World Cup Team

[Sproj]

Agreed but he hasn't been on song for two years.

 

[Big Pete]

Which doesn't bode well for his future but he's still proven himself to be a worthy player at this level.

 

[Sproj]

Well we can only hope that new coaching and a rejuvenated roster has a good effect on him next season.

 

[KingWebcke]

World Cup isn't the time to select players on form - it's about talent and Thaiday has been a good servant for both state and country over a number of years now.

I agree that a national team shouldn't be picked on form, if you mean short term form. but I also don't think a national team should just be about talent, it should be about a player's ability and level of performance.

otherwise, over the last few years I'm sure people could have made the semi-legitimate argument that Hayne should have been Australian fullback because he is as talented or more talented than Slater or Inglis. which of course it ridiculous because while Hayne may have a bundle of talent, he doesn't always put it together and the quality of his play has generally been a step below Inglis and Slater over the last few years.

You should choose rep teams based on their ability and how well they are likely to perform. While talent is a good indicator of that, I think the best indicator is actually long term form ie. how well a player has performed over the last couple seasons at all levels of the game.

Thaiday hasn't performed consistently well at any level since 2011. he might have had the 'talent' at one point but that doesn't mean he is going to retain it forever. There are plenty of ways a player can lose talent: age; serious injury; being cursed by a warlock; lack of motivation; the game changing so their style of play is less effective; or not having Lockyer passing to you anymore ... I think those last two are particularly relevant.

 

[Anonymous person]

Thaiday has been a good servant for both state and country over a number of years now.

i would say its debatable, but its not really - hes been ordinary for years.

thaiday being a great player is a myth.

 

[Big Pete]

I don't think that argument applies to Thaiday KW. It isn't just a matter of 'talent' but also his past performances which have been good. This isn't a Mateo, T-Rex, Taylor etc. case Thaiday has a history of proven performances which is as recent as Game 2 2013.

 

[Russell Coight]

Agree with the comments on Thaiday form did not warrant a selection, I also wouldn't have picked Hayne, cant believe the hype around him. People still talking about his form for 12 weeks in 2009, thats nearly 5 years ago ffs.

 

[KingWebcke]

I don't think that argument applies to Thaiday KW. It isn't just a matter of 'talent' but also his past performances which have been good. This isn't a Mateo, T-Rex, Taylor etc. case Thaiday has a history of proven performances which is as recent as Game 2 2013.

that is pretty sad that Thaiday can justify his place based on a history of proven performances, when those 'proven performances' at rep level are restricted to one excellent 30 minute period over the course of two years.

at some point past performances cease to have value if you can't continue contributing them. after all, you only pick a player based on their past performances because you hope they will continue with them.

the same argument for Thaiday could be used to support quite a few silly selections. Would you be happy to see Bull Bailey or Willie Mason return to the national team? despite being old has-beens, they have a history of proven performances equal to that of Sam Thaiday, in my opinion ... obviously they are absurd examples but I find equally absurd that a player can still be feeding off his play from several seasons ago

 

[KingWebcke]

I also wouldn't have picked Hayne, cant believe the hype around him. People still talking about his form for 12 weeks in 2009, thats nearly 5 years ago ffs.

I think Hayne has been very good since 2009 too. He is just playing in a shit team. obviously he hasn't been as good as he was in late 2009 but apart from being injured all the time in 2012 and 2013 I think he has been playing well. the fact that he plays with one of the shittest teams of the last decade shouldn't detract from his individual game

and he always plays excellently in Origin. I think he should be starting on the wing or in the centres.

 

[Big Pete]

It's not as if Thaiday has had a lot of opportunities to impress in the Test arena since 2011 though. In fact, he's only played in two games and they were the instantly forgettable ANZAC test matches.

You can point to Origin but if anything it just justifies his selection further. Thaiday missed Origin 2 last year and it left an obvious impact on the side with Taylor stinking the joint up. Now, Sam didn't have the best Origin 3, his defence in particular was pretty brittle but he proved to be a far more effective option on that fringe than his other players.

I could understand wanting to drop Sam if there were a bunch of players like SBW banging the door down but that isn't the reality. Right now, the best fringe options for Australia are still very inexperienced and can't be counted on just yet in this arena. Thaiday has been.

 

[Unbreakable]

1 - Greg Inglis
2 - Darius Boyd
3 - Michael Jennings
4 - Brent Tate
5 - Jarryd Hayne
6 - Johnathan Thurston
7 - Cooper Cronk
8 - Matt Scott
9 - Cameron Smith (c)
10 - Paul Gallen (vc)
11 - Greg Bird
12 - Nate Myles
13 - Corey Parker

14 - Daly Cherry-Evans
15 - Luke Lewis
16 - Andrew Fifita
17 - James Tamou

That'd be my team.

 

[KingWebcke]

You can point to Origin but if anything it just justifies his selection further. Thaiday missed Origin 2 last year and it left an obvious impact on the side with Taylor stinking the joint up.

That doesn't justify Thaiday's spot at all. all that tells you is that if you drop Thaiday you shouldn't replace him with Taylor, which is hardly rocket science. if the choice was between Thaiday and Taylor I would go with Thaiday but that isn't the situation being presented to Tim Sheens.

Thaiday's play in Origin has been really poor for the last two years. his defence in particular. I don't think it is a particularly compelling case for Thaiday's selection when the best examples of his quality over the last two years are (a) a really good 30 minute patch in Game 2 and (b) the fact that he is less shit than David Taylor.

could understand wanting to drop Sam if there were a bunch of players like SBW banging the door down but that isn't the reality. Right now, the best fringe options for Australia are still very inexperienced and can't be counted on just yet in this arena. Thaiday has been.

There aren't a bunch of players lining up to take his spot, so I'm not violently opposed to his place in the squad. but if he's competing for a spot on the bench, then I think Papalii has him covered.

Papalii has outplayed Thaiday at NRL level over the last 2 seasons and in the limited minutes he got in Origin, I think he showed that he is capable of bringing his strong running game to the higher levels, is good enough defensively and isn't overawed by the occasion. I don't think there is a good reason to think that Thaiday would be able to play better for 30 minutes off the bench than Papalii.

 

[Alec]

Yeah, Papalii struggled a bit in the latter parts of the year, but you can see past the form that he's a better player than Thaiday already. Cordner too. I don't think they'll cost us a game if we blood one of them early, especially as there are other quality players all around them and they can ease into it.

Besides, both Big Papa and Cordner aren't afraid to play in the middle if needed, while Thaiday is like a little baby you can't take off the edge for some reason.

 

[Big Pete]

It wasn't just Taylor though - none of the bench players made a difference either so it showed that his absence had an impact on the team.

I've got nothing against Papalii receiving the nod over Thaiday on the bench. However, I just believe Thaiday's presence in a 24 man squad is justified.

Alec your post makes absolutely no sense given Thaiday played prop for his club and one of his features has always been taking the odd hit up in the middle third.

 

[KingWebcke]

yeah, I don't mind Thaiday in the squad that much. I'm just worried about that fact that he'll inevitably find his way into the 17. especially if Sheens decides to do something like shifting Bird to lock or benching Lewis so Thaiday can start.

 

[Alec]

Alec your post makes absolutely no sense given Thaiday played prop for his club and one of his features has always been taking the odd hit up in the middle third.

Fair enough, I guess it's just the impression he gives me, but I'm probably wrong.

 

[Art Vandelay]

It's a Sheens-coached side so I'm expecting:

1. DCE
2. Jennings
3. Lewis
4. J Morris
5. B Morris
6. Inglis
7. Thurston
8. Papalii
9. Smith
10. Cordner
11. Gallen
12. Fitzhenry in a moderately offensive Thaiday wig
13. Scott
14. Farah (To give Smith a break)
15. Cronk (Can play anywhere)
16. Tate (To cover injuries)
17. Bird (Even Sheens knows to pick at least one bench prop)

 

[Sproj]

Haha I like the Fitzhenry call.