RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Thanks for doing that .

I'd point out though, people (me) have often said Farrell didn't have a running game, because he really didn't. However that performance was fantastic. He's still not going to have defenders scared, or thinking about doubling up, but most importantly, they will have to stay focused on him, and cannot simply drift off, meaning our outside backs have more space/time, and Farrell does have the passing ability to get it out to them.

I haven't seen the whole game, so unwise to critically comment, but it looked like every other game he has played at 12 when we have been on the front foot and been given time and space to attack. The bits that really impressed me about our backline were the differing roles played by different backs in attack, with changing points of attack and running lines, and Ford attacking the tackle line; blindside wings popping up and breaking the gainline or distributing (classic from May for example), and Daly coordinating attacks with the backfield, and good use of dummy runners, notably Manu and Faz. None of this seemed to be something that Faz could uniquely do, and I'd have said Francis could have done all I saw, with more effect on the run....(BUT I didn't see the whole game). What did he do that I have missed? I suppose as he will start, and we know that is true, there is comfort in how well it all worked, assuming Ford is the starting 10 (???)

All that said- it was the pack that really impressed with their carrying and hands- balanced back row looked great, enabled by the front five in all phases.

Youngs looked dreadful in the extended highlights I saw.

The bolded bit is not unfair - he didn't do anything particularly spectacular in terms of a 12's jobs, but he did all of them well, which a lot of people maintain that he can't. Where he really did well was interchanging with Ford and providing a second 10 option - on occasions they split the field and kept the defence guessing and when you've got Ford, Manu, Cokanasiga and May on one side of a scrum and Faz and Daly on the blind side, it's a lot of threats to keep an eye on.

On the italics, I think Francis is getting inflated as a favoured Not-Farrell option - I don't know his running is any better than Farrell showed here and his handling and deftness certainly isn't. My problem with Farrell is that he's very much an 8 out of 10 player, in that he'll on average do 8 things exceptionally well and shit the bed twice. And sometimes you get that all in one game and sometimes you get two games where he's excellent and everything goes right (vs Ireland and France) and then one where he's terrible (Wales).

Puja

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Thanks for doing that .

I'd point out though, people (me) have often said Farrell didn't have a running game, because he really didn't. However that performance was fantastic. He's still not going to have defenders scared, or thinking about doubling up, but most importantly, they will have to stay focused on him, and cannot simply drift off, meaning our outside backs have more space/time, and Farrell does have the passing ability to get it out to them.

I haven't seen the whole game, so unwise to critically comment, but it looked like every other game he has played at 12 when we have been on the front foot and been given time and space to attack. The bits that really impressed me about our backline were the differing roles played by different backs in attack, with changing points of attack and running lines, and Ford attacking the tackle line; blindside wings popping up and breaking the gainline or distributing (classic from May for example), and Daly coordinating attacks with the backfield, and good use of dummy runners, notably Manu and Faz. None of this seemed to be something that Faz could uniquely do, and I'd have said Francis could have done all I saw, with more effect on the run....(BUT I didn't see the whole game). What did he do that I have missed? I suppose as he will start, and we know that is true, there is comfort in how well it all worked, assuming Ford is the starting 10 (???)

All that said- it was the pack that really impressed with their carrying and hands- balanced back row looked great, enabled by the front five in all phases.

Youngs looked dreadful in the extended highlights I saw.

The bolded bit is not unfair - he didn't do anything particularly spectacular in terms of a 12's jobs, but he did all of them well, which a lot of people maintain that he can't. Where he really did well was interchanging with Ford and providing a second 10 option - on occasions they split the field and kept the defence guessing and when you've got Ford, Manu, Cokanasiga and May on one side of a scrum and Faz and Daly on the blind side, it's a lot of threats to keep an eye on.

On the italics, I think Francis is getting inflated as a favoured Not-Farrell option - I don't know his running is any better than Farrell showed here and his handling and deftness certainly isn't. My problem with Farrell is that he's very much an 8 out of 10 player, in that he'll on average do 8 things exceptionally well and shit the bed twice. And sometimes you get that all in one game and sometimes you get two games where he's excellent and everything goes right (vs Ireland and France) and then one where he's terrible (Wales).

Puja

I'm not a Francis fan, should have made that clear, he looks ok and that's it. That's kinda fair re Farrell, though on a separate rating system I'd struggle to give him 8/10 on any of his skills at international standard; he's a mediocre international player imo, and that's at 10. I'd be one of those people who still says he can't do all of a 12's job well (and frankly, that depends on the side you have and then what job you ask them to do; I know hardly anyone on here recognises the value of a 12 who merely makes ground all the time and defends well and passable hands, but hey), his hands remain poor for a distributor left to right and I'd still question his defence........but also accept that if his limitations weren't exposed, they can't be called out .

Got to agree re: Itoje's finish, and to a lesser extent Curry's.

Possibly one of the most inelegant manoeuvres I've ever seen.

Francis rounded JD2 once or twice. Farrell wouldn't have managed the same, but did far more than he had before. Equally, whilst Francis can keep a backs move flowing i don't think he's as good a distributor as Farrell, who is very good at keeping his hips square and making a play.

Whilst I'd love a better 12, i feel either of them are good enough for us to do well with. If Farrell keeps going (he does have some pace) and improving, then he really might be worth all those plaudits.

Raggs wrote:Francis rounded JD2 once or twice. Farrell wouldn't have managed the same, but did far more than he had before. Equally, whilst Francis can keep a backs move flowing i don't think he's as good a distributor as Farrell, who is very good at keeping his hips square and making a play.

Whilst I'd love a better 12, i feel either of them are good enough for us to do well with. If Farrell keeps going (he does have some pace) and improving, then he really might be worth all those plaudits.

To be clear, Francis is average, so hardly a high bar. What was this 'far more'- he made some straight medium pace carries, but he has done that before? However you keep a straight/holding running line, and hips square is 'a' way, it shouldn't hinder your passing, and Farrells passing, left to right, remains poor; if you really insist on playing a 2nd 5/8th style of 12, they have to be a top notch passer both ways.

As you can tell, hopefully, I'm not wedded to having a 2nd %/8th 12. I'd rather have two proper threats in midfield, and if you have Daly in the back three, you can still split the plays; what I liked was looking at the players selected, and using them with imagination. I do accept that many plays required a second distributor, but both May and Daly did that, and I'm sure the likes of JJ would have managed.

Anyway, I have to accept that Faz is an option at 12, and maybe that's a price worth paying for Ford at 10, but still not convinced. Faz will play, so utterly wasting my time here, as per,

So you're saying the 12 needs to kick, gotcha.

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Francis rounded JD2 once or twice. Farrell wouldn't have managed the same, but did far more than he had before. Equally, whilst Francis can keep a backs move flowing i don't think he's as good a distributor as Farrell, who is very good at keeping his hips square and making a play.

Whilst I'd love a better 12, i feel either of them are good enough for us to do well with. If Farrell keeps going (he does have some pace) and improving, then he really might be worth all those plaudits.

To be clear, Francis is average, so hardly a high bar. What was this 'far more'- he made some straight medium pace carries, but he has done that before? However you keep a straight/holding running line, and hips square is 'a' way, it shouldn't hinder your passing, and Farrells passing, left to right, remains poor; if you really insist on playing a 2nd 5/8th style of 12, they have to be a top notch passer both ways.

As you can tell, hopefully, I'm not wedded to having a 2nd %/8th 12. I'd rather have two proper threats in midfield, and if you have Daly in the back three, you can still split the plays; what I liked was looking at the players selected, and using them with imagination. I do accept that many plays required a second distributor, but both May and Daly did that, and I'm sure the likes of JJ would have managed.

Anyway, I have to accept that Faz is an option at 12, and maybe that's a price worth paying for Ford at 10, but still not convinced. Faz will play, so utterly wasting my time here, as per,

Hard not to think that Ford, Tuilagi, JJ is the best midfield combo.

Though would also have been good to see Ford, Slade, Tuilagi at some point.

But if we have to have Farrell, I'd much rather he be alongside Ford than at 10. Because our average try count and win %age without Ford at 10 in recent years is terrible.

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote: I haven't seen the whole game, so unwise to critically comment, but it looked like every other game he has played at 12 when we have been on the front foot and been given time and space to attack. The bits that really impressed me about our backline were the differing roles played by different backs in attack, with changing points of attack and running lines, and Ford attacking the tackle line; blindside wings popping up and breaking the gainline or distributing (classic from May for example), and Daly coordinating attacks with the backfield, and good use of dummy runners, notably Manu and Faz. None of this seemed to be something that Faz could uniquely do, and I'd have said Francis could have done all I saw, with more effect on the run....(BUT I didn't see the whole game). What did he do that I have missed? I suppose as he will start, and we know that is true, there is comfort in how well it all worked, assuming Ford is the starting 10 (???)

All that said- it was the pack that really impressed with their carrying and hands- balanced back row looked great, enabled by the front five in all phases.

Youngs looked dreadful in the extended highlights I saw.

The bolded bit is not unfair - he didn't do anything particularly spectacular in terms of a 12's jobs, but he did all of them well, which a lot of people maintain that he can't. Where he really did well was interchanging with Ford and providing a second 10 option - on occasions they split the field and kept the defence guessing and when you've got Ford, Manu, Cokanasiga and May on one side of a scrum and Faz and Daly on the blind side, it's a lot of threats to keep an eye on.

On the italics, I think Francis is getting inflated as a favoured Not-Farrell option - I don't know his running is any better than Farrell showed here and his handling and deftness certainly isn't. My problem with Farrell is that he's very much an 8 out of 10 player, in that he'll on average do 8 things exceptionally well and shit the bed twice. And sometimes you get that all in one game and sometimes you get two games where he's excellent and everything goes right (vs Ireland and France) and then one where he's terrible (Wales).

Puja

I'm not a Francis fan, should have made that clear, he looks ok and that's it. That's kinda fair re Farrell, though on a separate rating system I'd struggle to give him 8/10 on any of his skills at international standard; he's a mediocre international player imo, and that's at 10. I'd be one of those people who still says he can't do all of a 12's job well (and frankly, that depends on the side you have and then what job you ask them to do; I know hardly anyone on here recognises the value of a 12 who merely makes ground all the time and defends well and passable hands, but hey), his hands remain poor for a distributor left to right and I'd still question his defence........but also accept that if his limitations weren't exposed, they can't be called out :).

This is the key point. His limitations were not exposed by an Irish backline that were pathetic in both attack and defence. They just did not show up. Faz and his mates in the backline had an armchair ride, thanks to a totally dominant pack and a lousy opposition. That Ireland performance would make the Much-Binding-In-The-Marsh reserves look good.
Still, fair play to England - you can only play what is in front of you, and they certainly turned the screw when given the opportunity, with an impressive exhibition of power rugby.
England will have much sterner tests, but they are in a pretty good place at present leading up to the RWC.

Digby wrote:So you're saying the 12 needs to kick, gotcha.

I'd have thought you'd have gotten another line in all this time

Stom wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Francis rounded JD2 once or twice. Farrell wouldn't have managed the same, but did far more than he had before. Equally, whilst Francis can keep a backs move flowing i don't think he's as good a distributor as Farrell, who is very good at keeping his hips square and making a play.

Whilst I'd love a better 12, i feel either of them are good enough for us to do well with. If Farrell keeps going (he does have some pace) and improving, then he really might be worth all those plaudits.

To be clear, Francis is average, so hardly a high bar. What was this 'far more'- he made some straight medium pace carries, but he has done that before? However you keep a straight/holding running line, and hips square is 'a' way, it shouldn't hinder your passing, and Farrells passing, left to right, remains poor; if you really insist on playing a 2nd 5/8th style of 12, they have to be a top notch passer both ways.

As you can tell, hopefully, I'm not wedded to having a 2nd %/8th 12. I'd rather have two proper threats in midfield, and if you have Daly in the back three, you can still split the plays; what I liked was looking at the players selected, and using them with imagination. I do accept that many plays required a second distributor, but both May and Daly did that, and I'm sure the likes of JJ would have managed.

Anyway, I have to accept that Faz is an option at 12, and maybe that's a price worth paying for Ford at 10, but still not convinced. Faz will play, so utterly wasting my time here, as per,

Hard not to think that Ford, Tuilagi, JJ is the best midfield combo.

Though would also have been good to see Ford, Slade, Tuilagi at some point.

But if we have to have Farrell, I'd much rather he be alongside Ford than at 10. Because our average try count and win %age without Ford at 10 in recent years is terrible.

well yes, and sadly yes

I strongly believe that Farrell made far more meaningful carries in that game than in most previous. And from an earlier time in the match. He's done it once before, a Scotland game i think, and our attack looked good then too because there was more space all round. Normally the defence just drifted when he had the ball since they knew he was just going to pass it along.

Raggs wrote:I strongly believe that Farrell made far more meaningful carries in that game than in most previous. And from an earlier time in the match. He's done it once before, a Scotland game i think, and our attack looked good then too because there was more space all round. Normally the defence just drifted when he had the ball since they knew he was just going to pass it along.

Just tried to have a quick look at previous stats but can't find them. He may have simply carried more (9 times for 16 yards), but I didn't see much different in what he was doing when he carried. I applaud mixing up what he does, if that's the case, but there are other players I'd rather see carry 9 times. But, he will play, so at least changing what he does is a start.

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:I strongly believe that Farrell made far more meaningful carries in that game than in most previous. And from an earlier time in the match. He's done it once before, a Scotland game i think, and our attack looked good then too because there was more space all round. Normally the defence just drifted when he had the ball since they knew he was just going to pass it along.

Just tried to have a quick look at previous stats but can't find them. He may have simply carried more (9 times for 16 yards), but I didn't see much different in what he was doing when he carried. I applaud mixing up what he does, if that's the case, but there are other players I'd rather see carry 9 times. But, he will play, so at least changing what he does is a start.

Yeah, it's important to acknowledge that most of us wouldn't pick him but are resigned to him being in the team.

So if we must have him, I for one would definitely have him with Ford.

Because without Ford, we're shit.

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:I strongly believe that Farrell made far more meaningful carries in that game than in most previous. And from an earlier time in the match. He's done it once before, a Scotland game i think, and our attack looked good then too because there was more space all round. Normally the defence just drifted when he had the ball since they knew he was just going to pass it along.

Just tried to have a quick look at previous stats but can't find them. He may have simply carried more (9 times for 16 yards), but I didn't see much different in what he was doing when he carried. I applaud mixing up what he does, if that's the case, but there are other players I'd rather see carry 9 times. But, he will play, so at least changing what he does is a start.

Oh I don't want him as a primary carrier, but at the same time, I felt he simply didn't carry in the past, allowing the defence to easily drift onto Joseph and the wings, taking away their space. So even though they'd carry more often, they'd mostly be less effective carries. I'd rather 5 effective Joseph carries than 10 ineffective ones.

Raggs wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:I strongly believe that Farrell made far more meaningful carries in that game than in most previous. And from an earlier time in the match. He's done it once before, a Scotland game i think, and our attack looked good then too because there was more space all round. Normally the defence just drifted when he had the ball since they knew he was just going to pass it along.

Just tried to have a quick look at previous stats but can't find them. He may have simply carried more (9 times for 16 yards), but I didn't see much different in what he was doing when he carried. I applaud mixing up what he does, if that's the case, but there are other players I'd rather see carry 9 times. But, he will play, so at least changing what he does is a start.

Oh I don't want him as a primary carrier, but at the same time, I felt he simply didn't carry in the past, allowing the defence to easily drift onto Joseph and the wings, taking away their space. So even though they'd carry more often, they'd mostly be less effective carries. I'd rather 5 effective Joseph carries than 10 ineffective ones.

well yes. I'd like to access the carrying stats from he was last playing 12, but as I said, IF the plays are being mixed up more including more faz-carry (and there was a much better use of dummy runners and 'new' entry points from the back three etc) this can only be a good thing. That said, I think England could have been running the same plays with Manu and JJ in midfield, albeit with a bit more jiggery pokery on how they lined up from primary possession; ditto with Slade, who is a better passer than Faz. Anyway, as we are stuck with Faz so its right to look for the silver lining.

Just listening to the BBC rugby thing (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p07ls69r) and them all fawning over Farrell (obviously) but they briefly mentioned the man you want sat in the pocket to slot a drop goal. Who do we actually want to use in that situation if Farrell and Ford are both on the pitch? I genuinely can't remember many from either of them. I have a feeling it would be another situation it's got to be Farrell so as not to undermine his general ice-mannery.

Listening a bit further in to the show they all actually seemed genuinely shocked at Ford playing quite well and that it's even a question to not have Farrell at 10.

I'm glad you called out that shot from Kearney - it was absolutely ridiculous. Bearing in mind a French lock has just been banned for three weeks (reduced from six) for a dangerous clear out, I don't see how that gets away scot free.

Talking of Scott's, I see that Barrett had his ban conveniently set to run the length of the Mitre 10 Cup matches between now and the World Cup that he definitely would(n't) have played in so he is available for the World Cup.

Some of Ireland's niggle was downright cheap shot merchant territory. You picked up Conway's attempted leg sweep/kick on Curry in the act of scoring, but there was a lot of other generally cuntish behaviour

Mikey Brown wrote:Just listening to the BBC rugby thing (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p07ls69r) and them all fawning over Farrell (obviously) but they briefly mentioned the man you want sat in the pocket to slot a drop goal. Who do we actually want to use in that situation if Farrell and Ford are both on the pitch? I genuinely can't remember many from either of them. I have a feeling it would be another situation it's got to be Farrell so as not to undermine his general ice-mannery.

Listening a bit further in to the show they all actually seemed genuinely shocked at Ford playing quite well and that it's even a question to not have Farrell at 10.

I've sampled a few this week (boring admin tasks at work so need something to fix my brain on) and all of them are saying the same thing. I just can't process it. Is it because Sarries are so successful? Good PR? Refusing to accept any of his faults? Voodoo?

Mikey Brown wrote:Just listening to the BBC rugby thing (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p07ls69r) and them all fawning over Farrell (obviously) but they briefly mentioned the man you want sat in the pocket to slot a drop goal. Who do we actually want to use in that situation if Farrell and Ford are both on the pitch? I genuinely can't remember many from either of them. I have a feeling it would be another situation it's got to be Farrell so as not to undermine his general ice-mannery.

Listening a bit further in to the show they all actually seemed genuinely shocked at Ford playing quite well and that it's even a question to not have Farrell at 10.

Every time I've seen Faz go for a drop-kick, he's flubbed it badly. Thinking of the draw in the dead rubber between England and South Africa a few years back and his attempt at the match-winnig drop goal barely got off the ground.

Having said that, it's not Ford's forte either. He's scored a couple for Leicester, but missed some too. I wouldn't put my house on either of them.

Hopefully it's been a big part of training over the summer.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Just listening to the BBC rugby thing (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p07ls69r) and them all fawning over Farrell (obviously) but they briefly mentioned the man you want sat in the pocket to slot a drop goal. Who do we actually want to use in that situation if Farrell and Ford are both on the pitch? I genuinely can't remember many from either of them. I have a feeling it would be another situation it's got to be Farrell so as not to undermine his general ice-mannery.

Listening a bit further in to the show they all actually seemed genuinely shocked at Ford playing quite well and that it's even a question to not have Farrell at 10.

Every time I've seen Faz go for a drop-kick, he's flubbed it badly. Thinking of the draw in the dead rubber between England and South Africa a few years back and his attempt at the match-winnig drop goal barely got off the ground.

Having said that, it's not Ford's forte either. He's scored a couple for Leicester, but missed some too. I wouldn't put my house on either of them.

Hopefully it's been a big part of training over the summer.

Puja

Daly is the man. Just get him to come into centre field off his wing....

Ford and Farrell have definitely nailed a few drop goals for England. From memory Farrell has bagged a couple against NZ and Ford got one in Dublin a few years back. There’s probably a couple more between them that I can’t remember.

Maybe it's just that the misses stick out more, but I'm with Puja and don't feel confident in either of them nailing a DG, even without the pressure of a WC Final

I would actually put Ford and Farrell quite high on my list of current 10’s likely to slot a crucial drop goal. Although I concede that probably says more about the lack of drop goals scored in test rugby nowadays.

Sexton would have to be 1st, but after that not sure who I would fancy.

Timbo wrote:Ford and Farrell have definitely nailed a few drop goals for England. From memory Farrell has bagged a couple against NZ and Ford got one in Dublin a few years back. There’s probably a couple more between them that I can’t remember.

Really? I mean, I do have memory issues, but I genuinely have no recollection of those.

Puja

ETA. Well, I'll be. Those make me feel a bit better.

Ford has 2 for England, 10 in total. Faz has three for England, but only 5 in total. Those are not the stats of trusted drop kickers. But as Timbo says, its not a prevalent scoring method any more. Jonny had 58, with 36 in tests, to go to the other extreme; even Dan Carter managed 8 internationally.