It’s weird that wanting possibly the most exciting/talented player in the country to get some game time/experience at a World Cup, in a game we should win fairly easily and in place of someone playing out of position/past their best, and discussing the merits of two players in contention to replace an injured player has, for some, become us deciding all three are on course to win world player of the year in 2024.
Personally I find it weird that, "I think the punditry and casual fan adulation of Arundell is going over the top after one game against Chile," has morphed into me agreeing with Dallaglio about this backline selection.
Puja
(Not particularly having a go at you Puja) but has anyone on here particularly praised Arundell to high heaven? Or are we all just a bit beyond hacked off that we’ve reverted to the stodgiest possible backline from players available? It seems like we’ve been trying this particular experiment for many years now, and are pretty sure of the outcome mainly due to repetitive evidence. Is there anyone on this forum who actually believes we’ll get past the semi-final with this backline?
For my part, I’m not utterly terrified of trying a (highly) promising 20 year old in a match we’re nailed on to win. I retain the right though to be utterly terrified of having to watch this same experiment yet again. I’ll be glad when the WC’s over frankly. The faint glimmers are being smothered.
Yep, due to RFU incompetence, albeit we’re now led to believe them having greater control over players is a good thing, and Jones’s arrogance, this tournament is nothing more than prep for the next four years yet we’ve shoehorned in three players into the backline who won’t be in Oz in four years (surely global warming will do for the Iceman even if he is above all other scientific measures) against a team who have been poor all tournament. To achieve this we’ve left out a bloke who looks like he could* be the next Cullen/Robinson.
*emphasis very much on could so as to avoid any doubt that I’m not anointing him the heir to Hermes**
**the god not the defunct parcel delivery service.
Last edited by Mellsblue on Fri Oct 06, 2023 9:45 am, edited 2 times in total.
You could make a good arguement for the front row. After that you might be struggling a bit.
Was more a point of style though, as phenomenally skillful as DMac is his defensive ability and game management are not as strong as the other options and it holds him back. If he takes another sabbatical then a spell in France might both help the game management element and boost his bank balance.
Or it could be that he’s up against world class players to make the team.
In other words he's not as strong as the options in front of him. Right there in the original comment.
The All Blacks do shift around the backline to squeeze their best players in though. He could yet be reinvented as a winger.
Yes, but as stated to Puja earlier, it’s about player skill set and coach out look rather than a direct player to player comparison.
Mackenzie is left out because players such as B. Barrett are ahead of him whereas Arundell is left out for an over the hill (as much as it pains me to say it) May, an out of position Marchant and an out of form Steward. I reckon Ian Foster would be picking Arundell for this match. Luckily, there’s no way to prove or disprove this theory but, as it’s the internet, I claim it as fact
Or it could be that he’s up against world class players to make the team.
In other words he's not as strong as the options in front of him. Right there in the original comment.
The All Blacks do shift around the backline to squeeze their best players in though. He could yet be reinvented as a winger.
Yes, but as stated to Puja earlier, it’s about player skill set and coach out look rather than a direct player to player comparison.
Mackenzie is left out because players such as B. Barrett are ahead of him whereas Arundell is left out for an over the hill (as much as it pains me to say it) May, an out of position Marchant and an out of form Steward. I reckon Ian Foster would be picking Arundell for this match. Luckily, there’s no way to prove or disprove this theory but, as it’s the internet, I claim it as fact
I'm more inclined to think that we have hit his ceiling as an fb.
In other words he's not as strong as the options in front of him. Right there in the original comment.
The All Blacks do shift around the backline to squeeze their best players in though. He could yet be reinvented as a winger.
Yes, but as stated to Puja earlier, it’s about player skill set and coach out look rather than a direct player to player comparison.
Mackenzie is left out because players such as B. Barrett are ahead of him whereas Arundell is left out for an over the hill (as much as it pains me to say it) May, an out of position Marchant and an out of form Steward. I reckon Ian Foster would be picking Arundell for this match. Luckily, there’s no way to prove or disprove this theory but, as it’s the internet, I claim it as fact
I'm more inclined to think that we have hit his ceiling as an fb.
Agreed but I’m trying not to trigger…
The debate over Arundell is enough for a Friday. I don’t want to rehash the one over Steward as well.
Yes, but as stated to Puja earlier, it’s about player skill set and coach out look rather than a direct player to player comparison.
Mackenzie is left out because players such as B. Barrett are ahead of him whereas Arundell is left out for an over the hill (as much as it pains me to say it) May, an out of position Marchant and an out of form Steward. I reckon Ian Foster would be picking Arundell for this match. Luckily, there’s no way to prove or disprove this theory but, as it’s the internet, I claim it as fact
I'm more inclined to think that we have hit his ceiling as an fb.
Agreed but I’m trying not to trigger…
The debate over Arundell is enough for a Friday. I don’t want to rehash the one over Steward as well.
Ah yes. Point taken
Perhaps Ford’s game management needs to be questioned- - see if we can trigger some positives from Banquo about the back line.
It’s weird that wanting possibly the most exciting/talented player in the country to get some game time/experience at a World Cup, in a game we should win fairly easily and in place of someone playing out of position/past their best, and discussing the merits of two players in contention to replace an injured player has, for some, become us deciding all three are on course to win world player of the year in 2024.
Personally I find it weird that, "I think the punditry and casual fan adulation of Arundell is going over the top after one game against Chile," has morphed into me agreeing with Dallaglio about this backline selection.
Puja
(Not particularly having a go at you Puja) but has anyone on here particularly praised Arundell to high heaven? Or are we all just a bit beyond hacked off that we’ve reverted to the stodgiest possible backline from players available? It seems like we’ve been trying this particular experiment for many years now, and are pretty sure of the outcome mainly due to repetitive evidence. Is there anyone on this forum who actually believes we’ll get past the semi-final with this backline?
For my part, I’m not utterly terrified of trying a (highly) promising 20 year old in a match we’re nailed on to win. I retain the right though to be utterly terrified of having to watch this same experiment yet again. I’ll be glad when the WC’s over frankly. The faint glimmers are being smothered.
Not really, although my original point was about punditry and the general public (incited by a comment quoted from the BBC Sport website). Us lot here tend to be a bit more well-informed than the casuals and pundits who I was castigating for treating him as undroppable because he scored 5 against Chile.
We're not going past the semi-finals no matter what we do, and I do understand Borthwick looking to secure a bird in the hand by having a plan that can be operated by what we have, rather than using this RWC as part of the development plan for the next. As long as he uses the young talent across the next 4 years, I'm okay with him playing safety first right now as long as it does indeed get us to the semis.
I will note that this is not an endorsement of picking Fazlet or Marchant on the wing, or of being terrified of picking Arundell against Samoa.
Mr Mwenda wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2023 7:11 am
Much has been said that I agree with. I find the need to integrate Farrell pretty baffling.
A few observations: Marchant is overrated on here. I wouldn't have moved him to the wing but you'd think we were talking about world class player. TWillis and Pearson appear to be the kings across the water now. When they're selected and mediocre in a mediocre squad whose nuxt?
It’s weird that wanting possibly the most exciting/talented player in the country to get some game time/experience at a World Cup, in a game we should win fairly easily and in place of someone playing out of position/past their best, and discussing the merits of two players in contention to replace an injured player has, for some, become us deciding all three are on course to win world player of the year in 2024.
It just seems to me that TWillis and Pearson seem to be gaining ever more credit by their absence. Didn't they both feature in the warm up games and look as poor as many others?
Re: the most exciting player, I didn't mention Arundel or did you mean Farrell?
Personally I find it weird that, "I think the punditry and casual fan adulation of Arundell is going over the top after one game against Chile," has morphed into me agreeing with Dallaglio about this backline selection.
Puja
(Not particularly having a go at you Puja) but has anyone on here particularly praised Arundell to high heaven? Or are we all just a bit beyond hacked off that we’ve reverted to the stodgiest possible backline from players available? It seems like we’ve been trying this particular experiment for many years now, and are pretty sure of the outcome mainly due to repetitive evidence. Is there anyone on this forum who actually believes we’ll get past the semi-final with this backline?
For my part, I’m not utterly terrified of trying a (highly) promising 20 year old in a match we’re nailed on to win. I retain the right though to be utterly terrified of having to watch this same experiment yet again. I’ll be glad when the WC’s over frankly. The faint glimmers are being smothered.
Not really, although my original point was about punditry and the general public (incited by a comment quoted from the BBC Sport website). Us lot here tend to be a bit more well-informed than the casuals and pundits who I was castigating for treating him as undroppable because he scored 5 against Chile.
We're not going past the semi-finals no matter what we do, and I do understand Borthwick looking to secure a bird in the hand by having a plan that can be operated by what we have, rather than using this RWC as part of the development plan for the next. As long as he uses the young talent across the next 4 years, I'm okay with him playing safety first right now as long as it does indeed get us to the semis.
I will note that this is not an endorsement of picking Fazlet or Marchant on the wing, or of being terrified of picking Arundell against Samoa.
Puja
What makes you think he will use the "young talent" over the next 4 years though?
(Not particularly having a go at you Puja) but has anyone on here particularly praised Arundell to high heaven? Or are we all just a bit beyond hacked off that we’ve reverted to the stodgiest possible backline from players available? It seems like we’ve been trying this particular experiment for many years now, and are pretty sure of the outcome mainly due to repetitive evidence. Is there anyone on this forum who actually believes we’ll get past the semi-final with this backline?
For my part, I’m not utterly terrified of trying a (highly) promising 20 year old in a match we’re nailed on to win. I retain the right though to be utterly terrified of having to watch this same experiment yet again. I’ll be glad when the WC’s over frankly. The faint glimmers are being smothered.
Not really, although my original point was about punditry and the general public (incited by a comment quoted from the BBC Sport website). Us lot here tend to be a bit more well-informed than the casuals and pundits who I was castigating for treating him as undroppable because he scored 5 against Chile.
We're not going past the semi-finals no matter what we do, and I do understand Borthwick looking to secure a bird in the hand by having a plan that can be operated by what we have, rather than using this RWC as part of the development plan for the next. As long as he uses the young talent across the next 4 years, I'm okay with him playing safety first right now as long as it does indeed get us to the semis.
I will note that this is not an endorsement of picking Fazlet or Marchant on the wing, or of being terrified of picking Arundell against Samoa.
Puja
What makes you think he will use the "young talent" over the next 4 years though?
Because he already is bringing it through and he also brought the young talent through at Tigers. He's turned to the old guard to help keep things tight at the world cup but that makes sense, a quick look at the success of a youthful Wallaby side will show you why.
I don't think you are going to see anything other than variations on pragmatic rugby so if you're hoping for young talent emerging to also equate to a new dawn of attacking rugby you may well be disappointed though I'd certainly hope we see more from the attack then we are currently seeing.
In other words he's not as strong as the options in front of him. Right there in the original comment.
The All Blacks do shift around the backline to squeeze their best players in though. He could yet be reinvented as a winger.
Yes, but as stated to Puja earlier, it’s about player skill set and coach out look rather than a direct player to player comparison.
Mackenzie is left out because players such as B. Barrett are ahead of him whereas Arundell is left out for an over the hill (as much as it pains me to say it) May, an out of position Marchant and an out of form Steward. I reckon Ian Foster would be picking Arundell for this match. Luckily, there’s no way to prove or disprove this theory but, as it’s the internet, I claim it as fact
I'm more inclined to think that we have hit his ceiling as an fb.
Or just that oppos have worked out that it’s better to run at him and change direction slightly rather than hoof the ball high into the sky for him to catch?
Edit; oops soz Mells.
Last edited by Beasties on Fri Oct 06, 2023 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mr Mwenda wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2023 7:11 am
Much has been said that I agree with. I find the need to integrate Farrell pretty baffling.
A few observations: Marchant is overrated on here. I wouldn't have moved him to the wing but you'd think we were talking about world class player. TWillis and Pearson appear to be the kings across the water now. When they're selected and mediocre in a mediocre squad whose nuxt?
It’s weird that wanting possibly the most exciting/talented player in the country to get some game time/experience at a World Cup, in a game we should win fairly easily and in place of someone playing out of position/past their best, and discussing the merits of two players in contention to replace an injured player has, for some, become us deciding all three are on course to win world player of the year in 2024.
It just seems to me that TWillis and Pearson seem to be gaining ever more credit by their absence. Didn't they both feature in the warm up games and look as poor as many others?
Re: the most exciting player, I didn't mention Arundel or did you mean Farrell?
Pearson looked adequate but no more, but TWillis just got 15 mins or so in one game didn’t he? And he looked good for the time he got. Mikey got overexcited if I remember corretly?
I watched Pearson in that game fairly closely. He looked completely gassed almost from the start, which was very uncharacteristic. Makes more sense now hearing about the training blocs etc.
Looking forward to seeing how he gets on at Saints this season.
I've no idea who they'll call up. As I think someone said already, there's almost no point at this stage unless they think there is someone there who would genuinely be pushing for the 23.
Yes, but as stated to Puja earlier, it’s about player skill set and coach out look rather than a direct player to player comparison.
Mackenzie is left out because players such as B. Barrett are ahead of him whereas Arundell is left out for an over the hill (as much as it pains me to say it) May, an out of position Marchant and an out of form Steward. I reckon Ian Foster would be picking Arundell for this match. Luckily, there’s no way to prove or disprove this theory but, as it’s the internet, I claim it as fact
I'm more inclined to think that we have hit his ceiling as an fb.
Or just that oppos have worked out that it’s better to run at him and change direction slightly rather than hoof the ball high into the sky for him to catch?
Edit; opps soz Mells.
No need to apologise. I’ve said similar a number of times this year.
Pearson looked adequate but no more, but TWillis just got 15 mins or so in one game didn’t he? And he looked good for the time he got. Mikey got overexcited if I remember corretly?
T Willis should have been in the initial squad. But the out of form injured Billy got the nod ‘cause we need the old guard to tighten things up. That’s worked out a dream
(Not particularly having a go at you Puja) but has anyone on here particularly praised Arundell to high heaven? Or are we all just a bit beyond hacked off that we’ve reverted to the stodgiest possible backline from players available? It seems like we’ve been trying this particular experiment for many years now, and are pretty sure of the outcome mainly due to repetitive evidence. Is there anyone on this forum who actually believes we’ll get past the semi-final with this backline?
For my part, I’m not utterly terrified of trying a (highly) promising 20 year old in a match we’re nailed on to win. I retain the right though to be utterly terrified of having to watch this same experiment yet again. I’ll be glad when the WC’s over frankly. The faint glimmers are being smothered.
Not really, although my original point was about punditry and the general public (incited by a comment quoted from the BBC Sport website). Us lot here tend to be a bit more well-informed than the casuals and pundits who I was castigating for treating him as undroppable because he scored 5 against Chile.
We're not going past the semi-finals no matter what we do, and I do understand Borthwick looking to secure a bird in the hand by having a plan that can be operated by what we have, rather than using this RWC as part of the development plan for the next. As long as he uses the young talent across the next 4 years, I'm okay with him playing safety first right now as long as it does indeed get us to the semis.
I will note that this is not an endorsement of picking Fazlet or Marchant on the wing, or of being terrified of picking Arundell against Samoa.
Puja
What makes you think he will use the "young talent" over the next 4 years though?
It’s weird that wanting possibly the most exciting/talented player in the country to get some game time/experience at a World Cup, in a game we should win fairly easily and in place of someone playing out of position/past their best, and discussing the merits of two players in contention to replace an injured player has, for some, become us deciding all three are on course to win world player of the year in 2024.
It just seems to me that TWillis and Pearson seem to be gaining ever more credit by their absence. Didn't they both feature in the warm up games and look as poor as many others?
Re: the most exciting player, I didn't mention Arundel or did you mean Farrell?
Pearson looked adequate but no more, but TWillis just got 15 mins or so in one game didn’t he? And he looked good for the time he got. Mikey got overexcited if I remember corretly?
Probably. The bar is pretty low at this point but I was very impressed by him controlling crappy ball at the scrum and wrestling a good position out of it under pressure from the defence. Pretty basic stuff and there was no time for much else, but it was more than I can remember seeing Vunipola do for years (and exactly the sort of 'tough stuff' Dombrandt gets torn to pieces for not doing) and I don't think we'd seen Earl at 8 (if at all) at that point.
It just seemed like another pointless exercise. I don't know what else Borthwick expected to see in a 15 minute cameo.
Epaminondas Pules wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2023 9:37 am
I'm wondering if this is the slowest backline ever selected for a rugby match ever?
Exhibit A:
M Cueto (Sale Sharks); M Banahan (Bath), D Hipkiss (Leicester), A Erinle (Biarritz), U Monye (Harlequins); J Wilkinson (Toulon), P Hodgson (London Irish)
It just seems to me that TWillis and Pearson seem to be gaining ever more credit by their absence. Didn't they both feature in the warm up games and look as poor as many others?
Re: the most exciting player, I didn't mention Arundel or did you mean Farrell?
Pearson looked adequate but no more, but TWillis just got 15 mins or so in one game didn’t he? And he looked good for the time he got. Mikey got overexcited if I remember corretly?
Probably. The bar is pretty low at this point but I was very impressed by him controlling crappy ball at the scrum and wrestling a good position out of it under pressure from the defence. Pretty basic stuff and there was no time for much else, but it was more than I can remember seeing Vunipola do for years (and exactly the sort of 'tough stuff' Dombrandt gets torn to pieces for not doing) and I don't think we'd seen Earl at 8 (if at all) at that point.
It just seemed like another pointless exercise. I don't know what else Borthwick expected to see in a 15 minute cameo.
Fairly sure I’d read on here that SB was keen to get him involved. And then he got 15 mins. I’d never make an international manager, I’d need to see more than 15 mins.
But I’d have given him more. The guy’s a force. If Wasps hadn’t ceased he’d have been here for the full season and we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. But, tbf, I’ve been surprised by Earl’s performances and I’m not a fan of his at all.
Epaminondas Pules wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2023 9:37 am
I'm wondering if this is the slowest backline ever selected for a rugby match ever?
Exhibit A:
M Cueto (Sale Sharks); M Banahan (Bath), D Hipkiss (Leicester), A Erinle (Biarritz), U Monye (Harlequins); J Wilkinson (Toulon), P Hodgson (London Irish)
Reckon that lot could still beat our currently selected backline.
Epaminondas Pules wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2023 9:37 am
I'm wondering if this is the slowest backline ever selected for a rugby match ever?
Exhibit A:
M Cueto (Sale Sharks); M Banahan (Bath), D Hipkiss (Leicester), A Erinle (Biarritz), U Monye (Harlequins); J Wilkinson (Toulon), P Hodgson (London Irish)
Reckon that lot could still beat our currently selected backline.
In terms of speed maybe, skill levels not even close. Not sure you'd fancy anyone past Wilkinson to throw a pass.
Reckon that lot could still beat our currently selected backline.
In terms of speed maybe, skill levels not even close. Not sure you'd fancy anyone past Wilkinson to throw a pass.
Banahan was underrated and a much more skillful player than given credit for (plus kept working on himself all through his career, which I do like in a player, especially one that could've got away with just being big), but aside from that, agreed. Erinle and Hipkiss was the lowest skilled centre duo I think we ever put out - both good honest triers, but with clogs for hands.
