RugbyRebels

twitchy wrote:If you think about it what really is mass? Like we are all just energy man. A mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass

Here to help.

Puja

Pass me the bong.

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:He really should be fixed on Robshaw at 6. He's still churning out quality performances and the only risk to him is his inevitable exhaustion and burnout. He should never have gone to South Africa, especially not to be f*cked about. Hopefully Quins will do the right thing by him and rest him for the European weekends.

Puja

Robshaw was miles off the pace in SA, and even allowing for fatigue I don't see much that makes him an obvious candidate to succeed at test level unless the rest of his pack really covers his lack of pace

Maybe we can get away with having a more turgid player in a Hartley or a Robshaw, but if we start stacking the pack with them we'd better start some rain dances

The difference between him and Hughes is that Robshaw *has* succeeded at test level in the past. He was rubbish in South Africa, but the poor sod's been carrying Quins for years and doing the donkey work for England all season (and basically beig the only working back row for most of the 6N selections). He needed a rest.

He's now turning in typical tireless performances for Quins and looks to be in prime form. He's not a turgid player that you get away with - he's the glue that allows others to shine. Yes, it'd be nice if he had a bit more pace, but I'd rather have someone at 6 who keeps running and grinds himself into the ground for the team than someone with more flash and less work ethic.

Puja

If he's the best we've got we're not very good, I'm not certain he's the best we could be, but I've long been less than enamoured so it's possible I can't see the wood for the trees

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
Robshaw was miles off the pace in SA, and even allowing for fatigue I don't see much that makes him an obvious candidate to succeed at test level unless the rest of his pack really covers his lack of pace

Maybe we can get away with having a more turgid player in a Hartley or a Robshaw, but if we start stacking the pack with them we'd better start some rain dances

The difference between him and Hughes is that Robshaw *has* succeeded at test level in the past. He was rubbish in South Africa, but the poor sod's been carrying Quins for years and doing the donkey work for England all season (and basically beig the only working back row for most of the 6N selections). He needed a rest.

He's now turning in typical tireless performances for Quins and looks to be in prime form. He's not a turgid player that you get away with - he's the glue that allows others to shine. Yes, it'd be nice if he had a bit more pace, but I'd rather have someone at 6 who keeps running and grinds himself into the ground for the team than someone with more flash and less work ethic.

Puja

we're not very good,

It's this.

It's a fair charge, and you can't suddenly find a new Richard Hill. But I do object to us not trying to be the best we could be

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
Robshaw was miles off the pace in SA, and even allowing for fatigue I don't see much that makes him an obvious candidate to succeed at test level unless the rest of his pack really covers his lack of pace

Maybe we can get away with having a more turgid player in a Hartley or a Robshaw, but if we start stacking the pack with them we'd better start some rain dances

The difference between him and Hughes is that Robshaw *has* succeeded at test level in the past. He was rubbish in South Africa, but the poor sod's been carrying Quins for years and doing the donkey work for England all season (and basically beig the only working back row for most of the 6N selections). He needed a rest.

He's now turning in typical tireless performances for Quins and looks to be in prime form. He's not a turgid player that you get away with - he's the glue that allows others to shine. Yes, it'd be nice if he had a bit more pace, but I'd rather have someone at 6 who keeps running and grinds himself into the ground for the team than someone with more flash and less work ethic.

Puja

If he's the best we've got we're not very good, I'm not certain he's the best we could be, but I've long been less than enamoured so it's possible I can't see the wood for the trees

I really do think you're significantly underestimating him. Hopefully he'll show his non-knackered performances again this autumn and we won't just have a thrid second row selected, again. Or Shields parachuted in without form. Or Rhodes parachuted in for no reason apart from being from the SH and Eddie liking the cut of his jib.

In fact, even if I didn't rate Robshaw, one look at some of Eddie's alternatives would make me thankful we have him!

Puja

I'm not enamoured of a number of options Eddie is looking at additional to Robshaw. But then we're back to Eddie thinks we're shit at rugby and can only be trusted with a specific type of game

I still think Eddie is a good coach, and without doubt he's had success with England, but it's not ambitious or progressive stuff

I'd be happy to give Wilson a go at 6, wouldnt be fussed if Ross got the call and i'm a big Armand admirer, but really Robshaw has invariably delivered for England and seems to be in very good form this season (he was excellent against Saracens).

Don't get me started on armand.

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
Robshaw was miles off the pace in SA, and even allowing for fatigue I don't see much that makes him an obvious candidate to succeed at test level unless the rest of his pack really covers his lack of pace

Maybe we can get away with having a more turgid player in a Hartley or a Robshaw, but if we start stacking the pack with them we'd better start some rain dances

The difference between him and Hughes is that Robshaw *has* succeeded at test level in the past. He was rubbish in South Africa, but the poor sod's been carrying Quins for years and doing the donkey work for England all season (and basically beig the only working back row for most of the 6N selections). He needed a rest.

He's now turning in typical tireless performances for Quins and looks to be in prime form. He's not a turgid player that you get away with - he's the glue that allows others to shine. Yes, it'd be nice if he had a bit more pace, but I'd rather have someone at 6 who keeps running and grinds himself into the ground for the team than someone with more flash and less work ethic.

Puja

If he's the best we've got we're not very good, I'm not certain he's the best we could be, but I've long been less than enamoured so it's possible I can't see the wood for the trees

Robshaw may not get into the NZ team nor the SA team now they've discovered Kolisi, but he's a damn good player. He has excellent reading of the game, he invaiably makes his tackles, and lots of them, and he rarely breaks down.

There is a strong case for replacing him sooner or later. It would be fantastic to add some extra carrying ability, better handling and pace to the backrow. But the question is: who? Underhill can tick one of those boxes only. Ross and Rhodes again tick one, at most 2 of those boxes. Shields could tick them all, but we've hardly had a chance to see that, have we? That leaves the kids. I think Mercer could be a great 6, he's quick, carries very well, has good hands and can sill make his tackles.

I don't think it's unreasonable, at all, to suggest Robshaw is our absolute best BSF going into the WC. There's no way he should continue after, mind.

Willis

Raggs wrote:Willis

Any updates on him?

Nothing new that I'm aware of.

Well, Mercer's going to get a run at no 8 for Bath - Faletau is confirmed as having broken his arm last week and is out for the AIs.

Puja

Stom wrote:
Robshaw may not get into the NZ team nor the SA team now they've discovered Kolisi, but he's a damn good player. He has excellent reading of the game, he invaiably makes his tackles, and lots of them, and he rarely breaks down.

.

May not? It's not just those two either, it's quite likely the only 6N team who'd start him is England. he's hardly a bad player, and he puts in some exceptional efforts but for me he does lack some skills, he can't maintain a huge workrate to overcome that and he lacks pace to cover any mistakes

twitchy wrote:

Raggs wrote:Willis

Any updates on him?

I imagine Eddie would've liked to have tried him at 7 in SA except for his injury. He seems to tick most of Eddie's current Eng 7 requirements.

England have a ton of 6's yet the Ewok is still faffing around with converted locks and importing Johnny Foreigner.

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:
Robshaw may not get into the NZ team nor the SA team now they've discovered Kolisi, but he's a damn good player. He has excellent reading of the game, he invaiably makes his tackles, and lots of them, and he rarely breaks down.

.

May not? It's not just those two either, it's quite likely the only 6N team who'd start him is England. he's hardly a bad player, and he puts in some exceptional efforts but for me he does lack some skills, he can't maintain a huge workrate to overcome that and he lacks pace to cover any mistakes

May not... but. It's a phrase.

You really think Scotland, Wales, Italy and France would pass him up? And I think he'd have a good chance with Ireland, too. He's a damn good player. Just because he doesn't fit your model of Kvesic, doesn't mean he's not a classy operator.

But he does maintain a huge workrate. A superman workrate, tbh. His positioning in defense is one of the best, plus he's possibly the best defensive organiser around right now. His tackle technique is superb, he's not a slouch (but, of course not the best) at the breakdown, he recycles possession very well and understands the tactical flow of a game and when to slow down and when to speed up.

Just because he's not an explosive carrier nor particularly fast doesn't make him an "OK" player. He's a lot better than that.

Not to say we shouldn't be looking at upgrades, we absolutely should. There just aren't any. Yet. Willis could come back perfect for the job. If Underhill keeps improving in attack, he could do so. Shields could take over. Then there is Clifford (if ever fit), Mercer at 6 or one of the young Prem backrows currently getting gametime.

But none of them have been anywhere near Robshaw's standards recently, either due to class, form or injury.

Why can't the AP slacken off on player release for the extra AI in the run-up to the RWC? It does England no favours to play a SA XV missing 4 players. Why not rearrange the club matches, come to that? I think there needs to be a re-think on the whole business. There should be no club matches during AIs or 6N and the 6N should have no gap weeks.

Stom wrote:Not to say we shouldn't be looking at upgrades, we absolutely should. There just aren't any. Yet. Willis could come back perfect for the job. If Underhill keeps improving in attack, he could do so. Shields could take over. Then there is Clifford (if ever fit), Mercer at 6 or one of the young Prem backrows currently getting gametime.

But none of them have been anywhere near Robshaw's standards recently, either due to class, form or injury.

Thanks Stom. +1 on both of your last posts. Saved me the effort.

Oakboy wrote:Why can't the AP slacken off on player release for the extra AI in the run-up to the RWC? It does England no favours to play a SA XV missing 4 players. Why not rearrange the club matches, come to that? I think there needs to be a re-think on the whole business. There should be no club matches during AIs or 6N and the 6N should have no gap weeks.

Just read this on the BBC. So why do English players get released out side of the window? Is there an extra clause?

JellyHead wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Why can't the AP slacken off on player release for the extra AI in the run-up to the RWC? It does England no favours to play a SA XV missing 4 players. Why not rearrange the club matches, come to that? I think there needs to be a re-think on the whole business. There should be no club matches during AIs or 6N and the 6N should have no gap weeks.

Just read this on the BBC. So why do English players get released out side of the window? Is there an extra clause?

The RFU pays the clubs for release. The PRL have already stated in the past that they'd be happy to talk to other unions about making similar arrangements.

Raggs wrote: The RFU pays the clubs for release. The PRL have already stated in the past that they'd be happy to talk to other unions about making similar arrangements.

Cheers.

Oakboy wrote:Why can't the AP slacken off on player release for the extra AI in the run-up to the RWC? It does England no favours to play a SA XV missing 4 players. Why not rearrange the club matches, come to that? I think there needs to be a re-think on the whole business. There should be no club matches during AIs or 6N and the 6N should have no gap weeks.

They would argue why can't national teams just organise 3 autumn internationals inside the release window. I agree with you on there shouldn't be club games in international weekends, but where else are you going to fit them into the season? It's a quart into a pint pot and until they accept Which's manifesto of having 16-20 clubs in two divisions of 8-10, there's going to be more games than there are eligible weekends.

I don't know it's such a bad thing for England. We were complaining a few months back that it was a brutal start to the AIs with the two best teams, both coming off the back of the RC, first up. Playing a weaker Springboks will give us a chance to get our patterns together and get into our stride before facing New Zealand.

Puja