There comes a point where you've got to work out whether you're just going to pick a young Wallaby team and develop them up and let go of the rest or whether you do what everyone else does and that's pick a couple of young blokes.
One of the great examples is what France did at the last World Cup. The French could have been in the semi-finals and finals and they effectively picked just an under-23s team. They virtually didn't have an old bloke in their side and by the end of the tournament were playing really well and got pipped by Wales. They shouldn't have lost to Wales. They should have beaten Wales and they basically picked this under-23 team.
If you come back and we believe in this concept of cohesion why wouldn't we pick a team now that would guarantee that would definitley be peaking in three years time at the Rugby World Cup i.e. just pick guys that are under the age of 23 and not pick a single bloke above that age. And maybe say, we've got the next two World Cup cycles to think about in France and then, if we can get, in Australia. Let's pick a team that we know that every single one of them has 50 Test matches, be 26-27, be at the peak of their careers and prepare for that now and bite the bullet on it.
2020 a right off anyway ... would you actually do that?
Yeah. 100 per cent. I'd definitely do it. Doing anything else is just what everyone else does and if we're in a point in time in rugby where we need something inivitive and when we talk about inivatation what does it mean? It means doing things differently. What can we do differently? Well here's an idea in selection let's do something completely differently. In fact it's not that different because France did it at the last World Cup and it almost knocked Wales out and got them through to the last four. If you go back and have a look at the data of their every age. Ntamack's some player now and he was like 19 or 20. They basically picked half a dozen blokes out of their 20s team and put them in.
Correct. And they so basically said let's pick an under-23s team. I was chatting to Jashville, he was over there doing commentary work, and he said basically they decided to pick an under 23 team knowing that they've got their home world cup to pick a team that's going to be peaking for their home world cup in four years time and give them a World Cup experience. What's wrong with doing that right now and almost excluding anyone over the age of 26-27. Now I know that's going to be hard and tough on a few other blokes, but if you want to build cohesion and expeirence and we think that cohesion is important, well the national team gets a choice to build cohesion. It's really the only team that has that choice because it selects from everybody. And if we believe that cohesion is important - which we do - the national team is the only one that can actually achieve it without structural change, all they have to do is select. So select blokes who in three years time you're going to be pretty sure that are going to be in a position to play and you can do that and that's where you pick a bloke like Tate McDermott over Nic White for example or over Joe Powell or anybody else. Pick blokes under the age of 23.
The odd exception?
Maybe but the other thing that is worth noting here is that the All Blacks went through that period where they had to pick because of a cavalere tour they picked the Baby Blacks which was in 1986 and in '87 they win the World Cup off the back of the Baby All Blacks which David Kirk was the captain for. The only reason Kirky was captain was because the other blokes went to South Africa for the Cavalhere's tour. There were 19 blokes that went to South Africa and I think it was 85-86 before the Rugby World Cup so those guys weren't eligble for the World CUp in '87 because they'd been banned basically. I think they then overturned that. But google a bit of that. That's a good example of a team that has actually done a similar thing and the side that Kirky was captain of was called the Baby All Blacks because all the senior blokes weren't there. So we've actually got history on our side. New Zealand did it in '87 and France almost did it at last year's world cup. What better opportunity to pick a team and build cohesion because the Wallabies are the only team that can do it, based on a Wallabies side, to get us to the next world cup and the World Cup after that because if we don't do that we're not giving ourselves a chance.
Fraser?
Of course he's not a Wallaby yet. But in a year's time or two years time he's going to be. Let's give him the chance now, lets fast-track him and don't pick Michael Hooper. These are the tough choices we have to make. I look at the way Hooper's playing and I wouldn't pick him in the Wallabies, I think he's playing rubbish. I know others will say he's playing fantastic. I can't see a single thing that he does on the field that is actually of real significance and I'd pick Fraser McReight over him every day of the week. And same with Liam Wright. He's another guy who could say, we've got two blokes there, let's not persist with MIchael Hooper. He's going to be 31, past his prime. In my mind he's not a bloke who should have played 100 Tests for the Wallabies.
Taniela?
100 per cent. Taniela is playing unbelievable rugby at the moment. Al's a good footballer, hard-working but there's no X-factor. He's not destroying. I remember when I'd go a long to Wallabies sessions. They'd do scrum practice, you'd get a real sense because everyone's right at the top of their game because everyone's fresh becuase it's just scrum against scrum, there's no fatigue, no anything else, they're just ready to go, let's see who the best scrummager is. So they pack scrums, Taniela would be on one side and he'd destroy the other scrum, then they'd shift him over, he'd come on the other side and he'd destroy the pack he was just packing with. It didn't matter who else he packed with, they'd just destroy them. He's nearly playing 80 minutes of footy a week. I said it a couple of years ago, this is a bloke who could play 100 Tests for your country as a prop. No problems. Why wouldn't you. My view would be, a guy like Taniela, he needs to be starting.
Let's pick these young guys. Angus Bell, he's another bloke who can play a lot of Test matches. Massive frame, big kid, unbelievable ball player, runs holes, he's got a fantastic skill-set. He's a bit like James Slipper. Put blokes in there in and around them like Slips and put these guys on the bench, but don't persist with blokes who don't have an upside. We can't persist with guys who have limited upside. If I just look at the front-row, Tom Robertson, no problems, player, Wallaby, that bloke's never going to destroy a scrum. We know what his upside is. We can go it's limited upside. Why persist with him. We know that Angus Bell has a lot of upside because he's 19. Let's pick the upside. Let's pick on potential right now. Now's the time to pick on potential becuase we're not going to sack the coach and in three years time they're all going to have 50-60 Test matches and they'll be under the age of 26.
Let's get rid of the scar tissue. Any bloke whose been scarred by losing Bledisloe Cups, that's the first thing that we should be evaluating and basing our selection decisions on. Why bother persisting.
Take on 10s?
I think Lolesio is better than Kuenzle, definitley. Having seen him play I don't think he's a natural 10, he's going to be more of a 12. Lolesio is definitley a natural 10. That's another great example, do we pick James O'Connor or Matt To'omua or Noah Lolesio or Will Harrison to be our 10s? I'm going Lolesio and Will Harrison every day of the week. I'm leaving To'omua and O'Connor behind.
McDermott, O'Connor?
It's going OK. What does it even mean? It's going OK but it's not the best thing I've ever seen. It's not Gregan and Larkham. Tate's only playing half the game.
Let's look at the 10s, we've got these two choices or these two blokes, let's pick the young blokes. Same with the front-row. The locks, we've got Angus Blyth, well he's a bloke who can play international rugby, we've got Trevor Hosea, he's a bloke who can play international rugby, let's pick them now.
Fraser McReight, Michael Hooper, let's pick Fraser McReight.
Harry Wilson, we haven't got a No.8, but Harry Wilson no question. Him over Naisarani. Pick Valetini. Let's pick the young blokes.
And the wingers as well. Tom Wright's only 22 or whatever.
I'm not suggesting I'd do that. Koroibete's one who is a standout, but there might be others that you pick.
Who wants to watch those losers roll and get beaten again. I don't want that.
