RugbyRebels

Puja wrote:

Timbo wrote:

Puja wrote:
A google tells me that he played the 2018 AIs at 13 (alongside Be Te'o) and all but one of the 2019 6N (alongside Manu)

Puja

Yes, I meant the 2019 6 Nations. Seasons and years all merge into one at the moment. It was the Ireland game and the 2019 tournament that seemed to propel him forwards into potentially England’s first choice 13. That fair? He’s barely played at 13 since, mainly through injury.

Oh, that I completely understand! I'm not sure exactly of your point though. Are you saying that he's not really a 13?

Puja

Yeah, I made a bit of a hash of it.

He had a reasonable 2018, a bit dodgy in South Africa then decent in the Autumn games, but then really stepped it up in the 6 Nations. He finally looked comfortable at 13 in international rugby. That seemed to be his breakthrough.

Since then England have played around 15 tests and Slade has started just 1 at 13- a qf in the World Cup in which he played well. He’s done a very decent job as a utility player in other games during that time, but generally injured or on the bench having just returned from injury.

So my point, and what I’m wondering, is how can it be reasonable to judge him when since looking really good in his favoured position during the ‘19 6N’s he’s barely played there since? And I’d also argue that in the appearances he has made in the last 16 months he’s only actually had one poor performance, which was against Georgia.

Timbo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Timbo wrote:
Yes, I meant the 2019 6 Nations. Seasons and years all merge into one at the moment. It was the Ireland game and the 2019 tournament that seemed to propel him forwards into potentially England’s first choice 13. That fair? He’s barely played at 13 since, mainly through injury.

Oh, that I completely understand! I'm not sure exactly of your point though. Are you saying that he's not really a 13?

Puja

Yeah, I made a bit of a hash of it.

He had a reasonable 2018, a bit dodgy in South Africa then decent in the Autumn games, but then really stepped it up in the 6 Nations. He finally looked comfortable at 13 in international rugby. That seemed to be his breakthrough.

Since then England have played around 15 tests and Slade has started just 1 at 13- a qf in the World Cup in which he played well. He’s done a very decent job as a utility player in other games during that time, but generally injured or on the bench having just returned from injury.

So my point, and what I’m wondering, is how can it be reasonable to judge him when since looking really good in his favoured position during the ‘19 6N’s he’s barely played there since? And I’d also argue that in the appearances he has made in the last 16 months he’s only actually had one poor performance, which was against Georgia.

Okay, that makes a lot more sense. And it's a question I'm not in a position to answer, as I'm judging him as a 12, not as a decent international 13, so I'll bow out and stop trying to answer the thing that's not directed to me.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Timbo wrote:

Puja wrote:
Oh, that I completely understand! I'm not sure exactly of your point though. Are you saying that he's not really a 13?

Puja

Yeah, I made a bit of a hash of it.

He had a reasonable 2018, a bit dodgy in South Africa then decent in the Autumn games, but then really stepped it up in the 6 Nations. He finally looked comfortable at 13 in international rugby. That seemed to be his breakthrough.

Since then England have played around 15 tests and Slade has started just 1 at 13- a qf in the World Cup in which he played well. He’s done a very decent job as a utility player in other games during that time, but generally injured or on the bench having just returned from injury.

So my point, and what I’m wondering, is how can it be reasonable to judge him when since looking really good in his favoured position during the ‘19 6N’s he’s barely played there since? And I’d also argue that in the appearances he has made in the last 16 months he’s only actually had one poor performance, which was against Georgia.

Okay, that makes a lot more sense. And it's a question I'm not in a position to answer, as I'm judging him as a 12, not as a decent international 13, so I'll bow out and stop trying to answer the thing that's not directed to me.

Puja

Fair enough. I think your point about suddenly looking a lot better having a physical 12- first Te’o then Manu- inside him was pretty accurate. I’d have played Lawrence at 12 and Slade at 13 these last 2 games personally.

For whatever reason Slade just seems to prefer/need the bit of extra time and space afforded at 13. Notable that he has looked a lot more comfortable at 15 for England- again more time and space- than he has at 12.

Timbo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Timbo wrote:
Yeah, I made a bit of a hash of it.

He had a reasonable 2018, a bit dodgy in South Africa then decent in the Autumn games, but then really stepped it up in the 6 Nations. He finally looked comfortable at 13 in international rugby. That seemed to be his breakthrough.

Since then England have played around 15 tests and Slade has started just 1 at 13- a qf in the World Cup in which he played well. He’s done a very decent job as a utility player in other games during that time, but generally injured or on the bench having just returned from injury.

So my point, and what I’m wondering, is how can it be reasonable to judge him when since looking really good in his favoured position during the ‘19 6N’s he’s barely played there since? And I’d also argue that in the appearances he has made in the last 16 months he’s only actually had one poor performance, which was against Georgia.

Okay, that makes a lot more sense. And it's a question I'm not in a position to answer, as I'm judging him as a 12, not as a decent international 13, so I'll bow out and stop trying to answer the thing that's not directed to me.

Puja

Fair enough. I think your point about suddenly looking a lot better having a physical 12- first Te’o then Manu- inside him was pretty accurate. I’d have played Lawrence at 12 and Slade at 13 these last 2 games personally.

For whatever reason Slade just seems to prefer/need the bit of extra time and space afforded at 13. Notable that he has looked a lot more comfortable at 15 for England- again more time and space- than he has at 12.

Tbh it’s a bit tricky to judge him at 12 based on two games outside a 10 playing deep and badly. He was poor v Georgia but I wouldn’t base his future at 12 on that, given the mistakes were unusual for him- his handling skills are the best part of his game.

Looking back now, I just can't make my mind up about Billy V. I thought he began looking lean and mean. His handling, particularly of a wet ball from restarts was excellent. His functional No 8 play at the back of the scrum was mainly competent. Decision-making and defence - not sure!

Carrying! That has always been his main attribute amid claims that he creates loads of space for others because it takes three or more to stop him. Is it fair to suggest that he is going through the motions a bit these days? His carrying looked a bit half-hearted to me - as if hitting an opponent and getting rid of the ball to a team-mate was the height of his ambition. He rarely looks for gaps or ways of getting past opponents now.

So, if Billy's 20 stones on the hoof is not getting past opponents might a more athletic No 8 give us something that is missing? Maybe, it is time to try a different approach.

Thought he did some very good things. My feeling is that he didnt quite do enough of them.

I didn't watch all the game. I did see Billy trying to take contact upright and without leg drive at least twice. You know, that appalling English style carrying that gets shown up by the likes of SA who always drive like their lives depend on it.

I also did not watch all the game. I can excuse a couple of mistakes or poor carries, but do feel we should be looking to eliminate them.

A lot of that, though, is about game management. Because of the way we play (and who is calling the shots), we tend to have a lot of forward carries one out and players don't want to run on to the ball because the pass would inevitably go behind them or to their ankles or head, leaving them open for a big hit.

We need better at 9 and 10, basically, if we want to be good at anything attacking.

Our defence and forward play is pretty special, though. Just when the ball gets past 8 it rarely ends up past 10 with any urgency. In fact, the best pass from the base all day was from Itoje...

Stom wrote: Just when the ball gets past 8 it rarely ends up past 10 with any urgency. In fact, the best pass from the base all day was from Itoje...

Maybe, things would improve if Itoje was captain (though not from 6)!

fivepointer wrote:Thought he did some very good things. My feeling is that he didnt quite do enough of them.

He carried more than any other forward and was joint second in the tackle count. My impression is also that He did a lot of clearing, though sometimes he could improve on the technique.

Oakboy wrote:

Stom wrote: Just when the ball gets past 8 it rarely ends up past 10 with any urgency. In fact, the best pass from the base all day was from Itoje...

Maybe, things would improve if Itoje was captain (though not from 6)!

I don't think just changing the captain is going to solve things.

We have a(nother) new attack coach, who's had limited time with the squad yet. We have an extremely limited 10 who, to compound his lack of top class passing ability, is not a very good reader of the game on attack (he's better in defence, even if his individual decision making can be iffy). We have a 9 who, for all his good reason form, is not the most accurate or timely of passers... Timely being the key thing.

In fact, I'd say the problems all stem from the fear of making mistakes.

When was that best pass of the day from the base by Itoje?

Digby wrote:When was that best pass of the day from the base by Itoje?

No idea, I'll check.


40m, well, 39:50.

Stom wrote:

Digby wrote:When was that best pass of the day from the base by Itoje?

No idea, I'll check.


40m, well, 39:50.

The one described by one esteemed correspondent as not exactly zipping down the line? I get it wasn't by Youngs, but that was a good pass by a lock rather than a good pass.