberts, so not the bes measure there.

Besides look at the Ozzie front row, at scrum time they will struggle, and their tight five as a whole will not hold a candle to the Lions

I think AUS will surprise a lot of people vs. the Lions.

SA are a better set piece unit the Lions and when do they dominate AUS??? Seldom... in fact AUS have won 7 out the last 9 vs. the boks.. i.e the best in the business when it comes to forward play and physical dominance.

4 years ago everyone was saying the same about the Lions vs. the boks.

Well we have just been woeful against the Wallabies in the last 4 years.

But you can point that two two things, poor coaching and no smarts.

The number of games we have lost to the Brumbies in the last 10 minutes is astounding.

fa0019 wrote:When did anyone from the home nations last give AUS a hiding?

Ireland completly dominated them in the world cup.

GunsGerms wrote:

fa0019 wrote:When did anyone from the home nations last give AUS a hiding?

Ireland completly dominated them in the world cup.

Remember Ferris' hit on Genia... magic. Still they recovered well.

fa0019 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

fa0019 wrote:When did anyone from the home nations last give AUS a hiding?

Ireland completly dominated them in the world cup.

Remember Ferris' hit on Genia... magic. Still they recovered well.

Oh I do alright. Ferris is one of my favorite Irish players of all time. Truely world class. Will be sad to see him go to Japan.

I want to see what damage he does in Japan.. they're a hardy lot yet I think the butchers bill will be quite high.

Well Kaino and Jerry Collins have spent time there / are there so they must be used to getting bashed a bit.

mikey_philVIII wrote:The Wallabies would most likely lose with Cooper put it that way. Aus never missed him and they have JOC and Barnes.

I gather you haven't been watching SXV. QC is the top 10 this year followed closely by Foley and Toomua. If Cooper has a playmaking 12 rather the one-dimensionl, non-passing, crash-ball merchant Pat McCabe then he'll be all over the Lions backline. JOC and Barnes?? Shouldn't be anywhere near the 10 jersey. JOC has a limited passing game and less vision than Cooper. His kicking is also pretty ordinary. Barnes is solid and reliable but uncreative. JOC is best suited to the wing and Barnes would be best suited to a bench role where he can cover 10, 12 and 15. Kurtley is also a better 10 than these two.

fa0019 wrote:I think AUS will surprise a lot of people vs. the Lions.

SA are a better set piece unit the Lions and when do they dominate AUS??? Seldom... in fact AUS have won 7 out the last 9 vs. the boks.. i.e the best in the business when it comes to forward play and physical dominance.

4 years ago everyone was saying the same about the Lions vs. the boks.

I agree. The AB and Springbok packs are better than any pack the Lions could put out and i don't recall the Wallabies being bossed about too much by them in recent times. I would say even Argentina's pack is more physical than the Lions. Maybe not as technically skillful but more physical. Forgive me for being blase but I've heard the Wallaby pack 'is going to be dominated etc etc' too many times to take much notice - and without fail it is always from the NH. Apparently Wales were going to do it last year.............still waiting for that one.

Icu wrote:

fa0019 wrote:I think AUS will surprise a lot of people vs. the Lions.

SA are a better set piece unit the Lions and when do they dominate AUS??? Seldom... in fact AUS have won 7 out the last 9 vs. the boks.. i.e the best in the business when it comes to forward play and physical dominance.

4 years ago everyone was saying the same about the Lions vs. the boks.

I agree. The AB and Springbok packs are better than any pack the Lions could put out and i don't recall the Wallabies being bossed about too much by them in recent times. I would say even Argentina's pack is more physical than the Lions. Maybe not as technically skillful but more physical. Forgive me for being blase but I've heard the Wallaby pack 'is going to be dominated etc etc' too many times to take much notice - and without fail it is always from the NH. Apparently Wales were going to do it last year.............still waiting for that one.

In all fairness Ireland, England and Scotland have all dominated the Wallaby pack in recent years at various times so its not a stretch to the imagination to suggest a combination of all three plus the best Welsh players might be able to outmuscle the Wallabies.

GunsGerms wrote:

Icu wrote:

fa0019 wrote:I think AUS will surprise a lot of people vs. the Lions.

SA are a better set piece unit the Lions and when do they dominate AUS??? Seldom... in fact AUS have won 7 out the last 9 vs. the boks.. i.e the best in the business when it comes to forward play and physical dominance.

4 years ago everyone was saying the same about the Lions vs. the boks.

I agree. The AB and Springbok packs are better than any pack the Lions could put out and i don't recall the Wallabies being bossed about too much by them in recent times. I would say even Argentina's pack is more physical than the Lions. Maybe not as technically skillful but more physical. Forgive me for being blase but I've heard the Wallaby pack 'is going to be dominated etc etc' too many times to take much notice - and without fail it is always from the NH. Apparently Wales were going to do it last year.............still waiting for that one.

In all fairness Ireland, England and Scotland have all dominated the Wallaby pack in recent years at various times so its not a stretch to the imagination to suggest a combination of all three plus the best Welsh players might be able to outmuscle the Wallabies.

The reality is the Wallabies do not have a tight five in the same class as the Lions, but they have learn't (smartly if I might add) ways to negate tight fives and have been able to work their attacking plan around that.

As for the backrowers, the Wallabies don't stand back for the Lions in that department.

Biltong wrote: The reality is the Wallabies do not have a tight five in the same class as the Lions, but they have learn't (smartly if I might add) ways to negate tight fives and have been able to work their attacking plan around that.

As for the backrowers, the Wallabies don't stand back for the Lions in that department.

Agreed. I have witnessed the Aussie front 5 get hammered on quite a few occasions yet Australia have still managed to hammer their opponent. Cant think of any other team that can do this.

Biltong wrote:
The reality is the Wallabies do not have a tight five in the same class as the Lions, but they have learn't (smartly if I might add) ways to negate tight fives and have been able to work their attacking plan around that.

As for the backrowers, the Wallabies don't stand back for the Lions in that department.

Perhaps so. I reckon the Springbok and AB front 5 are equal to if not superior to the front 5 the Lions can put out. For lack of anything else, I am measuring the Wallaby pack against those two and i think they stand up pretty well. I do not think the Wallaby front 5 are superior to their AB or Springbok counterparts but no team beats the Springboks 7/9 previous games without gaining some sort of parity in the forwards. The Wallabies do not need to dominate the Lions forward pack - they only need to hold their own and i think they are capable of that.

Icu wrote:

Biltong wrote:
The reality is the Wallabies do not have a tight five in the same class as the Lions, but they have learn't (smartly if I might add) ways to negate tight fives and have been able to work their attacking plan around that.

As for the backrowers, the Wallabies don't stand back for the Lions in that department.

Perhaps so. I reckon the Springbok and AB front 5 are equal to if not superior to the front 5 the Lions can put out. For lack of anything else, I am measuring the Wallaby pack against those two and i think they stand up pretty well. I do not think the Wallaby front 5 are superior to their AB or Springbok counterparts but no team beats the Springboks 7/9 previous games without gaining some sort of parity in the forwards. The Wallabies do not need to dominate the Lions forward pack - they only need to hold their own and i think they are capable of that.

I agree with all of that

Icu wrote:

Biltong wrote:
The reality is the Wallabies do not have a tight five in the same class as the Lions, but they have learn't (smartly if I might add) ways to negate tight fives and have been able to work their attacking plan around that.

As for the backrowers, the Wallabies don't stand back for the Lions in that department.

Perhaps so. I reckon the Springbok and AB front 5 are equal to if not superior to the front 5 the Lions can put out. For lack of anything else, I am measuring the Wallaby pack against those two and i think they stand up pretty well. I do not think the Wallaby front 5 are superior to their AB or Springbok counterparts but no team beats the Springboks 7/9 previous games without gaining some sort of parity in the forwards. The Wallabies do not need to dominate the Lions forward pack - they only need to hold their own and i think they are capable of that.

"For lack of anything else"

or because you would rather not acknowledge that the Aussie front 5 consistently struggle against the Irish, Welsh, English and Scottish front 5s?

define 'consistently struggle'...

Taylorman wrote:define 'consistently struggle'...

I'm basing that on the last few encounters between each of the aforementioned sides if thats what you mean.

I think that the most important thing for the Wallabies is to get their 1st choice front row out on the pitch.

See the Oz touring side vs. France with their front row understudies. They got smashed off the park.
Then the game against England with their 1st choice back.

That expected England pack dominance never materialised and in a straight match up of the backs - England loose.

Same could happen to the Lions.

struggle in terms of the scoreboard? the result? or just the perception. How is struggle defined? getting pushed backwards?

Taylorman wrote:struggle in terms of the scoreboard? the result? or just the perception. How is struggle defined? getting pushed backwards?

We were talking about the front 5 Taylorman. Struggle in terms of getting munched in the set piece.

Everyone thinks if you get smashed upfront then you lose the match... in AUS case it just doesn't apply.

7 wins out of last 9 vs. the boks and 8 from 8 vs. Wales.... 2 of the biggest packs out there.

A weakness... sounds like a strength to me.

Do you have to keep on reminding me?

fa0019 wrote:Everyone thinks if you get smashed upfront then you lose the match... in AUS case it just doesn't apply.

7 wins out of last 9 vs. the boks and 8 from 8 vs. Wales.... 2 of the biggest packs out there.

A weakness... sounds like a strength to me.

Who cares what their record v the Boks is. Ireland for example also have a good recent record v the Boks. What do the Boks have to do with anything?

Don't worry BB, in a few years time with the new Jake White scholarship with the ARU, any SA vs. AUS matches will be Boks 1st vs. Boks 2nds so you'll never be on a losing side.

(England will be boks 3rd... you know, the "turn up on Saturday with your gear" social side)



Jokes aside, I just find it hilarious how everyone thinks AUS are weak, sorry dude. It doesn't sink in though as much as I try to tell people. Its what they want the fans/opposition to think.

GunsGerms wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Everyone thinks if you get smashed upfront then you lose the match... in AUS case it just doesn't apply.

7 wins out of last 9 vs. the boks and 8 from 8 vs. Wales.... 2 of the biggest packs out there.

A weakness... sounds like a strength to me.

Who cares what their record v the Boks is. Ireland for example also have a good recent record v the Boks. What do the Boks have to do with anything?

Boks are the most notorious pack in world rugby over the last 4 years.... an example to show how well they play against so called bigger sides.

Ireland haven't played AUS that much 4 games in since the 07 RWC and their record is 1 win in 4 (although that win did come in the RWC11 mind).

I don't think Cooper will be missed at all, for every jinking run or line break he gets snagged, charged down etc..

He makes as many mistakes as he does breaks!!!

Genia on the other hand is the total package, as is players like JOC and Beale.

I think Aus will go into the tests with a backline resembling...

9. Genia
10. Harris
11. Ioane
12. Barnes
13. JOC
14. Faloua
15. Beale

Or thats what I would be looking at anyway, nice mixture of guile and strike runners. Maybe even drop Harris to the bench, move the centres in and play Mogg at 13 (he can play there can't he?)

Quade who...

fa0019 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Everyone thinks if you get smashed upfront then you lose the match... in AUS case it just doesn't apply.

7 wins out of last 9 vs. the boks and 8 from 8 vs. Wales.... 2 of the biggest packs out there.

A weakness... sounds like a strength to me.

Who cares what their record v the Boks is. Ireland for example also have a good recent record v the Boks. What do the Boks have to do with anything?

Boks are the most notorious pack in world rugby over the last 4 years.... an example to show how well they play against so called bigger sides.

Ireland haven't played AUS that much 4 games in since the 07 RWC and their record is 1 win in 4 (although that win did come in the RWC11 mind).

Your head to head stats Ireland v Australia are not correct. Last five games:

Sun 19th Nov 06 16:00 Ireland 21 - 6 Australia Lansdowne Road More
Sat 14th Jun 08 20:05 F Australia 18 - 12 Ireland Telstra Dome More
Sun 15th Nov 09 15:00 F Ireland 20 - 20 Australia Croke Park Report | Audio
Sat 26th Jun 10 20:00 F Australia 22 - 15 Ireland Suncorp Stadium Report
Sat 17th Sep 11 20:30 RWC-PC Australia 6 - 15 Ireland Eden Park

2 wins Ireland, 2 wins Australia, 1 draw. The two biggest wins were by 9 points and 15 points both of which Ireland won.

Ireland also the won the only WC match between the two teams during that time frame.

Looks like Ireland have the edge there.

GunsGerms wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Everyone thinks if you get smashed upfront then you lose the match... in AUS case it just doesn't apply.

7 wins out of last 9 vs. the boks and 8 from 8 vs. Wales.... 2 of the biggest packs out there.

A weakness... sounds like a strength to me.

Who cares what their record v the Boks is. Ireland for example also have a good recent record v the Boks. What do the Boks have to do with anything?

Boks are the most notorious pack in world rugby over the last 4 years.... an example to show how well they play against so called bigger sides.

Ireland haven't played AUS that much 4 games in since the 07 RWC and their record is 1 win in 4 (although that win did come in the RWC11 mind).

Your head to head stats Ireland v Australia are not correct. Last five games:

Sun 19th Nov 06 16:00 Ireland 21 - 6 Australia Lansdowne Road More
Sat 14th Jun 08 20:05 F Australia 18 - 12 Ireland Telstra Dome More
Sun 15th Nov 09 15:00 F Ireland 20 - 20 Australia Croke Park Report | Audio
Sat 26th Jun 10 20:00 F Australia 22 - 15 Ireland Suncorp Stadium Report
Sat 17th Sep 11 20:30 RWC-PC Australia 6 - 15 Ireland Eden Park

2 wins Ireland, 2 wins Australia, 1 draw. The two biggest wins were by 9 points and 15 points both of which Ireland won. Looks like Ireland have the edge there.

I did say since the RWC07 so 08 onwards so my quote of 1 win in 4 is correct.... anything else is a bit far fetched.... almost as bad as considering form from the last lions tour in 2001 in relation to the lions hopes this year. 7 years ago is quite a while back.. I mean England almost retained the RWC 5 years ago!!!

But you're right... given your snapshot.

I will say that the Aussie super 15 teams do seem to be peaking at the right time for Australia. I wonder if this is partially because all Aussie players want to break their way into the Aussie squad for this tour so are playing extra well.

GunsGerms wrote:I will say that the Aussie super 15 teams do seem to be peaking at the right time for Australia. I wonder if this is partially because all Aussie players want to break their way into the Aussie squad for this tour so are playing extra well.

I think its in part because the conference system means they play each other more.... AUS' conference is simply weaker then the SA & NZ conference.

The Brumbies look impressive mind, Auelua looks very dangerous and amazing that he's never been capped. They went away to the Sharks and made them look ordinary... then again they came to us a week later and we put 4 tries on them and sent them home with a bloody nose.

But it must be a great carrot for the players... Smith has come back and looks amazing after 2 years in Japan.... he was very impressive vs. the Stormers... If Pocock was fit I think he would even be making him sweat a little. He's near certain to test.

fa0019 wrote:
I did say since the RWC07 so 08 onwards so my quote of 1 win in 4 is correct.... anything else is a bit far fetched.... almost as bad as considering form from the last lions tour in 2001 in relation to the lions hopes this year. 7 years ago is quite a while back.. I mean England almost retained the RWC 5 years ago!!!

But you're right... given your snapshot.

Yes but you conveniently didnt mention the draw in Dublin which might suggest to some the Aussies had won more than two narrow wins in Australia. The fact is Ireland have a very decent record v Australia and part of that is because in particular in the WC Ireland managed to smash them up front and neutralise their backs out wide.

GunsGerms wrote:

fa0019 wrote:
I did say since the RWC07 so 08 onwards so my quote of 1 win in 4 is correct.... anything else is a bit far fetched.... almost as bad as considering form from the last lions tour in 2001 in relation to the lions hopes this year. 7 years ago is quite a while back.. I mean England almost retained the RWC 5 years ago!!!

But you're right... given your snapshot.

Yes but you conveniently didnt mention the draw in Dublin which might suggest to some the Aussies had won more than two narrow wins in Australia. The fact is Ireland have a very decent record v Australia and part of that is because in particular in the WC Ireland managed to smash them up front and neutralise their backs out wide.

It wasn't on purpose , filtered on wins only when searching. Record vs. both AUS and SA is decent certainly.

GG - no matter what the article we both seem to be on opposite sides of the coin

I just hope you never find out my childhood heroes were Ally McCoist & Graeme Souness!!!

GunsGerms wrote:I will say that the Aussie super 15 teams do seem to be peaking at the right time for Australia. I wonder if this is partially because all Aussie players want to break their way into the Aussie squad for this tour so are playing extra well.

the Auusie condeference have two teams at the top, but they have also played an extra game, ignoring the ridiculous bye points system which just confuddles reality, their next team lies in 10th position.

fa0019 wrote:GG - no matter what the article we both seem to be on opposite sides of the coin

I just hope you never find out my childhood heroes were Ally McCoist & Graeme Souness!!!

We sure do.

Ah not too interested in football anymore to be honest. As for two Rangers players being your heros I can honestly say I have never be sucked into any Rangers v Celtic nonsense. In fact to wind up my fervent Celtic fan friends I often pretend to support Rangers for which I have earned the nickname Cromwell. Hate the notion of mixing sport and religion. Im sure you do too. Maybe we can agree on that?

McCoist and Souness were both good players seem like decent characters. Mind you I find McCoist a bit irritating on a question of sport.

I love all the hype surrounding Smith at the minute, he's had a few patches for 20 minutes or so he looks good but he has been pretty rubbish in general.

The game he came on for Pococks injury was the only good performance he's had, after that it's been the odd few minutes here and there, I hope he play v the lions!!

I watched one game where he was a passenger, carried once and got smashed, then hit 3 attacking rucks and 2 defencive ones and he bounced completey off, he's lost the physicality to compete at Super level let alone test level!!