Japan 2019 - Pool D Australia Fiji Georgia Uruguay Wales

First topic message reminder :

Team	Played	Won	Drawn	Lost	Tries	PF	PA	+/-	BP	Points
Wales	2	2	0	0	8	72	39	33	1	9
Australia	2	1	0	1	9	64	50	14	2	6
Georgia	2	1	0	1	7	47	50	-3	1	5
Uruguay	2	1	0	1	4	37	60	-23	0	4
Fiji	2	0	0	2	7	48	69	-11	2	2

Australia 39 - 21 Fiji  
Wales 43-14 Georgia
Fiji 27-30 Uruguay        
Georgia 33-7 Uruguay                  
Australia 25-29 Wales                    


3 October 2019         Georgia v Fiji                           Hanazono Rugby Stadium, Higashiosaka
5 October 2019         Australia v Uruguay                  Oita Stadium, Ōita
9 October 2019         Wales v Fiji                              Oita Stadium, Ōita
11 October 2019       Australia v Georgia                   Shizuoka Stadium Ecopa, Fukuroi
13 October 2019       Wales v Uruguay                      Kumamoto Stadium, Kumamoto

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:How poor have Australia been today?

We can make allowances for weather etc, but this is abject.

Difficult game in awful weather against a team that tackle hard and love he set piece. Australia are out playing Georgia at their own game.

I think the Aussies are doing well and are looking a good side.

I guess we are looking at this very differently

I think the rain is a massive factor, lots of dropped balls.

But to over power the Georgia Scrum is a massive statement. This Aussie tight five deserve some respect.

maestegmafia wrote:Bazzers keeping it simple there.

We are simple folk.

Fair play to Australia for scoring twice in the last four minutes.

Lots to do before whatever QF they're in.

Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

maestegmafia wrote:Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

Which one? Yours or ours?

Pal Joey wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

Which one? Yours or ours?

Sorry mate yes the ITV in the uk one. Michael Lynagh, Clive Woodward and Sam Warburton.

What are they saying on the game in ‘Straya????

maestegmafia wrote:Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

My wifi signal died during some fairly typical SCW guff, interestingly last words being "When we won the World Cup"

Consensus seemed to be that Australia were holding back, not showing what they had etc etc. This may be true, and they are always capable of a one off strong performance, but for most of teh last 4 years they have been serving up tripe.

maestegmafia wrote:

Pal Joey wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

Which one? Yours or ours?

Sorry mate yes the ITV in the uk one. Michael Lynagh, Clive Woodward and Sam Warburton.

What are they saying on the game in ‘Straya????

Not so positive. Justin Harrison, Phil Kearns, Drew Mitchell.
All think we're undercooked... backline combination problems, forwards OK but questioning their experience for the next round.

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

My wifi signal died during some fairly typical SCW guff, interestingly last words being "When we won the World Cup"

Consensus seemed to be that Australia were holding back, not showing what they had etc etc. This may be true, and they are always capable of a one off strong performance, but for most of teh last 4 years they have been serving up tripe.

Apart from against Wales. They ALWAYS raise their game against us! ......... hmmm

The Oracle wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

My wifi signal died during some fairly typical SCW guff, interestingly last words being "When we won the World Cup"

Consensus seemed to be that Australia were holding back, not showing what they had etc etc. This may be true, and they are always capable of a one off strong performance, but for most of teh last 4 years they have been serving up tripe.

Apart from against Wales.  They ALWAYS raise their game against us!  ......... hmmm  

Perhaps excluding last Autumn though? They were over physical but it was from memory a rather ropy old game with Wales nerves matched against Australian <something or other>


Australia are clearly a threat, and they have have worked on the pack. Personally I feel their forwards go better with the back row arrangement utilised today - though the breakdown suffers. The big problem they have are their backs. Cheika has not shown any consistency in selection, or style of play. The half backs have been poor, centres uncertain and back 3 showing flashes of brilliance among a lot of meh.

LondonTiger wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

My wifi signal died during some fairly typical SCW guff, interestingly last words being "When we won the World Cup"

Consensus seemed to be that Australia were holding back, not showing what they had etc etc. This may be true, and they are always capable of a one off strong performance, but for most of teh last 4 years they have been serving up tripe.

Apart from against Wales.  They ALWAYS raise their game against us!  ......... hmmm  

Perhaps excluding last Autumn though? They were over physical but it was from memory a rather ropy old game with Wales nerves matched against Australian <something or other>


Australia are clearly a threat, and they have have worked on the pack. Personally I feel their forwards go better with the back row arrangement utilised today - though the breakdown suffers. The big problem they have are their backs. Cheika has not shown any consistency in selection, or style of play. The half backs have been poor, centres uncertain and back 3 showing flashes of brilliance among a lot of meh.

This Australia team are as good as the one that made the last final if not better.

LondonTiger wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Interesting listening to the punditry team evaluating the match.

My wifi signal died during some fairly typical SCW guff, interestingly last words being "When we won the World Cup"

Consensus seemed to be that Australia were holding back, not showing what they had etc etc. This may be true, and they are always capable of a one off strong performance, but for most of teh last 4 years they have been serving up tripe.

Apart from against Wales.  They ALWAYS raise their game against us!  ......... hmmm  

Perhaps excluding last Autumn though? They were over physical but it was from memory a rather ropy old game with Wales nerves matched against Australian <something or other>


Australia are clearly a threat, and they have have worked on the pack. Personally I feel their forwards go better with the back row arrangement utilised today - though the breakdown suffers. The big problem they have are their backs. Cheika has not shown any consistency in selection, or style of play. The half backs have been poor, centres uncertain and back 3 showing flashes of brilliance among a lot of meh.

Sorry LT, this was another attempt at humour by me! A tongue in cheek poke at those people who like to write off losses as ‘they just raise their game against us’! Wales aren’t poor against Oz, they just ‘raise their game’, etc., etc.

maestegmafia wrote:Taniela Tupou Has got some serious pace

He should have. His entire career was launched from an Auckland schoolboy video of it. # amazing long range tries as a kid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOuzV6fFTn8

So according to Cheika Australia is looking forward to meeting England. 

What.....after that performance yesterday, you must be joking.

Australia should of won the game yesterday in the first half what with the players they have. They ( Australia )7 points in the lead at half time, shocking, truly shocking.

Yeah Australia is not looking good, the only hope they have to eliminate England is if England have a very bad day at the office.

Whilst it is true England haven’t been tested during the RWC a rampant England seems on the cards for OZ.

maestegmafia wrote:This Australia team are as good as the one that made the last final if not better.

Seriously? Where are you getting that from? 

They’ve got a better tight five than they’ve had for a while (though that has to be balanced against the opposition - Wales have some of the weakest front row options they’ve had in a long while and didn’t have a full complement of locks), and they’ve got some impressive wings.

But they’ve also not worked out how to perm Foley, Lealiifano, To’omua, Beale and O’Connor into a midfield, and the form 10 is To’omua who is better suited to 12 (though England have the reverse of that problem). And they’ve got a serious issue with their tackle technique across the park and have been lucky to only pick up one ban so far. 

Their gameplan is based on keeping the ball in hand in wet, humid conditions where everyone has been making handling errors, and their coach is the one most susceptible to Eddie getting in his head.

Against that, they’re tenacious and creative and will always be capable of springing a surprise. They’re also very fit and capable of playing til the last minute. But Wales beat them and should have beaten them more easily (and by your logic, does that make them the equal of the 2015 All Blacks?).

To be honest, I would much rather face Australia in the QFs than Wales.

Couldn't have put it more succinctly myself, Poorfour. That's exactly the way I see it too.

I wrote a comment to the SMH (the coaches article) this morning expressing pretty much the same thing. I note it hasn't been published at all.
Maybe the journalist wanted to keep the hurtful truth obscured from their dwindling readership? Typical...

Then I thought one of the 'rugby experts' there may have read it and decided to forward a copy of it to Tim Horan to get him to slip a copy under the Oily One's hotel room door. Something to read and consider whilst he's sitting on the crapper... and the typhoon is in full swing outside perhaps?

Tell me I'm dreaming...  

Pal Joey wrote:Couldn't have put it more succinctly myself, Poorfour. That's exactly the way I see it too.

I wrote a comment to the SMH (the coaches article) this morning expressing pretty much the same thing. I note it hasn't been published at all.
Maybe the journalist wanted to keep the hurtful truth obscured from their dwindling readership? Typical...

Then I thought one of the 'rugby experts' there may have read it and decided to forward a copy of it to Tim Horan to get him to slip a copy under the Oily One's hotel room door. Something to read and consider whilst he's sitting on the crapper... and the typhoon is in full swing outside perhaps?

Tell me I'm dreaming...  

Jousting Sticks?

You’re Dreaming..!

Poorfour wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:This Australia team are as good as the one that made the last final if not better.

Seriously? Where are you getting that from? 

They’ve got a better tight five than they’ve had for a while (though that has to be balanced against the opposition - Wales have some of the weakest front row options they’ve had in a long while and didn’t have a full complement of locks), and they’ve got some impressive wings.

But they’ve also not worked out how to perm Foley, Lealiifano, To’omua, Beale and O’Connor into a midfield, and the form 10 is To’omua who is better suited to 12 (though England have the reverse of that problem). And they’ve got a serious issue with their tackle technique across the park and have been lucky to only pick up one ban so far. 

Their gameplan is based on keeping the ball in hand in wet, humid conditions where everyone has been making handling errors, and their coach is the one most susceptible to Eddie getting in his head.

Against that, they’re tenacious and creative and will always be capable of springing a surprise. They’re also very fit and capable of playing til the last minute. But Wales beat them and should have beaten them more easily (and by your logic, does that make them the equal of the 2015 All Blacks?).

To be honest, I would much rather face Australia in the QFs than Wales.

Good luck, Australia look and sound confident of making the semi finals. Could be form, could be, as all the commentators said after the type and style they played, that they are holding on to a few moves. Could be that they nearly put 50 points on the ABs in a championship game a short while ago where as their oppositions last championship match against a decent team they threw away a bonus point lead for a draw!

So avoid a red card would be a thing to aim for.

Can't write Aus off, but England will be favourites. If Cheika says the opposite, something like "Yeah we're bricking it mate" then the game is lost before it's even begun. I can't see why someone would take issue with a coach showing confidence in his team.

I do think that if you want to find one area where England are miles ahead of Aus its in the coach

lostinwales wrote:I do think that if you want to find one area where England are miles ahead of Aus its in the coach

And confidence, the Australians just don’t look confident at all.

Good summation by Poorfour, but I also believe they are better than 4 years ago. Wales battered them at Twickenham yet somehow clutched defeat from that game; Scotland were near enough their equals. It was only really England they shone against. This Australian team loos disjointed and a bit aimless at times, but they have a form Hooper by the looks of things, and Koroibete is better than any winger they had 4 years ago. If they get the 9-10-12 positions 'right' on the day - yet to see it, so it's a valid criticism - there's no reason they can't cause England huge, huge problems.

lostinwales wrote:I do think that if you want to find one area where England are miles ahead of Aus its in the coach

I think this is harsh. Yes, he's a clown, and goes beyond what EJ and Gatland have done at their most cantankerous.

But he's not a tactical mug. Australia did a tactical job on the ABs in the summer, as mentioned by maesteg. Now, *who* is responsible for that is up for debate, but he's still the coach responsible for it. Australian basic skills are good yet it's not as if they're out there playing 7s like Scotland or Fiji. They're far too inconsistent, yet they *do* tend to 'get it right' when it matters - whether that's enough for England, the form in the last 4 years suggests not, but you can guarantee the moment Cheika started moaning in the Wales post-match, they've been preparing for England, and no doubt they would rather have avoided them, hence the whining. But that's also because of the ABs, and keepingmentally 'healthy' - i.e. a sense of being cheated, to rule out the reality they got outplayed by the Welsh.

That doesn't mean Australia can't beat Englalnd. I'm really hoping we're going to see 2 really good games in this side of the draw - NZ look like they're getting a walkthrough if the game tomorrow goes ahead, but if not, it's going to be two cracking QFs with different styles. The two English games - Oz and NZ if they win the first - could be the games of the tournament. Wales v Oz was good enough, and that was with Wales barely playing any rugby in the second half. Looking forward to these two rounds on that side - and glad that Wales can look on from the other side (Uruguay aside).

If - thats a big if.

If we get an England player or 2 sent off

If everything goes right for Oz and everything wrong for Eng

If Oz somehow get Steve Walsh to referee.

They have a lot of problems at 9 10 12. Good individuals but getting past it or out of position. England also have a lot of strengths - players that will cause Australia all sorts of problems.

And in all this talk of quality wingers, its probably worth mentioning who has scored the most international tries since the start of 2018. Roadrunner...

Is Australia not running on the past rather than any form.

Yes they put NZ to the sword v 14 men but it was at home in front off their fans. The next game they couldn't score as NZ tightened up. England seem back to the power game and I can't see OZ being able to open the game up.

Wales seemed on top in their game with Oz and seemed to take their foot off rather than OZ changing anything.

The Rugby Championship isn't what it was and Oz are clearly underdogs v England. It's not like four years ago where they would have been viewed as equals.

They're clearly not at NZ's level, but no team is. England played a great game in dreadful conditions in front of their own fans as well - and they lost.

Australia were winning and outplaying NZ when the red card happened. Yes, it all but guaranteed the result, but they had worked them out defensively and were outplaying them at the breakdown, as well as getting through their defence - that's tactical. The idea that Cheika is just a gob is a classic case of falling for the superficial stuff - he's just a pantomime villain, but the players clearly respond to his siege mentality stuff. They haven't rebelled like they did against Deans or McKenzie.

Look, write off Australia, by all means. I'm just saying they've clearly looked quality, and they showed that second half v Wales - it's just not consistent enough. I don't think they're really that far behind the 'best of the rest' - they just go about it a different way.

So did they show their quality in the 2nd half? Or were they outplayed as wales chose not to play any rugby? Presumably england will do their traditional strangle with the ball and play off mistakes when they dont.

I don't think Wales chose not to play any rugby. They tried to tighten up but Australia outplayed them - although Wales did play pretty well defensively, and the length of time they held out for the 3rd try ultimately proved the difference. A lot of that second half was also down to things like the bounce of the ball, the flow etc. Every time Wales were in a good position, something like the Adams 'high' tackle happened, or a scrum or a knock on or something disrupted Welsh pressure. When they did put pressure on, it result in 6 points at either end of the half.

But if you don't think Australia played well then you're perhaps not payin close enough attention. The Australians are the second best team in understanding how to use pressure and convert it in to points. No NH team comes close, we value posession and territory and don't quite get how - like Rugby League - it's often about breaking them 2-3 minutes down the line, and what you do sets that up. It's why I hate to see teams take 3 points when 5m out with a penalty.

Either way, not sure what this discussion is about. People seem to think Australia are gash, I and other think they're still good. Let's wait and see.

Oz don't have Folou at 15 anymore so dont pose the same problem with the high ball or counter running. They are still better than Ireland or Wales at it but not the feared runners they once were. I would nearly say that England frighten me more than OZ at the moment.

Farrell and Ford will play the ball in the right areas to keep Oz in check. I don't see Oz's pack blowing holes up the middle. Once England's bench comes on I can see England doing it. Foley can't play a good tatical game that will move England around, and I don't know if the others can. Dropping Foley would be a big call which I don't think the coach would make.

I think like usual Australia have some exceptional individual players. Their back moves and attacking play can be very special. But they are less than the sum of their parts, and some of the key parts are showing wear and tear.

The last serious game we lost vs Australia was that world cup - and England were mentally in a horrible state. No sign of that now. We have a very good record against them

Looking at Green and Gold there are a fair number of Wallaby supporters expecting a loss and looking forward to it being the end of Cheika.

I think overall that australia have been ok but nothing special. They were well on top 2nd half vs wales which was why I was slightly quizzical over the claim that wales outplayed them. Another game that could have gone either way. Just feel that the way england pack have gone so far it'll be difficult for australia to get the field position to out enough pressure on throughout the game.

With regards to Australia, any news on beale's  injury? did he not get a HIA?

Google.

miaow wrote:

lostinwales wrote:I do think that if you want to find one area where England are miles ahead of Aus its in the coach

I think this is harsh. Yes, he's a clown, and goes beyond what EJ and Gatland have done at their most cantankerous.

But he's not a tactical mug. Australia did a tactical job on the ABs in the summer, as mentioned by maesteg. Now, *who* is responsible for that is up for debate, but he's still the coach responsible for it. Australian basic skills are good yet it's not as if they're out there playing 7s like Scotland or Fiji. They're far too inconsistent, yet they *do* tend to 'get it right' when it matters - whether that's enough for England, the form in the last 4 years suggests not, but you can guarantee the moment Cheika started moaning in the Wales post-match, they've been preparing for England, and no doubt they would rather have avoided them, hence the whining. But that's also because of the ABs, and keepingmentally 'healthy' - i.e. a sense of being cheated, to rule out the reality they got outplayed by the Welsh

Interesting cos out our way it’s generally accepted Cheika hasn’t a clue with how to put a side together to perform consistently. Beating NZ in a one off in a World Cup year isn’t as big a feat for oz as it might seem, especially when they get thrashed in the ones that make the difference...bled win for example, held since 2002. The Perth score line though, was unusual.

Cheika departing will be welcomed in Oz, even if they don’t have a replacement yet. He’s picked players out of position, he continued to favour poor performing players, ‘hoping’ they would eventually come right and has one of the poorest winning rates of any oz coach, losing too many to sides they would expect to beat. Part of that has been lack of or leaving cattle, but generally, a poor selector and shocking post match blues, his after match comments scathing of anyone and everyone he can get his teeth into to blame...outside himself or team that is.

Oz will improve when he’s gone simply for his departure alone.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think overall that australia have been ok but nothing special. They were well on top 2nd half vs wales which was why I was slightly quizzical over the claim that wales outplayed them. Another game that could have gone either way. Just feel that the way england pack have gone so far it'll be difficult for australia to get the field position to out enough pressure on throughout the game.

Over the 80 I think Wales did outplay them. But as you say, it was still close on the scoreboard - you don't need to win every minute of the 80, just the scoreboard. Both England and Australia look like high scoring teams, and Wales can struggle to really open up and put teams away until the game is won - and that's perhaps Gatland's model. For this upcoming game, it's all about contrasting styles of pressure and how each team scores. England are all short, sharp, abrasive shocks, while Australia are much more flowing, long periods of pressure - one thing that might be the difference is execution. EJ deliberately built a gameplan based on less scope for mistakes, and playing to England's strengths - and lots of quick chances, even if it just means hoofing it long and asking May to chase.

As a neutral I'm just hoping both teams play well. If they do, we'll see both a great game, and where the general standard is. Oz and Eng are 2 of the few teams who can knock NZ out as well.

England Ireland and Wales now all look like contenders. Bar Ireland’s loss all three have been solid and consistent, if anything, a bit short of big match play in the case of Ireland and England, Wales having passed the strongest tests.

Again it’s NZ and SA that will carry the SH hopes, with oz upset value at best. We always get upsets and it’s Ireland’s group this time that throws up the anomalies, and even as of now, continues to do so.

Hopefully the match goes ahead...tick, tick, tick...

Taylorman wrote:

miaow wrote:

lostinwales wrote:I do think that if you want to find one area where England are miles ahead of Aus its in the coach

I think this is harsh. Yes, he's a clown, and goes beyond what EJ and Gatland have done at their most cantankerous.

But he's not a tactical mug. Australia did a tactical job on the ABs in the summer, as mentioned by maesteg. Now, *who* is responsible for that is up for debate, but he's still the coach responsible for it. Australian basic skills are good yet it's not as if they're out there playing 7s like Scotland or Fiji. They're far too inconsistent, yet they *do* tend to 'get it right' when it matters - whether that's enough for England, the form in the last 4 years suggests not, but you can guarantee the moment Cheika started moaning in the Wales post-match, they've been preparing for England, and no doubt they would rather have avoided them, hence the whining. But that's also because of the ABs, and keepingmentally 'healthy' - i.e. a sense of being cheated, to rule out the reality they got outplayed by the Welsh

Interesting cos out our way it’s generally accepted Cheika hasn’t a clue with how to put a side together to perform consistently. Beating NZ in a one off in a World Cup year isn’t as big a feat for oz as it might seem, especially when they get thrashed in the ones that make the difference...bled win for example, held since 2002.

Cheika departing will be welcomed in Oz, even if they don’t have a replacement yet. He’s picked players out of position, he continued to favour poor performing players, ‘hoping’ they would eventually come right and has one of the poorest winning rates of any oz coach, losing too many to sides they would expect to beat. Part of that has been lack of or leaving cattle, but generally, a poor selector and shocking post match blues, his after match comments scathing of anyone and everyone he can get his teeth into to blame...outside himself or team that is.

Oz will improve when he’s gone simply for his departure alone.

Again, I'd say this is a fallacy from the outside. Australia have had some really poor players in the last 4 years, and he's been in charge for many positives, not least bringing through a number of tidy Polynesian/Aboriginal players in the front row, who are massively flying under the radar. For all the talk of Sinckler and Genge etc., the Australian tight 5 looks decent - 3 beanpole locks who will make any lineout attack wobble, paired with some stocky, mobile props and hookers.

I agree Cheika has hardly coached consistently, but all the media stuff - I think the players absolutely love it. And that's the main thing. He's exactly the kind of 'f you' coach who is one of the boys in a way, and you're judged on whether you can back it up because that's a risky tactic to take - for all the failings of mentality that you can see, there are clear benefits to it as well. EJ has done a lesser version of that with England, basically emboldening the players to not give a sheet about the things that don't impact the result - all things schoolmaster Lancaster probably got wrong.

Look, I'm no fan of Cheika, but some of the rugby the Wallabies play is really good, and now we're at the business end, if they perform, they could sneak their way to the final. Unlikely, as they'd be the underdogs in both QF and SF, but they're not mugs.

Which game? The Uruguay Wales game? Hopefully, yeah, but never thought it was under threat of cancellation.

miaow wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

miaow wrote:

lostinwales wrote:I do think that if you want to find one area where England are miles ahead of Aus its in the coach

I think this is harsh. Yes, he's a clown, and goes beyond what EJ and Gatland have done at their most cantankerous.

But he's not a tactical mug. Australia did a tactical job on the ABs in the summer, as mentioned by maesteg. Now, *who* is responsible for that is up for debate, but he's still the coach responsible for it. Australian basic skills are good yet it's not as if they're out there playing 7s like Scotland or Fiji. They're far too inconsistent, yet they *do* tend to 'get it right' when it matters - whether that's enough for England, the form in the last 4 years suggests not, but you can guarantee the moment Cheika started moaning in the Wales post-match, they've been preparing for England, and no doubt they would rather have avoided them, hence the whining. But that's also because of the ABs, and keepingmentally 'healthy' - i.e. a sense of being cheated, to rule out the reality they got outplayed by the Welsh

Interesting cos out our way it’s generally accepted Cheika hasn’t a clue with how to put a side together to perform consistently. Beating NZ in a one off in a World Cup year isn’t as big a feat for oz as it might seem, especially when they get thrashed in the ones that make the difference...bled win for example, held since 2002.

Cheika departing will be welcomed in Oz, even if they don’t have a replacement yet. He’s picked players out of position, he continued to favour poor performing players, ‘hoping’ they would eventually come right and has one of the poorest winning rates of any oz coach, losing too many to sides they would expect to beat. Part of that has been lack of or leaving cattle, but generally, a poor selector and shocking post match blues, his after match comments scathing of anyone and everyone he can get his teeth into to blame...outside himself or team that is.

Oz will improve when he’s gone simply for his departure alone.

Again, I'd say this is a fallacy from the outside. Australia have had some really poor players in the last 4 years, and he's been in charge for many positives, not least bringing through a number of tidy Polynesian/Aboriginal players in the front row, who are massively flying under the radar. For all the talk of Sinckler and Genge etc., the Australian tight 5 looks decent - 3 beanpole locks who will make any lineout attack wobble, paired with some stocky, mobile props and hookers.

I agree Cheika has hardly coached consistently, but all the media stuff - I think the players absolutely love it. And that's the main thing. He's exactly the kind of 'f you' coach who is one of the boys in a way, and you're judged on whether you can back it up because that's a risky tactic to take - for all the failings of mentality that you can see, there are clear benefits to it as well. EJ has done a lesser version of that with England, basically emboldening the players to not give a sheet about the things that don't impact the result - all things schoolmaster Lancaster probably got wrong.

Look, I'm no fan of Cheika, but some of the rugby the Wallabies play is really good, and now we're at the business end, if they perform, they could sneak their way to the final. Unlikely, as they'd be the underdogs in both QF and SF, but they're not mugs.

Whaddya mean fallacy from the outside? Whereas you are commenting from where? The inside? We play this clown three times every year and see the selections, results, tantrums, misfires. He’s been consistently poor as a coach since the World Cup final, and even then hadn’t had that side for even a year yet. You’re right that your judged whether you can back it up and he’s proved time and time again that he can’t. So how you get to your conclusion is beyond me, sounds more like an apprehensive nervousness about what’s coming up rather than an appraisal of the mans abilities. He’s terrible. Terrible for oz rugby and needs the boot, even that’s well overdue.

Bomber was simply poor, too much theory and cuddling and Jones came in and cleared that up in no uncertain terms. Dropped the poor performing players, despite being well liked...Robshaw etc, and put some mongrel back into the team.

Never seen such a contrast- a fragile English side in 2015 to one with teeth 6 months later. All because of the change in leadership.

It’s actually that lack of mongrel that I’m concerned about from the ABs when they have this lay-off. It’s not good at all not playing Italy. Waiting two weeks to suddenly get fired up for 80 minutes will be difficult with no roll on from a recent match.

ABs are particularly poor at starting from a lay-off because it takes that much more to be able to make the high paced, fast passing plays stick all of a sudden, and while focussing on the skills the can quickly forget the mongrel, which is why I’m glad we don’t have a England or the Boks first. England particularly as they get into their structure quickly.

Ireland are similarly fast starters but they have their own demons to deal with and don’t have the player power of England so not as concerned there in terms of starting.

Taylorman wrote:Whaddya mean fallacy from the outside? Whereas you are commenting from where? The inside?

You're putting too much heed on what 'Kiwis'/the media makes of Cheika. So yes, you're overestimating the facets of Cheika you see 'from the outside' and underestimating the impact he has within the squad, which can be seen indirectly through things like tactics, mindset, mentality, team togetherness etc.

In this RWC cycle, Australia’s win record against Tier 1 teams is:
- 17% against NZ
- 20% against England
- 33% against Ireland
- 42% against South Africa
- 50% against Scotland
- 66% against France
- 83% against Wales
- 86% against Argentina
- 100% against Italy.

While they usually raise their game for the RWC, and their tight five is a bit better, I just don’t see them having made enough of an improvement to turn that around. If we were seeing that level of improvement, surely they’d have been able to beat Wales, one of the teams they’ve got the best record against?

miaow wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Whaddya mean fallacy from the outside? Whereas you are commenting from where? The inside?

You're putting too much heed on what 'Kiwis'/the media makes of Cheika. So yes, you're overestimating the facets of Cheika you see 'from the outside' and underestimating the impact he has within the squad, which can be seen indirectly through things like tactics, mindset, mentality, team togetherness etc.

Kiwi media? Hey no, we love him. It’s their own media and fans that do all that. They all want him gone...nobody I’ve seen has said he should stay on.

What goes on from the inside is irrelevant when assessing his abilities. His results first speak for themselves. His after match comments lack integrity and respect for everything the games about. Totally dismissive of Referees.. ‘I give up...I don’t know the rules anymore’ he resigns throwing his hands up like a disciplined child throwing his toys.

You’re not even close to the mark and if this side does anything it will be in spite of and not because of anything he does.

In feb he took them all for a hard as hill training camp. As many as three or four got calf injuries, Pocock out for the season.

No idea.

The stories from the camp will surface after he’s gone.

Poorfour wrote:In this RWC cycle, Australia’s win record against Tier 1 teams is:
- 17% against NZ
- 20% against England
- 33% against Ireland
- 42% against South Africa
- 50% against Scotland
- 66% against France
- 83% against Wales
- 86% against Argentina
- 100% against Italy.

While they usually raise their game for the RWC, and their tight five is a bit better, I just don’t see them having made enough of an improvement to turn that around. If we were seeing that level of improvement, surely they’d have been able to beat Wales, one of the teams they’ve got the best record against?

When since 1978 have you ever seen oz as bad as that. Never I’d say. 26 test losses since 2016 at over six every year, unheard of. It was getting bad under Ewen Mac and Cheika rescued it in 2015, but his all in one basket approach to selecting, players like Foley, Dean mumm, Neil Hannigan, Beale ...picking these guys continuous ply after poor matches just got silly. Only recently he’s managed to tear himself away from Foley only to put him back again vs Wales! Where he went poorly.

Tbh your criticisms of Cheika are mirrored by the Kiwis and Hansen - it's just a slightly differently accent and significantly different level of disdain that separates the two.

You have your view, I have mine. Cheika strikes me as a coach the players like - for better or worse. Siege mentality can only help at this stage as they're hardly a well oiled machine.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Google.

Provide him a link, because 9/10 questions could be answered off that. Discuss.