RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:
Plus you need to learn patience when replying

Apologies.

larf, I never started

We (well, mainly me) really need a sarcasm emoji/meme/gif.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:
Apologies.

larf, I never started

We (well, mainly me) really need a sarcasm emoji/meme/gif.

Oh I got it

Mellsblue wrote:
Yes, first choice for Ospreys, as far as I know - I haven't seen him play.

I've seen him play, including the Clermont game, but he must have played better else there'd be no point not just picking Tom Wood.

I've seen this boy play a fair bit at 6 and 7, he is the business and at 19 will only get better, he's under the tutelage of Richard Hill who wasn't to shabby a backrower as I recall, he's not first choice at the Os currently but has been standing in for Tipuric since his concussion and started a few games before Tipuric was concussed but at 6 iirc.

The Os have Cracknell coming through who also looks an excellent backrow prospect so I wouldn't be suprised to see Underhill going across the bridge before too long.

I would say he is nearing the best 7 you have already.

Numbers wrote:I've seen this boy play a fair bit at 6 and 7, he is the business and at 19 will only get better, he's under the tutelage of Richard Hill who wasn't to shabby a backrower as I recall, he's not first choice at the Os currently but has been standing in for Tipuric since his concussion and started a few games before Tipuric was concussed but at 6 iirc.

The Os have Cracknell coming through who also looks an excellent backrow prospect so I wouldn't be suprised to see Underhill going across the bridge before too long.

I would say he is nearing the best 7 you have already.

If coming under the tutelage of Hill were all it took then Andy Saull would be a 60 cap veteran for England.

As someone who has perhaps seen more of him what are his strengths? From the Clermont game which got him a fair bit of positive coverage he worked reasonably hard, made his tackles, carried reasonably, and didn't get drawn out of the line much (maybe once) - which is all fine, perhaps more than that at 19, but there wasn't anything special about it. There's got to be more than I saw to get people so excited.

Digby wrote:

Numbers wrote:I've seen this boy play a fair bit at 6 and 7, he is the business and at 19 will only get better, he's under the tutelage of Richard Hill who wasn't to shabby a backrower as I recall, he's not first choice at the Os currently but has been standing in for Tipuric since his concussion and started a few games before Tipuric was concussed but at 6 iirc.

The Os have Cracknell coming through who also looks an excellent backrow prospect so I wouldn't be suprised to see Underhill going across the bridge before too long.

I would say he is nearing the best 7 you have already.

If coming under the tutelage of Hill were all it took then Andy Saull would be a 60 cap veteran for England.

As someone who has perhaps seen more of him what are his strengths? From the Clermont game which got him a fair bit of positive coverage he worked reasonably hard, made his tackles, carried reasonably, and didn't get drawn out of the line much (maybe once) - which is all fine, perhaps more than that at 19, but there wasn't anything special about it. There's got to be more than I saw to get people so excited.

..perhaps its his maturity of play at 19, in a pretty intimidating game, as simple as that. I thought I'd just join the uninformed quotes club.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Numbers wrote:I've seen this boy play a fair bit at 6 and 7, he is the business and at 19 will only get better, he's under the tutelage of Richard Hill who wasn't to shabby a backrower as I recall, he's not first choice at the Os currently but has been standing in for Tipuric since his concussion and started a few games before Tipuric was concussed but at 6 iirc.

The Os have Cracknell coming through who also looks an excellent backrow prospect so I wouldn't be suprised to see Underhill going across the bridge before too long.

I would say he is nearing the best 7 you have already.

If coming under the tutelage of Hill were all it took then Andy Saull would be a 60 cap veteran for England.

As someone who has perhaps seen more of him what are his strengths? From the Clermont game which got him a fair bit of positive coverage he worked reasonably hard, made his tackles, carried reasonably, and didn't get drawn out of the line much (maybe once) - which is all fine, perhaps more than that at 19, but there wasn't anything special about it. There's got to be more than I saw to get people so excited.

..perhaps its his maturity of play at 19, in a pretty intimidating game, as simple as that. I thought I'd just join the uninformed quotes club.

Just join?

His decision making around the breakdown is good and his technique is very strong. He's not a dumb trucker ball in hand, but does the hard yards when necessary. Good positioning and decisions in the defensive line. Obviously very strong. I'm very impressed, especially for his age.

I know Hilda rates him as the best backrow prospect we have on our hands.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
If coming under the tutelage of Hill were all it took then Andy Saull would be a 60 cap veteran for England.

As someone who has perhaps seen more of him what are his strengths? From the Clermont game which got him a fair bit of positive coverage he worked reasonably hard, made his tackles, carried reasonably, and didn't get drawn out of the line much (maybe once) - which is all fine, perhaps more than that at 19, but there wasn't anything special about it. There's got to be more than I saw to get people so excited.

..perhaps its his maturity of play at 19, in a pretty intimidating game, as simple as that. I thought I'd just join the uninformed quotes club.

Just join?

Fair.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:His decision making around the breakdown is good and his technique is very strong. He's not a dumb trucker ball in hand, but does the hard yards when necessary. Good positioning and decisions in the defensive line. Obviously very strong. I'm very impressed, especially for his age.

I know Hilda rates him as the best backrow prospect we have on our hands.

I get being impressed for his age. I'm not sure how we go from there to thinking he could possibly/reasonably be on the plane to Oz. I've only seen a small number of games, but of those I saw the gulf between him and Tips wasn't small, which is fine, but other than he might at some point conceivably play for Wales I can't see why we'd pick him now and I wouldn't want to pick him just to be that negative anyway.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: ..perhaps its his maturity of play at 19, in a pretty intimidating game, as simple as that. I thought I'd just join the uninformed quotes club.

Just join?

droll. Unusual.

Humph

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Just join?

droll. Unusual.

Humph

ha- edit strikes again!

Digby wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:His decision making around the breakdown is good and his technique is very strong. He's not a dumb trucker ball in hand, but does the hard yards when necessary. Good positioning and decisions in the defensive line. Obviously very strong. I'm very impressed, especially for his age.

I know Hilda rates him as the best backrow prospect we have on our hands.

I get being impressed for his age. I'm not sure how we go from there to thinking he could possibly/reasonably be on the plane to Oz. I've only seen a small number of games, but of those I saw the gulf between him and Tips wasn't small, which is fine, but other than he might at some point conceivably play for Wales I can't see why we'd pick him now and I wouldn't want to pick him just to be that negative anyway.

who has said that, out of interest?

I think mention has been made of securing him....and I'd agree that might appear both desperate and negative, but I'm also a fan of expediency.

Banquo wrote: who has said that, out of interest?

I think mention has been made of securing him....and I'd agree that might appear both desperate and negative, but I'm also a fan of expediency.

I'm sure I've heard and seen discussion on it, but I am somewhat feeble minded, and too you may have edited all posts stating he could go on tour. I'm not that strongly against him going on a Saxons tour, I've not seen enough if him, but my early take is there are currently better options, but as it's the Saxons one could take a punt. I'm also a little happier if he goes with the Saxons that he wouldn't then be tied in when he mayn't progress to England proper.

Digby wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:His decision making around the breakdown is good and his technique is very strong. He's not a dumb trucker ball in hand, but does the hard yards when necessary. Good positioning and decisions in the defensive line. Obviously very strong. I'm very impressed, especially for his age.

I know Hilda rates him as the best backrow prospect we have on our hands.

I get being impressed for his age. I'm not sure how we go from there to thinking he could possibly/reasonably be on the plane to Oz. I've only seen a small number of games, but of those I saw the gulf between him and Tips wasn't small, which is fine, but other than he might at some point conceivably play for Wales I can't see why we'd pick him now and I wouldn't want to pick him just to be that negative anyway.

Looking at backrow options and his current ability I'd have him on the Saxons tour. I'd not have him full squad yet, but he's already a good player.

I'd expect the gap with Tips to be pretty large at present, after all Tips has over 40 Welsh caps and is a Briish Lion. He's a quality player who simply suffers from having Warburton around.

Digby wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:His decision making around the breakdown is good and his technique is very strong. He's not a dumb trucker ball in hand, but does the hard yards when necessary. Good positioning and decisions in the defensive line. Obviously very strong. I'm very impressed, especially for his age.

I know Hilda rates him as the best backrow prospect we have on our hands.

I get being impressed for his age. I'm not sure how we go from there to thinking he could possibly/reasonably be on the plane to Oz. I've only seen a small number of games, but of those I saw the gulf between him and Tips wasn't small, which is fine, but other than he might at some point conceivably play for Wales I can't see why we'd pick him now and I wouldn't want to pick him just to be that negative anyway.

I think the main talk about him going to Australia is the extent to which he's clearly impressed Jones when our flankers are not all that. That, and if Jones wants a guy who really understands openside play while being genuinely powerful, Underhill appears to be in a very small group that look like they could fulfil that... and by very small, I mean its him.

I don't think I'd take him just yet, but his inclusion feels like a matter of time.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: who has said that, out of interest?

I think mention has been made of securing him....and I'd agree that might appear both desperate and negative, but I'm also a fan of expediency.

but I am somewhat feeble minded,

harsh, but..(edited)

I've watched many Pro-12 games this season and have seen Underhill play several times. I would say that as a 19 year old he is something special, with a great engine, the X factor, and very powerful for a bloke who is not that massive. England should nail him down as soon as possible. He should have a long international career ahead of him and could hold probably hold his own even now. He'd bring more zip to the backrow than either Robshaw or Haskell.

For purposes of comparison I would rate him comfortably ahead of new, whizz-kid Irish flanker, van der Flier.

Spiffy wrote: He'd bring more zip to the backrow than either Robshaw or Haskell.

I'm not especially a fan of Robshaw or Haskell playing for England, but based on what I've seen so far I wouldn't even entertain the notion of starting Underhill over one of them, Underhill's work just wasn't that special, and there were decent chunks of the game he's resting in (which again doesn't seem unfair at 19, but you can't play for England just 'cause you're 19)

I'm quite sure there's more to Underhill than I've seen, at least I hope there is.

Digby wrote:

Spiffy wrote: He'd bring more zip to the backrow than either Robshaw or Haskell.

I'm not especially a fan of Robshaw or Haskell playing for England, but based on what I've seen so far I wouldn't even entertain the notion of starting Underhill over one of them, Underhill's work just wasn't that special, and there were decent chunks of the game he's resting in (which again doesn't seem unfair at 19, but you can't play for England just 'cause you're 19)

I'm quite sure there's more to Underhill than I've seen, at least I hope there is.

I've really not seen him resting - if anything he seems a very active member of the team. He's strong at the breakdown in the tackle and in the carry. I don't really see a weakness to his game. He's not brilliant, yet. But he's as good a backrow as I've seen at that age.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Digby wrote:

Spiffy wrote: He'd bring more zip to the backrow than either Robshaw or Haskell.

I'm not especially a fan of Robshaw or Haskell playing for England, but based on what I've seen so far I wouldn't even entertain the notion of starting Underhill over one of them, Underhill's work just wasn't that special, and there were decent chunks of the game he's resting in (which again doesn't seem unfair at 19, but you can't play for England just 'cause you're 19)

I'm quite sure there's more to Underhill than I've seen, at least I hope there is.

I've really not seen him resting - if anything he seems a very active member of the team. He's strong at the breakdown in the tackle and in the carry. I don't really see a weakness to his game. He's not brilliant, yet. But he's as good a backrow as I've seen at that age.

Heres hoping hes as good as any backrower you've seen when hes 20...

There are never any guarantees. People pick up injuries and come back differently. People fall off their one season high. Personally I already think he'd be more useful to you than Robshaw or Haskell - not perhaps yet a better player but likely to become so very soon indeed - and on the very limited amount of Clifford that I've seen I'd have him comfortably ahead of Clifford at 7.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:There are never any guarantees. People pick up injuries and come back differently. People fall off their one season high. Personally I already think he'd be more useful to you than Robshaw or Haskell - not perhaps yet a better player but likely to become so very soon indeed - and on the very limited amount of Clifford that I've seen I'd have him comfortably ahead of Clifford at 7.

Eugene, please stop basing your opinion on facts gathered by actually watching him, you evidently haven't heard that Digby has seen him play one game and according to him he isn't good enough.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:There are never any guarantees. People pick up injuries and come back differently. People fall off their one season high. Personally I already think he'd be more useful to you than Robshaw or Haskell - not perhaps yet a better player but likely to become so very soon indeed - and on the very limited amount of Clifford that I've seen I'd have him comfortably ahead of Clifford at 7.

I've a feeling Clifford may be wasted as a test openside, as a lighter, speedier No.8 option though he seems a good prospect.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Digby wrote:

Spiffy wrote: He'd bring more zip to the backrow than either Robshaw or Haskell.

I'm not especially a fan of Robshaw or Haskell playing for England, but based on what I've seen so far I wouldn't even entertain the notion of starting Underhill over one of them, Underhill's work just wasn't that special, and there were decent chunks of the game he's resting in (which again doesn't seem unfair at 19, but you can't play for England just 'cause you're 19)

I'm quite sure there's more to Underhill than I've seen, at least I hope there is.

I've really not seen him resting - if anything he seems a very active member of the team. He's strong at the breakdown in the tackle and in the carry. I don't really see a weakness to his game. He's not brilliant, yet. But he's as good a backrow as I've seen at that age.

In the games I've seen he's tended to stand out in the backs a lot, which is fine if the coaches are happy with that role and how and where it enables him to come into the game. But that does mean he's let off a fair amount of lineout and maul work which does rather take it out of the forwards.