England v Wales; Saturday, 4.45. ITV / S4C

[Banquo]

I know Roots is not flavour of the month but I think he has been more effective than the other two in the back row. I'd cheerfully dump all three but I can't see how Roots is the main problem.

We've been getting a lot of very quick ball. We've lost three attacking rucks across 145 minutes of games so far. How are the back row the position where we need to "dump all three"?

I was looking at the Opta stats the other day and Roots is doing a very impressive job on the stats alone. He has made 13 carries, committing 2+ tacklers for 12 of them, and 69% have made it over the gainline (especially impressive when you consider some of the hard yards he's been asked to make). In attacking rucks, he's hit 37 with an 89% effectiveness. I can definitely see why Statistics Bastard likes him.

https://theanalyst.com/eu/2024/02/six-n ... stats-hub/

Puja

probably quite similar to Brad Shields, but without the knock ons . He's a good player, and one who looks better with better players around him- and hands up, much better than my perception based on Exeter games.

[Oakboy]

I know Roots is not flavour of the month but I think he has been more effective than the other two in the back row. I'd cheerfully dump all three but I can't see how Roots is the main problem.

We've been getting a lot of very quick ball. We've lost three attacking rucks across 145 minutes of games so far. How are the back row the position where we need to "dump all three"?

I was looking at the Opta stats the other day and Roots is doing a very impressive job on the stats alone. He has made 13 carries, committing 2+ tacklers for 12 of them, and 69% have made it over the gainline (especially impressive when you consider some of the hard yards he's been asked to make). In attacking rucks, he's hit 37 with an 89% effectiveness. I can definitely see why Statistics Bastard likes him.

https://theanalyst.com/eu/2024/02/six-n ... stats-hub/

Puja

I think we have three better players, basically. So, developing the work currently being achieved, there is a lot of scope for improvement - whatever the stats say against two poor teams.

[Stom]

I know Roots is not flavour of the month but I think he has been more effective than the other two in the back row. I'd cheerfully dump all three but I can't see how Roots is the main problem.

We've been getting a lot of very quick ball. We've lost three attacking rucks across 145 minutes of games so far. How are the back row the position where we need to "dump all three"?

I was looking at the Opta stats the other day and Roots is doing a very impressive job on the stats alone. He has made 13 carries, committing 2+ tacklers for 12 of them, and 69% have made it over the gainline (especially impressive when you consider some of the hard yards he's been asked to make). In attacking rucks, he's hit 37 with an 89% effectiveness. I can definitely see why Statistics Bastard likes him.

https://theanalyst.com/eu/2024/02/six-n ... stats-hub/

Puja

Yeah, Roots is being fine. It's the other two that aren't really showing it, for me, especially Underhill. He's made the same number of tackles as Roots, with fewer rucks hit, fewer carries, fewer metres made...I just don't get him right now.

You'd think, if we're picking him to tackle, his tackle stats would be through the roof, but they're the same as Roots and only one more than Earl. So maybe he's meant to be hitting rucks, but he hits fewer, less effectively, than either Roots or Earl. So maybe he's carrying? And sure, he actually gets go forward well, but less often by far than the other two.

Our backrow effectiveness is being taken as a whole, while it may be exaggerated by the form and skill of the other two.

[Which Tyler]

I'm just not convinced that Underhill (or Ford) are actually over their injuries - I think they're managing them.
Which means that they're not as effective as they should be, and shouldn't be selected. But it also means, that "just one more week" might make all the difference.

Ford has a history of playing below-par whilst trying to play through an injury that really needs attention, whilst Underhill was a week away from return for about a month ahead of the 6N, and wearing a surgical boot for much of that - suspicion of a stress fracture, which are always buggers to judge healing times.

[Epaminondas Pules]

I'm just not convinced that Underhill (or Ford) are actually over their injuries - I think they're managing them.
Which means that they're not as effective as they should be, and shouldn't be selected. But it also means, that "just one more week" might make all the difference.

Ford has a history of playing below-par whilst trying to play through an injury that really needs attention, whilst Underhill was a week away from return for about a month ahead of the 6N, and wearing a surgical boot for much of that - suspicion of a stress fracture, which are always buggers to judge healing times.

This. And gaining match fitness in internationals, which is......interesting

[Which Tyler]

This. And gaining match fitness in internationals, which is......interesting

Yes but... Silly Bollocks is far from the first coach to try it.

[Epaminondas Pules]

I know Roots is not flavour of the month but I think he has been more effective than the other two in the back row. I'd cheerfully dump all three but I can't see how Roots is the main problem.

We've been getting a lot of very quick ball. We've lost three attacking rucks across 145 minutes of games so far. How are the back row the position where we need to "dump all three"?

I was looking at the Opta stats the other day and Roots is doing a very impressive job on the stats alone. He has made 13 carries, committing 2+ tacklers for 12 of them, and 69% have made it over the gainline (especially impressive when you consider some of the hard yards he's been asked to make). In attacking rucks, he's hit 37 with an 89% effectiveness. I can definitely see why Statistics Bastard likes him.

https://theanalyst.com/eu/2024/02/six-n ... stats-hub/

Puja

Yeah, Roots is being fine. It's the other two that aren't really showing it, for me, especially Underhill. He's made the same number of tackles as Roots, with fewer rucks hit, fewer carries, fewer metres made...I just don't get him right now.

You'd think, if we're picking him to tackle, his tackle stats would be through the roof, but they're the same as Roots and only one more than Earl. So maybe he's meant to be hitting rucks, but he hits fewer, less effectively, than either Roots or Earl. So maybe he's carrying? And sure, he actually gets go forward well, but less often by far than the other two.

Our backrow effectiveness is being taken as a whole, while it may be exaggerated by the form and skill of the other two.

Earl's been very good. There's pros and cons to the unit, which hasn't bedded in yet, whilst one is only just back from injury and another is new to test rugby. And an eye on IF other player were available we probably wouldn't be having this chat.

[Mellsblue]

Selectorially Backwardslooking has stated that Ford is only playing as M. Smith is injured. If no Ford then it’s starting F. Smith who, and I’m hoping this inarguable, is pretty raw still and having Furbank/Slade as replacement 10 or bringing in someone who isn’t up to test rugby (though my preferred option would obvs be the magician that is Fredrick Burns Esq). I offer no defence for selecting Underhill.

[Mellsblue]

Personally, I'd want CCS at 6 with George and Chessum at lock (start and bench either way round).

this

Yep

Fourthed. I do think Roots is playing pretty well but CCS’s ceiling is Grand Central Station like.