vs Georgia

[Banquo]

I still don't think it works - you're doubling down on their strengths and leaving their weaknesses open. But we'll see whether Eddie tries it against Ireland - I suspect we'll see Hill back.

Good go forward from Billy?! Were we watching the same game? He made sod all impact from the base and twice got hit backward behind the majority of his pack. His 8 picks from the sequence of early 5m scrums were embarrassing. He looked hesitant in the carry - trying to step rather than power.

His defensive shift was good, but I'm not willing to forgive the almost red card. You can call it exquisitely well judged, but I'm seeing a tackle where he has no control and, if the ball carrier drops his shoulder an inch, Billy's got an early bath and a 4 week ban for something that was entirely unnecessary.

Puja

You are doubling down on a redundant argument as intended.

Yes, billy broke several times from the base, getting over the gainline comfortably at least three times, notably once in a perfect exit strategy. He was knocked back twice, unsurprisingly given the difficulties in timing in the conditions and the amount of carrying he was doing. Just feels like because he’s not quite the player he was- and he’s heavily marked- folks don’t give him credit. His handling was good too.

And lol on the ‘nearly a bad tackle but actually a good one’ argument.

I don't get the lol - he's not in control and a slight movement from the opposition sees him red carded. It's not a good tackle; it's a lucky tackle. Functionally no different from Farrell on the young Wasps 10, except Billy's oppo didn't dip at all.

It's reckless and poor play to throw himself in like that given the penalties nowadays. And entirely unnecessary considering he had him lined up and could've delivered just as dominant a hit a foot lower.

Puja

If my aunt were a bloke she’d be a bicycle

[Puja]

You are doubling down on a redundant argument as intended.

Yes, billy broke several times from the base, getting over the gainline comfortably at least three times, notably once in a perfect exit strategy. He was knocked back twice, unsurprisingly given the difficulties in timing in the conditions and the amount of carrying he was doing. Just feels like because he’s not quite the player he was- and he’s heavily marked- folks don’t give him credit. His handling was good too.

And lol on the ‘nearly a bad tackle but actually a good one’ argument.

I don't get the lol - he's not in control and a slight movement from the opposition sees him red carded. It's not a good tackle; it's a lucky tackle. Functionally no different from Farrell on the young Wasps 10, except Billy's oppo didn't dip at all.

It's reckless and poor play to throw himself in like that given the penalties nowadays. And entirely unnecessary considering he had him lined up and could've delivered just as dominant a hit a foot lower.

Puja

If my aunt were a bloke she’d be a bicycle

So you'd say it's an excellent height for him to be tackling at? He should keep doing that?

Puja

[Banquo]

I don't get the lol - he's not in control and a slight movement from the opposition sees him red carded. It's not a good tackle; it's a lucky tackle. Functionally no different from Farrell on the young Wasps 10, except Billy's oppo didn't dip at all.

It's reckless and poor play to throw himself in like that given the penalties nowadays. And entirely unnecessary considering he had him lined up and could've delivered just as dominant a hit a foot lower.

Puja

If my aunt were a bloke she’d be a bicycle

So you'd say it's an excellent height for him to be tackling at? He should keep doing that?

Puja

Good straw man. I think getting cross at someone for something that didn’t happen is your prerogative.

[p/d]

It was a cracking tackle

[Timbo]

If my aunt were a bloke she’d be a bicycle

So you'd say it's an excellent height for him to be tackling at? He should keep doing that?

Puja

Good straw man. I think getting cross at someone for something that didn’t happen is your prerogative.

Especially when they have zero history of being penalised for tackling high and/or dangerously.

[Puja]

If my aunt were a bloke she’d be a bicycle

So you'd say it's an excellent height for him to be tackling at? He should keep doing that?

Puja

Good straw man. I think getting cross at someone for something that didn’t happen is your prerogative.

Okay, let's rephrase - you are happy for him to tackle someone at that height? That's a good thing for him to be doing in your books and you don't think it's reckless at all?

Puja

[Scrumhead]

Yes, I understand that. Which forwards do you think Jones will pick v Ireland? There are more or less three valid choices for every position (apart from hooker?).

Stuart’s emergence has made our front row options a lot more interesting and gives us a better opportunity to mix and match depending on the opposition.

We are almost at a point where we can pick two strong scrummaging props (Marler and Stuart), two props who are better in the loose (Mako and Sinckler), mix it up i.e. one of each or, as we saw yesterday, using the more ‘dynamic’ props as impact subs. Genge is a bit of an outlier (in a good way) because his improvement on the scrummaging front means he’s offering the set piece and carrying ability in the loose. If he can keep his head, he has the potential to be our best prop IMO.

I’d like to see the same front row (and replacements) for the remaining games. I think it’s definitely worth perspevering with and a relatively safe experiment, given that Ireland are without their best prop (Furlong) and possibly Healy too (I think he went off injured on Friday). Wales’ scrum is looking ropey too so, why not stick?

As for the rest of the pack, I think the biggest debates are (hopefully) who partners Itoje and which two flankers get the nod.

I’d pick Launchbury to partner Itoje, but I’d be open to giving Hill another shot. Ewels is OK, but Launchbury is significantly better and Hill has the potential to get there.

As for the flankers, Curry starts every time for me. I’d prefer to see him in tandem with Willis, with Earl on the bench but I won’t lose sleep if Underhill is picked.

Willis did well yesterday. I think the key was to show that his carrying and defence could cut it against a physical side. He definitely did that, scored a try and showed the maturity not to try to overdo it on the jackal. My only concern was that he might try to get too eager on the turnovers in an effort to impress and end up giving away penalties. He didn’t do that, so IMO, he passed the test with flying colours. At worst, he’s shown he’s worth another chance. At best, he’s given Eddie a real selection headache.

Earl has the potential to bring the best impact from the bench.

I think Billy stays at 8. With the squad we have, the only real alternatives are to shift Curry back to 8 or play Earl there. I’m not especially keen on either, but I wouldn’t be entirely against three flankers against some opponents.

Why is it a given that Curry starts every time? If we’re talking about the 6 role, it would seem Willis can do everything that Curry can but in a more powerful package. The pre RWC 2019 version of Curry when he was starting to show some great interlinking skills had built up a good case to start at openside but I’m not sure he’s that type of player anymore thanks to Eddy and Mitchell’s “career guidance”

Err ... because he is pretty much universally regarded as our best flanker ...

I don’t know how to do a poll on this forum, but I feel pretty confident that more or less everyone on this board apart from you would pretty emphatically vote for Tom Curry as England’s best flanker.

Willis has the potential to be as good, but at this point in time, he has 45mins of test rugby under his belt. Underhill is very good in certain aspects of the game but simply isn’t as good a player/as well rounded as Curry. No-one else would be likely to feature in that conversation.

Are you now going to try to tell me Ludlam is better than Curry based upon some highlights you watched?

[Raggs]

Curry is easily the best backrow we have.

[morepork]

He is indeed, the annoying prick.

[Mr Mwenda]

Itoje is the best flanker we have*.


*"Humour"

[Danno]

Itoje is the best flanker we have*.


*"Humour"

He's an 8, you clown.

[Mr Mwenda]

Excellent

[jngf]

Stuart’s emergence has made our front row options a lot more interesting and gives us a better opportunity to mix and match depending on the opposition.

We are almost at a point where we can pick two strong scrummaging props (Marler and Stuart), two props who are better in the loose (Mako and Sinckler), mix it up i.e. one of each or, as we saw yesterday, using the more ‘dynamic’ props as impact subs. Genge is a bit of an outlier (in a good way) because his improvement on the scrummaging front means he’s offering the set piece and carrying ability in the loose. If he can keep his head, he has the potential to be our best prop IMO.

I’d like to see the same front row (and replacements) for the remaining games. I think it’s definitely worth perspevering with and a relatively safe experiment, given that Ireland are without their best prop (Furlong) and possibly Healy too (I think he went off injured on Friday). Wales’ scrum is looking ropey too so, why not stick?

As for the rest of the pack, I think the biggest debates are (hopefully) who partners Itoje and which two flankers get the nod.

I’d pick Launchbury to partner Itoje, but I’d be open to giving Hill another shot. Ewels is OK, but Launchbury is significantly better and Hill has the potential to get there.

As for the flankers, Curry starts every time for me. I’d prefer to see him in tandem with Willis, with Earl on the bench but I won’t lose sleep if Underhill is picked.

Willis did well yesterday. I think the key was to show that his carrying and defence could cut it against a physical side. He definitely did that, scored a try and showed the maturity not to try to overdo it on the jackal. My only concern was that he might try to get too eager on the turnovers in an effort to impress and end up giving away penalties. He didn’t do that, so IMO, he passed the test with flying colours. At worst, he’s shown he’s worth another chance. At best, he’s given Eddie a real selection headache.

Earl has the potential to bring the best impact from the bench.

I think Billy stays at 8. With the squad we have, the only real alternatives are to shift Curry back to 8 or play Earl there. I’m not especially keen on either, but I wouldn’t be entirely against three flankers against some opponents.

Why is it a given that Curry starts every time? If we’re talking about the 6 role, it would seem Willis can do everything that Curry can but in a more powerful package. The pre RWC 2019 version of Curry when he was starting to show some great interlinking skills had built up a good case to start at openside but I’m not sure he’s that type of player anymore thanks to Eddy and Mitchell’s “career guidance”

Err ... because he is pretty much universally regarded as our best flanker ...

I don’t know how to do a poll on this forum, but I feel pretty confident that more or less everyone on this board apart from you would pretty emphatically vote for Tom Curry as England’s best flanker.

Willis has the potential to be as good, but at this point in time, he has 45mins of test rugby under his belt. Underhill is very good in certain aspects of the game but simply isn’t as good a player/as well rounded as Curry. No-one else would be likely to feature in that conversation.

Are you now going to try to tell me Ludlam is better than Curry based upon some highlights you watched?

Is this your data driven assertion again? - ‘universally‘ is a broad nay sweeping claim to make on behalf of something.

[Raggs]

"Pretty much universally" so excluding some people. Seems reasonable enough to me. Curry is a bloody fantastic flanker, and whilst I might pick Willis over him at premiership level, I'd not be willing to do that at international yet.

[Scrumhead]

As Raggs has just pointed out, I said ‘pretty much universally’, which is quite different.

If there is anyone else on the board who doesn’t think Curry is our best flanker, they’re not in a rush to make themselves known.

The data says Willis has been unbelievable in the Premiership, but until he gets more of a run at test level, we don’t know that he can translate that form to international rugby.

Yesterday’s performance was a good start. He immediately looked at home, although If you look at the stats, they’re nothing special (aside from the try, he made 14m from 10 carries, made 4 tackles, missed 2 and made 1 turnover).

At this point in time, it would be very, very bold to laud him as England’s best flanker.

As I said, he has the potential to be as good as Curry, possibly even better, but you’re question was ‘why is it a given that Curry starts every time?’, the simple answer is that he’s proved he deserves to and there is plenty of data to back up why.

[Puja]

Why is it a given that Curry starts every time? If we’re talking about the 6 role, it would seem Willis can do everything that Curry can but in a more powerful package. The pre RWC 2019 version of Curry when he was starting to show some great interlinking skills had built up a good case to start at openside but I’m not sure he’s that type of player anymore thanks to Eddy and Mitchell’s “career guidance”

Err ... because he is pretty much universally regarded as our best flanker ...

I don’t know how to do a poll on this forum, but I feel pretty confident that more or less everyone on this board apart from you would pretty emphatically vote for Tom Curry as England’s best flanker.

Willis has the potential to be as good, but at this point in time, he has 45mins of test rugby under his belt. Underhill is very good in certain aspects of the game but simply isn’t as good a player/as well rounded as Curry. No-one else would be likely to feature in that conversation.

Are you now going to try to tell me Ludlam is better than Curry based upon some highlights you watched?

Is this your data driven assertion again? - ‘universally‘ is a broad nay sweeping claim to make on behalf of something.

The fact that not a single other person on the board apart from you has disagreed that Curry is the best flanker available to England speaks volumes.

Puja

[Banquo]

So you'd say it's an excellent height for him to be tackling at? He should keep doing that?

Puja

Good straw man. I think getting cross at someone for something that didn’t happen is your prerogative.

Okay, let's rephrase - you are happy for him to tackle someone at that height? That's a good thing for him to be doing in your books and you don't think it's reckless at all?

Puja

Still putting words in my mouth. Fact is, it was an excellent legal tackle. I think you are over reacting somewhat.

[Puja]

Good straw man. I think getting cross at someone for something that didn’t happen is your prerogative.

Okay, let's rephrase - you are happy for him to tackle someone at that height? That's a good thing for him to be doing in your books and you don't think it's reckless at all?

Puja

Still putting words in my mouth. Fact is, it was an excellent legal tackle. I think you are over reacting somewhat.

Okay, let's go simpler - do you not think it was reckless?

Puja

[Banquo]

Okay, let's rephrase - you are happy for him to tackle someone at that height? That's a good thing for him to be doing in your books and you don't think it's reckless at all?

Puja

Still putting words in my mouth. Fact is, it was an excellent legal tackle. I think you are over reacting somewhat.

Okay, let's go simpler - do you not think it was reckless?

Puja

No.

[Puja]

Still putting words in my mouth. Fact is, it was an excellent legal tackle. I think you are over reacting somewhat.

Okay, let's go simpler - do you not think it was reckless?

Puja

No.

So what's your problem with the words I put in your mouth then? You think it's an excellent legal tackle and not reckless at all.

I'm just baffled how we can have several years of lambasting Farrell's technique with, "He'll get in trouble for that one day," and not have a problem with BillyV launching himself at the very pinnacle of someone's shoulder.

Puja

[Oakboy]

Okay, let's go simpler - do you not think it was reckless?

Puja

No.

So what's your problem with the words I put in your mouth then? You think it's an excellent legal tackle and not reckless at all.

I'm just baffled how we can have several years of lambasting Farrell's technique with, "He'll get in trouble for that one day," and not have a problem with BillyV launching himself at the very pinnacle of someone's shoulder.

Puja

Maybe, a one-off (Billy) is on the edge but a series (Farrell) is an accident waiting to happen?

[Banquo]

Okay, let's go simpler - do you not think it was reckless?

Puja

No.

So what's your problem with the words I put in your mouth then? You think it's an excellent legal tackle and not reckless at all.

I'm just baffled how we can have several years of lambasting Farrell's technique with, "He'll get in trouble for that one day," and not have a problem with BillyV launching himself at the very pinnacle of someone's shoulder.

Puja

You know perfectly well the difference, and you also should know the difference with what Faz does regularly and what Billy did legally, and in fact unusually for him.

[Puja]

No.

So what's your problem with the words I put in your mouth then? You think it's an excellent legal tackle and not reckless at all.

I'm just baffled how we can have several years of lambasting Farrell's technique with, "He'll get in trouble for that one day," and not have a problem with BillyV launching himself at the very pinnacle of someone's shoulder.

Puja

Maybe, a one-off (Billy) is on the edge but a series (Farrell) is an accident waiting to happen?

See, that I can understand. I still rate it as a lucky tackle rather than a good one, but can completely acknowledge that he doesn't have form. Hopefully it'll get picked up in video analysis and he'll be encouraged to go a touch lower.

Puja

[twitchy]

I'm glad I wasn't the only one that problems with amazon's feed.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... land-side/

"I have superfast broadband and a 4K Smart TV with a specific Prime app and I still had viewing problems. They did not stop me seeing the games but the ball pixelating, odd-coloured grass and things going in a slow, jerky motion were enough to be annoying"

[Puja]

I'm glad I wasn't the only one that problems with amazon's feed.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... land-side/

"I have superfast broadband and a 4K Smart TV with a specific Prime app and I still had viewing problems. They did not stop me seeing the games but the ball pixelating, odd-coloured grass and things going in a slow, jerky motion were enough to be annoying"

As someone who has worked tech support, I am literally compelled to point out the massive hole in that statement quoted. Superfast broadband, check. 4k Smart TV, check. What connects the two together? If the answer is, "A wireless router that is across the other side of the house, safely concealed behind three solid walls, and which was simultaneously being accessed by three teenagers playing games," then I have an answer for Brian Moore as to why the picture wasn't great.

It's more than likely that there were actual problems with Amazon, but I'm willing to bet a lot of the complaining being done is because of things which aren't their fault.

Puja