The Hook Dilema

I said when the team was announced that I was glad Gatland had the minerals to go with form players such as Preistland Charteris and Faletau and it paid off in perfromance and nearly in the result.

Whilst being pleased that he put Hook and Priestland both on the field I did query that maybe they should have been in the alternative positions, not cos I doubted Rhys' ability but thought it might have been a big ask.

BUT he proved me (and few others) completely wrong and produced a mature calm and top noth performance one that for now, at least surely puts him in the driving seat as our No1 O/Half.

Which brings me onto the topic, what to do with Hook, I am still unconvinced by him at XV and very rarely saw him in the attacking role, whilst no one player is ever to blame for a defeat but his fault did lead to their first try.

So where to put him:

10 - Not at the expense of Priestland no (squad rotation yes and maybe to give Rhys a rest).

15 - No just seems wasted there.

12 - For me this seems the more natural place but that said JD2 Came into it a bit more in 2nd half and Roberts is going greats guns and they are two very strong defensive players.

So maybe it should be the bench covering 10, Centre and XV and maybe to add a spark at the end of games.

I agree, I though Priestland showed why he is selected at 10. Controlled the game really well. If only he had put over that drop kick!!!

Hook was poor today. Missed 2 very kickable penalties, dropped the high ball that lead to the first try where he also made a poor attempt at a try line tackle.

15 is definitely not the position for him but at the moment he wouldn't get in to the midfield where Priestland, Davies and Roberts did very well today.

Hook has never been a 15 and I can't understand why he keeps getting selected there. If it's the " because we need him on the field somewhere" argument, well today showed that his creativity simply doesn't work from FB. If he can't displace Davies then he should be on the bench to come on and offer a different game at 10 or centre if that's what's needed.

Frankly, Hook doesn't fit into the Welsh backline. Roberts, finally, is being used correctly, and he is evidently integral to the team. If Hook doesn't start at 10, which I think, his performance against France in mind, would be a risk, Priestland will keep the shirt.

I feel that, in JD2 and Roberts, we have two gliders who will make the yards against the teams in the group, unlike the jinker Hook, who is prone to jinking himself into blind corridors.

I understand why he plays full back; removing him from the constant decision making at 10 until he learns the role in France, but still having him on the pitch to pop up and create something. However, he isn't a full back; he played brilliantly in the position in the Autumn of '09, but never since. He did only spill one high ball, a defensive one, and claimed two others (one defensive, one attacking), and he kicked very well, as expected. But Steyn's try showed his lack of full back ability; he is not a great tackler, and any full back should be smashing him into touch there, or at the very least wrapping him up so the ball is held up.

It's difficult. If Byrne's horrifically off form, then there is little option with Stoddart out, and the prospect of 1/2P there against Samoa and Fiji doesn't instil confidence. Think it's the best situation at the moment.

The other problem is of course - if not hook at 15 then who?

Hopefully it will remain just that: a dilemma. Hook and Priestland have both flourished at 10 in recent games because they're contesting each other for the starting berth I believe. I maintain that I think competition for places is key to draw the best performances from the players. We've also seen immense improvements in the second row and at 8 due to players knowing they have to perform to stay in contention.

I'm not sure Hook's missed kicks are down to the position. How would goal-kicking be any different wearing 15 rather than 10? Besides, I believe one of them (you know the one) went over so technically that's only one miss.

Though I still think Hook's tackling is suspect for a fullback. He really should have pushed Steyn into touch imo but instead got knocked backwards.

Despite having said on another thread that I hope he doesn't tinker too much for the Samoan game I would be tempted to have a serious look at Halfpenny at XV if Byrne is still out of form.

I feel for the big games Gatland will always try to get Hook on the field but it seems either at XV or now it could be at the expense of better players (Priestland and Davies)

I actually thought Hook had a really good game at FH. Only one mistake under the highball (which sadly did cost us points). Otherwise I thought his kicking was good, and he did often look to run it. Also he and Rhys did interchange sometimes during the match. I thought it worked well with him there to be honest. He's the best option we've got at FB.

I have been banging this drum for many a good month (but have been shouted down by various posters on here). Hook is a fantastic player who is very good in three or four positions but not the best available in any of them. This has shades of the Lions tour when he was not picked for the tour and was put on standby as a utility back only. A bench spot to cover 15, 13, 12 and 10 is at best the only option.

You can see how Priestland and Davies bring out the best in Roberts, which Hook (in the past) has never been able to at 13 or 10 IMHO. Contrast that with Hook who didnt have a poor game but was at fault for the 1st try and missed two "kickable" attempts.

Its going to compound even more next year, when you have Jones retiring but will have Tovey, Biggar, Morgan, Priestland all pushing at 10, and with Scott Williams (Henson??) pushing for the midefield slots. FB seems to be the only option as apart from Byrne, Prydie and Barrie Davies you havent much cover there.

I disagree. Hook's better than simply a utility sub. I think he is setting his stall out by moving to France, and whatever comes of that, we will get a clearer picture of where he is likely to play. I like him at 10, 12 and 13, not so much at 15, but then needs must come WC time.

I think he could play with Roberts in the centre. I think he could also maybe play with JD2 there. However, for the big games, you'd want the two big boys in the midfield.

I've stopped putting medium term guesses down over Hook. There's no use. It's chopping and changing all the time, and if that is what will happen for the rest of his career with Wales, perhaps we should just live with it. He has been an excellent servant for the country, never once complaining publically or refusing to play, and that should be comended, even though some will just say 'he's doing his job'. He'll likely play 15 now for the rest of the tournament, with SJ and now Priestland viable first choice 10s, and Byrne out of form/Halfpenny untried at FB.

fly,

If XV is to be our only option then it will compounded further by him going to Perpignan to play 10.

he's not been guaranteed to play 10 at Perpignan though bedford.

For me Hook has always been this mercurial player who can make things happen. I feel his main strength is his vision and elusive running so for this reason I'd have him at 13. He offers more in attack than JD and I think he's played his best rugby for Wales in this position. Defence may be weakened though, which is a drawback. Also, who to play 15? Halfpenny??? As the last line of defence the fullback needs to be solid in defence and Hook simply isn't. Just look at his body position for their 1st try today. He should have been hitting him around the waist and into touch, but he was stood up straight, head on and just got pushed over. Fullback is our new 'problem position' I feel.

Hook is like Steve Gerrard for England - a quality player who has to be picked and will be played out of position just to have him on the field.

One possible change could be halfpenny at fullback and Hook 12 with Roberts at 13. Bit more creativity and Roberts coming at different angles.
I thought Roberts did really well today and made good yards. JD2 also did well but I feel he is too similar in style to Roberts so maybe for the Namibia game it might be worth a look at something different.

I don't feel we should change this team for the Samoa match.

Byrne is still a quality option at fullback. Seemed to try too hard against Argentina, using his boot to get back into the game, but then kicked at the wrong times, and often out on the full, so his poor form compounded itself, he tried harder, made more mistakes etc.

We have loose, unstructured games coming up against Fiji and Samoa. These will not necessarily be games that Byrne is needed or would excel in. Who knows...

Its going to compound even more next year, when you have Jones retiring but will have Tovey, Biggar, Morgan, Priestland all pushing at 10, and with Scott Williams (Henson??) pushing for the midefield slots. FB seems to be the only option as apart from Byrne, Prydie and Barrie Davies you havent much cover there.[/quote]

You should add Martyn Thomas to the list of full backs. He was knocking on the door before his injury setbacks and given an injury free run, he'll rediscover his form!

miaow wrote:I disagree. Hook's better than simply a utility sub. I think he is setting his stall out by moving to France, and whatever comes of that, we will get a clearer picture of where he is likely to play. I like him at 10, 12 and 13, not so much at 15, but then needs must come WC time.

I think he could play with Roberts in the centre. I think he could also maybe play with JD2 there. However, for the big games, you'd want the two big boys in the midfield.

I've stopped putting medium term guesses down over Hook. There's no use. It's chopping and changing all the time, and if that is what will happen for the rest of his career with Wales, perhaps we should just live with it. He has been an excellent servant for the country, never once complaining publically or refusing to play, and that should be comended, even though some will just say 'he's doing his job'. He'll likely play 15 now for the rest of the tournament, with SJ and now Priestland viable first choice 10s, and Byrne out of form/Halfpenny untried at FB.

That's not strictly true, a confident Hook went public and spoke to the press only a few years ago making a big statement that he would and only wanted to play 10 for Wales, then going back on his word when he was dropped from the 10 slot to be moved to 13 and 15. That could have destabilised the Welsh camp but give him credit since that outburst he has applied himself in what position he has been selected for. He has matured since his marriage and baby arrival, and could well still be the Welsh 10 if his French holiday works out.

i think that after todays performance you might see 1/2p playing 15 for the next match (or maybe replacing Shane), if 1/2p is selected and plays well,,,,,,,,,,, then Mr G will have a real problem with Gatlands Law "Hook must start somewhere"

I don't think it's a law. He's always looking to pick the best team, and that often means picking your best players, of which Hook is one. If he is a detriment to the team, or another player could do a better job, he'll drop him, as has been seen at 10.

However, a choice between 1/2P and Hook, in a WC, in a position that is quite specialist, I'd rather go with Hook, although would like to see 1/2P get a run there eventually. People are making too big a deal about it. He played well. He's a good player.

rugby,

Maybe noy but that was big part of him moving there and he has been gauranteed the 10 shirt to start in.

Whether he keeps it or not depends on his performances I suppose.

I didn't think he'd been guaranteed the 10 shirt bedford

Hook has the game to play anywhere in the backline.... he just needs time in whatever position is chosen at.

He looked ok today but its a fact that he knocked on the high ball which lead to the boks try.... a ball a standard FB would take.

He's played FB in what 1-2 games this season... and then he is thrust into the biggest match Wales has played in 4 years in an alien position.

If Gatland was going to always play Stephen Jones and then Priestland due to SJ's injury and wanted Hook to play at FB then at least give him some game time.

I find it strange posters are having a go at a player being asked to play out of position and missing one catch under difficult conditions, SA made a mess of a number of up and unders and North made a hash of a catch that Hook tidied up. Look at the catches he did take under pressure!. How can some posters have a go at his penalties, it could be argued he missed one kick in windy conditions, he did not miss a simple drop goal by at least a another goal width! I thought JD2 looked slow in defence and had a very poor game for the first 3/4 of the game. I don't have a problem with Preistland he kicks long and hits touch, the only problem his he telegraphs his passes.

I would prefer Hook at 10 not 15 but to get the best out of the team Wales may be better off Hook at 12 and Roberts at 13. Bryne must play in the next match if we reach the QF.

Well played Wales, I thought Toby was going off at the time he made his impact, it is a shame he has not had more game time prior to the RWC instead of wasting time on Powell. Toby's hands were much better today but I think we lacked some composure across the team.

I am about rugby'ed out at the moment as I am watching the Blues!

Totally agree about the Faletau/Powell switch, I was anticipating it, and worried about it as well. Powell looked fired up, but that could go one of two ways, as we know. Unbelievable that Wales managed to get through the whole game with only one sub, and still looked fitter than SA.

Hook shouldn't be moved to 10. I think he has to play the role of the utility back for the rest of the tournament barring injury.

What about 1/2p instead of Shane then? - I do appreciate that SA saw shane as a danger and always had an eye on him but I cant remember seeing him do anything when he had possession

I dont see Hook going in at 12, Roberts showed his worth today, 13 is a possibility and Hook's played very well there before. JD didnt show anything great today, solid in defence but when you need tries Hook would be the choice. Unless Priestland loses his bottle as the tournament progresses thats the only position Hook could be successful in, if not the bench may be calling if he carries on with similar performances as today.

Scoi - I've just watched the match again. Some of the breaks JD made were superb. Many were only half breaks but he always got over the gain line and sucked defenders in, and more importantly, he offloaded. He was running good support lines all day too. Had a couple of wobbly moments, but he's improving with each game.

I think with regards to changes, I don't think we should make any unless forced to by injury. Give this team who have played so win the chance to get a W under their belts. Will stand us in good stead later on.

Absolutely agree with JD2 being undervalued. Typical, just like Roberts. It'll take two years until the rest of Wales gets behind him when they realise that, actually, he is on the verge of becoming world class as it is.

And if you want tries, you go for JD2, not Hook. And, considering the opposition...we're going to want the two big men in the centre. NZ didn't play SBW and Nonu just on the off chance; they respected Tonga and we'll need to do the same in selection. That's why I'd rather see Shane be the ultimate super sub, even if that frustrates him and means, when he does come on and get his hands on the ball, he tries too hard and forces it a bit. Frankly, he adds little to a team that, in the last six months, has evolved dramatically. He is still class, but his role in the squad needs to change depending on the opposition, and he shouldn't be an automatic selection anymore.

One fact that seems to be missed here is that RP played at 10 and played well but we LOST! He played behind the best performance by a welsh eight against a top 3 side but we still Lost.

When Hook plays at 10 we win many more games then we loose. With all the ball we had I reckon Hook would have created a lot more then RP.

We should swap RP and Hook around for the next game and then stick with our most talented player in his preferred and best position and then we can still win the WC.

Against SA I guess it made some sense starting Hook at 15 - though it backfired - as they did what was expected and kicked a lot of ball. But Hook is our best 10 and should play there every game from now on.

Only wales would move their most talented player from 10 to FB!!

Deadfred:

Agreed but I don't trust RP at FB, I believe that is why Hook played fullback because of the up and unders, yes Hook missed one but he did not miss another but he saved North and Phillips when they missed the ball. The press say Hooks missed catch led to the try, I question this as Wales won the ball for a scum after this but SA were awarded a free kick which led to the try (how far do you go back).

Unfortunately S Jones is declared fit and he like Preistland require everybody else to create e.g., Wales had 65% ball against the All Blacks last year and we got stuffed in the first test. I think RP had a fair game and is better than SJ (long kicking, kick off's, support play and breaks) but we have to rely on the centres etc to make the breaks to score.

I would go with your best player by a mile at 10, look at results they speak for themselves but a number of Scarlet supports can't see the wood for the trees.

If Byrne was fit and in form then i think Hook would play at 10 and Priestland to the bench. The only reson Hook was put at 15 is that he was the best option there. Priestland played very well but i think Hook would have been just as good or possibly better and with a good 15 it could have been a different game, tries were scored because of the lack of a good 15. If we solve the 15 problem then its nice to be in the position of having 2 players vying for the starting 10 shirt and that doesnt even include Jones.

Priestland played well and seems to have a great temperament. Even so, I'm surprised Gatland didn't move Hook to 10 when we went behind. He could have brought on Knoyle too and picked up the tempo. As things were, for all Roberts' strong running, we never looked like scoring through the backline. How many times did the ball reach the wings through the hands?

samuraidragon wrote:Priestland played well and seems to have a great temperament. Even so, I'm surprised Gatland didn't move Hook to 10 when we went behind. He could have brought on Knoyle too and picked up the tempo. As things were, for all Roberts' strong running, we never looked like scoring through the backline. How many times did the ball reach the wings through the hands?

I think this was a close call, keep with a team that was working but not getting the points in the hope they convert a chance of gamble with a change, in hindsight an easy decision, in reality i think he made the right call.

With Phillips, Roberts and Davies in the back line it's difficult to get the ball out to the wings. I feel Hook throws longer passes (risk of interceptions though) than Priestland so will get the ball out quicker and Knoyles quicker service would have helped as well. The next 3 games certainly need quicker service to tire the big fellas out and to stop them lining up to smash us back in the tackle.

Hook is safe under the high ball and doesn't kick possession away. Unless Hook is at FB you have Byrne who, lets face it shouldn't even be in NZ. As far as I'm concerned Byrne is a waste of a squad position

As far as I know, Hook has only played 15 three or four times for Wales and not at all for the O's in recent years. Such is his rugby talent, that he makes a fair fist of it, but doesn't look truly comfortable. He's a confidence player, and that edge of nervousness may be affecting the rest of his game. Yes, he's pretty solid under the high ball, but he doesn't have the positional radar that an experienced full-back has. He rarely seems to come into the line either - less than Byrne does anyway - perhaps because he is nervous about positioning. We are missing a lot of Hook's game by playing him at 15.

As for Byrne, I think the major problem recently has been poor kicking and decision-making. He's still a crunching tackler , takes the high ball better than Hook (not surprising, he's had plenty of time to perfect that studs-up leap) and can burst into the line like a third winger.

Priestland has the 10 jersey to lose now, far more composed and pragmatic than Hook even though us welsh long for the mercurial players. Priestland will also get better as he is an intelligent rugby player and is also able to make incisive breaks and make the right choices as a rule. Hook really does become a dillema and at Centre he weakens our defensive strength IMO and this must not be compromised. He is also not a FB IMO and perhaps for Wales he is best used as a bench player who can cover a number of options or he remains the 2nd choice 10 at the moment much in the vein of Ogara and Sexton and Flood and Wilko. It's a nice problem to have although we need a full back - 1/2 p will be given a chance soon but perhaps the Samoa match might be asking too much.

Absolutely crazy. Genuinely, Deadfred, so illogical it's wonderful. We lost because of Priestland? It's that simple? And it definitely had nothing to do with missed opportunities, both collectively as a team and through the boots of Hook and Priestland?

Madness...

I dont see why they'd play Priestland at 10 if thy didnt trust him at fullback? Surely that makes absolutely no sense?

The only thing I would have changed about the plan on Saturday was to alternate Hook/Priestland at first receiver with Priestland possibly coming into the line from fullback as he's more used to that attacking role than hook.

Other than that, South Africa took their points, we didnt. That happens in international rugby.

No individual players fault.

Also, Funny how we've started to see Roberts at his best with Jon Davies along side him, and Jon Davies got us out of some very, very tricky positions in our own 22 with ball in hand with some scintilating line breaks that bought us the time we needed.

If at the wknd we had roberts/hook in midfield and byrne at full back then we would not have played like that. Hook isnt a proper centre and Roberts cant go off on his barnstorming runs as he knows hook's not strong enough defensively or aware enough positionally to cover for him.

Gatland got his selections right on the weekend, thats the first time we can say that for a while.

This yet again proves that Gatland, despite getting a lot of thing right IMO has failed over the last two sets of AI games to blood a XV replacement.

he has always just moved Hook back there, I would dearly love to see Halfpenny given a crack at XV, (maybe against Namibia) with the long term goal of him being our fist choice there.

Priestland had a great game and no one can guarantee that Hook would have played better. He deserves to keep the shirt now.

Comfort wrote:

Gatland got his selections right on the weekend, thats the first time we can say that for a while.

bedfordwelsh wrote:This yet again proves that Gatland, despite getting a lot of thing right IMO has failed over the last two sets of AI games to blood a XV replacement.

he has always just moved Hook back there, I would dearly love to see Halfpenny given a crack at XV, (maybe against Namibia) with the long term goal of him being our fist choice there.

Priestland had a great game and no one can guarantee that Hook would have played better. He deserves to keep the shirt now.

Blood a replacement? Please, take North and Faletau as examples that this notion of 'blooding' a player is ridiculous; if they work hard enough, and are good enough, they should be able to step in.

Anyway, Gatland is certainly not at fault for the 15 shirt. Byrne has been awful, and whereas Phillips has worked incredibly hard to get back into the team and earn his starting shirt, Byrne has not, through injury and poor form. Stoddart looked wonderful against England, and I'm sure would be the starting 15 or on the bench against SA had he been fit. He adds the 15 line that Hook does not, and has the trickery and instinctive flair that Byrne does not. He has a big boot, but is prone to kicking it out on the full, although Hook and Byrne also are.

It's unfortunate he was injured. Just as it was unfortunate that Martyn Thomas got injured. And Tom Prydie. Do you really think that all of these players would have been overlooked in the summer by Gatland if they had been fit? The AIs are a time to win, not to 'blood players'. The Magners did the blooding, and produced these boys. Unfortunately, after them, there is a dearth of talent in the position. Thankfully, Gatland knows Hook is competent in the position, and this is what happened, him filling in. Seriously, get your head out of your backside and realise that it has nothing to do with Gatland, and he is not responsible for injury or poor form, and the work he has done in the last two months to get a similar team to the one that played in the 6N to that performance against SA is superb.

People still seem to have chips on their shoulders about the man. Accept his faults, yes, but give him credit for what he has done, and certainly don't blame him for the fact that there are few quality 15s in the country, and that the ones available to him are either injured, out of form, or playing out of position.

Sorry - that doesn't wash with me. Gatland has had several years to bring up an alternative 10, as Ireland have done with Sexton. Instead he persevered with an often misfiring Stephen Jones. Only when SJ got injured in the preamble to the England game did Priestland get a try out in the shirt. He's stepped up well, but frankly is still inexperienced and I for one am still unsure whether our first choice is Jones, Hook or Priestland.

Likewise, we have no options at 15. Hook is doing a job but looks uncomfortable and has had maybe three starts in the position at any level in the past 3 years.

As for Prydie - what was Gatland thinking of! A young lad of 17 who still is not a regional first choice was sent in against the All Blacksaway from home and, inevitably, exposed.

Let's see how we go from here. If we get knocked out again by a PI team, it's curtains for Gatland and deservedly so. If we make the QFs , ok that's a result most fans would accept as an improvement.

miaow,

Do I think Gatland would have overlooked these players if fit? As a rule yes, look how long he stuck with Copper whilst having fitter and alternative options.

He had the chance to put somewhere in there whilst Byrne was injured but IMO took the easy option and moved Hook back there.

I should add that Gatland has not developed an experienced alternative to Mike Phillips either. That cost us over the weekend. Mike is on better form now, but the slowness of service, predictable moves to the blindside, shipping the ball to static forwards etc. remain a problem.

Over the past few years Gatland has stuck with the tried-and tested player group, presumably because he was prioiritizing results over bringing on new players. But the results were poor too, so we have fallen between two stools.

This World Cup is reminding me a lot of 2003. We have some great new players, but it may be a year too early for them, given their lack of toplevel experience.

I'll eat my words if we thrash Samoa though...

Priestland is a tidy prospect but is handicapped by only being able to kick the ball 40m out of hand. When we're playing a team with two (the Steyns) players who can bomb it 70m then it becomes a glaring deficiency.

We're not a good enough test team to have the luxury of playing the second best ten in the world (Hook) at full back.

For all his deficiencies - the fact is that during periods when he plays 10 we score more points than the opposition.