RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 9:07 am

p/d wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:56 am Not felt this about a player since a young Rory Clegg burst onto the scene.

Poor man’s Rob Miller but then who wasn’t.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:44 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 7:31 am I guess the overall point is that there are at least a few in the past decade, let alone the ‘last 50yrs’.

Pollock may well end up being a generational talent, I’m just uncomfortable with that proclamation at this point. His impact has been sensational and worthy of the headlines, but this whole notion that we need to accept him as the messiah or be branded a heathen is irritating.

I presume that is aimed at me - with some justification, I accept. Frankly, time will tell. Maybe, I am overexcited about an exceptional talent but I think your use of the word 'messiah' is at least as 'over-the-top' as any of my utterances.

It is many months now since Pollock's under-20 performances were reported on here in such glowing terms - way before I even saw him play. I subsequently saw what the fuss was about.

I'd make one appeal. Please don't spoil the pleasure in thinking and hoping that we may have a very top prospect. In 2002, we had, arguably, up to 6 or 7 very top standard players, since when we've rarely had more than one or two at any given time. Currently, we have one - Itoje - with Freeman and IFW probably having the talent to follow. Pollock may or may not prove good enough to join that company. My personal opinion is that he will. That would make four in the category, our highest number for 23 years. I am excited about that. If that comes across as anything but enthusiasm for the national team - sorry.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 9:34 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:44 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 7:31 am I guess the overall point is that there are at least a few in the past decade, let alone the ‘last 50yrs’.

Pollock may well end up being a generational talent, I’m just uncomfortable with that proclamation at this point. His impact has been sensational and worthy of the headlines, but this whole notion that we need to accept him as the messiah or be branded a heathen is irritating.

I presume that is aimed at me - with some justification, I accept. Frankly, time will tell. Maybe, I am overexcited about an exceptional talent but I think your use of the word 'messiah' is at least as 'over-the-top' as any of my utterances.

It is many months now since Pollock's under-20 performances were reported on here in such glowing terms - way before I even saw him play. I subsequently saw what the fuss was about.

I'd make one appeal. Please don't spoil the pleasure in thinking and hoping that we may have a very top prospect. In 2002, we had, arguably, up to 6 or 7 very top standard players, since when we've rarely had more than one or two at any given time. Currently, we have one - Itoje - with Freeman and IFW probably having the talent to follow. Pollock may or may not prove good enough to join that company. My personal opinion is that he will. That would make four in the category, our highest number for 23 years. I am excited about that. If that comes across as anything but enthusiasm for the national team - sorry.

mate, in 2002, we had 10 or so exceptional players (Front row, Johnson, back row, half backs, Greenwood, Robinson imo) ....importantly backed up by several very good ones (some of whom looked less good when not surrounded by worldies to be fair). I agree mostly with your current diagnosis, though Tom Curry is also exceptional.

Stom wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 9:51 am
Also fair to note that 2002 was the "end" of the cycle, whereas this looks like we're closer to the beginning/middle.

Stom wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 9:51 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 9:34 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:44 am

I presume that is aimed at me - with some justification, I accept. Frankly, time will tell. Maybe, I am overexcited about an exceptional talent but I think your use of the word 'messiah' is at least as 'over-the-top' as any of my utterances.

It is many months now since Pollock's under-20 performances were reported on here in such glowing terms - way before I even saw him play. I subsequently saw what the fuss was about.

I'd make one appeal. Please don't spoil the pleasure in thinking and hoping that we may have a very top prospect. In 2002, we had, arguably, up to 6 or 7 very top standard players, since when we've rarely had more than one or two at any given time. Currently, we have one - Itoje - with Freeman and IFW probably having the talent to follow. Pollock may or may not prove good enough to join that company. My personal opinion is that he will. That would make four in the category, our highest number for 23 years. I am excited about that. If that comes across as anything but enthusiasm for the national team - sorry.

mate, in 2002, we had 10 or so exceptional players (Front row, Johnson, back row, half backs, Greenwood, Robinson imo) ....importantly backed up by several very good ones (some of whom looked less good when not surrounded by worldies to be fair). I agree mostly with your current diagnosis, though Tom Curry is also exceptional.

Also fair to note that 2002 was the "end" of the cycle, whereas this looks like we're closer to the beginning/middle. Some of our best players are very young in international terms and could become exceptional world talents given time (Freeman, IFW, Mitchell, Smith/Smith), while we do have a good number of those excellent, but not quite top tier players (George (who could be considered top tier, tbh), Stuart...OK, that's it, lol).

Beasties wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 10:41 am

Stom wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 9:51 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 9:34 am

mate, in 2002, we had 10 or so exceptional players (Front row, Johnson, back row, half backs, Greenwood, Robinson imo) ....importantly backed up by several very good ones (some of whom looked less good when not surrounded by worldies to be fair). I agree mostly with your current diagnosis, though Tom Curry is also exceptional.

Also fair to note that 2002 was the "end" of the cycle, whereas this looks like we're closer to the beginning/middle. Some of our best players are very young in international terms and could become exceptional world talents given time (Freeman, IFW, Mitchell, Smith/Smith), while we do have a good number of those excellent, but not quite top tier players (George (who could be considered top tier, tbh), Stuart...OK, that's it, lol).

Will Stuart’s star just gets brighter and brighter.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:44 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 7:31 am I guess the overall point is that there are at least a few in the past decade, let alone the ‘last 50yrs’.

Pollock may well end up being a generational talent, I’m just uncomfortable with that proclamation at this point. His impact has been sensational and worthy of the headlines, but this whole notion that we need to accept him as the messiah or be branded a heathen is irritating.

I presume that is aimed at me - with some justification, I accept. Frankly, time will tell. Maybe, I am overexcited about an exceptional talent but I think your use of the word 'messiah' is at least as 'over-the-top' as any of my utterances.

It is many months now since Pollock's under-20 performances were reported on here in such glowing terms - way before I even saw him play. I subsequently saw what the fuss was about.

I'd make one appeal. Please don't spoil the pleasure in thinking and hoping that we may have a very top prospect. In 2002, we had, arguably, up to 6 or 7 very top standard players, since when we've rarely had more than one or two at any given time. Currently, we have one - Itoje - with Freeman and IFW probably having the talent to follow. Pollock may or may not prove good enough to join that company. My personal opinion is that he will. That would make four in the category, our highest number for 23 years. I am excited about that. If that comes across as anything but enthusiasm for the national team - sorry.

Puja wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 11:56 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:44 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 7:31 am I guess the overall point is that there are at least a few in the past decade, let alone the ‘last 50yrs’.

Pollock may well end up being a generational talent, I’m just uncomfortable with that proclamation at this point. His impact has been sensational and worthy of the headlines, but this whole notion that we need to accept him as the messiah or be branded a heathen is irritating.

I presume that is aimed at me - with some justification, I accept. Frankly, time will tell. Maybe, I am overexcited about an exceptional talent but I think your use of the word 'messiah' is at least as 'over-the-top' as any of my utterances.

It is many months now since Pollock's under-20 performances were reported on here in such glowing terms - way before I even saw him play. I subsequently saw what the fuss was about.

I'd make one appeal. Please don't spoil the pleasure in thinking and hoping that we may have a very top prospect. In 2002, we had, arguably, up to 6 or 7 very top standard players, since when we've rarely had more than one or two at any given time. Currently, we have one - Itoje - with Freeman and IFW probably having the talent to follow. Pollock may or may not prove good enough to join that company. My personal opinion is that he will. That would make four in the category, our highest number for 23 years. I am excited about that. If that comes across as anything but enthusiasm for the national team - sorry.

This is fair.

I would also say that I haven't given up on Arundell yet. He's had a tough couple of years with his boyhood club going bust and the ill-advised move to Racing, but he's still the same talented player whose U20s games gave us dropped jaws and frantic googling to see if Scotland could poach him.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Apr 29, 2025 12:28 pm OHC's had a great year, but again I don't know where he fits in. You've got IFW and Freeman as the undisputed, then Roebuck and Sleightholme as being very nearly nailed onto the squad. Murley is probably just below the latter two, given they've shown they can step up and excel and he hasn't definitively (yet). Even we're saying Freeman's with the Lions and Sleightholme and IFW are injured, then we already have both wing spots filled by Roebuck-Murley, so we're talking about a bench option, at best, for one of the morass of (mostly untried) exciting players.

Plus, there's the option of Arundell, given that Selects Bigthighs has specifically answered a question of when he was available with, “As I understand, as soon as the Racing season finishes then he’s going to be available for selection."

I'd rank the pretenders as:
1) Arundell - I think we need to get him back reintegrated as quickly as possible and this tour's an ideal opportunity to get his confidence and swagger back.
2=)Radwan/Brown-Bampoe/Hendy - Tied between these three and I can't separate them. Radwan's got that incredible pace and seems to have gone up another level after moving from the English!Connacht, Hendy has that incredibly weird running style that seems so effective in breaking contact, and Brown-Bampoe has so little experience but appears to have everything you'd want from him.
5) OHC - Top Prem try-scorer, but how confident are we that he can make space as well as finish?
6=) Elliot/Muir - look like great players, but maybe just club-level?
8) Ibitoye - will make a great Barbarians player at some point and will have pundits demanding his selection, but is too loose and would not survive the step-up against the very best.

And that's assuming that we're completely done with the likes of Daly and Cokanasiga (neither of which are certainties).

Puja

Danno wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 12:24 pm Will he be available? I know he's signed for Bath but the eligibility rules might as well be written in hieroglyphics

Danno wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 12:24 pm Will he be available? I know he's signed for Bath but the eligibility rules might as well be written in hieroglyphics

Danno wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 11:51 am Oh I don't want him to change, just to learn, and my view is he's not to be capped against T1 sides if Twindaloo, Earl, Willis and CCS are available just now. He'll probably be playing the upside-down land club sides this summer so that'll be no bad thing.

Danno wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 11:51 am Oh I don't want him to change, just to learn, and my view is he's not to be capped against T1 sides if Twindaloo, Earl, Willis and CCS are available just now. He'll probably be playing the upside-down land club sides this summer so that'll be no bad thing.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 1:21 pm Yeah. A season or two playing horribly out of position is probably the best thing for their development.

jngf wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 1:41 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 1:21 pm Yeah. A season or two playing horribly out of position is probably the best thing for their development.

This out of position concept seems to be less sacrosanct when utility skills are looking more and more valuable - or just because club rugby plays Pollock at 7 doesn’t imply England should do too come what may imo. Added to that Pollock has yet to demonstrate conclusively that he’s a better openside option than any of Curry x 2 or Earl - and that’s before we look at tried and tested world class openside options ( Underhill and Jack Willis) as well as more contemporary age group players,notably Pepper.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 2:33 pm

jngf wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 1:41 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 1:21 pm Yeah. A season or two playing horribly out of position is probably the best thing for their development.

This out of position concept seems to be less sacrosanct when utility skills are looking more and more valuable - or just because club rugby plays Pollock at 7 doesn’t imply England should do too come what may imo. Added to that Pollock has yet to demonstrate conclusively that he’s a better openside option than any of Curry x 2 or Earl - and that’s before we look at tried and tested world class openside options ( Underhill and Jack Willis) as well as more contemporary age group players,notably Pepper.

I agree with most of the second part. It’s totally possible he would take to the responsibilities of a centre with ease, but there’s a huge chance it would be an unnecessary spanner in the works of his development.

I just don’t see who it’s benefiting, as opposed to letting him do his thing and fight his way ahead of the competition in the back row.

Puja wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 11:56 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:44 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 7:31 am I guess the overall point is that there are at least a few in the past decade, let alone the ‘last 50yrs’.

Pollock may well end up being a generational talent, I’m just uncomfortable with that proclamation at this point. His impact has been sensational and worthy of the headlines, but this whole notion that we need to accept him as the messiah or be branded a heathen is irritating.

I presume that is aimed at me - with some justification, I accept. Frankly, time will tell. Maybe, I am overexcited about an exceptional talent but I think your use of the word 'messiah' is at least as 'over-the-top' as any of my utterances.

It is many months now since Pollock's under-20 performances were reported on here in such glowing terms - way before I even saw him play. I subsequently saw what the fuss was about.

I'd make one appeal. Please don't spoil the pleasure in thinking and hoping that we may have a very top prospect. In 2002, we had, arguably, up to 6 or 7 very top standard players, since when we've rarely had more than one or two at any given time. Currently, we have one - Itoje - with Freeman and IFW probably having the talent to follow. Pollock may or may not prove good enough to join that company. My personal opinion is that he will. That would make four in the category, our highest number for 23 years. I am excited about that. If that comes across as anything but enthusiasm for the national team - sorry.

This is fair.

I would also say that I haven't given up on Arundell yet. He's had a tough couple of years with his boyhood club going bust and the ill-advised move to Racing, but he's still the same talented player whose U20s games gave us dropped jaws and frantic googling to see if Scotland could poach him.

Puja

Danno wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 11:58 am

Puja wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 11:56 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:44 am

I presume that is aimed at me - with some justification, I accept. Frankly, time will tell. Maybe, I am overexcited about an exceptional talent but I think your use of the word 'messiah' is at least as 'over-the-top' as any of my utterances.

It is many months now since Pollock's under-20 performances were reported on here in such glowing terms - way before I even saw him play. I subsequently saw what the fuss was about.

I'd make one appeal. Please don't spoil the pleasure in thinking and hoping that we may have a very top prospect. In 2002, we had, arguably, up to 6 or 7 very top standard players, since when we've rarely had more than one or two at any given time. Currently, we have one - Itoje - with Freeman and IFW probably having the talent to follow. Pollock may or may not prove good enough to join that company. My personal opinion is that he will. That would make four in the category, our highest number for 23 years. I am excited about that. If that comes across as anything but enthusiasm for the national team - sorry.

This is fair.

I would also say that I haven't given up on Arundell yet. He's had a tough couple of years with his boyhood club going bust and the ill-advised move to Racing, but he's still the same talented player whose U20s games gave us dropped jaws and frantic googling to see if Scotland could poach him.

Puja

And there's always that try for Irish which is one of the best individual scores I've ever seen

jngf wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 12:59 pm

Danno wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 11:51 am Oh I don't want him to change, just to learn, and my view is he's not to be capped against T1 sides if Twindaloo, Earl, Willis and CCS are available just now. He'll probably be playing the upside-down land club sides this summer so that'll be no bad thing.

I would also say ( and goodness knows one loves a genuine forward with pace, gas and flair ) that I’d still pick a fit Underhill or an none-exiled Jack Willis at 7 over Pollock every time at this stage.

The other fact is a 20 year old player ( other than an absolute physical leviathon ) no matter how talented is going to be challenged against hard bitten full grown test forwards - for me at this point Pollock might be a better bet at 12 or 13 than backrow at test level, especially whilst he’s still maturing physically. I would have made a similar comment about Tom Curry and Ben Curry and more recently Tom Pearson at the point of their first year or two breaking into test side. In short I really keen to see Pollock get more test experience but recommending we experiment with him as a centre, to truly use this gas of his.