Moderator: Puja
Agreed, but the bench is stupid and Faz is lucky.Stom wrote:That team is much more balanced, though, thank fuck. Would have liked to have seen Earl start, but can't quibble. Curry needs to step up.
Yeah, got a kick up the arse when he briefly stopped being MOTM every week. I'd say he's better than Billy was when he first got capped.Stom wrote:I don't know how much that has been form and how much has been management/specific training.Banquo wrote:Totally agree on Lawes as I said beforehand, though can see the logic if it hadn't failed before.Stom wrote:
Well, I thought it was obvious...ANYONE! Seriously, he has Hill, Earl, and Ludlam in the squad. Then there's Willis, then Dombrandt, and then Sam Simmonds.
There are options. People who actually play backrow.
If Jones believes Lawes is better there than any of them, he's insane and should be removed from his role.
Screw the rest, I can understand most of it, though I would chuck a kid in at 9 just to get rid of Youngs.
But selecting Lawes at 6 is the definition of insanity.
On the other player front, the only one he hasn't looked at is Dombrandt iirc- and from what I hear, he has not been first choice all the time at Quins.
You mentioned chucking in the youngsters...who?
He's rough around the edges, but so was Billy. Just because we've got a risk averse coach, too, doesn't mean he's not ready...
On the kids... Mitchell, Maunder, Taylor, anyone, really. Uren would be an upgrade.
Fair enough. Can I look forward to 3000 Dombrandt v Billy posts going forward.Mikey Brown wrote:Yeah, got a kick up the arse when he briefly stopped being MOTM every week. I'd say he's better than Billy was when he first got capped.Stom wrote:I don't know how much that has been form and how much has been management/specific training.Banquo wrote: Totally agree on Lawes as I said beforehand, though can see the logic if it hadn't failed before.
On the other player front, the only one he hasn't looked at is Dombrandt iirc- and from what I hear, he has not been first choice all the time at Quins.
You mentioned chucking in the youngsters...who?
He's rough around the edges, but so was Billy. Just because we've got a risk averse coach, too, doesn't mean he's not ready...
On the kids... Mitchell, Maunder, Taylor, anyone, really. Uren would be an upgrade.
I wonder whether he’s got a citing coming? He dropped an elbow on Ollivon when he scored his second try I think ... didn’t look good.p/d wrote:Wtf has LCD done wrong
Yes. He almost made the cut for the final RWC group. He’s obviously not currently involved in the 6N squad.Banquo wrote:Fair enough. Can I look forward to 3000 Dombrandt v Billy posts going forward.Mikey Brown wrote:Yeah, got a kick up the arse when he briefly stopped being MOTM every week. I'd say he's better than Billy was when he first got capped.Stom wrote:
I don't know how much that has been form and how much has been management/specific training.
He's rough around the edges, but so was Billy. Just because we've got a risk averse coach, too, doesn't mean he's not ready...
On the kids... Mitchell, Maunder, Taylor, anyone, really. Uren would be an upgrade.
Has Dombrandt been in the training group for England at all?
Personal issue sounds most likelyScrumhead wrote:I wonder whether he’s got a citing coming? He dropped an elbow on Ollivon when he scored his second try I think ... didn’t look good.p/d wrote:Wtf has LCD done wrong
If not, could be something to do with the personal issue that was potentially going to keep him out of the Scotland game.
Thats a weird one- there were family issues? I'd have thought he was in line to start!p/d wrote:Wtf has LCD done wrong
Mitchell’s in as an apprentice which is entirely fair given he hasn’t played for Saints yet this season. Maunder’s just very meh and is 2nd/3rd choice at Chiefs. Taylor had a bright start at Saints and then seems to have dropped off quite a bit (two very poor outings recently).Stom wrote:I don't know how much that has been form and how much has been management/specific training.Banquo wrote:Totally agree on Lawes as I said beforehand, though can see the logic if it hadn't failed before.Stom wrote:
Well, I thought it was obvious...ANYONE! Seriously, he has Hill, Earl, and Ludlam in the squad. Then there's Willis, then Dombrandt, and then Sam Simmonds.
There are options. People who actually play backrow.
If Jones believes Lawes is better there than any of them, he's insane and should be removed from his role.
Screw the rest, I can understand most of it, though I would chuck a kid in at 9 just to get rid of Youngs.
But selecting Lawes at 6 is the definition of insanity.
On the other player front, the only one he hasn't looked at is Dombrandt iirc- and from what I hear, he has not been first choice all the time at Quins.
You mentioned chucking in the youngsters...who?
He's rough around the edges, but so was Billy. Just because we've got a risk averse coach, too, doesn't mean he's not ready...
On the kids... Mitchell, Maunder, Taylor, anyone, really. Uren would be an upgrade.
Mitchell and Maunder have barely had any rugby this season due to injury and getting stuck as third choice at their clubs. Taylor is not an international quality player - he's a Prem player who' been in a decent run of form. Same for Uren. There's no point chucking either of them in to be out of their depth.Stom wrote:I don't know how much that has been form and how much has been management/specific training.Banquo wrote:Totally agree on Lawes as I said beforehand, though can see the logic if it hadn't failed before.Stom wrote:
Well, I thought it was obvious...ANYONE! Seriously, he has Hill, Earl, and Ludlam in the squad. Then there's Willis, then Dombrandt, and then Sam Simmonds.
There are options. People who actually play backrow.
If Jones believes Lawes is better there than any of them, he's insane and should be removed from his role.
Screw the rest, I can understand most of it, though I would chuck a kid in at 9 just to get rid of Youngs.
But selecting Lawes at 6 is the definition of insanity.
On the other player front, the only one he hasn't looked at is Dombrandt iirc- and from what I hear, he has not been first choice all the time at Quins.
You mentioned chucking in the youngsters...who?
He's rough around the edges, but so was Billy. Just because we've got a risk averse coach, too, doesn't mean he's not ready...
On the kids... Mitchell, Maunder, Taylor, anyone, really. Uren would be an upgrade.
Left camp this morning, wife in labourBanquo wrote:Thats a weird one- there were family issues? I'd have thought he was in line to start!p/d wrote:Wtf has LCD done wrong
I do think they're very different to be fair, but yeah I imagine I'll mention him a whole lot. He requires heavy marking for a different reason, but to me he's the only player (other than Manu) that requires the same consistent attention from a defence as Vunipola.Banquo wrote:Fair enough. Can I look forward to 3000 Dombrandt v Billy posts going forward.Mikey Brown wrote:Yeah, got a kick up the arse when he briefly stopped being MOTM every week. I'd say he's better than Billy was when he first got capped.Stom wrote:
I don't know how much that has been form and how much has been management/specific training.
He's rough around the edges, but so was Billy. Just because we've got a risk averse coach, too, doesn't mean he's not ready...
On the kids... Mitchell, Maunder, Taylor, anyone, really. Uren would be an upgrade.
Has Dombrandt been in the training group for England at all?
Momentum?p/d wrote:Left camp this morning, wife in labourBanquo wrote:Thats a weird one- there were family issues? I'd have thought he was in line to start!p/d wrote:Wtf has LCD done wrong
I know its cliched, and obvious, but he reminds me strongly of Nick Easter,which is hardly surprising.Mikey Brown wrote:I do think they're very different to be fair, but yeah I imagine I'll mention him a whole lot. He requires heavy marking for a different reason, but to me he's the only player (other than Manu) that requires the same consistent attention from a defence as Vunipola.Banquo wrote:Fair enough. Can I look forward to 3000 Dombrandt v Billy posts going forward.Mikey Brown wrote:
Yeah, got a kick up the arse when he briefly stopped being MOTM every week. I'd say he's better than Billy was when he first got capped.
Has Dombrandt been in the training group for England at all?
The clue was you starting your post with ‘Devil’s advocate’Banquo wrote:The clue to my devils advocacy was advocating Faz.Mellsblue wrote:I agree that he’s in credit. You’re playing devils advocate to my devils advocateBanquo wrote: Devil's advocate- excellent world cup, including beating New Zealand convincingly, with said captain, scrum half and full back. Bit of a bump against a good SA team who out thought us on the pitch. Players made so many individual mistakes v France, no coach can mitigate that- after half time, his intervention, big improvement
Game plan- he's working with the skill sets he sees from the AP day in day out. He has actually improved some players I'd say.
Most teams would struggle when losing two or three world class players, esp carriers.
On the 8, 9, 12, 15 issues.....who else?
Faz is rated by every coach he has ever worked with, including one's who are actually very good.
(not that I agree with a lot of this tbh)
However, I agree that the loss of world class players would be an issue to any team but the need for a Billy understudy has been a requirement for a few years now.
My issue with Farrell is with him as capt not as a player (not that I think he’s the world class operate most seek to think he is!). When even Dallaglio is claiming it’s not working then it’s safe to assume it’s not working!
As it seemed that hadn’t been picked up by some, I thought it was worth saying againMellsblue wrote:The clue was you starting your post with ‘Devil’s advocate’Banquo wrote:The clue to my devils advocacy was advocating Faz.Mellsblue wrote: I agree that he’s in credit. You’re playing devils advocate to my devils advocate
However, I agree that the loss of world class players would be an issue to any team but the need for a Billy understudy has been a requirement for a few years now.
My issue with Farrell is with him as capt not as a player (not that I think he’s the world class operate most seek to think he is!). When even Dallaglio is claiming it’s not working then it’s safe to assume it’s not working!
Are you daring to suggest that humour and Farrell go together?Banquo wrote:As it seemed that hadn’t been picked up by some, I thought it was worth saying againMellsblue wrote:The clue was you starting your post with ‘Devil’s advocate’Banquo wrote: The clue to my devils advocacy was advocating Faz.
I think he literally means step up, at scrum time, and Ludlum to step back to no8.......I hope the shirt numbers are just Eddie being stubborn.Banquo wrote:Agreed, but the bench is stupid and Faz is lucky.Stom wrote:That team is much more balanced, though, thank fuck. Would have liked to have seen Earl start, but can't quibble. Curry needs to step up.
What do you think Curry needs to do to 'step up' , aside from actually controlling the ball at the base?
I blame Eddie Jones.Banquo wrote:As it seemed that hadn’t been picked up by some, I thought it was worth saying againMellsblue wrote:The clue was you starting your post with ‘Devil’s advocate’Banquo wrote: The clue to my devils advocacy was advocating Faz.