The impending Hooper vs Pocock Dilemma

[BDA]

I'd prefer for us to look at the 6 or 7 or 10 rounds that both players are on the field and see which was better.

If he get to the end of the season and Pocock has played three 3 then yes you'd be questioning his selection. But first lets work out which is our more effective 7.

It would be silly to measure Palu v McCalman and say McCalman is our best no.8 because Palu spent 7 games on the sideline.

 

[Braveheart81]

Do they have to play on the same weekend for a comparison though?

I agree that Pocock was better than Hooper in round 1 (which is the only week when both players played).

I'd probably say that Hooper was better than either of those performances in rounds 2 and 4 though.

 

[BDA]

fair point. Well I think this thread is really about a comparison between the two players.

If we are going to rank every week, we'd probably have to determine who was the best aussie no.7 for each week. Did Hooper outplay the likes of Butler and Colby F? I think Hooper was the best this week.

 

[Slim 293]

If we're including all 7's then the tally so far would be:

Round 1. Pocock
Round 2. Hooper
Round 3. Butler
Round 4. Hooper

 

[No4918]

When is God back?

 

[Scrubber2050]

I don't think we should be counting the rounds where one or both aren't playing. It creates a false economy.

BDA

it is only a bit of fun, old mate

 

[BDA]

ha. Are you suggesting I'm taking this too seriously?

 

[Tomikin]

If we're including all 7's then the tally so far would be:

1. Pocock
2. Hooper
3. Butler
4. Hooper

I would say Gill's probably been good in a well beaten team..

 

[Hugh Jarse]

ha. Are you suggesting I'm taking this too seriously?

There are a few on here that are.

 

[qwerty51]

Actually if we're basing it off zero reputations..

1. Hooper
2. Gill
3. Butler
4. Alcock
5. Fainga'a
6. Pocock

 

[Scrubber2050]

Actually if we're basing it off zero reputations..

1. Hooper
2. Gill
3. Butler
4. Alcock
5. Fainga'a
6. Pocock

Probably right Querty but ATM

Pocock

Daylight



Hooper
Rest

 

[Joe Blow]

It really depends on the balance of the back row and what sort of game Cheika wants to play. If they are both fit and firing there is no doubt that they will both go (to the RWC).
None of those other fellas will get a look in although I would opt for Gill if they needed one. He has a very good all around OS game and lends some weight to the pack.

 

[Godfrey]

Actually if we're basing it off zero reputations..

1. Hooper
2. Gill
3. Butler
4. Alcock
5. Fainga'a
6. Pocock

I think Slim's list was who won each round, hence Hooper appearing twice. If that's what you were responding too that is.

Gill has probably been the Reds most consistent player this season - I don't think that you could possibly get a higher accolade than out performing some of the in-form dynamos in that team.

 

[fatprop]

Interestingly Hooper was in Foxsport's team of the week

7. Michael Hooper (Waratahs) — The only openside flanker to make a linebreak over the weekend, Hooper made a team high 11 tackles, ran for 58 metres and secured a pilfer. His four tackle busts takes him to a total of 14 for the year, the most by a forward in Super Rugby.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I remain amazed by the people who underrate Hooper. We're very lucky to have him, when you consider how game time Bam has missed over the last couple of seasons.

 

[Braveheart81]

I remain amazed by the people who underrate Hooper. We're very lucky to have him, when you consider how game time Bam has missed over the last couple of seasons.

It does almost seem that the people who don't like the way he plays as an openside flanker, mark him down when he makes a line break.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I would certainly prefer that he stole the ball more at the breakdown, but he more than makes up for that with his metres on attack and accurate tackling in defence.

 

[Scoey]

I will preface what I am about to say by stating that I think that Hooper is an incredible Rugby player. In terms of my criticisms of him, I can only speak for myself but it comes back to what I want from my #7. I want him securing quick ball and slowing down the oppositions ball. I want him hard on the ball when there is half a chance of a turnover. If he's excelling at those things, then if he value adds elsewhere then that stuff is gravy.
It's the same old argument that folk have about props. I think there is zero point having a prop that is excellent around the field if he can't hold his side of the scrum up, yet plenty will disagree.
I get frustrated when people laud Hooper as the pinnacle of openside flankerism and then rattle off line break and run meter stats. If he was David Pocock in the rucks and Michael Hooper with the ball in hand then I think I would have a Rugby orgasm every time I saw him run onto a pitch, but he's not. No one is, and if it has to be one or the other, for my openside flanker I go the David Pocock in the rucks guy.
That's how it is for me anyway.

 

[Scrubber2050]

I would certainly prefer that he stole the ball more at the breakdown, but he more than makes up for that with his metres on attack and accurate tackling in defence.

Would love him to get 10 turnovers per match as well but whilst he has the biggest motor in Super rugby he still is only human. An incredibly durable and tough competitor.

 

[qwerty51]

No one is, and if it has to be one or the other, for my openside flanker I go the David Pocock in the rucks guy.
That's how it is for me anyway.

That's all well and good and I agree if we're talking about David Pocock 2010-11 but it's amazing how many people think he's just going to pick up from where he left off despite no evidence of it in the 1 or 2 games he's played a year since the first major injury. Ignoring him as a player, the game has moved on, holding on penalties are much harder to come by. The current David Pocock hasn't shown anything to suggest his game in any facet is better than Hooper's.