Bledisloe 2 - Saturday 25th August 2018 - Eden Park, Auckland

[dru]

Didn't realise we picked the national team based on how much they earn - Quade should be starting

It isn't that simple, but yes it would be wise to avoid the Quade debacle. You can criticise the contract or if it happens, the (non) selection, but either way there is a disconnect behind paying someone $6.0m and leaving said person on the bench.

 

[Bandar]

It isn't that simple, but yes it would be wise to avoid the Quade debacle. You can criticise the contract or if it happens, the (non) selection, but either way there is a disconnect behind paying someone $6.0m and leaving said person on the bench.

I agree there is a disconnect, we have Hoops for the next 5 years and I reckon Pocock for next year so it probably won't be a problem after the world cup. Either way we have to pick our strongest team available & currently that is both out them but if everyone is available and playing to potential (in my opinion) Hoops is on the bench.

 

[Gnostic]

So now we're getting all sorts of calls to play people out of their natural positions again. Beale to 15, Izzy to 13, Rodda to 6. It just goes from ridiculous to worse.



DHP is a fullback and had one of the better games there in Bledisloe 2. Leave him there.



Beale and Foley are weaknesses in defense, whether front on in the line or shifting around to wings and or fullback. Is there any wonder that the Wallabies can't transition from defense to attack on those few occasions the ABs turn the ball over?



Folau might be a good bet at wing, but has shown nothing at 13 when tried by the Tahs, and in fact was played pretty much at 13 in attack in Bledisloe 1, to no real effect.



Rodda is a lock, and like most locks is fairly ponderous in the open. He would not make a 6 in a month of Sundays. Tui has some promise but again is slow around the ground which is a weakness from him. I don't think Samu has shown much in the tests he's played and is not a No 8. Timu would be a better option there.



Arnold is a better fit to start with Coleman, and then Rodda can come off the bench. Tui despite his lack of pace is our best No 6 atm but will be challenged once Dempsey and Valetini are fit and Naisarani is eligible.



The backline must be stabilised in defense with all players defending in their spots. No more swapping around in defense. To'omua needs to come into the starting lineup at 10 or 12. Either or both of Foley and Beale must make way or we'll always have huge holes in the defensive dyke. I would be open to Beale at 10 and To'omua at 12, but more radically perhaps, To'omua at 10 and Meakes at 12. Looks like Hodge at 13 until one of the Ks returns. Izzy considered for wing but nowhere else. Koroibete to come out until he learns to control himself in his kick chases etc. Misses too many tackles by not having the smarts to adjust when the runner puts a step on.



I have been wondering too, just what lineup we'll go with in the back row if and when Naisarani, Dempsey and Valetini come good, say from early next year. If Dempsey regains his No 6 spot, and Naisarani (from March) proves to be the No 8 we are all wanting him to be, who, out of Hooper and Pocock, then go to the bench or be left out altogether? Hard to see the $6m man being left out, but that's exactly what should happen. RA and Tahs fans must be hoping Pocock will leave after the RWC so that the contract can be justified.

I'd drop Beale from the squad altogether, I don't see the brilliant attacking game he has every 6-8 tests as being worth the defensive frailty he brings for the rest of the time. Foley on the other hand is a hard worker in defence and has a good record of making some wonderful covering tackles over the last few years, probably more covering tackles than Beale makes in positional direct tackles in a season.

We can opine about the lack of balance and the need for players to fulfil the core skills for the positions they are playing in, but judging from past performance and comments made to the media, however I don't think we will see any significant change made to personnel or tactics (except they may get some in attack that does not resemble the Macqueen coached Wallabies from 1998).

 

[Gnostic]

Playing no mistake rugby is what got Deans sacked

​

What a load of shit.

Deans got the arse because he talked gobbledegook, had no clear logic in selection or game plans and the results were shite. There was also the significant pressure from a successful Reds season which not only got the results but played great rugby doing it.

Chieka has survived this long because the entirety of the Australian Pro game is a skid mark on the porcelain bowl.

 

[jimmydubs]

I agree there is a disconnect, we have Hoops for the next 5 years and I reckon Pocock for next year so it probably won't be a problem after the world cup. Either way we have to pick our strongest team available & currently that is both out them but if everyone is available and playing to potential (in my opinion) Hoops is on the bench.

Pretty discouraging for LFG to ever bother to come back to these shores when you've gone and done this. It's a good contract for hoops it's a dog for RA.

 

[Brumby Runner]

And the younger No 7s coming through, Hardwick? Wright?

 

[mark_s]

Nice piece of analysis at the rugbypass on the gaps between the two teams and why the Wallabies are susceptible to turnover ball:

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/analysis-one-passage-play-sums-differences-blacks-wallabies

 

[Strewthcobber]

And the younger No 7s coming through, Hardwick? Wright?

Hopefully inspired to chase a $6m/5 year contract one day?

 

[Tomikin]

Hardwick and Wright aint in Hoopers class.. Its a long deal but his worth the money.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[Brumby Runner]

If we ever get a coach who has the balls to select Pocock at 7 and wanting a replacement 7 on the bench, then it won't be long before comparisons start to be drawn between Hooper, who does not play like a 7 at all, and the best of the rest, probably Hardwick in a year or two.

 

[Joe Blow]

Hardwick and Wright aint in Hoopers class.. Its a long deal but his worth the money.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

He may be worth that money annually right now but there is no solid reason to give him an extended contract, or at least the cons outweigh the pros. It is disheartening for these young players and many other coaches may see him as a backup to Pocock on the bench. He also qualifies for the Wallabies through the Giteau law already. He may also lose form or be inured some time in the next few years, God forbid.
A standard 1-2 year deal would have been fine. Who knows what the rugby landscape will look like in a couple of years?

 

[dru]

He may be worth that money annually right now but there is no solid reason to give him an extended contract, or at least the cons outweigh the pros. It is disheartening for these young players and many other coaches may see him as a backup to Pocock on the bench. He also qualifies for the Wallabies through the Giteau law already. He may also lose form or be inured some time in the next few years, God forbid.
A standard 1-2 year deal would have been fine. Who knows what the rugby landscape will look like in a couple of years?

When it is aid that Hooper is worth $6.0m I wonder what the metric is inn the word "worth"?

One metric I play with is comparing to the average pro player in Aus. Maybe a starting Super player in year 2 is on say $120k over 5 years of success may increase to say $250K? If that is close to right I'm having trouble with the metric. You could add a broader appeal marketing value but I'm not sure how that stacks for Hooper vs Beale or Folau.

 

[Derpus]

When it is aid that Hooper is worth $6.0m I wonder what the metric is inn the word "worth"?

One metric I play with is comparing to the average pro player in Aus. Maybe a starting Super player in year 2 is on say $120k over 5 years of success may increase to say $250K? If that is close to right I'm having trouble with the metric. You could add a broader appeal marketing value but I'm not sure how that stacks for Hooper vs Beale or Folau.

Don't know about union but league the average is 300k.

Edit: google tells me average is 220k.

So a million a year broken up between super club, country and third party doesnt seem crazy.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[wamberal]

Hooper has obviously been adjudged to be indispensable to the Wobbs. Therefore he simply has to be paid somewhere fairly close to his market value.


(Note: I do not believe that he is indispensable, but then again, I am not making the decisions.)

 

[Joe Blow]

Why not a two year deal to see him through the RWC and then look at it again?
The Wallabies have not been setting the world on fire since the last RWC and he has been front and centre throughout that period. I’m not suggesting it’s his fault but he has been a big part of it.

 

[Boof1050]

Probably a good way to test his worth is a debate about how many of the top national teams around the world that Hooper would get picked for besides the Wallabies. I certainly seem to think that most of the coaches of those teams given the choice would take Pocock over Hooper in the 7 position.

 

[dru]

Don't know about union but league the average is 300k.

Edit: google tells me average is 220k.

So a million a year broken up between super club, country and third party doesnt seem crazy.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Interesting thought. I suspect the $220k as an average wage is distorting things due to the small number of very high cost players. The earnings of your average player would be less.

Still - add the international season to the Super season and the additional games. Double those earnings to $440k for the extra content. It is still a big gap for any metric. I think.

This is not Hooper specific BTW, any big name signing hits the same issues.

 

[Derpus]

Interesting thought. I suspect the $220k as an average wage is distorting things due to the small number of very high cost players. The earnings of your average player would be less.

Still - add the international season to the Super season and the additional games. Double those earnings to $440k for the extra content. It is still a big gap for any metric. I think.

This is not Hooper specific BTW, any big name signing hits the same issues.

440k for an average player. Despite his divisive nature Hooper is not an average player. He is extremely good. I expect other players are earning similar figures just on shorter contracts.

The NRL has exactly the same outliers for their big name players. It's pretty standard really. If we only pay average wages to our best players, our best players will get extraordinary salaries in Europe or Japan.

 

[dru]

440k for an average player. Despite his divisive nature Hooper is not an average player. He is extremely good. I expect other players are earning similar figures just on shorter contracts.

The NRL has exactly the same outliers for their big name players. It's pretty standard really. If we only pay average wages to our best players, our best players will get extraordinary salaries in Europe or Japan.

Yeah I know, I'm being generous. So it works to $2.2m for "average" (skewed but the math works) compared to the $6.0m he gets. Nearly 3x. I don't think like some big stars that he attracts bums in seats, so the only justification is that:
a) he is actually 3x better
b) it is better value for money than investing elsewhere.

Look I like Hooper, but I'm still not gelling with the value.

PS we are well off topic so I'll leave it there.

 

[KOB1987]

Probably a good way to test his worth is a debate about how many of the top national teams around the world that Hooper would get picked for besides the Wallabies. I certainly seem to think that most of the coaches of those teams given the choice would take Pocock over Hooper in the 7 position.

You're making the assumption that those other countries can choose from both as well. What's Hooper worth if there's no Pocock? Which incidentally is likely to be the case here after RWC next year.