RugbyRebels

TheDasher wrote:

Mr Mwenda wrote:Isn't Slade the new Twelvetrees?

Slade doesn't get charged down as much, kick the ball out on the full as much and doesn't throw the ball along the ground as much. That said, I've always liked 12trees for the good moments he has

Slade seems to go missing in games, where as 12T seemed to fuck games up

13 looks to be the poisoned chalice of positions playing under Jones.

...so lets play Owen there

This is making for some very painful reading, so I’m really not sure why I’m chiming in again. FWIW I think Stom is saying that the vocal/inspirational qualities that Farrell has may be great to have on the pitch, but can be found in many positions and don’t necessarily tick the boxes of the skills a fly-half needs.

So much of this seems to revolve around people disagreeing what “control” of a game actually is. You can argue Farrell is controlling things if he’s shouting at people and getting them in position. He also tends to make 1 or 2 very telling interventions in a game, like a big hit or a really good attacking play.

You could argue it is about consistently making the right decision to get us in the right areas of the pitch and having the skill/timing/accuracy to make those plays. Do the Farrel-at-10ers feel he does all those things better than Ford? I don’t, but I could see why you’d want the other elements mentioned above.

Mikey Brown wrote:This is making for some very painful reading, so I’m really not sure why I’m chiming in again. FWIW I think Stom is saying that the vocal/inspirational qualities that Farrell has may be great to have on the pitch, but can be found in many positions and don’t necessarily tick the boxes of the skills a fly-half needs.

So much of this seems to revolve around people disagreeing what “control” of a game actually is. You can argue Farrell is controlling things if he’s shouting at people and getting them in position. He also tends to make 1 or 2 very telling interventions in a game, like a big hit or a really good attacking play.

You could argue it is about consistently making the right decision to get us in the right areas of the pitch and having the skill/timing/accuracy to make those plays. Do the Farrel-at-10ers feel he does all those things better than Ford? I don’t, but I could see why you’d want the other elements mentioned above.

I think you get to the heart of it there. And yes, I think Farrell is more than good enough at the things you mention in your bottom paragraph to play at 10 for us and he brings everything else that you mention. I think Ford's passing is lovely but I think Farrell's is also extremely good, and improving. I think his kicking is clever and generally accurate, and again, increasingly so. I think he's very comparable to Ford in terms of skills and he brings more to the party overall.

Mikey Brown wrote: You could argue it is about consistently making the right decision to get us in the right areas of the pitch and having the skill/timing/accuracy to make those plays. Do the Farrel-at-10ers feel he does all those things better than Ford? I don’t, but I could see why you’d want the other elements mentioned above.

In terms of talking about a fly-half, this is what we should be talking about. Being able to decide on the fly what the best move is for the team - kick, go wide, stay narrow, try a surprise etc.etc. - and having the skills to pull the options off. And the communication. Having good motivational skills is great but shouldn't be accommodated in the team at the cost of falling short in the most important position.

Although I'm going to be very surprised if anyone has particularly different thoughts as to where Fazlet falls there than they did last time I saw a discussion like this. And if Dasher wants us to be less negative about Farrell, I'm not sure having a debate about his abilities where most of us honestly have a negative position is going to help. You wanna talk about how Farrell, a good international player, gets less than his fair due? There's something there. Want to talk about how Farrell is a world class player and as good as Sexton? That's only going one way...

TheDasher wrote:

Stom wrote:

TheDasher wrote:
I want the same from my 10 Stom. Difference is I don't see Farrell being buried in rucks to be honest. I see him as the most influential England player, with a good rugby brain, strong resolve and great determination. I think making him the main man at 10 is incredibly logical.

Not sure we'll ever agree

So you're basically saying McCaw should have been at 10, Parisse at 10, Carling at 10... Lobbe at 10, Hooper at 10...

Theyre all the most influential players in their teams, with good rugby brains, great determination and strong resolve. And none of them were 10s.

In fact, Carling is a bloody good example.

You need different skills at 10. You need skills Carter had, Johnny had, Sexton has, Ford has...

Yep, that's it, I think McCaw and Parisse should be at 10, that's exactly it. Give me strength.

I'm saying I want Farrell at 10, just like Mark McCall does, just like numerous other people are.

I'm saying he's an excellent 10, he controls the game extremely well and he has the skills to excel there. He's a key, influential player that I think should control things from fly-half.

You might disagree but suggesting the Saracens fly half should play for England at fly-half is not the same as thinking a flanker should play there.

I think Stom is trying to say that other than the first quality a good rugby brain, strong resolve and great determination aren’t really at the top of the list for what you want from your flyhalf.

Mellsblue wrote:

TheDasher wrote:

Stom wrote:
So you're basically saying McCaw should have been at 10, Parisse at 10, Carling at 10... Lobbe at 10, Hooper at 10...

Theyre all the most influential players in their teams, with good rugby brains, great determination and strong resolve. And none of them were 10s.

In fact, Carling is a bloody good example.

You need different skills at 10. You need skills Carter had, Johnny had, Sexton has, Ford has...

Yep, that's it, I think McCaw and Parisse should be at 10, that's exactly it. Give me strength.

I'm saying I want Farrell at 10, just like Mark McCall does, just like numerous other people are.

I'm saying he's an excellent 10, he controls the game extremely well and he has the skills to excel there. He's a key, influential player that I think should control things from fly-half.

You might disagree but suggesting the Saracens fly half should play for England at fly-half is not the same as thinking a flanker should play there.

I think Stom is trying to say that other than the first quality a good rugby brain, strong resolve and great determination aren’t really at the top of the list for what you want from your flyhalf.

good manners and a schoolboy haircut. Nothing less will do from an English fh

TheDasher wrote:Slade doesn't get charged down as much, kick the ball out on the full as much and doesn't throw the ball along the ground as much. That said, I've always liked 12trees for the good moments he has

Farrell throws the ball along the ground fairly regularly

All I want to see is objective balance when it comes to Farrell, as there seems to be very little of it. When he does good things, he's lauded and that's fair enough. We should enjoy the moments and congratulate the players when they do good things and Farrell does indeed do good things.

He makes his fair share of mistakes too, but do they get analysed or talked about? No.

We often read write ups and articles about how many penalties someone gave away, or the hooker missing a throw, someone knocking on, getting turned over, or just not having a good day at the office. The writer doesn't waste any time naming that player in order to confirm their own bias of them. Even Barnes blamed Ford multiple times for missing the tackle that led to Japan's first try. Ford missed just 2 tackles against Japan and made 9, but we still have to hear and read about his suspect defence. Those 2 missed tackles are all he has missed in the last 3 matches out of 17 attempts. Farrell is lauded for his big hits. They're cracking at times and all fans want to see that, so I've no problem seeing them replayed and rejoiced. However, we don't see the missed tackles, or the flying out of the line talked about though. Ford kicked extremely well against Japan too, but we continue to be told that it's not a strong part of his game, based on missing a few for England years ago, even though the stats suggest he can kick well enough. Even after he took some kicks, rather than the camera focus being on Ford, for some daft reason we were looking at Farrell's face. Even when Farrell lines up a kick, we hear words like 'ice man', 'temperament', 'faultless', but he misses at times, which is only human as all players miss from time to time. When he does miss, we hear it's 'uncharacteristic', but is it?

So many newspapers and online articles stated in bold letters that Farrell won that match against Japan, but none offered any details other than his mere presence as to the reason why he won the match for us. There was no mention of any instances of good play he performed. No mention of the 3 changes Japan made at half time which may have made more of an immediate negative impact for them. No mention of the fact they had pretty much emptied their bench by the time we scored our second try. No mention that their bench is not likely to be as well stocked as ours. Little mention of their fitness levels. Most articles agreed that our other replacements played well and contributed, but according to the headlines, it was thanks to Farrell.

I've watched rugby in pubs around here when Wales play and there's a collective groan when a player makes a mistake. It doesn't matter who made the mistake, whether it's a 'star player', but it gets noticed, commented on and analysed. Done. When watching England play, I've often sworn at the telly when a player (it doesn't matter who) makes a mistake, as I'm sure most fans do. The commentators go on about conceding penalties, discipline, poor passes and mistakes, but strangely when Farrell makes the errors, or offends, it doesn't warrant being talked about.

I'm not asking for journalists to start sticking pins in Farrell-esque voodoo type dolls when he makes a mistake, but acknowledging it isn't going to make the world stop spinning*. He's a competent player. Improved a lot over the years too, but he still has areas which need quite a bit of improvement imo to be considered world class. Again, he does good things in matches. I'm not saying he's a bad player, but I do believe he is a bit over-hyped by the media.

Also, I concede that many of the so-called experts and pros rate Farrell highly, but again, we have seen that kind of hype before in all sports with players that have divided opinion in fans. I don't think it's a case of tall poppy syndrome either. I've no issue with stars like Messi, Ronaldo, Mayweather, Barrett, Sexton, Bolt, Federer, Neymar, Nadal, Lebron James, etc being lauded non-stop. I don't even like a few of them for how they come across, but their talent is plain to see.

*I have no evidence to back that claim up, so perhaps that is why things are the way they are. Positive comments on Farrell in the media keeps the world spinning

In the Farrell/Ford debate, one factor that is worth a mention is that Farrell, at FH, has won a fair bit more at club level. He is acknowledged as a significant playing/leadership part of the best team in the GP.

That's the fact bit. Having said it, I can't help mentioning that I don't like Saracens. Maybe I don't like Farrell for similar, unjustifiable reasons.

Like or dislike matters not a jot. Whatever we think, for the rest of this management era, Farrell will always be in the England starting XV.

Oakboy wrote:In the Farrell/Ford debate, one factor that is worth a mention is that Farrell, at FH, has won a fair bit more at club level. He is acknowledged as a significant playing/leadership part of the best team in the GP.

That's the fact bit. Having said it, I can't help mentioning that I don't like Saracens. Maybe I don't like Farrell for similar, unjustifiable reasons.

Like or dislike matters not a jot. Whatever we think, for the rest of this management era, Farrell will always be in the England starting XV.

That is probably part of the hype.

Saracens are a bloody good team though, with a superb pack...and yes, Farrell is a part of their success.

It will be interesting if say, England get knocked out of the world cup before realistic expectation, and Jones gets the boot. Then if someone like Baxter gets the job, if he will stick with Farrell or whether it will be a clean slate for all players and a fresh blueprint for the team? Though I'm sure Jones and previous coaches said they do the same, but pretty much kept their core players no matter what.

Farrell's old boy will be top of the list after Jones, so expect them to line up at 10 and 12. With a switch of codes seeing Liam playing alongside Shields in all 'new look' back row.

Andy Farrell's record as a coach against NZ is pretty impressive to be fair, but would he be looked at as a head coach? I suppose he'd probably demand that in order to leave Ireland, especially after Burt.

Who is liam?

twitchy wrote:Who is liam?

Connor's brother

I'm so confused.

p/d wrote:

twitchy wrote:Who is liam?

Connor's brother

You mean Noel.

Mikey Brown wrote:Andy Farrell's record as a coach against NZ is pretty impressive to be fair, but would he be looked at as a head coach? I suppose he'd probably demand that in order to leave Ireland, especially after Burt.

I maintain that Farrell the elder is an exceptional defensive coach that needs to be kept in his box by a strong head coach/DoR. Great for Sarries under McCall, for Ireland under Schmidt, for the Lions under Gatland - under the more collegial regime of Burt, slightly less so.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Andy Farrell's record as a coach against NZ is pretty impressive to be fair, but would he be looked at as a head coach? I suppose he'd probably demand that in order to leave Ireland, especially after Burt.

I maintain that Farrell the elder is an exceptional defensive coach that needs to be kept in his box by a strong head coach/DoR. Great for Sarries under McCall, for Ireland under Schmidt, for the Lions under Gatland - under the more collegial regime of Burt, slightly less so.

Puja

And if he wants to be considered otherwise, he needs to take a head coaching job and prove it.

That said, I've got a horrible feeling that he's in the line for the England job without proving it.

twitchy wrote:Who is liam?

Liam Farrell.

Ah thank you I'm really slow this afternoon.

Peat wrote:

Puja wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Andy Farrell's record as a coach against NZ is pretty impressive to be fair, but would he be looked at as a head coach? I suppose he'd probably demand that in order to leave Ireland, especially after Burt.

I maintain that Farrell the elder is an exceptional defensive coach that needs to be kept in his box by a strong head coach/DoR. Great for Sarries under McCall, for Ireland under Schmidt, for the Lions under Gatland - under the more collegial regime of Burt, slightly less so.

Puja

And if he wants to be considered otherwise, he needs to take a head coaching job and prove it.

That said, I've got a horrible feeling that he's in the line for the England job without proving it.

I thought him having a head coaching role in 2014-15 is where the problems came from.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Peat wrote:

Puja wrote:
I maintain that Farrell the elder is an exceptional defensive coach that needs to be kept in his box by a strong head coach/DoR. Great for Sarries under McCall, for Ireland under Schmidt, for the Lions under Gatland - under the more collegial regime of Burt, slightly less so.

Puja

And if he wants to be considered otherwise, he needs to take a head coaching job and prove it.

That said, I've got a horrible feeling that he's in the line for the England job without proving it.

I thought him having a head coaching role in 2014-15 is where he problems came from.

Puja

I see what you did there.

Finn Russell at 12 for Scotland. Where Eddie leads, others will follow.

Thought this was quite interesting: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/n ... enry-slade

Slade being a brown nose, honestly.....