RugbyRebels

Mikey Brown wrote:I think he’s just refuting that they’re similar?

I still don’t think it’s as simple as them both wearing 4 meaning they’re incompatible. Put simply I’d say I’m happy with Launch in there doing the heavy lifting in the tight, wearing 5, he just doesn’t have the lineout game but to be top class in that role.

Itoje as an all action forward at 4 is fortunately very good in the lineout anyway, and has run the lineout for England previously, no?

Where’s the weak point other than that? I don’t feel like placement in the pods is enough.

Yes, not sure it’s too complicated

Not sure about the Wilkinson-Hodgson comparison to Itoje-Launch.

I’d say it’s more like Dan Carter (Itoje), being a ridiculous all round rugby player, that can play 10 with Aaron Mauger or Ma’a Nonu outside him, or at 12 with Mehrtens or Spencer inside him. Either way he’ll still be the best player on the pitch.

Mikey Brown wrote:I think he’s just refuting that they’re similar?

I still don’t think it’s as simple as them both wearing 4 meaning they’re incompatible. Put simply I’d say I’m happy with Launch in there doing the heavy lifting in the tight, wearing 5, he just doesn’t have the lineout game but to be top class in that role.

Itoje as an all action forward at 4 is fortunately very good in the lineout anyway, and has run the lineout for England previously, no?

Where’s the weak point other than that? I don’t feel like placement in the pods is enough.

Which of them would jump in the middle? Which of them would lock on the opposite side to where they're most comfortable? Which of them would get to attack the maul? Which of them would stand at the front at kickoffs? Well, actually that one's easy - Itoje would stand at the front and Launch would stand wherever we could hide him.

All of those questions have answers - you'd probably put Itoje as the middle jumper and make him be the defensive mauler and one of them could scrum on the opposite side. It's very far from insuperable, but you would still be picking a player who has been picked for England on the basis of how well he's played for his club with the responsibilities and placement of a number 4, and then asking him to do a different role than what brought him to your attention.

And it all seems a bit pointless as a discussion when we already have two players who can play number 5, so this entirely hypothetical scenario won't even come up.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
Launchbury is terrific in the maul, but one of the reasons for that is that it's a speciality of the number 4 and front jumper - the 4 can attack the maul while the 5 tries to defend it. Itoje is terrific in the maul as well - his destruction of the Kiwi maul in the RWC semi was a highlight - and you're getting two players who specialise in the same thing at set piece, which means you're going to have to ask the other one not to do something they're good at.

I agree with you that they would be complementary players in the loose, but the fact is that they play the same position. It's like playing Marchant and Joseph together - both great players, but one of them is going to have to step across to a role that they're not used to and give up the things that they're good at and take on responsibilities that they're not as good at.



Excellent typo in the context of your moistness.

Puja

The analogy with JJ and Marchant is pretty weak tbh. Their skill sets and athletic abilities are similar: Itojes and Launchburys are not imo. I understand the speciality in the set play as I said before, but they are not similar players, which was to your original point.

They *are* similar players though! You're picking one aspect of play - the loose - while ignoring everything else that a lock does. They do the same job in the scrum, the same job in the lineout (Itoje better), the same job in the maul (Launch slightly better), the same job at kickoffs (Itoje better by a distance), they operate in the same pods in attacking plays. Yes, they have different skillsets and athletic abilities, but they use those to play the same role slightly differently.

I agree that JJ and Marchant analogy is pretty weak, but I couldn't think of a more contrasting pair of outside centres, as a lot of centres can play both sides. It's like playing Charlie Hodgson and Jonny Wilkinson together or like the claims you could have BillyV and Nathan Hughes in the same team.
Are they capable of playing together? Sure! But you will be asking one of them to stop doing a lot of the things that you selected them for.

Puja

On the scrum, I’m pretty certain Kruis would scrum on the tighthead side, so Itoje has clearly done both.

Mr Mwenda wrote:

Timbo wrote:I think distribution is a part of Eddie’s reasoning for his fb selection, but I also think kicking is a huge factor. Not only does he want a big, accurate boot but also an ability to kick late on the line with either foot. Daly does this really well in particular.

I mentioned on here a couple of weeks ago watching Watson for Bath against Sarries and Exeter on consecutive weekends. He was incredibly sharp and carried a massive threat running the ball back, but both games hinged on Daly and Hogg pinning Bath back in their own half with a series of great kicks in the last 20/30 minutes. Conversely I don’t think Watson kicked once. You’d have to say that Watson was the least effective of the three over the 2 games.

Clearly Daly is an athletic strike runner too, and Malins and Furbank have been at club level. I think Watson is now seen a ‘break glass in case of emergency’ option for Jones at 15.

Hardly surprising, Watson has no experience at full back and was hung out to try by maverick selectors.

Excellent work sir.

Puja

Adam_P wrote:15. George Furbank (Northampton Saints, 2 caps)
14. Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 43 caps)
13. Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 50 caps)
12. Henry Slade (Exeter Chiefs, 29 caps)
11. Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby, 56 caps)
10. Owen Farrell (Saracens, 83 caps)
9. Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 99 caps)
1. Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 59 caps)
2. Jamie George (Saracens, 49 caps)
3. Kyle Sinckler (Bristol Bears, 35 caps)
4. Maro Itoje (Saracens, 38 caps)
5. Jonny Hill (Exeter Chiefs, uncapped)
6. Tom Curry (Sale Sharks, 23 caps)
7. Sam Underhill (Bath Rugby, 18 caps)
8. Billy Vunipola (Saracens, 51 caps)

FINISHERS
16. Tom Dunn, (Bath Rugby, uncapped)
17. Ellis Genge (Leicester Tigers, 18 caps)
18. Will Stuart (Bath Rugby, 3 caps)
19. Charlie Ewels (Bath Rugby, 15 caps)
20. Ben Earl (Bristol Bears, 3 caps)
21. Dan Robson (Wasps, 2 caps)
22. Ollie Lawrence (Worcester Warriors, uncapped)
23. Ollie Thorley (Gloucester Rugby, uncapped)

Looking forward to see how Slade goes at 12 as I’ve long thought Slade and Joseph might work nicely but problematic if Billy gets injured given Jones’ parallel universe where Charlie Ewels/T Curry slot in

FKAS wrote:

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:
Willis is a young player just joining his first international squad. The other backrows have had more squad time. Eddie will want him up to speed before including him. I think that's a good choice.

I have no idea why Furbank is in there. There's a better fullback in the squad. There's better fullbacks not called up.

Willis is older than both Curry and Earl just FYI. Personally I think he brings something different to the party that we could do with.

Curry and Earl have both been in squad before though and know how Eddie operates. Neither were in the Prem Final so have had more prep time with the squad.

I'm sure Willis will be capped shortly. He's exactly the type of flanker Eddie seems to like. I also think Eddie will develop his game further, which in a way is worrying.

Eddie’ll play him at bloody scrum half then

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
Mind, the only other player who has just arrived, without recent experience of England, and has gone into the XXIII is Jonny Hill and he's in a much less competitive area. The gap between Hill and Ewels on current form is significantly larger than the gap between Underhill, Curry, BillyV, or Earl. Where there's finer margins, I'm okay with the decision to not dump him in after four days' training.

I mean, I'd've picked him myself, but I do understand it.

Puja

Assuming you don’t rate Launchbury or Ewels then?

Fair point on Launchbury, although I think he's too similar to Itoje to play both together. Ewels is a solid international, but nothing outstanding - if injuries mean he ends up playing, he's a useful backup to have who won't let us down, but if he's our first choice 5 then that's a weak position for us.

Puja

Interesting Puja, I see Launchbury and Itoje as poles apart
in style, the former being the big ballast, mauling/carrying lock the latter being the Uber athletic but comparatively short/light lineout expert with the odd dash of fetching and gurning at the opposition thrown in. For me Ewels is competent club class rather than test class tbh (shades of Borthwick here?)

Mikey Brown wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote: They play utterly differently though- I take your point on what they are asked to do on set plays, but in the loose an excellent and complementary pair. Itoje is certainly better in the lineout and receiving, but Launchbury is terrific in the maul, Itoje on the floor and the tackle.

Launchbury is terrific in the maul, but one of the reasons for that is that it's a speciality of the number 4 and front jumper - the 4 can attack the maul while the 5 tries to defend it. Itoje is terrific in the maul as well - his destruction of the Kiwi maul in the RWC semi was a highlight - and you're getting two players who specialise in the same thing at set piece, which means you're going to have to ask the other one not to do something they're good at.

I agree with you that they would be complementary players in the loose, but the fact is that they play the same position. It's like playing Marchant and Joseph together - both great players, but one of them is going to have to step across to a role that they're not used to and give up the things that they're good at and take on responsibilities that they're not as good at.

Puja

I feel like the 4 and 5 roles have changed a bit in the last few years and Launch is almost of the previous generation where you could have a big lump that hits rucks and mauls and doesn't bother too much with the lineout. Now you have a lot of 5s who do all the tight-head/set-piece work (Kruis, Whitelock, AWJ) and allow the number 4 to play more like a backrow.

I sort of agree it leaves a bit of a hole in lineout expertise where Kruis/Ewels could easily fit, but Itoje is fantastic at basically everything so I'm not too worried. It will be interesting to see who is where in the scrum. I imagine Launch will be filling the tight-head role. Maybe at the restarts just get him to lift someone who can catch as well.

Is Itoje in any way fantastic at carrying? (on paper he should be) but he punches well below his weight in this area compared to how good I feel he ought to be given his physique and athleticism elsewhere - for me it’s frustrating not to see him be more prolific in this capacity - and oh so upright!

jngf wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote: Assuming you don’t rate Launchbury or Ewels then?

Fair point on Launchbury, although I think he's too similar to Itoje to play both together. Ewels is a solid international, but nothing outstanding - if injuries mean he ends up playing, he's a useful backup to have who won't let us down, but if he's our first choice 5 then that's a weak position for us.

Puja

Interesting Puja, I see Launchbury and Itoje as poles apart
in style, the former being the big ballast, mauling/carrying lock the latter being the Uber athletic but comparatively short/light lineout expert with the odd dash of fetching and gurning at the opposition thrown in. For me Ewels is competent club class rather than test class tbh (shades of Borthwick here?)

I think Itoje transcends either of those described types of player. He can pretty much do the lot. Might not be the strongest lineout caller and could add to his carrying game but he's far more powerful than his frame suggests.

Launchbury always makes me thing of a big bruising blindside that hasn't made it and had to switch to lock. For a big lad he's good at the breakdown but he tended to lack a lot of the technical lock skills in his mid twenties that he seems to have got (bar the lineout where he's at best average) as he hits 30. He's lost some of those breakdown skills mind, not sure I'd say he was a particularly notable ball carrier these days either though that could just be in comparison to the flying Wasps backrow.

I think Eddie has tended to opt against Launchbury because he's weak at the lineout and only ok at the scrum. Itoje is head and shoulders above the other contenders. So who do you pick to go with him? Not the bloke that is shocking at the lineout, you're looking for the lineout leader so Lawes or Kruis. Lawes offers more in the loose and Kruis more in the tight. Kruis and Lawes also offers a good combo. Just like that Launchbury is fourth choice and only likely to get a start if Itoje isn't available. Hill could overtake Launchbury over the next few weeks as well being just as mobile and physical but a lot more technical (and three years younger).

jngf wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Puja wrote:
Launchbury is terrific in the maul, but one of the reasons for that is that it's a speciality of the number 4 and front jumper - the 4 can attack the maul while the 5 tries to defend it. Itoje is terrific in the maul as well - his destruction of the Kiwi maul in the RWC semi was a highlight - and you're getting two players who specialise in the same thing at set piece, which means you're going to have to ask the other one not to do something they're good at.

I agree with you that they would be complementary players in the loose, but the fact is that they play the same position. It's like playing Marchant and Joseph together - both great players, but one of them is going to have to step across to a role that they're not used to and give up the things that they're good at and take on responsibilities that they're not as good at.

Puja

I feel like the 4 and 5 roles have changed a bit in the last few years and Launch is almost of the previous generation where you could have a big lump that hits rucks and mauls and doesn't bother too much with the lineout. Now you have a lot of 5s who do all the tight-head/set-piece work (Kruis, Whitelock, AWJ) and allow the number 4 to play more like a backrow.

I sort of agree it leaves a bit of a hole in lineout expertise where Kruis/Ewels could easily fit, but Itoje is fantastic at basically everything so I'm not too worried. It will be interesting to see who is where in the scrum. I imagine Launch will be filling the tight-head role. Maybe at the restarts just get him to lift someone who can catch as well.

Is Itoje in any way fantastic at carrying? (on paper he should be) but he punches well below his weight in this area compared to how good I feel he ought to be given his physique and athleticism elsewhere - for me it’s frustrating not to see him be more prolific in this capacity - and oh so upright!

Okay so he’s not a fantastic tight carrier (not that it’s the priority for me in a lock) but he often shows up very well in the wider channels, and Launch is a good, solid carrier around the fringes anyway.

The makeup of the backrow makes such a difference to all these areas of selection too.

There’s always a balancing act unless you’ve got players who are 10/10 across the board, which is why I don’t really get this idea that they’ve been playing explicitly as a 4 or 5. Launch will partner Rowlands (a brute) one week and Gaskell (built like a greyhound) the next. They have their strengths and weaknesses and they all have to be adaptable.

Itoje has been playing a lot alongside Swinson who is a monster scrummaging tight-lock and little else. If it wasn’t for Launchbury’s insane work rate and ability/mobility to pop up in the right spot you might even compare the two.

Itoje has played about half his rugby at 6, I think he can manage being middle jumper.

TLDR I’m sure everyone is sick to death of this, but I think we’ll manage okay at lock without these two stepping on eachother’s toes.

On anther point is a 17 and a half Stone Curry a slower Curry ? (Albeit for some of us such a weight would constitute a rewarding payoff from a diet )

jngf wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Puja wrote:
Launchbury is terrific in the maul, but one of the reasons for that is that it's a speciality of the number 4 and front jumper - the 4 can attack the maul while the 5 tries to defend it. Itoje is terrific in the maul as well - his destruction of the Kiwi maul in the RWC semi was a highlight - and you're getting two players who specialise in the same thing at set piece, which means you're going to have to ask the other one not to do something they're good at.

I agree with you that they would be complementary players in the loose, but the fact is that they play the same position. It's like playing Marchant and Joseph together - both great players, but one of them is going to have to step across to a role that they're not used to and give up the things that they're good at and take on responsibilities that they're not as good at.

Puja

I feel like the 4 and 5 roles have changed a bit in the last few years and Launch is almost of the previous generation where you could have a big lump that hits rucks and mauls and doesn't bother too much with the lineout. Now you have a lot of 5s who do all the tight-head/set-piece work (Kruis, Whitelock, AWJ) and allow the number 4 to play more like a backrow.

I sort of agree it leaves a bit of a hole in lineout expertise where Kruis/Ewels could easily fit, but Itoje is fantastic at basically everything so I'm not too worried. It will be interesting to see who is where in the scrum. I imagine Launch will be filling the tight-head role. Maybe at the restarts just get him to lift someone who can catch as well.

Is Itoje in any way fantastic at carrying? (on paper he should be) but he punches well below his weight in this area compared to how good I feel he ought to be given his physique and athleticism elsewhere - for me it’s frustrating not to see him be more prolific in this capacity - and oh so upright!

Not long ago you were praising his carrying trying to support your proposal that he play 8. He’s a better carrier out wide than Launchbury tho.

Banquo wrote:

jngf wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:
I feel like the 4 and 5 roles have changed a bit in the last few years and Launch is almost of the previous generation where you could have a big lump that hits rucks and mauls and doesn't bother too much with the lineout. Now you have a lot of 5s who do all the tight-head/set-piece work (Kruis, Whitelock, AWJ) and allow the number 4 to play more like a backrow.

I sort of agree it leaves a bit of a hole in lineout expertise where Kruis/Ewels could easily fit, but Itoje is fantastic at basically everything so I'm not too worried. It will be interesting to see who is where in the scrum. I imagine Launch will be filling the tight-head role. Maybe at the restarts just get him to lift someone who can catch as well.

Is Itoje in any way fantastic at carrying? (on paper he should be) but he punches well below his weight in this area compared to how good I feel he ought to be given his physique and athleticism elsewhere - for me it’s frustrating not to see him be more prolific in this capacity - and oh so upright!

Not long ago you were praising his carrying trying to support your proposal that he play 8. He’s a better carrier out wide than Launchbury tho.

I was ,you’re right, and on reflection and in mitigation I might have over egged the pudding on this and extrapolated too much from seeing the odd hint at carrying potential. I wish Sarries had released him on loan to the Warriors where he could have had a season in the backrow - though his agent (Mr Wray? )doubtless had other plans and didn’t want Maro going too Brummie..

jngf wrote:

Banquo wrote:

jngf wrote:
Is Itoje in any way fantastic at carrying? (on paper he should be) but he punches well below his weight in this area compared to how good I feel he ought to be given his physique and athleticism elsewhere - for me it’s frustrating not to see him be more prolific in this capacity - and oh so upright!

Not long ago you were praising his carrying trying to support your proposal that he play 8. He’s a better carrier out wide than Launchbury tho.

I was ,you’re right, and on reflection and in mitigation I might have over egged the pudding on this and extrapolated too much from seeing the odd hint at carrying potential. I wish Sarries had released him on loan to the Warriors where he could have had a season in the backrow - though his agent (Mr Wray? )doubtless had other plans and didn’t want Maro going too Brummie..

He’s a world class lock, who has room to improve carrying wise- he’s slowly getting to triple threat body positioning as well.

jngf wrote: I wish Sarries had released him on loan to the Warriors where he could have had a season in the backrow - though his agent (Mr Wray? )doubtless had other plans and didn’t want Maro going too Brummie..

I'm not sure reading this you know where either Worcester or Birmingham are.

Digby wrote:

jngf wrote: I wish Sarries had released him on loan to the Warriors where he could have had a season in the backrow - though his agent (Mr Wray? )doubtless had other plans and didn’t want Maro going too Brummie..

I'm not sure reading this you know where either Worcester or Birmingham are.

Not sure how you can make any such inferences on my geographical knowledge from the passage - it’s about 30 miles from the centre of Birmingham to the centre of Worcester, which I’m sure you know was the faithful city and has a statue of Sir Edward Elgar opened by Prince Charles in 1980 - I might just as well extrapolate you are Judith Chalmers in reality using that sort of logic

jngf wrote:

Digby wrote:

jngf wrote: I wish Sarries had released him on loan to the Warriors where he could have had a season in the backrow - though his agent (Mr Wray? )doubtless had other plans and didn’t want Maro going too Brummie..

I'm not sure reading this you know where either Worcester or Birmingham are.

Not sure how you can make any such inferences on my geographical knowledge from the passage - it’s about 30 miles from the centre of Birmingham to the centre of Worcester, which I’m sure you know was the faithful city and has a statue of Sir Edward Elgar opened by Prince Charles in 1980 - I might just as well extrapolate you are Judith Chalmers in reality using that sort of logic

And Sixways is closer still. But why you'd drag yourself up and down that stretch of M5 if you had a choice I've no idea, even before there's a pandemic

Digby wrote:

jngf wrote:

Digby wrote:
I'm not sure reading this you know where either Worcester or Birmingham are.

Not sure how you can make any such inferences on my geographical knowledge from the passage - it’s about 30 miles from the centre of Birmingham to the centre of Worcester, which I’m sure you know was the faithful city and has a statue of Sir Edward Elgar opened by Prince Charles in 1980 - I might just as well extrapolate you are Judith Chalmers in reality using that sort of logic

And Sixways is closer still. But why you'd drag yourself up and down that stretch of M5 if you had a choice I've no idea, even before there's a pandemic

If you were happy to travel that distance to Worcester each day presumably you'd do it the other way and live down Cheltenham way. M5 is a bit easier that side.

FKAS wrote:

Digby wrote:

jngf wrote:
Not sure how you can make any such inferences on my geographical knowledge from the passage - it’s about 30 miles from the centre of Birmingham to the centre of Worcester, which I’m sure you know was the faithful city and has a statue of Sir Edward Elgar opened by Prince Charles in 1980 - I might just as well extrapolate you are Judith Chalmers in reality using that sort of logic

And Sixways is closer still. But why you'd drag yourself up and down that stretch of M5 if you had a choice I've no idea, even before there's a pandemic

If you were happy to travel that distance to Worcester each day presumably you'd do it the other way and live down Cheltenham way. M5 is a bit easier that side.

One could really brave and establish home west of the river Severn (best to invest in 4 by 4 though and vote Tory )

I've lost track - why would Itoje have gone to Worcester anyway? Was that ever even on the cards?

Puja

We've got an actual, honest to god 6 nations game coming up on Saturday and we appear to have people discussing commuting on motorways. Some fairly strong confirming of stereotypes happening here.

16th man wrote:We've got an actual, honest to god 6 nations game coming up on Saturday and we appear to have people discussing commuting on motorways. Some fairly strong confirming of stereotypes happening here.

To be fair, Digby will discuss anything, just wind him up and watch him go.

And it makes a change from the usual for jngf.

I, for one, am really looking forward to seeing how that team goes. Wish Willis was involved, mind.

Stom wrote:

16th man wrote:We've got an actual, honest to god 6 nations game coming up on Saturday and we appear to have people discussing commuting on motorways. Some fairly strong confirming of stereotypes happening here.

To be fair, Digby will discuss anything, just wind him up and watch him go.

And it makes a change from the usual for jngf.

I, for one, am really looking forward to seeing how that team goes. Wish Willis was involved, mind.

Yep on both fronts for me. Expecting a touch of rust, but otherwise a pretty sharp performance. Especially looking at some of the new and newer faces putting their hands up and seeing what they can do in an England shirt. Not having last week's game, albeit a proper friendly, was really disappointing.

Not having last weekends game wouldn't be as bad if Italy hadn't had a game. But for all they got hosed they did get to play