RugbyRebels

Itoje, Hill and Steward are certainties, I'd guess. I hope SB does not have Tuilagi in the 23 but does have Willis and OHC in the XV. Beyond that there are either/or solutions pretty much everywhere (starting/bench in many cases).

Obviously, Farrell is a starter. I just hope it's at 10.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:55 pm Somehow typed OHC when I meant Freeman, but yeah I’m sure he could have a stab at playing fullback.

Malins I just forget exists entirely. I hope the move to Bristol sees him play 10 or 15 a bit more as he is very talented, but somehow seems a little wasted out wide despite a fantastic strike rate?

he is/was a full back by preference.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:03 pm Itoje, Hill and Steward are certainties, I'd guess. I hope SB does not have Tuilagi in the 23 but does have Willis and OHC in the XV. Beyond that there are either/or solutions pretty much everywhere (starting/bench in many cases).

Obviously, Farrell is a starter. I just hope it's at 10.

Genge and Sinckler are near certainties you'd think too, and probably Dombrandt given lack of other 8's and the flankers in the squad now (be amazed if he went Simmonds).

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:26 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:03 pm Itoje, Hill and Steward are certainties, I'd guess. I hope SB does not have Tuilagi in the 23 but does have Willis and OHC in the XV. Beyond that there are either/or solutions pretty much everywhere (starting/bench in many cases).

Obviously, Farrell is a starter. I just hope it's at 10.

Genge and Sinckler are near certainties you'd think too, and probably Dombrandt given lack of other 8's and the flankers in the squad now (be amazed if he went Simmonds).

Watch him select a perfectly sensible and reasonable 22 but slip Earl in at 8.

Will selecting 22 be deemed as English arrogance

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:26 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:03 pm Itoje, Hill and Steward are certainties, I'd guess. I hope SB does not have Tuilagi in the 23 but does have Willis and OHC in the XV. Beyond that there are either/or solutions pretty much everywhere (starting/bench in many cases).

Obviously, Farrell is a starter. I just hope it's at 10.

Genge and Sinckler are near certainties you'd think too, and probably Dombrandt given lack of other 8's and the flankers in the squad now (be amazed if he went Simmonds).

Has Dombrandt been in good form? I haven't seen a huge amount of Quins recently, so I've got no informed position.

Puja

p/d wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:25 pm Will selecting 22 be deemed as English arrogance

22 reasonable selections plus the odd selection at number 8 makes 23.

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:26 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:26 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:03 pm Itoje, Hill and Steward are certainties, I'd guess. I hope SB does not have Tuilagi in the 23 but does have Willis and OHC in the XV. Beyond that there are either/or solutions pretty much everywhere (starting/bench in many cases).

Obviously, Farrell is a starter. I just hope it's at 10.

Genge and Sinckler are near certainties you'd think too, and probably Dombrandt given lack of other 8's and the flankers in the squad now (be amazed if he went Simmonds).

Has Dombrandt been in good form? I haven't seen a huge amount of Quins recently, so I've got no informed position.

Puja

up and down like Quins tbh. I'm not sold, but he adds some bulk as well as no little skill, to what might otherwise be not the mightiest of back rows.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:32 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:26 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:26 pm

Genge and Sinckler are near certainties you'd think too, and probably Dombrandt given lack of other 8's and the flankers in the squad now (be amazed if he went Simmonds).

Has Dombrandt been in good form? I haven't seen a huge amount of Quins recently, so I've got no informed position.

Puja

up and down like Quins tbh. I'm not sold, but he adds some bulk as well as no little skill, to what might otherwise be not the mightiest of back rows.

Hmmm. That was the impression I had from the (very little) that I've seen, which isn't promising. While I do like the symbolism of the change of tack of dropping BillyV in the change from the old regime, it's ironic that it's happened at a time when he's in pretty good form and the darlings of the punditry of Simmonds and Dombrandt are in variable form.

Could be an option to go full fast and flighty and have one of Ludlam, JWillis or Earl at 8? Would reduce our hard carrying options, but there'd be no excuse for not having quick and clean ball in attack.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:12 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:32 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:26 pm

Has Dombrandt been in good form? I haven't seen a huge amount of Quins recently, so I've got no informed position.

Puja

up and down like Quins tbh. I'm not sold, but he adds some bulk as well as no little skill, to what might otherwise be not the mightiest of back rows.

Hmmm. That was the impression I had from the (very little) that I've seen, which isn't promising. While I do like the symbolism of the change of tack of dropping BillyV in the change from the old regime, it's ironic that it's happened at a time when he's in pretty good form and the darlings of the punditry of Simmonds and Dombrandt are in variable form.

Could be an option to go full fast and flighty and have one of Ludlam, JWillis or Earl at 8? Would reduce our hard carrying options, but there'd be no excuse for not having quick and clean ball in attack.

Puja

4. Ribbans/Hill
5. Itoje
6. Chessum
7. Willis
8. Earl/Ludlam

Use the three locks to carry hard and then give Willis and Earl/Ludlam license to roam and to run lines further out.

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:12 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:32 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:26 pm

Has Dombrandt been in good form? I haven't seen a huge amount of Quins recently, so I've got no informed position.

Puja

up and down like Quins tbh. I'm not sold, but he adds some bulk as well as no little skill, to what might otherwise be not the mightiest of back rows.

Hmmm. That was the impression I had from the (very little) that I've seen, which isn't promising. While I do like the symbolism of the change of tack of dropping BillyV in the change from the old regime, it's ironic that it's happened at a time when he's in pretty good form and the darlings of the punditry of Simmonds and Dombrandt are in variable form.

Could be an option to go full fast and flighty and have one of Ludlam, JWillis or Earl at 8? Would reduce our hard carrying options, but there'd be no excuse for not having quick and clean ball in attack.

Puja

well there would be the excuse of being knocked back at the tackle line . We'd have to handle smartly to get to the gainline, not sure wickieborth and co will have time to have sorted that. Plus unlikely to have much in the way of heavy carrying from the backs.

FKAS wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:16 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:12 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:32 pm
up and down like Quins tbh. I'm not sold, but he adds some bulk as well as no little skill, to what might otherwise be not the mightiest of back rows.

Hmmm. That was the impression I had from the (very little) that I've seen, which isn't promising. While I do like the symbolism of the change of tack of dropping BillyV in the change from the old regime, it's ironic that it's happened at a time when he's in pretty good form and the darlings of the punditry of Simmonds and Dombrandt are in variable form.

Could be an option to go full fast and flighty and have one of Ludlam, JWillis or Earl at 8? Would reduce our hard carrying options, but there'd be no excuse for not having quick and clean ball in attack.

Puja

4. Ribbans/Hill
5. Itoje
6. Chessum
7. Willis
8. Earl/Ludlam

Use the three locks to carry hard and then give Willis and Earl/Ludlam license to roam and to run lines further out.

Cheesus I thought Chessum was a lock. You Tigers boys need to make yer minds up

That'd make the front work row hard, as well as the locks. Having two back row looking for lines wide out might lead your breakdown a bit under resourced, pending on working on a natty system--- and there's not too much time to do that with some new combos.

Dombrandt’s going fine. Are we already that desperate to start ‘innovating’ again?

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:39 pm Dombrandt’s going fine. Are we already that desperate to start ‘innovating’ again?

Don't think we are ''desperate', just some are not massively impressed by Dombrandt tbh. As I said, I think he's a bit inconsistent if talented. I'd go with him, as I said- a near cert imo.

FKAS wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:16 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:12 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:32 pm
up and down like Quins tbh. I'm not sold, but he adds some bulk as well as no little skill, to what might otherwise be not the mightiest of back rows.

Hmmm. That was the impression I had from the (very little) that I've seen, which isn't promising. While I do like the symbolism of the change of tack of dropping BillyV in the change from the old regime, it's ironic that it's happened at a time when he's in pretty good form and the darlings of the punditry of Simmonds and Dombrandt are in variable form.

Could be an option to go full fast and flighty and have one of Ludlam, JWillis or Earl at 8? Would reduce our hard carrying options, but there'd be no excuse for not having quick and clean ball in attack.

Puja

4. Ribbans/Hill
5. Itoje
6. Chessum
7. Willis
8. Earl/Ludlam

Use the three locks to carry hard and then give Willis and Earl/Ludlam license to roam and to run lines further out.

If we had Lawes available (which isn't out of the question - he's only officially been ruled out of training this week), then I'd consider a lock at 6 again because he is genuine quality (and, yes, I know that he's a full-time 6 nowadays and hasn't played lock in X number of years, I still don't have to like it ), but ideally I still want a pure flanker at blindside. The UnderCurry combo worked so well and we've got so many options in that same mould that we're still spoiled for choice even when our first two options are out injured. And Chessum isn't Lawes - he's promising, he's got talent, but he's not the finished article yet and I still think he's better at lock.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:31 pmwell there would be the excuse of being knocked back at the tackle line . We'd have to handle smartly to get to the gainline, not sure wickieborth and co will have time to have sorted that. Plus unlikely to have much in the way of heavy carrying from the backs.

If we're playing Genge, Sinckler, and Blamire, then we do have a fair selection of heavy carriers to make the gainline in traffic (which isn't really Dombrandt's USP anyway).

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:39 pm Dombrandt’s going fine. Are we already that desperate to start ‘innovating’ again?

Like I said, I've not seen much of him this season, so I have only a very vague idea of how he's going. However, "fine" is damning with faint praise, isn't it?

Puja

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:39 pm Dombrandt’s going fine. Are we already that desperate to start ‘innovating’ again?

That'll do for me.

I really do not want to see a lightweight lock filling a back row berth. The one area of squad selection that can have some impact is the back row, let's just play a 6 at 6, 7 at 7 ........you get the gist

and a 12 at 12.

Dombrandt was very good at the weekend, i thought. I'm sure he'll be at 8.

fivepointer wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:59 pm Dombrandt was very good at the weekend, i thought. I'm sure he'll be at 8.

...I think so. But he isn't consistently very good imo, but then neither are quins.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:31 pmwell there would be the excuse of being knocked back at the tackle line . We'd have to handle smartly to get to the gainline, not sure wickieborth and co will have time to have sorted that. Plus unlikely to have much in the way of heavy carrying from the backs.

If we're playing Genge, Sinckler, and Blamire, then we do have a fair selection of heavy carriers to make the gainline in traffic (which isn't really Dombrandt's USP anyway).


Puja

We'll need all the carrying we can get tbh, esp given the likely backs. I think Dombrandt can be asked to truck it up from time to time.

p/d wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:58 pm I really do not want to see a lightweight lock filling a back row berth. The one area of squad selection that can have some impact is the back row, let's just play a 6 at 6, 7 at 7 ........you get the gist

and a 12 at 12.

What have you got against Exeter?!

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:12 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:32 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:26 pm

Has Dombrandt been in good form? I haven't seen a huge amount of Quins recently, so I've got no informed position.

Puja

up and down like Quins tbh. I'm not sold, but he adds some bulk as well as no little skill, to what might otherwise be not the mightiest of back rows.

Hmmm. That was the impression I had from the (very little) that I've seen, which isn't promising. While I do like the symbolism of the change of tack of dropping BillyV in the change from the old regime, it's ironic that it's happened at a time when he's in pretty good form and the darlings of the punditry of Simmonds and Dombrandt are in variable form.

Could be an option to go full fast and flighty and have one of Ludlam, JWillis or Earl at 8? Would reduce our hard carrying options, but there'd be no excuse for not having quick and clean ball in attack.

Puja

Puja, why do you say that Ludlam and J Willis reduce our hard carrying options? Earl, maybe. Willis, in particular, especially in his French team role, takes a lot of stopping at close quarters. I'm not a stats man but I'd be surprised if Dombrandt was many yards ahead of Ludlam.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:18 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:12 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:32 pm
up and down like Quins tbh. I'm not sold, but he adds some bulk as well as no little skill, to what might otherwise be not the mightiest of back rows.

Hmmm. That was the impression I had from the (very little) that I've seen, which isn't promising. While I do like the symbolism of the change of tack of dropping BillyV in the change from the old regime, it's ironic that it's happened at a time when he's in pretty good form and the darlings of the punditry of Simmonds and Dombrandt are in variable form.

Could be an option to go full fast and flighty and have one of Ludlam, JWillis or Earl at 8? Would reduce our hard carrying options, but there'd be no excuse for not having quick and clean ball in attack.

Puja

Puja, why do you say that Ludlam and J Willis reduce our hard carrying options? Earl, maybe. Willis, in particular, especially in his French team role, takes a lot of stopping at close quarters. I'm not a stats man but I'd be surprised if Dombrandt was many yards ahead of Ludlam.

Fair point, well made. JWillis has always been a machine in close contact - remains to be seen if he can replicate it at international level, but he was always huge for Wasps - and I've been impressed with Ludlam for Saints at 8.

I guess I was just making assumptions about playing a flanker at 8 reducing our oomph without really thinking it through.

Puja

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:04 pm

fivepointer wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:59 pm Dombrandt was very good at the weekend, i thought. I'm sure he'll be at 8.

...I think so. But he isn't consistently very good imo, but then neither are quins.

How often do you watch Quins? It’s fair to say Dombrandt has the occasional quiet game, but I’d argue he is consistently very good, even when Quins are not.

For a player who is mostly complimented for his attacking skill set, he is way more influential in defence than he’s given credit for. He regularly comes up with big turnovers and recently has been good at disrupting opposition mauls.

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:58 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:04 pm

fivepointer wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:59 pm Dombrandt was very good at the weekend, i thought. I'm sure he'll be at 8.

...I think so. But he isn't consistently very good imo, but then neither are quins.

How often do you watch Quins? It’s fair to say Dombrandt has the occasional quiet game, but I’d argue he is consistently very good, even when Quins are not.

For a player who is mostly complimented for his attacking skill set, he is way more influential in defence than he’s given credit for. He regularly comes up with big turnovers and recently has been good at disrupting opposition mauls.

Interesting that. It's perception again. An 'occasional quiet game' to you (who sees far more of him than me) has seemed several times to me to be disappearing when he should not. That leads me to jump to the conclusion that he might not be up for it at international level when it gets tough.

Your further comments about defence and 'mixing it' probably mean that I am wrong about him - possibly prejudiced because I rate Simmonds highly. Perhaps, neither has been used properly for England so far and it's that simple.

I totally agree with your last sentence.

I’m biased in the other direction, but I feel like Simmonds gets more allowances made because of his try scoring record. The thing is. he’s been nowhere near as influential for Exeter of late and without the tries and highlight reel moments, he’s a small 8 who requires compromises to be made to accommodate him. I don’t think the same is true for Dombrandt.