The debate goes on as to whether two No.7s should take the field for the Wallabies, but whether we are prepared to admit it or not, the Michael Hooper-David Pocock combination created holes.
In some quarters of our Australian rugby fraternity, there is a reluctance to criticise Michael Cheika, or Australian rugby royalty like Pocock.
Hooper, as we all know, is not so blessed, even though he has a better skill set than Pocock in some important areas of the game.
If Cheika continues with the Hooper-Pocock combination, or even brings Hooper off the bench while leaving Pocock on, then the one key area of the game that suffers is the lineout.
Last season, a false sense of security was allowed to set over Australian rugby after the Wallabies defeated the All Blacks in Sydney, with most claiming the reason was because Pocock and Hooper played in tandem.
True to a certain extent – some will no doubt still argue that it was a large extent – but it was not the only reason; not by a long shot.
The All Blacks’ kicking game was uncharacteristically wayward. Dan Carter, trying to make his way back into the international arena, had a game that certainly won’t make his highlight reel, proving he is only human after all.
Kieran Read, nowhere near his best form, was coming back after a series of concussions, and boy did they miss the imperious attacking and defensive nous of Ma’a Nonu, out with injury.
As he demonstrated at the World Cup, Nonu’s replacement Sonny Bill Williams, can be just as effective with his own unique set of skills, but he was still coming to terms with the game of rugby union and the All Blacks’ gameplay.
Williams in Sydney was neither the player he was before he returned to the NRL, nor the one he became at the World Cup, where he almost led the tournament for offloads, with 12.
Sam Whitelock, returning form injury, was on the bench, and Luke Romano, also making his way back into the All Black fold, did not have the same impact as an in-form Sam Whitelock.
This is not to say the Wallabies did not play very well and deserve victory against the old foe, but it did lull many into a false sense of where they were at when measured against the All Blacks. Perhaps most all, it seemed like evidence the Hooper-Pocock combination should stay.
At Eden Park, Cheika surprisingly left Pocock on the bench, but he still played in tandem with Hooper for a large part of the game.
Hooper had to come off for a concussion check, so Pocock replaced him off the bench. After Hooper returned, and with the breakdown under enormous pressure, Pocock stayed on.
This time though, the All Blacks under the tactical genius of Wayne ‘The Professor’ Smith and Steve Hansen’s uncanny ability to get his side up several levels after a loss, was a wake-up call for the Wallabies.
With Nonu back, Read better for his run, and Eden Park the only genuine international home ground fortress in world rugby, the Wallabies’ task was never going to be easy.
Carter put in a masterclass, just as he did in the World Cup final. This time, a rampaging All Black tight five, and the masterstroke of replacing Jerome Kaino with Victor Vito at No.6 to speed up the attack to the breakdown, came together to nullify the effectiveness of the Hooper-Pocock combination.
But the most telling aspect was Whitelock and Read poaching and disrupting the Wallaby lineout.
We saw the same lineout issues during the Rugby Championship, and in the World Cup tier-one nations attacked the Wallaby setpiece, but none more effectively than the All Blacks.
With two shorter (though Pocock is a stocky 1.84 metres) non-jumping number 7s in the Wallaby back row, and with Will Skelton – whether he started or came on from the bench – inept at the lineout for a guy his size and too heavy to effectively lift with speed, the Wallabies’ throw was highly vulnerable, and opposition sides knew it.
With fewer options to throw it too, the lineout is much easier to target, especially if the opposition has world-class poachers, and in Read and Whitelock, the All Blacks arguably have the world’s best. At the World Cup they both topped the lineout steals with six apiece, making it a major turnover weapon for the All Blacks.
But the All Black pair are masters of not only making the turnover steal, but disrupting the opposition ball even if it is won.
Just as they did at Eden Park, the All Blacks destroyed the Wallaby lineout in the World Cup final.
Sydney Morning Herald journalist Paul Cully’s post-match headline read: “Rugby World Cup 2015 final: Wallabies Lineout ends dream against the All Blacks”.
There was more to their victory than just the Wallabies wobbly lineout, nevertheless it was one of the key reasons the Kiwis dominated the Wallabies at the set piece.
This is where Cheika was naïve – and not for the first time in the World Cup.
After the quarter-final escape against Scotland, Cheika said, “We didn’t go to our kicking game, maybe that was a bit naïve of me. Maybe we shouldn’t have opened it up for them.”
Mind you, whatever happened to players thinking on their feet regardless of the instructions from the coach if the plan isn’t working on the field? Or even the captain taking some initiative to operate another plan, even if just temporarily?
So why did Cheika play Hooper and Pocock in the final run-on side when he knew – or should have known – it would badly weaken the lineout, and that the All Blacks had the jumpers and the firepower to exploit such a glaring weakness.
This meant they were able to create defensive and attacking turnovers on the Wallabies’ throw, which they most certainly did, and they were crucial.
It appeared as if even Cheika started to believe the hype surrounding the Scott Fardy, Pocock, Hooper combination with claims being made – although largely by Australian journalists – they were the best fetching trio in the world, and therefore must play against the All Blacks.
But the best fetching trio does not by definition make you the best back row, because there is much more in the modern game than fetching – a point lost by our media until the end of the World Cup final.
Pully Cully, in the same post-match article, perhaps put it best: “the Wallabies trio confirmed their status as the best ball-fetching trio in the world. But loose forward play has other components – lineout prowess, dominant tackling and continuity in attack. Here, Kieran Read, Richie McCaw and Jerome Kaino held all the cards…”
Any Australian who watched the final without one eye knows this is a fair assessment.
The All Blacks had a better-balanced back row, with a wider skill set, operating like three jackals across the park. They were always at the right place at the right time from lineout to ruck, in the backline as link men, as bludgeoning line breakers with superb offloading skills, as very physical hard hitting defenders, and of course as poachers of the ball.
Rod Kafer on Rugby 360 argued that Hooper is a better player for the Wallabies than he is for the Waratahs right now, because they have a more balanced back row, allowing him to operate like a No.6 playing at No.7, leaving the bulk of fetching to Pocock, and even Fardy who is also strong over the ball.
But it is not balanced enough.
While it may be well balanced for open play, it is not for the set piece, namely the lineout, and it hurt the Wallabies in 2015 by turning the ball over or having it disrupted.
Teams like the All Blacks and the Springboks hunt as a pack, with just about every player in the side skilled at making breakdown turnovers. This frees up the backrow to rove into more defensive and attacking spaces operating as ball carriers, and can provide an avenue for taller operators and more lineout options, which both McCaw and Read certainly do for the All Blacks.
This is where, and as McCaw reminded us in interviews, the role of the No.7 has evolved to be more versatile and effective in other areas of the park – not just an out-and-out fetcher.
But you need 1-15 to understand the darks arts of the breakdown to complete this transition effectively.
Both the Boks and the All Blacks do this as a team better than the Wallabies. It is also one of the reasons Pocock is so badly missed when he doesn’t play. A sense of panic seems to come over some in the Australian media.
Michael Hopper has been criticised this season, rather famously by Bob Dwyer recently, who proclaimed the Waratahs 7 had lost his mojo and was now so far down the pecking order that he should not be picked for the upcoming England Test series.
I can’t see this happening. Cheika will rightly show loyalty to his World Cup trio, at least in squad selection.
Though Dwyer’s criticism was a bit harsh, in some ways I am on the same page, at least in that Hooper should not start with Pocock because the lineout becomes a source of turnover ball.
At just over 1.82 metres, Hooper is not the biggest openside going around, and not really a serious lineout option at Test level. This would be okay, except that Pocock is not a lineout option either. This leaves only Fardy as a genuine option.
Hooper’s assets are his speed, ball-running skills and his defence. His body size means he is not as strong over the ball as many other backrowers, and it is no secret that he often gets bulldozed off the ball. But he has a high work rate, is a great link player, and lifts the tempo of the Wallaby forward game.
The reality is that even though he plays at 7, his game is more like that of a 6. Thus, in the Test arena, Hooper is a better bench player, coming on when most teams are tiring. But which player to take off is the problem – and who starts instead of him?
The other contenders are Liam Gill (Reds), Sean McMahon (Rebels) and Matt Hodgson (Force).
The stats for the 2016 Super completion after Round 8 show some interesting comparisons between the top five contenders.
Up to Round 8, Gill has only played three games and yet his stats make good reading. In only half the number of games as Pocock, Gill has made considerably more metres, made three more clean breaks, beaten only two fewer defenders, made more offloads, and taken two lineout catches.
In fact, Pocock, with the same number of games, gets beaten hands down by both Hooper and McMahon for metres gained, carries, clean breaks, defenders beaten, and offloads. Hooper has even managed a lineout catch. These stats show that areas of Pocock’s game are not as strong as others.
After Pocock’s recent suspension, the New Zealand Herald’s Gregory Paul wrote an article heaping praise on his fetching skills, but said, “For all his brilliance over the ball, his skill-set is stunningly limited.”
Pocock is the best over-the-ball poacher in the world, no doubt, but the other areas of his game seem to get swept under the carpet as long he is getting vital turnovers and making crucial tackles in defence, which of course he always does.
He does not have the game of McCaw, yet no one wants to talk about his deficiencies – or at least his weaker overall skillset.
Now I am not suggesting for one minute that Pocock should not start for the Wallabies. He is so good at what he does that he is a first-pick, no question, but I am suggesting we need to talk about what he does not bring to the game.
McMahon’s stats are the standout here.
Most importantly, he has taken eight lineout catches and made one steal, proving he is a genuine lineout option which the Wallabies desperately need. He is also in blistering form, showing the kind of physicality in his defence and carries that have been lacking.
Hogson is also in good form, despite the dismal showing of the Force, topping the tackle count for the competition (but he has had a lot of defending to do). As of Round 8, he also just beats Pocock for percentages on effective turnovers.
Like Pocock, he is not a huge carrier of the ball in terms of metres gained and defenders beaten, but he can offload reasonably well in traffic. He is more a Pocock in his game style than a Hooper of McMahon type.
Thus McMahon must start ahead of Hooper, not only because of the physicality and skill set he brings, but also because he is the best lineout operator. Cheika cannot afford to play favourites when the lineout was such a weakness last season.
The question is where does he play?
If there was a No.8 in Australia in the same class as Duane Vermeulen or Kieran Read, David Pocock would play 7. So I would have McMahon at No.8 and Pocock in his preferred position.
True, Poccock has played there at Test level and McMahon would need time to adjust. Yet long term he would be a better No.8 than Pocock, because of his wider skill set, stronger ball carrying, less stocky body type, and height (just over 1.86 metres), which all suit this position.
The bench then would have to be Michael Hooper, because he has the Test experience and brings that extra zip with tired bodies on the field. That said, Gill has been a shining light in a disappointing Reds side.
I’m sure many will have their own views on this subject, but the starting backrow is Scott Fardy, Sean McMahon, David Pocock, and a bench of Michael Hooper or Liam Gill, with Hooper getting the nod from me.
Nicholas Bishop
Expert
Well Boz, Lealiifano had a prolonged chance under Deans/McKenzie and didn't stick at 12. That's a fact not spin.I think he's better off challenging Foley at 10, because he does have a good skill set.
Boz
Guest
1. Leliifano getting knocked out in the Lions test was just bad luck, Matt Toomua has been concussed heaps of times and nobody questions his competence for it. 2. The entire team played badly when McKenzie started, you can't pin the first ABs loss on Leilefano. The first flogging in Sydney happened when Toomua was at 10 for most of the game. They improved throughout the season, both when CLL and when Toomua were 12, and into the much closer matches against the All Blacks the next year. CLL wasn't deselected on form at any stage, he went out with injury a couple of times and so did Toomua. Anyway Nick, I find these conversations get a bit silly when people start spinning facts to support their truth, so that is me out.
Wee Willy
Guest
The three people I have met up here in Deliverance County FNQ, who can read, are rugby fans and we all agree that Pocock deserves the nickname Witchity because he is a grub. The number of times he did disgraceful things to McAwesome is a stain on the national psyche. How he did not get a red card for stomping on the face of the only player in history, who is mentioned in the same breath as Pine Tree, is beyond our ken. I wrote earlier that it was a criminal act which would be punished by a minimum of one year in gaol. According to the LNP, (Largely Nasty Party), he should be stripped of his passport and deported back to his mate Mugabe.
CUW
Guest
i was trying to locate the Daily mail article but could not .... they gave a lot of space to cheika while he was in europe.
CUW
Guest
Read played at 6 when he started out. After moving to 8 , i cannot recall seeing him play at 6 ever!!! maybe u can tell me when he played at 6 AFTER he became the crusaders and all blacks 8. Elsom was a 6 , just like Mowen and Dennis who were thrust into 8 - and just like pocock is thrust into 8. there are 3 genuine 8s in NZ who are of NZ origin - Read , Vito , Squire. Yes they may have started at 6 ( i dont know if Vito and Squire startred at 6 but i do know Read started at 6 with crusaders). then there are 2 other 8s - Leitch who is actually japan's 6. and there is Kaino or Luatua who play at 8 for blues. Kaino has always been a 6 who can play 8 when required. Luatua started out at 2nd row and then moved onto 6 before moving onto 8 due to necessity. During the world cup even Mccaw was prepared to go to 8. Does it mean he is an 8 ? I dont think so - it is just that with his years of experience and the skill set he ahs Mccaw can play at 8. so does burgur for saffers. also during the world cup - both kaino and vito who were essentially selected as 6, and could cover 8 , were also training to play in second row , just so that the coach has options and flexibility with the bench. does it mean they are 2nd rowers day-in day -out.?? I dont think so. when there is no need for versatality or emergencies, imo , a coach shud look at the best position for a player. that is why for ex. leitch plays at 8 for chiefs but at 6 for japan. When Sqiure moved out from chiefs, it left only Mama vaipulu as the alternative 8. Vaipulu has not shown the form of 2014/15 so the chiefs have used the next best option of Leitch as 8. when it came to japan Eddie Jones had two good 8s in Tui (with Reds?) and a new guy who had been a revelation - Mafi. again Jones the shrewd coach decided to use Leitch as his 6 to great effect and use mafi at 8 with great impact - he was sensational in the world cup. that is why i said above - there was a bad decision to ditch higginbotham , when he was the best 8 in form in auzzy just before the world cup ( and also to use a burnt out palu). a question for u ? do u think h'botham would have moved to europe , if he had been selected for auzzy? it is a very interesting situation , becoz mowen chose to go despite being a wallaby and with the world cup on the horizon. not being an auzzy or new zealander i do not understand the undercurrents at play :D
Fox Saker
Guest
I agree Bakkies and good points
Bakkies
Guest
You thinking of Leroy Houston?
Nicholas Bishop
Expert
We'll have to disagree re: Lealiifano. He was tried as long ago as 2013 at 12 by Robbie Deans in the Lions series. As soon as the Lions saw his name on the team-sheet, they went about finding ways to target him. Result - LLF was knocked out in the first significant collision of the match, and I doubt anyone remembers his contribution for the rest of the series. He played the first six TRC games at 12 later that year when Ewen McKenzie took over, four of which were heavy losses to NZ and SA by an average margin of -19 points. They should also have lost at home to the Pumas. Then McKenzie turned to Matt Toomua at 12 (outside Quade Cooper) and they began to turn things around on the European tour following. So this cycle has already been tried, and we know the results. I can't see Nathan Grey accepting a Foley/LLF axis defensively. If CLL plays for the Wallabies again, it has to be as a 10.
Fox Saker
Guest
Thanks RobC - I think we found out the answer to your question "what happens if one gets injured - Pocock was out of the Scotland game and it nearly went south.
Boz
Guest
"I think your first para is too negative Boz. Australia won TRC when most Aussie supporters had their hands covering their eyes fearing the worst after the Autumn 2014 tour. They beat the All Blacks, South Africa and Australia. Then they advanced from a nightmare WC group all the way to the final of the tournament. There are no ifs or buts about it, it was a season where Cheika got the max out of his selections." Yes, they did very well but the reality is that to achieve what they really want, to win back the Bledisloe and work towards the 2019 World Cup, they have to get better. That means addressing the obvious weaknesses in their game against the All Blacks, the lineout and better attacking play. It might actually mean accepting a step back in performance for a season while the likes of McMahon, Holloway and Kerevi get up to speed, but if they don't bite the bullet and do that then they won't make progress. They aren't going to beat the All Blacks with an outstanding defensive system alone. "Thanks for the reminder, but I do rate Kerevi as more than a banger. He does have some finesse in his play, both through the hands and off the boot. However he is not the kind of second 10 Cheika has said he wants. He may be able to develop him into a Nonu over time, but it does take time (prob 2-3 seasons)." Yeah, that is why I said to start him on the bench as a finisher. "I don’t think Christain Lealiifano is a strong enough 12 to pair with Bernard Foley if Nathan Grey abandons his current defensive pattern as you suggest. Matt Toomua makes more sense as he is far more robust physically, but he doesn’t appear to be at the top of Cheika’s wish list." That is simply wrong, they are basically the same build and Lealiifano is ahead of Toomua in his tackles completed stats by about 10%. Lealiifano also has a better running game than Toomua and is a better goal kicker than Foley, something which should work in his favour. Toomua's real strengths are between his ears - he is an excellent playmaker, has a great sense of positional play, is an excellent defensive organiser and has excellent judgement with his rushing defence - all of which he backs up with excellent skills. He isn't quite the natural athlete that Lealiifano is though and in any case is going to England for three years after the Super Rugby season, so there isn't much point in investing more time in him. I would rather see Larkham and Grey intensively work on Lealiifano's thinking skills. Not that they are that bad, he did very well at 12 during the 2014 season when he played there, both with the Brumbie and the Wallabies. "The major issue is that I believe Michael Cheika is already committed to Hooper at 7 and the defensive pattern that goes with it. Changes if they occur will occur within that frame, so (maybe unfortunately) there is little point in debating what could happen if that commitment wasn’t in place." He has not committed to Michael Hooper, I just heard him say that the team for the June test series has not been decided yet on Rugby 360. However, if he does go with Hooper come August and the All Blacks tests, I get the feeling that there will be a few "I told you so's" floating around (mainly from Bob Dwyer) and that Mr Cheika might have cause to re-assess that selection.
RobC
Roar Guru
I think CUW, all coaches are personal. Those who have had a good boss knows what a world of difference it makes. But there's sometimes a chemistry issue that gets in the way. For example KD and EM never got along. But KD does well with Check. Having said all that I think youre right. Higgers is much of a talent to not make the effort to reconnect: - Jed is too raw - Ita V in injured - Timani still playing at lock (omg) - Despite being a 2013 Pelicki medal winner, Jack Schatz form hasnt improved enough. - So its either Big Dog or Poey (omg). Re Gil, Being injured and going to 7s didnt help Gill's chances. Not Check's fault What Im most curious about is exactly what kind of WBs Check and Pulver is going to build in the next 4 or so years. That means sorting this out with coaches and administrators, before the players. re players. I think the best is yet to come: - I have great faith in Aus Rugby and its prospects. Incredible faith. - Mostly due to Aus's ability to attract people to our fair shores including from NZ, SA, Pac Isles etc - Partially because ARU's strategy is sound
somer
Guest
Who's basing it on one game? The ABs have been dominating world rugby for the past 5 years and their back row has certainly been a major component in this dominance. Even so to dismiss the WC final as just one game is disingenuous, the AB back row stepped up a gear when it mattered the most and the Wallaby back row couldn't match them.
grapeseed
Guest
I must agree with NB - Pooper has been used 7 times (I believe) including against South Africa, NZ (twice), Wales, England and Argentina, for win rate of 85%+. Pretty good stats, assuming I am accurate.
CUW
Guest
guess i goot the wrong name. it is an auzzy 8 / 3rd row in europe but now i cant recall who he is ... :(
grapeseed
Guest
Take your pick of tight locks or front rowers. I assume you would pick Simmons as a lock and Fardy at 6, which means that you still have pedestrian carriers in the team. My design allows for one non-jumping behemoth to carry, plus another lock. Plus Pocock's improving.
grapeseed
Guest
"Why is everyone trying to move people around , rather than use a real 8?" 1. Because the magic of the internet allows me to indulge in all sorts of hypotheticals, such as Hooper to 11 (also part of the same comment) 2. Because the incumbent Aus 8 played his entire professional career at 7 and his schoolboy career at 12. 3. Because numerous players such as McCalman (who you mentioned), Elsom, Higginbotham (who you also mentioned), Kieren Read and many others have interchanged between 6 and 8 their entire careers. Others such as Samo interchanged between lock and 8. 4. Because there are barely any people who solely play 8 (as you mentioned) - three in NZ, the rugby capital of the world, you say? 5. Because Jed Holloway (the NSW boy you mentioned) has played the vast majority of his career at lock, not 8 as you assume. 6. See number 1. I would say no one else you mentioned as a "genuine 8" is in fact a genuine 8.
Nicholas Bishop
Expert
I think your first para is too negative Boz. Australia won TRC when most Aussie supporters had their hands covering their eyes fearing the worst after the Autumn 2014 tour. They beat the All Blacks, South Africa and Australia. Then they advanced from a nightmare WC group all the way to the final of the tournament. There are no ifs or buts about it, it was a season where Cheika got the max out of his selections. Thanks for the reminder, but I do rate Kerevi as more than a banger. He does have some finesse in his play, both through the hands and off the boot. However he is not the kind of second 10 Cheika has said he wants. He may be able to develop him into a Nonu over time, but it does take time (prob 2-3 seasons). I don't think Christain Lealiifano is a strong enough 12 to pair with Bernard Foley if Nathan Grey abandons his current defensive pattern as you suggest. Matt Toomua makes more sense as he is far more robust physically, but he doesn't appear to be at the top of Cheika's wish list. The major issue is that I believe Michael Cheika is already committed to Hooper at 7 and the defensive pattern that goes with it. Changes if they occur will occur within that frame, so (maybe unfortunately) there is little point in debating what could happen if that commitment wasn't in place.
CUW
Guest
i think u missed certain other aspects , which my fav zinzan used to do . like support the backs in kick returns ; run the wide lines or the outside lines maybe with a wing ; be the defensive link between forwards and backs - which is a hard trait i think , in knowing where to stand in defensive lines and paterns. for example sometimes u may see zinzan defending at the corners with the backs rather than in the middle with the forwards. if u watch zinzan , it is rare for him to be out of place. i think both read and parrise have the same traits at 8. imo , knowing where to be is a "sense" thing and difficult to be taught. also imo , this applies to fullbacks as well. either u have it or u dont - but by working hard maybe u can improve ur positining , but not ur "sense".
RobC
Roar Guru
For FoxSaker good article :) Since Eden Park, its been clear to me the Pooper is a pooper. In addition to your pointers, I wish to add that this is not sustainable. It detracts from creating a base-game not reliant on a specific combination of players: - What happens if one of the the Pooper is injured? - A winning team especially in Rugby comes interchangeable players (ie lego, ABs) - Not unique / player specific combinations (ie a hand carved toy) Check should look at the base-game. Select a depth of players for that, train them for the combinations. There is no sustainable base-game around "Pooper". Time to move on. Also, nice description of the NZ (Not just the AB) forwards, thank you FoxSaker: - Its not about the breakdown - Its about managing the contact areas. - Offloads, BD, tackle, D-line, O-line, pilfers, support play. - (that's not to mention setpiece) That is why I mentioned earlier Liam Gill in another article, as exceptional. He is the only one who demonstrates all this very well. He is also an excellent decision maker. The difference is, it is drilled across all NZ structures. In Aus, its every man for himself: - NZ forwards is like Superman. And are universally trained and groomed as such - Aus forwards are like the mutant characters in HEROES series. They have mutant skills in one area. But generally left to develop themselves without the benefit of a universal system.
CUW
Guest
@ RobC : that is the problem with ur coach , imo. he is getting personal with too many players. for some reason he rubisshed higginbotham , when it was plain that he was the best 8 in super rugger in the world cup year ; despite being a penalty magnet like adam thompson , but that did not stop sgh from taking him to a world cup. for some reason he did not use toomua a lot at world cup and now he wants to go. for some reason he never had a look at gill and now he is playing very welll and then leaving. auzzy do not have the kind of talent like nz or sa or even england , to let good players go becoz of favoritism or egos or whatever.