Pocock would have been paid 50% more if the contract was for three years of rugby instead of two.
Where to for Super Rugby?
- Thread starter Quick Hands
- Start date
- Status
Pocock would have been paid 50% more if the contract was for three years of rugby instead of two.
He is comfortably our best player. It's not surprising that we have missed him.
The variance in results with him in the team versus out of the team are substantial.
Merrow
Arch Winning (36)
They certainly are. The most frustrating thing about watching the last 3 tests are the distinct lack of turnover ball.
Dave Beat
Paul McLean (56)
No we haven't.
We can not relay on one man, our problems have been basic rugby skills across the park, building phases, crossing the add line, and scoring points.
Yes he is one of our first picked - but he as one player will not change the problems we have all seen.
Merrow
Arch Winning (36)
Not sure that I said that, but yes, as you say, as he's one of the first picked, we definitely missed him. Frustrating to watch our back row not being able to secure any turnover ball. It's a skill that our current crop don't seem to be able to master. And frankly, if I don't want to see a battle for the ball then I may as well be watching league.
I get what you're saying, and Pocock is a player who would be missed by most teams (probably only not the ABs), but I wonder if the obvious plan to not go hard at turnovers in these mid year Tests would have been radically different if Pocock was here? Intuitively, you'd think so, but who knows. Against teams like the All Blacks, I think the role for a single player aiming to do that is limited these days as they are so aggressive at the clean out. He'd be good enough to get one or two, but he's so heavily marked by them now and our penalty count from attacking the ball last year was high. But if we go up against the ABs with no real structure to attack the ball, and no basis to be confident of counter-rucking to get the ball but just standing off and hoping to "out-defend " them, we will be, like all their opponents, cannon-fodder.
We'll find out next year. Of course, his defence alone is a thing to miss.
Short answer - yeah, he is missed.
Dave Beat
Paul McLean (56)
As per what Cyclo said.
I don't think he would have changed the outcome.
I'm confused about game plan and game management;
Building phases, crossing the add line, earning the right.
A number of people have said Hooper has been one of our strongest over these 3 tests - so that would mean one of them playing out of position, and this impacts us elsewhere.
Yes missed - but gee, as i said - my concerns lay elsewhere.
I think you'd still pick both of them in the starting XV. Between Higginbotham and Timani, number 8 wasn't a strong position for the Wallabies in this series.
Merrow
Arch Winning (36)
That's not saying much really. Overall the team has been pretty shit, with only a couple of exceptions.........Coleman for one. Hoopers more effective playing with Poey than without him. If you're not playing someone like Fardy, then you have to have someone like Poey that can make something out of nothing. If someone has to play out of position then so neither. It's not like it hasn't been done before in the Wallabies.
I'd take that one or two t/o's Cyclo
Who wouldn't!
Dave Beat
Paul McLean (56)
I'm still yet to disagree with you.
All I said is that there are far larger problems at play than not having Poey.
Some of the selections have really intrigued me - why isn't Fardy there?
Test matches are played to win, not experiment.
dru
David Wilson (68)
Playing the double 7, with Hooper and Pocock, exposes balance issues in the back row and line out. If we are returning to it, must have Fardy or Higgers as the third back rower. Is it Hanigan that people rate in the line out? Maybe him then but we miss having a "punch it up" no 8 with Hanigan imo.
Coleman/Arnold/Carter MUST sort the line out as well as we would only have three primary jumpers. Opposition teams are already sussing our weakness to being pinned in the 25. It only gets worse with the double 7.
L
Leo86
Guest
Not to take away from Fardy
Hodgo. His wife said the other day he has broken his nose 33 times
Who else bleeds that much for their team?
Hodgo. His wife said the other day he has broken his nose 33 times
dru
David Wilson (68)
Stoff, I think there is plenty for South Africa to resolve with running in two international pro comps. How will the Celts enthusiasm work coming from Euro winter to African Summer? Perhaps on the Hiveldt? I don't think it is comfortably sustainable until tested.
Got to give them 10/10 for innovation/disruption all the same.
Some fan talk is for one of the Euro teams to be a combining of two-three non-franchise teams. Helps the intention of concentrating the Currie Cup too.
It is a fascinating "watch this space", but I don't think it's an inevitable dropping of SANZAR or even a $ or horsepower race between Soup and Pro 12(14).
We can only wish that the ARU understood the term "B Plan".
dru
David Wilson (68)
I understand the positives but we should also know the risks. Put that line out against England and it is a result with plenty of predictability.
It's possibly necessary, but it is not without risk.
half
Dick Tooth (41)
Tuesday night was at a function the host is a very well connected Rugby fellow.
I asked him who is going to get the chop Force, Rebels or Brumb's move to Melbourne.
He laughed and said words this this effect, if its the Rebels they have to pay between 26 and 30 million. If they move the ACT side and merge they will effectively give the Rebels the side and they won't do that. The ARU believes it can deal with the WA gov.
They can't afford the 26 to 30 million so its already decided. He then said you should be able to work it out from that.
I asked him who is going to get the chop Force, Rebels or Brumb's move to Melbourne.
He laughed and said words this this effect, if its the Rebels they have to pay between 26 and 30 million. If they move the ACT side and merge they will effectively give the Rebels the side and they won't do that. The ARU believes it can deal with the WA gov.
They can't afford the 26 to 30 million so its already decided. He then said you should be able to work it out from that.
- Status