RugbyRebels

‘His constant dropping of Smith’ ... eh? Marcus has played in every round of the Premiership so far this season and has racked up a total of 924mins out of a possible 1040mins.

Scrumhead wrote:‘His constant dropping of Smith’ ... eh? Marcus has played in every round of the Premiership so far this season and has racked up a total of 924mins out of a possible 1040mins.

Was the last season. This season's been a bit of a blur, if I'm honest.

Still doesn’t stack up though? Smith made 22/22 Premiership appearances last season and played 80mins for a good chunk of those.

You could actually argue the opposite and say we’ve put too much reliance on such a young 10.

Banquo wrote:

Stom wrote:

Banquo wrote: Not as a back row- he's been no better than ok there at best at intl level.
Dombrandt wasn't always being picked as I recall, but it was hardly an unfair comment either, given you have alluded to him improving his work rate in the downtime.

Part of that seemed to be Gustard wanting 3 grafters in the backrow, so we had Lawday at 8 to add even more workrate and "graft" instead of another player who can make things happen.

Don't get me wrong, I like Lawday, but he's just like a lesser version of James Chisholm to me, and should be our backup flanker, not our starting 8. But I seem to disagree with our head coach on many things. Like I think Elia has huge potential and should be given lots of minutes at hooker, but Gustard thinks Baldwin can actually play rugby, not just stick his fat fingers into a Lion's mouth.

It seems that Dombrandt has taken the hint on workrate and contribution.

Certainly looks like he's been working on reducing his "rig" from this pre-season photo. Hard to tell for sure, but he does look a bit trimmer and he's certainly bought two tickets to the gun show.



Puja

Not breaking through obviously but T Curry has got himself even more jacked.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... emiership/

Hopefully he gets as heavy as Billy and converts to being a perpetually injured number 8.

twitchy wrote:Not breaking through obviously but T Curry has got himself even more jacked.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... emiership/

And the person most likely to be called in for a 'random drug test' is...

At least it'll make it easier to tell him and his brother apart. Hopefully it doesn't slow him down and he's able to still be as dynamic as he is currently.

FKAS wrote:

twitchy wrote:Not breaking through obviously but T Curry has got himself even more jacked.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... emiership/

And the person most likely to be called in for a 'random drug test' is...

At least it'll make it easier to tell him and his brother apart. Hopefully it doesn't slow him down and he's able to still be as dynamic as he is currently.

From what I've understood, it's the competition between them that mostly drove him, so I imagine that Ben has got bigger too.

Raggs wrote:

FKAS wrote:

twitchy wrote:Not breaking through obviously but T Curry has got himself even more jacked.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... emiership/

And the person most likely to be called in for a 'random drug test' is...

At least it'll make it easier to tell him and his brother apart. Hopefully it doesn't slow him down and he's able to still be as dynamic as he is currently.

From what I've understood, it's the competition between them that mostly drove him, so I imagine that Ben has got bigger too.

Confirmed: https://www.rugbypass.com/news/sale-sou ... ting-edge/

Puja

Anyone know where to find that graph plotting players weights against 100m times over the years? It was quite interesting.

I’m wondering if we’re going to see a ton of these guys coming back from the break absolutely enormous.

You posted it in the EPS thread I think.

twitchy wrote:You posted it in the EPS thread I think.

Oh, did I? I certainly meant to post it here, but didn't think I got that far.

My brain is disintegrating.

Mikey Brown wrote:Hopefully he gets as heavy as Billy and converts to being a perpetually injured number 8.

Jones seems to like his utility back rowers concept - Wilson, Ludlum and now a bigger T Curry - still think this risks the ‘jack of all trades syndrome’

jngf wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Hopefully he gets as heavy as Billy and converts to being a perpetually injured number 8.

Jones seems to like his utility back rowers concept - Wilson, Ludlum and now a bigger T Curry - still think this risks the ‘jack of all trades syndrome’

I half thought of also including Ben Earl in the above list as well but to be fair he’s only played at openside for test team this far - and May well have leapfrogged Tom Curry as the openside back up to Underhill (though of course the same might be said of Wilson too....gulp ) - btw appreciate value Wilson brings it’s just him playing openside excites me to the same extent as Robshaw and Haskell playing there did....

jngf wrote:

jngf wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Hopefully he gets as heavy as Billy and converts to being a perpetually injured number 8.

Jones seems to like his utility back rowers concept - Wilson, Ludlum and now a bigger T Curry - still think this risks the ‘jack of all trades syndrome’

I half thought of also including Ben Earl in the above list as well but to be fair he’s only played at openside for test team this far - and May well have leapfrogged Tom Curry as the openside back up to Underhill (though of course the same might be said of Wilson too....gulp ) - btw appreciate value Wilson brings it’s just him playing openside excites me to the same extent as Robshaw and Haskell playing there did....

Would you be interested in broadening your understanding of backrow play, jngf?

Stom wrote:

jngf wrote:

jngf wrote:
Jones seems to like his utility back rowers concept - Wilson, Ludlum and now a bigger T Curry - still think this risks the ‘jack of all trades syndrome’

I half thought of also including Ben Earl in the above list as well but to be fair he’s only played at openside for test team this far - and May well have leapfrogged Tom Curry as the openside back up to Underhill (though of course the same might be said of Wilson too....gulp ) - btw appreciate value Wilson brings it’s just him playing openside excites me to the same extent as Robshaw and Haskell playing there did....

Would you be interested in broadening your understanding of backrow play, jngf?

Would you be interested in elaborating on this question? ( assuming you’re not Don Rutherford or similar rugby authority )

jngf wrote:

Stom wrote:

jngf wrote:
I half thought of also including Ben Earl in the above list as well but to be fair he’s only played at openside for test team this far - and May well have leapfrogged Tom Curry as the openside back up to Underhill (though of course the same might be said of Wilson too....gulp ) - btw appreciate value Wilson brings it’s just him playing openside excites me to the same extent as Robshaw and Haskell playing there did....

Would you be interested in broadening your understanding of backrow play, jngf?

Would you be interested in elaborating on this question? ( assuming you’re not Don Rutherford or similar rugby authority )

Be fairly miraculous if it were indeed Don Rutherford.

jngf wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Hopefully he gets as heavy as Billy and converts to being a perpetually injured number 8.

Jones seems to like his utility back rowers concept - Wilson, Ludlum and now a bigger T Curry - still think this risks the ‘jack of all trades syndrome’

I think back row roles are becoming increasingly interchangeable TBH.

I wrote a whole thread on Number 8s a while back and I think it’s fair to say that the big, ball carrying number 8 is less and less common. Billy, Duane Vermeulen and Isi Naisarani are becoming the exception rather than the rule.

Also, when you think about a lot of the top flankers, the likes of Sam Cane, Ardie Savea, David Pocock and Josh Navidi have all been moved around the back row.

jngf wrote:

Stom wrote:

jngf wrote:
I half thought of also including Ben Earl in the above list as well but to be fair he’s only played at openside for test team this far - and May well have leapfrogged Tom Curry as the openside back up to Underhill (though of course the same might be said of Wilson too....gulp ) - btw appreciate value Wilson brings it’s just him playing openside excites me to the same extent as Robshaw and Haskell playing there did....

Would you be interested in broadening your understanding of backrow play, jngf?

Would you be interested in elaborating on this question? ( assuming you’re not Don Rutherford or similar rugby authority )

I mean that you post a lot about backrows without seemingly understanding what the roles of flankers are within different systems. I'm a tactic nerd across sports (OK, I'm not so good at cricket yet, field setting is complicated) and love to see how the roles players take change across systems.

For instance, the way England use their flanks and therefore the characteristics Eddie looks for in his 6 and 7 and how that impacts who plays where. Because the number 7 is different from the number 6 in one important aspect that directly impacts their role elsewhere: they're the man off the scrum on the openside, they need to be quick, tackle hard, and hit rucks effectively. So their ability on the turnover is secondary or even tertiary. Meaning the 6 might take on more of those roles. Or the 7, depending on the player and the tweaks Jones does make to his system.

In other words: the ability to jackal is waaaaay down the list of priorities for a player wearing the 7 shirt under Eddie Jones. It's often higher up the list of priorities for the player wearing 6, but in realistic terms, it's a role shared among many of the players.

Welp, this thread is now done for!

Puja

Scrumhead wrote:

jngf wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Hopefully he gets as heavy as Billy and converts to being a perpetually injured number 8.

Jones seems to like his utility back rowers concept - Wilson, Ludlum and now a bigger T Curry - still think this risks the ‘jack of all trades syndrome’

I think back row roles are becoming increasingly interchangeable TBH.

I wrote a whole thread on Number 8s a while back and I think it’s fair to say that the big, ball carrying number 8 is less and less common. Billy, Duane Vermeulen and Isi Naisarani are becoming the exception rather than the rule.

Also, when you think about a lot of the top flankers, the likes of Sam Cane, Ardie Savea, David Pocock and Josh Navidi have all been moved around the back row.

I certainly think there is now an expectation that the ball carrying number 8 needs to be able to keep up with the flankers. Gone are the days when the 8 could be half flanker, half lock. I don't think the idea of a big ball carrier is gone though, the most talked about backrow this year has been Hoskins Sotutu. A very skillful but let's face it big ball carrying number 8. The Blues like their ball carrying 8s so much they are even using Akira Iaone at 6. The Crusaders have Whettu Douglas, the Highlanders have Mikaele-Tu'u the Kiwi teams love a big number 8.

I also think that modern rugby puts more of an emphasis on the whole backrow to do something ball in hand. Backrow is increasingly an all action position hence we are seeing flankers come in to the 8 position because they have the all round game to play that role and they aren't solely there to carry the backrow as a unit offers that. Little bit odd you name dropped Cane in that respect because he's pretty limited ball in hand and it sometimes feels like a position is being made for him rather than him demanding one. He's lucky that Foster made him captain already otherwise it might have been a tough ask to get into the match day squad for the ABs such is the ridiculous talent they have at the minute.

Fair point on Sotutu, but I think we’re essentially on the same wavelength.

I wasn’t using Cane as an example of a ball carrier. I was simply saying that he’s a high profile flanker that’s swapped between 6 and 7. For context, jngf is fixated on shirt numbers so it was referencing that. I think that’s also the thrust of Stom’s post and Puja’s ‘welp’.

Scrumhead wrote:Fair point on Sotutu, but I think we’re essentially on the same wavelength.

I wasn’t using Cane as an example of a ball carrier. I was simply saying that he’s a high profile flanker that’s swapped between 6 and 7. For context, jngf is fixated on shirt numbers so it was referencing that. I think that’s also the thrust of Stom’s post and Puja’s ‘welp’.

Scrumhead, I‘m not quite as fixated on shirt numbers as you like to think - I was very happy to see Rives, Winterbottom and Robinson wear 6 shirts in occasional test outings as it was clear they were playing the openside type roles ....for exactly the same reasoning when Robshaw, Haskell or more recently Wilson wears the 7 shirt nobody should be kidding themselves that we aren’t seeing anything but blindside flankers at work!

jngf wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:Fair point on Sotutu, but I think we’re essentially on the same wavelength.

I wasn’t using Cane as an example of a ball carrier. I was simply saying that he’s a high profile flanker that’s swapped between 6 and 7. For context, jngf is fixated on shirt numbers so it was referencing that. I think that’s also the thrust of Stom’s post and Puja’s ‘welp’.

Scrumhead, I‘m not quite as fixated on shirt numbers as you like to think - I was very happy to see Rives, Winterbottom and Robinson wear 6 shirts in occasional test outings as it was clear they were playing the openside type roles ....for exactly the same reasoning when Robshaw, Haskell or more recently Wilson wears the 7 shirt nobody should be kidding themselves that we aren’t seeing anything but blindside flankers at work!

But that's kinda the point...

The role of an openside and a blindside changes throughout history. The only aspect of their play that is determined by them being opensides or blindsides is their actions off the scrum. At every other point in the match, they are simply a "loose forward".

Jesus. I can’t believe we’re doing this again, but yes.

If it just so happens your 7 is a good carrier or lineout jumper, while your 8 is fantastic over the ball and your 6 is a great link-man (to use a horribly simplistic breakdown of key back-row skills), it doesn’t really matter that they’re not fitting the archetypes.

None of us on here (I think I can say with near certainty) particularly want to see Wilson at 7. I think that was more just an optics thing as EJ had quite taken to the idea of Curry at 6. But as a pair of flankers they are ticking just about every box, whichever shirts they’re wearing.