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
Featured
2024 Guinness Six Nations
[2023 Six Nations] England Squad
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="Pieter Steph du Teague" data-source="post: 1116472" data-attributes="member: 72520"><p>Okie dokie. There's a reason I haven't told you why I disagree that a proper flanker is better than a lock-blindside, which is that I don't disagree. Which I specifically said in my original post when I said that I'd prefer both Hill and Willis to Chessum. What I argued then, and what I have continued to argue, is that a lock-blindside is better <em>for the lineout </em>and that they impact far more aspects of the lineout than just the 2-3 balls that they catch.</p><p></p><p>Yes, I could argue that. Which I did. Of course the lock still has to out-jump the opposition; I'm not suggesting that having a lock-blindside is some magical cheat code that ensures possession 100% of the time, but I am arguing that it's easier for a jumper to out-jump their opposition when being lifted by someone who is 6'8 and 120kg than someone who is 6'3 and under 110kg. Also you keep saying lanky. In what universe is Chessum lanky? The man's 19 stone and has a higher BMI than Willis.</p><p></p><p>So the reason why the 3rd jumper being tall can matter:</p><p>Say you have two lineouts opposing each other that go 1 4 5 6 3. The opposition's 5 is 6'7 (which Grant Gilchrist is, and he is the likely 5 we'll face against Scotland). If we throw to our 6'8 6 and Gilchrist jumps in the middle then he has no chance of getting the ball. The ball goes well over his head, and so all 3 of Scotland's jumping options have to be ready to jump and challenge. But, if our back jumper is only 6'3 then the ball has to be thrown lower and so Gilchrist can jump in the middle and still have a reasonable chance of stealing that ball. That way, they only really have to mark our 1st and 2nd choice jumpers as even if we throw to our third jumper, Gilchrist still has that man covered.</p><p></p><p>Again, I agree, as I said in my initial post. I never argued that lock-blindsides are overall better than out and out flankers. I specifically said otherwise. But lock-blindsides are better <em>in the lineout.</em></p><p></p><p>Regardless, this discussion clearly isn't going to bear any fruit for either of us and it feels like it's starting to get a bit heated so this will be my last contribution to it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pieter Steph du Teague, post: 1116472, member: 72520"] Okie dokie. There's a reason I haven't told you why I disagree that a proper flanker is better than a lock-blindside, which is that I don't disagree. Which I specifically said in my original post when I said that I'd prefer both Hill and Willis to Chessum. What I argued then, and what I have continued to argue, is that a lock-blindside is better [I]for the lineout [/I]and that they impact far more aspects of the lineout than just the 2-3 balls that they catch. Yes, I could argue that. Which I did. Of course the lock still has to out-jump the opposition; I'm not suggesting that having a lock-blindside is some magical cheat code that ensures possession 100% of the time, but I am arguing that it's easier for a jumper to out-jump their opposition when being lifted by someone who is 6'8 and 120kg than someone who is 6'3 and under 110kg. Also you keep saying lanky. In what universe is Chessum lanky? The man's 19 stone and has a higher BMI than Willis. So the reason why the 3rd jumper being tall can matter: Say you have two lineouts opposing each other that go 1 4 5 6 3. The opposition's 5 is 6'7 (which Grant Gilchrist is, and he is the likely 5 we'll face against Scotland). If we throw to our 6'8 6 and Gilchrist jumps in the middle then he has no chance of getting the ball. The ball goes well over his head, and so all 3 of Scotland's jumping options have to be ready to jump and challenge. But, if our back jumper is only 6'3 then the ball has to be thrown lower and so Gilchrist can jump in the middle and still have a reasonable chance of stealing that ball. That way, they only really have to mark our 1st and 2nd choice jumpers as even if we throw to our third jumper, Gilchrist still has that man covered. Again, I agree, as I said in my initial post. I never argued that lock-blindsides are overall better than out and out flankers. I specifically said otherwise. But lock-blindsides are better [I]in the lineout.[/I] Regardless, this discussion clearly isn't going to bear any fruit for either of us and it feels like it's starting to get a bit heated so this will be my last contribution to it. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Featured
2024 Guinness Six Nations
[2023 Six Nations] England Squad
Top