Wales vs Australia, 5 November 2016, (1:30am 6 November AEDT) @ Millenium Stadium

[PeterK]

There seems to be a recurring theme to your posts that you want any option that doesn't involve Hooper starting.

It's arguable that the pilfering player off the bench can have a greater impact because they get to play against tiring players who might be slightly slower or less effective with their cleanouts.

Sure.

I like the way the AB's do the split with Todd/Cane starting for breakdown focus and in tight play and A Savea to pick up the tempo.

Look what happened when Hooper started Todd had a field day since Hooper's strength is not the ruck.
Warburton is out for Wales and Tipuric will be starting who is a ruck monkey.

 

[Scrubber2050]

There seems to be a recurring theme to your posts that you want any option that doesn't involve Hooper starting.

It's arguable that the pilfering player off the bench can have a greater impact because they get to play against tiring players who might be slightly slower or less effective with their cleanouts.

Knowing Chek's history and selections from the past he will chose his team. There are no other selectors. In his mind he will put his best 15 on the park to try and grab an early win to get the tour off to a good start and therefore build some confidence within the group.

The Welsh will bring it to us, no question, no doubt. Personally I think we will be vulnerable to the onslaught.

Pocock is on tour. He's the world's best 7, playing 8. Fucking use him in all tests. He's got a year off to rest up after that.

Hoops at 7, Poey at 8 and Timani on bench.

 

[Braveheart81]

Look what happened when Hooper started Todd had a field day since Hooper's strength is not the ruck.
Warburton is out for Wales and Tipuric will be starting who is a ruck monkey.

It rarely seems to be the case though that one 7 is nullified by the other one. It will be a rarity that the player needing to clean out the pilferer is the opposition 7.

There was a moment early in Bledisloe 3 where Todd won a penalty at the breakdown when we were hot on attack (from memory it was when Arnold missed a clean out). I remember reading a comment on the forum from someone along the lines of "that is what a real 7 does."

The only reason we were down that end of the field is because Hooper made a linebreak.

 

[dru]

Knowing Chek's history and selections from the past he will chose his team. There are no other selectors. In his mind he will put his best 15 on the park to try and grab an early win to get the tour off to a good start and therefore build some confidence within the group.

The Welsh will bring it to us, no question, no doubt. Personally I think we will be vulnerable to the onslaught.

Pocock is on tour. He's the world's best 7, playing 8. Fucking use him in all tests. He's got a year off to rest up after that.

Hoops at 7, Poey at 8 and Timani on bench.

Agree with this, but what are the jumpers? Coleman & Arnold fine, but surely we need at least a third. I'd take Mumm for sure if available (starting to sound like Cheika), Fardy needs to be considered against Timani in the mean time.

 

[PeterK]

It rarely seems to be the case though that one 7 is nullified by the other one. It will be a rarity that the player needing to clean out the pilferer is the opposition 7.

There was a moment early in Bledisloe 3 where Todd won a penalty at the breakdown when we were hot on attack (from memory it was when Arnold missed a clean out). I remember reading a comment on the forum from someone along the lines of "that is what a real 7 does."

The only reason we were down that end of the field is because Hooper made a linebreak.

On attack the openside is not there for a clear out, because he is quick he is there to protect the ball, to be there first before the other 7 not standing wide waiting for the ball so he can run it.
Pocock protects the ball better on attack and steals the ball better on defence.
Agree the locks and no 6/8 are there for the big clear out.
If Hooper is first over the ball then Todd could not have stolen so many.

 

[PeterK]

Agree with this, but what are the jumpers? Coleman & Arnold fine, but surely we need at least a third. I'd take Mumm for sure if available (starting to sound like Cheika), Fardy needs to be considered against Timani in the mean time.

Haven't we learned our lessons yet?

I really do not agree. Timani is a must to start to be a ball carrier in tight and get over the advantage line. Also to drive back their big ball carriers from making easy metres up the middle.

Also adds to the lineout.

Pooper must not be used.

My weak preference is Pocock to start but ok with Hooper. Then the 6 should be Fardy and the 8 Timani. No McMahon no Pooper starting.

It is balanced and does not have obvious weaknesses to be exploited.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Agree with this, but what are the jumpers? Coleman & Arnold fine, but surely we need at least a third. I'd take Mumm for sure if available (starting to sound like Cheika), Fardy needs to be considered against Timani in the mean time.

I don't think that has been an issue in the past. Chek will select someone, anyone to facilitate the continuation of the "pooper" or a variation of it.

 

[Viking]

There seems to be a recurring theme to your posts that you want any option that doesn't involve Hooper starting.

It's arguable that the pilfering player off the bench can have a greater impact because they get to play against tiring players who might be slightly slower or less effective with their cleanouts.

Hooper is also a pilfering player so that works for him off the bench too - but his impact on attack will have more impact from the bench.

I like the pilferer focused to start so we understand how the ref interprets the breakdown and his effectiveness that follows. Poey coming on in the last 30mins has less time to work this out and potentially carries the risk of giving away penalties late in the game - which I think is the worst time to give away penalties in close games.

Also if Poey's effectiveness is limited due to ref interpretation he can be subbed early and swapped with Hooper. If he is carving it up then we can go with the Pooper.

So I'd much rather see Poey start and Hooper come from the bench. Actually I'd like to see him them rotated cos they are both good but at full strength I'd lean towards Pocock for the reasons above.

 

[Braveheart81]

On attack the openside is not there for a clear out, because he is quick he is there to protect the ball, to be there first before the other 7 not standing wide waiting for the ball so he can run it.
Pocock protects the ball better on attack and steals the ball better on defence.
Agree the locks and no 6/8 are there for the big clear out.
If Hooper is first over the ball then Todd could not have stolen so many.

That's not the way we play though and it's not the way most teams play these days.

Players have their zones when the team is in possession of the ball (for instance we tend to have our 7 patrolling the right edge).

It is generally not the gameplan that they just chase the ball around the park.

The reality is that the Wallabies won a greater percentage of their breakdown ball in that match than the All Blacks did.

There is no doubt that Pocock is better at the breakdown than Hooper. Regardless of who is on the field though, securing the breakdown by making an effective cleanout isn't necessarily their job depending on where it happens.

 

[Viking]

It rarely seems to be the case though that one 7 is nullified by the other one. It will be a rarity that the player needing to clean out the pilferer is the opposition 7.

There was a moment early in Bledisloe 3 where Todd won a penalty at the breakdown when we were hot on attack (from memory it was when Arnold missed a clean out). I remember reading a comment on the forum from someone along the lines of "that is what a real 7 does."

The only reason we were down that end of the field is because Hooper made a linebreak.

It's not about nullifying the other one's strength. It's about being equally effective at turnovers/forcing penalties.

Todd will still win his turnovers, but Hooper should "nullify" that by also winning turnovers / slowing down ball. 1 turnover made by Todd can be cancelled out by 1 turnover made by Hooper.

He didn't win nearly as much ball and if Todd is having that much success at the breakdown I don't see any reason why Hooper/Pocock can't either - maybe the All Blacks are more accurate at cleans outs but I don't think that was the case in Bled 3.

 

[Braveheart81]

It's not about nullifying the other one's strength. It's about being equally effective at turnovers/forcing penalties.

Todd will still win his turnovers, but Hooper should "nullify" that by also winning turnovers / slowing down ball. 1 turnover made by Todd can be cancelled out by 1 turnover made by Hooper.

That's surely an overly simplistic way of looking at things.

The effectiveness of a player isn't down to one statistic and whether that player has more of that statistic than their opposite number.

As was said a couple of posts up, that first forced penalty by Todd came off the back of a linebreak by Hooper.

Those are both important stats to a team.

We had significantly more possession than the All Blacks in that game so invariably they will win more breakdown penalties/turnovers because they have a lot more opportunities.

 

[PeterK]

There is no doubt that Pocock is better at the breakdown than Hooper. Regardless of who is on the field though, securing the breakdown by making an effective cleanout isn't necessarily their job depending on where it happens.

I clearly stated it was not the 7's job to do a cleanout, did I not?

I said it was his job to be over the ball first protecting it from being stolen. It was the job of the locks and 6 and 8 to do the cleanouts.

On defence it is his job to do pilfers.

Next time please read what I have read.

 

[Viking]

That's surely an overly simplistic way of looking at things.

The effectiveness of a player isn't down to one statistic and whether that player has more of that statistic than their opposite number.

As was said a couple of posts up, that first forced penalty by Todd came off the back of a linebreak by Hooper.

Those are both important stats to a team.

We had significantly more possession than the All Blacks in that game so invariably they will win more breakdown penalties/turnovers because they have a lot more opportunities.

Yes it is over-simplistic. I do agree on attack and cleaning out rucks etc. they probably have different roles.

But I think both Hooper (especially when the Pooper is not on the field, or Fardy) has a primary job to make turnovers/force penalties. Both Hooper and Todd share that role for their respective teams. (as well as other differing roles)

So in terms of turnovers forced I think its quite reasonable to compare the two.

At least in my view.

 

[the coach]

So we get to watch that rugby league powerhouse, Scotland, playing Australia, NZ and England live on FTA, but no Wallaby Tests. Well done ARU --- how do you expect to lift the profile of rugby v league if you can't even get a possible Grand Slam tour on FTA?

 

[Braveheart81]

So we get to watch that rugby league powerhouse, Scotland, playing Australia, NZ and England live on FTA, but no Wallaby Tests. Well done ARU --- how do you expect to lift the profile of rugby v league if you can't even get a possible Grand Slam tour on FTA?

Just to clarify, the ARU has zero control over the rights for these matches.

 

[PeterK]

So we get to watch that rugby league powerhouse, Scotland, playing Australia, NZ and England live on FTA, but no Wallaby Tests. Well done ARU --- how do you expect to lift the profile of rugby v league if you can't even get a possible Grand Slam tour on FTA?

Rugby is far more popular in the world so the cost of the rights to these matches is a lot more. Fox did not win them BEIN did. Fox is paying them for the right to broadcast it on fox like it does EPL.
For CH10 the cost was too much. When Fox wins the right it probably onsells it for a lot less to CH10.

League on the other hand has little interest around the world so for CH 9 to buy the rights to show it does not cost much at all.

That is the trouble with Rugby being so much more popular i.e a true intl sport.

 

[the coach]

Just to clarify, the ARU has zero control over the rights for these matches.

Sure, but they do sell the rights to cover the Rugby Championship, The Bledisloe Cup and other inbound tests and therefore could include, as a condition, that the successful bidder has to also cover the spring tour.

 

[USARugger]

Sure, but they do sell the rights to cover the Rugby Championship, The Bledisloe Cup and other inbound tests and therefore could include, as a condition, that the successful bidder has to also cover the spring tour.

And they'd probably be told to get fucked

 

[the coach]

And they'd probably be told to get fucked

Maybe, but I wonder if they tried?

 

[the coach]

BTW, according to the ARU, beIN are only showing the Wales, Ireland and Scotland matches at this point.