RugbyRebels

Puja wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:You're thing of Ram Man. He would definitely be a prop.

Isn't Ram Man just Andrew Sheridan's secret identity?

Puja

Well, it was until now.

Oakboy wrote:

Dasheragain wrote:I'd pick Hughes at 8 in Billy's absence, no hesitation there whatsoever, he offers a lot I think.

The flanks are more difficult for me. Is Eddie 100% decided on where to play Itoje? He's had him at lock and 6 and if Launch, Lawes, Kruis and Itoje are all fit, he may put Maro at 6 again, I don't know.

Is Robshaw as valuable as some make out? I'm in the camp that rates him but probably wouldn't pick him if I was in charge. Underhill at this point is a hope, I can't see why he's nailed on to start tbh. It goes on and on with various others.

Not sure why some have such an issue with Haskell who's been excellent under Eddie and offers pace, power, work-rate, great defence etc - he's a very fine player hence the faith of Eddie, Dai Young, the Lions etc.

Hi Dash. Welcome back, assuming it's you!!

I think a reasonable balance is achieved with Robshaw, Hughes and somebody quick. As long as Haskell genuinely retains pace, I suppose he's a candidate but his legs look a bit leaden to me now. I was always happy with Robshaw at 7 and still would be compared with anyone else I've seen so far. Lawes is quick enough to give balance if picked at 6 and his current performances there for Saints are encouraging. I'd start with those three and simply challenge others to demand the shirts.

Hi mate, tis me yes! Forgot my password so many times with Dasher as my name had to go with Dasheragain.

I still think Haskell is pretty quick tbh, and I watch Wasps as often as I can. He's incredibly fit so maintains pace and is explosive over short distances too. He's strong over the ball, a great defender etc. I think he's a total berk but a pretty good player. He was superb in our 3-0 series win in Aus.

I like Hughes and have no problem whatsoever with him starting at 8. To be honest, I still rate Ben Morgan as highly as anyone and can't understand his exclusion.

Haven't seen enough of Underhill but I hope he's the messiah the press tell us he might be. Don't understand the Kvesic problem either, Eddie doesn't think he's physical enough apparently... He looks like a right specimen to me and has been pretty strong when I've watched him.

Another chap I like is Jackson Wray, who I think deserves to be in the frame.

On balance, at this moment I think I'd be looking at Itoje at 6 with Hughes or Morgan at 8 with Robshaw/Haskell/Wray at seven, until Underhill or someone puts their hand up. Lawes and Launchbury (he has to start, tragic seeing him on the bench, he's world class) at lock with Kruis on the bench. Something along those lines...

Dasheragain wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Dasheragain wrote:I'd pick Hughes at 8 in Billy's absence, no hesitation there whatsoever, he offers a lot I think.

The flanks are more difficult for me. Is Eddie 100% decided on where to play Itoje? He's had him at lock and 6 and if Launch, Lawes, Kruis and Itoje are all fit, he may put Maro at 6 again, I don't know.

Is Robshaw as valuable as some make out? I'm in the camp that rates him but probably wouldn't pick him if I was in charge. Underhill at this point is a hope, I can't see why he's nailed on to start tbh. It goes on and on with various others.

Not sure why some have such an issue with Haskell who's been excellent under Eddie and offers pace, power, work-rate, great defence etc - he's a very fine player hence the faith of Eddie, Dai Young, the Lions etc.

Hi Dash. Welcome back, assuming it's you!!

I think a reasonable balance is achieved with Robshaw, Hughes and somebody quick. As long as Haskell genuinely retains pace, I suppose he's a candidate but his legs look a bit leaden to me now. I was always happy with Robshaw at 7 and still would be compared with anyone else I've seen so far. Lawes is quick enough to give balance if picked at 6 and his current performances there for Saints are encouraging. I'd start with those three and simply challenge others to demand the shirts.

Hi mate, tis me yes! Forgot my password so many times with Dasher as my name had to go with Dasheragain.

I still think Haskell is pretty quick tbh, and I watch Wasps as often as I can. He's incredibly fit so maintains pace and is explosive over short distances too. He's strong over the ball, a great defender etc. I think he's a total berk but a pretty good player. He was superb in our 3-0 series win in Aus.

I like Hughes and have no problem whatsoever with him starting at 8. To be honest, I still rate Ben Morgan as highly as anyone and can't understand his exclusion.

Haven't seen enough of Underhill but I hope he's the messiah the press tell us he might be. Don't understand the Kvesic problem either, Eddie doesn't think he's physical enough apparently... He looks like a right specimen to me and has been pretty strong when I've watched him.

Another chap I like is Jackson Wray, who I think deserves to be in the frame.

On balance, at this moment I think I'd be looking at Itoje at 6 with Hughes or Morgan at 8 with Robshaw/Haskell/Wray at seven, until Underhill or someone puts their hand up. Lawes and Launchbury (he has to start, tragic seeing him on the bench, he's world class) at lock with Kruis on the bench. Something along those lines...

Yes, I agree with lots of that. It's odd that Kvesic can't get in the Exeter side. I wonder why they signed him? Mind you, I really rate Salvi (ahead of Kvesic) and he can't get in either.

I would have Launchbury as my first name on the England team sheet. The debate about Lawes/Itoje at 6 will rumble on, of course. I often think back to Shankly (might have been Busby) who used to say that if there was doubt on selection, pick the player the opposition would like least. All of Launchbury, Lawes and Itoje would get in for me ahead of Kruis or the other back-row contenders on that premise.

Re the rest of the side at this moment (I know I'm not going with the flow of conversation right now but it's been so long since I put England rugby thoughts into text I'll throw it out there), I'd go with:

1) Vunipola
2) George
3) Cole
4) Lawes
5) Launchbury
6) Itoje
7) Haskell/Wray/Robshaw
8) Hughes/Morgan

9) Robson
10) Farrell (Captain)
11) Daly
12) Teo
13) Joseph
14) Rokoduguni
15) Watson

Genge
Sinkler
Hartley
Kruis
a backrower
Youngs
Ford
Slade

Still want Wade in there somewhere, probably the next wing off the line...

Wade just seems to be less effective the bigger the game is. Much as I like what he does on his day.

What did you think of Ford in Argentina? Why does Farrell take his spot?

Mikey Brown wrote:Wade just seems to be less effective the bigger the game is. Much as I like what he does on his day.

What did you think of Ford in Argentina? Why does Farrell take his spot?

I just yearn to see Wade in an England shirt at Twickenham, doing a pretty good impression of Jason Robinson. He's vulnerable to the high ball but other than that, I think he's pretty solid. He's not a massive defender but his pace and footwork mean he's pretty hard to get away from, nobody is going to step and accelerate away from him.

Re Ford and Farrell. Saw the highlights of the Argie games. I love Ford as an attacking fly half and want him in my matchday squad. Thing is, I also want Teo for go forward, defence and offloads; he deserves to be starting at 12 in my view. Farrell is a proper test match player; he's a leader, he's brave and aggressive, he's capable of lovely passing and kicking, he can control a game and he's a fine goal-kicker. I don't think we'll lose many games because of him, he's a pretty strong all rounder at ten. I think Ford can have worse games, is a target for ball carriers, isn't as good a goal kicker. I just feel if we were playing NZ tomorrow, they'd rather Ford was playing.

Dasheragain wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Wade just seems to be less effective the bigger the game is. Much as I like what he does on his day.

What did you think of Ford in Argentina? Why does Farrell take his spot?

I just yearn to see Wade in an England shirt at Twickenham, doing a pretty good impression of Jason Robinson. He's vulnerable to the high ball but other than that, I think he's pretty solid. He's not a massive defender but his pace and footwork mean he's pretty hard to get away from, nobody is going to step and accelerate away from him.

Re Ford and Farrell. Saw the highlights of the Argie games. I love Ford as an attacking fly half and want him in my matchday squad. Thing is, I also want Teo for go forward, defence and offloads; he deserves to be starting at 12 in my view. Farrell is a proper test match player; he's a leader, he's brave and aggressive, he's capable of lovely passing and kicking, he can control a game and he's a fine goal-kicker. I don't think we'll lose many games because of him, he's a pretty strong all rounder at ten. I think Ford can have worse games, is a target for ball carriers, isn't as good a goal kicker. I just feel if we were playing NZ tomorrow, they'd rather Ford was playing.

Ford and Teo (and JJ) imo would be a fantastic combo. I agree that Faz should be at 10 or nowhere, but fear that you have indulged in hyperbole over his skills- I will agree that he has improved from having ropy all round skills to being mainly competent.

I don't think NZ would give a crap either way though; they'd be quite happy with Faz's mad flying up from defence- their wingers coming off the blindside would cause havoc, and seek to wind him up, and relish the occasionally clunky hands he still shows, and happily ignore him as a running threat. On Ford, as you say, they'd try and run over him, but would be more leery about him ball in hand- he'd give their defence more pause for thought. They are just different players, so that's good- I'd have Ford to start, and Faz would be a decent option to close out a close game.

Unfortunately, its wade's decision making that lets him down in defence- I'd love to see him start but for that.

I agree with most of your other selections, but hate that we still are trying to shoehorn players into positions that don't maximise their strengths...this is Itoje I refer to, a world class lock, but barely a decent 6. IMO we need to accept that one of our 4 quality locks will miss out on the 23, and one will be on the bench. Robshaw at 6 and Hughes at 8 looks a good, and complementary start, so finding a 7 who is all that means to most folks is the imperative for me, rather than cludging something together.

welcome back

Banquo wrote:

Dasheragain wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Wade just seems to be less effective the bigger the game is. Much as I like what he does on his day.

What did you think of Ford in Argentina? Why does Farrell take his spot?

I just yearn to see Wade in an England shirt at Twickenham, doing a pretty good impression of Jason Robinson. He's vulnerable to the high ball but other than that, I think he's pretty solid. He's not a massive defender but his pace and footwork mean he's pretty hard to get away from, nobody is going to step and accelerate away from him.

Re Ford and Farrell. Saw the highlights of the Argie games. I love Ford as an attacking fly half and want him in my matchday squad. Thing is, I also want Teo for go forward, defence and offloads; he deserves to be starting at 12 in my view. Farrell is a proper test match player; he's a leader, he's brave and aggressive, he's capable of lovely passing and kicking, he can control a game and he's a fine goal-kicker. I don't think we'll lose many games because of him, he's a pretty strong all rounder at ten. I think Ford can have worse games, is a target for ball carriers, isn't as good a goal kicker. I just feel if we were playing NZ tomorrow, they'd rather Ford was playing.

Ford and Teo (and JJ) imo would be a fantastic combo. I agree that Faz should be at 10 or nowhere, but fear that you have indulged in hyperbole over his skills- I will agree that he has improved from having ropy all round skills to being mainly competent.

I don't think NZ would give a crap either way though; they'd be quite happy with Faz's mad flying up from defence- their wingers coming off the blindside would cause havoc, and seek to wind him up, and relish the occasionally clunky hands he still shows, and happily ignore him as a running threat. On Ford, as you say, they'd try and run over him, but would be more leery about him ball in hand- he'd give their defence more pause for thought. They are just different players, so that's good- I'd have Ford to start, and Faz would be a decent option to close out a close game.

Unfortunately, its wade's decision making that lets him down in defence- I'd love to see him start but for that.

I agree with most of your other selections, but hate that we still are trying to shoehorn players into positions that don't maximise their strengths...this is Itoje I refer to, a world class lock, but barely a decent 6. IMO we need to accept that one of our 4 quality locks will miss out on the 23, and one will be on the bench. Robshaw at 6 and Hughes at 8 looks a good, and complementary start, so finding a 7 who is all that means to most folks is the imperative for me, rather than cludging something together.

welcome back

Thanks, good to be back.

Re Ford and Farrell - I think whilst this board has always been more Ford than Farrell, but most outside of it agree with me. I suspect that Mark Mcall feels Farrell is imperative to Saracens and their success and wouldn't swap. Farrell has been pushed to 12 because international coaches want him in the side, both Gatland for the Lions and Jones for England. I think his aggressive, winning mentality, his presence and his all round ability are key to the side at 10, where he's obviously a main man. When defences tire, I'd bring Ford on. And I disagree, I think in the rain at Twickenham, I suspect the ABs would be shocked if Farrell wasn't in the team, he's what Eddie wants England to be, tough, talented, arrogant and hellbent on winning. Plus he has the skills which I know are even more important.

I don't feel like I'm shoehorning players. I'm trying to pick the most effective pack. Itoje started slowly at 6 for England and then improved, I think he's capable of being an awesome 6 personally and regardless, I don't always feel people have to fit the old-school definition/description for their position. I think he can be a world class 6 and a world class lock.

Itoje and Haskell/Wray with Hughes at 8 is formidable in my view. Mobility, power and work-rate.

Re Wade. it's taking rough with the smooth. Decision making related mistake every few games, tries out of nothing every few games. He is the most effective try scorer in the premiership stats wise by a long way I believe, of those currently playing, for a reason, he's lethal.

It's a weird one. It does seem curious that it would only be a bunch of us on here who feel this way about Farrell. Have we simply created an echo chamber of bias in here?

Why is it you never, ever hear mainstream pundits talk about his flaws? He makes enormous mistakes in defence quite regularly. More regularly than Ford I would say. Same with his kicking from hand.

I'd suggest that coaches have used Farrell at 12, speaks volumes about the general lack of a good 12 option, and rather less about the fact that they seemed to choose other 10s ahead of him at 10.

Mikey Brown wrote:It's a weird one. It does seem curious that it would only be a bunch of us on here who feel this way about Farrell. Have we simply created an echo chamber of bias in here?

Why is it you never, ever hear mainstream pundits talk about his flaws? He makes enormous mistakes in defence quite regularly. More regularly than Ford I would say. Same with his kicking from hand.

I'm sure there are others of course but generally, Farrell is regarded as the better all rounder and a great character for international rugby - both of which I think are true. Ford is classier, but I think Farrell is the better all-rounder, I think that's fair to say.

At ten he makes less mistakes, he is not a 12.

Raggs wrote:I'd suggest that coaches have used Farrell at 12, speaks volumes about the general lack of a good 12 option, and rather less about the fact that they seemed to choose other 10s ahead of him at 10.

I disagree. I'm sure you've heard Gatland, Jones and Mcall have all talked about what Farrell brings to a side. There were good options at 12 for the lions and there are a few for England; Teo, Slade, Devoto etc.

I'm living in hope that Kvesic not starting is about him building time on the training paddock getting up to speed with what Exeter want. The Chiefs support game isn't akin what he's played in before and a lack of familiarity could see problems given their happiness to keep the ball. And Baxter doesn't just want him not to foul up the 25th phase, but also to carry more himself, so if that takes a bit of time to work on fair enough.

That's the bit I don't get, though. The phrase "all-rounder" is used all the time in this context and I just don't see how it is true. If Ford weren't so flakey from the tee there is surely absolutely no way anybody could argue it?

Obviously there's no concise way to rate these or put an order on the importance of each attribute, but what would you disagree with in here that makes Farrell the better all-rounder. He also has this strange reputation as a master tactical kicker. I have literally no idea where this came from.

Goal-kicking: Farrell
Restarts: Ford
Line-kicking: Ford
Kicking in open play: Ford
Passing: Ford (by a mile)
Running: Ford
Offloading: Farrell
Tackling: Farrell in terms of the physical impact but I would imagine he may miss more
Defending/defensive alignment: Ford, but I'm partially willing to accept the systems Farrell is used in play a big part

I know that's a shoddy way of comparing players but I'd have to say Ford is a better decision maker in general too. I do think there is value to Farrell's attitude and Ford can look a bit wobbly every so often, but to me that would only be the deciding factor when if they were equal in all these other areas.

Anyway, where were we on the pack?

6. Launch
7. Lawes
8. Itoje

Right?

Dasheragain wrote:Another chap I like is Jackson Wray, who I think deserves to be in the frame.

Quick. Someone change his password

Welcome back

The experts fawning over Farrell baffles me. Barnes is running a one man campaign for him in The Times that Alastair Campbell would be proud of. We are pretty much pro-Ford on here but I know plenty of others - with lives who don't come on here - who feel that Farrell is terribly overrated.
I think NH rugby will always prefer the honest yeoman over the sometimes fallible artist. In many aspects of the game Wilkinson was nowhere near the player Hodgson was but one can walk on water and the other was boo'd by the Twickenham crowd.

Mellsblue wrote:
I think NH rugby will always prefer the honest yeoman over the sometimes fallible artist.

Give it a few minutes and some muppet will mention Jackson Wray, just you wait and see

Mellsblue wrote:

Dasheragain wrote:Another chap I like is Jackson Wray, who I think deserves to be in the frame.

Quick. Someone change his password

Welcome back

The experts fawning over Farrell baffles me. Barnes is running a one man campaign for him in The Times that Alastair Campbell would be proud of. We are pretty much pro-Ford on here but I know plenty of others - with lives who don't come on here - who feel that Farrell is terribly overrated.
I think NH rugby will always prefer the honest yeoman over the sometimes fallible artist. In many aspects of the game Wilkinson was nowhere near the player Hodgson was but one can walk on water and the other was boo'd by the Twickenham crowd.

Thanks Blue.

To be fair Hodgson was boo'd as for England he couldn't kick for shit, kept getting charged down and had the physicality of a dog turd.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:
I think NH rugby will always prefer the honest yeoman over the sometimes fallible artist.

Give it a few minutes and some muppet will mention Jackson Wray, just you wait and see

What's the in joke with him lads? Not rated?

I'm sure Convex will back me up, wherever he is.

The Ford/Farrell argument is boring.

How about full-back, what's the RR trend with that one?

Dasheragain wrote:The Ford/Farrell argument is boring.

How about full-back, what's the RR trend with that one?

Olowofela's the new messiah: http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/viewtop ... =25#p95277

Puja

Dasheragain wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:
I think NH rugby will always prefer the honest yeoman over the sometimes fallible artist.

Give it a few minutes and some muppet will mention Jackson Wray, just you wait and see

What's the in joke with him lads? Not rated?

I'm sure Convex will back me up, wherever he is.

Just that he's a very good club player, a bit akin to Alex Goode maybe. Which is still very impressive, just not of much interest to England. And would Convex backing up an argument make it stronger do you feel?

Digby wrote:

Dasheragain wrote:

Digby wrote:
Give it a few minutes and some muppet will mention Jackson Wray, just you wait and see

What's the in joke with him lads? Not rated?

I'm sure Convex will back me up, wherever he is.

Just that he's a very good club player, a bit akin to Alex Goode maybe. Which is still very impressive, just not of much interest to England. And would Convex backing up an argument make it stronger do you feel?

I wouldn't say Robshaw is a better player than him right now.

Re Convex. No, I regretted it as soon as I typed it.

Puja wrote:

Dasheragain wrote:The Ford/Farrell argument is boring.

How about full-back, what's the RR trend with that one?

Olowofela's the new messiah: http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/viewtop ... =25#p95277

Puja

Slightly torn between Watson and Daly... Watson for me I think though.

Raggs wrote:I'd suggest that coaches have used Farrell at 12, speaks volumes about the general lack of a good 12 option, and rather less about the fact that they seemed to choose other 10s ahead of him at 10.

obviously, tbh

Dasheragain wrote:The Ford/Farrell argument is boring.

How about full-back, what's the RR trend with that one?

I wasn't trying to harass you about it. But I was genuinely curious what I was missing, which nobody seems to actually have an answer for.

Fullback is a weird one. I can't remember the last time anyone else got any serious time there. I can only remember Slade there weirdly enough.