Bledisloe 1 - Saturday 18 August 2018 - ANZ Stadium, Sydney

[Brumby Runner]

In the Wallaby pattern the 13 rarely defends at 13 (usually at 12 off structured situations). Chieka usually opts for a winger who plays a pure wing role on attack, but deals with the defensive burden of the 13 channel.

I think they do this to shuffle Foley and Beale into more opportune situations where they defend edge. Less attritional I guess.

The problem with that pattern has always been that the winger invariably is defending on his lonesome against a two or three player overlap. Both Speight and Koroibete have suffered that fate on numerous occasions.

I think though that the pattern has been changed somewhat this year with more of the backline actually defending in their own spots. It really is an indictment on the players who have to be protected from one half of the game. If they cannot defend to the required level then they are only half rugby players and not fit to represent the country. Let them show that they are capable by not hiding them, and if they're not then piss them off.

 

[Bandar]

Must have the two best (most attacking) players on the field at once, even when it means moving the best in the world in the 10 spot to 12.

I think the best 10 in the world probably isn't going to make the 23

 

[Dan54]

The likely side will be something like:

01. J.Moody
02. C.Taylor
03. O.Franks
04. B.Retallick
05. S.Whitelock
06. L.Squire
07. S.Cane
08. K.Read (C)
09. A.Smith
10. B.Barrett
11. R.Ioane
12. N.Laumape
13. R.Crotty
14. B.Smith
15. J.Barrett

16. N.Harris
17. K.Tu'inukuafe
18. O.Tu'ungafasi
19. S.Barrett
20. J.Hemopo/S.Frizell/L.Whitelock
21. TJ.Perenara
22. A.Lienert-Brown
23. D.McKenzie

Which is, of course, different to what I'd go for, particularly in the backs.

As Williams is the, apparent, preferred second-five, I've plonked his crash ball replacement there on the assumption that's what they want. But they could equally have Lienert-Brown starting with Laumape on the bench. I'd be surprised and delighted if Goodhue makes an appearance, but I'm not holding out much hope there. Injuries aside, Mo'unga is a snowballs chance in hell of making the bench because of some airy-fairy excuse making for the McKenzie vanity project.

Reckon Crotty will be 12 with either ALB or Goodhue at 13, also Naholo might make it in 14, Smith 15, and not sure where Jordie will fit in. Otherwise I see it pretty well the same zer0, I reckon the forwards pick themselves. I reckon Mounga will get either bench spot or starting against Pumas!

 

[Derpus]

Is $70 dollars for the upper tier at ANZ worth it or would i need binoculars?

 

[Quick Hands]

Is $70 dollars for the upper tier at ANZ worth it or would i need binoculars?

You'll be a long way back. I sat there for the Super Rugby final in 2014 - at least you are side on though.

 

[Quick Hands]

Manly can’t parachute him in for this weekend’s game?

I'm sure that Hooper would love nothing more.

 

[Quick Hands]

Hooper is the fittest bloke out, if anyone can make it work he can.

Regardless we have Samu on the bench who is a similar player if he cant go the full 80.

Hooper could play 160 and not miss a beat. He's like the energiser bunny.

 

[fatprop]

From Twitter

​

Iain Payten‏Verified account @iainpayten
FollowingFollowing

@iainpayten​

More
One hour after his five-year contract was announced and Michael Hooper is out doing 50s x plenty to be ready for the Bledisloe. That's why.

 

[Dan54]

I think what he is doing 3 years after signing a 5 year contract is what we are all asking!

 

[Joe Blow]

I think what he is doing 3 years after signing a 5 year contract is what we are all asking!

And who else will have come through. It’s not as if we are now, or have ever been, short of decent 7s. No question Hooper is a very good player, but so is Pocock and many would choose him ahead of Hooper if they were competing for the same spot.
Makes no sense to give any player a 5 year contract. There is absolutely no need. If he is good enough he will stick around and if not it allows another player to come through locally. He already qualifies for the Wallabies under the Giteau rule.
Not sure what they are on at RA.

 

[Wilson]

Think you'll find the fact that he's captain and has been for years already is a big part of it. That makes him much harder to replace, even with a backlog of 7s. Clearly looks like a plan to build through the next to world cups around his leadership on and off the field.

 

[Braveheart81]

I'd bet there is a 3rd party component as there has been with other top dollar Wallaby contracts. If one of the sponsors has kicked in a component of Hooper's contract for 5 years then that is great.

He's got a squeaky clean character, he's a long term Wallaby captain and will play a lot of tests. There's significant value there for all parties.

Clearly there's risk involved but he'll also be an important senior player still with years left at the point we lose Pocock, Beale, Genia, Folau etc.

We have a bunch of younger guys in this team but Hooper's experience level is off the charts relative to others around his age (26). Our other very experienced players are a chunk older. This team will need experience carrying through in 2021 onwards when a lot of the current core of the squad are gone.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Joe Blow]

I guess it’s a done deal now.
It really reflects a lack of confidence in our own rugby systems by RA.
We will see how it pans out over time.

 

[Up the Guts]

I guess it’s a done deal now.
It really reflects a lack of confidence in our own rugby systems by RA.
We will see how it pans out over time.

Is it a lack of confidence or is Hooper such a valuable commodity that we want him to stick around? A guy who spends his own time helping others to improve like Hooper did with Latu is exactly the sort of player who should be on a five year contract. Also helps that he’s the fittest man in Rugby with almost no injury record so he’s likely to still be competing in five years time. There’s also a tendency to diminish his playing quality just because Pocock is a freak at the breakdown. Hooper is always compared to Pocock in terms of his inferiority at the breakdown but is seldom measured against Pocock in the areas he excels.

 

[cyclopath]

I guess it’s a done deal now.
It really reflects a lack of confidence in our own rugby systems by RA.
We will see how it pans out over time.

If RA plays hardball and undervalues players, offering them low contracts, what do you think happens, in the context of European dollars / Euro / Pounds?
If they leave, people whine that RA / franchises have fucked up. If they pay market value or over, RA / franchises have fucked up.
You seem to want the ideal where RA offers low contracts and magically players say "thanks for even considering us" and we keep all our top flight players for nix. Won't happen.

 

[Joe Blow]

If RA plays hardball and undervalues players, offering them low contracts, what do you think happens, in the context of European dollars / Euro / Pounds?
If they leave, people whine that RA / franchises have fucked up. If they pay market value or over, RA / franchises have fucked up.
You seem to want the ideal where RA offers low contracts and magically players say "thanks for even considering us" and we keep all our top flight players for nix. Won't happen.

I'm not suggesting he should not be contracted. The problem is the length of the contract. He does not need a 5 yr term. Sign him for two or three years and see how he goes. What if he suffers an injury that reduces his ability to perform or if his attitude changes? Or as I said, if someone better comes along?
There is zero benefit in a 5 yr contract in rugby except for the player.

 

[Joe Blow]

Not to mention that we will most likely have a change of coach after the RWC and RA would have already decided who should be captain and starting 7 for the length of the new coaches tenure.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Coulda sworn I clicked on the Bledisloe 1 thread not the Michael Hooper's New Contract one.......

 

[cyclopath]

Not to mention that we will most likely have a change of coach after the RWC and RA would have already decided who should be captain and starting 7 for the length of the new coaches tenure.

You really believe “Wallaby Captain” was inked on the contract for 5 years? Being a bit silly.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Brumby Runner]

Very few if any of the criticisms of the contract are about the value placed on Hooper. Though that is the one element the defenders try to limit the debate to. It is simply the five year duration that most, perhaps all, are critical of.