RugbyRebels

Mikey Brown wrote:Which 6?

Genge, Bateman, Thompson, Spencer, Ford, May,

Adam_P wrote:I think pointing to good signings is wide of the mark. There is no doubt you have plenty of good players, in fact you have a decent number of exceptional players. It's clearly a coaching issue, as the team is delivering way below the sum of its parts

I agree. I feel the same way about Quins at the moment, but if push came to shove, I’d probably swap the Tigers squad for ours. For a team to have as many current Tier 1 international players as Tigers do and perform so poorly is quite incredible. It suggests their coaching team is more of a hindrance than a help IMO.

Tigersman wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Which 6?

Genge, Bateman, Thompson, Spencer, Ford, May,

I’d have gone for the same 6 with the addition of Holmes.

Scrumhead wrote:

Tigersman wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Which 6?

Genge, Bateman, Thompson, Spencer, Ford, May,

I’d have gone for the same 6 with the addition of Holmes.

Like i'm even tempted to say I would keep Holmes let May go and for the money spent on May to find a more direct running wing.
Because May is great and has surprisingly improved all round but he's not the type winger we need currently.
We need another Goneva really, as we just don't create room for May to run with.

Tigersman wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

Tigersman wrote:
Genge, Bateman, Thompson, Spencer, Ford, May,

I’d have gone for the same 6 with the addition of Holmes.

Like i'm even tempted to say I would keep Holmes let May go and for the money spent on May to find a more direct running wing.
Because May is great and has surprisingly improved all round but he's not the type winger we need currently.
We need another Goneva really, as we just don't create room for May to run with.

I have to say the idea of releasing May because we don't use him effectively rankles. He's one of the very best wingers in the world and it's not like we haven't got the personnel to create room for him. We should change what we're doing, not trade out gold for bronze that fits our current shitty gameplan better.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Tigersman wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:
I’d have gone for the same 6 with the addition of Holmes.

Like i'm even tempted to say I would keep Holmes let May go and for the money spent on May to find a more direct running wing.
Because May is great and has surprisingly improved all round but he's not the type winger we need currently.
We need another Goneva really, as we just don't create room for May to run with.

I have to say the idea of releasing May because we don't use him effectively rankles. He's one of the very best wingers in the world and it's not like we haven't got the personnel to create room for him. We should change what we're doing, not trade out gold for bronze that fits our current shitty gameplan better.

Puja

Don't disagree.
That being said I always preferred to have one winger who is more the crash ball kind and the other the speedster, so i'm a bit biased.

I would like May to be the speedster but cap and all.

Tigersman wrote:

Puja wrote:

Tigersman wrote:
Like i'm even tempted to say I would keep Holmes let May go and for the money spent on May to find a more direct running wing.
Because May is great and has surprisingly improved all round but he's not the type winger we need currently.
We need another Goneva really, as we just don't create room for May to run with.

I have to say the idea of releasing May because we don't use him effectively rankles. He's one of the very best wingers in the world and it's not like we haven't got the personnel to create room for him. We should change what we're doing, not trade out gold for bronze that fits our current shitty gameplan better.

Puja

Don't disagree.
That being said I always preferred to have one winger who is more the crash ball kind and the other the speedster, so i'm a bit biased.

I would like May to be the speedster but cap and all.

It’s Leicester. You could co-invest in all the property you want and you still wouldn’t breach the cap.

Puja wrote:

Tigersman wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:
I’d have gone for the same 6 with the addition of Holmes.

Like i'm even tempted to say I would keep Holmes let May go and for the money spent on May to find a more direct running wing.
Because May is great and has surprisingly improved all round but he's not the type winger we need currently.
We need another Goneva really, as we just don't create room for May to run with.

I have to say the idea of releasing May because we don't use him effectively rankles. He's one of the very best wingers in the world and it's not like we haven't got the personnel to create room for him. We should change what we're doing, not trade out gold for bronze that fits our current shitty gameplan better.

Puja

I know what you mean.

Good systems can make average players better, but bad systems can lead to great players being ineffective.

Combinations are also massively important. At Quins, Care and Smith are without question our best halfbacks, but IMO, they don’t bring the best out of each other. Care effectively runs the show and we play a lot off 9 so Smith’s ability to run the game is limited which means he often tries to force miracle plays when he does get the ball.

One of the reasons I really rate Pat Lam is that he seems to be very good identifying the players who can gel together and execute his game plan.

Scrumhead wrote:[At Quins, Care and Smith are without question our best halfbacks, but IMO, they don’t bring the best out of each other. Care effectively runs the show and we play a lot off 9 so Smith’s ability to run the game is limited which means he often tries to force miracle plays when he does get the ball.

This reminds me of a stat from this match that the blew my brains. Leicester, despite having arguably the best 10 at the World Cup, ran north of 90% off Youngs.......

Mellsblue wrote:

Tigersman wrote:

Puja wrote:
I have to say the idea of releasing May because we don't use him effectively rankles. He's one of the very best wingers in the world and it's not like we haven't got the personnel to create room for him. We should change what we're doing, not trade out gold for bronze that fits our current shitty gameplan better.

Puja

Don't disagree.
That being said I always preferred to have one winger who is more the crash ball kind and the other the speedster, so i'm a bit biased.

I would like May to be the speedster but cap and all.

It’s Leicester. You could co-invest in all the property you want and you still wouldn’t breach the cap.

Frankly you'd get credit for that

Mellsblue wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:[At Quins, Care and Smith are without question our best halfbacks, but IMO, they don’t bring the best out of each other. Care effectively runs the show and we play a lot off 9 so Smith’s ability to run the game is limited which means he often tries to force miracle plays when he does get the ball.

This reminds me of a stat from this match that the blew my brains. Leicester, despite having arguably the best 10 at the World Cup, ran north of 90% off Youngs.......

Are you really arguing that Ford was the best 10 at the RWC? I know I get hung up on prejudices and preconceptions but I need someone to explain to me why Ford is as good as claimed.

I just think he is seriously over-rated which puts me at odds with you and many others on this board. He must be the FH who has found the most ways of avoiding having an influence on a game of rugby. He does some great things. He has great hands. He is a safe place-kicker. But . . .

So often, in my eyes, he just f###ing disappears. The game against Saints was a classic example. I know he was playing with Ben Youngs and I know the forwards were struggling to give decent ball but if he's as good as claimed why was he not constantly adjusting the play to get himself into a position of influence? If he is that good a FH, by definition, he must be the ultimate game manager, sorting out the SH and the constant mistakes.

I just can't see how he can look so feeble in comparison with the Saints reserve FH, for example. It can't just be everyone else's fault all the time. Can he only influence the game in a perfect forwards-dominated go-forward situation?

Oakboy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:[At Quins, Care and Smith are without question our best halfbacks, but IMO, they don’t bring the best out of each other. Care effectively runs the show and we play a lot off 9 so Smith’s ability to run the game is limited which means he often tries to force miracle plays when he does get the ball.

This reminds me of a stat from this match that the blew my brains. Leicester, despite having arguably the best 10 at the World Cup, ran north of 90% off Youngs.......

Are you really arguing that Ford was the best 10 at the RWC?

Yes, arguably.

Quick google and the Irish Times, Standard and ESPN would argue the same.

Oakboy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:[At Quins, Care and Smith are without question our best halfbacks, but IMO, they don’t bring the best out of each other. Care effectively runs the show and we play a lot off 9 so Smith’s ability to run the game is limited which means he often tries to force miracle plays when he does get the ball.

This reminds me of a stat from this match that the blew my brains. Leicester, despite having arguably the best 10 at the World Cup, ran north of 90% off Youngs.......

Are you really arguing that Ford was the best 10 at the RWC? I know I get hung up on prejudices and preconceptions but I need someone to explain to me why Ford is as good as claimed.

I just think he is seriously over-rated which puts me at odds with you and many others on this board. He must be the FH who has found the most ways of avoiding having an influence on a game of rugby. He does some great things. He has great hands. He is a safe place-kicker. But . . .

So often, in my eyes, he just f###ing disappears. The game against Saints was a classic example. I know he was playing with Ben Youngs and I know the forwards were struggling to give decent ball but if he's as good as claimed why was he not constantly adjusting the play to get himself into a position of influence? If he is that good a FH, by definition, he must be the ultimate game manager, sorting out the SH and the constant mistakes.

I just can't see how he can look so feeble in comparison with the Saints reserve FH, for example. It can't just be everyone else's fault all the time. Can he only influence the game in a perfect forwards-dominated go-forward situation?

Ford effectively kept Tigers up last season. His efforts were hugely influential in them escaping relegation.

Tigers as a whole stank yesterday. Even top players like Tuilagi and May were anonymous. Singleing out Ford is just unfair.

Ford has often turned things around for England. We invariably look a lot more threatening when he is at 10 but like any back its so much easier to play when on the front foot and you have good ball to work with. If your pack is second best and you are living off scraps, its very difficult, if not impossible, to control a game.

I do think Ford was a bit shite yesterday, even allowing for the terrible team he’s playing in. But that is the worst game he’s played in a Tigers shirt for a long, long time.

Ford had an outstanding World Cup, and you can tell because there wasn’t one mention of Cipriani throughout.

Speaking of which, Oakboy wants to be explaining what’s going on with his boy Cippers at the moment? Been awful this season so far. Honestly, “fucking disappearing” would be an improvement on what he offering up.

Yeah there is definitely some thing up with cips.

Just been looking at the highlights of what Russell is doing the top 14, getting paid an absolute mint, and wondering why he stuck around?

Mikey Brown wrote:Just been looking at the highlights of what Russell is doing the top 14, getting paid an absolute mint, and wondering why he stuck around?

Eddie picked him suggesting he was in with a chance for the world cup.

I think it would be fair to say he’s lost motivation, although Gloucester aren’t firing full stop. They’re not playing particularly badly, just nowhere near as well as last season.

Re. Ford, Oakboy’s realised we’re bored of him constantly banging on about Eddie Jones so is simply moving to a new target for his strange oppositional stance.

I can't really blame Cipriani for losing heart and interest now that any real chance of an international future has gone, thanks to Jones (sorry if I dare to mention him).

As for Ford, I really want to see him stand up and play to his ability. I have never criticised his skill, only his application and consistency. At one stage about two years back I really thought he should be England captain on the grounds that having leadership control would enable him to crawl out from beneath Farrell's influence. Now, though, he disappears from games too often to merit that thought.

If I was picking the England team for a match tomorrow, I'd pick Farrell at 10 and Ford would not be in the 23. I will be interested to see what Jones does but, if he is honest about learning lessons, I suspect one of his priorities will be loading the team with character and a few reputations might be at stake: Ford, Billy V, Mako, Tuilagi and Cole amongst them.

Oakboy wrote:I can't really blame Cipriani for losing heart and interest now that any real chance of an international future has gone, thanks to Jones (sorry if I dare to mention him).

.

I bloody can, he's being paid to play. If he doesn't want to play, he can always terminate his contract.

Not sure why you'd want to jettison players of the quality of Mako, Billy, Manu and Ford. Ford did have a stinker on Saturday for sure though-as did most of his team mates, something very wrong at Tigers- and I think some of your questions about that performance are vaild; that said, all 10's have stinkers from time to time.

Mellsblue: Ford was the best 10 in the RWC.
Oak boy: Mentions saints game.

......

Pretty sure that wasn’t the RWC.

Oakboy wrote: I suspect one of his priorities will be loading the team with character and a few reputations might be at stake: Ford, Billy V, Mako, Tuilagi and Cole amongst them.

the biggest surprise is that Kruis didn't make your list.

I think we over rate players constantly, as such they are subject to criticism when they have had an abject day at the office. For what it's worth I think Ford and Farrell fall into this category, however that doesn't make them poor players. Just be nice if we could find one that had both Ford's mercurial skill and Farrell's physicality and arrogance.

p/d wrote:

Oakboy wrote: I suspect one of his priorities will be loading the team with character and a few reputations might be at stake: Ford, Billy V, Mako, Tuilagi and Cole amongst them.

the biggest surprise is that Kruis didn't make your list.

I think we over rate players constantly, as such they are subject to criticism when they have had an abject day at the office. For what it's worth I think Ford and Farrell fall into this category, however that doesn't make them poor players. Just be nice if we could find one that had both Ford's mercurial skill and Farrell's physicality and arrogance.

This.

Tigersman wrote:Mellsblue: Ford was the best 10 in the RWC.
Oak boy: Mentions saints game.

......

Pretty sure that wasn’t the RWC.

Point of order. I said arguably the best....but, yes, it was a strange leap.

Enough is enough. It's time for Murphy to do the decent thing before loyal Tigers' supporters begin to wave banners demanding his departure as head coach.