Has your Origin team changed after that series?

Yeah I've replaced Waterhouse with Watmough (I'm still sceptical of him TBH, particularly in defence, but you can't drop him after that sort of game) and Wallace with either Barrett or Kimmorley; I don't care which one.

I knew before the series that there was every chance I'd want Wallace gone by the end of it, but I never thought I'd actually want Watmough in the team.

 

Oh, and adding to this, I think Kite's played and failed enough times to declared the bloke an Origin failure providing we have players actually performing well at club level to take his place, so I'd have Douglas in his place.

 

While the selectors would have obviously had reservations about changing the captain mid-series, I don't think it'll bother them too much at the start of a new series, particularly given we lost and Gidley was poor. If he's not at fullback he shouldn't be anywhere near the team, IMO.

I was kind of 50/50 about whether I wanted Gidley or Stewart at fullback before this series, but while I think a lot of the criticism of Gidley is over-the-top, and that people suggesting that Hayne, Patten or McKinnon are better options should be shot, Gidley was poor this year and Stewart should be ahead of him if he's fit and.. free. Gidley's ability to play positions other than fullback is vastly over-rated and although I know the selectors disagree with me about that, I don't think he'll be in the team next year unless Stewart is in gaol or Wing goes to rugby union.

 

Don't think they'd drop the captain mid-series, but as I said, given we lost and Gidley was poor, I don't think changing the captain for a new series will worry them too much. They'll probably talk it up as a positive "cleansing" thing or something.

 

You just made a borderline call saying that someone was better than a Newcastle player and a Canberra player. Julian and Fungus have smoke coming out their ears AWS.

 

There's no doubt that Soward has looked better in attack this year than Campese and Mullen, but you have to take it into context. It's a lot easier to look good playing on the back of a platform set by Michael Weyman and Justin Poore who are organised by Ben Hornby and throwing balls to Matt Cooper and Brett Morris.. than trying to do so playing out of position on the back of Mark Taufua and Chris Houston, or with the support of Marc Herbert and the expert hole-running of Nigel Plum and Jarrod Croker.

We saw what Soward was like in an average team last year - he was quite Mullen-like in his inconsistency. The Dragons weren't exactly shit either; they were just average. Campese has produced performances similar to what Soward is now in a much worse team than what Soward has to support him at the moment.

And then, of course, there's defence. Contrary to popular belief I don't think Soward's defence is categorically not good enough to play Origin, but he's a below average defender and that certainly counts against him when you put him up against Campese who is one of the best tacklers in the game.

What a lot of NSW supporters fail to realise is that Origin isn't about how good you've looked this year or what your 'form' is like; it's about how good you actually are and what you can do against good opposition in a game where everyone's weaknesses will be exemplified. You don't get a head start on the scoreboard for having lots of players from well-performing teams in your side and you can't paper over technical flaws.

 

He's playing well in a team that is better than the opposition significantly more times than not. That description doesn't fit the New South Wales team at the moment.

That's why it's relevant. It's not the players he's playing with as an absolute concept; but the players he's playing with in comparison to their opposition.