RugbyRebels

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm Papers have rumours of team being 10-15 of Ford, May, Farrell, Manu, Marchant, Steward, and that the backrow will be Lawes/Curry/Earl, with BillyV on the bench.

If we *must* have Farrell starting (and apparently, we must), I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before. Not thrilled by Marchant on the wing, mind. His speed's not a liability, but he's not a real winger and it feels like we're neutralising part of our attacking threat so that we can crowbar the ICEMAN into the XV. Mind, we weren't using that attacking threat anyway, so I guess there's that.

The BillyV news is the more important bit to me and fantastic news to hear, if it's true. Good to know that we've recognised that playing two flankers is important.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm Papers have rumours of team being 10-15 of Ford, May, Farrell, Manu, Marchant, Steward, and that the backrow will be Lawes/Curry/Earl, with BillyV on the bench.

If we *must* have Farrell starting (and apparently, we must), I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before. Not thrilled by Marchant on the wing, mind. His speed's not a liability, but he's not a real winger and it feels like we're neutralising part of our attacking threat so that we can crowbar the ICEMAN into the XV. Mind, we weren't using that attacking threat anyway, so I guess there's that.

The BillyV news is the more important bit to me and fantastic news to hear, if it's true. Good to know that we've recognised that playing two flankers is important.

Puja

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:01 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm Papers have rumours of team being 10-15 of Ford, May, Farrell, Manu, Marchant, Steward, and that the backrow will be Lawes/Curry/Earl, with BillyV on the bench.

If we *must* have Farrell starting (and apparently, we must), I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before. Not thrilled by Marchant on the wing, mind. His speed's not a liability, but he's not a real winger and it feels like we're neutralising part of our attacking threat so that we can crowbar the ICEMAN into the XV. Mind, we weren't using that attacking threat anyway, so I guess there's that.

The BillyV news is the more important bit to me and fantastic news to hear, if it's true. Good to know that we've recognised that playing two flankers is important.

Puja

It’s on defence that I find the midfield (and the moving of Marchant) a lot more concerning.

I feel like Tuilagi has grown in to his role as a defender at 12, but doesn’t look nearly light enough on his feet these days to play wider, whilst Farrell introduces all sorts of confusion alongside his famed physicality.

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:24 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:01 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm Papers have rumours of team being 10-15 of Ford, May, Farrell, Manu, Marchant, Steward, and that the backrow will be Lawes/Curry/Earl, with BillyV on the bench.

If we *must* have Farrell starting (and apparently, we must), I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before. Not thrilled by Marchant on the wing, mind. His speed's not a liability, but he's not a real winger and it feels like we're neutralising part of our attacking threat so that we can crowbar the ICEMAN into the XV. Mind, we weren't using that attacking threat anyway, so I guess there's that.

The BillyV news is the more important bit to me and fantastic news to hear, if it's true. Good to know that we've recognised that playing two flankers is important.

Puja

It’s on defence that I find the midfield (and the moving of Marchant) a lot more concerning.

I feel like Tuilagi has grown in to his role as a defender at 12, but doesn’t look nearly light enough on his feet these days to play wider, whilst Farrell introduces all sorts of confusion alongside his famed physicality.

I wonder if the idea is to have Ford playing wing on defence so that they can use Marchant's organisational skills at 13 and move the lighter Ford away from traffic - he's an excellent tackler who completes a high percentage successfully, but he is vulnerable to giving up yards by being dragged backwards when big men run at him.

Again, it wouldn't be what I'd do, but it's an explanation for effectively having the midfield labelled as 13 and 14.

Puja

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:33 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:24 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:01 pm

It’s on defence that I find the midfield (and the moving of Marchant) a lot more concerning.

I feel like Tuilagi has grown in to his role as a defender at 12, but doesn’t look nearly light enough on his feet these days to play wider, whilst Farrell introduces all sorts of confusion alongside his famed physicality.

I wonder if the idea is to have Ford playing wing on defence so that they can use Marchant's organisational skills at 13 and move the lighter Ford away from traffic - he's an excellent tackler who completes a high percentage successfully, but he is vulnerable to giving up yards by being dragged backwards when big men run at him.

Again, it wouldn't be what I'd do, but it's an explanation for effectively having the midfield labelled as 13 and 14.

Puja

Could be, but I never quite understand the logistics of the flyhalf and winger (who might be on the far side) having to swap back and forth between changes of possession.

It hardly seems much more sensible than sticking Steward to the wing for Smith at fullback. Can Ford do a good goose step?

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:01 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm Papers have rumours of team being 10-15 of Ford, May, Farrell, Manu, Marchant, Steward, and that the backrow will be Lawes/Curry/Earl, with BillyV on the bench.

If we *must* have Farrell starting (and apparently, we must), I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before. Not thrilled by Marchant on the wing, mind. His speed's not a liability, but he's not a real winger and it feels like we're neutralising part of our attacking threat so that we can crowbar the ICEMAN into the XV. Mind, we weren't using that attacking threat anyway, so I guess there's that.

The BillyV news is the more important bit to me and fantastic news to hear, if it's true. Good to know that we've recognised that playing two flankers is important.

Puja

It’s on defence that I find the midfield (and the moving of Marchant) a lot more concerning.

I feel like Tuilagi has grown in to his role as a defender at 12, but doesn’t look nearly light enough on his feet these days to play wider, whilst Farrell introduces all sorts of confusion alongside his famed physicality.

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 2:08 pm I hate how resigned to and numb we have become to the hard man of Europe getting the nod at 12.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 2:17 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 2:08 pm I hate how resigned to and numb we have become to the hard man of Europe getting the nod at 12.

Let's face it, all he has to do is fart to get 8/10 from most pundits. Our protests about him just waste breath so it's easier to talk about other selections. He must have broken some sort of record for being so bad that we have stopped whingeing about his selection.

Margin_Walker wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 2:01 pm Which papers have this as the team?

I'm not believing any leaked team until the Mail or Times leak it.

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm , I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before.
Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm Papers have rumours of team being 10-15 of Ford, May, Farrell, Manu, Marchant, Steward, and that the backrow will be Lawes/Curry/Earl, with BillyV on the bench.

If we *must* have Farrell starting (and apparently, we must), I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before. Not thrilled by Marchant on the wing, mind. His speed's not a liability, but he's not a real winger and it feels like we're neutralising part of our attacking threat so that we can crowbar the ICEMAN into the XV. Mind, we weren't using that attacking threat anyway, so I guess there's that.

The BillyV news is the more important bit to me and fantastic news to hear, if it's true. Good to know that we've recognised that playing two flankers is important.

Puja

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:40 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:33 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:24 pm

I wonder if the idea is to have Ford playing wing on defence so that they can use Marchant's organisational skills at 13 and move the lighter Ford away from traffic - he's an excellent tackler who completes a high percentage successfully, but he is vulnerable to giving up yards by being dragged backwards when big men run at him.

Again, it wouldn't be what I'd do, but it's an explanation for effectively having the midfield labelled as 13 and 14.

Puja

Could be, but I never quite understand the logistics of the flyhalf and winger (who might be on the far side) having to swap back and forth between changes of possession.

It hardly seems much more sensible than sticking Steward to the wing for Smith at fullback. Can Ford do a good goose step?

Sinfield doesn't use a traditional pendulum system in defence so moving Ford to the wing doesn't really happen. The wings tend to defend flat in the line with the flyhalf and fullback in the backfield. If the flyhalf gets caught in the line the scrum half drops in. Occasionally a winger drops back to cover for the fullback.

Keeps a kicking presence and then a chaser/aerial option in the backfield.

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 5:24 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm , I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before.
Puja

Dear god, despite all the evidence....it last 'worked' eons ago when our pack was dominating, and only against poor opposition. Faz is a better 10 than 12, but a mediocre 10.

and fck Marchant on the wing.

Clueless back selection if so. The fact that we even try and make sense out of it shows we have Stockholm syndrome

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 5:35 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:40 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:33 pm

Could be, but I never quite understand the logistics of the flyhalf and winger (who might be on the far side) having to swap back and forth between changes of possession.

It hardly seems much more sensible than sticking Steward to the wing for Smith at fullback. Can Ford do a good goose step?

Sinfield doesn't use a traditional pendulum system in defence so moving Ford to the wing doesn't really happen. The wings tend to defend flat in the line with the flyhalf and fullback in the backfield. If the flyhalf gets caught in the line the scrum half drops in. Occasionally a winger drops back to cover for the fullback.

Keeps a kicking presence and then a chaser/aerial option in the backfield.

Huh, interesting. I didn't know that was how it worked.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 5:40 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 5:24 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:33 pm , I still regard him as least damaging at 12, and I still don't mind Ford/Farrell as a combo as much as some others on here do - it's not what I would pick, but it has worked before.
Puja

Dear god, despite all the evidence....it last 'worked' eons ago when our pack was dominating, and only against poor opposition. Faz is a better 10 than 12, but a mediocre 10.

and fck Marchant on the wing.

Clueless back selection if so. The fact that we even try and make sense out of it shows we have Stockholm syndrome

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am, cause my memory's shithouse), but we haven't actually used Ford/Farrell since 2020, have we? I thought Ford was dumped shortly after we won the Autumn Nations Cup thingy and we've just had loads of attempts to make either Farrell at 10 or Smith/Farrell work.

So, "all the evidence" would include the last time we were actually good at the game.

Puja

Beasties wrote: ↑Thu Oct 05, 2023 12:52 pm What time do we get to find out what position Farrell is playing?