Semi-final No.1 Northampton v Saracens

[chippieolamus]

Youngs is better at everything bar throwing.

 

[Peat]

Youngs is better at everything bar throwing.

And that is, imo, a narrower difference than many credit.

 

[91jmay]

Nah, DH throws all over lineout. Leicester mainly go to front from what I've seen. I think Youngs will do fine at WC though given time to work on combinations with jumpers, however if it is George off the bench instead of LCD that is a big step down from DH starting with Youngs off bench.

 

[Raggs]

George a step down from Hartley? In experience perhaps, in lineout ability, no, in scrummaging, not obviously, in carrying I'd bet Hartley doesn't have his pace or passing, George is often one of the top tacklers on sarries side and is often enough to guy rushing forward and nailing people. Oh, and he's better at not giving away stupid penalties or cards.

 

[jaffka]

"Now"... He had one before didn't he?

Does it give him the ability to do more than tackle?

The now relates to the time difference between my posts, the original one following the semi final and my later one obviously after the final. That's the semantics explained then.

As I said its a team game and players with different skills make a team and the player concerned in this little debate has a winners medal.

Still if you want to knock him, you must be one hell of a player...

 

[ratsapprentice]

So you think a back rower that can't carry is good enough at international level?

And specifically - "what England are missing"?

The thing is Jaffka... You don't need to be particularly good at something to analyse it - if that was the case then there would literally only be one person able to legitimately criticise players.

 

[jaffka]

So you think a back rower that can't carry is good enough at international level?

And specifically - "what England are missing"?

The thing is Jaffka... You don't need to be particularly good at something to analyse it - if that was the case then there would literally only be one person able to legitimately criticise players.

Quite simply playing players in their correct positions.

Feel free to knock who you want but don't get all up tight when you get called out on it

 

[ratsapprentice]

Called out on what?

 

[Peat]

The now relates to the time difference between my posts, the original one following the semi final and my later one obviously after the final. That's the semantics explained then.

As I said its a team game and players with different skills make a team and the player concerned in this little debate has a winners medal.

Still if you want to knock him, you must be one hell of a player...

If we refrained from criticising players and coaches better than us, this forum wouldn't exist. It's a simply awful argument for anything. It even points just pointing at the medals as an argument, which is quite difficult.

Not to mention your original reply didn't actually contradict anything Rats said. Winning medals doesn't make him any less or more of a one trick pony...

So, yeah, what exactly are England missing out on?

 

[Duck a l'Orange]

If we refrained from criticising players and coaches better than us, this forum wouldn't exist.

Dunno, reckon we could still take the mickey out of Alex Goode

 

[ZeroTwo]

If we refrained from criticising players and coaches better than us, this forum wouldn't exist.

Speak for yourself. I'm still going to make it I tell you!

 

[jaffka]

Called out on what?

I will accept that as check mate then.

- - - Updated - - -

If we refrained from criticising players and coaches better than us, this forum wouldn't exist. It's a simply awful argument for anything. It even points just pointing at the medals as an argument, which is quite difficult.

Not to mention your original reply didn't actually contradict anything Rats said. Winning medals doesn't make him any less or more of a one trick pony...

So, yeah, what exactly are England missing out on?

Why should I have to contradict?

As for your question, try reading my answer in full.

 

[Peat]

Why should I have to contradict?

As for your question, try reading my answer in full.

Because then you'd have been engaging with the argument rather than posting a bunch of waffle and saying it is when it's not. As it is, I have no idea what the hell you're on about other than you like making assertions and then not backing them up when asked why you did so.

 

[jaffka]

Because then you'd have been engaging with the argument rather than posting a bunch of waffle and saying it is when it's not. As it is, I have no idea what the hell you're on about other than you like making assertions and then not backing them up when asked why you did so.

Ah, you disagree with something and therefore class it as waffle. Very grown up.

As for your assumption, I conclude that you haven't read my posts, the few that there are on this subject.

 

[chippieolamus]

Ah, you disagree with something and therefore class it as waffle. Very grown up.

As for your assumption, I conclude that you haven't read my posts, the few that there are on this subject.

You haven't really made any points. Sure, Burger is a great tackler and that is fine in Saracens' system, but at international level you need to be able to do more than that. An international team can't afford to have a back rower who does little else but tackle, they need other aspects to their game - its fine if tackling is your main strength but you also need other strings to your bow, e.g. although Lydiate's main role for Wales is tackling he's also competent at turning the ball over and he's a decent carrier.

 

[Peat]

Ah, you disagree with something and therefore class it as waffle. Very grown up.

As for your assumption, I conclude that you haven't read my posts, the few that there are on this subject.

No, that's really not it at all.

To try and make this as clear as possible - your style of posting and debating means your argument isn't coming across at all. If you care about trying to have a discussion about rugby, then please actually make posts that actually make a case for something and engage with the posts you're replying to. If you think you're doing this - then you are mistaken.

And if you are neither willing to listen to constructive criticism, or actually make take part in a discussion... well, have a nice day I guess.

 

[goodNumber10]

Ah, you disagree with something and therefore class it as waffle. Very grown up.

As for your assumption, I conclude that you haven't read my posts, the few that there are on this subject.

 

[psychic duck]

You haven't really made any points. Sure, Burger is a great tackler and that is fine in Saracens' system, but at international level you need to be able to do more than that. An international team can't afford to have a back rower who does little else but tackle, they need other aspects to their game - its fine if tackling is your main strength but you also need other strings to your bow, e.g. although Lydiate's main role for Wales is tackling he's also competent at turning the ball over and he's a decent carrier.

That is simply not true that there is no space at all in international rugby for a flanker who high impact, high work rate tackling flanker.

Lydiate is a player of exactly that mould (and no he is not a 'decent' carrier either) and was part of a Grand Slam winning team and became a Lion. He might not have had a chance in other team systems, but he fitted in with the the system Gatland wants. Other examples include Joe Worsley who won 70 odd caps for England at international level, Strokosch with Scotland, and whilst I'll credit Dusautoir as a better carrier than any of those, he's another flanker who's primary role is as a tackler.

There's numerous players who've found a role in their sides for tackling prowess. Obviously it needs to be part of a balanced back row, but to say Burger, or players like him have no role at all at international is way off the mark. In fact, I reckon Gatland would love to have him as part of his team as an alternative to Lydiate when his form's dipped.

 

[ratsapprentice]

All those players do actually carry though... regardless of their ability - Burger doesn't.

He's more tape and steel than flesh and bone at this point in his career - if he had to make a reasonable number of carries (5 - let's say) and tackle like he does for a side like Wales in a 6N I wouldn't back him to make it through the tournament.

 

[chippieolamus]

That is simply not true that there is no space at all in international rugby for a flanker who high impact, high work rate tackling flanker.

Lydiate is a player of exactly that mould (and no he is not a 'decent' carrier either) and was part of a Grand Slam winning team and became a Lion. He might not have had a chance in other team systems, but he fitted in with the the system Gatland wants. Other examples include Joe Worsley who won 70 odd caps for England at international level, Strokosch with Scotland, and whilst I'll credit Dusautoir as a better carrier than any of those, he's another flanker who's primary role is as a tackler.

There's numerous players who've found a role in their sides for tackling prowess. Obviously it needs to be part of a balanced back row, but to say Burger, or players like him have no role at all at international is way off the mark. In fact, I reckon Gatland would love to have him as part of his team as an alternative to Lydiate when his form's dipped.

I actually agree with you. There is a place for a player whose main role is to tackle as long as they offer other things. Burger doesn't really. Dusautoir, Lydiate all have other things which they can do (not sure about Strokosh and Worsley, I've only really properly followed rugby for the last 2 or so years), whereas Burger doesn't really offer too much else: his breakdown work is poor, his carrying is poor, he doesn't really link play at all, he basically doesn't have any other strengths. That works in Saris system, but wouldn't work at international level.