• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Hooper vs Gill

Hooper vs Gill

  • Hooper

    Votes: 57 51.8%

  • Gill

    Votes: 53 48.2%
  • Total voters
    110
Status
Not open for further replies.
Blue

Blue

Andrew Slack (58)
Gill is a great pincher of pill but so is Hooper.

For mine Hooper is a more complete footballer. Much better running game. Runs very clever lines and is much stronger when taking it up.

Therefore:

Hooper ~ 2(Gill) (for those who failed math that means Hooper is equal to more or less two Gills, much like McCabe is more or less three Tom Carters, and possibly more)

Discuss.
 
barbarian

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
Jeez Blue, provocative stuff! This thread could get interesting.

FWIW I think both are fantastic players. I would have Hooper ahead of Gill at the moment, but not by as much as you. Also it is worth considering Gill is younger than Hooper, and has had less Super Rugby starting experience.
 
vidiot

vidiot

John Solomon (38)
Hooper is a year older and has a a season of super rugby on Gill, which means something when you're 19. Gill has hardly been a complete chump linking or carrying.

I think that having Hooper injured and picking Gill to start would not make 99% of coaches all that unhappy, even now.


Lets face it, they both make South African 7s - oh sorry 6's, you guys are so special - look like a bunch of eye pokers.

Too much?
 
B

brumsfan

Sydney Middleton (9)
No one is saying Gill isn't a very good player because he clearly is, but for me Hooper is a considerable way ahead in every area except the defensive breakdown where they are taking in in turns leading the competition. Hooper is also much more physical in contact I have yet to see Gill drive a much larger guy backwards in the tackle, Hooper does it all the time.
Hooper's running game is fast making him one of the best across all 15 teams and the whole backrow not just for no. 7's.

Another area the brumbies miss him when he is not playing, and is seldom talked about, is his speed to the attacking breakdown. He is so fast at arriving cleaning out or getting over the ball that the brumbies get very quick clean ball to swing the backs into motion.
For the record Hooper is 8 months older.
 
Slim 293

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Blue said:
Gill is a great pincher of pill but so is Hooper.

For mine Hooper is a more complete footballer. Much better running game. Runs very clever lines and is much stronger when taking it up.

Therefore:

Hooper ~ 2(Gill) (for those who failed math that means Hooper is equal to more or less two Gills, much like McCabe is more or less three Tom Carters, and possibly more)

Discuss.
Click to expand...

Oh boy...

With the large Reds contingent on this board this is quickly going to go one way...
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
I haven't voted yet.
Just trying to decide who to antagonise more. Or less.
Nah, mainly because there's not much in it, and I hate these things - 2 great young players, and inevitably it leads to something silly being said about one or both.
 
RugbyReg

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
TSR said:
Lynagh was a more complete footballer than Larkham. Does that make him better?
Click to expand...

yep.

Depends who is the back row is.

If we are 8 Palu and 6 Higgers or Dennis, then we hardly need someone else who's main trait is ball running right? (disregarding Pocock will be the man).
 
J

Jiggles

Guest
Up until the last round, I would've said Gill. I honestly think he is the best pure fetcher in the world right now. However the game Hooper played against the Canes was exceptional, not just for his pilfers, but for his defensive work, his link play and and carries. It was the best performance by any forward in any game I have watched this year. So that is why I voted for Hooper in the above poll, based on who I would rather have starting in a team right now.

Who will be the long term option to challenge and push Pocock? Well thats Easy. Gill. Why?

Hooper is moving to the Tahs, so his development will be stunted and he will be ruined. ;)
 
TSR

TSR

Andrew Slack (58)
Should Pocock be injured or should the selectors decide that even superman Pocock can't play 3 tests in 12 days I expect them to pick Hooper. I think he has been in better form over the course of the season and I actually think it would be a good thing if Gill was left out of the Wallabies squad & the end of season tour to allow him to physically develop further.

However, for the last 4 games Gill has been one of the most influential from either side in the game IMO. To argue he is a lessor player because he is displaying a more limited skill set (and I say 'displaying' because generally players don't play international 7s unless they have a very well rounded game) is a flawed arguement in my view. In the last 4 weeks I think that Gill has been playing every bit as good as Hooper, who has still been superb.

Look how long we have picked props with a better 'all round' game and look where that has got us.

But I dont think the form of either of them will cause the selectors even a second hesitation before they write down D Pocock next to number 7
 
F

Forcefield

Ken Catchpole (46)
There is no point comparing them unless it is for Wallaby selection. How would each player's game suit that? I think Hooper is clearly better at S15 level but would he be able to do those slippery eel tackle busts against higher quality Test level defences?

I'm biased, but while those two are still developing physically, I reckon Matt Hodgson is the best choice behind David Pocock at 7.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top