RugbyRebels

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:58 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:53 pm Rodd should be a straight swap for Marler. I would also start Cole and keep Baxter/Stuart on bench

Then hope George hits his jumpers ….. I know. It wasn’t his fault

Why would you not start Baxter, given how well he did for 60 minutes last week?

Puja

I’d give Baxter his spurs as starter. Rodd is the obvious bench option. And I agree with others that Coley would be a decent foil at scrum time.

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 11:35 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 11:19 pm Obama must regret that high tackle so much. His team lose the final and he misses out on the perfect chance to get a run at the England 1 shirt.

I can’t say I’d figured Lyogun was on the radar but I don’t know who else would get the shot.

Watching the highlights back Baxter does appear in support at a few very key attacking rucks just in time. A pretty good shift for a first start, but an obvious step up and a lot to learn still in the scrum.

Brantingham would've been my choice to be next up, but his cause has definitely suffered from Diamond being a petty git and not playing him after he agreed to join Saracens. Hard to call up someone who hasn't played since March.

Puja

Big Phil is not on the radar at the moment. Has done really well at Falcons, but is a little way off yet and yes Dimes kind of shafted him towards the end of the season. I think he’ll be there or thereabouts by 6 nations time.

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:58 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:53 pm Rodd should be a straight swap for Marler. I would also start Cole and keep Baxter/Stuart on bench

Then hope George hits his jumpers ….. I know. It wasn’t his fault

Why would you not start Baxter, given how well he did for 60 minutes last week?

Puja

I was really impressed with the baby faced assassin, but would still like to see us stick to the initial script and have him coming off the bench. He adds a bit more dynamism around the park and I want to see what he can do with more oxygen in his lungs against a tiring defence.

Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:59 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:53 pm Rodd should be a straight swap for Marler. I would also start Cole and keep Baxter/Stuart on bench

Then hope George hits his jumpers ….. I know. It wasn’t his fault

them lineouts have become complicated since front middle back (or JFM ::).

I think the ‘hit CCS in the arse’ call has legs though

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:14 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:58 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:53 pm Rodd should be a straight swap for Marler. I would also start Cole and keep Baxter/Stuart on bench

Then hope George hits his jumpers ….. I know. It wasn’t his fault

Why would you not start Baxter, given how well he did for 60 minutes last week?

Puja

I was really impressed with the baby faced assassin, but would still like to see us stick to the initial script and have him coming off the bench. He adds a bit more dynamism around the park and I want to see what he can do with more oxygen in his lungs against a tiring defence.

Why not use him to help tire than and then introduce the Rodd!

Forget the props. Does anybody have an opinion on Alex Coles?

Epaminondas Pules wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:16 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:14 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:58 pm

Why would you not start Baxter, given how well he did for 60 minutes last week?

Puja

I was really impressed with the baby faced assassin, but would still like to see us stick to the initial script and have him coming off the bench. He adds a bit more dynamism around the park and I want to see what he can do with more oxygen in his lungs against a tiring defence.

Why not use him to help tire than and then introduce the Rodd!

Fair point. ( I love ‘the Rodd’! Our equivalent of the beast)
I think I’m probably being a tad pessimistic about how he fares on next outing v Lomax. Hell Baxter or Rodd I’m happy. Just glad to see them both in the 23

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:21 pm Forget the props. Does anybody have an opinion on Alex Coles?

Has an inoffensive vocal range, as demonstrated on his likeable 2023 hit I Hate Your Friends.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:21 pm Forget the props. Does anybody have an opinion on Alex Coles?

I think he’s fourth choice 6.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:45 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:21 pm Forget the props. Does anybody have an opinion on Alex Coles?

I think he’s fourth choice 6.

I assume FKAS has some stats to back that up?

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 7:06 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:45 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:21 pm Forget the props. Does anybody have an opinion on Alex Coles?

I think he’s fourth choice 6.

I assume FKAS has some stats to back that up?

Yep. He played no8 for Ely RFC u12s.

Epaminondas Pules wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:02 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:58 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:53 pm Rodd should be a straight swap for Marler. I would also start Cole and keep Baxter/Stuart on bench

Then hope George hits his jumpers ….. I know. It wasn’t his fault

Why would you not start Baxter, given how well he did for 60 minutes last week?

Puja

Coley would be a decent foil at scrum time.

bit fishy...

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 7:08 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 7:06 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:45 pm

I think he’s fourth choice 6.

I assume FKAS has some stats to back that up?

Yep. He played no8 for Ely RFC u12s.

Stom wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:12 pm We’re always going to lose out with a lock at 6. And can we trust a 6 at lock if there’s an injury? Since Lawes I’m not sure. But, hey, maybe we should give it a go. We have 3 players who can play lock to some extent in CCS, Ted, and Dombrandt. Do we pick one of them on the bench covering lock?

CCS surely not (for now, at least)

Leaves us to exposed at the lineout, particularly against the ABs under Robertson who themselves aren't adverse to using Barrett at 6 in order to maintain three strong lineout jumpers on the field.

FKAS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:14 am

Stom wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:12 pm We’re always going to lose out with a lock at 6. And can we trust a 6 at lock if there’s an injury? Since Lawes I’m not sure. But, hey, maybe we should give it a go. We have 3 players who can play lock to some extent in CCS, Ted, and Dombrandt. Do we pick one of them on the bench covering lock?

CCS surely not (for now, at least)

aren't adverse to using Barrett at 6 in order to maintain three strong lineout jumpers on the field.

never works that well tbh . Usually ends in a yellow or red. Mostert is also a good example of that when PSDT isn't about.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:00 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:14 am

Stom wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:12 pm We’re always going to lose out with a lock at 6. And can we trust a 6 at lock if there’s an injury? Since Lawes I’m not sure. But, hey, maybe we should give it a go. We have 3 players who can play lock to some extent in CCS, Ted, and Dombrandt. Do we pick one of them on the bench covering lock?

CCS surely not (for now, at least)

aren't adverse to using Barrett at 6 in order to maintain three strong lineout jumpers on the field.

never works that well tbh . Usually ends in a yellow or red. Mostert is also a good example of that when PSDT isn't about.

Worked annoyingly well at the weekend though didn't it.

Robertson likes his set piece. Lineout, rolling maul and scrum were all go to areas of strength for his Crusaders.

He was at 6 for about 3 minutes, oddly.

Still, he’s had some good games there.

FKAS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:24 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:00 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:14 am

aren't adverse to using Barrett at 6 in order to maintain three strong lineout jumpers on the field.

never works that well tbh . Usually ends in a yellow or red. Mostert is also a good example of that when PSDT isn't about.

Worked annoyingly well at the weekend though didn't it.

Robertson likes his set piece. Lineout, rolling maul and scrum were all go to areas of strength for his Crusaders.

if as as mikey says, not that impactful- can't say I noticed the switch in honesty.
All coaches should like a set piece tbh, if they don't, they are mad.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:38 am He was at 6 for about 3 minutes, oddly.

Still, he’s had some good games there.

I'm not that convinced by that particular Barrett, esp as a back row. Certainly his early appearances there seem to have been characterised by daft mistakes.

Charlie Morgan proposing that England should go to a 6:2 bench split and bring Dombrandt onto the bench and... I think he's possibly right. I'm not a fan of 6:2s as of a general rule, but our game does rely on asking CCS and Underhill to go very hard and empty the tank and I don't have faith in Coles as an effective regular 6. I'd rather tell Martin to empty the tank as well and finish with a back 5 of Itoje, Coles, Earl, TCurry, Dombrandt.

The risk is either having FSmith as 23 (and having MSmith covering 15, but leaving us zero impact changes on the bench), or have Sleightholme as 23 and require Furbank at 10 if MSmith goes down injured. However, I think in order to beat NZ at Eden Park, we're going to need to gamble a little bit and take some risks.

Puja

How did you (or CM) manage to write all that without referencing Earl at 12?

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 11:58 am How did you (or CM) manage to write all that without referencing Earl at 12?

It's just assumed by now.

Puja

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:41 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:24 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:00 am
never works that well tbh . Usually ends in a yellow or red. Mostert is also a good example of that when PSDT isn't about.

Worked annoyingly well at the weekend though didn't it.

Robertson likes his set piece. Lineout, rolling maul and scrum were all go to areas of strength for his Crusaders.

if as as mikey says, not that impactful- can't say I noticed the switch in honesty.
All coaches should like a set piece tbh, if they don't, they are mad.

All coaches want a set piece that's reliably solid. Some coaches want a set piece that's a weapon. Borthwick and Robertson both want it as a weapon.

Borthwick has specifically referenced speed to the breakdown since the match. Maybe he realises he needs to compromise at the lineout if he’s wedded to the expansive attack. Lawes was a bit of cheat code in his last two international seasons. CCS could get to that level quickish but after him that style of no6 is either non existent or sat home/on a beach clearly out of the picture.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 4:12 pm Borthwick has specifically referenced speed to the breakdown since the match. Maybe he realises he needs to compromise at the lineout if he’s wedded to the expansive attack. Lawes was a bit of cheat code in his last two international seasons. CCS could get to that level quickish but after him that style of no6 is either non existent or sat home/on a beach clearly out of the picture.

I'd say it's more speed of thought and decision-making, rather than speed of foot - CCS has the distinct advantage over other times we've tried to have a tall 6 in that he is actually a back row who can play lock, rather than just a mobile lock, so he's got the instincts already.

Sometimes though, it's just a case that you have to accept turnovers will occasionally happen when you play expansively against a very good team. One of the ones I saw in the m-b-m, Mitchell gets tackled and Underhill looks for the pop pass offload off the deck that could've kept an overlap alive - in that second of delay, Codie Taylor pulls off a ridiculous steal of the ball. Yes, Underhill could've secured the ball and, with hindsight, should've done, but that doesn't mean I don't want him calling for that offload 10 times out of 10 in that exact situation. Gotta take risks if we want to score tries.

Puja