RugbyRebels

jngf wrote:

Puja wrote:

jngf wrote:To some extent the no.8 choice will influence things too - thought Dombrandt was on terrific form against Wasps and would select him with Nathan Hughes as a back up ahead of Billy at mo.

Dombrandt was pretty average against Wasps. He hit two beautiful lines for his tries and made a good offload that led to another try, which I'm sure showed up well on the highlights, but he lost the ball a few times, didn't make an impact in the breakdown, and wasn't particularly dominant in defence. He wasn't terrible, but the highlights package did not provide an accurate assessment of the game.

Cunderhillis is still my first choice back row (in whichever jerseys they like), although I would accept anything with Earl, BillyV, BCurry, or Hill in as well. All things told, I'm just so glad we're going to pick 3 back rows from our plethora of talented young players that I'm not bothered which of them get the nod.

Puja

I think there is always a question of balancing pragmatism against the potential pay off of introducing a bit of flair. If a hard grafting, unflashy, do all the basics, high work rate style is prioritised as the key thing above all then players like Robshaw and Wilson would motm week in week out and at least one of them gained some Lions caps - players who add a bit of flair/panache (e.g. at this point Dombrandt) may not be as big a contributor to the unglamouress stuff but they don’t half make rugby a more interesting spectacle to watch! I’m glad to see Dombrandt get a training squad call as it might be an antitdote to the “comfy pair of slippers” just pick Billy come what may or the utter madness of picking Curry well out of position

You can't have an international player who does only three good things in a match though. No-one's advocating getting rid of flair or panache - Earl and Simmonds get a lot of pumps on the board - but you do have to have something more than three good involvements, however good those three are.

Puja

Puja wrote:

jngf wrote:

Puja wrote:
Dombrandt was pretty average against Wasps. He hit two beautiful lines for his tries and made a good offload that led to another try, which I'm sure showed up well on the highlights, but he lost the ball a few times, didn't make an impact in the breakdown, and wasn't particularly dominant in defence. He wasn't terrible, but the highlights package did not provide an accurate assessment of the game.

Cunderhillis is still my first choice back row (in whichever jerseys they like), although I would accept anything with Earl, BillyV, BCurry, or Hill in as well. All things told, I'm just so glad we're going to pick 3 back rows from our plethora of talented young players that I'm not bothered which of them get the nod.

Puja

I think there is always a question of balancing pragmatism against the potential pay off of introducing a bit of flair. If a hard grafting, unflashy, do all the basics, high work rate style is prioritised as the key thing above all then players like Robshaw and Wilson would motm week in week out and at least one of them gained some Lions caps - players who add a bit of flair/panache (e.g. at this point Dombrandt) may not be as big a contributor to the unglamouress stuff but they don’t half make rugby a more interesting spectacle to watch! I’m glad to see Dombrandt get a training squad call as it might be an antitdote to the “comfy pair of slippers” just pick Billy come what may or the utter madness of picking Curry well out of position

You can't have an international player who does only three good things in a match though. No-one's advocating getting rid of flair or panache - Earl and Simmonds get a lot of pumps on the board - but you do have to have something more than three good involvements, however good those three are.

Puja

Jonah Lomu, Julian Savea and early international career Jonny May would like a chat

Winger vs backrow in terms of involvement....

What a catch

Banquo wrote:

padprop wrote:You wont find many top level “flairy” backrowers that don’t do a hell of alot of grunt work as well, its no tradeoff at the highest level, you have to be able to do both.

I think Dombrandt can be unfairly treated on here but he doesn’t stand a chance of an international career if his flairy moments arent backed up but alot of nuts and bolts, which from my viewings he does seem to be capable of, just seems to be more a mentality thing.

Probably more of an experience thing. He's not played much senior or even top level age grade rugby, and a lot of that in a team in what could kindly be called a state of flux.

I've never seen "did you see that ludicrous display last season?" spelt like that before

padprop wrote:

Puja wrote:

jngf wrote:
I think there is always a question of balancing pragmatism against the potential pay off of introducing a bit of flair. If a hard grafting, unflashy, do all the basics, high work rate style is prioritised as the key thing above all then players like Robshaw and Wilson would motm week in week out and at least one of them gained some Lions caps - players who add a bit of flair/panache (e.g. at this point Dombrandt) may not be as big a contributor to the unglamouress stuff but they don’t half make rugby a more interesting spectacle to watch! I’m glad to see Dombrandt get a training squad call as it might be an antitdote to the “comfy pair of slippers” just pick Billy come what may or the utter madness of picking Curry well out of position

You can't have an international player who does only three good things in a match though. No-one's advocating getting rid of flair or panache - Earl and Simmonds get a lot of pumps on the board - but you do have to have something more than three good involvements, however good those three are.

Puja

Jonah Lomu, Julian Savea and early international career Jonny May would like a chat

Good point. I will amend to, "You can't have an international forward who does only three good things in a match," as everyone knows backs are workshy and spend more time worrying about their hair than accomplishing things on the pitch.

Puja

Lots of hookers are like an extra backrow these days. If his strength translates in the scrum and his darts are good, why wouldn't you?

Puja wrote:

padprop wrote:

Puja wrote:
You can't have an international player who does only three good things in a match though. No-one's advocating getting rid of flair or panache - Earl and Simmonds get a lot of pumps on the board - but you do have to have something more than three good involvements, however good those three are.

Puja

Jonah Lomu, Julian Savea and early international career Jonny May would like a chat

Good point. I will amend to, "You can't have an international forward who does only three good things in a match," as everyone knows backs are workshy and spend more time worrying about their hair than accomplishing things on the pitch.

Puja

And thus, everything is good with the world again

padprop wrote:

Banquo wrote:

padprop wrote:You wont find many top level “flairy” backrowers that don’t do a hell of alot of grunt work as well, its no tradeoff at the highest level, you have to be able to do both.

I think Dombrandt can be unfairly treated on here but he doesn’t stand a chance of an international career if his flairy moments arent backed up but alot of nuts and bolts, which from my viewings he does seem to be capable of, just seems to be more a mentality thing.

Probably more of an experience thing. He's not played much senior or even top level age grade rugby, and a lot of that in a team in what could kindly be called a state of flux.

Potentially, or a combo of both, we’ve seen a plethora of young backrowers (Earl, Curry x 2, Willis, Hill) come with a more duck-to-water approach to back row play at the professional level with similar times spent playing professional rugby, as well as people like Polledri breaking through in a very similar fashion, yet having a more complete game. Imagine it goes a bit deeper with Dombrandt as I’d hedge that he’s been an absolute unit his whole playing career and has such obvious USPs that the more basic parts of his game may have fallen by the way side from an earlier age, but only time will tell

Think they all came through rugby finishing schools as it were- he’s more of a late bloomer.

Personally I'd go:

6 Underhill
7 Curry
8 Vunipola

Bench: Jack Willis

Banquo wrote:

padprop wrote:

Banquo wrote: Probably more of an experience thing. He's not played much senior or even top level age grade rugby, and a lot of that in a team in what could kindly be called a state of flux.

Potentially, or a combo of both, we’ve seen a plethora of young backrowers (Earl, Curry x 2, Willis, Hill) come with a more duck-to-water approach to back row play at the professional level with similar times spent playing professional rugby, as well as people like Polledri breaking through in a very similar fashion, yet having a more complete game. Imagine it goes a bit deeper with Dombrandt as I’d hedge that he’s been an absolute unit his whole playing career and has such obvious USPs that the more basic parts of his game may have fallen by the way side from an earlier age, but only time will tell

Think they all came through rugby finishing schools as it were- he’s more of a late bloomer.

Definitely. Having watched all of Dombrandt’s games this season, I think he’s in a bit of a transitional phase where he’s trying to find the right balance between showing more of an appetite for the grunt work as well as finding time and space for his ‘flairy’ moments. It’s definitely clicking more as time goes on - he’s upped his work rate significantly and is showing up more in defence but he’s also getting his hands on the ball in space.

I think that there’s a misconception that he’s a big ball carrier. He can do that to reasonable effect, but actually he’s much better used running clever lines (which he has a fantastic instinct for) and using his distribution skills and awareness to good effect. He’s more like a lightweight Ben Morgan than a Billy type player.

TheDasher wrote:Personally I'd go:

6 Underhill
7 Curry
8 Vunipola

Bench: Jack Willis

I’m starting to like the look of

Curry
Underhill
Willis

Billy.

Having billy come on against tired defenses could be mayhem. And those 3 in combination would be lethal in and around the breakdown.

TheDasher wrote:Personally I'd go:

6 Underhill
7 Curry
8 Vunipola

Bench: Jack Willis

Going with a tried and tested combination which has come off best against several highly vaunted back rows and is still young enough to develop?

Get off this board at once.

16th man wrote:

TheDasher wrote:Personally I'd go:

6 Underhill
7 Curry
8 Vunipola

Bench: Jack Willis

Going with a tried and tested combination which has come off best against several highly vaunted back rows and is still young enough to develop?

Get off this board at once.

This. If you’re not championing Sedbergh u14 XV capt and no7 you’re doing RR wrong.

16th man wrote:

TheDasher wrote:Personally I'd go:

6 Underhill
7 Curry
8 Vunipola

Bench: Jack Willis

Going with a tried and tested combination which has come off best against several highly vaunted back rows and is still young enough to develop?

Get off this board at once.

#worldcupfinal2019

But I agree

There’s a lot of talk about depth (particularly with a crazy international schedule ahead) and how we get a proper look at all the exciting prospects, but I’ve not actually seen many who don’t have at least 2 of Curry, Underhill or Vunipola in their proposed first choice back row.

Saying that; here’s my side for our next game against a tier 2 side.

1. Vunipola
2. Underhill
3. Ewers
4. Hill
5. Dombrandt
6. Wilson
7. Willis
8. Willis
9. Curry
10. Curry
11. Evans
12. Simmonds
13. Ludlam
14. Nowell
15. Mercer

No Earl?

I'd drop Nowell for Ben Earl, but looks solid otherwise.

Is Barbeary on the scrap heap already? Sheeesh.

Mikey Brown wrote:14. Nowell

That made me laugh loud enough to startle my children.

Puja

Beasties wrote:Is Barbeary on the scrap heap already? Sheeesh.

I don't see there being any point in giving caps to people who'll be too old for the 2035 RWC. Just a waste of precious opportunities to get caps into young players.

Puja

Beasties wrote:Is Barbeary on the scrap heap already? Sheeesh.

Ah, yes. I knew I had a better centre pairing in mind when I started writing that. I can't tell what his proper position is anymore though. Has it all been in the backrow so far for Wasps?

Puja wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:14. Nowell

That made me laugh loud enough to startle my children.

Puja

They're welcome.

Banquo wrote:

16th man wrote:

TheDasher wrote:Personally I'd go:

6 Underhill
7 Curry
8 Vunipola

Bench: Jack Willis

Going with a tried and tested combination which has come off best against several highly vaunted back rows and is still young enough to develop?

Get off this board at once.

#worldcupfinal2019

But I agree

They weren't stellar but I'd put them a way down the list of things which went horribly wrong.

Puja wrote:

Beasties wrote:Is Barbeary on the scrap heap already? Sheeesh.

I don't see there being any point in giving caps to people who'll be too old for the 2035 RWC. Just a waste of precious opportunities to get caps into young players.

Puja

There are probably under 8s out there with better basics than Ben Youngs.