England Post-WC discussion

From what I gather it's nothing concrete just them adding a few possible reasons together (they can easily afford to buy out the remaining two years of his contract, it's close to where his family's based, Bath Uni is quite highly rated for economics, as is Bristol, and they could use him as an eventual replacement for Flou).

 

As someone (J'nuh I think?) pointed out, commuting between uni in Cardiff and rugby in the west country is doable and no worse than uni in Cardiff and rugby in Swansea - no need to change his course at all.

 

So the same reasons for hte same speculation as we've had here.
Still hope it's true though... even if he doesn't play #8

 

Won't be off to Bath, he hasn't been to London irish first.

 

Is there a list somewhere of former London Irish academy players who now play for Bath?

 

1st team Coaches:
Booth
Hatley
Darren Edwards
Allen Ryan

Players
Lahiff *
Garvey *
Sisi *
Bowden
Joesph *
Banahan * (Prob tough here)
Watson *
Homer *
all been involved with Irish before Bath.
* = Academy players

 

Lahiff, Garvey, Joseph, Banahan, Watson, Homer

Also Sisi, who they pinched out of Irish's academy and now have loaned him back

Beaten, curses.

 

Weighing in on the openside debate, Haskell is right, in that it's the balance of the backrow that matters, but this is usually achieved by having an openside that can cut it with the best. There isn't a 100% blueprint for the perfect openside, they tend to vary, with some being great all rounders, and others a little more specialist in certain areas (usually achieving at least 3 out of jackling, carrying, defence, ball handling). All should have a decent turn of pace for a forward and an excellent reading of the game imo.

I find it quite alarming to hear Eddie Jones talking about not having any more 6.5's in the team, yet hearing all the rumours about Haskell starting at 7! A 6.5 is exactly what Haskell would be, as he misses the mark on quite a few areas I highlighted above. He's a typical 6 imo who maybe boasts a little more pace that some of the slower blidsides out there (Lydiate?). I also don't understand the idea of pinning all hopes on a teenager (Underhill), when there's a potentially excellent option in the squad already (Kvesic). I'm yet to be convinced that Underhill isn't more than a potentially excellent blindside either.

 

There's nothing wrong with following behind the defensive line. He's saying you're letting someone else do the work and that its detrimental which is crap. If the defenders aren't running at you u wouldn't have made that tackle anyway. You're running across the pitch to get to a breakdown u wouldn't have been involved in and then you stick urself in there, probably get smashed but manage to slow the ball or cause the oppo to add extra players. That's working harder than making a single tackle.

Also he says no England player has been told to do that. As if that's a good thing considering the poor work England have had at the breakdown.

 

Sounds like a certain someone wants Underhill to stay in Wales.

 

Haha, i'd love it if he stayed at the ospreys, because atm he's strengthening the Ospreys squad. If he carries on developing, i think he could overtake Lydiate in the pecking order (Underhill has a couple more strings to his bow). However that doesn't affect my statement above. Let's see how he plays when the weather improves...

 

Well, yes. I mentioned he could well be a 6. So what?

You're right. Competing with Tipuric and Lydiate is a fantastic way to get yourself into the reckoning. It's pretty clear he's going to play for England this summer and autumn, that much is certain. I've no issues with him staying in Wales. You've got a better recent history of natural 7s, something we seem to have lost the capacity to do so.

 

I kinda like the idea of 6.5's put I'd prefer it if it was approached from the direction of having a 7 do more 6 duties than the reverse... 2 strong people at the breakdown (3 if you 8 is good there) can play absolute havoc with other teams but having no strong people at the breakdown, as England did, always leaves your defence scrambling because the ball is never slowed down and always slows your own attack down because you can't get the ball out. I guess you could say I'd prefer a 6.75 to a 6.5 if that is the plan you want to use.

 

Campese, spit, not one of Jones' fan, feels that England will win more games but will bore the bejesus out of everyone!!!

I kinda agree!!!!

 

There is something wrong with that guy, he has never said anything that wasn't negative or condescending about England ever. Never known someone to so consistantly and regularly slag off England.

 

He's just an idiot . Simple as that really . How can you say anything about what Eddie is doing when he hasn't run a single training day yet never mind a bloody game !

 

Every player out of the defensive line means the line needs to be stretched more, meaning more gaps opening.

You can already have a sweeper and two or three fielders out of the defensive line, in addition to anyone committed to the ruck. Contrast to opposition team, who only lose those they commit to the ruck. It can definitely an issue if you have a 7 that's regularly not in the defensive line.

 

As I said they would only be out of the line if the ball has moved away from where they were and goes wider.

There are plenty of advantages. Slowing the ball down allows more players to get back in a defensive line. Making the opposition commit more players to a breakdown lessens attackers. Getting a turnover penalty stops the attack dead meaning u defend for less time. Or u can just spread out in a flat line and wait for the opposition to knock on. It depends how u want to play and the players u have.

I just disagree with Haskell saying because ur not making a tackle ur not working a hard.

 

Which is saying something, at a guess.

Two things about flankers.

a) Most of today's best flankers can be categorised as 6.5s in that they're clearly capable of playing both to a test standard, even if you'd rather have them in one position rather than the other. That's the standard to aim for. Guys who can do a bit of each, but none of it to test standard, which is kinda where we were, that is not the standard to aim for.

b) A good openside can be part of the defensive line and still drop behind it in time to make the jackal when on; he can also be part of the defensive line and shifting within to stay close to the ball as the attack progresses. I don't think I've seen any opensides who are consistently behind the defensive line; I don't think I've seen any good opensides who are not consistently monitoring whether they are in the right place, whether they could make a tackle, whether they could intervene, whether they need to shift sides of the ruck and so on.

 

I've also not seen opensides just prance around behind the defensive line, leaving the tackling to others and sniffing out turnovers. Many of the top opensides are usually very high up on the tackle count in games. Even Tips, who's more known for his attacking play, often tops the tackle chart in games.

This is where having an excellent reading for a game becomes so important. It enables the best opensides to quickly adapt to what's unfolding, and get themselves in the best positions on the field to influence the game, both in attack and defence. This is similar to a fullback in a way. Many wingers probably have many of the raw ingredients to play at fullback, but if they can't read a game to the highest level their positioning in attack and defence won't be up to scratch, and they'll be exposed.

With regards to Haskell, he's not exactly the brightest of rugby players. He'll tun around, smash some people, carry the ball effectively, and when the opportunity arises, he'll be relatively effective over the ball, but he'll position himself on the pitch like a blindside, not an openside, and thus won't have the influence an openside should.