What have L Jones, Holley, Delpoux, Jenkins and Gatland all have in common?

Answers please.

They are all going to be first against the wall when the revolution comes?

lol that may well be the case lost, but was thinking more along the lines that neither Lyn Jones aside maybe) thought Hook was good enough at 10 as surely they can't all be wrong can they?

Will you be adding Humphrey's to that list in the future Bedford?

offload,

Wouldn't surprise me at all.

I recall an old coach saying.... if a chap makes a line break and has no support, is it that he ran too far after losing possession at the tackle or is it that his support players didn't make enough effort to be on his shoulder?

Perhaps its not hook, perhaps its that few players are able to read his natural game and that Wales' choice of 12 throughout his career does not give Hook something to work off?

For me he certainly has been the most skilled 10 I reckon you guys have produced since Jiffy. Henson himself was never a natural 10 unlike Hook but a greater talent overall. Nevertheless

I'll repeat my usual line about Hook...

If you made a highlights video of the best bits of his play you'd think you had a genius on your hands. He makes fantastic breaks, and when everything is going well he looks terrific. Its just the rest of the time that is the problem.

I would guess all of the above coaches thought that at one time or another they could make him into the player they wanted, but for one reason or another they, and he, have failed

played on the margins too much but I do feel his problem was as much his inability to tone his instincts down due to fellow players being unable to keep up with him.

fa0019 wrote:played on the margins too much but I do feel his problem was as much his inability to tone his instincts down due to fellow players being unable to keep up with him.

Maybe. But there are also times when playing at center when tackling became optional. (And yes that is probably at least partially due to a dodgy shoulder) Other times when his kicking radar has been way off, or he takes wrong choices. You would have thought that if it is due to his team mates not being able to keep up, that at some point in his career (and he has been around for a while) he would have found someone more on his wavelength. I don't know enough about his career to say if that happenend, but I think we would have heard about it if it was the case.

It is possible to be right when everyone else is wrong, but its not that likely.

lostinwales wrote:

fa0019 wrote:played on the margins too much but I do feel his problem was as much his inability to tone his instincts down due to fellow players being unable to keep up with him.

Maybe. But there are also times when playing at center when tackling became optional. (And yes that is probably at least partially due to a dodgy shoulder) Other times when his kicking radar has been way off, or he takes wrong choices. You would have thought that if it is due to his team mates not being able to keep up, that at some point in his career (and he has been around for a while) he would have found someone more on his wavelength. I don't know enough about his career to say if that happenend, but I think we would have heard about it if it was the case.

It is possible to be right when everyone else is wrong, but its not that likely.

If you played Jiffy, JW, Lynagh, Larkham, Cooper etc at 13 would they be efficient too?

Either they couldn't tackle.... lynagh, Cooper etc or they didn't have the pace to play Centre especially at 13.

Another problem he has had is that his versatile play meant a Jones Hook or Priestland Hook 10-12 was better than a Hook and Another 10-12. Meant he was often played out of position and whilst he got enough caps at 10 if I recall they were not often one after the other instead if Jones, Priestland were injured etc, if it was an easy game vs. Tonga etc.

Misused talent but perhaps a little too off chart for the talent pool.

In a nutshell - inconsistent.

Most teams function better with a consistent playmaker who does most things well. Hook is prone to moments of genius and a lot of mediocrity. He's never been the best player in any position.

Having said that, why Gatland prefers Priestland as his back up is strange - have to believe it's because of the English factor and that Hook isn't available for the 4th game.

Hook has all the physical atributes but lacks the top 6 inches. He can do the brillians but to often follows it up with real disaters, he also drifts in and out of games, not the qualities for a playmaker. Posters have commented that he has made breaks but left his support behing, thats becase his communication is non-existent and his team mates haven't a clue what he is doing.

You cant blame it on his coaches for moving him around the field. I would also have him behind Patchell, Tovey and Owen Williams at 10. Even at 15 he is behind Halfpenny, Liam Williams, Amos and Dan Evans and Prydie. An similarly at centre the 4 players in the squad are all better in their position. He has been an useful utility bench option but frankly there are now better and more dedicated players coming through.

Its really frustrating that he has not dedicated himself to developing his game to fulfill his early great promise. Perhaps Gloucester will be his opportunity, if not maybe Japan next stop?

This is surprisingly reassuring as thought I was in the minority on my opinion of Hook.

Not on you're own at all Bedford. I'm no fan and to quote a reply in a discussion we've had when someone questioned his omission

"It's great, means he can't run down blind alleys, away from support, into contact when there's a huge overlap, throw interception passes and miss easy tackles"

The biggest difference between the great flyhalfs like Barry john, Phill Bennett, Cliff Morgan, Jonathan Davies and james Hiok is that they had the vision to take on a defence but they also had the pace to back themselves.

James Hook has great vision but his feet have never been fast enough.

As an opposition supporter (Scotland), I've always loved watching him. I don't think I ever minded conceding points to him as they were normally from something brilliant. At the same time, I probably felt delighted at his mistakes but didn't remember them.

Definitely my favourite welsh player of the past decade. And not for his mistakes.

I think I'd share every word of what Des wrote.

It must be his erratic genius that Gatland and the rest can't decipher onto a tactics page. I'd still pick Hook for his madness.

Hook's lack of game time at 10 for Wales is down to the way Gatland wants to play. Its just not Hooky's style, Hook needs to play loose to get the best out of himself, he cannot manage a rigid gameplan.

To me his best position for Wales is centre, give him some space to exploit defences and not have to worry about the game management side of things.

At test level, and maybe a few years back, always thought of him as an excellent centre, and an average FH. Maybe if he'd been mix and matched with JD a bit more - good contrast in their styles.

[quote="IronMike"]Hook's lack of game time at 10 for Wales is down to the way Gatland wants to play.


BUT as I said its not just Gatland who has thought that every coach he has played for has come to same conclusion.

Can't really argue that, as much as he wants to be a 10, today's game calls for structure rather than silky running ability.

Bennett, John et al would probably suffer the same problem if they played today.

IronMike wrote:Can't really argue that, as much as he wants to be a 10, today's game calls for structure rather than silky running ability.

Bennett, John et al would probably suffer the same problem if they played today.

In my youth I had the privilage to regularly watch Phil Bennett, and I can ensure you his tactical ability was second to none. I friend of my brothers played centre down at Strady for a few seasons and at times looked a world beater. When I asked him about his sudden surge in form he told me that all he had to do was let Phil call the play and follow his instructions to the letter and suddenly he would be in space with the ball and often as not dotting down for a try. I also remember Phil's tactical kicking and the number of times he destroyed the confidence of top quality opposing full backs by putting the ball just out of their reach.

Whether he would have had they physical qualities to play 10 in the modern game is another matter, but I supose if Shane Williams was able to bulk us so would Benny.