Quade Cooper's defence this year
- Thread starter disco
- Start date
- Status
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
Qwerty, I do have to ask (and I'm not trying to be inflamatory, so I hope it doesn't come across that way) - but you don't think that Cooper deserves the same second chance that Rob Horne was given. Rob Horne was very poor at the start of this years Super 15, but improved after suspension and was then picked in the Wallabies.
With regards to the arguement for continuity, I think that is fine to a point, but not if there is a clear gap in abilities. I think it is much more dependant on whether Deans thinks that Quades improvement in defence is sufficient compared to Barnes. IMO he is a clearly superior attacking player, but Barnes was probably a clearly superior defender by the same marging. Cooper is not yet on equal footing with Barnes as a defender, but I feel he has closed the gap somewhat, whereas Cooper is still a mile ahead in attack.
For arguements sake, if in the same circumstances Elton Flately had just been man of the match twice and Larkham become available after injury would anyone not want Larkham picked in the run on side? I know people will argue that Cooper is not Larkham, but my point is that picking for continuity should only be applied when the two players are considered on par. IMO if Cooper continues to defend soundly in the 10 channel than he would be my pick hands down. I would then move Barnes & McCabe out one each - not ideal, but a far superior backline in my view so worth the change. Alternatively, Barnes goes to the bench and the centres stay.
With regards to the arguement for continuity, I think that is fine to a point, but not if there is a clear gap in abilities. I think it is much more dependant on whether Deans thinks that Quades improvement in defence is sufficient compared to Barnes. IMO he is a clearly superior attacking player, but Barnes was probably a clearly superior defender by the same marging. Cooper is not yet on equal footing with Barnes as a defender, but I feel he has closed the gap somewhat, whereas Cooper is still a mile ahead in attack.
For arguements sake, if in the same circumstances Elton Flately had just been man of the match twice and Larkham become available after injury would anyone not want Larkham picked in the run on side? I know people will argue that Cooper is not Larkham, but my point is that picking for continuity should only be applied when the two players are considered on par. IMO if Cooper continues to defend soundly in the 10 channel than he would be my pick hands down. I would then move Barnes & McCabe out one each - not ideal, but a far superior backline in my view so worth the change. Alternatively, Barnes goes to the bench and the centres stay.
Schadenfreude
John Solomon (38)
Hey did the wallabies leak tries all last year?
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
No, but I think the shuffling of players made our attack disjointed.
I actually think it is more a class thing, Quade heralds from one of the least salubrious areas of Kiwi land and now acts like a cashed up bogan, so he was at negative 50 before he even started doing some cheap shots to the AB captain.
P
Paradox
Guest
Indeed. *sarcasm*
T
TOCC
Guest
Isn't it grand that we can sit back behind our big desks with private school educations and criticise the insalubrious peasants out there who weren't offered the same opportunity at life...
I for one believe its insipid that a person naturally gifted should be offered the chance to earn an income on par or exceeding mine without any alumni network to give them a leg up..
P
Paradox
Guest
I'm waiting for his rant against Kurtley (growing up in Mt Druitt and all).
Mate, on another site the kiwis continually started their hate of the guy beginning with comments about where he grew up (Tokoroa) in highly derogatory terms.
It was an observation about an attitude I was surprised to see from the Kiwis at the time, but it was there.
Reddy!
Bob Davidson (42)
My opinion about this:
The games we saw Barnes play is the best you will ever see Barnes play; that is Barnes at his peak and there is little room for improvement in his game and the game the Wallabies can play with him there.
Cooper on the other hand is an untapped quantity at test level, we have not seen him play his best there yet, but we know he has the potential to offer a lot more than Barnes.
I don't get the argument to keep Barnes there for team consistency sake: wasn't the backline and attack the most criticised element of the Wallaby game against Wales? Conversely, Cooper has had the Reds attack humming like a bee in only a couple of games back from a serious injury.
The games we saw Barnes play is the best you will ever see Barnes play; that is Barnes at his peak and there is little room for improvement in his game and the game the Wallabies can play with him there.
Cooper on the other hand is an untapped quantity at test level, we have not seen him play his best there yet, but we know he has the potential to offer a lot more than Barnes.
I don't get the argument to keep Barnes there for team consistency sake: wasn't the backline and attack the most criticised element of the Wallaby game against Wales? Conversely, Cooper has had the Reds attack humming like a bee in only a couple of games back from a serious injury.
Scoey
Tony Shaw (54)
On the arguement of consistency at the expense of form - it's like this. You pick any truly great Rugby team over the ages and they all have one thing in common. Settled combinations. This is coincidently one of the things the Wallabies have been severly lacking for what seems like an eternity.
Yes, granted. Injuries have, for a long time, inhibited our ability to select the same group of players each game but when the opportunity arises to continue to select a group of players then the value of this should never be underplayed.
The key to a Rugby team performing is that they need to be one cohesive group. The S15 winning Reds last year weren't individually the best players in the comp but as a group they were one unit. The current squad of Brumbies were given the wooden spoon by many of the games experts before the season even began, but look how they are travelling.
Picking and dropping players each game can quickly erode and unhinge that sense of cohesion and I thikn this is magnified at the National level when compared to S15. I am encouraged by the prospect of us having played almost the same 22 for three tests and succeeding. If we can continue to biuld them team I am excited by what they may be able to achieve.
Yes, granted. Injuries have, for a long time, inhibited our ability to select the same group of players each game but when the opportunity arises to continue to select a group of players then the value of this should never be underplayed.
The key to a Rugby team performing is that they need to be one cohesive group. The S15 winning Reds last year weren't individually the best players in the comp but as a group they were one unit. The current squad of Brumbies were given the wooden spoon by many of the games experts before the season even began, but look how they are travelling.
Picking and dropping players each game can quickly erode and unhinge that sense of cohesion and I thikn this is magnified at the National level when compared to S15. I am encouraged by the prospect of us having played almost the same 22 for three tests and succeeding. If we can continue to biuld them team I am excited by what they may be able to achieve.
Groucho
Greg Davis (50)
Rancid bait.
Regardless, Carter and Cruden are better.
Cruden is playing well, but he's merely good (a regulation ten) whereas Cooper has produced exceptional football in bursts. Laptop's problems are consistency and defence, not ability.
FrankLind
Colin Windon (37)
Cruden is most certainly not a "regulation 10".
Both are yet to prove they can foot it at test level consistently.
I think Cruden has a more steady temperament and his form for the Chiefs this year puts him ahead of Cooper for now. I'd pick him ahead of Cooper if they both played for the same team.
Scoey
Tony Shaw (54)
They sure do Scotty. Great Rugby teams have a lot of things in common. I was merely trying to point out why there is significant benefit in sticking with a squad that hasn't done anything wrong rather than chopping and changing. Something that may have been lost on the average punter over the years. I could be well wrong. The Wallabies quad that played Wales is not the team I'd pick; far from it. But I would be 100% ok with us taking that team forward into TRC.
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
Mostly agree with that Scotty. Berrick is a fine player, but I think he works best as a foil for a flashier partner in either the 10 or 12 jersey. That's why I like him at 12 with QC (Quade Cooper) at 10 or if he were to play 10 himself, have JOC (James O'Connor) at 12. He's more Noddy than Mark Ella or Steve Larkham. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, BTW. You need the solid dependable types in any team, as opposed to a gaggle of superstars.
Unless they are Bok teams who have great 9s and solid, dependable 10s
T
TOCC
Guest
I apologize as I interpreted what you said as your own personal opinion, not that of someone elses..
Kiwis look for a reason to hate him, I think it's an insight into someones character to judge a person on their socioeconomic background..
For the record Kevin Mealamu, Sean Maitland and Richard Kahui are also from Tokoroa.
- Status