RugbyRebels

Looked like two changes made a big difference:
The backs defence looked much better with JJ on.
When we started using Simmonds like Simmonds, rather than Vunipola, Italy couldn't cope with his pace.

Simmonds excellent. Brown pants. The rest all somewhere in between.

Our prop resources are scary, if we're being honest.

And Farrell has really improved as a 12. Starting to look good there, despite the regular howlers (see intercept).

Lawes ran well at 6, tbh, but our breakdown work was poor. I thought Itoje the worst of our starting 3 locks. Launch just carries so well in that first pod.

JJ and Nowell have to start next week, right? Brown and Te'o to the bench.

Largely good. Launch immense in the first half. Simmonds just ridiculous and Ford with some masterful passing again. Farrell ran well I thought.

Youngs was even zipping out some great passes when he planted his feet properly, shame to see that injury. Care was good though, if a little conservative on the running front.

Teo I think served his purpose simply by being a good foil for Ford/Farrell, not sure it matters how well Joseph does anything else.

Robshaw looked to spend the whole game trying to get wide and not having a whole lot of impact.

I was pretty crap.

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:So, for next week, Simmonds and JJ have to start, Watson has to start at the back, with JN right wing?

No, Ben Teo had a good game, Flats said so.

Te'o was decent running hard lines, JJ just as good there, whilst being better an Jimmy lines and 2 players in defence.

Robshaw, Simmonds, Mercer
Care Ford, Farrell, JJ
Nowell, May, Watson

I was obviously joking, well i thought it obvious. Though not a clue what your first sentence is meant to mean after the second comma

The only surprising thing in that game was how much Italy has improved since the AIs

Stom wrote:Simmonds excellent. Brown pants. The rest all somewhere in between.

Our prop resources are scary, if we're being honest.

And Farrell has really improved as a 12. Starting to look good there, despite the regular howlers (see intercept).

Lawes ran well at 6, tbh, but our breakdown work was poor. I thought Itoje the worst of our starting 3 locks. Launch just carries so well in that first pod.

JJ and Nowell have to start next week, right? Brown and Te'o to the bench.

I just don't see Brown having an impact as a sub

16th man wrote:Looked like two changes made a big difference:
The backs defence looked much better with JJ on.
When we started using Simmonds like Simmonds, rather than Vunipola, Italy couldn't cope with his pace.

i nearly fainted with surprise

As usual bench looked good against tiring opposition

Thank god for the introduction of George and Kruis. Good to see Mako have a good game (my motm)

Backs generally okay, but other sides won’t be too worried

Danno wrote:

Stom wrote:Simmonds excellent. Brown pants. The rest all somewhere in between.

Our prop resources are scary, if we're being honest.

And Farrell has really improved as a 12. Starting to look good there, despite the regular howlers (see intercept).

Lawes ran well at 6, tbh, but our breakdown work was poor. I thought Itoje the worst of our starting 3 locks. Launch just carries so well in that first pod.

JJ and Nowell have to start next week, right? Brown and Te'o to the bench.

I just don't see Brown having an impact as a sub

....but what happens if Watson gets crocked, who covers 15?

Renniks wrote:The only surprising thing in that game was how much Italy has improved since the AIs

Put their performance today up against yesterday's efforts by Scotland or France and I'd back them to win.

Danno wrote:

Stom wrote:Simmonds excellent. Brown pants. The rest all somewhere in between.

Our prop resources are scary, if we're being honest.

And Farrell has really improved as a 12. Starting to look good there, despite the regular howlers (see intercept).

Lawes ran well at 6, tbh, but our breakdown work was poor. I thought Itoje the worst of our starting 3 locks. Launch just carries so well in that first pod.

JJ and Nowell have to start next week, right? Brown and Te'o to the bench.

I just don't see Brown having an impact as a sub

No. But who else is there? No Daly, so we have drunken Denny or Earle. Yay.

Brown it is

My mistake. Farrel motm.... SCW said so

His love for Owen is like Banquo’s for JJ

16th man wrote:

Renniks wrote:The only surprising thing in that game was how much Italy has improved since the AIs

Put their performance today up against yesterday's efforts by Scotland or France and I'd back them to win.

Or Ireland even, who were pants, too.

p/d wrote:My mistake. Farrel motm.... SCW said so

His love for You wen is like Banquo’s for JJ

Be more impactful if it made sense. Not quite quick enough on the edit.

JJ was quite good, no?

16th man wrote:

Renniks wrote:The only surprising thing in that game was how much Italy has improved since the AIs

Put their performance today up against yesterday's efforts by Scotland or France and I'd back them to win.

Italy would get stuffed

Banquo wrote:rubbish resourcing at the breakdown. You have to have three back rows in your team, end of story.

It's not just the selection it's the system, though it'd be fair to say that surely raises the importance of of selecting those more competent at the breakdown

p/d wrote:

16th man wrote:

Renniks wrote:The only surprising thing in that game was how much Italy has improved since the AIs

Put their performance today up against yesterday's efforts by Scotland or France and I'd back them to win.

Italy would get stuffed

Did you watch Scotland yesterday?

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:My mistake. Farrel motm.... SCW said so

His love for You wen is like Banquo’s for JJ

Be more impactful if it made sense. Not quite quick enough on the edit.

JJ was quite good, no?

No better or worse than expected, against a tiring 2nd tier side

Te'o was a bit lost at sea in defence, tough to play with Farrell and a back row that doesn't slow ball in fairness

16th man wrote:

p/d wrote:

16th man wrote:
Put their performance today up against yesterday's efforts by Scotland or France and I'd back them to win.

Italy would get stuffed

Did you watch Scotland yesterday?

Yup. They would have trounced yesterday’s Scotland. Don’t think it will pan out that way but I haven’t seen Italy look that threatening (or composed) for a while.

p/d wrote:

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:My mistake. Farrel motm.... SCW said so

His love for You wen is like Banquo’s for JJ

Be more impactful if it made sense. Not quite quick enough on the edit.

JJ was quite good, no?

No better or worse than expected, against a tiring 2nd tier side

I guess its not the rugby chess you so enjoy. Old Ben was certainly exposed out wide, but mitigation was that he hasn't played since October.

Final score flattered us a touch but we did look very good at times when attacking. We can score tries in clusters and that makes us very dangerous.
Set piece was very strong, the Ford-Farrell axis worked nicely and the bench offered real impact.
For all the talk of the back row, I thought Lawes was really good and Simmonds just outstanding. Watson took his tries with great aplomb. Brown our poorest performer, which is now becoming a trend.
Interesting to see who comes in at SH for Wales, and probably the rest of the 6N as Youngs has copped a nasty injury unfortunately.

Digby wrote:Te'o was a bit lost at sea in defence, tough to play with Farrell and a back row that doesn't slow ball in fairness

Indeed. And T’eo really is a 12, like Farrell is a 10 (or as SCW would say a world class inside centre)

p/d wrote:

Digby wrote:Te'o was a bit lost at sea in defence, tough to play with Farrell and a back row that doesn't slow ball in fairness

Indeed. And T’eo really is a 12, like Farrell is a 10 (or as SCW would say a world class inside centre)

He certainly should only be considered there.

fivepointer wrote:Final score flattered us a touch but we did look very good at times when attacking. We can score tries in clusters and that makes us very dangerous.
Set piece was very strong, the Ford-Farrell axis worked nicely and the bench offered real impact.
For all the talk of the back row, I thought Lawes was really good and Simmonds just outstanding. Watson took his tries with great aplomb. Brown our poorest performer, which is now becoming a trend.
Interesting to see who comes in at SH for Wales, and probably the rest of the 6N as Youngs has copped a nasty injury unfortunately.

I thought Lawes was good at what he was expected to be good at… But with Simmonds topping the tackle count, and Robshaw still putting in 110% - it was clear that we struggled at the breakdown more often than we should - I think that's largely due to playing Lawes at 6 and I'd happily sacrifice his good points for a Curry or a Wilson

ETA: Itoje for me would make way with Lawes retained in the 2nd row