The Wallabies Thread

[Braveheart81]

The thing that worries me a bit about Hooper being captain is that this might mean the return of Cockahoop. Having a comparative lightweight at 8 just will not work, IMHO.

That's a season away. Let's wait and see what happens.

We need Lopeti Timani to get back to a strong level of form (or Isi Nasairani to be eligible and keep up the form he has shown this season) before it becomes a concern.

The other candidates for the number 8 jersey are hardly heavyweights relative to Pocock.

 

[Brumby Runner]

You're right about the 8s BH. If Timani fails to come up, just who are the options to fill that spot in the RC and EOYT? I do not like the look of a light weight back 3 comprising Hanigan, Hooper, Hardwick. Or even McMahon in any one of the spots if he's even available.

Talk about all the eggs in one basket. It looks to be Lopeti or no-one. Think we'll be wishing Higgers, RHP and Fardy were in the squad before the year is out.

 

[gel]

He's been named as part of the leadership group so my guess is nothing is wrong with the bloke.

Plenty of people seem to be coming from a position that Cheika must or should have been doing everything to find an alternative option to Hooper and take a punt on them.

I think the reality is clearly that Hooper is the best candidate by some distance at this point in time.

Really?

His last tenure as captain of the wallabies was poor, as indicated by their results during his tenure as well as the utter petulant behaviour he displayed during McKenzie's departing conference.

His tenure as captain of the Waratahs has been poor as indicated by their results and lack of any semblance of playing like a team.

At a time when Australian rugby is on its knees, and the ARU push a slogan "we will unite", to name a captain guaranteed to polarise the rugby community is an odd call.

Twice he's been caught telling the referee that his players aren't listening to him.

He is a great individual player on the field, but I believe he is not a very good team player from what I have observed (example - scrums how fast is he to vacate the scrum if it starts to slide backwards forcing the failure, yet has he ever achieved anything like a quick tackle or similar by doing so?).

He is incredibly arrogant in front of the camera and automatically turns a section of the community off (as indicated by the blowback with his appointment).

Given the above, he is always going to be viewed harshly and subject to criticism. His only recourse is to be mindbogglingly successful and shut his critics up.

tldr: giving the captaincy to a guy that has failed twice as a captain and polarises the fanbase is the big punt, giving it to almost anyone else in the team is less risky.

Coleman should have got the gig.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Michael Hooper has fantastic skills, but to my eyes he leaves the pack, at both Tahs and Wallabies levels, almost one man short in the way he plays the game. I think he, or at least the way Cheika is using him, is one of the factors in the decline of the Wallabies in the past couple of years.

After the initial success of the shock tactic of playing Pocock and Hooper together, that combination really didn't have the desired impact in later test matches. And without Pocock in the team, the selected backrow has usually been substantially underweight and unbalanced in the combination of skills required, and more often than not, Hooper has added flair to the backline without having much to offer the pack.

There are very real questions about his ability to lead a side as illustrated in his previous appointments at the Wallabies and at the Tahs.

IMO he should not be the Wallaby captain, and longer term with the return of Pocock, should not even be in the starting Wallabies' side. His value will be seen to be a bench player.

Foley should be the present Wallaby captain until someone else develops (eg Coleman) imo.

 

[Hardtackle]

Couldn't have said it better myself, BR.

The Wallabies won't be a serious power until the obsession with picking him is over.

 

[Braveheart81]

Coleman should have got the gig.

Someone who has captained about 4 or 5 Super Rugby games at most?

I think Coleman could definitely be Wallaby captain material in the future but I think it would be a huge leap to put him in that position now.

 

[Killer]

ye

Couldn't have said it better myself, BR.

The Wallabies won't be a serious power until the obsession with picking him is over.

yeah I could wear Foley, I know its outside the box but I would still like to give Taf a run for the series, he looks very good when controlling the ref at scrum time and surely he would have the teams respect?

 

[Braveheart81]

You're right about the 8s BH. If Timani fails to come up, just who are the options to fill that spot in the RC and EOYT? I do not like the look of a light weight back 3 comprising Hanigan, Hooper, Hardwick. Or even McMahon in any one of the spots if he's even available.

Talk about all the eggs in one basket. It looks to be Lopeti or no-one. Think we'll be wishing Higgers, RHP and Fardy were in the squad before the year is out.

I would have absolutely had RHP in the squad, but Higgers hasn't done anything to suggest he should remain at number 8. Looking forward he would clearly be a far better lineout option than Pocock if he was number 8 but is hardly more physical.

I think Timani is the likely number 8 for the Rugby Championship and if he can't produce the form necessary to keep that spot then it will be McMahon.

I would certainly take McMahon there about Higginbotham.

 

[Braveheart81]

ye

yeah I could wear Foley, I know its outside the box but I would still like to give Taf a run for the series, he looks very good when controlling the ref at scrum time and surely he would have the teams respect?

TPN has no real captaincy experience and still ends up in that same position where he isn't on the field for the last half an hour and Hooper is the captain.

There is clearly a changing of the guard happening in the leadership group. All four of Foley, Coleman, Kerevi and Ala'alatoa are new to that situation this season.

 

[Rock Lobster]

The thing that worries me a bit about Hooper being captain is that this might mean the return of Cockahoop. Having a comparative lightweight at 8 just will not work, IMHO.

Cheika pretty much confirmed this at his presser yesterday when quizzed about Pocock's return.

“I think you have seen how I’ve looked at that situation before,”

 

[Killer]

TPN has no real captaincy experience and still ends up in that same position where he isn't on the field for the last half an hour and Hooper is the captain.

There is clearly a changing of the guard happening in the leadership group. All four of Foley, Coleman, Kerevi and Ala'alatoa are new to that situation this season.

Yeah hear your point, but I would have Foley not Hooper. Also Taf is fit this year, for the Force he has never looked happy coming off and for mine his play hasn't been dropping off at all.

 

[Braveheart81]

Yeah hear your point, but I would have Foley not Hooper. Also Taf is fit this year, for the Force he has never looked happy coming off and for mine his play hasn't been dropping off at all.

At Wallaby level you're hopefully looking at a situation where the reserve is almost as good as the starter.

 

[Killer]

At Wallaby level you're hopefully looking at a situation where the reserve is almost as good as the starter.

yeah understand the tactical reasons, but I think the cultural upside is worth it. As you know I'm not in the Hooper camp for this reason.

 

[Braveheart81]

The whittled down squad to either 33 or 34 players will be announced tomorrow.

 

[No4918]

7/10 kids say Hooper is their favourite player apparently so I'm happy with the call to make him captain.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I would have absolutely had RHP in the squad, but Higgers hasn't done anything to suggest he should remain at number 8. Looking forward he would clearly be a far better lineout option than Pocock if he was number 8 but is hardly more physical.

I think Timani is the likely number 8 for the Rugby Championship and if he can't produce the form necessary to keep that spot then it will be McMahon.

I would certainly take McMahon there about Higginbotham.

In spite of all the fans' criticism of Higgers towards the back end of the season (incl the June test window), I reckon his form over the whole of the season hasn't been too bad. He is playing closer to the breakdown these days and is one of the few forwards who looks like he could break the defense when he attacks down the blind side. Even with, perhaps especially with, McMahon at 8, Higgers would be a far better No 6 option than Hanigan.

And I wonder out loud just why McMahon is even being considered. He is off o/s next year just like a few others who were ruled out of the Wallabies for essentially that reason. And his form for the Rebels after injury return was pretty woeful anyway. Seems to me he doesn't warrant a spot on either of those criteria.

 

[Highlander35]

And his form for the Rebels after injury return was pretty woeful anyway.

In the 2.5 games he played, with 8ish weeks between games 2 & 3?

Everything else is 100% valid tho. Like him, doesn't deserve it on current circumstances

 

[Scrubber2050]

No use mentioning Higgers.
Higgers has played well for the Reds this year but he doesn't play the Cheika style of play. He cannot or does not want to change and Chek is only as flexible as our good Malaysian PM Doctor Mahatmir.

It's like oil and water.

One bloke is a player and the other bloke Coach and sole selector. Even I know who wins that contest (and as it should be).

 

[KOB1987]

And I wonder out loud just why McMahon is even being considered. He is off o/s next year just like a few others who were ruled out of the Wallabies for essentially that reason. And his form for the Rebels after injury return was pretty woeful anyway. Seems to me he doesn't warrant a spot on either of those criteria.

He was named in the squad before he announced his decision to go O/S and the word on the street was Cheika working on him to stay. The whittled down squad gets named tomorrow, let's save the anguish until after that.

 

[upthereds#!]

Cheika wanted Higs to play the in tight enforcer in a combo with Hanigan and Hoops. Everyone knows Higs is world class as a wider play therefore even anyone with half a brain would know it's a poorly balanced combo. Cheikas fault was trying to force higs (a square) into a round hole, because he already has enough squares, and Hanigan hasnt got the body to match his round hole style of play. To me, that's not Higs fault, that's cheikas. Blind freddy could clearly see it was not going to work. You get someone who is EXCELLENT at X, but say he has to do Y, even though that will never work, then punish him because it didn't work. Just let the squares be squares and the circles be circles. To me, Higs is a better square then Dempsey, whereas Timani is a very lonely circle.