RugbyRebels

thedman wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: It means one plays left centre and one plays right centre, not inside and outside. Nothing to do with feet. So, both players need to be comfortable at OC and IC. As both rely heavily on their outside arc, neither have a tactical kicking game and neither can 'truck it up' I can't see it working.

What are the advantages? Is it used when one player is better at passing off a particular hand?

its usually when they are quite similar styles of players, you could configure it to take advantage of a longer pass off the left hand, or if you have right and left footed kickers, or even which side they are stronger defenders on on say a drift. But tbh its normally a fudge when one player refuses to budge from say oc.

thedman wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: It means one plays left centre and one plays right centre, not inside and outside. Nothing to do with feet. So, both players need to be comfortable at OC and IC. As both rely heavily on their outside arc, neither have a tactical kicking game and neither can 'truck it up' I can't see it working.

What are the advantages? Is it used when one player is better at passing off a particular hand?

Sometimes - England used it for a while with Carling and Guscott. It cuts down on the running across field for the OC so you can realign quicker.

This is a rugby from, can't believe we're having to explain this.

Think it's more to do with the fact that both JJ and Daly are most definitely OCs. Neither of them would be in any way suitable for IC duties. Manu and Slade on the other hand are more than capable of playing either/or IC/OC. They both have things about them that make them flexible and desirable for both positions, whereas JJ and Daly have particular abilities that are totally suited to OC centre only. Or wing. Or FB at push.

Chilli wrote:I have read recently that Jones is unwilling to play a ‘left and right’ style centre combination. What the heck does that mean?

Hah! That bit of information started with this board! Or at least the old one. Bloody thieving newspapers.

Puja

Beasties wrote:This is a rugby from, can't believe we're having to explain this.

Think it's more to do with the fact that both JJ and Daly are most definitely OCs. Neither of them would be in any way suitable for IC duties. Manu and Slade on the other hand are more than capable of playing either/or IC/OC. They both have things about them that make them flexible and desirable for both positions, whereas JJ and Daly have particular abilities that are totally suited to OC centre only. Or wing. Or FB at push.

Why shouldn't it be explained?

Ryan's thoughts:

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2 ... ix-nations

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Beasties wrote:This is a rugby from, can't believe we're having to explain this.

Think it's more to do with the fact that both JJ and Daly are most definitely OCs. Neither of them would be in any way suitable for IC duties. Manu and Slade on the other hand are more than capable of playing either/or IC/OC. They both have things about them that make them flexible and desirable for both positions, whereas JJ and Daly have particular abilities that are totally suited to OC centre only. Or wing. Or FB at push.

Why shouldn't it be explained?

Fair enough, one too many Babychams last night

Arse.

Sorry, just testing to see if my av appeared.

Edit: Arse.

Anybody else had a post disappear?

My tits did.

Parsifal wrote:Arse.

Sorry, just testing to see if my av appeared.

Edit: Arse.

Too big? That was my initial problem.

Parsifal wrote:My tits did.

From the av?

The tits are pretty big, hey, let's be honest, pretty and big but I'll try editing to see if I can squeeze them in.

Edit: Phew. Despite resorting to manual manipulation, I managed to squeeze them in.

Parsifal wrote:The tits are pretty big, hey, let's be honest, pretty and big but I'll try editing to see if I can squeeze them in.

Edit: Phew. Despite resorting to manual manipulation, I managed to squeeze them in.

I see you've just had your nails done!

twitchy wrote:Ryan's thoughts:

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2 ... ix-nations

its what's been said on here in general, though I'd dispute Lawes adding dynamism cf Launchbury.

Beasties wrote:This is a rugby from, can't believe we're having to explain this.

??? someone asked a question.

Ryan has nailed it.

Looks like Jones wants to build a squad to dominate up front, kill off the opposition in defence and score off their mistakes.

The success of the backs depends on the return of Tuilagi and the deftness of touch from twinkle toes off the bench.

As Campo said, don't expect exciting rugby under Jones (though he was shot down for daring to say this).

Parsifal wrote:Arse.

Sorry, just testing to see if my av appeared.

Edit: Arse.

That's definitely not an arse.

p/d wrote:Ryan has nailed it.

Looks like Jones wants to build a squad to dominate up front, kill off the opposition in defence and score off their mistakes.

The success of the backs depends on the return of Tuilagi and the deftness of touch from twinkle toes off the bench.

As Campo said, don't expect exciting rugby under Jones (though he was shot down for daring to say this).

Hey, if his tactics result in more attacks like the one that led to Nowell's try, I'd call that exciting.

Puja

p/d wrote:Ryan has nailed it.

Looks like Jones wants to build a squad to dominate up front, kill off the opposition in defence and score off their mistakes.

The success of the backs depends on the return of Tuilagi and the deftness of touch from twinkle toes off the bench.

As Campo said, don't expect exciting rugby under Jones (though he was shot down for daring to say this).

its nothing of a surprise what Ryan has said- Eddie has said it himself....winning is all.

Am I posting?

Wow. I am.

Carry on.

What are we expecting then....

Win with a few stumbles?

Comfortable win?

Brave loss?

Thrashing (wrong end of)?

WaspInWales wrote:What are we expecting then....

Win with a few stumbles?

Comfortable win?

Brave loss?

Thrashing (wrong end of)?

weather looks to be a bit crap, so not sure whether that helps or hinders.


Win with stumbles; think the scrum will be tough and we'll maybe look a bit shaky wide.

Another pragmatic victory.