Which players are going to make a breakthrough in 19/20?

[16th man]

Who in their right mind wouldn’t?

Me I wouldn't. Whether I'm in my right mind could be debated.

Any coach with a decent half back pairing would have his team playing touchline to touchline. Keep the phases going wide, wide. Make the backrow with two locks run. Keep your moreobile backrow on the wider channels and target the backs. No one wants their backs getting hammered around the ruck whilst the pack runs their legs from under them. Game will be tight for the first 30 minutes then people will start tiring or hurting (if you're the winger in another ruck as the opposition number 8 comes gleefully piling in).

Lawes and Itoje are mobile for locks (very mobile in Itoje's case) but not especially so for backrows. Having both in the backrow alongside a solid workhorse like Wilson doesn't give you much speed. You're going to be playing up your jumper. Wilson a player with a diesel engine would be your big hope but he'd be making a lot of covering tackles instead of contesting the breakdown.

Then you have the other problem of who you have in the second row if you put your two first choice locks in the backrow?

Ah, welcome to our oft repeated back row discussions.

None of us, except jngf, would want Itoje anywhere but lock. you’ll just have to get used to our constant bringing up of the topic in less than obvious ways...

This is why fresh blood for the boards is always good. New people who aren't bored rigid of the repetition, and will post the obvious counter points without losing the will to live.

Obviously it won't last long and FKAS will be as tired of it as the rest of us are soon. The idea that England should put two locks in the back row, as they're slightly mobile, will be around in whatever rugby becomes once the icecaps melt and half of us are drowned and the rest have gills.

[jngf]

Me I wouldn't. Whether I'm in my right mind could be debated.

Any coach with a decent half back pairing would have his team playing touchline to touchline. Keep the phases going wide, wide. Make the backrow with two locks run. Keep your moreobile backrow on the wider channels and target the backs. No one wants their backs getting hammered around the ruck whilst the pack runs their legs from under them. Game will be tight for the first 30 minutes then people will start tiring or hurting (if you're the winger in another ruck as the opposition number 8 comes gleefully piling in).

Lawes and Itoje are mobile for locks (very mobile in Itoje's case) but not especially so for backrows. Having both in the backrow alongside a solid workhorse like Wilson doesn't give you much speed. You're going to be playing up your jumper. Wilson a player with a diesel engine would be your big hope but he'd be making a lot of covering tackles instead of contesting the breakdown.

Then you have the other problem of who you have in the second row if you put your two first choice locks in the backrow?

Ah, welcome to our oft repeated back row discussions.

None of us, except jngf, would want Itoje anywhere but lock. you’ll just have to get used to our constant bringing up of the topic in less than obvious ways...

This is why fresh blood for the boards is always good. New people who aren't bored rigid of the repetition, and will post the obvious counter points without losing the will to live.

Obviously it won't last long and FKAS will be as tired of it as the rest of us are soon. The idea that England should put two locks in the back row, as they're slightly mobile, will be around in whatever rugby becomes once the icecaps melt and half of us are drowned and the rest have gills.

Some of us would put Sam Simmonds in the backrow but not at no.8......Not sure even Jones would play 2 locks in the same backrow ...then again Ewels and Lawes

[Puja]

Who in their right mind wouldn’t?

Me I wouldn't. Whether I'm in my right mind could be debated.

Any coach with a decent half back pairing would have his team playing touchline to touchline. Keep the phases going wide, wide. Make the backrow with two locks run. Keep your moreobile backrow on the wider channels and target the backs. No one wants their backs getting hammered around the ruck whilst the pack runs their legs from under them. Game will be tight for the first 30 minutes then people will start tiring or hurting (if you're the winger in another ruck as the opposition number 8 comes gleefully piling in).

Lawes and Itoje are mobile for locks (very mobile in Itoje's case) but not especially so for backrows. Having both in the backrow alongside a solid workhorse like Wilson doesn't give you much speed. You're going to be playing up your jumper. Wilson a player with a diesel engine would be your big hope but he'd be making a lot of covering tackles instead of contesting the breakdown.

Then you have the other problem of who you have in the second row if you put your two first choice locks in the backrow?

Ah, welcome to our oft repeated back row discussions.

None of us, except jngf, would want Itoje anywhere but lock. you’ll just have to get used to our constant bringing up of the topic in less than obvious ways...

Yeah, sorry new guy - oblique running joke! Jngf has a fervently held theory that Itoje would be the perfect number 8 and this argument has been held so often that we actively banned it in the runup to the 2019 RWC on the basis that every thread in the forum eventually devolved into "why would you want to move our best lock to make an okay no 8!?"

In other board traditions, it's also a running joke to suggest that England can't pick Watson at 15 until Bath start playing him there (in reaction to people suggesting Daly, Slade, Nowell, May, Farrell, Anyone at full-back for England while maintaining that Watson was a winger and they didn't want to move him "out of position").

I don't think we've got anything else?

Puja

[Mikey Brown]

I’ve got to admit I find your persistence/obsession as fascinating as I do infuriating.

If you had to choose between players being assigned the correct roles on the pitch, or being assigned the correct shirt numbers (based on your top-trumps style priority system of height, weight, 100m time, bicep circumference etc.) which would you go for?

[Mellsblue]

Apols.

[jngf]

I’ve got to admit I find your persistence/obsession as fascinating as I do infuriating.

If you had to choose between players being assigned the correct roles on the pitch, or being assigned the correct shirt numbers (based on your top-trumps style priority system of height, weight, 100m time, bicep circumference etc.) which would you go for?

Sticking Curry in the middle of the backrow in the 6 Nations does not strike me being anywhere near correct pitch assignment even if he had ‘69’ stuck on his back!

[Mellsblue]

My deepest, most sincerest apologies.

[Digby]

In other board traditions, it's also a running joke to suggest that England can't pick Watson at 15 until Bath start playing him there (in reaction to people suggesting Daly, Slade, Nowell, May, Farrell, Anyone at full-back for England while maintaining that Watson was a winger and they didn't want to move him "out of position").

I don't think we've got anything else?

Puja

Any emerging 9 being a better bet than the proven class of Ben Youngs.

Also the Leicester back row has been something of an ongoing joke, but also too easy a target

[Mr Mwenda]

Me I wouldn't. Whether I'm in my right mind could be debated.

Any coach with a decent half back pairing would have his team playing touchline to touchline. Keep the phases going wide, wide. Make the backrow with two locks run. Keep your moreobile backrow on the wider channels and target the backs. No one wants their backs getting hammered around the ruck whilst the pack runs their legs from under them. Game will be tight for the first 30 minutes then people will start tiring or hurting (if you're the winger in another ruck as the opposition number 8 comes gleefully piling in).

Lawes and Itoje are mobile for locks (very mobile in Itoje's case) but not especially so for backrows. Having both in the backrow alongside a solid workhorse like Wilson doesn't give you much speed. You're going to be playing up your jumper. Wilson a player with a diesel engine would be your big hope but he'd be making a lot of covering tackles instead of contesting the breakdown.

Then you have the other problem of who you have in the second row if you put your two first choice locks in the backrow?

Ah, welcome to our oft repeated back row discussions.

None of us, except jngf, would want Itoje anywhere but lock. you’ll just have to get used to our constant bringing up of the topic in less than obvious ways...

Yeah, sorry new guy - oblique running joke! Jngf has a fervently held theory that Itoje would be the perfect number 8 and this argument has been held so often that we actively banned it in the runup to the 2019 RWC on the basis that every thread in the forum eventually devolved into "why would you want to move our best lock to make an okay no 8!?"

In other board traditions, it's also a running joke to suggest that England can't pick Watson at 15 until Bath start playing him there (in reaction to people suggesting Daly, Slade, Nowell, May, Farrell, Anyone at full-back for England while maintaining that Watson was a winger and they didn't want to move him "out of position").

I don't think we've got anything else?

Puja

Don't forget the hask's love of posts!

[Puja]

Also the Leicester back row has been something of an ongoing joke, but also too easy a target

Yeah, that's less of an inside joke and more just a joke.

Don't forget the hask's love of posts!

Puja

[Beasties]

I have to admit a sneaking admiration for jngf's willingness to continue to reopen this particularly flat bottle of Babycham. The guy's got stamina. He'd be a pain to play against I'm sure. I reckon he'd make a particularly good stand in for the POTUS if he ever gets Covid.

[twitchy]

Only a week until we have some thing new to discuss.

[FKAS]

Only a week until we have some thing new to discuss.

And we all hope it's not Tigers continued inability to pick a balanced backrow. There should be two locks in a pack not three and certainly not four.

[Puja]

Only a week until we have some thing new to discuss.

And we all hope it's not Tigers continued inability to pick a balanced backrow. There should be two locks in a pack not three and certainly not four.

Gods, I hope so. Have we got our South African back rows through yet, or will they not be available until September?

Puja

[FKAS]

Only a week until we have some thing new to discuss.

And we all hope it's not Tigers continued inability to pick a balanced backrow. There should be two locks in a pack not three and certainly not four.

Gods, I hope so. Have we got our South African back rows through yet, or will they not be available until September?

Puja

Liebenburg yes. Brink is here but injured. The new lad whose name is temporarily evading me I'm not sure about.

A Liebenburg, Reffell, Taufua backrow would be perfectly acceptable with Wells and Wallace on the bench.