RugbyRebels

Wales squad:
Forwards: Rob Evans (Scarlets), Wyn Jones (Scarlets), Nicky Smith (Ospreys), Elliot Dee (Dragons), Ryan Elias (Scarlets), Ken Owens (Scarlets), Leon Brown (Dragons), Tomas Francis (Exeter Chiefs), Samson Lee (Scarlets), Dillon Lewis (Cardiff Blues), Jake Ball (Scarlets), Adam Beard (Ospreys), Bradley Davies (Ospreys), Cory Hill (Dragons), Alun Wyn Jones (capt, Ospreys), Ellis Jenkins (Cardiff Blues), Dan Lydiate (Ospreys), Ross Moriarty (Dragons), Justin Tipuric (Ospreys), Aaron Wainwright (Dragons).

Backs: Aled Davies (Ospreys), Gareth Davies (Scarlets), Tomos Williams (Cardiff Blues), Gareth Anscombe (Cardiff Blues), Dan Biggar (Northampton Saints), Rhys Patchell (Scarlets), Jonathan Davies (Scarlets), Tyler Morgan (Dragons), Hadleigh Parkes (Scarlets), Owen Watkin (Ospreys), Josh Adams (Worcester Warriors), Steffan Evans (Scarlets), Leigh Halfpenny (Scarlets), Jonah Holmes (Leicester Tigers), Luke Morgan (Ospreys), George North (Ospreys), Liam Williams (Saracens).

Injuries are making the back row decisions a lot easier. But it's disappointing not so see Ollie Griffiths in the squad, not sure how Aaron Wainwright got in ahead of him...

The insanity of Rhys Webb's exclusion plays out... but we have so many good scrum halves that we don't suffer too much. I guess.

Keelan Giles was unlucky not to be fit at the start of the season, so out of contention. Obviously Dan Evan should be in there etc etc.

But anyway, a very strong squad. Gatland's selections will be interesting... will he actually take some risks to try some of these guys out or will it be same old? Hoping Patchell will get the nod. And Liam Williams at full back instead of 1/2p... but I don't think it'll happen in a serious game.

It’s a decent squad. A few players unlucky to miss out due to injury. Selection for the Scotland game will be interesting particularly as Biggar won’t be available. Personally I don’t think we will see too much experimentation as it’s so close to the RWC and because it’s Gatland so I don’t think there are too many shirts or squad places up for grabs for the trip to Japan unless injury hits.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:Injuries are making the back row decisions a lot easier. But it's disappointing not so see Ollie Griffiths in the squad, not sure how Aaron Wainwright got in ahead of him...

The insanity of Rhys Webb's exclusion plays out... but we have so many good scrum halves that we don't suffer too much. I guess.

Keelan Giles was unlucky not to be fit at the start of the season, so out of contention. Obviously Dan Evan should be in there etc etc.

But anyway, a very strong squad. Gatland's selections will be interesting... will he actually take some risks to try some of these guys out or will it be same old? Hoping Patchell will get the nod. And Liam Williams at full back instead of 1/2p... but I don't think it'll happen in a serious game.

I would have liked to have seen Griffiths in the squad as I rate him very highly, the only reasoning I can see behind this is that from the Dragons games I've seen this season Wainwright is playing very well and is a stronger ball carrier. The all round skillset of Griffiths tho is there for all to see so it's still a bit puzzling.

Wainwright in there to make up for lack of Faletau. Griffiths is the on form flanker in Wales at the moment, so very disappointed for him.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:Injuries are making the back row decisions a lot easier. But it's disappointing not so see Ollie Griffiths in the squad, not sure how Aaron Wainwright got in ahead of him...

.

Gatland is building a big squad in an attempt to insulate us from the injury problems that have affected the last two World Cups.

Ollie Griffiths is good enough, now we test Aaron Wainwright and see if he is good enough. We already know Thomas Young is good enough. Playing international matches, even if fifteen minutes off the bench is both a test and an education for the player. A pool of 60+ players seems a good idea.

.

I see what you are saying, but I’m not sure this is the time to do that. I’d prefer this season was all about gelling the RWC squad rather than experimenting too much, although I suspect Wainwright won’t get that much game time over the series.

Sandydragon wrote:...although I suspect Wainwright won’t get that much game time over the series.

I suspect you are right, but at least we will know more.

Well, we got a fairly comfortable victory but we won't beat Australia playing like that. That defence was great but it won't stop the Aussies, we need to score a few tries too. Sure, it's a safe approach against a weaker team but if we don't try something a little aggressive/risky we'll just get owned by the better sides. Again. It's as if Gatland's experiments with a more attacking style never happened.

(Felt sorry for Luke Morgan - he had nothing to do)

Agreed. We seemed very happy to let the Scots run at us and whilst that worked today, I can’t see it being effective against the Aussies.

I definitely prefer Anscombe atmfly half to Biggar. We also had three clear opportunities and scored two tries, with the other being close.

Our key issue I think was that we were happy to kick the ball away too easily, once again, too many box kicks that put no pressure on the opposition.

Yup, if we box kick to the Aussies like that (and that much) they will shred us. The only argument for using this tactic is if we have Biggar and Liam next week, players who actually compete for high ball. However, for me (as ever) this is not reason enough to play Biggar because this is his only world-class attacking skill.

Edwards continues to do a fantastic job for Wales, but it is not (and never has been) enough against the best teams. Thank goodness Howley will be gone in 12 months.

I guess you could see it as a "hit-out" for that style of game to see if it's in any shape to use against Australia. You have to say it was very effective today, against a team that were supposed to be able to run us around. But I agree Oz should be a lot more incisive / clinical than Scotland were and we can't afford to play that much rugby without the ball. As to finishing I don't think there's a lot to criticise, but we're going to have to find a way to get in scoring positions more than 3-4 times per game.

After years of watching us get lacerated, Gatball had its charms for a while. I actually came to enjoy that feeling of security when the opposition were in our half, that we could actually trust our defence and weren't just waiting for them to score so that we could have our turn. That feeling returned in the second half today - Scotland camped on our line but I actually felt fairly relaxed. But after a first half where by common consent our forwards dominated, I couldn't help feeling "so why aren't we attacking, then?" a lot of the time.

Still, it's a win - and a comfortable one - to start us off, and that's worth a lot IMO. Whatever the game lacked in elite quality, it was a proper, intense test match and we should now be up to speed for the remaining games without it having cost us another demoralizing home defeat.

Sourdust wrote:I guess you could see it as a "hit-out" for that style of game to see if it's in any shape to use against Australia. You have to say it was very effective today, against a team that were supposed to be able to run us around. But I agree Oz should be a lot more incisive / clinical than Scotland were and we can't afford to play that much rugby without the ball. As to finishing I don't think there's a lot to criticise, but we're going to have to find a way to get in scoring positions more than 3-4 times per game.

After years of watching us get lacerated, Gatball had its charms for a while. I actually came to enjoy that feeling of security when the opposition were in our half, that we could actually trust our defence and weren't just waiting for them to score so that we could have our turn. That feeling returned in the second half today - Scotland camped on our line but I actually felt fairly relaxed. But after a first half where by common consent our forwards dominated, I couldn't help feeling "so why aren't we attacking, then?" a lot of the time.

Still, it's a win - and a comfortable one - to start us off, and that's worth a lot IMO. Whatever the game lacked in elite quality, it was a proper, intense test match and we should now be up to speed for the remaining games without it having cost us another demoralizing home defeat.

It was a definite bonus to win our first game, and at least we play the Aussies after a warm up against another side which was also playing their first game.

Australia have been anything but clinical lately. Full of running and plenty of line breaks, but absolutely no composure when it comes to finishing.

Just don’t kick it to Folau in space, or give Beale any room.

Lizard wrote:Australia have been anything but clinical lately. Full of running and plenty of line breaks, but absolutely no composure when it comes to finishing.

Just don’t kick it to Folau in space, or give Beale any room.

Unless we have a radical overhaul of our tactics that's exactly what we'll do.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Lizard wrote:Australia have been anything but clinical lately. Full of running and plenty of line breaks, but absolutely no composure when it comes to finishing.

Just don’t kick it to Folau in space, or give Beale any room.

Unless we have a radical overhaul of our tactics that's exactly what we'll do.

Yup. Doing the same thing 27 times in a row is the last thing they will expect us to do.

FFS NZ, fancy turning up to this match? England very sharp but NZ not out of first gear.

30 mins gone. Stuff is happening but it’s very boring & hard to focus on. Wales happy without the ball for now.

Congratulations Wales, you didn't shit the bed against the Wallabies for once.

Some interesting reffing. If Sarevi hitting the kicker in the head well after the ball is gone isn't reckless then what the hell is?

Edgy game and Halfpenny radar had an off day, but I’ll take that win. Very pleased with our composure at the end.

If the scoreline had been the other way we'd have had our ears bent backwards with how Wales didn't have the composure, lacked the killer instinct, froze against the big boys etc. and how the SH teams "find a way to win".

We can talk about Wales' deficiencies some other time. They found a way to beat Australia. I'm having a beer.

Sourdust wrote:If the scoreline had been the other way we'd have had our ears bent backwards with how Wales didn't have the composure, lacked the killer instinct, froze against the big boys etc. and how the SH teams "find a way to win".

We can talk about Wales' deficiencies some other time. They found a way to beat Australia. I'm having a beer.

This!

Thankfully the Kerevi incident can be discussed a little more calmly after the result. But OMG...
For several years now, the authorities have been telling us over and over again that intent is irrelevant, and that incidents will be adjudged on outcome. It seems like a dogma tailor-made to deliver injustice but we've had to slowly accept it. So now we get this incident - clearly accidental, but equally clearly a failure of technique, with a dangerous outcome - and in refusing to penalize, the referee is heard to say "It's not a deliberate act of foul play"...! This is PRECISELY the defence we have been repeatedly told is inapplicable. Kerevi unarguably endangered Halfpenny by failing in his "duty of care"; and it's not even a PENALTY? The fact that the decision is compounded by allowing Australia to convert a subsequent penalty for goal, and tie the scores late on, adds drama and frustration but is not directly relevant. Even with Aus 20 points ahead, the only point of debate is the colour of the card, not if it's a penalty at all. When we talk about "inconsistency"? This.

Sourdust wrote:Thankfully the Kerevi incident can be discussed a little more calmly after the result. But OMG...
For several years now, the authorities have been telling us over and over again that intent is irrelevant, and that incidents will be adjudged on outcome. It seems like a dogma tailor-made to deliver injustice but we've had to slowly accept it. So now we get this incident - clearly accidental, but equally clearly a failure of technique, with a dangerous outcome - and in refusing to penalize, the referee is heard to say "It's not a deliberate act of foul play"...! This is PRECISELY the defence we have been repeatedly told is inapplicable. Kerevi unarguably endangered Halfpenny by failing in his "duty of care"; and it's not even a PENALTY? The fact that the decision is compounded by allowing Australia to convert a subsequent penalty for goal, and tie the scores late on, adds drama and frustration but is not directly relevant. Even with Aus 20 points ahead, the only point of debate is the colour of the card, not if it's a penalty at all. When we talk about "inconsistency"? This.

Agreed... although I think you may be being generous in taking this to be an accident - the jury's out on whether Kerevi maintained his body position deliberately.

But anyhow, we won - not prettily - but it will be good for the boys' confidence this time next year.

Great defence, but we seem to have given up on trying to create anything. Good enough for a struggling Australia, maybe good enough for South Africa too, but we'll need more against Ireland and England, and much more against NZ.

Job done though, that was the most important thing today.