RugbyRebels

Epaminondas Pules wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:21 pm As a pack we’ve gone from four jackaling threats to one and largely not compensated, favouring ballast. Injuries and retirements are a cause but we can’t slow ball without offering significant threats.

We are playing two opensides and Itoje is still there. That should be three. I think there's a greater emphasis on tackling the opposition behind the gain line or knocking them back with a double tackle though. When you make those dominant hits it can take longer to clear the ruck so your jackler can get in. We don't seem to favour the chop and jackle approach much.

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 8:41 am Out of the 6 so called DT rugby 'experts' 5 of them are dropping Roots and Dingwall. Itoje to 6 seems a popular choice with Lawrence in at 12.

And Care is starting for most with Freeman dropped by one. No sense there then.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:01 am

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 8:41 am Out of the 6 so called DT rugby 'experts' 5 of them are dropping Roots and Dingwall. Itoje to 6 seems a popular choice with Lawrence in at 12.

And Care is starting for most with Freeman dropped by one. No sense there then.

But the one (Fiona) who is dropping Freeman is also the only one keeping Roots.

Dropping Freeman really would be funny.

I’m sure Itoje would be fine at 6 but I just don’t see the point.

The jackalling thing is weird. We just don’t seem interested. We’ve also seen Scotland take this approach, with very mixed results.

Having Earl in the team as an 8 and then not attacking the ball that much does seem unintuitive.

So much of the debate is tainted by 'I wouldn't start from here'. SB has done what he's done and we can only opine with that in mind. At this point, IMO, there have to be compelling reasons for any changes and they need to be stronger than the continuity argument with a new defensive system.

Those vulnerable in a A or B debate are the same ones who featured for the last two matches. I think they include George, Chessum, all three back-rowers, Ford, Dingwall, Steward and Daly. I see the disadvantages of dropping any of them as out-weighing any theoretical gain that alternatives offer for this one match.

Lose it and there has to be a re-think. Win it and the same argument applies. It's where we are at.

But if that isn’t his best XV then why stick with it.

I think you pick a side that can nullify the oppo strengths whilst exploiting their weaknesses

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:59 am But if that isn’t his best XV then why stick with it.

I think you pick a side that can nullify the oppo strengths whilst exploiting their weaknesses

Steely Ballbag has always said he picks the side for the best 80mins performance against a given opposition. Which sounds like every other coach until you see him do something like stack the bench with his best forwards who all come on just after half time after a thoroughly inspiring first half only to run rampant in the second. If anything he's been quite standard with his selections so far, I wonder if he'll start being more interesting this weekend though the bench did add something Vs Wales.

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:59 am But if that isn’t his best XV then why stick with it.

I think you pick a side that can nullify the oppo strengths whilst exploiting their weaknesses

I agree IF players are allowed to think for themselves and IF any changes were made at the start of the two weeks training period. I doubt either proviso applies. You would not have picked SB's team for Italy or Wales and neither would I. Starting from scratch, neither of us would pick it v Scotland.

Contrarily, I'd add that if the team had looked slicker in the first two matches, I'd not hesitate to strengthen it to pursue your contention. Unfortunately, we were anything but and there's the issue. I don't believe these coaches are likely to get more improvement with changes than continuity. Our progress (if any) is going to be a long grind, IMO. I'd love to be wrong.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 10:46 am

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:59 am But if that isn’t his best XV then why stick with it.

I think you pick a side that can nullify the oppo strengths whilst exploiting their weaknesses

I agree IF players are allowed to think for themselves and IF any changes were made at the start of the two weeks training period. I doubt either proviso applies. You would not have picked SB's team for Italy or Wales and neither would I. Starting from scratch, neither of us would pick it v Scotland.

Contrarily, I'd add that if the team had looked slicker in the first two matches, I'd not hesitate to strengthen it to pursue your contention. Unfortunately, we were anything but and there's the issue. I don't believe these coaches are likely to get more improvement with changes than continuity. Our progress (if any) is going to be a long grind, IMO. I'd love to be wrong.

If we stick with continuity then the downside is EMB posters will be unable to debate the merit of one player over another. We will be left with FKAS defending SB ( only joking FKAS!) as the rest of us rip into him and Wigglesworth.

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 11:16 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 10:46 am

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:59 am But if that isn’t his best XV then why stick with it.

I think you pick a side that can nullify the oppo strengths whilst exploiting their weaknesses

I agree IF players are allowed to think for themselves and IF any changes were made at the start of the two weeks training period. I doubt either proviso applies. You would not have picked SB's team for Italy or Wales and neither would I. Starting from scratch, neither of us would pick it v Scotland.

Contrarily, I'd add that if the team had looked slicker in the first two matches, I'd not hesitate to strengthen it to pursue your contention. Unfortunately, we were anything but and there's the issue. I don't believe these coaches are likely to get more improvement with changes than continuity. Our progress (if any) is going to be a long grind, IMO. I'd love to be wrong.

If we stick with continuity then the downside is EMB posters will be unable to debate the merit of one player over another. We will be left with FKAS defending SB ( only joking FKAS!) as the rest of us rip into him and Wigglesworth.

Yes, but I only advocate it in the current quest for a 3rd 6N win after three crap years.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 10:46 am

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:59 am But if that isn’t his best XV then why stick with it.

I think you pick a side that can nullify the oppo strengths whilst exploiting their weaknesses

I agree IF players are allowed to think for themselves and IF any changes were made at the start of the two weeks training period. I doubt either proviso applies. You would not have picked SB's team for Italy or Wales and neither would I. Starting from scratch, neither of us would pick it v Scotland.

Contrarily, I'd add that if the team had looked slicker in the first two matches, I'd not hesitate to strengthen it to pursue your contention. Unfortunately, we were anything but and there's the issue. I don't believe these coaches are likely to get more improvement with changes than continuity. Our progress (if any) is going to be a long grind, IMO. I'd love to be wrong.

To be honest Dors I get where you are coming from. However I believe players are not quite as shackled as you seem to think nor would we create a step backwards by tweaking with the 23. As long as SB tells us straight the reason for x replacing y rather than 'y has been given a different role'

Ha. I'd somehow forgotten about that one despite it probably being the highlight of the world cup for me. I'd love to know what Borthwick actually told Ford in person. Presumably he wasn't trying to sell him on the idea that being an unused replacement was a promotion from winning that Argentina game on his own.

I'm all for cohesion but I'd really hope our players aren't going to be thrown that far off course by a couple of their other training mates (that they spend virtually 24/7 with) coming in and out of the side. I won't be devastated to see the same 23 again, but I can only imagine we're going to be even more conservative against France and Ireland so it would be a shame not to see more of the fresh faces.

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 11:16 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 10:46 am

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:59 am But if that isn’t his best XV then why stick with it.

I think you pick a side that can nullify the oppo strengths whilst exploiting their weaknesses

I agree IF players are allowed to think for themselves and IF any changes were made at the start of the two weeks training period. I doubt either proviso applies. You would not have picked SB's team for Italy or Wales and neither would I. Starting from scratch, neither of us would pick it v Scotland.

Contrarily, I'd add that if the team had looked slicker in the first two matches, I'd not hesitate to strengthen it to pursue your contention. Unfortunately, we were anything but and there's the issue. I don't believe these coaches are likely to get more improvement with changes than continuity. Our progress (if any) is going to be a long grind, IMO. I'd love to be wrong.

If we stick with continuity then the downside is EMB posters will be unable to debate the merit of one player over another. We will be left with FKAS defending SB ( only joking FKAS!) as the rest of us rip into him and Wigglesworth.

Even as a Tigers fan who thinks Borthwick is a good head coach, I still have no idea what Wigglesworth is doing there as attack coach. We at least seem to have a better structure now though I'd have preferred fixing the attack this 6N with Jones working on that area whilst Sinfield's defence was retained from the world cup and then moving onto changing the defence over in the summer as Sinfield got ready to leave.

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 12:34 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 11:16 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 10:46 am

I agree IF players are allowed to think for themselves and IF any changes were made at the start of the two weeks training period. I doubt either proviso applies. You would not have picked SB's team for Italy or Wales and neither would I. Starting from scratch, neither of us would pick it v Scotland.

Contrarily, I'd add that if the team had looked slicker in the first two matches, I'd not hesitate to strengthen it to pursue your contention. Unfortunately, we were anything but and there's the issue. I don't believe these coaches are likely to get more improvement with changes than continuity. Our progress (if any) is going to be a long grind, IMO. I'd love to be wrong.

If we stick with continuity then the downside is EMB posters will be unable to debate the merit of one player over another. We will be left with FKAS defending SB ( only joking FKAS!) as the rest of us rip into him and Wigglesworth.

Even as a Tigers fan who thinks Borthwick is a good head coach, I still have no idea what Wigglesworth is doing there as attack coach. We at least seem to have a better structure now though I'd have preferred fixing the attack this 6N with Jones working on that area whilst Sinfield's defence was retained from the world cup and then moving onto changing the defence over in the summer as Sinfield got ready to leave.

Oh, you’re a Tigers fan?

Care at 9, Lawrence at 12 apparently.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:57 pm Care at 9, Lawrence at 12 apparently.

No news on the forwards?

Per Telegraph:

Loose forward George Martin is also expected to return to the matchday squad after recovering from a knee injury and has been backed by Sinfield to “leave a mark on somebody”.

Sounds like he'll come on the bench.

The odds must be shortening on a 2nd row being selected at 6 to try and pinch Scottish lineout ball.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 5:27 pm Per Telegraph:

Loose forward George Martin is also expected to return to the matchday squad after recovering from a knee injury and has been backed by Sinfield to “leave a mark on somebody”.

Sounds like he'll come on the bench.

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 5:58 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 5:27 pm Per Telegraph:

Loose forward George Martin is also expected to return to the matchday squad after recovering from a knee injury and has been backed by Sinfield to “leave a mark on somebody”.

Sounds like he'll come on the bench.

Missed out the 'to'! Sorry.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 6:47 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 5:58 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 5:27 pm Per Telegraph:

Loose forward George Martin is also expected to return to the matchday squad after recovering from a knee injury and has been backed by Sinfield to “leave a mark on somebody”.

Sounds like he'll come on the bench.

Missed out the 'to'! Sorry.

I assume that means Coles drops out. No problem with that.

Scotland XV: 15. Blair Kinghorn; 14. Kyle Steyn, 13. Huw Jones, 12. Sione Tuipulotu, 11. Duhan van der Merwe; 10. Finn Russell (co-capt), 9. Ben White; 1. Pierre Schoeman, 2. George Turner, 3. Zander Fagerson; 4. Grant Gilchrist 5. Scott Cummings; 6. Jamie Ritchie, 7. Rory Darge (co-capt), 8. Jack Dempsey.

Replacements: 16 Ewan Ashman, 17 Alec Hepburn, 18 Elliot MIllar-Mills, 19 Sam Skinner, 20 Andy Christie; 21 George Horne, 22 Ben Healy, 23 Cameron Redpath.

15. George Furbank

14. Tommy Freeman

13. Henry Slade

12. Ollie Lawrence

11. Elliot Daly

10. George Ford - vice captain

9. Danny Care

1. Ellis Genge - vice captain

2. Jamie George - captain

3. Dan Cole

4. Maro Itoje - vice captain

5. Ollie Chessum

6. Ethan Roots

7. Sam Underhill

8. Ben Earl

Replacements

16. Theo Dan

17. Joe Marler

18. Will Stuart

19. George Martin

20. Chandler Cunningham-South

21. Ben Spencer

22. Fin Smith

23. Immanuel Feyi-Waboso

I was assuming Steward was injured, but it appears he's just been dropped. Bold call Cotton.

Puja

Steward dropped? Didnt see that happening. Pleased Lawrence is back but disappointed its Dingwall who misses out. Not quite sure what the prop reshuffle is all about.