[2021 Six Nations] England Squad

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Now that I've established Curry and Underhill's individual ball carrying ability in relation to their England team mates, I will analyse their ball carrying ability as a flanker pairing in relation to other flanker pairings fielded both by England and by other Tier 1 international teams. The purpose of analysing them as a duo is to gain a better understanding of their ball carrying ability as a shared load between two players when compared to other flanker pairings, as many international sides give one flanker much more carrying responsibility than the other. As a result of this imbalance in the ball carrying work load between the flankers of other international teams, there is little benefit in determining that, for example, CJ Stander is a significantly better ball carrier than either Curry or Underhill while Josh van der Flier hardly touches the ball as that gives no indication of how effectively the Curry-Underhill pairing is able to ball-carry as a duo.

In 2020, England fielded five different starting flanker pairings: Lawes-Underhill, Ludlam-Underhill, Lawes-Wilson, Itoje-Willis and, of course, Curry-Underhill. The Curry-Underhill pairing (which spent more than twice as much time together than any of the other pairings) achieved an average Cp80M of 11. Compared to the other flanker-pairings fielded by England, this quantity of carrying can be categorised as being decidedly average. Despite the presence of a back-row/lock hybrid, the flanker pairings of Itoje-Willis and Lawes-Underhill both achieved a Cp80M of 18, significantly higher than the Curry-Underhill pairing. This could suggest that, despite being ineffective carriers, the back-row/lock hybrids get through more overall defensive and breakdown work than the typical back row players, thus allowing their flank partners to carry more often. The Cp80M of the Ludlam-Underhill pairing (the only pairing besides Curry-Underhill with two true back rowers) further supports this suggestion, as it was only able to achieve a measly Cp80M of 5. The Lawes-Wilson had a Cp80M of 10, nearly identical to the Curry-Underhill duo.

While the statistics suggest that the Curry-Underhill pairing doesn't carry very often in comparison to other England flanker pairings, the effectiveness of these carries is where the duo thrives. The Curry-Underhill pairing averages a MpC of 5.4 and a DBpC of 0.15. This DBpC is the highest of the England flanker pairings and is only rivalled by the Itoje-Willis pairing (0.14). The Lawes-Underhill pairing was able to muster a 0.06 while the Lawes-Wilson and Ludlam-Underhill pairings failed to beat a defender between them. In regards to MpC, the Curry-Underhill pairing is only beaten by the Ludlam-Underhill pairing (7.3) and comfortably beats the Itoje-Willis (4.3), Lawes-Underhill (4.3) and Lawes-Wilson (3.4) pairings. While the Cp80M statistic shows that flanker pairings with a back-row/lock hybrid in them allow the true back rower to carry far more often, the MpC and DBpC statistics show that these carries are less effective than when there is a true back rower on each of the flanks. This is likely for a couple of reasons: a) quite simply, the weak carrying ability of the back-row/lock hybrids brings down the average MpC and DBpC of the flanker pairings, and b) the weak carrying ability of the back-row/lock hybrids means that the opposition defence is able to target the true back rower as it doesn't have to commit defenders to tackling the back-row/lock hybrid. As a result, the Curry-Underhill pairing can be determined to have been the most dominant ball carrying flanker pairing that England fielder in 2020.

When compared to the flanker pairings of other nations, the story is largely the same. The Cp80M of the Curry-Underhill pairing (11) is relatively poor when compared to the flanker-pairings of these other nations, only managing to beat France (9). The flanker duos of Argentina (12), Georgia (12) and Wales (12) all achieve a similar Cp80M to the Curry-, Underhill duo, while Italy (19), New Zealand (18), Scotland (18), Fiji (16), Australia (15) and Ireland (15) all achieve significantly higher. However, much like when being compared to its fellow England flanker pairings, it is in regards to the quality, not the quantity, of ball carrying that the Curry-Underhill pairing thrives. The Curry-Underhill pairing achieved an average DBpC of 0.15. This statistic is only beaten by the Fijian flanker duo, which achieved an enormous 0.25. However, as a result of Fiji only playing one game in 2020, and this game being played against the weakest nation to take part in Tier 1 competition (Georgia) this statistic can largely be disregarded as being a fluke. With the Fijian flanker pairing disregarded, the Curry-Underhill pairing achieves the highest DBpC of any national team to have taken part in Tier 1 competition in 2020, equalling Australia (0.15) and beating Italy (0.14), Argentina (0.11), Georgia (0.11), Ireland (0.10), New Zealand (0.10), France (0.08), Scotland (0.07) and Wales (0.05). Furthermore, the Curry-Underhill pairing managed a MpC of 5.4, only being beaten by the flanker pairing of Italy (5.6) and equalled by that of Wales (5.4). The duo beats France (5.0), Georgia (4.7), Scotland (4.5), Ireland (4.3), Fiji (4.0), New Zealand (2.5), Australia (2.2) and Argentina (1.4). In fact, the Curry-Underhill flanker pairing, along with the Italian duo, are the only two pairings to score highly both in regards to how many metres they make and how many defenders they beat.

To conclude, when putting this together I originally intended to demonstrate that, while the Curry-Underhill flanker pairing is exceptional when it comes to defence and the breakdown, it ultimately struggles with ball in hand and cannot compete with other international teams who deploy large, ball-carrying blindsides. However, what I've instead found is that despite the fact that neither of Curry or Underhill are exceptional ball carriers, the fact that they are both very capable with ball in hand means that when paired together, they are significantly more dangerous than the flanker duos of teams who deploy one ball carrier and one traditional openside.

Looks like I was wrong yesterday, oops.

(2/2)

 

[Juggler]

Sterling work Mr Beast

 

[Scotty]

Now that I've established Curry and Underhill's individual ball carrying ability in relation to their England team mates, I will analyse their ball carrying ability as a flanker pairing in relation to other flanker pairings fielded both by England and by other Tier 1 international teams. The purpose of analysing them as a duo is to gain a better understanding of their ball carrying ability as a shared load between two players when compared to other flanker pairings, as many international sides give one flanker much more carrying responsibility than the other. As a result of this imbalance in the ball carrying work load between the flankers of other international teams, there is little benefit in determining that, for example, CJ Stander is a significantly better ball carrier than either Curry or Underhill while Josh van der Flier hardly touches the ball as that gives no indication of how effectively the Curry-Underhill pairing is able to ball-carry as a duo.

In 2020, England fielded five different starting flanker pairings: Lawes-Underhill, Ludlam-Underhill, Lawes-Wilson, Itoje-Willis and, of course, Curry-Underhill. The Curry-Underhill pairing (which spent more than twice as much time together than any of the other pairings) achieved an average Cp80M of 11. Compared to the other flanker-pairings fielded by England, this quantity of carrying can be categorised as being decidedly average. Despite the presence of a back-row/lock hybrid, the flanker pairings of Itoje-Willis and Lawes-Underhill both achieved a Cp80M of 18, significantly higher than the Curry-Underhill pairing. This could suggest that, despite being ineffective carriers, the back-row/lock hybrids get through more overall defensive and breakdown work than the typical back row players, thus allowing their flank partners to carry more often. The Cp80M of the Ludlam-Underhill pairing (the only pairing besides Curry-Underhill with two true back rowers) further supports this suggestion, as it was only able to achieve a measly Cp80M of 5. The Lawes-Wilson had a Cp80M of 10, nearly identical to the Curry-Underhill duo.

While the statistics suggest that the Curry-Underhill pairing doesn't carry very often in comparison to other England flanker pairings, the effectiveness of these carries is where the duo thrives. The Curry-Underhill pairing averages a MpC of 5.4 and a DBpC of 0.15. This DBpC is the highest of the England flanker pairings and is only rivalled by the Itoje-Willis pairing (0.14). The Lawes-Underhill pairing was able to muster a 0.06 while the Lawes-Wilson and Ludlam-Underhill pairings failed to beat a defender between them. In regards to MpC, the Curry-Underhill pairing is only beaten by the Ludlam-Underhill pairing (7.3) and comfortably beats the Itoje-Willis (4.3), Lawes-Underhill (4.3) and Lawes-Wilson (3.4) pairings. While the Cp80M statistic shows that flanker pairings with a back-row/lock hybrid in them allow the true back rower to carry far more often, the MpC and DBpC statistics show that these carries are less effective than when there is a true back rower on each of the flanks. This is likely for a couple of reasons: a) quite simply, the weak carrying ability of the back-row/lock hybrids brings down the average MpC and DBpC of the flanker pairings, and b) the weak carrying ability of the back-row/lock hybrids means that the opposition defence is able to target the true back rower as it doesn't have to commit defenders to tackling the back-row/lock hybrid. As a result, the Curry-Underhill pairing can be determined to have been the most dominant ball carrying flanker pairing that England fielder in 2020.

When compared to the flanker pairings of other nations, the story is largely the same. The Cp80M of the Curry-Underhill pairing (11) is relatively poor when compared to the flanker-pairings of these other nations, only managing to beat France (9). The flanker duos of Argentina (12), Georgia (12) and Wales (12) all achieve a similar Cp80M to the Curry-, Underhill duo, while Italy (19), New Zealand (18), Scotland (18), Fiji (16), Australia (15) and Ireland (15) all achieve significantly higher. However, much like when being compared to its fellow England flanker pairings, it is in regards to the quality, not the quantity, of ball carrying that the Curry-Underhill pairing thrives. The Curry-Underhill pairing achieved an average DBpC of 0.15. This statistic is only beaten by the Fijian flanker duo, which achieved an enormous 0.25. However, as a result of Fiji only playing one game in 2020, and this game being played against the weakest nation to take part in Tier 1 competition (Georgia) this statistic can largely be disregarded as being a fluke. With the Fijian flanker pairing disregarded, the Curry-Underhill pairing achieves the highest DBpC of any national team to have taken part in Tier 1 competition in 2020, equalling Australia (0.15) and beating Italy (0.14), Argentina (0.11), Georgia (0.11), Ireland (0.10), New Zealand (0.10), France (0.08), Scotland (0.07) and Wales (0.05). Furthermore, the Curry-Underhill pairing managed a MpC of 5.4, only being beaten by the flanker pairing of Italy (5.6) and equalled by that of Wales (5.4). The duo beats France (5.0), Georgia (4.7), Scotland (4.5), Ireland (4.3), Fiji (4.0), New Zealand (2.5), Australia (2.2) and Argentina (1.4). In fact, the Curry-Underhill flanker pairing, along with the Italian duo, are the only two pairings to score highly both in regards to how many metres they make and how many defenders they beat.

To conclude, when putting this together I originally intended to demonstrate that, while the Curry-Underhill flanker pairing is exceptional when it comes to defence and the breakdown, it ultimately struggles with ball in hand and cannot compete with other international teams who deploy large, ball-carrying blindsides. However, what I've instead found is that despite the fact that neither of Curry or Underhill are exceptional ball carriers, the fact that they are both very capable with ball in hand means that when paired together, they are significantly more dangerous than the flanker duos of teams who deploy one ball carrier and one traditional openside.

Looks like I was wrong yesterday, oops.

(2/2)

So one we havnt seen is Willis-Curry right? And your stats showed Willis as a better carrier? Be it from a small sample size and we all know hes top tier at openside stuff, so could that be an even better partnership? Not wanting to break up Curry-Underhill but i just think Willis will break into this team over the next couple of years.

 

[Jimbo]

So one we havnt seen is Willis-Curry right? And your stats showed Willis as a better carrier? Be it from a small sample size and we all know hes top tier at openside stuff, so could that be an even better partnership? Not wanting to break up Curry-Underhill but i just think Willis will break into this team over the next couple of years.

Imagine slotting Willis in with them at 8 not saying it's particularly balanced, almost every opposition breakdown would be a nightmare for them.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Imagine slotting Willis in with them at 8 not saying it's particularly balanced, almost every opposition breakdown would be a nightmare for them.

True, but a shame rugby's multi faceted. That would be like playing Rodber, Clarke and Richards in the good old days. One dimensional, but a hell of a dimension.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

True, but a shame rugby's multi faceted. That would be like playing Rodber, Clarke and Richards in the good old days. One dimensional, but a hell of a dimension.

Yep the same backrow that got spanked/exposed by the ABs back row of Brewer, Kronfeld and ZZB in that RWC semi where Lomu ran riot. Still remember how much ball England got turned over that day.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Yep the same backrow that got spanked/exposed by the ABs back row of Brewer, Kronfeld and ZZB in that RWC semi where Lomu ran riot. Still remember how much ball England got turned over that day.

The same back row that beat the ABs in 1993......

Proves the point though. If you put all your eggs in one basket it will come off sometimes and look fantastic when it does, but be brutally exposed when it doesn't.

 

[BPM]

So one we havnt seen is Willis-Curry right? And your stats showed Willis as a better carrier? Be it from a small sample size and we all know hes top tier at openside stuff, so could that be an even better partnership? Not wanting to break up Curry-Underhill but i just think Willis will break into this team over the next couple of years.

I do too, but I'm also conscious that we've only really got the Georgia game to go on when judging Willis' carrying at test level. I know the Georgians are very physical but that's not necessarily the same as being good defenders. Basically, I think we need a bigger sample size, but I'd be happy for Eddie to give him that chance.

 

[RedruthRFC]

The same back row that beat the ABs in 1993......

The win came against a back row of Joseph, Brooke, Pene though, a far cry from the 1995 back row. It's mad how much the NZ team improved over the next 18 months, the side on that tour were up there with the 2003 vintage and 2020 vintage as the poorest Kiwi side I've seen.

I don't remember why, but I was only thinking about how mad that England back row was the other day. Picking that back row summed up English rugby of that era totally, it beat up all before it in the 5N and had come out on top against a similarly mad (Fritz van Heerden on the blindside) SA back row in 1994, so Rowell assumed it would continue doing the same, but was certainly found out against a balanced NZ back row. FWIW, which is very little 26 years later, Clarke at 8 and Ojomoh at 7 was a much more balanced back row, but nobody wanted to be the guy who repeated the mistake of 1991 and dropped Richards for a big match.

Funnily enough, that NZ tour in 1993 was responsible for setting back the cause of a balanced England back row back a few years when Andy Robinson was blamed for conceding the try that cost the South West the match. The loss to SA at Twickenham in 1995 was the last nail in the coffin (and Robinson's last cap?).

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Mitchell has extended his contract until the end of the RWC

RFU

www.englandrugby.com

I didn't realise he wasn't contracted that long anyway - but good signing either way. Defence has been solid under Mitch, and you don't want to be chopping and changing structures while building to a WC

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

Also, our improvements in the backrow coincided with his arrival as coach of the backrow in 2018. I know there was an influx of new talent at that time too, but it looks like he's had a very positive influence on what was our weakest area for years.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Sooooooooooooo.................

What's the changes for next game then?
Bar getting a new coaching set up, that is

EJ is back to viewing Lawes as a backrow, so I guess we're stuck with Itoje/Hill for the duration,
Robson wasn't good today, so that'll seal Youngs starting
If Farrell wasn't dropped after the ANC final then he's not getting dropped for today

Maybe EJ will go back to Farrell/Ford combo?

It's hard to judge the backs outside of the Youngs/Farrell combo/with apparently zero attacks coaching going on.
May was poor - does he have enough credit in the bank?
Daly is one of EJs faves, but I really want to see Malins get a proper go

It's really hard to predict what EJ will do - I can't ever recall him really reacting to bad performances in terms of player switching, bar subbing, then dropping, Burrell after a crap opening 20mins on tour

 

[Reiser99]

Sooooooooooooo.................

What's the changes for next game then?
Bar getting a new coaching set up, that is

EJ is back to viewing Lawes as a backrow, so I guess we're stuck with Itoje/Hill for the duration,
Robson wasn't good today, so that'll seal Youngs starting
If Farrell wasn't dropped after the ANC final then he's not getting dropped for today

Maybe EJ will go back to Farrell/Ford combo?

It's hard to judge the backs outside of the Youngs/Farrell combo/with apparently zero attacks coaching going on.
May was poor - does he have enough credit in the bank?
Daly is one of EJs faves, but I really want to see Malins get a proper go

It's really hard to predict what EJ will do - I can't ever recall him really reacting to bad performances in terms of player switching, bar subbing, then dropping, Burrell after a crap opening 20mins on tour

What will EJ do? That's the issue, because he's nailed his colours to the mast and with a limited squad there are not much changes that can be made. Italy is next and we need every minute of it to get players game time and some form. Once again we can't use it to blood new players (does EJ do that anyway?) and there are some positions where the depth has gone way beyond 'one injury and we're ******'.

 

[TheSaffycen]

You could have a prime Dan Carter out there but if you tell him to kick possession away all game we'll still lose.
Lawrence and Watson can't get blame for never having the ball.
May still has credit in the bank he's won us too many games on his own to drop after a few mistakes.

 

[Reiser99]

So going to review players, though maybe off with my analysis.

Genge - Didn't do much in attack, but then generally England didn't attack much. 16 tackles, 2 missed tackles. 3 penalties, though at least one shouldn't have been given. Didn't really take his chance, but I think should start next week.
George - Not his usual self. Didn't do too much in attack or defence really. 2 tackles and 1 missed is pretty shocking considering how much defending England did. Without match fitness I'd start LCD and have George on the bench.
Stuart - I obviously wasn't watching because I feel like I can't remember him doing much, but apparently he made 16 tackles and missed none. Same as with Genge, didn't really stand up, but should get another shot.
Itoje - Only sarries player who looked good. Gave away some penalties, but also made an impact. Still one of the best options we have, but hopefully form will pick up quickly.
Hill - Probably has the best defence stats with 24 tackles made, 1 missed. Can't remember him doing much else though and lineout wasn't perfect either. Lawes might tackle harder, but I don't see him solving our problems. I'd give him another chance, but I wouldn't be upset if Lawes started either.
Wilson - Definitely didn't have his usual impact. 14 tackles, 2 missed. Apparently only 1 run. I'd have Earl or Willis personally.
Curry - Again not his best game either. 19 tackles, 3 missed. 9 carries, 18 metres made. Better than some, but not brilliant. Definitely still one of the better options we have.
Vunipola - Waste of space right now. 13 tackles, 3 missed. Fully deserved his YC. 2 carries all game...

Youngs - Same as ever tbh. Poor passing, semi decent kicking. We have better options who need game time.
Farrell - He was possibly the worst player on the pitch for me. Awful passing, terrible kicking. He held back any potential attacking opportunity we had. I'd drop him completely.
May - Poor game for him. Missed tackles, dropped balls. Hard to judge attack when the ball will never get to you. Again has credit, but needs to perform better.
Lawrence - I feel sorry for him. How can you be judged when you're never given the ball? Waste of time him being there with this current setup.
Slade - Didn't play well and missed 4 tackles. Again hard to judge attack when have so little of the ball, but didn't do much when he did. Know he can do better though and most players would struggle with that level of service.
Watson - Did he touch the ball more than once? Again not much point being on the field when the ball isn't passed to you.
Daly- Isn't a FB and never has been. He's manage to get away with it recently, but we have better players than him.

Sum up for me: I'd replace George, Wilson, Vunipola, Youngs, Farrell, and Daly for next game.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Saw a thing on twitter earlier asking which of the players playing today would actually be considered the form player in that position in the league,
Which I thought was an interesting enough question.

In my opinion:

1. Genge --> Yes
2. George --> No (because Saracens haven't played for a while - Credit in the bank, but LCD should probably be considered the form English hooker atm, despite the Chiefs dip)
3. Stuart --> Probably (with Sinck unavailable - though his form has dipped recently)
4. Itoje --> No (Sarries - though good form beforehand, so credit in the bank)
5. Hill --> No (Chiefs dip, plus I've never really rated him as an individual - works very well as part of Chiefs pack, but Chiefs are better than the sum of their parts, nothing about him screams world class lock to me)
6. Wilson --> Yes (or at least one of them)
7. Curry --> Yes (or at least one of them)
8. Vunipola --> No (Sarries - also poor form for a while before now, Simmonds obv the frontrunner - but Dombrandt has found form again too)
9. Youngs --> No (probably Randall the form 9 atm, though Robson and Spencer should both be ahead)
10. Farrell --> No (Sarries - poor form for England in the autumn, Ford, Smith and Simmonds all better options)
11. May --> No (nose dived since moving to Gloucester - reasonable autumn, poor today)
12. Lawrence --> Kinda (good form before injury, but this is his first game back since then. Opposite number today should've been in this shirt)
13. Slade --> Maybe (Chiefs slump, but JJ off the boil too - Marchant? I know Quins are on a streak atm, but can't remember him standing out)
14. Watson --> Probably not (? Would need a Bath fan to chime in on how he's been playing as an individual - their poor form overshadows individual efforts for me atm)
15. Daly --> No (Sarries - plus he's just never really looked fully at home in the back 3)


I concede at lock cause we're running a bit bare atm with Launch injured and Kruis gone - Itoje has enough credit in the bank, and Hill was a reasonable pick considering his run with Chiefs.
I struggle to pick out back 3 players - you've got guys like Odogwu and Malins playing really well atm. Thorley should have gotten a look in over the autumn but has got the stink of Gloucester on him now. May and Watson both had plenty of credit in the bank coming in to this - but I think May should probably sit out next week. Keep Watson, start Malins at 15 and Odogwu on the wing.

I know a cohesive team is more than sticking together the in form players, but having only 3 or 4 in form players in a 15 isn't great.
I mean how many of the Scotland team are being outplayed by their rivals?

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

It's not a player issue, it's a coaching issue. You can't win matches with one out runners running into a brick wall or a back line that's only move is to kick.

Knowing how stubborn Jones is, nothing will change, we might win a few more games and paper over the massive cracks that appeared a year ago and then he'll blame COVID for players not being up to speed. The reality is his game plan hasn't been good enough for a while and he still picks out of form players. Billy looked like an utter waste of space (as he has for ages now). What would we lose by trying Simmonds there?

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

I was expecting changes for Italy anyway, because it's Italy, but now I'm worried Eddie will play his Sarries contingent to get them some match practice.

 

[Scotty]

Theres something wrong with the balance of our backline. We have zero power atm, lawrence isnt a power player really, he more runs smart lines hitting shoulders, maybe Odogwu is what we need a little explosive powerful runner to get us on the front foot in the centres(even though he isnt ready) or as a winger with a licence to roam and pop up in the midfield? For the record i rate lawrence highly but maybe he isnt ready(not sure odogwu is either) or maybe our gameplan doesnt get him enough ball. Or maybe just maybe we have no actual 12s... and we are slotting in a 13 there and expecting them yo find the same space.

Faz needs to be benched, he always favours a kick through when we have an overlap, ive always rated him as a solid 10 and good in defence but he hasnt been good in a while now and he's the DAMN CAPTAIN!.

Vs Italy id like to see
Genge LCD Stuart
Itoje Lawes
Willis Billy Curry

Not even suggesting no billy

Robson ford
Some centres(not Faz)
May Malins(15) Watson

George
Obano
Williams
Hill
Randall
Faz
Odogwu

Is it bad im not confident about getting a BP vs italy? And who are our best centre combo?

 

[Reiser99]

Theres something wrong with the balance of our backline. We have zero power atm, lawrence isnt a power player really, he more runs smart lines hitting shoulders, maybe Odogwu is what we need a little explosive powerful runner to get us on the front foot in the centres(even though he isnt ready) or as a winger with a licence to roam and pop up in the midfield? For the record i rate lawrence highly but maybe he isnt ready(not sure odogwu is either) or maybe our gameplan doesnt get him enough ball. Or maybe just maybe we have no actual 12s... and we are slotting in a 13 there and expecting them yo find the same space.

Faz needs to be benched, he always favours a kick through when we have an overlap, ive always rated him as a solid 10 and good in defence but he hasnt been good in a while now and he's the DAMN CAPTAIN!.

Vs Italy id like to see
Genge LCD Stuart
Itoje Lawes
Willis Billy Curry

Not even suggesting no billy

Robson ford
Some centres(not Faz)
May Malins(15) Watson

George
Obano
Williams
Hill
Randall
Faz
Odogwu

Is it bad im not confident about getting a BP vs italy? And who are our best centre combo?

Billy has been poor for a while, but yesterday it was a case of why was he even on the field. If he's not going to get regular game time then I don't see the point in playing him, simple as that. Hoping he'll be fit by the end of the 6N's is wasting a 6N's on getting a player fit.
I also wouldn't even have Faz on the bench. Maybe it's Jones' tactics, but I honestly don't think Faz can think for himself. Whenever we have struggled and are losing games he just seems to double down on the tactics that haven't worked.

Also think it's a little harsh on Lawrence. Hard to assess a player when your team don't pass you the ball and the tactics seem to be anything other than give the centres the ball.