RugbyRebels

I wonder if Baxter will start to develop the side, or at least try to, or again double down on doing plan A with more commitment

Digby wrote:I wonder if Baxter will start to develop the side, or at least try to, or again double down on doing plan A with more commitment

Much depends on the quality of the youngsters coming through, I'd guess. He might need reinforcements in the front row and a quality SH could be necessary.

Digby wrote:I wonder if Baxter will start to develop the side, or at least try to, or again double down on doing plan A with more commitment

They’ll stay as they are more or less, won’t they? They’ve gone from Championship to Prem champs and from struggling in Europe to winning the Champions Cup with broadly the same game plan. They won’t change cos they lost one game to an outstanding team.

Think they’ll reflect on more prosaic elements. Breakdown on their ball was a long way short of where it normally is, lineout at key times not good enough and getting back to having a dominant scrum. All things they’ve proven they can do to a high standard in the recent past. Of course if they can bring in a signing or an outstanding academy player that’ll help no doubt.

Watching today’s games you might also think that if someone else had managed to knock Leinster out the Chiefs may well have won the thing again.

Oakboy wrote:

Puja wrote:

Timbo wrote:
Maybe he’s trying too hard for England? Obviously there’s a tipping point, but he’s still very new to international rugby and is worth sticking with for now imo. Watching him yesterday and against the packs of Racing, Toulouse etc and he has a level of physicality that’s pretty rare. You’re not a fan?

I was definitely a fan before his England performances and wouldn't necessarily say I'm against him now, but he has a lot to prove before I'll welcome him into the England 5 shirt with more than a "f*ck's sake". I understand nerves or trying too hard, but there were too many that were just too stupid or showed all the coordination of a baby giraffe on ice.

Puja

Do you not wonder why he can look so good playing for Baxter and so bad playing for Jones? After all, Exeter, arguably, have played against better XVs than Scotland's so the 'big step-up' to international rugby is of questionable significance, especially in an empty stadium. I think it was more about who he was playing with than against and more about coaching/preparation than individual performance.

Against Jonny Gray rather than alongside him. That’ll be it.

Timbo wrote:

Digby wrote:I wonder if Baxter will start to develop the side, or at least try to, or again double down on doing plan A with more commitment

They’ll stay as they are more or less, won’t they? They’ve gone from Championship to Prem champs and from struggling in Europe to winning the Champions Cup with broadly the same game plan. They won’t change cos they lost one game to an outstanding team.

Think they’ll reflect on more prosaic elements. Breakdown on their ball was a long way short of where it normally is, lineout at key times not good enough and getting back to having a dominant scrum. All things they’ve proven they can do to a high standard in the recent past. Of course if they can bring in a signing or an outstanding academy player that’ll help no doubt.

Watching today’s games you might also think that if someone else had managed to knock Leinster out the Chiefs may well have won the thing again.

Agreed. Baxter's post-match comment that it was only Exeter's 3rd QF compared with Leinster's 17 or 18 is an honest appraisal of the comparative big match competence. Constantly learning how to learn is what top professional sports people have to keep in mind. Some run out of modesty in that respect. Baxter is not one of them.

Mourinho is a classic example in football of losing it. It comes out in inconsistency together with stubborn/irrational selection and a conviction that he must know it all - 'look how many games I've won'. (I won't say who I think is the obvious example at rugby.)

Oakboy wrote:

Puja wrote:

Timbo wrote:
Maybe he’s trying too hard for England? Obviously there’s a tipping point, but he’s still very new to international rugby and is worth sticking with for now imo. Watching him yesterday and against the packs of Racing, Toulouse etc and he has a level of physicality that’s pretty rare. You’re not a fan?

I was definitely a fan before his England performances and wouldn't necessarily say I'm against him now, but he has a lot to prove before I'll welcome him into the England 5 shirt with more than a "f*ck's sake". I understand nerves or trying too hard, but there were too many that were just too stupid or showed all the coordination of a baby giraffe on ice.

Puja

Do you not wonder why he can look so good playing for Baxter and so bad playing for Jones? After all, Exeter, arguably, have played against better XVs than Scotland's so the 'big step-up' to international rugby is of questionable significance, especially in an empty stadium. I think it was more about who he was playing with than against and more about coaching/preparation than individual performance.

of course ... must be Eddie Jones’ fault. Don’t you ever get bored of saying the same thing ...

I’m not sure Eddie spends much 1:1 time with each individual player. He has a forwards coach so if there’s any culpability from an England POV, perhaps it lies with them? But of course, if you can only take one prejudiced viewpoint, it’s obviously Eddie coaching him on his clear out technique.

FWIW, I’m with Timbo. I feel like Hill is trying too hard and has moments where he thinks he has to do something when he’d be better off doing nothing (i.e. don’t blatantly sack a maul in an illegal position).

Scrumhead wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Puja wrote:
I was definitely a fan before his England performances and wouldn't necessarily say I'm against him now, but he has a lot to prove before I'll welcome him into the England 5 shirt with more than a "f*ck's sake". I understand nerves or trying too hard, but there were too many that were just too stupid or showed all the coordination of a baby giraffe on ice.

Puja

Do you not wonder why he can look so good playing for Baxter and so bad playing for Jones? After all, Exeter, arguably, have played against better XVs than Scotland's so the 'big step-up' to international rugby is of questionable significance, especially in an empty stadium. I think it was more about who he was playing with than against and more about coaching/preparation than individual performance.

of course ... must be Eddie Jones’ fault. Don’t you ever get bored of saying the same thing ...

I’m not sure Eddie spends much 1:1 time with each individual player. He has a forwards coach so if there’s any culpability from an England POV, perhaps it lies with them? But of course, if you can only take one prejudiced viewpoint, it’s obviously Eddie coaching him on his clear out technique.

FWIW, I’m with Timbo. I feel like Hill is trying too hard and has moments where he thinks he has to do something when he’d be better off doing nothing (i.e. don’t blatantly sack a maul in an illegal position).

By all means substitute 'Jones and crew' and 'Baxter and crew' for the individuals' names in my post. It amounts to the same thing if head coaches appoint their assistants doesn't it?

I certainly see what you mean about Hill's application but reining in a new player's enthusiam and helping the guy to learn personal 'under-pressure' judgement is part of management - on and off the field. Of course, on the day neither Farrell nor Itoje set brilliant examples.

I can forgive the odd dull penalty. After all, he wasnt alone and far more experienced players than Hill committed unnecessary offences.
He does tick a lot of boxes but isnt the most agile of movers. At times he does seem to be a bit lumbering. He's a big heavy man so that perhaps isnt so surprising.
I'd stick with him for now. I think he's shown enough to earn further opportunities.

fivepointer wrote:I can forgive the odd dull penalty. After all, he wasnt alone and far more experienced players than Hill committed unnecessary offences.
He does tick a lot of boxes but isnt the most agile of movers. At times he does seem to be a bit lumbering. He's a big heavy man so that perhaps isnt so surprising.
I'd stick with him for now. I think he's shown enough to earn further opportunities.

If you want a bit more movement then... Ribbans maybe?

Digby wrote:

fivepointer wrote:I can forgive the odd dull penalty. After all, he wasnt alone and far more experienced players than Hill committed unnecessary offences.
He does tick a lot of boxes but isnt the most agile of movers. At times he does seem to be a bit lumbering. He's a big heavy man so that perhaps isnt so surprising.
I'd stick with him for now. I think he's shown enough to earn further opportunities.

If you want a bit more movement then... Ribbans maybe?

Eddie's just buying time for George Martin to get some game time under his belt...

FKAS wrote:

Digby wrote:

fivepointer wrote:I can forgive the odd dull penalty. After all, he wasnt alone and far more experienced players than Hill committed unnecessary offences.
He does tick a lot of boxes but isnt the most agile of movers. At times he does seem to be a bit lumbering. He's a big heavy man so that perhaps isnt so surprising.
I'd stick with him for now. I think he's shown enough to earn further opportunities.

If you want a bit more movement then... Ribbans maybe?

Eddie's just buying time for George Martin to get some game time under his belt...

Martin can be the new Underhill, the just what am I supposed to be looking at player. Underhill has of course proven quite a lot by now, though I still don't know he'd be in my XXIII

Digby wrote:

FKAS wrote:

Digby wrote:
If you want a bit more movement then... Ribbans maybe?

Eddie's just buying time for George Martin to get some game time under his belt...

Martin can be the new Underhill, the just what am I supposed to be looking at player. Underhill has of course proven quite a lot by now, though I still don't know he'd be in my XXIII

Martin is definitely not the new Underhill. Might be more of the Lawes replacement. Against Newcastle at the weekend he was the top tackler (around the 20 mark) and carried something like 8 times for 9 metres with 7 gain line successes. That's not what Underhill does but is the gritty tight stuff we might need in the England pack going forward to free up Underhill and Curry to go be nightmares to the opposition.

Ah. So you're saying he's a number 8. The new Itoje perhaps?

Digby wrote:

fivepointer wrote:I can forgive the odd dull penalty. After all, he wasnt alone and far more experienced players than Hill committed unnecessary offences.
He does tick a lot of boxes but isnt the most agile of movers. At times he does seem to be a bit lumbering. He's a big heavy man so that perhaps isnt so surprising.
I'd stick with him for now. I think he's shown enough to earn further opportunities.

If you want a bit more movement then... Ribbans maybe?

I like Ribbans a lot. He should get a chance in the summer. Nothing wrong in having a heavy hitting lock like Hill but he isnt the most nimble of forwards.
On Martin, I think 6 is where he's going to play in the short term at least, likely vying with Ted Hill for a place.

FKAS wrote:

Digby wrote:

FKAS wrote:
Eddie's just buying time for George Martin to get some game time under his belt...

Martin can be the new Underhill, the just what am I supposed to be looking at player. Underhill has of course proven quite a lot by now, though I still don't know he'd be in my XXIII

Martin is definitely not the new Underhill. Might be more of the Lawes replacement. Against Newcastle at the weekend he was the top tackler (around the 20 mark) and carried something like 8 times for 9 metres with 7 gain line successes. That's not what Underhill does but is the gritty tight stuff we might need in the England pack going forward to free up Underhill and Curry to go be nightmares to the opposition.

Underhhill in the sense of what does he actually do, not that the style is reminiscent

So for instance we see Underhil tackles well, but does that offer enough in the highest level to warrant selection? In a game where tackling is required he's going to look good one can assume, in games where other things are more to the fore does he still advance enough of a case.

And with Martin we're not even at the level of he tackles well, he's played so little he has no rep for anything.

Digby wrote: And with Martin we're not even at the level of he tackles well, he's played so little he has no rep for anything.

But just feel that potential ceiling..

16th man wrote:

Digby wrote: And with Martin we're not even at the level of he tackles well, he's played so little he has no rep for anything.

But just feel that potential ceiling..

Genuine artex?

fivepointer wrote:

Digby wrote:

fivepointer wrote:I can forgive the odd dull penalty. After all, he wasnt alone and far more experienced players than Hill committed unnecessary offences.
He does tick a lot of boxes but isnt the most agile of movers. At times he does seem to be a bit lumbering. He's a big heavy man so that perhaps isnt so surprising.
I'd stick with him for now. I think he's shown enough to earn further opportunities.

If you want a bit more movement then... Ribbans maybe?

I like Ribbans a lot. He should get a chance in the summer. Nothing wrong in having a heavy hitting lock like Hill but he isnt the most nimble of forwards.
On Martin, I think 6 is where he's going to play in the short term at least, likely vying with Ted Hill for a place.

Re Ribbans, Eddie's already done an Eddie. Whilst we were all talking about Ribbans a while ago Eddie went straight past him and called up Moon.

Beasties wrote:

fivepointer wrote:

Digby wrote:
If you want a bit more movement then... Ribbans maybe?

I like Ribbans a lot. He should get a chance in the summer. Nothing wrong in having a heavy hitting lock like Hill but he isnt the most nimble of forwards.
On Martin, I think 6 is where he's going to play in the short term at least, likely vying with Ted Hill for a place.

Re Ribbans, Eddie's already done an Eddie. Whilst we were all talking about Ribbans a while ago Eddie went straight past him and called up Moon.

Actually, didn't Eddie call him upto camp really early on?

EDIT - He was named in the squad in Oct 2020.

Digby wrote:

FKAS wrote:

Digby wrote:
Martin can be the new Underhill, the just what am I supposed to be looking at player. Underhill has of course proven quite a lot by now, though I still don't know he'd be in my XXIII

Martin is definitely not the new Underhill. Might be more of the Lawes replacement. Against Newcastle at the weekend he was the top tackler (around the 20 mark) and carried something like 8 times for 9 metres with 7 gain line successes. That's not what Underhill does but is the gritty tight stuff we might need in the England pack going forward to free up Underhill and Curry to go be nightmares to the opposition.

Underhhill in the sense of what does he actually do, not that the style is reminiscent

So for instance we see Underhil tackles well, but does that offer enough in the highest level to warrant selection? In a game where tackling is required he's going to look good one can assume, in games where other things are more to the fore does he still advance enough of a case.

And with Martin we're not even at the level of he tackles well, he's played so little he has no rep for anything.

That is a very lazy and inaccurate summary IMO. Destructive tackling is Underhill’s biggest stand out quality, but he’s far more than just a tackler. His carrying has improved a lot and he hits good lines, often in tandem with Curry. He’s frequently one of our best players so how you arrive at the conclusion that he doesn’t ‘advance enough of a case’ is beyond me.

We pretty much got done over at the breakdown throughout the 6 Nations which ruined our attacking platform. A fit Underhill would have made a big difference to that IMO.

Scrumhead wrote:

Digby wrote:

FKAS wrote:
Martin is definitely not the new Underhill. Might be more of the Lawes replacement. Against Newcastle at the weekend he was the top tackler (around the 20 mark) and carried something like 8 times for 9 metres with 7 gain line successes. That's not what Underhill does but is the gritty tight stuff we might need in the England pack going forward to free up Underhill and Curry to go be nightmares to the opposition.

Underhhill in the sense of what does he actually do, not that the style is reminiscent

So for instance we see Underhil tackles well, but does that offer enough in the highest level to warrant selection? In a game where tackling is required he's going to look good one can assume, in games where other things are more to the fore does he still advance enough of a case.

And with Martin we're not even at the level of he tackles well, he's played so little he has no rep for anything.

That is a very lazy and inaccurate summary IMO. Destructive tackling is Underhill’s biggest stand out quality, but he’s far more than just a tackler. His carrying has improved a lot and he hits good lines, often in tandem with Curry. He’s frequently one of our best players so how you arrive at the conclusion that he doesn’t ‘advance enough of a case’ is beyond me.

We pretty much got done over at the breakdown throughout the 6 Nations which ruined our attacking platform. A fit Underhill would have made a big difference to that IMO.

No unfair points, but would I pick him over Willis as a for instance. My inclination is I'd go for Willis, partly because Underhill doesn't offer enough in the round even with improvements. I say this confessing whilst I like Underhill a lot I've never been convinced by him

What are the big positives you'd see with Underhill coming back into the backrow over someone like Wilson, and I assume it'd Wilson you'd be dropping from the 6N lineup for Underhill, that would be likely to bolster our breakdown work? If anything I'd tend to think Wilson better at the breakdown

I think Underhill is a bit underrated when it comes to the breakdown, but the big thing for me is his tackling makes everyone else’s jobs there a huge amount easier. Consistently putting opposition carriers on the back foot is like gold dust. It’s not like it’s just his head on tackling that stands out either. He’s made some outstanding cover tackles and just seems to know where to be.

What do you actually view as a weakness in him? What does ‘in the round’ cover? He’s no lineout jumper for sure, but I’m not sure why he’s considered a one trick pony by so many.

Raggs wrote:

Beasties wrote:

fivepointer wrote:
I like Ribbans a lot. He should get a chance in the summer. Nothing wrong in having a heavy hitting lock like Hill but he isnt the most nimble of forwards.
On Martin, I think 6 is where he's going to play in the short term at least, likely vying with Ted Hill for a place.

Re Ribbans, Eddie's already done an Eddie. Whilst we were all talking about Ribbans a while ago Eddie went straight past him and called up Moon.

Actually, didn't Eddie call him upto camp really early on?

EDIT - He was named in the squad in Oct 2020.

I've no doubt you're right. Relying on one's memory rarely yields positive results in my case. Obv I'm gonna have to use google more.

Mikey Brown wrote:I think Underhill is a bit underrated when it comes to the breakdown, but the big thing for me is his tackling makes everyone else’s jobs there a huge amount easier. Consistently putting opposition carriers on the back foot is like gold dust. It’s not like it’s just his head on tackling that stands out either. He’s made some outstanding cover tackles and just seems to know where to be.

What do you actually view as a weakness in him? What does ‘in the round’ cover? He’s no lineout jumper for sure, but I’m not sure why he’s considered a one trick pony by so many.

He's not an especially good carrier (cf Curry or Willis), he's not often seen linking with the backs (he's not alone there), he's not especially brilliant over the ball (cf Willis), not even sure he's a great decison maker at the breakdown (cf Wilson). He's a destructive tackler off first phase which is why he wears 7 for set piece purpose, and as you say a good tracker and cover tackler. All of Willis, Wilson and Curry are smarter players though. I don't think anyone is saying he has a weakness per se. I like him as a player, and he's definitely improving, but his USP is his tackling.

Beasties wrote:

Raggs wrote:

Beasties wrote: Re Ribbans, Eddie's already done an Eddie. Whilst we were all talking about Ribbans a while ago Eddie went straight past him and called up Moon.

Actually, didn't Eddie call him upto camp really early on?

EDIT - He was named in the squad in Oct 2020.

I've no doubt you're right. Relying on one's memory rarely yields positive results in my case. Obv I'm gonna have to use google more.

Edit: Moon got called up in Jan 2020 for the "6N squad".