Michael Hooper presents a significant problem for the Wallaby side. Hooper is a fantastic player; his tackling is great, his engine is inexhaustible, and his running game is superb.
Michael Cheika wants him on the field for the Wallabies and it is an opinion that is difficult to disagree with. Hooper is a difference maker with ball in hand – he is just not a strong breakdown presence.
And as a backrower, especially one wearing the No.7 on his jersey, that is problematic.
On June 30 I wrote that Cheika was too smart to start Hooper over Pocock given that the latter is clearly the best openside.
I said that I expected to see Hopper come off the bench for last 20-30 minute to inject running, but starting Pocock allows Higginbotham’s lower work rate to be accomodated and provide a lineout option.
Now, after the Springbok game, I am convinced that Michael Essa (there’s a lot of Michaels in this story) was correct in his article on July 8, and that by naming Hooper as vice-captain, Cheika has nailed his colours to the mast and will pick him in the starting side.
There is no doubt that Hooper is a net positive to the Wallabies. What has to be acknowledged though is that Hooper brings complications to the balance of the side.
Firstly, his offensive ruck involvements are below par, he is far too often stationed in the centres looking for a run. In half of the Wallaby breakdown turnovers conceded against the Springboks Hooper was stationed one in from the wing and made no attempts to secure the ball.
Secondly, he is not a very good pilferer of the football at the breakdown, barely troubling the stats people when it comes to steals or penalties forced (3 per 15 games in contrast to Pocock with 26 and Liam Gill with 24).
Hooper also doesn’t push well in the scrum, and is always guilty of disengaging his shoulder too early, and is too small to jump in the lineout.
There are numerous comments on The Roar criticising Hooper on these points, citing them as proof that David Pocock should be the Wallaby openside flanker – I’ve posted a fair few of them myself.
Pocock is a different sort of beast; he too possesses a massive engine, is a more prolific tackler than Hooper and an absolute demon at the breakdown, almost impossible to shift off the ball and arguably the best in the world at winning penalties there.
Pocock, though, doesn’t have the running and linking game of Hooper, he’s stronger, but doesn’t have the speed, and he also can’t contribute at lineout time.
With two great talents like this, in possession of complementary skill sets (picture a Hooper driving tackle with Pocock following as the arriving player to steal the ball), it seems obvious that the Wallabies will be a stronger team with ‘The Pooper’ (the correct term for playing Pocock and Hooper in tandem) on the field.
However there is a cost and it comes at set piece time. With the Pooper on the paddock, numbers 4, 5, and 6 and whoever is on the bench in numbers 19 and 20 all need to be lineout jumpers. That means the Wallabies cannot afford to have Will Skelton in the side at all.
Cheika is not willing to pay the price of no Will Skelton. He has been reported as saying that there was “no risk” to playing Hooper and Pocock on the field at the same time, and that the team had practiced for the situation of having Skelton, Hooper and Pocock all together at lineout time.
That is a concerning statement with a game against Argentina coming up. The starting back five forwards for the Pumas all jump at lineout time and even Victor Matfield would struggle to combat that with only two jumpers.
So what do you Roarers think Cheika should do?
Far north rugby fan
Guest
Id love to see a back 5 of Simmons, Horwill, higginbotham, pocock, mccalman and have the bench a 6-2 split with Arnold/Skelton, mumm, and hooper on the bench have the work horses grind them down then bring in the game changers to finish the fight
really
Guest
How do you solve a problem like Hooper? Personally I'd try and Make him a Tight head Prop. He's got the right build. he isn't much shorter then slipper and he'd give the front row some extra firepower in the open field. But that will clearly never happen
Rebel
Guest
"Caught Habana" is a bit misleading, tackled from the side yes, but it's not like he ran him down from behind. Also, in my eyes he never made a clear release of the tackled player and should have been penalised. This is not a slight on either player, just calling that one play as I saw it. It's a good dilemma to have fitting both players into the side.
Johnny Boy Jnr
Guest
McCaw is there for his leadership and game awareness. McCaw never poisoned his own coach while fracturing his own squad at the same time.
Magic Sponge
Guest
Theres no problem to solve cause he is one of our best forwards, but red eyes are blinded.
Red Kev
Roar Guru
Why not 13. He gets over the advantage line, great tackler. Kerevi-Hooper in the centres against the USA, k go.
Jereme Lane
Roar Guru
you could hardly say that pocock is big enough for 6 or 8 too. he is 10kg lighter than most. i love how the debate is one of the hottest topics in world rugby that has all the experts split but johnny boy jnr has just decided it for us all! Thanks mate
RobC
Roar Guru
Gday Kev. Thanks for the cool topic, and questions. imo, For this weekend, he should tell Hoops to push scrums like there's no tomorrow. Poey is the better openside scrummager. WBs dealt with Pumas before, in Gold Coast last year - including Hoops. Mendoza was a disaster, but that we in the middle of text-gate or shirt-gate. I would prefer Poey for a safer scrum. Although this weekend, lineout may be less of a problem this weekend, so Pooper may work. Either way, I hope we can get a decent kicker. If QC cant kick goals, I want him outta there until he gets his radar right.
Johnny Boy Jnr
Guest
[snip. No insults pls] This has nothing to do with Gill. It has to do with Pocock being a superior player to Hooper as a no. 7 and Hooper not being tall/heavy enough to be effective as a 6 or 8. Playing two 7's hasn't worked before but given how limited the Wallabies are in talent it's probably worth giving another go this season. That means Skelton has to be escorted to the departure lounge immediately (unless he miraculously learns to scrimmage and jump in line outs prior to their match this weekend).
MiB
Guest
Hooper could fix two problems in one by moving out to #12 (until Cheika acknowledges he needs Kerevi). Apart from Pocock into #7, the pack remains the same. Jumping options at 4, 5, 6, 8. After all - the lineout was impeccable last weekend, it was only the breakdown that was of major concern. A solid crash-ball runner at #12 such as Hooper would help to straighten the attack, bend the line and tighten the defence in one simple positional change. He stays close to the action (quick breakdown recycling) and could potentially evolve into a Nonu-type playmaker with a bit of gametime in the midfield. His combination & experience with Folau could make for a beautiful offloading highlight reel. I have honestly never understood the hype over Toomua. He's good, but not great. The reason he looked like a 'game-changer' last weekend was more to do with Pocock and Phipps; quick ball from repeat phases of possession. And as much as I wanted Giteau to succeed in his return, that was also fairly lackluster. The Wallabies need a big #12 with instincts to run the ball. Hooper. (or Kerevi).
PeterK
Roar Guru
agree with all your points
Super-Human
Guest
What's interesting is how often McCaw doesn't pilfer anymore. And still is a massive influence on the game.
jemainok
Guest
Hey Big Kev, after a couple minutes thought on the topic, I came up with the view that Hooper could be the catalyst for change in number 7. However I don't think he will be seen as the one who caused the dynamic ball running number 7, who runs like a winger when shown a bit if space, because of the fact he is not so strong at the breakdown. Now putting on my Kiwi hat, I see a flanker in the New Zealand ranks who has many of those wonderful game changing attributes that Hooper pocesses, except he is very good at the breakdown, so good, I would suggest next year he will put the preordained Sam Cane on the bench, then force Cane to become a 6. That is just my speculation of course. But Ardie Savea has the Potential to be a special player. And a big thanks to Hooper for once again showing a 7 can be that dynamic ball runner because I was forgetting how good Michael Jones was and Hooper took me back to 1987 with a couple of his runs last year.
Hoy
Roar Guru
Why can't we just have complete player like other countries? Why can't we have complete skills like other countries? What is wrong with our coaching through juniors/club/whatever that means we can have a good linout jumper in Simmons, but Simmons can't help but give away penalties at ruck time? Why do we value a prop like Kepu over one like Holmes, who can actually keep scrums up? Why do our play makers like Beale/Foley/Cooper get to that level with such terrible defense? At least Cooper appears to have worked hard on it, but is still a good league grappler, more so than a bloke who will drop a runner cold. How does our main centre for many years, AAC, not know how to pass, or set up his outside player to pass to him?
Warpath
Guest
You make a lot of sense, I just want to nitpick one thing. When you say Horwill is a better pick than Skelton 'on current form', you're basing that on 30 mins as a sub for Horwill and 50 mins for Skelton as a starter. Because prior to that, Skelton's form was far better, to the point where most didn't even want Horwill in the squad and Skelton was an automatic selection. Since the game I've seen others write off Skelton as a wallaby altogether. This is crazy talk. Everyone has good and bad games, you don't chop and change so quickly. If Skelton fails to perform another couple of times then maybe you make a change. Until then, stick with him.
LifestyleSpecialist
Roar Rookie
Boks played 3 open sides on Saturday with only class jumpers. Wasn't a disaster for them. I'd be dropping Skelton to bench anyway as long as Horwill shows some mongrel to balance out Simmons. If not the new and improved Dean Mumm or the forgotten Luke Jones or giant Arnold to have a shot.
Mad Dutchman
Guest
Got carried away - four points not two!
Mad Dutchman
Guest
I have two points to make, largely in response to the negative/death-riding comments that have been made: 1) Was Skelton really that bad? He kept the ball alive on occasion, made some metres with ball in hand and, for mine, it is his supports (or lack thereof) that are responsible for the ball subsequently being turned over. Besides, and this cannot be measured, I suspect the Boks mauled less than they usually do because of his selection in the team and his fantastic maul disruption throughout the entire Super Rugby season. For those who do not want him in the team this week please tell me who is going to stop the Argie maul if he is not there??? (They scored 2 maul tries against the AB's for those who missed it!) 2) It is very tempting to say all the reserves who came on and made a difference deserve a start this week but it is always going to be far easier to look good in 20-30 mins against an opposition who are either weaker or tired. 3) I am amazed there are still some questioning Hooper - what game were you watching? 4) I am all for a 'horses for courses' use of players but am worried by how close we are getting to the rwc and how much better Cheika needs to understand the combinations that 'work'.
Squirrel
Roar Rookie
It is a no brainer to pick Hooper and Pocock. Where are all those egg faced gill supporters now
World in Union
Guest
Considering that Hooper was probably the best player on either team last Sat I think you have to include him in the starting XV and throw short at virtually every lineout. His defense was superb and we all know about his attacking and linking skills. The other forwards will have to show more mongrel at the breakdown and between Fardy, Palu and Higginbotham the Wallabies have No.8 position covered. So yes, let's use 'The Pooper' to propel the Wallabies during The Rugby Championship. At least it gives Cheik some time (4 games) to see if this works or needs amending. Now, as for 'Kev' Horwill .. I'm certainly not convinced and after last Sat I have to say "ditto" for Will Genia and Matt Giteau - the latter is just too small.