RugbyRebels

Is this peak RR, when Spencer's lack of international status is blamed on Farrell? One would think that coaches would have an issue with such a negative presence.

Scrumhead wrote:Changing the subject slightly, I now feel like I was 100% right in bemoaning our lack of effort to secure Jake Polledri.

On the one hand, I think he already had a bit of commitment to Italy, but on the other it didn’t seem like we made much of an effort to go after him.

IMO, he’s the form 8 in the Premiership and is developing in to a fine player. Feels wasted in an Italian team that’s shown no signs of getting better.

He already was a very fine player, and I also bemoaned his loss. As you say, its probably more his loss than anything, as it were.

I guess it depends on your ambitions. Perhaps he wanted to be the main man which isn’t something he would have had with England.

Scrumhead wrote:I guess it depends on your ambitions. Perhaps he wanted to be the main man which isn’t something he would have had with England.

Or maybe he felt a strong connection to Italy given his father and him playing all the age groups for Italy?

Puja

Puja wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:I guess it depends on your ambitions. Perhaps he wanted to be the main man which isn’t something he would have had with England.

Or maybe he felt a strong connection to Italy given his father and him playing all the age groups for Italy?

Puja

Nah, can't have been that, he was born in England, according to some, that must mean that he can only possibly want to play for England, and shouldn't have ties or strong feelings to any other country...

Scrumhead wrote:I guess it depends on your ambitions. Perhaps he wanted to be the main man which isn’t something he would have had with England.

Maybe not. Or maybe if surrounded by better players he would be outstanding- even with our excellent back row options, I'd think he's a better carrier than most.

Raggs wrote:

Puja wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:I guess it depends on your ambitions. Perhaps he wanted to be the main man which isn’t something he would have had with England.

Or maybe he felt a strong connection to Italy given his father and him playing all the age groups for Italy?

Puja

Nah, can't have been that, he was born in England, according to some, that must mean that he can only possibly want to play for England, and shouldn't have ties or strong feelings to any other country...

As was his dad, who played and captained age group rugby for England. So its possibly a bit more opportunistic, no problem with that though.

I don’t have a problem with him taking the opportunity to play for Italy at all. All I’m saying is that we didn’t really force him to make a choice.

He (and his dad) are born in raised in England. Had he been given the option of playing for us, I think he would have had to have a long, hard think about it at the very least. I just don’t know that the choice was that clear.

Personally, I think he declared a little too early. Had he given it another season, I think he would have stood a good chance of making the England squad and might even have taken the spot Ludlam did for the RWC.

Dont forget Polledri was playing in NL1 a couple of seasons back. he was never on the England radar, either at senior or at junior level. He never played for Bristol in the League and wasnt remotely in contention for an age grade place.
You can understand why he opted to go with Italy as England hadnt shown any interest, and his prospect of making it in England appeared pretty slim when he was slogging it out with Hartpury.

fivepointer wrote:Dont forget Polledri was playing in NL1 a couple of seasons back. he was never on the England radar, either at senior or at junior level. He never played for Bristol in the League and wasnt remotely in contention for an age grade place.
You can understand why he opted to go with Italy as England hadnt shown any interest, and his prospect of making it in England appeared pretty slim when he was slogging it out with Hartpury.

And Italy had been interested through the age grades and kept in contact and support when he was at Hartpury. Can't blame him for feeling a sense of loyalty to that nation rather than jumping to England when he started making it at Glaws.

Puja

Oakboy wrote:The criticism of Spencer needs to be held in check a smidge until he has had a full season at Bath. Spending year after year trying to play like Wigglesworth and being under Farrell's thumb needs to be worked out of his system. IMO, if Jones resigned tomorrow the odds are high that his successor would start by picking Spencer st 9 with Robson on the bench. That is not to say that either (or both) would last but they would very likely be tested properly.

Based on what?

Just leaving a player on 99 caps for the lols I would guess.

It’s certainly what I would do.

Nice little article on Freddie Steward: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54179458

I wouldnt be at all shocked if Steward was picked as an apprentice in the next England squad.

For him to be acknowledged as Tigers’ first choice fullback so quickly is definitely a vote of confidence.

I’m all for highly promising players like Steward and Barbeary spending time as apprentices with the full England squad. With a full 3yrs to go until the next RWC, they have a genuine shot of forcing their way in to the picture if they can build upon their potential.

fivepointer wrote:I wouldnt be at all shocked if Steward was picked as an apprentice in the next England squad.

Although his positioning can still go wrong etc, he seems to be no worse than Furbank, but with some much larger upsides, in my mind.

Wouldn't mind seeing Malins at fullback a few times either.

He's certainly getting a big puff atm - Charlie Morgan article in the telegraph too. Our new messiah!

Puja

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Oakboy wrote:The criticism of Spencer needs to be held in check a smidge until he has had a full season at Bath. Spending year after year trying to play like Wigglesworth and being under Farrell's thumb needs to be worked out of his system. IMO, if Jones resigned tomorrow the odds are high that his successor would start by picking Spencer st 9 with Robson on the bench. That is not to say that either (or both) would last but they would very likely be tested properly.

Based on what?

A desire for progress. I meant to say that it may well be the other way round but I think a new guy would want the question asked about Spencer/Robson. Either or both might be good enough - or not. Nobody, including Jones, knows. If we had a world class SH or two ahead of them, it would matter little but we have Youngs and Heinz (with Care discarded). IMO, Spencer could be useful and I think his ceiling is likely to be higher than Robson's. Others disagree. What do you think?

I think Robson is a better player but Spencer is better suited to Eddie’s preferred game plan.

I’m hoping Mitchell proves to be the right blend of Robson’s attacking skills and Spencer’s game management, kicking game.

Scrumhead wrote:Nice little article on Freddie Steward: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54179458

The burning question on Eddie’s lips is can he play No 8, cos he’s more or less the right build.

Oakboy wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Oakboy wrote:The criticism of Spencer needs to be held in check a smidge until he has had a full season at Bath. Spending year after year trying to play like Wigglesworth and being under Farrell's thumb needs to be worked out of his system. IMO, if Jones resigned tomorrow the odds are high that his successor would start by picking Spencer st 9 with Robson on the bench. That is not to say that either (or both) would last but they would very likely be tested properly.

Based on what?

A desire for progress. I meant to say that it may well be the other way round but I think a new guy would want the question asked about Spencer/Robson. Either or both might be good enough - or not. Nobody, including Jones, knows. If we had a world class SH or two ahead of them, it would matter little but we have Youngs and Heinz (with Care discarded). IMO, Spencer could be useful and I think his ceiling is likely to be higher than Robson's. Others disagree. What do you think?

I’d be inclined to say that a new coach could as likely look at Mitchell, Randall and Maunder alongside a more experienced head, be that internationally (Youngs) or club (Spencer or Robson). All three have major flaws, but it would also depend on what the coach wanted in terms of playing style, which itself is a big topic.

I read the CM morgan puff piece on him as well. Does he actually have a good running game? I saw him almost kill himself by tackling Naiyaravoro's thigh with his face which while brave could just have easily seen him leaving the pitch on a stretcher.

twitchy wrote:I read the CM morgan puff piece on him as well. Does he actually have a good running game? I saw him almost kill himself by tackling Naiyaravoro's thigh with his face which while brave could just have easily seen him leaving the pitch on a stretcher.

Yes he does.

And to be fair he still tackled him. Sometimes ideal positioning into the tackle isn’t possible, but the trick is to still make the tackle, or at least try to.

It does actually seem surprising they didn’t stick him at 8 given how enormous he looks compared to others in those early schools clips.

Though I think I saw him with an 8 on his back at some point in there.