RugbyRebels

This is great fun to watch. Always good having Ramos at 10 to give the opposition try scoring chances

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:03 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 2:50 pm

Possibly because I think the term and general concept of "natural game" he complete shite. Quality players adapt to whatever the game throws at them and can play a range of tactics. The "natural game" argument comes out when average to maybe good players struggle to adapt or show the ability to play a variation of tactics at a higher level.

If you’re right, and I don’t think you are, then we’re fecked because we have players who have proved the can’t play whatever style Borthwick asks for and a coach who changes personnel on a horses for courses basis. I’d also add that you’ve spent many a post arguing in favour of that horses for courses selection, eg Steward. In which case you’re either disagreeing with yourself or admitting Steward etc are average. I actually think it’s both.

I'm disagreeing with the concept of the term "natural game" not about selecting players for their strengths and weaknesses. Most players have strengths and weaknesses, you gain X by selecting play a bit lose some of y. Difference between logic and a lazy largely meaningless term.

Fin Smith has looked good playing for Worcester, Northampton and England. None of those styles or tactics have been similar. Which then is his "natural game"?

Natural game and strength and weaknesses are synonymous.
Standing on the gain line releasing runners, as you’ve pointed out on this board countless times. Ask him to play like Damien Mackenzie and that wouldn’t be his natural game as it would sideline his strengths and expose his weaknesses.

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm This is great fun to watch. Always good having Ramos at 10 to give the opposition try scoring chances

Italy pretty potent ball in hand nonetheless actually trying to take the game to France… who are really great going forward today. Less so in d as you say.
Some great skill and awareness of space on display. Pass from lock to Brex a worldie.

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:03 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 2:50 pm

Possibly because I think the term and general concept of "natural game" he complete shite. Quality players adapt to whatever the game throws at them and can play a range of tactics. The "natural game" argument comes out when average to maybe good players struggle to adapt or show the ability to play a variation of tactics at a higher level.

If you’re right, and I don’t think you are, then we’re fecked because we have players who have proved the can’t play whatever style Borthwick asks for and a coach who changes personnel on a horses for courses basis. I’d also add that you’ve spent many a post arguing in favour of that horses for courses selection, eg Steward. In which case you’re either disagreeing with yourself or admitting Steward etc are average. I actually think it’s both.

I'm disagreeing with the concept of the term "natural game" not about selecting players for their strengths and weaknesses. Most players have strengths and weaknesses, you gain X by selecting play a bit lose some of y. Difference between logic and a lazy largely meaningless term.

Fin Smith has looked good playing for Worcester, Northampton and England. None of those styles or tactics have been similar. Which then is his "natural game"?

This is quite a hill to die on.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:57 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm This is great fun to watch. Always good having Ramos at 10 to give the opposition try scoring chances

Italy pretty potent ball in hand nonetheless actually trying to take the game to France… who are really great going forward today. Less so in d as you say.
Some great skill and awareness of space on display. Pass from lock to Brex a worldie.

Italy have become an absolute joy to watch. Some of the handling between forwards and backs - both sides - just highlights how turgid the game was yesterday.

I assume Edwards is letting rip in the changing room.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:56 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:03 pm
If you’re right, and I don’t think you are, then we’re fecked because we have players who have proved the can’t play whatever style Borthwick asks for and a coach who changes personnel on a horses for courses basis. I’d also add that you’ve spent many a post arguing in favour of that horses for courses selection, eg Steward. In which case you’re either disagreeing with yourself or admitting Steward etc are average. I actually think it’s both.

I'm disagreeing with the concept of the term "natural game" not about selecting players for their strengths and weaknesses. Most players have strengths and weaknesses, you gain X by selecting play a bit lose some of y. Difference between logic and a lazy largely meaningless term.

Fin Smith has looked good playing for Worcester, Northampton and England. None of those styles or tactics have been similar. Which then is his "natural game"?

Natural game and strength and weaknesses are synonymous.
Standing on the gain line releasing runners, as you’ve pointed out on this board countless times. Ask him to play like Damien Mackenzie and that wouldn’t be his natural game as it would sideline his strengths and expose his weaknesses.

That was the England attack yesterday. Fin had options and released them. Knock ons and poor ruck discipline ruined the attacks more than the Scotland defence nullified it. So you think Fin's already playing his natural game.

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:01 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:57 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm This is great fun to watch. Always good having Ramos at 10 to give the opposition try scoring chances

Italy pretty potent ball in hand nonetheless actually trying to take the game to France… who are really great going forward today. Less so in d as you say.
Some great skill and awareness of space on display. Pass from lock to Brex a worldie.

Italy have become an absolute joy to watch. Some of the handling between forwards and backs - both sides - just highlights how turgid the game was yesterday.

I assume Edwards is letting rip in the changing room.

One where the attack coaches are smiling and the defences coaches look like they're chewing on a wasp.

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:01 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:57 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm This is great fun to watch. Always good having Ramos at 10 to give the opposition try scoring chances

Italy pretty potent ball in hand nonetheless actually trying to take the game to France… who are really great going forward today. Less so in d as you say.
Some great skill and awareness of space on display. Pass from lock to Brex a worldie.

Italy have become an absolute joy to watch. Some of the handling between forwards and backs - both sides - just highlights how turgid the game was yesterday.

I assume Edwards is letting rip in the changing room.

Just a shame they get excited and make mistakes at key moments but a proper handful. France just unplayable with momentum tho

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:02 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:56 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm

I'm disagreeing with the concept of the term "natural game" not about selecting players for their strengths and weaknesses. Most players have strengths and weaknesses, you gain X by selecting play a bit lose some of y. Difference between logic and a lazy largely meaningless term.

Fin Smith has looked good playing for Worcester, Northampton and England. None of those styles or tactics have been similar. Which then is his "natural game"?

Natural game and strength and weaknesses are synonymous.
Standing on the gain line releasing runners, as you’ve pointed out on this board countless times. Ask him to play like Damien Mackenzie and that wouldn’t be his natural game as it would sideline his strengths and expose his weaknesses.

That was the England attack yesterday. Fin had options and released them. Knock ons and poor ruck discipline ruined the attacks more than the Scotland defence nullified it. So you think Fin's already playing his natural game.

Are we having the same argument? This is like banging my head against a moving wall.

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:02 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:56 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:48 pm

I'm disagreeing with the concept of the term "natural game" not about selecting players for their strengths and weaknesses. Most players have strengths and weaknesses, you gain X by selecting play a bit lose some of y. Difference between logic and a lazy largely meaningless term.

Fin Smith has looked good playing for Worcester, Northampton and England. None of those styles or tactics have been similar. Which then is his "natural game"?

Natural game and strength and weaknesses are synonymous.
Standing on the gain line releasing runners, as you’ve pointed out on this board countless times. Ask him to play like Damien Mackenzie and that wouldn’t be his natural game as it would sideline his strengths and expose his weaknesses.

That was the England attack yesterday. Fin had options and released them. Knock ons and poor ruck discipline ruined the attacks more than the Scotland defence nullified it. So you think Fin's already playing his natural game.

I think you’ve talked yourself around to that conclusion but the original point was equally around Mitchell, whose strengths of speed to the breakdown, pace generally are by and large wasted by getting him to continually box kick ( which he has worked on and does pretty well mainly).

As said earlier, Saints play in a way that suits their players by preference - but can play a plan b, though not as well. In Englands case, are we capitalising on our players strengths and mitigating weaknesses? If we get the semantic out of the way, has to be a question surely?

It’s the eternal coaches dilemma to be fair. Borthers constructs game plans per opposition team and his own preferred methods it seems. It’s a way of doing it, and no right or wrong answer. Other coaches do it other ways.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:05 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:01 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:57 pm

Italy pretty potent ball in hand nonetheless actually trying to take the game to France… who are really great going forward today. Less so in d as you say.
Some great skill and awareness of space on display. Pass from lock to Brex a worldie.

Italy have become an absolute joy to watch. Some of the handling between forwards and backs - both sides - just highlights how turgid the game was yesterday.

I assume Edwards is letting rip in the changing room.

Just a shame they get excited and make mistakes at key moments but a proper handful. France just unplayable with momentum tho

Getting murdered now sadly

Massive win for France. Not sure what that will do for Italy? Do they look at the game with us as an opportunity to bounce back or will it have knocked their confidence?

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:17 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:02 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 3:56 pm
Natural game and strength and weaknesses are synonymous.
Standing on the gain line releasing runners, as you’ve pointed out on this board countless times. Ask him to play like Damien Mackenzie and that wouldn’t be his natural game as it would sideline his strengths and expose his weaknesses.

That was the England attack yesterday. Fin had options and released them. Knock ons and poor ruck discipline ruined the attacks more than the Scotland defence nullified it. So you think Fin's already playing his natural game.

I think you’ve talked yourself around to that conclusion

He seems to have talked himself round to the fact players do have a natural game. Lazy.

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:51 pm Massive win for France. Not sure what that will do for Italy? Do they look at the game with us as an opportunity to bounce back or will it have knocked their confidence?

Italy were pretty good ball in hand, but couldn’t hold France at the tackle line. France were pretty spectacular tbh.

France clicked. Everything they tried came off. Italy defended poorly at times but France are hard to stop when they get on a roll.
Italy are pretty good with the ball.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:55 pm

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:51 pm Massive win for France. Not sure what that will do for Italy? Do they look at the game with us as an opportunity to bounce back or will it have knocked their confidence?

Italy were pretty good ball in hand, but couldn’t hold France at the tackle line. France were pretty spectacular tbh.

Oh I agree. I admire their handling and ambition. I wish we had those qualities!

Still, there’s only so many positives you can take out of a beating like that. Particularly when the pre game chat had Italy as contenders.

Don’t think Italy will lose too much heart from that. There was plenty to like about their play.

The crowd could have been a bit more supportive once the scoreboard got away from them.

As for France, at times unplayable. Not bad for a side that were, according to all the commentary team, really poor last time out.

Overall, I don’t think today’s result does us any real favours …

1) It creates far more opportunity for misplaced confidence/complacency from us.

2) It puts us in a scenario where anything but a huge win will be classed as a failure.

3) They have a big point to prove.

It would have been a lot better for us if they’d lose by a much more acceptable margin.

Would be good to see the performers from the A game get a look in to show that pathway is working.

Lockett, Ojomoh and JVP probably the standouts. In for Tcurry (with Hill in from bench), Slade and Randall? I’d have Bcurry in for Earl too.

Sleightholme fortunate to get another go because Murley and Muir are injured and I don’t think Freeman is as effective on the left wing. Great finisher but rest of his game really needs polishing.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 7:04 pm Would be good to see the performers from the A game get a look in to show that pathway is working.

Lockett, Ojomoh and JVP probably the standouts. In for Tcurry (with Hill in from bench), Slade and Randall? I’d have Bcurry in for Earl too.

Sleightholme fortunate to get another go because Murley and Muir are injured and I don’t think Freeman is as effective on the left wing. Great finisher but rest of his game really needs polishing.

why would you promote those a teamers over longstanding senior squad members who didn't play/make the 23/6? esp Dingwall/Beard, and Coles/Martin next in line v Lockett.

Assume u mean Sleightholme needs polishing?

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 10:00 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 7:04 pm Would be good to see the performers from the A game get a look in to show that pathway is working.

Lockett, Ojomoh and JVP probably the standouts. In for Tcurry (with Hill in from bench), Slade and Randall? I’d have Bcurry in for Earl too.

Sleightholme fortunate to get another go because Murley and Muir are injured and I don’t think Freeman is as effective on the left wing. Great finisher but rest of his game really needs polishing.

why would you promote those a teamers over longstanding senior squad members who didn't play/make the 23/6? esp Dingwall/Beard, and Coles/Martin next in line v Lockett.

Assume u mean Sleightholme needs polishing?

Presumed Martin isn’t fit. Is Coles fit? He dropped out of the squad for Ireland when Clark was called up.

At centre, I don’t think Beard plays 12 does he? He does his best work in the wider channels. That would need Lawrence to move into 12 which doesn’t really work. I do really like Beard though.

Dingwall I forgot about…

And yes, Sleightholme needs to polish his game.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 10:08 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 10:00 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 7:04 pm Would be good to see the performers from the A game get a look in to show that pathway is working.

Lockett, Ojomoh and JVP probably the standouts. In for Tcurry (with Hill in from bench), Slade and Randall? I’d have Bcurry in for Earl too.

Sleightholme fortunate to get another go because Murley and Muir are injured and I don’t think Freeman is as effective on the left wing. Great finisher but rest of his game really needs polishing.

why would you promote those a teamers over longstanding senior squad members who didn't play/make the 23/6? esp Dingwall/Beard, and Coles/Martin next in line v Lockett.

Assume u mean Sleightholme needs polishing?

Presumed Martin isn’t fit. Is Coles fit? He dropped out of the squad for Ireland when Clark was called up.

At centre, I don’t think Beard plays 12 does he? He does his best work in the wider channels. That would need Lawrence to move into 12 which doesn’t really work. I do really like Beard though.

Dingwall I forgot about…

And yes, Sleightholme needs to polish his game.

It’s two weeks to the Italy game and Martin was close for this game, ditto Cole’s. Ojomoh played 13 today didn’t he?
I’d support JVP replacing Randall in fairness tho guess he’d be leaping over Spencer too.
Lawrence is playing 12 quite a lot esp in defence, and in fact gave the offload to Smith to set up Dalys try v France. Think he’s got a mix and match role if he is kept in the team…. Tho he looked a bit exposed in defence in open spaces too. Mind, the whole defensive structure beyond 12 ish looked shot. Communication seems non existent judging by wingers biting in consistently.

I would swap LCD for Dan and otherwise retain the starting team the same unless Furbank is fit. It wasn’t a great performance but I feel Scotland (Townsend) should be credited for the game plan first half and England (Borthers) credited for responding- it was a poor game but it wasn’t due to individuals.

On the bench I’d bring Martin back probably for CCS and JvP for Randall. If Furbank is fit it’s a tight call between MSmith and Daly in the 23 shirt.

Slade seems to be the favourite scapegoat at the moment but I think he’s been generally solid and don’t see any of the realistic alternatives as having a particularly high ceiling so value the cohesiveness. For the centre position I’m still holding out for the return of Marchant.

SixAndAHalf wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 11:00 pm I would swap LCD for Dan and otherwise retain the starting team the same unless Furbank is fit. It wasn’t a great performance but I feel Scotland (Townsend) should be credited for the game plan first half and England (Borthers) credited for responding- it was a poor game but it wasn’t due to individuals.

On the bench I’d bring Martin back probably for CCS and JvP for Randall. If Furbank is fit it’s a tight call between MSmith and Daly in the 23 shirt.

Slade seems to be the favourite scapegoat at the moment but I think he’s been generally solid and don’t see any of the realistic alternatives as having a particularly high ceiling so value the cohesiveness. For the centre position I’m still holding out for the return of Marchant.

Furbank hasn’t played for months and wasn’t in great nick before tbh.
Slade… kicked away two good attacking positions and missed a ton of tackles ( 5 from 17 and two turnovers) and if he is leading the wide defence he’s doing a poor job there. Even his penalty touchline kicks aren’t as good as for his club. He never makes a break. It’s just all so average to poor for a bloke with so many caps.

One thing for sure is we shouldn't be picking that turnstile daly.