Wallaby Captaincy

[Sully]

Stephen Moore for captain ala Davis Cup style. He just made the speech Hooper should have made on Rugby HQ.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Stephen Moore for captain ala Davis Cup style. He just made the speech Hooper should have made on Rugby HQ.

Exactly. A much more levelled head response, whilst being decisive.

Quite liked his comments about Patston also.

 

[Dctarget]

Hindsight's a bitch.

 

[Froggy]

While I don't have any problem with Moore being offered the captaincy, a good speech (which he may or may not have written himself) is hardly what we should be judging a captain on. The problem is, captaincy is not about being a consistent player, which seems to be what people on this thread are assuming. Moore, Slipper and AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), may well all be good skippers, who knows, but have any of them captained a side at any senior level?
Michael Hooper is clearly a leader, hence he's a guy who has attracted captaincy at all levels, including taking over the Tahs after Dennis was injured. Now I agree with many posters here, he wasn't really ready for the top level yet, and has shown that on several occasions. The trouble is, Horwill is really the only other player in the current 23 that has top level captaincy experience (and I think he's a good captain, by the way), and Link doesn't seem to want to start him.
What seems to be suggested here is 'Hooper doesn't seem ready yet, so let's try someone totally untested".
I'm not sure if that's sound thinking.

 

[Slim 293]

While I don't have any problem with Moore being offered the captaincy

He was already offered the captaincy........

What seems to be suggested here is 'Hooper doesn't seem ready yet, so let's try someone totally untested".
I'm not sure if that's sound thinking.

That's not really it though.............

Hooper gained the captaincy because Moore was injured, and it would be expected that Moore will regain the captaincy when fit.............

And based on recent events it would seem that Hooper might not be quite ready just yet for that role at test level.

Most of us supported the decision to give the captaincy to Hooper when Moore went down despite his youth as he clearly has leadership qualities, and he will be better for the experience, but right now the Wallabies need a more experienced leader.

 

[Thinker]

Michael Hooper's captaincy has changed my views on the matter quite a lot. Ironically, into line with the views of any captain I work with as a coach etc.
(This was his on-field captaincy. His performance this week has even cemented these views further)

I was staunchly against SA carrying Smit for all those years, but not only did they win the RWC, the had a quality captain for any game he played.

We don't have a captaincy issue, we have an issue of captaincy amongst the guys selected.

I'm not suggesting Kev as skipper, but our season on the field would have certainly benefited from his captaincy and in all seriousness we wouldn't have lost much if he played vs Carter or Simmons. Most of the guys who are potential captains are not much worse than other playing options and have much higher ceilings than the guys who are.

Moore is probably the only skipper candidate who is a lock in the team. I'd also say Pocock but the injuries have caused people to forget just how good he is.

Most of our World XV caliber players, those who have the potential to be when at their best or who have been in the last 3 years, all have captaincy potential; Moore, Horwill, Pocock, Hooper & Genia, reformed Cooper is a maybe while Folau is a long shot and comment is not required for Beale.

If we were SA or NZ all these guys would be playing week in, week out when fit and we'd have a glut of quality leadership. Since we continue to ignore the "win the world cup" model, Moore is probably the only 100% walk up start when fit. Even the openside debate has 4 popular answers.

Personally I thought we had it pretty good with the Horwill, Pocock and Genia group but while Horwill had quite a bit of success as captain (in trophies) his ref management wasn't as smooth as it could have been.

So a Moore captain with a VC from Horwill, Genia, Pocock, Slipper or someone else who I've missed.

 

[Thinker]

Were they great teams because of a great captain, or were they great captains because of a great team?

You can have great captains without great teams, but you can't have a truly great team with a great captain.

Three common denominators between all RWC champs Captaincy, Length of time together and Goal Kicking (almost cost the Kiwis).

Results solidify the legacy of a captain, but they aren't necessarily the creator of it. The RWC tend to fall on the right side of things, but plenty of runners-up, if they had have gotten up and won might not have captains in that echelon.

 

[REDinCPT]

there's another player who is always selected when fit, doesn't seem to be susceptible to long term injuries and usually plays 80 minutes: Rob Simmons

this might actually happen one day!

 

[Sandpit Fan]

there's another player who is always selected when fit, doesn't seem to be susceptible to long term injuries and usually plays 80 minutes: Rob Simmons

this might actually happen one day!

Just when you thought the thread was winding down...

Strap yourselves in boys, the next few pages could be interesting!

 

[Ruggo]

Moore should get the job back no doubt. Happy to see QC (Quade Cooper) get the vice captain that he had before injury.

Genia isn't a great captain for the record. Under the pump he has a nasty little habit of turning on his team mates and not in a positive way might I add.

 

[Train Without a Station]

@Thinker, just a few comments.

I agree you can't have a great team without a great captain. At the same time, do you honestly think John Eales would have been an effective captain against Argentina with the individuals he had around him? Eales also had good leaders like Horan, Gregan, Kearns around him for much of his time. Hooper for instance lacked anything resembling this.

With regards to Pocock, I strongly disagree people have forgotten how good he is. The longer he is out, the larger his legend grows. I just think some people have realized that a player whose biggest strength is the breakdown, who only pilfers as much ball, or a little more ball as Hooper does has limitations in what he offers all-round. People say he controls and turns the tide on games. I fail to see any indications of these moments with the exception of rare instances (RWC QF is a great example of one, but a rarity, not the norm).

I agree we may have been better served with Horwill as captain and likely wouldn't have lost anything starting him.

 

[Froggy]

Firstly, I thoroughly agree with those posters who said we would have been better served with Horwill as captain and playing in front of either Simmons or Carter, however Link clearly isn't of that mind.

I just don't agree with the comments that suggest Moore was the savior, but when he was struck down we were left with Hooper. Yes, Slim Moore was offered the captaincy (I was talking about him being re-offered it when he gets back) but what evidence do we have that he would have been any good? He MAY have been brilliant (although one wonders why, given the time he has had at the top, he hasn't had a captaincy role before), but where is the evidence? What sides has he captained?

 

[A mutterer]

I never thought that the amount of masturbation that occurred during the fappening could ever be topped but looks like you've got there gents.

Well played?

 

[Scrubber2050]

No one really knows if Moore will be a good Captain.

BUT he ticks all the right boxes (not in any order)
1. Conservative
2. Great player
3. Well respected by playing group.
4. can string a few words together in a Press Conference
5. Respected by coaching staff and obviously ARU
6. Very very experienced player, approaching 100 caps.
7. Has ability to "lift" players around him from his own game

8. AND he's a Queenslander - this one is only a bit of humour

 

[Train Without a Station]

I will say, I think Hooper would be a better captain if Moore was in the team.

 

[Braveheart81]

No one really knows if Moore will be a good Captain.

BUT he ticks all the right boxes (not in any order)
1. Conservative

Que?

In what way?

How exactly is it a positive?

 

[ACT Crusader]

I will say, I think Hooper would be a better captain if Moore was in the team.

And some on here would probably argue that Hooper would be a better player of Moore was in the team and captaining.

 

[Slim 293]

Firstly, I thoroughly agree with those posters who said we would have been better served with Horwill as captain and playing in front of either Simmons or Carter, however Link clearly isn't of that mind.

I just don't agree with the comments that suggest Moore was the savior, but when he was struck down we were left with Hooper. Yes, Slim Moore was offered the captaincy (I was talking about him being re-offered it when he gets back) but what evidence do we have that he would have been any good? He MAY have been brilliant (although one wonders why, given the time he has had at the top, he hasn't had a captaincy role before), but where is the evidence? What sides has he captained?

He's captained the Brumbies in the one match Mowen wasn't available, and he'll be the team captain next year...........

 

[Strewthcobber]

There's one fairly major cross against his name at the moment though isn't there.......

 

[wamberal]

I will say, I think Hooper would be a better captain if Moore was in the team.

And perhaps if the team management was good enough,