RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote: Ben was unfortunate to have a bad day at the office today. I'd look to Robson or Cook over them tbh.

...or either of those two. I think it a position where, over a number of years now, we really have failed to develop strength in depth.

I mean, Wigglesworth ffs

Banquo wrote:

Peat wrote:

Banquo wrote: it was Kruis, as he had against Scotland.

Care was much sharper than Youngs and that kick through for JJ's try was inspired.

Thank you. Nothing exasperates me more than the hooker getting it in the neck for a dodgy lineout while the caller isn't even considered for criticism.

The kick for JJ's try was wonderful - but then I thought Youngs spotting there was no one at home for that chip through that got us the 5m lineout was fine work too. But less memorable as the forwards then made a hash of it.

Still, I'm willing to go with the consensus on this.

Hartley's throwing was off, but something else was wrong with the lineouts.....and I'd agree that calling may have been something to do with that. They did use four jumpers, which was nice.

Care was sharper and more consistent than Youngs, whose passing was 'variable' if we are being kind, a little ponderous, and made one howler of a decision coming left, when there was something like a 7 on 3 to the right...maybe he didnt get a call, but.......

Or did get a call of course. Seemed a very odd decision mind whoever made it. Who received the pass?

p/d wrote:

Banquo wrote: Ben was unfortunate to have a bad day at the office today. I'd look to Robson or Cook over them tbh.

...or either of those two. I think it a position where, over a number of years now, we really have failed to develop strength in depth.

I mean, Wigglesworth ffs

worrying innit.

This from a country who produced Mike Lampkowski and Shaun Perry.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Peat wrote:
Thank you. Nothing exasperates me more than the hooker getting it in the neck for a dodgy lineout while the caller isn't even considered for criticism.

The kick for JJ's try was wonderful - but then I thought Youngs spotting there was no one at home for that chip through that got us the 5m lineout was fine work too. But less memorable as the forwards then made a hash of it.

Still, I'm willing to go with the consensus on this.

Hartley's throwing was off, but something else was wrong with the lineouts.....and I'd agree that calling may have been something to do with that. They did use four jumpers, which was nice.

Care was sharper and more consistent than Youngs, whose passing was 'variable' if we are being kind, a little ponderous, and made one howler of a decision coming left, when there was something like a 7 on 3 to the right...maybe he didnt get a call, but.......

Or did get a call of course. Seemed a very odd decision mind whoever made it. Who received the pass?

Not sure, think he picked up, shaped left, did a little pirouette and popped to some poor mug.

Renniks wrote:

Peat wrote:
Thank you. Nothing exasperates me more than the hooker getting it in the neck for a dodgy lineout while the caller isn't even considered for criticism.

Was there not 1 overthrow over a full stretch jumper, and at least 1 pinged for not straight (though at least 2 more that were really bad) ?

Hoping Kruis doesn't call the same line outs for first few next time out - but would keep letting him call them

The only one I remember I thought I saw go straight through Kruis' hands; but no one else seems to remember that, so maybe that was over his hands. This is what happens when you watch games in the morning all bleary-eyed, and not particularly interested because England aren't particularly interesting.

And, because it wasn't particularly interesting, I'm not gonna go back and check!

To make it look like I've got something intelligent to contribute, I'm gonna look at ESPN stats and reel off the more interesting points to me, completely aware they're still probably wrong...

Kruis missed 4 tackles. Not sure that means much.

FordFaz kicked 17 times and passed only 34 times. Joseph ran it 12 times and passed 2 times. I'm beginning to get a feeling that our wingers exist solely to counter-attack and defend.

Wild Bill Vunipola is down for 10 passes and 2 offloads. He also made 19 carries, equal to the combined efforts of the 6 forwards that got subbed off.

Hang on - doesn't the 6N site do stats now? Why am I looking at the dogshit things on ESPN?

edit: 4 turnovers for Kruis on the 6N site, fair play that's nice work. 2 for Robshaw. Watson and Itoje also listed with 2.

The comedy chargedown was entertaining too. I assume he knew it wasn't going to play on.

Peat wrote:

Renniks wrote:

Peat wrote:
Thank you. Nothing exasperates me more than the hooker getting it in the neck for a dodgy lineout while the caller isn't even considered for criticism.

Was there not 1 overthrow over a full stretch jumper, and at least 1 pinged for not straight (though at least 2 more that were really bad) ?

Hoping Kruis doesn't call the same line outs for first few next time out - but would keep letting him call them

The only one I remember I thought I saw go straight through Kruis' hands; but no one else seems to remember that, so maybe that was over his hands. This is what happens when you watch games in the morning all bleary-eyed, and not particularly interested because England aren't particularly interesting.

And, because it wasn't particularly interesting, I'm not gonna go back and check!

To make it look like I've got something intelligent to contribute, I'm gonna look at ESPN stats and reel off the more interesting points to me, completely aware they're still probably wrong...

Kruis missed 4 tackles. Not sure that means much.

FordFaz kicked 17 times and passed only 34 times. Joseph ran it 12 times and passed 2 times. I'm beginning to get a feeling that our wingers exist solely to counter-attack and defend.

Wild Bill Vunipola is down for 10 passes and 2 offloads. He also made 19 carries, equal to the combined efforts of the 6 forwards that got subbed off.

Hang on - doesn't the 6N site do stats now? Why am I looking at the dogshit things on ESPN?

Billy was definitely doing the solo carrying gig again, though Mako helped out a bit. On the JJ thing, well he could have passed to the wings, who likely would have just been bundled into touch- there wasn't much sign of say Mikey or the BSW hitting the channel outside him. He was trying to make breaks, make something happen a lot of the time; maybe he was a little greedy and forcing it a bit.

Peat wrote:

Renniks wrote:

Peat wrote:
Thank you. Nothing exasperates me more than the hooker getting it in the neck for a dodgy lineout while the caller isn't even considered for criticism.

Was there not 1 overthrow over a full stretch jumper, and at least 1 pinged for not straight (though at least 2 more that were really bad) ?

Hoping Kruis doesn't call the same line outs for first few next time out - but would keep letting him call them

The only one I remember I thought I saw go straight through Kruis' hands; but no one else seems to remember that, so maybe that was over his hands. This is what happens when you watch games in the morning all bleary-eyed, and not particularly interested because England aren't particularly interesting.

And, because it wasn't particularly interesting, I'm not gonna go back and check!

To make it look like I've got something intelligent to contribute, I'm gonna look at ESPN stats and reel off the more interesting points to me, completely aware they're still probably wrong...

Kruis missed 4 tackles. Not sure that means much.

FordFaz kicked 17 times and passed only 34 times. Joseph ran it 12 times and passed 2 times. I'm beginning to get a feeling that our wingers exist solely to counter-attack and defend.

Wild Bill Vunipola is down for 10 passes and 2 offloads. He also made 19 carries, equal to the combined efforts of the 6 forwards that got subbed off.

Hang on - doesn't the 6N site do stats now? Why am I looking at the dogshit things on ESPN?

edit: 4 turnovers for Kruis on the 6N site, fair play that's nice work. 2 for Robshaw. Watson and Itoje also listed with 2.

Wings are screwed with this 10/12 set up.

bitts wrote: Obviously ive lost all ability to be objective about the twat though.

This made me lol

morepork wrote: Italy just gave up after that JJ intercept, the pricks.

This also made me lol. A little bit because it's true. They almost expect to lose and when they throw away their slim chance of a win they just have a hissy fit. A bit like Scotland ........ and their rugby team.

Exactly what I thought would happen, happened.

Our backrow put in a shift individually, made shed load of tackles, missed none and were praised for it. But, just how effective were they? How many turnovers did they win? How many metres were made...meaningful metres that is? Why don't espn show turnovers won? Surely this is a vital stat these days...shewerly?

Our backrow is still our achilles heel.

Our new achilles heel is now our 12.

Our 9 is now our pulled hamstring.

3 areas that could be sorted as alternatives are there but I won't be holding my breath.

WaspInWales wrote:Exactly what I thought would happen, happened.

Our backrow put in a shift individually, made shed load of tackles, missed none and were praised for it. But, just how effective were they? How many turnovers did they win? How many metres were made...meaningful metres that is? Why don't espn show turnovers won? Surely this is a vital stat these days...shewerly?

Our backrow is still our achilles heel.

Our new achilles heel is now our 12.

Our 9 is now our pulled hamstring.

3 areas that could be sorted as alternatives are there but I won't be holding my breath.

12 is new?!

Have we had a lad put in 2 good 6Ns at 12 since Greenwood retired?

The 6N site is the place to go for stats for the 6N now. Some on the England Rugby site too. Robshaw got 2. Think Haskell may have got one? Itoje got two.

Peat wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Exactly what I thought would happen, happened.

Our backrow put in a shift individually, made shed load of tackles, missed none and were praised for it. But, just how effective were they? How many turnovers did they win? How many metres were made...meaningful metres that is? Why don't espn show turnovers won? Surely this is a vital stat these days...shewerly?

Our backrow is still our achilles heel.

Our new achilles heel is now our 12.

Our 9 is now our pulled hamstring.

3 areas that could be sorted as alternatives are there but I won't be holding my breath.

12 is new?!

Have we had a lad put in 2 good 6Ns at 12 since Greenwood retired?

The 6N site is the place to go for stats for the 6N now. Some on the England Rugby site too. Robshaw got 2. Think Haskell may have got one? Itoje got two.

Fair point...I was just trying to be dramatic.

Cheers for the tip on stats....not sure I believe those turnover numbers though. Robshaw and Haskell managed three times as many as last week? Can believe Itoje doubled them single-handedly this week though!

WaspInWales wrote:

Peat wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Exactly what I thought would happen, happened.

Our backrow put in a shift individually, made shed load of tackles, missed none and were praised for it. But, just how effective were they? How many turnovers did they win? How many metres were made...meaningful metres that is? Why don't espn show turnovers won? Surely this is a vital stat these days...shewerly?

Our backrow is still our achilles heel.

Our new achilles heel is now our 12.

Our 9 is now our pulled hamstring.

3 areas that could be sorted as alternatives are there but I won't be holding my breath.

12 is new?!

Have we had a lad put in 2 good 6Ns at 12 since Greenwood retired?

The 6N site is the place to go for stats for the 6N now. Some on the England Rugby site too. Robshaw got 2. Think Haskell may have got one? Itoje got two.

Fair point...I was just trying to be dramatic.

Cheers for the tip on stats....not sure I believe those turnover numbers though. Robshaw and Haskell managed three times as many as last week? Can believe Itoje doubled them single-handedly this week though!

I can.

p/d wrote:

Peat wrote:

Renniks wrote:
Was there not 1 overthrow over a full stretch jumper, and at least 1 pinged for not straight (though at least 2 more that were really bad) ?

Hoping Kruis doesn't call the same line outs for first few next time out - but would keep letting him call them

The only one I remember I thought I saw go straight through Kruis' hands; but no one else seems to remember that, so maybe that was over his hands. This is what happens when you watch games in the morning all bleary-eyed, and not particularly interested because England aren't particularly interesting.

And, because it wasn't particularly interesting, I'm not gonna go back and check!

To make it look like I've got something intelligent to contribute, I'm gonna look at ESPN stats and reel off the more interesting points to me, completely aware they're still probably wrong...

Kruis missed 4 tackles. Not sure that means much.

FordFaz kicked 17 times and passed only 34 times. Joseph ran it 12 times and passed 2 times. I'm beginning to get a feeling that our wingers exist solely to counter-attack and defend.

Wild Bill Vunipola is down for 10 passes and 2 offloads. He also made 19 carries, equal to the combined efforts of the 6 forwards that got subbed off.

Hang on - doesn't the 6N site do stats now? Why am I looking at the dogshit things on ESPN?

edit: 4 turnovers for Kruis on the 6N site, fair play that's nice work. 2 for Robshaw. Watson and Itoje also listed with 2.

Wings are screwed with this 10/12 set up.

Yet I thought they both did well, swapping sides and looking for work on each other's wing and down the centre of the pitch

Few have mentioned how comfortable Itoje looked in the back-row. If we allow for him being out of practice in the position, it was some debut. I'd definitely pick him at 6 for the Ireland match. I don't think anyone will get the better of him at the breakdown too easily. He also adds a huge presence in the lineout.

Another surprise for me is that one or two are still knocking Nowell. He is a far better defender than any of the alternatives (his first tackles in each half stopped Parisse in his tracks). He showed against Scotland that he takes chances well. I think he is there to stay.

Oakboy wrote:Few have mentioned how comfortable Itoje looked in the back-row. If we allow for him being out of practice in the position, it was some debut. I'd definitely pick him at 6 for the Ireland match. I don't think anyone will get the better of him at the breakdown too easily. He also adds a huge presence in the lineout.

Another surprise for me is that one or two are still knocking Nowell. He is a far better defender than any of the alternatives (his first tackles in each half stopped Parisse in his tracks). He showed against Scotland that he takes chances well. I think he is there to stay.

I'm really tempted to put Itoje at 6 but i think you'd have to have a pacy openside alongside him. he's a major talent but it might be best to leave him at lock. He has to be in the 23 from now on either way.

I'm with you on Nowell but we seem to be in a minority.

Oakboy wrote:Few have mentioned how comfortable Itoje looked in the back-row. If we allow for him being out of practice in the position, it was some debut. I'd definitely pick him at 6 for the Ireland match. I don't think anyone will get the better of him at the breakdown too easily. He also adds a huge presence in the lineout.

Another surprise for me is that one or two are still knocking Nowell. He is a far better defender than any of thealternatives (his first tackles in each half stopped Parisse in his tracks). He showed against Scotland that he takes chances well. I think he is there to stay.

You surprise me every day Dors.....

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Few have mentioned how comfortable Itoje looked in the back-row. If we allow for him being out of practice in the position, it was some debut. I'd definitely pick him at 6 for the Ireland match. I don't think anyone will get the better of him at the breakdown too easily. He also adds a huge presence in the lineout.

Another surprise for me is that one or two are still knocking Nowell. He is a far better defender than any of thealternatives (his first tackles in each half stopped Parisse in his tracks). He showed against Scotland that he takes chances well. I think he is there to stay.

You surprise me every day Dors.....

Why? You've spent ten years educating me!

fivepointer wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Few have mentioned how comfortable Itoje looked in the back-row. If we allow for him being out of practice in the position, it was some debut. I'd definitely pick him at 6 for the Ireland match. I don't think anyone will get the better of him at the breakdown too easily. He also adds a huge presence in the lineout.

Another surprise for me is that one or two are still knocking Nowell. He is a far better defender than any of the alternatives (his first tackles in each half stopped Parisse in his tracks). He showed against Scotland that he takes chances well. I think he is there to stay.

I'm really tempted to put Itoje at 6 but i think you'd have to have a pacy openside alongside him. he's a major talent but it might be best to leave him at lock. He has to be in the 23 from now on either way.

I'm with you on Nowell but we seem to be in a minority.

Why do you say that, 5P?

Oakboy wrote:

fivepointer wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Few have mentioned how comfortable Itoje looked in the back-row. If we allow for him being out of practice in the position, it was some debut. I'd definitely pick him at 6 for the Ireland match. I don't think anyone will get the better of him at the breakdown too easily. He also adds a huge presence in the lineout.

Another surprise for me is that one or two are still knocking Nowell. He is a far better defender than any of the alternatives (his first tackles in each half stopped Parisse in his tracks). He showed against Scotland that he takes chances well. I think he is there to stay.

I'm really tempted to put Itoje at 6 but i think you'd have to have a pacy openside alongside him. he's a major talent but it might be best to leave him at lock. He has to be in the 23 from now on either way.

I'm with you on Nowell but we seem to be in a minority.

Why do you say that, 5P?

balance. dont think Haskell/Robshaw would really fit the bill, though Kvesic might but it seems unlikely EJ is going to call for him.

fivepointer wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Few have mentioned how comfortable Itoje looked in the back-row. If we allow for him being out of practice in the position, it was some debut. I'd definitely pick him at 6 for the Ireland match. I don't think anyone will get the better of him at the breakdown too easily. He also adds a huge presence in the lineout.

Another surprise for me is that one or two are still knocking Nowell. He is a far better defender than any of the alternatives (his first tackles in each half stopped Parisse in his tracks). He showed against Scotland that he takes chances well. I think he is there to stay.

I'm really tempted to put Itoje at 6 but i think you'd have to have a pacy openside alongside him. he's a major talent but it might be best to leave him at lock. He has to be in the 23 from now on either way.

I'm with you on Nowell but we seem to be in a minority.

Clifford at 7 seems the logical choice with Itoje

I'm also a member of the Jack Nowell fan club!

Bloggs wrote:

fivepointer wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Few have mentioned how comfortable Itoje looked in the back-row. If we allow for him being out of practice in the position, it was some debut. I'd definitely pick him at 6 for the Ireland match. I don't think anyone will get the better of him at the breakdown too easily. He also adds a huge presence in the lineout.

Another surprise for me is that one or two are still knocking Nowell. He is a far better defender than any of the alternatives (his first tackles in each half stopped Parisse in his tracks). He showed against Scotland that he takes chances well. I think he is there to stay.

I'm really tempted to put Itoje at 6 but i think you'd have to have a pacy openside alongside him. he's a major talent but it might be best to leave him at lock. He has to be in the 23 from now on either way.

I'm with you on Nowell but we seem to be in a minority.

Clifford at 7 seems the logical choice with Itoje

I'm also a member of the Jack Nowell fan club!

Whilst I like the look of both Clifford and Itoje, one is a utility back row at his club, and the other has been playing lock all season. Its a big ask (esp v Ireland) to field a wholly new back row even if they were specialists- and I'm totally on the page that our breakdown work ball in hand is a bit shoddy, and the back row have a big role in that; Eddie has painted himself into a bit of a corner. Very tricky one; imo he needed to start one or other v Scotland, and I'm wanting Itoje to be playing second row long term (and could well be wrong!).

On Nowell, you get effort, solid defending, work off the ball- but he's not scaring any defences as yet- need to find a way of using his quick feet.

Banquo wrote:

Bloggs wrote:

fivepointer wrote:
I'm really tempted to put Itoje at 6 but i think you'd have to have a pacy openside alongside him. he's a major talent but it might be best to leave him at lock. He has to be in the 23 from now on either way.

I'm with you on Nowell but we seem to be in a minority.

Clifford at 7 seems the logical choice with Itoje

I'm also a member of the Jack Nowell fan club!

Whilst I like the look of both Clifford and Itoje, one is a utility back row at his club, and the other has been playing lock all season. Its a big ask (esp v Ireland) to field a wholly new back row even if they were specialists- and I'm totally on the page that our breakdown work ball in hand is a bit shoddy, and the back row have a big role in that; Eddie has painted himself into a bit of a corner. Very tricky one; imo he needed to start one or other v Scotland, and I'm wanting Itoje to be playing second row long term (and could well be wrong!).

On Nowell, you get effort, solid defending, work off the ball- but he's not scaring any defences as yet- need to find a way of using his quick feet.

Yep, the time for experimenting has gone, unfortunately. I'd have both Itoje and Clifford in the XXIII but only Clifford to start.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Bloggs wrote:
Clifford at 7 seems the logical choice with Itoje

I'm also a member of the Jack Nowell fan club!

Whilst I like the look of both Clifford and Itoje, one is a utility back row at his club, and the other has been playing lock all season. Its a big ask (esp v Ireland) to field a wholly new back row even if they were specialists- and I'm totally on the page that our breakdown work ball in hand is a bit shoddy, and the back row have a big role in that; Eddie has painted himself into a bit of a corner. Very tricky one; imo he needed to start one or other v Scotland, and I'm wanting Itoje to be playing second row long term (and could well be wrong!).

On Nowell, you get effort, solid defending, work off the ball- but he's not scaring any defences as yet- need to find a way of using his quick feet.

Yep, the time for experimenting has gone, unfortunately. I'd have both Itoje and Clifford in the XXIII but only Clifford to start.

EJ will not, nor should he, change both flankers for Ireland no matter how much we'd all like him to. Personally I'd also start Clifford with Itoje on the bench and Hask dropping out of the squad.