RugbyRebels

Always thought it was a shame that despite a bit of media coverage , the Jack Nowell at openside experiment has yet to take place. Wondered what Eddie’s vision was for Nowell in this role and whether he was looking for a contemporary interpretation of the ‘whirling dervish’ fetcher approach of Andy Robinson or early stage Neil Back?

Appreciate how many options we have but it would be quite a different approach from the Underhill/Curry style or indeed the other still largely untried approach of playing an out and out flier in the Simmonds/Clifford mold at 7.

I don't think he was ever going to play on the side of the breakdown, more just playing more in the style of a seagulling flanker.

Yes. That and coming off his wing to buzz around the rucks.

As for a more freewheeling 7, Ben Earl has loads of pace and has been in and around the recent squads. I think he’ll do very well at Bristol and I can see him developing in to a very nice impact option from the bench (he also covers 8) or a possible alternative starter.

I think the ship has already sailed for Clifford. Great player but sadly made of glass and I don’t see him becoming more robust with age. As of right now, I haven’t seen him in any of the training photos/footage from Quins and while it’s possible he’s just camera shy or maybe even away for COVID-19 related reasons, I think it’s probably most likely he’s rehabbing from his latest injury.

Clifford never really stood out as 100% international quality for me, so I'd definitely agree that his potential time has come and gone, given the other players we have, and have up and coming.

For a (short) time, Clifford really looked like he had the goods. He has very good basics with some stand out qualities from a pace and footwork POV. However, I think the pace has gone from being genuinely fast to just being above average now following injuries and his more recent issues with his shoulder are worryingly recurrent.

Earl has very similar attributes with the benefit of being a bit more robust.

Yep. Sadly he’s one of those where if he now manages to see out his club career on his terms that’ll be a big plus.

Takes years of experience to make a half decent openside. It was clickbait, and you clicked.

I clicked here to roll my eyes but I'm starting to wonder if I should link the MOCA test instead. Yes it's mean.

What are the worst "experiments" you can think of?

- Dan Cole at fly half.

- Marcus Smith at tight head.

Ben Youngs at lock

Stom wrote:Ben Youngs at lock

Ben Youngs at scrum half

Bloggs wrote:

Stom wrote:Ben Youngs at lock

Ben Youngs at scrum half

Has he ever played at SH before??

Raggs wrote:I don't think he was ever going to play on the side of the breakdown, more just playing more in the style of a seagulling flanker.

Totally as a I see it. With a blank canvass, as a youngster, I imagine he could have been great.

As it is, too much decision making to develop

TheNomad wrote:

Raggs wrote:I don't think he was ever going to play on the side of the breakdown, more just playing more in the style of a seagulling flanker.

Totally as a I see it. With a blank canvass, as a youngster, I imagine he could have been great.

As it is, too much decision making to develop

He'd never be a Pocock over the ball, but give him semi regular sessions on poaching, and it'd not be bad. Always felt there's a good reason why outside backs tend to get a few turnovers, they're often targeting isolated players.

twitchy wrote:What are the worst "experiments" you can think of?

- Dan Cole at fly half.

- Marcus Smith at tight head.

Tom Curry at no.8 .....(Itoje at 6 was lacklustre too but not quite as bad imo)

Raggs wrote:

TheNomad wrote:

Raggs wrote:I don't think he was ever going to play on the side of the breakdown, more just playing more in the style of a seagulling flanker.

Totally as a I see it. With a blank canvass, as a youngster, I imagine he could have been great.

As it is, too much decision making to develop

He'd never be a Pocock over the ball, but give him semi regular sessions on poaching, and it'd not be bad. Always felt there's a good reason why outside backs tend to get a few turnovers, they're often targeting isolated players.

It will be on the heretical side to some but to unearth a player with the the skillset and athleticism to cover openside and outside centre would really add an X factor to this England side. This was the sort of role I think players like Simmonds and Nowell (and possibly Earl?) could pull off - though I think Burt and then Eddie have prioritised defence as the key thing the flankers bring to the party with attack a very optional extra

jngf wrote:

Raggs wrote:

TheNomad wrote:
Totally as a I see it. With a blank canvass, as a youngster, I imagine he could have been great.

As it is, too much decision making to develop

He'd never be a Pocock over the ball, but give him semi regular sessions on poaching, and it'd not be bad. Always felt there's a good reason why outside backs tend to get a few turnovers, they're often targeting isolated players.

It will be on the heretical side to some but to unearth a player with the the skillset and athleticism to cover openside and outside centre would really add an X factor to this England side. This was the sort of role I think players like Simmonds and Nowell (and possibly Earl?) could pull off - though I think Burt and then Eddie have prioritised defence as the key thing the flankers bring to the party with attack a very optional extra

Is there any current player in World Rugby who is equally adept in the forwards and backs? Sure there’s some that could probably make a go of it, but at the top level, a good specialist will always beat a non-specialist.

I find it weird that you’re knocking Lancaster and Eddie for prioritising defence, yet less than a week ago you were extolling the virtues of Underhill over Curry purely based upon his defence?

Raggs wrote:

TheNomad wrote:

Raggs wrote:I don't think he was ever going to play on the side of the breakdown, more just playing more in the style of a seagulling flanker.

Totally as a I see it. With a blank canvass, as a youngster, I imagine he could have been great.

As it is, too much decision making to develop

He'd never be a Pocock over the ball, but give him semi regular sessions on poaching, and it'd not be bad. Always felt there's a good reason why outside backs tend to get a few turnovers, they're often targeting isolated players.

You don’t need to ‘be a Pocock’ to be an effective jackal in outside channels. As you say, it’s much more about ‘targeting isolated players’ where there support is also likely to be less effective. It’s very different when you’ve got big, heavy forwards ready to smash into you.

Raggs wrote:

TheNomad wrote:

Raggs wrote:I don't think he was ever going to play on the side of the breakdown, more just playing more in the style of a seagulling flanker.

Totally as a I see it. With a blank canvass, as a youngster, I imagine he could have been great.

As it is, too much decision making to develop

He'd never be a Pocock over the ball, but give him semi regular sessions on poaching, and it'd not be bad. Always felt there's a good reason why outside backs tend to get a few turnovers, they're often targeting isolated players.

I'm not sure what you are saying would not be so bad? Him to rove about looking for turnovers?

Scrumhead wrote:

Raggs wrote:

TheNomad wrote:
Totally as a I see it. With a blank canvass, as a youngster, I imagine he could have been great.

As it is, too much decision making to develop

He'd never be a Pocock over the ball, but give him semi regular sessions on poaching, and it'd not be bad. Always felt there's a good reason why outside backs tend to get a few turnovers, they're often targeting isolated players.

You don’t need to ‘be a Pocock’ to be an effective jackal in outside channels. As you say, it’s much more about ‘targeting isolated players’ where there support is also likely to be less effective. It’s very different when you’ve got big, heavy forwards ready to smash into you.

well yes, he already does (sort of) do this targeting, so not sure what the difference or benefit would be. If he was anywhere near a half decent oppo forward and trying his luck he'd get wiped out more often than not.

Scrumhead wrote:

jngf wrote:

Raggs wrote:
He'd never be a Pocock over the ball, but give him semi regular sessions on poaching, and it'd not be bad. Always felt there's a good reason why outside backs tend to get a few turnovers, they're often targeting isolated players.

It will be on the heretical side to some but to unearth a player with the the skillset and athleticism to cover openside and outside centre would really add an X factor to this England side. This was the sort of role I think players like Simmonds and Nowell (and possibly Earl?) could pull off - though I think Burt and then Eddie have prioritised defence as the key thing the flankers bring to the party with attack a very optional extra

Is there any current player in World Rugby who is equally adept in the forwards and backs? Sure there’s some that could probably make a go of it, but at the top level, a good specialist will always beat a non-specialist.

I find it weird that you’re knocking Lancaster and Eddie for prioritising defence, yet less than a week ago you were extolling the virtues of Underhill over Curry purely based upon his defence?

Quite, I think most sides would benefit from a player who could play both outside centre and openside flanker to a high standard.

That's what I'm saying, it would be a very good thing to have. It's what Eddie was talking about I reckon.

Raggs wrote:That's what I'm saying, it would be a very good thing to have. It's what Eddie was talking about I reckon.

Bit puzzling then- Why wouldn't you just ask an actual back row to do it, allowing Nowell to do his basics in defence (and not needing someone else to do his man marking or whatever the pattern is), without removing himself from the game when he'd likely get smashed back more often than not. He doesn't seem especially suited to the roving Hooper style role tbh, and certainly hasn't the experience/reading the game or even physical ability/robustness.

I think its a handy ability to have in his 'standard role' in defence, where as you say, you may get more isolated players. Where I do like him 'following the ball' is in attack, where he is pretty good at turning iffy ball into decent ball, with a little step, half break, or even effective little pick and go's where its a bit wider.

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:That's what I'm saying, it would be a very good thing to have. It's what Eddie was talking about I reckon.

Bit puzzling then- Why wouldn't you just ask an actual back row to do it, allowing Nowell to do his basics in defence (and not needing someone else to do his man marking or whatever the pattern is), without removing himself from the game when he'd likely get smashed back more often than not. He doesn't seem especially suited to the roving Hooper style role tbh, and certainly hasn't the experience/reading the game or even physical ability/robustness.

I think its a handy ability to have in his 'standard role' in defence, where as you say, you may get more isolated players. Where I do like him 'following the ball' is in attack, where he is pretty good at turning iffy ball into decent ball, with a little step, half break, or even effective little pick and go's where its a bit wider.

What? I'm saying he stays on the wing, but because of his strengths already, you give him more training in poaching, so that when there's an isolated winger on a break, or only with backs support, Nowell is in the best position to get a turnover. I'm not suggesting that you put him on guard and expect him to compete with the forwards, but rather take advantage of his strengths to compete against backs on the edges.

Given how England defend if the ball is that wide we're probably scrambling, which isn't a great position to try to get over the ball from. If we wanted to vary the blitz more and drift a little then we might create better chances to involve someone ore adapt at the breakdown wider out. Although tbh we'd need a few injuries before I'd be picking Nowell so hopefully it's not an issue