RugbyRebels

badback wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 3:43 pm

ad_tigger wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 3:37 pm I'm genuinely terrified that Mako is going to get turned inside out and upside down, if he is he may not feature in the six nations, really hope I'm wrong though. I think Genge was incredibly unlucky with the ref last week, so hope he can out bomb squad the bomb squad when he comes on angry and fresh with 30 to go.

I like keeping JvP in, dropping him to the bench would have been counterproductive especially as he needs as much game time as possible before the world cup.

Feel same re Mako…

It makes you wonder if SA will deliberately throw a few forward passes early on to test our scrum - assuming that Billy does not drop the ball a couple of times and do it for them.

Happy with the squad, but I'd say Mako would be a better bet from the bench- he can then figure how he needs to engage in the tight and evaluate the ref; lets face it, he's a canny scrummager rather than a technical expert, plus well suited to giving 25 minutes of everything vs 55 minutes of pacing a bit. On Coles- he's a great lad, but this is a massive test for someone who is really a novice at 6- he has the smarts, but the physicality will be something else.

But as said, its a more sensible selection than we might have been lead to believe , Very happy with Freeman- and hope he turns up well.

badback wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 3:42 pm Haven’t seen any of Coles. Any good?

Surprised by Ribbans on bench. Every time he’s played he’s looked the real deal to me.

He's been good in the Prem - quick across the ground, carries well by picking good lines, and also has scored a few tries by running a good support line following the likes of Mitchell et al and being the first man on the scene. Wouldn't've said he was massively physical, but he's not a lightweight.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:35 pm

badback wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 3:42 pm Haven’t seen any of Coles. Any good?

Surprised by Ribbans on bench. Every time he’s played he’s looked the real deal to me.

He's been good in the Prem - quick across the ground, carries well by picking good lines, and also has scored a few tries by running a good support line following the likes of Mitchell et al and being the first man on the scene. Wouldn't've said he was massively physical, but he's not a lightweight.

Puja

As you say he's quite mobile but otherwise nothing special. The lines he runs are what make him a good pick, especially for this game. There's no way we'll simply bludgeon our way over the gain line but some well picked lines by a lock sized bloke should hopefully get us some momentum.

FKAS wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:53 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:35 pm

badback wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 3:42 pm Haven’t seen any of Coles. Any good?

Surprised by Ribbans on bench. Every time he’s played he’s looked the real deal to me.

He's been good in the Prem - quick across the ground, carries well by picking good lines, and also has scored a few tries by running a good support line following the likes of Mitchell et al and being the first man on the scene. Wouldn't've said he was massively physical, but he's not a lightweight.

Puja

As you say he's quite mobile but otherwise nothing special. The lines he runs are what make him a good pick, especially for this game. There's no way we'll simply bludgeon our way over the gain line but some well picked lines by a lock sized bloke should hopefully get us some momentum.

He's got a great engine, and covers ground quickly- and I'd say the ability to run good lines- and good hands- do give him something special tbh. I would say though, that is a huge test for essentially a novice 6.

At least that is cleared up. Willis not selected so he could get off to Toulouse

Banquo wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 5:18 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:53 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:35 pm

He's been good in the Prem - quick across the ground, carries well by picking good lines, and also has scored a few tries by running a good support line following the likes of Mitchell et al and being the first man on the scene. Wouldn't've said he was massively physical, but he's not a lightweight.

Puja

As you say he's quite mobile but otherwise nothing special. The lines he runs are what make him a good pick, especially for this game. There's no way we'll simply bludgeon our way over the gain line but some well picked lines by a lock sized bloke should hopefully get us some momentum.

He's got a great engine, and covers ground quickly- and I'd say the ability to run good lines- and good hands- do give him something special tbh. I would say though, that is a huge test for essentially a novice 6.

Agreed. Coles has shown plenty of promise.

Generally I would prefer a specialist blindside flanker, but Coles and Chessum’s versatility will be useful moving forward.

As you said though, playing at 6 vs. the Boks is a big test for experienced players, let alone a rookie.

What should we expect resultwise from this game?

We're at one win, a loss and draw so far this autumn. We've been a bit hit and miss.

We have a pretty settled side against SA who have lost a couple of close games and are fielding a severely depleted XV.

We should win this, shouldnt we?

fivepointer wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:27 pm What should we expect resultwise from this game?

We're at one win, a loss and draw so far this autumn. We've been a bit hit and miss.

We have a pretty settled side against SA who have lost a couple of close games and are fielding a severely depleted XV.

We should win this, shouldnt we?

Yes, we ought to win. Will we? I'm hopeful but not confident.

Too close to call.
RSA are better than us at the moment, which is reflected in the rankings. But, we're at home, and their squad is more depleted.

On top of that, of course, it depends what our gameplay is. Does Eddie want us to actually attack? Or does he want to hide those shapes, and just have us kick downfield and then defend?

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:04 pm Too close to call.
RSA are better than us at the moment, which is reflected in the rankings. But, we're at home, and their squad is more depleted.

On top of that, of course, it depends what our gameplay is. Does Eddie want us to actually attack? Or does he want to hide those shapes, and just have us kick downfield and then defend?

In fairness we have done a lot of good things in attack, but failed to convert as many chances as we should- of equal concern/ slightly more bothered about stupidity, hosts of individual errors, pens, defence......and star quality at centre

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:18 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 5:18 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:53 pm

As you say he's quite mobile but otherwise nothing special. The lines he runs are what make him a good pick, especially for this game. There's no way we'll simply bludgeon our way over the gain line but some well picked lines by a lock sized bloke should hopefully get us some momentum.

He's got a great engine, and covers ground quickly- and I'd say the ability to run good lines- and good hands- do give him something special tbh. I would say though, that is a huge test for essentially a novice 6.

Agreed. Coles has shown plenty of promise.

Generally I would prefer a specialist blindside flanker, but Coles and Chessum’s versatility will be useful moving forward.

As you said though, playing at 6 vs. the Boks is a big test for experienced players, let alone a rookie.

Martin is playing lock for Tigers on Sunday, first time since his debut in the PRC a couple of years ago. Could be another hybrid option for Eddie. Martin is currently very much a 6, right down to the crunching tackles and high tackle count. Chessum is a mobile lock. Not sure on Coles but it would probably be beneficial to England if he became more of a lock.

Hopefully post world cup we'll have some mobile locks and one of Martin or Ted Hill at 6 bringing some physicality.

FKAS wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 10:14 pm

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:18 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 5:18 pm

He's got a great engine, and covers ground quickly- and I'd say the ability to run good lines- and good hands- do give him something special tbh. I would say though, that is a huge test for essentially a novice 6.

Agreed. Coles has shown plenty of promise.

Generally I would prefer a specialist blindside flanker, but Coles and Chessum’s versatility will be useful moving forward.

As you said though, playing at 6 vs. the Boks is a big test for experienced players, let alone a rookie.

Martin is playing lock for Tigers on Sunday, first time since his debut in the PRC a couple of years ago. Could be another hybrid option for Eddie. Martin is currently very much a 6, right down to the crunching tackles and high tackle count. Chessum is a mobile lock. Not sure on Coles but it would probably be beneficial to England if he became more of a lock.

Hopefully post world cup we'll have some mobile locks and one of Martin or Ted Hill at 6 bringing some physicality.

Coles always played lock until the last couple of games of last season; he's really kicked on as a 6, but if you ask him, he'd probably still say he's a lock.....but will play where he is asked to.

For no reason other than wasting two minutes on my phone. I'd rate them (from most 4 to most 6) Itoje, Chessum, Coles, Lawes, Martin, Hill. You're all very welcome.

It's great if some of them can play 2 positions but for the most part I don't really care. We seem to have built up this need to cover both positions that I just don't think is really that important, assuming you're good enough in your primary spot.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:30 pm For no reason other than wasting two minutes on my phone. I'd rate them (from most 4 to most 6) Itoje, Chessum, Coles, Lawes, Martin, Hill. You're all very welcome.

It's great if some of them can play 2 positions but for the most part I don't really care. We seem to have built up this need to cover both positions that I just don't think is really that important, assuming you're good enough in your primary spot.

Yes. I don't get this notion of playing forwards out of position just because of their size or some other meaningless criterion. At present there just a few forwards in the world game who are equally effective at lock or 6 e.g. Beirne, Lawes, Pieter Steph, Mostert, Woki. Posters may come up with a few others, but there are not many. Playing club rugby in a different position is not the ideal preparation for a game at the international level. Like playing centres on the wing.

I don't think versatile forwards is anything new, particularly when thinking about the limited numbers in a world cup squad. Martin Corry covered lock and 8 from the bench for the 2003 campaign with Moody covering 6 and 7.

Depending on the game plan it's quite useful to have some options. If you've got a Coles or a Chessum in the side you can have an openside as the backrow cover but still have the option of a physical option in the backrow if there's an injury. Similarly it doesn't hurt if your hooker can do a turn at flanker in an emergency which is how Singleton got into the last world cup squad.

My preference has always been for a 3rd line-out option but how important that remains is debatable. A Croft at 6, for example, gave a serious stealer on the opposition's throw.

Now, though, how important is possession anyway? What case is there for a 3rd jumper or, conversely a jackaler if the SH's default action is to box-kick? Or, come to that, if a FH kicks more than he passes or a FB kicks so often rather than carry? We even see kicks from turnover possession and, weirdest of all, kicks with a penalty advantage.

I still wonder if players would be better with no coaching at all or, at least, be allowed to play naturally. In England's case, chasing the game late against NZ, with all pre-conceived plays a distant memory, we looked more threatening (especially in terms of likelihood to convert chances). I don't even think it's a case of 'do A or B'. It's more going balls-out with 100% conviction on whatever course of action first comes into mind. Oddly enough, I think that removes hesitation resulting in fewer mistakes and better discipline.

It depends entirely on the kick surely. Kicking = bad isn't factually accurate. Having a fullback that wins a good proportion of contestable kicks means kicking and chasing is a strong game plan. Kicking on turnover ball it there's nobody in the backfield can be a great option, particularly with the 50/22 law. Kicks from penalty advantage where it's a quick shot to glory isn't a bad idea either as you don't necessarily want to batter away through lots of phases up front if you are then going to the lineout and rolling maul, conserve the energy. All depends on the situation.

That's not to say England don't adopt a low risk, low entertainment style of rugby outside the opposition's third of the pitch. That does make sense in a pragmatic way, particularly when international defences are good and our discipline is pretty shoddy.

Just a shame kicking is an attacking weapon rather than a last resort.

I miss the days of a prop left with no option but to try and kick it

Of course there are good and bad kicks. However, territory has become the holy grail and pressuring the opposition into making mistakes the main tactic. I think we have become too easy to play against as a result. We are negative and predictable for too high a proportion of every game. As long as the opposition safely field our kicks they are comfortable. Winning at kick tennis can have a degree of satisfaction tactically but how often does it happen? IMO, kicking is no different to the alternatives - passing, running etc. Done skilfully (which includes choosing when to do it) it can cause damage. Done constantly it does not surprise. And, it's boring to watch.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:26 am Of course there are good and bad kicks. However, territory has become the holy grail and pressuring the opposition into making mistakes the main tactic. I think we have become too easy to play against as a result. We are negative and predictable for too high a proportion of every game. As long as the opposition safely field our kicks they are comfortable. Winning at kick tennis can have a degree of satisfaction tactically but how often does it happen? IMO, kicking is no different to the alternatives - passing, running etc. Done skilfully (which includes choosing when to do it) it can cause damage. Done constantly it does not surprise. And, it's boring to watch.

Who kicks the most in international rugby?

(I agree bad kicking is ....bad and very dull)

No detail at all obviously but saw this the other day kicks/tries per 80.

Article in The Times today saying the Boks have gone from kicking circa 33 per 80 mins last year to the figure above this year.
The tries per 80mins table makes for grim reading.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:26 pm Article in The Times today saying the Boks have gone from kicking circa 33 per 80 mins last year to the figure above this year.
The tries per 80mins table makes for grim reading.

Stand out number is the French kicking for me. Which is why I asked the question- I don't think anyone has accused France of being dull or lacking ambition.

Squidge's video on France v the boks talks about their different kicking strategies (and the boks' evolving game):