Tuilagi

First topic message reminder :

Have to say, I am a little worried about taking Tuilagi on the Lions now.

This weekend Leicester had almost all the ball, and he was totally anonymous.

If he can not impose himself on a game with 60-70% possession, and it totally outplayed by his own team mate in center - who made countless line breaks and looked dangerous - I do start to worry

LordDowlais wrote:

TJ wrote:Dowlais - but several of those players you list are not the creative type of centres we feel we would need - and in the opinion of many of us twelvetrees should be playing. He looked very good the chance he got and I cannot understand why he was dropped again.

I want to see the best players playing for the Lions, not players who could be creative, when he starts pulling up trees for England then I will change my mind, for now it is one of the ones I have metioned above.

Wouldn't you rather see the best team though? Sometimes you need to look at the best combinations and who operates best with who, or under what game plan. Rather than simply picking the 15 best players.

TJ wrote:Dowlais. the issue here is we are playing Australia who will soak up direct pressure all day. We will need guile to beat them so Barritt, Roberts, Tuilagi will not do the job without a creative partner and Earls and Evans are not up to standard.

A midfield containing nothing but bosh merchants will mean the back 3 get no attacking ball and we will have a great back 3. We need that back 3 to get ball at pace and with a bit of space - the midfield need to be selected to do this. The wales game plan will not work.

By this theory then do you agree that perhaps Scott Williams is deserving of a chance, after all he is creative and good in defence, also he has more caps to his name than Twelvetrees does, and he has got a few try's at international level as well, does this make him fit into your category as well, because if it does then surely even Scott Williams is infront of Twelvetrees, and this is using your idea of picking a player.

In the case of Tuilagi, he is potentially devastating in the right setup. When teams have to commit players to nullifying him, that frees up the rest of the team. In the case of England I don't think they had any other players to offer a significant threat aside from Tuilagi though. Mike Brown maybe, but he is a 15 for me, currently wasted on the wing. Imagine if they had the likes of Wade out wide, to exploit the space created by defenders committing to Tuilagi.

If you have a player with the ability to literally scare defences into committing more men, that is a great weapon in itself.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

TJ wrote:Dowlais - but several of those players you list are not the creative type of centres we feel we would need - and in the opinion of many of us twelvetrees should be playing. He looked very good the chance he got and I cannot understand why he was dropped again.

I want to see the best players playing for the Lions, not players who could be creative, when he starts pulling up trees for England then I will change my mind, for now it is one of the ones I have metioned above.

Wouldn't you rather see the best team though? Sometimes you need to look at the best combinations and who operates best with who, or under what game plan. Rather than simply picking the 15 best players.

Very true RG. I don't expect 36 to go on the tour, but if he did it would be perfectly possible for him to form an excellent partnership with ANO centre and make the test team. Similar things have happened on Lions tours before.

LordDowlais wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Will Greenwood went in 1997 despite not being England's first choice 12. Phil De Glanville, a completely average player, had that distinction.

Just because Lancaster thinks Barritt the better 12, does not necessarily make it so. He also picked Tom Wood at 8 and Mike Brown at 11. Barritt is very good, I'm not disputing that, but Twelvetrees offers something different.

Max Evans is a winger, not a centre.

What about the other suggestions I made, Luke Marshall and Matt Scott?

This discussion isn't about one player in particular, but how best to come to the right combination for the Tests, and whether the "incumbent choices", Roberts, Barritt, JD2, Tuilagi and BOD, will be able to form the right combination, along with the likes of Biggar, Farrell, Cuthbert and North.

Remember, between selection time and the Tests, there's a tour in which to take a look at options. But we won't get to the optimal outcome, if we don't have the right ingredients in the first place.

His profile suggests differently.

Well his profile is wrong. He plays wing for Castres, and wing for Scotland (when picked). He used to play 13 at Glasgow but it's been some time since he's been a regular starter in the centres.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Will Greenwood went in 1997 despite not being England's first choice 12. Phil De Glanville, a completely average player, had that distinction.

Just because Lancaster thinks Barritt the better 12, does not necessarily make it so. He also picked Tom Wood at 8 and Mike Brown at 11. Barritt is very good, I'm not disputing that, but Twelvetrees offers something different.

Max Evans is a winger, not a centre.

What about the other suggestions I made, Luke Marshall and Matt Scott?

This discussion isn't about one player in particular, but how best to come to the right combination for the Tests, and whether the "incumbent choices", Roberts, Barritt, JD2, Tuilagi and BOD, will be able to form the right combination, along with the likes of Biggar, Farrell, Cuthbert and North.

Remember, between selection time and the Tests, there's a tour in which to take a look at options. But we won't get to the optimal outcome, if we don't have the right ingredients in the first place.

His profile suggests differently.

Well his profile is wrong. He plays wing for Castres, and wing for Scotland (when picked). He used to play 13 at Glasgow but it's been some time since he's been a regular starter in the centres.

and he is also pants - profile should note that

TJ wrote:Dowlais. the issue here is we are playing Australia who will soak up direct pressure all day. We will need guile to beat them so Barritt, Roberts, Tuilagi will not do the job without a creative partner and Earls and Evans are not up to standard.

A midfield containing nothing but bosh merchants will mean the back 3 get no attacking ball and we will have a great back 3. We need that back 3 to get ball at pace and with a bit of space - the midfield need to be selected to do this. The wales game plan will not work.

Not this old banana. England have only played Aus once in the past 2 years and lost 20-14, incidently a score that flattered them.

Wales' last three games were lost by 2, 1, and 2 points. Whatever the limitations of the plan it is clearly is a better plan than the one England had, or a similar plan executed by better players. There is nothing wrong with the tactics employed by Wales and with better players in certain positions then it is likely that these games would have resulted in victory. That is kind of the point of the Lions isn't it, picking the best players we have available to improve execution and decision making.

Please don't make yourself look foolish by bringing Scotland into this as their recent successes were clearly Freak results gained in Freakish weather. So unless we are expecting to play tests in conditions that induce hyperthemia and you know something we don't know? . The results while hard earned and well deserved have no bearing upon recent form lines, tactical approaches or Lions selection.

Gatland will stick to the plan, and rely upon better execution and decision making. He will not rely upon a one cap wonder to provide the creative spark you require. Risk vs Reward is always at the front of Gatland's thinking.

I agree in the sense that it's not the Welsh "game plan" per se that's necessarily the issue. I think in general Wales do a pretty good job with the players they have at their disposal.

I just think that the Lions have better options in some key positions, and accordingly (by definition) are selecting from a wider array of talents.

The best Lions teams are able to maximise those talents and come up with the best combinations "as a team" (as noted by Rory above), and that does not necessarily mean you consider each position in isolation, and simply pick the most experienced available international player. You have to consider combinations to optimise the available players.

The 1997 front five was a great example of this. Tom Smith, Paul Wallace and Jeremy Davidson - three players who were not tipped to start the Tests prior to the tour selection, and yet Telfer looked at the available options and went for a unit which he felt was best suited for the task in hand.

GeordieFalcon wrote:The problem is Dowlais that hes not picked by England because Lancaster for what ever reasosn wants to play a boring defence first style. That means Barritt suits because he is basically and extra flanker.

Ironically Tweveltrees is excellent defensively, but is way superior in attack.
Now i don think id take Twelvetrees either just yet, but if he went (like i think Wade will ) as a wild card then he wouldnt look out of place in the lions squad.

If not he MUST be selected for Englands tour and MUST start at 12. I wouldnt take Barritt to Oz either.

Boring defence first style. You mean like Wales?

Generally defence first works.

Look at the top 2 sides in the AP - best defences are key.

It's players with good consistency,hard working and mental strength that you want in your team. The grafters.

Twelvetrees is unproven - you can't really say with conviction whether 36 is the saviour until he proves himself in more than 1 test. He did well vs Scotland (so did Barritt by the way) but was invisible vs Ireland.

Barritt is consistent at least. 36 isn't a leader. He can't run a defensive line.

Set the platform then the flashy stuff can happen.

I think you're only looking at one side of the coin Beshocked.

What about players with skill and footballing ability. You need those as well.

Of course a good defence is paramount, but the Lions will need more than that to win the series against Australia. It's why NH teams tend to struggle against the SH sides - we haven't developed the top two inches and learned to play with sufficient skill at high tempo.

I am fully aware of the abilities of Brad Barritt, and I'm not suggesting he doesn't tour. He is more than a very good defender, he's shown that in international rugby. My question isn't focused on any one individual, but rather a question of balance, and making sure the Lions are looking at the best possible combinations on the tour.

You never know, Roberts and Tuilagi with Sexton at 10 might very well click. You never know. Barritt and BOD, or JD2 and BOD might similarly work well. However, when I look at those options, I don't see a playmaker. I don't see a Will Greenwood, a Rob Henderson, a Gregor Townsend or a Mike Catt.

Then I look at the Aussies, and I think of JOC, Beale, Cooper and Barnes.

I think we are pinning an awful lot here on Youngs and Sexton to create space.

Which is why I think Gatland should seriously think about taking a player like Twelvetrees or Madigan.

The rest are all the same. Either decent tacklers, decent runners but no one has a kicking game to play off. This puts a lot of pressure on the 10.

Proven or not, the team needs a good balance. You can't just go with one game plan... you need a primary strategy yes but you also need options and chaning like for like ain't going to cut it when you're down and you need an alternative.

Take Farrell for example. He will tour and he will test. Sexton is not yet back and has been off for a while.... Farrell is right up there in terms of taking the starting jersey. Goode takes pressure off him at England by offering a secondary kicker/receiver. Without a secondary player Farrell tends to struggle. Are we going to play Farrell with Tuilagi and Roberts for instance???

Beshocked,

A strong defence is absolutely vital im in total agreeance...but picking players becasue of that is in my eyes stiffling the team.

Yes i accept we have missed big runners like Morgan etc which backs need, but a backline of Farrell, Barritt, Tuulagi whilst rock solid in defence isnt going to bother the Aussies or any other teams..skills wise.

Ive been a big defender of Barritt on here...i just feel now is the time to look for more offensive options. Im not saying Twelvetrees is the saviour by any means...im saying he offers more than Barritt. If not him we need to find another who can fill that 12 spot and give us some spark...especially as i suspect Farrell is nailed on for the 10 spot for the forseeable future.

Dogged, tough, mentally strong, grafters are essential i would never doubt that...BUT a team full of them is also a problem. And Lancs team is heading quick step towards that!

And as for the Ireland match - pretty much anyone on both sides outside of the FH and whoever was fielding the kicks was invisible. Tuilagi did as much in the few minutes he was on as any other outside back

Dragonbreath - sorry I made a comment that could possibly be interpreted as a tiny criticism of Wales so must be jumped on from a height immediately! Don't be so touchy FFS!

My point simply is that In my opinion we need a creative / playmaker type centre - and none of the main candidates have shown a lot of ability in this regard - Roberts, Tualagi, Barritt to name 3. Twelvetrees might be the man dto do it -but other candidates are there.

I am certain tho that using the midfield to run straight at the Aus defence in the bosh bosh way Wales and England did in this years 6N will not provide the scores we need to win the series. - unless of course we can import a scots monsoon again!

TJ wrote:Dragonbreath - sorry I made a comment that could possibly be interpreted as a tiny criticism of Wales so must be jumped on from a height immediately! Don't be so touchy FFS!

My point simply is that In my opinion we need a creative / playmaker type centre - and none of the main candidates have shown a lot of ability in this regard - Roberts, Tualagi, Barritt to name 3. Twelvetrees might be the man dto do it -but other candidates are there.

I am certain tho that using the midfield to run straight at the Aus defence in the bosh bosh way Wales and England did in this years 6N will not provide the scores we need to win the series. - unless of course we can import a scots monsoon again!

Me too over touchy, just that these were very close games lost through a lack of composure in the heat of battle rather than a flawed game plan yet people keep rolling it out. I don't disagree that we need a playmaker but we don't have one and as I said Gats has a way of doing things that has worked for him, what is it 3 Premierships a HC couple of Grand Slams. 36 could be the answer but is one decent game against a ordinary Scots side really all the evidence required to take such a risk. Being a good club player (and has he really even established himself as that yet) is not enough. We are where we are, there is no playmaker Greenwood, Henson, Catt type player available, so Gats will deploy his most potent battering rams and rely on Sextons (a lot really does depend upon that boys fitness) ability to play on the gain line and bring runners into the game with little inside balls as he has done in recent years so expertly at Leinster.

There is no creative 12 (and I don't hold with playing Sexton at 12 to manufacture one) so pragmatism demands that the execution of the blitzkrieg attack be flawless and relentless in its intensity. What elese do we have?

I suppose one thought is if it is worth bringing a playmaker (not 100% proven) as a flyer and also as a second plan

They would then be able to proved themseleves on the tour

Small Wood and Scott etc are good enough to be considered, and could proved themselves on tour

Basically - the two options are

have all the players of a similar fold and play one way

or

take a risk to have a back up plan B with one creative flyer (and let them fight for their place on tour)

I would go for having a plan b myself

I think we've answered your question a million times with a number of suggestions!!

I certainly agree that shifting Sexton to 12 is not the answer though. The decision to play Wilkinson at 12 against New Zealand was vile.

Another idea could be to bring a playmaker onto one of the wings, rather than one of the usual suggestions of North and Cuthbert. A good ball player who can come off his wing and distribute. Sean Maitland can do that as an example, also has plenty pace. Luke Fitzgerald another possibility in this regard.

Another possible is Alex Goode at 15, who although not entirely fashionable at the moment, does have the ability to glide into the line if used properly, and can act as that second playmaker if needed.

Riskysports wrote:I suppose one thought is if it is worth bringing a playmaker (not 100% proven) as a flyer and also as a second plan

They would then be able to proved themseleves on the tour

Small Wood and Scott etc are good enough to be considered, and could proved themselves on tour

Basically - the two options are

have all the players of a similar fold and play one way

or

take a risk to have a back up plan B with one creative flyer (and let them fight for their place on tour)

I would go for having a plan b myself

Risky by name, Risky by nature.

Dragonbreath - I really hope Gatland does not do as you suggest because if so he has not learned from the defeats and the lions will be defeated. The only way to win is by outplaying them (or a Scottish monsoon) Playing the boshers in midfield especially with Philips at SH negate the talent the lions will have out wide. The way to win is with pace and guile

TJ wrote:Dragonbreath - I really hope Gatland does not do as you suggest because if so he has not learned from the defeats and the lions will be defeated. The only way to win is by outplaying them (or a Scottish monsoon) Playing the boshers in midfield especially with Philips at SH negate the talent the lions will have out wide. The way to win is with pace and guile

You don't seem to get it, the type of players you want only exist in your head. We don't have them, if we did I am sure they would be selected. Anyway, I still think we will win

TJ wrote:Dragonbreath - I really hope Gatland does not do as you suggest because if so he has not learned from the defeats and the lions will be defeated. The only way to win is by outplaying them (or a Scottish monsoon) Playing the boshers in midfield especially with Philips at SH negate the talent the lions will have out wide. The way to win is with pace and guile

Or rather the way to win is to be able to play in a variety of circumstances, and have a game plan and options to suit whatever conditions and match situation we end up having to face.

I agree with Risky's main point, which (I think) is that combinations and players tend to develop through the tour, and unless you know exactly how you want the team to play from day one, and know exactly the players to play that way, having a little bit of variety in terms of skill sets is extremely helpful.

The type of players I want exist - but are young and inexperienced - or aging.

Twelvetrees, Scott, Maitland in the former category, Bod in the latter. others have been suggested such as JD2

Remeber this thread - for I bet I am right - there is almost no chance of a lions win playing the bosh bosh bosh game. Aus will simply negate that and outscore the lions if they do. Personally I think Gatland is wiser than that but maybe not

TJ wrote:The type of players I want exist - but are young and inexperienced - or aging.

Twelvetrees, Scott, Maitland in the former category, Bod in the latter. others have been suggested such as JD2

Remeber this thread - for I bet I am right - there is almost no chance of a lions win playing the bosh bosh bosh game. Aus will simply negate that and outscore the lions if they do. Personally I think Gatland is wiser than that but maybe not

JD2 has very poor distribution and lacks situational intelligence, so he is definately not what you are looking for. I have made my opinion on 36 pretty clear and Scott, well who knows, a couple of breaks here and there does not a Lion make. What Maitland has got to do with the discussion I am not quite sure. BOD may well be captain though I can't think of an occasion when Gats has picked a back as his captain. In any event he is in the twilight of his career great a player as he has been.

What I would say is that Lions tours are not development vehicles, potential might be enough to get you a ticket in the good old days, but you will get very little game time and you will have to be completely outstanding to get in the match squad or have people die in their beds around you. Today I am not even sure it gets you a ticket.

Gats will play his normal game plan and will believe in advance that it will work. If the forst test is close win or lose he will stick with it. If he takes players like Scott, or 36 then they may get a run if we are 2 down and the fat lady has stopped singing.

Like Wales we're Frak if we play your plan Dragon. Gatland is so wrong for this job.

dragonbreath wrote:

TJ wrote:Dragonbreath - sorry I made a comment that could possibly be interpreted as a tiny criticism of Wales so must be jumped on from a height immediately! Don't be so touchy FFS!

My point simply is that In my opinion we need a creative / playmaker type centre - and none of the main candidates have shown a lot of ability in this regard - Roberts, Tualagi, Barritt to name 3. Twelvetrees might be the man dto do it -but other candidates are there.

I am certain tho that using the midfield to run straight at the Aus defence in the bosh bosh way Wales and England did in this years 6N will not provide the scores we need to win the series. - unless of course we can import a scots monsoon again!

Me too over touchy, just that these were very close games lost through a lack of composure in the heat of battle rather than a flawed game plan yet people keep rolling it out. I don't disagree that we need a playmaker but we don't have one and as I said Gats has a way of doing things that has worked for him, what is it 3 Premierships a HC couple of Grand Slams. 36 could be the answer but is one decent game against a ordinary Scots side really all the evidence required to take such a risk. Being a good club player (and has he really even established himself as that yet) is not enough. We are where we are, there is no playmaker Greenwood, Henson, Catt type player available, so Gats will deploy his most potent battering rams and rely on Sextons (a lot really does depend upon that boys fitness) ability to play on the gain line and bring runners into the game with little inside balls as he has done in recent years so expertly at Leinster.

There is no creative 12 (and I don't hold with playing Sexton at 12 to manufacture one) so pragmatism demands that the execution of the blitzkrieg attack be flawless and relentless in its intensity. What elese do we have?

In terms of Gatland's 3 Premierships and the HC win, he had a back line and, more importantly, two centres, that complemented each other at Wasps.

Waters (13) and Abbot (12), with Erinle as a (huge) impact sub, were a superb centre partnership in attack and defence for 3 of those trophies.*

* Erinle and Lewsey replaced Abbot and Waters in the 2005 Premiership final.

As people have said, it's about picking combinations that work well together.



PS - If Gatland engenders the team spirit he fostered at Wasps back in those days, the Lions will do ok.

Hopefully three things will come to pass:
1. Warren will by-pass all the English contenders.
2. Andy Farrell will get the order of the elbow.
3. England will concentrate on the importance of winning every game including Argentina away.

Oh, and fourthly
Leave Dan Cole at home to build his strength and mental preparedness to lead the Rose to a RWC victory. (He might need a couple of weeks in a Polish fridge though.)

Dragonbreath - you do realise Scott was the top or second top centre in the 6N? Outstanding in a mediocre team and in a season where the backs did not do well overall.

greytiger wrote:Hopefully three things will come to pass:
1. Warren will by-pass all the English contenders.
2. Andy Farrell will get the order of the elbow.
3. England will concentrate on the importance of winning every game including Argentina away.

Oh, and fourthly
Leave Dan Cole at home to build his strength and mental preparedness to lead the Rose to a RWC victory. (He might need a couple of weeks in a Polish fridge though.)

I tend to agree. I'd rather no English players went. That way, another series humiliation can't be blamed on them by the Welsh, and England can concentrate on meaningful tests in Argentina and prepare for the new domestic season.

Tuilagi in the Lions side will make space for others as he will attract more defenders. So when he has an off game as some say it - invariably those outside him are the ones being praised. (making the breaks and scoring the trys)

Jimpy wrote:

greytiger wrote:Hopefully three things will come to pass:
1. Warren will by-pass all the English contenders.
2. Andy Farrell will get the order of the elbow.
3. England will concentrate on the importance of winning every game including Argentina away.

Oh, and fourthly
Leave Dan Cole at home to build his strength and mental preparedness to lead the Rose to a RWC victory. (He might need a couple of weeks in a Polish fridge though.)

I tend to agree. I'd rather no English players went. That way, another series humiliation can't be blamed on them by the Welsh, and England can concentrate on meaningful tests in Argentina and prepare for the new domestic season.

The Lions is an experience all players want to be part of...and all of us Brits (and Irish ) will get behind the boys. We have an small group of players who definately should go...and will add much to the squad and test teams. Dont forget they say being on a LIons tours is the equivalent of playing something like 10 -20 tests. So it will improve our players also. I have said i think Wade will go as a wildcard. Imagine the experience and what he will learn. That can only benefit England in the long run.

As for England this gives us a chance to try out other new players in a competitive environment.

Yes, it was a very 'competitive environment' in the fish & chip shop this evening. Those Samoans take ages to order!

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

greytiger wrote:Hopefully three things will come to pass:
1. Warren will by-pass all the English contenders.
2. Andy Farrell will get the order of the elbow.
3. England will concentrate on the importance of winning every game including Argentina away.

Oh, and fourthly
Leave Dan Cole at home to build his strength and mental preparedness to lead the Rose to a RWC victory. (He might need a couple of weeks in a Polish fridge though.)

I tend to agree. I'd rather no English players went. That way, another series humiliation can't be blamed on them by the Welsh, and England can concentrate on meaningful tests in Argentina and prepare for the new domestic season.

The Lions is an experience all players want to be part of...and all of us Brits (and Irish ) will get behind the boys. We have an small group of players who definately should go...and will add much to the squad and test teams. Dont forget they say being on a LIons tours is the equivalent of playing something like 10 -20 tests. So it will improve our players also. I have said i think Wade will go as a wildcard. Imagine the experience and what he will learn. That can only benefit England in the long run.

As for England this gives us a chance to try out other new players in a competitive environment.

Or irrepairably damage their confidence or injure them long term.

No im going to be positivie

Dowlais you think I am having a laugh ..seriously

You dont recognise the difference betwen 12 and 13 - thats is having a laugh

We are talking 12 and then you mention
Manu Tuilagi
Keith Earls
Max Evans

that is having a laugh

TJ wrote:Dragonbreath - you do realise Scott was the top or second top centre in the 6N? Outstanding in a mediocre team and in a season where the backs did not do well overall.

Either he was top or he was second, stats can be misleading. It doesn't matter if your stats show that you made 10 tackles and missed two if those two result in tries and were urine poor efforts. I have nothing against the lad, we are discussing what we think will happen with respect to selection. He made a couple of eye catching breaks probably carried the ball quite a bit (the Scots forwards did actually do very well in terms of keeping the ball) but I saw nothing in his game that suggests he is a playmaker. He does have pace and looks a nice player in full flow but he just hasn't been around long enough to demonstrate he has the rugby intelligence of a BOD for example, and I have assumed that that is the type of player we are ideally looking for here. Personally I think that if BOD shows anything like acceptable form he will play 12, but again this choice may be a weakness in Gatlands selection thinking. He is not the player of old but who knows he may have a couple of big ones left in the tank

Scott may well travel but as much because he is Scottish as anything he has done on the field. Good luck to him, these tours do tend to result in a lot of injuries and he may well get a chance to prove you right

Cheers - I was just wondering if you were discounting him because you did not see him - as many do. I think he will be a great playmaker but its a year too early for him really. He would be a gamble.

LordDowlais wrote:

TJ wrote:Dowlais. the issue here is we are playing Australia who will soak up direct pressure all day. We will need guile to beat them so Barritt, Roberts, Tuilagi will not do the job without a creative partner and Earls and Evans are not up to standard.

A midfield containing nothing but bosh merchants will mean the back 3 get no attacking ball and we will have a great back 3. We need that back 3 to get ball at pace and with a bit of space - the midfield need to be selected to do this. The wales game plan will not work.

By this theory then do you agree that perhaps Scott Williams is deserving of a chance, after all he is creative and good in defence, also he has more caps to his name than Twelvetrees does, and he has got a few try's at international level as well, does this make him fit into your category as well, because if it does then surely even Scott Williams is infront of Twelvetrees, and this is using your idea of picking a player.

So that's it then, as nobody has disagreed with me on this, or even given an answer, the solution to our problems is Scott Williams.

Scott Williams plays outside centre (13) does he not?

funnyExiledScot wrote:Scott Williams plays outside centre (13) does he not?

He came on for Roberts at Twickenham last year, and he scored so he is so good he could probably play either.

Did JD2 not move to 12 when that happened, with Williams in the outside centre channel?

I'm only asking because you seem to know so much.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Did JD2 not move to 12 when that happened, with Williams in the outside centre channel?

I'm only asking because you seem to know so much.

I do not know that much, but what I do know is, that taking Billy Twelvetrees on the Lions tour is a smack in the face for the PROVEN international players in Britain and Ireland, also there are better players than him.

LordDowlais wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Did JD2 not move to 12 when that happened, with Williams in the outside centre channel?

I'm only asking because you seem to know so much.

I do not know that much

Agreed.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Did JD2 not move to 12 when that happened, with Williams in the outside centre channel?

I'm only asking because you seem to know so much.

I do not know that much

Agreed.

On no, you are one of those one's that take snippets from my comments to distort what I am saying as well are you ? I have come across your ilk before, I need a new strategy.

Always good to have a plan B my friend

funnyExiledScot wrote:Always good to have a plan B my friend

Im Welsh, we do not have a plan B, or so all other nations keep telling us.

LordDowlais wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Always good to have a plan B my friend

Im Welsh, we do not have a plan B, or so all other nations keep telling us.

In the 6 Nations this season, you didn't need one!

propdavid_london wrote:Tuilagi in the Lions side will make space for others as he will attract more defenders. So when he has an off game as some say it - invariably those outside him are the ones being praised. (making the breaks and scoring the trys)

Tuilagi will disappear as he does in any game where he meets decent players in the centre. He is a winger forced into a thirteen shirt and cant handle playing as an outside centre when challenged.

maestegmafia wrote:

propdavid_london wrote:Tuilagi in the Lions side will make space for others as he will attract more defenders. So when he has an off game as some say it - invariably those outside him are the ones being praised. (making the breaks and scoring the trys)

Tuilagi will disappear as he does in any game where he meets decent players in the centre. He is a winger forced into a thirteen shirt and cant handle playing as an outside centre when challenged.

Dead right - after all he did next to sod all for 60-70 minutes against NZ..... And he hasnt scored a try against SA yet. Must be useless

maestegmafia wrote:Tuilagi will disappear as he does in any game where he meets decent players in the centre. He is a winger forced into a thirteen shirt and cant handle playing as an outside centre when challenged.

He was very poor against Wales this year, which really cannot be denied.

However the fallacious nature of your claim is evidenced by his two previous meetings with the JD2/DrJamie combo when he played better than them both times.
He has poor games - most players do. He has also had some very good games - including against decent opposition.

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Tuilagi will disappear as he does in any game where he meets decent players in the centre. He is a winger forced into a thirteen shirt and cant handle playing as an outside centre when challenged.

He was very poor against Wales this year, which really cannot be denied.

However the fallacious nature of your claim is evidenced by his two previous meetings with the JD2/DrJamie combo when he played better than them both times.
He has poor games - most players do. He has also had some very good games - including against decent opposition.

When?

Regularly?

He disappeared vs Wales, infact he did very little in the Six nations at all, anonymous vs Toulon in the HEC 1/4 final leicester lost.

When Ireland or Leinster need Brian O'Driscoll they don't need to look for him, he is the guy dragging his team into the game. you can not say the same for Tuilagi.