Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
If Michael hooper was English would he actually start at 7?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Peat" data-source="post: 662283" data-attributes="member: 42330"><p>If Hooper or Kvesic had come through at Quins they would be at England starters. Quins is an incredible cradle of rugby at the moment and has a particular specialty in ball-handling forwards. They promote their players young and put them on the big stage to shine in strong teams. It is no accident that Quins probably have produced more young Saxons/Senior forwards than any other club in England at the moment - Marler, Buchanan, Collier, Sinckler, Matthews, Wallace.</p><p></p><p>If Hooper or Kvesic had come through at Glaws than they would probably be in the same position as they are now. I don't think Glaws are any stronger than Wuss as producers of forwards at the moment and last season they offered zero platform to make a case for England selection. I agree with Saffycen that if Kvesic had been at Sarries last season he'd be in the England 23 at least.</p><p></p><p>In short, there's nothing like being at a top club to make your case for an England shirt. Kvesic has yet to have that luxury. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Your reasoning for why they want it might be sound, but I believe it would still be a mistake. Leaving aside the worry that some players get too big too quickly and end up with more injuries than necessary, I would rather have a quicker and more agile Hooper over a slower one with more strength. I might end up feeling the same way about Kvesic. Obviously it's a balancing act to get as good a player as possible, and the bigger a skillset the better, but I feel its possible to take a fantastic specialist and make him a mediocre generalist by trying to get him to do too many things. I think its possible they'd have done that with Hooper.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not entirely true for my money. Cole poaches when he plays, Robshaw goes through hot bursts, Wood gets over the ball from time to time, so does Youngs, you'll often see Tuilagi go for it. Yes, we currently have no specialist, and yes, the emphasis on forcing turnovers in other ways and avoiding cheap penalties means its not a vital part of the plan, but it is still there - and even if we don't poach the ball, we'll still have someone in there slowing it up. </p><p></p><p>More to the point, this is the system that Lancaster has come up with from the parts available, which doesn't include a World Class fetcher. Would he change the system if he had one?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Tom Rees. Was made of glass alas.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Peat, post: 662283, member: 42330"] If Hooper or Kvesic had come through at Quins they would be at England starters. Quins is an incredible cradle of rugby at the moment and has a particular specialty in ball-handling forwards. They promote their players young and put them on the big stage to shine in strong teams. It is no accident that Quins probably have produced more young Saxons/Senior forwards than any other club in England at the moment - Marler, Buchanan, Collier, Sinckler, Matthews, Wallace. If Hooper or Kvesic had come through at Glaws than they would probably be in the same position as they are now. I don't think Glaws are any stronger than Wuss as producers of forwards at the moment and last season they offered zero platform to make a case for England selection. I agree with Saffycen that if Kvesic had been at Sarries last season he'd be in the England 23 at least. In short, there's nothing like being at a top club to make your case for an England shirt. Kvesic has yet to have that luxury. Your reasoning for why they want it might be sound, but I believe it would still be a mistake. Leaving aside the worry that some players get too big too quickly and end up with more injuries than necessary, I would rather have a quicker and more agile Hooper over a slower one with more strength. I might end up feeling the same way about Kvesic. Obviously it's a balancing act to get as good a player as possible, and the bigger a skillset the better, but I feel its possible to take a fantastic specialist and make him a mediocre generalist by trying to get him to do too many things. I think its possible they'd have done that with Hooper. Not entirely true for my money. Cole poaches when he plays, Robshaw goes through hot bursts, Wood gets over the ball from time to time, so does Youngs, you'll often see Tuilagi go for it. Yes, we currently have no specialist, and yes, the emphasis on forcing turnovers in other ways and avoiding cheap penalties means its not a vital part of the plan, but it is still there - and even if we don't poach the ball, we'll still have someone in there slowing it up. More to the point, this is the system that Lancaster has come up with from the parts available, which doesn't include a World Class fetcher. Would he change the system if he had one? Tom Rees. Was made of glass alas. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
If Michael hooper was English would he actually start at 7?
Top