RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote: Ah- there's a difference between taking note of what is about you vs deciding what to do about it.

Yes, but at 9 what you take note of likely informs what you do, unless you plant a deckchair and take the time to really look at everything which isn't any use to anyone but the opposition. It's not as strict as pick one from 3, but you have to lean towards something in advance

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Ah- there's a difference between taking note of what is about you vs deciding what to do about it.

Yes, but at 9 what you take note of likely informs what you do, unless you plant a deckchair and take the time to really look at everything which isn't any use to anyone but the opposition. It's not as strict as pick one from 3, but you have to lean towards something in advance

any position, not unique to 9.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Ah- there's a difference between taking note of what is about you vs deciding what to do about it.

Yes, but at 9 what you take note of likely informs what you do, unless you plant a deckchair and take the time to really look at everything which isn't any use to anyone but the opposition. It's not as strict as pick one from 3, but you have to lean towards something in advance

any position, not unique to 9.

9 is unique though with the restricted view, lack of communication coming to you, lack of time all whilst being a major TDM, the major TDM oftentimes

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Yes, but at 9 what you take note of likely informs what you do, unless you plant a deckchair and take the time to really look at everything which isn't any use to anyone but the opposition. It's not as strict as pick one from 3, but you have to lean towards something in advance

any position, not unique to 9.

9 is unique though with the restricted view, lack of communication coming to you, lack of time all whilst being a major TDM, the major TDM oftentimes

Just to quote myself, which always validates a point, even with all that said 10 is still a harder position to play

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Yes, but at 9 what you take note of likely informs what you do, unless you plant a deckchair and take the time to really look at everything which isn't any use to anyone but the opposition. It's not as strict as pick one from 3, but you have to lean towards something in advance

any position, not unique to 9.

9 is unique though with the restricted view, lack of communication coming to you, lack of time all whilst being a major TDM, the major TDM oftentimes

which is a different point.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: any position, not unique to 9.

9 is unique though with the restricted view, lack of communication coming to you, lack of time all whilst being a major TDM, the major TDM oftentimes

which is a different point.

I'm sticking with it isn't, because all that informs what you'll do as the 9. You cannot approach each phase with an open mind reviewing your options and execute quickly on an eventual selection, nobody does that. Some might think they do, but if you showed them video back of all the things they're missing about they best they could say is I didn't/couldn't see that

p/d wrote:I blame Spiffy

Guilty, m'lud

As an aside to the 9 debate, I always thought it insane that England for ages played Youngs at 9 and Farrell at 10, then switched to Care at 9 and Ford at 10. When Youngs and Ford play their club rugby off 10, and Care and Farrell play theirs off 9.

I think this is another reason we just look better with Ford at 10: because he is the one making the decisions. When Youngs needs to be the one making the plays, he gets confused and Farrell isn't sharp enough to take the decision making off him fully. So having Youngs, Ford, Farrell, gives us our best decision maker in the middle with 2 players who CAN do the right thing when not thinking about it a chance to do those right things.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
9 is unique though with the restricted view, lack of communication coming to you, lack of time all whilst being a major TDM, the major TDM oftentimes

which is a different point.

I'm sticking with it isn't, because all that informs what you'll do as the 9. You cannot approach each phase with an open mind reviewing your options and execute quickly on an eventual selection, nobody does that. Some might think they do, but if you showed them video back of all the things they're missing about they best they could say is I didn't/couldn't see that

I'm saying all players need to take notice of their surroundings and circumstances,. that's not unique. If you are saying that a 9 has to use that to narrow/inform his options whilst arriving at the 'situation', fair enough; I'd also argue the same would apply to other players, but possibly to not the same degree. To me you are just trying to excuse Youngs look of confusion when he has to think . The one thing I do know is that if any of that slows your speed to the ball, you are in bother, probably with the exception of the 9

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: which is a different point.

I'm sticking with it isn't, because all that informs what you'll do as the 9. You cannot approach each phase with an open mind reviewing your options and execute quickly on an eventual selection, nobody does that. Some might think they do, but if you showed them video back of all the things they're missing about they best they could say is I didn't/couldn't see that

I'm saying all players need to take notice of their surroundings and circumstances,. that's not unique. If you are saying that a 9 has to use that to narrow/inform his options whilst arriving at the 'situation', fair enough; I'd also argue the same would apply to other players, but possibly to not the same degree. To me you are just trying to excuse Youngs look of confusion when he has to think . The one thing I do know is that if any of that slows your speed to the ball, you are in bother, probably with the exception of the 9

I've not just spoken about Youngs though, I commented on the focus Smith had at the weekend to pass the ball out meant he ignored the kicking game that was frankly needed for NZ, or that Stringer with his focus on getting the ball away didn't break enough and that caused other problems. Yes the problem replicates elsewhere, but not to the same degree imo. You can reasonably say the forwards have the same lack of vision once at the breakdown, but they don't have the same TDM responsibility

There isn't a right/wrong in all this, just a series of tradeoffs

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
I'm sticking with it isn't, because all that informs what you'll do as the 9. You cannot approach each phase with an open mind reviewing your options and execute quickly on an eventual selection, nobody does that. Some might think they do, but if you showed them video back of all the things they're missing about they best they could say is I didn't/couldn't see that

I'm saying all players need to take notice of their surroundings and circumstances,. that's not unique. If you are saying that a 9 has to use that to narrow/inform his options whilst arriving at the 'situation', fair enough; I'd also argue the same would apply to other players, but possibly to not the same degree. To me you are just trying to excuse Youngs look of confusion when he has to think . The one thing I do know is that if any of that slows your speed to the ball, you are in bother, probably with the exception of the 9

I've not just spoken about Youngs though, I commented on the focus Smith had at the weekend to pass the ball out meant he ignored the kicking game that was frankly needed for NZ, or that Stringer with his focus on getting the ball away didn't break enough and that caused other problems. Yes the problem replicates elsewhere, but not to the same degree imo. You can reasonably say the forwards have the same lack of vision once at the breakdown, but they don't have the same TDM responsibility

There isn't a right/wrong in all this, just a series of tradeoffs

It was a joke tbh.
And the latter bit is just you agreeing!

Stom wrote:As an aside to the 9 debate, I always thought it insane that England for ages played Youngs at 9 and Farrell at 10, then switched to Care at 9 and Ford at 10. When Youngs and Ford play their club rugby off 10, and Care and Farrell play theirs off 9.

I think this is another reason we just look better with Ford at 10: because he is the one making the decisions. When Youngs needs to be the one making the plays, he gets confused and Farrell isn't sharp enough to take the decision making off him fully. So having Youngs, Ford, Farrell, gives us our best decision maker in the middle with 2 players who CAN do the right thing when not thinking about it a chance to do those right things.

Wow, Stom, that's a bit deep. I still think that Jones would say that Farrell can do it all and that if he needs, for whatever reason, to pick either Ford or Farrell, he will always pick the latter.

Spiffy wrote:

p/d wrote:I blame Spiffy

Guilty, m'lud

All ya had to do was same something nice about Benjamin, but oh no.....

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
I'm sticking with it isn't, because all that informs what you'll do as the 9. You cannot approach each phase with an open mind reviewing your options and execute quickly on an eventual selection, nobody does that. Some might think they do, but if you showed them video back of all the things they're missing about they best they could say is I didn't/couldn't see that

I'm saying all players need to take notice of their surroundings and circumstances,. that's not unique. If you are saying that a 9 has to use that to narrow/inform his options whilst arriving at the 'situation', fair enough; I'd also argue the same would apply to other players, but possibly to not the same degree. To me you are just trying to excuse Youngs look of confusion when he has to think . The one thing I do know is that if any of that slows your speed to the ball, you are in bother, probably with the exception of the 9

I've not just spoken about Youngs though, I commented on the focus Smith had at the weekend to pass the ball out meant he ignored the kicking game that was frankly needed for NZ, or that Stringer with his focus on getting the ball away didn't break enough and that caused other problems. Yes the problem replicates elsewhere, but not to the same degree imo. You can reasonably say the forwards have the same lack of vision once at the breakdown, but they don't have the same TDM responsibility

There isn't a right/wrong in all this, just a series of tradeoffs

He just saved them for the right moment..

Spiffy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: I'm saying all players need to take notice of their surroundings and circumstances,. that's not unique. If you are saying that a 9 has to use that to narrow/inform his options whilst arriving at the 'situation', fair enough; I'd also argue the same would apply to other players, but possibly to not the same degree. To me you are just trying to excuse Youngs look of confusion when he has to think . The one thing I do know is that if any of that slows your speed to the ball, you are in bother, probably with the exception of the 9

I've not just spoken about Youngs though, I commented on the focus Smith had at the weekend to pass the ball out meant he ignored the kicking game that was frankly needed for NZ, or that Stringer with his focus on getting the ball away didn't break enough and that caused other problems. Yes the problem replicates elsewhere, but not to the same degree imo. You can reasonably say the forwards have the same lack of vision once at the breakdown, but they don't have the same TDM responsibility

There isn't a right/wrong in all this, just a series of tradeoffs

He just saved them for the right moment..

Nice.

It's a little different being a scrum, and certainly being such an attacking scrum, and quite possibly too they'd analysed the 11 would cheat and move the openside.

And it doesn't mean the focus will always be on one thing, I'm suggesting it shifts the balance of what they'll be looking at and what they'll be looking to do. What would blow my theory apart perhaps is Ben Youngs saying all his best passes come when he was looking to kick couldn't see any space and got forced into shovelling the ball out, although maybe then I'd go with Banquo's claim on not thinking

So... TDM = time-limited decision making or something?

Tactical Decision maker

Typically goes 8, 9, 10 in ascending order of importance, some role for 2 and 15 also

Tah

Digby wrote:

Spiffy wrote:

Digby wrote:
I've not just spoken about Youngs though, I commented on the focus Smith had at the weekend to pass the ball out meant he ignored the kicking game that was frankly needed for NZ, or that Stringer with his focus on getting the ball away didn't break enough and that caused other problems. Yes the problem replicates elsewhere, but not to the same degree imo. You can reasonably say the forwards have the same lack of vision once at the breakdown, but they don't have the same TDM responsibility

There isn't a right/wrong in all this, just a series of tradeoffs

He just saved them for the right moment..

Nice.

It's a little different being a scrum, and certainly being such an attacking scrum, and quite possibly too they'd analysed the 11 would cheat and move the openside.

And it doesn't mean the focus will always be on one thing, I'm suggesting it shifts the balance of what they'll be looking at and what they'll be looking to do. What would blow my theory apart perhaps is Ben Youngs saying all his best passes come when he was looking to kick couldn't see any space and got forced into shovelling the ball out, although maybe then I'd go with Banquo's claim on not thinking

What claim of not thinking?

Mr Mwenda wrote:Tah

+1

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Spiffy wrote:
He just saved them for the right moment..

Nice.

It's a little different being a scrum, and certainly being such an attacking scrum, and quite possibly too they'd analysed the 11 would cheat and move the openside.

And it doesn't mean the focus will always be on one thing, I'm suggesting it shifts the balance of what they'll be looking at and what they'll be looking to do. What would blow my theory apart perhaps is Ben Youngs saying all his best passes come when he was looking to kick couldn't see any space and got forced into shovelling the ball out, although maybe then I'd go with Banquo's claim on not thinking

What claim of not thinking?

Players are better acting not thinking

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Nice.

It's a little different being a scrum, and certainly being such an attacking scrum, and quite possibly too they'd analysed the 11 would cheat and move the openside.

And it doesn't mean the focus will always be on one thing, I'm suggesting it shifts the balance of what they'll be looking at and what they'll be looking to do. What would blow my theory apart perhaps is Ben Youngs saying all his best passes come when he was looking to kick couldn't see any space and got forced into shovelling the ball out, although maybe then I'd go with Banquo's claim on not thinking

What claim of not thinking?

Players are better acting not thinking

That's what you really took from our 'debate'. Ah well.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: What claim of not thinking?

Players are better acting not thinking

That's what you really took from our 'debate'. Ah well.

Or I just wanted to write a sentence that paired Banquo with not thinking

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Players are better acting not thinking

That's what you really took from our 'debate'. Ah well.

Or I just wanted to write a sentence that paired Banquo with not thinking

The pride of a job well done.

So.... Ummm, arrrrh... Youngs ?
After you Digby and Puja.