RugbyRebels

Epaminondas Pules wrote:What has anyone seen from Barbeary (other than school vides) that makes anyone possibly think he could be a centre?

I doubt many have seen his set piece, but there weren't any real issues there, that said age grade scrums and lineout are not really as competitive as Prem rugby and beyond. The only issue really was at scrum time where his hook could be a little hit and miss, but compensated with power to drive over.

Oh and Banquo - you called it mate!

I for one am simply jesting. He’s a quality young prospect, we have very few 12s... 2+2=5.

twitchy wrote:He just looked incredibly comfortable at 8 and can seemingly do all different sorts of different ball carries well. Even his control of the ball at the base of the scrum looked very natural (I've seen international 8's struggle to do this).

Yes, given England are so reliant on a fit Billy and that Barbeary has a similar stocky physical prescence and tight carrying qualities too, you’ld think he’d be worth a look at as a test 8? Certainly seems to conform to England norm (Starting from time of Morgan tbh) of having a Front rowish build used at 8

I assume it's another weird piece of trolling, but Billy really doesn't play like a front row player, Curry and Simmonds really, really don't look like front row players, and we cannot possibly know if Barbeary can carry in remotely similar fashion to Billy.

If anything, I'd say Barbeary is more similar to Underhill. He's a dynamic ball carrier who breaks the line and causes chaos with the offload. Billy's more about tight carries that work more over time to wear down the opposition and cause chaos on a more general scale later in the game. Barbeary relies more on a bit of space. Which might be a problem with the current gameplay.

Can't really decide where to play him until we've seen how he goes at hooker. Can he scrummage, can he throw in, can he carry on creating this level of havoc and perform his set piece roles?

If he can, surely we're better off with him in the front row, frequently acting like a back row, than actually in the back row?

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:If anything, I'd say Barbeary is more similar to Underhill. He's a dynamic ball carrier who breaks the line and causes chaos with the offload. Billy's more about tight carries that work more over time to wear down the opposition and cause chaos on a more general scale later in the game. Barbeary relies more on a bit of space. Which might be a problem with the current gameplay.

He might be of similar build to Underhill but he seems to try and get on the ball a lot unlike Underhill who rarely carries. Might be youthful exuberance but soon he'll have played enough games to have settled into senior rugby proper. If he keeps the carrying work rate up and keeps putting in barnstorming performances he'll be difficult to overlook. If he starts doing it from hooker he'll be impossible to overlook.

Tom Moore wrote:Can't really decide where to play him until we've seen how he goes at hooker. Can he scrummage, can he throw in, can he carry on creating this level of havoc and perform his set piece roles?

If he can, surely we're better off with him in the front row, frequently acting like a back row, than actually in the back row?

This is the key issue for me. It's all very well saying, "If we put him at hooker, then we get all this loose performance without using a back row spot," but this could be like the "Croft could play lock!" argument in that moving him to a more strenuous scrummaging position loses a chunk of his impact in the loose. Plus, we don't want a neo-LCD where he specialises at hooker and then we're afraid to pick him cause his darts are wobbly.

I hope he can convert to the front row and still keep this impact, but we'll have to wait and see.

Puja

Except he is a hooker, playing in the backrow for now to get him on the pitch because he's potentially that good. And LCD has had the best darts percentage in the Prem for three years running.

I'm also not sure why we have to liken him to another player. He's his own player.

Yeah, the only way you're going to easily liken him to another is saying he's like a combination of others, since there's potentially no one like him, combination of George and LCD, got the soft skills (maybe better) of George, with the physicality of LCD. He's special, I'm hopeful that his set piece work will be upto snuff.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:Except he is a hooker, playing in the backrow for now to get him on the pitch because he's potentially that good. And LCD has had the best darts percentage in the Prem for three years running.

I'm also not sure why we have to liken him to another player. He's his own player.

Someone can have good numbers but regularly choke on the really important moments... while another can have poor numbers but regularly choke and be called THE ICEMAN.

Oh, whoops, wrong thread

Stom wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:Except he is a hooker, playing in the backrow for now to get him on the pitch because he's potentially that good. And LCD has had the best darts percentage in the Prem for three years running.

I'm also not sure why we have to liken him to another player. He's his own player.

Someone can have good numbers but regularly choke on the really important moments... while another can have poor numbers but regularly choke and be called THE ICEMAN.

Oh, whoops, wrong thread

Don’t worry. Every thread is a Farrell thread.

Remember that time he scored a disallowed try and then injured himself celebrating. Ah, memories.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:Except he is a hooker, playing in the backrow for now to get him on the pitch because he's potentially that good. And LCD has had the best darts percentage in the Prem for three years running.

I'm also not sure why we have to liken him to another player. He's his own player.

Disagree - he's an age grade hooker who has never played it at men's level, and the form that people are effusing about has come solely at back row. We *don't know* if his form will translate to him moving back to hooker, cause he's never played a minute of men's rugby there.

Puja

It's not quite the same as saying Maro to 8 or Underhill to 12! He does have some history there...

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:It's not quite the same as saying Maro to 8 or Underhill to 12! He does have some history there...

Ben Clarke rarely played openside at all prior to British Lions 93’ tour yet he managed to adapt to being an England starter there (albeit not in Backy’s class) so just because Itoje’s not played at 8 before or Barbeary’s not played at 12 In senior rugby before doesn’t mean they couldn’t adapt to a switch of roles well if their build and athleticism can cope with it . That said the idea of Underhill at 12 has now put me off dinner so thanks for that!

jngf wrote:

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:It's not quite the same as saying Maro to 8 or Underhill to 12! He does have some history there...

Ben Clarke rarely played openside at all prior to British Lions 93’ tour yet he managed to adapt to being an England starter there (albeit not in Backy’s class) so just because Itoje’s not played at 8 before or Barbeary’s not played at 12 In senior rugby before doesn’t mean they couldn’t adapt to a switch of roles well if their build and athleticism can cope with it . That said the idea of Underhill at 12 has now put me off dinner so thanks for that!

Ben Clarke at 7. That's the argument you're going with? Ben Clarke. At 7.

Puja

Keeping up with the current game.

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:If anything, I'd say Barbeary is more similar to Underhill. He's a dynamic ball carrier who breaks the line and causes chaos with the offload. Billy's more about tight carries that work more over time to wear down the opposition and cause chaos on a more general scale later in the game. Barbeary relies more on a bit of space. Which might be a problem with the current gameplay.

Eh? We musta been watching different Underhills.

Meant Simmonds...

Puja wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:Except he is a hooker, playing in the backrow for now to get him on the pitch because he's potentially that good. And LCD has had the best darts percentage in the Prem for three years running.

I'm also not sure why we have to liken him to another player. He's his own player.

Disagree - he's an age grade hooker who has never played it at men's level, and the form that people are effusing about has come solely at back row. We *don't know* if his form will translate to him moving back to hooker, cause he's never played a minute of men's rugby there.

Puja

Yes he has. He played hooker for Notts before getting injured and also for Wasps in the Prem Cup and several times in the A league.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Puja wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:Except he is a hooker, playing in the backrow for now to get him on the pitch because he's potentially that good. And LCD has had the best darts percentage in the Prem for three years running.

I'm also not sure why we have to liken him to another player. He's his own player.

Disagree - he's an age grade hooker who has never played it at men's level, and the form that people are effusing about has come solely at back row. We *don't know* if his form will translate to him moving back to hooker, cause he's never played a minute of men's rugby there.

Puja

Yes he has. He played hooker for Notts before getting injured and also for Wasps in the Prem Cup and several times in the A league.

And did he show this level of form there? Genuine question.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Puja wrote:
Disagree - he's an age grade hooker who has never played it at men's level, and the form that people are effusing about has come solely at back row. We *don't know* if his form will translate to him moving back to hooker, cause he's never played a minute of men's rugby there.

Puja

Yes he has. He played hooker for Notts before getting injured and also for Wasps in the Prem Cup and several times in the A league.

And did he show this level of form there? Genuine question.

Puja

Pretty much from what I saw. To be fair the level of competition, at set piece certainly, is not quite what it is at the top level. The only issue I've seen in him is sometimes his hook could be a bit hit and miss. Was something that came out occasionally at schools/grade, where compensating through power made up for it somewhat.

Wasps do have somewhat of a quandary though with Oghre and Barbeary coming through alongside Taylor and Cruse. 4 into 2 is a tough call.

That said, I'm just pleased he's playing and making an impact. It all builds experience and exposure.

Surgery on Monday, maybe out for 12 weeks

FFS- which is it? 2? 6? 8? 12?

Mikey Brown wrote:FFS- which is it? 2? 6? 8? 12?

Very good. Very good indeed.

Puja

TBH, 12wks is quite a good outcome. When I first saw him shout in pain and hobble off, I thought it was a knee ligament which could have been a lot longer lay off.