RugbyRebels

Was not expecting that from Wasps!

Can't see us holding on for the 2nd half, but still very pleased, and the chance of a bonus point becoming a possibility.

It's quite depressing that I don't see us winning still...

I didn't either, but look at that!

Huge performance, very happy now. From relegation potential, to 5th place, in the space of 2 weeks. Crazy how tight the league is this time round.

And bar a dodgy JP Doyle ref decision and a couple of last minute brain farts Wasps could actually be 4th by now.

WTAF. Haven't seen Wasps play with that much heart for a long time.

That was more like the real Nathan Hughes. I really enjoyed the back row competition. Unfortunately, I don't understand the individuals' assessment by Jones. How Shields can be rated above Armand remains a mystery. I'd rate Hughes, Armand and Kvesic as the three best in that order. The other three were behind and, arguably, Shields was the best of that lower tier, marginally, though Ewers or Carr both had a case.

Wasps showed a level of commitment that has been sorely lacking for most of their season. Exe were definitely off colour, lacking accuracy and control, but credit Wasps for defending with resilience and taking their opportunities.

Oakboy wrote:That was more like the real Nathan Hughes. I really enjoyed the back row competition. Unfortunately, I don't understand the individuals' assessment by Jones. How Shields can be rated above Armand remains a mystery. I'd rate Hughes, Armand and Kvesic as the three best in that order. The other three were behind and, arguably, Shields was the best of that lower tier, marginally, though Ewers or Carr both had a case.

Hughes was excellent. Shields was also very good, huge work rate, 24 tackles with zero missed, an absolute nuisance at defensive rucks and some lovely touches on the ball. Can’t understand how you could look at that game and not see him as a very good all round 6 tbh.

Conversely, Armand was decent but fairly quiet.

Timbo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:That was more like the real Nathan Hughes. I really enjoyed the back row competition. Unfortunately, I don't understand the individuals' assessment by Jones. How Shields can be rated above Armand remains a mystery. I'd rate Hughes, Armand and Kvesic as the three best in that order. The other three were behind and, arguably, Shields was the best of that lower tier, marginally, though Ewers or Carr both had a case.

Hughes was excellent. Shields was also very good, huge work rate, 24 tackles with zero missed, an absolute nuisance at defensive rucks and some lovely touches on the ball. Can’t understand how you could look at that game and not see him as a very good all round 6 tbh.

Conversely, Armand was decent but fairly quiet.

Presumably, touching somebody and letting someone else complete the tackle means that it's not a missed tackle, then? Otherwise, he missed several. Yes, he had some good handling touches but one or two clangers as well. IMO, his only merit placing him ahead of other flankers is in the lineout (where I think Armand is better). Shields is a reasonably good club 6, I accept, but I still simply don't get how he can be considered international 1st-23 level.

To give another example, Jones let Graham go to Scotland, having buggered him about. I think he is a better player than Shields based on watching him recently. Now, work that out in the context of Graham getting selected ahead of Wilson originally, to this board's amazement. Wilson is genuine international standard based on his performances over the last 6 months or so. I also still rate Robshaw despite others writing him off.

You and Jones see it differently. Fair enough.

Oakboy wrote:

Timbo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:That was more like the real Nathan Hughes. I really enjoyed the back row competition. Unfortunately, I don't understand the individuals' assessment by Jones. How Shields can be rated above Armand remains a mystery. I'd rate Hughes, Armand and Kvesic as the three best in that order. The other three were behind and, arguably, Shields was the best of that lower tier, marginally, though Ewers or Carr both had a case.

Hughes was excellent. Shields was also very good, huge work rate, 24 tackles with zero missed, an absolute nuisance at defensive rucks and some lovely touches on the ball. Can’t understand how you could look at that game and not see him as a very good all round 6 tbh.

Conversely, Armand was decent but fairly quiet.

Presumably, touching somebody and letting someone else complete the tackle means that it's not a missed tackle, then? Otherwise, he missed several. Yes, he had some good handling touches but one or two clangers as well. IMO, his only merit placing him ahead of other flankers is in the lineout (where I think Armand is better). Shields is a reasonably good club 6, I accept, but I still simply don't get how he can be considered international 1st-23 level.

To give another example, Jones let Graham go to Scotland, having buggered him about. I think he is a better player than Shields based on watching him recently. Now, work that out in the context of Graham getting selected ahead of Wilson originally, to this board's amazement. Wilson is genuine international standard based on his performances over the last 6 months or so. I also still rate Robshaw despite others writing him off.

You and Jones see it differently. Fair enough.

Look, I don't think Shields is particularly good, but calling him worse than Graham? That's a low blow...

I thought he was pretty damn poor against Tigers. Blinkered, clumsy and never seemed to make the right decision. Shields is a far better player.

I think he's still short of international level, but I think Graham is poor. But then again, I think/thought Blair Cowan was also poor, and many rated him.

Stom wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Timbo wrote:
Hughes was excellent. Shields was also very good, huge work rate, 24 tackles with zero missed, an absolute nuisance at defensive rucks and some lovely touches on the ball. Can’t understand how you could look at that game and not see him as a very good all round 6 tbh.

Conversely, Armand was decent but fairly quiet.

Presumably, touching somebody and letting someone else complete the tackle means that it's not a missed tackle, then? Otherwise, he missed several. Yes, he had some good handling touches but one or two clangers as well. IMO, his only merit placing him ahead of other flankers is in the lineout (where I think Armand is better). Shields is a reasonably good club 6, I accept, but I still simply don't get how he can be considered international 1st-23 level.

To give another example, Jones let Graham go to Scotland, having buggered him about. I think he is a better player than Shields based on watching him recently. Now, work that out in the context of Graham getting selected ahead of Wilson originally, to this board's amazement. Wilson is genuine international standard based on his performances over the last 6 months or so. I also still rate Robshaw despite others writing him off.

You and Jones see it differently. Fair enough.

Look, I don't think Shields is particularly good, but calling him worse than Graham? That's a low blow...

I thought he was pretty damn poor against Tigers. Blinkered, clumsy and never seemed to make the right decision. Shields is a far better player.

I think he's still short of international level, but I think Graham is poor. But then again, I think/thought Blair Cowan was also poor, and many rated him.

Just as a matter of interest then, Stom, for a match against NZ tomorrow in a straight choice between Shields and Robshaw for the 6 shirt, who would you choose?

Shields was off par when he first rocked up, probably feeling the heat of giving up on the AB slot (which will have been a dream since he was a tot) for the gamble of an England shirt.....if you like, the pressure of a big signing and trying too hard to justify the price tag, plus settling into sides who wouldn't be on the same kiwi wavelength. Seems to have found his groove now by dint of high workrate, solid tackling and good decision making. The fact that he'd given up on NZ is pause for thought however.

"...by dint of high workrate, solid tackling and good decision making"

Damned with faint praise. A can't wait for his first "yeoman-like effort".

Bye-bye Brad, bye-bye.

Oakboy wrote:

Stom wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Presumably, touching somebody and letting someone else complete the tackle means that it's not a missed tackle, then? Otherwise, he missed several. Yes, he had some good handling touches but one or two clangers as well. IMO, his only merit placing him ahead of other flankers is in the lineout (where I think Armand is better). Shields is a reasonably good club 6, I accept, but I still simply don't get how he can be considered international 1st-23 level.

To give another example, Jones let Graham go to Scotland, having buggered him about. I think he is a better player than Shields based on watching him recently. Now, work that out in the context of Graham getting selected ahead of Wilson originally, to this board's amazement. Wilson is genuine international standard based on his performances over the last 6 months or so. I also still rate Robshaw despite others writing him off.

You and Jones see it differently. Fair enough.

Look, I don't think Shields is particularly good, but calling him worse than Graham? That's a low blow...

I thought he was pretty damn poor against Tigers. Blinkered, clumsy and never seemed to make the right decision. Shields is a far better player.

I think he's still short of international level, but I think Graham is poor. But then again, I think/thought Blair Cowan was also poor, and many rated him.

Just as a matter of interest then, Stom, for a match against NZ tomorrow in a straight choice between Shields and Robshaw for the 6 shirt, who would you choose?

That's hardly a comparison...Robshaw and Graham are also a world apart...

For what it's worth, I'd probably pick Robshaw tomorrow, but given another 2 months, Shields will probably be in front.

But he'd still be behind Wilson and probably Underhill for me (who I think is a 6 in disguise), and if Willis can get and stay fit, behind him, too.

morepork wrote:"...by dint of high workrate, solid tackling and good decision making"

Damned with faint praise. A can't wait for his first "yeoman-like effort".

Bye-bye Brad, bye-bye.

Exactly the point

Stom wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Stom wrote:
Look, I don't think Shields is particularly good, but calling him worse than Graham? That's a low blow...

I thought he was pretty damn poor against Tigers. Blinkered, clumsy and never seemed to make the right decision. Shields is a far better player.

I think he's still short of international level, but I think Graham is poor. But then again, I think/thought Blair Cowan was also poor, and many rated him.

Just as a matter of interest then, Stom, for a match against NZ tomorrow in a straight choice between Shields and Robshaw for the 6 shirt, who would you choose?

That's hardly a comparison...Robshaw and Graham are also a world apart...

For what it's worth, I'd probably pick Robshaw tomorrow, but given another 2 months, Shields will probably be in front.

But he'd still be behind Wilson and probably Underhill for me (who I think is a 6 in disguise), and if Willis can get and stay fit, behind him, too.

I’m almost with Stom on this.

I have been a vocal critic of Shields, but he has improved significantly (albeit from a low base) over the past few games. If he continues on the same upward curve, I’d be a lot more comfortable with his inclusion.

Whether he’ll be better than Robshaw is debatable. Chris is having a bit of a Renaissance now he’s injury-free.

In shields defence, he's been playing almost constantly for over 12 months now.

Scrumhead wrote:

Stom wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Just as a matter of interest then, Stom, for a match against NZ tomorrow in a straight choice between Shields and Robshaw for the 6 shirt, who would you choose?

That's hardly a comparison...Robshaw and Graham are also a world apart...

For what it's worth, I'd probably pick Robshaw tomorrow, but given another 2 months, Shields will probably be in front.

But he'd still be behind Wilson and probably Underhill for me (who I think is a 6 in disguise), and if Willis can get and stay fit, behind him, too.

I’m almost with Stom on this.

I have been a vocal critic of Shields, but he has improved significantly (albeit from a low base) over the past few games. If he continues on the same upward curve, I’d be a lot more comfortable with his inclusion.

Whether he’ll be better than Robshaw is debatable. Chris is having a bit of a Renaissance now he’s injury-free.

The question is whether he can step back up, pace wise. But he is playing beautifully. Robshaw that is.

Shields was OK, nothing special. He did miss tackles and did lose the ball in contact, though some of his work was very good. He was no better than the Exeter back rowers, or Thompson on Friday night for that matter.
There are better players available to England. Jono Ross for instance.

Ross? Never. Unbelievably limited and goes missing in games.