The story behind Michael Hooper's 'ballsy' call
Wallabies skipper Michael Hooper potentially put his captaincy credentials on the line when he turned down an easy three points during the last stages of his side's win over Ireland on Saturday night.
With just 10 minutes left to play and his side leading Ireland by the slim margin of two points, the Wallabies were awarded a penalty well within range for kicker Bernard Foley.
Kicking the penalty would have ensured a 14-9 margin and forced Ireland to win the ball back and try to march downfield for a try.
Hooper instead opted to go for the kill.
David Pocock eventually crossed for what was the match-sealing try as the Wallabies triumphed 18-9, snapping the reigning Six Nations champion and world No. 2 Ireland's 15-month unbeaten reign.
Hooper's decision to go for the five-pointer was nothing short of ballsy.
“That was almost the name of the call, the boss came up with it,” Hooper said at the post-match press conference.
“I think you guys [Wallaby coaching staff] were calling for that up top, since speaking to them after the game.
“We backed ourselves to do a job there and thought it would change the picture.
“If we throw something at them at this game, early on, it might change how they (Ireland) react in later games.
“We worked on it, it paid off a couple of phases later than we probably would have liked, but we did the job and scored about 10 phases later.”
Hooper's back-row partner David Pocock shone in his return at blindside flanker, notching 15 tackles, winning three turnovers and scoring the match-winner while new teammate Pete Samu made an impressive international debut from the bench.
“Pete Samu in his debut came on and made a difference straight away, took to it really well,” Hooper said.
“I’ve played with Dave a lot now and it was no surprise to me, some of the stuff he was doing tonight.
“We can only get better from here.”
The series resumes in Melbourne next weekend, where a win would lock up an impressive series win over the Irish.
In other news:
Latest Comments
Spot on Ben. Dead right. Havili looked great at 10. Easily the highest rugby IQ of any NZ player these days. Getting a kick charged down is a result of getting used to adjusting your depth to the line at 10, which he will sort out with time. But other than that it was an outstanding first effort in that position this year. I think the NZ media has misunderstood this directive from Razor. Havili might rank behind B Barrett this year, but Beuden is 33 this month and won't last much longer. DMaC is great but flaky and not really a test match animal (his efforts in Dunedin versus Aus last year for example). If Razor can't have Mounga, DMaC is too unstructured for Razor (and is just too small for test rugby). Havili will end up our first choice first five, and in partnership with Jodie will be excellent. Two triple threat operators in tandem, and big bodies and tough tacklers to boot. Jordoe will be the ABs goal kicker. I am an Aucklander and Blues (and Warriors) fan, but Havili at 10 is going to be sensational in time… he can be the best first five in the world by the end of this year. No question.
Go to commentsSharks deserved to be far further back by the last quarter. Their tackling was awful, their set pieces were disappointing, their defensive organization was poor (especially on the Kok side of the D line), they kept making unnecessary errors, and they never looked like cracking the Clermont defense during those first 60m. Masuku kept them in touch, with some help from the Clermont generosity on penalty opportunities. Agree with the writer of this article. It was belligerence, and ability to raise their pressure game just enough, that turned the last quarter into a Bok-style shutout. Clermont have a reputation of not playing the full 80m, and there was a bit of that for sure. But, quite often when the intensity of a team drops off in the last quarter credit is due to the opponent for tiring them out. At 60m, with the Kok try, you thought that just maybe the game was on. At 70m, with the Mapimpi contribution, one felt that Clermont were fading, while facing a team that would maintain the pressure game through the final whistle. Good win in the end, but the Sharks are still playing way below their potential. And with their resources, and a coach that has had enough time to figure things out, they are running out of excuses.
Go to comments