Tom Homer

What's the future for this guy? I have seen him a few times this season on tv and he plays terrific. He runs well, very quick, but agile and powerful too. His passes are on target and connects with teammates in stride. He makes his tackles, most of which are right out of a text book or training film. That cover tackle last week was a thing of beauty. And, oh yes, he kick goals from everywhere. Still just a kid, and I wouldn't want him rushed into the England mess, but don't you think this is a kid with a future? I know he is playing fullback at the moment, but I think he came up as a wing and has played inside as well.

What do you think? Where would he fit in?

Very decent player, was causing the blues so many problems with the boot when we played them.

Englands cover for Foden perhaps? He has the skillset to possibly play at 10 too.

Personally think he has nothing redeeming apart from his fantastic goal kicking. I find the talk of him being International class laughable to be honest.

I'm a big fan of Homer, he's a cracking player with a well rounded skillset.

He's behind Foden & Brown as a FB, I'd be considering him more as a natural left wing, with his ability to cover FB allowing for a centre/wing impact option like Joseph on the bench.

The only downside for me is that he's not as good a strike runner as other options coming through at the moment. From a try scoring point of view I think Sharples, Wade & May have an edge on him. It depends what balance we need in the team.

He can cause problems with the ball in hand - see his try versus Worcester as a classic example of his running ability. However, he is perhaps not as big a threat as some of the other young players coming through. The defensive and kicking aspects of his game are spot on, but he will be looking to pose a bit more of a threat when breaking forward with the ball.

Very good goal kicker but not as interesting as Goode maybe as a runner...

I'd say hes behind more than just Foden and Brown. Armitage, Goode, Morgan are much better players imo. Plus there's players like Sharples, May who look much stronger than Homer at 15.

I didn't mention other FBs because there is no point after the top 2 as far as the EPS is concerned.

No way are Sharples & May better FBs than Homer, wingers yes. Goode had good parts to last season, but he's not been great this. Morgan yes, but he seems incapable of staying off the physio's bench. Armitage is a top FB, but his attitude and ban collecting are serious problems.

I'd without doubt have Sharples as a better FB, May possibly not as he's a little raw.

My problem with Homer is if you take away his goal kicking which England don't need, I can't see him offering anything apart from been safe.

To me the point about Homer is he is still 21, just a kid. He has a few years to hone his craft before thinking about a call up. And at 21 there better be people in front of him. I posted this because in each of the matches I have seen him play this year he has done very well, and shows a lot for the future. Frankly, I'd like to see him with some match time inside. And, I think there is something very special about the mental makeup of a 21 year old kid who does most of the kicking for his club.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I'd without doubt have Sharples as a better FB, May possibly not as he's a little raw.

My problem with Homer is if you take away his goal kicking which England don't need, I can't see him offering anything apart from been safe.

That seems like the same sort of logic that selected Monye at FB.

In terms of him not offering anything aside from his boot, it's interesting to compare his stats for the season to Sharples:


Homer/Sharples

matches 9/9
tries 1/2
kicks from hand 25/12
passes 33/16
metres carried 308/304
clean breaks 4/4
offloads 2/1
defenders beaten 11/9


Sharples is the better winger, but Homer is far more than just a boot.

From when I've seen him he seems to have more of the skill set of a centre than a back 3 - decent boot from hand, strong in defence, seems to run good lines but not great 1 on 1 or searing pace. Not sure on his passing but niwatts stats say he's not bad (although it doesn't state if those 33 passes went to hand!)

Forgot to add, if he feels his strongest position if FB then he will have to out Delon Armitage at LI before he can be considered for for the full England squad.

I'm pretty sure Homer has played more games at FB than Sharples so would expect him have stronger stats in certain areas.

Stats don't really give the whole picture either, I'm pretty sure a defence would be more concerned with Sharples running the ball back than Homer. Sharples tends to draw a defence and creates space for players around him.

I've stated a couple of times that I think Sharples is a better wing and running threat, what I was disputing were comments like:

"he has nothing redeeming apart from his fantastic goal kicking"

"if you take away his goal kicking..I can't see him offering anything apart from been safe"

And your point is?

That you're not a very good judge of players.

If you think that's true of Homer you must think only marginally more of Sharples.

Could I not just judge players differently to yourself? It's quite arrogant to state otherwise.

I stand by my comments and don't think the stats show a full picture. Sharples is a much better all round player than Homer at full back and on the wing.

I presume Homer is a much better place kicker as I've not seen Sharples.

Homer is not a particularly good player and I doubt we'd even be having this debate if he wasn't such a strong place kicker.

Idiotic post...

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Sharples is a much better all round player than Homer at full back

Come on, how many times has Sharples played at FB, 3 maybe 4 times? What is it with people making claims about players out of position.


You certainly seem to be making quite confused claims, one minute you say

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Plus there's players like Sharples, May who look much stronger than Homer at 15.

then the next

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I'd without doubt have Sharples as a better FB, May possibly not as he's a little raw.

Regarding Homer, he's a pretty decent player, but probably not as good as other players coming through. He seems to do well in most areas of his game, he'd be a handy player to have about and certainly wouldn't let anybody down, but I don't think he excels in enough areas to trump the competition he'll face over the next couple of years. Thereabouts though and only 21, so plenty of time to develop and advance his cause.

I'm pretty sure Sharples spent most of his time at FB when Morgan was/is injured.

I just don't think Homer is a particularly good player, think I'll leave it at that as we're going round in circles.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I'm pretty sure Sharples spent most of his time at FB when Morgan was/is injured.

I wonder if you are getting confused with players. Jonny May has played full back this season, while pretty sure it wa sFreddie Burns and Tom Voyce who covered for Morgans absences last season.

I'm not getting confused, Sharples filled in at FB on numerous occasions last season for Gloucester.

I apologise, in the last season and a half he has indeed played 4 times at FB. Not exactly numerous occassions though.

If he keeps performing as he is, he'll give himself a decent shout. Better than Goode who has been awful this year. Watched him against Northampton on Saturday and he looked clueless.
However, Foden, Brown, Morgan are ahead in the pecking order, with Armitage perhaps playing himself out of contention with discipline issues.

It's more than once so I'm claiming that as numerous!

Besides the point I was trying to make, Sharples could have played 3mins at FB and I'd still prefer him to Homer.

I think Homer has played well this year. His massive boot is a great tactical option and he has the composure to give a team security from the back. His running game could do with a little more expression but he is a young guy, the confidence to try more will come. I'd like to see him in the Saxons.

I am a huge Irish fan, and I have to partly agree with Pooly that if it wasnt for Homers goalkicking, there would not be this hype about him.
He is a solid player, but doesnt have that attacking threat of Sharples, Armitage, May etc.

However, his goal kicking is the best in the Premiership and he will win Irish games which is why he has to be in the team every week.

He is young and has time to develop his attacking game.

I guess it all depends on what you want from a player and how he fits in to the way the team plays. I accept that Homer does not possess the same running threat as Sharples or May, but fail to see how that makes him a poor player in some peoples eyes, as there is more to rugby than just running the ball.

When he does run the ball, he often breaks the initial tackle very well, and I would love to see him do it more, but he is playing at present in a team shorn of most of its' first choice backline through injury and suspension, and so at times he appears to be playing to specific instructions and taking the conservative option.

As a full back he is a good defender, reads the game well, has a good tactical boot, and rarely takes the wrong option and puts the team in trouble.

He has said himself that he feels he needs to develop his attacking game a bit and his aim this season is to get more amongst the tries.

He is a 21 year old kid, who is playing very well, and just because he is not as eye catching as some, it does not make him a bad player, as he is in fact the opposite, and has shown continually this season that he is very good.

I think the fact he has an excellent kicking game makes it easy to say he has no more to his game. He has been playing in a side with numerous injuries in the backline, so playing conservatively is probably the best option.

He's a good defender. good under the highball and a good kicker (place and from hand). Not lightning quick, and needs to improve on his running game, but has the makings of a very good player. Will be interesting to see him when he's had a run of games, with a centre partneship that are regular together and wingers who he has had time to develop a relationship with. Then we will see if he can get involved in attacks more.

On a side note didn't get to the game on Saturday, so can anyone tell me how Jarvis played?

Average.
Kicked out of hand reasonably well.

Jarvis did a job without ever looking likely to get the backline moving.

Similar player to Halfpenny in some respects but where Leigh has the advantage in pace Homer has the advantage in size and power. I have seen quite a bit of Tom Homer play and agree with you, definitely someone with a future. However England are blessed in the wing/full back positions right now it seems, don't forget Mike Brown is also playing well. If he wants an England future perhaps a move in-field to a place wheere England are not so blessed? Yes I know, another player out of position.

doctor_grey wrote: Still just a kid, and I wouldn't want him rushed into the England mess, but don't you think this is a kid with a future?

I think here lies one of the problems. Why not cap him now? Why not cap one of your promising young no.7s now? I don't see any reason why they have to represent England at Saxons level, etc before being capped. If you are good enough then you play for your country. NZ and recently Wales have done it to great effect.

The thing is he isn't quite ready for international rugby at the moment where as the Saxons would be a good testing ground away from his club where he can get experience without the big media pressure. Manu benefited from it, particularly the loss away in Ireland from which he came back a better player. Those experiences are worth something and in weather that could be miserable having his massive boot available will help the Saxons as well as test him out. If he does well with the Saxons he'll be in a good position to challenge for the summer tour.

Homer is a good young solid player. The fundamentals are there for him to become a very solid international player. Physically powerful, fearless in the tackle and under the high ball, strong positioning sense and of course, a massive boot.

He's a very English sort of full back really, sort of like a young Webb or a young Stimpson.

If he can work on his attacking game, less straight lines and more angles, and improve his stepping at pace, then he could really make a mark.

In terms of where he is in the grand selection scheme of things, behind Foden, Brown and Goode I think, so Saxons would be where I would put him. Also enables you to take a look at a real playmaker at 10, without having to worry about his kicking.

formerly known as Sam wrote:The thing is he isn't quite ready for international rugby at the moment...

Amazing how you know that.

Not a question of whether he's ready or not is it though?

It's a question of whether he's in the top 2/3 fullbacks in the country and therefore deserving of his place in the squad on merit. He's not outperforming Foden, Brown and Goode in my view. Until he does, he shouldn't be in the England squad.

New Zealand and Wales, the countries you cite as ones that "give youth a chance", do nothing of the sort. They just pick the best available players. Lydiate, Warburton and Falateu were the best players on form in their positions, that's why Gatland rightly selected them. Picking Homer would not be the same at all.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Not a question of whether he's ready or not is it though?

It's a question of whether he's in the top 2/3 fullbacks in the country and therefore deserving of his place in the squad on merit. He's not outperforming Foden, Brown and Goode in my view. Until he does, he shouldn't be in the England squad.

New Zealand and Wales, the countries you cite as ones that "give youth a chance", do nothing of the sort. They just pick the best available players. Lydiate, Warburton and Falateu were the best players on form in their positions, that's why Gatland rightly selected them. Picking Homer would not be the same at all.

Yes, something I had mentioned earlier. If you scroll up you will see I also mentioned that Brown is playing well. Armitage is set to come back to which would give them another option. Alex Goode though is one seriously overated player.

I'm sorry but if picking the players we did isn't giving youth a chance then what is it? We could have persisted with JT and the usual mob as we have done for year which has got us how far....fourth in the 6 Nations.

Morgannwg wrote:I'm sorry but if picking the players we did isn't giving youth a chance then what is it?

As I carefully explained, it's picking on form and completely ignoring age. Had Gatland picked JT he would have been ignoring form.

Pick on form, ignore age. That's how you get your best players on the pitch and maximise your chances of winning.

Neither Wales nor New Zealand ignored players in better form when making their selections. If England pick Homer, they would be doing exactly that.

I think it shows how much talent and depth there is in England at the moment, when its unlikely that he'll be picked. I know that 12 months ago Wales could have done with him.

I think it shows how much talent and depth there is in England at the moment, when its unlikely that he'll be picked. I know that 12 months ago Wales could have done with him.

True, and it's often the case with England. Buckets of depth and potential in one position and barely an international standard player in another.

Form will be interesting this season in particular, as a number of players might be prone to burn-out having featured in the World Cup, so their form may drop and allowing younger and fresher players to impress.

To my mind that's fine, and the senior players should be made to re-earn their positions. Something that England really failed to grasp directly after 2003.