RugbyRebels

If we get in to the mindset of ‘Grand Slam or the tournament is shot’, we’ll face a lot of disappointment.

I’m as pi$$ed off with the needlessly stupid selections as anyone else and I’m not feeling overly optimistic about tomorrow’s game, but as it stands, we still have a chance of winning the tournament.

So far I think Ireland’s results have somewhat flattered them. They have a good record at home but they were poor against Scotland and lucky to win IMO. They were much better against Wales, but they’re nowhere near the dominant force they were in 2018. Let’s see how well they travel.

Scrumhead wrote:If we get in to the mindset of ‘Grand Slam or the tournament is shot’, we’ll face a lot of disappointment.

I’m as pi$$ed off with the needlessly stupid selections as anyone else and I’m not feeling overly optimistic about tomorrow’s game, but as it stands, we still have a chance of winning the tournament.

So far I think Ireland’s results have somewhat flattered them. They have a good record at home but they were poor against Scotland and lucky to win IMO. They were much better against Wales, but they’re nowhere near the dominant force they were in 2018. Let’s see how well they travel.

Indeed and indeed....but I do think Ireland have added something to their game that will cause us different problems to the last couple of times, when essentially our plan was to smother their carriers at the tackle line, and which Eddie looks like he is going for again as well as shoring up the lineout.

I thought our lineout went well in Scotland given the conditions. And whilst POM is a lineout threat he's also part of a triple threat at the breakdown where we've made ourselves much weaker, and I don't want to claim to be Nostradamus or anything but I reckon there'll be more breakdowns than lineouts.

As of today however I don't find I'm that bothered, I'm not wholly sanguine but in the main interest in the side has been laid dormant and I'll wait until they do something interesting before being interested

Digby wrote:I thought our lineout went well in Scotland given the conditions. And whilst POM is a lineout threat he's also part of a triple threat at the breakdown where we've made ourselves much weaker, and I don't want to claim to be Nostradamus or anything but I reckon there'll be more breakdowns than lineouts.

As of today however I don't find I'm that bothered, I'm not wholly sanguine but in the main interest in the side has been laid dormant and I'll wait until they do something interesting before being interested

Scotland's lineout isn't as good as Ireland's. Eddie himself said that's why he picked lawes, so take it up with him. I agree we've weakened the breakdown, but as I said, he's looking to knock the carriers back. As you repeatedly say, there are always trade offs.

Scrumhead wrote:So far I think Ireland’s results have somewhat flattered them. They have a good record at home but they were poor against Scotland and lucky to win IMO. They were much better against Wales, but they’re nowhere near the dominant force they were in 2018. Let’s see how well they travel.

Agreed but somehow Ireland have won two out of two and there is credit in that. Playing badly and winning is one step up from playing badly and losing. The other factor in all this is that the other teams usually raise their game against us. It could be that Ireland will be significantly better on Sunday than they have been so far.

It is not unreasonable to suggest that we will have to be considerably better than we have been so far to beat them. Has Jones picked the right team to do that? Who knows. He reports that in the build-up the team has been better in training than at any time in the 6N so far. Whether he is worth listening to on that is a matter of opinion at this stage. We can all tell him on Sunday evening!

Digby wrote:I thought our lineout went well in Scotland given the conditions. And whilst POM is a lineout threat he's also part of a triple threat at the breakdown where we've made ourselves much weaker, and I don't want to claim to be Nostradamus or anything but I reckon there'll be more breakdowns than lineouts.

As of today however I don't find I'm that bothered, I'm not wholly sanguine but in the main interest in the side has been laid dormant and I'll wait until they do something interesting before being interested

Per Healy:

I know Jones has spoken about the importance of the line-out, and Devin Toner coming in for Iain Henderson obviously makes Ireland even stronger there, given they already have two fine jumpers in James Ryan and O’Mahony.
But there are 40 line-outs per game at the very most. At Murrayfield a fortnight ago, there were 39. And that was a freak fixture because of the weather.
There will be around 200 rucks in the match, and it is there that England will be hurt if their cohesion is off.
Jaco Peyper is not a bad referee at all. However, the breakdown has become nigh-on impossible for the officials. In the red zones, Ireland have been very effective – both against Scotland and then against Wales. It seems like there has been a policy for the entire team to be hugely aggressive and to push the boundaries, both by creeping beyond the offside line and when jackalling on the floor.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:I thought our lineout went well in Scotland given the conditions. And whilst POM is a lineout threat he's also part of a triple threat at the breakdown where we've made ourselves much weaker, and I don't want to claim to be Nostradamus or anything but I reckon there'll be more breakdowns than lineouts.

As of today however I don't find I'm that bothered, I'm not wholly sanguine but in the main interest in the side has been laid dormant and I'll wait until they do something interesting before being interested

Per Healy:

I know Jones has spoken about the importance of the line-out, and Devin Toner coming in for Iain Henderson obviously makes Ireland even stronger there, given they already have two fine jumpers in James Ryan and O’Mahony.
But there are 40 line-outs per game at the very most. At Murrayfield a fortnight ago, there were 39. And that was a freak fixture because of the weather.
There will be around 200 rucks in the match, and it is there that England will be hurt if their cohesion is off.
Jaco Peyper is not a bad referee at all. However, the breakdown has become nigh-on impossible for the officials. In the red zones, Ireland have been very effective – both against Scotland and then against Wales. It seems like there has been a policy for the entire team to be hugely aggressive and to push the boundaries, both by creeping beyond the offside line and when jackalling on the floor.

We join Ireland in being offside, a lot, we've not been quite so bad at the breakdown when it comes to pushing boundaries. It could actually be a poor game if both sides are allowed to create their own offside lines as they've done so far, I was almost tempted to start a thread about where is the line supposed to be, because I'll be damned if I think it's where Itoje stands

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:I thought our lineout went well in Scotland given the conditions. And whilst POM is a lineout threat he's also part of a triple threat at the breakdown where we've made ourselves much weaker, and I don't want to claim to be Nostradamus or anything but I reckon there'll be more breakdowns than lineouts.

As of today however I don't find I'm that bothered, I'm not wholly sanguine but in the main interest in the side has been laid dormant and I'll wait until they do something interesting before being interested

Per Healy:

I know Jones has spoken about the importance of the line-out, and Devin Toner coming in for Iain Henderson obviously makes Ireland even stronger there, given they already have two fine jumpers in James Ryan and O’Mahony.
But there are 40 line-outs per game at the very most. At Murrayfield a fortnight ago, there were 39. And that was a freak fixture because of the weather.
There will be around 200 rucks in the match, and it is there that England will be hurt if their cohesion is off.
Jaco Peyper is not a bad referee at all. However, the breakdown has become nigh-on impossible for the officials. In the red zones, Ireland have been very effective – both against Scotland and then against Wales. It seems like there has been a policy for the entire team to be hugely aggressive and to push the boundaries, both by creeping beyond the offside line and when jackalling on the floor.

We join Ireland in being offside, a lot, we've not been quite so bad at the breakdown when it comes to pushing boundaries. It could actually be a poor game if both sides are allowed to create their own offside lines as they've done so far, I was almost tempted to start a thread about where is the line supposed to be, because I'll be damned if I think it's where Itoje stands

Which makes Healy right about one thing: we'll need to get on the right side of the ref from the first minute.

Oakboy wrote:
Which makes Healy right about one thing: we'll need to get on the right side of the ref from the first minute.

When is that an idea one wants to ignore?

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Which makes Healy right about one thing: we'll need to get on the right side of the ref from the first minute.

When is that an idea one wants to ignore?

Never, of course, but might Ireland just have a bit more nous in that respect? It will be interesting.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Which makes Healy right about one thing: we'll need to get on the right side of the ref from the first minute.

When is that an idea one wants to ignore?

Never, of course, but might Ireland just have a bit more nous in that respect? It will be interesting.

Momentum is momentum, though I don't know if this is much about Ireland, we tend to win when we make fast starts and lose/struggle if playing catch up.

There are some refs who might tend to start going more with one side, but I don't think that's the case for Sunday

looking at these Eddie's team made me think. How many examples of someone successfully switching positions at the international level can anyone think of?

Success means looking as comfortable in their new position as they did in their old or looks good enough that they don't look out of place. Dallaglio and Hill, I think, were both 7s before being asked to play 8 &6. There's probably a heap of french examples I can't think of tbf.

bitts wrote:looking at these Eddie's team made me think. How many examples of someone successfully switching positions at the international level can anyone think of?

Success means looking as comfortable in their new position as they did in their old or looks good enough that they don't look out of place. Dallaglio and Hill, I think, were both 7s before being asked to play 8 &6. There's probably a heap of french examples I can't think of tbf.

Dallagio was played at 7 In Rowell era because he was really fast to begin with though I recall him saying he really wanted to play 6 all along as his strength was carrying. Hill I think always preferred 7 but imo he was a bit understated/quiet in this role ( I’m meaning in an England context as opposed to Saracens or British Lions) compared to the more flamboyant talents of say Back and the workrate 6 roll was where he really found his forte.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Which makes Healy right about one thing: we'll need to get on the right side of the ref from the first minute.

When is that an idea one wants to ignore?

Never, of course, but might Ireland just have a bit more nous in that respect? It will be interesting.

On the upside their captain is as unlikeable as ours

Oakboy wrote:...we'll need to get on the right side of the ref from the first minute.

When is that not the case ?

p/d wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:
When is that an idea one wants to ignore?

Never, of course, but might Ireland just have a bit more nous in that respect? It will be interesting.

On the upside their captain is as unlikeable as ours

But perhaps a better footballer

Spiffy wrote:

p/d wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Never, of course, but might Ireland just have a bit more nous in that respect? It will be interesting.

On the upside their captain is as unlikeable as ours

But perhaps a better footballer

He's got the diving and complaining to the ref part nailed

bitts wrote:looking at these Eddie's team made me think. How many examples of someone successfully switching positions at the international level can anyone think of?

Success means looking as comfortable in their new position as they did in their old or looks good enough that they don't look out of place. Dallaglio and Hill, I think, were both 7s before being asked to play 8 &6. There's probably a heap of french examples I can't think of tbf.

Within this team, Curry at 6 was working well, and well on his way to being just as good (and had already proved my preconception to be wrong), Curry at 8 is far too early to write off as a failed experiment (though not meeting your criteria after 2 matches) Daly at wing is an outright improvement over Daly at OC (proving me wrong at the time), Could even argue that Farrell at IC is at least as effective as Farrell at FH.

At this late stage, if you were allowed just one change to the 23, what would you do?


I think I'd have Ibitoye on the bench instead of Ewels.

If allowed one change I'd drop a lock, if I was allowed two changes I'd drop two locks.

As an aside this two locks on the bench nonsense does highlight the importance of dropping the bench down to 5-6 players

Digby wrote:As an aside this two locks on the bench nonsense does highlight the importance of dropping the bench down to 5-6 players

Do you not like Bill's proposal of going back to 'injury only substitutions' then?

Digby wrote:As an aside this two locks on the bench nonsense does highlight the importance of dropping the bench down to 5-6 players

Agree.

Oakboy wrote:At this late stage, if you were allowed just one change to the 23, what would you do?


I think I'd have Ibitoye on the bench instead of Ewels.

If 1 change, Lawes for Mercer. If 2, then Ewels for Thorley.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:As an aside this two locks on the bench nonsense does highlight the importance of dropping the bench down to 5-6 players

Do you not like Bill's proposal of going back to 'injury only substitutions' then?

If he has a plan to police it I'll listen else no