NPR

Yup, that second half was like 70% possession to Australia, the numbers are going to be mad.

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Mon Jul 18, 2022 7:52 pm10/12 might work if Smith gets the confidence Ford has to tell Farrell to fuck off out of it. The Farrell at 10 play can and has yielded some good results, but it's being used far too often to be a surprise. Keep him at 12 and get Smith playing flat where he's most effective(like Ford), so Farrell can make decisions one step on.

I think after the first Test I had no issues with how Farrell was used as a distributor. I do want to see him run more, though. It's fucking mad that you have a superbly gifted attacking threat in Smith, and the guy who basically reinvented himself this season as a direct offloading runner, and between them they make 10m a game barring slices of luck like Smith's try.

The first Test is exactly how not to use the Smith/Farrell partnership. The 2nd and 3rd Tests showed glimpses of life. But we still have the following issues:

1) Both of them aren't getting/taking the opportunities to run the ball
2) They had an absolute no-mark out of his depth journeyman at 13
3) Only one back 3 player with pace
4) A slow back row

Both Smith and Farrell have to provide more threat with ball in hand and they can both do this. But they also need better choices around them. Billy's gone well on tour but he's not a player who picks a line like Dombrandt, so if you're going to favour him you need to recognise that you need some other options in the pack who can think like a back at times (Sinkler's return would be good; George used to be good for this!). Porter offered absolutely nothing. Marchant is our best option for support lines and breaks that aren't Tuilagi-bosh, he's always sniffing for opportunities and Farrell's offloads would be ideal for this. Nowell is a busy player who's done about as well as can be expected but he's just not quick enough (or good enough with his hands) to turn his work into real positive outcomes.

The Smith/Farrell partnership can work. I don't see the point in dropping either of them if you're doing so off the back of matches where they've been dealt a shit hand. They're both very, very good and very, very clever rugby players with very different skillsets who are capable of getting the best out of players around them as well as producing excellent individual performances.

But they can't do it if we pick a random side with no clear vision and handcuff ourselves to offensively suspect selections.

Raggs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:29 amWhat's the point in giving it to Smith every time if we're not yet going forwards and there's nothing on?

While I agree with the gist of your post, turning shit ball into opportunities is one of the things he can do really well. He's the something-out-of-nothing guy. I've lost track of the number of times commentators have remarked on a break or a try by starting with "Smith got the ball and it looked like there was nothing on, but..."

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:42 am

Raggs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:29 amWhat's the point in giving it to Smith every time if we're not yet going forwards and there's nothing on?

While I agree with the gist of your post, turning shit ball into opportunities is one of the things he can do really well. He's the something-out-of-nothing guy. I've lost track of the number of times commentators have remarked on a break or a try by starting with "Smith got the ball and it looked like there was nothing on, but..."

But really only works when he has a credible threat outside of him to keep the defence guessing, England they currently don't have to guess, there is no threat.

ASMO wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 11:33 am

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:42 am

Raggs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:29 amWhat's the point in giving it to Smith every time if we're not yet going forwards and there's nothing on?

While I agree with the gist of your post, turning shit ball into opportunities is one of the things he can do really well. He's the something-out-of-nothing guy. I've lost track of the number of times commentators have remarked on a break or a try by starting with "Smith got the ball and it looked like there was nothing on, but..."

But really only works when he has a credible threat outside of him to keep the defence guessing, England they currently don't have to guess, there is no threat.

Sort of. His footwork and personal threat can create space for other players. It helps if they're not fucking donkeys and are alive to the opportunities of course.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:42 am

Raggs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:29 amWhat's the point in giving it to Smith every time if we're not yet going forwards and there's nothing on?

While I agree with the gist of your post, turning shit ball into opportunities is one of the things he can do really well. He's the something-out-of-nothing guy. I've lost track of the number of times commentators have remarked on a break or a try by starting with "Smith got the ball and it looked like there was nothing on, but..."

My issue is at international that happens rarely, and at the cutting edge of a world cup, even rarelyer... Smith was struggling with his decision making in the 2nd test regardless, some beautifully timed passes and some absolute cop out kicks. First test showed him dithering a bit as he was trying to find a bit of space for himself, which then meant the space that had been made a bit further out got eaten up anyway. He'll adapt to the pace of the game I'm sure, and there will be rare occasions for him to make a break, but there'll be even less if we don't play off 9 very much.

I do prefer him at 1st receiver with Farrell as the out the back option, and we did seem to switch to mostly this after the first test being the other way. He can be more of an individual threat, whilst Farrell can just pick passes. The new style we're playing to does seem to make much better use out of the dual playmakers than we were previously managing, it's just obviously a lot more work for players to get into and adapt.

Raggs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 11:58 am

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:42 am

Raggs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 10:29 amWhat's the point in giving it to Smith every time if we're not yet going forwards and there's nothing on?

While I agree with the gist of your post, turning shit ball into opportunities is one of the things he can do really well. He's the something-out-of-nothing guy. I've lost track of the number of times commentators have remarked on a break or a try by starting with "Smith got the ball and it looked like there was nothing on, but..."

My issue is at international that happens rarely, and at the cutting edge of a world cup, even rarelyer... Smith was struggling with his decision making in the 2nd test regardless, some beautifully timed passes and some absolute cop out kicks. First test showed him dithering a bit as he was trying to find a bit of space for himself, which then meant the space that had been made a bit further out got eaten up anyway. He'll adapt to the pace of the game I'm sure, and there will be rare occasions for him to make a break, but there'll be even less if we don't play off 9 very much.

The setup in the first Test was a disaster - it wasn't Smith getting average ball and failing to do something with it, it was Smith getting the ball behind his own players, from a static playmaker, and being asked to do his thing with fewer options than normal. And that static playmaker was just asked to ship the ball on most of the time in trained-monkey fashion.

Creating something out of nothing will indeed never happen if you're not willing to let your playmakers try things off less-than-perfect ball though. Sure, there's times when the smart thing is to reset, and either keep it tight or kick it, but there's plenty of times when there's no immediate advantage but it's still worth giving the genius a shot at it. Plenty of other 10s do this at international level, so I don't understand advocating for not allowing for it at all. It's not just about him making a break, but about him creating one and creating space / bending the line in other ways.

I do prefer him at 1st receiver with Farrell as the out the back option, and we did seem to switch to mostly this after the first test being the other way. He can be more of an individual threat, whilst Farrell can just pick passes. The new style we're playing to does seem to make much better use out of the dual playmakers than we were previously managing, it's just obviously a lot more work for players to get into and adapt.

It's definitely an improvement, but it's still not giving either playmaker full opportunity to show what they can do, and it's hobbled us as a result. And I don't think personnel change solves that, it's the approach as much as anything. We can't have 10 and 12 barely threatening the defence for most of the game.

oof

Even bigger oof, Ed Slater diagnosed with MND at 33. Retiring with immediate effect.

Poor guy

He's only marginally older than me, can't imagine getting that sort of news at this age.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Thu Jul 21, 2022 2:00 pm Even bigger oof, Ed Slater diagnosed with MND at 33. Retiring with immediate effect.

Poor guy

He's only marginally older than me, can't imagine getting that sort of news at this age.

Absolutely shocking, feel sick

Just awful.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Thu Jul 21, 2022 2:00 pm Even bigger oof, Ed Slater diagnosed with MND at 33. Retiring with immediate effect.

Poor guy

He's only marginally older than me, can't imagine getting that sort of news at this age.

Fuck!!!!
Dreadful news

Holy! Poor bastard!

Awful news, poor fella.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Thu Jul 21, 2022 2:00 pm Even bigger oof, Ed Slater diagnosed with MND at 33. Retiring with immediate effect.

Poor guy

He's only marginally older than me, can't imagine getting that sort of news at this age.

Ah no. Terrible news.

That's rubbish, a lingering death sentence at that age. Poor sod.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 12:13 pm
It's definitely an improvement, but it's still not giving either playmaker full opportunity to show what they can do, and it's hobbled us as a result. And I don't think personnel change solves that, it's the approach as much as anything. We can't have 10 and 12 barely threatening the defence for most of the game.

There was a line attributed to Smith posted here recently about Farrell, and how Farrell makes great decisions at the line. Which I think was posted to say good things about Farrell, but the other way to look at Smith's positives comments was 'dear god Farrell takes so long to get to the line, doesn't draw enough defenders and everyone outside him as defenders drifting across far too comfortably' so yes he makes good decisions once at the line the steps into that happening are too slow and cause too many wider problems that stunt what's already a stunted attack.

That said the system of wide wide can work, but we need the setup and support to work better. And then they can practically march up the middle if the defence has to set for the wide play. But we have to speed up so defences are stressed to think look wider, and then Smith can set about attack transition. How much that's a shape thing, how much it's players getting time playing together, how much it's things like a lock in the backrow and slow(er) back three types is up for debate

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 11:25 am

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 12:13 pm
It's definitely an improvement, but it's still not giving either playmaker full opportunity to show what they can do, and it's hobbled us as a result. And I don't think personnel change solves that, it's the approach as much as anything. We can't have 10 and 12 barely threatening the defence for most of the game.

There was a line attributed to Smith posted here recently about Farrell, and how Farrell makes great decisions at the line. Which I think was posted to say good things about Farrell, but the other way to look at Smith's positives comments was 'dear god Farrell takes so long to get to the line, doesn't draw enough defenders and everyone outside him as defenders drifting across far too comfortably' so yes he makes good decisions once at the line the steps into that happening are too slow and cause too many wider problems that stunt what's already a stunted attack.

That said the system of wide wide can work, but we need the setup and support to work better. And then they can practically march up the middle if the defence has to set for the wide play. But we have to speed up so defences are stressed to think look wider, and then Smith can set about attack transition. How much that's a shape thing, how much it's players getting time playing together, how much it's things like a lock in the backrow and slow(er) back three types is up for debate

Wide wide wont really work unless you have pace to burn on the outside, we have Nowell

Yes, pace is the key. Clearing the ball from rucks cleanly and quickly and getting it through the hands asap is the key to creating situations, but once i gets wide pace is required. We have somewhat managed to make wide wide work in the past when JJ was wearing 13 with May and Watson on the wings and Brown or Daly at fullback. For all his many flaws while positioned there, Daly is quick and could join the line well. An outside backs config incorporating Porter Nowell and Steward just doesn't enable wide play. You can maybe get away with a slow 13 if he can reliably get the ball away quickly and if both wings are rapid.

Off-season amusement.

If the Premiership/Pro League had a NFL style Hall of Fame, who would your first five entries be?

Rules:

Must be retired
Can't have played for your team
Premiership HOF does not necessarily mean Test great or trophy winner
Preferably all from different teams

Mine:

1). Lawrence Dallaglio (Wasps) - Five titles, including the first professional League title and the three in a row, I think it's a shoo in.

2). Steve Hanley (Sale) - Record try scorer with 75 until Cueto took the crown five years later. Deserved as the first and best on that front.

3). Charlie Hodgson (Sale/Saracens) - Bending my own rules a bit, but his stint at Sarries lasted five years so he wasn't on a pension top up (although he probably suffered less of a battering behind the Sarries pack than the Sale pack). Ever the bridesmaid to Wilkinson at Test level and fucked about by Woodward trying to play him at 12, he was a points machine and a consumate controller of the game and won three titles.

4). Tom Smith (Northampton) - Eight seasons with the Saints, fuck me, he was an amazing loosehead and always seemed to know exactly what to do at any given time.

5). Martin Johnson (Leicester) - Nuff said.

Harsh but fair

1. Simon Shaw (Bris, Wasps) - most skillful lock I've seen
2. Richard Hill (Sarries) - better on one leg than most on two
3. Toby Flood (Newcastle, Leicester) - achieved far more than his Inspector Gadget body seemed capable of
4. Declan Danaher (London Irish) - no huge achievements but I have a soft spot for him, and he was a titan for Irish for aeons
5. Dan Lyle (Bath) - I thought he was a great number 8 and a real flag bearer for US rugby

In no particular order:
Mark van Gisbergen
Craig Gillies
James Simpson-Daniel
Tim Stimpson
Jake Boer

If I were to add Sarries players onto the list:
Richard Hill
Kris Chesney
Cobus Visagie

Bruce Reihana
Charlie Hodgson
Richard Wigglesworth
Lawrence Dallaglio
James Simpson-Daniel

Difficult though. You could easily make a case for Johnno, Kay, Corry, Castrogiovanni, Murphy (I know, I know), and bunch of others just from Tigers. How do you decide who's really hall of fame at club level? Does it have to bias towards European performances? Club legends? "Personalities"? Very tough!

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 11:25 am
There was a line attributed to Smith posted here recently about Farrell, and how Farrell makes great decisions at the line. Which I think was posted to say good things about Farrell, but the other way to look at Smith's positives comments was 'dear god Farrell takes so long to get to the line, doesn't draw enough defenders and everyone outside him as defenders drifting across far too comfortably' so yes he makes good decisions once at the line the steps into that happening are too slow and cause too many wider problems that stunt what's already a stunted attack.

Tell me, have you ever heard of the phrase 'post-rationalisation'?

ASMO wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 11:34 am

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 11:25 am

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 12:13 pm
It's definitely an improvement, but it's still not giving either playmaker full opportunity to show what they can do, and it's hobbled us as a result. And I don't think personnel change solves that, it's the approach as much as anything. We can't have 10 and 12 barely threatening the defence for most of the game.

There was a line attributed to Smith posted here recently about Farrell, and how Farrell makes great decisions at the line. Which I think was posted to say good things about Farrell, but the other way to look at Smith's positives comments was 'dear god Farrell takes so long to get to the line, doesn't draw enough defenders and everyone outside him as defenders drifting across far too comfortably' so yes he makes good decisions once at the line the steps into that happening are too slow and cause too many wider problems that stunt what's already a stunted attack.

That said the system of wide wide can work, but we need the setup and support to work better. And then they can practically march up the middle if the defence has to set for the wide play. But we have to speed up so defences are stressed to think look wider, and then Smith can set about attack transition. How much that's a shape thing, how much it's players getting time playing together, how much it's things like a lock in the backrow and slow(er) back three types is up for debate

Wide wide wont really work unless you have pace to burn on the outside, we have Nowell

It makes it harder to attract defensive interest wider certainly, but you only need the setup to allow wide wide if you want to actually go up the middle attacking transition with Smith and maybe a Quirke or Randall

Garforth would be very close to making the five, but if picking one player from Leicester it's the one on the list:

Back
Waters
Hodgson (wasn't sure if Wigglesworth was fully retired else maybe that one swaps)
Dowson
Mapusua (not the longest club career but an absurdly high standard)

SaintK wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:20 am So, casual racism is rife in Premiership rugby every week according to Luther Burrell.

In an extraordinary interview with echoes of that by Azeem Rafiq two years ago which sparked English cricket’s racism scandal, Burrell said there was racist “banter” in his own sport “every week” and that it had become “normalised”.
Burrell - who has played for Leeds, Sale, Northampton and Newcastle - was also said by the Mail on Sunday to have recent hard evidence of such bigotry in the form of WhatsApp messages.
But the 32 year-old vowed he would “never name names”, saying he had gone public to provoke change and prevent his three- and five-year-old children going through what he had.

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2F ... -slave%2F

Looks like Newcastle is the prime suspect...

https://archive.ph/cMN3x

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 8:46 am Garforth would be very close to making the five, but if picking one player from Leicester it's the one on the list:

Back

Without a doubt. If such a thing as pound for pound rankings existed in rugby he would be the p4p greatest rugby player we have produced. Incredible longevity too.

I'm reading Johnnos autobiography right now and it is quite clear that he holds Back in very high esteem to where you would say Back was the real leader of the club.

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 8:24 am

SaintK wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:20 am So, casual racism is rife in Premiership rugby every week according to Luther Burrell.

In an extraordinary interview with echoes of that by Azeem Rafiq two years ago which sparked English cricket’s racism scandal, Burrell said there was racist “banter” in his own sport “every week” and that it had become “normalised”.
Burrell - who has played for Leeds, Sale, Northampton and Newcastle - was also said by the Mail on Sunday to have recent hard evidence of such bigotry in the form of WhatsApp messages.
But the 32 year-old vowed he would “never name names”, saying he had gone public to provoke change and prevent his three- and five-year-old children going through what he had.

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2F ... -slave%2F

Looks like Newcastle is the prime suspect...

https://archive.ph/cMN3x

It would appear that way

Bath sign Quinn Roux as injury cover for Ewels. The diagnosis for Ewels is he's likely to missing the great bulk of next season, if not all of it, the poor sod.

That's two huge locks signed for next season with Attwood and Roux. I can't quite see how both would start as they're both massive (both not far off 20 stone) and not easily lifted, and not sure our backrow offer enough option - although I know very little of Roux's lineout prowess, that's likely to be where we really miss Ewels. Despite the consensus on NPR - not that I think you're all whinging bitches - I rate him as a very tidy lock, and I'd have thought him and Attwood would have made a very good lock pairing.

In saying that, we desperately missed some grunt last season so good to see it's being tackled (pardon pun)

inactionman wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 11:29 am Bath sign Quinn Roux as injury cover for Ewels. The diagnosis for Ewels is he's likely to missing the great bulk of next season, if not all of it, the poor sod.

That's two huge locks signed for next season with Attwood and Roux. I can't quite see how both would start as they're both massive (both not far off 20 stone) and not easily lifted, and not sure our backrow offer enough option - although I know very little of Roux's lineout prowess, that's likely to be where we really miss Ewels. Despite the consensus on NPR - not that I think you're all whinging bitches - I rate him as a very tidy lock, and I'd have thought him and Attwood would have made a very good lock pairing.

In saying that, we desperately missed some grunt last season so good to see it's being tackled (pardon pun)

Ewels is probably a good solid club lock, along the lines of a Louis Deacon or an Alex Brown.

George Ford out until the New Year. I guess Sanderson will be looking for another 10, Rob du Preez not really a trutworthy back up

Sale Sharks are due to be without their star signing for the rest of 2022 after their director of rugby Alex Sanderson confirmed that England fly-half George Ford is set for a lengthy spell on the sidelines.
The 29-year-old was one of Sale’s big-name additions ahead of the upcoming campaign, but Sanderson revealed that Ford has undergone surgery on an Achilles issue.
He sustained the injury during Leicester Tigers’ Premiership final clash with Saracens in June and was forced off the field in the first half.

SaintK wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 12:43 pm George Ford out until the New Year. I guess Sanderson will be looking for another 10, Rob du Preez not really a trutworthy back up

Sale Sharks are due to be without their star signing for the rest of 2022 after their director of rugby Alex Sanderson confirmed that England fly-half George Ford is set for a lengthy spell on the sidelines.
The 29-year-old was one of Sale’s big-name additions ahead of the upcoming campaign, but Sanderson revealed that Ford has undergone surgery on an Achilles issue.
He sustained the injury during Leicester Tigers’ Premiership final clash with Saracens in June and was forced off the field in the first half.

Every time I watched Sale last season I could swear Rob Du Preez was playing in a different position. Unless you're Jason Robinson or Austin Healey, not really a ringing endorsement.

McGinty's gone to Bristol, hasn't he?

SaintK wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 12:43 pm George Ford out until the New Year. I guess Sanderson will be looking for another 10, Rob du Preez not really a trutworthy back up

Sale Sharks are due to be without their star signing for the rest of 2022 after their director of rugby Alex Sanderson confirmed that England fly-half George Ford is set for a lengthy spell on the sidelines.
The 29-year-old was one of Sale’s big-name additions ahead of the upcoming campaign, but Sanderson revealed that Ford has undergone surgery on an Achilles issue.
He sustained the injury during Leicester Tigers’ Premiership final clash with Saracens in June and was forced off the field in the first half.

We've got Wilkinson and Curtis who really need to be given their chance. From what I've seen they're both capable enough and could potentially shine after an extended run. The problem is we're also without our star 9 for at least some of the start of the campaign, so will be relying on untested players/joe simpson in key positions.

I also think that's harsh on RDP, he's not the flashiest 10 in the world, but he can do a decent job at premiership level. I'd still rather see him at 13 as a second distributor though. What really pisses me off is that if there was ever a player to bring Sam James back into form it was Ford, and we won't see that until it's potentially too late.

England 7's team just been dicked 34-0 by Samoa in Commonwealth Games
Highly unlikely to get to the quarter finals as they play NZ next!!!

SaintK wrote: ↑Fri Jul 29, 2022 11:05 am England 7's team just been dicked 34-0 by Samoa in Commonwealth Games
Highly unlikely to get to the quarter finals as they play NZ next!!!

Not that I follow England 7s ( as opposed to GB for Olympics) but was very surprised at that result. Is this an inexperienced / experimental England team?

Sevens just isn't much of a focus for England period. It hasn't been since the men's team with Tait and Varndell

We'll put sides forwards, we fund them somewhat, but any decent players will almost certainly be on the 15s side of things

Interview with Eddie Jones


https://inews.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/e ... ls-1778827

Christ he's obnoxious. And never misses a chance to slag off England or English rugby.

I've been ready for him to fuck off for what feels like a century at this point.