RugbyRebels

Rowan! I won’t ask you again.

Some more quality analysis from the 1014 site. Ireland are being looked into here, and whilst they run a more conventional system than England with a 1331 they use it in a different way to many.

http://the1014.com/irelands-patterns-ta ... -1-looper/

I'm going to say again I think the 1331 looks as a starting point a better bet than the England system, 'cause it's just easier to keep the ball. Though for anyone who watched the preview Ireland do need a lot more phases and time on the ball than England to score a try. As noted in the article now Ireland can pair Henshaw and Aki they might start to do more damage with the system as they'll have two powerful carriers. Also interesting Ireland aren't close to having the same 10-12 balance as England.

In addition to looking at or thinking on attack there's no reason not to have the odd post on defence, and from the above article the following photo is included



And what draws my attention is how much the England defence is going at the inside shoulder as they come off the line. If Ireland can up their passing with the use of the flat 3 in a pod some tip on passes could cause some big holes to open up, though for now the use of the first 3 pod as per the article is quite functional simply to set up the 2nd use of a 3 pod.

Do Ireland have the handling skills in their tight 5 to do that consistently?

The 1014 pieces are great though. Will give the Ireland one a watch later.

Timbo wrote:Do Ireland have the handling skills in their tight 5 to do that consistently?

The 1014 pieces are great though. Will give the Ireland one a watch later.

Not consistently I wouldn't think. But if you can get just 1-2 to dot it it'll work until defences are watching those players for it, and it might encourage a fraction more drift (or for Gustard a faster blitz)

I'm pretty sure Schmidt will be working on getting handling skills up across the board, but that mayn't be revealed to the world until next season

Having perhaps read the above or more importantly the 1014 articles, and still more importantly having watched England would you fan out in defence Vs England, or smash the breakdown? Probably both but with more emphasis on looking to pile in than Vs most

Digby wrote:Having perhaps read the above or more importantly the 1014 articles, and still more importantly having watched England would you fan out in defence Vs England, or smash the breakdown? Probably both but with more emphasis on looking to pile in than Vs most

Smash the breakdown, definitely. It's where the AP clubs have struggled in the ERC - some rude and unsporting Celt goes competing for the ball and upsets our delicate plans.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Having perhaps read the above or more importantly the 1014 articles, and still more importantly having watched England would you fan out in defence Vs England, or smash the breakdown? Probably both but with more emphasis on looking to pile in than Vs most

Smash the breakdown, definitely. It's where the AP clubs have struggled in the ERC - some rude and unsporting Celt goes competing for the ball and upsets our delicate plans.

Puja

The AP teams are set to put more men in than England too, unless from somewhere the 'floaters' in the England attack hit at least 4-5 more rucks each and/or arrive some large chunk of a second earlier, and if they could do that they'd already have been doing it. The England attack might have reached a point it relies on a defence fanning out and blitzing, it's interesting whilst somehow I'd prefer to see someone else trying to make it work when watching it

Was thinking about how England will line up the carrying pods now, and am suspecting to see Launch and Mako try and be the carriers in the first pod of 2, hitting heavier traffic, and Lawes and Simmonds likely carrying options in the next pod, where Simmonds can find more spaces, and Lawes can use his fend to get around.

Was also thinking that by not putting many men into the breakdown, you can understand why Eddie likes Haskell, he is very good at securing our ball.

Mako can do the tight work, he's also maybe more dangerous as a carrier tying in the end of the blitzing line and is one of the few forwards we have who can reliably put the ball out of the back.

Digby wrote:Mako can do the tight work, he's also maybe more dangerous as a carrier tying in the end of the blitzing line and is one of the few forwards we have who can reliably put the ball out of the back.

You're basically saying Mako can do it all, which he can, but I think we need him for his heavy traffic work due to lack of options.

Digby wrote:Mako can do the tight work, he's also maybe more dangerous as a carrier tying in the end of the blitzing line and is one of the few forwards we have who can reliably put the ball out of the back.

I think I'd have Robshaw in the first pod. And I reckon Simmons will be one of the 1s.

Raggs wrote:

Digby wrote:Mako can do the tight work, he's also maybe more dangerous as a carrier tying in the end of the blitzing line and is one of the few forwards we have who can reliably put the ball out of the back.

You're basically saying Mako can do it all, which he can, but I think we need him for his heavy traffic work due to lack of options.

We need him in 2 or 3 positions at once given a lack of carrying options

Attwood can be a fine player when on form and was over looked unfairly for a while I thought. Great at the tight stuff, good scrummager, good carrier and worked hard. In that period a few years ago when Lawes played badly for two years but was still picked in the squad, Attwood should've been in from what I remember.

Generally underused by England would be my summary on him.

I know not all agree but I just wish EJ had called up Morgan at some point. Yes we can say he hasn't been in great form but it's not ALWAYS all about that. The confidence and morale-boosting factor of being called up and then having a stormer against Italy can change a player and he's the type who would have a stormer against Italy too... A mistake I reckon.

TheDasher wrote:I know not all agree but I just wish EJ had called up Morgan at some point. Yes we can say he hasn't been in great form but it's not ALWAYS all about that. The confidence and morale-boosting factor of being called up and then having a stormer against Italy can change a player and he's the type who would have a stormer against Italy too... A mistake I reckon.

What counts as having a stormer? No doubt he could have some strong carries, but is that close to enough? It was easy to criticise Hughes on his supposed storming first season of club rugby in England, but the truth is he like Morgan just wasn't working hard enough. Now it might be we're so down on carriers we should select Morgan in this side anyway and someone else will have to do his work, but while Burt did accept that at times it's not likely Eddie will

What has Morgan done recently? I know we can look back 4 or so years to see some decent performances, but since then? He's also had a serious injury in the meantime.

Badly, to answer the question, judging by the first squad

At least you have Te'o starting Banquo

Digby wrote:

TheDasher wrote:I know not all agree but I just wish EJ had called up Morgan at some point. Yes we can say he hasn't been in great form but it's not ALWAYS all about that. The confidence and morale-boosting factor of being called up and then having a stormer against Italy can change a player and he's the type who would have a stormer against Italy too... A mistake I reckon.

What counts as having a stormer? No doubt he could have some strong carries, but is that close to enough? It was easy to criticise Hughes on his supposed storming first season of club rugby in England, but the truth is he like Morgan just wasn't working hard enough. Now it might be we're so down on carriers we should select Morgan in this side anyway and someone else will have to do his work, but while Burt did accept that at times it's not likely Eddie will

Morgan generally was great for England imv, worked hard, carried exceptionally - generally one of our better players when in a white shirt. Having a stormer would be loads of yardage, lot's of carrying, good tackle count, presence at rucks etc. I think he'd do all that. He is a talent, EJ's job is to get the most out of English talent and I think getting back on the radar and being given an opportunity may do him the world of good. Just my view.

Raggs wrote:What has Morgan done recently? I know we can look back 4 or so years to see some decent performances, but since then? He's also had a serious injury in the meantime.

Just said this in another post - he's a talent. Great ball carrier without question. Injury and being dropped have probably effected him - sometimes great managers pick from left-field if the talent is there, in this case, with the injures etc, I'd have called him up and given him a go.

TheDasher wrote:

Digby wrote:

TheDasher wrote:I know not all agree but I just wish EJ had called up Morgan at some point. Yes we can say he hasn't been in great form but it's not ALWAYS all about that. The confidence and morale-boosting factor of being called up and then having a stormer against Italy can change a player and he's the type who would have a stormer against Italy too... A mistake I reckon.

What counts as having a stormer? No doubt he could have some strong carries, but is that close to enough? It was easy to criticise Hughes on his supposed storming first season of club rugby in England, but the truth is he like Morgan just wasn't working hard enough. Now it might be we're so down on carriers we should select Morgan in this side anyway and someone else will have to do his work, but while Burt did accept that at times it's not likely Eddie will

Morgan generally was great for England imv, worked hard, carried exceptionally - generally one of our better players when in a white shirt. Having a stormer would be loads of yardage, lot's of carrying, good tackle count, presence at rucks etc. I think he'd do all that. He is a talent, EJ's job is to get the most out of English talent and I think getting back on the radar and being given an opportunity may do him the world of good. Just my view.

I don't recall Morgan being hard working or much of a presence at rucks. He did have some TV games for England, lots of nice carries, and yes someone has to make the carries but you do also have to wonder is it enough?

If we lose Farrell or Ford to injury do the team change on a fundamental basis how they setup? Or does JJ become the 2nd playmaker?

Digby wrote:

TheDasher wrote:

Digby wrote:
What counts as having a stormer? No doubt he could have some strong carries, but is that close to enough? It was easy to criticise Hughes on his supposed storming first season of club rugby in England, but the truth is he like Morgan just wasn't working hard enough. Now it might be we're so down on carriers we should select Morgan in this side anyway and someone else will have to do his work, but while Burt did accept that at times it's not likely Eddie will

Morgan generally was great for England imv, worked hard, carried exceptionally - generally one of our better players when in a white shirt. Having a stormer would be loads of yardage, lot's of carrying, good tackle count, presence at rucks etc. I think he'd do all that. He is a talent, EJ's job is to get the most out of English talent and I think getting back on the radar and being given an opportunity may do him the world of good. Just my view.

I don't recall Morgan being hard working or much of a presence at rucks. He did have some TV games for England, lots of nice carries, and yes someone has to make the carries but you do also have to wonder is it enough?

I think because he's a big unit and his carrying stood out, some people tagged him as lazy in other aspects, if he was, I didnt notice it. In fact I remember some pretty good cover tackles, big hits and the odd turnover. And some great tries.

But again, that was all 4 years ago or longer, and he's done the square root of snot all since then.