• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Wallaby 31 players for 2015 RWC

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Not really. The first half Australia had 75% possession. Considering we finished the game with 59%, when Hooper was fresh he had significantly less opportunity to pilfer - because we had the ball!

Hooper forced a penalty in the first half. So he made 1.

When Hodgson was on our possession was the lowest of all game. That really shows where his mind-set is in regards to retaining missing. Clearly his mind is on other things!
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I believe the Cheetahs as a team made more tackles than any other team in the competition in 2014. Their backrow were at the forefront of that.

They also leaked the most points in the competition.

Statistics can often be an indicator of how a team plays the game. The Force tried to play a territory based game for much of 2014 and relied heavily on their defence. Hodgson had an incredible season but there's a reason why he topped the tackle count and pilfers in the competition by a significant margin. The way his team played the game gave him a huge number of opportunities for both.
 
Viking

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
@TWAS
According to fox sports Hodgson scored 6 tries for the Force in 16 games and Hooper only scored 2 in 17 games.

You indicted that the Force has significantly less possession then the Tahs. A stat which you used to indicate Hooper was a more effective pilferer. He made more pilfers but had less opportunity because they defended less then the Force.

The same can be said of Hodgsons try scoring abilities. He made 3 times as many tries as Hooper, and also had less opportunity to do so as they attacked much less then the Tahs. Refer to Stats you previously provided.

Therefore according to stats, Hodgsons is more than 3 times more effective at scoring tries.

Gee if only Hodgson was on the field he would have scored 6 tries instead of Hooper's 2.

Stats are bullshit. Hooper is clearly a better attacking player - yet the stats indicate Hodgeson is a better try scorer - yet I don't think he is capable of scoring any of the international tries Hooper scored using his footwork and acceleration.

Proceed to uppercut yourselves.
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Seb V said:
@TWAS
According to fox sports Hodgson scored 6 tries for the Force in 16 games and Hooper only scored 2 in 17 games.

You indicted that the Force has significantly less possession then the Tahs. A stat which you used to indicate Hooper was a more effective pilferer. He made more pilfers but had less opportunity because they defended less then the Force.

The same can be said of Hodgsons try scoring abilities. He made 3 times as many tries as Hooper, and also had less opportunity to do so as they attacked much less then the Tahs. Refer to Stats you previously provided.

Therefore according to stats, Hodgsons is more than 3 times more effective at scoring tries.

Gee if only Hodgson was on the field he would have scored 6 tries instead of Hooper's 2.

Stats are bullshit. Hooper is clearly a better attacking player - yet the stats indicate Hodgeson is a better try scorer - yet I don't think he is capable of scoring any of the international tries Hooper scored using his footwork and acceleration.

Proceed to uppercut yourselves.
Click to expand...


Try scoring and attacking are two different things. That's why Seb. I can pick and go from 1m out or be on the back of a maul. Doesn't mean I'm a good attacking player.

For statistics like run meters, pilfers, and tackles made there is less variables. Either you did them, or you didn't.
 
Highlander35

Highlander35

Steve Williams (59)
McMahon is the best Openside in the country, and should be starting there for the Wallabies come world cup.

Or, you could stick with the current captain, and have Hodgeson, Gill or a fit Pocock as backup,
 
Viking

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Train Without a Station said:
Try scoring and attacking are two different things. That's why Seb. I can pick and go from 1m out or be on the back of a maul. Doesn't mean I'm a good attacking player.

For statistics like run meters, pilfers, and tackles made there is less variables. Either you did them, or you didn't.
Click to expand...


Isn't try scoring the most important! It's where you get points and win games isn't it?
Doesn't the stats reflect Hodgson being more opportunistic? Who cares if it's from 1 metre out? The stats indicate he's scoring tries and Hooper isn't.
 
qwerty51

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
I think it reflects the dismal attacking players the Force have.

If the Force had Phipps, Foley, Beale, Folau, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), Alofa would Hodgo have scored that many tries?
 
Viking

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
qwerty51 said:
I think it reflects the dismal attacking players the Force have.

If the Force had Phipps, Foley, Beale, Folau, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), Alofa would Hodgo have scored that many tries?
Click to expand...


Exactly. My point is Stats don't show the full picture. Yet I can work them towards my favour or most arguments.
 
Dave Beat

Dave Beat

Paul McLean (56)
Seb V said:
@TWAS
According to fox sports Hodgson scored 6 tries for the Force in 16 games and Hooper only scored 2 in 17 games.

You indicted that the Force has significantly less possession then the Tahs. A stat which you used to indicate Hooper was a more effective pilferer. He made more pilfers but had less opportunity because they defended less then the Force.

The same can be said of Hodgsons try scoring abilities. He made 3 times as many tries as Hooper, and also had less opportunity to do so as they attacked much less then the Tahs. Refer to Stats you previously provided.

Therefore according to stats, Hodgsons is more than 3 times more effective at scoring tries.

Gee if only Hodgson was on the field he would have scored 6 tries instead of Hooper's 2.

Stats are bullshit. Hooper is clearly a better attacking player - yet the stats indicate Hodgeson is a better try scorer - yet I don't think he is capable of scoring any of the international tries Hooper scored using his footwork and acceleration.

Proceed to uppercut yourselves.
Click to expand...

From the man that once sat on the fence talking up Poey.
Both awesome players - I pick Hooper.
But close.
 
Sir Arthur Higgins

Sir Arthur Higgins

Bob Davidson (42)
i am very weary of anyone suggesting pocock will be at the next world cup. after two knee reco's i think the odds are against him to be honest.
he can come back from the time off and get back to top standard, i do not doubt that, but i think the nature of his injuries will be the factor. i don't have a lot of faith in his knees being tip top.

i agree on mcmahon. i think he should be in the end of year tour, see how he goes in a couple of games and while i think him starting is unlikely, nor should he start as he's so raw and young, i think it's a great time to start introducing him to the environment at the very least.

we need a proper 6. i dont know who that is at the moment. higgers is an option but mowen is a bit of a loss and fardy's form has been poor (or not test standard). i recall simmons being a pretty handy 6 when he was trialled there but unsurprisingly, and i swear i am not being a pie-eyed supporter, luke jones is the answer for the wallabies at six.
 
topgun

topgun

Billy Sheehan (19)
Bear with me.
Skelton is not a lock by definition: no hope in a lineout, not so great scrum but he is absolutely devastating in open play. It would be worth a crack at No.8 as he fits the bill perfectly:strong running option, bone crunching tackler, perilous cleanouts etc. Palu won't last forever and for Skelton, the best is yet to come...
 
Viking

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
topgun said:
Bear with me.
Skelton is not a lock by definition: no hope in a lineout, not so great scrum but he is absolutely devastating in open play. It would be worth a crack at No.8 as he fits the bill perfectly:strong running option, bone crunching tackler, perilous cleanouts etc. Palu won't last forever and for Skelton, the best is yet to come.
Click to expand...


Possibly Fotu could make the squad with a strong super rugby season next year.
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Sir Arthur Higgins said:
i i recall simmons being a pretty handy 6 when he was trialled there but unsurprisingly, and i swear i am not being a pie-eyed supporter
Click to expand...



As a Simmons defender I strongly propose that. He's not a loosie. Ok as a fill in but I would play a lot of people there before him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top