Brumbies down Waratahs in Super derby

I would have left the headline as Brumbies down Waratahs. I wouldn't mention the word "super" at all.

And he is earning it. You expect miracles and when they dont happen you think those that dont deliver are not doing their job.

Oh Im not dressing it up the way I like but you are. Im stating what their goal is and you are the one twisting it and making it what you want. So please dont do that, make Im doing something that Im not whilst you do the very thing you accuse me of.

Yes, it's not easy, but that's what he's paid to do. If he can't or is not capable, resign and let some one else have a go. It's that simple. And the money is good as head of the ARU, so he needs to earn it.

But they trained well :)

Coaching of course....

You can dress it up however you like, but their strategy is flawed. Underpinning it is the assumption (and it is an assumption) that cutting a team will lead to improved performance among the other four clubs. But why would it? Because the remaining four clubs will do a perfect job of taking the best components of the dumped team and do a perfect job of assimilating them into their own teams? It won't happen. The Aussie Super Rugby clubs are underperforming not because they don't have the cattle, but because they are not being run or coached effectively. When the ARU uses their magic bullet on the Brumbies, Rebels, or whoever, then the remaining teams will simply absorb the handful of players who don't go overseas and continue to churn out mediocrity until such time as they get a brilliant coach who comes along and papers over the cracks for a season or two like Cheika did.

Well I'm sure that Hoops will be pleased that the Tahs defence only let in 28 points not the usual 30+

Here are the facts. M.Hooper has been selected at 7 by J.White, M.Cheika, D.Gibson, R.Deans and E.McKenzie to name a few. Nowhere else, only 7. He gets selected there because he does what the coach wants him to do. Thats how coaches do things, they select players and coach them to do what they want. If players dont do what they want, coaches drop them and pick somebody else. Thats how it works. Yet the endless comments about how hes not a 7 and he doesnt do what a 7 should. If he doesnt then he wouldnt be picked there and he wouldnt stay there. Yet coaches ALWAYS pick him there. M.Hooper has won almost every award at every level since he turned pro including Aus club player of the year and Aus International player of the year. He has not yet won world player of the year but he was nominated for it in 2015. All these awards are decided by different people in different ways. Yet people keep saying these awards won by greats such as McCaw, G.Smith and D.Pocock are sham awards that mean nothing. They say this purely because they dont understand why Hooper won. Its not because these awards are shams its only because they dont like the result and therefore the award must be a sham. Rather than question their own opinion, they attack anything that contradicts it. Its clear that Hooper wins awards and is considered one of the best players in Aus, if not the world by international level coaches and players. Its also clear that those who disagree dont understand rugby well enough to grasp why he is considered to be so good. Thats the key here. Those who go against so much evidence, awards, selections, nominations etc simply dont understand. Its not that all these coaches are wrong. Its not that all of the players are wrong. Its not that all the awards are a sham. Its that people dont understand why people who know more than them disagree. So instead of trying to grasp why that is they turn it around and act as if it is all of those top rugby brains that dont understand, those awards are a sham, they dont know what theyre talking about those international coaches.... Its quite surreal tbh. I think I will go with what I see and what 100% of who matters say rather than listening to somebody like that.

Common sense? Surely you jest? Youre saying that suggesting all the awards are shams is common sense? No, suggesting that all the awards are shams because you dont like the results is something but it aint common sense. Common sense is accepting that Hooper wins multiple awards and selectio without fail for a reason. Ya think?

Exactly. The awards system is flawed, you just have to look who made the top 5, and how the points are awarded. Though that would mean some common sense.

soapit said 'no worries. just dont expect to carry much weight with those who are able look at the detail of how these awards get achieved' Theyre achieved through consistent high performance, like all awards. However I do know that those who dont rate Hooper will try to undermine everything that suggests hes quality no matter how absurd that may seem to those who are not determined to rationlize extreme bias against him. I mean seriously, to claim all his awards and nominations, his selection by Deans, McKenzie and Cheika is all wrong and Hoopers not very good. Really? You guys cant see what youre doing or how extremely biased and irrational that is? I find that quite incredible. Hooper will keep getting selected because hes very good. You guys should try and figure out why hes considered so good.

Yeah, us who know better right? Better than the international coaches right? All those awards won by the likes of Carter and co were just a sham. I often find if my opinion differs to all of the evidence, and I mean absolutely all of it, what I do is claim its all a sham because, like you, I know better than international coaches, club coaches, players, opponents and...well everyone. Its all fake news. Hooper doesnt do his job but hes got magical hypnotic skills that convince his coach not to drop him. He must do this because players get dropped if they are not doing whats asked of them so he must be some kind of wizard or at least be able to bend matter to his will. Thats why he gets selected when not doing his job. Clearly we know this Soapit but his magic is strong and he seems to have power of over every coach hes had. Those awards for being the best player are a sham. I know this because I disagree with the results. So in conclusion, its all a conspiracy. Hooper was selected as Australias best international player and club player multiple times but we all know that my opinion overides that. Even when he was selected as one of the best players on earth my opinion still trumps that. His selection, without fail, by every coach hes ever had at the professional level is not because hes good its merely because hes a magical mind altering being. Dont expect us who know better to listen or pay attention to anyone or anything. Its all wrong, fake news. Awards should be decided by a few people who cant understand why Hooper even gets selected because they are the real experts.

no worries. just dont expect to carry much weight with those who are able look at the detail of how these awards get achieved.

'Getting so bad that copying London Irish by setting up a London Australians club is the only hope. Is London Irish full of Irish anyway.' SA tried that by setting up the London Tribe but it was vetoed. They instead got heavily involved with Saracens aka Saffacens at the time

You dont have the players. Just look at the flyhalfs and halfbacks NZ has. TKB, Weber, Pulu, Smith, Perenara and Hall are all better than any Aus 9 imo and Sapoaga, Mounga, West, Barrett, Francis, McKenzie, Cruden and a couple of others are arguably better than any Aus flyhalf right now. I keep hearing that you have the players but you dont, nowhere near it. NZ could put together about 9 teams or more as good as your 5 teams. You have enough for 3 and at a stretch 4 teams. Aus has a good group of about 40 players but around the 50 player mark it drops quickly. Even within that 40 players there is a serious lack of depth in particular positions, notably flyhalf, halfback and inside centre. NZ has around twice the depth and generally a higher quality of player but Aus has the players? For what? Aus has the players to put out 3 NZ quality sides and a fourth side for growth. They expanded too quick and now they are losing to most overseas teams all the time.

@ Fionn Stop moving the goalposts with every subsequent post you make. The NZRU, as I stated, has a bigger income than the ARU's. The NZRU's revenue comes from a variety of sources, not just internally, as anyone with half a brain would know. NZ also creates considerably more value for broadcasters through pay TV subscriptions than Australia does. Yet you said NZ had a "tiny" revenue and theorised that this is why it needs Australia. The NZRU does NOT need the ARU: a union that receives less income, drives less value for broadcasters world wide, receives lower sponsorship revenue and has the burden of insolvent Super Rugby franchises to deal with. Why the hell would NZ chose Australia as a rugby partner over South Africa-- a country that generates the most value for Pay TV providers and is also a country NZ players and coaches love touring? And contrary to what you assert, NZ retains the vast majority of its top players...how the hell do you think it achieves what it does?

I will stop chirping on about all the evidence from everyone who matters in rugby if you stop backing your argument up with nothing....NOTHING....nobody who matters anywhere in rugby agrees with you on Hooper....nobody. He is selected by those who know better. He wins awards from those who know better. The general public have no say. But as you point out, Trump was elected by the general public, people like you and me. Fake news? But Im sure all the coaches and players are wrong. Maybe we should let them know, us who really know whats up.

WBGL in principle you are correct, for a number of years the ARU have not managed its resources or the fundamentals that make this game great. With the clarity and level of wisdom they have been entrusted with. The end result, we are struggling with our competitiveness as all the focus is on the big end of town not the kindergarten. To be honest watched/enjoyed the earlier Highs/Canes game and had trouble with the discipline and the scant regard for commitment and dedication that the Tah’s / Brum derby delivered. We don’t appear to be playing the brand of rugby other nations find commonplace. The Lions are another good example; I’m positive we have the players but are missing the motivation.

I don't think Fionn takes into consideration the massive sponsorship deal from ADIDAS and AIG that significantly takes away any funding pressures that he perceives they have. Don't for a second think anyone in this partnership would generate or demand as much money if the All Blacks weren't involved. The All Blacks are the most marketable team in World Rugby and one of the most marketable teams in World sport. It may sound arrogant but the All Blacks are who the broadcasters are paying the big money for, it certainly isn't the Wallabies.