RugbyRebels

Cause who doesn’t like an argument

From the Heil

ENGLAND

15 Freddie Steward - 7

Looks more assured than ever under the high ball and took everything Australia aimed at him.

14 Jack Nowell - 6

After a nightmare season with injuries Nowell was busy but out jumped by Koroibete.

13 Joe Marchant - 6

Could have scored in first half but for miracle cover tackle and limited impact after break.

12 Owen Farrell - 6

Back in the ranks but linked well with Smith and offered himself as first receiver. Missed two shots.

11 Joe Cokanasiga - 5

Not as involved as boss Eddie Jones would have liked and needs to hunt ball more.

10 Marcus Smith - 7

Very lively display from the 10 who had two old heads around him and played better than both.

9 Danny Care - 6

Back after three-and-a-half years out and went the distance, showed couple of flashes with ball.

1 Ellis Genge - 7

Turning into a real force for England and added a try onto his usual nuts and bolts.

2 Jamie George - 6

Nailed his throw ins, carried and got about park before being replaced with 14 minutes left.

3 Will Stuart - 5

Started strongly in the scrum but England’s effort up front faded and so did Stuart.

4 Maro Itoje - 6

Made a nuisance of himself at the maul and secured ball in line out without dominating.

5 Jonny Hill - 5

Rose to Swain’s bait and was yellow-carded but carried hard in first Test since autumn.

6 Courtney Lawes (capt) - 6

Now the official leader and made his hits but massive job to turn tour around.

7 Tom Curry - 6

Big charge and pass should have resulted in Marchant score but took head knock and off at half-time.

8 Billy Vunipola - 6

First international for 15 months and carded for a high shot on Hooper. Marred decent return.

Replacements: L.Cowan-Dickie (for George 66) 5, M.Vunipola (for Genge 57) 5, J.Heyes (for Stuart 79) 5, O.Chessum (for Hill 69) 5, L.Ludlam (for Curry HT) 8, J.Van Poortvliet (for Care 79) 6, G.Porter (N/U), H.Arundell (for Cokanasiga 72) 7

Harsh on Stuart, but otherwise looks pretty much on the money for the starters. I’d drop Smith one to a 6. Not sure how Ludlum is an 8. Industrious, but so we’re others to. Badly missed tackle for the Aus 3rd try. Mako was busy as was LCD.

Arundell only a 7? Scored a nice try with his first touch and made a break with his second.

Stuart is undermarked. Thought he put in a very decent shift.

The rest? Yeah, its there or thereabouts.

The use and timings of subs by Jones continues to grind my gears. JVP and Heyes dont make an entrance until the 79th minute. Porter stays unused.

Agree on Stuart. He did ‘fade’ later in the game, but that’s not really surprising given how long he was on for.

Curry’s head knock is a worry. I assume he doesn’t need to go through the RTP protocols if he didn’t have an official HIA, but the fact he didn’t return for the second half suggests he probably should.

fivepointer wrote:Arundell only a 7? Scored a nice try with his first touch and made a break with his second.

Stuart is undermarked. Thought he put in a very decent shift.

The rest? Yeah, its there or thereabouts.

The use and timings of subs by Jones continues to grind my gears. JVP and Heyes dont make an entrance until the 79th minute. Porter stays unused.

Yep on the subs. Very late changes, which is extra odd as we’d lost control of the game and needed to change things and wrestle back momentum.

Scrumhead wrote:Agree on Stuart. He did ‘fade’ later in the game, but that’s not really surprising given how long he was on for.

Curry’s head knock is a worry. I assume he doesn’t need to go through the RTP protocols if he didn’t have an official HIA, but the fact he didn’t return for the second half suggests he probably should.

Especially given the (probable) moment where he sustained it - headbutting Kerevi's elbow in a big tackle. Should've been pulled off for an HIA immediately after that big of a head contact, not waited till half-time.

Puja

Assuming Curry were to be out, who covers No 8? Despite his streamlined appearance, I have reservations about Billy's effectiveness for the full 80.

dunno how Smith scores the same as Curry and more than Billy. George did not nail his throws either, disappointing underthrows.

No point in marking late subs, but if you are Arundell's a 9.9.

Banquo wrote: No point in marking late subs, but if you are Arundell's a 9.9.

Harsh.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote: No point in marking late subs, but if you are Arundell's a 9.9.

Harsh.

To be fair he was marking him out of 5

Looks like they decided on those scores before the game and just tweaked the captions to fit in afterwards.

And the Telegraph

http://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk/ ... cle/326283

Has Curry at a 9 and Stuart at 8 as our standouts

Steward was at fault for one Aus try, biting in when there was no need. I'd have marked him down 1.

Is it just me that doesn't get the Steward hype? He was good in the AIs last year but had a poor 6N (tbf all of our backs did) and he didn't look that good on Saturday. Admittedly I don't watch Leicester other than the Premiership Final where again I thought he was ok but nothing special. Not trying to hate on the lad but because he is great under the high ball the rest of his game seems to get overlooked.

Freddo wrote:Is it just me that doesn't get the Steward hype? He was good in the AIs last year but had a poor 6N (tbf all of our backs did) and he didn't look that good on Saturday. Admittedly I don't watch Leicester other than the Premiership Final where again I thought he was ok but nothing special. Not trying to hate on the lad but because he is great under the high ball the rest of his game seems to get overlooked.

Batten down the hatches, old boy.

Probably has been overhyped.
I blame Smith

Mellsblue wrote:

Freddo wrote:Is it just me that doesn't get the Steward hype? He was good in the AIs last year but had a poor 6N (tbf all of our backs did) and he didn't look that good on Saturday. Admittedly I don't watch Leicester other than the Premiership Final where again I thought he was ok but nothing special. Not trying to hate on the lad but because he is great under the high ball the rest of his game seems to get overlooked.

Batten down the hatches, old boy.

Freddo wrote:Is it just me that doesn't get the Steward hype? He was good in the AIs last year but had a poor 6N (tbf all of our backs did) and he didn't look that good on Saturday. Admittedly I don't watch Leicester other than the Premiership Final where again I thought he was ok but nothing special. Not trying to hate on the lad but because he is great under the high ball the rest of his game seems to get overlooked.

Harsh. If we’re expecting players to be faultless, we’re setting an impossible bar.

Steward is 21 and has been playing test rugby for a year or so. He’s taken to it like a duck to water and while he isn’t error free (see Peej’s reference to the defensive read for Petaia’s try), he doesn’t make a lot of mistakes and is comfortably our best fullback.

Sure his game has room for development, but he’s getting better at hitting good lines in attack and he has some playmaking ability when he’s in the position to use it. We’ve not seen as much of that for England, but that’s more to do with our tactics than it is with Steward IMO.

More to the point, we’ve got way bigger problems than worrying about what a 21 year old player who is already good needs to go to keep improving.

Scrumhead wrote: More to the point, we’ve got way bigger problems than worrying about what a 21 year old player who is already good needs to go to keep improving.

Mediocrity awaits.

I think curry was worth more than smith, but a 9 is insane, he wasn’t that good. Probably a 7, with smith bumped down to 6. Lud was showreel for me. Lots of floppy hair carries and interventions but not a lot of real substance.

As ever under jones, it’s hard to pick a standout. Which in a way is a good thing: the team lives and dies by its team wide performance. But I do feel we’re missing out on some performances.

Stom wrote: the team lives and dies by its team wide performance.

Mostly dies.

Scrumhead wrote:

Freddo wrote:Is it just me that doesn't get the Steward hype? He was good in the AIs last year but had a poor 6N (tbf all of our backs did) and he didn't look that good on Saturday. Admittedly I don't watch Leicester other than the Premiership Final where again I thought he was ok but nothing special. Not trying to hate on the lad but because he is great under the high ball the rest of his game seems to get overlooked.

Harsh. If we’re expecting players to be faultless, we’re setting an impossible bar.

Steward is 21 and has been playing test rugby for a year or so. He’s taken to it like a duck to water and while he isn’t error free (see Peej’s reference to the defensive read for Petaia’s try), he doesn’t make a lot of mistakes and is comfortably our best fullback.

Sure his game has room for development, but he’s getting better at hitting good lines in attack and he has some playmaking ability when he’s in the position to use it. We’ve not seen as much of that for England, but that’s more to do with our tactics than it is with Steward IMO.

More to the point, we’ve got way bigger problems than worrying about what a 21 year old player who is already good needs to go to keep improving.

I thought Steward was one of our better backs, again. He was for me in the 6N as well. Nothing flash just gets the job done. Marchant was the same at the weekend. No fireworks but no stupid penalties, very little in the way of error count and gave the playmakers options.

I'd say Steward (and Marchant) are the least of our concerns as Scrumhead says.

Whether Steward continues to develop enough to command the shirt long term we'll see. He is a growing presence in the attack so hopefully he continues to grow into the role. He's a product of Tigers and Borthwick though, percentage rugby will be preferred over take high risks. Then again we had a 15 who did that and we were happy when Eddie moved him on. I suspect bar injury Steward will be the go to option for the world cup.

FKAS wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

Freddo wrote:Is it just me that doesn't get the Steward hype? He was good in the AIs last year but had a poor 6N (tbf all of our backs did) and he didn't look that good on Saturday. Admittedly I don't watch Leicester other than the Premiership Final where again I thought he was ok but nothing special. Not trying to hate on the lad but because he is great under the high ball the rest of his game seems to get overlooked.

Harsh. If we’re expecting players to be faultless, we’re setting an impossible bar.

Steward is 21 and has been playing test rugby for a year or so. He’s taken to it like a duck to water and while he isn’t error free (see Peej’s reference to the defensive read for Petaia’s try), he doesn’t make a lot of mistakes and is comfortably our best fullback.

Sure his game has room for development, but he’s getting better at hitting good lines in attack and he has some playmaking ability when he’s in the position to use it. We’ve not seen as much of that for England, but that’s more to do with our tactics than it is with Steward IMO.

More to the point, we’ve got way bigger problems than worrying about what a 21 year old player who is already good needs to go to keep improving.

I thought Steward was one of our better backs, again. He was for me in the 6N as well. Nothing flash just gets the job done. Marchant was the same at the weekend. No fireworks but no stupid penalties, very little in the way of error count and gave the playmakers options.

I'd say Steward (and Marchant) are the least of our concerns as Scrumhead says.

Whether Steward continues to develop enough to command the shirt long term we'll see. He is a growing presence in the attack so hopefully he continues to grow into the role. He's a product of Tigers and Borthwick though, percentage rugby will be preferred over take high risks. Then again we had a 15 who did that and we were happy when Eddie moved him on. I suspect bar injury Steward will be the go to option for the world cup.

Being one of our better backs remains a low bar. He's great under the high ball, and a big unit, which could be deployed more as a carrier in different channels. If he has played 12, I'd like to see more and better handling. I'd prefer more gas there, and wouldn't object to seeing how Arundell or Freeman cope the other side of the ball- they are excellent attackers.
Marchant has done fine too, and he's the sort of running 13 I'd prefer and we have to have if you have the two receiver axis of doom.
We are just utterly unsure of what the best backline composition is- being slaves to a style is imo unhelpful, and actually un eddie like.

Stom wrote:I think curry was worth more than smith, but a 9 is insane, he wasn’t that good. Probably a 7, with smith bumped down to 6. Lud was showreel for me. Lots of floppy hair carries and interventions but not a lot of real substance.

As ever under jones, it’s hard to pick a standout. Which in a way is a good thing: the team lives and dies by its team wide performance. But I do feel we’re missing out on some performances.

Am I alone in thinking Curry hasn't really been that great for quite a while? His base level is generally very good, I'm not denying that, it just feels like he gets rated as world class by default now. He never seems to face the same criticism as Ludlam, despite doing the headless chicken thing a fair amount too.

I'm not sure how much he's just been messed about with the positional changes and this determination he has to carry in to heavy traffic and bump people. He's certainly added to his game in a number of ways, but at risk of sounding like [redacted] I'd love to see more of those classic openside skills on display. He's just such a good link player when he's on it.

Just seen his tour is done, so this feels like it might be read as harsh. I'm just talking about him getting high scores by default. Big shame for him to be out of the tour though. He really does seem to drive standards in the pack.

Mikey Brown wrote:

Stom wrote:I think curry was worth more than smith, but a 9 is insane, he wasn’t that good. Probably a 7, with smith bumped down to 6. Lud was showreel for me. Lots of floppy hair carries and interventions but not a lot of real substance.

As ever under jones, it’s hard to pick a standout. Which in a way is a good thing: the team lives and dies by its team wide performance. But I do feel we’re missing out on some performances.

Am I alone in thinking Curry hasn't really been that great for quite a while? His base level is generally very good, I'm not denying that, it just feels like he gets rated as world class by default now. He never seems to face the same criticism as Ludlam, despite doing the headless chicken thing a fair amount too.

I'm not sure how much he's just been messed about with the positional changes and this determination he has to carry in to heavy traffic and bump people. He's certainly added to his game in a number of ways, but at risk of sounding like [redacted] I'd love to see more of those classic openside skills on display. He's just such a good link player when he's on it.

Does he?

The only thing I really see about Curry is that he only ever runs into contact, which is largely wrong, but he seems to now have that label.