RugbyRebels

Timbo wrote:

jngf wrote:

Timbo wrote:According to Underhill Curry was the fastest of all the England forwards at the World Cup. Saw an interview where he joked that Tom should be doing speed work with the backs instead.

So Eddie plays Wilson at openside instead

Wilson is a machine. He’ll go well.

My only question mark would be sharpness and fitness at this level, given a longish lay off and not much playing time. But as I said, he is very smart.

Oakboy wrote:Over what distance should a backrower be judged, though? Normally, I'd guess 20 metres would be adequate. If the distance is longer I doubt any would catch Simmonds.

Depends on what role you have them doing, but generally you'd expect them to have more endurance if you look at what they do. Joe Simmonds? I've never seen him in an extended sprint tbh, but others may have.

As an aside Jason Robinson struggled to maintain any sort of pace after about 30 m iirc.

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Stom wrote:Mercer is quick, yes. Luckily Smith is a lot quicker than he was 2 years ago, though. He was still a kid back then, was blowing after 10m, lol.

I know.. but...
He still got caught by a #8 who'd been playing the whole match.

He's going to have to do something pretty attrocious to be able to forget that one (something like Carling getting dumped instead of scoring a try).

Also - is Smith actually faster now? or just capable of running more than 20 yards whilst fresh? because at no stage was he pulling away from Zach

I don't think that's too surprising tbh; most 10's would lose their wheels after 40m. Imagine Farrell in that scenario, or even Ford? Great effort from Mercer in fairness.

Yep. Mercer is a pretty decent athlete, and at 6’3” with his stride length I would imagine he’d catch quite a few inside backs over 60-70 metres in a straight line.

Oakboy wrote:Over what distance should a backrower be judged, though? Normally, I'd guess 20 metres would be adequate. If the distance is longer I doubt any would catch Simmonds.

I’s say Ben Earl would give Simmonds a pretty decent race tbh, over more or less any sprint distance. Reckon Ardie Savea might be faster than both of them though.

Edit: are you talking Joe Simmonds? If so, do you not think his brother quicker over 20m+?

Timbo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Over what distance should a backrower be judged, though? Normally, I'd guess 20 metres would be adequate. If the distance is longer I doubt any would catch Simmonds.

I’s say Ben Earl would give Simmonds a pretty decent race tbh, over more or less any sprint distance. Reckon Ardie Savea might be faster than both of them though.

I didn't know if he meant a back rower catch a 10 like Joe Simmonds, or was referring to Simmonds senior...I'd say Sam Simmonds has very good acceleration but no idea of his stamina at that pace. Ideally you want (say) an openside to have very good acceleration, but also excellent stamina for longer sometimes speculative supporting runs.

Timbo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Over what distance should a backrower be judged, though? Normally, I'd guess 20 metres would be adequate. If the distance is longer I doubt any would catch Simmonds.

I’s say Ben Earl would give Simmonds a pretty decent race tbh, over more or less any sprint distance. Reckon Ardie Savea might be faster than both of them though.

Edit: are you talking Joe Simmonds? If so, do you not think his brother quicker over 20m+?

I was only referring to backrowers.

Oakboy wrote:

Timbo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Over what distance should a backrower be judged, though? Normally, I'd guess 20 metres would be adequate. If the distance is longer I doubt any would catch Simmonds.

I’s say Ben Earl would give Simmonds a pretty decent race tbh, over more or less any sprint distance. Reckon Ardie Savea might be faster than both of them though.

Edit: are you talking Joe Simmonds? If so, do you not think his brother quicker over 20m+?

I was only referring to backrowers.

In that case I don't know, I don't recall seeing Simmonds S over more than 20m, where he is rapid.

Ben Earl is rapid. Watch his try against Saints at the w/e. He ran a fair distance and some nippy backs didnt get close to him.

So annoying that Underhill is out. Not only could it have prevented yet another back row bodge job, I’d also liked to have seen him have a real go at Biggar (who must have been touch and go).

I know Watson hasn’t played much rugby but Navidi and Williams are pretty big dice rolls from Pivac off the back of 0 rugby in some time. Am I right in thinking Williams hasn’t played at all since the RWC semi?

Scrumhead wrote:So annoying that Underhill is out. Not only could it have prevented yet another back row bodge job, I’d also liked to have seen him have a real go at Biggar (who must have been touch and go).

I know Watson hasn’t played much rugby but Navidi and Williams are pretty big dice rolls from Pivac off the back of 0 rugby in some time. Am I right in thinking Williams hasn’t played at all since the RWC semi?

Williams played the weekend for Scarlets. Still a bit of a dice roll though.

And, if Underhill had been fit, then one of him or Wilson would've been on the bench instead of Earl. No way Eddie is giving up his Tesco Value PSdT at 6.

Puja

Remember when Itoje was played at 6 for a few games? Good times.

Puja wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:So annoying that Underhill is out. Not only could it have prevented yet another back row bodge job, I’d also liked to have seen him have a real go at Biggar (who must have been touch and go).

I know Watson hasn’t played much rugby but Navidi and Williams are pretty big dice rolls from Pivac off the back of 0 rugby in some time. Am I right in thinking Williams hasn’t played at all since the RWC semi?

Williams played the weekend for Scarlets. Still a bit of a dice roll though.

And, if Underhill had been fit, then one of him or Wilson would've been on the bench instead of Earl. No way Eddie is giving up his Tesco Value PSdT at 6.

Puja

Williams was retained by Wales, he hasnt played for Scarlets yet.

The back row is a mind f#ck, and Ewels on the bench is pointless

You're all ignoring the May shaped elephant in the room when it comes to back row speed. All other comparisons are meaningless.

Beasties wrote:You're all ignoring the May shaped elephant in the room when it comes to back row speed. All other comparisons are meaningless.

jack Nowell, not so much.

Puja wrote: And, if Underhill had been fit, then one of him or Wilson would've been on the bench instead of Earl. No way Eddie is giving up his Tesco Value PSdT at 6.

Puja

Genuinely laughed out loud at that

Anyone else sort of lost interest a bit in this 6 nations? Particularly with the Italy situation. Maybe it’s always this way after the World Cup.

What's vexing me is we've gone this far under Jones with little no work done on the attack front and we're starting to count down to a new coach who will probably want to work on set piece and defence, unless we get Townsend and just flip in absurd fashion the other way. I'd like the team to actually look like they can attack, not just off set piece, and not just with kicking the ball away. We don't have to look like the 2001 Brumbies or 2011 Reds overnight, but something worth watching and competent would be nice

A coach swap with England and Scotland would definitely get me interested again. That would be amazing to watch.

Townsend absolutely at a loss what to do with all these big carriers and EJ trying to destroy Scottish rugby from the inside for being insulted by those two idiots on the way back from Murrayfield.

Mikey Brown wrote:Anyone else sort of lost interest a bit in this 6 nations? Particularly with the Italy situation. Maybe it’s always this way after the World Cup.

Defo subdued after a WC. But also the two breaks in the middle make it a struggle to sustain interest.

Mikey Brown wrote:Anyone else sort of lost interest a bit in this 6 nations? Particularly with the Italy situation. Maybe it’s always this way after the World Cup.

A little. Knowing that its not going to finish is a bit of a downer. That and England's rather stodgy, conservative selection and play havent exactly set the pulses racing. Just how much further forward are we going to be after the Wales game?

Beasties wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Anyone else sort of lost interest a bit in this 6 nations? Particularly with the Italy situation. Maybe it’s always this way after the World Cup.

Defo subdued after a WC. But also the two breaks in the middle make it a struggle to sustain interest.

I certainly agree that the 6N needs to scrap the gap weeks which lose all credibility with players turning out for their clubs. What depresses me most is that our RWC SF performance showed how we could play. Then, because SA steamrollered us, Jones now sees copying those tactics as the new fashion. I think that England are a horrendous team to watch for the neutral based on all our matches in this 6N. The current style of kicking and trying to dominate without the ball has no chance of attracting non-rugby people to watch the game - effectively destroying any PR blip from reaching the SF.

Talking to friends from the other home nations, I get, "I don't bother to watch England unless we are playing them. They are so boring." I don't have a counter-argument and my only defence is that I am an avid fan so I'll carry on watching. As ever, it is what we have with Jones - the 'Mourinho effect'. Effectively it's win or zero.

fivepointer wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Anyone else sort of lost interest a bit in this 6 nations? Particularly with the Italy situation. Maybe it’s always this way after the World Cup.

A little. Knowing that its not going to finish is a bit of a downer. That and England's rather stodgy, conservative selection and play havent exactly set the pulses racing. Just how much further forward are we going to be after the Wales game?

The selection is not helping me in the slightest. I want England to win (and gods, I cannot take a loss to Wales considering how many Welsh I work with), but it feels like the only way Lawes at 6, Curry at 8, and Daly at 15 might stop happening is if we lose. And, if we continue winning with them, then it'll be cemented in as our side and we'll continue playing with one hand tied behind our back until we play NZ or SA and get destroyed.

Puja

Beasties wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Anyone else sort of lost interest a bit in this 6 nations? Particularly with the Italy situation. Maybe it’s always this way after the World Cup.

Defo subdued after a WC. But also the two breaks in the middle make it a struggle to sustain interest.

I actually quite appreciated the weeks off when they arrived, which is something I've never, ever felt before watching the 6 nations.

Oakboy wrote:
Talking to friends from the other home nations, I get, "I don't bother to watch England unless we are playing them. They are so boring." I don't have a counter-argument and my only defence is that I am an avid fan so I'll carry on watching. As ever, it is what we have with Jones - the 'Mourinho effect'. Effectively it's win or zero.

I think many of them would say "boring, boring England" whatever was put in front of them. Lord knows Ireland, Wales and Scotland have stunk out the place enough this and previous seasons despite in some cases having their best ever teams.

England v Wales for a triple crown? That still interests me.