EPS Watch / Player Form Thread

[oldbackrow]

[Puja]

That's a massive false equivalence - Hughes aims his hand-off and catches Ward in the face/neck. It's not a case of Ward headbutting Hughes's hand - the hand goes to the head, not vice versa. And he does it again to Robshaw in the same game. Agreed that both Robshaw and Ward could've avoided being handed off with different technique, but that doesn't give Hughes licence to hand people off in the face.

Launchbury I think should be very proud - it's not very often one can say that you've knocked a man unconscious with your groin.

Puja

But it's not against the laws to hand off in the face, is it, with a straight arm and open palm? Genuine question, not sure if the laws have changed.

In the video here the arm is out quite far in advance and it looks to me as if Ward does just run straight into it by going too high. I'm not sure it's aimed directly at the throat. What is malicious is Marler's no-arms tackle on Rowlands' knee in the next phase, and then Ward's attempt at a DDT on him straight after.

http://sport.bt.com/hughes-shoves-rival ... 4222808797

Edited as being unnecessarily spiky.

Just watched the video again and I see your point about Ward running into it. I was remembering the Robshaw one, where it is definitely aimed.

To be clear, I don't think either is a citing offence (except by the ridiculous standards where Hartley's is somehow a citeable offence), but I would say both are a penalty, as he has no need to be going that high with his fend.

Puja

[Digby]

I don't mind the Hartley citing, but I don't like that what Hartley is doing is allowed by the refs more generally. Essentially (at least in theory) you're not allowed to clean out the player Hartley is intending to connect with in the fashion Hartley attempts even before he accidentally catches someone in the head. So if you're that reckless and someone does get hurt I've no sympathy.

However, there's a big caveat that what Hartley is doing is allowed in game after game even if i shouldn't be, so it seems a best inconsistent to only pick out Hartley.

[Mikey Brown]

That's a massive false equivalence - Hughes aims his hand-off and catches Ward in the face/neck. It's not a case of Ward headbutting Hughes's hand - the hand goes to the head, not vice versa. And he does it again to Robshaw in the same game. Agreed that both Robshaw and Ward could've avoided being handed off with different technique, but that doesn't give Hughes licence to hand people off in the face.

Launchbury I think should be very proud - it's not very often one can say that you've knocked a man unconscious with your groin.

Puja

But it's not against the laws to hand off in the face, is it, with a straight arm and open palm? Genuine question, not sure if the laws have changed.

In the video here the arm is out quite far in advance and it looks to me as if Ward does just run straight into it by going too high. I'm not sure it's aimed directly at the throat. What is malicious is Marler's no-arms tackle on Rowlands' knee in the next phase, and then Ward's attempt at a DDT on him straight after.

http://sport.bt.com/hughes-shoves-rival ... 4222808797

Edited as being unnecessarily spiky.

Just watched the video again and I see your point about Ward running into it. I was remembering the Robshaw one, where it is definitely aimed.

To be clear, I don't think either is a citing offence (except by the ridiculous standards where Hartley's is somehow a citeable offence), but I would say both are a penalty, as he has no need to be going that high with his fend.

Puja

Even watching the replay at 50 seconds where Hughes clearly adjusts his aim?

It seems like at least a week since I've mentioned how Teo uses his forearm (guard) to hit people in the face practically every game he plays but I've never seen it called up.

It does seem like a bit of a gap in the laws but there are a ton of instances, like in the video posted, where you can make contact with the head but it doesn't appear dangerous at all. It's a fine line I guess.

[Digby]

Te'o using his forearm isn't allowed, Hughes using his open palm is. The question is then whether even if he's allowed to use his palm are Hughes' actions still dangerous.

[oldbackrow]

If we go down the route the game seems to be going I wonder how you the tackle will go. I can understand wanting to stop 'clothesline' neck tackles but some tackles being penalised are nowhere near. If handing off becomes and issue, how long before the ball carrier starts getting cited for 'high knee lift' into a tackle? Are we going down the road to touch or tag rugby?

If Hughes is out will Siimonds get a chance? Is Beaumont injured or is he worth a shout?

[Puja]

If we go down the route the game seems to be going I wonder how you the tackle will go. I can understand wanting to stop 'clothesline' neck tackles but some tackles being penalised are nowhere near. If handing off becomes and issue, how long before the ball carrier starts getting cited for 'high knee lift' into a tackle? Are we going down the road to touch or tag rugby?

If Hughes is out will Siimonds get a chance? Is Beaumont injured or is he worth a shout?

Ugh, I hate slippery slope arguments. Handing off isn't an issue in and of itself - doing it to someone's face is. "Don't hit someone in the head or neck" doesn't seem too draconian to me.

I don't know Simmonds will get a shout at 8 - I'm not sure he's a classic enough 8 for Eddie and he's more likely to get a run on the flank. It may be that he goes young and opts for Mercer instead.

Puja

[belgarion]

Why wasn't the ball carrier in the 2nd clip sent off for taking the player out in the air
& driving him head first into the ground, as shown in the slo-mo?

[Digby]

Ugh, I hate slippery slope arguments. Handing off isn't an issue in and of itself - doing it to someone's face is. "Don't hit someone in the head or neck" doesn't seem too draconian to me.

Nothing in seniors rugby though says you can't hand-off to the face. At some age groups, at least in some countries, you can't handoff above the armpit, maybe people would prefer that, but it's not what we're dealing with today

[oldbackrow]

Because he's the ball carrier and that only applies to to contests for the ball or the responsibility of the attacker.

Puja, I understand where you are coming from but we were coached to hand off by aiming at the top of the head, but we were also coached that when tackling you targetted the legs, whereas now tackling the torso (to stop the offload) is far more common, hence head to head tackles and into face hand offs. We were also coached to drop the shoulder into the tacklers chest with the non carrying arm and drive up with the forearm to (allegedly) push the tackler away (but knowing you might hit the chin!) T'eo does however seem to lead with the forearm which is illegal!

[Peej]

But it's not against the laws to hand off in the face, is it, with a straight arm and open palm? Genuine question, not sure if the laws have changed.

In the video here the arm is out quite far in advance and it looks to me as if Ward does just run straight into it by going too high. I'm not sure it's aimed directly at the throat. What is malicious is Marler's no-arms tackle on Rowlands' knee in the next phase, and then Ward's attempt at a DDT on him straight after.

http://sport.bt.com/hughes-shoves-rival ... 4222808797

Edited as being unnecessarily spiky.

Just watched the video again and I see your point about Ward running into it. I was remembering the Robshaw one, where it is definitely aimed.

To be clear, I don't think either is a citing offence (except by the ridiculous standards where Hartley's is somehow a citeable offence), but I would say both are a penalty, as he has no need to be going that high with his fend.

Puja

Even watching the replay at 50 seconds where Hughes clearly adjusts his aim?

It seems like at least a week since I've mentioned how Teo uses his forearm (guard) to hit people in the face practically every game he plays but I've never seen it called up.

It does seem like a bit of a gap in the laws but there are a ton of instances, like in the video posted, where you can make contact with the head but it doesn't appear dangerous at all. It's a fine line I guess.

I actually agree with you about using the forearm to smash your way through - and Hughes was actually pinged for that a couple weeks back.

[Peej]

171023163525-29-what-a-shot-1024-super-169.jpg

On the subject of a fine line, this wasn't penalised - though it should be noted that it's Haskell's arm in there too, and Ward's right arm seems to be going for the ball

[twitchy]

I don't know Simmonds will get a shout at 8 - I'm not sure he's a classic enough 8 for Eddie and he's more likely to get a run on the flank. It may be that he goes young and opts for Mercer instead.

Puja

Mercer certainly isn't a classic 8 either and seems to be playing 6 mainly this season.

[Puja]

I don't know Simmonds will get a shout at 8 - I'm not sure he's a classic enough 8 for Eddie and he's more likely to get a run on the flank. It may be that he goes young and opts for Mercer instead.

Puja

Mercer certainly isn't a classic 8 either and seems to be playing 6 mainly this season.

Mercer's likely to grow into his shoulders though and could be seen as an investment in the future. I don't want to be saying that Simmonds is too small to play international rugby at no 8... but it does feel like he's too small to be playing international rugby at no 8.

Puja

[twitchy]

I agree about simmonds but mercer would be just as ineffective at playing the billy style 8. Let's hope hughes doesn't get banned.

[TheNomad]

At 50 seconds its pretty clear the throat is exactly there Hughes aims. I don't know what the law says about it either to be honest. I was only asking if that is what he had been cited for.

Also do you mean Joe Gray's attempted tackle? As Marler is stood right in the middle of the pitch.

I'm not sure I agree with that - he doesn't aim for his throat. It looks like he goes lower but it slips up.

Either way it's not great because having slipped up, he pushes his throat. But I don't think he's aiming for that

[Mellsblue]

I'd rather Simmonds playing the Billy role than Mercer. What I'd really rather is that we adapt rolls/tactics/personnel and use Simmonds similar to the way he plays for Exeter. If not, we might as well recall Waldrom or Morgan and just accept that we only play one way with our 8 and pick horses for courses.

[TheNomad]

Mercer certainly isn't a classic 8 either and seems to be playing 6 mainly this season.

Mercer's likely to grow into his shoulders though and could be seen as an investment in the future. I don't want to be saying that Simmonds is too small to play international rugby at no 8... but it does feel like he's too small to be playing international rugby at no 8.

Puja

I don't want to say that either...but we all know he is

Has potential at flanker though. More likely 7 than 6.

Robashaw would have been my first name on the sheet not so long ago but Lawes and Armand have been the best 6s in the league this year - after that, maybe Mercer! I know some just flat out won't accept Lawes as an international 6, but I reckon he'd do well if given a shot

[Oakboy]

All the grey areas between actual laws and interpretation should not come to be debated by citing. As I understand it a palm-led hand-off to the face is not against the laws of the game so any attempt to ban the practice should come from law changes or directives after which citing would be appropriate. Citing for dangerous play when it is 'legal' is just opinion. Is it reasonable to introduce safety as a factor just because Hughes is so good at it? For years, anybody able to hand-off with such efffectiveness would have been praised for their strength, timing etc.

Having said that, referees have been allowed to apply their running of the game despite their practice not complying with laws. Straight scrum feeds are ignored when the fancy takes them and I still don't understand how a referee can legitimately tell a SH to play the ball that's still in the scrum no matter how much I approve of the spirit behind the call.

[Which Tyler]

Mercer certainly isn't a classic 8 either and seems to be playing 6 mainly this season.

Mercer if very much an 8 in the Faletau mold; and he's (just about) big enough to play that role effectively, whilst having more room to grow.
No-one is very effective at playing the Billy role whilst not being Billy.

Mercer is playing 6 due to team necessity, rather then being molded into being a 6.

For the AIs, I wouldn't be unhappy with either Mercer or Simmonds being in the 20 shirt (or Underhill, or Curry) - though I have my usual doubts on Simmonds about capping anyone in their breakthrough season. I always want to know how a player responds to having been worked out before capping them.

On the Lawes front - for my money, he's played himself ahead of Robshaw, however harsh that is on the latter; so Kruis and Itojke up front, Lawes at 6; Hughes at 8, Underhill/Curry at 7; with the other on the bench alongside Mercer.

[Mikey Brown]

All the grey areas between actual laws and interpretation should not come to be debated by citing. As I understand it a palm-led hand-off to the face is not against the laws of the game so any attempt to ban the practice should come from law changes or directives after which citing would be appropriate. Citing for dangerous play when it is 'legal' is just opinion. Is it reasonable to introduce safety as a factor just because Hughes is so good at it? For years, anybody able to hand-off with such efffectiveness would have been praised for their strength, timing etc.

Having said that, referees have been allowed to apply their running of the game despite their practice not complying with laws. Straight scrum feeds are ignored when the fancy takes them and I still don't understand how a referee can legitimately tell a SH to play the ball that's still in the scrum no matter how much I approve of the spirit behind the call.

I mean it really was great timing and strength from Hughes. He had a very impressive game. It has seemed strange to me for a while that it is legal when you hit them in the throat/face, but I don't think Ward was stopping him wherever Hughes's paw landed.

[belgarion]

[quote="oldbackrow"]Because he's the ball carrier and that only applies to to contests for the ball or the responsibility of the attacker.

I was being faceitious, but if Hughes is being cited for shoving someone in the face the citing
officer should have cited the player in the clip for something that was far more dangerous & liable
to caouse injury to an opponent.

Yes Iknow it is a different game & different CO but the principle is the same

[Scrumhead]

I'd rather Simmonds playing the Billy role than Mercer. What I'd really rather is that we adapt rolls/tactics/personnel and use Simmonds similar to the way he plays for Exeter. If not, we might as well recall Waldrom or Morgan and just accept that we only play one way with our 8 and pick horses for courses.

Yep. We need some more sausage ‘rolls’ in the team.

In all seriousness. I agree with your point. We need to develop game plans that aren’t dependent on individual players being available.

Hughes is an effective deputy for Billy as he can offer some similar aspects of play. However, almost all of our other options at 8 don’t suit that role. I’d like to see us work on a ‘no Billy’ plan that allows for a wider/looser carrying role from our 8s. That would suit Simmonds, Mercer, Clifford and probably Hughes better than just trying to do the Billy role. The trouble is, that requires someone else to pick up the slack as a heavy carrier. Playing Mako and George would help though I guess?

As an avowed supporter/defender of Robshaw, I feel uncomfortable saying this, but I am slightly warming to the idea of Lawes or Itoje at 6. Firstly it would upgrade our line out options and secondly (linked), it reduces the necessity for the 7 or 8 to be a jumper.

[Mellsblue]

I'd rather Simmonds playing the Billy role than Mercer. What I'd really rather is that we adapt rolls/tactics/personnel and use Simmonds similar to the way he plays for Exeter. If not, we might as well recall Waldrom or Morgan and just accept that we only play one way with our 8 and pick horses for courses.

Yep. We need some more sausage ‘rolls’ in the team.

In all seriousness. I agree with your point. We need to develop game plans that aren’t dependent on individual players being available.

Hughes is an effective deputy for Billy as he can offer some similar aspects of play. However, almost all of our other options at 8 don’t suit that role. I’d like to see us work on a ‘no Billy’ plan that allows for a wider/looser carrying role from our 8s. That would suit Simmonds, Mercer, Clifford and probably Hughes better than just trying to do the Billy role. The trouble is, that requires someone else to pick up the slack as a heavy carrier. Playing Mako and George would help though I guess?

As an avowed supporter/defender of Robshaw, I feel uncomfortable saying this, but I am slightly warming to the idea of Lawes or Itoje at 6. Firstly it would upgrade our line out options and secondly (linked), it reduces the necessity for the 7 or 8 to be a jumper.

Incorrectly using rolls instead of roles whilst thinks about Thomas Waldrom. The ultimate Freudian slip.

[scuzzaman]

Shit, guys: are any of your A team going to be available?

I feel a BBC article coming on:

"Does English Rugby Have a Violence Problem?"

#lulz