Willis, Simmonds or B Curry as starting openside in 6 Nations?

[Banquo]

Get the idea that Borthwick won't pick anyone who doesn't work their nuts off and Earl's stats for both attacking and defensive work suggests a player who is unfairly pigeonholed as a fancy dan seagulling out wide IMO (Charlie Morgan has done several pieces on Earl which highlight how effective he has been). He deserves a decent opportunity, although he's forever going to be cursed as he's just too tempting to drop in as the back row bench option given his versatility and skill set. For Scotland I'd personally go with Willis/Curry/Dombrandt as the starting back row with Earl on the bench, but would have no issue with Ludlam taking any of those slots.

Not necessarily disagreeing, but how many times has willis played/packed down at 6? I also note that Toulouse use him as a lineout jumper, which is handy (though I guess wasps maybe did as well?).

[SDHoneymonster]

I don't know tbf - Ben has played a fair bit at blindside though so you could swap them over fairly easily.

[p/d]

I think the Curry boys are top flight. Nuggerty blighters, with massive work-rate, lead by example and no shortage of the old skill asset! Ben is in cracking form and is going to be hard to overlook. No nonsense player.

[Banquo]

I don't know tbf - Ben has played a fair bit at blindside though so you could swap them over fairly easily.

Mebbe, but it’s a big step from occasional club blindside to intl one with not much intl experience. It’s not as big a deal as it used to be with starting position carrying a specific role, but even the scrum defence would take a bit of getting used to. They are both bloody good tho.

[Which Tyler]

Not necessarily disagreeing, but how many times has willis played/packed down at 6? I also note that Toulouse use him as a lineout jumper, which is handy (though I guess wasps maybe did as well?).

11% of his starts: https://all.rugby/player/tom-willis
I'd guess a higher percentage of his bench appearances (second half of last season) as he was making way for Barbeary at 8, who my (fallible) memory suggests was playing 80 minutes

[Mikey Brown]

I think that was about Jack Willis, who I’d guess would be at 6 for most of his Wasps appearances?

[Mikey Brown]

Back Row : 58 times ( Openside Flanker 53%, Blindside Flanker 41%, Number 8 5% )

I’m surprised to see how much he’s actually been at 7, assuming this is accurate.

[Which Tyler]

I think that was about Jack Willis, who I’d guess would be at 6 for most of his Wasps appearances?

My apologies - I'd lost track a bit, I'm sure there was a debate about Tom Willis place in the pecking order as a BSF; or was that somewhere else?

Now get of my lawn!

[Banquo]

I think that was about Jack Willis, who I’d guess would be at 6 for most of his Wasps appearances?

really? Given that Shields was at 6 a lot and I've always viewed Jack Willis as an openside tbh....I'm surprised he's played that much at 6 tbh!

[Puja]

I think that was about Jack Willis, who I’d guess would be at 6 for most of his Wasps appearances?

really? Given that Shields was at 6 a lot and I've always viewed Jack Willis as an openside tbh....I'm surprised he's played that much at 6 tbh!

Nizam Carr and Thomas Young were both major players at 7 for Wasps over the last few years.

Puja

[Banquo]

I think that was about Jack Willis, who I’d guess would be at 6 for most of his Wasps appearances?

really? Given that Shields was at 6 a lot and I've always viewed Jack Willis as an openside tbh....I'm surprised he's played that much at 6 tbh!

Nizam Carr and Thomas Young were both major players at 7 for Wasps over the last few years.

Puja

Carr spent a lot of time at 8. But Shields was also a major player for Wasps. Just saying I'd always viewed Willis as a 7, could be wrong....plus Willis was injured a lot on those last few years.

[Mikey Brown]

Well I’d say with our combined genius we’ve worked out he can probably play both sides fairly comfortably.

I’d always viewed him as that destructive blindside that can carry and jump a bit, and just happens to be incredible over the ball. Like POM or Ritchie. He was probably just wearing 6 when I first saw him and it’s stuck.

[jngf]

Is J Willis more of a carrier than a linkman?

[Mikey Brown]

I’d say carrier but he’s just good/smart in general, still not entirely sure I understand your definition of ‘link man’ but I’d say Ben Curry is fantastic in that area.

[Banquo]

I’d say carrier but he’s just good/smart in general, still not entirely sure I understand your definition of ‘link man’ but I’d say Ben Curry is fantastic in that area.

I THINK he means someone like Neil Back/McCaw who was excellent at supporting (backs) breaks and maintaining continuity either through handling or ensuring a quick recycle.

Willis J - as we've discussed- is an interesting hybrid of jackelling 7 and tight, small yards carrying 6 of yesteryear. Plus lineout.

[jngf]

I’d say carrier but he’s just good/smart in general, still not entirely sure I understand your definition of ‘link man’ but I’d say Ben Curry is fantastic in that area.

I THINK he means someone like Neil Back/McCaw who was excellent at supporting (backs) breaks and maintaining continuity either through handling or ensuring a quick recycle.

Willis J - as we've discussed- is an interesting hybrid of jackelling 7 and tight, small yards carrying 6 of yesteryear. Plus lineout.

Exactly! With that in mind would that indicate J Willis would be optimally deployed at 6 with B Curry or B Earl (or S Simmonds ) in the 7 berth?

[Banquo]

I’d say carrier but he’s just good/smart in general, still not entirely sure I understand your definition of ‘link man’ but I’d say Ben Curry is fantastic in that area.

I THINK he means someone like Neil Back/McCaw who was excellent at supporting (backs) breaks and maintaining continuity either through handling or ensuring a quick recycle.

Willis J - as we've discussed- is an interesting hybrid of jackelling 7 and tight, small yards carrying 6 of yesteryear. Plus lineout.

Exactly! With that in mind would that indicate J Willis would be optimally deployed at 6 with B Curry or B Earl (or S Simmonds ) in the 7 berth?

what do you mean by `deployed at 6'. Number on back is irrelevent obviously, so does that mean pack down on the blindside? Thereafter its about how you use the strengths of players in the context of what you are trying to achieve.....so Curry B and Willis J look to have a complimentary skills mix and so look a decent pairing. Then the question is who is best packing down where, what happens post lineout in attack if say Willis is a jumper or lifter, then what do the next couple of phases need from either of them in skill set terms...and so on, and equivalent q's in defence.

[jngf]

I THINK he means someone like Neil Back/McCaw who was excellent at supporting (backs) breaks and maintaining continuity either through handling or ensuring a quick recycle.

Willis J - as we've discussed- is an interesting hybrid of jackelling 7 and tight, small yards carrying 6 of yesteryear. Plus lineout.

Exactly! With that in mind would that indicate J Willis would be optimally deployed at 6 with B Curry or B Earl (or S Simmonds ) in the 7 berth?

what do you mean by `deployed at 6'. Number on back is irrelevent obviously, so does that mean pack down on the blindside? Thereafter its about how you use the strengths of players in the context of what you are trying to achieve.....so Curry B and Willis J look to have a complimentary skills mix and so look a decent pairing. Then the question is who is best packing down where, what happens post lineout in attack if say Willis is a jumper or lifter, then what do the next couple of phases need from either of them in skill set terms...and so on, and equivalent q's in defence.

By deployed at 6 I’m meaning packing down on the blindside flank at scrum time.

[Mikey Brown]

I'd guess the question was more about how you'd plan to use them from set plays, rather than deciding their number based on attributes (like pace or linking ability) they can show off in the loose. FWIW 6. Willis 7. Curry makes the most sense to me too, but I'm not going to be too bothered about what numbers they're wearing as long as they're being used well.

[Banquo]

Exactly! With that in mind would that indicate J Willis would be optimally deployed at 6 with B Curry or B Earl (or S Simmonds ) in the 7 berth?

what do you mean by `deployed at 6'. Number on back is irrelevent obviously, so does that mean pack down on the blindside? Thereafter its about how you use the strengths of players in the context of what you are trying to achieve.....so Curry B and Willis J look to have a complimentary skills mix and so look a decent pairing. Then the question is who is best packing down where, what happens post lineout in attack if say Willis is a jumper or lifter, then what do the next couple of phases need from either of them in skill set terms...and so on, and equivalent q's in defence.

By deployed at 6 I’m meaning packing down on the blindside flank at scrum time.

Cool.

[Banquo]

I'd guess the question was more about how you'd plan to use them from set plays, rather than deciding their number based on attributes (like pace or linking ability) they can show off in the loose. FWIW 6. Willis 7. Curry makes the most sense to me too, but I'm not going to be too bothered about what numbers they're wearing as long as they're being used well.

quite, but how you use them can't be done in isolation of what the plan and tactics are- I would say that those two give you a lot of flexibility, though not sure how quick Curry B is, if for example you want to attack wider more often through the backs. Its the old chicken and egg about picking players for a plan or developing a plan around a core of players- but I wouldn't that the likely backrow would be one you'd pin your whole game plan on; but the likely pack does look overall that it will be very mobile, and that the backs won't by physically imposing....so.....