RugbyRebels

Big D wrote:Of all our injuries who is likely to challenge for a RWC spot?

Marfo? Not sure what is happening with him.
Gray - Looking increasingly like one half of our best second row.
Bradbury/Thomson/Barclay - All possibles.
Taylor - Likely?
Scott/Bennett - Possibles?

You could make a case for all three of Barclay, Bradbury and Thomson heading to RWC. Whilst I appreciate that sounds ridiculous in case of Thomson when he has yet to pull on the shirt,assuming he plays in 6N and performs then he might just bring something different.
RGray - recurring back injury for a guy of that size is pretty ominous. If fit, though, i think he makes it.
Taylor is one of these guys who’s stock has risen more from not playing rather than what he has done in the shirt. Playing for Sarries helps too. He’s a very good player but given ACL must be a long shot.
Marfo - nae chance.
Bennett - think he’s probably shot, sadly.
Scott - decent chance.

AL. wrote:The thing that staggered me was the frequency that the ball would come out to the first receiver and then go (via a full physical stop - along with any momentum gained) and turn round to pass behind to Hastings, soul sappingly slow and tedious.

It really is tiresome stuff isn't it. Mako Vunipola and a couple of others are very good at this role but even that becomes horribly telegraphed. without convincing attacking runs going on around it none of this stuff works.

It's crazy thinking that we're still doing these moves unopposed in training- thinking they look fantastic- and then totally shocked when we get on the field and a) do it so slowly somebody gets totally smashed or b) do about 17 passes nowhere near any defenders and then we're left with an isolated attacker 15 metres behind the gain-line.

I cant see Hogg playing but i think he is a team leader and theres lots of young players.

If he gets anything it will be a bench spot against SA or Argentina

ARM wrote:I don’t think we’ve ever beaten a Gatland coached team. Two years ago Howler was in charge in Lions year.

Final chance in 6N. At home. Must win.

I'll be glad to see the back of the prick.

Big D wrote:

OptimisticJock wrote:Is Dean with the squad?

Don't think so.

I'd have him in ahead of Grigg.

OptimisticJock wrote:

Big D wrote:

OptimisticJock wrote:Is Dean with the squad?

Don't think so.

I'd have him in ahead of Grigg.

Grigg did just put in a motm performance against the ospreys though. Something to be said for picking on form.

Its all well and good talking about winning the breakdown/slow ball/blitz defence or whatever but our back line should still be able to do more than run into the nearest defender. We had no skills on show at all. We cant just rely on set moves that go to pot as soon as a defence shows up. A blitz defence isnt *that* hard to get around, you just ping the ball down the line a bit faster to where theres a massive dog leg in the defensive line (I know I know, its not that easy either, but plenty of other teams manage to deal with it). We're still too reliant on individual brilliance, we still don't create enough space via team work, running angles and handling skills.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

OptimisticJock wrote:

Big D wrote:

OptimisticJock wrote:Is Dean with the squad?

Don't think so.

I'd have him in ahead of Grigg.

As would I.

Townsend has been given more rope than many for loses in Fiji and USA even allowing for rotation. Grigg looked out of place in both. He was also poor starting against Italy. Although he had a good cameo against England, they were well beaten by that point. Some people are good club players but not internationals and I think Grigg is one of those.

Big D wrote:

OptimisticJock wrote:

Big D wrote:
Don't think so.

I'd have him in ahead of Grigg.

As would I.

Townsend has been given more rope than many for loses in Fiji and USA even allowing for rotation. Grigg looked out of place in both. He was also poor starting against Italy. Although he had a good cameo against England, they were well beaten by that point. Some people are good club players but not internationals and I think Grigg is one of those.

Agreed. He's the new social media hero though. Jones had a rotten game so they are all elevating Grigg to a status he hasn't really earned. It's amazing how quickly people forget when they are desperate for a quick fix. Regarding Toony being given more rope, I've seen a lot more people talking about Toony being given the job too soon and wishing we'd kept Vern after last Saturday. Lose to Fiji and I think he will be under a lot of pressure.

Big D wrote:

OptimisticJock wrote:

Big D wrote:
Don't think so.

I'd have him in ahead of Grigg.

As would I.

Townsend has been given more rope than many for loses in Fiji and USA even allowing for rotation. Grigg looked out of place in both. He was also poor starting against Italy. Although he had a good cameo against England, they were well beaten by that point. Some people are good club players but not internationals and I think Grigg is one of those.

This, definitely this. He has one outstanding talent, hitting nice lines against a retreating defence. He is very effective at pro14 level and perhaps coming off the bench in the EC, but his distribution is limited and his defence is just not up to it, not through lack of trying. A great wee player but not an international IMHO.

Chunks Baws wrote:

Big D wrote:

OptimisticJock wrote: I'd have him in ahead of Grigg.

As would I.

Townsend has been given more rope than many for loses in Fiji and USA even allowing for rotation. Grigg looked out of place in both. He was also poor starting against Italy. Although he had a good cameo against England, they were well beaten by that point. Some people are good club players but not internationals and I think Grigg is one of those.

Agreed. He's the new social media hero though. Jones had a rotten game so they are all elevating Grigg to a status he hasn't really earned. It's amazing how quickly people forget when they are desperate for a quick fix. Regarding Toony being given more rope, I've seen a lot more people talking about Toony being given the job too soon and wishing we'd kept Vern after last Saturday. Lose to Fiji and I think he will be under a lot of pressure.

That is more rope, if Vern had lost in Fiji and USA the pitch forks would be out IMO.

We don't seem to learn lessons in attack. Where was plan B or C at the weekend. We don't take defensive lessons on board either. His loyalty to Taylor is both commendable and potentially job threatening in the longer term.

Big D wrote:

Chunks Baws wrote:

Big D wrote:
As would I.

Townsend has been given more rope than many for loses in Fiji and USA even allowing for rotation. Grigg looked out of place in both. He was also poor starting against Italy. Although he had a good cameo against England, they were well beaten by that point. Some people are good club players but not internationals and I think Grigg is one of those.

Agreed. He's the new social media hero though. Jones had a rotten game so they are all elevating Grigg to a status he hasn't really earned. It's amazing how quickly people forget when they are desperate for a quick fix. Regarding Toony being given more rope, I've seen a lot more people talking about Toony being given the job too soon and wishing we'd kept Vern after last Saturday. Lose to Fiji and I think he will be under a lot of pressure.

That is more rope, if Vern had lost in Fiji and USA the pitch forks would be out IMO.

We don't seem to learn lessons in attack. Where was plan B or C at the weekend. We don't take defensive lessons on board either. His loyalty to Taylor is both commendable and potentially job threatening in the longer term.

Yeah, that's what I was getting at. That and people being a lot more vocal in their disappointment in Townsend.

I almost choked when I saw Taylor linked with England a few months back. I'd have driven him to Twickenham myself.

ARM wrote:

Cameo wrote:

ARM wrote:Didn’t see the game. Worth watching? Doesn’t sound like it.

But let me guess...Scotland, once again, fail in trying to re-write the rules of modern rugby by thinking they can compete when they lose all the collisions by picking a lightweight team.

Actually no, I think we failed to speed up the game enough. Part of that seemed to be us (Price) trying to be (over) methodical and part is that it is very hard to play open attacking rugby with Mathieu Raynal as referee.

Wasnt a great game at all with very few linebreaks. Incidentally, while there is an argument that Horne's try should have stood (didnt look to lose contact with the ball til after it was down), why is he not catching that?

Watched it last night. Whilst you might be on to something, it’s nigh on impossible to generate quick ball when you can’t win the collisions or dominate the breakdown. It’s a recurring theme - when teams like Wales put minimal bodies in to the breakdown, fan out and blitz hard, we struggle. We can often get away with it with Hogg on the park as he is a genuine world class talent. I think it was the 2016 6N when Hogg either scored or assisted >50% of our tries.

Fair point. I do think it is notable though (contrary to ehat some have been saying) that this wasnt the case of same old same old. We were much narrower and more controlled than previously under townsend. I'm not sure whether that was his tactics or whether the combination of in your face defence and slow ball mean that Hastings didnt back himself to spread it (when Finn would whatever the situation for better or worse). I do think we were quite predictable though.

Is it possible they simplified the game plan a bit for Hastings?

This is interesting.

Nicked from another forum. Some proper insight into what went wrong with our defence in Cardiff.


https://www.rugbypass.com/news/analysis ... ctually-is

Chunks Baws wrote:Nicked from another forum. Some proper insight into what went wrong with our defence in Cardiff.


https://www.rugbypass.com/news/analysis ... ctually-is

Very good article.

Good that Jones could make in game adjustments.

Bad that the system (or "sweepers") failed and adjustments weren't made.

Really worrying how poorly Dunbar defended that second try. Moriaty is covered by 2 other defenders and Anscombe gets outside Dunbar too easily to the point that if Jones hadn't waited he was straight through.

Big D wrote:

This is interesting.

That is some superb analysis.

Chunks Baws wrote:Nicked from another forum. Some proper insight into what went wrong with our defence in Cardiff.


https://www.rugbypass.com/news/analysis ... ctually-is

As is this but just leaves me concerned about the nous of our coaches. If the system isn't working then heads will ultimately drop on on the pitch. There really is only a plan A - Glasgow suffer from the same mindset.

Nice to see some in depth analysis. One possible follow up I'd be interested to see is whether our lack of a second line of defence (and thus additional man or two in the front line) has any benefits. I.e. Do we concede less line breaks than we would otherwise even if the ones we do allow more often lead to points. It doesnt feel like it although on the weekend neither team could break the line.

Cameo wrote:Nice to see some in depth analysis. One possible follow up I'd be interested to see is whether our lack of a second line of defence (and thus additional man or two in the front line) has any benefits. I.e. Do we concede less line breaks than we would otherwise even if the ones we do allow more often lead to points. It doesnt feel like it although on the weekend neither team could break the line.

I'd be interested to see teams clean break v tries ratio against us in our own half. Thinking back to Twickenham last year it felt like any missed tackle resulted in a try.

Or chips in behind.

Definitely interesting. Sounds like this person has put more thought into it that blindly suggesting we drop Jones like I have been doing. Though I’m sure I’ve seen him make a few defensive mistakes before, he’s still relatively young and inexperienced I guess.

Dunbar not defending well definitely is a worry.

Mikey Brown wrote:Definitely interesting. Sounds like this person has put more thought into it that blindly suggesting we drop Jones like I have been doing. Though I’m sure I’ve seen him make a few defensive mistakes before, he’s still relatively young and inexperienced I guess.

Dunbar not defending well definitely is a worry.

Haha yeah I was definitely suprised by the "top defensive OC" stats. Maybe there is something in the "when our centres miss, we concede" theory which means they get highlighted more

Thats the thing, Dunbar missed 3, Watson 2, several 1 but because of the tries people are focusing on Jones.

Big D wrote:Thats the thing, Dunbar missed 3, Watson 2, several 1 but because of the tries people are focusing on Jones.

I’m not going to pretend to know about defensive structures employed by backs during international rugby, but what I would say is that going high on George North when he’s got the ball tucked away and is several metres out is a mistake, particularly when you have time to take him low or even jump on his fecking back. Would still have him in the team - am keen to see how he plays v boks.

That said, I would even go as far as saying the two tries weren’t the main reasons we lost on Saturday - improvements in a few areas would have seen a better result, irrespective of two shitty tries.