RugbyRebels

Adam_P wrote:I'd like my 15 to be defensively solid, like Foden

are you being ironic? I really liked Foden at 15 for England for a long while, but he became very error prone in his later caps.

No, Fodens last ditch tackling and holding people up over the line is excellent

Trouble with Saints is they did what Leicester did and brought too many average PI players with the hope that they will come good IMO.

Wonder if Saints will do a cull like Tigers did soon? IMO they need it.
Too many ageing players and average players taking up cap.

Esp if they are starting to use their academy more for depth which it is looking like.

Adam_P wrote:No, Fodens last ditch tackling and holding people up over the line is excellent

It certainly was, as befitting an ex 9, but he started to miss them in an England shirt. He was terrific in top form.

I'm amused by the posters who have managed to work Saints being rag dolled up front, and subsequently walked through out wide, around to Mallinder's defence.

Never let it be said that we'll ever let go of a bone on here.

After many years championing Earle and Mallinder, today I'm giving up on both.

Both of them have all the parts to be quality players but in both cases something is missing. Mallinder just doesn't fancy it, and wasn't a ten at U20 level never mind at Premiership level.

I watch a little nfl, and Earle reminds me of those players who come out of college with the most amazing physical stats but just can't step up

bitts wrote:After many years championing Earle and Mallinder, today I'm giving up on both.

At age 22 and 21 respectively?

16th man wrote:I'm amused by the posters who have managed to work Saints being rag dolled up front, and subsequently walked through out wide, around to Mallinder's defence.

Never let it be said that we'll ever let go of a bone on here.

So how do you think Mallinder defended? Of course he wasn't culpable for the entire performance, but was symptomatic, and the game re-emphasised his weaknesses, as well as Saints other, and not unexpected, difficulties.

Not entirely sure your description of what happened up front is accurate- they were more shredded by some great handling from Brits and surprisingly Koch. Saints then defended abjectly in their own 22.

Banquo wrote:

16th man wrote:I'm amused by the posters who have managed to work Saints being rag dolled up front, and subsequently walked through out wide, around to Mallinder's defence.

Never let it be said that we'll ever let go of a bone on here.

So how do you think Mallinder defended? Of course he wasn't culpable for the entire performance, but was symptomatic, and the game re-emphasised his weaknesses, as well as Saints other, and not unexpected, difficulties.

Not entirely sure your description of what happened up front is accurate- they were more shredded by some great handling from Brits and surprisingly Koch. Saints then defended abjectly in their own 22.

He wasn't great, but he could have been smashing people like Wilco in his prime and not stemmed the flow today. He also, to my memory, wasn't one of the several saints players who had hands on Sarries players in the build up to tries, only to be shrugged off / walked through. Speciftcally singling him out just feels like confirmation bias.

Yes the Sarries handling caused Saints problems, but they made yards around the fringe and up the middle, from uncomplicated carries, that the Saints pack were powerless to stop, whilst also stopping the Saints forwards dead on the gainline, and they exerted far more pressure at the breakdown than Saints managed.

16th man wrote:

Banquo wrote:

16th man wrote:I'm amused by the posters who have managed to work Saints being rag dolled up front, and subsequently walked through out wide, around to Mallinder's defence.

Never let it be said that we'll ever let go of a bone on here.

So how do you think Mallinder defended? Of course he wasn't culpable for the entire performance, but was symptomatic, and the game re-emphasised his weaknesses, as well as Saints other, and not unexpected, difficulties.

Not entirely sure your description of what happened up front is accurate- they were more shredded by some great handling from Brits and surprisingly Koch. Saints then defended abjectly in their own 22.

He wasn't great, but he could have been smashing people like Wilco in his prime and not stemmed the flow today. He also, to my memory, wasn't one of the several saints players who had hands on Sarries players in the build up to tries, only to be shrugged off / walked through. Speciftcally singling him out just feels like confirmation bias.
oh and further to this, on 2 of Maitland's tries he was the guy getting close to making the tackle in the corner, whilst, in shot, you could see the winger and full back jogging / strolling back having given up.

Yes the Sarries handling caused Saints problems, but they made yards around the fringe and up the middle, from uncomplicated carries, that the Saints pack were powerless to stop, whilst also stopping the Saints forwards dead on the gainline, and they exerted far more pressure at the breakdown than Saints managed.

16th man wrote:

Banquo wrote:

16th man wrote:I'm amused by the posters who have managed to work Saints being rag dolled up front, and subsequently walked through out wide, around to Mallinder's defence.

Never let it be said that we'll ever let go of a bone on here.

So how do you think Mallinder defended? Of course he wasn't culpable for the entire performance, but was symptomatic, and the game re-emphasised his weaknesses, as well as Saints other, and not unexpected, difficulties.

Not entirely sure your description of what happened up front is accurate- they were more shredded by some great handling from Brits and surprisingly Koch. Saints then defended abjectly in their own 22.

He wasn't great, but he could have been smashing people like Wilco in his prime and not stemmed the flow today. He also, to my memory, wasn't one of the several saints players who had hands on Sarries players in the build up to tries, only to be shrugged off / walked through. Speciftcally singling him out just feels like confirmation bias.

Yes the Sarries handling caused Saints problems, but they made yards around the fringe and up the middle, from uncomplicated carries, that the Saints pack were powerless to stop, whilst also stopping the Saints forwards dead on the gainline, and they exerted far more pressure at the breakdown than Saints managed.

It came from a discussion about centre pairings in parallel to the game, and he also happened to be the guy who missed the most tackles on the Saints team, including not laying a finger on Brits running straight through his channel. The 'bias' exists for a reason, namely his defence has been and remains very weak, which is an issue as a centre.
Think you are slightly awry on the relative dents made by the forwards in 'tight carrying' as well; Sarries made their forward inroads mainly from Koch and Brits (with some average defence from saints, its true), and all of lawes, Waller, Ludlam and Wood had some joy carrying as well. So 'rag dolling' seems a bit OTT. What I saw was very smart lines from Sarries to get beyond the gainline, and then very weak scramble defence thereafter from Saints; Saints themselves did reasonably ball in hand, but Sarries scramble defence reacted better.

I agree that Mallinder wasn't really a standout culprit, but his defence was pants....and the rest of his game underwhelming frankly, but always difficult to be a 10 in a game where the whole team is imploding.

(I responded before your edit, which makes no difference anyway. I get you want Mallinder to succeed, and he is young, but he is going to have to defend a lot better to succeed at the highest level. 8 tackles attempted, 5 missed)

16th man wrote:

bitts wrote:After many years championing Earle and Mallinder, today I'm giving up on both.

At age 22 and 21 respectively?

To be fair, if we'd given up on 12T a little bit earlier, then we'd all be happier!

Puja

Puja wrote:

16th man wrote:

bitts wrote:After many years championing Earle and Mallinder, today I'm giving up on both.

At age 22 and 21 respectively?

To be fair, if we'd given up on 12T a little bit earlier, then we'd all be happier!

Puja

I just think that if the problem's with Earle and Mallinder's games could have been fixed, they would have been.

FYI, Mallinder's cover tackling was good last season. It's when someone's running head on he goes missing.

Puja wrote:

16th man wrote:

bitts wrote:After many years championing Earle and Mallinder, today I'm giving up on both.

At age 22 and 21 respectively?

To be fair, if we'd given up on 12T a little bit earlier, then we'd all be happier!

Puja

I'd have stuck with Twelvetrees back then, certainly so if the other options were Barrett, Burgess, Burrell or Farrell.

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

16th man wrote:
At age 22 and 21 respectively?

To be fair, if we'd given up on 12T a little bit earlier, then we'd all be happier!

Puja

I'd have stuck with Twelvetrees back then, certainly so if the other options were Barrett, Burgess, Burrell or Farrell.

I still think Barritt's underrated (on here). Use him properly, as Sarries do and he's an effective player. We should have accepted our limitations and played to them rather than praying for a miracle in 12T.

Puja

Barritt has improved season on season, when he played for England he was very limited. Now he's passing, putting in grubbers, and carrying half decently. He's the living embodiment of Saracens as a team, from pure brutish defence, to something far more capable.

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
To be fair, if we'd given up on 12T a little bit earlier, then we'd all be happier!

Puja

I'd have stuck with Twelvetrees back then, certainly so if the other options were Barrett, Burgess, Burrell or Farrell.

I still think Barritt's underrated (on here). Use him properly, as Sarries do and he's an effective player. We should have accepted our limitations and played to them rather than praying for a miracle in 12T.

Puja

If Barrett is underrated he's very welcome to play some 7s and head off to gain some Saffer caps. And yes he's improved, but not to a sensible test standard.

Raggs wrote:Barritt has improved season on season, when he played for England he was very limited. Now he's passing, putting in grubbers, and carrying half decently. He's the living embodiment of Saracens as a team, from pure brutish defence, to something far more capable.

Aye. He does seem to have flourished in some way since being ditched by England. Though he wouldn't be the first to look class for Saracens and unable to really replicate it for England. The blame for that probably lays at the feet of a few people though.

Raggs wrote:Barritt has improved season on season, when he played for England he was very limited. Now he's passing, putting in grubbers, and carrying half decently. He's the living embodiment of Saracens as a team, from pure brutish defence, to something far more capable.

I would suggest he was always doing that stuff for sarries, at least to a degree. I have always rated him, and he is a coaches dream tbh. He was never going to look stunning internationally tho as his running is merely average or worse at that level. He does a lot of very good things that don't get recognised.

Saints very poor but take nothing away from Saracens who did put together some highly impressive periods of play. They were a class above to be fair. Lozowski is developing nicely.

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Barritt has improved season on season, when he played for England he was very limited. Now he's passing, putting in grubbers, and carrying half decently. He's the living embodiment of Saracens as a team, from pure brutish defence, to something far more capable.

I would suggest he was always doing that stuff for sarries, at least to a degree. I have always rated him, and he is a coaches dream tbh. He was never going to look stunning internationally tho as his running is merely average or worse at that level. He does a lot of very good things that don't get recognised.

He operates well within a particular club system against club opposition. I see him as an outstanding club servant who simply could not step up a level, especially when required to think on his feet and adapt his game. Just as a matter of interest, was he ever played between Ford and Joseph?

2/9/17 - Hartley: ‘Its bad lads but let’s put it behind us. It can’t get any worse.’
14/10/17 - Wood: ‘Time for revenge boys.’
15/10/17 - Hartley: ‘Ok, so it can get worse. Let’s draw a line in the sand.’
19/1/18 - Hartley: ‘Fresh heads boys. What’s gone is gone. New start, don’t think about the last result.’
20/1/18 - Wood: ‘I expect better lads. They’ve got in to your head. Next time we...wait what’s that? Interview time. Sort yourselves out lads.’
6/5/18 - Wood: ‘No repeat of the last match lads. We’re progressively getting worse. Let’s get out there and smash them.’
7/5/18 - Hartley: ‘Are you doing this on ****ing purpose. I’m going for a beer.’

Certainly depressing stuff. We were at least competitive for the first 40 which we haven't managed against Sarries in the previous games. Reece Marshall played well on his first start too, but other than that it was poor all round. Almost as if there wasn't a team playing against Sarries in the second half once the tries started coming in

That frankly is embarrassing and unacceptable for a pro side. Boyd has quite a job on his hands.

I did note that young Painter got a 20 min run at TH. Big powerful lad with loads of potential.

Yes Painter is an absolute monster, hoping to see a lot more of him next season