Exeter vs Glasgow

[Raggs]

So watched through, skipping the non interesting bits where possible. 4 minutes in he gets the ball from a counter ruck (not his), good hands though to hold onto it. Not what I'm talking about, but good play. Half time and he's not slowed ball once, he was part of another counter ruck attempt, but by the time he got there it'd already been killed off (Yeandle started it). He's rarely been first man in clearout/support either, I believe I saw it once.

Funnily enough in the 2nd half about 4 minutes in, he does the same as the first, other players effectively win the counter ruck, he comes in and grabs the ball off the ground, not his turnover, nor was he a significant part of it's creation, he'll be credited with it in the stats though. It's good work, but it's not 6/7 breakdown work.

In the 2nd half I saw him being useful at attacking rucks 5 times, 4 as being there and useful, once with a good clearout.

76 minutes gets over the ball again, never really threatening the turnover, but slows slightly. Both times he's threatened a turnover (except the one he won) has been on the wings in very isolated positions. Not suggesting he should have won the turnovers, but rather than both were very much obvious times for any forward to try and get over.

Has taken 2 lineouts though.

This is his body position for his actual turnover. Yes, they can go your way, but that is not good, and cannot be used as an example of good over the ball.



Still for me, this shows nothing of what I'd want to be seeing from my 6/7 in an England side. From my 8? Even then not so much. Does taking the ball at the back of the maul count as a carry? I have to assume so, otherwise I'm not sure where his 7 carries all came from, as I don't recall seeing them, but it wasn't him carrying I was focusing on, and I guess he could have easily done more pick and goes 2m out than I noticed, thought I saw about 3.

I know Exeter play a different style, and don't use him how England would use him, but it's impossible to assume that he could fit in for England. I would love to see him tried at 6/7 and actually get to try that different gamestyle to see if he can do it, but you'd need to talk to Baxter about that, it's not upto Eddie to use up a training spot to find out if he might be able to do it, especially in a position where he has strength.

[Banquo]

Given that he was playing 8, and given that we agree that his tasking is different, and given everything else he did, I’d say that’s a pretty decent display at the breakdown. You seem to be saying he didn’t do all that you’d want a 6 or 7 to do- well that’s hardly a surprise. My point is pretty different, in that he clearly has the skills and decision making to impact the breakdown. I’m not claiming he’s McCaw nor even Willis, but that he shouldn’t be discounted from England contention because of his ruck work either side of the ball. Wish I had your spare time tho

[fivepointer]

I rate Simmonds anyway. Does a lot of things very well. That he isnt getting a game for England isnt down to his weaknesses, its more to do with the excellence of others. Mind you, I do find it odd that Ludlam has been selected ahead of him, when he is clearly an inferior all round player. You could also say that Simmonds offers a more complete package than Underhill say.

[Oakboy]

I rate Simmonds anyway. Does a lot of things very well. That he isnt getting a game for England isnt down to his weaknesses, its more to do with the excellence of others. Mind you, I do find it odd that Ludlam has been selected ahead of him, when he is clearly an inferior all round player. You could also say that Simmonds offers a more complete package than Underhill say.

I rate Simmonds very highly and would pick him at 8 for England. However, Curry and Willis are far better flankers with others not that far behind. I'm not sure Simmonds should be considered as a flanker at all. It is all a question of pace/ballast in terms of the backrow balance, IMO. Exeter's way gives lots of back row tries, usually from the 8 (Waldrom before Simmonds etc.). I'd try the system for England with Itoje at 6, much as many will hate the idea!! At least it would be a constructive experiment with try-scoring in mind, a significant line-out boost and a good opportunity to change the captaincy.

[Banquo]

I rate Simmonds anyway. Does a lot of things very well. That he isnt getting a game for England isnt down to his weaknesses, its more to do with the excellence of others. Mind you, I do find it odd that Ludlam has been selected ahead of him, when he is clearly an inferior all round player. You could also say that Simmonds offers a more complete package than Underhill say.

Yes, the first part is true as I’ve said before, and as you say there’s not much he can’t do as a back row player.

[Banquo]

I rate Simmonds anyway. Does a lot of things very well. That he isnt getting a game for England isnt down to his weaknesses, its more to do with the excellence of others. Mind you, I do find it odd that Ludlam has been selected ahead of him, when he is clearly an inferior all round player. You could also say that Simmonds offers a more complete package than Underhill say.

I rate Simmonds very highly and would pick him at 8 for England. However, Curry and Willis are far better flankers with others not that far behind. I'm not sure Simmonds should be considered as a flanker at all. It is all a question of pace/ballast in terms of the backrow balance, IMO. Exeter's way gives lots of back row tries, usually from the 8 (Waldrom before Simmonds etc.). I'd try the system for England with Itoje at 6, much as many will hate the idea!! At least it would be a constructive experiment with try-scoring in mind, a significant line-out boost and a good opportunity to change the captaincy.

So you wouldn’t pick Simmonds at flanker because Underhill and Curry are far better flankers, yet you’d drop one of them for Itoje who is a world class second row and mediocre 6? He can still captain the side from second row.

I’m not really suggesting Simmonds as a flanker anyway, just pointing out how much there is to his game.

[Mikey Brown]

Yep, it's handy to have a centre who's strong at the breakdown but not a requirement.

[Banquo]

Yep, it's handy to have a centre who's strong at the breakdown but not a requirement.

And a full back who can pass?

[Mikey Brown]

Like Daly you mean?

[Spiffy]

Strange discussion this. Simmonds is playing regularly for Exeter at 8, where he is scoring tries for fun, is in the thick of everything, making his tackles and running with tremendous power and good speed. Yet everyone is pointing out why he should not be selected on the flank for England. OK, but why not give him a run at 8, where he belongs. He might not be as out-and-out powerful as Billy V, but has a bit more to his overall game.

I'd love to see an England back row of Curry (7) Willis (6) and Simmonds (8) - a lot of cumulative skills and a bit of power on display. Not saying that should be a first choice trio but worth a run against a lesser team to see how it goes.

[Banquo]

Strange discussion this. Simmonds is playing regularly for Exeter at 8, where he is scoring tries for fun, is in the thick of everything, making his tackles and running with tremendous power and good speed. Yet everyone is pointing out why he should not be selected on the flank for England. OK, but why not give him a run at 8, where he belongs. He might not be as out-and-out powerful as Billy V, but has a bit more to his overall game.

I'd love to see an England back row of Curry (7) Willis (6) and Simmonds (8) - a lot of cumulative skills and a bit of power on display. Not saying that should be a first choice trio but worth a run against a lesser team to see how it goes.

It started a while ago when I think I suggested he’d be a good squad member - whilst recognising a lot of competition about- and his credentials at the breakdown were questioned. I think there are a lot of great combos we could put out, but you can’t select them isolation either; I would like the Willis, Curry pairing tried though- gives you some lineout permutations too.

[Raggs]

Strange discussion this. Simmonds is playing regularly for Exeter at 8, where he is scoring tries for fun, is in the thick of everything, making his tackles and running with tremendous power and good speed. Yet everyone is pointing out why he should not be selected on the flank for England. OK, but why not give him a run at 8, where he belongs. He might not be as out-and-out powerful as Billy V, but has a bit more to his overall game.

I'd love to see an England back row of Curry (7) Willis (6) and Simmonds (8) - a lot of cumulative skills and a bit of power on display. Not saying that should be a first choice trio but worth a run against a lesser team to see how it goes.

He doesn't play like Billy though. That's the thing. Exeter use Ewers as their main carry option, who happens to be quite similar to Billy in his attributes. This is why everyone compares Simmonds with the England flankers, because ultimately, they're the ones he's competing with. In truth, I'd say the way he's used is perhaps more similar to George in the England setup, bit further out, using pace and ability. He's much better than George at using it, but Curry, Underhill and Billy all play in a much tighter game for England.

The question then becomes is it worth rejigging how England play to include Simmonds? You'd still likely need a Billy in the backrow, although I would say Curry's carrying is getting better and better. To call him a luxury player is not really accurate, but I just don't see what he brings that ousts any of the current pack in the way we play, or that he's so much better that we need to rejig.

[Oakboy]

Strange discussion this. Simmonds is playing regularly for Exeter at 8, where he is scoring tries for fun, is in the thick of everything, making his tackles and running with tremendous power and good speed. Yet everyone is pointing out why he should not be selected on the flank for England. OK, but why not give him a run at 8, where he belongs. He might not be as out-and-out powerful as Billy V, but has a bit more to his overall game.

I'd love to see an England back row of Curry (7) Willis (6) and Simmonds (8) - a lot of cumulative skills and a bit of power on display. Not saying that should be a first choice trio but worth a run against a lesser team to see how it goes.

He doesn't play like Billy though. That's the thing. Exeter use Ewers as their main carry option, who happens to be quite similar to Billy in his attributes. This is why everyone compares Simmonds with the England flankers, because ultimately, they're the ones he's competing with. In truth, I'd say the way he's used is perhaps more similar to George in the England setup, bit further out, using pace and ability. He's much better than George at using it, but Curry, Underhill and Billy all play in a much tighter game for England.

The question then becomes is it worth rejigging how England play to include Simmonds? You'd still likely need a Billy in the backrow, although I would say Curry's carrying is getting better and better. To call him a luxury player is not really accurate, but I just don't see what he brings that ousts any of the current pack in the way we play, or that he's so much better that we need to rejig.

That's the crunch - hence my suggestion of Itoje, Simmonds, Curry.

Yes, it is worth rejigging (as are all units) because we are under-performing. The Australian Dwarf might be winning but we are at about 80% max with every team and system he puts out. IMO, it's all about raising the ceiling. Our player pool is that good - better than the management, frankly!!

[Timbo]

Unlike Raggs I don’t have the time to watch the game back, but I was surprised Simmonds got man (‘star’) of the match. Thought he was very decent overall, but pretty quiet. I’d have gone Jonny Gray, who was bloody excellent.

[Banquo]

Unlike Raggs I don’t have the time to watch the game back, but I was surprised Simmonds got man (‘star’) of the match. Thought he was very decent overall, but pretty quiet. I’d have gone Jonny Gray, who was bloody excellent.

I was a bit surprised too, funnily enough- it wasn’t a highlight reels performance that is usually ...um...highlighted- though his all round ability was on display, with some line out wins, some maul rudder work, decent work at the base, a couple of decent carries, and the turnovers. Gray put in a big shift. Yeandle was my choice.

[Banquo]

Strange discussion this. Simmonds is playing regularly for Exeter at 8, where he is scoring tries for fun, is in the thick of everything, making his tackles and running with tremendous power and good speed. Yet everyone is pointing out why he should not be selected on the flank for England. OK, but why not give him a run at 8, where he belongs. He might not be as out-and-out powerful as Billy V, but has a bit more to his overall game.

I'd love to see an England back row of Curry (7) Willis (6) and Simmonds (8) - a lot of cumulative skills and a bit of power on display. Not saying that should be a first choice trio but worth a run against a lesser team to see how it goes.

He doesn't play like Billy though. That's the thing. Exeter use Ewers as their main carry option, who happens to be quite similar to Billy in his attributes. This is why everyone compares Simmonds with the England flankers, because ultimately, they're the ones he's competing with. In truth, I'd say the way he's used is perhaps more similar to George in the England setup, bit further out, using pace and ability. He's much better than George at using it, but Curry, Underhill and Billy all play in a much tighter game for England.

The question then becomes is it worth rejigging how England play to include Simmonds? You'd still likely need a Billy in the backrow, although I would say Curry's carrying is getting better and better. To call him a luxury player is not really accurate, but I just don't see what he brings that ousts any of the current pack in the way we play, or that he's so much better that we need to rejig.

That's the crunch - hence my suggestion of Itoje, Simmonds, Curry.

Yes, it is worth rejigging (as are all units) because we are under-performing. The Australian Dwarf might be winning but we are at about 80% max with every team and system he puts out. IMO, it's all about raising the ceiling. Our player pool is that good - better than the management, frankly!!

Change the record Dors.

The backrow isn’t the issue, and even if it were, your solution is pretty flawed.

[Mikey Brown]

Yep, the solution is cramming some of our existing backrow options in to other spots on the field, not the other way round.

[stevedog1980]

As a Scotsman I wish I had your problems.

Which choice of world class flankers shall we play today?? Do we want a destructive 8 or to play a more nuanced game??

Nice problems to have. Unfortunately for England, a crop of what would otherwise be 1st choice 6's and 7's have all come along at once. Willis, Underhill, Croft and Earl are all genuine class.

I would like to see Simmonds in the conversation though, he's at least got to be considered for the bench. As others have pointed out, he has many of the attributes needed to play flanker but with his experience at 8 he'd be an ideal number 20, surely he's exactly what Eddie Jones has referred to as "a finisher"?

[jngf]

As a Scotsman I wish I had your problems.

Which choice of world class flankers shall we play today?? Do we want a destructive 8 or to play a more nuanced game??

Nice problems to have. Unfortunately for England, a crop of what would otherwise be 1st choice 6's and 7's have all come along at once. Willis, Underhill, Croft and Earl are all genuine class.

I would like to see Simmonds in the conversation though, he's at least got to be considered for the bench. As others have pointed out, he has many of the attributes needed to play flanker but with his experience at 8 he'd be an ideal number 20, surely he's exactly what Eddie Jones has referred to as "a finisher"?

For me the biggest thing Simmonds would bring to the party is the ability to keep up with the threequarters and perform that lineman role. Curry was starting to display this ability but moving him to 6 seemed to downplay it - Underhill never has displayed it ditto Willis (To be fair their both more built for hard yards carrying) - and Ludlum and Earl may have the pace and atheleticism to link - That said I suspect Simmonds is (marginally) the quickest of the lot and if used on one flank with a dedicated fetcher like Willis or Curry on the other we might get an extra dimension from the backrow? I’m not sold on him at no.8 though as my size queen tendencies simply can’t countenance a no.8 under 17 stone and barely 6’ -more seriously I’m sadly convinced that the tight carrying required a test level requires a bigger unit than Simmonds, Earl et al. ( whilst at the same time a bit more athleticism than Billy can offer wouldn’t go amiss)