SF v SA

[Scrumhead]

I’m a huge fan of Tom Curry, but he hasn’t been great and I worry he’s skating on thin ice from a discipline POV. Our chances of beating SA are extremely slim and to have any chance, we really can’t afford any cards. We need to be physical, but we need to be sensible and it looks like his desire to make an impact is having a negative impact on his control.

I wonder whether Ludlam or Underhill is the better pick for this game, but then I’d be worried about Curry coming off the bench trying to prove a point.

[p/d]

Tough one Scrumhead. I suppose it is weighing what might happen against what we need to happen. I for one think Earl will get battered v SA and Lawes won’t have anywhere near as many interventions. I still favour the Curry, Underhill and Ludlum ‘mental’ physicality but there is no way that will happen. It is do or die and SB needs to find away around SA. I think it can be done, but we need a hell of a lot more than just defence

[Puja]

Tough one Scrumhead. I suppose it is weighing what might happen against what we need to happen. I for one think Earl will get battered v SA and Lawes won’t have anywhere near as many interventions. I still favour the Curry, Underhill and Ludlum ‘mental’ physicality but there is no way that will happen. It is do or die and SB needs to find away around SA. I think it can be done, but we need a hell of a lot more than just defence

I actually think Earl stands the best chance against SA, cause he runs around people rather than through. Because he's smaller, he doesn't often get involved in the "I'm going to outman you" competitions that we seem to get drawn into with the Saffas and which we always seem to lose. Not that he doesn't bosh occasionally, but he throws his weight around much more effectively than someone bigger who might carry the ball into contact upright to try and force extra metres because he expects to go through.

Puja

[Carter1989]

Time for Arundell, Steward, Smith?

We need to try something different, this back 3, at least as a group that played against Fiji…. will get mullered vs SA.

[p/d]

Tough one Scrumhead. I suppose it is weighing what might happen against what we need to happen. I for one think Earl will get battered v SA and Lawes won’t have anywhere near as many interventions. I still favour the Curry, Underhill and Ludlum ‘mental’ physicality but there is no way that will happen. It is do or die and SB needs to find away around SA. I think it can be done, but we need a hell of a lot more than just defence

I actually think Earl stands the best chance against SA, cause he runs around people rather than through. Because he's smaller, he doesn't often get involved in the "I'm going to outman you" competitions that we seem to get drawn into with the Saffas and which we always seem to lose. Not that he doesn't bosh occasionally, but he throws his weight around much more effectively than someone bigger who might carry the ball into contact upright to try and force extra metres because he expects to go through.

Puja

Do hope you are right Puja.

[Banquo]

Get Coles back in at 6.

Indeed. Big unit, used to losing with England. Has all the attributes.
What has happened to him?

Being stuck at 6 v SA by Eddie wrecked his confidence and he wasn't even in Saints match day squad at the end of last season. He's apparently back in favour now, though may stick to second row.

[Banquo]

I’m a huge fan of Tom Curry, but he hasn’t been great and I worry he’s skating on thin ice from a discipline POV. Our chances of beating SA are extremely slim and to have any chance, we really can’t afford any cards. We need to be physical, but we need to be sensible and it looks like his desire to make an impact is having a negative impact on his control.

I wonder whether Ludlam or Underhill is the better pick for this game, but then I’d be worried about Curry coming off the bench trying to prove a point.

when did Underhill last play? I'm not being a smartar5e, just wondering whether he'll be sharp enough.

[Puja]

I’m a huge fan of Tom Curry, but he hasn’t been great and I worry he’s skating on thin ice from a discipline POV. Our chances of beating SA are extremely slim and to have any chance, we really can’t afford any cards. We need to be physical, but we need to be sensible and it looks like his desire to make an impact is having a negative impact on his control.

I wonder whether Ludlam or Underhill is the better pick for this game, but then I’d be worried about Curry coming off the bench trying to prove a point.

when did Underhill last play? I'm not being a smartar5e, just wondering whether he'll be sharp enough.

He did play the last few games of the season for Bath, didn't he? I mean, hardly in prime match fitness, but he's not so far behind Tom Curry.

I am inclined to give Curry more leeway, as he is so short on game time - the Fiji game was basically his third match back after a layoff of 7 months and I'm hoping he's knocked the rust off by now.

Puja

[jngf]

I’m a huge fan of Tom Curry, but he hasn’t been great and I worry he’s skating on thin ice from a discipline POV. Our chances of beating SA are extremely slim and to have any chance, we really can’t afford any cards. We need to be physical, but we need to be sensible and it looks like his desire to make an impact is having a negative impact on his control.

I wonder whether Ludlam or Underhill is the better pick for this game, but then I’d be worried about Curry coming off the bench trying to prove a point.

I feel like John the Baptist and I very nearly suffered his fate from all you little Salomes out there for uttering not disimilar things not so long ago

For what it’s worth I think Curry’s level of “dog” in play is and continues to be the best in the England squad - I don’t think moving back to openside (having bulked up to play 6/8) did him any favours - and the touches of finesse he used to offer seem less present. I did notice he took a lovely catch at the back of the line against Fiji. The other thing I find enigmatic is all the squad and coaches saying how fast he is in training but one honestly doesn’t see that in his actual play so I wonder if there’s an element of hype here? From what I’ve seen both Ludlam and Earl are both significantly faster and more explosive.

[jngf]

Tough one Scrumhead. I suppose it is weighing what might happen against what we need to happen. I for one think Earl will get battered v SA and Lawes won’t have anywhere near as many interventions. I still favour the Curry, Underhill and Ludlum ‘mental’ physicality but there is no way that will happen. It is do or die and SB needs to find away around SA. I think it can be done, but we need a hell of a lot more than just defence

I actually think Earl stands the best chance against SA, cause he runs around people rather than through. Because he's smaller, he doesn't often get involved in the "I'm going to outman you" competitions that we seem to get drawn into with the Saffas and which we always seem to lose. Not that he doesn't bosh occasionally, but he throws his weight around much more effectively than someone bigger who might carry the ball into contact upright to try and force extra metres because he expects to go through.

Puja

I’m not sure Earl is any smaller than Curry Puja?

[Puja]

Tough one Scrumhead. I suppose it is weighing what might happen against what we need to happen. I for one think Earl will get battered v SA and Lawes won’t have anywhere near as many interventions. I still favour the Curry, Underhill and Ludlum ‘mental’ physicality but there is no way that will happen. It is do or die and SB needs to find away around SA. I think it can be done, but we need a hell of a lot more than just defence

I actually think Earl stands the best chance against SA, cause he runs around people rather than through. Because he's smaller, he doesn't often get involved in the "I'm going to outman you" competitions that we seem to get drawn into with the Saffas and which we always seem to lose. Not that he doesn't bosh occasionally, but he throws his weight around much more effectively than someone bigger who might carry the ball into contact upright to try and force extra metres because he expects to go through.

Puja

I’m not sure Earl is any smaller than Curry Puja?

Only a stone and a half between them.

I feel like John the Baptist and I very nearly suffered his fate from all you little Salomes out there for uttering not disimilar things not so long ago

I think the difference is that you have been saying that for several years, including during periods where he's been our absolute best player. You'll get very little credit for an "I told you so" after him having two iffy games. More likely to be called a broken clock than a prophet.

Puja

[Banquo]

I’m a huge fan of Tom Curry, but he hasn’t been great and I worry he’s skating on thin ice from a discipline POV. Our chances of beating SA are extremely slim and to have any chance, we really can’t afford any cards. We need to be physical, but we need to be sensible and it looks like his desire to make an impact is having a negative impact on his control.

I wonder whether Ludlam or Underhill is the better pick for this game, but then I’d be worried about Curry coming off the bench trying to prove a point.

little Salomes out there

From English Message Board to Charcuterie Board, nearly

[Mr Mwenda]

Reading here at times can be a chorizo.

[TheDasher]

I think Curry needs a big game. Not entirely fair as he's been out and is clearly not back to his best yet, but Ludlam was building nicely, shows a similar level of 'dog', carries well and is extremely physical too. I think I'd get rid of Billy and have Ludlum on the bench.

Thinking about it, where we really suffer against the boks is in the front row - that's the difference maker. Itoje, Chessum, Ribbans, Martin, Ludlum, Curry (hopefully improving as I said), Earl etc are all slightly on the up at this moment I feel and despite George obviously being a very good player, Genge being a great ball-carrier etc, we just can't match them at scrum time in the front row. I think I'd take a gamble on Will Stuart over Cole. Stuart is a huge unit and is due a good game, he's capable of playing pretty well and perhaps the occasion will bring out some extra thrust from him. I'd probably jettison Cole and bring in Stuart, maybe...

Oh, and I'd start Arundell but that won't happen obviously.

[Banquo]

Reading here at times can be a chorizo.

Silly sausage

[Scrumhead]

Looking at the stats, Curry made 20 tackles vs. Fiji. It’s not like he’s been bad. He just hasn’t been as good as he usually is.

My worry is more that his over exuberance/desire to make an impact means he’s treading a fine line on the discipline front. He was pretty lucky not to get a couple of yellows vs. Fiji and we can’t afford losing anyone against the Boks - not even for 10mins.

I’m also worried that a brief of ‘maximum physicality’, might be the wrong guidance for him in particular.

I’m never disappointed to see Curry on the team sheet - I just want him to be controlled.

[francoisfou]

Reading here at times can be a chorizo.

Silly sausage

Is that the würst you can do

[Banquo]

Reading here at times can be a chorizo.

Silly sausage

Is that the würst you can do

Same old baloney

[Banquo]

Looking at the stats, Curry made 20 tackles vs. Fiji. It’s not like he’s been bad. He just hasn’t been as good as he usually is.

My worry is more that his over exuberance/desire to make an impact means he’s treading a fine line on the discipline front. He was pretty lucky not to get a couple of yellows vs. Fiji and we can’t afford losing anyone against the Boks - not even for 10mins.

I’m also worried that a brief of ‘maximum physicality’, might be the wrong guidance for him in particular.

I’m never disappointed to see Curry on the team sheet - I just want him to be controlled.

TBH its probably still adjusting to the pace of intl rugby after a while out.

[jngf]

You say salami and I’ll say Salome

[TheDasher]

Looking at the stats, Curry made 20 tackles vs. Fiji. It’s not like he’s been bad. He just hasn’t been as good as he usually is.

My worry is more that his over exuberance/desire to make an impact means he’s treading a fine line on the discipline front. He was pretty lucky not to get a couple of yellows vs. Fiji and we can’t afford losing anyone against the Boks - not even for 10mins.

I’m also worried that a brief of ‘maximum physicality’, might be the wrong guidance for him in particular.

I’m never disappointed to see Curry on the team sheet - I just want him to be controlled.

Agree with all of that, he certainly wasn't bad - I suppose I felt that Ludlam might have been better as Curry gets back to his best. Never disappointed to see him on the team sheet either.

I thought the low, no arms tackle was slightly bad luck, he went very low, leaned forward slightly too much and his hand/hands touch the ground to balance himself at the hit happened. I think he intended to wrap but lost balance slightly. I had had a few beers though.

[Mr Mwenda]

Reading here at times can be a chorizo.

Silly sausage

Hot dog! You are Ellis Genge and I claim my five pounds.

[Banquo]

Reading here at times can be a chorizo.

Silly sausage

Hot dog! You are Ellis Genge and I claim my five pounds.

You old ham

[Gloskarlos]

Well, we have Bon O'Keefe for this match. Angus Gardner takes control of the first semi.

[Banquo]

Well, we have Bon O'Keefe for this match. Angus Gardner takes control of the first semi.

Jackal away fellas, jackal away