What will England do with Owen Farrell?

by InjuredYetAgain Mon Jul 08 2013, 21:20

As I have just said in another thread, Owen Farrell was, to me, the player who developed the most on tour. Before he went, I thought (justifiably, I may add) that he was just a kicking machine who carried no threat with ball in hand. However, by the end of the tour, he was playing flatter and bringing his outside backs into play very nicely, thank you very much.
Do you think Lancaster (and however his club coach is - I should know, can't remember and can't be arsed checking who it is on Google) will have seen this and move him closer to the gainline or will they leave him as is, lying deeper and playing more of an O'Gara type game based around territory?

by Portnoy's Complaint Mon Jul 08 2013, 21:46

As none of the half-backs progressed or enhanced their credibility in any way during the Lions tour, my guess is dependent on their coaches - both club and country.

I think that if Farrell(A) gets sacked from England and Sarries get rid of his spectre, then Farrell(O) can develop into a very fine player.

by InjuredYetAgain Mon Jul 08 2013, 21:52

You are being a tad harsh on Farrell Jnr there, aren't you? I am no apologist of his but I did see someone move up a level or two when on tour.
How is his father holding him back?

by Dubbelyew L Overate Mon Jul 08 2013, 23:05

It's debatable if Farrell has advanced his cause more with Lancaster on the Lions tour, or Burns on England's tour. Time will tell.

I suspect that Sarries will continue to use Farrell as 12 outside Hodgson, as well as 10, on rotation (with Barritt and Tomkins also in the frame). As far as England goes, much will depend on Glaws, with Burns and Twelvetrees, and Bath, with Ford and Eastmond. Flood is also still in contention, and Slade could make a late charge.

Will Farrell end up 10 or 12, or utility, or will his generally sound game be eclipsed by the brilliance of others? Only 2 seasons till RWC, decisions need to be made imminently.

by sirtidychris Mon Jul 08 2013, 23:11

At 21 he has 16 england caps, an aviva champions medal and a lions Tour under his belt, along with a win over the all blacks. He will be learning more and more every season, from hodgson, flood, wilko. Sexton, jenkins etc etc. He isnt the finished product but he can defend like a demon (6ft 2, 15 stone and still developing ) kick the tough points and has that ice cool winners personality. He needs to work on his attacking play and avoid the stupid getting in peoples faces ala Chris ashton, but in a few years he will.be immense. Just think he'll be 25 for the next líons, with a rwc under his belt. My main worry is that saracens will stunt his development and his current weaknesses are due to sarries defense orientated style of play, however for me he is still starting 10 with burns pushing very hard from the bench.

by robbo277 Mon Jul 08 2013, 23:50

I think the 10 shirt is between him and Burns for me, with Flood as a third option in the EPS.

If Farrell can nail down the Saracens 10 shirt and play flatter like he did against the Rebels and bring players into the game, then he should get the chance for England, as with his solid defence and goal-kicking temperament he would be some weapon. However, if he gets shunted into the centres and stands deep to kick the leather off the ball whenever he plays at 10 then I'd be looking to start Burnis in the AIs.

by doctor_grey Tue Jul 09 2013, 00:46

With only two years to the RWC, which really only gives one season to decide on the optimal candidates, there are really three candidiates, Farrell, Burns, and Flood. This upcoming season is going to be a big challenge for all three of them.

by beshocked Tue Jul 09 2013, 08:49

I think Saracens will use Farrell less in the centres if they can. Certainly if Marcelo Bosch does indeed sign up. They have also signed up a centre called Tim Streather.

Saracens are called defensively orientated but they score plenty of tries when Hodgson is starting at fly half. Farrell Jr has not shown the same skill hence he has been given the tougher matches generally. It is up to Farrell Jr to show that with him at fly half Saracens can get try bonuses/score tries.

by sirtidychris Tue Jul 09 2013, 09:24

Saracens only score tries when hodgson play because 'charge down charlie' is a lean mean kick-deflecting touch-down machine !!!

by Portnoy's Complaint Tue Jul 09 2013, 09:27

beshocked wrote:Saracens are called defensively orientated but they score plenty of tries when Hodgson is starting at fly half. Farrell Jr has not shown the same skill hence he has been given the tougher matches generally.

A little obscure comment which, like a politician's weasel words, needs to be exposed to a little scrutiny. Last season was nomadic before the move to their move so some additional defensive game plans might be excusable but the cold stats in terms of tries (for and against) show that any success was indeed borne of negativity rather than anything else. http://www.premiershiprugby.com/matchcentre/fixtures/previous_seasons.php

by beshocked Tue Jul 09 2013, 10:15

41 for, 25 against doesn't sound negative to me. That's +16.

5 try bonuses against Exeter,Leicester,London Irish,Worcester and London Welsh. 4 at home. Charlie started in all those matches.

Last few games the floodgates opened in regards to tries. Something like 28 tries in 7 games.

by Portnoy's Complaint Tue Jul 09 2013, 10:20

'shocked wrote:Something like 28 tries in 7 games.

Sounds like 13 in 15 to me Wink

by beshocked Tue Jul 09 2013, 10:24

That's the beginning of the season. Look my point is they can score a lot of tries when in the right frame of mood. It depends on what the coaches want.

by Portnoy's Complaint Tue Jul 09 2013, 10:37

Precisely. Trouble is it seems that when they decided to rip it up upfield, the floodgates opened downfield.

by beshocked Tue Jul 09 2013, 10:45

Don't quite know what you mean.

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 09:14

I think its all down to Sarries.

If they continue this regimented style of brutally efficient but individually restrictive rugby then i think he could become stifled and the likies of Burnes etc could well over take him.

However if he is given first choice at Sarries and allowed to play flatter and a bit more individual then we could see him really come good.

Ive been hugely critical of him in the past, but i accept he is only 21. I have seen glimpses of things that show he can play...but its so limited and scarce its difficult to judge.

It might be that for his future developement he needs to leave Sarries (i know that'll never happen)...but Saints need a top Fh and with those players around him...he could come out of his shell...

by **LondonTiger** Wed Jul 10 2013, 09:58

Hey kids, we know a song about that:

What shall we do with the Owen Farrell.
What shall we do with the Owen Farrell.
What shall we do with the Owen Farrell.
Only Sarries know that.

Move him up to the gainline, yes please,
Move him up to the gainline, yes please,
Move him up to the gainline, yes please,
come on Sarries, do that.

What shall we do with the Owen Farrell.
What shall we do with the Owen Farrell.
What shall we do with the Owen Farrell.
Only Sarries know that.

Get him passing, and then running,
Get him passing, and then running,
Get him passing, and then running,
Come on Sarries, do that.

What shall we do with the Owen Farrell.
What shall we do with the Owen Farrell.
What shall we do with the Owen Farrell,
England is expecting.

by **rodders** Wed Jul 10 2013, 10:22

Well considering his dad is one of the coaches I suspect they'll pick him.....

Also the sooner England realise he's a better 12 than a 10 the better for all concerned...

by Guest Wed Jul 10 2013, 10:34

If I were Stuart Lancaster I'd be looking to use Farrell in more or less the same way that Warren Gatland did - use him as a "closer", a bit like a baseball pitcher.

He doesn't (yet) have the full range of skills that I'd want from a starting 10, but he's a useful guy to have on the bench and bring on in the last 20 minutes or so if England are slightly ahead and you want to rest the starter for future games. You can be confident that he'll keep the scoreboard ticking over by kicking his goals, and won't make too many mistakes, as long as he keeps his discipline.

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 10:43

SO who do you start then Mawhis.

I am a big fan of Burns....but i have no doubt whatsoever that Farrell will start the Ai's

by Guest Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:03

Damn - I hadn't prepared for follow-up questions!

I'd prefer to see how Burns goes against full strength opposition, but Flood would be an option too. I just don't see Farrell as a starting 10 at the moment.

I agree that lancaster will almost certainly start him anyway though.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:06

Geordiefalcon Farrell move to Saints? That's a joke right?

Yes it is down to Sarries. I hope they do encourage him to play flatter. That's what Hodgson does.

Mawhis I dont know why you see Farrell as merely a bench option. None of Farrell's fly half rivals are Jonathan Sexton.

What full range of skills do you want?

Call me a traditionalist but I want a fly half who can actually tackle. Burns makes Hodgson look like a backrow forward in the tackling department.

by LordDowlais Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:12

What will England do with Owen Farrell ? Well I would suggest that they would continue playing one of the most potentially gifted players in England at fly half, for me he is very much in the Wilko mould, and I mean that as a compliment, England have never had flashy no 10's but they have always had outside halves who were very good to world class in the basics, when Farrell matures you will have a cold as ice assassin who will kick goals from anywhere, be solid in defence, and have an excellent kicking game, what more would you want ?

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:12

It was merely a suggestion Beshocked in a way of continuing his improvment.

Personally i dont think Burns defence is as bad as every one says it is. Its not a Brad Barritt standard but whos is.

And Beshocked, we can be traditionalists...yes we want our FH's to tackle...but we also want them to be able to run and pass the ball when WE have it... Wink

by Portnoy's Complaint Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:12

rodders wrote:Well considering his dad is one of the coaches I suspect they'll pick him.....

Also the sooner England realise he's a better 12 than a 10 the better for all concerned...

Better than 36 Rodders?

Youngs/Care
Burns/Flood
36
Manu

doesn't sound too dull.

And so long as Glaws do their bit on his development, Billy's got a bit of tap in his shoe if required.

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:16

when Farrell matures you will have a cold as ice assassin who will kick goals from anywhere, be solid in defence, and have an excellent kicking game, what more would you want ?

Lord Dowlais, id like a FH who plays flat on the gain line, who can pass, make some runs to keep the defenders alert and create space for others...etc

Farrell has shown glimpses of this...so we know its there...the question is can we bring out the potential for longer periods of the game.

Farrell isnt a patch on Johnny at the moment...but he could be very good. And thats coming from a big farrell critic who accepts the lad could be good.

by LordDowlais Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:19

GeordieFalcon wrote:
when Farrell matures you will have a cold as ice assassin who will kick goals from anywhere, be solid in defence, and have an excellent kicking game, what more would you want ?

Lord Dowlais, id like a FH who plays flat on the gain line, who can pass, make some runs to keep the defenders alert and create space for others...etc

Farrell has shown glimpses of this...so we know its there...the question is can we bring out the potential for longer periods of the game.

Farrell isnt a patch on Johnny at the moment...but he could be very good. And thats coming from a big farrell critic who accepts the lad could be good.

He has all the attributes to be as good as Wilko, lets not forget, for all Wilko's achievements he was not re-known for his snake hips and sidesteps and scintillating pace, no, he was known for his goal kicking, defence, and kicking game, and Farrell has this in raw ability at the moment.

by Guest Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:24

I think that this blog post from Planet Rugby (written before the Lions Tour) is pretty fair, if you ignore the stuff about wilko: http://www.planetrugby.co.uk/lions/story/0,25883,16016_8695995,00.html

Planet Rugby wrote:Meanwhile, the choice to take only two fly-halves - and not one of the centres in the squad could possibly be considered fly-half cover, even at a pinch - is indicative of only one thing for us: that one Mr. J. Wilkinson will complete his tour de force with Toulon and then jet off to Australia.

But we are truly mystified as to the inclusion of Owen Farrell. The Six Nations was the measure of form according to Gatland. In which case, we have a fly-half in Jonathan Sexton who is only now rediscovering pre-injury form,and another who singularly failed ever to ignite England's backs with anything beyond a kick.

If ever there was an illustration of Farrell's shortcomings it had to be the butchered overlap in the Heineken Cup semi-final where an accomplished fly-half of the ilk of Carter, Wilkinson or Cooper would have found the pass to be of second nature. Instead, Farrell delivered a wonky, soggy balloon of a pass, which cost his side their last real opportunity of winning.

He kicks well. Very well. He tackles. But he is indisciplined, has a lot of skills to learn, and just does not have the variety of game a complete fly-half should have. The Lions are short in the ten department - until Jonny flies out anyway.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:39

Geordiefalcon you say Burns defence isn't bad but it was in the AP. I think the worst tackling from a 10. If Burns can improve his tackling significantly then yes he will be a decent option.

Burns' tackling doesn't need to be Barritt standard. Needs to be above revolving door standard though.

Mawhis I think that assessment is unfair. PR show they know very little by omitting England's crushing of Scotland.

I thought Farrell was good vs Scotland and Ireland -he got MOM in the Scotland match. Good vs NZ. Average vs Ulster in the HC quarter final (outclassed Paddy Jackson anyway). Played well vs Quins at Allianz Park.

by Portnoy's Complaint Wed Jul 10 2013, 11:44

beshocked wrote:Geordiefalcon you say Burns defence isn't bad but it was in the AP. I think the worst tackling from a 10. If Burns can improve his tackling significantly then yes he will be a decent option.

Burns' tackling doesn't need to be Barritt standard. Needs to be above revolving door standard though.

Mawhis I think that assessment is unfair. PR show they know very little by omitting England's crushing of Scotland.

I thought Farrell was good vs Scotland and Ireland -he got MOM in the Scotland match. Good vs NZ. Average vs Ulster in the HC quarter final (outclassed Paddy Jackson anyway). Played well vs Quins at Allianz Park.

Drawing mom mentions from Ireland and Scotland is not exactly inspiring confidence. Especially as the method in which broadcasters chose them makes them optimally user-friendly.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:02

Oh right Portnoy Complaint because broadcasters chose them it makes my point null and void?

Farrell did play well anyhow.

I don't know why you are criticising Ireland. They had more Lions players in the starting XV than England. Scotland came 3rd in the 6 nations.

Unfortunately for Flood he didn't really make the most of his start vs Italy. Neither did he do much with his starts vs Australia and South Africa in the AIs. He simply hasn't played well on the international stage for some time.

Burns has his own flaws as already mentioned.

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:05

LordDowlais wrote:
GeordieFalcon wrote:
when Farrell matures you will have a cold as ice assassin who will kick goals from anywhere, be solid in defence, and have an excellent kicking game, what more would you want ?

Lord Dowlais, id like a FH who plays flat on the gain line, who can pass, make some runs to keep the defenders alert and create space for others...etc

Farrell has shown glimpses of this...so we know its there...the question is can we bring out the potential for longer periods of the game.

Farrell isnt a patch on Johnny at the moment...but he could be very good. And thats coming from a big farrell critic who accepts the lad could be good.

He has all the attributes to be as good as Wilko, lets not forget, for all Wilko's achievements he was not re-known for his snake hips and sidesteps and scintillating pace, no, he was known for his goal kicking, defence, and kicking game, and Farrell has this in raw ability at the moment.

People forget that when he first came on the England scene, Wilko was a very good runner, making lots of breaks at pace. It was latterly that he became the more deep seating controlling fh.

I havent seen any breaks or running rugby from Farrell that Johnny was doing at this stage in their careers...

by LordDowlais Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:10

GeordieFalcon wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
GeordieFalcon wrote:
when Farrell matures you will have a cold as ice assassin who will kick goals from anywhere, be solid in defence, and have an excellent kicking game, what more would you want ?

Lord Dowlais, id like a FH who plays flat on the gain line, who can pass, make some runs to keep the defenders alert and create space for others...etc

Farrell has shown glimpses of this...so we know its there...the question is can we bring out the potential for longer periods of the game.

Farrell isnt a patch on Johnny at the moment...but he could be very good. And thats coming from a big farrell critic who accepts the lad could be good.

He has all the attributes to be as good as Wilko, lets not forget, for all Wilko's achievements he was not re-known for his snake hips and sidesteps and scintillating pace, no, he was known for his goal kicking, defence, and kicking game, and Farrell has this in raw ability at the moment.

People forget that when he first came on the England scene, Wilko was a very good runner, making lots of breaks at pace. It was latterly that he became the more deep seating controlling fh.

I havent seen any breaks or running rugby from Farrell that Johnny was doing at this stage in their careers...

That is because Andy Farrell has not got the best front eight in living memory giving him a platform like Wilko had, christ if I was behind Johnston, Hill, Dallaglio ect I would have been making breaks left right and center as well.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:11

Geordiefalcon Farrell is a different player. Not sure why you are so critical. He's a young man who for his age has done very well.

Well said Lord dowlais.

by Scrumpy Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:12

Burns is the better prospect imo, he has the xfactor.

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:15

He didnt have that at the falcons...

Im not being overly critical Beshocked. Im being realisitic. I accept he has shown glimpses...but he must get over this over realiance on his boot.

I genuinely hope he can being on his game it will be a massive benefit to England.
And i do appreciate his age.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:17

Scrumpy wrote:Burns is the better prospect imo, he has the xfactor.

Perhaps he should go on the show then?

by LordDowlais Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:19

GeordieFalcon wrote:He didnt have that at the falcons...
Im not being overly critical Beshocked. Im being realisitic. I accept he has shown glimpses...but he must get over this over realiance on his boot.

I genuinely hope he can being on his game it will be a massive benefit to England.
And i do appreciate his age.

I am not sayin he did, but you are the one who used, and I qoute "when he first came onto the England scene", Wliko achieved naff all at the Falcons, hell I cannot remember him playing that often for them, it was on the international stage where Wilko shined.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:27

Geordiefalcon surely we should look at Farrell Jr's strengths.

Why is it that England fans in general are never satisfied? What you are looking for is a cross between Dan Carter and Jonny Wilkinson. Unfortunately there's not a player like that yet though perhaps with genetic engineering in the future......

I think there is far too much obsession with attack,attack attack! Doing the basics well is all you need. Farrell has aspects of his game that need working out but he is very strong in certain areas. Burns has areas in his game which are also good but he far less experienced and has his own flaws to iron out.

Flood has been a loyal servant to English rugby but hasn't shown good form internationally recently.

by **LondonTiger** Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:31

beshocked wrote:Geordiefalcon surely we should look at Farrell Jr's strengths.

Agreed, though of course the same must be said when we discuss other candidates.

The reason we are discussing this really is because playing for the Lions, Owen has shown some abilities that were previously hidden. Should he continue to develop he will be an excellent player for England, should his development not continue then we will be left with a solid player who needs additional flair around him.

Much of this can equally be said about the entire england team. there are a lot of players of promise and at times performance. We need a core to really kick on.

by lostinwales Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:32

For what its worth I thought Burn's defense in Argentina looked fine. I think its not easy to pick between Burns and Farrell as neither are the finished article. I think at his best Flood is still better than both of them - but I can't remember the last time I saw him actually playing up to that level.

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:32

I was merely pointing out that whilst he had a great pack for the national team he didnt for his club team...and he did play alot of games.

Lets not forget Farrell plays behind a strong club pack but doesnt shine. I want to see a bit more

Im being realistic at the moment re Farrell. Once i see a bit more offensive play from him...good passing, a few runs commiting defenders and making space for others and offloading etc then great ill praise him loads.

I hope he shows us more this season...and maybe with Twelvetrees beside him rather than Barritt will help...

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:36

lostinwales wrote:For what its worth I thought Burn's defense in Argentina looked fine. I think its not easy to pick between Burns and Farrell as neither are the finished article. I think at his best Flood is still better than both of them - but I can't remember the last time I saw him actually playing up to that level.

It was mate...

Its just the arguement mate

Burns fans say his tackling is fine and that Farrell cant run or pass
Farrell fans say his tackling is ferrocious and his game management is great and burns is a revolving door
Wink

by jeffwinger Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:39

Beshocked I think you're falling foul of the statistics regarding Burns' defence. This is why you must always look at statistics in context, without that they are next to useless.

Burns is not a brilliant defender but he is not a poor defender either. I think if you watched Gloucester games closely you would see that he punches above his weight and rarely misses important front up tackles. He frequently acts a sweeping defender, using his pace to cover out wide, and is often the last man to be diving in when an attacker goes over the line. This reflect poorly in the statistics since as soon as you get fingertips on the attacker and don't bring him down its down as a miss. His tackle numbers look a lot like you'd see for a full back.

We saw in Argentina that he was a very capable defender. I think the first test saw him make 14 and miss 0.

I'm not trying to say Burns is a great defender. He isn't. Farrell is the vastly superior defender. However Burns isn't as bad as the simple stats would have you believe. I don't expect him to be a weak link in the England defence should he play.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:40

Londontiger I agree. Though I don't think the abilities were that hidden. He showed partly what he could do vs Scotland. He kicked a lot less in that game.

I really hope that Farrell is allowed to play flatter, become more instinctive. He needs to be allowed to play a more organic game. Needs to mix up his game more.

Perhaps a silly question but why don't more fly halves pass flatter?

Always hear complaints that player X is standing too deep etc.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:45

jeffwinger I have watched Gloucester a few times when it's been on ESPN. I wouldn't say Burns has been a rock for Gloucester defensively. If you say he is acting like a full back he should be making those tackles.

An understrength Argentina isn't exactly proof that Burns is a solid tackler at international level. We'll see what his defence is like when tested by better sides.

You are right the stats don't tell the whole story but they give you a fair indication.

Plus there is Gloucester's tries conceded to take into consideration.

by **LondonTiger** Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:45

beshocked wrote:
Perhaps a silly question but why don't more fly halves pass flatter?

The closer you get to the opposition, the quicker you have to decide what to do. In the end you either pre-determine you action or have to learn to be more instinctive, think quicker.

to play successfully up flatter, you have to be good at it, but to get good at it you have to be doing it. Catch-22.

by **LondonTiger** Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:50

beshocked wrote:jeffwinger I have watched Gloucester a few times when it's been on ESPN. I wouldn't say Burns has been a rock for Gloucester defensively. If you say he is acting like a full back he should be making those tackles.

Often he is making the tackle - ie bringingthe man to ground, but if the attacker scores it is a missed tackle.

Equally people who try and cover tackle a lot, will often get close enough to touch the man, but realistically not close enough to actually make the tackle. That counts as a missed tackle, yet being so crap you get nowhere near the man does not.

If the stat existed we would need to look at how often a stand off is beaten whilst defending their channel, irrespective of whether they lay hands on the man, and discount the ones where they are trying to cover for others. After all according to the stats Cipriani missed few tackles, but when you watched the game that was often because he ran away from the attempt.

by beshocked Wed Jul 10 2013, 12:52

Fair points. I suppose that's why a player like Hodgson finds it easier to do that because he's more experienced.

I hope that Farrell practices it in the pre season warm up matches then.

A lot of the time when I have seen Farrell play it doesn't seem like he thinks. He just keeps to a script. Generally automatically kicking the ball.

If Farrell does become more instinctive, less automated he could be very good indeed.

Hodgson does seem to use his brain a bit more. Kicking to touch intelligently. Making good decisions.

by Geordie Wed Jul 10 2013, 13:10

A lot of the time when I have seen Farrell play it doesn't seem like he thinks. He just keeps to a script. Generally automatically kicking the ball.

beshocked, thats the point ive been trying to make. I agree 100%
The question is...is this him, or is this what Sarries are instilling into him.

Hopefully this season both will take the shackles off and let him play...

by Sponsored content