Team for Scotland

Moderator: Puja

francoisfou
Posts: 2514
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:01 pm
Location: Haute-Garonne

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by francoisfou »

Curry had a good game at 8, but should he be retained against Ireland? Their 8, CJ Stander must be about the same size as Curry, although with significantly more international experience. Thoughts?
User avatar
jngf
Posts: 1571
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 5:57 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by jngf »

francoisfou wrote:Curry had a good game at 8, but should he be retained against Ireland? Their 8, CJ Stander must be about the same size as Curry, although with significantly more international experience. Thoughts?
Curry did have a good game but imo that was more by virtue of the weather conditions dictating that the back row concentrated on breakdown work. On the one or two carries he attempted he did not cross the gain line as far as I could make out. Stander is a much larger forward and I would move Curry back to 7 and Underhill across to 6 - with 8 left to Earl or Ludlum.
francoisfou
Posts: 2514
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:01 pm
Location: Haute-Garonne

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by francoisfou »

jngf wrote:
francoisfou wrote:Curry had a good game at 8, but should he be retained against Ireland? Their 8, CJ Stander must be about the same size as Curry, although with significantly more international experience. Thoughts?
Curry did have a good game but imo that was more by virtue of the weather conditions dictating that the back row concentrated on breakdown work. On the one or two carries he attempted he did not cross the gain line as far as I could make out. Stander is a much larger forward and I would move Curry back to 7 and Underhill across to 6 - with 8 left to Earl or Ludlum.
Wot! Not Itoje!
User avatar
jngf
Posts: 1571
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 5:57 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by jngf »

francoisfou wrote:
jngf wrote:
francoisfou wrote:Curry had a good game at 8, but should he be retained against Ireland? Their 8, CJ Stander must be about the same size as Curry, although with significantly more international experience. Thoughts?
Curry did have a good game but imo that was more by virtue of the weather conditions dictating that the back row concentrated on breakdown work. On the one or two carries he attempted he did not cross the gain line as far as I could make out. Stander is a much larger forward and I would move Curry back to 7 and Underhill across to 6 - with 8 left to Earl or Ludlum.
Wot! Not Itoje!
Not under Eddie I expect!
Banquo
Posts: 19152
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Banquo »

francoisfou wrote:Curry had a good game at 8, but should he be retained against Ireland? Their 8, CJ Stander must be about the same size as Curry, although with significantly more international experience. Thoughts?
I'd think Stander is about a stone heavier and less agile. Curry still looked uncomfortable at the base of the scrum, unsurprisingly, as its quite a skill to master; it'd be comedic to see Itoje try and do it.
User avatar
Oakboy
Posts: 6381
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:42 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Oakboy »

In a way, you can make a case for Curry at 8. It keeps him, Underhill, Ludlum, Earl and Hill in the mix with as many of the gifted group of backrowers in the 23 as Jones can manage. Then, the bloody idiot brings on Lawes at 6 again so that case is blown apart.

Of course, he could just bring Wilson back or, horror of horrors, pick Simmonds or Hughes.

Then, we look at short term/long term and say we'll concentrate on the under-25s for 4 years time. Except that, the fricking blazers have only given Jones till 2021. So, Jones is bent only on winning a game at a time. That really should help our chances in 2023.

The whole thing is a mucking fuddle.
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17709
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Puja »

Banquo wrote:
francoisfou wrote:Curry had a good game at 8, but should he be retained against Ireland? Their 8, CJ Stander must be about the same size as Curry, although with significantly more international experience. Thoughts?
I'd think Stander is about a stone heavier and less agile. Curry still looked uncomfortable at the base of the scrum, unsurprisingly, as its quite a skill to master; it'd be comedic to see Itoje try and do it.
There was one occasion in the first half, where the ball was stuck at his knees in a moving scrum and Price was all over Heinz. A real 8 would have picked and gone and helped out his 9, but Curry couldn't/wouldn't do it and eventually Heinz had to shrug off Price and go in for it himself. It will cost us not having a specialist 8 at some point (and Ludlam doesn't have the specialist skills any more than Curry does).

I can sort of see the point of it and can see a future where he's a good 8 in the Hooper mould, but that is a good distance in the future.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 5840
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Stom »

jngf wrote:
francoisfou wrote:Curry had a good game at 8, but should he be retained against Ireland? Their 8, CJ Stander must be about the same size as Curry, although with significantly more international experience. Thoughts?
Curry did have a good game but imo that was more by virtue of the weather conditions dictating that the back row concentrated on breakdown work. On the one or two carries he attempted he did not cross the gain line as far as I could make out. Stander is a much larger forward and I would move Curry back to 7 and Underhill across to 6 - with 8 left to Earl or Ludlum.
Curry did have a couple of relatively successful carries. He got across the gainline and sucked in defenders.

But, yes, usually the next carry he was stopped dead or pushed backward. He's not the guy you want carrying in the tight.
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Digby »

In a normal game is having Mako/Genge, George/LCD, Sinckler, Itoje and Kruis enough to carry in the tight? Can Curry not carry that bit wider regardless of his shirt number and whether Billy is available? Come to that does Billy have to carry so tight given the likely tight five?
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 5840
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Stom »

Digby wrote:In a normal game is having Mako/Genge, George/LCD, Sinckler, Itoje and Kruis enough to carry in the tight? Can Curry not carry that bit wider regardless of his shirt number and whether Billy is available? Come to that does Billy have to carry so tight given the likely tight five?
Well, indeed...
Raggs
Posts: 3304
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:17 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Raggs »

Digby wrote:In a normal game is having Mako/Genge, George/LCD, Sinckler, Itoje and Kruis enough to carry in the tight? Can Curry not carry that bit wider regardless of his shirt number and whether Billy is available? Come to that does Billy have to carry so tight given the likely tight five?
I tend to feel 3 is the magic number for big carriers. Don't think itoje/Kruis are there yet to rank amongst the 3, Launch perhaps is, but I'd rather Billy. Mako, LCD and Sink?
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Digby »

Raggs wrote:
Digby wrote:In a normal game is having Mako/Genge, George/LCD, Sinckler, Itoje and Kruis enough to carry in the tight? Can Curry not carry that bit wider regardless of his shirt number and whether Billy is available? Come to that does Billy have to carry so tight given the likely tight five?
I tend to feel 3 is the magic number for big carriers. Don't think itoje/Kruis are there yet to rank amongst the 3, Launch perhaps is, but I'd rather Billy. Mako, LCD and Sink?
For sure three is the magic number, that's just common sense at this point. But if you're going with that 3 (Mako, LCD and Sink), then whoever the 8 is can go wider, especially if the 9 is putting pace on the game
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 5840
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Stom »

Digby wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Digby wrote:In a normal game is having Mako/Genge, George/LCD, Sinckler, Itoje and Kruis enough to carry in the tight? Can Curry not carry that bit wider regardless of his shirt number and whether Billy is available? Come to that does Billy have to carry so tight given the likely tight five?
I tend to feel 3 is the magic number for big carriers. Don't think itoje/Kruis are there yet to rank amongst the 3, Launch perhaps is, but I'd rather Billy. Mako, LCD and Sink?
For sure three is the magic number, that's just common sense at this point. But if you're going with that 3 (Mako, LCD and Sink), then whoever the 8 is can go wider, especially if the 9 is putting pace on the game
Lol
Banquo
Posts: 19152
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Banquo »

Puja wrote:
Banquo wrote:
francoisfou wrote:Curry had a good game at 8, but should he be retained against Ireland? Their 8, CJ Stander must be about the same size as Curry, although with significantly more international experience. Thoughts?
I'd think Stander is about a stone heavier and less agile. Curry still looked uncomfortable at the base of the scrum, unsurprisingly, as its quite a skill to master; it'd be comedic to see Itoje try and do it.
There was one occasion in the first half, where the ball was stuck at his knees in a moving scrum and Price was all over Heinz. A real 8 would have picked and gone and helped out his 9, but Curry couldn't/wouldn't do it and eventually Heinz had to shrug off Price and go in for it himself. It will cost us not having a specialist 8 at some point (and Ludlam doesn't have the specialist skills any more than Curry does).

I can sort of see the point of it and can see a future where he's a good 8 in the Hooper mould, but that is a good distance in the future.

Puja
Does Hooper play 8? I've seen Pocock there. Are you thinking of Savea?
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17709
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Puja »

Banquo wrote:
Puja wrote:
Banquo wrote: I'd think Stander is about a stone heavier and less agile. Curry still looked uncomfortable at the base of the scrum, unsurprisingly, as its quite a skill to master; it'd be comedic to see Itoje try and do it.
There was one occasion in the first half, where the ball was stuck at his knees in a moving scrum and Price was all over Heinz. A real 8 would have picked and gone and helped out his 9, but Curry couldn't/wouldn't do it and eventually Heinz had to shrug off Price and go in for it himself. It will cost us not having a specialist 8 at some point (and Ludlam doesn't have the specialist skills any more than Curry does).

I can sort of see the point of it and can see a future where he's a good 8 in the Hooper mould, but that is a good distance in the future.

Puja
Does Hooper play 8? I've seen Pocock there. Are you thinking of Savea?
Yeah, brain wasn't working - I was thinking of Pocock.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
jngf
Posts: 1571
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 5:57 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by jngf »

Banquo wrote:
Puja wrote:
Banquo wrote: I'd think Stander is about a stone heavier and less agile. Curry still looked uncomfortable at the base of the scrum, unsurprisingly, as its quite a skill to master; it'd be comedic to see Itoje try and do it.
There was one occasion in the first half, where the ball was stuck at his knees in a moving scrum and Price was all over Heinz. A real 8 would have picked and gone and helped out his 9, but Curry couldn't/wouldn't do it and eventually Heinz had to shrug off Price and go in for it himself. It will cost us not having a specialist 8 at some point (and Ludlam doesn't have the specialist skills any more than Curry does).

I can sort of see the point of it and can see a future where he's a good 8 in the Hooper mould, but that is a good distance in the future.

Puja
Does Hooper play 8? I've seen Pocock there. Are you thinking of Savea?
Hooper plays exclusively at 7 but is a helluva carrier for an open side in fact he’s probably been best 7 since McCaw’s retirement imo.
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Digby »

Puja wrote:
Banquo wrote:
Puja wrote:
There was one occasion in the first half, where the ball was stuck at his knees in a moving scrum and Price was all over Heinz. A real 8 would have picked and gone and helped out his 9, but Curry couldn't/wouldn't do it and eventually Heinz had to shrug off Price and go in for it himself. It will cost us not having a specialist 8 at some point (and Ludlam doesn't have the specialist skills any more than Curry does).

I can sort of see the point of it and can see a future where he's a good 8 in the Hooper mould, but that is a good distance in the future.

Puja
Does Hooper play 8? I've seen Pocock there. Are you thinking of Savea?
Yeah, brain wasn't working - I was thinking of Pocock.

Puja
Curry will be much more what Jones saw in Rodney So'oialo and hoped for in Jack Clifford, at least such is my assumption
Banquo
Posts: 19152
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Banquo »

Digby wrote:
Puja wrote:
Banquo wrote: Does Hooper play 8? I've seen Pocock there. Are you thinking of Savea?
Yeah, brain wasn't working - I was thinking of Pocock.

Puja
Curry will be much more what Jones saw in Rodney So'oialo and hoped for in Jack Clifford, at least such is my assumption
When did Jones coach Rodders?
User avatar
jngf
Posts: 1571
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 5:57 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by jngf »

Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:
Puja wrote:
Yeah, brain wasn't working - I was thinking of Pocock.

Puja
Curry will be much more what Jones saw in Rodney So'oialo and hoped for in Jack Clifford, at least such is my assumption
When did Jones coach Rodders?
When did Jones coach?.....
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Digby »

Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:
Puja wrote:
Yeah, brain wasn't working - I was thinking of Pocock.

Puja
Curry will be much more what Jones saw in Rodney So'oialo and hoped for in Jack Clifford, at least such is my assumption
When did Jones coach Rodders?
I don't know that he did, but that was his stated role model for Clifford, unless one files it under stuff Eddie says it's perhaps of interest
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Digby »

jngf wrote:
Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:
Curry will be much more what Jones saw in Rodney So'oialo and hoped for in Jack Clifford, at least such is my assumption
When did Jones coach Rodders?
When did Jones coach?.....
You might not like what England do, but they don't look like they're not coached. Loads of structure and detail around our game that repeats, and that can't possibly be an accident
Timbo
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 9:05 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Timbo »

jngf wrote:
Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:
Curry will be much more what Jones saw in Rodney So'oialo and hoped for in Jack Clifford, at least such is my assumption
When did Jones coach Rodders?
When did Jones coach?.....
:roll:
Banquo
Posts: 19152
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Banquo »

Digby wrote:
jngf wrote:
Banquo wrote: When did Jones coach Rodders?
When did Jones coach?.....
You might not like what England do, but they don't look like they're not coached. Loads of structure and detail around our game that repeats, and that can't possibly be an accident
Yes, very much a detail coach.
Scrumhead
Posts: 5984
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 10:33 am

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Scrumhead »

I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see Wilson back in the squad for the home games against Ireland and Wales, but I can’t see Eddie abandoning the Curry at 8 experiment just yet.

I’d be perfectly happy to see Wilson back but I’d also say Earl looked immediately lively when he came on.
Banquo
Posts: 19152
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Team for Scotland

Post by Banquo »

Scrumhead wrote:I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see Wilson back in the squad for the home games against Ireland and Wales, but I can’t see Eddie abandoning the Curry at 8 experiment just yet.

I’d be perfectly happy to see Wilson back but I’d also say Earl looked immediately lively when he came on.
yep, the upside would be that Wilson has looked at home at the base of the scrum, something that you couldn't say about Curry (and no shame in that). Wilson has looked our most intelligent back row player in the last couple of seasons too.
Post Reply