Quade Cooper’s fellow Wallabies have leapt to his defence after former All Blacks coach Graham Henry called him the team’s “glaring weakness” at last year’s World Cup.
In his recently released biography The Final Word, Henry said: “Quade Cooper was plainly the weakest link. Coach Robbie Deans had taken him out of the front line … because he was a suspect tackler. He doesn’t lack heart but defending is not his area of strength.”
The ex-coach said dropping New Zealand-born Cooper back weakened Australia’s back three in both a positional sense and for kicks in the air.
But Cooper’s teammates rebuffed suggestions they would be reluctant to play beside him.
Winger Drew Mitchell said the flyhalf had proven himself to his teammates and that was all that mattered.
“They’re the ones you want to convince, and when times get tough you want to make sure the bloke you’re playing next to knows you can do the job,” he said.
Mitchell added that players weren’t motivated to get the blessing of an opposition coach.
Fullback Adam Ashley-Cooper said Cooper was a player with great ability.
“Playing with him is always exciting. There’s a lot of unpredictability around his game,” Ashley-Cooper said.
New Zealand-born Cooper had a difficult run in 2011 where he bore the brunt of Kiwi hostility at the Rugby World Cup.
Henry led the All Blacks to win the world crown, and his book’s release coincides with Cooper’s return to the Wallabies after suffering a season-ending knee injury during the bronze medal final and other complications along the way.
Wallabies Coach Robbie Deans was unimpressed with Henry’s attack.
“I haven’t read his book,” he said.
“Quade’s in the squad, he’s returning to the game, he’s working hard at that. He’s a bloke that’s played fairly in the past and he will in the future.”
And it seems the squad’s refusal to take Henry’s bait has trickled down to the man in question himself.
Last night Cooper tweeted to over 600,000 followers: “Determination to succeed against all the odds = attitude.”
Kane, I believe the Boks would have been a totally different game altogether. At the time I was chatting exclusively on another site and during the world cup the All BLack supporters kept reminding everyone that the All BLacks feared the Aussie more than the Boks. The NZ media climbed onto the same wagon at the time. Suposedly their unpredictability was more a threat than the Boks' predictability. However looking at the records of the two teams against the All Blacks over the preceding years, nothing suggested or proved the Wallabies were more dangerous to the all BLacks. Forward packs are what depicts whether a team wins or not, back line players can depict by how many points. Based on how the Irish and Boks stifled Australia to such an extent that their backs had little to do but defend, their backs was never going to be an issue. The Boks know how to stifle forward packs and killing ball at source, the Wallabies to win has to outscore teams with running rugby. The point is, there was a lot of smoke blwon about the wallabies and their attack, and yet against every top team they showed nothing. The Boks could have beaten the All Blacks, but one thing is certain, it would have been a much tougher game.
The Expert
Guest
Biltong Well said im just over the two decades they have complained of reasons they have lost cups im even willing to admit it wasent all lawrences fault in the quarter and we wont be going on about it in 10 years The reason i brought up 87 was that the moaning they do does the same it takes away from the team that won i was simply giving them a taste of how other teams mustve felt in last 24 years that have won the cup In 2003 for example no team would beatve england i actually think as little as i want to that was the most dominate team to enter a cup soo well prepared though im sure the kiwis would still say they shouldve won that one Im not the only one on here that has had a go at gh as i said it looks worse his comments as nz has had too many excuses over the years ,this is why his comments go down like a lead balloon Btw i never thought lawrences was involved in match fixing hes just hopeless ,match fixing comments question someones intelligence so im actually surprised kiwis would defend those comments by gh
Kane
Guest
Name why 87 was a weak fact? was or 2003 or 2011 a weak cup because the Springboks didn't make the semi let alone the final? Was 1999 a weak cup because the Springboks didn't make the final? Give me some facts why Henry isn't loved world wide? I hear they love him in Wales. How about some facts why the stadiums are sub par? What makes a stadium worth wile for a final? As long as there is a proper field to play on I see it is adequate. "You guys steal alot of pi players and do little to help build these teams fact and im not talking players born in nz im talking the others" You say this yet I've told you facts that they take ore of our born players than we do of their born players so your points have no traction! Call me sensitive if you want but maybe I'm allergic to bullshit!
Kane
Guest
I'm just baiting the troll! I'm aware that on certain days the ref for some god forsaken reason decides to favour one team over the others. I was hoping for a Springbok All Black semi over anything else but alas it dint happen. i must say I think the way the all blacks were playing they would of beaten the Springboks but if you don't believe that you are welcome to your opinion.
Just to clear a few things from the way I see it. Expert, The reason why I compared 2007 to 1987 is because you are devaluing a world cup win because the Boks didn't play the All Blacks, by the same reasoning you could then devalue our win in 2007 because we didn't play the All Blacks. Devaluing any RWC win is not acceptable. Then to all. To discuss the 2011 RWC and why SA wasn't there to meet the All Blacks in the semi final is a very sensitive and debateable point whch isn't going to end in good debate for various reasons, but I'll give you my opinion on it. We can blame ourselves for not finishing a team off that was under huge pressure for the most part of the game, we can argue the Australian try's legality till the cows come home, we can also ask the question how it is possiblethat the Australian team only conceded 5 penalties in a game under the type of pressure they were under, and how it was possible that they conceded virtually no penalties in their 22. But for the purpose of the debate to go on, let's just say in spite of circumstances we should have won that game. I want to say this, The All Blacks are the best team in the world without any doubt, in the first half of the 20th century the Springboks were the best team in the world, these things go in cycles, we are still behind the All BLacks but not that far behind, consider the fact that over the past 8 years we have had a 40% win ration over the All Blacks whilst they have been trouncing the toffee out of every other team, as a Springbok supporter I am acutely aware of the challenges we have faced over the past 16 years to fight politics, quotas, nepotism and plainly just poor administration. The fact is as much as we debate this point, the All Blacks only have one real rival, and that is the springboks, sure it took us a while to muddle through all the challenges of our new society and I doubt it will ever be over, but we are slowly getting back to the point where we challenge the All Blacks to a point where they know they will have to be at the top of their game to beat us. In the last 8 years we have more wins over the All BLacks than all the other teams put together. That is a fact and therefor I beleive there should be a mutual respect between not only our teams, players and media, but most of all amongst ourselves.
The Expert
Guest
kane Your statement dosent look great as those are facts sunny boy Another fact no other country has matched for 24 years you had excuse after excuse why you lost world cups which tried to take away from the real world champions credibility Really vile to be honest ,all the other teams just went home started over not the constant bitching really really poor sports and im sure many would agree Henrys comment are jumped on not because what hes said more because of the 24 years of it the whole rugby world has got
You really want an answer to that?
The Expert
Guest
Kane 87 was a weak cup is a fact ?? Henry is not well liked worldwide fact ?? You used sub standard stadiums for world cup fact ?? You guys steal alot of pi players and do little to help build these teams fact and im not talking players born in nz im talking the others Mate as ive said hardly vile btw kiwis just like to live in a pretend world where no one says some of these facts ,you must be a very sensitive bloke
Kane
Guest
You have brought nothing but vile to the table, no facts what so ever my friend.
The Expert
Guest
Kuruki Get a sence of humour ,i changed my name to chuckles out of respect to the great gh ,ive brought up plenty of facts you just dont like ive said things the kiwis dont like to bring up and in fact not one person on here has any ammo that has proven anything ive said is not accurate Just because you believe the all blacks any coach or player they have had is perfect dosent mean rest of world has to believe this i would actually say its accurate that nz is not well liked world wide for a top team and i believe alot of the moaning by people like gh has caused this over the last 20 odd years If you guys think nz is say as liked as the brazilian football team well dream on you are not ,this site be very boring if we all agree on everything you seem like the kinda bloke that winge about what happened in nz like 200 years ago ,my original name was expert and i didnt change it all the time as you have moaned about
Kane
Guest
Why do you include Biltong in this? Sure he may disagree with some of my opinions but at least he has a sound logic for those opinions. Please don't try and bring him down to your level again, he is above and beyond your petty immature rants.
Kane
Guest
I think you didn't read my replays! Yet you're still stating we steal a lot of island talent yet they steal more off us. Call them weak cups all you like but I doubt the Springboks had it in them to win the 1987 or 1991 RWC the worlds best teams at the time won them end of story. Why was introducing the cup in 1987 a joke. The Springboks aren't the be all and end all to world rugby. Just because you guys weren't there doesn't make it a waste of time. No you didn't get to the semis because you guys couldn't enter a team end of story. Is that worst from a South African point of view because the two cups we have held here you haven't been able to make the semis when the one time you hold a cup we make the finals there? If South Africa is that much better at hosting than NZ why haven't you hosted another one?
Riccardo
Guest
Why do you change your name when it's so obvious that it's you? This is weak, insincere and immature. Very few cheap shots your way whoeveryouare. Actually, just about every reply has been validated by statistics. It's you that makes negative generalisations, even to Biltong, a Bok fanatic and your countryman. You treat him with disdain and his knowledge far exceeds your's. Shame on you. 1987 was the inaugural RWC. Of course it was a little weak. The Boks were missed but so what. The All Blacks were deserved victors and the gauntlet had been laid down. Enough said. If you take the time to analyse International Squads you will find that the Wallabies have more imports. So do England. This diminishes your stance somewhat but I would ask you what's your point in the first place? Gh? Your understanding of English, and rugby for that matter, is embarrassing. It's Sir Graham to you, you little pip-squeak. He is the most successful Coach of the most successful sports team in history, bar the Needle, who's tenure was brief. So yes, there is plenty of doubt about your acid-laden opinion. Show some respect and your posts will be engaged accordingly. There are a lot of All Black detractors on this site who can still debate with humour and knowledge. You appear to have neither... You are an embarrassment to the game.
Riccardo
Guest
Good post Nabley. Spot on...
Kuruki
Roar Guru
Can we please get rid of this absolute muppet. He is a disgrace to this site. The fact he is changing his name shows this is nothing but a trolling session. He will change his name and crawl back into his pathetic little hole. Better yet tell us all what his original name is on this site.
Chuckles
Guest
Sorry nabley i changed name to the kiwi legend sir chuckles
Chuckles
Guest
Nabley The expert is waiting for you to point out something ive said thats not fact ?just because i have a few stabs at people from those funny little islands does not means the are not facts I just think the kiwis acted like coopers was the bloke that shot all those poor people recently in colorado it was a bit over the top ,ritchie macaw plays to they far side of the rules so im sure hes used to the odd kick but oh dear qc kicked him for gods sake they need to harden up Dont you think nabley the kiwis would defend any kiwi no matter how much in the wrong if a pom a sth african or an aussie said anything about them oh dear you cant say that hes a kiwi ,ultimate small man attitude
Nabley
Guest
The Expert (what a strange nom de plume given some of the things you write). In answer to your question, you would have to ask a Kiwi that. On our Western side of the Tasman, I think that if a loud mouth NZer did what QC did he would have got the same treatment. Lets not try an make excuses. QC was a liability and Henry has got it right. I hate to say this but I think damaging his knee might just have been the best thing that has happened to him. It gavehim time for introspection and adjustment. He did a really good defensive tackle against the Sharks which showed something most of us have never seen before.
colvin
Guest
ABF, I like the moniker. There have been over 300 posts on an article named "Wallabies support Cooper after Henry attack" I could see early on that this thread was turning a bit competitive, so early on I came up with a list of subjects that I thought might be a bit more constructive to discuss. That didn't get far so I came up with the question of which is Higgers best position, thinking that the Roarers might be interested in giving their views on whether he should be a back or a forward. They weren't, so I decided to spike their interest and hit them with the possibility of SBW joining the Tahs, as I was sure that would get them excited. But all to no avail. So the I threw at them the possibility of Wayne Smith and Aaron Cruden joining SBW at the Tahs as I was convinced that Tahs supporters would leap around with joy and thank all NZers and the NZRU for being so generous; almost brotherlylike to their Aussie mates and neighbours. But I got nowhere. It seems the Roarers were more content roaring at each other so I stepped back from it all. But I heard another rumour, did you hear this one ABF? Richie has put in for a sabatical in 2013 and has agreed to put in a high priced season at the Tahs to do his bit to revitalise the Tahs brand and ensure HSBC get better value for their sponsorship money. A win for everyone.
The Expert
Guest
Nabley I thought qc didnt deserve what he got in nz at all it made you guys look poor sports to whole world ,i didnt realise hed done much to macaw i think more your media going on quade hurt our poor ritchie and you guys sucked it up big time The 4 more years chant was odd at eden park too as it showed kiwis never understood gregans original sledge ,you guys are allways favourites so are only team that can choke the 4 more only applies to nz Can any kiwi understand this ?