RugbyRebels

Oakboy wrote: T'aint a bad attempt!! Thanks.

fivepointer wrote:Dont forget Exe also employ Hogg, Gray and Francis who are international regulars.

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:Some were saying he was well down the queue behind Smith and Umaga even, (See Puja above fessing up to talking against Simmonds) and Steenson was indeed mentioned in intl terms for both England and Ireland, even when Exeter weren’t top two. For a while he probably was amongst the most effective in the prem in fairness.

I saw Puja fessing up to it - but I haven't found him actually doing it. ETA: I've searched this thread going back 2 years, and the EMB going back to pre-lockdown. Closest thing I've found to anyone "dismissing" Simmonds is Puja and Stom saying things like "He looks like a very high level Prem fly-half to me, but not (English) international class." "He deserves a look in IMO, but Eddie seems to prefer others" "Smith and Umaga both seem to have much higher ceilings"

NB, rating Smith and Umaga is not the same as "dismissing" Simmonds - any more than rating May, Watson and Daly is "dismissing" Nowell.

Scrumhead wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:
I guess it depends on what you think ‘game management’ should encompass. To me, seeing where opportunities are and having the ability to exploit space etc. are creative assets I would expect my 10 to have.

I’m not saying Farrell doesn’t have creative skills at all. They’re just not very well developed in comparisons to other 10s.

IMO, he’s good at managing a game plan, but doesn’t generally play ‘heads-up’ rugby. I feel like he has a pre-conceived idea of what to do depending upon where he is on the pitch and will follow that 9 times out of 10 regardless of what’s evolving around him.

Note, I’m talking about Farrell as a 10 not a 12.

This seems to stem from the kind of retro view that everything revolves around the 10. In many teams, it doesn’t. Game management and creative hub aren’t necessarily bracketed together.

Is it really a ‘retro view’ that a 10 should have a decent level of creative ability?

In Farrell’s case, we’re talking about a guy who’s feted as ‘World Class’.

Anyway, if you’re not playing off 10, you’re probably playing off 9 which is usually less creative.

Which Tyler wrote:I've never claimed to have a life, just a search function

Oakboy wrote: T'aint a bad attempt!! Thanks.

Puja wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Dont forget Exe also employ Hogg, Gray and Francis who are international regulars.

That's right. Hogg and Gray are very good international players!

Puja

Banquo wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

Banquo wrote: This seems to stem from the kind of retro view that everything revolves around the 10. In many teams, it doesn’t. Game management and creative hub aren’t necessarily bracketed together.

Is it really a ‘retro view’ that a 10 should have a decent level of creative ability?

In Farrell’s case, we’re talking about a guy who’s feted as ‘World Class’.

Anyway, if you’re not playing off 10, you’re probably playing off 9 which is usually less creative.

Or off 12 or 13. Which can be creative . The point I’m making is not tricky though- the 10 does not need to be the creative hub.

padprop wrote:Do we pick Dombrandt at number 20 and just hope no one gets injured in the first 20 minutes? Always great off the bench

fivepointer wrote:Always prepared to cut a player some slack if they can come up with a game changing moment and do something other players probably couldn't, but Dombrandt can be exasperating at times.
The missed tackles, something i've noticed the last few times i've seen him, are particularly annoying.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Always prepared to cut a player some slack if they can come up with a game changing moment and do something other players probably couldn't, but Dombrandt can be exasperating at times.
The missed tackles, something i've noticed the last few times i've seen him, are particularly annoying.

Aye. At club level I'm seeing Simmonds and Mercer with the game changing type moments, but with less of the down aspects.

It is annoying, as you look at Dombrandt's positives and they are really exciting. He doesn't just run into people and try to dominate, like Nathan Hughes, but picks intelligent lines, hits weak shoulders at pace and then has the ability to absorb his surroundings and make good decisions. That is the kind of stuff that translates into international level.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Always prepared to cut a player some slack if they can come up with a game changing moment and do something other players probably couldn't, but Dombrandt can be exasperating at times.
The missed tackles, something i've noticed the last few times i've seen him, are particularly annoying.

Aye. At club level I'm seeing Simmonds and Mercer with the game changing type moments, but with less of the down aspects.

It is annoying, as you look at Dombrandt's positives and they are really exciting. He doesn't just run into people and try to dominate, like Nathan Hughes, but picks intelligent lines, hits weak shoulders at pace and then has the ability to absorb his surroundings and make good decisions. That is the kind of stuff that translates into international level.

Raggs wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Always prepared to cut a player some slack if they can come up with a game changing moment and do something other players probably couldn't, but Dombrandt can be exasperating at times.
The missed tackles, something i've noticed the last few times i've seen him, are particularly annoying.

Aye. At club level I'm seeing Simmonds and Mercer with the game changing type moments, but with less of the down aspects.

It is annoying, as you look at Dombrandt's positives and they are really exciting. He doesn't just run into people and try to dominate, like Nathan Hughes, but picks intelligent lines, hits weak shoulders at pace and then has the ability to absorb his surroundings and make good decisions. That is the kind of stuff that translates into international level.

Hughes ran those lines when he was first getting the England coaches excited. Perhaps not as well as Dombrandt, but he certainly cut some nice angles.

Looking at the stats and apparently Jack Willis made 21 carries in that game. Insane.

Puja wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Always prepared to cut a player some slack if they can come up with a game changing moment and do something other players probably couldn't, but Dombrandt can be exasperating at times.
The missed tackles, something i've noticed the last few times i've seen him, are particularly annoying.

Aye. At club level I'm seeing Simmonds and Mercer with the game changing type moments, but with less of the down aspects.

It is annoying, as you look at Dombrandt's positives and they are really exciting. He doesn't just run into people and try to dominate, like Nathan Hughes, but picks intelligent lines, hits weak shoulders at pace and then has the ability to absorb his surroundings and make good decisions. That is the kind of stuff that translates into international level.

I think TWillis might be in with a shout at the next England squad above either of those two (and it would 100% be peak Eddie to pick him and not Jack) - he's raw, but he's hard working, carries strongly, hits good lines, and is a nuisance at the ruck. Plus, gotta love a specialist 8 with good ball control at the back of a scrum.

Anyone know when Eddie is actually picking his squad?

Puja

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Always prepared to cut a player some slack if they can come up with a game changing moment and do something other players probably couldn't, but Dombrandt can be exasperating at times.
The missed tackles, something i've noticed the last few times i've seen him, are particularly annoying.

Aye. At club level I'm seeing Simmonds and Mercer with the game changing type moments, but with less of the down aspects.

It is annoying, as you look at Dombrandt's positives and they are really exciting. He doesn't just run into people and try to dominate, like Nathan Hughes, but picks intelligent lines, hits weak shoulders at pace and then has the ability to absorb his surroundings and make good decisions. That is the kind of stuff that translates into international level.

Stom wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Always prepared to cut a player some slack if they can come up with a game changing moment and do something other players probably couldn't, but Dombrandt can be exasperating at times.
The missed tackles, something i've noticed the last few times i've seen him, are particularly annoying.

Aye. At club level I'm seeing Simmonds and Mercer with the game changing type moments, but with less of the down aspects.

It is annoying, as you look at Dombrandt's positives and they are really exciting. He doesn't just run into people and try to dominate, like Nathan Hughes, but picks intelligent lines, hits weak shoulders at pace and then has the ability to absorb his surroundings and make good decisions. That is the kind of stuff that translates into international level.

To be fair, it's Dombrandt's 3rd season as a pro rugby player...

His work rate has improved dramatically, his fitness levels are on a different planet to when he arrived...

I have faith he can iron out some of his issues and turn into an international class player. The fact we don't need to pick him now speaks wonders for the quality we have available, as he is quality, just a little rough around the edges.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Stom wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:
Aye. At club level I'm seeing Simmonds and Mercer with the game changing type moments, but with less of the down aspects.

It is annoying, as you look at Dombrandt's positives and they are really exciting. He doesn't just run into people and try to dominate, like Nathan Hughes, but picks intelligent lines, hits weak shoulders at pace and then has the ability to absorb his surroundings and make good decisions. That is the kind of stuff that translates into international level.

To be fair, it's Dombrandt's 3rd season as a pro rugby player...

His work rate has improved dramatically, his fitness levels are on a different planet to when he arrived...

I have faith he can iron out some of his issues and turn into an international class player. The fact we don't need to pick him now speaks wonders for the quality we have available, as he is quality, just a little rough around the edges.

Oh, absolutely. He's still somewhat of an infant in terms of top level experience, so you expect flaws. I'm hoping someone really grabs him by the scruff of the neck because he could be quite special. But those flaws will get much more exposed at international level.

Stom wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Stom wrote:
To be fair, it's Dombrandt's 3rd season as a pro rugby player...

His work rate has improved dramatically, his fitness levels are on a different planet to when he arrived...

I have faith he can iron out some of his issues and turn into an international class player. The fact we don't need to pick him now speaks wonders for the quality we have available, as he is quality, just a little rough around the edges.

Oh, absolutely. He's still somewhat of an infant in terms of top level experience, so you expect flaws. I'm hoping someone really grabs him by the scruff of the neck because he could be quite special. But those flaws will get much more exposed at international level.

I just realised I made a mistake, this is still his 2nd season! lol.

Yeah, I completely agree.