USA v England, Sat 19/07. 10.05pm Rugbypass & RFU YouTube

[Banquo]

Hardly a recipe for a great performance in fairness. Long gruelling season, straight into one of the toughest trips, two great wins, so a huge anticlimax in weird conditions. Pretty pointless game tbh.

[pjm1]

On the plus side, no one got struck by lightning!

[Scrumhead]

A bit harsh. I thought both centres were good whenever they were given an opportunity to play.

Obviously the standard of opposition needs to be taken into account, but credit where credit is due … Ojomoh’s physicality in defence was good to see too. Looks like he would fit the gameplan nicely.

I was underwhelmed by Pepper. After a couple of good cameos, I thought he was going to rip it up, but he was pretty anonymous. In fairness, it can be harder to shine as a flanker in these sort of games, but he suffered in comparison to CCS who was very busy a prominent on both sides of the ball.

It was always going to be hard to shine in that back row- his job was mostly to clear rucks and let the other 2 stay out ready to carry.

I know they are different players but watching Dombrandt after 2 games of Willis is just depressing. The ferocity of the carry, protection of the ball, all round workrate are just night and day.

Sure. I did acknowledge it’s hard for a flanker to shine in these sorts of games.

TBF, the carrying wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to do that. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.

[Epaminondas Pules]

Highlight for me was the superb falcon that Ojomoh threw into Beard’s face!

But if a scrappy old affair. Error strewn and largely pointless.

[Danno]

Pretty good tour all told. I hope we decide to use our midfield options instead of parachuting Slade back in when his hand is fixed

[Banquo]

A bit harsh. I thought both centres were good whenever they were given an opportunity to play.

Obviously the standard of opposition needs to be taken into account, but credit where credit is due … Ojomoh’s physicality in defence was good to see too. Looks like he would fit the gameplan nicely.

I was underwhelmed by Pepper. After a couple of good cameos, I thought he was going to rip it up, but he was pretty anonymous. In fairness, it can be harder to shine as a flanker in these sort of games, but he suffered in comparison to CCS who was very busy a prominent on both sides of the ball.

It was always going to be hard to shine in that back row- his job was mostly to clear rucks and let the other 2 stay out ready to carry.

I know they are different players but watching Dombrandt after 2 games of Willis is just depressing. The ferocity of the carry, protection of the ball, all round workrate are just night and day.

Sure. I did acknowledge it’s hard for a flanker to shine in these sorts of games.

TBF, the carrying wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to do that. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.

Did CCS do the whole game at 6? I feel a bit for him, I think he could be immense as a 6 if backed.

[pjm1]

Glad I didn’t stay up to watch this given the extra hour difference for me. Will catch up on YouTube and skip past the TMO nonsense!

[Stom]

It was always going to be hard to shine in that back row- his job was mostly to clear rucks and let the other 2 stay out ready to carry.

I know they are different players but watching Dombrandt after 2 games of Willis is just depressing. The ferocity of the carry, protection of the ball, all round workrate are just night and day.

Sure. I did acknowledge it’s hard for a flanker to shine in these sorts of games.

TBF, the carrying wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to do that. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.

Did CCS do the whole game at 6? I feel a bit for him, I think he could be immense as a 6 if backed.

When Dommers left he moved to 8. Then when Hill came on, Curry went to 8.

[Banquo]

Sure. I did acknowledge it’s hard for a flanker to shine in these sorts of games.

TBF, the carrying wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to do that. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.

Did CCS do the whole game at 6? I feel a bit for him, I think he could be immense as a 6 if backed.

When Dommers left he moved to 8. Then when Hill came on, Curry went to 8.

If this doesn’t summon the devil….

[Which Tyler]

Biggest winners from the tour are the centres, all of whom did well with what they had.
I see no need for Slade to wear an England shirt again. I'd rather see Freeman given a shot at 13 than Slade there again.
We've now got Lawrence, Atkinson, Dingwall, Northmore and Ojomoh to invest time in, and enough round pegs to fill the round hole at IC that we can let Ollie play in his actual position.
Also worth noting that 2 of those 5 are comfortable in either centre berth, which allows a lot of extra freedom, only pairing the two OCs together could end up looking unbalanced, and even that wouldn't be terrible.

Only real losers from the tour would be Dan and Dombrandt, but both seem to have protected status, so will probably hold on to 3rd place in the pecking order - Dommers could lose out if CCS moves to 8 (unlikely given that they're a club combination), but neither really being challenged by their 4th choice.

[Which Tyler]

I think the problem was that we caught the ball, players came in to form the maul and the catcher gave the ball over the top of them to Dombrandt, who then bound on. There was an IRB law clarification a while back on that - the ball can be transferred within a maul by ripping it backwards, but you can't pass it over the top of already bound people (cause teams were doing that and making nigh-undefendable mauls).

Thank you. Didn't know that one - I guess it makes sense if it's a pass, as the moment the balls in the air, it's a pass with blockers. Not sure it makes sense as a hand-over, but if that's the law, and reason, then fair enough.

[Scrumhead]

Biggest winners from the tour are the centres, all of whom did well with what they had.
I see no need for Slade to wear an England shirt again. I'd rather see Freeman given a shot at 13 than Slade there again.
We've now got Lawrence, Atkinson, Dingwall, Northmore and Ojomoh to invest time in, and enough round pegs to fill the round hole at IC that we can let Ollie play in his actual position.
Also worth noting that 2 of those 5 are comfortable in either centre berth, which allows a lot of extra freedom, only pairing the two OCs together could end up looking unbalanced, and even that wouldn't be terrible.

Only real losers from the tour would be Dan and Dombrandt, but both seem to have protected status, so will probably hold on to 3rd place in the pecking order - Dommers could lose out if CCS moves to 8 (unlikely given that they're a club combination), but neither really being challenged by their 4th choice.

Yeah, agree with all of that.

I expect Dombrandt to miss out in future on account of Earl and Pollock being comfortable at 8. Both of those are probably inked into the squad already.

Moving forward, I’d hope Willis has 8 sewn up with either one of Earl or Pollock deputising, being the impact option from the bench or possibly shifting there from the flanks later in games.

I’d also add Langdon to the losers list. He had a great opportunity and while he wasn’t awful, he definitely didn’t seize his chance in the way I hoped he would. If he’s been like that in training it probably explains why he’s down the pecking order. He could easily lose out to Oghre.

[Puja]

I think the problem was that we caught the ball, players came in to form the maul and the catcher gave the ball over the top of them to Dombrandt, who then bound on. There was an IRB law clarification a while back on that - the ball can be transferred within a maul by ripping it backwards, but you can't pass it over the top of already bound people (cause teams were doing that and making nigh-undefendable mauls).

Thank you. Didn't know that one - I guess it makes sense if it's a pass, as the moment the balls in the air, it's a pass with blockers. Not sure it makes sense as a hand-over, but if that's the law, and reason, then fair enough.

The reason they clarified it as still being offside with a handover is that it removed any competition - if the ball doesn't have to be transferred to somone binding onto the first man, then a lock could jump in the lineout, have two players bound onto his midriff in perfect driving position (with no need to pay any attention to the ball) as soon as he landed, and then use long arms to just hand it back to someone at the back who could then plonk themselves at the back of a wedge. Better to rule that the ball can only be transferred to someone directly bound onto you, otherwise it stops being a maul.

Puja

[Which Tyler]

I think the problem was that we caught the ball, players came in to form the maul and the catcher gave the ball over the top of them to Dombrandt, who then bound on. There was an IRB law clarification a while back on that - the ball can be transferred within a maul by ripping it backwards, but you can't pass it over the top of already bound people (cause teams were doing that and making nigh-undefendable mauls).

The reason they clarified it as still being offside with a handover is that it removed any competition - if the ball doesn't have to be transferred to somone binding onto the first man, then a lock could jump in the lineout, have two players bound onto his midriff in perfect driving position (with no need to pay any attention to the ball) as soon as he landed, and then use long arms to just hand it back to someone at the back who could then plonk themselves at the back of a wedge. Better to rule that the ball can only be transferred to someone directly bound onto you, otherwise it stops being a maul.

Both posts deserve a full Hask, btw

[badback]

Don’t often post but enjoy reading. Thank you!

For the first time I was at this one live. Interesting (to me) observations from being live - in no particular order.

George Ford is a huge fan favorite. Cheers for his name when announced. At end people craning over railings call out his name so they can get him to look in their direction for a photo. And it’s very obvious live just how crazy skilled he is.

Ben Curry is massive. Well they all are. He was kind enough to sign son’s shirt. To see him up close well a bit scary. In a good way.

Their tactics as a team, at least for this game, much easier to see live. It seemed they were kicking to gain field position in opposite half. Then from set piece running a series of moves.

Oh and when attacking everting is very fast. But they certainly take their time when ball is not in play to move from one bit of the game to another.

Just a few thoughts.