The impending Hooper vs Pocock Dilemma

[cyclopath]

Unfortunately the most vocal forum posters from Tah land can often make that statement seem relatively true. Give the guy a break;'that last statement from you wasn't called for. i thought you were better than that.

Thanks for your help, as usual.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Given the Brumbies' backline attack was a bit "meh", maybe put Pocock at 12 - the Brumbies' forwards were fantastic on attack - linking well, running into gaps, backing up the man.
I'm semi-serious.
No, I'm not, but the forwards were bloody impressive, well, most of them.

didnt he play there at school?

 

[cyclopath]

didnt he play there at school?

Yeah, because there was another 7 who was very good, and they wanted both players in the same team, I believe. I think they figured he could be played anywhere and it wouldn't matter! Was it the same school team as Cooper? I seem to remember a video around here a year or two back showing Pocock carving up off Cooper's passes.
Does anyone remember??

 

[light]

Yep, Cooper was at 10 and Pocock was at 12. Both were at ACGS (Churchie) but I can't remember who the openside was.

Not surprisingly, they won the GPS premiership in 2005. One of the best schoolboy back lines I've seen but this isn't the thread to go into that.

 

[nathan]

No, not all are. Some are. Don't make stupid statements.

Sorry, by 'all' I was referring to the ones that were, not generalising all Tah fans. Me english, it's not that great. I didn't think of it as a stupid statement, but I could in how you read it as being a shot towards Tah fans so I understand your defensive position.

 

[cyclopath]

Unfortunately the most vocal forum posters from Tah land can often make that statement seem relatively true. Give the guy a break;'that last statement from you wasn't called for. i thought you were better than that.

As do vocal and provocative posters from all franchises. It serves no-one any good to label the whole group based on a few individuals. I wish people would not do it.

 

[Merrow]

I believe points this week are definitely in Poey's favour.

 

[BDA]

Yeah, because there was another 7 who was very good, and they wanted both players in the same team, I believe. I think they figured he could be played anywhere and it wouldn't matter! Was it the same school team as Cooper? I seem to remember a video around here a year or two back showing Pocock carving up off Cooper's passes.
Does anyone remember??

Damn that 7 must have been decent. Can we add that guy to the list of wallaby no.7 contenders

 

[formerflanker]

Great for Australian rugby to see 2 world class 7s pushing each other to even higher standards. I thought both Hooper and Pocock had great 1st half games this weekend and then found the match swung away from them in the second half.

 

[Pfitzy]

Great game, but also highlights the rule changes since then

Clear release
Going beyond the ball and allowing the cleanout to help you scrag to the ball

Not to mention Quade was in his "stupid haircut" phase. Well, one of them

I think Hooper is a bit of a knob and I have nothing but admiration for Pocock, but at this stage I'd like to have Hooper start and perhaps a Skelton-off, Fardy-into-lock, Pocock-into-blindside change at the 55 minute mark.

Despite the repeated proof that Fardy at lock is going to get our scrum utterly munted at Test level? Are you a back?

As for Hooper being a knob - pretty big statement to make. Know him do you?



See, the thing is going to boil down to how the balance of the pack works. If you look at our likely front row options, there is a lot of ball running there. The second row looks like to firm up once Simmons gets a few games under his belt, and we see if Skelton can keep going.

So depending on the 8 we pick - and in broad terms you're talking hard-running McCalman versus pace in Higginbotham - then the locks and flankers will need to strike a balance between ball running, pilfering, and donkey work like cleaning out etc.

Because quite frankly I want guys like Slipper, Moore, Kepu trucking it up and bashing other teams backwards behind the advantage line. If you pick Skelton, that is also his strength. Guys like Carter and Simmons are not good ball runners IMHO but have power to clean out and are invaluable to our set piece.

If the 4 ball runners in the T5 are going to do a good job, then a wider finisher like Higginbotham might be better than McCalman, in the same way that Kieran Read is good for the ABs because they've got guys like Retallick in the second row.

It also depends on the opponent. Some of them you want to pilfer any ball they have and counterattack like a mofo. Some of them you're happy to just bash the shit out of them and let them turn it over in contact.

 

[cyclopath]

^^^^^^^^^^^^

This. Balance. It often gets overlooked in thrown-up teams. Read is a curious example, because he can play wide and loose like a more accurate and consistent version of Higginbotham, but can do the dirty work when needed too. He does more of the former, as you say, because Retallick / Whitelock.
I'm on record around here for a while as not being keen on shoe-horning Hooper and Pocock on together just because they're both good. It's the reality that good players will sit on the bench sometimes.One or the other for mine, depending on the opposition and the state of the game at the time.
Someone like McCaw is a bit different as he plays a more hybrid flanker role these days, and is more adaptable, although by "these days" I mean more recent "past" days. Looks off-pace to me.

 

[Bullrush]

6-Fardy, 7-Pocock, 8-Palu/Higgenbotham/Hell-take my Grandma

You start Pocock every game you possibly can. It's that simple. He is head-and-shoulders above not just Hooper but almost every other 7 who he plays against. It's not rocket science.

Man - I hope Cheika has this much trouble picking between the 2 whenever they play the ABs.

 

[ChargerWA]

Interesting that you didn't calculate Palu into the #8 equation there Pfitzy.

I would think if he keeps playing like last week he's a lock in the starting team at 8. That means you have a much tighter playing 8 and you can afford to start a looser playing 7. Advantage Hooper.

 

[A mutterer]

while i think pocock took this round, his form is still building. and he picked up a hat trick because of the hard yards put in by the tight five. says as much about how the brumbs forwards played in that first half as the good game he had.

what worries me more is that both tahs and brumbies had very quiet second halves as it they had taken the foot off the gas.

in a rwc year i expect to see the best teams with lots of wallabies be absolutely, clinically fucking ruthless in putting teams to the swords.

 

[boyo]

Not to mention Quade was in his "stupid haircut" phase. Well, one of them

This

 

[Antony]

^^^^^^^^^^^^

This. Balance. It often gets overlooked in thrown-up teams. Read is a curious example, because he can play wide and loose like a more accurate and consistent version of Higginbotham, but can do the dirty work when needed too. He does more of the former, as you say, because Retallick / Whitelock.
I'm on record around here for a while as not being keen on shoe-horning Hooper and Pocock on together just because they're both good. It's the reality that good players will sit on the bench sometimes.One or the other for mine, depending on the opposition and the state of the game at the time.
Someone like McCaw is a bit different as he plays a more hybrid flanker role these days, and is more adaptable, although by "these days" I mean more recent "past" days. Looks off-pace to me.

My 'McCaw-being-criticised' google alert went off. I think he's building - and I thought he was really strong last night. Back to playing a classic 7 role over the ball, and made Luatua his personal bitch on a few occasions.

As regards the Pocock/Hooper debate - I'm not saying anything new here, but I love the idea of a Hooper/Fardy/Pocock backrow (except to the extent that the ABs would have to play against it).

Pocock plays the McCaw role, Hooper plays the Read role, Fardy does Fardy. I'd then go Skelton and Carter in the row, giving you 3.5 jumpers (counting Hooper, Pocock and Skelton as half a jumper each) and a good mix of guys with impact in attack and defence (like Hooper and Skelton), and work-monkeys (like Carter and Fardy). And then Pocock, who must just be such a pain in the ass to play against.

You'd suffer a bit in the set-piece, but you'd gain massively at ruck-time.

 

[Ruggo]

My 'McCaw-being-criticised' google alert went off. I think he's building - and I thought he was really strong last night. Back to playing a classic 7 role over the ball, and made Luatua his personal bitch on a few occasions.

As regards the Pocock/Hooper debate - I'm not saying anything new here, but I love the idea of a Hooper/Fardy/Pocock backrow (except to the extent that the ABs would have to play against it).

Pocock plays the McCaw role, Hooper plays the Read role, Fardy does Fardy. I'd then go Skelton and Carter in the row, giving you 3.5 jumpers (counting Hooper, Pocock and Skelton as half a jumper each) and a good mix of guys with impact in attack and defence (like Hooper and Skelton), and work-monkeys (like Carter and Fardy). And then Pocock, who must just be such a pain in the ass to play against.

You'd suffer a bit in the set-piece, but you'd gain massively at ruck-time.

The thing is NZ forwards do the whole show. They have a jack of all trades aspect about them. It goes beyond the AB's because they do it in Super Rugby and NPC also. I think it is why NZ sides play with great continuity because when one finds himself out of position he just slots in and is able to complete the basic functions required. It's just quality to watch.

 

[Viking]

My 'McCaw-being-criticised' google alert went off. I think he's building - and I thought he was really strong last night. Back to playing a classic 7 role over the ball, and made Luatua his personal bitch on a few occasions.

As regards the Pocock/Hooper debate - I'm not saying anything new here, but I love the idea of a Hooper/Fardy/Pocock backrow (except to the extent that the ABs would have to play against it).

Pocock plays the McCaw role, Hooper plays the Read role, Fardy does Fardy. I'd then go Skelton and Carter in the row, giving you 3.5 jumpers (counting Hooper, Pocock and Skelton as half a jumper each) and a good mix of guys with impact in attack and defence (like Hooper and Skelton), and work-monkeys (like Carter and Fardy). And then Pocock, who must just be such a pain in the ass to play against.

You'd suffer a bit in the set-piece, but you'd gain massively at ruck-time.

If you want a balanced backrow like the ABs then the closest we have would be Pocock does McCaw, Fardy does Read, Palu does Kaino.

 

[Antony]

I think Fardy and Read are very different players, and in a lot of ways Hooper could more accurately replicate Read's most impressive contributions (being his ball-carrying). Obviously there are still big differences.

 

[Chris McCracken]

while i think pocock took this round, his form is still building.

If his form is "still building", I'd hate to be opposing him when it has "built".

I've been on the fence with this, but in the last couple of weeks, I've been seeing Pocock consistently making the difference. I think he's shown that he's capable of coming back to his old form and perhaps doing better. It's going to make it hard for Hooper to get a start and for Gill to even get a plane ticket.

Plus, after he's won the RWC, he'll end poverty and reverse global warming.