RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:
This pretty much sums it up for me. I think Nowell doesn't have the top end pace and, for all his other attributes, this means I'd have him down the pecking order. Just as for all the good things Younds does his passing means he shouldn't be playing for Eng.

Yarp

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:
This pretty much sums it up for me. I think Nowell doesn't have the top end pace and, for all his other attributes, this means I'd have him down the pecking order. Just as for all the good things Younds does his passing means he shouldn't be playing for Eng.

Yarp

His ball presentation was very good, particularly given the traffic he was carrying in. But I'm still inclined to think he's not a test winger.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:
This pretty much sums it up for me. I think Nowell doesn't have the top end pace and, for all his other attributes, this means I'd have him down the pecking order. Just as for all the good things Younds does his passing means he shouldn't be playing for Eng.

Yarp

His ball presentation was very good, particularly given the traffic he was carrying in. But I'm still inclined to think he's not a test winger.

Its interesting that you feel the need to highlight such a basic skill, and that it might be a positive in his favour. Know what you mean though.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:
Yarp

His ball presentation was very good, particularly given the traffic he was carrying in. But I'm still inclined to think he's not a test winger.

Its interesting that you feel the need to highlight such a basic skill, and that it might be a positive in his favour. Know what you mean though.

Worth nothing Wasps didn't apply enough pressure, Smith was well policed and that was pretty much enough. Still, driving basic skills is what sets teams apart.

He has held his spot over time on merit, and brought spikiness that was evidently lacking before.
He still got positive reviews on this board for his poorer outings (wal, fra )
Eng. has not produced wings of the size/power/skill of the SH nations if that is the measure...very
few world class in the last 30 yrs. to be fair.
His skill level and rugby instinct are good..best of a ( relatively) bad bunch as mentioned.

Galfon wrote:He has held his spot over time on merit, and brought spikiness that was evidently lacking before.
He still got positive reviews on this board for his poorer outings (wal, fra )
Eng. has not produced wings of the size/power/skill of the SH nations if that is the measure...very
few world class in the last 30 yrs. to be fair.
His skill level and rugby instinct are good..best of a ( relatively) bad bunch as mentioned.

You guys are unbelieveably conservative when it comes to outside backs. You seldom invest in dynamos, preferring instead the staid solidity of underpant models.

Oakboy wrote: Nowell was excellent and anybody who still claims that he does not have real pace is denying the evidence of their own eyes.

He's a born worker. You go looking for work, you find it.
The Lad has a lot of heart.

morepork wrote:You guys are unbelieveably conservative when it comes to outside backs. You seldom invest in dynamos, preferring instead the staid solidity of underpant models.

MarkCueto_280x390_788235a.jpg

Shudder to think what your Google search history looks like MP.

WaspInWales wrote:

morepork wrote:You guys are unbelieveably conservative when it comes to outside backs. You seldom invest in dynamos, preferring instead the staid solidity of underpant models.

MarkCueto_280x390_788235a.jpg

Shudder to think what your Google search history looks like MP.

He'll find the photos of Guilford in that Rarotonga bar even if it costs him his freedom.

WaspInWales wrote:

morepork wrote:You guys are unbelieveably conservative when it comes to outside backs. You seldom invest in dynamos, preferring instead the staid solidity of underpant models.

MarkCueto_280x390_788235a.jpg

Shudder to think what your Google search history looks like MP.

It looks like your Mum.


She shudders too.

morepork wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:

morepork wrote:You guys are unbelieveably conservative when it comes to outside backs. You seldom invest in dynamos, preferring instead the staid solidity of underpant models.

MarkCueto_280x390_788235a.jpg

Shudder to think what your Google search history looks like MP.

It looks like your Mum.


She shudders too.

Has Len hacked your account?

Sent from my SM-N920G using Tapatalk

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
His ball presentation was very good, particularly given the traffic he was carrying in. But I'm still inclined to think he's not a test winger.

Its interesting that you feel the need to highlight such a basic skill, and that it might be a positive in his favour. Know what you mean though.

Worth nothing Wasps didn't apply enough pressure, Smith was well policed and that was pretty much enough. Still, driving basic skills is what sets teams apart.

..maybe here

kk67 wrote:

Oakboy wrote: Nowell was excellent and anybody who still claims that he does not have real pace is denying the evidence of their own eyes.

He's a born worker. You go looking for work, you find it.
The Lad has a lot of heart.

yay.

As an outsider looking in, Nowell may not be amongst the top 10 international wings out there but he is the best England have got right now, and to my mind he is one of your better players within the team as a whole. I don't know whether that says more about me, Nowell or the current state of the England team.

Milner-Skudder doesn't look like he has much top end. Does that mean England fans wouldn't want him in the squad?

Len wrote:Milner-Skudder doesn't look like he has much top end. Does that mean England fans wouldn't want him in the squad?

Too hairy..

bruce wrote:As an outsider looking in, Nowell may not be amongst the top 10 international wings out there but he is the best England have got right now, and to my mind he is one of your better players within the team as a whole. I don't know whether that says more about me, Nowell or the current state of the England team.

How likely are we to ever have fifteen top world class players? In 2003 we had quite a few but we also had others that would not have made a World 3rd XV: Kay, Dawson, Tindall, Cohen & Lewsey, perhaps. I'd rank Nowell below them but so what?.

We have few players, if any, who would make a World 2nd XV. In time, several may rise to that level: Itoje, Launchbury perhaps?

What really matters is maximising potential. I see Nowell as very likely to do that as an individual and an integral part of the team.

bruce wrote:

Len wrote:Milner-Skudder doesn't look like he has much top end. Does that mean England fans wouldn't want him in the squad?

Too hairy..

He is a hairy bugger its true. He has a step that makes me have a sex wee when I see it though.

bruce wrote:As an outsider looking in, Nowell may not be amongst the top 10 international wings out there but he is the best England have got right now, and to my mind he is one of your better players within the team as a whole. I don't know whether that says more about me, Nowell or the current state of the England team.

I'm not convinced Nowell is the best England have right now, he's reasonably in the mix but I'd pick from the following before putting Nowell on the wing, May, Yarde, Watson, Wade and Rokoduguni. I think Nowell is in the next group down with Ashton pushing those ahead, but not pushing that hard, he's certainly okay though.

Len wrote:

bruce wrote:

Len wrote:Milner-Skudder doesn't look like he has much top end. Does that mean England fans wouldn't want him in the squad?

Too hairy..

He is a hairy bugger its true. He has a step that makes me have a sex wee when I see it though.

there you have it. Nowell is a tidy enough player when not defending badly, but doesn't have much as a runner that'll worry international opposition overly; this debate started with Oakboy saying he had real pace...and he hasn't.

I'm not quite sure why everyone loves Jack so much really, in the context of England becoming a truly consistently top team (if that's not an arrogant aspiration). Sure he may 'maximise his potential', whatever that is, but if the very best he is ever going to be is world 3rd XV, then why wouldn't you want someone better? Its true England doesn't have a queue of top wings, but I wouldn't have him at even the front of that. I'm not saying he is a poor player at all- though his defence has looked poor on the right wing- but that he is a squad filler at best for me; see Digby's list.

Jack should be made captain. World class winger and a dapper dresser.The Beckham of rugby, if you will.

p/d wrote:Jack should be made captain. World class winger and a dapper dresser.The Beckham of rugby, if you will.

This. Captain Jack. Natty rat's tail, and rakish headgear.

Banquo wrote:

Len wrote:

bruce wrote:
Too hairy..

He is a hairy bugger its true. He has a step that makes me have a sex wee when I see it though.

there you have it. Nowell is a tidy enough player when not defending badly, but doesn't have much as a runner that'll worry international opposition overly; this debate started with Oakboy saying he had real pace...and he hasn't.

I'm not quite sure why everyone loves Jack so much really, in the context of England becoming a truly consistently top team (if that's not an arrogant aspiration). Sure he may 'maximise his potential', whatever that is, but if the very best he is ever going to be is world 3rd XV, then why wouldn't you want someone better? Its true England doesn't have a queue of top wings, but I wouldn't have him at even the front of that. I'm not saying he is a poor player at all- though his defence has looked poor on the right wing- but that he is a squad filler at best for me; see Digby's list.

I think most would agree he's not an out and out speed merchant, but he runs some good support lines and is dangerous close to the opponent's line, where he is as likely as any wing to get over. I remember a club game last season (or it might have been early this season) against London Irish, where Nowell intercepted a pass inside his own 22, set off for the try line at the other end with nobody in front of him and a decent head start, and was overhauled fairly easily by a L.I. centre whose name now escapes me. He will not run in many long range tries.

I think he is summed up perfectly by his tackling this 6 nations. Generally dogged and physical, one massive Lewsey-esque trysaver, but completely failed with some of the basics at times.

He can do a lot of the extra bits, but it would be great if he had the essentials nailed.

I do like him, despite the pikey tail, I just don't want the first adjective I'd use of a winger to be 'scrappy'. I think I'm in the camp that say he's not really a winger and could probably be just as effective at OC/FB if he spent time there. The way he plays certainly suits Exeter though.

I don't know if his defensive issues are more with positioning or technique, he certainly seems to be brave and if he's more suited to defending there I'd like to see more of him at 15.

Mikey Brown wrote:I think he is summed up perfectly by his tackling this 6 nations. Generally dogged and physical, one massive Lewsey-esque trysaver, but completely failed with some of the basics at times.

He can do a lot of the extra bits, but it would be great if he had the essentials nailed.

I do like him, despite the pikey tail, I just don't want the first adjective I'd use of a winger to be 'scrappy'. I think I'm in the camp that say he's not really a winger and could probably be just as effective at OC/FB if he spent time there. The way he plays certainly suits Exeter though.

I don't know if his defensive issues are more with positioning or technique, he certainly seems to be brave and if he's more suited to defending there I'd like to see more of him at 15.

Substitute haircut and name in the relevant bits and you've got.....Mike Brown.



BEATCH!