RugbyRebels

When you say 18 months for complete repair, when do you think he will play next?

For Joe Bloggs, playing for Old Prostates RFC, close to12 months; for a pro athlete around the 6 month mark, but that would be an ankle that's "good enough" not "right"

Manu's back next week, so we'll be fine.

Puja

I'd have hoped he wouldn't have toured anyway, he needs a break; however, if WT's diagnosis is correct, then its a bad injury and one for which proper rehab is necessary.

Joseph broken bone in his foot, not ankle. 4 months is what I read.

Timbo wrote:Joseph broken bone in his foot, not ankle. 4 months is what I read.

As far as results go, that's a pretty good one from the possibilities discussed. I'd prefer him to take 6 months and get fully right though.

Puja

Timbo wrote:Joseph broken bone in his foot, not ankle. 4 months is what I read.

Lucky boy if true

Which Tyler wrote:

Timbo wrote:Joseph broken bone in his foot, not ankle. 4 months is what I read.

Lucky boy if true

hmm..not my definition of lucky. But I agree it could have been worse.

Which Tyler wrote:

Timbo wrote:Joseph broken bone in his foot, not ankle. 4 months is what I read.

Lucky boy if true

Yeah, if true is right. Bath press release said foot, then local journo on twitter said broken bone. But local journo has also speculated that the press release is wrong and it is his ankle.

In amongst the usual waffle - don't take kids, pick the biggest players you can find, ie Haskell, Attwood, JCW and Webber - Stephen Jones states that Kruis will need an operation this summer.

Also:

That headline is a load of codswallop. You read the actual quotes and Brown says no-one is ruled out, some idiot with an eye for a headline asks, "Does that mean that it could be a coach currently with another 6N team," and Brown says that it could be. Gatland will get the most clicks, as no-one would be crushed by the idea of getting Schmidt. What crap journalism.

I hope.

Puja

Yep, its the worst kind of attention grabbing headline that bears very little relationship to what is actually said.

All options are on the table currently - which is exactly what you would expect, though Brown does say that the successor will require international experience and success.

fivepointer wrote:Yep, its the worst kind of attention grabbing headline that bears very little relationship to what is actually said.

All options are on the table currently - which is exactly what you would expect, though Brown does say that the successor will require international experience and success.

That strikes me as an iffy criteria. An English coach is likely to know the English conditions and English mindsets best, but is unlikely to have worked abroad because the salaries are better here. Someone like Baxter or Richards isn't going to abandon the clubs that they've built from nothing to success in order to go coach Romania or Russia and, frankly, how much extra benefit would that even be to their development?

Puja

Gary Richardson on Sportsweek earlier was talking about the rumours being Gatland and Schmidt. I'd hoped we'd moved beyond Gatland tbh, if we do end up with him it'll be on the back of a sodding drawn jamboree series which will further deepen my disregard for the jamboree tour.

Though the article as noted as seemingly clickbait when it's only 50% of the story under current discussion, or reported to be under discussion.

Crap journalism or not it is a frightening thought.

Still struggling with the Jones appointment without contemplating the disappointment is set to continue.

Still pining for Jimmy Mally?

Mellsblue wrote:Still pining for Jimmy Mally?

I’d take Puja over Gatland, even if he appointed cross dressing theatre types as his assistants

p/d wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Still pining for Jimmy Mally?

I’d take Puja over Gatland, even if he appointed cross dressing theatre types as his assistants

I would have women assistants in mne's suits and it would be glorious. Not a tracksuit to be seen.

Puja

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/spor ... -xp5rlmdxf



It was another uncomfortable weekend for George Ford fans. The Leicester Tigers fly half didn’t perform badly against Newcastle Falcons. That is the best that can be said about his performance at Welford Road. For a player of his ability, it was not enough. Playing behind a Leicester pack that destroyed the Falcons at the set piece, he let the game drift from the home team.

Ford’s flight of imagination has been grounded. The balance between the sneaking breaks and the stream of accurate passes has been replaced with an almost monotonous distribution, too far from the opposing back line to threaten, too lacking in variety to make defenders think. Frankly, any half-decent footballer could have done as much as Ford in what proved a crushing defeat for Leicester in the Premiership.

Dean Richards suggested that Leicester didn’t do enough to close out the game. The Falcons director of rugby was right. Leicester were protecting their lead when they should have been going for the kill. For Leicester read their captain and decision-maker, Ford. Where there was once a fresh-faced and positive-minded fly half, there’s now a more experienced operator learning the wrong lessons with age.

The great fly halves are the ones who make things happen. The average ones try not to do too much wrong. Ford exploded on to the senior scene from junior rugby as the most creative fly half in the world. Now he is tapering out into a highly skilled, risk-averse pivot — dime a dozen. Age brings him not so much wisdom as conservatism.

His personal journey from rugby’s bold to cautious does not suit him. He’s too talented a player to finish the game having not done much wrong. All that match-winning ability of which he has so much is being wasted. Friday night’s effort can be broken down into two parts; the first hour when he threw a stream of technically accomplished but non-penetrative passes and the last 20 minutes when he went into territorial mode with a couple of very decent kicks from hand.

It was rugby by rote, something I never thought I’d write about Ford. Such is the latent ability of the 25-year-old, he is still my first-choice fly half for England but he has to start mixing his game more, using his little stepping game, the delayed pass, the array of kicks. A week earlier I watched Johnny Sexton in the European Champions Cup semi-final for Leinster against Scarlets. Everything he did, whether passing or sending up a towering kick, seemed to have intent. Ford, in an ever more grey contrast, does what he does because it’s an easy textbook play. Similar to the Irishman, he has to back his ability to play under pressure.

It may well be that, come June, Ford will start a Test match against another former prodigy. South Africa’s Handré Pollard followed in Ford’s footsteps to become the dominant fly half in world junior rugby circles. Ford missed the 2012 Junior World Championship to concentrate on the big boys and Leicester. Pollard, one year younger than the Englishman, won the tournament with the Baby Boks. Two years later I watched an outstanding Pollard lose to Maro Itoje’s England Under-20 at Eden Park, Auckland.

That same season he graduated straight into South Africa senior ranks. Few have made a more dramatic impression in their first season. The All Blacks 22 match-winning run came to an end in 2014 in South Africa as the 20-year-old fly half scored two tries and directed operations quite superbly. He appeared destined for greatness. One year on and he was facing Dan Carter in the World Cup semi-final.

In England, the rugby nation debated the merits of Ford and Owen Farrell; South Africa knew they had their man. But ruptured knee ligaments laid waste to the fly half’s 2016 while another serious setback, this time an ankle injury, delayed his return to the big time last year. On the evidence of the Super Rugby season and Saturday afternoon in particular, he appears ready to tentatively step back on to the stage he lit up as a youth.

His game management was good. As with Ford, he has that easy passing ability but he frequently slipped into the second receiver position (as Ford does at his best) to seek out the killer pass. Four minutes from time, Pollard ran a superb line to draw two Highlanders defenders into his web and send his Bulls team-mate over for what looked the winning try.

Earlier in the game he intercepted off an intricate Highlanders midfield move to run half the field for a try. The South African commentator, Joel Stransky, a World Cup-winning fly half from 1995, wondered if Pollard thought he could make the tryline. After the injury break he doubted not so much his speed as levels of self-confidence.

By full time the 1995 drop-goal hero had forgotten any earlier qualms. Pollard produced a balanced game of running, passing and some smart tactical kicking. He is also a fine goalkicker. Pollard is not yet at his blistering best, Ford far from a disaster zone. Yet one man’s form is on the drift as the other’s tide is coming in. Nothing in rugby would give me greater pleasure than Ford and Pollard making waves, the one against the other. For that to happen Ford may need to address his slow withdrawal from the gain line.

Do Leicester have an attack coach? They have "dummy" runners, and use the pullback pass, but it's all done at such depth, and the dummy runners rarely seem to actually be options, half the time they start flat to Ford, so will never actually receive the pass, meaning the defence just gets to run past them, and go for the backs. I'm obviously biased, but when Cips is playing first receiver for Wasps, there are no dummy runners, just two lines of attack available for him to decide which to use, with everyone remaining an option, whilst still being relatively close to the defence. I know Cips likes to have a great deal of control over the attack, but our attack coach seemed to start a lot of this before Cips arrived even (his ability to pick passes obviously makes it more effective).

Barnes has a point. I think chopping and changing clubs, and coaches within, hasn’t helped Ford. I’m not sure playing with the current England set-up - both no attack/backs Coach and the style of play - has helped.
He needs to settle at Leicester and find some ‘rhythm’, and get back to playing as he was when he first broke into the Leicester 1stXV and the season Bath made the Prem final.
On form, I think he’s the best manipulator of a defensive line in the world.

I think no player can truly improve when they are their own coach. He needs someone to help him take his game to the next level. Stop treating him like a 32 year old veteran.

Risk averse is a phrase that reflects my own view on what Ford has become. He does appear to be going through the motions at times, intent on the bread and butter play rather than going for something a bit more adventurous.
Maybe thats how he is being instructed to play. If it is, then the coaches arent doing him, or their team, any favours by reigning in his creative capabilities.

I wonder how aware he is of the (bizarre) perception that he is the unreliable maverick and Farrell is the consistent one, when it’s pretty much the opposite.

I could certainly beleive he’s just trying to get through games without making a blunder that can be used as ammo for dropping him in favour of Farrell.

I also agree with a lot of the talk about attack coaches and this over-reliance on scripted dummy-runner plays. The Cipriani/Wasps conversation is interesting because they seem one of very few teams who can attack in a way that only New Zealand seem to do well, flooding a precise point in the line with attackers and trusting their distribution skills enough to get somebody through a gap.

It suits Cipriani and I think would suit Ford too. But no, we’ll just keep relying on the Lomu-esque running threat of Hartley, jogging along with his hands in his pockets, then pop it behind for Ford/Farrell and hope that an opposition defender has made a mistake somewhere.