RugbyRebels

Scrumhead wrote:Yeah - I’m firmly in the Jack Willis appreciation society too. If he can replicate his Premiership/European form at test level, he’ll be pushing Curry and Underhill very hard. Bad news for Ludlam who is also a very good player but lacking the same game-changing ability of the other three. Earl is another who will push hard. With a run of games he’s looking good and has the pace, footwork and linking game to be an interesting alternative without a big compromise on power.

On Ludlum - maybe we have yet to see game changing ability from him though this may well manifest itself in the form of immense energy about the park and I also suspect he might be the fastest of all those flankers I mentioned in
opening comments? Ludlum (including with his ability to switch between 6 and 7 at ease) reminds me the most of all these flankers of a more polished version of Moody and that’s no bad thing!

How much rugby do you watch jngf? The OP suggests that you haven’t really seen Willis play so are asking everyone else about him.

Also are you basing your comparison of Ludlam and Moody and your suspicion of him being the ‘fastest’ on with you’ve seen from him at test level?

Having seen a decent amount of Ludlam in the Premiership and Cup, I’d agree that ‘energy’ is one of his attributes. He’s fairly quick, very aggressive and is a good tackler and jackal. He can also carry reasonably well and regularly pops up with good supporting lines. I think he’s a good all round flanker who is good at a lot of things without being outstanding in any particular one. In comparison to Curry, Underhill, Willis and possibly Earl, he’s lacking an obvious/outstanding point of difference.

I like Ludlam and I’ve got no issue with him being selected, but I think he may have his work cut out with Willis and Earl starting and doing very well. His one trump card is that he’s already shown he can do it at test level which Willis and Earl haven’t yet had the opportunity to demonstrate.

Digby wrote:

Raggs wrote:

Digby wrote:

Does he look better at 6? My impression, and I'm sure you're paying rather more attention, is you'd want him to have as much ball in hand as possible so stick him at 8, or maybe don't pick him if he's not having the same impact

In open and unstructured play yes, off the back of the scrum i lime Vailanus power.

Not seen a lot from Vailanu, but if you have him and Carr who's clearing rucks? It hasn't been a major feature of what Willis brings, to get back on point, you don't have JCW, Taylor isn't a clearer, Launch is, Gaskell isn't. Basically can you have Vailanu and Carr without Carr being at 7 to get Shields in, and if Carr is at 7 what of Willis and Young?

I'm also not really sure if Wasps are trying to build a base, or speed their game up

The two games I've done ruck marks on Willis he absolutely has been clearing rucks. His workrate was off the charts in the quins game last season. Putting in more interactions than I'd have expected from Itoje or robshaw as it was at the time, in a busy international game.

If someone can find the Bordeaux game online i might try it again.

EDIT - Found it up on youtube, hopefully it stays up for long enough.

Raggs wrote:
The two games I've done ruck marks on Willis he absolutely has been clearing rucks. His workrate was off the charts in the quins game last season. Putting in more interactions than I'd have expected from Itoje or robshaw as it was at the time, in a busy international game.

If someone can find the Bordeaux game online i might try it again.

EDIT - Found it up on youtube, hopefully it stays up for long enough.

I picked a game at random, Wasps Vs Irish, and watched the first 20 minutes. And you've simply not had the ball so it's been a waste of 20 minutes more than anything else

OK, so quick and dirty stats.

He made 29/92 defensive rucks, winning 5 turnovers and being a significant influence another 13 times. Conceded 2 penalties (think both were harsh myself, one I thought was a good turnover, the other he was cleared out, which is why he was off his feet). He made 17/68 attacking rucks (exactly 25%), 2 insufficients, one MLB is there and he sort of slips around the side of a player whilst getting round MLB, the 2nd I believe as he's over the tackled player before the French player comes in, the ruck is formed, but refs can go either way, and he doesn't clear out well enough. ESPN has him down as joint top tackler at 17, with 1 miss (I counted 3 misses). He took 2 lineouts.

He's down for 74 interactions in 72 minutes of game time. He loses 7 points for insufficients, missed tackles and penalties. Putting him on 67 positive interactions.

That's an OPI/min (overall positive interactions per minute) of 0.93. Now I can't remember how I previously did penalty conceded turning attempts, so it's possible that as I've reduced him twice here (once for insufficient work at the ruck, and a second for conceding the penalty), that he's been more harshly treated than I would a player in the other games I've done.

I've checked the ruck mark charts I have easily available, and the only other players to get the many or more positive interactions have been Wilson, Robshaw and Haskell (Haskell and Robshaw didn't have lineouts counted, Itoje was 66 in one game). Only Itoje has scored a higher OPI/min, but Kruis, Wilson, Curry and Robshaw have all been in the same ball park (0.9+).

Ire vs eng 2019 saw 85 attacking rucks, Kruis and Wilson made 35/34, Curry made 29. So a higher percentage than Willis.

2nd SA test saw 63 rucks in total, so a close comparison, Launch had the most with 20, Itoje, shields and curry had 16/15/16. So rather comparable.

I know test is different to domestic (or lower level euro), but Willis seems to be able to mostly get involved in defensive rucks (and the vast majority are effective), without other areas of his game being significantly off the pace (if at all).

So once again, his workrate is insane.

Is Willis’ stronger position 6 or 7 and can he be described as a ‘linkman’ in the way T Curry when at 7 might be?

Haven't seen much nice link play from him.

Hmm, something is odd with espn's numbers actually.

There's vastly more tackles than rucks, which doesn't make that much sense to me, unless their either counting assists, or counting rucks properly. Which obviously changes the numbers a lot.

Raggs wrote:Hmm, something is odd with espn's numbers actually.

There's vastly more tackles than rucks, which doesn't make that much sense to me, unless their either counting assists, or counting rucks properly. Which obviously changes the numbers a lot.

A lot of tackles involve two tacklers. Plus, they'll count missed tackles as tackle attempts, don't they, so some will involve more.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Raggs wrote:Hmm, something is odd with espn's numbers actually.

There's vastly more tackles than rucks, which doesn't make that much sense to me, unless their either counting assists, or counting rucks properly. Which obviously changes the numbers a lot.

A lot of tackles involve two tacklers. Plus, they'll count missed tackles as tackle attempts, don't they, so some will involve more.

Puja

Before they'd always seem to pick one tackler, and the other was just assist, which wasn't counted. Wasps made (excluding misses) 156 tackles, but BB only had 101 rucks.

Perhaps now they are counting both men in a 2 man tackle, or a significant assist, and I'm good with that, i just wish it was clearer.

Raggs wrote:

Puja wrote:

Raggs wrote:Hmm, something is odd with espn's numbers actually.

There's vastly more tackles than rucks, which doesn't make that much sense to me, unless their either counting assists, or counting rucks properly. Which obviously changes the numbers a lot.

A lot of tackles involve two tacklers. Plus, they'll count missed tackles as tackle attempts, don't they, so some will involve more.

Puja

Before they'd always seem to pick one tackler, and the other was just assist, which wasn't counted. Wasps made (excluding misses) 156 tackles, but BB only had 101 rucks.

Perhaps now they are counting both men in a 2 man tackle, or a significant assist, and I'm good with that, i just wish it was clearer.

55 offloads maybe?

Danno wrote:

Raggs wrote:

Puja wrote:
A lot of tackles involve two tacklers. Plus, they'll count missed tackles as tackle attempts, don't they, so some will involve more.

Puja

Before they'd always seem to pick one tackler, and the other was just assist, which wasn't counted. Wasps made (excluding misses) 156 tackles, but BB only had 101 rucks.

Perhaps now they are counting both men in a 2 man tackle, or a significant assist, and I'm good with that, i just wish it was clearer.

55 offloads maybe?

Offloads don't count as a tackle (unless it's off the ground I guess).

Raggs wrote:

Danno wrote:

Raggs wrote:
Before they'd always seem to pick one tackler, and the other was just assist, which wasn't counted. Wasps made (excluding misses) 156 tackles, but BB only had 101 rucks.

Perhaps now they are counting both men in a 2 man tackle, or a significant assist, and I'm good with that, i just wish it was clearer.

55 offloads maybe?

Offloads don't count as a tackle (unless it's off the ground I guess).

Surely if someone is brought to a halt, that's a tackle, even if they pop the ball out of contact?

Puja

Not if their knee etc doesn't hit the ground. Game a season or two ago, Sinckler was only on for the last 5m and made a great stopping hit, but it was offloaded, it didn't show in the stats.

I meant that an offload wouldn't result in a ruck. And not entirely seriously.

When it comes to ruck marks, Raggs doesn’t do ‘not entirely seriously’.

Mellsblue wrote:When it comes to ruck marks, Raggs doesn’t do ‘not entirely seriously’.

Having had a stab at them once, I can wholeheartedly appreciate why.

jngf wrote:Is Wallis’ stronger position 6 or 7 and can he be described as a ‘linkman’ in the way T Curry when at 7 might be?

Not sure about Wallis, but Willis is not really a link man. I’d say he’s more like a 7 in defence and a 6 in attack.

To explain what I mean by that, he is excellent over the ball as you might expect from a 7 in defence whereas he’s more of a carrier than a link man in attack. If I had to liken him to another player, I’d say he’s more a Sean O’Brien style of 7. Does that help?

Scrumhead wrote:

jngf wrote:Is Wallis’ stronger position 6 or 7 and can he be described as a ‘linkman’ in the way T Curry when at 7 might be?

Not sure about Wallis, but Willis is not really a link man. I’d say he’s more like a 7 in defence and a 6 in attack.

To explain what I mean by that, he is excellent over the ball as you might expect from a 7 in defence whereas he’s more of a carrier than a link man in attack. If I had to liken him to another player, I’d say he’s more a Sean O’Brien style of 7. Does that help?

Sounds very close to how I describe Underhill and if Willis is as good as all this it won’t be too long before he takes 6 shirt from T Curry? ( with the latter moving back to 7)

He’s probably a better carrier than Underhill IMO. Also not too bad as a lineout option.

If I had to compare Willis, Curry, Underhill and Ludlam strengths relative to each other I’d say:

Willis - best jackal, possibly best carrier
Curry - best link man, best all-rounder
Underhill - best defensive flanker - unbelievable tackler
Ludlam - best work rate/quickest

Raggs wrote:

Puja wrote:

Raggs wrote:Hmm, something is odd with espn's numbers actually.

There's vastly more tackles than rucks, which doesn't make that much sense to me, unless their either counting assists, or counting rucks properly. Which obviously changes the numbers a lot.

A lot of tackles involve two tacklers. Plus, they'll count missed tackles as tackle attempts, don't they, so some will involve more.

Puja

Before they'd always seem to pick one tackler, and the other was just assist, which wasn't counted. Wasps made (excluding misses) 156 tackles, but BB only had 101 rucks.

Perhaps now they are counting both men in a 2 man tackle, or a significant assist, and I'm good with that, i just wish it was clearer.

Are they not distinct enough for them to count?

Btw, just started watching the Bordeaux match, and BB have from the kick off made a brilliant start, maybe only 2-3 players are behind the kicker. Ref obviously doesn't give a shit, but it amused me

Oh FFS. Willis has ditched his blue and red boots for a black pair, now in theory I approve of that, but it doesn't make it easier to track him

Into the 15th minute and BB have runners ahead of the kicker again at the restart, they also had that from a box kick in open play that saw the offside player force a knock on from Wasps, really poor from the officiating team.

Willis is proving very strong over the ball, might have been harshly pinged once but got away with a not releasing so..., again it's hard to judge his ruck work on attack as Wasps simply don't keep the ball. Launchbury is the class act on the pitch so far.

Digby wrote:Into the 15th minute and BB have runners ahead of the kicker again at the restart, they also had that from a box kick in open play that saw the offside player force a knock on from Wasps, really poor from the officiating team.

Willis is proving very strong over the ball, might have been harshly pinged once but got away with a not releasing so..., again it's hard to judge his ruck work on attack as Wasps simply don't keep the ball. Launchbury is the class act on the pitch so far.

Really hoping for a Launchbury Renaissance - Eddie Jones, Gatland and Borthwick have imo all miss-prioritised him in favour of Kruis whom I simply don’t think is as good an all round player.

I think ol’ Launchers might be a surprise chop from the EPS.