Discussion in 'International Test Matches' started by TRF_heineken, Nov 19, 2018.
I love cips but he is just as likely to give a try away as create one
You do know that bean is a black troll
Sinckler is funny
Tbh, if there were a slew of injuries pre WC, I'd take him over Mallinder or Francis any day of the week
There's not enough people in Ireland for them to have a #2 team.
So are America now the Rugby Championship champions?
They put way more points on Ireland than New Zealand could manage
Didn't watch the game (one weekend a year it becomes very hard) saw some text commentary happy with the result.
Will say I said in Eng V SA Farrell will cost his side a game with his tackling some day (and these two incidents are not the first, Bath V Saracens Prem final springs to mind) as he won't always get away with. Plus international and domestic refs will be way more keeping an eye on him. He really needs to cut it out as I think its only becoming more clear its a problem and spotlight has now been shown..
some good points there, yep he needs to be very careful.
Yes, i agree. Don't understand the knockers. he is a pretty good player
Yes i have been told.
Some on here simply prefer a 10 who can attack better but concede the game line at every defensive set, his attacking game has come on considerably in the last few seasons just needs to watch those tackles, for me the One against SA was fine, think he got away with one against OZ though.
Letter of the law they were both penalties at minimum.
'Trying' to wrap your arms isn't good enough. You need to actually use your arms. Accidentally shoulder charging someone is still a shoulder charge.
Some here will criticise a player for conceding a bit in defence but otherwise being a pretty reliable tackler yet have no problem with players who completely miss the tackle leaving gaping holes in the defence or give away even a single penalty, which loses more metres in one go than Ford would concede in the entire game.
Compare, Itoje gives away 2 back to back penalties and the opposition have travelled the length of the pitch and have a set piece in our 22. Think the sum total of all the ground Ford concedes in the entire game would even come close? Conceding ground in the tackle is not such a bad thing in defence, hell many defences incorporate conceding a bit in the tackle to make a turnover. Falling off tackles, being out of position and conceding penalties are all far far worse.
The ford/farrell problem is a pretty nice problem to have. Compared to the Foley and no one problem we have.
I think it's more a no one/no one problem! Very poor flyhalf stocks, at the moment. Anything in the pipeline?
Bottom line is he needs to work on his tackling, and I'm certain he will.
And those tackles would have galvanised his team anyway, right or wrong.
While I think Ford and Cipriani are more skillful in certain aspects of flyhalf play, their weaknesses overshadow their strengths. And I agree with Jones in that Cipriani is a 'great highlights' guy. Helping Farrell's case is that he has been doing it for winning teams these past few years, unlike his two rivals.
Farrells attacking game isn’t as weak as some make out.
Nor is it as strong as others make out.
In other shocking news, humans enjoy hyperbole.
The main thing about Farrell is that he is nowhere near as good as he is hyped to be; with the media particularly simply ignoring anything he does poorly; to the point blaming other players; whilst extolling the things he's okay at as being the best in the world.
He's also done most of his learning whilst occupying the England shirt - rather learning how to be a good rugby player, and THEN being picked for England - and his critics especially can't get that feeling of nepotism from his early career fully out of their minds (personally, I think that "nepotism" was more expressed by the media's unwillingness to criticise him and cut off their flow of juicy gossip and leaks from his dad).
He's an OK international player - who's a bit paint-by-numbers in attack, and who's vision and skills sometime let him down in the process - but paint-by-numbers is exactly what most coaches want from their players as it gives them control, rather than an independent thinker who might disagree with the coach.
In defence he puts in the odd dominant tackle, which absolutely does lift his team. But he also completely misses more than his fair share, and creates dog-legs in the defensive line; which only gets picked up by his critics.
As a kicker, he's OK at the international level - sorry, but 80% for his career is NOT world class he's usually hailed as being. His kicking from hand is less varied, less accurate and more conservative than his challengers - but is generally solid, and not a problem.
He is not an Iceman - he getting ever less of a Petulant Oik; but he still has that petulant streak in him - especially when talking to refs (again, he's getting better - largely by not speaking to refs at all - which is a terrible characteristic in a captain.)
He galvanises his team with his never-say-die attitude, extrovertism, and his occasional big hits.
He's also petulant with mediocre skill levels and sub-par game management.
He's a perfectly competent international FH or centre; he's not world class in anything except attitude; nor is he a liability in anything... currently (2 years ago he was for those dog-legs; and he soon will be for those shoulder barges).
The hyperbolic media circle-jerk over Farrell puts his critics into hyperbolic response (typically watered down significantly when actually put to explanations rather than 1-2 sentence sound-bites); as does the fact that his challengers for the shirt get crucified if they make the same mistake Farrell does; or ignored if they show the same good skill that Farrell gets lionised for.
And yes, I do blame the media for most of this - it enables his supporters to think that he can do no wrong, polarising the debate. Most rugby forums I see seem to be about 50:50 between his supporters and his critics (excepting the Saracens club forum, and Rugby Rebels in different directions) but the casual observers follow the media narrative because they don't know better; and media narrative has become so entrenched that they can't be more reasonable anymore as it would upset the casual viewers and lose sales/clicks (see what happened to Charlie Morgan when he went from largely-independant to working for the Telegraph).
FTR: I am NOT suggesting that his supporters on places like this do so because they follow the media line; just that the media has led to polarisation of opinion, and brought the causual observers along who don't actually watch enough rugby to look deeper than commentary.
TBH at the moment the big problem is 12 as Te'o was abysmal. Farrell and Ford would have been far more effective than Farrell and Te'o.
Separate names with a comma.