David Pocock has roared back into Super Rugby without missing a beat – nicking the ball off any isolated runners, registering his now-to-be-expected high tackle stats, and visibly looking to add a linking-running game.
So, all good for continued contribution at Brumby level for the rest of season, before rolling this form seamlessly into an Irish series?
Well no, because all the unbalanced issues of a Pocock-based loose forward trio of the past remain.
The distant rumble of a ‘Pooper’ selection is beginning to get louder, although a quick read of its past outcomes really should make those agitators fall silent.
Post the winning debut of the Michael Hooper-Pocock combo against New Zealand in Sydney, there were three games for this selection. Here are the average stats for those three games:
Australia
Lineout percentage: 69
Total loose forward run metres: 35 metres
Team tackle percentage: 77
New Zealand
Lineout percentage: 98
Total loose forward run metres: 97 metres
Team tackle percentage: 90
All Blacks games should be used as the yardstick for performance, because Ireland’s loose forward trio are of genuine high quality. Besides, there is little value in generating either turnovers or penalties at the contest if your lineout and tackle numbers look like the above.
The way he plays makes it difficult to build a back three around him. This is not a criticism of his ability, merely a style observation that suggests a remedy.
For all his dominance when over the ball and high tackle-count from a huge workrate, sides have found ready ways to counter his effectiveness.
In recent weeks, we have seen the Highlanders isolate him with pace in the second half of their game, and the Jaguares did a sterling job of simply playing away from him the longer the game went on, and Pocock’s frustration on the park was clear for all to see.
He largely plays at or behind the advantage line from quite wide channels for a 7 in almost all his key actions, which allows opposing sides to shape a gameplan away from him when required.
Note his first three tackles at or near the gain line were all within one minute of each other, but then his game tended to drift back behind the advantage line and wider from the ruck.
I picked this game because of the praise the commentators heaped on his effort during the halftime summary, by which time his tackle split was 12/2. Note there is one really good over the gain-line tackle in here.
In the above clip, note Highlander Dillon Hunt does most of his work in front of the advantage line, and starting from close to the ruck, ramping up the pressure on the opposition and allowing his side to continually move forward.
If the Wallabies are going to compete with the big guns, they need to find a way to put pressure on the opposition side of the gainline.
The more you watch, the more it is clear Pocock is not running traditional 7 lines, either side of the ball, his defensive lines are more those of a blindside – even a halfback on occasion – given the amount of cover he tries to provide.
Despite his undoubted ability, it is this difference from traditional 7s which makes it hard to fit him into a structure. It’s not dissimilar to how the All Blacks look unbalanced when Ardie Savea starts.
[latest_videos_strip category=”rugby” name=”Rugby”]
So, has Pocock ever been part of truly balanced loose forward trio at international level, and can that be replicated with the current players available?
Looking back through the stats, it appears the Pocock-included trio that has been least affected in the areas of lineout, loose forward run-metres and with a comparable win record was Rocky Elsom at 6, Pocock at 7 and Richard Brown at 8, back in 2010.
Many on these board have contended that if Pocock is to start at 7, or indeed Hooper in the same position, then the back row needs to also have a dominant lineout forward, a strong tight-ball runner, and a wider ball-runner all wrapped into the other two individuals, plus an enhanced offensive threat from somewhere.
If this 2010 trio is to be the future template, perhaps the Wallabies are not looking for individuals with strong specific skill sets, but rather more reliable, broad skill-based individuals like Elsom and Brown, with big engines and big hearts who can allow the 7 to play their designated role, whatever that might be.
I will close with a question: if we accept the balance of the back row is more important than the high-level specific skills in the individuals, who are today’s Elsom and Brown that will allow Pocock or Hooper to just play their natural game?
Bootlicker
Guest
He`s puny.Got noodle arms and spaghetti legs.
Highlander
Guest
I reckon there is real,value in choosing a 7 away from either of the Pooper boys, and I do like McMahon
Highlander
Guest
be my guest Happy to help Rob I am a great believer in, it is not so much what you do in our game, more where you do it
RobC
Roar Guru
Highlander thanks for the excellent article Appreciate it greatly. I hope the right people read it. If you don't mind I'll use it as reference for my article on the same topic
RobC
Roar Guru
Hi Nick. Looks like Highlander has written most of my anti Poop article :) Re SeanMc imo he's proven to be as good a 6/8 option as as the best in the world. Both in the loose and LO. His departure to Japan is much worse than losing Fardy imo
RobC
Roar Guru
Yes Digaaa! It's incredibly frustrating for me
RobC
Roar Guru
Highlander for me the LO issue is a big enough reason not to choose the Poops. It's like using Scott Sio as a hooker. Set piece is non-negotiable You add other reasons for sending the Pooper down the toilet. Which I agree. With the new rules the 7 needs to be fast and elusive like a powerful 12 If he's short then The 6 and 8 need to be taller enforcers. To this end, SeanMc is a surprise packet Bring him back and the Pooper can be flushed. https://www.theroar.com.au/2018/04/23/new-reds-players-needed-stop-red-ink/
RobC
Roar Guru
Highlander I'm with you and against Nick on this one The Pooper is a terrible idea. Not only because of results but it also constipates the pathway for others
jeznez
Roar Guru
No but there are enough official sources and these official sources generally align to observation of comparing these players visually against their opponents. I loved your call yesterday that McCauley and 'Sticks' Palmer must really be 120kgs, you must then think that Tui, Douglas, Etzebeth, Retallick and co are 130kgs, which in turn would push Will Skelton up to about 150kgs.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Yep, RA is so broke they can't even afford a set of scales. They just throw mystery numbers up there and never change them - except they do! The only players in the Tahs pack that weighed more than their opponents were Kepu and Hooper. Per the guys I listed above the rest gave away a massive weight advantage. That didn't tell though as the Tahs used their superior speed and fitness to control the match. The following week they came up against a Lions side with size, speed and fitness and they got blasted off the park unable to hold on to the ball at the ruck and tackle area. The Reds were massive that night playing 121 kg Lukhan Tui at 6, while the Tahs played a second open side in Will Miller at 88kgs. There is almost half the 70 kg weight difference between the packs right there.
Rugby Tragic Too
Roar Guru
says who I met him the other day and if anything he's 5 kgs heavier than last year. Hes been pumping weights in the gym.
Rugby Tragic Too
Roar Guru
jeznez straw man never said any of those things I spoke of the collective pack sizes, there was no way the tahs gave away 70kgs. they did on paper but as I've said the programs of player sizes on't ever get updated. They are unreliable. The tahs pack was by and large just as big as the reds. perhaps a few kilos ligter on average per man but nothing of the significance you blokes keep carrying on with. thats probably why the tahs were the dominant pack
Rugby Tragic Too
Roar Guru
have you personally weighed them?
Harry Jones
Expert
excellent, highlander
Highlander
Guest
I will never understand why they let Fardy go Haven’t seen enough of ASY to comment
Nicholas Bishop
Expert
It would have to be between Dempsey (if he's fit in time) and Timu I'd think :)
3rdPint
Guest
Great article Highlander and some good comments. If I may throw one on the table...Angus Scott-Young...thoughts? Yeah, yeah, I know he's young, but a constant theme in the comments is we lack established options, so why not look to the youth? I think he plays a similar game to Fardy. Perhaps not quiet the threat in the lineout, but he's only 4cm shorter at 194cm, and he'll do the hard grind in the tight and compete all game. Perhaps Hooper (Cheika will pick him), Timu at 8 and S-Y at blind?
bluffboy
Guest
Yes mate, for me spot on. Its the same analogy that could be used for injured players or player carry an injury. Is it better to carry on at say 70% or put a second string player in at 100%, we do see this conundrum weekly though. Is just us that see when you take a players skill set that has made a star and knows it inside and out and then try a fix, change or tinker with something that's not broken, well 4th in the world is maybe where Cheika belongs. Maybe even lucky to be there. Bye the way ......6.5 GOLD!!!!
Stin
Guest
Absolutely quality observations!! “then the back row needs to also have a dominant lineout forward, a strong tight-ball runner, and a wider ball-runner all wrapped into the other two individuals, plus an enhanced offensive threat from somewhere.” Fardy anyone?
Highlander
Guest
Good points Nick, and that is the key point, IF you can compete. You can’t complain about poor outcomes or extenuating circumstances when those are clear and open selections. The Wallaby locks with Elsom and Brown were Mumm Chisholm and then Sharpe at the end, good without being great. Selecting them against a AB lineout with Read in addition to the locks wasn’t clever - to me O’mahony is Read like at lineout time and the Wallabies run a real risk of a beating if they get this wrong. So if Simmons and Coleman get selected, would you pick Pooper?