Oakboy wrote:I don't question the claim that George, at his best, is a better individual player than Hartley, at his best. I do question whether George's performance, as an individual, last Saturday was better than Hartley's last performance, as an individual. Further, I question whether the forwards around George perform, as a unit, as well as they have done regularly around Hartley.
I'm just trying to compare objectively. George may be the best available currently but there's a hell of a lot of room for improvement.
George made 13 tackles, missed 1 at the weekend. His last start against France he made 18, missed 1. To my knowledge Hartley has only made double figure tackles twice in 25? test starts under Jones. That’s a pretty tangible, objective comparison for you.
The difference in mobility, athleticism, work rate and physicality between the two is enormous. I will say that I think England could find ways of using George more as a ball carrier though.
Isiekwe had made 8 tackles in the first 35 minutes of the SA test... it's not all about tackle count.
I do agree that George does seem to be the better player, but Hartley was better than most give him credit for, and George hasn't been setting the world alight since starting.
Raggs wrote:Isiekwe had made 8 tackles in the first 35 minutes of the SA test... it's not all about tackle count.
I do agree that George does seem to be the better player, but Hartley was better than most give him credit for, and George hasn't been setting the world alight since starting.
Hartley on repeat basis just wasn't working hard enough, and that when he was barely lasting 50 minutes
Raggs wrote:Isiekwe had made 8 tackles in the first 35 minutes of the SA test... it's not all about tackle count.
I do agree that George does seem to be the better player, but Hartley was better than most give him credit for, and George hasn't been setting the world alight since starting.
The problem is judging by different criteria.
Hartley is now being judged by the fact we're not winning without him. But George is performing much better as a hooker. Perhaps the answer to the question lies elsewhere...
It's hard to judge George's play when he's handicapped by bad selection in the set peice. This weekend should give a better idea of George and LCD working with a proper 2nd row and having 3/4 lineout options ( not sure on Curry as a jumper? )
Cipriani is a fly half, and a good one. If he is to get a run in the second test I hope it will be in that slot, where he gets a chance to show his stuff as a playmaker and run the game, and not as a makeshift FB , where he has not played for about 10 years. If he does run on at FB and England get humped, I can see him scapegoated and, once again, toodle pip to his international future. That would be quite unfair.
Or rather trying to add it all up and seeing their overall contribution (unfortunately no one has offered up their GPS data yet, complete with timestamps). George has the higher ceiling than Hartley, but I still don't think he's contributing significantly more in his starts yet, I do expect him to get better though, whereas I don't feel the same about Hartley.
I’m a fan of George. It’s a shame that his real chance as the starting hooker has come at a point where he’s physically and mentally knackered off the back of two years of non-stop rugby.
He’s been disappointing, but he’s definitely capabale of a lot more.
I’m also a fan of Cowan-Dickie so I'm hoping he gets a chance to show a bit more from the bench.
The issue with Simmonds is that he's proven a Prem, European and international level that in a tight physical game he's not that useful. So he would have been lethal in the first 20 minutes last week, but pretty much useless after that. And the Boks are never going to give us that much time and space again.
Peej wrote:The issue with Simmonds is that he's proven a Prem, European and international level that in a tight physical game he's not that useful. So he would have been lethal in the first 20 minutes last week, but pretty much useless after that. And the Boks are never going to give us that much time and space again.
Fair point! Can you ever justify picking a forward who is verging on the small side against SA?
Peej wrote:The issue with Simmonds is that he's proven a Prem, European and international level that in a tight physical game he's not that useful. So he would have been lethal in the first 20 minutes last week, but pretty much useless after that. And the Boks are never going to give us that much time and space again.
Fair point! Can you ever justify picking a forward who is verging on the small side against SA?
He's not small or lacking power for a 7, which is where we could be trying him. As an 8, he's too small.
Peej wrote:The issue with Simmonds is that he's proven a Prem, European and international level that in a tight physical game he's not that useful. So he would have been lethal in the first 20 minutes last week, but pretty much useless after that. And the Boks are never going to give us that much time and space again.
Fair point! Can you ever justify picking a forward who is verging on the small side against SA?
He's not small or lacking power for a 7, which is where we could be trying him. As an 8, he's too small.
Dash, you are back to the old argument about open-sides. Would Simmonds really hold his own at 7 against SA? He'd be good with the ball in hand but how much ball would he win?
Oakboy wrote:
Fair point! Can you ever justify picking a forward who is verging on the small side against SA?
He's not small or lacking power for a 7, which is where we could be trying him. As an 8, he's too small.
Dash, you are back to the old argument about open-sides. Would Simmonds really hold his own at 7 against SA? He'd be good with the ball in hand but how much ball would he win?
Simmonds is an inch shorter and a pound heavier than Tom Curry.
TheDasher wrote:
He's not small or lacking power for a 7, which is where we could be trying him. As an 8, he's too small.
Dash, you are back to the old argument about open-sides. Would Simmonds really hold his own at 7 against SA? He'd be good with the ball in hand but how much ball would he win?
Simmonds is an inch shorter and a pound heavier than Tom Curry.
Oakboy wrote:
Fair point! Can you ever justify picking a forward who is verging on the small side against SA?
He's not small or lacking power for a 7, which is where we could be trying him. As an 8, he's too small.
Dash, you are back to the old argument about open-sides. Would Simmonds really hold his own at 7 against SA? He'd be good with the ball in hand but how much ball would he win?
Difficult to say without seeing him play as a 7. My point is that he has the frame for it. True, we need to see if he can steal ball, slow ball down, offload to link after one of his breaks etc.
When talking about physicality vs the boks, another point is that we're not playing particularly lumpy second rows. Now I'd pick Launch and Itoje as my starting locks too, so I'm not criticising Eddie, I'd just say that our locks are dynamic rather than heavy weight. Does that play a part? We haven't dominated sides physically up front for some time.
TheDasher wrote:
He's not small or lacking power for a 7, which is where we could be trying him. As an 8, he's too small.
Dash, you are back to the old argument about open-sides. Would Simmonds really hold his own at 7 against SA? He'd be good with the ball in hand but how much ball would he win?
Simmonds is an inch shorter and a pound heavier than Tom Curry.
Puja
Exactly. I have no issue with either of them re physicality if playing 7. As has been said, it's whether or not Simmonds can even play 7 in the way we'd need him to. I'm impressed with Curry and excited about him getting a good run. To have him, his brother, Willis when he returns plus the option of Simmonds is a big step forward for recent days of shitty opensides.
Dash, you are back to the old argument about open-sides. Would Simmonds really hold his own at 7 against SA? He'd be good with the ball in hand but how much ball would he win?
Simmonds is an inch shorter and a pound heavier than Tom Curry.
Puja
Exactly. I have no issue with either of them re physicality if playing 7. As has been said, it's whether or not Simmonds can even play 7 in the way we'd need him to. I'm impressed with Curry and excited about him getting a good run. To have him, his brother, Willis when he returns plus the option of Simmonds is a big step forward for recent days of shitty opensides.
Should I be feeling more optimistic than I was when Fraser, Kvesic and Wallace were the same age?
Peej wrote:The issue with Simmonds is that he's proven a Prem, European and international level that in a tight physical game he's not that useful. So he would have been lethal in the first 20 minutes last week, but pretty much useless after that. And the Boks are never going to give us that much time and space again.
I genuinely think I saw Simmonds have about 2 quiet club games all season. Champions Cup-wise he was great at home to Montpellier and away in Dublin, 2 massive and physical teams. Both Glasgow games he was a standout too, and they’re practically an international team.
Last edited by Timbo on Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Peej wrote:The issue with Simmonds is that he's proven a Prem, European and international level that in a tight physical game he's not that useful. So he would have been lethal in the first 20 minutes last week, but pretty much useless after that. And the Boks are never going to give us that much time and space again.
I genuinely think I saw Simmonds have about 2 quiet club games all season. Champions Cup-wise he was great at home to Montpellier and away in Dublin, 2 massive and physical teams. Both Hlasgow games he was a standout too, and they’re practically an international team.
Yeah this is ridiculous. He really went missing vs Wales, but Christ he is vying with Hughes for a spot. Who despite being enormous has been quite dramatically outmuscled several times in his international career so far. Neither are able to fill Billy’s boots, but they shouldn’t have to whether that means adapting the role or playing at 7.
If he’s fit we should give Simmonds a chance. You never know, a bit of pace and that ability to run between people instead of over them may find a use.
Peej wrote:The issue with Simmonds is that he's proven a Prem, European and international level that in a tight physical game he's not that useful. So he would have been lethal in the first 20 minutes last week, but pretty much useless after that. And the Boks are never going to give us that much time and space again.
Fair point! Can you ever justify picking a forward who is verging on the small side against SA?
Neil Back did ok; even SA have toyed with what we call opensides.
Dash, you are back to the old argument about open-sides. Would Simmonds really hold his own at 7 against SA? He'd be good with the ball in hand but how much ball would he win?
Simmonds is an inch shorter and a pound heavier than Tom Curry.
Puja
Does he have Curry's breakdown technique?
He's been very good over the ball for Chiefs when the occasion has demanded it.....but their approach to the breakdown doesn't look for jackelling skills, hence surprising they signed Kvesic (tho they did play Salvi a lot) and then not playing him.
NZ have a no8 who does his best work in the wider, open spaces and they seem to be doing ok. As always, is about the balance of the entire pack. If we have George, Williams/Sinckler and Shields replacing Hartley, Cole and Robshaw we already have some more tight carriers. If Billy is injured then we could use Simmonds in a different fashion to Billy, rather than just going to Billy-lite.
In the shorter term, I’d love to see him in the bench this weekend.
Mellsblue wrote:NZ have a no8 who does his best work in the wider, open spaces and they seem to be doing ok. As always, is about the balance of the entire pack. If we have George, Williams/Sinckler and Shields replacing Hartley, Cole and Robshaw we already have some more tight carriers. If Billy is injured then we could use Simmonds in a different fashion to Billy, rather than just going to Billy-lite.
In the shorter term, I’d love to see him in the bench this weekend.
NZ have one of the best 8's of all time in Read. They also have a pack who have superb basics and excellent breakdown technique and decision making. They can afford a luxury Okapi- who can do the tight physical work if needed, pretty big unit.
