Search results

I don't think he is poor by any means. But I still think AAA and Wright are slightly better at addressing refs. That's not the only part of being a Captain though. Then there's the on-field leadership getting everyone in the team motivated, communicating well, on the same page etc. Then...

Easily the best 7. But doubt he is the best leader. I'd argue even AAA and Wright look like better Captains at there respective clubs.

Agreed. I love it. Same for World Rugby as a whole. Everyone in the top 7 can beat anyone on their day. England, France, Ireland, Wales (maybe not this years Wales), and now Argentina. All these teams versing each other is such a great contest with differing styles.

Hanigan gave away 2 penalties last match he started so maybe not exactly Mr Reliable.

Theory: It must be effort in training. Hangigan seems like the type of bloke who puts in 110%. Being a country bloke probably used to hard work and thrives in those conditions. Probably looks like he has more strength then he does at training since most of it is more effort then the next person...

I disgree. You have no evidence at all that Hanigan is a poor scummaging lock. You could argue MOST hybrid 6/locks in the past have been poor scrummagers at lock (like scott Fardy)... but there is every chance a hybrid 6/lock CAN scrummage. In fact, there is now evidence he can since he did...

He was average the first test but certainly wasn't poor. Wright was very poor on his first bench start but still managed to earn another shot - where he was solid the next. Valetini was also poor on his first start from the bench. I think Samu's first game was better then both Valetini...

The scrum was more then fine when Hanigan was at lock last time. In fact I think Tupou won a scrum penalty when Hanigan was at lock. So no evidence of issue there. Although I do agree that he does not offer much around the park and although improved, is still way off what we are looking for...

Still a bit baffled how Wright and Valetini is favoured over Samu. But no real big criticisms of his selections so far.

Please not Marto!!!!

Makes the decision easy for Rennie then. Would have been very curious to see which way he would have gone if both were fit and healthy.

Rennie said at the start of his tenure that Hooper must earn his spot like the rest of the players. The fact he has dropped so many player for average performances is suggesting he wouldn't hesitate to drop the captain either. Many people believed Cheika had his favourites which he picked on...

I never said he did. So I doubt he will be dropped. I agree on resting for a game. I also very much doubt it will be this weekend, they have had 2 weeks off already and he is very much needed against a firing Argentina. Who will play 6 is really the only big question mark. And the Hodge V JOC (James O'Connor)...

The whole premise of "Hooper won't be dropped he's the Captain" is a bit BS to me. Captains who play shit will be dropped.

Yeh my comment was Rennie not hesitating to drop Hooper on poor form. I didn't mean swapping captain every game. I was more leaning to a situation of several poor performances in a row, with some amazing performances by another 7. Again, doubt it would happen. But I also don't think Hooper's...

I disagee. Sometimes it would be more efficient to look at the opposition first. Let say they start a 10-12 combo with zero caps and barely a super xv season under their belt. Well you sure as hell know what channel you're going to target. So if the team dynamic and strengths are all out wide...

I agree. I doubt Hooper would be dropped by one poor game. 3 poor games in a row then he might. But I also doubt that happening. But I do think if Rennie were facing the Pocock V Hooper dilemma then the Captaincy might be different.

Anyone know much about these blokes?

I like the idea of moving Samu back to 7. With Valetini 6, McCaffrey or some-one else 8.

Or Shaun McMahon.