Team for Australia

Moderator: Sandydragon

User avatar
Graigwen
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:25 am

Team for Australia

Post by Graigwen »

Wales: L Williams; Rees-Zammit, Tompkins, Halaholo, Adams; Biggar, T Williams; W Jones, Elias, Francis, Beard, S Davies, Jenkins (capt), Basham, Wainwright.

Replacements: Dee, G Thomas, Lewis, Carter, Tshiunza, G Davies, Priestland, McNicholl.
User avatar
Graigwen
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:25 am

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Graigwen »

Australian team:

Australia: Beale; Kellaway, Ikitau, Paisami, Daugunu; O'Connor, White; Slipper (capt), Latu, Tupou, Arnold, Rodda, Leota, Samu, Valetini.

Replacements: Fainga'a, Bell, Alaalatoa, Skelton, Swinton, McDermott, Foketi, Wright.
User avatar
Sandydragon
Posts: 10476
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Sandydragon »

Graigwen wrote:Wales: L Williams; Rees-Zammit, Tompkins, Halaholo, Adams; Biggar, T Williams; W Jones, Elias, Francis, Beard, S Davies, Jenkins (capt), Basham, Wainwright.

Replacements: Dee, G Thomas, Lewis, Carter, Tshiunza, G Davies, Priestland, McNicholl.
All things considered, that’s a decent side. Looks like we are shaping up for a running encounter.

And no Hooper for the Aussies. That’s a big loss although they still have plenty of talent out there and they have to click sometime this tour (hopefully not Saturday).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Graigwen
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:25 am

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Graigwen »

I don't have many doubts about our team, given the injury situation.

I am still not entirely convinced by Seb Davies as a second row. He seems to fall between two stools, despite looking such a good prospect a couple of years ago.

I am happier with our starting props of course.

I think it is a good call to have Priestland on the bench.

Bad luck for Australia to be missing Hooper.

.
normanski
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by normanski »

Graigwen wrote:I don't have many doubts about our team, given the injury situation.

I am still not entirely convinced by Seb Davies as a second row. He seems to fall between two stools, despite looking such a good prospect a couple of years ago.

I am happier with our starting props of course.

I think it is a good call to have Priestland on the bench.

Bad luck for Australia to be missing Hooper.

.
I understand your reservations about Seb Davies but often a run in the international side can build experience and confidence. Perhaps he is a journeyman lock/six but this is a great chance for him against some top Aussie locks to lay down a marker for the six nations.

As you say this is probably the best side we can put out given our horrendous injury situation and if (big if) they can pull it off on Saturday it will put a gloss on our performance which I didn’t think we would have a few weeks ago.
SDHoneymonster
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2021 3:27 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by SDHoneymonster »

First time in a long while I'd say that Australia have the advantage in the tight five, both starting and on the bench - what was an area of weakness last week with Ala'alatoa and Tupou out is back to being a strength. On the flipside you could say the same about Wales' backline options, and given Hooper's injury also sways the back row battle in favour of Wales given Jenkins and Basham's performances this Autumn I make Wales slight favourites.
User avatar
Sandydragon
Posts: 10476
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Sandydragon »

SDHoneymonster wrote:First time in a long while I'd say that Australia have the advantage in the tight five, both starting and on the bench - what was an area of weakness last week with Ala'alatoa and Tupou out is back to being a strength. On the flipside you could say the same about Wales' backline options, and given Hooper's injury also sways the back row battle in favour of Wales given Jenkins and Basham's performances this Autumn I make Wales slight favourites.
I think the scrum will be even, but their lineout worries me a lot. Carrying will favour them I think, but the back row will be an intriguing battle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Sandydragon
Posts: 10476
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Sandydragon »

Graigwen wrote:Wales: L Williams; Rees-Zammit, Tompkins, Halaholo, Adams; Biggar, T Williams; W Jones, Elias, Francis, Beard, S Davies, Jenkins (capt), Basham, Wainwright.

Replacements: Dee, G Thomas, Lewis, Carter, Tshiunza, G Davies, Priestland, McNicholl.
Just noticed that there’s no replacement back row player on the bench. I presume that if any of the back row need to come off then Seb Davies will move backwards?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Graigwen
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:25 am

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Graigwen »

Sandydragon wrote: Just noticed that there’s no replacement back row player on the bench. I presume that if any of the back row need to come off then Seb Davies will move backwards?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tshiunza can play blindside I understand, although more likely Seb Davies will move back as you say.

.
normanski
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by normanski »

The Fail rugby writers have given their forecast for the match and all predict a narrow win for Wales. I hope so but I also hope none of our team have a brain fart moment to wing the advantage to the Aussies.
normanski
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by normanski »

Some hit on Beard. I don’t think he’ll be back.
normanski
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by normanski »

Anybody out there watching the game?
User avatar
Sandydragon
Posts: 10476
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Sandydragon »

Yeah mate. Seems like we’re in for an exciting second half and it’s still anyone’s game.

I’m at my sisters so not posting too much


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by WaspInWales »

Was I alone in thinking Beale's yellow was a tad harsh? Definite penalty though.
User avatar
Sandydragon
Posts: 10476
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Sandydragon »

WaspInWales wrote:Was I alone in thinking Beale's yellow was a tad harsh? Definite penalty though.
He did ruin a potential try scoring opportunity. LRZ has some pace and could have skinned the cover. I think it’s consistent with other yellows given for the same offence.

I just hope we can score a try against 14 players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by WaspInWales »

Sandydragon wrote:He did ruin a potential try scoring opportunity. LRZ has some pace and could have skinned the cover. I think it’s consistent with other yellows given for the same offence.

I just hope we can score a try against 14 players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Without the cover, it's a penalty try all day long imo. I just think the 'unnatural arm' explanation is a bit meh. In real time in looked like a knock on from Beale but in the act of wrapping his arms for the tackle. Just seemed a bit harsh to me.
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by WaspInWales »

Why does it matter face or head?
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by WaspInWales »

Have Australia upset this ref or something?
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by WaspInWales »

Fair play, they've scored a couple of nice tries!

Thought Paisami had blown it by not arcing the other way.

What a finish.
normanski
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by normanski »

The rest of you can come out from behind the settee now! We won but goodness knows how our mostly third team managed it.
User avatar
Spiffy
Posts: 1976
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 4:13 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Spiffy »

That Oz team must be frustrating for Australian fans. They have some great individual players but don't seem capable of putting on a coordinated team performance. The sum is less than the parts.
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by WaspInWales »

Spiffy wrote:That Oz team must be frustrating for Australian fans. They have some great individual players but don't seem capable of putting on a coordinated team performance. The sum is less than the parts.
Vastly improved on last week though, but I do get your point.
User avatar
Sandydragon
Posts: 10476
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Sandydragon »

WaspInWales wrote:
Spiffy wrote:That Oz team must be frustrating for Australian fans. They have some great individual players but don't seem capable of putting on a coordinated team performance. The sum is less than the parts.
Vastly improved on last week though, but I do get your point.
This was the best Australian performance of the autumn. Unlike in the past two weeks their offloads tended to stick and their passing was more accurate. That said, Wales didn’t put on as much pressure as Scotland and England did.

Wales played better this week in phases but someone needs to sort out our scrum. We still had a lot of players missing which does make a huge difference. But once again the win feels underwhelming. The red card was clear cut (and Thomas is very lucky his yellow wasn’t red). That always affects the game review. But again I feel that we would have lost if the opposition had a full team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by WaspInWales »

Sandydragon wrote:This was the best Australian performance of the autumn. Unlike in the past two weeks their offloads tended to stick and their passing was more accurate. That said, Wales didn’t put on as much pressure as Scotland and England did.

Wales played better this week in phases but someone needs to sort out our scrum. We still had a lot of players missing which does make a huge difference. But once again the win feels underwhelming. The red card was clear cut (and Thomas is very lucky his yellow wasn’t red). That always affects the game review. But again I feel that we would have lost if the opposition had a full team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No argument about the red, and agree about Thomas. It did seem to galvanise the Aussies, but Wales sure have a knack of making things look a lot harder than they should against teams with fewer players on the pitch.

Surely teams prepare for such scenarios?
User avatar
Sandydragon
Posts: 10476
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Team for Australia

Post by Sandydragon »

WaspInWales wrote:
Sandydragon wrote:This was the best Australian performance of the autumn. Unlike in the past two weeks their offloads tended to stick and their passing was more accurate. That said, Wales didn’t put on as much pressure as Scotland and England did.

Wales played better this week in phases but someone needs to sort out our scrum. We still had a lot of players missing which does make a huge difference. But once again the win feels underwhelming. The red card was clear cut (and Thomas is very lucky his yellow wasn’t red). That always affects the game review. But again I feel that we would have lost if the opposition had a full team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No argument about the red, and agree about Thomas. It did seem to galvanise the Aussies, but Wales sure have a knack of making things look a lot harder than they should against teams with fewer players on the pitch.

Surely teams prepare for such scenarios?
Our composure was questionable a few times today and sometimes I think losing a player galvanises the team that’s down to 14 whilst the team at full strength can lose a bit of focus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post Reply