Rugby debate: Drop Priestland? Yes or No?

First topic message reminder :

This is by no means an assault on one player because Wales lost. I think there should be several changes for next week. There was a lot of rustyness and silly errors, but one thing I am noticing is one person in particular is not developing as well as others.

Rhys Priestland has of course played well for the Scarlets and had some great games for Wales. He played well during the WC till he got injured and he hasn't really played with any consistency since.

Yes he has talent, yes he's played well before, yes he's young and of course if he has one or two poor games then axing him isn't always the solution. Players need another chance if they have potential and you don't want to destroy a players confidence by dropping them for the odd mediocre performance. He can play shambolic against England and we can still win, but that is England. This Australia test is serious and we need some big bottle and big performances.

He kicks possession away for no reason when he have the likes of Cuthbert, North and JD2 outside of him. When he kicks an up and under it goes too far and can't be chased. Of course the worst mistake was the knock on that could have lead to a match winning try. His Six Nations was average, he didn't spark. He rarely makes a good break (like Stephen Jones). Our running backline needs a more attacking minded 10.

Hook deserves a chance quite frankly because we have nobody else. The best 10 in the UK (Dan Biggar) wasn't good enough to tour, apparently.

Priestland should start next week on the bench. If Hook has a howler then he can come back on in the 2nd half and prove his worth. We have enough 10's in Wales knocking at the door. Time to see who is the most capable.

no.
priestland had a pig of a game, but, again, it was not because of what he did wrong but rather what went wrong around him. he could easily be benched (10, 15 cover) but this would be a backwards step.

preistland has all the natural ability and seems to be a clever young man. we need him to play through this bad patch. when the team (and our lumpo of a 9) get their sh1t together preistland will be ready and waiting to do the buisness.

preistland didnt let us down. others in the team let him down on a few cruicial occations and it made wales and priestland look shoddy.

dog,

He has to take some of the blame his kicking out of hand was very poor to say the least and you cant blame others for that

bedford,
no, priest is not blameless. but neither should he carry all the blame. (dropping him would suggest he does)

it was a poor welsh performance; a shoddy, often lazy effort. it was a bad result, hopefully that will give the whole squad a kik up the arse.

where is edwards? we need him in sergent major mode again.

He doesn't respect Howley, probably. He hasn't got the voice for a head man, or the stature. These things count. Charisma.

Glas a du wrote: He hasn't got the voice for a head man, or the stature.

howley?

Yes Howley, the mild mannered Janitor.

Seagultaf wrote:

gowales wrote:

Glas a du wrote:Whilst I agree Priestland needs to be dropped, the alternative he has available, Hook, is surely worse?

I don't think so, he's been playing well for Perpignan at 10 and has played more good games at 10 internationally than Priestland has to date

Wales forwards were bested and Wales lost, and so typically the fans reaction is to call for the number 10 to be dropped..............priceless!

According to the Perpignan fans on the message boards, they have not been particularly enamoured with Hook. Don't forget they very nearly got relegated this season! Also Hook has played more rubbish games at international level that Priestland has even played at test level.

Hook has all the basic skills but lacks concentration and pace at this level. I just don't see how Hook would have coped with the pressure the Ozzies were putting on our 10 better than Priestland did.

Christophe Manas (Perpignan coach), in an interview with L'Equipe (legendary daily sports paper) compared Hook to Dan Carter;

"He's an instinctive player. He returned from the World Cup with the impression of having missed the competition. But there was also a lot of desire on his part to advance, to take over the position of 10....he joined our game systems quickly and humanely, I tend to compare him to Dan Carter...."

Eurosport described Hook's performance in the 25-10 win against Toulouse as a 'consummate display'.

Should always take the opinions of people on message boards with a pinch of salt. Especially when they are French, and things get lost in translation???

never been a hook fan, not enough of a strong skill set in just one position, but a smattering of ability which keeps him as cover. since his move to perpignan i think he has slowed down physically and mentally. his positional play and reading of the game was poor.

i know he doesnt play 15 , but a player of his supposed ability playing at 15 should be more aware and scan much better.

perps standard of playing has not brought him on in any department as far as i can see.

Casartelli wrote:

Seagultaf wrote:

gowales wrote:

Glas a du wrote:Whilst I agree Priestland needs to be dropped, the alternative he has available, Hook, is surely worse?

I don't think so, he's been playing well for Perpignan at 10 and has played more good games at 10 internationally than Priestland has to date

Wales forwards were bested and Wales lost, and so typically the fans reaction is to call for the number 10 to be dropped..............priceless!

According to the Perpignan fans on the message boards, they have not been particularly enamoured with Hook. Don't forget they very nearly got relegated this season! Also Hook has played more rubbish games at international level that Priestland has even played at test level.

Hook has all the basic skills but lacks concentration and pace at this level. I just don't see how Hook would have coped with the pressure the Ozzies were putting on our 10 better than Priestland did.

Christophe Manas (Perpignan coach), in an interview with L'Equipe (legendary daily sports paper) compared Hook to Dan Carter;

"He's an instinctive player. He returned from the World Cup with the impression of having missed the competition. But there was also a lot of desire on his part to advance, to take over the position of 10....he joined our game systems quickly and humanely, I tend to compare him to Dan Carter...."

Eurosport described Hook's performance in the 25-10 win against Toulouse as a 'consummate display'.

Should always take the opinions of people on message boards with a pinch of salt. Especially when they are French, and things get lost in translation???

I had the fortune of seeing perpignan at the business end of the season (whilst on business) Hook at 10 had an awesome game, I spoke glowingly of how he must have settled into the life of a twinkling toes instinctive flyhalf for a French side (in the pub afterwards) to the home fans.............. and like seagulltaf pronounced the Perpignan fans are not enarmoured with Mr H at all, "too inconsistent", gets turned over too many times, and in tight play cannot see the options....... some things never change it seems. They are not impressed and were all talk about a young french 10 that in their words is better at 17 than Hook (with all his experience) is now. I would say by the end of next season Hook will be playing 12 or out of it altogether

Personally I would play him with young Webb midweek and if he can't produce the goods with fast distribution from the scrum against a club side, then IMHO its time to put the Hook experience to bed............. and move on

I mean Mr F you can always talk about Matthew Morgan next

Flyhalffactory old boy! - How's things big man?

From the BBC (hence impartial) website;

"James Hook scored the opening try, kicked well and showed impressive game control, although the fly-half was helped by a dominant Wales pack..."

Hooky's even controlling a game now! The one thing the keyboard cowboys said he'd never be able to do.

A stint in France has done him the world of good, he's the complete 10 now.

(BTW - Matthew Morgan is a brilliant talent - been watching him play for last 7 years - but at test level he's a potential 9 not a 10. Suffers from the Priestland/Jones flaw of not being able to kick it very far out of hand.

Morgan at 9 and Hook at 10??? Now I'd pay good money to see that!)

Priestland should have taken that pass and a try should have been scored. The lieks of BJ, JD and plenty of other flyhalfs in the past would have caught that pass. It was a critical time in the game, just as Wales had taken the momentum. It's moments like that that really test players, when they really need to be switched on. It wasn't a good pass, but it wasn't the worst either -- a good back should take such a pass, especially when there's an easy overlap try-walk-in on offer. Poor form. He should be dropped for that and many other manifestations of poor form.

Casartelli wrote:Flyhalffactory old boy! - How's things big man?

From the BBC (hence impartial) website;

"James Hook scored the opening try, kicked well and showed impressive game control, although the fly-half was helped by a dominant Wales pack..."

Hooky's even controlling a game now! The one thing the keyboard cowboys said he'd never be able to do.

A stint in France has done him the world of good, he's the complete 10 now.

(BTW - Matthew Morgan is a brilliant talent - been watching him play for last 7 years - but at test level he's a potential 9 not a 10. Suffers from the Priestland/Jones flaw of not being able to kick it very far out of hand.

Morgan at 9 and Hook at 10??? Now I'd pay good money to see that!)

Wait what? When did Matthew Morgan become an international scrum half?

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:Flyhalffactory old boy! - How's things big man?

From the BBC (hence impartial) website;

"James Hook scored the opening try, kicked well and showed impressive game control, although the fly-half was helped by a dominant Wales pack..."

Hooky's even controlling a game now! The one thing the keyboard cowboys said he'd never be able to do.

A stint in France has done him the world of good, he's the complete 10 now.

(BTW - Matthew Morgan is a brilliant talent - been watching him play for last 7 years - but at test level he's a potential 9 not a 10. Suffers from the Priestland/Jones flaw of not being able to kick it very far out of hand.

Morgan at 9 and Hook at 10??? Now I'd pay good money to see that!)

Wait what? When did Matthew Morgan become an international scrum half?

See - I think you almost certainly read the word 'potential' in my post, but chose to pretend that you didn't.

And I find that intriguing.

The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

So Morgan is a good 10 that's played all his life at 10, including being the only 10 to beat the baby blacks yet you think he should play 9?

Are you Scott Johnson?

Glas a du wrote:The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

Valid point - Priestland is a decent player but has lost that pre RWC form so badly that it could cost us games now.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Biggar is a also a good player but he's just a Stephen Jones clone. He'll do a job, but come on, what do we want? Why settle for hamburger when we have fillet steak ready and waiting!

Hook showed in 2008 what he's capable of and he's served his apprenticeship, and then some.

He's ready to play 10 now and take Wales to the next level over the next 5 years.

CurlyOsp wrote:So Morgan is a good 10 that's played all his life at 10, including being the only 10 to beat the baby blacks yet you think he should play 9?

Are you Scott Johnson?

Actually, I think that Nipper is so talented that, at "Rabo" level he could play either and be devastatingly effective. You know like in France and New Zealand they often see 9 & 10 as interchangeable? France & New Zealand? Hmmm? Quite good at rugby there. Weepu, Parra, that other little French fella. Giteau has played 9 & 10 too. And Carter.

In adult, test, rugby, I think he'd always struggle at 10. But at 9? In between Lydiate, Warbs, Roberts, JD2? He'd get a lot of protection and would rip opposition apart in open play.

(Don't tell anyone I said, but Howley is already thinking along similar lines...)

Casartelli wrote:

CurlyOsp wrote:So Morgan is a good 10 that's played all his life at 10, including being the only 10 to beat the baby blacks yet you think he should play 9?

Are you Scott Johnson?

Actually, I think that Nipper is so talented that, at "Rabo" level he could play either and be devastatingly effective. You know like in France and New Zealand they often see 9 & 10 as interchangeable? France & New Zealand? Hmmm? Quite good at rugby there. Weepu, Parra, that other little French fella. Giteau has played 9 & 10 too. And Carter.

In adult, test, rugby, I think he'd always struggle at 10. But at 9? In between Lydiate, Warbs, Roberts, JD2? He'd get a lot of protection and would rip opposition apart in open play.

(Don't tell anyone I said, but Howley is already thinking along similar lines...)

When did Carter EVER play 9? He played 12 a lot.

I don't remember Giteau ever playing 9 either.

Weepu and Pienaar can play 9/10 - A few french scrum halfs have, but Parra was poor there (and only played there because of mad Marc), Skrela and Michalak played a bit of both - but I havent exactly seen them setting the world alight at 9.

Just because a team is good at rugby and has 1 SH in their squad who has some experience playing 9 does not suggest causation.

Casartelli wrote:

Glas a du wrote:The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

Valid point - Priestland is a decent player but has lost that pre RWC form so badly that it could cost us games now.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Biggar is a also a good player but he's just a Stephen Jones clone. He'll do a job, but come on, what do we want? Why settle for hamburger when we have fillet steak ready and waiting!

Hook showed in 2008 what he's capable of and he's served his apprenticeship, and then some.

He's ready to play 10 now and take Wales to the next level over the next 5 years.

Suggesting Stephen Jones was a bad flyhalf and Hook is the saviour

Stephen Jones was a lot closer to Carter than Hook is. Jones was consistent over a long period, Hook is unreliable and thus never a long term 10 option. Stephen Jones was the Lions 10 for a reason.

Have to agree with 606, those players can play both positions, but can only play one at a good standard. Parra and Weepu arent great 10's and do you really think Carter is as good at 9 as he is at 10? I don't think so.

If you've been following Nipper for as long as you say you have, you'd have seen him prove time and time again that 10 is his position. He's had a lot of good coaches and none have ever given him any extended time at 9 for that reason!

CurlyOsp wrote:Have to agree with 606, those players can play both positions, but can only play one at a good standard. Parra and Weepu arent great 10's and do you really think Carter is as good at 9 as he is at 10? I don't think so.

If you've been following Nipper for as long as you say you have, you'd have seen him prove time and time again that 10 is his position. He's had a lot of good coaches and none have ever given him any extended time at 9 for that reason!

His defence has looked good so far in the U20s. I hope he can start to be more consistent at regional level, his place kicking was awful against NZ for example. Habberfield is the real star of this backline if you ask me, although Morgan has been distributing very well in the midfield.

Both 10's struggled with place kicking that match, i think it had a lot to do with the conditions. Not so long ago Morgan was knocking pens over from the halfway line for the O's but he's been off with the boot lately.

In this tournament he's shown he can controll a game well and get the backline going, rather than his old aproach of taking everything on himself. But you're right in saying that Habberfield has been the star.

Unfortunatly for Morgan, he wont be getting a huge amount of game time with Biggar in the form of his life (and not getting called up :s), so the step up may take longer than expected.

If Morgan plays anywhere it's outside half or wing.

Jeez why is it always so black and white. Ive been a harsh critic of Hook at ten and a fan of RP. However at the moment RP is a liability in a welsh shirt. Hook played very well today and deserves to play on saturday. He is the more inform player. That doesnt mean RP gets cast to the scrapheap nor does it mean Hook is the next Dan Carter. We have a game on saturday and we have to pick the players who will help us win. In all honesty I have not seen anything fro RP since the pass to JD in the Irish game. The rest of his game has been tidy at best and awful at worst. Hook has been awful in a welsh shirt, he has also been sublime.

Morgan hasnt been exposed in defence at the u20s yet, HOwever he will need to bulk up before he can be even considered for senior honours.

Wellies has been in gradual decline for the past 3 years, once a great player now a shadow of himself. His best was the 05-08 period

Tovey moving to the Blues will really get the exposure he didnt at the dragons,

Steffan Jones stepping up is a great talent as is the other young ten at the dragons,

Biggar really doesnt do it for me but even I have to admit hes a great kicker of the ball.

All of these guys are going to be competing for the ten shirt all have talent and at different times different players will get their chance.

If your opinions are fixed in stone then you arent adapting. I called for Hook to be dropped and RP to get a run after the Twickenham game last year. At the moment I think RP should be dropped and Hook given the jersey. In the AI's it could be Hook still, I dunno I cant read the future, maybe priestland will come back into form, maybe mrgan will bulk up, Maybe Tovey will ignite the cardiff backs. who knows? but at the moment it has to be Hook on saturday.

I think Hook should play 10 on Saturday, so I don't know where your getting that from.

Hook is not the long term answer at 10 though.

Yeah I haven't been a fan of Hooks for a few seasons, not all his fault was messed about to much.

Priestland has been poor pf late, Biggar isn't there so Hook should get the nod for Saturday.

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

Glas a du wrote:The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

Valid point - Priestland is a decent player but has lost that pre RWC form so badly that it could cost us games now.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Biggar is a also a good player but he's just a Stephen Jones clone. He'll do a job, but come on, what do we want? Why settle for hamburger when we have fillet steak ready and waiting!

Hook showed in 2008 what he's capable of and he's served his apprenticeship, and then some.

He's ready to play 10 now and take Wales to the next level over the next 5 years.

Suggesting Stephen Jones was a bad flyhalf and Hook is the saviour

Stephen Jones was a lot closer to Carter than Hook is. Jones was consistent over a long period, Hook is unreliable and thus never a long term 10 option. Stephen Jones was the Lions 10 for a reason.

Wales 606 100% spot on .............. Mr F you old cheeky chappy playing that silly game again

This is old ground but I'll say it again

Carter is like Jones, Quade Cooper is like Hook............

Carter on Stephen Jones when the Lions played NZ

"I modelled my game on Jones quite a lot, i.e. I run when the option is to run which is rare, I pass for another team mate to run which is often....... its all about game management not headline running"

Mr F, as I said I saw Hook having an awesome game for Perpignan and I was most impressed, but when I waxed lyrical about him after the game the supporters in the pub were almost 100% of one opinion INCONSISTENT, with the same old foibles, (so I shut up)

Gets turned over too often, suicide runs under pressure, cannot hold the defensive line.............

Same old same old....... it seems

ps Mr F
Have you watched Matthew Morgan? where the heck has "he can't kick far come from"....I have only see a few snippets here and there, but he has a MULE of a kick............. saw him smash a pen from within his own half, he is a much stronger kicker than eithere Jones Bigger or Hook

wales606 wrote:I think Hook should play 10 on Saturday, so I don't know where your getting that from.

Hook is not the long term answer at 10 though.

You simply dont know that. Hook may or may not be the solution, He is young and as long as he performs in a welsh shirt then why should he not be the answer? If he doesnt then sombody else will be but tyo say he is not the long term answer is ridiculous. You only find out the answer after the question has been asked, its rugby not jeopardy

If Osprey's hadn't messed Hook around I think he would be up there with the best world 10's imo. He has it all for me and these inconsistencies have all stemmed from him playing 10 for Wales, then playing 12 and sometimes 15 for the O's. Then, when asked to play 10 for Wales, he couldn't replicate his performances as in 2008 because he hadn't played 10 week in week out for his club.

Ospreys didn't play hook at 10 because he wasn't great at 10. Biggar was and is better at 10. Most of his best performances came at 12 with the ospreys imho.

It was his own stubborness in wanting to play 10 that got him messed around.

flyhalffactory wrote:

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

Glas a du wrote:The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

Valid point - Priestland is a decent player but has lost that pre RWC form so badly that it could cost us games now.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Biggar is a also a good player but he's just a Stephen Jones clone. He'll do a job, but come on, what do we want? Why settle for hamburger when we have fillet steak ready and waiting!

Hook showed in 2008 what he's capable of and he's served his apprenticeship, and then some.

He's ready to play 10 now and take Wales to the next level over the next 5 years.

Suggesting Stephen Jones was a bad flyhalf and Hook is the saviour

Stephen Jones was a lot closer to Carter than Hook is. Jones was consistent over a long period, Hook is unreliable and thus never a long term 10 option. Stephen Jones was the Lions 10 for a reason.

Wales 606 100% spot on .............. Mr F you old cheeky chappy playing that silly game again

This is old ground but I'll say it again

Carter is like Jones, Quade Cooper is like Hook............

Carter on Stephen Jones when the Lions played NZ

"I modelled my game on Jones quite a lot, i.e. I run when the option is to run which is rare, I pass for another team mate to run which is often....... its all about game management not headline running"

Mr F, as I said I saw Hook having an awesome game for Perpignan and I was most impressed, but when I waxed lyrical about him after the game the supporters in the pub were almost 100% of one opinion INCONSISTENT, with the same old foibles, (so I shut up)

Gets turned over too often, suicide runs under pressure, cannot hold the defensive line.............

Same old same old....... it seems

ps Mr F
Have you watched Matthew Morgan? where the heck has "he can't kick far come from"....I have only see a few snippets here and there, but he has a MULE of a kick............. saw him smash a pen from within his own half, he is a much stronger kicker than eithere Jones Bigger or Hook

Doesn't matter what they say in the pub (or on an online forum!) - the Perpignan coach (he's a paid professional, probably earned the right to have an opinion) compared Hook to Carter...

...Hook makes mistakes, but HE WAS NEVER GIVEN A CHANCE to develop his skills as a 10 at test level. Since 2008 he has not started more than 2 consecutive games at 10 for Wales at outside half. Priestland has had more than a dozen chances, without being messed around out of position, and has just got progressively worse (that's not to say he is a poor rugby player - he'll be good for Llanelli in the Celtic league and deserves a pro contract).

This has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams.

martyr_94 wrote:If Osprey's hadn't messed Hook around I think he would be up there with the best world 10's imo. He has it all for me and these inconsistencies have all stemmed from him playing 10 for Wales, then playing 12 and sometimes 15 for the O's. Then, when asked to play 10 for Wales, he couldn't replicate his performances as in 2008 because he hadn't played 10 week in week out for his club.

+100

Casartelli wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

Glas a du wrote:The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

Valid point - Priestland is a decent player but has lost that pre RWC form so badly that it could cost us games now.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Biggar is a also a good player but he's just a Stephen Jones clone. He'll do a job, but come on, what do we want? Why settle for hamburger when we have fillet steak ready and waiting!

Hook showed in 2008 what he's capable of and he's served his apprenticeship, and then some.

He's ready to play 10 now and take Wales to the next level over the next 5 years.

Suggesting Stephen Jones was a bad flyhalf and Hook is the saviour

Stephen Jones was a lot closer to Carter than Hook is. Jones was consistent over a long period, Hook is unreliable and thus never a long term 10 option. Stephen Jones was the Lions 10 for a reason.

Wales 606 100% spot on .............. Mr F you old cheeky chappy playing that silly game again

This is old ground but I'll say it again

Carter is like Jones, Quade Cooper is like Hook............

Carter on Stephen Jones when the Lions played NZ

"I modelled my game on Jones quite a lot, i.e. I run when the option is to run which is rare, I pass for another team mate to run which is often....... its all about game management not headline running"

Mr F, as I said I saw Hook having an awesome game for Perpignan and I was most impressed, but when I waxed lyrical about him after the game the supporters in the pub were almost 100% of one opinion INCONSISTENT, with the same old foibles, (so I shut up)

Gets turned over too often, suicide runs under pressure, cannot hold the defensive line.............

Same old same old....... it seems

ps Mr F
Have you watched Matthew Morgan? where the heck has "he can't kick far come from"....I have only see a few snippets here and there, but he has a MULE of a kick............. saw him smash a pen from within his own half, he is a much stronger kicker than eithere Jones Bigger or Hook

Doesn't matter what they say in the pub (or on an online forum!) - the Perpignan coach (he's a paid professional, probably earned the right to have an opinion) compared Hook to Carter...

...Hook makes mistakes, but HE WAS NEVER GIVEN A CHANCE to develop his skills as a 10 at test level. Since 2008 he has not started more than 2 consecutive games at 10 for Wales at outside half. Priestland has had more than a dozen chances, without being messed around out of position, and has just got progressively worse (that's not to say he is a poor rugby player - he'll be good for Llanelli in the Celtic league and deserves a pro contract).

This has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams.

Of course he's going to talk up a signing that he's paid a lot of money for! I agree Hook is our best 10 for saturday in this situation, but in general why should he have been given a chance to develop his skills at 10 at test level when he wasn't doing the job at regional level?

The only 10 that's earned any merit at regional level has been left at home because Howley is holding a grudge.

CurlyOsp wrote:Ospreys didn't play hook at 10 because he wasn't great at 10. Biggar was and is better at 10. Most of his best performances came at 12 with the ospreys imho.

It was his own stubborness in wanting to play 10 that got him messed around.

Hook didn't play 10 at the Ospreys because, at that time, Holley, Johnson and Humph were making the decisions, and, no disrespect intended, they didn't have the credentials to manage Bonymaen U-9s backline.

(Humph has earned the right to be a forwards coach, to be fair).

CurlyOsp wrote:Ospreys didn't play hook at 10 because he wasn't great at 10. Biggar was and is better at 10. Most of his best performances came at 12 with the ospreys imho.

It was his own stubborness in wanting to play 10 that got him messed around.

You can't blame the guy who had come back off a grand slam, playing 10 and was an instrumental part of us winning in 2008, to be stubborn at wanting to play his best position for his region. Biggar was not a better FH, he kicked far too much and its only this season where he has matured.

Casartelli wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

Glas a du wrote:The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

Valid point - Priestland is a decent player but has lost that pre RWC form so badly that it could cost us games now.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Biggar is a also a good player but he's just a Stephen Jones clone. He'll do a job, but come on, what do we want? Why settle for hamburger when we have fillet steak ready and waiting!

Hook showed in 2008 what he's capable of and he's served his apprenticeship, and then some.

He's ready to play 10 now and take Wales to the next level over the next 5 years.

Suggesting Stephen Jones was a bad flyhalf and Hook is the saviour

Stephen Jones was a lot closer to Carter than Hook is. Jones was consistent over a long period, Hook is unreliable and thus never a long term 10 option. Stephen Jones was the Lions 10 for a reason.

Wales 606 100% spot on .............. Mr F you old cheeky chappy playing that silly game again

This is old ground but I'll say it again

Carter is like Jones, Quade Cooper is like Hook............

Carter on Stephen Jones when the Lions played NZ

"I modelled my game on Jones quite a lot, i.e. I run when the option is to run which is rare, I pass for another team mate to run which is often....... its all about game management not headline running"

Mr F, as I said I saw Hook having an awesome game for Perpignan and I was most impressed, but when I waxed lyrical about him after the game the supporters in the pub were almost 100% of one opinion INCONSISTENT, with the same old foibles, (so I shut up)

Gets turned over too often, suicide runs under pressure, cannot hold the defensive line.............

Same old same old....... it seems

ps Mr F
Have you watched Matthew Morgan? where the heck has "he can't kick far come from"....I have only see a few snippets here and there, but he has a MULE of a kick............. saw him smash a pen from within his own half, he is a much stronger kicker than eithere Jones Bigger or Hook

Doesn't matter what they say in the pub (or on an online forum!) - the Perpignan coach (he's a paid professional, probably earned the right to have an opinion) compared Hook to Carter...

...Hook makes mistakes, but HE WAS NEVER GIVEN A CHANCE to develop his skills as a 10 at test level. Since 2008 he has not started more than 2 consecutive games at 10 for Wales at outside half. Priestland has had more than a dozen chances, without being messed around out of position, and has just got progressively worse (that's not to say he is a poor rugby player - he'll be good for Llanelli in the Celtic league and deserves a pro contract).This has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams.

That is just as ridiculous as saying Hook is not wales answer! Priestland has proven he has the talent to play international rugby

"his has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams." -- Howley (and I assume Howley, rather than Gatland has been making the decisions re: squad/team selection) is too loyal to players who are not performing and clearly out of form. Gatland is also sometimes too loyal to players. There's a time for loyalty and giving players a chance -- but if players are not performing game after game, they should be dropped. It doesn't matter who they are -- the team comes first. Can you imagine NZ or any top SH team continuining to play players who are not performing?

If Wales are serious aboit getting into the top 3/4 countries in the world, the coaches have to be ruthless. Drop players when they repeatedly don't perform (it can sometimes be a good thing to put a player who is used to starting to the bench, or drop him altogeteher). Just look how Ryan Jones has reponded to losing the captaincy and being dropped!

Hook deserves a run at 10. And although I'm not a Biggar fan, he should be in Aus training with the squad at least, putting pressure on the other 10s -- and if he performs in training, should be in the match-day squad. No one's place should be certain, not even Warburton's (there was a case to start with Tips in the first test, to have a temporary match-day captain, and have Warbs on the bench -- given that Warbs had not played for 3 months).

They may have made some bad decisions but playing Biggar ahead of Hook was the right call. They saw Biggars potential as a big game player and now he's really starting to come into his own.

Could you really see Hook turning out performances like Biggar has done in both away finals at the RDS? He doesn't have the head for it. When the pressure's on his game goes to pot.

Casartelli wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

Glas a du wrote:The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

Valid point - Priestland is a decent player but has lost that pre RWC form so badly that it could cost us games now.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Biggar is a also a good player but he's just a Stephen Jones clone. He'll do a job, but come on, what do we want? Why settle for hamburger when we have fillet steak ready and waiting!

Hook showed in 2008 what he's capable of and he's served his apprenticeship, and then some.

He's ready to play 10 now and take Wales to the next level over the next 5 years.

Suggesting Stephen Jones was a bad flyhalf and Hook is the saviour

Stephen Jones was a lot closer to Carter than Hook is. Jones was consistent over a long period, Hook is unreliable and thus never a long term 10 option. Stephen Jones was the Lions 10 for a reason.

Wales 606 100% spot on .............. Mr F you old cheeky chappy playing that silly game again

This is old ground but I'll say it again

Carter is like Jones, Quade Cooper is like Hook............

Carter on Stephen Jones when the Lions played NZ

"I modelled my game on Jones quite a lot, i.e. I run when the option is to run which is rare, I pass for another team mate to run which is often....... its all about game management not headline running"

Mr F, as I said I saw Hook having an awesome game for Perpignan and I was most impressed, but when I waxed lyrical about him after the game the supporters in the pub were almost 100% of one opinion INCONSISTENT, with the same old foibles, (so I shut up)

Gets turned over too often, suicide runs under pressure, cannot hold the defensive line.............

Same old same old....... it seems

ps Mr F
Have you watched Matthew Morgan? where the heck has "he can't kick far come from"....I have only see a few snippets here and there, but he has a MULE of a kick............. saw him smash a pen from within his own half, he is a much stronger kicker than eithere Jones Bigger or Hook

Doesn't matter what they say in the pub (or on an online forum!) - the Perpignan coach (he's a paid professional, probably earned the right to have an opinion) compared Hook to Carter...

...Hook makes mistakes, but HE WAS NEVER GIVEN A CHANCE to develop his skills as a 10 at test level. Since 2008 he has not started more than 2 consecutive games at 10 for Wales at outside half. Priestland has had more than a dozen chances, without being messed around out of position, and has just got progressively worse (that's not to say he is a poor rugby player - he'll be good for Llanelli in the Celtic league and deserves a pro contract).

This has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams.

IT ACTUALLY DOES MATTER, the coach said what the papers needed to hear.......... its called been political or if you want "Gatlandism"

Hook in his first two international season had more games at 10 that Jones/Robinson/Sweeney combined (I have given these stats before) HOW MUCH MORE CHANCES CAN YOU GIVE A PLAYER

Casartelli wrote:

This has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams.

Hook does not kick the ball a LOT further than Biggar.

Hook may be able to kick it further, but Biggar is 10 times the tactical kicker Hook is - Biggar is a LOT more accurate than Hook.

We might aswell bring Lee Byrne back to play 10...

CurlyOsp wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

Glas a du wrote:The Elephant in the room is that Biggar is not there. Disaster. Priestland will cost us the next two tests.

Valid point - Priestland is a decent player but has lost that pre RWC form so badly that it could cost us games now.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Biggar is a also a good player but he's just a Stephen Jones clone. He'll do a job, but come on, what do we want? Why settle for hamburger when we have fillet steak ready and waiting!

Hook showed in 2008 what he's capable of and he's served his apprenticeship, and then some.

He's ready to play 10 now and take Wales to the next level over the next 5 years.

Suggesting Stephen Jones was a bad flyhalf and Hook is the saviour

Stephen Jones was a lot closer to Carter than Hook is. Jones was consistent over a long period, Hook is unreliable and thus never a long term 10 option. Stephen Jones was the Lions 10 for a reason.

Wales 606 100% spot on .............. Mr F you old cheeky chappy playing that silly game again

This is old ground but I'll say it again

Carter is like Jones, Quade Cooper is like Hook............

Carter on Stephen Jones when the Lions played NZ

"I modelled my game on Jones quite a lot, i.e. I run when the option is to run which is rare, I pass for another team mate to run which is often....... its all about game management not headline running"

Mr F, as I said I saw Hook having an awesome game for Perpignan and I was most impressed, but when I waxed lyrical about him after the game the supporters in the pub were almost 100% of one opinion INCONSISTENT, with the same old foibles, (so I shut up)

Gets turned over too often, suicide runs under pressure, cannot hold the defensive line.............

Same old same old....... it seems

ps Mr F
Have you watched Matthew Morgan? where the heck has "he can't kick far come from"....I have only see a few snippets here and there, but he has a MULE of a kick............. saw him smash a pen from within his own half, he is a much stronger kicker than eithere Jones Bigger or Hook

Doesn't matter what they say in the pub (or on an online forum!) - the Perpignan coach (he's a paid professional, probably earned the right to have an opinion) compared Hook to Carter...

...Hook makes mistakes, but HE WAS NEVER GIVEN A CHANCE to develop his skills as a 10 at test level. Since 2008 he has not started more than 2 consecutive games at 10 for Wales at outside half. Priestland has had more than a dozen chances, without being messed around out of position, and has just got progressively worse (that's not to say he is a poor rugby player - he'll be good for Llanelli in the Celtic league and deserves a pro contract).

This has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams.

Of course he's going to talk up a signing that he's paid a lot of money for! I agree Hook is our best 10 for saturday in this situation, but in general why should he have been given a chance to develop his skills at 10 at test level when he wasn't doing the job at regional level?

The only 10 that's earned any merit at regional level has been left at home because Howley is holding a grudge.

That's not correct. The PREVIOUS coach was in place when Hook was signed and the understudy could have used Hook as a scapegoat when Perpignan were struggling.

But he didn't. He stopped using Hook as a utilty back, gave him a starting slot at 10, avoided relegation and compared Hook to Dan Carter...

"When the pressure's on his game goes to pot." -- It's certainly the case that Hook was awful in the WC, but he's been messed around different positions at club and country level for too long. The coaches should take the blame -- versatility should be exploited only when there are injuries and there's no specialist cover. I'd rather see a specialist FB than Hook or any non-specialist player at FB. I'd have taken Byrne on tour for that reason (from what I've seen of him in France, Byrne has been playing well -- ceryainly better than he had done for the Ospreys last season).

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

This has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams.

Hook does not kick the ball a LOT further than Biggar.

Hook may be able to kick it further, but Biggar is 10 times the tactical kicker Hook is - Biggar is a LOT more accurate than Hook.

We might aswell bring Lee Byrne back to play 10...

It's a fair point - but Wales don't utilise 'tactical' kicking - we bomb it down the pitch, chase and defend.

So...pick the 10 that kick's it furthest (Hook)?

Forgot to mention -- Hook can be great under pressure and deliver a winning score. He's done it for Wales and Ospreys.

Casartelli wrote:

wales606 wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

This has to be Hook's time, with Biggar as back up (Hook kicks the ball a LOT further out of hand than Biggar) or we'll just accept our current position as plucker losers to the best teams.

Hook does not kick the ball a LOT further than Biggar.

Hook may be able to kick it further, but Biggar is 10 times the tactical kicker Hook is - Biggar is a LOT more accurate than Hook.

We might aswell bring Lee Byrne back to play 10...

It's a fair point - but Wales don't utilise 'tactical' kicking - we bomb it down the pitch, chase and defend.

So...pick the 10 that kick's it furthest (Hook)?

Thats b*llocks - You can just kick it randomly as far as you can. Biggar has a precision boot and Gatland and Howley have been developing Wales' TACTICAL kicking game for about 4 years now - Thats why Wales' defensive strategy is so important.

Ospreydragon wrote:Forgot to mention -- Hook can be great under pressure and deliver a winning score. He's done it for Wales and Ospreys.

If you're right in what you're saying then Hook should be given another season at club level to settle in to the role of 10 and prove his worth. At the moment he isn't good at pressure, whether that be because he's been messed around or not.

Either way, Biggar is the form 10 and the obvious option to tour. Love him or hate him, he's the most qualified (at club level) for the job and would have been able to do a solid job at 10 at least.

Wales 606 - "Thats b*llocks - You can just kick it randomly as far as you can. Biggar has a precision boot and Gatland and Howley have been developing Wales' TACTICAL kicking game for about 4 years now - Thats why Wales' defensive strategy is so important. "

We NEVER (well, 99% of the time) tactically kick (like, say, Ronan O'Gara does).

We box kick (all over the place) or we kick it down the middle, chase and defend. These are the tactics.

Hook, when the pressure was on, kicked those 2 wonderful conversions from the touch lines to give us our first win at HQ for more than 20 years. That was pressure. He was playing 10 consistently then.

He's not some bottler otherwise he would be nowhere near the Welsh set up. He's playing 10 now at Pereignan and played well against the Baa baa's when switched to 10, and played well against the Brumbies today. He should be starting at 10 saturday. It would also stop him from playing 15!!

martyr_94 wrote:Hook, when the pressure was on, kicked those 2 wonderful conversions from the touch lines to give us our first win at HQ for more than 20 years. That was pressure. He was playing 10 consistently then.

He's not some bottler otherwise he would be nowhere near the Welsh set up. He's playing 10 now at Pereignan and played well against the Baa baa's when switched to 10, and played well against the Brumbies today. He should be starting at 10 saturday. It would also stop him from playing 15!!

x 1000. He is a RUBBISH fullback at test level!