Puja wrote:I know your dislike is well documented, but plodder? He's no Tom Croft, but he's hardly glacial. And any deficit in pace is made up for by his workrate, his engine, and his ability to get to the right place at the right time.
I think with the 3+ phases thing he's talking about in your own half or around half-way. I think he's right on that.
Puja
I didn't notice any mention of own half, but could easily have missed.
I am assuming that it was elided from the quotes used in the newspaper articles, otherwise the comment makes little to no sense - he's unlikely to coach kicking the ball away inside the opposition 22 if we don't score in 3 phases!
Puja
NZ do kick ball away in the opposition half though, indeed there was recently more than a little hype around Barret's cross kicks.
I like his comments that we need to be better in attack, I'm just not sure I'd limit it as he's seemingly done. He's talking about turnovers and kick returns, and really we look if not poor then often lacking imagination and/or inability to support beyond 1st phase
Digby wrote:
I didn't notice any mention of own half, but could easily have missed.
I am assuming that it was elided from the quotes used in the newspaper articles, otherwise the comment makes little to no sense - he's unlikely to coach kicking the ball away inside the opposition 22 if we don't score in 3 phases!
Puja
NZ do kick ball away in the opposition half though, indeed there was recently more than a little hype around Barret's cross kicks.
I like his comments that we need to be better in attack, I'm just not sure I'd limit it as he's seemingly done. He's talking about turnovers and kick returns, and really we look if not poor then often lacking imagination and/or inability to support beyond 1st phase
That's not kicking ball away though, is it? It's effectively just a risky miss-pass.
Our attacking game did look sharp in Argentina though. Forwards coming from deep and hitting the ball at pace, and then spinning wide through the backs. It's classic play for a reason.
Yeah, I took it as read that Eddie was talking about 3 phases in your own half/around halfway. I do think in general that this England team under Eddie doesn't place too high a premium on keeping possession through a multitude of phases. Even in the red zone we tend to look to put width on the attack quite quickly, offload or pull out a strike move etc. In contrast to the likes of Ireland or Wales who will go one out phase after phase after phase.
The games in Argentina were very open mind, especially the first one, which isn't without relevance. Actually our attack looked better in the first test with Wilson and Curry on the flanks, though how much that was them, the team, Vs it just being a very unusually open game I really couldn't say.
And we can talk about our intent in put width on the ball, but how often to we actually get the ball to Joseph, Watson and Daly? If I was defending England then other than the Vunipolas it'd be Joseph, Watson and Daly I wouldn't want on the ball. I think there's a lot of work needed before we could claim to have much in the way of a wide game, though granted I lean towards being a miserable sod. And to get back to Robshaw (and the other loose forwards, if we did truly put pace on the ball can we truly support that?
Robshaw never seems to have a problem keeping up with play however it goes and we have had some fairly quick Quins and England performances in his time. Like I said, top speed isn't up with the fastest, but his stamina, workrate and knowledge means that he gets there quickly enough. I would agree that we need a faster partner than Haskell to him though - I will be hugely disappointed if we don't have one of Curry/Curry/Underhill gracing the 7 shirt in the AIs.
Adding some more pace elsewhere would be an improvement, supposing other areas don't fall off. But I'm still a little surprised that people can watch Robshaw and not be struck by the fact he struggles to keep up, tbh so does Billy, I'd understand people feeling on balance they're still the best options, but I don't get how they're not seen as having issues in mobility.
Eh? Robshaw 'struggling to keep up with play'? Since when?
I'd never describe him as fast, but to suggest he isn't able to keep up with play seems overly negative to me. Sure he's not first to every ruck but that's not a realistic expectation anyway.
Robshaw is insanely fit and is one of those players that often seems to be everywhere because he makes so many contributions all over the pitch.
I agree that we'd benefit from a faster, more attacking 7 alongside him but I think Robshaw's contribution at 6 is massively undervalued.
It's not about Robshaw being first to every ruck. It's more that he's maybe some fraction of a second behind where the top players are in arriving to the breakdown, and as noted before that can be made worse if the ball keeps getting to the floor. That's not to say he's never early to a breakdown, and that he's never good on the floor, simply that he and indeed England as a whole tend to be just that bit off what it takes to be the best.
So none of this is judging Robshaw by the standard of what does it take to be a fantastic player for Quins, and a very good player for England. More it's about where does he rate Vs the likes of McCaw, Smith, Kaino, Hill. 'tis quite possible that whilst he's never going to be a top, top player he's still the best England can muster, as say at one point in time was Nick Easter.
I can see how that may be the case (and wouldn't even consider dropping him right now) but I'd like to finally see what he is like given a run when not paired with a plodding 6/7.
Just to pointlessltly riff off a comment, do we have a player for whom, if we had 15 of them, it could make a viable team? I think we can agree that Robshaw, whatever his virtues, will never make a winger. Sinckler's probably got the skills and a reasonable turn of pace, but 15 Kyle Sincklers would start fights with themselves, let alone the opposition.
Puja wrote:Just to pointlessltly riff off a comment, do we have a player for whom, if we had 15 of them, it could make a viable team? I think we can agree that Robshaw, whatever his virtues, will never make a winger. Sinckler's probably got the skills and a reasonable turn of pace, but 15 Kyle Sincklers would start fights with themselves, let alone the opposition.
Puja wrote:Just to pointlessltly riff off a comment, do we have a player for whom, if we had 15 of them, it could make a viable team? I think we can agree that Robshaw, whatever his virtues, will never make a winger. Sinckler's probably got the skills and a reasonable turn of pace, but 15 Kyle Sincklers would start fights with themselves, let alone the opposition.
Outside of England, 15 Faletaus would be good. 15 Kainos. Generally, I think backrows are the most likely candidates, no?
George Smith sure, but how many of them can actually pass , and actually pass not simply an offload. I'm not saying they'd all be Bergamasco at 9, but a lot of them would, many would even be worse
Outside of England, 15 Faletaus would be good. 15 Kainos. Generally, I think backrows are the most likely candidates, no?
George Smith sure, but how many of them can actually pass , and actually pass not simply an offload. I'm not saying they'd all be Bergamasco at 9, but a lot of them would, many would even be worse
Well, you're going to lack skills whoever you pick... I guess it's about limiting that skill loss as much as possible. Pocock perhaps. Though I imagine the scrum would go backwards at a rate of knots.
Outside of England, 15 Faletaus would be good. 15 Kainos. Generally, I think backrows are the most likely candidates, no?
George Smith sure, but how many of them can actually pass , and actually pass not simply an offload. I'm not saying they'd all be Bergamasco at 9, but a lot of them would, many would even be worse
