Australia vs England - First Test

[Banquo]

Out of interest - why is Smith as typecast as he seems to be in here?

Just because he plays one way, with one type of IC for Quins, really doesn't mean that he can't play any other way, or with any other type of IC.

If we apply that same logic, then no FH in history has ever been able to play without their club-mate, or a carbon copy, at IC. Hell, for Smith we're also told that he can't play with Care or Care-like at SH and Dombrandt or Dambrandt-like at 8.

Has any FH ever had his club mates at 8, 9 and 12 (except Sexton, and no-one would ever claim that not providing them is setting him up to fail).

For me, in his internationals to date, he has looked as if he needed a running 12 on his shoulder - I watched him closely v Wales, as I was there, and it was obvious that he needed help- and its a function of the way he currently plays, he looks to create space through footwork at present a lot of the time, and when that doesn't work, he needs a bail out. So the jury is out for me as how he adapts that style into intl rugby where its a bit tighter; maybe a more experienced at 12 intl in Faz will help.

[Banquo]

Out of interest - why is Smith as typecast as he seems to be in here?

Just because he plays one way, with one type of IC for Quins, really doesn't mean that he can't play any other way, or with any other type of IC.

If we apply that same logic, then no FH in history has ever been able to play without their club-mate, or a carbon copy, at IC. Hell, for Smith we're also told that he can't play with Care or Care-like at SH and Dombrandt or Dambrandt-like at 8.

Has any FH ever had his club mates at 8, 9 and 12 (except Sexton, and no-one would ever claim that not providing them is setting him up to fail).
Has any FH every not looked better with a get-out-of-jail-free IC like Esterhuizen or Tuilagi? were they all incapable of playing without one?

Well yes. Same with Curry who apparently only ever runs into contact, completely negating his often late offloads and his ability to step. You shag one sheep and all that.

Not a great analogy, as Curry has a bank of varied international work. But as above, it could be chicken and egg for Smith.

[Mikey Brown]

as ever, and I will take it on the chin as guilty, we are focusing on the wrong bit of the selection- I blame Faz. Will the pack produce is the 1st question?

Lol. I swear the whole last page was a response to you saying the backs were slow and the midfield wasn’t good enough.

Of course we need the pack to perform. I’ve given up trying to guess how any England side will actually turn out on the day though. Again not much personnel wise that many would change in the pack, so it’s down to having some sort of faith in the coaching set up.

[Epaminondas Pules]

I like that squad. From what is actually available that's pretty decent. As good an all round pack as he can probably pick. Minor arguments over who plays hooker (one of which hasn't really played in a while) and Hill. The backrow is hardly pedestrian, and Billy is the form 8.....and frankly just about all that's available. Club combo at halfback. Probably the best midfield he can pick and a solid back three albeit lacking in pace, both options for which have never played international rugby, let alone away in Australia. Pack bench looks decent, albeit I'd prefer an alternative to Ludlam, as I think the other options are better. The backs are raw, but also quite exciting, and cover multiple positions.

I'm surprised no Randall, but beyond that it's a relatively low argument of Porter or Dingwall or Freeman or Arundell.

I agree, but its so underwhelming in the backs.

The alternative is basically play an exciting rookie and erm.....erm......play two exciting rookies? I know you've already said there's little option other than what he's picked. I just don't get all the fun sponges bemoaning when there's frankly fuck all else in the cupboard, and in some positions, like 12 there's nothing beyond Manu that's really worth anything or would worry anyone. From what there is it is pretty good and we get a look at Arundell, which is a massive bonus.

[Epaminondas Pules]

Out of interest - why is Smith as typecast as he seems to be in here?

Just because he plays one way, with one type of IC for Quins, really doesn't mean that he can't play any other way, or with any other type of IC.

If we apply that same logic, then no FH in history has ever been able to play without their club-mate, or a carbon copy, at IC. Hell, for Smith we're also told that he can't play with Care or Care-like at SH and Dombrandt or Dambrandt-like at 8.

Has any FH ever had his club mates at 8, 9 and 12 (except Sexton, and no-one would ever claim that not providing them is setting him up to fail).
Has any FH every not looked better with a get-out-of-jail-free IC like Esterhuizen or Tuilagi? were they all incapable of playing without one?

Well yes. Same with Curry who apparently only ever runs into contact, completely negating his often late offloads and his ability to step. You shag one sheep and all that.

Not a great analogy, as Curry has a bank of varied international work. But as above, it could be chicken and egg for Smith.

Maybe it's that it is an unknown, which should be exciting, whereas here it is generally seen as a negative. We should want to see if Smith can play with other options as his only club like player available to us anywhere is Manu, so playing with alternative is kind of a must. But all hinges on the pack anyway, so somewhat moot.

[Banquo]

I like that squad. From what is actually available that's pretty decent. As good an all round pack as he can probably pick. Minor arguments over who plays hooker (one of which hasn't really played in a while) and Hill. The backrow is hardly pedestrian, and Billy is the form 8.....and frankly just about all that's available. Club combo at halfback. Probably the best midfield he can pick and a solid back three albeit lacking in pace, both options for which have never played international rugby, let alone away in Australia. Pack bench looks decent, albeit I'd prefer an alternative to Ludlam, as I think the other options are better. The backs are raw, but also quite exciting, and cover multiple positions.

I'm surprised no Randall, but beyond that it's a relatively low argument of Porter or Dingwall or Freeman or Arundell.

I agree, but its so underwhelming in the backs.

The alternative is basically play an exciting rookie and erm.....erm......play two exciting rookies? I know you've already said there's little option other than what he's picked. I just don't get all the fun sponges bemoaning when there's frankly fuck all else in the cupboard, and in some positions, like 12 there's nothing beyond Manu that's really worth anything or would worry anyone. From what there is it is pretty good and we get a look at Arundell, which is a massive bonus.

That's the point I've made- the experienced cupboard is pretty bare. But ok, lets hope for the best eh.

[Banquo]

as ever, and I will take it on the chin as guilty, we are focusing on the wrong bit of the selection- I blame Faz. Will the pack produce is the 1st question?

Lol. I swear the whole last page was a response to you saying the backs were slow and the midfield wasn’t good enough.

Of course we need the pack to perform. I’ve given up trying to guess how any England side will actually turn out on the day though. Again not much personnel wise that many would change in the pack, so it’s down to having some sort of faith in the coaching set up.

That is why I said guilty as charged!

[Banquo]

Well yes. Same with Curry who apparently only ever runs into contact, completely negating his often late offloads and his ability to step. You shag one sheep and all that.

Not a great analogy, as Curry has a bank of varied international work. But as above, it could be chicken and egg for Smith.

Maybe it's that it is an unknown, which should be exciting, whereas here it is generally seen as a negative. We should want to see if Smith can play with other options as his only club like player available to us anywhere is Manu, so playing with alternative is kind of a must. But all hinges on the pack anyway, so somewhat moot.

yes, as I said . I'm just concerned that giving him the same set up which has struggled before is going to get the same results- lets just hope the pack turns up and that more thinking has occurred.

[Epaminondas Pules]

I agree, but its so underwhelming in the backs.

The alternative is basically play an exciting rookie and erm.....erm......play two exciting rookies? I know you've already said there's little option other than what he's picked. I just don't get all the fun sponges bemoaning when there's frankly fuck all else in the cupboard, and in some positions, like 12 there's nothing beyond Manu that's really worth anything or would worry anyone. From what there is it is pretty good and we get a look at Arundell, which is a massive bonus.

That's the point I've made- the experienced cupboard is pretty bare. But ok, lets hope for the best eh.

Well the alternative is to be dour, and what's the point in that? You / We / Eddie Jones can't do anything about it. There is excitement to be had. The pack looks robust, Billy looks in form and hungry, Smith gets more experience with his club 9 this time (arguably the form 9), the bench pack looks like it'll make an impact and we get to see a couple of really exciting youngsters.

[Puja]

From what there is it is pretty good and we get a look at Arundell, which is a massive bonus.

Quick question, as I don't know the answer - can Arundell play winger? I've realised that I have only ever seen him play 15 and, while "he's a bit quick" is normally a good marker for a winger, I don't actually know if he has any experience there at all. When Nowell inevitably gets injured, can he just slot in there or will he go to 15 and Steward on the wing?

Actually, having said that, when Nowell gets injured in the 6th minute, I suspect it'd probably be Porter that comes on. I reckon he's the like-for-like Nowell replacement in Eddie's eyes.

Puja

[Banquo]

The alternative is basically play an exciting rookie and erm.....erm......play two exciting rookies? I know you've already said there's little option other than what he's picked. I just don't get all the fun sponges bemoaning when there's frankly fuck all else in the cupboard, and in some positions, like 12 there's nothing beyond Manu that's really worth anything or would worry anyone. From what there is it is pretty good and we get a look at Arundell, which is a massive bonus.

That's the point I've made- the experienced cupboard is pretty bare. But ok, lets hope for the best eh.

Well the alternative is to be dour, and what's the point in that? You / We / Eddie Jones can't do anything about it. There is excitement to be had. The pack looks robust, Billy looks in form and hungry, Smith gets more experience with his club 9 this time (arguably the form 9), the bench pack looks like it'll make an impact and we get to see a couple of really exciting youngsters.

as above, reasonably happy with the pack. I shall stop complaining as all is well - but i agree (and did above) that its likely the best we can do.

[Puja]

The alternative is basically play an exciting rookie and erm.....erm......play two exciting rookies? I know you've already said there's little option other than what he's picked. I just don't get all the fun sponges bemoaning when there's frankly fuck all else in the cupboard, and in some positions, like 12 there's nothing beyond Manu that's really worth anything or would worry anyone. From what there is it is pretty good and we get a look at Arundell, which is a massive bonus.

That's the point I've made- the experienced cupboard is pretty bare. But ok, lets hope for the best eh.

Well the alternative is to be dour, and what's the point in that? You / We / Eddie Jones can't do anything about it. There is excitement to be had. The pack looks robust, Billy looks in form and hungry, Smith gets more experience with his club 9 this time (arguably the form 9), the bench pack looks like it'll make an impact and we get to see a couple of really exciting youngsters.

I'd say people who argue that either haven't watched Mitchell this season or are Eddie Jones (or both).

Overall, I agree with you - let's travel hopefully so that we can have our hopes properly crushed on Saturday.

Puja

[Which Tyler]

For me, in his internationals to date, he has looked as if he needed a running 12 on his shoulder - I watched him closely v Wales, as I was there, and it was obvious that he needed help- and its a function of the way he currently plays, he looks to create space through footwork at present a lot of the time, and when that doesn't work, he needs a bail out. So the jury is out for me as how he adapts that style into intl rugby where its a bit tighter; maybe a more experienced at 12 intl in Faz will help.

Don't get me wrong - I'm usually about the most negative on Smith here - because I don't think he's ready yet, because his vision is pretty narrow, and I don't think he's good at controlling a game.

He needs to learn to see space/mismatches for players who aren't him, and especially needs to see space/mismatches more than 1 pass away. He also needs to get better at reading the game phase by phase, and doing what's needed for 3 phases time, and when it's best to bail.
Beyond that, he needs to adjust to the extra pace at international level, which closes down most of the gaps he does see, by the time he's got the ball in his hands.
All of which is basically "he needs more experience"

If he can get those skills, then he'll be an all-time great, and if we want him ready for France'23, then he needs every minute of game time we can get into him. It's sacrificing the now, to maximise the future. If he doesn't, we can bring Ford back in (which personally, I would do anyway, but that's me).

But I don't see how he's being set up to fail, or is incapable of playing with different players around him, and I think that's doing his talent an injustice.

[Banquo]

For me, in his internationals to date, he has looked as if he needed a running 12 on his shoulder - I watched him closely v Wales, as I was there, and it was obvious that he needed help- and its a function of the way he currently plays, he looks to create space through footwork at present a lot of the time, and when that doesn't work, he needs a bail out. So the jury is out for me as how he adapts that style into intl rugby where its a bit tighter; maybe a more experienced at 12 intl in Faz will help.

Don't get me wrong - I'm usually about the most negative on Smith here - because I don't think he's ready yet, because his vision is pretty narrow, and I don't think he's good at controlling a game.

He needs to learn to see space/mismatches for players who aren't him, and especially needs to see space/mismatches more than 1 pass away. He also needs to get better at reading the game phase by phase, and doing what's needed for 3 phases time, and when it's best to bail.
Beyond that, he needs to adjust to the extra pace at international level, which closes down most of the gaps he does see, by the time he's got the ball in his hands.
All of which is basically "he needs more experience"

If he can get those skills, then he'll be an all-time great, and if we want him ready for France'23, then he needs every minute of game time we can get into him. It's sacrificing the now, to maximise the future. If he doesn't, we can bring Ford back in (which personally, I would do anyway, but that's me).

But I don't see how he's being set up to fail, or is incapable of playing with different players around him, and I think that's doing his talent an injustice.

well yes. Not sure we are disagreeing- ideally he'd have some different help around him, but he hasn't.

[Banquo]

Out of interest - why is Smith as typecast as he seems to be in here?

Just because he plays one way, with one type of IC for Quins, really doesn't mean that he can't play any other way, or with any other type of IC.

If we apply that same logic, then no FH in history has ever been able to play without their club-mate, or a carbon copy, at IC. Hell, for Smith we're also told that he can't play with Care or Care-like at SH and Dombrandt or Dambrandt-like at 8.

Has any FH ever had his club mates at 8, 9 and 12 (except Sexton, and no-one would ever claim that not providing them is setting him up to fail).
Has any FH every not looked better with a get-out-of-jail-free IC like Esterhuizen or Tuilagi? were they all incapable of playing without one?

Well that's partly what I'm aiming at- imo he needs a different set up to thrive at this point. and to your last point, and my previous one, the team was thriving when that combo was 'tearing sides apart' with a quicker back three and a pack making big dents up front.

Quicker back 3? wasn't it Nowell and Brown on the wings?
I'd be surprised if Nowell was hugely quicker than Nowell, and Coka is definitely quicker than Brown.

I revised my view having looked it up but the point on pack remains (and Watson was quick then , and Nowell younger and less injured....not a serious point)

[Mellsblue]

Had a quick look at ‘16 & ‘17 6N (as who has time to look at all the matches and it should give a flavour) and there always seemed to be one flyer with another one on the bench. Away from that I’d always say we look more dangerous with 2 out of Watson, May and Daly on the wing than any other combo. The Brown at 11 argument is a red herring as he was replaced by the pace of Daly at 15 and it was soon discarded, iirc, if only to repeat the mistake with Steward many years later.
Nobody is asking for Eng to replicate Quins in their entirety but this looks about as far away from it as is possible, other than having teammates at 9 & 13.
Fun sponges or critical thinkers, who knows? If we were all cheerleaders with a penchant for the liberal use of the exclamation mark this would be a dull place. Perhaps we were all once cheerleaders but years of being underwhelmed bar the RWC 2007 fluke and 90% of RWC 2019 has beaten it out of us with the last two seasons being the dog turd icing on the cow pat cake.

[Scrumhead]

The side isn’t exactly what I’d have selected, but I’m mostly pretty pleased with it and I’m at least hopeful we can play some decent rugby.

I think it’s somewhat of an exaggeration to say Smith needs an Esterhuizen type to play well. We have that option at Quins, so of course we’re going to use it. It doesn’t mean it’s the only system he can succeed in.

[Oakboy]

I'm intrigued with this debate. I think Hill, Itoje and Lawes should guarantee line-out ball. The scrum should compete even if it does not dominate. I suspect that we'll get a decent amount of ball at ruck time.

So, all-in-all, that could mean enough ball to allow the backs to be creative, perhaps to a game-winning extent.

What bothers me is that Farrell and Care naturally, and Smith by instruction, will simply kick too much possession away. With no 'gas-merchants' to chase, where are points to come from?

[Epaminondas Pules]

From what there is it is pretty good and we get a look at Arundell, which is a massive bonus.

Quick question, as I don't know the answer - can Arundell play winger? I've realised that I have only ever seen him play 15 and, while "he's a bit quick" is normally a good marker for a winger, I don't actually know if he has any experience there at all. When Nowell inevitably gets injured, can he just slot in there or will he go to 15 and Steward on the wing?

Actually, having said that, when Nowell gets injured in the 6th minute, I suspect it'd probably be Porter that comes on. I reckon he's the like-for-like Nowell replacement in Eddie's eyes.

Puja

He can, and yes I'd expect Porter to be the safe / EJ choice in the 6th minute.

[FKAS]

What bothers me is that Farrell and Care naturally, and Smith by instruction, will simply kick too much possession away. With no 'gas-merchants' to chase, where are points to come from?

Care's issue normally is that he doesn't kick until he has to by which point he kicks from a place of weakness and his box kicking isn't a strong point of his game.

Steward is excellent on the kick chase, Nowell and Cokanasiga pretty good as well. As long as the kicks as weighted well enough that's not an area that will concern me. Farrell is good at ensuring the ball comes down with snow on it.

[Raggs]

Going back a bit, but didn't Coka terrorise aus last time he played them?

[Banquo]

I'm intrigued with this debate. I think Hill, Itoje and Lawes should guarantee line-out ball. The scrum should compete even if it does not dominate. I suspect that we'll get a decent amount of ball at ruck time.

So, all-in-all, that could mean enough ball to allow the backs to be creative, perhaps to a game-winning extent.

What bothers me is that Farrell and Care naturally, and Smith by instruction, will simply kick too much possession away. With no 'gas-merchants' to chase, where are points to come from?

Quality of ball is the issue.

[Stom]

I'll be honest in saying my foibles with this selection are the same ones I've had for ages: the backrow.

I think it's slow. I think we've picked a 1-5 who are agile and get involved in the play, and then we've picked Lawes at 6 to totally negate that. It's like he's a safety blanket. And then Ludlam on the bench, too. Why, I don't know. We have this guy called Willis, he's pretty good. Why isn't he in the 23 at all? That's what I don't get.

[Banquo]

I'll be honest in saying my foibles with this selection are the same ones I've had for ages: the backrow.

I think it's slow. I think we've picked a 1-5 who are agile and get involved in the play, and then we've picked Lawes at 6 to totally negate that. It's like he's a safety blanket. And then Ludlam on the bench, too. Why, I don't know. We have this guy called Willis, he's pretty good. Why isn't he in the 23 at all? That's what I don't get.

top notch lineout and big tackles (and in fairness improved carrying) v turnovers, mobility and breakdown; Ludlam offers more versatility across the backrow. That's all I've got . I'd have gone for Willis somewhere for sure.

[Puja]

Going back a bit, but didn't Coka terrorise aus last time he played them?

Terrorise might be a bit strong, but he did knock someone out on his way to a try:



Puja