RugbyRebels

Gloskarlos wrote:

Digby wrote:There's not a lot in that which would make me think he's as fast as Jacob Rowan, though he'd have a fair bit more bulk/power. That he's got both power and pace might see him stand out more than just the pace

I've never seen Rowan accelerate like Polledri, not even close - but you are right it is the blend that catches the eye.

I'm still left feeling when we've got Billy, Morgan, Hughes, Mercer, Curry, Clifford... we're not missing out much by not having Polledri's carrying. We can pick carriers if we want, the problem seems to be more we don't want to, and/or we think Robshaw, and Lawes count as main carriers rather than support

Digby wrote:

Gloskarlos wrote:

Digby wrote:There's not a lot in that which would make me think he's as fast as Jacob Rowan, though he'd have a fair bit more bulk/power. That he's got both power and pace might see him stand out more than just the pace

I've never seen Rowan accelerate like Polledri, not even close - but you are right it is the blend that catches the eye.

I'm still left feeling when we've got Billy, Morgan, Hughes, Mercer, Curry, Clifford... we're not missing out much by not having Polledri's carrying. We can pick carriers if we want, the problem seems to be more we don't want to, and/or we think Robshaw, and Lawes count as main carriers rather than support

Only Billy really makes good breaks though, and that is through power in the main rather than footwork. I know Polledri may not be able to do the same on the international scene but I reckon he made more clean (or certainly eyecatching) breaks this year in the prem than the others you mention.

Anyway - I agree England has an embarrasment of riches in the back row very interested to see how Polledri goes against the Scots tomorrow in an international

Gloskarlos wrote:

Digby wrote:

Gloskarlos wrote:
I've never seen Rowan accelerate like Polledri, not even close - but you are right it is the blend that catches the eye.

I'm still left feeling when we've got Billy, Morgan, Hughes, Mercer, Curry, Clifford... we're not missing out much by not having Polledri's carrying. We can pick carriers if we want, the problem seems to be more we don't want to, and/or we think Robshaw, and Lawes count as main carriers rather than support

Only Billy really makes good breaks though, and that is through power in the main rather than footwork. I know Polledri may not be able to do the same on the international scene but I reckon he made more clean (or certainly eyecatching) breaks this year in the prem than the others you mention.

Anyway - I agree England has an embarrasment of riches in the back row very interested to see how Polledri goes against the Scots tomorrow in an international

Glaws have a lot of carriers, which gives him more space.

Raggs wrote:Owen Slot of the times posted an image of his article, showing just how massively Ford's individual attacking threat, and try assists have dropped since 2015. I've tried to point out that all those stats are not a condemnation of Ford's attacking threat, but rather the fact he's gone from a midfield of Burrell+JJ to one of Farrell+JJ. If the defence aren't interested in others, there's nowhere to go.

Just seen it. The stats do drop off a cliff but, as you say, no context to the fact he had a proper IC, albeit Burrell, and that his role will have changed under a new regime.
I had a quick look at the 2015 6N and Ford is top points scorer, Joseph is top try scorer and Ford has a kicking % of 83.33. I see why we moved away from it now. Fark me.

Bring back the Burt.

Can't help but think that Ford and Farrell has become the rugby equivalent of Lampard and Gerrard.

Critical bit of information from today’s Times. Chris Wyles has penned a piece on our new (old) scrumhalf and I can confirm his nickname is Wiggy.

padprop wrote:Can't help but think that Ford and Farrell has become the rugby equivalent of Lampard and Gerrard.

More like Scholes and Lampard. 1 a very good playmaker & quiet guy who just got on with playing, the other good at taking penalties
& hyped up to world class level by the media

belgarion wrote:

padprop wrote:Can't help but think that Ford and Farrell has become the rugby equivalent of Lampard and Gerrard.

More like Scholes and Lampard. 1 a very good playmaker & quiet guy who just got on with playing, the other good at taking penalties
& hyped up to world class level by the media

Why can't we keep it in rugby? Barnes or Andrews. Charlie or St. Johnny...

And Lampard was bloody good.

Stom wrote:

belgarion wrote:

padprop wrote:Can't help but think that Ford and Farrell has become the rugby equivalent of Lampard and Gerrard.

More like Scholes and Lampard. 1 a very good playmaker & quiet guy who just got on with playing, the other good at taking penalties
& hyped up to world class level by the media

Why can't we keep it in rugby? Barnes or Andrews. Charlie or St. Johnny...

And Lampard was bloody good.

Because they were accommodated in the same team when it really should’ve been one or the other. Barnes and Andrew and Wilko and Hodgson (after a short lived experiment) weren’t.

Polledri.....

Mellsblue wrote:Polledri.....

lol exactly what I was thinking. Nope not needed at all wouldn't get any where near the england team.

Mellsblue wrote:Polledri.....

No surprise. A good player, playing well.

That one still stings for me.

Mellsblue wrote:Critical bit of information from today’s Times. Chris Wyles has penned a piece on our new (old) scrumhalf and I can confirm his nickname is Wiggy.

I knew it. In your face Diggle

Stom wrote:

belgarion wrote:

padprop wrote:Can't help but think that Ford and Farrell has become the rugby equivalent of Lampard and Gerrard.

More like Scholes and Lampard. 1 a very good playmaker & quiet guy who just got on with playing, the other good at taking penalties
& hyped up to world class level by the media

Why can't we keep it in rugby? Barnes or Andrews. Charlie or St. Johnny...

And Lampard was bloody good.

Andrew. And Frank was goal hanger average

twitchy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Polledri.....

lol exactly what I was thinking. Nope not needed at all wouldn't get any where near the england team.

Me too,. Our embarrassment of riches in the back row obvs today

Polledri has apparently been tied to Italy since U20’s, so best to drop the idea he could have played for England.

Timbo wrote:Polledri has apparently been tied to Italy since U20’s, so best to drop the idea he could have played for England.

I think that’s accepted but you’ve missed the point

Banquo wrote:

Timbo wrote:Polledri has apparently been tied to Italy since U20’s, so best to drop the idea he could have played for England.

I think that’s accepted but you’ve missed the point

It’s clearly not and no.

So Eddie has said that some players (plural) have played their last match for England.
Assuming this isn't just "things that Eddie says", who would that be?

Hopefully: Hartley, Cole, Haskell, Wigglesworth..

Sod's law: Launchbury, Armand, Ford, Joseph

Timbo wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Timbo wrote:Polledri has apparently been tied to Italy since U20’s, so best to drop the idea he could have played for England.

I think that’s accepted but you’ve missed the point

It’s clearly not and no.

It’s been mentioned numerous times that he’s no longer EQP and has never wanted to be EQP. The point is that a player who has come through the English academy system achieved more in 60 mins against Scotland than the entire England team, crying out for carriers, achieved in 80mins. There’s a certain irony there, whether you’ve missed the point or not.

Which Tyler wrote:So Eddie has said that some players (plural) have played their last match for England.
Assuming this isn't just "things that Eddie says", who would that be?

Hopefully: Hartley, Cole, Haskell, Wigglesworth..

Sod's law: Launchbury, Armand, Ford, Joseph

The hopefuls seem about right. Don’t even joke about Launch, Ford and Joseph........you just get the feeling he and/or Borthwick doesn’t/don’t rate Launch. You also get the feeling he’s looking for an excuse to drop Joseph.

Timbo wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Timbo wrote:Polledri has apparently been tied to Italy since U20’s, so best to drop the idea he could have played for England.

I think that’s accepted but you’ve missed the point

It’s clearly not and no.

See Mells. Pretty much everyone has said it’s a bugger we missed the boat, and the.point is that it’s a shame as he looks good

Mellsblue wrote:

Timbo wrote:

Banquo wrote: I think that’s accepted but you’ve missed the point

It’s clearly not and no.

It’s been mentioned numerous times that he’s no longer EQP and has never wanted to be EQP. The point is that a player who has come through the English academy system achieved more in 60 mins against Scotland than the entire England team, crying out for carriers, achieved in 80mins. There’s a certain irony there, whether you’ve missed the point or not.

There have been numerous posts lamenting the fact Eddie hasn’t picked him. Twitchy’s post half way up the page implies this also.

Timbo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Timbo wrote:
It’s clearly not and no.

It’s been mentioned numerous times that he’s no longer EQP and has never wanted to be EQP. The point is that a player who has come through the English academy system achieved more in 60 mins against Scotland than the entire England team, crying out for carriers, achieved in 80mins. There’s a certain irony there, whether you’ve missed the point or not.

There have been numerous posts lamenting the fact Eddie hasn’t picked him. Twitchy’s post half way up the page implies this also.

Fair enough. Those posts, that included me, were quite a few weeks ago. It’s been accepted for a while he’s lost to Italy, doesn’t mean we can’t lament what he couldn’t brought.