RugbyRebels

Hardly a recipe for a great performance in fairness. Long gruelling season, straight into one of the toughest trips, two great wins, so a huge anticlimax in weird conditions. Pretty pointless game tbh.

On the plus side, no one got struck by lightning!

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 8:07 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 7:57 am A bit harsh. I thought both centres were good whenever they were given an opportunity to play.

Obviously the standard of opposition needs to be taken into account, but credit where credit is due … Ojomoh’s physicality in defence was good to see too. Looks like he would fit the gameplan nicely.

I was underwhelmed by Pepper. After a couple of good cameos, I thought he was going to rip it up, but he was pretty anonymous. In fairness, it can be harder to shine as a flanker in these sort of games, but he suffered in comparison to CCS who was very busy a prominent on both sides of the ball.

It was always going to be hard to shine in that back row- his job was mostly to clear rucks and let the other 2 stay out ready to carry.

I know they are different players but watching Dombrandt after 2 games of Willis is just depressing. The ferocity of the carry, protection of the ball, all round workrate are just night and day.

Sure. I did acknowledge it’s hard for a flanker to shine in these sorts of games.

TBF, the carrying wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to do that. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.

Highlight for me was the superb falcon that Ojomoh threw into Beard’s face!

But if a scrappy old affair. Error strewn and largely pointless.

Pretty good tour all told. I hope we decide to use our midfield options instead of parachuting Slade back in when his hand is fixed

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 9:09 am

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 8:07 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 7:57 am A bit harsh. I thought both centres were good whenever they were given an opportunity to play.

Obviously the standard of opposition needs to be taken into account, but credit where credit is due … Ojomoh’s physicality in defence was good to see too. Looks like he would fit the gameplan nicely.

I was underwhelmed by Pepper. After a couple of good cameos, I thought he was going to rip it up, but he was pretty anonymous. In fairness, it can be harder to shine as a flanker in these sort of games, but he suffered in comparison to CCS who was very busy a prominent on both sides of the ball.

It was always going to be hard to shine in that back row- his job was mostly to clear rucks and let the other 2 stay out ready to carry.

I know they are different players but watching Dombrandt after 2 games of Willis is just depressing. The ferocity of the carry, protection of the ball, all round workrate are just night and day.

Sure. I did acknowledge it’s hard for a flanker to shine in these sorts of games.

TBF, the carrying wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to do that. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.

Did CCS do the whole game at 6? I feel a bit for him, I think he could be immense as a 6 if backed.

Glad I didn’t stay up to watch this given the extra hour difference for me. Will catch up on YouTube and skip past the TMO nonsense!

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 10:20 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 9:09 am

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 8:07 am

It was always going to be hard to shine in that back row- his job was mostly to clear rucks and let the other 2 stay out ready to carry.

I know they are different players but watching Dombrandt after 2 games of Willis is just depressing. The ferocity of the carry, protection of the ball, all round workrate are just night and day.

Sure. I did acknowledge it’s hard for a flanker to shine in these sorts of games.

TBF, the carrying wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to do that. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.

Did CCS do the whole game at 6? I feel a bit for him, I think he could be immense as a 6 if backed.

When Dommers left he moved to 8. Then when Hill came on, Curry went to 8.

Stom wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 10:30 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 10:20 am

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 9:09 am

Sure. I did acknowledge it’s hard for a flanker to shine in these sorts of games.

TBF, the carrying wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to do that. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.

Did CCS do the whole game at 6? I feel a bit for him, I think he could be immense as a 6 if backed.

When Dommers left he moved to 8. Then when Hill came on, Curry went to 8.

If this doesn’t summon the devil….

Biggest winners from the tour are the centres, all of whom did well with what they had.
I see no need for Slade to wear an England shirt again. I'd rather see Freeman given a shot at 13 than Slade there again.
We've now got Lawrence, Atkinson, Dingwall, Northmore and Ojomoh to invest time in, and enough round pegs to fill the round hole at IC that we can let Ollie play in his actual position.
Also worth noting that 2 of those 5 are comfortable in either centre berth, which allows a lot of extra freedom, only pairing the two OCs together could end up looking unbalanced, and even that wouldn't be terrible.

Only real losers from the tour would be Dan and Dombrandt, but both seem to have protected status, so will probably hold on to 3rd place in the pecking order - Dommers could lose out if CCS moves to 8 (unlikely given that they're a club combination), but neither really being challenged by their 4th choice.

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 7:30 am
I think the problem was that we caught the ball, players came in to form the maul and the catcher gave the ball over the top of them to Dombrandt, who then bound on. There was an IRB law clarification a while back on that - the ball can be transferred within a maul by ripping it backwards, but you can't pass it over the top of already bound people (cause teams were doing that and making nigh-undefendable mauls).

Thank you. Didn't know that one - I guess it makes sense if it's a pass, as the moment the balls in the air, it's a pass with blockers. Not sure it makes sense as a hand-over, but if that's the law, and reason, then fair enough.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 11:12 am Biggest winners from the tour are the centres, all of whom did well with what they had.
I see no need for Slade to wear an England shirt again. I'd rather see Freeman given a shot at 13 than Slade there again.
We've now got Lawrence, Atkinson, Dingwall, Northmore and Ojomoh to invest time in, and enough round pegs to fill the round hole at IC that we can let Ollie play in his actual position.
Also worth noting that 2 of those 5 are comfortable in either centre berth, which allows a lot of extra freedom, only pairing the two OCs together could end up looking unbalanced, and even that wouldn't be terrible.

Only real losers from the tour would be Dan and Dombrandt, but both seem to have protected status, so will probably hold on to 3rd place in the pecking order - Dommers could lose out if CCS moves to 8 (unlikely given that they're a club combination), but neither really being challenged by their 4th choice.

Yeah, agree with all of that.

I expect Dombrandt to miss out in future on account of Earl and Pollock being comfortable at 8. Both of those are probably inked into the squad already.

Moving forward, I’d hope Willis has 8 sewn up with either one of Earl or Pollock deputising, being the impact option from the bench or possibly shifting there from the flanks later in games.

I’d also add Langdon to the losers list. He had a great opportunity and while he wasn’t awful, he definitely didn’t seize his chance in the way I hoped he would. If he’s been like that in training it probably explains why he’s down the pecking order. He could easily lose out to Oghre.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 11:20 am

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 7:30 am
I think the problem was that we caught the ball, players came in to form the maul and the catcher gave the ball over the top of them to Dombrandt, who then bound on. There was an IRB law clarification a while back on that - the ball can be transferred within a maul by ripping it backwards, but you can't pass it over the top of already bound people (cause teams were doing that and making nigh-undefendable mauls).

Thank you. Didn't know that one - I guess it makes sense if it's a pass, as the moment the balls in the air, it's a pass with blockers. Not sure it makes sense as a hand-over, but if that's the law, and reason, then fair enough.

The reason they clarified it as still being offside with a handover is that it removed any competition - if the ball doesn't have to be transferred to somone binding onto the first man, then a lock could jump in the lineout, have two players bound onto his midriff in perfect driving position (with no need to pay any attention to the ball) as soon as he landed, and then use long arms to just hand it back to someone at the back who could then plonk themselves at the back of a wedge. Better to rule that the ball can only be transferred to someone directly bound onto you, otherwise it stops being a maul.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 12:53 pm I think the problem was that we caught the ball, players came in to form the maul and the catcher gave the ball over the top of them to Dombrandt, who then bound on. There was an IRB law clarification a while back on that - the ball can be transferred within a maul by ripping it backwards, but you can't pass it over the top of already bound people (cause teams were doing that and making nigh-undefendable mauls).

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 7:30 amThe reason they clarified it as still being offside with a handover is that it removed any competition - if the ball doesn't have to be transferred to somone binding onto the first man, then a lock could jump in the lineout, have two players bound onto his midriff in perfect driving position (with no need to pay any attention to the ball) as soon as he landed, and then use long arms to just hand it back to someone at the back who could then plonk themselves at the back of a wedge. Better to rule that the ball can only be transferred to someone directly bound onto you, otherwise it stops being a maul.

Both posts deserve a full Hask, btw

Don’t often post but enjoy reading. Thank you!

For the first time I was at this one live. Interesting (to me) observations from being live - in no particular order.

George Ford is a huge fan favorite. Cheers for his name when announced. At end people craning over railings call out his name so they can get him to look in their direction for a photo. And it’s very obvious live just how crazy skilled he is.

Ben Curry is massive. Well they all are. He was kind enough to sign son’s shirt. To see him up close well a bit scary. In a good way.

Their tactics as a team, at least for this game, much easier to see live. It seemed they were kicking to gain field position in opposite half. Then from set piece running a series of moves.

Oh and when attacking everting is very fast. But they certainly take their time when ball is not in play to move from one bit of the game to another.

Just a few thoughts.

This wasn't the best game but it was 80 minutes of rugby so that was something.

I'll give credit to the US. They threw in some big tackles - we dropped the ball in the tackle a lot so I feel that's probably down to the US tackling powerfully. There was a double shot on IFW in about the 75 minutes that I thought he might not get back up from. Fair play to them for scoring too. That might be the first try we conceded all tour that wasn't down to a weird bobble or bounce.

Forced or otherwise, we dropped the ball too often. There were also quite a few passes that hit people too hard (or indeed in the head) - whether that's a poor pass or inaccurate running lines meaning people got in the way I don't know. This was this line ups first go I guess so understandable. With that much possession I'd have expected us to score more against the US.

We lost a few lineouts. I don't know if that reflects on the thrower, jumpers or all of them. Scrum went well. Don't think we lost one.

I want to add to the positives re the commentators. I was a bit taken out by the phraseology (and the accents tbh.. wasn't expecting it), but the enthusiasm for the game was great. They actually talked it up pretty well and made it feel like more of an event than a scratch England side v a lower tier team (in a low key friendly with tons of handling errors). I think that type of cynicism-less enthusiasm is probably something the USA (with all its 'school spirit' etc) does a bit better than the UK.

Not the best game but I'm not mad. England do have some good selection headaches going forwards. There's probably 10 back row players scrapping for 3 shirts. 3 (or 4) Fly halves. We now have some potentially very good centres and back 3. We've got 4 or 5 goods locks plus the front row (ok not hooker) is starting to develop a bit of depth.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jul 19, 2025 11:01 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Sat Jul 19, 2025 10:50 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jul 19, 2025 10:42 am

er....hence saying 'I suppose you could say that's gone well, given that he's made the Lions bench'.

And of course 'utility/versatility' has its place. But it can go wrong for some players. plus like it or not, positional skills are important.

Positional skills are important but a lot of those are transferable between related positions. For CCS a lot of the lock/6/8 skills are are transferable. Not the first time someone has played across those positions. Similarly Marcus at 10 and 15, as most 10s sit in the backfield as part of modern defences so those positional and high ball skills are required by him anyway.

I’m not arguing that (though there are distinct specialist positional skills) I’m positing that sometimes versatility can hinder a career. I could play both centre and fullback to a decent level and it worked well for me.

Yep. Unclear at this point how Smith’s career would be going if he weren’t spending so much time back and forth between half/full-back.

I don’t think his slightly wonky form is unrelated, as much as I see the appeal of him being able to cover there.

badback wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 1:40 pm Don’t often post but enjoy reading. Thank you!

For the first time I was at this one live. Interesting (to me) observations from being live - in no particular order.

George Ford is a huge fan favorite. Cheers for his name when announced. At end people craning over railings call out his name so they can get him to look in their direction for a photo. And it’s very obvious live just how crazy skilled he is.

Ben Curry is massive. Well they all are. He was kind enough to sign son’s shirt. To see him up close well a bit scary. In a good way.

Their tactics as a team, at least for this game, much easier to see live. It seemed they were kicking to gain field position in opposite half. Then from set piece running a series of moves.

Oh and when attacking everting is very fast. But they certainly take their time when ball is not in play to move from one bit of the game to another.

Just a few thoughts.

Your son is following a long rugby tradition of getting curry on one's shirt!

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sun Jul 20, 2025 8:15 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jul 19, 2025 11:01 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Sat Jul 19, 2025 10:50 am Positional skills are important but a lot of those are transferable between related positions. For CCS a lot of the lock/6/8 skills are are transferable. Not the first time someone has played across those positions. Similarly Marcus at 10 and 15, as most 10s sit in the backfield as part of modern defences so those positional and high ball skills are required by him anyway.

I’m not arguing that (though there are distinct specialist positional skills) I’m positing that sometimes versatility can hinder a career. I could play both centre and fullback to a decent level and it worked well for me.

Yep. Unclear at this point how Smith’s career would be going if he weren’t spending so much time back and forth between half/full-back.

I don’t think his slightly wonky form is unrelated, as much as I see the appeal of him being able to cover there.

100%. I don’t think Marcus’ form was ever notably ‘wonky’ prior to the whole fullback scenario came up.

He’s very obviously more comfortable at 10 and I imagine it has been mentally challenging to be dropped from the 10 shirt and put in a no-win situation where he plays in a position he is uncomfortable in that exposes his weaknesses and lack of familiarity with the role or accepts being dropped to the bench.

Yes, that versatility got him a place on the Lions tour, but does anyone really want him to be starting at 15? I don’t even think he wants that.

Moreover, the whole change of position ultimately came from a few poor defeats for England that were harshly blamed on his game management. I still maintain that other factors like the coaching debacle with Felix Jones (and the resulting defensive readjustment) and the apparent tactical instructions to play containment rugby in the final quarter were far bigger factors in those defeats than anything Marcus did/didn’t do.

We’ll never know if we’d have won those games with Ford or Fin Smith at 10 but I still feel like Marcus was treated very poorly and I wouldn’t be surprised if it has affected him mentally to some degree. Feeling like you’ve finally got the shirt only to have your replacement come in and immediately anointed as a saviour (for not that much), must suck.

What would have happened if Marcus had simply refused to play FB?

I can’t imagine it would have gone down well. He was basically asked to take one for the team.

He did it with good grace but even with it securing him a place with the Lions, I’m still not sure it’slim his best interests.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 21, 2025 7:51 am What would have happened if Marcus had simply refused to play FB?

He'd be out the international picture I'd have thought. Can't imagine that sort of attitude would go down well, also don't think it would be a Marcus thing to do. I'm happy to criticise a couple elements of his game but attitude isn't one of them.

The same weaknesses in his game at 10 have been largely the weaknesses in his game since he first broke through. He's now 26, it's really on him of he can't improve those elements. He's got Ford as a mentor in the squad, he's got Evans as a mentor at Quins and he's got all of the skills required.

I actually quite like him at 15 and generally England have been good at hiding his weaknesses in that position whilst allowing him to show his strengths.

I don't think Marcus has been harshly treated; he's had a lot of starts at 10 which haven' t ended in many wins and involved a stuttering backline (yeah I know, not a great deal with him in midfield and not brilliant up front). Ford and Fin Smith are better at consistently running a backline and a game but don't have his spark or eye for a gap; so it depends what you are trying to do and what other personnel are available. Like it or not, Smith M has functioned best with a big unit outside him, and we don't have one...and also with players who are familiar with the way he plays, which is very different to most 10's....and that's a club thing imo.

One could argue he's been well treated in the sense that he is being given an opportunity to keep playing intl rugby by rolling the dice with him at 15. Though as I said a zillion times, not sure its really doing him a favour long term.

It’s a great reason why I love the lions - you get to see (some of) our players in totally different playing environments… coaches, styles and with different types of players around them. Sometimes the games are even international level

Haven’t really seen enough of Marcus yet but looking forward to it

Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Jul 21, 2025 11:45 am I don't think Marcus has been harshly treated; he's had a lot of starts at 10 which haven' t ended in many wins and involved a stuttering backline (yeah I know, not a great deal with him in midfield and not brilliant up front). Ford and Fin Smith are better at consistently running a backline and a game but don't have his spark or eye for a gap; so it depends what you are trying to do and what other personnel are available. Like it or not, Smith M has functioned best with a big unit outside him, and we don't have one...and also with players who are familiar with the way he plays, which is very different to most 10's....and that's a club thing imo.

One could argue he's been well treated in the sense that he is being given an opportunity to keep playing intl rugby by rolling the dice with him at 15. Though as I said a zillion times, not sure its really doing him a favour long term.

Thats it.

He's an obvious talent but there are other players who might serve the team better.