RugbyRebels

Oakboy wrote:

twitchy wrote:

32nd Man wrote:Fairly dispiriting hearing Jones wanging on about our attack having no ceiling as its unpredictable. As if there's something revolutionary about chucking shit at a wall and seeing what sticks.

There may be no ceiling but on the evidence of Saturday we're into the sub-basement establishing how low it's floor is.

That is an uncharitable interpretation of his comments to say the least.

What I find odd is Jones's contention that our attack is well prepared but not restricted by structure (my words). The players still look afraid to go off-plan even if they are free to do so. Natural handlers like Smith and Slade could do hell of a lot more IF the other players were running good lines and taking a risk or two.

Maybe (not serious) they should call up Ashton. At least he used to arrive on the FH's shoulder at the right time, in the right place to exploit a gap occasionally.

I dunno, they were popping up all over the place, but funnily enough a- you can't do much until the defence is a bit in retreat and/or narromed (I'm looking at you forwards a bit), b- perhaps we are too samey in the backline to worry a good defence like Wales , but c- yes, runners do need to help Smith and Slade out- Smith was using his own play book a lot, and players seemed unable to take his cues...time maybe.

On another note- where is the rugby intelligence. When Wales were down to 14, and had 6 backs, there was a near midfield scrum to us in their half. We had three outside backs plus Steward on the left v 2 welsh defenders flat and one deep, and two on the right v 2 welsh defenders. So a 4 on 2 + 1 on the left, and a 2 on 2 on the right. What did we do- yes, we went right. I know its a bit harder to go left on your own ball, but its hardly impossible; and besides, why not stack the right side if that is the side you want to attack. Maybe not visible on telly, but glaringly obvious and stupid from the stands; who made that call!?

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

twitchy wrote:
That is an uncharitable interpretation of his comments to say the least.

What I find odd is Jones's contention that our attack is well prepared but not restricted by structure (my words). The players still look afraid to go off-plan even if they are free to do so. Natural handlers like Smith and Slade could do hell of a lot more IF the other players were running good lines and taking a risk or two.

Maybe (not serious) they should call up Ashton. At least he used to arrive on the FH's shoulder at the right time, in the right place to exploit a gap occasionally.

I dunno, they were popping up all over the place, but funnily enough a- you can't do much until the defence is a bit in retreat and/or narromed (I'm looking at you forwards a bit), b- perhaps we are too samey in the backline to worry a good defence like Wales , but c- yes, runners do need to help Smith and Slade out- Smith was using his own play book a lot, and players seemed unable to take his cues...time maybe.

On another note- where is the rugby intelligence. When Wales were down to 14, and had 6 backs, there was a near midfield scrum to us in their half. We had three outside backs plus Steward on the left v 2 welsh defenders flat and one deep, and two on the right v 2 welsh defenders. So a 4 on 2 + 1 on the left, and a 2 on 2 on the right. What did we do- yes, we went right. I know its a bit harder to go left on your own ball, but its hardly impossible; and besides, why not stack the right side if that is the side you want to attack. Maybe not visible on telly, but glaringly obvious and stupid from the stands; who made that call!?

On your last sentence, who should make the call when a forward is captain? Presumably, 9, 10 or 12? Is there still a Youngs/Farrell hang-up whereby nobody else thinks on the hoof (or is encouraged so to do)? Maybe, a simple answer would be to make Slade captain.

Oakboy wrote: Maybe, a simple answer would be to make Slade captain.

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

twitchy wrote:
That is an uncharitable interpretation of his comments to say the least.

What I find odd is Jones's contention that our attack is well prepared but not restricted by structure (my words). The players still look afraid to go off-plan even if they are free to do so. Natural handlers like Smith and Slade could do hell of a lot more IF the other players were running good lines and taking a risk or two.

Maybe (not serious) they should call up Ashton. At least he used to arrive on the FH's shoulder at the right time, in the right place to exploit a gap occasionally.

I dunno, they were popping up all over the place, but funnily enough a- you can't do much until the defence is a bit in retreat and/or narromed (I'm looking at you forwards a bit), b- perhaps we are too samey in the backline to worry a good defence like Wales , but c- yes, runners do need to help Smith and Slade out- Smith was using his own play book a lot, and players seemed unable to take his cues...time maybe.

On another note- where is the rugby intelligence. When Wales were down to 14, and had 6 backs, there was a near midfield scrum to us in their half. We had three outside backs plus Steward on the left v 2 welsh defenders flat and one deep, and two on the right v 2 welsh defenders. So a 4 on 2 + 1 on the left, and a 2 on 2 on the right. What did we do- yes, we went right. I know its a bit harder to go left on your own ball, but its hardly impossible; and besides, why not stack the right side if that is the side you want to attack. Maybe not visible on telly, but glaringly obvious and stupid from the stands; who made that call!?

Another example of Smith's lack of experience (and possibly authority) compared to Ford, who would likely have spotted it and bossed people into making a play.

Danno wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
What I find odd is Jones's contention that our attack is well prepared but not restricted by structure (my words). The players still look afraid to go off-plan even if they are free to do so. Natural handlers like Smith and Slade could do hell of a lot more IF the other players were running good lines and taking a risk or two.

Maybe (not serious) they should call up Ashton. At least he used to arrive on the FH's shoulder at the right time, in the right place to exploit a gap occasionally.

I dunno, they were popping up all over the place, but funnily enough a- you can't do much until the defence is a bit in retreat and/or narromed (I'm looking at you forwards a bit), b- perhaps we are too samey in the backline to worry a good defence like Wales , but c- yes, runners do need to help Smith and Slade out- Smith was using his own play book a lot, and players seemed unable to take his cues...time maybe.

On another note- where is the rugby intelligence. When Wales were down to 14, and had 6 backs, there was a near midfield scrum to us in their half. We had three outside backs plus Steward on the left v 2 welsh defenders flat and one deep, and two on the right v 2 welsh defenders. So a 4 on 2 + 1 on the left, and a 2 on 2 on the right. What did we do- yes, we went right. I know its a bit harder to go left on your own ball, but its hardly impossible; and besides, why not stack the right side if that is the side you want to attack. Maybe not visible on telly, but glaringly obvious and stupid from the stands; who made that call!?

Another example of Smith's lack of experience (and possibly authority) compared to Ford, who would likely have spotted it and bossed people into making a play.

Unless Farrell was on the pitch???

A complaint I've had about Smith for a while (when I've seen him for Quins), is that he doesn't look as good as Ford at picking out runners. He's exceptional at seeing space for himself, and spotting when the short ball is on, but when he's got a pod of forwards etc running outside of him, he doesn't seem to be able to spot which one has the least resistance in front of them to get on the front foot.

Ford, Cips and in my opinion, Umaga, are very good at consistently hitting the runner with the best chance of making a few yards. Something Smith doesn't seem to have in his arsenal yet. He then either ends up starring in the show (since it's his breaks/assists that cause huge linebreaks), or struggles in the game a bit.

Please note, I'm not suggesting Umaga should be in the England setup over Smith (and certainly not Ford), simply that in that one aspect of the game I think Umaga is better than Smith. I think Cips is probably the master of it (though again, not suggesting he should be in the squad).

I do hope Smith can develop that part of his game more, much like Ford has done.

Oakboy wrote:

Danno wrote:

Banquo wrote: I dunno, they were popping up all over the place, but funnily enough a- you can't do much until the defence is a bit in retreat and/or narromed (I'm looking at you forwards a bit), b- perhaps we are too samey in the backline to worry a good defence like Wales , but c- yes, runners do need to help Smith and Slade out- Smith was using his own play book a lot, and players seemed unable to take his cues...time maybe.

On another note- where is the rugby intelligence. When Wales were down to 14, and had 6 backs, there was a near midfield scrum to us in their half. We had three outside backs plus Steward on the left v 2 welsh defenders flat and one deep, and two on the right v 2 welsh defenders. So a 4 on 2 + 1 on the left, and a 2 on 2 on the right. What did we do- yes, we went right. I know its a bit harder to go left on your own ball, but its hardly impossible; and besides, why not stack the right side if that is the side you want to attack. Maybe not visible on telly, but glaringly obvious and stupid from the stands; who made that call!?

Another example of Smith's lack of experience (and possibly authority) compared to Ford, who would likely have spotted it and bossed people into making a play.

Unless Farrell was on the pitch???

Let me enjoy this Farrell-less period in peace and witbout reminders, please

Raggs wrote:A complaint I've had about Smith for a while (when I've seen him for Quins), is that he doesn't look as good as Ford at picking out runners. He's exceptional at seeing space for himself, and spotting when the short ball is on, but when he's got a pod of forwards etc running outside of him, he doesn't seem to be able to spot which one has the least resistance in front of them to get on the front foot.

Ford, Cips and in my opinion, Umaga, are very good at consistently hitting the runner with the best chance of making a few yards. Something Smith doesn't seem to have in his arsenal yet. He then either ends up starring in the show (since it's his breaks/assists that cause huge linebreaks), or struggles in the game a bit.

Please note, I'm not suggesting Umaga should be in the England setup over Smith (and certainly not Ford), simply that in that one aspect of the game I think Umaga is better than Smith. I think Cips is probably the master of it (though again, not suggesting he should be in the squad).

I do hope Smith can develop that part of his game more, much like Ford has done.

As sais earlier, he's still a bit about 'what can I do' rather than what can I enable for others- which says to me Eddie has told him to be himself; its a bit easier to do your own thing at prem level, esp when others are on your own wavelength. He has such a strong personal skill set, its natural; however it does indicate he needs some eyes and ears (and runners) at the point to help his scanning. Given the amount of change we are seeing in most units per game, its hardly surprising he can't bring instant cohesion; but it does need looking at.

Ford remains a better - but different- 10 all round I'd say, but Smith could well develop into a more influential international.

To Dors....Smith should be calling that scrum piece all day.

Banquo wrote: Ford remains a better - but different- 10 all round I'd say, but Smith could well develop into a more influential international.

This.
I think Smith can get to, or very near, Ford’s game management and gain line decision level and will also have a superior running game.

I think Ford is limited in an England shirt. Can’t help thinking Jones feels the same. 20 mins to ease Scotland back into the game and 80 on the bench v Wales is hardly an endorsement.

Smith looks to have the bag of tools, just some need sharpening at test level. Sure to come and hopefully Jones will build around that rather than ‘sending him back to work on things’

Oakboy wrote:Unless Farrell was on the pitch???

Nah - Ford would have spotted it, bossed people into making the play, and then Farrell would have kicked it anyway...

Raggs wrote:I do hope Smith can develop that part of his game more, much like Ford has done.

It feels like a lot of us (well, at least 3) are saying similar things - his vision is brilliant around his channel, and not so good at the wider picture.
A lot of FHs who start like that end up playing a dozen or so club matches at FB to gain that early on - too late for Smith to do that now, but it might have been a good option in retrospect (though, of course, he came into the Quins 10 shirt through injury, so the option wasn't there when he was being eased in)

Danno wrote:Let me enjoy this Farrell-less period in peace and witbout reminders, please

Lest we forget

Damn you, Which

Who needs Farrell. We have Daly to kick away overlap ball.

p/d wrote:I think Ford is limited in an England shirt. Can’t help thinking Jones feels the same. 20 mins to ease Scotland back into the game and 80 on the bench v Wales is hardly an endorsement.

Smith looks to have the bag of tools, just some need sharpening at test level. Sure to come and hopefully Jones will build around that rather than ‘sending him back to work on things’

Jones limited him as he thought that was how test rugby was won. Now he’s realised, 18 months late, that the game has changed he’s ditched the player I’d most like to take us through to France ‘23.

Mellsblue wrote:

p/d wrote:I think Ford is limited in an England shirt. Can’t help thinking Jones feels the same. 20 mins to ease Scotland back into the game and 80 on the bench v Wales is hardly an endorsement.

Smith looks to have the bag of tools, just some need sharpening at test level. Sure to come and hopefully Jones will build around that rather than ‘sending him back to work on things’

Jones limited him as he thought that was how test rugby was won. Now he’s realised, 18 months late, that the game has changed he’s ditched the player I’d most like to take us through to France ‘23.

The really fun part is trying to predict what bit of insight from the present moment will only dawn on him 18 months from now, immediately before the World Cup starts.

So, why are openings being butchered?

Are the coaches somehow laying the wrong base work?

Or, are the players just thick?

Or, are the players struggling to adjust from playing by rote to the 'new' freedom?

Or, has there just been too much change in player selection and coaching appointments?

P/D, in his usual trend of cynical asides, suggested a while back that the less coaching the players get, the better they play. I wonder if there was a charity match tomorrow - a Barbarians v SH for Ukraine, for example - and the current England back line was selected for the Barbarians under a new coach, how they'd perform.

Beyond all that meandering, the crunch question has to be, "Is the team making any progress?"

Mikey Brown wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

p/d wrote:I think Ford is limited in an England shirt. Can’t help thinking Jones feels the same. 20 mins to ease Scotland back into the game and 80 on the bench v Wales is hardly an endorsement.

Smith looks to have the bag of tools, just some need sharpening at test level. Sure to come and hopefully Jones will build around that rather than ‘sending him back to work on things’

Jones limited him as he thought that was how test rugby was won. Now he’s realised, 18 months late, that the game has changed he’s ditched the player I’d most like to take us through to France ‘23.

The really fun part is trying to predict what bit of insight from the present moment will only dawn on him 18 months from now, immediately before the World Cup starts.

Atkinson is the answer at 12?

Mellsblue wrote:

p/d wrote:I think Ford is limited in an England shirt. Can’t help thinking Jones feels the same. 20 mins to ease Scotland back into the game and 80 on the bench v Wales is hardly an endorsement.

Smith looks to have the bag of tools, just some need sharpening at test level. Sure to come and hopefully Jones will build around that rather than ‘sending him back to work on things’

Jones limited him as he thought that was how test rugby was won. Now he’s realised, 18 months late, that the game has changed he’s ditched the player I’d most like to take us through to France ‘23.

Agree Mells. Just, as I’m sitting on Smith’s side of the fence, I thought a ‘Jonsey don’t like Fordy’ an apt (if not unfounded) crack worth exploiting

p/d wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Jones limited him as he thought that was how test rugby was won. Now he’s realised, 18 months late, that the game has changed he’s ditched the player I’d most like to take us through to France ‘23.

The really fun part is trying to predict what bit of insight from the present moment will only dawn on him 18 months from now, immediately before the World Cup starts.

Atkinson is the answer at 12?

Could well be. Hadn't Heinz been hovering around squads and never used for quite a while prior to RWC 19?

Mikey Brown wrote:

p/d wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:
The really fun part is trying to predict what bit of insight from the present moment will only dawn on him 18 months from now, immediately before the World Cup starts.

Atkinson is the answer at 12?

Could well be. Hadn't Heinz been hovering around squads and never used for quite a while prior to RWC 19?

Atkinson might’ve been the answer 18 months previous not 18 months hence!

p/d wrote:I wouldn’t have Marchant or Daly anywhere near 13 shirt. Nor Slade at 12

I appreciate he’s not a crash ball style centre however, I actually think Slade at 12 is a step up from Farrell playing there.Slade at 13 is a bit stodgy for my tastes though

jngf wrote:I appreciate he’s not a crash ball style centre however, I actually think Slade at 12 is a step up from Farrell playing there.Slade at 13 is a bit stodgy for my tastes though

Bloody hell, I agree with you (not necessarily that he's stodgy at 13, just a poor partner for Farrell).
I'm gonna have to re-think my position!


I think 12. Slade 13. Marchant is fine, and a step-up on anything that includes Farrell at IC - but... you need strike weapons on the wing, and carriers in the backrow.

Will Goodrick-Clarke?!

Puja

I've given up trying to decipher what these squads even mean. Is Curry injured?