Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
2003 - It's all about St Jonny
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Broms" data-source="post: 1012167" data-attributes="member: 84425"><p>I'd probably best describe JW as a safe pair of hands as a flyhalf, not ever breaking a game open but not making many mistakes. In his earlier days he really was a poor defender, getting skittled quite regularly though he did work on that part of his game and it vastly improved in his later years. His longevity in England colours probably reflects English coaching and selection values at that time. Flyhalves were not picked for flair, elusive running or tackle busting. Remember Stuart Barnes, an attacking F/H, never gaining favour over Rob Andrew, a plodding but dependable F/H. Wilkinson was just a continuation of the preference for that type of player. Back to the recent past, that's what set Carter apart, his reliability in the core skills but also his great individual skills. If your F/H is not also a dangerous attacker, your team is much easier to defend against. Look at England's fairly meagre try scoring record in the Wilkinson (and Andrew) years against the better opposition. Wins were often due to points from goal kicks. (to me, like Trump winning in 2016 without getting most votes)</p><p>The more options you have in all positions (15 man rugby as it used to be called) the more successful the team. That just about describes the ABs over many years. </p><p>So, Wilkinson: reliable, competent, yes. Greatest F/H, no, not on any comparative measure.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Broms, post: 1012167, member: 84425"] I'd probably best describe JW as a safe pair of hands as a flyhalf, not ever breaking a game open but not making many mistakes. In his earlier days he really was a poor defender, getting skittled quite regularly though he did work on that part of his game and it vastly improved in his later years. His longevity in England colours probably reflects English coaching and selection values at that time. Flyhalves were not picked for flair, elusive running or tackle busting. Remember Stuart Barnes, an attacking F/H, never gaining favour over Rob Andrew, a plodding but dependable F/H. Wilkinson was just a continuation of the preference for that type of player. Back to the recent past, that's what set Carter apart, his reliability in the core skills but also his great individual skills. If your F/H is not also a dangerous attacker, your team is much easier to defend against. Look at England's fairly meagre try scoring record in the Wilkinson (and Andrew) years against the better opposition. Wins were often due to points from goal kicks. (to me, like Trump winning in 2016 without getting most votes) The more options you have in all positions (15 man rugby as it used to be called) the more successful the team. That just about describes the ABs over many years. So, Wilkinson: reliable, competent, yes. Greatest F/H, no, not on any comparative measure. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
2003 - It's all about St Jonny
Top