Hangers

[DPK]

A curiosity topic, I'm just interested in your opinions of Daniel Halangahu's prospects. At the age of 26 and with over 50 Super rugby caps, has he seen enough and shown enough to merit a spot in the Wallabies squad? Will "Hangers" continue to be an important part of the Waratahs team in the years to come? Given the rebirth of the Australia A concept, will he be a part of this team?

My first topic started, so go easy.

 

[Bruce Ross]

My view is that he is the most complete five-eighth in the classical sense in the country. He has all the skills for the position plus the cool head necessary for the quarterbacking role so he would make a good addition to the Wallabies squad.

IIRR he played some A games in 2008.

 

[Epi]

I think his chances would be greatly improved if the powers that be finally realised that 10 is not Gits' best position. It's definitely not Beales' either, which leaves Barnes, Cooper and Hangers. With the Tahs playing Barnes at 12 it's absolutely possible he'd be included in the squad.

 

[DPK]

I agree with Bruce, and I think the classical style flyhalf is a lacking element in the Wallabies sides of the last few years. Giteau, Barnes and Cooper are of the ball running mould as opposed to the ball playing type that Halangahu and Larkham are.

 

[tranquility]

Hilarious that you claim Barnes and Cooper to be running 5/8s.

Barnes pretty much doensn't have a running game. He has a solid passing game, big kicking game and excellent defensive game.

Cooper - has a remarkable passing game, and probably possess the best long passing game in the business. However he needs to add more subtlety to his game with better short balls at the line. His kicking game is a pass and his defsense leaves alot to be desired. However he is very agile so I guess that's what you are referring too.

Giteau is a 12, and a damn good one. No need to elaborate and I can agree that he is a 'running' 5/8.

Hangers is only more classical because he has a more limited game. He is composed, throws a good short ball, and a good kick and can tackle. He has no running game, no beautiful face pass and does not inspire anyone. However he is consistent and can faciliate good players around him (is this what you mean by classical?) so with excellent ball runners out side him - he could be an option for the wallabies.

 

[waratahjesus]

Hilarious that you claim Barnes and Cooper to be running 5/8s.

Barnes pretty much doensn't have a running game. He has a solid passing game, big kicking game and excellent defensive game.

Cooper - has a remarkable passing game, and probably possess the best long passing game in the business. However he needs to add more subtlety to his game with better short balls at the line. His kicking game is a pass and his defsense leaves alot to be desired. However he is very agile so I guess that's what you are referring too.

Giteau is a 12, and a damn good one. No need to elaborate and I can agree that he is a 'running' 5/8.

Hangers is only more classical because he has a more limited game. He is composed, throws a good short ball, and a good kick and can tackle. He has no running game, no beautiful face pass and does not inspire anyone. However he is consistent and can faciliate good players around him (is this what you mean by classical?) so with excellent ball runners out side him - he could be an option for the wallabies.

i took classical to mean he organises the attack and backline and calls the plays, something giteau and co dont seem able to do, i think barnes does it from 12 for the wallabies and that giteau is terrible at it.

i dont actually think Hangers is as limited as people say he is, he does every facist of the game well

 

[naza]

He had a huge money offer to play in Europe but chose to stick with the Tahs. Admire his loyalty but he ought to have taken the money.

He won't be a Wallaby. He's a solid craftsman. He doesn't have the controlling game for test rugby and lacks the flair to unlock a quality defence.

Pros: solid overall, plays close to the advantage line, good defender, decent running game, has safe hands, & is a consummate professional.
Cons: Like Beale, he struggles to pass more than 10 metres. No x-factor. Is a distributor, not a playmaker. Overdid his 'dummy & go' move. Comes with no added extras (eg: vision, flair, reading a game).

 

[topo]

Hangers is only more classical because he has a more limited game. He is composed, throws a good short ball, and a good kick and can tackle. He has no running game, no beautiful face pass and does not inspire anyone. However he is consistent and can faciliate good players around him (is this what you mean by classical?) so with excellent ball runners out side him - he could be an option for the wallabies.

I think you're being a bit hard on him here. I know Sydney club rugby is not Test Rugby, but he certainly shows good running skills, a great right foot step and regular face balls (usually to Mitch Inman on a great angle). ?inspire? I don't know but he certainly has authority and players love having him in the side. I for one would love to see him in a Wallaby jersey.

 

[David]

Cooper - has a remarkable passing game, and probably possess the best long passing game in the business. However he needs to add more subtlety to his game with better short balls at the line. His kicking game is a pass and his defsense leaves alot to be desired. However he is very agile so I guess that's what you are referring too.

I play for Souths, so I spent quite a bit of time last year just peaking over at premier grade training when quade was training just to get a look at his passing, it is something special, however I agree, cooper isn't a proper running 5/8th like gits is, he is more effective at drawing in tacklers and then offloading for a linebreak, where gits actually breaks the line himself. Although quade has broken the line himself a few times this year I still don't see him as a classical running 5.8th.

 

[Scarfman]

SNK is the perfect fly-half, except that he sucks. If he didn't suck he would be the best ever. I hope this helps.

 

[DPK]

Cooper has a great long pass but I think he sometimes uses it when the ball really needs to go through hands. See the first try vs italy in this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwVKyz8b5JY

 

[Bruce Ross]

The classic five-eighth is primarily a quarterback - to use modern terminology - who has a fairly complete range of skills and the ability to make appropriate decisions and execute under critical pressure of time and space.

The other defining aspect of the great five-eighths, no matter how gifted, has been that they underplayed their hand, recognising that there were six other backs each of whom was entitled to play a part in attack. What we are now seeing with increasing frequency in this country are very gifted young players who have spent almost no time learning their craft before they are thrust forward as the new super stars, ready to take on the world. When they first emerge they dazzle us with their brilliance; having the advantage of surprise and novelty.

But once their performances have been subjected to intense video scrutiny their limitations become apparent. There is a high degree of predictability in the movement and decision patterns of all players; such as their propensity to step off a particular foot, their predisposition to chip and regather, the number of steps they use for a clearing kick, etc. Once opposing teams are fully briefed on this, the moments of brilliance and magic become fewer and fewer, and the dumb decision making more obvious.

Hangers is a good example of a very gifted footballer who spent years in club rugby mastering the most difficult position on the field. He is now at the stage where he could be relied upon to do a competent job at any level of the sport.

 

[Gagger]

I've only seen a good club player filling a gap at Super 14. The distribution seems more like "pass it to the next guy" and when the Tahs desperately needed a decent tactical game to get them out of their own half on the weekend, there wasn't one.

 

[waratahjesus]

i'd say wilkinson is a classic flyhalf as well and englande have done alright with him, not saying hangers should be the wallaby flyhalf but he deserves to be int he extended squad if they take 40 again

 

[DPK]

If he can survive a game against the Bulls and play pretty well, then he can survive a game against Italy or Fiji. Give him a go i reckon.

 

[Scotty]

Giteau, Barnes and Cooper are of the ball running mould as opposed to the ball playing type that Halangahu and Larkham are.

Hmmmmm...... that last bit is a little bit too much like comparing Halangahu to Larkham for my liking. They should even be in the same sentence.

And for the record, Larkham was a better ball runner as well as ball player than any of those 'ball running' flyhalves you have mentioned.

 

[Bruce Ross]

I've only seen a good club player filling a gap at Super 14. The distribution seems more like "pass it to the next guy" and when the Tahs desperately needed a decent tactical game to get them out of their own half on the weekend, there wasn't one.

As distinct from the previous two weeks when an established test player clearly exhibited "a decent tactical game to get them out of their own half", eh, Gagger?

Personally I didn't think the plugger from Clubland suffered by comparison.

 

[DPK]

Giteau, Barnes and Cooper are of the ball running mould as opposed to the ball playing type that Halangahu and Larkham are.

Hmmmmm...... that last bit is a little bit too much like comparing Halangahu to Larkham for my liking. They should even be in the same sentence.

And for the record, Larkham was a better ball runner as well as ball player than any of those 'ball running' flyhalves you have mentioned.

Im struggling to communicate what i mean here. I never recall seeing Larkham running to the advantage line and trying to put a massive step on, what i remember of Larkham was "ghosting" through the line and pin point passing. I wasnt really comparing them, just saying theyre similar types of flyhalf opposed to the type that i believe giteau, cooper and to a lesser extent barnes are.

 

[Scotty]

I agree with a sentiment above that Giteau needs to be put out to 12, then we can see who will fill the void long term at 10.

Cooper has the best attacking skills, but is too hit and miss and he is still afraid of contact. He needs to change this aspect if he wants to step up to the next level.

Hangers has all round skills, but they are only average, not excellent. He would be a stop gap measure.

Barnes stands too deep and is predictable.

Beale may still make it, but obviously needs more time there. At the moment 12 looks like his spot.

O'Connor probably has the most potential, but still a few question marks.

To'omua I like the look of, and is more of the described 'classical style' flyhalf - but does he have the instinct.

Lealiifano also needs to get a chance - he is as good as any of the others and more consistent than most.

 

[Scotty]

Im struggling to communicate what i mean here. I never recall seeing Larkham running to the advantage line and trying to put a massive step on, what i remember of Larkham was "ghosting" through the line and pin point passing. I wasnt really comparing them, just saying theyre similar types of flyhalf opposed to the type that i believe giteau, cooper and to a lesser extent barnes are.

We will have to agree to disagree, because 'ghosting' involves running in my book, and he was damn good at it. He could also step when he wanted.

I know what you are trying to say - all of the time Larkham had the ball he was looking to put someone else away, it is just that sometimes he didn't throw it and ended up 'ghosting' through a gap. Sometimes the abovementioned tuck the ball under the arm and never look like they are going to throw it.