Yesterday I wrote on The Roar with acclaim about Daniel Carter’s career. His climax to the Rugby World Cup was a genuine fairytale finish for a great performer.
Does this mean he was the best player in the world in 2015?
Carter’s performance in the clutch moments of the World Cup will become the stuff of legend, but across the entire season he wasn’t the best player this year.
David Pocock should have won the top gong at the IRB awards. The awards should capture form on both the domestic and international stage across 12 months of a calendar year.
In that case Ma’a Nonu might have been a stronger candidate as New Zealand’s nominee. Nonu had a storming Super Rugby season with the Hurricanes and backed that up with a stellar World Cup.
Anyhow, returning to Pocock.
Pocock is the biggest reason why Australia have transformed from rabble to near riches in 12 months.
Australia won the Rugby Championship and beat the All Blacks for the first time in four years with Pocock in the team. The twin attack of Pocock and Michael Hopper presented for the first time in a long time an original and genuine challenge to the All Blacks’ superiority.
Australia was smashed in Auckland when Pocock was strangely regulated to the bench after Sydney. His work at the breakdown is peerless at the moment, while his speed to the ball and his strength and technique over it are immense.
Pocock won more turnovers (17) than any other player at the World Cup – Richie McCaw won seven. Pocock’s ability to spoil opposition ball is perhaps the important facet to the Wallabies’ success.
Pocock was named man of the match against Fiji. His two tries and defensive disruption foiled a fierce challenge. He could have easily received similar recognition against England and Argentina, and that’s an opinion shared by smarter rugby brains than mine.
It’s no coincidence Australia struggled considerably against Scotland in the quarter-finals when Pocock was absent
How did the All Blacks limit Pocock’s effect in the final?
They cleverly attacked the short side, with short passes, quick recycles, low risk, and battered the Wallabies forwards into retreat, thus making it difficult for Pocock to zero in on his target.
The Wallabies didn’t muscle up, simple!
This is hardly Pocock’s fault. He played a strong game. He edged a feverish McCaw in the tackle count and was the last Wallabies defender chasing Beauden Barrett when he scampered away for the winning try. That effort alone epitomises his intensity.
Earlier in Super Rugby, Pocock was an essential figure in the Brumbies’ push to the semi-finals. He played 14 games and was in the top 20 for tackles made and top 10 for turnovers poached.
Additionally he scored eight tries, the most by a forward (tied with Boom Prinsloo). He became the first forward in Super rugby history to score two-hat-ricks in the same season.
Now let’s compare this with the efforts of Carter.
Carter wasn’t bad in Super Rugby, but far from memorable, especially by his own lofty standards.
He played 13 games and scored 127 points. He kicked 45 goals from 57 attempts and played a blinder against the Hurricanes in Nelson when the Crusaders beat the top-ranked round robin side.
The Crusaders missed the playoffs for the first time since 2001 – a massive failure for the fabled franchise. It should be noted the flawed points system meant the Crusaders actually finished on a greater number of points than the top team in the South African conference, but Carter didn’t impose himself on Super Rugby like Pocock did.
What about the international season? Carter scored a valuable 20 points in Apia to help a makeshift All Blacks struggle past Samoa. Yet he was horrible in Sydney – The New Zealand Herald gave him a four out of ten. He got his revenge in Auckland however, playing sublimely.
At the World Cup he was patchy during most of pool play, before transforming into the star he is in the finals. He scored 19 points and won MVP in the decider.
Carter had a great year, but Pocock had the best year.
PS: The coach of the year award was won by Michael Cheika. Steve Hansen’s snub in New Zealand caused some anger, but what about Eddie Jones?
His achievements at this World Cup were remarkable. Japan hadn’t won a game for 24 years. In 2015 they won three matches, climbed to 10th in the World Rankings and narrowly missed out on a first-ever quarter-final place.
Their win over third-placed South Africa must surely rank as the biggest upset in rugby history. Television audiences soared at home growing to reach 25 million against Samoa. Who else could achieve such an improvement with great flair and similar cattle?
vic rugby
Guest
Why look at mc caws 2010 season when you can watch him owning pocock and hooper in 2015
ThugbyFan
Guest
What most of our Kiwi friends forget, aggrieved at the mere proposition that Saints DC and R.McCawcaw do not walk on water, is that D.Pocock was in a team lacking really good locks, with virtually no lineout to guarantee possession, a workable but dodgy backrow and playing against an extremely well-coached team in which any of the 8 AB forwards would walk into any other international team. The sum of the AB pack was such that it could easily negate one man's play no matter how good he is and that's exactly what happens when the WB play the AB. They had tactics to keep Pocock out of the game by attacking elsewhere, knowing they easily held the upper hand against any of the other WB forwards. Put simply, at Eden Park and the RWC final, the team with the best PACK of forwards won. To consistently beat the AB, Australia needs more quality cattle. If the WB had a lock of E.Etzebeth's class and lineout presence, plus a ferocious large No 8 of D.Vermeulen's class, then we wouldn't be having this discussion as Pocock would have had licence to play at #7 as only D.Pocock can play. Who knows who would be the grinners then? Of course D.Carter and M.Nonu played great games, but any backline looks fabulous if your piggies are on top and going forward. Sadly we cannot see how they would go playing for teams with far weaker packs, playing in reverse gear most of the time, say Italy or USA. If I had to pick a Player of the Year, surely it is M.Nonu although R.McCaw would also get in on sentimental value. D.Pocock misses out in my view, simply because he wasn't in his best position.
kiwi
Guest
Others on this blog have made a good point about Pocock. He's been exceptional at the breakdown, but that alone isn't enough to win games or make you a truly great player. His tackling is sound but he offers little on attack and in support play. Players like Carter had significantly more influence on the outcome of games, not just because he's a no.10, but because he ensures time with the pill translates into points. Pocock won a lot of turnovers, but how often did it actually turn into points? I don't think his work at the breakdown is as influential as most people think, especially when the ABs are happy to kick the ball away and use their line speed to create offensive opportunities.
Phantom
Roar Rookie
As a #8 Pocock filled 1 of the key requirements of the position. The rest were MIA
ScrumJunkie
Guest
Absurd comment, and i'm never that harsh.
cylon
Guest
They did prepare for it, but the retallick at first receiver strategy turned out to be a rare tactical error by the nz coaching team. However, they have capacity to adpat and change strategy which is superior to any other coaching team in world rugby. There is a reason the ab's don't lose two in a row. After Sydney, their new strategy at Eden park was successful in nullifying cheika's approach. The tactical masterclass in the rwc final is another example of the superiority of the ab coaching staff. With chieka's demonstrated inability to change his game plan, pooper in the final wasn't ever going to be as much of a threat as oz fans hoped, because the ab's had already cracked it tactically.
cylon
Guest
The biggest difference between Sydney and Eden park and Sydney was the change in the ab's game plan to deal with pooper. In Sydney they used retallick as first receiver which failed. At Eden park they went back to DC running the show. The rwc final further demonstrated the tactical
puff
Guest
Interesting article and written with a degree of passion and commitment but what constitutes the player of the year award? Pocock is a journeyman with pilfering abilities that make him the standout performer within this local team but on the bigger stage where this award is judged. He is not in Carter’s class. It is beyond his capability to neither control play, a match nor field position. Playing as the breakdown expert he is not gifted with farsightedness, the kicking ability or foresight, to some up situations, act accordingly and stamp his authority on the scoreboard. Pocock is one dimensional and likes to domination within his comfort zone. He is lost out wide and in up tempo situations, has no kicking skills, is not considered fast, is not regarded as a lineout play maker but is a great defensive team player. In the Bledisloe matches and particularly in the RWC final, DP was missing in action. He labored with the NZ strategy and the pace of the match; hence his contribution was limited and not that note worthy. Sorry you achieve accolades when performing on the big stage when matching your abilities with the best in the world, not kicking the ball around the back yard.
Frisky
Guest
Hi Tragic, Nonu did a lot of work through heavy defensive traffic after receiving the pass from SBW. Who else could have scored that try? He tore the defender apart a large number of times and dented the line every other time. The MVP in my opinion.
Fox
Roar Guru
Not to be taken seriously? Yea well considering an Australian has barely won any WPOTY you would say that but bet if you had won as many as NZ you would be singing a different tune and especially of Pocok won it. Dan Carter was sensational in the Bledisloe decider - Controlled the game totally against Tonga - France - South Africa and in the Final...In the big games head to head Carter edges Pocock and Carter was played out of position for the Crusaders most of the season as well And Carter was the far far better player in the biggest game of the year - the WC final - totally deserved his win - I have said before - the greatest players step up in greatest games against the best opposition..Mccaw and Carter were both superior to Pocock in the final - just as McCaw was in semi-final at Eden Park in 2011 as well..he is without question the greatest no7 and captain to have ever played the game Carter stepped up in the biggest game of the year - Pocock did not
Rugby Tragic
Guest
Hi Frisky, the Cane games Nonu played are not included, the gong is selected from tests only. Yep was a very good try Nonu scored, wrong footed Beale to move into open space. SBW gave him the space with a great offload. It was spectacular to watch, and credit also to Drew Mitchell for not giving up on stopping Nonu but so close to the line with a head of steam, he was near impossible to stop.
Frisky
Guest
Nobu had a better year. Was hot for the Canes. Was so very very good in the final. - watch the first 5-10minutes of both halves and count the number of tackles he broke. Everyone is talking about how important the field goal was. Where would the AB have been without Nonu's amazing try. It was an amazing individual effort.
Frisky
Guest
Very good point about Eddie Jones. On reflection, he should have got the gong . Checks was outsmarted and out-manoeuvred by Hanson in the final. That alone should have denied him the honour, despite his effort in turning the WB into a very good team.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
I was expecting Laidlaw to get it. A sop to the NH.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
He was outstanding in the quarter-finals not only that try where he bumped guys off, but every time he got the ball. He was about as fired up as a winger can get.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Pocock had a better year than Carter, but the panel painted itself into a corner when they announced the nominees. With the World Cup given such a huge weighting in the outcome, a MOTM performance from Carter was always going to sway the vote in his favour. And the All Blacks kind of proved that the twin openside method doesn't work against them.
taylorman
Roar Guru
I think the analysis shows they rely on him too much against the AB's, because clearly they are able to lessen the impact of his ability to turnover better than most, i.e. by playing the side of the breakdown that Pocock isnt on- they played the blind a lot in the final- I saw it often, Pocock was one out on the other side after they fanned out. They were also able to put out better stats as a back row in the areas Pocock wasnt fulfilling as a looses- lineouts, meters carried etc. So although he was still getting great gains through his breakdown and defensive work, his other duties weren't being done, or, picked up by others. Against non AB sides- it would be interesting to see how the stats match against the Boks, he's either able to fulfill the rest of the role adequately, or its picked up by others, the AB's more ruthless in punishing weaknesses. So it appears the original concerns about playing Hooper and Pocock- largely dismissed after Sydney, are coming home to roost. A number 8 for example, does actually need to be a no. 8, not a position that is filled because another is too good to be left out. So Cheikas challenge if hes going to use Pocock as he has been against NZ, is to find a way, or players to fill the gaps hes leaving.
Alan
Guest
McCaw comprehensively outplayed Pocock in the final. Had three pilfers, same as Pocock, made 3x more running metres, and was a much better link player. Had 70% more ruck involvement per the other Aussie site, arrived to the breakdown first 55 times as opposed to Pocock's 34. Add his leadership qualities and there's no doubt as to who is still the best no7 in the world, and it ain't Pocock.
Rugby Tragic
Guest
Sorry, meaning that Hansen was 'part of a coaching' team that won the RWC in 2011... to go back to back ... buy you get my drift... hard to match
Rugby Tragic
Guest
Dan, you might be right mate... Then again, I think Hansen has won it 3 years in a row so maybe the selectors thought ... enough?.... but then again, since the award was started, I think 2001, even RWC winning coach won the gong. Its fair enough that Cheika won the award so congratulations have to go to him for 2015. When one thinks about it Hansen has just done what no other coach has done before and that record is likely to last for many, many years, maybe decades even. For a coach to coach a team to win back to back RWC titles where, as I understand it points are weighted. is going to be hard to match. At the very least it's going to take 8 consecutive years for a coach to match that (if coaching right through not being dropped in between) including coaching an acceptable international test season, is not going to be easy. While Michael Cheika is a good choice, I also think Steve Hansen would also have been worthy for the reasons I have posted.