Scrumhead wrote:
Also, you’re judging Kvesic’s effectiveness on the old breakdown laws. I’m not sure the Kvesic from 2 years ago would be allowed to be as effective now as he was then within the new laws.
I'm happy to find out. Whereas I'm not all that happy with our lack of turnovers and slowing the ball down, and even with the laws as they are the rugby league fanning out mantra is I think a little misguided.
There are problems in picking Kvesic, but there are problems at 2, 3, 7, 9, 12 and 15 anyway
Scrumhead wrote:
Also, you’re judging Kvesic’s effectiveness on the old breakdown laws. I’m not sure the Kvesic from 2 years ago would be allowed to be as effective now as he was then within the new laws.
I'm happy to find out. Whereas I'm not all that happy with our lack of turnovers and slowing the ball down, and even with the laws as they are the rugby league fanning out mantra is I think a little misguided.
There are problems in picking Kvesic, but there are problems at 2, 3, 7, 9, 12 and 15 anyway
I’d suggest that dealing with selection and/or player quality issues in some positions is not best remedied by compounding the issue and picking someone who can’t even get in their club side and has hardly played under the new laws that directly affect their game.
Scrumhead wrote:
Also, you’re judging Kvesic’s effectiveness on the old breakdown laws. I’m not sure the Kvesic from 2 years ago would be allowed to be as effective now as he was then within the new laws.
I'm happy to find out. Whereas I'm not all that happy with our lack of turnovers and slowing the ball down, and even with the laws as they are the rugby league fanning out mantra is I think a little misguided.
There are problems in picking Kvesic, but there are problems at 2, 3, 7, 9, 12 and 15 anyway
I’d suggest that dealing with selection and/or player quality issues in some positions is not best remedied by compounding the issue and picking someone who can’t even get in their club side and has hardly played under the new laws that directly affect their game.
And, assuming Hartley doesn't start, who to choose as on-field captain? Robshaw would seem the obvious choice but I would prefer an alternative, forward looking step. Obviously it depends on the final selection, but I would like to see expansion of experience so Launchbury would be my selection for this week.
I'm happy to find out. Whereas I'm not all that happy with our lack of turnovers and slowing the ball down, and even with the laws as they are the rugby league fanning out mantra is I think a little misguided.
There are problems in picking Kvesic, but there are problems at 2, 3, 7, 9, 12 and 15 anyway
I’d suggest that dealing with selection and/or player quality issues in some positions is not best remedied by compounding the issue and picking someone who can’t even get in their club side and has hardly played under the new laws that directly affect their game.
No sense of adventure some people.
The burdens of middle age do weigh me down. Ten years ago I’d have happily picked a backline with a 10 at 12, a 13 at 14 and a 15 who had never played there for his club.
At a time when young options are coming through, senior absentees (from injury, form or lack of favour), such as Kvesic or Tuilagi, may still have a future. However, they have to prove their worth in club rugby first. IMO, that has to be a minimum of 10 successive games as first choice, in-form and fully fit. Any sort of stuttering reappearance for England without that qualification risks being disruptive.
Ten years ago we did have Mike Catt at 12 and Tait (perhaps a 13) at 15. So as ever nothing much changes, especially in the phlegmatic world of English rugby
I'm happy to find out. Whereas I'm not all that happy with our lack of turnovers and slowing the ball down, and even with the laws as they are the rugby league fanning out mantra is I think a little misguided.
There are problems in picking Kvesic, but there are problems at 2, 3, 7, 9, 12 and 15 anyway
I’d suggest that dealing with selection and/or player quality issues in some positions is not best remedied by compounding the issue and picking someone who can’t even get in their club side and has hardly played under the new laws that directly affect their game.
No sense of adventure some people.
A ‘sense of adventure’ would be selecting Simmonds at 7 or (if possible), bringing in Ben Curry, who absolutely deserves a shot based upon current form.
Neither have a great deal of top level experience, but both are bang in form.
I’d like us to do more at the breakdown, but bringing in Kvesic is a bizarre solution that had no obvious merits.
Scrumhead wrote:
Also, you’re judging Kvesic’s effectiveness on the old breakdown laws. I’m not sure the Kvesic from 2 years ago would be allowed to be as effective now as he was then within the new laws.
This. It hadn’t really dawned on me - mainly as picking Kvesic would be ridiculous - but we have no idea whether he’d be effective under the new laws. As his strongest weapon is the turnover he’d either struggle or be worth his weight in gold.
I’m watching games with a curious eye on turnovers under the new laws and it’s definitely a lot more difficult. Sean McMahon managed a good steal on May on Saturday but it’s not as though all other teams are making numerous turnovers at the breakdown. Everyone is struggling to do it well under the new laws from what I can see.
Mellsblue wrote:
I’d suggest that dealing with selection and/or player quality issues in some positions is not best remedied by compounding the issue and picking someone who can’t even get in their club side and has hardly played under the new laws that directly affect their game.
No sense of adventure some people.
A ‘sense of adventure’ would be selecting Simmonds at 7 or (if possible), bringing in Ben Curry, who absolutely deserves a shot based upon current form.
Neither have a great deal of top level experience, but both are bang in form.
I’d like us to do more at the breakdown, but bringing in Kvesic is a bizarre solution that had no obvious merits.
Kvesic would bring merit, and concerns. Which isn't really any different to Simmonds, or even Robshaw or Itoje, at 7. They're just different pros and cons.
In not one case, nor ever were Underhill available, are we picking someone with a proven track record at 7 at this level
Digby wrote:In not one case, nor ever were Underhill available, are we picking someone with a proven track record at 7 at this level
Except that once Underhill went off you had just that with Robshaw. He may not be everbody's cup of tea at 7 but he has performed effectively there at international level - to the extent that he is the best 7 we have, IMO, until somebody else can overtake him.
Digby wrote:In not one case, nor ever were Underhill available, are we picking someone with a proven track record at 7 at this level
Except that once Underhill went off you had just that with Robshaw. He may not be everbody's cup of tea at 7 but he has performed effectively there at international level - to the extent that he is the best 7 we have, IMO, until somebody else can overtake him.
I understand some people were and are happy with Robshaw at 7, I'm just not in that number. Maybe if we had centres who were really good over the ball I'd accept it as a balance, but I don't think we've got any players in the centres who're really good over the ball
I truly can’t understand how you can keep fighting Kvesic’s corner with this level of conviction? He can’t get in to his club side so why would we pick him for England?
Right now any ‘merit’ he brings is based upon his form from two seasons ago. Don’t get me wrong, I like him as a player but until he plays regularly for Exeter and performs well enough to justify selection, then he remains a ridiculous suggestion. It’s not even as though he has any test level experience to speak of either - he’s had about 80mins combined across his caps so far.
Robshaw is perfectly serviceable at 7 in the absence of other options for this weekend, but I would prefer to leave him at 6 and see how Simmonds goes at 7.
Can you offer any examples of 7s who are getting lots of turnovers under the new laws? I’m not sure you’ll find many ...
Scrumhead wrote:I truly can’t understand how you can keep fighting Kvesic’s corner with this level of conviction? He can’t get in to his club side so why would we pick him for England?
Right now any ‘merit’ he brings is based upon his form from two seasons ago. Don’t get me wrong, I like him as a player but until he plays regularly for Exeter and performs well enough to justify selection, then he remains a ridiculous suggestion. It’s not even as though he has any test level experience to speak of either - he’s had about 80mins combined across his caps so far.
Robshaw is perfectly serviceable at 7 in the absence of other options for this weekend, but I would prefer to leave him at 6 and see how Simmonds goes at 7.
Can you offer any examples of 7s who are getting lots of turnovers under the new laws? I’m not sure you’ll find many ...
Scrumhead wrote:I truly can’t understand how you can keep fighting Kvesic’s corner with this level of conviction? He can’t get in to his club side so why would we pick him for England?
Right now any ‘merit’ he brings is based upon his form from two seasons ago. Don’t get me wrong, I like him as a player but until he plays regularly for Exeter and performs well enough to justify selection, then he remains a ridiculous suggestion. It’s not even as though he has any test level experience to speak of either - he’s had about 80mins combined across his caps so far.
Robshaw is perfectly serviceable at 7 in the absence of other options for this weekend, but I would prefer to leave him at 6 and see how Simmonds goes at 7.
Can you offer any examples of 7s who are getting lots of turnovers under the new laws? I’m not sure you’ll find many ...
As for the Itoje at 7 idea, I’d rather he just plucked a young 7 from the Prem and told them to give it a whirl. Curry, Evans, Ludlum, Willis, whoever I’m not really bothered.
I can’t wait for Banquo to find out Jones is contemplating it. That’s assuming he hasn’t already and is currently suffering from a stress induced heart attack.
Scrumhead wrote:I truly can’t understand how you can keep fighting Kvesic’s corner with this level of conviction? He can’t get in to his club side so why would we pick him for England?
Right now any ‘merit’ he brings is based upon his form from two seasons ago. Don’t get me wrong, I like him as a player but until he plays regularly for Exeter and performs well enough to justify selection, then he remains a ridiculous suggestion. It’s not even as though he has any test level experience to speak of either - he’s had about 80mins combined across his caps so far.
Robshaw is perfectly serviceable at 7 in the absence of other options for this weekend, but I would prefer to leave him at 6 and see how Simmonds goes at 7.
Can you offer any examples of 7s who are getting lots of turnovers under the new laws? I’m not sure you’ll find many ...
I'm not happy with serviceable, so I'm willing to take a punt, I understand others are less willing. Whether the risk taken is with Kvesic or Curry I'm not too fussed, and actually I'm not that fussed if it's with Simmonds. But I would like to start by selecting a player who might add as much as I want even if there are concerns.
I'd also add I don't watch Kvesic and think his play is all about turnovers, though if they're going down in number one could easily make the case that makes them more important not something to focus on less. And if you want turnovers watch Scotland Vs NZ, turnovers are very much still possible even if some have oddly seemingly given up in a desire to copy league (also worth a watch to see a try scored from a player offside ahead of the kicker that's barely drawn a murmur, though NZ did win)
Scrumhead wrote:I truly can’t understand how you can keep fighting Kvesic’s corner with this level of conviction? He can’t get in to his club side so why would we pick him for England?
Right now any ‘merit’ he brings is based upon his form from two seasons ago. Don’t get me wrong, I like him as a player but until he plays regularly for Exeter and performs well enough to justify selection, then he remains a ridiculous suggestion. It’s not even as though he has any test level experience to speak of either - he’s had about 80mins combined across his caps so far.
Robshaw is perfectly serviceable at 7 in the absence of other options for this weekend, but I would prefer to leave him at 6 and see how Simmonds goes at 7.
Can you offer any examples of 7s who are getting lots of turnovers under the new laws? I’m not sure you’ll find many ...
Mellsblue wrote:As for the Itoje at 7 idea, I’d rather he just plucked a young 7 from the Prem and told them to give it a whirl. Curry, Evans, Ludlum, Willis, whoever I’m not really bothered.
I can’t wait for Banquo to find out Jones is contemplating it. That’s assuming he hasn’t already and is currently suffering from a stress induced heart attack.
You mention Willis. He is the only one to give indications of valid groundhog ability/potential that I have seen. If he got to be a regular starter and developed well he might be worth a shout but he is not a current realistic option.
The Currys are decent enough on the deck, but I’d agree that Willis seems to be stronger over the ball and appears to have good judgement for when he can/can’t affect a turnover.
He’s not a realistic option now, but if he keeps getting game time with Wasps, I see no reason why he can’t be in the mix from a medium-term point of view. However, Shields’ signing doesn’t help so much on that front.
