Moderator: Puja
Oakboy wrote:The oddest factor of all is that there is a real opportunity for someone. You'd think SH would be the most popular position for teenagers in the circumstances.
fivepointer wrote:Its such a key position that coaches are probably less inclined to give young players a chance. A malfunctioning SH can really screw a team up, so coaches are wary about trusting a youngster, or giving them a bit of a run to gain confidence. Admittedly Maunder bucks the trend, but he is very unusual. 19 year old SHs are not normally a feature in the Premiership, or in the England squad. As with all player development, game time in pressurised situations is vital to their progress. Looking around the Prem squads, there arent that many young EQ SH's that do get much game time.
On the players available, i thought Robson should have seen some England action last season. His form did tail off a bit during the 2nd half of the season, but for quite a time he was comfortably the best SH in England. I think Eddie did miss a trick by not getting him in the squad.
That might be part of the problem - even more so as teens than as adults... size is king; so the nippy little lad with a bagful of talent gets benched for the big bloke who's more predicatable, but can tackle flankers.twitchy wrote:I agree it's also one of the last positions for smaller lads, you would have thought there would be loads.
Jeez, how innacurate was it earlier in his career? Was he passing right when going left?Peat wrote:For me, the frustrating thing about Youngs is he's still very close to being the same player that first toured with England as a 21 year old tyro, still clearly a bit raw but with so much promise. If anything, he's regressed a little - I don't think he plays as quick as he once did. His pass is more accurate but, as much as I defend it from the hyperbole, still at a standard where you wonder what on earth pros do all day. Box kicking's improved a lot though, give him that.
Ben Youngs is the poster boy for a generation of English players that seemed to stop improving the moment they got an England cap, no matter how many holes there were in their game i.e. plenty.
And he goes unthreatened in an England shirt because his rivals are of the same ilk. If Danny Care had ever learnt to box kick to the same standard, they'd be a lot closer. Simpson didn't really seem to put it all together until he was 25 or so. Robson... I haven't seen enough of him recently but I believe the basic refrain about consistency. That's the other thing that's bedevilled a generation of English backs, all the tools but not enough rugby intelligence to consistently pick the right one. It'd be very tempting to say there's too much time in the gym and doing what coaches say and not enough playing rugby and making their own decisions. I don't have enough evidence that this is true to say it, but it does add up.
Also, Webb is poo, and trust no one who says otherwise. The memory of him staring at the ball like it was the first time he'd seen a tit as a teenager in our 22 this year, not to mention him throwing a suicide ball the wrong way after that massive Welsh break the year before that, lives with me. Another guy who seems to have all the tools but no box in which to put them.
Youngs was a master of the bouncing bomb back then. I remember him throwing one or two a game at the beginning for England. People tear on his passing now, but it does usually go to somewhere where the intended recipient can catch it without bouncing once.belgarion wrote: Jeez, how innacurate was it earlier in his career? Was he passing right when going left?
What poor record? Dickie Jeeps wasn't a bad scrum half at all.Scrumhead wrote:Thinking ahead to the new season, I'm hoping that Maunder or Townsend can build upon the promise they showed last season, but I'm becoming increasingly resigned to the likelihood that barring injury, Youngs and Care will be our 9s in Japan.
To be honest, it's probably deserved too. Partially because (despite being inconsistent) both have the ability to put in match-winning performances and partially because nobody else has made a consistent enough challenge to be a real contender.
Over the past 6 or 7 years, only Wigglesworth has put up a sustained challenge which leads me to question why we seem to be so bad at producing quality 9s?
I'm in my mid 30s and despite Bracken and Dawson having their moments, I genuinely don't recall us having a consistently reliable and effective 9.
Even with the promise our age grade rugby has shown over the past few years, the 9s have generally been among the weakest links.
IMO, a good scrum half needs a to have a combination of the core skills - i.e. a good, quick pass (off both hands), a good sniping game and a good kicking game. Generally, I think our 9s are typically fairly good at one of these skills and downright poor at the other two.
2 Questions:
What are we doing wrong???
How much better would we be with a top quality 9?
As someone who's watched a lot of games back closely - sometimes zooming in on Youngs - I simply don't see what you're describing.Mikey Brown wrote:But there's still perhaps 5 (to 10?) a game that totally stop the fly-half from doing what they were planning. If anything Ford's fantastic handling masks a lot of it, he then gets slagged off for doing stupid kicks with no chasers. But he has often had to take a massive backwards/sideways step to even get the ball, and is left with few options.
I've done the same and agree. Imo he's been not far off bloomin excellent since Eddie took over.Peat wrote:As someone who's watched a lot of games back closely - sometimes zooming in on Youngs - I simply don't see what you're describing.Mikey Brown wrote:But there's still perhaps 5 (to 10?) a game that totally stop the fly-half from doing what they were planning. If anything Ford's fantastic handling masks a lot of it, he then gets slagged off for doing stupid kicks with no chasers. But he has often had to take a massive backwards/sideways step to even get the ball, and is left with few options.
Excellent? I haven't done any objective reassessment but there have been unforced errors such as a pass that hit Hughes on the ankle.Timbo wrote:I've done the same and agree. Imo he's been not far off bloomin excellent since Eddie took over.Peat wrote:As someone who's watched a lot of games back closely - sometimes zooming in on Youngs - I simply don't see what you're describing.Mikey Brown wrote:But there's still perhaps 5 (to 10?) a game that totally stop the fly-half from doing what they were planning. If anything Ford's fantastic handling masks a lot of it, he then gets slagged off for doing stupid kicks with no chasers. But he has often had to take a massive backwards/sideways step to even get the ball, and is left with few options.
He has had some very good games and rightly got MOTM a few times i believe. He has also had some dreadful games and you get the impression the very good ones are a rare treat with Youngs. Overall i think he is very average and 9/12 are positions England really need an upgrade......if there is one.Timbo wrote:I've done the same and agree. Imo he's been not far off bloomin excellent since Eddie took over.Peat wrote:As someone who's watched a lot of games back closely - sometimes zooming in on Youngs - I simply don't see what you're describing.Mikey Brown wrote:But there's still perhaps 5 (to 10?) a game that totally stop the fly-half from doing what they were planning. If anything Ford's fantastic handling masks a lot of it, he then gets slagged off for doing stupid kicks with no chasers. But he has often had to take a massive backwards/sideways step to even get the ball, and is left with few options.
Scrumhead wrote:Thinking ahead to the new season, I'm hoping that Maunder or Townsend can build upon the promise they showed last season, but I'm becoming increasingly resigned to the likelihood that barring injury, Youngs and Care will be our 9s in Japan.
To be honest, it's probably deserved too. Partially because (despite being inconsistent) both have the ability to put in match-winning performances and partially because nobody else has made a consistent enough challenge to be a real contender.
Over the past 6 or 7 years, only Wigglesworth has put up a sustained challenge which leads me to question why we seem to be so bad at producing quality 9s?
I'm in my mid 30s and despite Bracken and Dawson having their moments, I genuinely don't recall us having a consistently reliable and effective 9.
Even with the promise our age grade rugby has shown over the past few years, the 9s have generally been among the weakest links.
IMO, a good scrum half needs a to have a combination of the core skills - i.e. a good, quick pass (off both hands), a good sniping game and a good kicking game. Generally, I think our 9s are typically fairly good at one of these skills and downright poor at the other two.
2 Questions:
What are we doing wrong???
How much better would we be with a top quality 9?
Out of interest, have you ever noticed a pundit or commentator mention any of these moments in a game? I genuinely don't think I ever have. Certain players just don't seem to get called out on this incredibly basic stuff, Farrell being a prime example, and can still win a MOTM award whilst not being able to fulfill their primary role.Mellsblue wrote:It seems to me there's always at least one pass at the receivers feet and at least two or three that force the receiver to check/stretch/change option. Not what I'd ask for/want from an international scrumhalf.
Go on, I'll poke the bear.Mikey Brown wrote:Out of interest, have you ever noticed a pundit or commentator mention any of these moments in a game? I genuinely don't think I ever have. Certain players just don't seem to get called out on this incredibly basic stuff, Farrell being a prime example, and can still win a MOTM award whilst not being able to fulfill their primary role.Mellsblue wrote:It seems to me there's always at least one pass at the receivers feet and at least two or three that force the receiver to check/stretch/change option. Not what I'd ask for/want from an international scrumhalf.
I've said this all before, but imo giving Ford decent, clean ball is worth 100 good boxkicks from the 9 and the occasional effective snipe. I don't even want to get started on the "keeping the defence honest" thing.
There is an advantage but to counter that I'd argue Ford's best rugby came outside Stringer and an on form Cook, both of whom are not known for their sniping. This may be just coincidence as this was Bath's purple patch and before daddy had mucked up but I'm with Mikey, in that I'd just prefer quality service to Ford as a must with everything else secondary.Puja wrote:Go on, I'll poke the bear.Mikey Brown wrote:Out of interest, have you ever noticed a pundit or commentator mention any of these moments in a game? I genuinely don't think I ever have. Certain players just don't seem to get called out on this incredibly basic stuff, Farrell being a prime example, and can still win a MOTM award whilst not being able to fulfill their primary role.Mellsblue wrote:It seems to me there's always at least one pass at the receivers feet and at least two or three that force the receiver to check/stretch/change option. Not what I'd ask for/want from an international scrumhalf.
I've said this all before, but imo giving Ford decent, clean ball is worth 100 good boxkicks from the 9 and the occasional effective snipe. I don't even want to get started on the "keeping the defence honest" thing.
You don't think there's an advantage to "keeping the defnce honest"? Regardless of his other flaws, Youngs does at least slow a rush defence and stops them from just moving straight out to the 10.
Puja
Indeed. Although at the risk of having a circular thread, the point that there's only Aaron Smith who currently has all of that is a bit odd and suggests that the problem isn't just with us.Banquo wrote:This debate answers the OP original question- we are discussing the trade off between a having a passing or running and/or kicking 9....when all three are vital scrum half skills, overlaid with top class decision making.
Agreed. IMO, if a SH has natural hands and a rugby brain, his default action is to zip out a flat, accurate pass to the FH (are we really discussing anything so obvious), say, 9 times out of 10. Simply by doing that he makes running the ball more of a surprise and far more likely to be damaging. The debate may come about how often he should kick. I have a prejudice against any blind kicking (which box kicks often are), mainly because the success rate is so low - maybe 80%+ just gift possession to the opposition? That is not to say that kicking is not an essential SH skill. I just question in what circumstances and how often.Banquo wrote:This debate answers the OP original question- we are discussing the trade off between a having a passing or running and/or kicking 9....when all three are vital scrum half skills, overlaid with top class decision making.
Its a hard position, but none of the above is impossible.Raggs wrote:Where to be is easy if you don't mind them chasing the ball. Bit trickier if you want them reading the play. Zinging out 40-80 accurate, and generally long passes, off both hands, is also not that simple, that's probably more passes than some outside backs manage in a season, even a 5% poor pass rate will show up in a game. Running too often is bad, too little is bad, getting the balance right is tough, and variable, generally your vision can often be limited by a forwards fat arse. Box kicking tends to also be done under a lot of pressure, and although I have no experience of it, just looking at the technique, it would look to be much harder to control accuracy in comparison to a regular kicking style.
Of course, not, there's 9s out there that manage it, but Smith's kicking can still be pressured into errors (a few years ago serious pressure would lead to him completely losing it), and every 9 can have bad days. It's a tough position to get everything right, especially as so many of their "basic" skills are repeated far more than most players, if a 13 gave 1 poor pass every 3 or 4 games, people wouldn't worry too much (not great, but still), but that would be 5 or 6 for a scrum half, every game. Their error rates simply have to be a lot lower than everyone elses due to how much the ball goes through them.Banquo wrote:Its a hard position, but none of the above is impossible.Raggs wrote:Where to be is easy if you don't mind them chasing the ball. Bit trickier if you want them reading the play. Zinging out 40-80 accurate, and generally long passes, off both hands, is also not that simple, that's probably more passes than some outside backs manage in a season, even a 5% poor pass rate will show up in a game. Running too often is bad, too little is bad, getting the balance right is tough, and variable, generally your vision can often be limited by a forwards fat arse. Box kicking tends to also be done under a lot of pressure, and although I have no experience of it, just looking at the technique, it would look to be much harder to control accuracy in comparison to a regular kicking style.