Wallaby Watch 2014

[Ruggo]

I'm not a Hooper fan at all BUT if you took the team that was picked who should have been captain ahead of him?

Slipper. That couple of years extra experience could have made all the difference. Keep in mind we were only looking to fill the gap left by Moore's injury. Although not a huge amount of test experience, I would have also considered Fardy. Just on the grounds of maturity.

 

[Tomikin]

Ruggo,

To say a John Eales medalist and Super Rugby winning captain is hardly man love. His leadership at the Wallabies is lacking. He also has the most inexperienced team around him of any captain since Mortlock.

If anything, this talk of Pocock after not playing a full game for 2 years is man love. Pocock is a quality player. He's also very one dimensional.

He played 3 full games

 

[Tomikin]

Hooper's first choice 7 easy Hodgson 2nd rest will fight it out next year.

Can't we leave it there. Poey Gill have the potential to be amazing but kinda like Fardy and Moore now give up ya spot it may well be taken

 

[It is what it is]

Hooper's first choice 7 easy Hodgson 2nd rest will fight it out next year.

Can't we leave it there. Poey Gill have the potential to be amazing but kinda like Fardy and Moore now give up ya spot it may well be taken

Do you speak in shorthand too?

 

[Viking]

Can only play one style.

Hooper has varied between focusing more on scavenging, and more on ball running throughout his career.

Fardy has done the same in his time. Ran a lot more late last year and has been more prominent at the breakdown this year.

I'm not getting into an argument over who is better as a player, but I am stating that Pocock cannot really vary his game very much.

Your kidding right? He has played the same running game his entire career. This is why he gets so much back-lash on these forums.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Well considering he made more pilfers than any other test player in 2013, he must be ok at it.

 

[Train Without a Station]

But that also comes back to a common point of mine. The augmented view of the Australian public of the role of a 7. We consider that our 7 doesn't pilfer enough, yet he pilfered more than any other international player in 2013.

Considering we are not the best team in the world doing something different, you must admit it's possible that we (Australian rugby fans) are wrong about this.

 

[Viking]

Your first point was Hooper varied his focus on scavenging. I never said he was a poor scavenger. But it's clear he is more focused on his running game.

Yes it is impressive stats for some-one who's main focus is not scavenging. Very impressive actually.

Yet hitting rucks, tracking the ball, being the first player into rucks is a different story.

I do agree, we need to change our view on the role as a seven because currently Hooper is not what we are use too.

I'm slowly coming around, but the return of Pocock next year will be interesting and could put a spanner in the works.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Slipper. That couple of years extra experience could have made all the difference. Keep in mind we were only looking to fill the gap left by Moore's injury. Although not a huge amount of test experience, I would have also considered Fardy. Just on the grounds of maturity.

I reckon there's a bit of hindsight in slipper: he has been a revelation this year and I do very much like the cut of his jib.
Fardy would have no more on field authority than Hooper has had - he might have done a better job because the cut of his jib is impressive too.
But both benefit from not having to front the media and answer repetitive, shallow questions with enthusiasm.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Your first point was Hooper varied his focus on scavenging. I never said he was a poor scavenger. But it's clear he is more focused on his running game.

Yes it is impressive stats for some-one who's main focus is not scavenging. Very impressive actually.

Yet hitting rucks, tracking the ball, being the first player into rucks is a different story.

I do agree, we need to change our view on the role as a seven because currently Hooper is not what we are use too.

I'm slowly coming around, but the return of Pocock next year will be interesting and could put a spanner in the works.

Personally I prefer Hooper. But Pocock could in fact be the best selection.

I actually think Pocock is more of a risk, as to play his best game he relies on lenient officiating, but also to make a real impact at the ruck you rely on poor support, or technique from the opposition. No matter how good a player is, if the attacking team runs, supports, and rucks with perfect technique, you will never turn the ball over.

But like anything, selections are calculated risks. The consideration needs to consider what is the impact when that risk pays off? In the case of Pocock, it certainly is a big impact I agree.

 

[FilthRugby]

Sorta getting a bit tired of old Wallaby coaches adding their two cents worth in. Jones still does it, now Dingo Deans. Just let Cheika get on with things.

 

[qwerty51]

Sorta getting a bit tired of old Wallaby coaches adding their two cents worth in. Jones still does it, now Dingo Deans. Just let Cheika get on with things.

It only happens in Aus rugby too.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Tread lightly through the Hooper man love?

Hooper will be captain next week against Wales. Cheika will be the third Wallabies coach to prefer Hooper to Hodgson.

Suggesting that Hooper should be and will continue to be the Wallabies 7 hardly has anything to do with man love. It's just a reality of form and ability.

The return of Pocock is pure speculation right now. He's been out for a long time and will face an enormous battle to make the RWC squad.

Courage of my convictions. I truly believe Poey will be fit for next year and he will take back the starting No 7 for the Wallabies. Until then, Hooper is the man.

 

[Braveheart81]

I'm not going to say that I hope Hooper loses his spot but in reality, the Wallabies need more players who are consistently amongst the team's best performers being challenged for their spots.

It's the only way we'll become a better team on a regular basis.

We need to be leaving out players who are excellent test players not looking at some positions and particularly our bench and thinking gee... that wouldn't even be that threatening at Super Rugby level.

 

[fatprop]

I think Pocock will need to improve his attack to return to starting

 

[Brumby Runner]

Can only play one style.

Hooper has varied between focusing more on scavenging, and more on ball running throughout his career.

Fardy has done the same in his time. Ran a lot more late last year and has been more prominent at the breakdown this year.

I'm not getting into an argument over who is better as a player, but I am stating that Pocock cannot really vary his game very much.

TWAS here's an instance I disagree with you. Certainly, Pocock's strength is at the tackle and turning over ball. But he does have pretty good attacking skills as well. I can certainly remember him scoring tries for the Force in his early days, some of which were through heavy traffic that many others wouldn't have been able to score. More recently at the Brumbies he was developing into a very good link between forwards and backs before his injuries put paid to his last two seasons. He is a very good all round No 7 and an exceptional one in defense. As I said earlier, in form I have no doubt he will take back the Wallabies' No 7 jersey next year.

 

[fatprop]

TWAS here's an instance I disagree with you. Certainly, Pocock's strength is at the tackle and turning over ball. But he does have pretty good attacking skills as well. I can certainly remember him scoring tries for the Force in his early days, some of which were through heavy traffic that many others wouldn't have been able to score. More recently at the Brumbies he was developing into a very good link between forwards and backs before his injuries put paid to his last two seasons. He is a very good all round No 7 and an exceptional one in defense. As I said earlier, in form I have no doubt he will take back the Wallabies' No 7 jersey next year.

One of the early comments after his signing from White was that he needed to expand his attacking/ball playing skills.

His tries for the Force were mostly one metre out stuff

 

[cyclopath]

That's not true. A few people have said in the past that Hodgson was a better player than Hooper only to be drowned out in a wave of man love. Hooper has been nothing short of inadequate as a Wallaby captain but not really taken to task because of man love. His decision making has been woeful, he don't seem to have the attention of his team on the field and he don't have the respect of the referees that have officiated Wallaby tests. There has not been a huge amount of rational thinking in assessing Michael Hooper.

Let's put this on the record from me. I have not said he is a bad player, just over-hyped. There are parts of his game he does incredibly such as a very high and impactful work rate. He is a quality ball runner with a highly impressive change of pace and powerful leg drive. He has a low center of gravity and uses it incredibly well to his advantage. He does things that make one admire how he can punch above his weight.

I also don't see it as a cheap jibe but rather an expression of what I feel is the truth. I know damn well that I am better than a cheap jibe and I would like to think my conduct on this forum over a period of time is a reflection of that.

What a bunch of crap. Yours is a considered opinion but others' is not??
It's a cheap denigration of someone else's opinion.
"You like Hooper, must be man-love" - funnily enough a lot of his fellow players must be besotted with him to vote him highly in player awards. Not to mention coaches like Cheika, Fisher and McKenzie - biggest hype-merchants of all, I guess.
Just like "You criticise Player X - you're a hater". How much do we hear this term bandied around? I find it equally ridiculous.
It's dismissing another perfectly valid opinion by trivialising it as a blinded and poorly formed viewpoint. People can admire or critique players in degrees, and it isn't all blinded fanaticism.
Why not just state your case and leave it at that?

 

[Brumby Runner]

One of the early comments after his signing from White was that he needed to expand his attacking/ball playing skills.

His tries for the Force were mostly one metre out stuff

Could be a case of selective memory on the part of one of us.

 

[qwerty51]

Has the form of Horwill not taught you guys anything. Pocock will not return the player he once was. I'd love him to but it won't happen.