RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Where has Watson being faster than wade been verified?

I like a quiz

I'm disappointed that anything written on the EMB and corroborated by one other poster isn't unequivocally accepted as a fact. You can tell he's an outsider.

I think you are gold plating it with the corroboration to be honest,

I vaguely remember reading an interview with Wade where he said that his top speed isn't that quick. I could beleive that, It's his acceleration over 20 that is frightening (especially when you couple it with his balance).

bitts wrote:I vaguely remember reading an interview with Wade where he said that his top speed isn't that quick. I could beleive that, It's his acceleration over 20 that is frightening (especially when you couple it with his balance).

I was going to say he reminds me of Robinson, who was uber rapid over 10-15 yards, but wasn't quick - relatively- over longer distances. Watson is pretty sharp off the mark also though.

Aye. Remember being shocked seeing Robinson get burnt by Howlett. Then slowly realised that acceleration and top speed can be pretty different.

I mean Wade is obviously rapid by normal human standards but I reckon Watson, May, Daly and Yarde might win over 100.

Leaving aside who the actual quickest is (May at top speed, Wade at acceleration, Watson second for both I'd guess) for me the point is that they're all quick enough to be test wingers (with the possible exception of Nowell, who makes up for it elsewhere) so it comes down to other factors.

And I still struggle with the statement that Daly and (especially) Watson aren't good enough finishers. They bring loads more to the party as well as being good finishers.

Yarde? I mean come on

I do think there's an argument to say that Daly's skill set is better suited to 15 but he has very little playing time there

Carrying on this discussion from the eps thread but it's worth resurrecting this one. It's very harsh given his argentina performance but I say we bite the bullet and put watson in for brown at 15. Yes daly looks like he could be a good fullback but won't play at wasps.

twitchy wrote:Carrying on this discussion from the eps thread but it's worth resurrecting this one. It's very harsh given his argentina performance but I say we bite the bullet and put watson in for brown at 15. Yes daly looks like he could be a good fullback but won't play at wasps.

Is there any reason not to play both there for periods of a game? Maybe, a bit of flexibilty and thinking outside the box could develop a different approach.

twitchy wrote:Carrying on this discussion from the eps thread but it's worth resurrecting this one. It's very harsh given his argentina performance but I say we bite the bullet and put watson in for brown at 15. Yes daly looks like he could be a good fullback but won't play at wasps.

I think Id keep Watson on the wing. I think he has the potential to be a world leading winger. I think Daly is nailed on for another back three slot and if he can play 15 a bit for Wasps that will give us flexibility.

Id like Nowell to play 15 regularly - I think its a position that suits his strengths and covers his weaknesses.

May is an electric option on the wing but I think Eddie wants a power option so a player like Cokasinga could come into consideration if he does well for his club.

An outsider for the 15 shirt is Lozowski - hes looked great when he has played there and has all the tools to be a top class 15. However he may not play there at all with Williams at Sarries.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He looked great at 15 once, but a lot of that was due to him being thrown in and expectations being low. For me he's very much a 12, and I'd like to see him get the chance there.

Raggs wrote:He looked great at 15 once, but a lot of that was due to him being thrown in and expectations being low. For me he's very much a 12, and I'd like to see him get the chance there.

I think hed have a similar skillset to Alex Goode albeit with more gas. I dont see any 15s of that ilk on the horizon for England (Malins perhaps ironically?) so would prefer him there than at 12 where we have number of similar options.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Raggs wrote:He looked great at 15 once, but a lot of that was due to him being thrown in and expectations being low. For me he's very much a 12, and I'd like to see him get the chance there.

In theory, in practice how much has he played there, and how is his defence there? I can see he has the running threat (gas) and good hands....but there is more to it, and game time there at Sarries would look a challenge.

Im mostly wanting to see him at 12 since he has shown his game management and kicking can be variable. At 12 the pressure on both its reduced, he can run more often which seems to be a higher priority for him than i like for my 10s, and whilst his defensive reads will need to be tested, there's no doubt on his ability to be able to stop big carriers coming down his channel.

Wait. Watson not a good enough finisher. What?

Raggs wrote:Im mostly wanting to see him at 12 since he has shown his game management and kicking can be variable. At 12 the pressure on both its reduced, he can run more often which seems to be a higher priority for him than i like for my 10s, and whilst his defensive reads will need to be tested, there's no doubt on his ability to be able to stop big carriers coming down his channel.

He does seem to run more than pass at 12, which might just be the games he's had there, but he doesn't quite seem to play as a 2nd 10 as yet, which maybe if anything reinforces game management as an issue.

Peat wrote:Wait. Watson not a good enough finisher. What?

WHO SAID THIS

Raggs wrote:Im mostly wanting to see him at 12 since he has shown his game management and kicking can be variable. At 12 the pressure on both its reduced, he can run more often which seems to be a higher priority for him than i like for my 10s, and whilst his defensive reads will need to be tested, there's no doubt on his ability to be able to stop big carriers coming down his channel.

ah so its want him at 12, rather than a bunch of evidence that he's any good there? Nothing wrong in that, was just checking if I'd missed something; but as you point out, big carriers down the channel is only one part of the defensive picture. Still not sure how he'll get much game time there at Sarries.

Peat wrote:Wait. Watson not a good enough finisher. What?

Welcome to last month.

Puja

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Im mostly wanting to see him at 12 since he has shown his game management and kicking can be variable. At 12 the pressure on both its reduced, he can run more often which seems to be a higher priority for him than i like for my 10s, and whilst his defensive reads will need to be tested, there's no doubt on his ability to be able to stop big carriers coming down his channel.

ah so its want him at 12, rather than a bunch of evidence that he's any good there? Nothing wrong in that, was just checking if I'd missed something; but as you point out, big carriers down the channel is only one part of the defensive picture. Still not sure how he'll get much game time there at Sarries.

Not obvious he'll start much at 10, 12 or 15

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Im mostly wanting to see him at 12 since he has shown his game management and kicking can be variable. At 12 the pressure on both its reduced, he can run more often which seems to be a higher priority for him than i like for my 10s, and whilst his defensive reads will need to be tested, there's no doubt on his ability to be able to stop big carriers coming down his channel.

ah so its want him at 12, rather than a bunch of evidence that he's any good there? Nothing wrong in that, was just checking if I'd missed something; but as you point out, big carriers down the channel is only one part of the defensive picture. Still not sure how he'll get much game time there at Sarries.

Not obvious he'll start much at 10, 12 or 15

He got a pretty good amount of rugby at 10 last year - I think it was about 20 starts?

Puja

And isn't it just one game or two games at 12 (a game and a half for England this summer) in his whole career?

So, the other thread strayed on to which Lions players will be missing in the AIs. I didn't want to derail that one but I'm wondering now who we'll be looking at. Obviously it will be a totally different picture by the time we get to November but I'm keen to know who is earmarked for a rest.

I think the rest is a good idea but imagine Jones should/will be quite flexible on it.

Definite: Farrell, Daly, Watson

Maybe: Teo, Nowell

Surely free to play: Joseph

That's my rough impression of how much they played, without checking any stats. Would that leave a backline of this?

9. Youngs (FFS)
10. Ford
11. May
12. Possibly Teo
13. Joseph
14. Possibly Nowell
15. Brown

What would you change?

I really don't think Eddie will put Te'o at 12. He always has liked two playmakers in the past and, apart from a brief 1 and a bit game flirtation with Burrell, has gone for the same with England. I would expect him to use Te'o as a 13 with having him occasionally come off the bench if the shape needs to change; I really can't see him changing our attacking patterns this far into the project.

With that in mind, I'd say 12 is a shootout between whichever of Francis and Lozowski starts the season best, with Slade, Devoto, and Mallinder as outside bets.

Puja

Puja wrote:I really don't think Eddie will put Te'o at 12. He always has liked two playmakers in the past and, apart from a brief 1 and a bit game flirtation with Burrell, has gone for the same with England. I would expect him to use Te'o as a 13 with having him occasionally come off the bench if the shape needs to change; I really can't see him changing our attacking patterns this far into the project.

With that in mind, I'd say 12 is a shootout between whichever of Francis and Lozowski starts the season best, with Slade, Devoto, and Mallinder as outside bets.

Puja

He specifically said he wanted a 12 who'd carry the ball over the gainline at the start, and was lining Manu up to do that. Then Manu got hurt, Ford's kicking looked vulnerable and did a volte face. I do agree that it does appear that's how he sees Teo. and I do agree he took playmaking 12's to Argentina.

I don't think we know; but Eddie knows best.

(I would also hope he uses a bit of common sense with the backs tbh; none were really beasted. Forwards, esp Mako and Itoje need a break tho)

He's the reverse Burt in every sense then. Claiming he wants a basher at 12 then going with a playmaker.

I really see very little merit in putting Teo at 13 but you have me worried now. That Italy game was just horrifying. If Francis/Slade/Devoto played like that at 12 they would be cast out the same as Burrell was.

Mikey Brown wrote:He's the reverse Burt in every sense then. Claiming he wants a basher at 12 then going with a playmaker.

I really see very little merit in putting Teo at 13 but you have me worried now. That Italy game was just horrifying. If Francis/Slade/Devoto played like that at 12 they would be cast out the same as Burrell was.

agreed; I think Teo would be great alongside Ford, and JJ would thrive outside him, though accept it would mean a big change to the backs playbook.

(though I don't equate a 12 getting over the gainline necessarily with a bosher eg Eastmond)