T
Train Without a Station
Guest
He was highly respected at the Force and is highly respected at the Brumbies.
Liked and respected are two very different things. People can be disliked, but still respected.
He was highly respected at the Force and is highly respected at the Brumbies.
Scrubber's a Qlder. Can't recall any "agenda" by anyone else regarding Pocock being respected or otherwise, or any organised propaganda. I've seen people have opinions about who should be 7 or captain, which is not propaganda.I could understand why the ARU or even Cheika wouldn't pick Pocock because of the "own agenda" argument - although I highly doubt that should be taken into account, but I agree it COULD be a possibility.
I completely disagree with your statement that Pocock is not liked by other players? WHO? He was highly respected at the Force and is highly respected at the Brumbies. His history at the wallabies is the same.
Who the hell doesn't respect Pocock? Why do you think this? This I believe this theory has been built from the Hooper V Pocock propaganda, or the Tahs V Brumbies propaganda.
Complete bullshit.
Scrubber's a Qlder. Can't recall any "agenda" by anyone else regarding Pocock being respected or otherwise, or any organised propaganda. I've seen people have opinions about who should be 7 or captain, which is not propaganda.
Liked and respected are two very different things. People can be disliked, but still respected.
You only study your opposition as much as you play them though.
He would know every single player in England much better than our local based guys.
But we aren't playing every single player.
We are playing their test team. James Horwill and Rob Simmons have probably played England's test players as much, or more than Mumm. Most importantly, they've also played Wales' in that time. Simmons and Horwill have probably played Wales 10 times since Mumm last represented the Wallabies. How many times has Mumm played the Welsh test forwards?
So my point is he isn't consistently exposed to English test players. He plays each individual probably once or twice more than the Australians do. He just also plays against the ones that couldn't make it in between that.
Except teams would take most notice to the key players in each team - those key players would most likely be the Test players.
For example - The Tahs would surely have spent more time analysing Pococks game over Butlers.
I agree with both points of view. But he offers a NH perspective on how to exploit the weaknesses of said key players maybe?
I agree with both points of view. But he offers a NH perspective on how to exploit the weaknesses of said key players maybe?
I think a better comparison would be Matt Todd or Marty Holah. Even when McCaw retires Todd will probably lose out to Savea and Cane.
To me, it is baffling that a player off the bench for the Waratahs is preferred to either of Jones or Coleman who have put in the hard yards all year long in our competition.
He will know more than anyone else, and he was in very good form in the UK in a side known for playing expansive rugby, we have Gits and Mitchell being considered on their NH form, so why not him?
That said, if Horwill was near decent form, I don't think he would be being considered
Playing devils advocate, couldn't the same argument be made against Gits & Mitchell?
And maybe that's the sort of role cheika has in mind for the rwc. But he is fit and in form so why not have him contribute physically as a part of one of the 3 tight 5 units and keep him fit as a back up option. Let's face it, our domestically based locks haven't really been our strongest point recently.Don't think he needs to be in the train on squad to be able to contribute though. I saw where Cheika has said there might (will) be a role for George Smith later in the campaign. It read to me that he might join the coaching/management side, perhaps informally, because of his inside knowledge of the French players and NH style of play. If that's what Cheika wants from Mumm, then he could have contributed in a similar manner rather than as would appear keep a better performed local player in Jones out of the squad. In any case, I'm not sure that that is the reason Mumm is in the side. Cheika has said that he wants to pit three full sets of tight fives against each other in order to find the best operators and combinations. That sounds like he sees Mumm as one of the top six locks.
To me, it is baffling that a player off the bench for the Waratahs is preferred to either of Jones or Coleman who have put in the hard yards all year long in our competition.
Playing devils advocate, couldn't the same argument be made against Gits & Mitchell?
I could understand why the ARU or even Cheika wouldn't pick Pocock because of the "own agenda" argument - although I highly doubt that should be taken into account, but I agree it COULD be a possibility.
I completely disagree with your statement that Pocock is not liked by other players? WHO? He was highly respected at the Force and is highly respected at the Brumbies. His history at the wallabies is the same.
Who the hell doesn't respect Pocock? Why do you think this? This I believe this theory has been built from the Hooper V Pocock propaganda, or the Tahs V Brumbies propaganda.
Complete bullshit.
I agree. But where is the evidence supporting this? I think it simply stems from when he brought up the homophobic comments during the Tahs match.
Can't think of any other incidents where Pocock would be seen as a player who is disliked?
He does A LOT of talking on the field at the Brumbies and seems to be a player most of his team mates look up to and listen too.
Only when it suits a particular poster's purpose. I mean, some people think that George Smith is a serious option. Remind me, where is he putting the hard yards in?
If Mumm is a better fit for what the coach needs, then that is fine by me.
Maybe they should dump Moore and install Poey as Captain..