Michael Cheika's new Wallabies need a new captain: Adam Coleman

By Spiro Zavos / Expert

Whether he jumped or was pushed, Stephen Moore has done the right thing for the Wallabies by stepping down from the captaincy immediately, and ending his splendid 12-year international career at the end of the 2017.

It is not an easy thing to give up the honour and the extra income that comes with being the captain of the Wallabies. It is a measure of him as person and as a player dedicated to the cause of the Wallabies that, without drama or ego-massaging, he has stepped aside at the right time for the team and for himself.

Moore deserves a last hurrah as a Wallaby in November. He has been one of the few players of his generation who has actually grown as a player and a leader throughout his career.

The timing and details of his abdication will allow his steadying and dedicated influence to be available within the playing group and, most importantly, for the next captain.

The sentiment in most of the rugby media is that this next captain should be Michael Hooper. I disagree.

(AAP Image/David Moir)

In the Australian, the doyen Wayne Smith insists on a Hooper ascension: “At 25, he could well become the Wallabies’ next skipper for the next decade … It’s fair to say that Hooper would have learnt some harsh lessons from his early days as skipper but the critical thing is he absorbed them into his captaincy style and now he looks the complete leader …

“Yet it should not be seen that Hooper will win the captaincy in any way by default. He is the standout candidate.”

But on the same page of the Australian, Mark Ella disputes this analysis: “I must say I’m not a big fan of Hooper’s captaincy. His influence and general impact went missing for the Waratahs this season, who were a sham and should be embarrassed by the way they played given their playing list and resources.”

I must say I agree with Ella in his assessment.

I can’t see how Michael Hooper showed any real leadership qualities with the Waratahs. The players took no notice of his instructions not to give away stupid penalties under pressure. They failed to respond to his repeated urging to lift their game.

Some of his own decisions, notably when to take the points with easy penalties or go for the try option were wrong.

His own play as well has far too much of the individual Lone Ranger about it, rather than the ensemble player like most good number sevens.

This Lone Ranger mode is a strength of his game, allowing him to explode in brilliant one-off runs, for instance. But it is also a weakness, as his whole game is much less effective throughout the 80 minutes of play than it is in a handful of moments.

Ella has summed this dilemma about his play rather neatly: “Hooper is still young and exuberant and does the work of two players but he has to decide whether he wants to play in the forwards or in the backs.”

In other words, he is a fine player but he is not a fine number seven.

Even Wayne Smith agrees with this assessment, as he acknowledges in his article: “(Michael Hooper) now looks the complete leader. In every respect but one: he doesn’t have a lock on the number seven jersey. Or maybe he does under Cheika, but perhaps he shouldn’t have. He plays like a blindside flanker, but without the height to be a genuine lineout jumper, which pretty much comes with the job description of a Test number six.”

I would say that this is a fair analysis.

(AAP Image/Richard Wainwright)

Next year, the two best youngish Australian number sevens, Liam Gill (particularly) and Sean McMahon, will be playing out of Australia and will not be eligible for Wallabies selection.

With Hooper as captain, there will be no incentive from Michael Cheika, you would think, to get Gill or McMahon back playing in Australia and into the Wallabies squad.

There is also the David Pocock aspect to be considered, as well.

The Pooper combination does not make a lot of sense from a rugby perspective. Pocock is a traditional number seven; brilliant over the ball at a time when the laws of rugby are being adjusted to take this skill, with its high risk of head injuries, out of the game.

Like Hooper, Pocock has poor aerial skills. Neither of these number sevens has the rangy lineout abilities that a number six or eight absolutely needs.

The next Wallabies captain, I would argue, must be for the long haul.

There are too many question marks over Hooper’s captaincy skills and (particularly) his play around the field for his long term endorsement as the successor to Moore.

I now come to another matter regarding the Wallabies, after Moore, that deserve consideration.

From now on, Michael Cheika is in the position to create his own Wallabies side, Cheika’s Wallabies, going into the 2019 Rugby World Cup tournament, rather than a cut-and-paste edition of the McKenzie/Cheika Wallabies we have had for the last couple of years.

I think Cheika intends to create his own team, the real Cheika Wallabies. The sign for me that this is the new policy is dropping Quade Cooper from the train-on squad. And, the influx of young players into the squad.

If this is the policy, then Cheika must be applauded for starting to implement it. It looks like he is going to use Reece Hodge, for instance, as the back-up number ten rather than Cooper. Number ten is the position that Hodge played in most of his club rugby stint.

I would hope, too, that Cheika combines Rory Arnold and Adam Coleman in the second row, to give the Wallabies size, power and some monster grunt that has been lacking in the Wallabies essentially since John Eales retired in 2003.

(AAP Image/Dave Hunt)

It was noticeable, to me at least, that when Arnold was taken off at the 61st minute of the Brumbies-Hurricanes quarter-final that the home side began their slide to oblivion.

Michael Cheika needs to be quite ruthless with the players who were involved in the 2015 Rugby World Cup campaign. If their play hasn’t kicked on, he needs to replace them. Or, in the case of Israel Folau, switch him to a position, the wing, where his inadequate positional play and his general inability to read play is not exposed as it is at fullback.

The harsh fact is that being a losing Rugby World Cup finalist, as the Wallabies were in 2015, is generally the sign that the side, if it is kept together, is bound for subsequent failure.

Here are the beaten finalists in all the Rugby World Cup tournaments: 1987: France, 1991: England, 1995: New Zealand, 1999: France, 2003: Australia, 2007: England, 2011: France, 2015: Australia.

And here are the winning finalists in all the Rugby World Cup tournaments: 1987: New Zealand, 1991: Australia, 1995: South Africa, 1999: Australia, 2003: England, 2007: South Africa, 2011: New Zealand, 2015: New Zealand.

The interesting thing about these two lists is that there is very little correlation between being a losing finalist and a subsequent World Cup triumph within the next couple of tournaments.

France has played in three losing finals and has never won one.

It took England three more tournaments before it converted their losing 1991 final in a finals victory in 2003.

It also took New Zealand four more tournaments before converting their 1995 finals loss to a finals victory in 2011.

South Africa has won two Rugby World Cups and has never played in a losing final.

Australia lost the 2003 final and has not won one since.

(AAP Image/David Moir)

On the other hand, countries that have won a Rugby World Cup tournament, with the exception of England, have gone on to win another.

Rugby writers have developed the idea of sides “peaking too early” for Rugby World Cup tournaments. I think we should be developing the “beaten finalist curse” as a more obvious and more accurate notion.

A reason for the curse, I would suggest, is the mistaken belief that teams that get beaten in the final will somehow grow into being champions next time around.

This mistaken belief tends to encourage coaches to keep the bulk of the losing team for the next tournament.

The better plan is to rebuild the team with younger players, as the All Black coaches and selectors did in 2012 when they introduced nine new players and kept only the best of the veterans.

Michael Cheika seems to be doing this very thing this year. Good.

He needs to make one other dramatic change, I would argue. He needs to bring in a captain who was not part of the Rugby World Cup 2015 challenge.

That captain should be Adam Coleman, the captain of the Western Force side that comprehensively defeated the Melbourne Rebels late in the 2017 Super Rugby season.

Coleman is assured of his place in the Wallabies, unlike Hooper.

He has presence on the field, something that Hooper, for all his zipping around and his high octane energy, does not have.

Coleman, also, has a presence off the field, something the baby-faced Michael Hooper really doesn’t have.

This presence, on and off the field, is possibly the most important attribute a rugby captain can have.

I am reminded here of Ian McGeechan, coach of the 1997 British and Irish Lions, explaining why he picked Martin Johnson, a player without much captaincy experience, to lead the team through South Africa: “I wanted someone at the coin toss the Springboks could literally look up to.”

Earlier this year, I suggested that Bernard Foley should be the Wallabies captain when Stephen Moore stood down. I feel now that the Wallabies would be best served with Foley being vice-captain and having the role of the on-field tactician, which the number ten does anyway, allowing Coleman to lead by example with his super aggressive play in the forwards.

Wayne Smith in his article quoted earlier concedes that “as for a ‘Prince William’ selection (for Wallabies captain), there is only one possible contender lock Adam Coleman … But he has only captained the Western Force once, to a win over Melbourne Rebels, and it won’t hurt at all to allow him to spend some time working on his own game.”

I can’t see why Coleman can’t develop as a player and as a captain at the same time.

The importance of a forceful and tough-minded captain as the essential ingredient for a successful team has been spelt out in an interesting article in the Herald online written by Dylan Cleaver and headlined: “McCaw, Shelford reason for All Blacks dominance, claims new book.”

The book is ‘The Captain Class: The Hidden force that creates the world’s greatest teams,’ written by the Wall Street Journal deputy-editor of enterprise Sam Walker.

Walker identified the 16 greatest teams of all time, in his opinion. The All Blacks, in the Wayne Shelford era and the Richie McCaw era, were the only rugby team and the only team to make the list twice.

(Photo: AFP)

Dylan Cleaver makes this observation about Sam Walker’s research: “Expecting the common denominator between the Tier One teams to be the usual suspects of superstar players, enlightened coaching and administration, or financial muscle, Walker was shocked to learn this wasn’t always the case – in fact it usually wasn’t.”

What Walker actually learnt was, as he explains in the book, this truth:

“On a whim, I decided to make a list of the primary player-leaders of these 16 teams to see if any of their careers also served as bookends for their teams’ Tier One performances. The results of this exercise stopped me cold. (Every team’s dominant) performance corresponded in some way to the arrival and departure of one particular player. In fact, they all did. And with an eerie regularity that person was, or would eventually become, the captain.”

As Cleaver points out, in the case of the two All Blacks teams the player/captains were Shelford and McCaw.

Sam Walker identified seven traits that all 16 captains shared:

The only current Wallaby who goes close to sharing these traits is Adam Coleman.

This leads me to the inevitable conclusion that the best decision from a coaching perspective Michael Cheika might make would be to appoint Coleman as the captain of the Wallabies going into the 2019 Rugby World Cup.

The Crowd Says:

2017-08-04T02:19:40+00:00

piru

Roar Rookie


So Hooper for captain and Foley to be announced as VC awesome

2017-08-02T11:30:23+00:00

scubasteve

Guest


1. Sio 2. TPN 3. Ala’alatoa 4. Coleman 5. Arnold 6. McMahon 7. Pocock 8. Timani 9. Powell 10. Foley 11. Koroibete 12. Hodge 13. Kerevi 14. Folau 15. Beale 16. TBA (not Robertson) 17. Moore (until a youngster steps up) 18. Kepu 19. Philip/Rodda 20. TBA (not higgers) 21. Ruru/Lowrens 22. Magnay/Meakes 23. Naivalu/Magnay a couple of small tweaks. why are we not seeing more or Mack for 10? I thought he looked good in his first few games.

2017-08-02T03:11:04+00:00

Sammy Salsa

Guest


Like the team Rebellion, however I would move DHP to 11, KB to 15 and have Hodge at 12. Have KB play the same role in broken play running off Foley, they already have a good combination and have Hodge for boot + support off mini breaks, string in contact. I don't think that pure gas is really necessary from a test winger which is why I would move DHP to 11 for tactical kicking a decision making.

2017-08-02T03:00:54+00:00

marto

Guest


" But if its based on number of tackles, metres covered, line breaks or try scoring, then its Hooper." ^^ No wonder the Wallabies lost 9 tests last year when these Hooper stats are spoken of so highly by the Waratah Hooper lovers.. ,We were beaten by Scotland this year ( Home soil ) and nearly lost to Italy on ( Home soil ) You Hooper lovers just cant get it through those thick skulls of yours, that Hooper is the problem, as we have to design a game plan around his running game. Imagine for a second if any other Test coach had a record as horrendous as Cheikas since that thrashing in the 2015 RUGBY WORLD CUP... They would have been sacked ...

2017-08-02T02:44:06+00:00

marto

Guest


Mackenzie

2017-08-01T23:33:27+00:00

Neil

Guest


Well, that made my piccolo latte go cold fast, Sheek.

2017-08-01T14:44:50+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


The assumption that I find disturbing, especially among younger Aussies, is that Australia is always going to be the same good old country it is now. Well, it isn't the same country as 50 years ago, or 100 years ago. Now, in some ways it's better, but perhaps in other ways it isn't. Just don't take your lifestyle & your freedom for granted. There are plenty of idiots out there, especially among our pollies & academia, who'll find ingeniously ridiculous means to ruin our way of life. Because, well, because they're just so blinkered stupid. They're doing it now with their outrageously impractical, anti-discrimatory, politically correct rubbish. As an example of how quickly things can turn, back in the 1970s, the young generation, teens & 20-somethings of Tehran, Iran, led as "swinging" & free a life as most western countries. Not any more. It doesn't take many decades for a country to swing from good to bad, or back to good again. You just don't want to be stuck in the bad period for any length of time. Sometimes it can go for decades, or worse, centuries. There are plenty of examples from history to mull over. Anyone who think's Australia is going to be the same free, easygoing place for ever & ever, without having to fight for it occasionally, is grossly stupid.

2017-08-01T12:16:51+00:00

RahRah

Guest


What arrant cr@p. Funny that if a person has the temerity to disagree with someone they become "haters". Most believe that Hooper is not the best 7 in the country and voice that particular opinion. Do they "hate" Hooper? No, but they don't see him as the best 7, most would have him off the bench, this does not "haters" make. Do those of us who disagree with his choices "hate" Cheika? No we don't, but we do believe that he does not choose the best players in their correct position. Disagreement does not a person full of "hate" make. To try and vilify someone as a "hater" because the disagree with your opinion is lazy, puerile, and bereft of a cogent argument. Hooper quite clearly is not a man that other men will follow as a leader. No one disputes the effort that he makes and the fact that he busts a gut for 80 minutes but he does not inspire a "willingness" within his team, and quite frankly his tactical decisions when entrusted with leading the Wbs have been at best questionable.

2017-08-01T11:55:24+00:00

Chopper

Roar Rookie


That Gill and MacMahon are overseas and unavailable for wallabies selection is a tragedy for Australian rugby as is Chieka's inability to use Cooper's enormous talent. Obviously Hooper and Foley will be captain and vice captain under Chieka and we will continue to loose.

2017-08-01T11:54:22+00:00

bennalong

Guest


So what you're really saying, Spiro, is that if you got to pick the Wallabies captain, you'd choose Coleman. Yet on Walker's list of seven attributes I find it hard to see a case for Coleman over Hooper. Now if the Captain should be really tall..........! ............................Like John Eales, say? Then its Coleman. But if its based on number of tackles, metres covered, line breaks or try scoring, then its Hooper. Realistically, Cheika is going with Hooper. So as has become tradition in Australian Rugby, we'll bag the next captain. Hell, we'll bag the coach! We'll bag the team! But really Spiro, what is so outstanding about Kieran Read as captain? Is he the reason the All Blacks win? Don't get me wrong! I like the bloke and he's a great Number 8. But I point to him because his captaincy is so understated that it's only evident when the ref needs a decision , or needs to explain one. The really great Captains are usually older than most of the team. EXPERIENCE. Now given the number of people who seem to hate Hooper, (I must assume its got something to do with provincial allegiances), and given that we know Cheika will choose him, when can I expect you to agree with the haters who want to replace Cheika? Two birds, one stone. In all my rugby teams I never had one captain who played the role of tactician or sports psychologist. The good ones tried their guts out for eighty, and were frequently seen making breaks in the last ten. That's Michael Hooper.

2017-08-01T11:31:56+00:00

ScottD

Guest


Probably Speight at 11

2017-08-01T11:18:03+00:00

Drongo

Guest


Yeah, pick on the name I go by. Sucked in. Whatever you do, don't address your sad negativity. Have you ever been out of Sydney?

2017-08-01T10:49:06+00:00

ScottD

Guest


Swap RHP for McMahon and put McMahon or Higgers on the bench. I'd also put Jermaine Ainsley on bench as spare prop. Magnay a future WB but is still a couple if years away from delivering the consistency to be selected. Lowrens yes Ruru no (I'm not sure he is even eligible) with Powell on bench Lowrens starting. Not sure Naivalu is best 11 either.

2017-08-01T10:23:55+00:00

Phantom

Roar Rookie


If not Cheika then who.

2017-08-01T09:47:45+00:00

MitchO

Guest


Sure, you don't need to be particularly good to captain or coach a great team like the ABs to more wins than losses but a good Captain does make a difference just like a good coach does make a difference. Having at least 15 good players doesn't hurt though. I haven't read Sam Walker's book but he probably put some effort into looking at how important each factor was in a great team's success. The Crusaders were up against some pretty good teams during their title drought and from memory there wasn't much in it when NSW beat them. Wasn't it McCaw giving away a penalty at the death or am I thinking of a different final. All clubs agree that building a culture is important and success follows. That success will not necessarily be a string of firsts. It may only a string of finals appearances.

2017-08-01T09:21:46+00:00

RT

Guest


You could take the Queensland /Howill approach. Grab a passionate talented player and make him captain. That makes sense to me on the Coleman side. I'm a massive Tahs/Hooper fan but I'm afraid Hooper has no gravitas and frankly I think Norths captain in SYdney (Will Miller) is just as good. Personally I'm hoping that Poey's year off was just a phurphy. I'm hoping he's been in Argentina learning how to play hooker. If he has then he'd be with Dan Coles in a world XV and my pick for AUS skipper.

2017-08-01T08:28:08+00:00

RahRah

Guest


By the way, WTF is this obsession with Trump that seems to prevail on the website?

2017-08-01T08:23:21+00:00

piru

Roar Rookie


The jaw is mostly beard - and I'm not 'offended'

2017-08-01T08:18:29+00:00

RahRah

Guest


Judging by the square jawed handsome and rugged individual I see in your photo I would never have guessed that you would take offense. Having said that Piru, it was never aimed at you anyway, it was in response to this from Jake; "Yep, unfortunately Australia is in a holding pattern until the selfish generation aka the Baby Boomers shuffle off this mortal coil. They have been a blight on humanity". A statement made by one who is patently the epitome of the term "snow flake generation", who blame all their own failures and the ills of the world on someone else, as they are too piss week or inept to answer for their own decisions and failings.

2017-08-01T07:56:33+00:00

rugby tragic

Guest


mccaw was unable to lead his crusaders to a title in his last 7 years at the crusdaers. it doesn't matter how good you are at playing or as a captain, at the end of the day much is out of your control. the author of this article fails to recognise this which just shows how ridiculous his premises are

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar