The Official English Rugby Thread

[sockwithaticket]

I wasn't being entirely serious, but stick a guy like Simmonds or Earl at 12 and at the very least you've got a hard runner who can deliver some gain line and take advantage of any line breaks they make. Gain line threat in our back line is largely non-existent and and we don't have enough mobile, effective carriers upfront to compensate at the moment.

[Niegs]

Time to poach another Samoan.

Converting Simmonds and Nowell to inside centres as we speak!


On a more serious note, what ever happened to Ollie Lawrence?

On a related note, how about Joe Cockinasiga? ... big lad, could he pull an Inga the (former) Winga (wearing 12 at the end of his Samoa career... RIP).

From an extract of his latest book I saw,Eddie thinks Lawrence has an attitude problem, isn't hungry enough. .

This sort of thing annoys me immensely. I've heard this for years in the pros and down to community level. "Uncoachable" ... or, given how so many will thrive under another coach, "I didn't bother to see their perspective or nurture their talents with care, so I cut them."

Currently dealing with it at my club (where I'm just assisting), having to try and nurture some really good kids who've not been fully supported as such by their 'elite' development program and recently had the head coach unfairly call them out on something that wasn't actually true (post game 'this is your fault' type message that I later proved with video analysis it was nothing of the sort). While we may want this generation to be tougher, I think you just have to meet them there with appropriate, motivational challenges, have a 'why' answer that's insightful, and listen to them rather give kicks up the backside and require they develop 'grit' through beasting sessions.

[Kawazaki]

I wasn't being entirely serious, but stick a guy like Simmonds or Earl at 12 and at the very least you've got a hard runner who can deliver some gain line and take advantage of any line breaks they make. Gain line threat in our back line is largely non-existent and and we don't have enough mobile, effective carriers upfront to compensate at the moment.

Does Tuilagi even have a kicking and passing game anyway? Sure, I know he can short pass and offload but most of his carries are designed to bend or break the defensive line and usually result in a ruck.

[dpedin]

Moot point now - Tuilagi out with hamstring injury. Changes the gameplan somewhat?

[JM2K6]

Moot point now - Tuilagi out with hamstring injury. Changes the gameplan somewhat?

We've been talking about it for the last page or so :)

[Paddington Bear]

For me, we ought to develop a game plan that doesn't rely on crash ball centres. We have one who can play every so often who is up to standard. Make use of what we do have instead. Play fast.

[sockwithaticket]

For me, we ought to develop a game plan that doesn't rely on crash ball centres. We have one who can play every so often who is up to standard. Make use of what we do have instead. Play fast.

We do have them though - Atkinson, Kelly, Odogwu can all run into traffic effectively.

I'd love it if we actually did go all out attack and played at liightning speed, but that requires picking more pace in the outside backs and permanently sidelining Youngs and Farrell. We'd also need to get much, much better at supporting players, particularly around the breakdown, and would need effective carrying from almost everyone in the pack which means getting rid of someone like Ewels (oh no, anyway...). Finding a replacement tighthead should already be up there on the list of things to do, but it becomes even more important if we want to play the kind of game Sinckler would thrive in. Stuart just isn't that type of player.

[sockwithaticket]

I wasn't being entirely serious, but stick a guy like Simmonds or Earl at 12 and at the very least you've got a hard runner who can deliver some gain line and take advantage of any line breaks they make. Gain line threat in our back line is largely non-existent and and we don't have enough mobile, effective carriers upfront to compensate at the moment.

Does Tuilagi even have a kicking and passing game anyway? Sure, I know he can short pass and offload but most of his carries are designed to bend or break the defensive line and usually result in a ruck.

Can't recall ever having seen him kick, his passing is occasional. We've often had centres in the past who ostensibly have no more skill than the back rowers, possibly less. Noon, Tindall, Hipkiss, Tomkins...

[Paddington Bear]

For me, we ought to develop a game plan that doesn't rely on crash ball centres. We have one who can play every so often who is up to standard. Make use of what we do have instead. Play fast.

We do have them though - Atkinson, Kelly, Odogwu can all run into traffic effectively.

I'd love it if we actually did go all out attack and played at liightning speed, but that requires picking more pace in the outside backs and permanently sidelining Youngs and Farrell. We'd also need to get much, much better at supporting players, particularly around the breakdown, and would need effective carrying from almost everyone in the pack which means getting rid of someone like Ewels (oh no, anyway...). Finding a replacement tighthead should already be up there on the list of things to do, but it becomes even more important if we want to play the kind of game Sinckler would thrive in. Stuart just isn't that type of player.

Basically in agreement. I see sidelining Youngs and Ewels as easier and a surer route to success than putting any of the three mentioned above into 12 and hoping they prove to be top class. Front row remains a worry going forward.

[Kawazaki]

For me, we ought to develop a game plan that doesn't rely on crash ball centres. We have one who can play every so often who is up to standard. Make use of what we do have instead. Play fast.

England haven't got a coach anywhere near good enough to do that.

[Kawazaki]

I wasn't being entirely serious, but stick a guy like Simmonds or Earl at 12 and at the very least you've got a hard runner who can deliver some gain line and take advantage of any line breaks they make. Gain line threat in our back line is largely non-existent and and we don't have enough mobile, effective carriers upfront to compensate at the moment.

Does Tuilagi even have a kicking and passing game anyway? Sure, I know he can short pass and offload but most of his carries are designed to bend or break the defensive line and usually result in a ruck.

Can't recall ever having seen him kick, his passing is occasional. We've often had centres in the past who ostensibly have no more skill than the back rowers, possibly less. Noon, Tindall, Hipkiss, Tomkins...

The irony in all this of course is that Barbeary played all his junior rugby at 12, then some bright spark in the England performance pathway said he should become a hooker and then after a couple of seasons doing that they moved him to the backrow.

The planning and execution of his career has been pitiful. And he's still only 21.

[Paddington Bear]

For me, we ought to develop a game plan that doesn't rely on crash ball centres. We have one who can play every so often who is up to standard. Make use of what we do have instead. Play fast.

England haven't got a coach anywhere near good enough to do that.

I know you don't like him but England can and have played excellent rugby under Eddie, most of our best performances since '03 have come during his tenure. He's absolutely capable of doing this if he chooses to.

[sockwithaticket]

Does Tuilagi even have a kicking and passing game anyway? Sure, I know he can short pass and offload but most of his carries are designed to bend or break the defensive line and usually result in a ruck.

Can't recall ever having seen him kick, his passing is occasional. We've often had centres in the past who ostensibly have no more skill than the back rowers, possibly less. Noon, Tindall, Hipkiss, Tomkins...

The irony in all this of course is that Barbeary played all his junior rugby at 12, then some bright spark in the England performance pathway said he should become a hooker and then after a couple of seasons doing that they moved him to the backrow.

The planning and execution of his career has been pitiful. And he's still only 21.

I was thinking the other day that we probably lose a lot of guys who are physically well suited to being a robust centre, rather than the lither runner or distributor types we seem to have coming out of our ears, to the back row early in their development.

[JM2K6]

Barbeary switched from the backs to the forwards when he was 15, it's entirely reasonable for players to make that kind of move at that age. Sinckler was also a centre (and a fullback!) as a youngster. It's kinda meaningless.

[Raggs]

Barbeary switched from the backs to the forwards when he was 15, it's entirely reasonable for players to make that kind of move at that age. Sinckler was also a centre (and a fullback!) as a youngster. It's kinda meaningless.

At school he switched around a lot too, playing at 12, but still throwing in at the lineouts. For Egnaldn age grade he was hooker all the time, as he was in the mens games he played (just not at prem level).

EDIT - Loads of prem players, including forwards, were often fly halves/centres when much younger through the simple fact that they were the best player on the team.

[sockwithaticket]

Wasps vs. Bristol tonight



Wasps unavailable (8): Tom Cruse, Malakai Fekitoa, Vaea Fifita, Dan Frost, Robin Hislop, Rodrigo Martinez, Brad Shields, Thomas Young.



Bristol unavailable (14): Kyle Sinckler, John Afoa, Fitz Harding, Harry Randall, Andy Uren, Tom Whiteley, Toby Venner, Max Green, Sam Bedlow, Toby Fricker, Charles Piutau, Luke Morahan, Siva Naulago, Charlie Powell.

Must be one of the few times this season we've played someone with more absentees thn us.

I won't be able to watch live as I'm off to a gig, but I'm hopeful of coming back to a win.

Depending on how long Jack lasts on his first start in forever, we may get a chance to see Barbeary with both Willis boys

[Kawazaki]

Barbeary switched from the backs to the forwards when he was 15, it's entirely reasonable for players to make that kind of move at that age. Sinckler was also a centre (and a fullback!) as a youngster. It's kinda meaningless.

It's not meaningless at all. Barbeary has always been a beast carrier, he wasn't a plodder with no pace who got moved to the forwards because he wasn't a very good back. 6 years after that decision, he's now playing in a position where England have always had loads of depth away from the position he was in where England's options are pitiful (and have been for years).

[Happyhooker]

What's happened to rob miller?

[Oxbow]

Things being different, I'll tell you who could have filled that England 12 shirt - big, skilful, good hands, huge boot, reasonably quick - Harry Mallinder. Sadly it turned he was made of twigs and was a bit of a fanny to boot.

[Kawazaki]

Things being different, I'll tell you who could have filled that England 12 shirt - big, skilful, good hands, huge boot, reasonably quick - Harry Mallinder. Sadly it turned he was made of twigs and was a bit of a fanny to boot.

No chance. I never watched Mallinder play and thought, you know, he could play at 12.

[Oxbow]

Things being different, I'll tell you who could have filled that England 12 shirt - big, skilful, good hands, huge boot, reasonably quick - Harry Mallinder. Sadly it turned he was made of twigs and was a bit of a fanny to boot.

No chance. I never watched Malinder play and thought, you know, he could play at 12.

I did say things being different. He played at 12 quite a bit for Saints, then got floated around the backline when it became clear his tackling was less than stellar. He had the fundamentals to be a good 12, but was lacking that certain something to be a great rugby player.

[Kawazaki]

Things being different, I'll tell you who could have filled that England 12 shirt - big, skilful, good hands, huge boot, reasonably quick - Harry Mallinder. Sadly it turned he was made of twigs and was a bit of a fanny to boot.

No chance. I never watched Malinder play and thought, you know, he could play at 12.

I did say things being different. He played at 12 quite a bit for Saints, then got floated around the backline when it became clear his tackling was less than stellar. He had the fundamentals to be a good 12, but was lacking that certain something to be a great rugby player.

His physiology is wrong for a 12. Ideally, a 12 needs fast feet and a shorter stride length. A big arse, wide hips and decent sized quads too. Helps them to accelerate faster and change direction quicker. It's not an unbreakable rule but it's more likely you'll succeed at 12 with those basic attributes. The long striders tend to play in the outside backs.

[sockwithaticket]

What's happened to rob miller?

Inexplicably dropped after a couple of decent showings from the bench.

I really don't understand why Watson seems to be preferred. It's even less clear why we're starting Umaga at fullback ahead of either. Starting 10 or bench for him.

[Happyhooker]

What's happened to rob miller?

Inexplicably dropped after a couple of decent showings from the bench.

I really don't understand why Watson seems to be preferred. It's even less clear why we're starting Umaga at fullback ahead of either. Starting 10 or bench for him.

Oh good you agree. I saw those and thought he looked good and I do think he's our best fb

[JM2K6]

Barbeary switched from the backs to the forwards when he was 15, it's entirely reasonable for players to make that kind of move at that age. Sinckler was also a centre (and a fullback!) as a youngster. It's kinda meaningless.

It's not meaningless at all. Barbeary has always been a beast carrier, he wasn't a plodder with no pace who got moved to the forwards because he wasn't a very good back. 6 years after that decision, he's now playing in a position where England have always had loads of depth away from the position he was in where England's options are pitiful (and have been for years).

How much of him did you watch in his early and mid teens?

[Kawazaki]

Barbeary switched from the backs to the forwards when he was 15, it's entirely reasonable for players to make that kind of move at that age. Sinckler was also a centre (and a fullback!) as a youngster. It's kinda meaningless.

It's not meaningless at all. Barbeary has always been a beast carrier, he wasn't a plodder with no pace who got moved to the forwards because he wasn't a very good back. 6 years after that decision, he's now playing in a position where England have always had loads of depth away from the position he was in where England's options are pitiful (and have been for years).

How much of him did you watch in his early and mid teens?

The exact same YouTube videos you've seen.

[Niegs]

The irony in all this of course is that Barbeary played all his junior rugby at 12, then some bright spark in the England performance pathway said he should become a hooker and then after a couple of seasons doing that they moved him to the backrow.

The planning and execution of his career has been pitiful. And he's still only 21.

Next on the list of coaching things I dislike and am also currently going through ... development coaches playing God with player positions.

[Niegs]

What's happened to rob miller?

Inexplicably dropped after a couple of decent showings from the bench.

I really don't understand why Watson seems to be preferred. It's even less clear why we're starting Umaga at fullback ahead of either. Starting 10 or bench for him.

Seemed largely responsible/ineffectual in stopping several of Bath's tries recently. He's so very average.

[JM2K6]

It's not meaningless at all. Barbeary has always been a beast carrier, he wasn't a plodder with no pace who got moved to the forwards because he wasn't a very good back. 6 years after that decision, he's now playing in a position where England have always had loads of depth away from the position he was in where England's options are pitiful (and have been for years).

How much of him did you watch in his early and mid teens?

The exact same YouTube videos you've seen.

So none?

It literally does not matter what he was like at that age. Kids good enough to go on to be professional sportsmen are likely to dominate in any position, and often get put in the backs as a result with great success. It doesn't mean it was a bad idea for him to switch. He might well have ended up a dogshit 12 - we have no way to tell. I very much doubt Sinckler would be starting for England as a 10 or 15 if he hadn't moved...

[JM2K6]

What's happened to rob miller?

Inexplicably dropped after a couple of decent showings from the bench.

I really don't understand why Watson seems to be preferred. It's even less clear why we're starting Umaga at fullback ahead of either. Starting 10 or bench for him.

Seemed largely responsible/ineffectual in stopping several of Bath's tries recently. He's so very average.

Tbf the Wasps backline lacks creativity and he's been doing some good things with ball in hand at least.

[Kawazaki]

How much of him did you watch in his early and mid teens?

The exact same YouTube videos you've seen.

So none?

It literally does not matter what he was like at that age. Kids good enough to go on to be professional sportsmen are likely to dominate in any position, and often get put in the backs as a result with great success. It doesn't mean it was a bad idea for him to switch. He might well have ended up a dogshit 12 - we have no way to tell. I very much doubt Sinckler would be starting for England as a 10 or 15 if he hadn't moved...

There are loads of very very good backs playing rugby who are eligible for England. There are not many who can carry the ball up like Barbeary. To be honest, I thought you were more enlightened than the typical morons you get in junior rugby who think, 'he's a big lump, lets chuck him in the front-row'.

p.s educate yourself and watch those videos.

[Kawazaki]

The irony in all this of course is that Barbeary played all his junior rugby at 12, then some bright spark in the England performance pathway said he should become a hooker and then after a couple of seasons doing that they moved him to the backrow.

The planning and execution of his career has been pitiful. And he's still only 21.

Next on the list of coaching things I dislike and am also currently going through ... development coaches playing God with player positions.

Yep, it's so uninspired. Barbeary could have continued his development as a centre. His carrying ability is uncoached, some people just have what he's got. Not many though.

[JM2K6]

The exact same YouTube videos you've seen.

So none?

It literally does not matter what he was like at that age. Kids good enough to go on to be professional sportsmen are likely to dominate in any position, and often get put in the backs as a result with great success. It doesn't mean it was a bad idea for him to switch. He might well have ended up a dogshit 12 - we have no way to tell. I very much doubt Sinckler would be starting for England as a 10 or 15 if he hadn't moved...

There are loads of very very good backs playing rugby who are eligible for England. There are not many who can carry the ball up like Barbeary. To be honest, I thought you were more enlightened than the typical morons you get in junior rugby who think, 'he's a big lump, lets chuck him in the front-row'.

p.s educate yourself and watch those videos.

I don't know what I'm expected to learn beyond he tore it up amongst literal children but sure, I'll take a look. Surely we've both seen enough evidence of players who succeed in the backs at that age due to overwhelmingly superior physicality who are found out in senior rugby?

Like, I don't know the reasons for his move, just like I don't know the reasons for Sinckler's move. Maybe it was just "stick the big kid in the pack". Maybe it was more "your passing and general handling are shit, you have very little vision, but you've enormous potential on the carry and a big engine - you should consider being a forward". Tom Youngs was an England U20s centre and ended up a front row - and frankly having seen him in the U20s it was pretty obviously the right call, despite his 'success' at age grade level.

[JM2K6]

I did some googling: https://www.rugbyworld.com/in-the-mag/h ... ary-117708

Both Wasps and England saw him as a forward, not a centre. Now, it's possible everyone fucked up. Or it's possible he just didn't have the skillset required for centre.

[Kawazaki]

I did some googling: https://www.rugbyworld.com/in-the-mag/h ... ary-117708

Both Wasps and England saw him as a forward, not a centre. Now, it's possible everyone fucked up. Or it's possible he just didn't have the skillset required for centre.

Do you think Manu Tuilagi has the skillset to play centre?

[Raggs]

I did some googling: https://www.rugbyworld.com/in-the-mag/h ... ary-117708

Both Wasps and England saw him as a forward, not a centre. Now, it's possible everyone fucked up. Or it's possible he just didn't have the skillset required for centre.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... wonderkid/

Started in the front row when u16, playing in the u18s at school.

To help develop his skills he was moved to number 8. In his final year he was moved to centre to develop even more skills (though he still threw in for school games).

His England age grade stuff was all at hooker, and he played hooker in some mens games (not prem but lower level).

He's an extremely skillful forward, no arguments there, but what's wrong with him being an exceptionally skillful forward, who also happens to be a wrecking ball carrier wherever, instead of an averagely skilled back, who is a wrecking ball carrier.

[Kawazaki]

So none?

It literally does not matter what he was like at that age. Kids good enough to go on to be professional sportsmen are likely to dominate in any position, and often get put in the backs as a result with great success. It doesn't mean it was a bad idea for him to switch. He might well have ended up a dogshit 12 - we have no way to tell. I very much doubt Sinckler would be starting for England as a 10 or 15 if he hadn't moved...

There are loads of very very good backs playing rugby who are eligible for England. There are not many who can carry the ball up like Barbeary. To be honest, I thought you were more enlightened than the typical morons you get in junior rugby who think, 'he's a big lump, lets chuck him in the front-row'.

p.s educate yourself and watch those videos.

I don't know what I'm expected to learn beyond he tore it up amongst literal children but sure, I'll take a look. Surely we've both seen enough evidence of players who succeed in the backs at that age due to overwhelmingly superior physicality who are found out in senior rugby?

Like, I don't know the reasons for his move, just like I don't know the reasons for Sinckler's move. Maybe it was just "stick the big kid in the pack". Maybe it was more "your passing and general handling are shit, you have very little vision, but you've enormous potential on the carry and a big engine - you should consider being a forward". Tom Youngs was an England U20s centre and ended up a front row - and frankly having seen him in the U20s it was pretty obviously the right call, despite his 'success' at age grade level.

Those 'literal' children were called his peers.

[Kawazaki]

I did some googling: https://www.rugbyworld.com/in-the-mag/h ... ary-117708

Both Wasps and England saw him as a forward, not a centre. Now, it's possible everyone fucked up. Or it's possible he just didn't have the skillset required for centre.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... wonderkid/

Started in the front row when u16, playing in the u18s at school.

To help develop his skills he was moved to number 8. In his final year he was moved to centre to develop even more skills (though he still threw in for school games).

His England age grade stuff was all at hooker, and he played hooker in some mens games (not prem but lower level).

He's an extremely skillful forward, no arguments there, but what's wrong with him being an exceptionally skillful forward, who also happens to be a wrecking ball carrier wherever, instead of an averagely skilled back, who is a wrecking ball carrier.

Manu Tuilagi is a fairly compelling template for England to look at succession plans. Barbeary would have been in a talent pool of one.

[Niegs]

England rugby post this to celebrate Ben Youngs' career and all I can see is a weirdly tiny arm!

[Stranger]

I am optimistic that Kelly will become the player we need ay 12