6N Back Row

[kk67]

I don't think Robshaw has ever had a good match at 7 for England, there have been matches he's done well in for periods, but with his decision making and technical skills not being Hill like he has to lift the physical effort to a level even he can't sustain.

Meeow.....you should put that vicious little pussy on a leash.

[Mikey Brown]

I feel like it’s less about 12/13 with Slade and more about the license to roam that he gets in either system.

Somebody here gave a good summary of the way Exeter attack and when Slade can split the field with Steenson or be the distributor in the second wave. In theory you can do all that at 12 too but I’m not sure if that’s what has been asked of him with England.

Incidentally I saw somebody mention linebreak stats for all the fly-halves in the AP and Farrell is doing well there, second only behind that little child at Harlequins. I suppose you have to consider the forward pack he’s got, along with the opposition backrow being terrified of another searing break from Wigglesworth.

[p/d]

Barritt is a good foil for Farrell, as I suppose Roberts is for the little child at Quins.

Think if T'eo had kept fit he would provide a similar role for England.

Perhaps the future could be
10 Child
12 T'eo
13 JJ or Slade

......with Farrell at FB

[Rich]

Having just watched the Italy 6N game, it's clear the back row needs to be changed.

I can see why Eddie wants a lock like Lawes or Itoje at blindside - especially since Wales are next up and in Shingler Wales have a fine back row forward - who's 6'6" and Eddie probably think this needs to be countered.

But if it means keeping Robshaw at openside, I think it would be better the ceded to tail of the line out.

I think Eddie should go for :

Underhill (7) - Simmonds (8) - Robshaw (6)

Graham or Mercer on the bench.

[Rich]

On a side note: would this be England's first choice back row (if everyone was 100% fit) ???

Simmonds (7) - Billy V (8) - Hughes (6)


Three club No 8's I know and with Shields becoming available within a year ...who knows.

[Mikey Brown]

What do you mean would it be? Hughes and Simmonds have never even played those positions.

I understand the idea of Hughes at 6 even less than the idea of Simmonds at 7, which I wouldn't mind seeing at some point but only alongside a proper flanker who knows what he's doing in defence and around the fringes.

[Rich]

What do you mean would it be? Hughes and Simmonds have never even played those positions.

I understand the idea of Hughes at 6 even less than the idea of Simmonds at 7, which I wouldn't mind seeing at some point but only alongside a proper flanker who knows what he's doing in defence and around the fringes.

Well any No 8 worth his salt should be able to play blind side flanker and didn't Eddie say he saw Hughes as a blind side for England ?

"...Fiji-born Hughes qualified for England on residency grounds in June and has been one of the Premiership’s most consistent performers since being plucked from obscurity by Wasps in 2013. The 25-year-old, who picked up a rugby ball for the first time eight years ago, is a powerful carrier and Jones views him as a blindside flanker rather than No8, Billy Vunipola’s position...."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... sps-youngs


Hasn't Simmonds not played open side for Exeter ?


Of course England have a history of playing a back row of three club No 8's :

Clarke (7) - Richards (8) - Rodber (6)

[Mikey Brown]

Eddie says a lot of stuff.

Why would it be a good backrow though? If it were just about carrying then great.

[Rich]

Eddie says a lot of stuff.

Why would it be a good backrow though? If it were just about carrying then great.

Most of what Eddie says is sensible - in fact the only time I think he's contradicted himself is when he said that Robshaw was not an open side...only to change his mind when he ran short of options at 7.


A back row of :

Simmonds (7) - Billy V (8) - Hughes (6)

...offers a lot of options. Clearly Eddie wants a tall athletic type of player at blindside to offer a tail option at the line out. Hughes is 6'5" and offers this as well as being a week-in, week-out back row player - unlike Lawes/Itoje.

Billy V is the best "hard yards" carrier I can think of in world rugby right now.

Simmonds showed today that he has the ability to be world class...the commentators suggested he'd be ideal to bring on for the last 20 minutes against tiring legs but I'd want world class players starting (and Simmonds is going to be world class I'm sure).

Simmonds should have won the man of the match today - his tackle count was exactly what you want in a back row player and he showed good distribution too - like for Nowell's try at the end.

[Raggs]

Simmonds has definitely played 7 before, and recently.

Hughes, Billy, Simmonds offers good carrying, which as Digby keeps pointing out, would reduce the requirement of such accurate ruck clearouts.

I think it's something Eddie might still try, but time is running out to experiment with it to see if it can work, if not all 3 are fit in the autumn or summer, I don't see it happening.

[Digby]

I think it's more we don't look to play multiphase, and it can take a defence x phases before they get into a position to contest a ruck anyway, so England would do better winning more contacts and playing off that given how they're trying to play. For myself I'd change a lot around how they're even trying to play, though even then we could use another couple of carriers.

[Stom]

Robshaw gets through so much in this England side. Remove him and who does the supporting? And who organises the fringe defense?

It's definitely not Hughes, that's for sure. So Simmonds does that all? Which means his carrying will be minimal. Which kind of removes the point. Better to pick someone who actually does that fringe work primarily.

Robshaw, Simmonds, Billy could work well, imo, and in the future Underhill could replace Robshaw. Or someone else. But the point is: rugby is about defense just as much as it is attack. We need someone to lead that defense. None of those 3 suggested lead defenses. Robshaw does, Eddie has been pushing Underhill to (and he did when he replaced Robshaw) and there are others who do that and do it well. We need a Fardy, a Warburton, a POM, etc., etc. We don't have a Pocock or McCaw who can do it all.

[Digby]

Pocock doesn't so it all, he's very limited albeit brilliant at so much of what he does so

[Banquo]

Pocock doesn't so it all, he's very limited albeit brilliant at so much of what he does so

Ha, calling Pocock 'very limited' in the context of our current flanking choices made me smile.

[Oakboy]

Let's face it, if everybody was available, fit and on-form Eddie would pick Robshaw and Billy. Thereafter, his 3rd choice would depend on how he wants the unit to play in the general game strategy. We still have no proven, effective international 7 other than Robshaw despite all arguments. Eddie will probably prefer him at 6 but only if someone else proves capable of doing the job at 7. I would expect Simmonds to get a chance to stake a claim at some stage. Beyond that, we can whinge and pontificate but Eddie may continue with Lawes at 6 for the 6N unless Hughes becomes available, I suspect. Then, we might see 6. Robshaw, 7. Simmonds, 8. Hughes.

I still don't think we will see Simmonds AND Underhill starting in the 6N.

[Digby]

Pocock doesn't so it all, he's very limited albeit brilliant at so much of what he does so

Ha, calling Pocock 'very limited' in the context of our current flanking choices made me smile.

We're verging on not picking any flankers

[Which Tyler]

What do you mean would it be? Hughes and Simmonds have never even played those positions.

I understand the idea of Hughes at 6 even less than the idea of Simmonds at 7, which I wouldn't mind seeing at some point but only alongside a proper flanker who knows what he's doing in defence and around the fringes.

Wasn't Simmonds a 7 through age grade and loan spells? I was under the impression he'd never played 8 before this season (or at least, not consecutive games).

I think, all fit and firing, Robshaw (6) and Billy (8) are absolutely nailed on; we're then picking between Hughes, Simmonds, Underhill, Mercer and Curry for the 7 and 20 shirts. Currently, Mercer needs to be in the 20; and Simmonds offers more of what I want at 7 that Hughes or Underhill; whilst the Curries seem to be out of favour. I'd also look at converting Underhill to a 6, which seems to suit his style much better.

Robshaw (6), Simmonds (7), Billy (8)
Mercer (20) for me; albeit with a desire to get some experience into Underhill, Curry & Curry for the post-RWC turnover / injury cover.

[Mikey Brown]

I meant for England. The idea they're first choice in those positions but never had a start in either.

I can certainly believe Simmonds has played there. I think he's played centre in fairly recent years too, which comes as no surprise.

I maybe haven't seen enough of Mercer but I would have thought with that starting backrow you'd want a flanker on the bench. Underhill doesn't particularly inspire me as a substitute but I like the idea of giving him a chance at 7, with a mind to perhaps having him develop as a 6 too.

[Banquo]

Pocock doesn't so it all, he's very limited albeit brilliant at so much of what he does so

Ha, calling Pocock 'very limited' in the context of our current flanking choices made me smile.

We're verging on not picking any flankers

That's true.

[Which Tyler]

I meant for England. The idea they're first choice in those positions but never had a start in either.

I can certainly believe Simmonds has played there. I think he's played centre in fairly recent years too, which comes as no surprise.

I maybe haven't seen enough of Mercer but I would have thought with that starting backrow you'd want a flanker on the bench. Underhill doesn't particularly inspire me as a substitute but I like the idea of giving him a chance at 7, with a mind to perhaps having him develop as a 6 too.

Mercer has played across the backrow this season; and is perfectly capable of doing the roles required for all 3 (less so 7, but capable). Simmonds would be my other choice for the bench if he isn't starting, for much the same reason.

[Puja]

I meant for England. The idea they're first choice in those positions but never had a start in either.

I can certainly believe Simmonds has played there. I think he's played centre in fairly recent years too, which comes as no surprise.

I maybe haven't seen enough of Mercer but I would have thought with that starting backrow you'd want a flanker on the bench. Underhill doesn't particularly inspire me as a substitute but I like the idea of giving him a chance at 7, with a mind to perhaps having him develop as a 6 too.

But we'll have Kruis on the bench. That's as good as having a flanker, maybe better!

Just imagine it - Lawes and Itoje packing down on either flank. Nothing could go wrong with that.

Puja

[p/d]

Lot of talk about Mercer, but yet to be convinced he can step up a level. Love to be proved wrong as, without the flashing red of the Hask headgear, we could do with hint of blue to brighten things up.

[Which Tyler]

Lot of talk about Mercer, but yet to be convinced he can step up a level. Love to be proved wrong as, without the flashing red of the Hask headgear, we could do with hint of blue to brighten things up.

In an ideal world, Mercer's at least 6 months away from making the bench*.
We don't live in an ideal world though.
Without BillyV and NHughes; our options are to play at least one of Simmonds, Mercer, Morgan or Waldrom at 8...
Well, either that or play with 4 locks and push Robshaw to 8...


*ETA: given that we're in February now; make that 5 months - bench on tour; then again in the AIs; with a start against Japan, and possibly Australia

[p/d]

Lot of talk about Mercer, but yet to be convinced he can step up a level. Love to be proved wrong as, without the flashing red of the Hask headgear, we could do with hint of blue to brighten things up.

In an ideal world, Mercer's at least 6 months away from making the bench*.
We don't live in an ideal world though.
Without BillyV and NHughes; our options are to play at least one of Simmonds, Mercer, Morgan or Waldrom at 8...
Well, either that or play with 4 locks and push Robshaw to 8...


*ETA: given that we're in February now; make that 5 months - bench on tour; then again in the AIs; with a start against Japan, and possibly Australia

I understand the dilemma we face regards the 8 berth, and perhaps Waldron is a better option short term. That said can see Chisolmn leapfrogging Mercer. Zac just looks a bit powder puff, especially when playing alongside Simmonds. Need someone to hit players backward in the tackle, which is something neither Robshaw or Simmonds do (and for some reason Lawes no longer does.) Perhaps Underhill with Robshaw & Simmonds could work well,

[Banquo]

Lot of talk about Mercer, but yet to be convinced he can step up a level. Love to be proved wrong as, without the flashing red of the Hask headgear, we could do with hint of blue to brighten things up.

In an ideal world, Mercer's at least 6 months away from making the bench*.
We don't live in an ideal world though.
Without BillyV and NHughes; our options are to play at least one of Simmonds, Mercer, Morgan or Waldrom at 8...
Well, either that or play with 4 locks and push Robshaw to 8...


*ETA: given that we're in February now; make that 5 months - bench on tour; then again in the AIs; with a start against Japan, and possibly Australia

I understand the dilemma we face regards the 8 berth, and perhaps Waldron is a better option short term. That said can see Chisolmn leapfrogging Mercer. Zac just looks a bit powder puff, especially when playing alongside Simmonds. Need someone to hit players backward in the tackle, which is something neither Robshaw or Simmonds do (and for some reason Lawes no longer does.) Perhaps Underhill with Robshaw & Simmonds could work well,

Waldrom doesnt even get in the Chiefs squad these days.