The Magnificent 7

http://www.v2journal.com/the-magnificent-seven.html
In the wake of consecutive defeats against Australia and South Africa, there has been a growing clamour from some quarters for the inclusion of a 'genuine openside' in the England team. At present the 7 jersey is worn by captain Chris Robshaw, a man who played the majority of his early Premiership career as a blindside. Less than 6 months ago, after leading England to a second place finish in the 6 Nations, and then performing ably, both as a player and captain down in South Africa, Robshaw was being lauded for both his leadership, and his work at the breakdown.

Of course South Africa had spent June playing with a huge carrying back row, and no fetcher, and with Bismarck du Plessis also missing the threat from them over the ball at the tackle area was not massive. Since then, Robshaw has faced off against Michael Hooper and Francois Louw, two proper opensides, and he has found that a more difficult proposition.

My view of Robshaw is that he is a good leader, who the players respect, but he is a 6, and at best a 6 and half. I do not think he has made the correct calls 100% of the time in the last two matches, but I also don't believe that those calls were the main reason for the defeats. In both games England's half backs were poor and failed to control the game. Part of this however stemmed from the breakdown, and a lack of quick ball being available, which invariably meant that our backs had little chance once the ball did end up in their hands.

So what, or possibly who is the answer to this issue, and the man who can help to spark the attacking threat within the England team. Looking through the available options, it appears to me that there are potentially 7 pretenders to the crown, and they are listed below.

Club	Name	DoB	Age	Height	Weight	Caps
	Chris Robshaw	4th June 1986	26	6'2"	17st 4lbs	11
	Steffon Armitage	20th September 1985	27	5'9"	16st 3lbs	5
	David Seymour	27th September 1984	28	5'11"	15st 2lbs	0
	Andy Saull	27th September 1988	24	6'1"	16st 3lbs	0
	Will Fraser	29th October 1989	23	6'2"	14st 2lbs	0
	Jamie Gibson	27th September 1990	22	6'5"	16st 12lbs	0
	Luke Wallace	2nd October 1990	22	6'1"	16st	0
	Matt Kvesic	14th April 1992	20	6'1"	16st 5lbs	0

Looking at them in turn, Steffon Armitage is clearly the standout. In fine form since his transfer to Toulon he has won countless awards and is arguably the form openside in the northern hemisphere. Strong over the ball, his breakdown work is exceptional, and he also brings a huge work rate, and great ball carrying. The official problem however according to the RFU and Stuart Lancaster is that he plays in France and would not be available for training camps, although Lancaster's comments about his fitness and that he plays in a dominant pack give rise to the suspicion that he simply does not fancy him at international level. At present Lancaster does not have to show his hand when it comes to Armitage, and only a move home is likely to force the head coach to nail his colours to the mast.

Beyond Armitage there is not really a standout candidate, but there is a pack of players, all of whom may feel they could or should be in with a shot at some point in the immediate future. The eldest is Sale Shark's David Seymour, who at 28 may have missed the boat. A consistent performer, who wouldn't let anyone down, there may be question marks about his size at international level, as well as whether or not he has that little bit of x factor that you need to succeed at the very top.

Then there are the Saracens duo of Andy Saull and Will Fraser. Saull, a couple of years ago was touted as the next big thing, and has been in and around the Saxons. Injuries, Jaques Burger, and the late emergence of Fraser have somewhat stalled his progress at Saracens, and at 24, he is the eldest of the young guns competing for the shirt. What he brings is good work at breakdown, but even better link play and energy. He needs a run at club level though in order to force his claims. That may be difficult, as Fraser has in recent times looked the better player, and rarely seems to have a poor game. Good on the deck, the question marks over him are similar to those over Seymour, and he may need a string of big performances in the Heineken Cup in order to catapult him into the reckoning.

Jamie Gibson has been in the England squad and toured South Africa in the summer, so is clearly somebody who is on Lancaster's radar. As a London Irish fan, I rate the young man highly, but I am not sure that he is actually the proper 7 that England may be looking for. He has many fine attributes, and is decent over the ball, but he is a utility back row, who long term I think could end up at number 8, where his good rugby brain may be better served.

The England captain's young Quins team mate Luke Wallace is next on my list, but he has a huge fight on his hands even for his clubs 7 jersey. An all action player, Wallace burst onto the Premiership scene during the World Cup last year and impressed with a string of performances that belied his inexperience. This season game time has been harder to come by, but he captained Quins in the LV Cup producing an astonishing MOTM performance against Bath. He has good hands and links play well, but is also excellent on the deck, and in a twitter Q & A earlier this year cited slowing down opposition ball and making ours quick as his key aims on the field. If he can get enough game time at Quins, he looks a tremendous prospect.

The youngest of the group is Matt Kvesic, Worcester Warrior's England U20 star. This young man looks very good, and gets through a good amount of breakdown work, however it seems that he doesn't always play at 7 for his club, with some appearances at 8, and if he is to be the answer to the problem on the openside, then he may need to be specializing at club level first.


So there are options, but will, or even should Stuart Lancaster select them? My own view is that Chris Robshaw is a 6, and should be competing with Tom Wood, Tom Croft and James Haskell for that jersey. Back rows are about balance, and the balance of the England one is wrong at present. For me Lancaster ought to bite the bullet and have a look at Armitage, a back row of Robshaw, Armitage and Morgan is far more balanced than what we have seen so far. There is carrying, tackling and breakdown skills, and this may give us a better chance of using our backs to hurt teams, rather than as a defensive unit.

Sadly, I suspect that I will not see that combination in England jerseys in the near future. That being the case, the next in line has to be Wallace. He has looked very good every time I have watched him play, and does not appear to be fazed by anything. Him in there with Robshaw and Morgan could be a similar unit to at Quins, where he has played well with Robshaw and Easter alongside him.

Come to think of it, Nick Easter. Isn't he English qualified?

The one name bat you have missed out that I have seen get the better of all the above candidates (except Armitage) that you have listed is James Scaysbrook - too old probably, but if he was at a more 'establshed' club like Tigers, Quins or Saints, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him called up

He's done well since coming back to the Premiership with Exeter, but I think his ship has most definitely sailed. I also think with him, that he works exceptionally well as part of the Chiefs back row, but may not be as effective with other players, and certainly I would have questions about his ability to make the step up a level.

Imagine a back row of: Johnson-Scaysbrook-Morgan............now that's a back row with plenty of 'dog'!!

Hmm, maybe more mongrel than pedigree?!

If you don't want Morgan then we'll take him back he looks better in red.

Too late mate, he's tied to the rose, but you can have McShingler if you want, I'm sure the Scots won't mind!

Nah we're ok without him!!

Armitage all day long for me, I've been a massive fan since he started turning out regularly for Irish, it may be the fact that he's in France, it may have a little to do with the fact that he will be right on the upper end of SL's age limit for 2015 (30) and the fact that he looks like a 7 from the amateur era I'm sure doesn't help, but as an out and out 7 he's head and shoulders above the others on the list.

Armitage has an instinctive game and always seems to be in the right position despite being a little unorthodox in his lines.

As far as Robshaw goes, I'd say he's a 6.5, but if England continue with a 2nd row that produces turnover like they did on Saturday, the traditional 7 becomes less of a linchpin.

In terms of positives for Robshaw, he had a massive game on Saturday in terms of his work rate, he carried well, put in as many tackles as any other forward and hit just about every ruck in the second half. In terms of negatives, he doesn't win much turnover ball and he doesn't seem to have the link game between forwards and backs.

I think Robshaw's had a hard time over his decision to kick for goal on Saturday, if Farrell had just put up and done what he was told, England would have been receiving the restart with nearly 2 minutes on the clock, if Botha hadn't spilled the catch England still would have had an opportunity to run the ball back at SA and get some ground (SA were chucking away pernalties in the last 10), and to be honest, the lineout was far from stable and just as likely to cough the ball if he'd have gone for the corner. When was the last time England drove a maul over against a SH team anyway?

Kvesic and Wallace are the next in line for me as ones for the future, Saull and Fraser are a bit "Ready Salted" and I think Gibson's too tall for Test level and would have difficulty getting down to the ball first and staying there.

Another name not on the list but may be worth a look in 12 months is Bath's Guy Mercer, he's starting to fulfill his potential in Louw's shadow, he's sorting his strength and fitness out and had a cracking game against Quins on Friday. His one hurdle in terms of future development is Louw, and that's a pretty big hurdle. He seems to have finally won over the new coaches though.

My issue with Robshaw's decision to take the points was not the decision itself, but was the manner in which it was made. Two weeks running he has made decision and been talk out of them by team mates. Against Aus he clearly indicated that he wanted to go for the sticks until Care and Flood got involved and he changed his mind and went for the corner. Against the Boks we all clearly heard him asking Nigel Owens if he could change his decision.

For what it is worth I think he is a cracking player, but at present he is trying to be everything out there when really he should be concentrating more on his own game. I think he's our best blindside, as his work ethic is massive, and he does in general terms lead well. Just wish we'd get to see him lining up alongside Steffon rather than instead of him.

Ozzy3213 wrote:
Of course South Africa had spent June playing with a huge carrying back row, and no fetcher, and with Bismarck du Plessis also missing the threat from them over the ball at the tackle area was not massive. Since then, Robshaw has faced off against Michael Hooper and Francois Louw, two proper opensides, and he has found that a more difficult proposition.

I keep making this point, but can someone explain to me why exactly the quality of the opposition's openside would have any effect on the play of yours? Louw/Hooper etc are no better at clearing out rucks in attack than anyone else, so the fact that they are there shouldn't affect Robshaw's work at defensive breakdowns. It's like suggesting that one quarterback's performance directly affects the opposition quarterback.

Scaysbrook impresses me everytime i see him...

Saull is out of it in my eyes...

And once we're back in the prem our captain Will Welch will be straight into the Saxons to have a look at him...then he'll be promoted.

And Mark Wilson wont be far behind him he is absolutely awesome...as will Chris York...in fact our back row is seriously class...

Ozzy3213 wrote:My issue with Robshaw's decision to take the points was not the decision itself, but was the manner in which it was made. Two weeks running he has made decision and been talk out of them by team mates. Against Aus he clearly indicated that he wanted to go for the sticks until Care and Flood got involved and he changed his mind and went for the corner. Against the Boks we all clearly heard him asking Nigel Owens if he could change his decision.

For what it is worth I think he is a cracking player, but at present he is trying to be everything out there when really he should be concentrating more on his own game. I think he's our best blindside, as his work ethic is massive, and he does in general terms lead well. Just wish we'd get to see him lining up alongside Steffon rather than instead of him.

I said exactly this on another thread...against the Boks it was Owen Farrell argueing with him. If that had been Johno or Dalaglio...they wouldnt have even been considering argueing...and if they had they'd have been slapped daft in the changing rooms...

GeordieFalcon wrote:Scaysbrook impresses me everytime i see him...

Saull is out of it in my eyes...

And once we're back in the prem our captain Will Welch will be straight into the Saxons to have a look at him...then he'll be promoted.

And Mark Wilson wont be far behind him he is absolutely awesome...as will Chris York...in fact our back row is seriously class...

Glad to hear he's doing well. Showed flashes at Quins but never got a run in the team to show how good he could be.

thomh wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:
Of course South Africa had spent June playing with a huge carrying back row, and no fetcher, and with Bismarck du Plessis also missing the threat from them over the ball at the tackle area was not massive. Since then, Robshaw has faced off against Michael Hooper and Francois Louw, two proper opensides, and he has found that a more difficult proposition.

I keep making this point, but can someone explain to me why exactly the quality of the opposition's openside would have any effect on the play of yours? Louw/Hooper etc are no better at clearing out rucks in attack than anyone else, so the fact that they are there shouldn't affect Robshaw's work at defensive breakdowns. It's like suggesting that one quarterback's performance directly affects the opposition quarterback.

Louw and Hooper read the game as 7's. They instinctively know when to go hands on ball and when to sit off. Generally they would be there that split second quicker than Robshaw would to compete for it. yes, the clearing out of each combatants team mates will have an effect, but essentially if you chucked a ball into a breakdown, I would expect Louw or Hooper to be there before Robshaw, and be more difficult to shift of the ball, hence they are in direct competition, unlike opposition quarterbacks, who are never on the field at the same time.

http://www.v2journal.com/the-magnificent-seven.html

How strange, here's an article from the old 606 entitled Magnificent 7?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/F13534163?thread=6583815&show=50


I'm a seer I tells ye, a sage, a ... where was I?

Good article. You do have to wonder what Armitage would have to do to get a run out. The comments about looking good behind a dominant pack were a bit barbed, many players wouldn't look as good behind a retreating pack. Although I presume what he meant was that while Steffon looked like a handy player at Irish, he was never the stand-out player that he has become.

As a long term player, I wonder if Kvseic will end up being the man for England, he can currently play across the backrow, but you can't help thinking that in the next season or 2 either Saints, Sarries or Leicester will try and nab him and once that happens he will be able to settle at 7. However being a star at U20 level doesnt mean you will make the step up, James Scaysbrook or Hugo Ellis as a case in point.

What is interesting about any of these sort of articles is that if it had been written say a year ago, Andy Saul would be the front runner and seen as a good bet as the future 7. Fastforward a year and he has lost his way a bit. In another year there will be a new young player who looks very strong.

I agree that the Newcastle lads may come into the reckoning sooner rather than later, playing every week in the championship is clearly better for a players development rather than holding tackle bags and getting splinters warming the bench.

Surely you'll go with Kvseic I mean he was born I Germany and you like your foregin born players

I'll see your Matt Kvesic and raise you North, Cuthbert and Aaron Shingler. Is that some stones raining down on that greenhouse that I can see???

Ummm: Botha, Corbserio, Hartley, Barritt, Tuilagi, Waldrom, Vunipola

Ka boom!!!!

Ok back on topic...is Kvesic playing regularly..likewise Wallace?

Kvsiec's just come back from injury and is getting gametime now.

Wallace plays when Robshaw doesn't, interesting article in TRP where he says he wants to push Robshaw to 6 and 7 is the only position he wants.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Ok back on topic...is Kvesic playing regularly..likewise Wallace?

Kvesic seems to play 8 for Wuss as much as 7. Wallace is dropped as soon as Robshaw is back.

While Robshaw initially entered the Quins team as a 6 (mainly due to being unable to unseast Skinner at that time who was I think the england A captain) most of his rugby before and since has been at 7. Personally I think he is our best chance at having an international quality openside - and he plays the game like an openside. Sure he is different to Steffton - not least in being fit and not fat. I guess I just cannot get a grip on this love in with Armitage - at times it feels like forums (and pundits) always favour someone outside the selected group. It is of course much easier to shine at club rugby than at international.

Of course if forums selected teams there would be 7 or 8 changes evewry single week.

Interestingly, what has happened to Skinner? I remember Jono telling journalists that he would certainly play for England one day when he started playing for Leicester. Then he moved to Quins and was club captain and now he has pretty much disappeared...

You are right LT that especially when things aren't going well, it seems that any player outside the team seems to be suggested as a guaranteed game changer. I mean Sharples would have been in a lot of people's England XV last season, a couple of bad games and suddenly Wade is the saviour etc...

I love how heavy armitage is what is the fella made out of....bricks ? Great article, for me Wallace has to move clubs, he is a potential england star but will always be behind the club captain who is still young. He cant afford to make the mistake tom guest did and become a bench warmer for an engalnd star when you have the potential to be a great one yourself. As far as good teams needing an out and out 7 where should he go Northampton, Gloucester ?

Guy mercer at bath is one to keep half an eye on, he also is struggling for first team action and bath are pants at bringing guys through but he has bags of talent is in the fetcher mould and is undergoing an apprenticeship from Louw.

Sir Chris

Its an interesting thought on Wallace moving.
What is the right time?

Players like Alex Gray NO.8 for us moved (i think) too early...he was getting games being brougt on nicely then moved to LI and is nowhere now.

Then as you say players like Guest...has stayed put when probably should have moved.

So for Kvesic...if he's playing week in week out for Wuss (yes preferably at 7 not 8)...is that not better than playing once in a blue moon for say Leicester or Saints...

Or am i wrong? Will they learn more at Saints / Tigers etc being amongst better standard of players and playing once in a blue moon.

"Sure he is different to Steffton - not least in being fit and not fat"

LondonTiger wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Ok back on topic...is Kvesic playing regularly..likewise Wallace?

Kvesic seems to play 8 for Wuss as much as 7. Wallace is dropped as soon as Robshaw is back.

While Robshaw initially entered the Quins team as a 6 (mainly due to being unable to unseast Skinner at that time who was I think the england A captain) most of his rugby before and since has been at 7. Personally I think he is our best chance at having an international quality openside - and he plays the game like an openside. Sure he is different to Steffton - not least in being fit and not fat. I guess I just cannot get a grip on this love in with Armitage - at times it feels like forums (and pundits) always favour someone outside the selected group. It is of course much easier to shine at club rugby than at international.

Of course if forums selected teams there would be 7 or 8 changes evewry single week.

Of course it is easier to shine form outside the team than within, especially if the team has been losing. Steff may look a bit rotund, but I doubt there is more than an ounce of fat on him, and I've never seen fitness be an issue for him in all the years I've watched him.

Ozzy3213 wrote:

thomh wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:
Of course South Africa had spent June playing with a huge carrying back row, and no fetcher, and with Bismarck du Plessis also missing the threat from them over the ball at the tackle area was not massive. Since then, Robshaw has faced off against Michael Hooper and Francois Louw, two proper opensides, and he has found that a more difficult proposition.

I keep making this point, but can someone explain to me why exactly the quality of the opposition's openside would have any effect on the play of yours? Louw/Hooper etc are no better at clearing out rucks in attack than anyone else, so the fact that they are there shouldn't affect Robshaw's work at defensive breakdowns. It's like suggesting that one quarterback's performance directly affects the opposition quarterback.

Louw and Hooper read the game as 7's. They instinctively know when to go hands on ball and when to sit off. Generally they would be there that split second quicker than Robshaw would to compete for it. yes, the clearing out of each combatants team mates will have an effect, but essentially if you chucked a ball into a breakdown, I would expect Louw or Hooper to be there before Robshaw, and be more difficult to shift of the ball, hence they are in direct competition, unlike opposition quarterbacks, who are never on the field at the same time.

Yes but in reality there aren't really any breakdowns where you just chuck the ball on the floor. There's an attacking side and a defending side, and there still hasn't been an answer as to why someone like Louw or Hooper being on the field should have any impact at all on Robshaw's ability to win turnovers, given that they're no better than any other member of the pack at clearing out rucks..

A better example might be strikers in football. They're on the pitch at the same time, but no-one would ever say "we need to pick a big striker to counter the threat posed by Drogba". This idea that there's a battle between opensides strikes me as making about as much sense as that.

thomh

scenario 1

Manu carries in and is tackled Timani. Hooper arrives a split second before Robshaw and attempts to rip the ball. Robshaw gets there and gets hands on but Hooper having the better base and being set quicker rips the ball and it's turned over. Players clearing out have no effect on either Hooper or Robshaw.

Robshaw has failed to secure England's ball and Hooper has effected a turnover.

Scenario 2

Ioane carries in and is tackled by Barritt. Hooper arrives a split second before Robshaw, gets hands on and secures the ball before Robshaw can get over it and steal it for it England.

Robshaw has failed to turn it over and Hooper has secured good ball for his team.


It's not just about turnovers, it is also about securing your own ball (and quickly and cleanly). The 7's are , or should be in direct competition at every breakdown, regardless of being in defence or attack.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Sir Chris

Its an interesting thought on Wallace moving.
What is the right time?

Players like Alex Gray NO.8 for us moved (i think) too early...he was getting games being brougt on nicely then moved to LI and is nowhere now.

Then as you say players like Guest...has stayed put when probably should have moved.

So for Kvesic...if he's playing week in week out for Wuss (yes preferably at 7 not 8)...is that not better than playing once in a blue moon for say Leicester or Saints...

Or am i wrong? Will they learn more at Saints / Tigers etc being amongst better standard of players and playing once in a blue moon.

Theres a definate balance isn't there, Alex probably made the wrong choice as a year of regular starts with the falcons under the tutiledge of an ex england number 8 legend in the coalface of the championship would have been a fantastic base for his burgeoning career. Then theres guys like billy twelvetrees who had all the skills to be a starting 12 but was being used off the bench as a utility player by tigers so had to move...so far he's the starting 12 and pushing hard for england so looks like the right choice. Then theres Paul Doran Jones getting regular starts for Gloucester and in the england frame, so he moves to club where he only really ever warms pine and is slipping down the england pecking order.

I think starting once in a while off the bench for a club is great as long as your still undertaking your apprenticeship and your coach sees you starting in the first team in the next season or so (like tom youngs 2011/12) but if you back yourself for greater things, when you reach a certain age then the only way to truly progress and push for honours is week in and week out rugby in your best position, if your only being used as a reserve for the foreseeable future or moved around each week then its time to look elsewhere and hope an england feeder club has some space.

Ozzy

I understand that, but my point is that securing the ball when your team is in possession at a ruck isn't the openside's job any more than anyone else in the pack, so it's not Hooper vs Robshaw. It's Hooper vs whichever English player is trying to clear out the ruck.

Securing quick ball is a completely different skill to winning turnovers, and not one that is specific to your openside at all. Therefore, the idea of a battle between opensides is just a non-starter in my opinion.

Opensides rarely face off in direct completion. You want your 7 to arrive pretty quickly to a defensive breakdown/ruck but this isn't always the case when attacking.

I don't think a 7 ever really dominates another 7, he may play better which was possibly the case against Aus, not so much against SA for me.

Robshaw/Seymour/Saull/Fraser/Gibson/Wallace/Kvesic in the AP this season

Matches 7/9/4/9/7/2/9
Tries 0/0/0/0/1/0/0
Try Assists 1/0/0/0/0/0/0
Passes 42/14/2/10/6/2/14
Carries 65/32/8/24/24/6/49
Metres 71/53/11/36/79/10/207
Clean Breaks 1/0/0/0/1/0/3
Offloads 4/0/0/0/1/0/5
Defenders Beaten 5/0/1/0/0/0/15
Tackles 77/99/35/47/42/15/56
Missed Tackles 3/6/3/7/4/0/3
Penalties Conceded 2/2/2/3/10/1/9
Turnovers Conceded 2/2/3/7/6/0/6
Lineouts Won 9/2/0/0/18/2/7
Lineout Steals 2/2/0/0/1/0/1

I see Gatland's just gone on the record with the Torygraph saying that he won't take Robshaw with the Lions as an openside because he naturally isn't one.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/britishandirishlionsrugby/9709892/Warren-Gatland-spurns-Chris-Robshaw-for-Lions-tour-to-Australia.html

Thanks Glas.

That's not a controversial view, is it? Robshaw at 7 is fine if you want to play a certain way.

I think the Argentina tour will be the perfect chance to try out a "specialist" 7. Roshaw will probably be away with the lions so it'll give Lancaster a pressure free option. I'd go with Armitage followed by Wallace (I am biased but he is quality).

Perhaps we'll see:

6. Wood..........6.Wood..........6. Croft
7. Armitage......7. Wallace......7. Wood
8. Morgan........8. Haskell.......8. Morgan



I also expect that we'll see Wallace play a lot more at 7 for Quins in the future and Robshaw alternate between 6 and 7 more often as Fa'Asavalu is getting on a bit and his performances fluctuate.

For England they need to try out plenty of combinations in the backrows, not just to find the best but to build some experienced proven depth. Look at the awesome second string backrow that France have thanks to mad Marcs tinkering.

Glas a du wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/britishandirishlionsrugby/9709892/Warren-Gatland-spurns-Chris-Robshaw-for-Lions-tour-to-Australia.html

The problem for Robshaw and any England 7 currently is that SL's tactics don't use a poaching 7. Chris is expected to get through a lot of tackles and try to slow the opposition down in the danger zone, but we play a very low risk game and don't look to effect many turn overs. Robshaw is also told to stand out from the rucks as first reciever a lot of the time to try to help turn slow ball to faster ball.

If Gatland wants an out and out poacher then I can see why he'd be worried. For the record Robshaw can do that, he was asked to in SA and did it very well. Likewise for Quins in the AP final, but it isn't his first instinct and certainly isn't his only or primary use.

Horses for courses really.

Glas a du wrote:That's not a controversial view, is it?

Glas, it's not so much that it's 'controversial' it's just a case of Fatland sticking both feet in it and bad timing. Did he really need to come out & say that about Robshaw? An England captain a lot of England fans rally around after last years RWC debacle. Or would it better if he's just kept his mouth shut & made his selections down the line? Not in the AI's, and not right before the 6N when it seems he's blatently favouring others.

How would saying that not lead people to a belief in conflicts of interest and favouring players for bias and not positional style? Personally i don't give a monkies about the Lions, but these statements will be a kick in the teeth to professional players (especially one singled out), and to a lot of England fans that do care about their team, it's captain and the Lions tour.

So no, it's not a controversial view, it's just flapping the cake hole un-necessarily and at the wrong time.

Oh and very good article Ozzy, five stars!

AlastairW wrote:

Glas a du wrote:That's not a controversial view, is it?

Glas, it's not so much that it's 'controversial' it's just a case of Fatland sticking both feet in it and bad timing. Did he really need to come out & say that about Robshaw? An England captain a lot of England fans rally around after last years RWC debacle. Or would it better if he's just kept his mouth shut & made his selections down the line? Not in the AI's, and not right before the 6N when it seems he's blatently favouring others.

How would saying that not lead people to a belief in conflicts of interest and favouring players for bias and not positional style? Personally i don't give a monkies about the Lions, but these statements will be a kick in the teeth to professional players (especially one singled out), and to a lot of England fans that do care about their team, it's captain and the Lions tour.

So no, it's not a controversial view, it's just flapping the cake hole un-necessarily and at the wrong time.

Just a classic case of him trying to take the spotlight off of a frankly horrific Wales Autumn AW, Gatland's well known for these mind games. Robshaw will get over it, he had a couple of seasons of MJ messing him around which didn't slow him down one bit, can't see this suddenly getting to him.

yappysnap wrote:

AlastairW wrote:

Glas a du wrote:That's not a controversial view, is it?

Glas, it's not so much that it's 'controversial' it's just a case of Fatland sticking both feet in it and bad timing. Did he really need to come out & say that about Robshaw? An England captain a lot of England fans rally around after last years RWC debacle. Or would it better if he's just kept his mouth shut & made his selections down the line? Not in the AI's, and not right before the 6N when it seems he's blatently favouring others.

How would saying that not lead people to a belief in conflicts of interest and favouring players for bias and not positional style? Personally i don't give a monkies about the Lions, but these statements will be a kick in the teeth to professional players (especially one singled out), and to a lot of England fans that do care about their team, it's captain and the Lions tour.

So no, it's not a controversial view, it's just flapping the cake hole un-necessarily and at the wrong time.

Just a classic case of him trying to take the spotlight off of a frankly horrific Wales Autumn AW, Gatland's well known for these mind games. Robshaw will get over it, he had a couple of seasons of MJ messing him around which didn't slow him down one bit, can't see this suddenly getting to him.

For sure Yappy, i'd be happy to just palm Cipriani off onto the Lions squad for next year so England players have more time to play together as a team tbh, but i understand this is not a generally held view

AlastairW wrote:

Glas a du wrote:That's not a controversial view, is it?

Glas, it's not so much that it's 'controversial' it's just a case of Fatland sticking both feet in it and bad timing. Did he really need to come out & say that about Robshaw? An England captain a lot of England fans rally around after last years RWC debacle. Or would it better if he's just kept his mouth shut & made his selections down the line? Not in the AI's, and not right before the 6N when it seems he's blatently favouring others.

How would saying that not lead people to a belief in conflicts of interest and favouring players for bias and not positional style? Personally i don't give a monkies about the Lions, but these statements will be a kick in the teeth to professional players (especially one singled out), and to a lot of England fans that do care about their team, it's captain and the Lions tour.

So no, it's not a controversial view, it's just flapping the cake hole un-necessarily and at the wrong time.

So it is controversial. Thanks for clearing that up.

thomh wrote:Ozzy

I understand that, but my point is that securing the ball when your team is in possession at a ruck isn't the openside's job any more than anyone else in the pack, so it's not Hooper vs Robshaw. It's Hooper vs whichever English player is trying to clear out the ruck.

Securing quick ball is a completely different skill to winning turnovers, and not one that is specific to your openside at all. Therefore, the idea of a battle between opensides is just a non-starter in my opinion.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Opensides rarely face off in direct completion. You want your 7 to arrive pretty quickly to a defensive breakdown/ruck but this isn't always the case when attacking.

I don't think a 7 ever really dominates another 7, he may play better which was possibly the case against Aus, not so much against SA for me.

Sorry fellas, but I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you both on this one. If we are talking about a 'traditional 7' then you are looking at a player whose core responsibilities are

1. Securing quick ball for his team
2. Slowing down opposition ball
3. Winning turnovers

1 and 2 a diametrically opposed to each other and therefore bring the 7's into direct conflict. Of course at a ruck the contribution of overs is a factor, but ultimately the 7's are competing with each other. Whenever any 7 is interviewed, and asked who there most difficult opponent is, they don't select a lock or blindside and cite them as being tough as they regularly cleared them out when they were trying to get over the ball. They name another openside and talk about him being a real nuisance for them on the deck, where they are both competing for the same thing, the ball.

Most recently was former all black Craig Newby who actually gave Steffon as his most difficult opponent. As I have said, this isn't a bash Robshaw thread as I rate him highly, just as a 6.

Perhaps in the case of some 7s, but England use Robshaw as a carrier and first receiver quite a lot, so to say that he personally lost out to Hooper/Louw/whoever I don't think is fair. These days I would say that clearing out rucks is the job of all the forwards, but you may be right.

Glas a du wrote:

AlastairW wrote:

Glas a du wrote:That's not a controversial view, is it?

Glas, it's not so much that it's 'controversial' it's just a case of Fatland sticking both feet in it and bad timing. Did he really need to come out & say that about Robshaw? An England captain a lot of England fans rally around after last years RWC debacle. Or would it better if he's just kept his mouth shut & made his selections down the line? Not in the AI's, and not right before the 6N when it seems he's blatently favouring others.

How would saying that not lead people to a belief in conflicts of interest and favouring players for bias and not positional style? Personally i don't give a monkies about the Lions, but these statements will be a kick in the teeth to professional players (especially one singled out), and to a lot of England fans that do care about their team, it's captain and the Lions tour.

So no, it's not a controversial view, it's just flapping the cake hole un-necessarily and at the wrong time.

So it is controversial. Thanks for clearing that up.

Semantics Glas. The content; no. Which is what i judge controversiality on. Just very poor timing, or very good timing depending on factors neither of us can know about.

Ozzy3213 wrote:

thomh wrote:Ozzy

I understand that, but my point is that securing the ball when your team is in possession at a ruck isn't the openside's job any more than anyone else in the pack, so it's not Hooper vs Robshaw. It's Hooper vs whichever English player is trying to clear out the ruck.

Securing quick ball is a completely different skill to winning turnovers, and not one that is specific to your openside at all. Therefore, the idea of a battle between opensides is just a non-starter in my opinion.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Opensides rarely face off in direct completion. You want your 7 to arrive pretty quickly to a defensive breakdown/ruck but this isn't always the case when attacking.

I don't think a 7 ever really dominates another 7, he may play better which was possibly the case against Aus, not so much against SA for me.

Sorry fellas, but I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you both on this one. If we are talking about a 'traditional 7' then you are looking at a player whose core responsibilities are

1. Securing quick ball for his team
2. Slowing down opposition ball
3. Winning turnovers

1 and 2 a diametrically opposed to each other and therefore bring the 7's into direct conflict. Of course at a ruck the contribution of overs is a factor, but ultimately the 7's are competing with each other. Whenever any 7 is interviewed, and asked who there most difficult opponent is, they don't select a lock or blindside and cite them as being tough as they regularly cleared them out when they were trying to get over the ball. They name another openside and talk about him being a real nuisance for them on the deck, where they are both competing for the same thing, the ball.

Most recently was former all black Craig Newby who actually gave Steffon as his most difficult opponent. As I have said, this isn't a bash Robshaw thread as I rate him highly, just as a 6.

No problem with a bit of constructive bashing Ozzy, I think we all get a bit too precious about our players at times anyway.

It'd be interesting to see an England team with a Steffon Armitage or Luke Wallace at 7 for them.