RugbyRebels

Sorry that any player gets injured and hope Courtney Lawes’ makes a solid recovery , he’s been one of our best carrying forwards in last couple of seasons.

This does leave the question of who will get the 6 shirt next - from seeing recent Premiership matches an enormous case can be made for Jack Willis and Tom Hill. We also have Mark Wilson and Lewis Ludlum in the existing set up both of whom have high workrate, power in the carry and a lineout jumping dimension to their game. The Tom Curry at 6 works for some but I think the aforementioned players all look more convincing in the context of balancing the backrow but I am assuming Underhill will stay as the first choice test openside. A left field option would be to fit in Ben Earl or Sam Simmonds and either would complement Underhill’s game in the way Olivier Magne complemented Serge Betson.

To some extent the no.8 choice will influence things too - thought Dombrandt was on terrific form against Wasps and would select him with Nathan Hughes as a back up ahead of Billy at mo.

Why on earth would you bring back Nathan Hughes? Shall we call up Alex Goode while we’re at it?

Scrumhead wrote:Why on earth would you bring back Nathan Hughes? Shall we call up Alex Goode while we’re at it?

Perhaps because he’s a bloody good player who’s been a bit harshly judged by those same people who allow a Tom Curry at 8 selection such an enormous benefit of the doubt!

jngf wrote:To some extent the no.8 choice will influence things too - thought Dombrandt was on terrific form against Wasps and would select him with Nathan Hughes as a back up ahead of Billy at mo.

Dombrandt was pretty average against Wasps. He hit two beautiful lines for his tries and made a good offload that led to another try, which I'm sure showed up well on the highlights, but he lost the ball a few times, didn't make an impact in the breakdown, and wasn't particularly dominant in defence. He wasn't terrible, but the highlights package did not provide an accurate assessment of the game.

Cunderhillis is still my first choice back row (in whichever jerseys they like), although I would accept anything with Earl, BillyV, BCurry, or Hill in as well. All things told, I'm just so glad we're going to pick 3 back rows from our plethora of talented young players that I'm not bothered which of them get the nod.

Puja

Hughes has never impressed for England and he had more than a few chances to stake a claim. When we've got back rowers in almost double figures that could or should be picked, bringing him back into the frame would almost turn me Welsh

jngf wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:Why on earth would you bring back Nathan Hughes? Shall we call up Alex Goode while we’re at it?

Perhaps because he’s a bloody good player who’s been a bit harshly judged by those same people who allow a Tom Curry at 8 selection such an enormous benefit of the doubt!

Curry doesn't carry in a fashion that sees him get bullied in the tackle by a scrum-half. Curry actually puts his shoulder into tackles. Curry is actually a presence at the breakdown and earns turnovers.

Most importantly, Curry f*cking runs: http://rugbyrebels.co/board/viewtopic.p ... 03&p=45556

Apart from that, Hughes is fine. What's big Nathan done since the restart that's caught your eye anyway?

Puja

Hughes and Dombrandt together? Mmmm, not sold on that idea.

The best out and out 6 right now is Ted Hill, who offers everything you'd want.

I'd play him but Jones may stick with Curry and Underhill, which to be fair, is hardly an insignificant pairing at flanker.

Hughes is also being outplayed by Earl at club level. Why pick someone who never made much of an impact at international level over a player outperforming him at club level who has more potential?

fivepointer wrote:Hughes and Dombrandt together? Mmmm, not sold on that idea.

The best out and out 6 right now is Ted Hill, who offers everything you'd want.

I'd play him but Jones may stick with Curry and Underhill, which to be fair, is hardly an insignificant pairing at flanker.

No place for Willis?

Peej wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Hughes and Dombrandt together? Mmmm, not sold on that idea.

The best out and out 6 right now is Ted Hill, who offers everything you'd want.

I'd play him but Jones may stick with Curry and Underhill, which to be fair, is hardly an insignificant pairing at flanker.

No place for Willis?

In the squad, yes. Game time this autumn, definitely. My approach would be to mix up the back row selection for the coming games. Plenty deserve a chance but they cant all play at once.
Dave Flatman on the C5 highlights programme summed things up when he said that it would be a travesty if - he then reels off about 10 back rowers names - wasnt selected.

Yeah. I think Willis and Earl are the two I most want to see, followed by Hill. Simmonds would be good in some games, but he came a cropper before in the more physical games.

Did he really though? I can't say I remember it that well, and it does seem odd given the performances he puts in at European level.

I'm hoping we see, either Curry & Underhill or Willis at 6 and Curry at 7. With the BaaBaas, Italy and Georgia in the mix of fixtures we could hope for a bit of rotation. Probably won't see it, but it would allow us to just start to take a look amongst the veritable cornucopia of potential flank options.

Given the number of fixtures coming after a backlog of games I'd say we could probably select 6 or 7 options and rotate them through the games. Give some guys a chance whilst giving our normal selections game time as well.

6. Hill, Willis
7. Curry, Underhill, Earl
8. Vunipola, Simmons

Most are versatile to play several positions and you could put together a few quality backrows from that selection.

For the bigger games Underhill, Curry, Vunipola. Could give Hill, Willis, Simmons a go Vs Italy or Georgia.

FKAS wrote:Given the number of fixtures coming after a backlog of games I'd say we could probably select 6 or 7 options and rotate them through the games. Give some guys a chance whilst giving our normal selections game time as well.

6. Hill, Willis
7. Curry, Underhill, Earl
8. Vunipola, Simmons

Most are versatile to play several positions and you could put together a few quality backrows from that selection.

For the bigger games Underhill, Curry, Vunipola. Could give Hill, Willis, Simmons a go Vs Italy or Georgia.

I'd pick him, but I can't see Simmonds getting the squad. I think he'll look at Earl, Willis and Curry as backup 8 options.

Mikey Brown wrote:Did he really though? I can't say I remember it that well, and it does seem odd given the performances he puts in at European level.

Yes he did. But he was given a role which didn’t suit him, and was in a team that iirc was short of carriers.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

FKAS wrote:Given the number of fixtures coming after a backlog of games I'd say we could probably select 6 or 7 options and rotate them through the games. Give some guys a chance whilst giving our normal selections game time as well.

6. Hill, Willis
7. Curry, Underhill, Earl
8. Vunipola, Simmons

Most are versatile to play several positions and you could put together a few quality backrows from that selection.

For the bigger games Underhill, Curry, Vunipola. Could give Hill, Willis, Simmons a go Vs Italy or Georgia.

I'd pick him, but I can't see Simmonds getting the squad. I think he'll look at Earl, Willis and Curry as backup 8 options.

Has Jack Willis played much at 8 in senior rugby?

Curry will be at 6

Banquo wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

FKAS wrote:Given the number of fixtures coming after a backlog of games I'd say we could probably select 6 or 7 options and rotate them through the games. Give some guys a chance whilst giving our normal selections game time as well.

6. Hill, Willis
7. Curry, Underhill, Earl
8. Vunipola, Simmons

Most are versatile to play several positions and you could put together a few quality backrows from that selection.

For the bigger games Underhill, Curry, Vunipola. Could give Hill, Willis, Simmons a go Vs Italy or Georgia.

I'd pick him, but I can't see Simmonds getting the squad. I think he'll look at Earl, Willis and Curry as backup 8 options.

Has Jack Willis played much at 8 in senior rugby?

He plays there on a semi-regular enough basis for Wasps that I wouldn't be against him playing there internationally. He packed down at 8 when TWillis was substituted last game for example and I believe Shields was still on the pitch at the time, so that wasn't for lack of options.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:
I'd pick him, but I can't see Simmonds getting the squad. I think he'll look at Earl, Willis and Curry as backup 8 options.

Has Jack Willis played much at 8 in senior rugby?

He plays there on a semi-regular enough basis for Wasps that I wouldn't be against him playing there internationally. He packed down at 8 when TWillis was substituted last game for example and I believe Shields was still on the pitch at the time, so that wasn't for lack of options.

Puja

Yeah, regularly moves across as needed. I’d pick Simmonds or Mercer, but I expect Jones will look to the flanks for cover.

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:
I'd pick him, but I can't see Simmonds getting the squad. I think he'll look at Earl, Willis and Curry as backup 8 options.

Has Jack Willis played much at 8 in senior rugby?

He plays there on a semi-regular enough basis for Wasps that I wouldn't be against him playing there internationally. He packed down at 8 when TWillis was substituted last game for example and I believe Shields was still on the pitch at the time, so that wasn't for lack of options.

Puja

Ok

Puja wrote:

jngf wrote:To some extent the no.8 choice will influence things too - thought Dombrandt was on terrific form against Wasps and would select him with Nathan Hughes as a back up ahead of Billy at mo.

Dombrandt was pretty average against Wasps. He hit two beautiful lines for his tries and made a good offload that led to another try, which I'm sure showed up well on the highlights, but he lost the ball a few times, didn't make an impact in the breakdown, and wasn't particularly dominant in defence. He wasn't terrible, but the highlights package did not provide an accurate assessment of the game.

Cunderhillis is still my first choice back row (in whichever jerseys they like), although I would accept anything with Earl, BillyV, BCurry, or Hill in as well. All things told, I'm just so glad we're going to pick 3 back rows from our plethora of talented young players that I'm not bothered which of them get the nod.

Puja

I think there is always a question of balancing pragmatism against the potential pay off of introducing a bit of flair. If a hard grafting, unflashy, do all the basics, high work rate style is prioritised as the key thing above all then players like Robshaw and Wilson would motm week in week out and at least one of them gained some Lions caps - players who add a bit of flair/panache (e.g. at this point Dombrandt) may not be as big a contributor to the unglamouress stuff but they don’t half make rugby a more interesting spectacle to watch! I’m glad to see Dombrandt get a training squad call as it might be an antitdote to the “comfy pair of slippers” just pick Billy come what may or the utter madness of picking Curry well out of position

You wont find many top level “flairy” backrowers that don’t do a hell of alot of grunt work as well, its no tradeoff at the highest level, you have to be able to do both. Vermeulen, Savea, Faletau etc are doing a hell of a lot of tackles, turnovers and ruck hits. The days of the Parisse/Henry Tuilagi type seem to be long gone

I think Dombrandt can be unfairly treated on here but he doesn’t stand a chance of an international career if his flairy moments arent backed up but alot of nuts and bolts, which from my viewings he does seem to be capable of, just seems to be more a mentality thing.

padprop wrote:You wont find many top level “flairy” backrowers that don’t do a hell of alot of grunt work as well, its no tradeoff at the highest level, you have to be able to do both.

I think Dombrandt can be unfairly treated on here but he doesn’t stand a chance of an international career if his flairy moments arent backed up but alot of nuts and bolts, which from my viewings he does seem to be capable of, just seems to be more a mentality thing.

Probably more of an experience thing. He's not played much senior or even top level age grade rugby, and a lot of that in a team in what could kindly be called a state of flux.

Banquo wrote:

padprop wrote:You wont find many top level “flairy” backrowers that don’t do a hell of alot of grunt work as well, its no tradeoff at the highest level, you have to be able to do both.

I think Dombrandt can be unfairly treated on here but he doesn’t stand a chance of an international career if his flairy moments arent backed up but alot of nuts and bolts, which from my viewings he does seem to be capable of, just seems to be more a mentality thing.

Probably more of an experience thing. He's not played much senior or even top level age grade rugby, and a lot of that in a team in what could kindly be called a state of flux.

Potentially, or a combo of both, we’ve seen a plethora of young backrowers (Earl, Curry x 2, Willis, Hill) come with a more duck-to-water approach to back row play at the professional level with similar times spent playing professional rugby, as well as people like Polledri breaking through in a very similar fashion, yet having a more complete game. Imagine it goes a bit deeper with Dombrandt as I’d hedge that he’s been an absolute unit his whole playing career and has such obvious USPs that the more basic parts of his game may have fallen by the way side from an earlier age, but only time will tell