RugbyRebels

Puja wrote:

badback wrote:

Banquo wrote: On Daly yes- tired of saying it. Radwan? defence.....

Is his defense that bad? Haven’t seen enough of him to judge. But it was good to see someone who in attack looked scary. Seems like that’s where our lack is atm

Scary against USA, Tonga, and Canada. I'm not convinced he's actually international quality at the top level.

Puja

Radwan is the fastest man in English rugby and he has the rare talent (like Gerald Davies) of being able to step at top speed. Yes his defence probably needs a bit of work . But the selection of any player reflects a balancing act of his strong and weak points. Radwan can work oh his defence, but Malins and Nowell will not get any faster at this stage. I'm biased since I love to see a real traditional flier on the wing. Get enough ball into Radwan's hands and he will score tries.

Banquo wrote:On Daly yes- tired of saying it. Radwan? defence.....

So you're rejecting Radwan on the principal of his defence, and suggesting..... Daly ?

Oops

Mellsblue wrote:
Given the choice, I’ll take the retired Kyle Eastmond.

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:On Daly yes- tired of saying it. Radwan? defence.....

So you're rejecting Radwan on the principal of his defence, and suggesting..... Daly ?

Daly's wing defence is fine, unlike at 13. He is a proven class act on the wing.- even good uner the high ball there cf15 I think you know the difference.

Its not me rejecting Radwan , but it is his work on. I'm just commenting on why he isnt currenty in the squad. There is also a world where they both play wing

p/d wrote:Oops

tenaman leak?

Puja wrote:

badback wrote:

Banquo wrote: On Daly yes- tired of saying it. Radwan? defence.....

Is his defense that bad? Haven’t seen enough of him to judge. But it was good to see someone who in attack looked scary. Seems like that’s where our lack is atm

Scary against USA, Tonga, and Canada. I'm not convinced he's actually international quality at the top level.

Puja

Yeah you could be right. He did seem… flaky? But it would be nice to find out if someone that quick and tricky can cut it or not. Especially with the blunt sword we currently seem to have at the moment

badback wrote:

Puja wrote:

badback wrote: Is his defense that bad? Haven’t seen enough of him to judge. But it was good to see someone who in attack looked scary. Seems like that’s where our lack is atm

Scary against USA, Tonga, and Canada. I'm not convinced he's actually international quality at the top level.

Puja

Yeah you could be right. He did seem… flaky? But it would be nice to find out if someone that quick and tricky can cut it or not. Especially with the blunt sword we currently seem to have at the moment

True and I wouldn't necessarily be averse to giving him a go right now while we're currently so low on fit wingers. However, I'm wary of picking a player that isn't demanding a place on Premiership performances, simply because he has potential and certain physical characteristics that we'd like to use - feels like another Ollie Lawrence waiting to happen. Selecting more in hope than expectation.

Puja

Are we saying then that Hassell-Collins is a bit more middle distance than sprinter?

Good to hear Hill is back in full training.

Puja wrote:

badback wrote:

Puja wrote:
Scary against USA, Tonga, and Canada. I'm not convinced he's actually international quality at the top level.

Puja

Yeah you could be right. He did seem… flaky? But it would be nice to find out if someone that quick and tricky can cut it or not. Especially with the blunt sword we currently seem to have at the moment

True and I wouldn't necessarily be averse to giving him a go right now while we're currently so low on fit wingers. However, I'm wary of picking a player that isn't demanding a place on Premiership performances, simply because he has potential and certain physical characteristics that we'd like to use - feels like another Ollie Lawrence waiting to happen. Selecting more in hope than expectation.

Puja

I’m somewhere in between on this. No-one seemed to mind Cokanasiga being in the squad despite glaring deficiencies in his defensive skill set - mostly because his physical attributes and potential justified that. I’d give Radwan the same bandwidth. He’s more than good enough to be in the squad and has the potential to be deadly if used in the right way.

As for Premiership form, it’s tough to judge a winger playing in a team that is creating very little. Radwan’s better games (and most of his tries) tend to be when the game is loose and he’s playing on the counter attack. I find it hard to criticise him too much when Falcons aren’t creating any opportunities or giving him the ball. Rees-Zammit has been pretty similar with Gloucester TBH (definitely last season) and no-one seems to doubt him too much.

As much as Cokanasiga's quality at the very top level was unknown, the same applies for the opposition as defenders. Knowing there's a guy out wide who can either run around you or over the top of you will surely have an effect. I don't know maybe a backline full of players who are a 6/10 in every facet is the way to go, but it's not very fun is it.

Scrumhead wrote:

Puja wrote:

badback wrote: Yeah you could be right. He did seem… flaky? But it would be nice to find out if someone that quick and tricky can cut it or not. Especially with the blunt sword we currently seem to have at the moment

True and I wouldn't necessarily be averse to giving him a go right now while we're currently so low on fit wingers. However, I'm wary of picking a player that isn't demanding a place on Premiership performances, simply because he has potential and certain physical characteristics that we'd like to use - feels like another Ollie Lawrence waiting to happen. Selecting more in hope than expectation.

Puja

I’m somewhere in between on this. No-one seemed to mind Cokanasiga being in the squad despite glaring deficiencies in his defensive skill set - mostly because his physical attributes and potential justified that. I’d give Radwan the same bandwidth. He’s more than good enough to be in the squad and has the potential to be deadly if used in the right way.

As for Premiership form, it’s tough to judge a winger playing in a team that is creating very little. Radwan’s better games (and most of his tries) tend to be when the game is loose and he’s playing on the counter attack. I find it hard to criticise him too much when Falcons aren’t creating any opportunities or giving him the ball. Rees-Zammit has been pretty similar with Gloucester TBH (definitely last season) and no-one seems to doubt him too much.

Apart from Wales who dropped him (tongue firmly in cheek).

Mikey Brown wrote:As much as Cokanasiga's quality at the very top level was unknown, the same applies for the opposition as defenders. Knowing there's a guy out wide who can either run around you or over the top of you will surely have an effect. I don't know maybe a backline full of players who are a 6/10 in every facet is the way to go, but it's not very fun is it.

I love this. That's exactly how I feel, I want to be entertained by watching us play.

Mikey Brown wrote:As much as Cokanasiga's quality at the very top level was unknown, the same applies for the opposition as defenders. Knowing there's a guy out wide who can either run around you or over the top of you will surely have an effect. I don't know maybe a backline full of players who are a 6/10 in every facet is the way to go, but it's not very fun is it.

Probs a bit harsh on the backs- the real issue is that they are all a bit samey from 11-14....and individually quite exciting players in the prem. After all, no-one was decrying the selections of most before the 6N. Malins, Marchant, Nowell, all pretty popular on the board, Slade mixed but an excellent prem player; only Daly gets the most stick (rightly at 13 and 15 (at least positionally and under the high ball); he remains one of our better wing options).

ad_tigger wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:As much as Cokanasiga's quality at the very top level was unknown, the same applies for the opposition as defenders. Knowing there's a guy out wide who can either run around you or over the top of you will surely have an effect. I don't know maybe a backline full of players who are a 6/10 in every facet is the way to go, but it's not very fun is it.

I love this. That's exactly how I feel, I want to be entertained by watching us play.

as above, individually Randall, Smith, Marchant, Nowell, Malins, Steward, Daly and Slade are hardly dull players. And really there aren't many better options- others, different skills, but its not like we are overlooking Lomu or Campese.

It wasn't so much an accusation at the players in place at the moment, more just the mindset that having no weakness is much more important than having a big strength.

I'm generally happy to see all the current guys involved but the lack of balance in the backline is difficult to get around with the players selected/available. There's only so much Jones can do about the players available to him, but he has to find a way to effectively use a whole bunch of not-that-fast, not-that-evasive, not-that-strong players together in one backline. Is that definitely better than picking someone like Radwan who adds a huge amount but maybe falls short in a couple of areas?

Were Lomu and Campese without weakness? Do NZ spend years worrying about whether Roko, Sivi, Gear, Savea, Ioane start out as the complete, rounded players or do they just do what they need to fit a lethal strike runner in there somewhere?

I guess you could say we're in a similar position at 8/9/10, to be fair.

Mikey Brown wrote:It wasn't so much an accusation at the players in place at the moment, more just the mindset that having no weakness is much more important than having a big strength.

I'm generally happy to see all the current guys involved but the lack of balance in the backline is difficult to get around with the players selected/available. There's only so much Jones can do about the players available to him, but he has to find a way to effectively use a whole bunch of not-that-fast, not-that-evasive, not-that-strong players together in one backline. Is that definitely better than picking someone like Radwan who adds a huge amount but maybe falls short in a couple of areas?

Were Lomu and Campese without weakness? Do NZ spend years worrying about whether Roko, Sivi, Gear, Savea, Ioane start out as the complete, rounded players or do they just do what they need to fit a lethal strike runner in there somewhere?

Lomu was a bit of a freak so put that to one side, ditto Campese. New Zealand do consider weaknesses alongside strengths as it happens; look at Nonu, given a go, and sent away to work on his passing. And tbh, their teams have been strong enough to carry the odd weakness- are ours? You have also picked out players who stood out even in the skills extravaganza that used to be super rugby.

I agree Jones needs to do better with what he has- but not sure Radwan compares to the names you've trotted out....which was my point tbh, alongside those players being a bit better than 6/10 (but not that well rounded across the board anyway). And in fairness to Jones, he's not afraid of trying new players at all.

Yeah, but that argument can go both ways. Are their teams strong enough to carry the odd weakness (in part) because they have so many players with real lethal pace or firepower? Sending a slightly one-dimensional Nonu away is probably a lot easier when you have a prime Aaron Mauger and Luke McAllister available.

You're right that Radwan is not comparable to those NZ wingers at the moment, but it would be nice to at least try and offer that sort of threat is all I'm saying. It would be nice to scare another team when we don't have Manu.

This isn't purely about Radwan, he's just an example where we could add a bit of balance to our backline with some additional pace, footwork, finishing etc. Obviously we'd have to give him enough ball that the positives outweigh all those moments where he just waves the opposition through.

I know we're missing May, Watson and (haven't been able to develop) Cokanasiga. I'm just bored of my day job and of watching England play.

Mikey Brown wrote:Yeah, but that argument can go both ways. Are their teams strong enough to carry the odd weakness (in part) because they have so many players with real lethal pace or firepower? Sending a slightly one-dimensional Nonu away is probably a lot easier when you have a prime Aaron Mauger and Luke McAllister available.

You're right that Radwan is not comparable to those NZ wingers at the moment, but it would be nice to at least try and offer that sort of threat is all I'm saying. It would be nice to scare another team when we don't have Manu.

This isn't purely about Radwan, he's just an example where we could add a bit of balance to our backline with some additional pace, footwork, finishing etc. Obviously we'd have to give him enough ball that the positives outweigh all those moments where he just waves the opposition through.

I know we're missing May, Watson and (haven't been able to develop) Cokanasiga. I'm just bored of my day job and of watching England play.

and as said, he's looked at Radwan, Thorley, OHC, Lynagh (Solomona, anyone?!) just from memory. And yes, NZ had huge luxury of choice and quality. As ever, its all context.

Not sure we, let alone the opposition, look at our back line and quake in their boots. We provide more work for the touch judges than we do their defence coaches.

p/d wrote:Not sure we, let alone the opposition, look at our back line and quake in their boots. We provide more work for the touch judges than we do their defence coaches.

I sure don’t, but not sure we have for a while. May used to worry defences, Watson too, Manu and Daly from time to time. You could probably say the same up front since Billy disappeared.

I still think it is reasonable to criticise Jones for not playing Smith/Slade/Marchant at 10/12/13 and Daly on one wing with either Malins or Nowell on the other for all three matches. He's stuck with Steward at FB and his Youngs/Randall manoevres are OK.

Smith is new at 10. Slade and Marchant need time to gel. Changes at 9 and on one wing give the back line enough to cope with. Pick the best combination available, stick with it and put the training work in.

Now, though, everyone is slagging off performances that have been impotent and inconsistent. Whose fault is that?

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:
Has he though?

Puja

Capable, IMO, yes, especially in comparison to Farrell. Is it his best position and would he ever become a world class player there? I don’t think so.

I still say Farrell at 12 is undersold by a lot of people here - not to say he's great, but he is competent. I haven't seen anything from Slade this 6N that makes me think he's better than Farrell there.

Puja

I think you’re conflating the performance of the attack with an individuals performance.

This England attack is so obviously a work in progress it needs scaffolding.

I’d persist with Slade, and get Marchant outside him. If big Joe is back fit and firing, and Watson comes back, too, then we’ve got our wings sorted, too, and we start to look a lot more balanced.

Strange how we’re just not producing big backs anymore. Was a time that’s all we had.

Freddie Steward is tiny