Canes v Reds at the Cake Tin - 2011R11
- Thread starter Jets
- Start date
- Status
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
He is a freak no doubt, did some great things, but with moments left in the game he came up with a low percentage play that gave the canes a chance of winning.a PROFESSIONAL player should NEVER do that.
That's how he plays, but that is not how a RWC has EVER been won.
That's how he plays, but that is not how a RWC has EVER been won.
Victorian Reds Fan
Bob Loudon (25)
I don't think we can win the wc without Cooper. I agree that he makes some plainly stupid decisions, but he has more upside than flaws. That kick to Morahan on the run was insane. He is what I would call a rugby genius and being a genius tries things that others would not dare to try.
Victorian Reds Fan
Bob Loudon (25)
Disagree. Geniuses have a certain quality that is hard to pin down and I think Cooper has it. Larkham, no doubt, was a genius. There is a difference between an exceptionally good player and a genius. Genia is probably a better player than Cooper, but Cooper is a genius and Genia is not.
Victorian Reds Fan
Bob Loudon (25)
I think people underestimate Cooper's reading of the play. No doubt he plays a lot on instinct, but he does often make the right decisions. I think everyone would agree he is great to watch.
Penguin
John Solomon (38)
I don't underestimate Quades abilities at all VRF in fact there were lots of times since his debut that I felt like the only person that could see how good he was. It feels great to see him doing so well with a bit more experience under his belt. He's only going to get better.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
That's because you're a Brumbies supporter
I don't think Cooper is a genius, but fuck me he pulls off some freakish plays. It's all just instinctive to him.
Haha...
No, I think he's an extremely good attacking flyhalf, but he's not always the smartest player...
It's been said before, but he's in the Carlos Spencer kind of mould... can pull off some freakish moves but at the same time it doesn't always pay off and can cost his team...
A genius player wouldn't have gone for that cross field kick in the dying minutes when your team is only up by a single point...
Also, he can't tackle... but that's been covered enough...
DPK
Peter Sullivan (51)
Yeah, I don't know who in the Reds' brains trust thought a cross field kick was a good idea when they were only 1 point ahead with a couple of minutes to go, but that is pretty grim thinking.
G
GC
Guest
It's clear from Quade's tweets he isn't a genius.
Good footy player though.
Good footy player though.
It comes with the "Quade" package, you get moments of absolute total brilliance and moments of WFT?
Indeed, I am often saying "What Fe Thuck?" when Quade does something odd.
Victorian Reds Fan
Bob Loudon (25)
If Quad is not a rugby genius then who in the modern game is? Don't say Carter.
Bullrush
Geoff Shaw (53)
McCaw
Victorian Reds Fan
Bob Loudon (25)
I said genius not habitual cheater. :fishing
Bullrush
Geoff Shaw (53)
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Re QC (Quade Cooper): It is transparent and obvious that QC (Quade Cooper) (and Genia) have been at the very heart of almost all of this year's Reds' wins.
Let us say we had Barnes back at 10, or Beale say playing for us at 10 (using his recent play at 10 as a guide). Do we truly assess we would have, just for example, beaten the Stormers and (so decisively) the Bulls with either of those two commanding the play in that position? Which credible Aussie candidate-for-10 outside QC (Quade Cooper) would have guided the play so consistently well in 2011, set up so many tries, and scored crucial tries themselves (often against set and good defences) as has been case with QC (Quade Cooper)? His general 2011 discipline, lowered errors, carefulness of play, and general 'mature versatility' (vs his 2009 and 2010 tendency to over-slick play) have all improved markedly on 2010. I cannot think of one 2011 game where it can legitimately be said: 'QC (Quade Cooper) lost that game for the team', or where that is even close to being true. I can think of many where he was the biggest sole - and arguably decisive - contributor to the win. Even his tackles made and failed tackles level seems to have improved (with plenty more improvement rightly expected). To say he lost the game to the Canes is ridiculous - v poor defence in 1H, an under-fit, pot-plant Shep (who could of and should of been onside in the last crucial minutes), and badly failed rotations (Hanson in 1H l/os, disaster-land of unforced l/o losses that were gifts to the Canes, and, as they were, playing with a second-string back line), were all at the heart of that loss, not Cooper (and Link would know he made some serious rotational errors in that match, the absence of A Fainga'a for the run-on being one, maybe a tad of coaches' over-confidence creeping in?).
The biggest single problem we have with Cooper today is his place kicking success ratio is falling into the sustained <mid-70s% level which is highly dangerous in the final run of a long S15, and even more so in the tight games we will face. It could be said that this issue 'cost us the game last night' and in part that might have been true, except that Cruden's % ratio was worse and you can't balance up the 'if only' kicking ledger just on one side. And my other (tactical) concern is that I think Cooper needs a week or so off, as Genia soon will.
The other highly amusing implication of the 'Cooper's a huge liability' school is the ridiculous notion that we have in the likely Walls' squad all these wonderful '90% brilliant all the time' players that never, unlike Cooper, make silly mistakes or have enduring faults (unlike Cooper's dangerous non-qualities). Hmmm. What of Barnes' notorious lapses when, under Test pressure, he starts to over-kick, often wildly; what of Diggers' tendency to hold the pass too late and run 2-4 metres too far under pressure, and to make handling errors, then we have Gits' crabbing, Beale's 'go the low-% grubber' too often, and D Mitchell's generally lazy defence in 2010 (remember England T2 2010) that contributed to his temporary dropping? And these are just examples: there are very, very few highly talented rugby players without flaws that can be expensive. The key is the superior technical coaching required to remove or reduce them, and team constructions and tactics that contain or compensate for them in appropriate ways.
Let us say we had Barnes back at 10, or Beale say playing for us at 10 (using his recent play at 10 as a guide). Do we truly assess we would have, just for example, beaten the Stormers and (so decisively) the Bulls with either of those two commanding the play in that position? Which credible Aussie candidate-for-10 outside QC (Quade Cooper) would have guided the play so consistently well in 2011, set up so many tries, and scored crucial tries themselves (often against set and good defences) as has been case with QC (Quade Cooper)? His general 2011 discipline, lowered errors, carefulness of play, and general 'mature versatility' (vs his 2009 and 2010 tendency to over-slick play) have all improved markedly on 2010. I cannot think of one 2011 game where it can legitimately be said: 'QC (Quade Cooper) lost that game for the team', or where that is even close to being true. I can think of many where he was the biggest sole - and arguably decisive - contributor to the win. Even his tackles made and failed tackles level seems to have improved (with plenty more improvement rightly expected). To say he lost the game to the Canes is ridiculous - v poor defence in 1H, an under-fit, pot-plant Shep (who could of and should of been onside in the last crucial minutes), and badly failed rotations (Hanson in 1H l/os, disaster-land of unforced l/o losses that were gifts to the Canes, and, as they were, playing with a second-string back line), were all at the heart of that loss, not Cooper (and Link would know he made some serious rotational errors in that match, the absence of A Fainga'a for the run-on being one, maybe a tad of coaches' over-confidence creeping in?).
The biggest single problem we have with Cooper today is his place kicking success ratio is falling into the sustained <mid-70s% level which is highly dangerous in the final run of a long S15, and even more so in the tight games we will face. It could be said that this issue 'cost us the game last night' and in part that might have been true, except that Cruden's % ratio was worse and you can't balance up the 'if only' kicking ledger just on one side. And my other (tactical) concern is that I think Cooper needs a week or so off, as Genia soon will.
The other highly amusing implication of the 'Cooper's a huge liability' school is the ridiculous notion that we have in the likely Walls' squad all these wonderful '90% brilliant all the time' players that never, unlike Cooper, make silly mistakes or have enduring faults (unlike Cooper's dangerous non-qualities). Hmmm. What of Barnes' notorious lapses when, under Test pressure, he starts to over-kick, often wildly; what of Diggers' tendency to hold the pass too late and run 2-4 metres too far under pressure, and to make handling errors, then we have Gits' crabbing, Beale's 'go the low-% grubber' too often, and D Mitchell's generally lazy defence in 2010 (remember England T2 2010) that contributed to his temporary dropping? And these are just examples: there are very, very few highly talented rugby players without flaws that can be expensive. The key is the superior technical coaching required to remove or reduce them, and team constructions and tactics that contain or compensate for them in appropriate ways.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
RH I agree with parts of your post, vehemently disagree with other parts, but I love the irony that you refer to a test match last year against the poms when criticising Mitchell's lazy defence.
What were the stats for QC (Quade Cooper) against the Poms last year? was it 9 misses from 11 attempts?
What were the stats for QC (Quade Cooper) against the Poms last year? was it 9 misses from 11 attempts?
Penguin
John Solomon (38)
I agree with most of your post there RedsHappy, however this rotating to give players a rest is a real nonsense in my opinion. The season isn't all that long & they have 2 bye weeks. Those alone are enough of a break that a young man should need. Look at what rotation did this week by your own observation in the benching of Ant Fainga'a. Keeping the strongest available team on the park week in week out is the only way to sustain momentum in my opinion.
- Status