McCaw’s class shows Cooper can’t be tolerated
Roar Rookie By Bill Chapman, 8 Oct 2012 Bill Chapman is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- Quade Cooper, Richie McCaw, Rugby Union
162 Have your say
2,612 reads
All Black captain Richie McCaw looks on during the team training session in Brisbane, Friday, Aug. 26, 2011. The New Zealand All Blacks are in preparation for the Tri-Nations final against the Australian Wallabies on Saturday. (AAP Image/Patrick Hamilton)
Related coverage
At the weekend Richie McCaw celebrated his 100th Test match win. An outstanding record, but it is even more astounding to note he has only lost 12 test matches in his entire career.
We Australian supporters are inclined to regard McCaw with a mixture of responses, including the customary remarks about his ability to get away with murder on the pitch.
Regardless of our views about him it is clear, from every account and from all observers of the game, that the man demonstrates a very great level of humility and grace.
You struggle to remember any instance of cheap shot responses, even after incidents such as the infamous eye gouging incident in the RWC final last year.
McCaw exudes calmness. He is measured. He consistently praises and talks up his team mates. He does not even seem to become agitated by inept refereeing performances.
He has not, in my recollection, ever been the subject of any bad behaviour off the field. For all of these reasons his team mates, at all levels will follow him to hell and back.
While I may regularly scream at the TV screen and referee that he is offside, lying on the ball, lying all over opponents I cannot recall a single incident of outright foul play.
Contrast the antics of Quade Cooper. This is a man who states that he would refuse to wear his countries jersey. This is a man who engages in his own toxic outbursts in the week before a key test match. This is a man not above cheap shots.
In the (infamous) Fox Sports interview he was disingenuous in the extreme as to what the core problem is between he and Australian Rugby.
He should at least have been honest enough to state what the issues are between he and Robbie Deans rather than complaining about the absence of a five-star coaching resort.
His off field issues are well documented and so I will not repeat them. He may well be a troubled soul, requiring special attention but I submit he has zero personal awareness. He is an extremely well paid young man.
He is in a privileged position and, unlike for example David Pocock, he does not appear to feel any need in his rehab moments to put something back into the community. I suggest the guy has self selected.
Unless Australian rugby, which has any number of issues ahead of it, now wishes to encourage an environment of selfish, egocentric, petulant behaviour such as that demonstrated by Quade Cooper it should accept his ‘resignation’ and move on.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Passionate about your union? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily union email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
- Explore:
- Quade Cooper, Richie McCaw, Rugby Union
October 8th 2012 @ 4:24pm
Sprigs said | October 8th 2012 @ 4:24pm | Report comment
Anybody else you don’t happen to like, Bill?
October 8th 2012 @ 4:26pm
JJ said | October 8th 2012 @ 4:26pm | Report comment
Agreed. Unfortunately, many of us, myself included, have moved on from rugby in the meantime.
October 8th 2012 @ 4:27pm
Bono said | October 8th 2012 @ 4:27pm | Report comment
Great article. Agree 100% with your sentiments.
October 8th 2012 @ 4:28pm
Tom said | October 8th 2012 @ 4:28pm | Report comment
dont blame the ARU on Coopers behaviour. Blame his manager who comes across as a arrogant, disloyal and selfish smug who happens to be the manager of SBW.
October 8th 2012 @ 4:32pm
Johnno said | October 8th 2012 @ 4:32pm | Report comment
Yes Yes a good article one again admitting how great Mccaw is. He is no question maybe the best ever rugby player in history. As much as I find Quade a bit of clown, a goose, toxic himself call it what you want, I am now starting to agree with him on 1 point. A need for a national high performance centre. Canada has just built a million dollar high performance centre , Rugby centre of excellence.
If we had one at Ballymore would be the best spot or one in Canberra it would help, our whole national program.
Mens and womens, 15 a side teams
7even’s mens and women
Under-20 men’s and women
schoolboy/schoolgirl teams
-And special talent training programs could go on there. Plus rent it out to soccer and rugby league, and others eg schools, and amateur teams.
I think a national high performance centre would be good and Qaude is right about that. Coffs Harbour and Caloundra were too isolated but Ballymore Brisbane , or somewhere on the gold coast, or in Canberra, or make concord oval sydney the centre. But it would help rugby massively so Qaude is right there, and why he should eb tolerated as he does make that very good point about environments and having a professional set up, what better way than a high performance centre at Ballymore or Concord Oval.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/more-sports/new-training-centre-a-way-forward-for-canadian-rugby/article2380072/
October 9th 2012 @ 3:20am
Dan said | October 9th 2012 @ 3:20am | Report comment
Dont disagree about the comments on Quade, but I’m afraid I must on McCaw. He’s good, no doubt, but its when uder pressure that leadership skills show. Incidently. How can some-one be “No question, maybe the best….”? Its either no question or maybe it cant be both. Just saying
October 9th 2012 @ 3:40pm
Nick said | October 9th 2012 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
Any greater pressure than a world cup final? He’s a fantastic captain who’s learned from his mistakes and grown into the job. There’s been none better
October 10th 2012 @ 7:58am
Scotty said | October 10th 2012 @ 7:58am | Report comment
John Eales. Willie John McBride. There’s two.
October 9th 2012 @ 3:20pm
Paulo said | October 9th 2012 @ 3:20pm | Report comment
Johnno – I tend to benchmark other teams and since the AB’s don’t have a high performance centre, I assume that based on Quade’s concerns you have benchmarked against Lithuania & possibly Wales (Poland)? Can you confirm?
October 9th 2012 @ 3:54pm
Paulo said | October 9th 2012 @ 3:54pm | Report comment
Johnno – Couldn’t edit my previous comment . . . apologies . . . but assumed you benchmarked Lithuania as they have the record for consecutive test wins though are ranked 36th. Equally, Canada are ranked 13th so I fail to recognise the benefits of a high performance centre. Poland seems to be the venue for Wales High Performance training centre & they share this with a number of other teams & varying sports.
Before suggesting the development of a High Performance Centre for the ARU, can you advise who the staff would be? This seems to be a theme with the ARU/Wallabies . . . who defines the coaches/staff? How long as it been since the AB’s changed their support staff e.g. Mick Bryne (AFL) & Mike Cron (Scrum)? Can’t help thinking how the AB’s back 3 have improved their high ball skills since Mick joined the AB’s & how Mike has handled the percieved AB weakness at “set piece”. . . !
This high performance centre proposal is a significant expense for the ARU based on QC’s suggestion . . . again I tend to benchmark QC versus another kid who grew-up in the same street in Tokora (NZ) i.e. Richard Kahui. Here in NZ, Richard has a group of spectacular 3rd party sponsors who continue to support him thru’ ongoing injuries . . . unlike QC or SBW. He is seen as a role model from a difficult town like Tokora, yet conithues to impress your average Kiwi.
October 8th 2012 @ 4:37pm
Red Kev said | October 8th 2012 @ 4:37pm | Report comment
Your article was fine until this point:
“He is in a privileged position and, unlike for example David Pocock, he does not appear to feel any need in his rehab moments to put something back into the community. I suggest the guy has self selected.”
if you had done your research you would know just how much Cooper does put into the community. Engaging with fans face to face signing autographs as well as on social media, turning up at random club and school level sporting events, his “snap-shift” thing (which I think is a load of bollocks but that doesn’t change the fact it is still charitable work).
Nice points about McCaw, but that line I quoted reduces your article to nothing more than a hypocritical cheap shot.
October 8th 2012 @ 4:40pm
Sprigs said | October 8th 2012 @ 4:40pm | Report comment
Most people who use such language about public figures have never met them and know only a little about them.
October 9th 2012 @ 5:31am
peterlala said | October 9th 2012 @ 5:31am | Report comment
Red Kev, I’m no fan of Cooper. But…I’m happy to give him credit for his posistives.
It’s worth remembering that he has been poorly managed — by his coach and the ARU.
His relationship with the New Zealand public cost Australia any chance of beating the All Blacks in the world cup.
Cooper is like Pinocchio. The puppet-masters animated the puppet…but he has bitten the hand that created him.
October 9th 2012 @ 8:28am
Red Kev said | October 9th 2012 @ 8:28am | Report comment
Cooper did not cost the Wallabies the world cup.
Poor planning for the Ireland match, poor squad selection, poor play by most of the team (including Cooper) cost the Wallabies any chance of winning the RWC.
October 9th 2012 @ 9:08am
peterlala said | October 9th 2012 @ 9:08am | Report comment
RK, that’s true. But I believe Quade Cooper’s battle with New Zealand — including the All Black captain — meant the All Blacks effectively played their final against the Wallabies. The team and the public wanted to ensure they had the final word in the Cooper-NZ argument.
October 9th 2012 @ 12:46pm
Qukezone... said | October 9th 2012 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
Cooper was at the recnt Queensland junior rugby state champs, taking photos with fans and shaking the hands of players and encouraging them.
From what I observed he always makes time for supporters to chat sign autographs and take photos, he is regularly at the junior club grounds around Brisbane watching games – unlike some of the other Wallabies he does not shirk his public duties
October 8th 2012 @ 5:17pm
nobody said | October 8th 2012 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
but Pocock is doing a far greater thing than just signing autographs he is helping the poor people in his native Zimbabwe and is dedicated to help bring awareness for the right of equal marriage, i think i know who i’ll follow.
October 8th 2012 @ 6:01pm
Red Kev said | October 8th 2012 @ 6:01pm | Report comment
So you’re saying because Cooper isn’t born in Zimbabwe his charity work is less valuable?
October 9th 2012 @ 5:33am
peterlala said | October 9th 2012 @ 5:33am | Report comment
David Pocock’s support of gay marriage and carbon pricing is not charity work. It’s a man using his position for political purposes. That too should be stopped by his masters.
October 9th 2012 @ 8:17am
AussieKiwi said | October 9th 2012 @ 8:17am | Report comment
What, because someone is employed as a professional rugby player his “masters” have the right to prevent him from expressing views on the issues of the day? I don’t think so.
And I think the charity work referred to was the work in Zimbabwe. I would guess that most people would support his work raising the gay marriage issue, although it is not “charity” work.
I say good on him for caring. His views and activities are a world away from the me me me attitude of some of his generation (my brand, my future, my rugby, my devlopment, blah blah blah)
October 9th 2012 @ 4:34pm
AndyS said | October 9th 2012 @ 4:34pm | Report comment
And I suppose that, if one of them really disliked boat people and was making inflammatory comments in public on the subject, that would be their right and the ARU should keep out of it…? Whether most or any would support either of them is irrelevant, the question is whether they are trading on their position as Wallabies. I’m inclined to agree with Peter that DP is riding pretty close to the wind getting involved in the political dialogue.
October 9th 2012 @ 4:58pm
AussieKiwi said | October 9th 2012 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
Not sure what you mean by “inflammatory” comments, but you demonstrate the weakness of your argument by using that comparison. In the example you use, inflammatory comments may include unlawful comments eg discriminatory comments, or incitement of racial hatred.
Explain what you mean by the term, and show me an “inflammatory” comment made by DP and then the comparison can be properly assessed.
Generally speaking, by signing up as an employee of the ARU, a player does not lose his right to participate in public debate on social or political issues.
October 9th 2012 @ 5:24pm
AndyS said | October 9th 2012 @ 5:24pm | Report comment
The stuff a Pauline Hanson or Alan Jones spouts obviously isn’t unlawful, as they are still walking around. But it is certainly inflammatory. If a Wallaby were to be saying similar things in a public forum, would you expect the ARU to step in? Inflammatory is in the eye of the beholder – I have no doubt there are fundamentalist christians around that would get quite hot under the collar about DP’s views on gay marriage. But you are saying that’s OK, just so long as you agree with him…?
October 9th 2012 @ 10:26pm
Rob from Brumby Country said | October 9th 2012 @ 10:26pm | Report comment
For goodness’ sake, he was asked for his opinion, so he gave it. It’s certainly true that he has made an effort to cultivate a public (and yes, political) profile, but he hasn’t pontificated, he just stated his views. If you don’t like it, don’t vote for him. Oh, wait…
October 9th 2012 @ 5:48pm
peterlala said | October 9th 2012 @ 5:48pm | Report comment
AussieKiwi, I’m being pragmatic. Not moral. I think the Wallaby captain should focus on his job, leading the Wallabies. God know, that’s hard enough. Just like the head of the ARU would focus on…oh, that’s right…
My mistake. I was thinking about rugby. Not Australian rugby.
October 9th 2012 @ 10:40pm
Rob from Brumby Country said | October 9th 2012 @ 10:40pm | Report comment
Truth be told, I can’t see how his political opinion would have any more of an impact on his rugby than James O’Connor’s opinion of Swisse multivitamins. It’s not like he’s organising rallies.
October 9th 2012 @ 11:32pm
AndyS said | October 9th 2012 @ 11:32pm | Report comment
I don’t disagree, but would just note that the ARU does have the right of veto on sponsorship deals and what the players, as Wallabies, endorse. That is the point exactly.
October 10th 2012 @ 10:42am
AussieKiwi said | October 10th 2012 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Andy S, that may be the point, but not in the way you mean. If you are right there is a contractual term re sponsorship. That makes commercial sense. There is no contractual term that the players can’t take part in ordinary political debate, aand express their views,as is anyone’s right.
You introduce the term “imflammatory” and I agree with you that what constitutes inflammatory comment is, to a degree, in the eye of the behlder. That is exactly why it is unhelpful in this discussion. If anything that could be considered inflammatory by anyone, including Christian fundamentalists, was off limits to players they would be completely muzzled.
There are some basic standards of decency (which were obviously transgressed by Jones in his comments about Gillard’s father) but beyond that, the players are entitled to get behind any cause they choose.
The law has great difficulty in defining the precise limits of freedom of speech. Despite this difficulty there are limits, and that is why, for example, Jones has been done for defamation. Calling Lebanese men “vermin who infest our shores” is an example. It incited racial hatred and it was unlawful. If Poccock had said something like that, you might have a point. As it is, you have given no examples of his saying anything which might be remotely characterised as unacceptable in mainstream debate.
So yes there are limits, but some perspective please. Players are members of society and entitled to participate, within normal limits of civility, in political debates.
If there was a serious issue about bringing the game into disrepute, then there would have to be a discussion, but we are not even close to that territory with Pocock’s support for gay marriage. Just because there is a twilight, doesn’t mean there is no night and day.
October 10th 2012 @ 12:41pm
AndyS said | October 10th 2012 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
It is a good point about the commercial aspect, which certainly has an influence. But not for the ARU, who don’t necessarily get any money from the deal. They have the power of veto simply because it impacts on their brand (and Jeez, how I hate to use THAT phrase!).
OK, ignore inflammatory as too imprecise. There are all sorts of issues in the public domain, so would you agree the ARU should just ignore it if a current Wallaby were asked his position and divested himself of the opinion that only university qualified english speaking immigrants should be allowed in and the rest sent back, that gender unquestionably plays a big part in the PM’s performance, that God doesn’t exist and that marijuana and ecstasy should be legalised and become a personal choice. None of those views would be particularly extreme or unusual within the public debate – should the ARU be happy to have a Wallaby attach himself to them?
Your position seems to be that Pocock’s position was fine because his position wasn’t contentious. It isn’t particularly, but ask Julia whether drugs or gay marriage have caused her more grief as Prime Minister. And it is not like it can’t fire people up, as a lot of muslim countries still execute homosexuals. So it isn’t that they are not contentious, it is simply that they are politically correct to us. So back to the original point, who decides the acceptability of comments and by what criteria? Unless the ARU has published some sort of guidelines for the players, or told them it is OK to say whatever they like to whoever they like, then DP is rolling the dice.
October 10th 2012 @ 3:39pm
AussieKiwi said | October 10th 2012 @ 3:39pm | Report comment
Andy, my position is that there is a spectrum of behaviour, ranging from totally innocuous (eg campaigning for cancer research) to what would be generally regarded as offensive and unacceptable (eg the Alan Jones’ Lebanese comments referred to above). There has to be a balance struck in what is permissible. In striking that balance I favour the free speech end of the spectrum. The players are adults, not children. Beyond that I don’t think there is any simple answer.
I remember being very disappointed when Drew Mitchell tweeted a ringing endorsement of “his man” Tony Abbott in the last election, but that is his right.
I am unsure what your position is. That the players should say nothing about any topic that has the potential to be controversial, no matter how strongly they might feel about it?
October 10th 2012 @ 5:47pm
AndyS said | October 10th 2012 @ 5:47pm | Report comment
To a large extent, probably yes. My personal opinion is that being good at rugby makes them no more qualified to comment on non-rugby topics than the next person and the only reason their opinion is courted or receives any air time is because they are a Wallaby. They should simply decline to engage, just as they do if someone asks them about their opinion on the refereeing.
It is always nice to have a sensible discussion on a topic, but I’ve only really carried on the conversation because I see it as a serious problem in the making. It used to be that a player would have to write an article or be asked a direct question for this to be an issue. But we now have social media allowing people to widely disseminate opinions on just about any topic and a team of young men seemingly addicted to its use. Goodness knows too, I’ve come across few so consistently certain about the rightness and importance of their opinions than people in their early twenties. There have already been problems with players crossing the line on refs, the internals of the team and events within matches, so it is probably only a matter of time before something similar happens on an off-field topic. So far it has all been plain vanilla, safe and politically correct and the ARU appears to have no problem with it. So that would seem to be the precedent – so long as it does not affect rugby and doesn’t get them in legal hot water, the ARU has no part to play regardless of the view expressed. Let’s just hope no-one ever asks any of them any of the hard questions on religion, politics, right-to-life or any other blue touch-paper subject.
October 8th 2012 @ 5:24pm
WQ said | October 8th 2012 @ 5:24pm | Report comment
Ritchie McCaw is the best player to ever play the game.
His record speaks for itself and will not be bettered any time soon.
When the time comes he will handle his exit from the game with the same class that he has handled his entire career. I for one hope that is not for a little while yet!
October 9th 2012 @ 2:08am
Spencer said | October 9th 2012 @ 2:08am | Report comment
John Eales was the best Rugby player ever!
October 9th 2012 @ 3:50am
Tisso Time said | October 9th 2012 @ 3:50am | Report comment
Spencer I am into my sixth decade of watching test match rugby and I agree with WQ. This said John Eales was a very good player.
October 9th 2012 @ 5:24am
mania said | October 9th 2012 @ 5:24am | Report comment
wow spencer. johnEales was great but mccaw is the greatest. this is my 4th decade of watching rugby
October 9th 2012 @ 8:52am
Spencer said | October 9th 2012 @ 8:52am | Report comment
When RM kicks a goal to win a test match, and wins his second RWC, I will re evaluate my opinion. In the meantime I maintain my view. But thanks for your opinion.
October 9th 2012 @ 9:11am
peterlala said | October 9th 2012 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Spencer, McCaw for me. But John Eales did kick goals — match-winning goals at that.
October 9th 2012 @ 9:49am
Jerry said | October 9th 2012 @ 9:49am | Report comment
Richie McCaw scores match winning tries, instead.
I was actually surprised to see how poor Eales try scoring record is – obviously a lock isn’t gonna score as many tries as a back or even a mobile loose forward, but he only scored 2 tries in 86 tests. For a skilled mobile forward like him, that is actually pretty poor.
October 9th 2012 @ 11:27pm
ChrisT said | October 9th 2012 @ 11:27pm | Report comment
An almost identical record to Martin Johnson, 2 in 84 tests …… ‘though i don’t remember him ever being daft enough to take a swing at the posts ….. maybe a few other things ….
October 9th 2012 @ 11:12am
garth said | October 9th 2012 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Exactly, WAS the best and for his time, always will be. For now though, it is McCaw. 112 tests, 100 wins even Eales didn’t match that.
October 9th 2012 @ 12:34pm
wMc said | October 9th 2012 @ 12:34pm | Report comment
Eales – great player he was – not even in top 3 or 4 locks. Meads, McBride, Johnston, Matfield to name a few equal or better
October 9th 2012 @ 1:46pm
Jerry said | October 9th 2012 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
Nah, I’d have John Eales in an all time XV. The fact that he was a great player in both the amateur and pro eras and a great lineout proponent in both the pre and post lifting eras shows how good he was.
October 9th 2012 @ 10:22pm
WQ said | October 9th 2012 @ 10:22pm | Report comment
I am with you there Jerry
October 9th 2012 @ 1:00pm
WQ said | October 9th 2012 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
John Eales was in the top ten and a brilliant Rugby Player, he certainly was not better than Ritchie McCaw.
October 9th 2012 @ 2:12pm
GWS said | October 9th 2012 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
Eales never cheated. Mcaw could have worn the wb 9 and no one would have noticed
October 9th 2012 @ 3:56pm
WQ said | October 9th 2012 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
Yeh Yeh, same old dribble!
You don’t think John ever broke the rules GWS?
October 9th 2012 @ 4:06pm
peterlala said | October 9th 2012 @ 4:06pm | Report comment
GWS, you are right. That’s another point against Eales.
October 9th 2012 @ 11:52pm
Halleys Comet said | October 9th 2012 @ 11:52pm | Report comment
“Best” is just a subjective term, an opinion, which folks have a right to, doesn’t make it compulsory for others to agree though
October 8th 2012 @ 5:31pm
SkinnyKid said | October 8th 2012 @ 5:31pm | Report comment
Have to a agree. R Maccaw is the best player I have seen.
Does he get away with murder? no question. But the ABs are the masters at it.
They and he are also masters at taking their opportunities. Amazing to watch.
October 8th 2012 @ 5:33pm
krisl of Utah said | October 8th 2012 @ 5:33pm | Report comment
McCaw should never be compared. they are not in the same level.
October 10th 2012 @ 8:04am
Scotty said | October 10th 2012 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Indeed not, one has 2 World Cups.
October 13th 2012 @ 11:13am
Jerry said | October 13th 2012 @ 11:13am | Report comment
Eales 2 RWC titles are indeed impressive, but McCaw has been a much more consistent winner overall. He’s more Super Rugby Titles (7 to 0), more TN/RC titles (8 to 2), more Bledisloe Cups (10 to 7) etc.