Owen Farrell

[TheDasher]

Youngs, Banahan, Noon, Goode, Hodgson, Marler, Kruis, Hughes... These are all players we've argued over many a time.

Why is Farrell different? Why are we not allowed to criticise him?

Again, go back over all posts from the past few weekends and Farrell is hammered on here, page after page of it. All the while generally the mood should be quite good (we beat SA and nearly beat NZ) and Farrell has added more to proceedings than many others have.

No doubt you disagree.

Any actual quotes? I remember a lot of criticism about specific action, or general trends, typically backed up with reasoned arguments (or reference to previous arguments).
I don't recall any attacks, unfounded criticisms or negativity that wasn't backed up with specific examples.

Unless your idea of Farrell being attacked is that someone had the temerity to suggest he isn't world class, and the first name on the team sheet; the I want actual examples.


And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone.


For the record of have Farrell as first choice IC for England, 3rd choice FH
I think he's great at getting the best put of his teammates (Ford aside), but terrible at talking to the ref, and poor at the calmer, tactical decisions of a captain.
His passing has improved from being a liability to being decent, but prone to mistakes (which stills makes his passing better than our SHs). He's a good tackler, but a dodgy defender as he lacks discipline. His carrying is I proving, but he still doesn't interest defenders - he's become better at identifying that, and waltzing through the occasional gaping hole defences leave him.
Given his current rate of improvement, he's on course to present an actual threat ball-in-hand in time for the RWC, though the effectiveness of that threat remains to be seen (he'll never be a wrecking ball, sublime distributor, or beat a man with his footwork; but he's getting to the point where he can reach the gainline and provide quickish possession)

"And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone". What do you mean by that? I'm not asking you to do any research for me.

Re Farrell being "attacked". You started this thread and you used the word attack in your post, I didn't. That's why people are now using that word on this thread, because you used it.

If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads you'll see endless and pretty negative stuff being written about Farrell. I think it got way over the top, some have agreed and we are where we are.

I think he's become a clever runner of the ball, he has a good rugby brain and sees and executes on opportunity, he's an aggressive and brave defender and he clearly is someone the team follow. He also manages to have a big impact on international games of rugby, with a great amount of that impact/influence being positive.

Perhaps, we should as another poster on this thread just suggested, we should focus on the negatives of Ford when he next plays and the positives of Farrell. Mellsblue mentioned Farrell's error vs Ireland, but not the lovely weighted grubber through for Daly to score, we mention a missed tackle against New Zealand, but not the massive hit on the world's finest number 8, a missed tackle against SA, but not the steal of the ball etc.

[Peat]

Talking about the negatives of Ford is nothing new and having just searched for his name on the previous page, I'm not sure who suggested that.

[Which Tyler]

"And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone". What do you mean by that? I'm not asking you to do any research for me.

Re Farrell being "attacked". You started this thread and you used the word attack in your post, I didn't. That's why people are now using that word on this thread, because you used it.

If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads you'll see endless and pretty negative stuff being written about Farrell. I think it got way over the top, some have agreed and we are where we are.

...

Perhaps, we should as another poster on this thread just suggested, we should focus on the negatives of Ford when he next plays and the positives of Farrell. Mellsblue mentioned Farrell's error vs Ireland, but not the lovely weighted grubber through for Daly to score, we mention a missed tackle against New Zealand, but not the massive hit on the world's finest number 8, a missed tackle against SA, but not the steal of the ball etc.

By "do my research for me" I mean phrases like "If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads". Please point me in the direction of an unfounded criticism.
I have read through both of those threads and I don't see anywhere near the level of criticism that would justify the OTT defence of him that was launched; and had everyone repeating their balanced views of his positives and negatives.

Fair enough, I probably brought the word "attacked" into this all; be wise he's being defended from attacks that aren't there.

I do not believe that we do go over the top with the negativity, though I will accept that we concentrate on his negatives... because nobody else does. Equally, we don't really need to go on and on about his positives... because everyone else does. But that doesn't mean we don't acknowledge the positives, or go OTT with the negatives.

Focus on Ford's negatices and Farrell's positives - we could do that I suppose; but that would make us identical to every other rugby board around, and the media. This has been absolutely standard practice since they were playing U20 rugby together, and someone noticed that Farrell was bigger than Ford (exaggeration for effect)

[fivepointer]

It probably comes down to the fact that Farrell doesnt seem that likeable. He seems to have a bit of an attitude and his manner can be a little prickly. He comes across as a bit dour and a fraction too intense for people to warm to him. The way he interacts with people on the pitch is off putting.
Now what makes him a bit unlikeable also makes him the steely competitor he undoubtedly is, so we have to get on with how he is and try and focus on how he plays.
For my part i've come to accept that he is someone that coaches value and who does energise those he plays with. There are too many knowledgeable people in the game that rate him not to concede that he must have something.
We could all do with being a little more objective when talking about him. we should recognise the good things he does, while at the same time pointing out his flaws.

[Mellsblue]

Again, go back over all posts from the past few weekends and Farrell is hammered on here, page after page of it. All the while generally the mood should be quite good (we beat SA and nearly beat NZ) and Farrell has added more to proceedings than many others have.

No doubt you disagree.

Any actual quotes? I remember a lot of criticism about specific action, or general trends, typically backed up with reasoned arguments (or reference to previous arguments).
I don't recall any attacks, unfounded criticisms or negativity that wasn't backed up with specific examples.

Unless your idea of Farrell being attacked is that someone had the temerity to suggest he isn't world class, and the first name on the team sheet; the I want actual examples.


And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone.


For the record of have Farrell as first choice IC for England, 3rd choice FH
I think he's great at getting the best put of his teammates (Ford aside), but terrible at talking to the ref, and poor at the calmer, tactical decisions of a captain.
His passing has improved from being a liability to being decent, but prone to mistakes (which stills makes his passing better than our SHs). He's a good tackler, but a dodgy defender as he lacks discipline. His carrying is I proving, but he still doesn't interest defenders - he's become better at identifying that, and waltzing through the occasional gaping hole defences leave him.
Given his current rate of improvement, he's on course to present an actual threat ball-in-hand in time for the RWC, though the effectiveness of that threat remains to be seen (he'll never be a wrecking ball, sublime distributor, or beat a man with his footwork; but he's getting to the point where he can reach the gainline and provide quickish possession)

"And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone". What do you mean by that? I'm not asking you to do any research for me.

Re Farrell being "attacked". You started this thread and you used the word attack in your post, I didn't. That's why people are now using that word on this thread, because you used it.

If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads you'll see endless and pretty negative stuff being written about Farrell. I think it got way over the top, some have agreed and we are where we are.

I think he's become a clever runner of the ball, he has a good rugby brain and sees and executes on opportunity, he's an aggressive and brave defender and he clearly is someone the team follow. He also manages to have a big impact on international games of rugby, with a great amount of that impact/influence being positive.

Perhaps, we should as another poster on this thread just suggested, we should focus on the negatives of Ford when he next plays and the positives of Farrell. Mellsblue mentioned Farrell's error vs Ireland, but not the lovely weighted grubber through for Daly to score, we mention a missed tackle against New Zealand, but not the massive hit on the world's finest number 8, a missed tackle against SA, but not the steal of the ball etc.

Yeah. He does all those things and is roundly lauded for them. My issue is he makes a lot of errors but isn’t picked up on most, and he is then given praise for single-handedly saving us from defeat against Japan. He’s a good player - nobody is disputing that - but the media love in is weird and this board is a reaction to that.

[Stom]

I think this is weirdly relevant... http://davetrott.co.uk/2018/11/data-is- ... the-truth/

[Insouciant]

I've been critical of him, I can't remember attacking him as such though. Maybe a few cheap shots about missing tackles but then he missed a fair few the weekend before last.

I think it's the frustration with him being seen as the golden boy. The chosen one. Heir to Jonny's throne and although he's good, that comparison isn't there. People see Cips/Ford as having better vision and hands so when they are overlooked and Farrell throws a poor pass, they'll notice.

Add the talk of his ice cool temperament which his kicking stats don't back up and his occasionally mardy attitude on the pitch doesn't either. He can act pretty petulant and it's probably his will to win but chatting to the ref too much and reacting to things in an 'aggy' way is not a good thing.

Beyond that, there's much said of his fantastic defence so people have rightly pointed out the 10/11 missed tackles against NZ. This is a pretty bad stat whoever is playing and Farrell is picked over Ford/Cips in part because of his defending, so this gets noticed and mentioned.

He's s good player but not the one the media thinks he is. Would I pick him in my team? Maybe, we have so few 12s we a decent amount of game time and fitness. It's actually sad to think we've gone straight to Teo who's played so little rugby before the series.

[Mellsblue]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... ssion=true

[Galfon]

I think this is weirdly relevant... http://davetrott.co.uk/2018/11/data-is- ... the-truth/

One comment on the beeb live report attributed the team's 'personality' changing on his arrival, reflecting his own. that will screw the stattos and kmi krews! ..which is fine in this instance, but in losing causes against tenacious tougher opponents such as Wales rwc15, SA in the summer and NZ last week, a bit of stern resolve omnipresent in all truly great leaders did not appear to feature in his make-up.
That said, coming on at 10 after 63 mins in the deciding test for Lions13 ( won) and moving to IC to replace Te'O in Lions17 series, thus paving the way for the historic win/draw outcomes, shows he's got more than a bit in him.

[p/d]

For what it's worth I think he is a cracking player, and does have a drive/fire about him that is admirable. Away from the pitch he keeps his head down and nose clean, much like JW did. However, like JW, the hero worship mentality of the press ensures his status as a player Is somewhat exaggerated and flaws papered over. Thankfully, like JW, he is dedicated enough to work on his shortcomings and fine tune other areas.

Is he faultless, no. Is he regularly motm, no. Is he the worlds best kicker off the 't', no. (Honest Clive, he ain't). But heck he is my first choice 10 for England, and as long as he doesn't launch an aftershave or appear in a high street shop catalogue sporting nothing but a posing pouch then he will be a player I will hold in high regard.

All I wish is the likes of SCW would rein it in!

[Mikey Brown]

Again, go back over all posts from the past few weekends and Farrell is hammered on here, page after page of it. All the while generally the mood should be quite good (we beat SA and nearly beat NZ) and Farrell has added more to proceedings than many others have.

No doubt you disagree.

Any actual quotes? I remember a lot of criticism about specific action, or general trends, typically backed up with reasoned arguments (or reference to previous arguments).
I don't recall any attacks, unfounded criticisms or negativity that wasn't backed up with specific examples.

Unless your idea of Farrell being attacked is that someone had the temerity to suggest he isn't world class, and the first name on the team sheet; the I want actual examples.


And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone.


For the record of have Farrell as first choice IC for England, 3rd choice FH
I think he's great at getting the best put of his teammates (Ford aside), but terrible at talking to the ref, and poor at the calmer, tactical decisions of a captain.
His passing has improved from being a liability to being decent, but prone to mistakes (which stills makes his passing better than our SHs). He's a good tackler, but a dodgy defender as he lacks discipline. His carrying is I proving, but he still doesn't interest defenders - he's become better at identifying that, and waltzing through the occasional gaping hole defences leave him.
Given his current rate of improvement, he's on course to present an actual threat ball-in-hand in time for the RWC, though the effectiveness of that threat remains to be seen (he'll never be a wrecking ball, sublime distributor, or beat a man with his footwork; but he's getting to the point where he can reach the gainline and provide quickish possession)

"And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone". What do you mean by that? I'm not asking you to do any research for me.

Re Farrell being "attacked". You started this thread and you used the word attack in your post, I didn't. That's why people are now using that word on this thread, because you used it.

If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads you'll see endless and pretty negative stuff being written about Farrell. I think it got way over the top, some have agreed and we are where we are.

I think he's become a clever runner of the ball, he has a good rugby brain and sees and executes on opportunity, he's an aggressive and brave defender and he clearly is someone the team follow. He also manages to have a big impact on international games of rugby, with a great amount of that impact/influence being positive.

Perhaps, we should as another poster on this thread just suggested, we should focus on the negatives of Ford when he next plays and the positives of Farrell. Mellsblue mentioned Farrell's error vs Ireland, but not the lovely weighted grubber through for Daly to score, we mention a missed tackle against New Zealand, but not the massive hit on the world's finest number 8, a missed tackle against SA, but not the steal of the ball etc.

The way I see is it’s like a conversation throughout the games with the pundits/commentators who are pretty reliably jizzing their pants over all the good and totally ignoring the quite frequent mistakes, I guess that’s why it’s so one-sided.

I don’t think many doubt that he makes a massive physical impact on the opposition at times and, despite recent stats, he might well be one you’d want for a high pressure kick but we hear that side of the argument endlessly in the media.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

FWIW as an outsider, I think that even what was his petulant twat persona has improved to the extent that he's probably not much worse than Sexton in that regard now. He's steadily improved as a player as well. I mean I don't actually rate him as anything higher than an ok international player and am utterly bewildered he has ever been nominated for world player of the year, but I don't loathe him any more and with the right people around him I can see why he'd be in the England team.

[Oakboy]

If we are trying to assess his standing it is worth asking whether he'd get in at FH for: NZ, SA, Ireland or Wales.

[TheDasher]

If we are trying to assess his standing it is worth asking whether he'd get in at FH for: NZ, SA, Ireland or Wales.

If we're rating him vs their fly halves yes, if vs Ford, no.

[Oakboy]

If we are trying to assess his standing it is worth asking whether he'd get in at FH for: NZ, SA, Ireland or Wales.

If we're rating him vs their fly halves yes, if vs Ford, no.

I'm asking if he is better than Barrett, Pollard, Sexton, etc. And whether he'd be rated to the same extent by other head coaches.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Also, messageboards thrive on criticism rather than praise. I don't think that Farrell gets more than, say Ford, who gets pilloried for his defence and goal kicking regularly.

[TheDasher]

If we are trying to assess his standing it is worth asking whether he'd get in at FH for: NZ, SA, Ireland or Wales.

If we're rating him vs their fly halves yes, if vs Ford, no.

I'm asking if he is better than Barrett, Pollard, Sexton, etc. And whether he'd be rated to the same extent by other head coaches.

Sorry, my post sounded a bit knobbish.

Honestly most rugby players and coaches globally describe him as world class. I'd say he's a top tier intl fly half personally, up there with Barrett and Sexton, not better than either of them.

[Rich]

I'd have him 12 every day of the week in this England team.

Though I'd love to see Eastmond back in an England shirt.

Farrell is an outside half for his club, why do people want to play him out of position ?


Farrell is the best English OH and yes he has his limitations...his running game isn't that good but guess what, neither was Jonny Wilkinson's.


Farrell should be the first name on any England team-sheet.

[Rich]

If we are trying to assess his standing it is worth asking whether he'd get in at FH for: NZ, SA, Ireland or Wales.

If we picked the England team on the basis of their ability to get into an All Blacks side...we wouldn't have an England rugby team.


Farrell would get into the SA or Wales team if judged purely on ability Btw.

Probably not the NZ or Ireland teams.

[WaspInWales]

If we are trying to assess his standing it is worth asking whether he'd get in at FH for: NZ, SA, Ireland or Wales.

If we picked the England team on the basis of their ability to get into an All Blacks side...we wouldn't have an England rugby team.


Farrell would get into the SA or Wales team if judged purely on ability Btw.

Probably not the NZ or Ireland teams.

I'm not so sure tbh. Wales have kicking duties ably covered between whoever is at 10 and 1/2p. I don't think Farrell has the skill set of Patchell. Tbh, I've never been blown away by Biggar, but then he just comes across as a cocky twat. Anscombe is pretty good though tbh.

It's all subjective bollocks. Perhaps this question would be best asked on the opposing boards?

Farrell is well rated by coaches and former players and the like, but I honestly don't speak to many people around here who think he is that great. It would be interesting to see what neutral fans think.

It's also worth pointing out that most people I know around here hated Wilkinson with a passion...although they conceded he was a great player, they despised the media infatuation with him. I recall watching the Lions warm up match against Argentina in 2005 in my local club. Wilkinson saved the Lions blushes with a late kick to secure the draw with the clock deep into the red. Quite a few of the locals watching thought the ending was 'staged' so that Wilkinson could get the plaudits. They were adamant that the game should've finished over 5 minutes earlier. I tried pointing out that I didn't think the tv match clock was stopped during the moments when the ref called 'time off', but they weren't having any of it. I think some would've preferred the Lions to lose, than Jonny save the day.

[WaspInWales]

I'd have him 12 every day of the week in this England team.

Though I'd love to see Eastmond back in an England shirt.

Farrell is an outside half for his club, why do people want to play him out of position ?

Farrell is the best English OH and yes he has his limitations...his running game isn't that good but guess what, neither was Jonny Wilkinson's.

Farrell should be the first name on any England team-sheet.

But how is he the best OH? What does he do that is so much better than the other OHs?

I'm not talking about any psychic like presence on the pitch that somehow lifts the games of all those around him and steadies the ship. What does he do that is so much better than Ford, Cipriani or anyone else?

Both Ford and Cips, imo have far superior distribution off both hands and decent tactical kicking abilities.

Ford has missed 2 tackles so far this autumn compared to 14 from Farrell. Cips didn't miss a single tackle against SA, NZ or Japan

Ford's kicking stats are decent enough. Does anyone have premiership stats for kicking for goals?

Again, how is Farrell the best? What does he do that is better than other options?

Again, I'm not looking for answers that miraculously explain a turnaround in fortunes, (especially when any number of instances can affect a game), what is it exactly that Farrell does that is far better than other options?

[Spiffy]

Again, go back over all posts from the past few weekends and Farrell is hammered on here, page after page of it. All the while generally the mood should be quite good (we beat SA and nearly beat NZ) and Farrell has added more to proceedings than many others have.

No doubt you disagree.

Any actual quotes? I remember a lot of criticism about specific action, or general trends, typically backed up with reasoned arguments (or reference to previous arguments).
I don't recall any attacks, unfounded criticisms or negativity that wasn't backed up with specific examples.

Unless your idea of Farrell being attacked is that someone had the temerity to suggest he isn't world class, and the first name on the team sheet; the I want actual examples.


And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone.


For the record of have Farrell as first choice IC for England, 3rd choice FH
I think he's great at getting the best put of his teammates (Ford aside), but terrible at talking to the ref, and poor at the calmer, tactical decisions of a captain.
His passing has improved from being a liability to being decent, but prone to mistakes (which stills makes his passing better than our SHs). He's a good tackler, but a dodgy defender as he lacks discipline. His carrying is I proving, but he still doesn't interest defenders - he's become better at identifying that, and waltzing through the occasional gaping hole defences leave him.
Given his current rate of improvement, he's on course to present an actual threat ball-in-hand in time for the RWC, though the effectiveness of that threat remains to be seen (he'll never be a wrecking ball, sublime distributor, or beat a man with his footwork; but he's getting to the point where he can reach the gainline and provide quickish possession)

"And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone". What do you mean by that? I'm not asking you to do any research for me.

Re Farrell being "attacked". You started this thread and you used the word attack in your post, I didn't. That's why people are now using that word on this thread, because you used it.

If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads you'll see endless and pretty negative stuff being written about Farrell. I think it got way over the top, some have agreed and we are where we are.

I think he's become a clever runner of the ball, he has a good rugby brain and sees and executes on opportunity, he's an aggressive and brave defender and he clearly is someone the team follow. He also manages to have a big impact on international games of rugby, with a great amount of that impact/influence being positive.

Perhaps, we should as another poster on this thread just suggested, we should focus on the negatives of Ford when he next plays and the positives of Farrell. Mellsblue mentioned Farrell's error vs Ireland, but not the lovely weighted grubber through for Daly to score, we mention a missed tackle against New Zealand, but not the massive hit on the world's finest number 8, a missed tackle against SA, but not the steal of the ball etc.

Read is not the world's best 8, but even if he were, why wouldn't anyone expect a strong, well-built bloke like Farrell to make such a tackle when he was right in Read's path? Read popped up in front of him and Farrell knocked him down. That is his job and not the stuff of legend, and is more than offset by the high number of tackles he misses, not to mention his fairly average goal kicking stats, lack of gas and a couple of obvious howlers in most games.
That said, he is a competent and competitive player who has worked hard to maximize his skills and is still improving. But those skills are not that great compared to the best midfielders of today and of the past. I do think he should get credit for playing well when he actually does play well, as he sometimes does. I think most knowledgeable rugby fans are just fed up listening to a constant stream of media adulation which is now unrelated to his actual performance. He only has to play to get rave reviews, which might as well be written before the game is played.

[TheDasher]

Any actual quotes? I remember a lot of criticism about specific action, or general trends, typically backed up with reasoned arguments (or reference to previous arguments).
I don't recall any attacks, unfounded criticisms or negativity that wasn't backed up with specific examples.

Unless your idea of Farrell being attacked is that someone had the temerity to suggest he isn't world class, and the first name on the team sheet; the I want actual examples.


And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone.


For the record of have Farrell as first choice IC for England, 3rd choice FH
I think he's great at getting the best put of his teammates (Ford aside), but terrible at talking to the ref, and poor at the calmer, tactical decisions of a captain.
His passing has improved from being a liability to being decent, but prone to mistakes (which stills makes his passing better than our SHs). He's a good tackler, but a dodgy defender as he lacks discipline. His carrying is I proving, but he still doesn't interest defenders - he's become better at identifying that, and waltzing through the occasional gaping hole defences leave him.
Given his current rate of improvement, he's on course to present an actual threat ball-in-hand in time for the RWC, though the effectiveness of that threat remains to be seen (he'll never be a wrecking ball, sublime distributor, or beat a man with his footwork; but he's getting to the point where he can reach the gainline and provide quickish possession)

"And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone". What do you mean by that? I'm not asking you to do any research for me.

Re Farrell being "attacked". You started this thread and you used the word attack in your post, I didn't. That's why people are now using that word on this thread, because you used it.

If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads you'll see endless and pretty negative stuff being written about Farrell. I think it got way over the top, some have agreed and we are where we are.

I think he's become a clever runner of the ball, he has a good rugby brain and sees and executes on opportunity, he's an aggressive and brave defender and he clearly is someone the team follow. He also manages to have a big impact on international games of rugby, with a great amount of that impact/influence being positive.

Perhaps, we should as another poster on this thread just suggested, we should focus on the negatives of Ford when he next plays and the positives of Farrell. Mellsblue mentioned Farrell's error vs Ireland, but not the lovely weighted grubber through for Daly to score, we mention a missed tackle against New Zealand, but not the massive hit on the world's finest number 8, a missed tackle against SA, but not the steal of the ball etc.

Read is not the world's best 8, but even if he were, why wouldn't anyone expect a strong, well-built bloke like Farrell to make such a tackle when he was right in Read's path? Read popped up in front of him and Farrell knocked him down. That is his job and not the stuff of legend, and is more than offset by the high number of tackles he misses, not to mention his fairly average goal kicking stats, lack of gas and a couple of obvious howlers in most games.
That said, he is a competent and competitive player who has worked hard to maximize his skills and is still improving. But those skills are not that great compared to the best midfielders of today and of the past. I do think he should get credit for playing well when he actually does play well, as he sometimes does. I think most knowledgeable rugby fans are just fed up listening to a constant stream of media adulation which is now unrelated to his actual performance. He only has to play to get rave reviews, which might as well be written before the game is played.

Read is not the world's best 8 in your opinion Spiffy... he might be in mine.

I very clearly wasn't suggesting the tackle was the 'stuff of legend', that would be ridiculous obviously. I was simply saying that on RR, over the past few weeks, he has been the focus of much negativity and criticism.

I think he's a better fly-half than Ford at intl level, for everything he brings.

You mention MOST knowledgeable rugby fans being fed up... how do you know this? The ten or so people who are on here most of the time would support that fact but I would say that the vast majority of coaches, players and fans outside of this site seem to rate him more highly than people on here do.

When you have coaches of super rugby teams, other international sides, other fly-halves, captains etc praising him constantly, and I agree with them, it is difficult for me to change my mind on the basis of the few people on here who are so insanely outnumbered.

[TheDasher]

"And no "do my research for me" isn't going to convince anyone". What do you mean by that? I'm not asking you to do any research for me.

Re Farrell being "attacked". You started this thread and you used the word attack in your post, I didn't. That's why people are now using that word on this thread, because you used it.

If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads you'll see endless and pretty negative stuff being written about Farrell. I think it got way over the top, some have agreed and we are where we are.

...

Perhaps, we should as another poster on this thread just suggested, we should focus on the negatives of Ford when he next plays and the positives of Farrell. Mellsblue mentioned Farrell's error vs Ireland, but not the lovely weighted grubber through for Daly to score, we mention a missed tackle against New Zealand, but not the massive hit on the world's finest number 8, a missed tackle against SA, but not the steal of the ball etc.

By "do my research for me" I mean phrases like "If you read through the NZ/SA and Japan game threads". Please point me in the direction of an unfounded criticism.
I have read through both of those threads and I don't see anywhere near the level of criticism that would justify the OTT defence of him that was launched; and had everyone repeating their balanced views of his positives and negatives.

Fair enough, I probably brought the word "attacked" into this all; be wise he's being defended from attacks that aren't there.

I do not believe that we do go over the top with the negativity, though I will accept that we concentrate on his negatives... because nobody else does. Equally, we don't really need to go on and on about his positives... because everyone else does. But that doesn't mean we don't acknowledge the positives, or go OTT with the negatives.

Focus on Ford's negatives and Farrell's positives - we could do that I suppose; but that would make us identical to every other rugby board around, and the media. This has been absolutely standard practice since they were playing U20 rugby together, and someone noticed that Farrell was bigger than Ford (exaggeration for effect)

Not probably brought the word "attacked", did bring the word "attacked".

How is there an OTT defence WT? I'm not shouting and screaming, I'm saying that whilst I and the rest of the world think Farrell has been adding a great amount to proceedings this autumn, RR has been giving him a hard time. I'm not losing sleep over it. Why's it OTT? Because I'm still saying it?

I was just reading a minute ago someone in the Southern Hemisphere board (an Englishman) saying 'Farrell is balls'. I've read things along the lines of 'poor pass from Farrell', 'ice man this', 'ice man that', the repeated question of 'what has he actually done?' etc. Now I'm not the type to seriously go back over previous pages, copy and paste things and create a case, because it would be extremely dull so to do. I'm also not related to him and so I guess I'm not bothered enough to do it. Again, lots of negative stuff about Farrell on this board over the past few weeks when I think he's been playing very well and adding obvious value. That ok?

Re your final paragraph. So we criticise Farrell's so that we're not like ever other board around... Spiffy seems to think that most fans don't rate Farrell... this suggests you two disagree. Which is it?

If our goal is to be different from other boards in the way we think about certain players I apologise, I wasn't aware of it.

[twitchy]

If I was able to make gifs I would edit these to say owen farrell.