RugbyRebels

I’m curious if Jones was picturing Hill having more of a carrying role so far. He has a bit of an odd, upright style but seemed to be becoming very effective carrying the ball for Exeter. I thought that was one of the things prompting Eddie to look at him again recently.

No idea if it just doesn’t fit in to the plan or he’s just not taken to that aspect of test rugby yet. I agree we miss Launchbury though. Him and Itoje may not be the most perfectly balanced pairing but they both offer things this team badly needs.

Mikey Brown wrote:I’m curious if Jones was picturing Hill having more of a carrying role so far. He has a bit of an odd, upright style but seemed to be becoming very effective carrying the ball for Exeter. I thought that was one of the things prompting Eddie to look at him again recently.

No idea if it just doesn’t fit in to the plan or he’s just not taken to that aspect of test rugby yet. I agree we miss Launchbury though. Him and Itoje may not be the most perfectly balanced pairing but they both offer things this team badly needs.

I think the player we are missing most is actually Kruis. Eddie is concerned about the lineout hence deploying a 6 that can jump as opposed to dual opensides. Kruis was also very good at anchoring the scrum and just doing the grunt work at the breakdown to free up our big ball carriers to get ready to carry. I think Eddie was hoping Hill would do something similar. After all he is the engine in the Exeter pack but obviously hasn't quite settled into international rugby. Ewels then comes in as a poor man's Kruis.

Launchbury is an interesting one because he's the opposite to Kruis. Rank average in the lineout but more of a carrier and likes to be more visible in how he plays. To be fair Launchbury is a good scrummaging lock and good in the mail defence which would help lower our penalty count.

I think Eddie needs to have a real think over the balance in the pack. It certainly wasn't there this 6N and we conceded far too many penalties. I don't think with our line speed you can play all of Vunipola, Wilson and Hill/Ewels it just takes too much momentum out of the defensive line and means we can't put the pressure on the breakdown like we like to.

Mikey Brown wrote:I’m curious if Jones was picturing Hill having more of a carrying role so far. He has a bit of an odd, upright style but seemed to be becoming very effective carrying the ball for Exeter. I thought that was one of the things prompting Eddie to look at him again recently.

No idea if it just doesn’t fit in to the plan or he’s just not taken to that aspect of test rugby yet. I agree we miss Launchbury though. Him and Itoje may not be the most perfectly balanced pairing but they both offer things this team badly needs.

I don't quite get that- surely that IS balance?

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I’m curious if Jones was picturing Hill having more of a carrying role so far. He has a bit of an odd, upright style but seemed to be becoming very effective carrying the ball for Exeter. I thought that was one of the things prompting Eddie to look at him again recently.

No idea if it just doesn’t fit in to the plan or he’s just not taken to that aspect of test rugby yet. I agree we miss Launchbury though. Him and Itoje may not be the most perfectly balanced pairing but they both offer things this team badly needs.

I don't quite get that- surely that IS balance?

I mean not in the way Itoje/Kruis as a lock pairing covers all bases. They both free eachother up to do their thing.

The team might need carriers but that wouldn’t mean picking 8 Billys is balanced, to me anyway.

Mikey Brown wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I’m curious if Jones was picturing Hill having more of a carrying role so far. He has a bit of an odd, upright style but seemed to be becoming very effective carrying the ball for Exeter. I thought that was one of the things prompting Eddie to look at him again recently.

No idea if it just doesn’t fit in to the plan or he’s just not taken to that aspect of test rugby yet. I agree we miss Launchbury though. Him and Itoje may not be the most perfectly balanced pairing but they both offer things this team badly needs.

I don't quite get that- surely that IS balance?

I mean not in the way Itoje/Kruis as a lock pairing covers all bases. They both free eachother up to do their thing.

The team might need carriers but that wouldn’t mean picking 8 Billys is balanced, to me anyway.

Eh? I think they (launchbury/Itoje) offer different things (I interpreted your comment in a way you didn't intend I guess), so do complement each other, is my point. Had this debate before though.

Maybe it is simple. Lots of Saracens' forwards (Mako, George, Itoje, Kruis and Billy) covered up deficiencies in the England coaching set-up. Removing Kruis, having form-loss problems with the other Saracens and also losing the experience of Launchbury/Lawes means the coaching skills need to step up. Of course, it's easier to blame the one new boy no matter how much of a star he is for the European champions.

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Banquo wrote: I don't quite get that- surely that IS balance?

I mean not in the way Itoje/Kruis as a lock pairing covers all bases. They both free eachother up to do their thing.

The team might need carriers but that wouldn’t mean picking 8 Billys is balanced, to me anyway.

Eh? I think they (launchbury/Itoje) offer different things (I interpreted your comment in a way you didn't intend I guess), so do complement each other, is my point. Had this debate before though.

I just said “not the most perfectly balanced”. Kruis runs a lineout in a way Launch doesn’t. That’s all.

Mikey Brown wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:
I mean not in the way Itoje/Kruis as a lock pairing covers all bases. They both free eachother up to do their thing.

The team might need carriers but that wouldn’t mean picking 8 Billys is balanced, to me anyway.

Eh? I think they (launchbury/Itoje) offer different things (I interpreted your comment in a way you didn't intend I guess), so do complement each other, is my point. Had this debate before though.

I just said “not the most perfectly balanced”. Kruis runs a lineout in a way Launch doesn’t. That’s all.

On the other hand, Launch is much better in the maul, a better carrier, and better over the ball. I was puzzled by your 8 Billys comment tbh.

I just meant that whilst we probably want both their qualities in the pack, it does maybe leave areas (lineout/restarts) that need balancing out elsewhere, like picking 8 pure ball carriers might.

Mikey Brown wrote:I just meant that whilst we probably want both their qualities in the pack, it does maybe leave areas (lineout/restarts) that need balancing out elsewhere, like picking 8 pure ball carriers might.

Itoje is fantastic at restarts. We do need a third lineout option whether its Launch or someone else. I think your point applies in every selection decision tbh.

I’m a massive fan of Launchbury, but he’s notoriously rubbish on restarts.

Looks like Eddie won’t be going anywhere

Mellsblue wrote:Looks like Eddie won’t be going anywhere

Now that's what deepfakes are meant for! Brilliant.

Scrumhead wrote:I’m a massive fan of Launchbury, but he’s notoriously rubbish on restarts.

yes. But Itoje isnt

Oakboy wrote:Of course, it's easier to blame the one new boy no matter how much of a star he is for the European champions.

Tbf if he keeps giving away the most moronic penalties going, you're making yourself a target.

16th man wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Of course, it's easier to blame the one new boy no matter how much of a star he is for the European champions.

Tbf if he keeps giving away the most moronic penalties going, you're making yourself a target.

Also the old boys have a body of work showing they can hack it at this level, they don't always, but we know they can

Digby wrote:

16th man wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Of course, it's easier to blame the one new boy no matter how much of a star he is for the European champions.

Tbf if he keeps giving away the most moronic penalties going, you're making yourself a target.

Also the old boys have a body of work showing they can hack it at this level, they don't always, but we know they can

But, that is like saying that we know Jones's team CAN do it on occasion. The snag is that his team nearly always loses a crunch match. In fact, if you take that to its ultimate conclusion, forgetting friendlies, he has failed in every competition except one. After all, the object in all 6Ns is to win the GS and in every RWC to win it. That means going undefeated in every competition which he has managed just that once.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:

16th man wrote:
Tbf if he keeps giving away the most moronic penalties going, you're making yourself a target.

Also the old boys have a body of work showing they can hack it at this level, they don't always, but we know they can

But, that is like saying that we know Jones's team CAN do it on occasion. The snag is that his team nearly always loses a crunch match. In fact, if you take that to its ultimate conclusion, forgetting friendlies, he has failed in every competition except one. After all, the object in all 6Ns is to win the GS and in every RWC to win it. That means going undefeated in every competition which he has managed just that once.

It's exactly like saying that, and those on the outside need to push harder than they are to force their way in.

And yes England lose some crunch games, everyone does.

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:
Also the old boys have a body of work showing they can hack it at this level, they don't always, but we know they can

But, that is like saying that we know Jones's team CAN do it on occasion. The snag is that his team nearly always loses a crunch match. In fact, if you take that to its ultimate conclusion, forgetting friendlies, he has failed in every competition except one. After all, the object in all 6Ns is to win the GS and in every RWC to win it. That means going undefeated in every competition which he has managed just that once.

It's exactly like saying that, and those on the outside need to push harder than they are to force their way in.

And yes England lose some crunch games, everyone does.

Except that it is not 'some crunch games'. It is the crunch game of every year of Jones's tenure except one.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
But, that is like saying that we know Jones's team CAN do it on occasion. The snag is that his team nearly always loses a crunch match. In fact, if you take that to its ultimate conclusion, forgetting friendlies, he has failed in every competition except one. After all, the object in all 6Ns is to win the GS and in every RWC to win it. That means going undefeated in every competition which he has managed just that once.

It's exactly like saying that, and those on the outside need to push harder than they are to force their way in.

And yes England lose some crunch games, everyone does.

Except that it is not 'some crunch games'. It is the crunch game of every year of Jones's tenure except one.

Sack every coach ever.

Mellsblue wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:
It's exactly like saying that, and those on the outside need to push harder than they are to force their way in.

And yes England lose some crunch games, everyone does.

Except that it is not 'some crunch games'. It is the crunch game of every year of Jones's tenure except one.

Sack every coach ever.

Selection by plebiscite and tactics by pin the tail on the kick, run, pass based options?

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Except that it is not 'some crunch games'. It is the crunch game of every year of Jones's tenure except one.

Sack every coach ever.

Selection by plebiscite and tactics by pin the tail on the kick, run, pass based options?

Pin the tail on the donkey would lead to far too predictable results. A selection of tactics should be painted on to a barn door at Pennyhill. On the morning of a match Ben Youngs should be asked to throw a ball at the door, on second thoughts make it the evening before the match to allow sufficient time for the barn door to be hit, and whichever tactic the ball hits are the tactics for that weekend.

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Sack every coach ever.

Selection by plebiscite and tactics by pin the tail on the kick, run, pass based options?

Pin the tail on the donkey would lead to far too predictable results. A selection of tactics should be painted on to a barn door at Pennyhill. On the morning of a match Ben Youngs should be asked to throw a ball at the door, on second thoughts make it the evening before the match to allow sufficient time for the barn door to be hit, and whichever tactic the ball hits are the tactics for that weekend.

Need one of the options somewhere near the ceiling tbf

Danno wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:
Selection by plebiscite and tactics by pin the tail on the kick, run, pass based options?

Pin the tail on the donkey would lead to far too predictable results. A selection of tactics should be painted on to a barn door at Pennyhill. On the morning of a match Ben Youngs should be asked to throw a ball at the door, on second thoughts make it the evening before the match to allow sufficient time for the barn door to be hit, and whichever tactic the ball hits are the tactics for that weekend.

Need one of the options somewhere near the ceiling tbf

And a couple on the floor.

I haven't read much of this fred, so sorry if this has been said, but the current state of affairs should surprise nobody familiar with Eddie's previous work. In fact, the most unexpected aspect of this is that it's taken so long to get this bad.