Mobility of forwards in pre-professional and professional eras

[Raggs]

Curry only barely reached the necessary level of physicality against South Africa. Ben failed to reach the level in Argentina. It's a huge part of the game, especially for a player who's supposed to be clearing out rucks/making tackles.

It's a very different game, with very different players and very different approaches. I begin to think that jngf is still looking for players that would fit into the game in the 80/90s, rather than what's played today.

[fivepointer]

The game at the top level is now completely different to the one played in the 1980's. What players do now is so far removed from what they did then that it makes any kind of comparisons a bit pointless.

[Mr Mwenda]

Perhaps an interesting question might be how many players in great sides would struggle to play today. From what little I know of the 70s Welsh side I'd think Gareth Edwards would be ok.

From 2003 England vintage one would presume most had the drive to adapt to modern trends but perhaps some of the forwards' body shapes would present a challenge.

[Raggs]

I think most people at the top level of any age, could probably have done fine in the pro era with pro backing. I do wonder if there were better players out there at the time though, that simply didn't have the jobs that would allow them to simply have time off etc to play all these matches, who in these days, would have made better pros.

[jngf]

I think you're ignoring the comparators that you get to see them against in the old videos. Winterbottom and Calder might look fast and mobile, but that's in comparison to the players of the time, who did not have professional sprint coaches, the speed of the game and defence of the time, which could kindly be described as casual, and the amount of ball-in-play of the time, which was about 1/2 to 1/3 of current test matches. I promise you that if you put Curry and prime Winterbottom in any kind of race or mobility or endurance test, the results would be Curry, Curry lapping Winterbottom, then Winterbottom.

Puja

But Puja - what about your favourite flanker, Neil Back. All 5'10" and 14.5 st of him! (I'm not even sure he was 5'10".)

Maybe in heels.

Back was one of the best flankers of his time. I am grown up enough to know that the last three words are essential.

Puja

Speaking of our best ever openside, just stumbled on this interview with Backy (requires scrolling down the linked page to reach - the bit about Moody & the corgies is priceless ) https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.rugb ... ro14-no7s/

[Spiffy]

Many will disagree with me here, but I'd say that the flanker with the most complete all round game in the Brit.Isles over the past few years is Justin Tipuric. He can tackle, jackal, lineout jump, link, has great hands and speed and is a superb game reader with the knack of being in the right place. He is 16st and 6'2". That would be considered by many to be too small for an international flanker. In his case it's probably his size and build that enable him to to the things he does with tremendous mobility and pace.
Hamish Watson, the live wire Scottish flanker, is even smaller, but has dominated the past few games he's played in.
So bulk is not an absolute requirement for a top back rower, especially an open side. (Of course it's not a bad added advantage - with the crucial proviso that you can retain the speed and athleticism.)

[Mellsblue]

Many will disagree with me here, but I'd say that the flanker with the most complete all round game in the Brit.Isles over the past few years is Justin Tipuric. He can tackle, jackal, lineout jump, link, has great hands and speed and is a superb game reader with the knack of being in the right place. He is 16st and 6'2". That would be considered by many to be too small for an international flanker. In his case it's probably his size and build that enable him to to the things he does with tremendous mobility and pace.
Hamish Watson, the live wire Scottish flanker, is even smaller, but has dominated the past few games he's played in.
So bulk is not an absolute requirement for a top back rower, especially an open side. (Of course it's not a bad added advantage - with the crucial proviso that you can retain the speed and athleticism.)

Err...hello...

[Raggs]

Many will disagree with me here, but I'd say that the flanker with the most complete all round game in the Brit.Isles over the past few years is Justin Tipuric. He can tackle, jackal, lineout jump, link, has great hands and speed and is a superb game reader with the knack of being in the right place. He is 16st and 6'2". That would be considered by many to be too small for an international flanker. In his case it's probably his size and build that enable him to to the things he does with tremendous mobility and pace.
Hamish Watson, the live wire Scottish flanker, is even smaller, but has dominated the past few games he's played in.
So bulk is not an absolute requirement for a top back rower, especially an open side. (Of course it's not a bad added advantage - with the crucial proviso that you can retain the speed and athleticism.)

In truth neither Underhill nor Curry are monstrously big either, but both are superb backrow players. Same with Savea, McCaw in the past, George Smith, Hooper etc.

[jngf]

Many will disagree with me here, but I'd say that the flanker with the most complete all round game in the Brit.Isles over the past few years is Justin Tipuric. He can tackle, jackal, lineout jump, link, has great hands and speed and is a superb game reader with the knack of being in the right place. He is 16st and 6'2". That would be considered by many to be too small for an international flanker. In his case it's probably his size and build that enable him to to the things he does with tremendous mobility and pace.
Hamish Watson, the live wire Scottish flanker, is even smaller, but has dominated the past few games he's played in.
So bulk is not an absolute requirement for a top back rower, especially an open side. (Of course it's not a bad added advantage - with the crucial proviso that you can retain the speed and athleticism.)

And for me the issue is that too many opensides do bulk up to do carrying etc and don’t retain their original athleticism - 100% agree on Tipuric - he can do everything an openside should aspire to and I see no need whatsoever to turn such players into ball carrying beasts....(leave it to the tight 5, the blindside and the no.8)

[Mr Mwenda]

Many will disagree with me here, but I'd say that the flanker with the most complete all round game in the Brit.Isles over the past few years is Justin Tipuric. He can tackle, jackal, lineout jump, link, has great hands and speed and is a superb game reader with the knack of being in the right place. He is 16st and 6'2". That would be considered by many to be too small for an international flanker. In his case it's probably his size and build that enable him to to the things he does with tremendous mobility and pace.
Hamish Watson, the live wire Scottish flanker, is even smaller, but has dominated the past few games he's played in.
So bulk is not an absolute requirement for a top back rower, especially an open side. (Of course it's not a bad added advantage - with the crucial proviso that you can retain the speed and athleticism.)

Err...hello...

May's more of an 8 these days.

[Dan. Dan. Dan.]

Watson's pretty handy there too.

[Puja]

Watson's pretty handy there too.

It was actually very interesting watching Watson at the weekend after Willis went off. Traditionally, in that kind of situation where a forward goes off and has to be replaced by a back, the back only really does forward stuff at scrum-time and otherwise just becomes an eighth back. However, Watson seemed to be doing all of the jobs of a blindside flanker - tracking to be first at rucks, offering himself as a close carrier, jackalling, staying with his pod. Clearly one of Eddie's hybrid players in training and he didn't look out of place - I mean, I wouldn't select him there, but he looked like a flanker (more than Lawes does oftimes) and it was impressive versatility.

Puja

[jngf]

Watson's pretty handy there too.

It was actually very interesting watching Watson at the weekend after Willis went off. Traditionally, in that kind of situation where a forward goes off and has to be replaced by a back, the back only really does forward stuff at scrum-time and otherwise just becomes an eighth back. However, Watson seemed to be doing all of the jobs of a blindside flanker - tracking to be first at rucks, offering himself as a close carrier, jackalling, staying with his pod. Clearly one of Eddie's hybrid players in training and he didn't look out of place - I mean, I wouldn't select him there, but he looked like a flanker (more than Lawes does oftimes) and it was impressive versatility.

Puja

Watson’s put on enough weight in the past year to increasingly resemble a flanker

[paddy no 11]

If tipuric is the best of the current lot, who else fits the bill martyn Williams from the pro era? Would be nice to see a great link player to change it up

[Digby]

Watson's pretty handy there too.

It was actually very interesting watching Watson at the weekend after Willis went off. Traditionally, in that kind of situation where a forward goes off and has to be replaced by a back, the back only really does forward stuff at scrum-time and otherwise just becomes an eighth back. However, Watson seemed to be doing all of the jobs of a blindside flanker - tracking to be first at rucks, offering himself as a close carrier, jackalling, staying with his pod. Clearly one of Eddie's hybrid players in training and he didn't look out of place - I mean, I wouldn't select him there, but he looked like a flanker (more than Lawes does oftimes) and it was impressive versatility.

Puja

They could be a back in the eight or remain a 7th back, not sure they can become an eighth back unless I've not understood the entire sin process in a rather fundamental fashion

[Puja]

Watson's pretty handy there too.

It was actually very interesting watching Watson at the weekend after Willis went off. Traditionally, in that kind of situation where a forward goes off and has to be replaced by a back, the back only really does forward stuff at scrum-time and otherwise just becomes an eighth back. However, Watson seemed to be doing all of the jobs of a blindside flanker - tracking to be first at rucks, offering himself as a close carrier, jackalling, staying with his pod. Clearly one of Eddie's hybrid players in training and he didn't look out of place - I mean, I wouldn't select him there, but he looked like a flanker (more than Lawes does oftimes) and it was impressive versatility.

Puja

They could be a back in the eight or remain a 7th back, not sure they can become an eighth back unless I've not understood the entire sin process in a rather fundamental fashion

I am confused as to how you are confused.

So, Willis went off injured, but we had no forwards left on the bench, so Malins came on. He went to fullback, Daly went to wing, and Watson went to flank. Normally, a back who gets roped into the forwards packs down at the scrums and then goes to stand in the backline in the loose because that's where they know what they're doing.

That didn't happen on the weekend. Watson did the job of a flanker and actually did it pretty well (all things considered).

Puja

[jngf]

Perhaps an interesting question might be how many players in great sides would struggle to play today. From what little I know of the 70s Welsh side I'd think Gareth Edwards would be ok.

From 2003 England vintage one would presume most had the drive to adapt to modern trends but perhaps some of the forwards' body shapes would present a challenge.

That 2003 vintage would beat the current England side hands down imo.

[Which Tyler]

I am confused as to how you are confused.

I can help here - Digby was thinking it was a sin-bin, so 1 player goes off, no new player comes on.
He's wrong, it was an injury replacement, so we went from 8 forwards, 7 backs => 7 forwards, 8 backs

[Oakboy]

Perhaps an interesting question might be how many players in great sides would struggle to play today. From what little I know of the 70s Welsh side I'd think Gareth Edwards would be ok.

From 2003 England vintage one would presume most had the drive to adapt to modern trends but perhaps some of the forwards' body shapes would present a challenge.

That 2003 vintage would beat the current England side hands down imo.

Never. They'd win nothing at set piece or rucks and would get no ball unless the current team persisted in kicking the ball to them. The current lot would never be stupid enough to spend 80 minutes doing that . . . . Er?

[Timbo]

If given a significant amount of time to adjust to all the areas the modern game has moved forwards I’m sure the 2003 team would be very good.

If they were simply transported 18 years into the future for a one off game they’d get steamrolled by pretty much every current tier 1 team. There’s only so much you can do up against much bigger, faster, better conditioned and powerful athletes. You can’t cope with that for 80 minutes. Kicking games and things like back field coverage & aerial skills are on a whole other level than they were back then, and they’d get absolutely munched up by modern blitz defences.

[Digby]

I am confused as to how you are confused.

I can help here - Digby was thinking it was a sin-bin, so 1 player goes off, no new player comes on.
He's wrong, it was an injury replacement, so we went from 8 forwards, 7 backs => 7 forwards, 8 backs

I was, I did think to come back it was nice of Puja to acknowledge all our backs as bona fide backs in a (likely) futile effort to justify what I'd said to begin with.

Did we use the extra back at any point? I don't know if we have any moves for that situation but somewhere you can't defend pace on pace, unless to come back to a point rarely referenced that Farrell isn't much a runner in the centres. But you should be able to overload either the 13 or force a wing to position such your decision to kick/pass puts them out of position, or so it would seem. Also not sure what you'd do in defence, probably just just your line speed 'cause any change might prove more deleterious with players having to think for themselves

[jngf]

If given a significant amount of time to adjust to all the areas the modern game has moved forwards I’m sure the 2003 team would be very good.

If they were simply transported 18 years into the future for a one off game they’d get steamrolled by pretty much every current tier 1 team. There’s only so much you can do up against much bigger, faster, better conditioned and powerful athletes. You can’t cope with that for 80 minutes. Kicking games and things like back field coverage & aerial skills are on a whole other level than they were back then, and they’d get absolutely munched up by modern blitz defences.

I don’t accept the premis that current England team are faster or better conditioned than the 2003 vintage - exhibit A : Dallagio v Billy V Exhibit B: Wilkinson v Farell Exhibit C: Dawson v Youngs Exhibit D: Lewsey v Daly ....I could go on I’d go further and say that English rugby and possibly world rugby has declined in quality over the intervening period between 2003 and now

[Digby]

If given a significant amount of time to adjust to all the areas the modern game has moved forwards I’m sure the 2003 team would be very good.

If they were simply transported 18 years into the future for a one off game they’d get steamrolled by pretty much every current tier 1 team. There’s only so much you can do up against much bigger, faster, better conditioned and powerful athletes. You can’t cope with that for 80 minutes. Kicking games and things like back field coverage & aerial skills are on a whole other level than they were back then, and they’d get absolutely munched up by modern blitz defences.

I don’t accept the premis that current England team are faster or better conditioned than the 2003 vintage - exhibit A : Dallagio v Billy V Exhibit B: Wilkinson v Farell Exhibit C: Dawson v Youngs Exhibit D: Lewsey v Daly ....I could go on I’d go further and say that English rugby and possibly world rugby has declined in quality over the intervening period between 2003 and now

The problem you have is reminiscent of Trump phoning Georgia asking for just 12k more votes because he won, which is the data doesn't remotely back you up. More if you were to speak to any of Dallaglio, Wilkinson, Dawson or Lewsey they're not going to back up the view you have. You might prefer the product that saw attack have more time going back 15 to 20 years, tbh I'd have a lot of sympathy for that view, but sport conditioning has moved forwards, it's a trend we see all the time and not just in rugby

[jngf]

If given a significant amount of time to adjust to all the areas the modern game has moved forwards I’m sure the 2003 team would be very good.

If they were simply transported 18 years into the future for a one off game they’d get steamrolled by pretty much every current tier 1 team. There’s only so much you can do up against much bigger, faster, better conditioned and powerful athletes. You can’t cope with that for 80 minutes. Kicking games and things like back field coverage & aerial skills are on a whole other level than they were back then, and they’d get absolutely munched up by modern blitz defences.

I don’t accept the premis that current England team are faster or better conditioned than the 2003 vintage - exhibit A : Dallagio v Billy V Exhibit B: Wilkinson v Farell Exhibit C: Dawson v Youngs Exhibit D: Lewsey v Daly ....I could go on I’d go further and say that English rugby and possibly world rugby has declined in quality over the intervening period between 2003 and now

The problem you have is reminiscent of Trump phoning Georgia asking for just 12k more votes because he won, which is the data doesn't remotely back you up. More if you were to speak to any of Dallaglio, Wilkinson, Dawson or Lewsey they're not going to back up the view you have. You might prefer the product that saw attack have more time going back 15 to 20 years, tbh I'd have a lot of sympathy for that view, but sport conditioning has moved forwards, it's a trend we see all the time and not just in rugby

Thanks for bringing politics into it:)

[Digby]

I don’t accept the premis that current England team are faster or better conditioned than the 2003 vintage - exhibit A : Dallagio v Billy V Exhibit B: Wilkinson v Farell Exhibit C: Dawson v Youngs Exhibit D: Lewsey v Daly ....I could go on I’d go further and say that English rugby and possibly world rugby has declined in quality over the intervening period between 2003 and now

The problem you have is reminiscent of Trump phoning Georgia asking for just 12k more votes because he won, which is the data doesn't remotely back you up. More if you were to speak to any of Dallaglio, Wilkinson, Dawson or Lewsey they're not going to back up the view you have. You might prefer the product that saw attack have more time going back 15 to 20 years, tbh I'd have a lot of sympathy for that view, but sport conditioning has moved forwards, it's a trend we see all the time and not just in rugby

Thanks for bringing politics into it:)

Trump seemed an apt point of reference for looking at the bleeding obvious and declaring it fake news