What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Two hookers

Do we need two hookers in the side?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 28.6%
  • No

    Votes: 10 71.4%

  • Total voters
    14

Rsag85

Bench
Messages
3,923
Watching the game on Friday night and seeing Cook come on so late and looked really lost out there got me questioning the two hookers in the side. I think we do better as a side with just the one. Thoughts on this situation.
 

alien

Referee
Messages
20,279
I voted no. I'm happy with Farah playing 80 minutes. The attack was looking good with Farah at hooker. I don't like the idea of changing the spine during a game if the attack is looking good. Cook is good enough for first grade but Farah is better overall.
 

rabbitohs95

Bench
Messages
4,711
No but I like Cook's utility value on the bench too, so I'd keep him there anyway and use him to tear up opposition defences when required.
 

DiegoNT

First Grade
Messages
9,378
No but I like Cook's utility value on the bench too, so I'd keep him there anyway and use him to tear up opposition defences when required.
I don't believe Cook has much utility value. When we've had injuries in the backs it hasn't been cook going out to fill in, it's been guys like Turner who has plugged holes. Ditto for the halves, it's been Sutton filling in with a fresh forward taking his place.
As for cookie coming off the bench tearing up tiring opposition, his played about 15 or so games off the bench for us and it's yet to happen yet
 

Travitoh

First Grade
Messages
5,156
It's not about the individuals ability, it's about the team balance and i believe having 4 forwards on the bench brings out the best in our side and there are results to back that up.
If there was a situation during a game that required a fill in at dummy half, both Cody and AR are more than capable of slotting in there i believe as well as possibly Clark.
 

DiegoNT

First Grade
Messages
9,378
It's not about the individuals ability, it's about the team balance and i believe having 4 forwards on the bench brings out the best in our side and there are results to back that up.
If there was a situation during a game that required a fill in at dummy half, both Cody and AR are more than capable of slotting in there i believe as well as possibly Clark.
I think cam Murray would be great on the bench. If we needed a hooker he'd fit right in, otherwise he still has use as a good defensive forward
 

doyen

Bench
Messages
3,603
I don't believe Cook has much utility value. When we've had injuries in the backs it hasn't been cook going out to fill in, it's been guys like Turner who has plugged holes. Ditto for the halves, it's been Sutton filling in with a fresh forward taking his place.
As for cookie coming off the bench tearing up tiring opposition, his played about 15 or so games off the bench for us and it's yet to happen yet

Tearing up opposition--don't think so!!!!
 

Curns13

Juniors
Messages
1,325
I dont think 2 hookers is necessary. Farah was given an opportunity on Friday and made the most of it. It's up to Cook to respond if he wants the job back. Barring an injury or Origin selection, Cook should go back to NSW Cup and look to win his spot back. Bust your arse, put some pressure on and make the most of your opportunities when they come along.
 

Souths Till I Die

First Grade
Messages
5,927
Since we don't have both the Burgess twins playing is it really necessary to drop cook for a NSW Cup forward? All of our forwards barring Tom Burgess can play big minutes. Musgrove is unfit as well so I'm glad he was dropped. I mean Farah has played 1 amazing game all season. How do we not know cook could come onto the field next week and completely blow the game wide open against the storm? Sticking with a utility player off the bench isn't as problematic when all of our forwards are fit and can play for longer unlike the Burgess' and musgrove.
 

Travitoh

First Grade
Messages
5,156
3 of our 4 wins have come with Farah starting at hooker and playing big minutes.

Just because a forward can play big minutes, doesn't mean that they have to and playing the bash and crash style that we do with our forward pack, it should be about maximising the impact of all our forwards in their time on the park.

In the 2013 Ashes, Mitchell Johnson tore the English apart bowling short, sharp, aggressive spells. He's fit enough to bowl longer spells than he did but it'd be at the expense of his aggression. That's the approach we should take with our forwards.

Turner, Clark and Murray and share big minutes as they're being used more defensively and the others who we want to run hard at the line have shorter stints.
 

Rsag85

Bench
Messages
3,923
I voted no. I'm happy with Farah playing 80 minutes. The attack was looking good with Farah at hooker. I don't like the idea of changing the spine during a game if the attack is looking good. Cook is good enough for first grade but Farah is better overall.

We did look a bit lost in attack when Cook came on but he did go to 5/8 not hooker. Both can play the full 80 but I feel we need to pick one and stick with it.
 

southsport

First Grade
Messages
9,556
I vote no for two hookers because we need bigger bodies on the bench, glad to have Cook in the squad though.
 

callmack1

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,609
Yep I'm with a lot of you guys. Having two hookers is not nessisary anymore.

I think we'd be better off and more balanced with four forwards on the bench.

Atm, I'd go with Farah but that's not to say Cook won't fight his way back and re-claim the number 9 jersey. I see Cook as our long term hooker but we have looked better with Farah at hooker this season.

We are blessed two have two really good rakes but unfortunately we can't have them both in the 17 at the same time. Not taking anything away from whoever gets dropped (if they actually do get dropped) but we have to just pick one and go with it.
 

Amin Yashed

Juniors
Messages
603
Don't waste your time here, go and beat up some innocent at a railway station like you usually do.
Lol coming from filthy a homeless Redfern f**k like yourself. One of your fellow supporters claimed he did just that outside the game on Friday night.
 

rabbitohs95

Bench
Messages
4,711
I don't believe Cook has much utility value. When we've had injuries in the backs it hasn't been cook going out to fill in, it's been guys like Turner who has plugged holes. Ditto for the halves, it's been Sutton filling in with a fresh forward taking his place.
As for cookie coming off the bench tearing up tiring opposition, his played about 15 or so games off the bench for us and it's yet to happen yet
Well it did happen against Manly earlier this year. Granted, I do agree but I still want Cook in the squad.
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
Normlly I would say two hookers is always better than one.
But as we're talking about league I don't think the pros outweigh The negatives of our forwards playing more minutes.
I think we would be better off playing Cook at Norths getting a lot of game time for Origin when we will need him back in the side.
 

Latest posts

Top