RugbyRebels

jngf wrote:As mentioned I personally thought Curry and Billy had good games but there’s a strengthening case for introducing Willis, Hill and Dombrandt sooner rather than later (not altogether necessarily though)

Only two lineout jumpers and having to shove Curry into second row bordered on the farsical imo

Quite right, May was on the pitch after all.

Thought Billy had a lot more energy in his carrying in this match and maybe realises how closely Dombrandt is sniping at his heels!

jngf wrote:As mentioned I personally thought Curry and Billy had good games but there’s a strengthening case for introducing Willis, Hill and Dombrandt sooner rather than later (not altogether necessarily though)

Only two lineout jumpers and having to shove Curry into second row bordered on the farsical imo

To clarify my earlier remark, Curry was 'alright at best' relative to the standards that he usually plays at. I don't think he read Gauzere's interpretations at the breakdown all that well and seemed very slightly off the pace in general, but it's the first international game we've played in over 6 months. Knowing Eddie they've been flogged in camp again....

Curry in the 2nd row was down to Hill being sin binned. You want Lawes at 6 again?

Every time the camera showed Jones he looked bewildered/embarrassed. I suppose some are still surprised by that perhaps?

Danno wrote:

jngf wrote:As mentioned I personally thought Curry and Billy had good games but there’s a strengthening case for introducing Willis, Hill and Dombrandt sooner rather than later (not altogether necessarily though)

Only two lineout jumpers and having to shove Curry into second row bordered on the farsical imo

To clarify my earlier remark, Curry was 'alright at best' relative to the standards that he usually plays at. I don't think he read Gauzere's interpretations at the breakdown all that well and seemed very slightly off the pace in general, but it's the first international game we've played in over 6 months. Knowing Eddie they've been flogged in camp again....

Curry in the 2nd row was down to Hill being sin binned. You want Lawes at 6 again?

No - but at the same time I don’t want a guy who’s only 6’1” forced to play there because an Aussie muppet selected only 2 lineout jumpers in the starting XV - at least one of backrow has to have a lineout game and physical size up to covering that gap - Billy has the size but not the jumping, Curry has (some) jumping but not the size, Underhill has neither

Beasties wrote:

Stom wrote:Ratings?

The tight 5 - 7
Itoje - 8
Backrow - 6
Youngs - 7
Farrell - 4
May - 5
Slade - 6
Joseph - 5
Watson - 4
Furbank - 4

Jones - 0.

How TF do you mark the backs outside Farrell?
The lack of ambition has been extraordinary, even for Eddie.

Well indeed. So 5 as standard, marks taken off for crappiness.

I was considering a 2 or 3 for Farrell. He was that bad. Which considering the start is quite something.

Youngs did well but his kicking was terrible again. Robson worse from the boot, mind, in his 7 bloody minutes.

I thought Curry perhaps looked a bit slower? Maybe I’m just paranoid now he’s Haskell/Pocock shaped that he’s going to lose some of that mobility.

I can forgive some rustiness as we havent played since March. You'd expect a degree of inaccuracy.

But what was galling was the lack of any kind of ambition, the refusal to play what was in front of the players and some of the most boneheaded kicking imaginable.

Against that we got the job done, secured the try BP and put ourselves in a position to win the Championship. But jeez there was little to lift the spirits.

I'll finish with a major grouch. Jones has a habit of putting players on with 2-3 minutes to go. Dunn was the unlucky sod today. If you have a guy on the bench for crissake give him a proper run, particularly in a game you are clearly going to win.

When it looked like Dunn had missed his chance and George would stay on the full 80 it was horrible. I genuinely wouldn’t have blamed Dunn for lamping Eddie and leaving.

3 minutes is almost as bad. What a way to show that you have absolutely no faith in the guy.

He does it repeatedly. When a game is in the balance I get it, but I’m not buying that he had to keep George on to preserve the crucial points difference either.

I can only assume we thought if we kicked to Italy they’d knackered themselves out after 50 minutes and we’d walk in a 6 easy tries. I was impressed how hard their defence were still pushing right up until the end.

jngf wrote:

Danno wrote:

jngf wrote:As mentioned I personally thought Curry and Billy had good games but there’s a strengthening case for introducing Willis, Hill and Dombrandt sooner rather than later (not altogether necessarily though)

Only two lineout jumpers and having to shove Curry into second row bordered on the farsical imo

To clarify my earlier remark, Curry was 'alright at best' relative to the standards that he usually plays at. I don't think he read Gauzere's interpretations at the breakdown all that well and seemed very slightly off the pace in general, but it's the first international game we've played in over 6 months. Knowing Eddie they've been flogged in camp again....

Curry in the 2nd row was down to Hill being sin binned. You want Lawes at 6 again?

No - but at the same time I don’t want a guy who’s only 6’1” forced to play there because an Aussie muppet selected only 2 lineout jumpers in the starting XV - at least one of backrow has to have a lineout game and physical size up to covering that gap - Billy has the size but not the jumping, Curry has (some) jumping but not the size, Underhill has neither

Curry is a regular lineout jumper for Sale. He had to cover for Hill in I think one scrum during a sin bin. Hardly the end of the world. I quite liked the overall balance of the pack though the performances weren't great. Pack has to sort their discipline out though.

I very much liked the first look at the Itoje/Hill combination so aggressive and niggly. They could be an absolute nightmare to play against. Just need some more game time together.

I found that pretty painful to watch frankly. I am totally convinced we're a lot better than that, most importantly, in respect of what the backs can do.

Watching the endless kicking was just so bloody tedious

Eddie's presided over a team that has, generally, done well, but I'm slightly fed up of the silly selection games he plays and when I see the way we play in a game where the 'exam question' is joyfully simple: get as many points as possible...it just annoys me

But he keeps telling us he’s picked the best available 23?

TheNomad wrote:I found that pretty painful to watch frankly. I am totally convinced we're a lot better than that, most importantly, in respect of what the backs can do.

Watching the endless kicking was just so bloody tedious

Eddie's presided over a team that has, generally, done well, but I'm slightly fed up of the silly selection games he plays and when I see the way we play in a game where the 'exam question' is joyfully simple: get as many points as possible...it just annoys me

To be honest, I’d probably have made 2 changes to that 23... and I can understand both those choices. It’s the tactics...

Just infuriating when we have may, Slade, Watson, Joseph and we kick the leather off the bloody thing.

FKAS wrote:

jngf wrote:

Danno wrote:

To clarify my earlier remark, Curry was 'alright at best' relative to the standards that he usually plays at. I don't think he read Gauzere's interpretations at the breakdown all that well and seemed very slightly off the pace in general, but it's the first international game we've played in over 6 months. Knowing Eddie they've been flogged in camp again....

Curry in the 2nd row was down to Hill being sin binned. You want Lawes at 6 again?

No - but at the same time I don’t want a guy who’s only 6’1” forced to play there because an Aussie muppet selected only 2 lineout jumpers in the starting XV - at least one of backrow has to have a lineout game and physical size up to covering that gap - Billy has the size but not the jumping, Curry has (some) jumping but not the size, Underhill has neither

Curry is a regular lineout jumper for Sale. He had to cover for Hill in I think one scrum during a sin bin. Hardly the end of the world. I quite liked the overall balance of the pack though the performances weren't great. Pack has to sort their discipline out though.

I very much liked the first look at the Itoje/Hill combination so aggressive and niggly. They could be an absolute nightmare to play against. Just need some more game time together.

This. Curry is a regular jumper for Sale as is Underhill for Bath, albeit not to the same volume. But let’s ignore than and pretend we’ve only got locks who jump and that it was one scrum.

I am having such a good time right now, relatively speaking.

What pisses me off most is that Exeter are condemned as boring. Compared with that crap today, they are enlightening. It will be truly embarrassing to end up winning this 6N. Progress? Bollix.

Johnson talking the best French game plan for England

Oakboy wrote:What pisses me off most is that Exeter are condemned as boring. Compared with that crap today, they are enlightening. It will be truly embarrassing to end up winning this 6N. Progress? Bollix.

I think that's a bit harsh. Every team looks rusty at the start of the 6N, and that starts in the middle of the season. This match involved players that are a mix of knackered (Exeter), limited time in camp (Exeter, Wasps), little game time lately (almost everyone else), or a mix of all of the above

Danno wrote:I am having such a good time right now, relatively speaking.

Agree. We owe the Jocks a beer at least.

Never in doubt.

Mikey Brown wrote:

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:Ratings?

The tight 5 - 7
Itoje - 8
Backrow - 6
Youngs - 7
Farrell - 4
May - 5
Slade - 6
Joseph - 5
Watson - 4
Furbank - 4

Jones - 0.

About right, I'd probably go for a 7 for Curry, an 8 for Youngs and 4s for May and Slade.

And I'd mark Itoje down to 6/7 for the pens he gave up

You telling me you weren’t impressed with the reinvention of Slade as a crash ball 12?

I don't know what to say, I can't even be bothered to try and make a pun about it being more car crash than crash ball. You'd accuse them of not trying as a team, but then they did give away a lot of penalties to keep Italy in the game, and maybe that takes more than we realise

(I quite liked our props off the bench I suppose, and Robson looked worth at least another 20)

Can't really rate any backs outside of Farrell too much. Thought Furbank looked a bit iffy. Can we promise never to play Farrell at 10 again please.

Job done. A lot of rustiness, plenty to work on. Who's next up?

Complicated. We were unlucky in the WC2019 final, having played well in the semi..

Winning the 2020 6N - with some luck perhaps...

I'll take it.

Raggs wrote:Can't really rate any backs outside of Farrell too much. Thought Furbank looked a bit iffy. Can we promise never to play Farrell at 10 again please.

But, but, but...he's a world class #10. One of, it not the best in the world right now