The impending Hooper vs Pocock Dilemma

[Hans]

How did you get to 20 forwards?

Your breakup of players above only totals to 27 people.

I tend to think squads will be increased to at least 31 to allow for an extra prop due to the change to matchday 23s.

My Bad, double counted one of the 3's. So locks goes up to 5, backrow to 5 and probably props up 1, that takes the above to 30.

Props - 5
Hookers - 3
Locks - 5
Backrow - 5
Half - 2
Flyahlf - 2
Centre - 3
Wing - 3
Fullback - 2

 

[Hans]

That squad would allow for 4 genuine locks plus a jones type lock/backrow cover, as well as one of higgers or McCalman in the backrow.

 

[ACT Crusader]

5 x props
3x hookers
4x locks
5 x back rowers
3 x halfback
2x 1st 5s
3x midfielders
3x wings
2x fullbacks

17/13 split and with at least 2 versatile backs in the mix

 

[TOCC]

Witt the added emphasis on concussions and the extra prop on the bench I tend to think the IRB needs to expand the RWC squad size, at least to 32 players to cover the prop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Braveheart81]

If it's a 31 man squad I reckon you get:

5 props
3 hookers
4 locks
6 backrowers
3 halfbacks
2 fly halves
4 centres
4 wing/fullback

That's an 18/13 split.

Given the make up of our side, it's highly likely that the third choice 10 is one of the centres and the second choice fullback is one of the wings or centres.

Foley, To'omua, O'Connor, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), and Beale are all fairly likely members of the squad and can cover multiple positions.

We're getting well off topic of going back and forth about Pocock and Hooper though...

 

[ACT Crusader]

Hans, you have to take 3 halfbacks because of the unlikely event that one of your 2 in the match day 23 hurts themselves on gameday.

Unless of course Matt Giteau is in your squad .......

 

[Ash]

I like it.....

But I think for it to have any legitimacy it should be The Impending Pocock v Butler v Doyle Battle for the Wallaby 7 Jersey, injuries permitting...

That would make Hooper 4th, but I'm sure Tuggeranong Vikings also have one or two guys that might be smokies so we'll have to reevaluate after the John I Dent Cup concludes.

 

[Braveheart81]

Witt the added emphasis on concussions and the extra prop on the bench I tend to think the IRB needs to expand the RWC squad size, at least to 32 players to cover the prop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe Australia's path to RWC glory is a couple of concussions followed by Pocock playing prop with uncontested scrums?

 

[Slim 293]

Foley, To'omua, O'Connor, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), and Beale are all fairly likely members of the squad and can cover multiple positions.

SMS permitting............

 

[Braveheart81]

SMS permitting....

I've heard Cheika will pick him just to make sure sales of moral high horses and ivory towers remain strong.

 

[qwerty51]

31 is the confirmed squad size. I think that's a little harsh given that's only 8 players outside of matchday teams. Should be around 34 or 35.

 

[Braveheart81]

31 is the confirmed squad size. I think that's a little harsh given that's only 8 players outside of matchday teams. Should be around 34 or 35.

I reckon that will see most sides selecting 18 forwards and 13 backs.

Most matchday sides would have 13 forwards and 10 backs.

That means a prop, hooker, lock, two backrowers, halfback, centre and back three option sit out of each game.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Is there any huge objection out there to a hooper 7, pocock 6 set up? Aside from the loss of what Fardy brings, is there an argument to have both on at the same time. One seems to be a brilliant attacking player, the other brilliant defensively? Is there any major workload lost by playing Pocock over Fardy/McMahon?

I object strenuously. Two 7s on at the same time didn't work with Smith and Waugh. It sure as shit won't work with any other two of them.

@BH I really don't think people are saying that Hooper is no good. I think it's really a question of what people want to see out of a 7. Both offer different things and both are mightily good at what they do (when they're fit).

 

[qwerty51]

@BH I really don't think people are saying that Hooper is no good. I think it's really a question of what people want to see out of a 7. Both offer different things and both are mightily good at what they do (when they're fit).

What about the fact that people are expecting Pocock to dominate the breakdown like he did in 2010-11.. It's 2015: the game has changed, he's currently injured and hasn't played a Test since 2012 and hasn't even dominated a game in the one-off games he plays a year. Ridiculous.

 

[BDA]

What are the rules with replacing injured players at the RWC? pretty difficult from memory. didn't we end up with Samo on the wing last time, after taking about 5 backs who were under injury clouds

 

[Braveheart81]

What are the rules with replacing injured players at the RWC? pretty difficult from memory. didn't we end up with Samo on the wing last time, after taking about 5 backs who were under injury clouds

You can replace someone permanently in the squad but I believe the new player can't play for 48 hours after being named (so teams aren't disadvantaged having to fly someone from the other side of the world).

Samo only played on the wing due to several injuries in the same game.

 

[qwerty51]

Not sure about that, I think Samo was named pre-game on the wing from memory but Phipps ended up on the wing due to Mitchell's injury.

 

[Slim 293]

Samo did play on the wing in that game.......

The problem was the Wobs had too many short term injuries for guys that they weren't going to dump from the squad.

 

[Braveheart81]

Not sure about that, I think Samo was named pre-game on the wing from memory but Phipps ended up on the wing due to Mitchell's injury.

Samo did play on the wing in that game...

The problem was the Wobs had too many short term injuries for guys that they weren't going to dump from the squad.

My mistake.

Horne, Fainga'a, McCabe and Beale all got injured against the USA and Ioane broke his thumb (from memory) earlier in the tournament against Italy.

The only back that went into the tournament with injury concerns was Mitchell wasn't it?

 

[Bairdy]

Pretty straightforward for me; if both are fit and available for selection, Pocock gets the starting berth - primarily because he can impose himself physically when the Wallabies forward pack is collectively being dominated and starved of ball.

I can not recall within the last year or two a game where Hooper has physically dominated when the Wallabies were on the back foot (my memory is likely hazy so enlighten me if my assumption is incorrect). And in a RWC game where you don't always get 60/70% of possession to play running rugby, defence is all-important.

Which is the same reason why I am coming around to the idea of starting Skelton with Simmons, and bringing on Horwill from the bench in the RWC. But that is dependant on so many assumptions like Skelton continues to improve his scrummaging and fitness/work-rate off the ball, and Horwill plays like a saint and is in form.

TL;DR Hodgo > Alcock > Pocock > Hooper