Test Rugby Wallabies Rugby World Cup discussion

[Maester]

It's much easier to be exposed in a struggling team than it is to do well, especially when your best asset is your running and attacking game. Imagine how much better Hooper would be in a dominant side constantly going forward. It's actually easier for a guy like Pocock to stand out in a poor side, because in a poor side he'd be defending all the time and he does his best work in defence.

Most teams in the world would kill to have Hooper. Some of the way you describe things is pretty ridiculous. To suggest he isn't world class at test level is just evidently wrong. I actually think Hooper may be a better option against England. They don't have the greatest attack in the world, but they are very difficult to break down. Hooper is the kind of guy who can create a line break out of very little and often does. Tries are gold against a team like England and I'd rather we throw everything at them in attack. On the other hand, in a match against the All Blacks I'd certainly rather start with an in form Pocock.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

It's much easier to be exposed in a struggling team than it is to do well, especially when your best asset is your running and attacking game. Imagine how much better Hooper would be in a dominant side constantly going forward. It's actually easier for a guy like Pocock to stand out in a poor side, because in a poor side he'd be defending all the time and he does his best work in defence.

Most teams in the world would kill to have Hooper. Some of the way you describe things is pretty ridiculous. To suggest he isn't world class at test level is just evidently wrong. I actually think Hooper may be a better option against England. They don't have the greatest attack in the world, but they are very difficult to break down. Hooper is the kind of guy who can create a line break out of very little and often does. Tries are gold against a team like England and I'd rather we throw everything at them in attack. On the other hand, in a match against the All Blacks I'd certainly rather start with an in form Pocock.

My issue with Hooper and it is the same for NSW. He looks fantastic when we are on top and making line breaks. However when we are down he does very little to change the way the game is going. You need a number 7 that can change the game in defence. Defence creates tries and pressure, and frustrates the opposition. Hooper doesn't do that enough. Now is he poor, no he isn't. However he isn't work class in that asset. Pocock isn't as good in attack but he creates more opportunities for his attacking players. That is the number 7 we need, we don't need a runner.

Hooper hasn't been great against the really top sides, and I'm talking SA, NZ here. We need to beat these two to win the WC. No point picking someone who won't be fantastic against those two. The plan would be for Pocock to start and then to have two number 7's on for the last 20 (Hooper on the bench)

 

[Maester]

I wouldn't be against that plan, but I don't think Pocock's nailed down the spot yet. It will come down to how they perform in the Rugby Championship.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I wouldn't be against that plan, but I don't think Pocock's nailed down the spot yet. It will come down to how they perform in the Rugby Championship.

Has no bearing for me, or very little unless Pocock is ridiculously out of form and I doubt it. Pocock is going to be better in big games. For all Hooper being fantastic, he was belted against NZ, SA last year, especially NZ. I want a pilferer against NZ. To win the WC we need to beat NZ. Lets model our best side on beating NZ. No point trying to pick a side to beat Wales when they are minor players in terms of the end result.

50-60 minutes of Fardy/Hooper then bring Hooper on for Fardy. Miss a bit in the air but our lineout is terrible whether Fardy is there anyway.

 

[Maester]

So form in international rugby, against the two best teams in the world has no bearing? Please, it'll have total bearing.

Hoopers stats from 4 matches against New Zealand and South Africa last year (according to ESPN): 1 try, 4 turnovers, 37 runs for 116 metres, 11 defenders beaten with ball in hand, 50 tackles and only 1 penalty given away. Hardly the stats of someone who got belted. Those are excellent. Lets see how Pocock does against the same opposition first.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

So form in international rugby, against the two best teams in the world has no bearing? Please, it'll have total bearing.

Hoopers stats from 4 matches against New Zealand and South Africa last year (according to ESPN): 1 try, 4 turnovers, 37 runs for 116 metres, 11 defenders beaten with ball in hand, 50 tackles and only 1 penalty given away. Hardly the stats of someone who got belted. Those are excellent. Lets see how Pocock does against the same opposition first.

1 turnover a match for a number 7 is pathetic and you know it. You are relying on the other side dropping the ball to get possession, number 7's that turn the ball over are just so much better when the heat is on. If they give away a penalty or two so be it, I would rather my number 7 try and disrupt the ball. You want NZ with clean ball? I don't. They will put 50 on us that way. Pocock's matches against NZ have been better. He will be the number 7 and Hooper can warm the bench for 60-65 mins.

 

[Maester]

1 turnover a match for a number 7 is pathetic and you know it.

Averaging 1+ turnover a match is actually not that common. On Rugby HQ a couple of weeks ago they showed Pocock had been making about 1 turnover a game this season in Super Rugby (which was admittedly a lot higher than Hooper).

So the question is whether say 1 or (at most) 2 extra turnovers a match is worth more or less than what Hooper adds in attack. The reality is that it's still a toss up until we see how they both perform for the Wallabies in the RC.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Averaging 1+ turnover a match is actually not that common. On Rugby HQ a couple of weeks ago they showed Pocock had been making about 1 turnover a game this season in Super Rugby (which was admittedly a lot higher than Hooper).

So the question is whether say 1 or (at most) 2 extra turnovers a match is worth more or less than what Hooper adds in attack. The reality is that it's still a toss up until we see how they both perform for the Wallabies in the RC.

That is the thing, Hooper can't even get turnovers in Super Rugby, and I keep saying it. He has good points but he is just a pretty number 7 in defence. Defence wins matches more than often, I want my number 7 in the ruck, turning the ball over. If they give away a penalty here and there so be it. 1-2 extra turnovers can be an extra 6-7 points on the scoreboard, that is a pretty big difference. Not a toss up for me, it is just whether we pick an extra number 7 in Hooper on the bench or we pick a Luke Jones type. I'm tossing up on that point and probably would carry an extra 7.

 

[Maester]

You just said you thought 1 turnover a game is pathetic. And that's about what Pocock averages. 1-2 extra turnovers can be an extra 6-7 points a match, but more often than not it wouldn't be. And an extra half break or 5 beaten defenders is just as likely to translate to an extra try.

A potential joker in the pack here is George Smith. He's been playing number 8 for Lyon in the Top 14 and apparently killing it. If you had him at 6 or 8 then you could play Hooper at 7 and Palu, Higginbotham, McCalman or Luke Jones in the other spot and have a pretty balanced backrow.

I wouldn't be surprised if all 3 of Smith, Giteau and Mitchell are picked for the initial Wallabies Rugby Championship squad so that Cheika can get a look at them.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You just said you thought 1 turnover a game is pathetic. And that's about what Pocock averages. 1-2 extra turnovers can be an extra 6-7 points a match, but more often than not it wouldn't be. And an extra half break or 5 beaten defenders is just as likely to translate to an extra try.

A potential joker in the pack here is George Smith. He's been playing number 8 for Lyon in the Top 14 and apparently killing it. If you had him at 6 or 8 then you could play Hooper at 7 and Palu, Higginbotham, McCalman or Luke Jones in the other spot and have a pretty balanced backrow.

I wouldn't be surprised if all 3 of Smith, Giteau and Mitchell are picked for the initial Wallabies Rugby Championship squad so that Cheika can get a look at them.

Guess what pity Hooper hasn't done that at test level, Pocock has and he has the runs on the board. Fact is if he wasn't injured he would have been our number 7 the last 2 years. He is just the better player. Ask NZ who they would least likely want to face and it wouldn't be Hooper.

Smith..just no please, no more dads army please. As it is Giteau and Mitchell are pushing it. At least Mitchell helps us in a position we are average at best. Still would rather give an exemption to Digby Ioane though.

 

[Maester]

Yeah, as the stats I gave you demonstrate, Hooper has been doing it at test level. But I agree that Pocock would be a better option against the All Blacks in most circumstances. In case you haven't noticed though, the Wallabies haven't done any good against the All Blacks since well before either of them came on the scene. It's not like we were smashing them and then Pocock got injured.

From all reports Ioane hasn't been playing well in France. To be honest, I'd be surprised if Drew Mitchell makes the world cup. I think Speight and James O'Connor will be on the wings for the Wallabies if fit, and that Adam Ashley Cooper and Tomane will be next in line. But I wouldn't be surprised to see Mitchell get picked in the RC squad and get a chance to impress.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

We were a lot closer when Pocock played that is for sure. Our number 7 shouldn't be in the backbone waiting for it to be done for him. He should be in the ruck getting the ball. Simple actually and Cheika will see it that way at test level. Now whether Pocock captains the side is another thing though, I'm leaning towards giving it to someone else but that is a personal opinion.

I'd rather Iaone than any of those 3. Giteau was pedestrian at test level..and he is older now. People severely overrate Matt Giteau. He is another bloke who is an absolute front runner, fantastic when you are on top pathetic when we are not. Smith was past it 2 years ago and was replaced by Pocock and we looked so much better, can we not go after him please. Mitchell I am on the fence about and it is purely the wingers you listed- only JOC gives me any confidence. Sleight isn't having a great season, and AAK should be in the centres or on the bench, as a winger he is average. Tomane, maybe...but Mitchell is better. He isn't that old too.

 

[Maester]

Meh, whatever I think you're a bit narrow minded about the 7 position. It doesn't have a set job description and what's most important is the balance of the back row. I will be very happy with either Pocock or Hooper at 7. Whoever's there will be in the top 3 or 4 players in the team.

I think all Wallabies fans would love to have 2011 Digby Ioane available, but I think 2015 Ioane would be well down the pecking order.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I would be much happier having Hooper come in against tiring forwards around the 55-60 minute mark. It is playing to both players strengths. Pocock is MUCH better in the ruck, disrupting the ball and creating turnovers, let him do that for the first 60 alone. Replace a number 6 around the 60 minute mark and have two number 7's in the last 20, with Hooper basically playing as a running backrower.

 

[S120]

Rory Arnold and Adam Coleman are getting talked up hugely by Paul Cully (Sydney Morning Herald writer who I rate quite highly) to be pushing for lock spots in the RWC squad. I really want to see at least one of them play Bledisloe/RC matches.

Lord knows we need to improve in that area and we don't have many other guys to keep them out.

 

[Maester]

Rory Arnold and Adam Coleman are getting talked up hugely by Paul Cully (Sydney Morning Herald writer who I rate quite highly) to be pushing for lock spots in the RWC squad. I really want to see at least one of them play Bledisloe/RC matches.

Lord knows we need to improve in that area and we don't have many other guys to keep them out.

Well Skelton has been playing really well the last month or so. He's improved a lot. I think he and Simmons will likely start the first Wallabies test if fit. But like you I want to see Coleman and Arnold get a crack at some stage as well. Luke Jones also - though he might be better at 6.

 

[S120]

Well Skelton has been playing really well the last month or so. He's improved a lot. I think he and Simmons will likely start the first Wallabies test if fit. But like you I want to see Coleman and Arnold get a crack at some stage as well. Luke Jones also - though he might be better at 6.

Yeh I think Jones is a more ideal 6 at Test level. Fardy is our best guy there anyway for now, but long term I think Jones could own that jersey. Until he puts on a bit more bulk anyway. Rory Arnold and Adam Coleman both would have 8-12 kgs at least on Jones at this point, very valuable bulk to have as a lock, particularly at Test level.

Skelton I have softened on but I am still wanting to see how he scrummages at Test level before I relax with him. Everything else about him is very valuable but if he can't provide at least competent scrummaging behind our front row, he's not worth starting. If he shows he has improved significantly at Test pressure in the scrum, then I'd absolutely start him.

I'll be very frustrated if both of Arnold and Coleman don't make the RWC squad but Sam Carter does.

 

[Maester]

I'll be very frustrated if both of Arnold and Coleman don't make the RWC squad but Sam Carter does.

Or worse - Horwill!

 

[S120]

Cheika to announce the Rebels, Force and Reds to be part of the train on squad this weekend before the Tahs and Brumbies finish their seasons.

Personally I really hope to see Adam Coleman, Paul Alo-Emile, Nick Stirzaker named this weekend in the squad with a chance to travel to RWC. Throw in other young forwards like Rory Arnold, Scott Sio, Tolu Latu when their seasons are done. These guys are the next generation and it'd be great to have them in the Wallabies system from now on.

Greg Holmes has to be there too. If he doesn't make the final RWC squad behind Robinson/Alexander I will be very exasperated. Best tighthead scrummager in the country and we need that in Europe.

 

[S120]

Cooper, Faingaa, Hanson, Horwill, Genia, Gill, Hunt, Holmes, Kerevi, JOC, Simmons, Slipper, Coleman, Faulkner, Cummins, Hodson, McCalman, AloEmile, Higginbotham, Jones, McMahon, Toby Smith

22 named for pre Rugby Championship training. No Cowan, Charles, Stirzaker, Schatz.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Genia really? Can we stop picking blokes off what they did 4 years ago

 

[S120]

I don't mind Genia going as the back up. I'd rather take the very experienced rather than the very young (Stirzaker) or even the limited Nic White.

Lopeti Timani not getting picked while Horwill gets the nod is pretty mystifying though. Rory Arnold best get picked too.

 

[Maester]

Karmichael Hunt getting picked is very strange. Stirzaker and Timani should have been there IMO.

Horwill is very lucky and has certainly been picked on past performances. No way should he be in the world cup squad unless there's an injury crisis.

 

[S120]

I get Hunt being picked. Cheika probably wants to see him up close in the context of the systems and structures that he wants to enforce with the Wallabies.

 

[S120]

Hunt is likely better than what he showed with the Reds this year but most of them are with Graham as coach. I doubt he'll be picked but I don't mind him getting this chance.

I'm not convinced JOC will make the RWC just quietly.