Roar Forum: What changes should the Wallabies make for Ireland?

Adrian Denyer " bringing on Phipps, Latu, Skelton, with Mumm on a bit later," Do you want to win the test ??

Trenno Calm down - the Irish have never been ridicoulsy good and England perhaps once - the season of 2002/2003. Australia has a far better pedigree than both nations and will rise to the challenge more often than not . I would not be surprised to see a lopsided result this weekend favouring the Wallabies - they have a big performance in them which our competitors know .

One thing we agree on MH, is that Hooper is some kind of footballer. The guy is all courage, never shirks the fight and runs all day. I understand why he has great support. My arguement for a different alignment is really not about individual players but rather, team capabilities based on our current set of personnel. As an individual component, Hooper deserves every accolade he gets.

CB2 Good points you make . Let's not forget Hooper has excelled behind what is a very average tight 5 for a long time . Imagine if he had more support in the rucks and mauls from world class forwards- our front row has been a shambles for a long , long time .

Thanks T'Man, but the "compliment each other" retort is also now also a cliche used by those attempting to relate Pocock's value to Hooper. For whilst Hooper needs Pocock to be on the pitch to cover his patent lack of ruck and maul contact skills - the reverse principle is simply untrue. "Trade offs to have [Pocock] in the side?" I love it TM. I've actually spat out my coffee at the sheer audacity of this attempted line of arguement and my wife is currently berating me for tainting the cream coloured carpets. Bravo sir. We have designated specialists to handle wide ranging, support running, cover tackling and kick chasing. They are called backs, and there are seven of them in the run on team at any one time. There is little compliment in this laughable, manufactured myth of Cheika's creation. Simply accommodation, and resultant imbalance.

Yes. Toby Smith. Very solid in the even and almost as useful in the loose

yes, that's why Cheika needs them both on the field for the big matches. They complement each other bug by the same token, they lack eachothers skilset at the same time. That's why Cheika won't play a Fardy, Timani, Pocock type of backrow, because there's no one to do the wide yards quickly, meaning they'll lose a lot of first to the ball carrier contest, either in support, or defence. He relies heavily on Hooper for that specifically. If Pocock were a true, independent openside flanker, he wouldn't need Hooper to cover him off. And I beg to disagree, many if the greatest 7s have been speed merchants and as a general rule, most are faster than Pocock. As many have said many times, Pococks value is confined to a very narrow, but very critical role, but there are certainly trade offs for have him in the side, and that will generally be found in the numbers across the back row...meters, carries, tackles, lineout takes.

Agree, and I like Hooper. O'Brien and Co will have his measure in the tight.

It is now embarrassingly cliched for some commentators on these pages to attempt to distill the ruck and maul contest down to a singular metric: pilfers. It is an eye-watering nonsense. And those that attempt to purport David Pocock's limited skillset fail to recognise that his broad portfolio of contact skills occur at the most frequent and therefore, important battlefront on the rugby field. A great loosey can have an outstanding game and not make one forced turnover. How many opposition attackers need to commit to a ruck to retain possession? How quick or slow is the opposition's pill? How effectively do you clean out would be jackals on front foot ball? Do you have the strength and balance to secure a breakdown against multiple opposition when tiring second rowers are struggling to retreat? Do you have the skill to quarterback an attacking lineout, slide the ball to a hooker coming round the corner and the power in fierce contact to spearhead the forward drive to the tryline? And yes, getting to a defensive breakdown is one thing, possessing resilience in the ground contest is quite another. Very few of the greatest openside flankers have been singular speed merchants. And that is largely because the most important measure of pace for a great 7, is that which resides between the ears. Great opensides are always in the vicinty of the ball, it is instinct and a nose for opportunity - not foot speed - which sets them apart. There are many - valid and defensible - reasons why Michael Hooper might warrant a 7 Gold jersey over David Pocock. Breakdown potency is not one of them.

Can we stop the Tom Robertson experiment now. He is five foot ten and 20 kilos overweight. He is simply not a big enough man in terms of bone structure to be an international prop. He is not athletic enough, not fearsome enough and is yet to be in a Wallabies' scrum that has won its own feed. If I was playing against him it would be a pleasant relief to see him come off the bench. Can't we find someone who is six for two, 125kg, lives in an abandoned coal mine and eats what he kills. Now on the Pocock Hooper thing, yes, Pocock is a good fetcher once he's over the ball but that is a small part of a breakaway's game. Hooper's cover defence is something Pocock will never achieve - he is just not that quick. Hooper's speed to our breakdown is the lifeblood of possession. It is bleeding obvious that he hAs a much better football brain than Pocock. Hooper is good for a line break or two every week. Pocock is still very mechanical in the basics of attack. His offloads, if any, add little. He looks like a product of the gym..which he is. I'm guessing the Pocock fans are crusty old props who are envious of Hooper's breadth of skills and put off by his questionable haircuts. Hooper is always an automatic open side pick. You must have your fastest flanker pouring down on their fly half. This is taught in rugby 101. Why would you put a plodder on the open side? Having said that, Pocock is aN automatic blindside pick too. As for Mumm as a loosey?Crikey! He's no George Smith....and don't tell me about his line out value. There are more than a hundred rucks and mauls in a game and only a dozen line outs on your own throw...so, speed, tackling, clean out and pilfering are much more valuable than a few vertical jumps.

Only saw last 30 minutes of Ire v NZ but was very impressed with the Irish. They posed some serious questions to the ABs and commentators were probably right when they said no other team has challenged the ABs like that this year. O'Brien and the No. 8 were great as was their pack generally. Wallabies have traditionally had troubles dealing with this in-your-face abrasive style. Think Coleman's absence is huge for us. Where is our go-forward going to come from - Timani and Arnold seems to be it. Pooper ain't going to do it and that's why I think Hooper has to come from the bench and maybe start with McMahon for some crash and bash.

I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that Hooper is the fastest in the team over 40m. Regardless, I'd back Hooper in a foot race over say Foley. Is Foley fast enough to play 12? He did. Hooper's a top player. I have no criticism of him personally. And he might well be our second best player. But the bloke who's first is an openside flanker. And whilst individually Hooper might be more naturally talented than Fardy, Timani and a host of non-squad Australian loose forwards - Hooper's ability to win a collision against big bodies, pilot a scrum, dominate a clean out, halt a rolling maul, tower for a lineout, withstand a fierce ruck contest, is simply lesser. Not his fault. No lack of heart, skill, tenacity or endeavour. Just a natural reflection of physiology and circumstance. Doesn't make him a lesser player or take away from his individual plaudits. And it isn't a criticism. He's just not right to be a Wallaby 6 or 8 and he's not the best 7 in the team. Squeezing him into a forward pack desperate for greater forward- centric capability is costing this team.

Horan had blistering pace , Hooper is simply to slow to play in the centres at this level . People keep criticising Hooper , but after Pocock he is the second player picked and his John Eales medals corroborate that . A lot of foreign broadcasters rate Hooper Highly as a 7 - Aussies don't because of the Pocock factor and the recent legacy of George Smith . Personally , I think Hooper is awsesome - just brings so much guts and determination to the team and NEVER stops trying - hence Cheika loves him .

And yet there they both are, week after week, leaving you to err and whinge to nobody about what a travesty it is.

Biased and stupid RobL!!! Thanks for taking the time to respond though.

When you have played every Test since your debut it's because there is no one better in your position. Also, because you have consistently performed at a high level in the Super Rugby and Test arenas, kept yourself in great nick, been lucky with injury even...et al. From there when you have generated enough 3-2-1 best and fairest points during said Tests, you have again elevated yourself from an elevated pack...hence the shortlist of top five John Eales Medallist recipients each year. It's not a participation award Terry - the best, most consistent Wallaby performer over 12 months wins each year, as voted by his peers. Let that sink in.

Absolutely spot on. To have Hooper owning Pocock's 7 position is a travesty.. it verges on diabolical. And Folau has none of the intricate rugby fullback expertise one gains from a lifetime of playing the position. He's a stunning athlete, sure, but not a clue how to be a stunning rugby fullback. He's never learned the skillset. Er, he can't even kick?!

This is a excellent team, my only change would be Morahan in for Naivalu. I think he offers a cooler head in what will be an epic encounter in Dublin.

Biased & stupid? Ouch. That's just nasty and completely off base. I call it as I see it & am entitled to my opinion. To call me biased & stupid is uncalled for. Try watching what these players do throughout the game & not just the Hollywood moments that appear in the highlights reel. Watch Izzy wander around in the back pocket with no idea where to be, then watch Morahan or DHP and see the difference. Even the experts (other than Cheika) want him moved. Playing out of position is most likely the root of his form problem because he had a great season with the Tahs at 13. Try watching Hooper constantly. Same thing. The highlights are spectacular but what about the rest. Where does he go for 10 mins at a time? How fast does he get off the deck after making a tackle. Does he win the collision or is he a turnstile? Is he standing in position or too far off the ruck leaving a defensive gap? Does he actually push in the scrum or is he prairie dogging? Now do the same with Pocock (or any other good loose forward for that matter). Ardie Savea is probably as close to Hooper's style of 7 as any in the international arena. What does he do? Why was the breakdown as good as it has been all year without him? Just because Pocock had a screamer? I think not.

..When you play every test match since you made your debut you are going to accumulate more votes than any others . . You didn't listen again John... Those two players have played more tests than anyone else over the voting periods for the last 4 years.... You listening now ? You get it ?.. More tests played, equal more points to be had .. I`ll park this debate here, so it sinks in ...