Wallaby Captaincy

[fatprop]

The qualifier as stated that 2nd choice becomes first choice in the case of the lack of leadership options.

Ok, so reckon we drop our best player in a position for leadership material, yeah nah, we can't afford that, we need our best out there just to compete

You pick your best side and work out the captain from the selected for the campaign

We did, Moore, then he got wounded and we picked the next best option, and so on

 

[Viking]

So we're lacking running strength severely in the back row, evidenced by Hooper running the ball more than in 2013 because he is our best option and you reckon the 8 with the 2nd weakest running game in all aus is the 2nd choice 8 and 2nd choice 6?

For what he need in the team he's at best 4th choice at 8 and possibly even 3rd choice at 6. Otherwise the only thing he'd be leading us too is getting smashed behind the advantage line.

Let's remember his physicality and position were heavily questioned in last years rugby championship.

This is just an opinion and very different from many. I personally would put Mowen up more then 4th choice 8 and 3rd choice 6.

I would agree he would be my second choice 8 behind Palu, but before McCalman (Mowen played better then McCalman at Test level) at the start of this Rugby Championship. Higgers was in bad form too.

Plus Mowen would add so much to the line-out, He's better then Palu at the back of the scrum, he pilfers, and of coarse leadership. Ball-running is he average but in my opinion that doesn't put him down to 4th position.

 

[No4918]

The qualifier as stated that 2nd choice becomes first choice in the case of the lack of leadership options.

I agree. Selecting your best player is rarely an obvious decision at the best of times. The best team is more important. Then have a look at the TRC squad. We played most games with 5th or worse choice hooker. 2nd or 3rd #8. Last night our #12 was the 3rd choice, no one was really happy about it but he ripped it up. Have hardly had first choice wingers all year with Cummins overseas. Foley was second choice 10 until Cooper was injured.

Mowen is arguably as good as Higgers and McCalman. His leadership puts him in front. Simmons was in the view of many given the edge in selections for his lineout duties. With Mowen there to run it a different lock could have had a run, eg Skelton given a lot more time in the lead up to the RWC.

Looking at this I think the depth is better than some people give credit. We should have won last night and only fell away in the last 10 in SA. The Argies loss could have been different with a stronger leader which leaves the second Bledisloe as the only time we were totally out of the hunt.

 

[Gnostic]

Ok, so reckon we drop our best player in a position for leadership material, yeah nah, we can't afford that, we need our best out there just to compete

You pick your best side and work out the captain from the selected for the campaign

We did, Moore, then he got wounded and we picked the next best option, and so on

So leadership isn't that important, having a poor leader isn't as damaging as having a player who is pretty bloody good but a good leader as well. Just put the best individuals out there. Right.

I would point out that many here even argue with some evidence that Palu has not performed against the ABs in any event. I don't but understand the point and the margins you allude to are not so wide as to discount a debatable selection because of their Captaincy. It was not that long ago that Gregan was at best the No2 halfback in Australian Rugby yet was continually selected because of his leadership role.

 

[fatprop]

So leadership isn't that important, having a poor leader isn't as damaging as having a player who is pretty bloody good but a good leader as well. Just put the best individuals out there. Right.

I would point out that many here even argue with some evidence that Palu has not performed against the ABs in any event. I don't but understand the point and the margins you allude to are not so wide as to discount a debatable selection because of their Captaincy. It was not that long ago that Gregan was at best the No2 halfback in Australian Rugby yet was continually selected because of his leadership role.

I think you pick the best side and then pick the captain, if a unit isn't one of the best 15 then, no

On this seasons form, Mowen was 3rd or 4th choice

 

[terry j]

is this question being over analyzed? I mean, honestly, how important is a captain?

Phrase that differently, pretty piss weak if your (as a team) on field performance is tied in with who the frickin captain happens to be, or even worse follows the daily fluctuations of whoever the captain is.

Shit, you know the game plan from training, you've done the hard yards at training, whether it works or not comes down to who the captain is?

 

[Viking]

I think you pick the best side and then pick the captain, if a unit isn't one of the best 15 then, no

On this seasons form, Mowen was 3rd or 4th choice

On super rugby season form. But you need to include Test level form as well, where he has a history of being more effective then McCalman or Higgers ever was.

 

[Viking]

is this question being over analyzed? I mean, honestly, how important is a captain?

Phrase that differently, pretty piss weak if your (as a team) on field performance is tied in with who the frickin captain happens to be, or even worse follows the daily fluctuations of whoever the captain is.

Shit, you know the game plan from training, you've done the hard yards at training, whether it works or not comes down to who the captain is?

How important is the Captain. Solely probably not important. BUT LEADERS ARE IMPORTANT, currently we have very few. Hooper isn't being a great leader, and its a real issue at the moment. We need at least one strong leader in the group.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Seb V your comments on Mowen's form are fair overall. But I think based on what we need from our back row, his form is down on the pecking order.

 

[Viking]

TWAS, true, but if your broaden your assessment of team even further from the backrow you will realise what we need is leadership, and that will put him up the pecking order.

I think having a solid leader and Captain with an unbalanced back-row is more important then having a balanced back-row and no leader in the team. We currently have resorted to having a 22 year old as Captain and that has become a disadvantage to us. Both on and off the field.

On a side note. If Higgers continues to perform like he did last night he may well be the future Captain. He can do it all, Link man, Line-out, Aggressive runner, Tackler etc.

Higgers for Captain. You heard it here first.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Leadership won't get us over the advantage line though. And that's what we desperately need. If Mowen was a lock, we could carry him, as he still offers a lot.

I back Horwill before higgers right now. That may change as higgers will likely have an EOYT to cement his starting claims.

 

[terry j]

How important is the Captain. Solely probably not important. BUT LEADERS ARE IMPORTANT, currently we have very few. Hooper isn't being a great leader, and its a real issue at the moment. We need at least one strong leader in the group.

I get your point.

I'd like to think I would be playing to my utmost, 'leader or no leader'. For sure, have a captain to decide whether to go for goal or touch, things like that. To me, that is really where a captains role finishes.

Do the ABs need a 'leader'? One, without which, they could not do their core duties and play the game as a team? I don't think so, but that is a personal view.

What is missing are concepts like self worth, self pride. If they exist in a team, as it clearly does with a team like the ABs, what role does the captain have other than the official communication point between ref and team?

It seems to me all this talk about 'captain' is only coming about because of these missing elements. This goes all the way back to dublin, and look at the furor over that.

Because there is something about the ethos of this group where some just shrug, and accept, behaviour that would have been stamped out the first second if it occurred within the ABs. And that stamping out would not have come from some figure in authority, it would have been the proverbial 'take that arsehole out behind the bikesheds and teach him what we, as a group, allow as acceptable behaviour'.

There were many who felt the hallowed australian way of 'never dob on your mates no matter the topic' was violated and were outraged back then.

Chickens, roost. It's just the nature of things.

 

[Hoolly Doolly]

Higgers for Captain. You heard it here first.

can someone please poke my eyes out with a rusty screwdriver

 

[Pfitzy]

CANNOT BE UNSEEN!!!!

 

[Viking]

I get your point.

I'd like to think I would be playing to my utmost, 'leader or no leader'. For sure, have a captain to decide whether to go for goal or touch, things like that. To me, that is really where a captains role finishes.

Do the ABs need a 'leader'? One, without which, they could not do their core duties and play the game as a team? I don't think so, but that is a personal view.

What is missing are concepts like self worth, self pride. If they exist in a team, as it clearly does with a team like the ABs, what role does the captain have other than the official communication point between ref and team?

It seems to me all this talk about 'captain' is only coming about because of these missing elements. This goes all the way back to dublin, and look at the furor over that.

Because there is something about the ethos of this group where some just shrug, and accept, behaviour that would have been stamped out the first second if it occurred within the ABs. And that stamping out would not have come from some figure in authority, it would have been the proverbial 'take that arsehole out behind the bikesheds and teach him what we, as a group, allow as acceptable behaviour'.

There were many who felt the hallowed australian way of 'never dob on your mates no matter the topic' was violated and were outraged back then.

Chickens, roost. It's just the nature of things.

That's the thing isn't it. If everyone was 100% clear and 100% committed on doing the duties they are suppose to then no leader is needed as essentially they would all be leaders in their own roles.

The All Blacks are the best team in the world who are the best at playing collectively. Meaning they all know their roles and know what they have to do at any given moment on the field. Now that could be because there are so many experienced leaders in the group... or having so many leaders in the group could be a result of this clarity around a collective goal.

We unfortunately do no have this clarity. So many times we do not work collectively. We lack leaders who can get everyone working on the same page, so every player knows what they need to do. A comment from Jake White on Mowen was he was superb at doing this, he knows how to get everyone on the same page.

This is massive. Having a team working collectively instead of headless chooks.

And it is not as simple as a flankers roles is x and a props roles is y. It is game management on a team level, meaning we are down by this much points, at this end of the field, versing this team with x weakness and y strength, this is what we have to do at this moment in the game.

An example. I don't think Phipps would have gone for a quick tap instead of the point Verse the All Blacks 2 games ago had a good leader been on the field. Everyone on the team would know 3 points is what was needed.

 

[A mutterer]

I'd like to point out the miserable tone taken by many in calling out hooper as captain is getting to smell just as similar as some of the claims aimed at Ewen recently.

And if, as so many of you have publically stated, you find those in poor taste perhaps you should consider pulling your head in.