Tom Hockings - Dormant Potential

[todd4]

In 2008 and 2009 I thought Tom Hockings was a young guy going places - a potential Wallaby.

It looked like Tom would develop into the Force's pemanent lock partner with Sharpie with the potential to become a mainstay in the Force pack for years to come with rep honours along the way.

Sadly 2010 saw Tom's star start to wane. I know JM had a rotation policy and Tom and Sam seemed to be swaping week to week. I realise the value of a rotation policy but I wonder if this has stymied his development. Having said that he seemed to be getting enough chances to prove himself but didn't seem to make the most of those chances.

I guess what I'm getting at here is that with Dingos 'youth policy' one year out from the RWC, at the beginning of the year I would have thought Hockings would have been a shoe-in to at least make the Baa Baas team. Not only has he not made the "A" team but it seems his form this year was such that his name was not even mentioned.

It's frustrating when a young guy shows so much potential and then his progress seems to hit a brick wall.

Has he just had an off season? Has he reached his potential and possibly will not progress any higher? Am I being too harsh?

Does anyone have any info or thoughts on why he had such a quiet year?

[Reds81]

Agree, Tom is a quality player probably bringing a different dimension to Wykes.

Good question Todd4!

[RumourMonger]

Saw Hockings play a couple of club games for Soaks last season.

He was very average and made zero impact. Surprised to see him get any game time at all this year - JM must see something in him.

Hope they chop him and get a big, ugly, hard bastard who will do some damage.

Too many nice guys in the WF that haven't got the goods to cut it even at S14 level.

[Sheikh]

The start of the season, with all the injuries, I think we had 4-8 as: Sharpie, Hockings, Wykes, Hodgo and McCalman. Despite the losses, Wykes looked good at 6 and played at 8 for some scrums. I thought he had a chance of the Wallaby long squad, but when Brownie and Pocock came back, McCalman's play froze him out of the team.

Hockings, despite a couple of good games, overall had quite a poor season. Any lock would be put in the shade by Sharpie this year, but with the injuries we had and the requirement for 'senior' players to step up, Hockings seemed to wilt. I'm hoping he was carrying a niggle, but otherwise, I think he'd find himself at 4th choice lock (and maybe 5th if Luke Jones had stayed).

[TOCC]

Lock is a unique position, more often then not locks are signed on the physical size and not there playing potential... You just hope that a player can pick up the necessary skills later on in the game.

He might just be one of those players who was naturally large but just doesnt have the necessary skill... In saying that, i was thinking the same about Rob Simmons 12 months ago but he changed my opinion.

[Ecky]

I refereed him at Soaks last year and was quite surprised at how little impact he had on the game. I was expecting he'd shine at that level (much like Haig Sare did/does) but there was not a lot there.

But then when he plays for the he plays really well.

What's up with that?

[zimeric]

Tom has had his moments but overall had a quiet year, perhaps a little overshadowed by Sharpie... he may fair better at another team perhaps?? just a thought... although he is a good fit for the team, if his goal is to play for a rep team then he'll need to take stock of his present situation and if it doesnt meet his needs he should take that difficult step i think..

[sandgroperrugby]

JM wouldn’t adopt a rotation policy on the locks if they were dominant and up to scratch.

Both Wykes and Hockings have failed to progress to the next level. Now McCalman has pushed them out of starting lock and he is playing out of position to accommodate a dominant back row.

[Hansie]

Lock is a unique position, more often then not locks are signed on the physical size and not there playing potential... You just hope that a player can pick up the necessary skills later on in the game.

He might just be one of those players who was naturally large but just doesnt have the necessary skill... In saying that, i was thinking the same about Rob Simmons 12 months ago but he changed my opinion.

I wonder if the traditional Lock as you describe is the answer. Look at the Wallaby Scrum with Sharpie and Mumm get demolished with the front row we had. Can you tell me if Ben Alexander and co. were props, we'd give the Poms some curry? Is the diference in strength and technique between these guys that big??? The question I am coming to: do Big beefy strong locks have much influence in scrums?

So where do we use big beefy Locks - to take it up?? Pocock, Smith, Hodgo and even Brownie get over the advantage line when they hit it up.

Should we look at Locks with more agility, ball skills to perhaps become extra loosies, ball players etc.

Are the days of 115kg plus locks numbered? What about 7 foot 105 kg locks? Imagine two Pierre Spies's at Lock?

[Sheikh]

I wonder if the traditional Lock as you describe is the answer. Look at the Wallaby Scrum with Sharpie and Mumm get demolished with the front row we had. Can you tell me if Ben Alexander and co. were props, we'd give the Poms some curry? Is the diference in strength and technique between these guys that big??? The question I am coming to: do Big beefy strong locks have much influence in scrums?

So where do we use big beefy Locks - to take it up?? Pocock, Smith, Hodgo and even Brownie get over the advantage line when they hit it up.

Should we look at Locks with more agility, ball skills to perhaps become extra loosies, ball players etc.

Are the days of 115kg plus locks numbered? What about 7 foot 105 kg locks? Imagine two Pierre Spies's at Lock?

Big beefy locks certainly do help in the scrums. England have dropped Shaw to the bench, but he's probably the best scrummaging lock in the world. The down-side of that is that he's less useful in the loose.

Super rugby is based more on multiple phases of play, and so an ability in scrummaging is less important to a lock than loose play. The Force used McCalman as a lock and didn't appear to lose too much in the set-pieces.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Off topic, but in response to Hansie above]
One of the issues with the Australian scrum last weekend was Sharpie's position. There was an article about him playing on the wrong side of the scrum, and as he has a long-standing shoulder problem, he can't bind as well on that side. That lead to the locks splitting, and a front row already under pressure found fresh air behind them. On a couple of occassions Brownie was desperately trying to keep the locks together, while the English hooker was bearing down on him.

[Hansie]

Ahh that explains why he switched to Loosehead when Mumm was replaced. Or are you saying it affects him on either side?

Sharpie has been an absolute relevation.

[blueandblack]

...
Sharpie has been an absolute relevation.

He has? We've always known what a champion and leader he is.

[Sheikh]

It was this article: (http://twf.com.au/showthread.php?t=26531) or (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1225879637645) which is by Wayne Smith, who knows more about rugby than some reporters.

It might all be made up by Smith, but Sharpe does tend to play loose-head lock for us, so I presume the problem is a left-shoulder weakness (eg, sore rotator cuff at high arm extensions - hardly an unusual injury in a lock).

That the Wallaby scrum didn't improve significantly when Sharpie switched sides is probably more down to those around him.

[Cookie]

I wonder if the traditional Lock as you describe is the answer. Look at the Wallaby Scrum with Sharpie and Mumm get demolished with the front row we had. Can you tell me if Ben Alexander and co. were props, we'd give the Poms some curry? Is the diference in strength and technique between these guys that big??? The question I am coming to: do Big beefy strong locks have much influence in scrums?

So where do we use big beefy Locks - to take it up?? Pocock, Smith, Hodgo and even Brownie get over the advantage line when they hit it up.

Should we look at Locks with more agility, ball skills to perhaps become extra loosies, ball players etc.

Are the days of 115kg plus locks numbered? What about 7 foot 105 kg locks? Imagine two Pierre Spies's at Lock?

I think strong beefy locks do make a difference, look at brad thorn, not the tallest but one of the strongest in the AB's.

The combinations in the front 5 also have to be in tune with each other on the engage, they must go together,timing is everything on the hit for the scrum to be solid. Binding and body positioning and feet placement on the hit also have to be spot on.

The front row lay down the platform for the locks to push from, if you have a strong steady platform then a locks job is easy.

I thought the force had a strong platform this year, hopefully they can build on that combination next season.

I also wish that one day they will drop the word pause and go with crouch touch engage, I thought it worked well in nz at npc level