Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Moderator: Puja
- Oakboy
- Posts: 6361
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:42 am
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
What a joy to see a FH step round a few and set something up. No wonder Eddie likes the lad.
-
- Posts: 19093
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
very Ford likeOakboy wrote:What a joy to see a FH step round a few and set something up. No wonder Eddie likes the lad.

- Mellsblue
- Posts: 14556
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
There aren't many things funnier than watching a lanky lock at full speed. Thank you Charlie 'intercept' Matthews.
-
- Posts: 1668
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Jono Ross may be shaping up as a bit of a Jerome Schuster contender. Looks well off the pace.
-
- Posts: 1668
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Well, that's 2 tries from the 2 times we've managed to not drop the ball in the Quinn's half
-
- Posts: 1668
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Right Carley, it may gave been a knock on, but then Visser kicks it forwards and Quin's are offside when they jump on it, so maybe you can understand why Ross is a bit peed off.
-
- Posts: 1668
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
16th man wrote:Right Carley, it may gave been a knock on, but then Visser kicks it forwards and Quin's are offside when they jump on it, so maybe you can understand why Ross is a bit peed off, especially when you've said you've clearly seen it but it takes 5 replays to actually tell he didn't get it down for the try.
- Stom
- Posts: 5836
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Well, guess I was right...Stom wrote:Could be a try fest...neither team has the best defense.
-
- Posts: 19093
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
nailed it, quins less bad without the ball than Sale. Though a couple of quins tries were excellent.Stom wrote:Well, guess I was right...Stom wrote:Could be a try fest...neither team has the best defense.
- Stom
- Posts: 5836
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Marchant looking a cut above at times, for me.Banquo wrote:nailed it, quins less bad without the ball than Sale. Though a couple of quins tries were excellent.Stom wrote:Well, guess I was right...Stom wrote:Could be a try fest...neither team has the best defense.
And Smith does not act like an 18 year old. He's got some ability.
-
- Posts: 5975
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 10:33 am
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Just got home from the game. On the whole it was a very pleasing performance. I certainly felt as though we were a lot better value for our bonus point than Sale were for theirs.
- Puja
- Posts: 17650
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Indeed. There's some clear things to work on, but he's got things that you can't teach. His timing of the pass for the last try was utterly sublime.Stom wrote:Marchant looking a cut above at times, for me.Banquo wrote:nailed it, quins less bad without the ball than Sale. Though a couple of quins tries were excellent.Stom wrote:
Well, guess I was right...
And Smith does not act like an 18 year old. He's got some ability.
Was disappointed in BCurry today. Opportunity to show Eddie why he deserves to be in the EPS and he didn't get into the game apart from tackles. No competition for the ball, no trailing of runners looking for offloads, and I'm not sure he actually carried the ball. Deservedly given the shepherd's crook and Sale looked much better with Ioane.
Puja
Backist Monk
-
- Posts: 5890
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Highlight was watching Marcus Smith who does look a very fine talent. Lowlight was the injury to Clifford, which will probably rule him out of the AI's . This guy isnt getting much luck with injuries. Collier's early departure will be a concern.
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 14556
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
I agree he was poor but he did try and turnover ball, albeit comparatively rarely. On at least one I thought Quins were lucky not to be pinged for holding on and he did slow down a few others. It seems a deliberate tactic across all teams to go for less turnovers and just fan out across the pitch.Puja wrote:Was disappointed in BCurry today. Opportunity to show Eddie why he deserves to be in the EPS and he didn't get into the game apart from tackles. No competition for the ball, no trailing of runners looking for offloads, and I'm not sure he actually carried the ball. Deservedly given the shepherd's crook and Sale looked much better with Ioane.Stom wrote:Marchant looking a cut above at times, for me.Banquo wrote: nailed it, quins less bad without the ball than Sale. Though a couple of quins tries were excellent.
And Smith does not act like an 18 year old. He's got some ability.
Puja
I'd love to see stats for turnovers at the breakdown for this season compared to this time last year. It may well prove me wrong but from the games I've seen there is a conscious decision not to compete as much at ruck time for 'jackals' due to the new laws.
- Oakboy
- Posts: 6361
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:42 am
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Banquo wrote:very Ford likeOakboy wrote:What a joy to see a FH step round a few and set something up. No wonder Eddie likes the lad.
If only!

I am resigned to never seeing it from Ford IF Farrell is at 12. It's pure guesswork but I think Smith could have the character to tell Farrell (and Eddie, if necessary) to f/o whereas Ford, in my prejudiced opinion, seems to shelve character and, therefore, flair if he is alongside Farrell. The obvious solution is to give Ford a run for a few games with T'eo at 12 but I don't think Eddie will. Had Saracens been starting Farrell regularly, there might have been hope of resting him.
-
- Posts: 19093
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
You are right, its utter guesswork.Oakboy wrote:Banquo wrote:very Ford likeOakboy wrote:What a joy to see a FH step round a few and set something up. No wonder Eddie likes the lad.
If only!![]()
I am resigned to never seeing it from Ford IF Farrell is at 12. It's pure guesswork but I think Smith could have the character to tell Farrell (and Eddie, if necessary) to f/o whereas Ford, in my prejudiced opinion, seems to shelve character and, therefore, flair if he is alongside Farrell. The obvious solution is to give Ford a run for a few games with T'eo at 12 but I don't think Eddie will. Had Saracens been starting Farrell regularly, there might have been hope of resting him.
-
- Posts: 1668
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm
Re: Quins v Sale Fri 7.45
Last night was a good reminder that pinning hopes on a 19 year old is a bit premature. Sale were pretty badly outmuscled for the first hour. Hopefully when he's developed fully he'll be part of the solution to that issue, but last night he was definitely part of the problem.Mellsblue wrote:I agree he was poor but he did try and turnover ball, albeit comparatively rarely. On at least one I thought Quins were lucky not to be pinged for holding on and he did slow down a few others. It seems a deliberate tactic across all teams to go for less turnovers and just fan out across the pitch.Puja wrote:Was disappointed in BCurry today. Opportunity to show Eddie why he deserves to be in the EPS and he didn't get into the game apart from tackles. No competition for the ball, no trailing of runners looking for offloads, and I'm not sure he actually carried the ball. Deservedly given the shepherd's crook and Sale looked much better with Ioane.Stom wrote:
Marchant looking a cut above at times, for me.
And Smith does not act like an 18 year old. He's got some ability.
Puja
I'd love to see stats for turnovers at the breakdown for this season compared to this time last year. It may well prove me wrong but from the games I've seen there is a conscious decision not to compete as much at ruck time for 'jackals' due to the new laws.