We lost the first Bledisloe Cup Test badly and so as usual we see the opportunist axe grinders doing their thing online.
I do agree with some of the criticism, but there is a big one that to me is off the mark. I’m talking about the ‘never Pooper’ crowd, who let’s face it, are really the ‘never Hooper’ crowd.
Below I will list what I see as the main Wallabies failings from the match. I will give my view on why blaming Pooper (Hooper) for each is wrong.
The lineout
I’ll start with the most contentious. You cannot just blame Pooper (Hooper) for the failure of the line-out with any kind of certainty.
We had three legitimate tall men starters for the match; which in my opinion should have been sufficient if the lineout was run well. As Nicolas Bishop pointed out in his column from last week: “After a shaky start in the first Test, the Wallaby lineout settled down to win 90 per cent of its own ball over the course of the series.”
In other words, against Ireland – one of the best in world rugby – our line out functioned really well. With three jumpers, with Pooper.
So here is my question, why is the focus of the lineout woes not on the lineout captain Adam Coleman?
I’m not saying it is an easy job, but knowing what to do when the line out is under pressure – i.e. how to change things up – is surely a critical part of the job. Things won’t always be hunky dory against the best in the business (and surely now it is safe to say the current New Zealand defensive lineout is precisely that), and you have to know how to recover.
I thought the line out lacked creativity under pressure, and therefore lacked answers. They were rattled, as can happen in any sport. Where were the change-ups? Was the good ole’ remedy for a failing lineout, just see what happens at two, even tried?
The upshot: how can people be so sure a fourth jumper would have solved these issue?
Beauden Barrett of the All Blacks is tackled by Michael Hooper of the Wallabies (Photo by Matt King/Getty Images)
The scrum
You cannot blame Pooper (Hooper) for the scrum. Enough said. Six momentum killing penalties. With the lineout, against a team like the All Blacks, this is match losing stuff, no arguments from anyone.
Critical errors
Here are my top five in sequential order:
1. Bernard Foley’s dumb ‘lazy runner’
2. Lukhan Tui’s missed tackle just before half time leading to the first All Black try
3. Marika Koroibete’s strip that lead to the second All Black try
4. Dane Haylett-Petty’s dropped ball and failure to re-gather leading to the third All Black try
5. Will Genia and Tolu Latu not controlling the ball in the maul when it looked like we might be back in it
Hooper did spill one ball. Fine.
Bombed tries
You can’t blame Pooper (Hooper) for the bombed tries. This was the usual lack of skill under pressure. I actually think the Wallabies have been improving in this area under the current regime, but alas, in this match it did not show.
Will Genia and Dane Haylet-Petty looked off the pace
Genia’s service was slow and predictable. I can’t recall seeing him dither quite so badly before. He along with DHP looked short of a gallop, but of course, this is the All Blacks. That last five per cent will look like a massive deficiencies. You can’t blame Pooper for these selections.
Foley (kicking, and varying depth)
Foley should not be kicking for field position except in general play. From kick receipt or restart from a scrum or lineout inside the 22m this should never happen.
Why? Simple really, there are at least three other members of the backline that have bigger boots: Reece Hodge, Kurtley Beale, DHP.
Stephen Larkham, arguably Australia’s greatest fly-half was relegated to similar duties. Names like Chris Latham, Matt Burke and Joe Roff did the kicking for territory, most of the time.
This was not one of the real killer things in this particular match – most of New Zealand’s tries were actually from long range – but it is something that the Wallabies must deal with fast. We have the attacking weapons to take advantage of good field position but we sell ourselves short time and time again.
Foley and Beale also did not vary their depth under the ridiculous and borderline offside (which is just how top level rugby should be played) line speed of the All Blacks. This relates to the Genia criticism above.
Perhaps Genia was slow and this accentuated this issue, or perhaps Genia was slow because he wasn’t working well with his fly half. Either way, we weren’t able to put the All Blacks under much pressure in attack. Either way, not the fault of Pooper (Hooper), unless of course you are making the broad Cheika-Hooper ‘axis of evil’ type observation.
Will Genia of the Wallabies (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
Positives of Pooper (Hooper)
And so what did Pooper (Hooper) bring in this match? They led, in my opinion, potentially the best 40 minutes of Wallaby defence in recent memory. And lead they did.
I will again refer Nick Bishop’s article from last week for more detailed and expert analysis, suffice to say, with Hooper on one side of the field, and David Pocock on the other, our defensive line was lead up with speed and accuracy.
This was critical, perhaps above all else, to the Wallabies starting the game well and not repeating last year’s horror show. We were still in the match until Genia and Latu’s stuffed up maul with 15 minutes to go. Incredible. I would put Pooper at the top of the list of the reasons why this was so.
Some may say much of the positives I just attributed to Pooper in fact just belong to Pocock. Suffice to say I disagree. Hooper’s defensive effort was also critical. According to ESPN he made ten tackles, fourth highest for the Wallabies, for two missed, but this does not show the impact of his energy on the Australian line speed.
Was Hooper gassed earlier than usual? Perhaps. Should he have been hooked after 60 minutes? Perhaps. All of that goes no way to ‘never Pooper’.
Offside
Guest
Hahaha, love it Piripiri. Well said.
John
Guest
What a load of crap. Yes you can’t blame the Pooper for everything. However, the imbalance of the loosies means other people have to do their job as well as cover for the shortfalls in not having a well balanced loose trio like every other tier 1 team. They actually do that for a reason. The pooper was effective for 1 season then everyone worked out it’s weakness, nullified Pocock - no one cares about Hooper as he looks like he’s doing a lot but doesn’t actually achieve much, and isolated the 6 who has to cover the 6&8 role.
Graham Edwards
Guest
Finally, some common-sense. Hooper and Pocock are two incredible back-row players with incredible tickers and abilities and blaming them - or mostly one of them - for poor line-outs and poor scrums and then for the clearly identifiable individual mistakes OF OTHERS that led to the All Black tries is just rabid nonsense. The ONLY back-row challenge Australia have is to find a 3rd player who can hold his own with them. Unfortunately whether it is in rugby or in politics it is the loud overly-critical buffoons ("Trumpeteers" seems to be the best and most appropriate all-encompassing term for them) who are driving what were once measured and reasonable discussions. And finally, let's not forget that their opponents last weekend were, after all, the All Blacks who have an unparalleled record in world sport and have an embarrassing amount of depth in selection; any one of their bench-warmers would be a starting player in most Tier 1 Test sides!
Kane
Guest
Some interesting points there. Although you mentioned all the tries were long range not from sustained pressure on the line. The flip side is that when on the line the All Blacks never scored. In another game they will score there. There were a couple of instances where they should have been awarded penalties in the 22 for offsides. As for laying off the coach unless it’s for tactics. What happens if the coach hasn’t got any tactics ;)
CoachDavo
Guest
If you look at the score, and this is the first thing people see, you think what a thrashing, however, if you watch the actual game, as has been pointed out in this article the AB's tries came from long range and broken field position, they were not from sustained pressure on the WB line, so that is a positive to an extent. The negative is that we obviously need to improve broken play defence, but the AB's are the best in the world at attacking for these positions. In the first half you could see that the AB's were getting very frustrated at the pressure from the WB's, and this is when they really do start to push the legal/illegal line. With any loss the anti Waratah brigade come out in full force and blame Cheika and then in order Foley, Hooper, Beale, Folou and any other Waratah in the team. In some instances this is valid, but in my time watching the game, I am yet to ever see a coach drop a ball, miss a tackle, be offside, throw a forward pass etc, so lay off the coach unless it is for tactics and try to look for the positives rather than name call and just blow smoke
Misha
Guest
Folau doesn't like Poopers..just saying...
Rhys Bosley
Guest
I don’t think anybody wouldn’t acknowledge that we would give something up if Hopper was left off the park. It is more that he just doesn’t combine well with Pocock. Personally I don’t care which of them gets benched and which starts, but I just don’t think they can start together with any expectation of beating the All Blacks.
rebel
Roar Guru
Every decision? Good grief. When you rewatch and see no knock on from Goodhue, also pause when Kieran Read picks up the ball in the play where Crotty was concussed. let me know where you see Beale and is mates.
Kane
Roar Guru
I was curious so I went back and looked couldn't be sure he was offside on YouTube so I'll take the infield call as being right.
terrence
Guest
hooper missed the tackile on ioane which led to the goodhue try..surprised the writer missed that..
MitchO
Guest
TT I thought the pressure came from Hooper and Beale shooting up super fast with Pocock a bit slower and the three of them got up and squeezed them. Tui did a fair bit of work whilst those three were doing the defensive thing. Hooper was a bit underdone and when Folau came off KB had other work to cover.
RobC
Roar Guru
Luke, Hoops is good. I'd drop Poey or bench. But other way around is also ok for me
Tissot Time
Guest
Luke agree Pooper lead the best ever defensive effort for 40 minutes which pressured the ABs into handling errors. The question is why did this Pooper defensive leadership only last 40minutes given a match lasts 80minutes?
Lukas
Roar Pro
It was indeed a spectacular performance for Retallick, wasn't it?
Lukas
Roar Pro
I didn't look at over the ball turnovers. There weren't many that's for sure. Pocock had one, and the Kiwis had at least two, one each to Rettalick and Cane. The Wallaby defence in the first 40 is actually the kind of showing a winning team can be built around, providing of course the lineout and scrum can be remedied. Personally, I've always questioned the value of playing Simmons on the bench. He is not an "impact" player, but surely could set us up better in the line out? Most teams he plays in have decent line outs, with 3 or 4 jumpers. The Tahs are evidence of this, and also during the Ireland series when he started.
Lukas
Roar Pro
Where's the ball running grunt there though? Fardy's ball running was reasonable (no better IMO) but he tended to play in wider channels. Isn't that also Higganbotham's MO? And Pocock plays a linking role at best. I've said this before, but there is no evidence that Higganbotham was able to bring grunt in tight spaces to test matches. If he were to have been selected more often, and over the years I think he should have, it needed to be complemented by a tight -- Jerome Kaino -- type selection so that Higgs could play more like Keiran Read. Think 6. Elsom, 7. Pocock 8. Higganbotham type backrow. Fardy ain't no Elsom.
Cliff Bishkek
Roar Rookie
Fionn, what is difficult in calling a lineout? What is difficult in remembering the calls? What is difficult to throwing a ball into a lineout? Unless Rugby has changed in terms of the above three points with a lineout, then I have to say - none of the above are difficult. It is called practice, and practice, and practice, and practice again - the run on pack and the reserve pack. Similarly the scrum - practice, practice, practice.
Cliff Bishkek
Roar Rookie
Correct.
Cliff Bishkek
Roar Rookie
Highlander, this is ridiculous and I do not see any advantage at all for doing this. And as for impacting Tui and Timu, it would impact me - confusion reigns. The Ws need to start placing the people qualified and experienced in their correct positions and number.
Cliff Bishkek
Roar Rookie
Luke, you are 100% correct, Pooper did not impact the poor showing of the lineout on Saturday night. However, it does make it difficult to allow the 4th jumper. Yes the main problems were - Coleman calling and the No. 2s (esp. Latu) throwing in. Calling is not difficult to do, and lineouts and variation are not difficult to do. Practice and learn. All players need to know the calls. That is what was done when I played - the whole pack knew the calls. The other issue is the lifting. In Oliver's article yesterday, the photograph shows the hand positions of the lifters vs the AB lifters. The Ws are way off the mark and shown up to be very poor in that photograph. But using the example of the LOs against Ireland is not a good argument. Ireland are not the ABs. The Ws play the ABs more than any other team in International Rugby. Good coaching and selection works towards nullifying the strengths of the ABs. Our Coach and support do not do that. Pocock at No. 8 also decreases the use of a good strong, fast and tall No. 8. We should be blooding Holloway. A scrum is a sum of its parts. And must be trained and practiced. A locked scrum supports the scrum. The scrum penalties were due to our props - folding like deck chairs. But with a good No. 8 and I do not believe Pocock is a good No. 8 - he is quite capable but not good. This can and does weaken our scrum. Hooper also does at times weaken our sacrum because he attaches but has his head up too early and thus his drive goes missing. I do not know the answer, and yes the Pooper did not stuff the LOs. But it is not the best option IMHO for the game. And as someone below, which I noted also in the Irish games, the No. 8 and No. 6 and No. 7 seem to change around at various scrum sets. This is not good. For the moment, there may not be better options. But we need to start looking so as to be able to adjust to teams and improve our team go forward. Actually, and I may have missed it in your right up, what were the turnovers for both Hooper and Pocock in the game? I have not been able to find the stats on it.