New Zealand v Australia - Auckland - 23 August 2014

[cyclopath]

Sadly, much of the criticism comes from province based parochial sources.

Maybe. We all have biases, that's the truth of rugby supporters.
I'm a big fan of Pocock, and Gill, and to be honest, if Hooper didn't exist they'd currently be lined up behind Hodgo for the job ( I think). And fair enough.
Nobody has a mortgage, squatting rights or whatever, but Hooper has got the spot, and has done pretty much all he can do to make it a winner. If he falters, or is injured, and another is in peachy form, up they step. It's great we potentially have several really good 7s to choose from, and we should admire them all, not try to drag down one for what seem to be spurious reasons.
And before someone uses the "Core role of the 7" mantra - watch a Test from 5 years ago, 4 years ago, 3 years ago and so on and see how the game changes, and how great players (like McCaw) adapt and adjust. The core role of a 7 is fluid, not concrete, although it seems the thinking is sometimes set like it.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Sadly, much of the criticism comes from province based parochial sources.

I might be a mad Reds man but FFS only Slipper and Simmo have deserved run on spots, Horwill to be in the mix, and Hanson thru injury are the ONLY blokes I would subscribe to be worthwhile members of the Wallaby squad. May chuck Greg Holmes in there as a should have been - particularly looking at performance of bench front row options.

 

[Pfitzy]

With no games under his belt? Pocock wouldn't be in the squad. If you are talking about next season with both fit and both playing well - Pocock every time.

Nup, too small. Will throw it back and hope something bigger takes the bait.

 

[Slim 293]

Sadly, much of the criticism comes from province based parochial sources.

I dont' know what you're talking about...........

I might be a mad Reds man but FFS only Slipper and Simmo have deserved run on spots, Horwill to be in the mix, and Hanson thru injury are the ONLY blokes I would subscribe to be worthwhile members of the Wallaby squad. May chuck Greg Holmes in there as a should have been - particularly looking at performance of bench front row options.

 

[Spewn]

I've never seen such shit-canning of a player as Hooper cops from a small few - regarded widely in the rugby press, by opposing fans and most other rugby pundits, scoring highly on many metrics, rated by his peers in Aus rugby (John Eales medal) yet apparently only there until Pocock comes back, or Gill finds form or whatever.
It beggars belief.

Who cares what the rugby press says? Metrics? Are you going to refer to KPIs next?

 

[Slim 293]

Sadly, much of the criticism comes from province based parochial sources.

Seriously....... wha..............

Who cares what the rugby press says? Metrics? Are you going to refer to KPIs next?

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Who cares what the rugby press says? Metrics? Are you going to refer to KPIs next?

So a couple of questions then:

1, If the rugby press et al aren't to be listened to, who should be?
2, If Hooper is so seemingly unsuited to the job of an openside, who among the available players should be selected in his place and more to the point, who should be captain?

 

[Slim 293]

So a couple of questions then:

1, If the rugby press et al aren't to be listened to, who should be?
2, If Hooper is so seemingly unsuited to the job of an openside, who among the available players should be selected in his place and more to the point, who should be captain?

Clearly the answer is Jarrad Butler............

He had a blinder for Vikings in the John I Dent Cup finals.............

I can't see a bigger indicator of a player's worth, and apparently there's no one in the current Wallabies squad good enough to continue with.........

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Clearly the answer is Jarrad Butler....

He had a blinder for Vikings in the John I Dent Cup finals.....

I can't see a bigger indicator of a player's worth.....

I reckon Richard Hardwick, openside for the mighty green machine of University in the WA Premier Grade GF. He'll be suiting up for the Spirit at some point during the NRC.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I've never seen such shit-canning of a player as Hooper cops from a small few - regarded widely in the rugby press, by opposing fans and most other rugby pundits, scoring highly on many metrics, rated by his peers in Aus rugby (John Eales medal) yet apparently only there until Pocock comes back, or Gill finds form or whatever.
It beggars belief.

Don't forget Michael Gunn, Brad Wilkin, Jack Dempsey, Angus Crichton, Johnny Walker, Jack Joshson and Jack McCalman are all better than Hooper and Pocock will ever be. Lay down mezzaire that all of the above will be better than Cotterill, Hodgson, Fa'ainga, Gill, and Robinson as well, and that they will all be Wallabies all at the same time.

 

[Richo]

Who cares what the rugby press says? Metrics? Are you going to refer to KPIs next?

Yes, no one who is paid for a living to write full time about rugby should be given any credence whatsoever. And definitely we shouldn't count on that newfangled metrics shit, not if it's gonna tell us something we don't already know.

 

[barbarian]

And fuck the player votes, as well. What do those guys know about rugby? They have their heads stuck in rucks all day, they have no idea what is going on.

 

[Phil]

this alone - he's a team player that does what's expected of a 10. he has the form in the role and it was a strategic and tactical mistake to drop him for beale.

in a broader squad context heading towards the rwc, he is a solid back up if quade comes back in the same or better form, but that's not a guarantee (not having a go at quade by this comment).

I think you only have to look at how well Cruden played.To me,Foley is a similar style of player and should be in the team.
Smith helped a lot by being a decent half,so get Phipps and Foley in there quickly.

 

[Train Without a Station]

The Australian rugby public seems to have this skewed view of what an openside's role is due to David Pocock. David is a player with strengths and limitations. The team moved to work more around that and allow him to focus only on his strengths and others covered his limitation. Due to this people think that everything David was good at is the role of an openside and everything else is bludging.

Opensides are not by definition the breakdown experts. It just so happens that being the smallest and most mobile player in the pack, they are involved in the most breakdowns so therefore generally have the best breakdown stats. Also they are the shortest player with a lower weight so are best suited to being quick back to their feet to steal.

George Smith was a master of the breakdown. But he was also a complete rugby player in a number of ways which David Pocock is yet to be and a way of anybody is close to it's Hooper, though he would have to be a better force at the breakdown and a better skilled link player to get there.

But anyway my point is a 7's job isn't just to be this tight ruck monster, and it's in fact far from it. Pocock just played that way because it suited him and those around him and now everybody holds that against Hooper.

You'd think terms like "open side" flanker and "loose" forward would give people an indication of what part of the game these players should cover. Seemingly not.

 

[Richo]

IMO it's fucking kicking the poor blokes when they're down.

Of course the team well ahead is going to look at a draw as a loss, and the team we behind look at it as a partial victory. To say it's a lack of drive and mental fortitude from the wallabies is poor form.

I read elsewhere that the Wallabies don't employ a sports psychologist on a regular basis, whereas the All Blacks do. This stuff matters in modern sport and it seems like the All Blacks are innovators, despite being constantly in front -- and it's probably one of the things that keeps them in front. Everybody on this forum has been complaining about the Wallabies attitude. Isn't that much the same thing?

Anyway, agree to disagree on that particular article.

 

[Train Without a Station]

So when's Alcock back and Fugistaller eligible anyway? Get a real great 7 into the set up

 

[Richo]

But anyway my point is a 7's job isn't just to be this tight ruck monster, and it's in fact far from it. Pocock just played that way because it suited him and those around him and now everybody holds that against Hooper.

You'd think terms like "open side" flanker and "loose" forward would give people an indication of what part of the game these players should cover. Seemingly not.

Not to mention that fans decried the Deans years for being too boring and not playing attacking, exciting rugby. Pocock is a defensive force but offers little on attack. Hooper is one of the most dangerous forwards in world rugby with the ball in hand. Isn't that exactly what everybody has been demanding for bloody years?

 

[Slim 293]

I think we need to quit expecting that whoever wears the 7 jersey is going to be George Smith MK II............

George Smith was a freak.

 

[Spewn]

So a couple of questions then:

1, If the rugby press et al aren't to be listened to, who should be?
2, If Hooper is so seemingly unsuited to the job of an openside, who among the available players should be selected in his place and more to the point, who should be captain?

1. The metrologists so we can understand the metrics better.
2. Is someone suggesting he be replaced at the moment? Read my posts. Captain - Horwill. On second thoughts, keep it as is.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I think we need to quit expecting that whoever wears the 7 jersey is going to be George Smith MK II....

George Smith was a freak.

I'd be happy with George smith-lite.

Hooper is managing to surpass that.