RugbyRebels

I was with you until the last couple of lines. Don't we need to try something else? Or is that in fact what you were saying?

Mikey Brown wrote:I was with you until the last couple of lines. Don't we need to try something else? Or is that in fact what you were saying?

we do, and frankly, substantially better would be great, just better would be ace in some cases! I don't get why some don't think we can find a couple of players or more who will improve the team outside the last 6N XV tbh, and unless we try, we won't find out. The Curry boys will kick on, Underhill looks a good un, the likes of Marcus Smith have appeared, Lozowski, Messiah Francis, Maunder, Simmonds.....

Just think we don't need to shut the doors just yet in most positions-- Kiwis wouldn't, see Ioane, and even Barrett B under threat.

Mikey Brown wrote:I was with you until the last couple of lines. Don't we need to try something else? Or is that in fact what you were saying?

What I'm trying to assess is Eddie's options. I think he has three choices: 1. change personnel, 2. change playing style or 3. improve without substantially changing either. My guess is that he will choose No 3 because there are NO substantially better personnel and because the existing personnel can't play a different style. We might see marginal changes - Slade for JJ, Watson for Brown etc., depending on limited experimentation over the next 8-10 matches.

Oakboy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I was with you until the last couple of lines. Don't we need to try something else? Or is that in fact what you were saying?

What I'm trying to assess is Eddie's options. I think he has three choices: 1. change personnel, 2. change playing style or 3. improve without substantially changing either. My guess is that he will choose No 3 because there are NO substantially better personnel and because the existing personnel can't play a different style. We might see marginal changes - Slade for JJ, Watson for Brown etc., depending on limited experimentation over the next 8-10 matches.

Slade for JJ would make a huge change, not marginal....ditto Watson for Brown....

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I was with you until the last couple of lines. Don't we need to try something else? Or is that in fact what you were saying?

we do, and frankly, substantially better would be great, just better would be ace in some cases! I don't get why some don't think we can find a couple of players or more who will improve the team outside the last 6N XV tbh, and unless we try, we won't find out. The Curry boys will kick on, Underhill looks a good un, the likes of Marcus Smith have appeared, Lozowski, Messiah Francis, Maunder, Simmonds.....

Just think we don't need to shut the doors just yet in most positions-- Kiwis wouldn't, see Ioane, and even Barrett B under threat.

Banquo, I respect you immensely after all these years of posting, but are you genuinely hopeful or are you straw-clutching?

I think it's a tricky balance. Two years in to Eddie's reign, I think it would be very harsh to say that we're in anything other than a good place. That said, I don't think anyone is under any illusions that we are still firmly second best to NZ and despite having an excellent wins record, England under Eddie have rarely dominated the opposition.

I think there is absolutely scope for new blood, but I think we are running out of time for large scale experimentation. The AIs this season are not particularly tough and I'd like to see us take the opportunity to rest the Lions players and look at some other options (i.e. Underhill at 7) for the duration - not just against Samoa.

If those players do well, then the 2018 6N becomes an exercise of finding the right balance between them with the best of the core squad.

What I really want from the 2018 6N is dominant performances. I appreciate it's a big ask, but I want to see us win comfortably, not scrape through as we did last season. With Wales and Ireland at home, we have to use it as an opportunity to assert ourselves.

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I was with you until the last couple of lines. Don't we need to try something else? Or is that in fact what you were saying?

we do, and frankly, substantially better would be great, just better would be ace in some cases! I don't get why some don't think we can find a couple of players or more who will improve the team outside the last 6N XV tbh, and unless we try, we won't find out. The Curry boys will kick on, Underhill looks a good un, the likes of Marcus Smith have appeared, Lozowski, Messiah Francis, Maunder, Simmonds.....

Just think we don't need to shut the doors just yet in most positions-- Kiwis wouldn't, see Ioane, and even Barrett B under threat.

Banquo, I respect you immensely after all these years of posting, but are you genuinely hopeful or are you straw-clutching?

I think we have time to improve; two quality players have emerged in differing ways in the last two seasons. My angst would be if we head off to the world cup without having given ourselves the very best chance of putting out our best, and best prepared team; to mind its not either we make the very best of the current mob, OR we select new players where the current ones aren't cutting the mustard, but balance both. Simply put, I don't agree that we are stuck with the current lot for two years, but that they are a good platform to build from, and there are options snapping at the incumbents heels (unfortunately the better ones are where we have strength already to some extent)

Scrumhead wrote:I think it's a tricky balance. Two years in to Eddie's reign, I think it would be very harsh to say that we're in anything other than a good place. T

No-body is; its just that 'good place' is way away from being the best. Its a good platform-ish (and imo would be better for a few more serious options having been explored, but Eddie has probably rightly taken a mostly conservative approach in some positions) to build on; but even from your optimistic start point, you acknowledge a definite 20% change, and I'm somewhat higher than that through a combination of age, depth and lack of ability/limiting the ability of the team to be better.

I actually don't think we are disagreeing much- i'm just frustrated by any sign of complacency, or the assertion that this is it for the next two years; we should be more ambitious. I'm also not sure why we should be able to 'dominate' though, without some shift in personnel; the upside is that we have learned to win tight games (bar one), and that's a huge building block...to be built on!

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I was with you until the last couple of lines. Don't we need to try something else? Or is that in fact what you were saying?

What I'm trying to assess is Eddie's options. I think he has three choices: 1. change personnel, 2. change playing style or 3. improve without substantially changing either. My guess is that he will choose No 3 because there are NO substantially better personnel and because the existing personnel can't play a different style. We might see marginal changes - Slade for JJ, Watson for Brown etc., depending on limited experimentation over the next 8-10 matches.

Slade for JJ would make a huge change, not marginal....ditto Watson for Brown....

What evidence are you basing that upon though?

Slade has had some classy moments already this season but I don't think there is any evidence to suggest he would make a huge difference to a proven test player who has been one of our most reliable try-scorers and an excellent defender. Slade's Argentina tour sums him up for me - a fantastic piece of skill followed by a shockingly poor effort in the second test. I'll take JJ's consistency thanks ...

In any case, if we're going purely on early season form, Luther Burrell's looked quite good ... I don't see anyone suggesting a recall for him. My point is that form fluctuates and until Slade consistently puts in a run of top quality performances, he'll struggle to overhaul players who have shown better form over a sustained period. Particularly if they've already done so in an England shirt.

By dominate, I mean win convincingly.

The scoreline may have been close in Dublin, but Ireland dominated us IMO. We did not look like beating them at any stage.

If they can do that to us, I see no reason why we can't aspire to do that to them.

I agree that some of that is related to personnel, but I also think Ireland had a massive psychological edge that day and certain players (such as O'Mahony) were able to summon a level of performance that our players don't seem to be able to tap in to. We need to find that.

Scrumhead wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

What I'm trying to assess is Eddie's options. I think he has three choices: 1. change personnel, 2. change playing style or 3. improve without substantially changing either. My guess is that he will choose No 3 because there are NO substantially better personnel and because the existing personnel can't play a different style. We might see marginal changes - Slade for JJ, Watson for Brown etc., depending on limited experimentation over the next 8-10 matches.

Slade for JJ would make a huge change, not marginal....ditto Watson for Brown....

What evidence are you basing that upon though?

Slade has had some classy moments already this season but I don't think there is any evidence to suggest he would make a huge difference to a proven test player who has been one of our most reliable try-scorers and an excellent defender. Slade's Argentina tour sums him up for me - a fantastic piece of skill followed by a shockingly poor effort in the second test. I'll take JJ's consistency thanks ...

In any case, if we're going purely on early season form, Luther Burrell's looked quite good ... I don't see anyone suggesting a recall for him. My point is that form fluctuates and until Slade consistently puts in a run of top quality performances, he'll struggle to overhaul players who have shown better form over a sustained period. Particularly if they've already done so in an England shirt.

I think you've misread my meaning completely; I think JJ is a world class player, whose pace in attack and defence is a huge asset, alongside his superb reading in defence. Slade has nothing like that pace, but a stronger passing game. So swapping genuine gas for a distributor would change our attacking patterns massively, and imo have a huge impact on defensive patterns. In other words, I think it would both affect performance negatively at an individual level, and the team play would have to change a lot both in attack and defence.

as I said, you've misunderstood, so won't bother on your Burrell point.

Scrumhead wrote:By dominate, I mean win convincingly.

The scoreline may have been close in Dublin, but Ireland dominated us IMO. We did not look like beating them at any stage.

If they can do that to us, I see no reason why we can't aspire to do that to them.

I agree that some of that is related to personnel, but I also think Ireland had a massive psychological edge that day and certain players (such as O'Mahony) were able to summon a level of performance that our players don't seem to be able to tap in to. We need to find that.

Of course we can ASPIRE to, kind of the thread of my argument; we simply won't consistently with the quality of player in some positions that we have now- and you agree on three of them. Psychology is also part of being a better player.

Scrumhead wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

What I'm trying to assess is Eddie's options. I think he has three choices: 1. change personnel, 2. change playing style or 3. improve without substantially changing either. My guess is that he will choose No 3 because there are NO substantially better personnel and because the existing personnel can't play a different style. We might see marginal changes - Slade for JJ, Watson for Brown etc., depending on limited experimentation over the next 8-10 matches.

Slade for JJ would make a huge change, not marginal....ditto Watson for Brown....

What evidence are you basing that upon though?

In JJ v Slade I think Banquo means a huge change in style of player, not in quality. Banquo is JJ's second biggest fan, and Mrs Joseph is looking over her shoulder in fear of losing first place For Watson v Brown I'd guess he'd mean both style and quality.

OK. Fine with me.

The Burrell bit was intentionally ridiculous and for absolute clarity, I don't think we should be remotely considering giving him a recall.

I get how a player like Slade gives us an option that could substantially change our style of play. It's worth looking at, but given that our other options at 13 are JJ, Daly and possibly Marchant, I'd suggest our personnel is better suited to the current style. We just need to execute it better and more consistently.

Mellsblue wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

Banquo wrote: Slade for JJ would make a huge change, not marginal....ditto Watson for Brown....

What evidence are you basing that upon though?

In JJ v Slade I think Banquo means a huge change in style of player, not in quality. Banquo is JJ's second biggest fan, and Mrs Joseph is looking over her shoulder in fear of losing first place For Watson v Brown I'd guess he'd mean both style and quality.

Yes, I don't for a second advocate Slade as a better player than JJ, just a different one who MIGHT improve the team unit performance IF the best combo we can find at 9/10/12 is Youngs/Ford/Farrell. It is just an illustration of how experimentation might offer progress within the limitations of the available personnel.

For me, the biggest stumbling block remains the 9 shirt. I can't envisage substantial improvement if it is worn by Youngs or Care (or Robson, come to that).

Yeah, I don't get the fact we cannot blood new players now because it's too late. If they're good enough, 5 caps is enough, nevermind 20.

And we've got a few coming through, although it's too early for some of them.

I think Underhill looks like an upgrade on Haskell. Which is good. Eddie will be able to plonk him down into the 7 shirt and get an immediate 0.5-1% increase in performance. Then we have to look at improving him further to turn that 1% into 2%. Replicate that at 2, 12 and 15 and we've made up 8 of the 17% we're apparently behind NZ.

Scrumhead wrote:OK. Fine with me.

The Burrell bit was intentionally ridiculous and for absolute clarity, I don't think we should be remotely considering giving him a recall.

I get how a player like Slade gives us an option that could substantially change our style of play. It's worth looking at, but given that our other options at 13 are JJ, Daly and possibly Marchant, I'd suggest our personnel is better suited to the current style. We just need to execute it better and more consistently.

I didn't make the suggestion. Glad that's all cleared up then

Mellsblue wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

Banquo wrote: Slade for JJ would make a huge change, not marginal....ditto Watson for Brown....

What evidence are you basing that upon though?

In JJ v Slade I think Banquo means a huge change in style of player, not in quality. Banquo is JJ's second biggest fan, and Mrs Joseph is looking over her shoulder in fear of losing first place For Watson v Brown I'd guess he'd mean both style and quality.

quite. Thanks for re-confirming tho...

Stom wrote: I think Underhill looks like an upgrade on Haskell. Which is good. Eddie will be able to plonk him down into the 7 shirt and get an immediate 0.5-1% increase in performance.

Agreed. I wince at the prospect of us going through the upcoming AIs and 2018 6 Nations with Eddie still convinced Haskell is the best pick at 7.

In fact Underhill, Ludlam, or slightly more left field Sam Simmonds would all appear a marked improvement on the status quo. Many have talked of Wilson being a back up 6 to Robshaw but isn't this something Haskell might also be far better equipped to do than carrying on doing an impression of square peg in round 7 shaped hole?

You might think the likes of Underhill or Simmonds an upgrade on Haskell at 7 but I've no idea on what basis you'd think they'd be less of a square peg in a round hole. Ludlam, well it looks like he'll not play much so I don't know we need concern ourselves there. The Curry boys, they perhaps one could suggest look more like many peoples idea of a 7, and I can't say I've given up on Kvesic yet

It's going to be fascinating to see who Eddie selects in the back row for the AIs. Then, will he restrict himself to non-Lions?

Is the EPS announcement tomorrow, did I read?

Squad announcement tomorrow for get together next week. Going to be interesting. Lions, yes or no? Argentinian tourists retained? Bolters?

fivepointer wrote:Squad announcement tomorrow for get together next week. Going to be interesting. Lions, yes or no? Argentinian tourists retained? Bolters?

And, as importantly, huge ramifications for my fantasy league squad.

Are the likes of Robson,Wade and Roko still out in the cold? Will Simmonds and/or Clifford get a chance?

It's good that the AI's begin just after Movember starts. As much as I like the way he plays, Slade looks a proper knut with a 'tache. Nowell as well.

fivepointer wrote:Squad announcement tomorrow for get together next week. Going to be interesting. Lions, yes or no? Argentinian tourists retained? Bolters?

Yep. Lots of possible talking points.

I assume we're sticking with a 45-man extended EPS and I guess Eddie needs to think about who he wants in it across the season rather than just early-season form. I'd expect him to pick a pretty familiar squad for the actual EPS but make it a touch more experimental for the AIs.

The best contenders for bolters IMO would be:

Simmonds
Collins
Smith
Dunn (particularly with LCD & Taylor injured)

Beyond that, I'm not sure there's any other uncapped players who have massively put their hand up since the Argentina tour. I haven't included Ben Curry in my bolters as he was already in that squad.

My take on the players in danger of losing out is:

Wood
Harrison
Clifford
Francis (hard luck with injury)
Mullan

Probably a few more I can't think of right this second!

Solomona vs. Yarde is an interesting call ... they're probably competing for one shirt and both have started the season well. I know Yarde has his detractors but he's been very good this season and didn't pi$$ Eddie off at the last training camp.