Wallaby Watch 2014

[The_Brown_Hornet]

AND if you cannot manage the game (isn't that one of the most important attributes of a captain) then you shouldn't be even considered. Therefore EVEN if Poey comes back it will be very very hard to unseat Hooper from the way he is playing over the last 2 years. Kid is also only going to get better.

Tip: Poeys ARU contract will be downgraded next time he negotiates. Simply because we have one Michael Hooper then a Hodson and a Gill

Hard to disagree with that Scrubber.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I get the feeling that the Pocock supporters fall into the same trap as people who look to Moore and say senior player, first choice selection, not a complete fuckwit = must be a good captain.

Some people are just good senior players. You'd look at them to fill in at captain but you'd be in trouble if they were your first choice. The captain needs to be able to lift his team mates, hold them accountable and still maintain their respect. Horwill was good at this and this is why he was stuck with until Link looked to remove him from the starting team for a period. It's also why Mowen has been good.

For some players it can be a burden, for others like Mowen and Horwill, it brings out there best.

 

[BarneySF]

Makes me think about all those 'fill-in' 10's. Those that come to mind (in no certain order):

1. Gerrard (midweek EOYT team). Disaster although I liked it on paper.
2. Horan for a few games/
3. Nathan Grey against England in Melbourne 2003. Solid with no fancy stuff and little kicking IIRC.
4. Matt Rogers?? - Or was it that he always wanted to play there?
5. Pat Howard (or was he a 'regular'?)
6. David Knox

 

[Braveheart81]

For all Beale's so called selfish, individualistic play, he's managed to rack up a pretty good number of try assists this year.

Like most people, I'd pick Foley for the first test, but I think Beale is copping a fair bit for past sins (real or imagined... mostly real though ).

 

[Viking]

I get the feeling that the Pocock supporters fall into the same trap as people who look to Moore and say senior player, first choice selection, not a complete fuckwit = must be a good captain.

Some people are just good senior players. You'd look at them to fill in at captain but you'd be in trouble if they were your first choice. The captain needs to be able to lift his team mates, hold them accountable and still maintain their respect. Horwill was good at this and this is why he was stuck with until Link looked to remove him from the starting team for a period. It's also why Mowen has been good.

For some players it can be a burden, for others like Mowen and Horwill, it brings out there best.

Not necessarily. I always look at who's actually addressing the group. More often then not it's Pocock. I remember thinking numerous times watching the wallabies in a huddle after an opposition try, seeing Pocock addressing the team and thinking - why isn't the captain doing this.

Anyways, Enough of Pocock, Hooper should be Captain currently as there's a good chance Pocock won't get back to full fitness any time soon.

 

[Slim 293]

Tip: Poeys ARU contract will be downgraded next time he negotiates. Simply because we have one Michael Hooper then a Hodson and a Gill

I doubt Hodgson or Gill will have much effect on Poey's contract negotiations............

But no doubt Hooper will be getting a huge boost.............

 

[Scrubber2050]

Slim

THEY are sheer bloody minded nowadays and will look for any excuse

 

[Slim 293]

Pocock's injuries, and Hooper's rise to regular Wallaby starter/possible captain will certainly come into it...........

But I doubt Gill or Hodgson will be seeing any top ups.........

 

[Train Without a Station]

Slim,

It likely will. It's simple supply and demand. We all know some duds like Saia Fainga'a have had ARU contracts. Not because they were considered test standard, but due to the lack of alternatives. In this case there is a bonza of alternatives. If they are smart they will be putting money towards top players in positions of low depth, not high depth.

 

[Slim 293]

TWAS, I probably got in just before you posted that.......

I agree Pocock's value will have diminished with his injuries, and the rise of Hooper, although his marketability and form for Australia will probably still see him get a decent sum............

However, I don't think Hodgson or Gill will have any affect on that as they're unlikely to be receiving top ups from the ARU..........

 

[Sully]

Am I the only person who doesn't think Pocock is really a great captain? I'd have him over Genia even with Genia in best form, but ultimately, if we are going to be the best team in the world, we'd need a better "captain".

I haven't seen one thing that shows Pocock to be a good captain. In fact I'd say I've seen the opposite.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[The Red Baron]

Makes me think about all those 'fill-in' 10's. Those that come to mind (in no certain order):

1. Gerrard (midweek EOYT team). Disaster although I liked it on paper.
2. Horan for a few games/
3. Nathan Grey against England in Melbourne 2003. Solid with no fancy stuff and little kicking IIRC.
4. Matt Rogers?? - Or was it that he always wanted to play there?
5. Pat Howard (or was he a 'regular'?)
6. David Knox

I don't think Knoxie was a fill in 10. Played a fair bit of his rugby at the Brumbies there if I recall correctly. And Randwick, and everywhere else.

 

[Hawko]

I don't think Knoxie was a fill in 10. Played a fair bit of his rugby at the Brumbies there if I recall correctly. And Randwick, and everywhere else.

If you asked me where David Knox played most of his rugby, I would have said 10 without hesitation.

 

[BarneySF]

If you asked me where David Knox played most of his rugby, I would have said 10 without hesitation.

Yeah - meant for the Wallabies. Couldn't recall. Totally a 10 by trade.

 

[It is what it is]

Knox won 8 of 8 test matches for the Wallabies playing No 10 over an 11 yr period from 1985-96.
Wish we had more fill-ins like him.

 

[Braveheart81]

If you asked me where David Knox played most of his rugby, I would have said 10 without hesitation.

I would have said Coogee Oval.

 

[It is what it is]

I would have said Coogee Oval.

Boom tish, I'm here all week.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

If you asked me where David Knox played most of his rugby, I would have said 10 without hesitation.

and I suppose his 8 tests proves we haven't always been bothered with 10's who could/would tackle

 

[boyo]

Beat me to it

 

[Hawko]

There has been a lot of selective watching going on in Super Rugby and a lot of false memories. Simmons and Horwill have not been responsible for the Reds slump this year with two exceptions: Simmons has been a penalty magnet at times, often as a result of niggle play and Horwill has let emotion cloud his judgement in relation to handling referees.

In tight, Horwill's work has been very good and his stats reflect that. No one's died as a result of a bone cruncher, but he has moved bodies and made inroads. Simmons has probably been our best lineout exponent. I predict that both of them will start the first test if the French have their best tight five available. If some of them are not available due to Top 14 final commitments then Link may well want to experiment a bit.

If the French have full availability for test one, Skelton might well be the bench player not for his impact but in order to shore up the tight head side of the scrum. This is the French we are playing; to a french front rower its more important to win the scrum battle than the match. Hands up anyone who believes we have a rock solid tight head and a strong scrum. Yes, I thought so. The one thing we learned on the EOYT (but knowing us have probably forgotten) is that we must have an eight man effort in order not to be massacred by good scrums.

I suspect that, depending on results and form, Carter and Jones will appear in matches two and three, probably from the bench. If the scrum starts badly in test one I can see Skelton starting in game two with Jones or Carter on the bench.