The RugbyRebels Messageboard
http://www.rugbyrebels.co.uk/
Regardless of their sprint times in training the Currys’ playing style seems more about speed endurance/workrate than outright pace as such which is more Earl’s forte, at least when it comes to a rugby match context.
Steward is good positionally, England also normally drop the flyhalf into the backfield from phase play so Marcus will be back there as well. Should give us good coverage and good options irrespective of whether Ireland kick to compete or kick long.Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 10:03 am Does SB's strategy cope with Ireland not kicking to keep the ball in play? If they do multi-phase stuff to make progress will their bigger back row cough the ball up? Is the Irish FH (whichever it is) good enough to bounce the ball into touch every time he kicks outside the 22?
Steward is picked for his prowess under opposition high ball. Will there be much (any)? Does that make Murley a clever wing selection?
Whilst I'm still trying to decide whether the back row selection is inspired or stupid, I can't help applauding SB for taking the initiative and doing something unexpected.
Stats Believer obvs knew you were going to post this.Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 10:03 am Does SB's strategy cope with Ireland not kicking to keep the ball in play? If they do multi-phase stuff to make progress will their bigger back row cough the ball up? Is the Irish FH (whichever it is) good enough to bounce the ball into touch every time he kicks outside the 22?
Steward is picked for his prowess under opposition high ball. Will there be much (any)? Does that make Murley a clever wing selection?
Whilst I'm still trying to decide whether the back row selection is inspired or stupid, I can't help applauding SB for taking the initiative and doing something unexpected.
Trouble is with three open sides we look vulnerable physically at the breakdown and come lineout time. It’s a chunky roll of the dice.FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 10:35 amSteward is good positionally, England also normally drop the flyhalf into the backfield from phase play so Marcus will be back there as well. Should give us good coverage and good options irrespective of whether Ireland kick to compete or kick long.Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 10:03 am Does SB's strategy cope with Ireland not kicking to keep the ball in play? If they do multi-phase stuff to make progress will their bigger back row cough the ball up? Is the Irish FH (whichever it is) good enough to bounce the ball into touch every time he kicks outside the 22?
Steward is picked for his prowess under opposition high ball. Will there be much (any)? Does that make Murley a clever wing selection?
Whilst I'm still trying to decide whether the back row selection is inspired or stupid, I can't help applauding SB for taking the initiative and doing something unexpected.
Three opensides in the backrow should give us line speed and a great chance to spoil, hopefully that makes going through multiple phase attack difficult.
Three opensides and two quick wingers should mean we have a good kick chase, which is suspect is the game plan. Keep the ball on the park and pin Ireland in their own half so they are going through a lot of phases in their half or around the middle of the field. Tire their pack and then offload our bench and look to play in the final half hour.
It's as if, with all the talk of impact from the bench, we've forgotten that's only useful if you've made enough impact from the start to still be in the game. It seems such a glaringly risky selection that I think Borthwick may well have a very cunning plan up his sleeve, but maybe I'm being overly optimistic.
Cunning is not a word that immediately springs to mind in context of Borthwick - more honest, grafter, and taken by surprise and a bit slow to react to changing events…Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 12:52 pmIt's as if, with all the talk of impact from the bench, we've forgotten that's only useful if you've made enough impact from the start to still be in the game. It seems such a glaringly risky selection that I think Borthwick may well have a very cunning plan up his sleeve, but maybe I'm being overly optimistic.
I can't imagine what this strategy would be that is made unworkable by having either CCS/Willis starting.
Borthwick tends to talk about risks and bravery a fair bit, and the selection does potentially support that, but I worry it's really just another reason to focus on a kick-chase game. I remember the OHC selection feeling quite bold last year, then it felt as if his career ended on the choice to run (and get turned over) rather than return a kick.
Yeah if Mitchell dithers at the breakdown then we do look possibly open to a counter ruck, thankfully he's pretty quick there. I'm more worried about what happens if our line speed drops, not many of the pack are going to stop Irish momentum if we are static in defence. Could lead to penalties and sin bins or to the Irish cutting loose if we get it wrong.Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 12:14 pmTrouble is with three open sides we look vulnerable physically at the breakdown and come lineout time. It’s a chunky roll of the dice.FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 10:35 amSteward is good positionally, England also normally drop the flyhalf into the backfield from phase play so Marcus will be back there as well. Should give us good coverage and good options irrespective of whether Ireland kick to compete or kick long.Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 10:03 am Does SB's strategy cope with Ireland not kicking to keep the ball in play? If they do multi-phase stuff to make progress will their bigger back row cough the ball up? Is the Irish FH (whichever it is) good enough to bounce the ball into touch every time he kicks outside the 22?
Steward is picked for his prowess under opposition high ball. Will there be much (any)? Does that make Murley a clever wing selection?
Whilst I'm still trying to decide whether the back row selection is inspired or stupid, I can't help applauding SB for taking the initiative and doing something unexpected.
Three opensides in the backrow should give us line speed and a great chance to spoil, hopefully that makes going through multiple phase attack difficult.
Three opensides and two quick wingers should mean we have a good kick chase, which is suspect is the game plan. Keep the ball on the park and pin Ireland in their own half so they are going through a lot of phases in their half or around the middle of the field. Tire their pack and then offload our bench and look to play in the final half hour.
The game plan you outline is deffo in statistically blinded’s wheelhouse of comfort.
Dunno, he has tried different things in charge of England. He's tried to move things on a good deal from the super basic game plan from the world cup.jngf wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:08 pmCunning is not a word that immediately springs to mind in context of Borthwick - more honest, grafter, reactive and taken by surprise….Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 12:52 pmIt's as if, with all the talk of impact from the bench, we've forgotten that's only useful if you've made enough impact from the start to still be in the game. It seems such a glaringly risky selection that I think Borthwick may well have a very cunning plan up his sleeve, but maybe I'm being overly optimistic.
I can't imagine what this strategy would be that is made unworkable by having either CCS/Willis starting.
Borthwick tends to talk about risks and bravery a fair bit, and the selection does potentially support that, but I worry it's really just another reason to focus on a kick-chase game. I remember the OHC selection feeling quite bold last year, then it felt as if his career ended on the choice to run (and get turned over) rather than return a kick.
Agreed, but . . . I, for one, have been whingeing for some time about no inspiration or innovation in the planning. Even if I think his plans are misguided, I applaud him for trying. Something seems odd about Chessum, CCS and Willis on the bench in that they are, arguably, the opposites of the three backrowers chosen. An impactful bench or a backstop if things go wrong? Even then, at least there IS a Plan B.jngf wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:08 pmCunning is not a word that immediately springs to mind in context of Borthwick - more honest, grafter, reactive and taken by surprise….Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 12:52 pmIt's as if, with all the talk of impact from the bench, we've forgotten that's only useful if you've made enough impact from the start to still be in the game. It seems such a glaringly risky selection that I think Borthwick may well have a very cunning plan up his sleeve, but maybe I'm being overly optimistic.
I can't imagine what this strategy would be that is made unworkable by having either CCS/Willis starting.
Borthwick tends to talk about risks and bravery a fair bit, and the selection does potentially support that, but I worry it's really just another reason to focus on a kick-chase game. I remember the OHC selection feeling quite bold last year, then it felt as if his career ended on the choice to run (and get turned over) rather than return a kick.
Borthwick did like to load the bench at Tigers on occasion. I remember a couple of times he'd put Jasper Weise on the bench or the starting props and then bring them on early in the second half. Sometimes playing incredibly pragmatically in the first half and the attacking in the second as the opposition tired and their subs could be exploited.Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:17 pmAgreed, but . . . I, for one, have been whingeing for some time about no inspiration or innovation in the planning. Even if I think his plans are misguided, I applaud him for trying. Something seems odd about Chessum, CCS and Willis on the bench in that they are, arguably, the opposites of the three backrowers chosen. An impactful bench or a backstop if things go wrong? Even then, at least there IS a Plan B.jngf wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:08 pmCunning is not a word that immediately springs to mind in context of Borthwick - more honest, grafter, reactive and taken by surprise….Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2025 12:52 pm
It's as if, with all the talk of impact from the bench, we've forgotten that's only useful if you've made enough impact from the start to still be in the game. It seems such a glaringly risky selection that I think Borthwick may well have a very cunning plan up his sleeve, but maybe I'm being overly optimistic.
I can't imagine what this strategy would be that is made unworkable by having either CCS/Willis starting.
Borthwick tends to talk about risks and bravery a fair bit, and the selection does potentially support that, but I worry it's really just another reason to focus on a kick-chase game. I remember the OHC selection feeling quite bold last year, then it felt as if his career ended on the choice to run (and get turned over) rather than return a kick.
love it
. But ok, the Curry's are RAPID!
