John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

by **Biltong** Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:37 pm

I found this interesting piece on Scrum.com.

John Mitchell for ESPNScrum wrote:
Of the top nations, only Ireland and France seem to have settled on their fly-halves ahead of next year's World Cup.

Jonathan Sexton has been nominated for the IRB World Player of the Year award and France appear to have finally found a mature, stable flyhalf in Camille Lopez, who is proficient in general play and an equally reliable goal-kicker. However, from a southern hemisphere perspective, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa still don't appear to know who'll be wearing their respective No 10 jerseys at the World Cup.

It's all well and good forging competition for the fly-half berth, but competition can prove unhealthy if the respective coaches don't communicate well with their players.

Fly-half is such a pivotal position in terms of decision-making and execution that a coach needs to settle on his first five-eighth, as soon as possible, in order to allow for sufficient game time between now and the showpiece event in England in 10 months' time.

You certainly can't turn up at the event not knowing who your first-choice pivot will be. To offer an example, in 2003, I had to decide between Carlos Spencer, Andrew Mehrtens and a then 19-year-old Dan Carter at ten. Ultimately, Spencer was our man and we stuck with him.

Springbok coach Heyneke Meyer started 20-year-old Handré Pollard at flyhalf in Dublin and then 24-year-old Pat Lambie at Twickenham, in what he said was a pre-determined plan.

The publicly-stated reasoning behind the decision was to afford both pivots the experience of playing in northern hemisphere conditions.

While Pollard didn't have a great game against Ireland - neither did his halfback partner Francois Hougaard - Lambie did well against England. I like the look of the latter when he possesses a strong mindset and tries to dominate the opposition, instead of being passive.

It was Lambie's clever chip kick behind the England defence that resulted in Cobus Reinach's try at Twickenham and he also showed good composure at the end to slot that drop goal.

Pollard and Lambie are both top-class players, but I'd opt for experience and stick with the latter, especially if the currently-injured Fourie du Preez becomes available next year.

I believe Lambie would thrive if sound in the knowledge that he was the first-choice flyhalf, having perhaps fallen into the trap in the past of being satisfied with a place on the bench.

When it comes to the All Blacks at pivot, I've been impressed with Colin Slade, along with Beauden Barrett, who are both putting pressure on Aaron Cruden and Carter.

However, I believe that All Blacks boss Steve Hansen should have given Carter another go at ten against Wales in Cardiff on Saturday, as the 32-year-old will only improve the more he plays.

I don't think the All Blacks coaching staff can keep Carter wrapped in cotton wool for the rest of the tour, as there aren't many more Tests to be played before the 2015 World Cup.

Ireland have settled on their fly-half but other nations haven't © Getty Images

But one thing I know for sure is that Cruden has the better combinations with his backline, and when the synergy between him and Sonny Bill Williams kicks in, look out!

Akin to Cruden, Aaron Smith is pivotal to the All Blacks sustaining performance and results.

As far as the Wallabies are concerned, Bernard Foley has done the job at fly-half for Michael Cheika at the Waratahs, and you wouldn't blame the coach for sticking with him and 'Tahs scrumhalf Nick Phipps at Test level.

But Quade Cooper and Will Genia are both X-factor players who, in my opinion, offer more on attack than Foley and Phipps. For that reason alone they could yet force their way into the starting XV, especially if results don't go the Wallabies' way. However, Cheika will be having sleepless nights if he is required to change his New South Wales halfback pairing.

It's fair to say Ireland have been the best team this month, and deserve to be ranked third in the world. I expect Joe Schmidt's side to beat the Wallabies on Saturday and reckon that they could go on to reach the World Cup semi-finals for the first time in England next year.

On the flipside, England remind me of a PlayStation rugby team - there's no X-factor and they look over-structured. They keep on talking about learning and gaining experience, but at some point they have to start beating the world's best. Stuart Lancaster needs to decide now whether to persevere with Owen Farrell at flyhalf or give George Ford or Danny Cipriani a go on a long-term basis. Cipriani has the ability to break the line, but does he boast the mental strength to excel at Test level?

It was Ford, though, who replaced Farrell against the Springboks. With the 21-year-old starting against Samoa this Saturday, I believe he must be given a fair chance to stake his claim for the World Cup and therefore also start against the Wallabies in two weeks' time.

by GunsGerms Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:43 pm

I found this passage the most interesting:

It's fair to say Ireland have been the best team this month, and deserve to be ranked third in the world. I expect Joe Schmidt's side to beat the Wallabies on Saturday and reckon that they could go on to reach the World Cup semi-finals for the first time in England next year.

by **Biltong** Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:47 pm

GunsGerms wrote:I found this passage the most interesting:

It's fair to say Ireland have been the best team this month, and deserve to be ranked third in the world. I expect Joe Schmidt's side to beat the Wallabies on Saturday and reckon that they could go on to reach the World Cup semi-finals for the first time in England next year.

That's why I suggested last week that Ireland could make the final. Wink

by Geordie Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:24 pm

On the flipside, England remind me of a PlayStation rugby team - there's no X-factor and they look over-structured. They keep on talking about learning and gaining experience, but at some point they have to start beating the world's best. Stuart Lancaster needs to decide now whether to persevere with Owen Farrell at flyhalf or give George Ford or Danny Cipriani a go on a long-term basis.

Spot on!

Also

You certainly can't turn up at the event not knowing who your first-choice pivot will be.

Whats worse, turning up not knowing your first choice although all options are good or turning up knowing that your 10 is an average player despite having have some potentially exciting 10's as options.

by funnyExiledScot Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:41 pm

It very much looks like Vern Cotter has settled on Finn Russell at 10 for Scotland, which is an excellent piece of team selection. With Laidlaw at 9 there's no need to consider place kicking (not that Russell is a bad kicker) and Cotter has just gone with the best and most rounded play maker. Russell also has the benefit of being a very enthusiastic tackler.

Safe to say that Scotland, whilst not World Cup contenders, have now finally settled on a first choice fly half, and I'm delighted to report that it isn't Duncan Weir.

by Bathman_in_London Thu Nov 20, 2014 2:11 pm

Hard to argue with anything in that article, I guess you could say that only Ireland have a nailed on FH for the WC next year though, there's always the chance that France will do something stupid and recall Michelak...! Lopez looks good to me, personally I want to see a strong France, it does ruin the 6N a bit when they can only limp over the line against Italy.

Lambie's chip over the top for the try last week was top class though, having a FH with that vision really changes the way your team can play.

by Taylorman Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:14 pm

GunsGerms wrote:I found this passage the most interesting:

It's fair to say Ireland have been the best team this month, and deserve to be ranked third in the world. I expect Joe Schmidt's side to beat the Wallabies on Saturday and reckon that they could go on to reach the World Cup semi-finals for the first time in England next year.

We've yet to see how Cheika responds from a loss. The lesser structure of Oz might trouble Ireland but good to see the two ex Leinster coaches go to battle. I think Ireland will just pip it, but if Oz are allowed to string a few passes together they could nab it.

by SecretFly Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:40 pm

Taylorman wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:I found this passage the most interesting:

It's fair to say Ireland have been the best team this month, and deserve to be ranked third in the world. I expect Joe Schmidt's side to beat the Wallabies on Saturday and reckon that they could go on to reach the World Cup semi-finals for the first time in England next year.

We've yet to see how Cheika responds from a loss. The lesser structure of Oz might trouble Ireland but good to see the two ex Leinster coaches go to battle. I think Ireland will just pip it, but if Oz are allowed to string a few passes together they could nab it.

Yeah. On the button, Taylorman. If Ireland can keep it more close combat and maybe snipe here and there on a surprise counter or two they might have a good day. But if the Aussies can force a faster, looser rhythm onto the game (I'm sure it'll be one of their tactics to do just that) then Ireland's defensive systems might crumble, and with them that all important confidence.

But whereas I'd have been very worried about confidence going down in other years, I think all through the ranks there is much more solidity there now and even when under the strain, I think they'll keep focused and always believe they have an opportunity to the 80th minute.

by Taylorman Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:25 pm

"Ultimately, Spencer was our man and we stuck with him".

It'd be just like Mitchell to pick Spencer from he, Merts and Dan Carter...go figure...

He's covered some good points and I don't see NZ is in a bad position not knowing who their 10 is. Our problem is picking one from 4 pretty good ones. SA is in a different position in that none is able to be consistent enough to say I'm the one.

Having Aaron Smith as 9 gives our 10's a huge advantage over other sides.

by Guest Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:40 pm

Injuries are such a part and parcel of rugby these days (up to a 1/4 or a 3rd of a squad out at any one time is not unusual, but is still absurd in the grand scheme of things) that knowing your no.1 no.10 can often be of little comfort come big tournaments. Come the world cup you can bet that perhaps a quarter (just a guess) of first choice 10s will either not make it or get injured during the tournament. Knowing that you have decent back up, i.e knowing your 2nd and 3rd choice 10s, and knowing how to change your plans to play to their strengths, is the key in my opinion.

by **Biltong** Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:02 pm

Taylorman wrote:"Ultimately, Spencer was our man and we stuck with him".

It'd be just like Mitchell to pick Spencer from he, Merts and Dan Carter...go figure...

He's covered some good points and I don't see NZ is in a bad position not knowing who their 10 is. Our problem is picking one from 4 pretty good ones. SA is in a different position in that none is able to be consistent enough to say I'm the one.

Having Aaron Smith as 9 gives our 10's a huge advantage over other sides.

Neither Lambie nor Pollard has had that many games whilst Morne has been the favourite. Lambie is only playing his second test at ten since 2012.

Pollard had one poor game in conditions he has never faced before

by Taylorman Thu Nov 20, 2014 10:07 pm

Biltong wrote:
Taylorman wrote:"Ultimately, Spencer was our man and we stuck with him".

It'd be just like Mitchell to pick Spencer from he, Merts and Dan Carter...go figure...

He's covered some good points and I don't see NZ is in a bad position not knowing who their 10 is. Our problem is picking one from 4 pretty good ones. SA is in a different position in that none is able to be consistent enough to say I'm the one.

Having Aaron Smith as 9 gives our 10's a huge advantage over other sides.

Neither Lambie nor Pollard has had that many games whilst Morne has been the favourite. Lambie is only playing his second test at ten since 2012.

Pollard had one poor game in conditions he has never faced before

Yes that and poor selection has meant no one has been able to string several winning tests together (other than Morne). lambie and Pollard should caretake the role through to next year- no one else. They're more similar and can cover eachother.

In Cruden and DC we have two long term proven performers though DC needs more game time and Cruden just needs to get to the airport on time. In Barrett and Slade we're very spoilt but in line with Mitchells comments next year Hansen needs to nail the 10 down, which is why I think we are all over the place now. He's giving everyone maximum exposure to prove themselves. Next year is about continuity.

by kingraf Thu Nov 20, 2014 10:31 pm

I think we'll go into the world cup with Lambie as our 10 for the simple reason that he is a better kicker than Pollard. As to who I'd pick, that's a difficult one. Both are quality, I think Pollard has X-factor, and can make something from nothing, has a big boot on him and can turn a team over in a kicking game. Lambie on the other hand probably doesn't posses the same ability to turn teams over, but I think he attacks the line better, and is actually quite evasive due to his low center of gravity. He's also a better kicker at goal. I'd lean to Pollard, but Lambie is a fantastic ten

by **Biltong** Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:14 pm

Lambie is more subtle, a better distributor and tactical kicker, he is surprisingly good on defence, but Pollard has more power on defence and attack.

He is still young and needs to gain experience, but a very promising player

by doctor_grey Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:28 am

GeordieFalcon wrote:
On the flipside, England remind me of a PlayStation rugby team - there's no X-factor and they look over-structured. They keep on talking about learning and gaining experience, but at some point they have to start beating the world's best. Stuart Lancaster needs to decide now whether to persevere with Owen Farrell at flyhalf or give George Ford or Danny Cipriani a go on a long-term basis.

Spot on!

Also
You certainly can't turn up at the event not knowing who your first-choice pivot will be.

Whats worse, turning up not knowing your first choice although all options are good or turning up knowing that your 10 is an average player despite having have some potentially exciting 10's as options.

John Mitchell must have been reading our posts and simply regurgitated them for the article. This is 150% right.

by **Rugby Fan** Fri Nov 21, 2014 1:41 am

Gregor Paul thinks the All Blacks might have the top 4 fly halves in the world. He is willing to concede that some might rate Sexton but doesn't think there's much argument that they would still have 4 of the top 5.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/gregor-paul/news/article.cfm?a_id=196&objectid=11361341

by Taylorman Fri Nov 21, 2014 2:26 am

Rugby Fan wrote:Gregor Paul thinks the All Blacks might have the top 4 fly halves in the world. He is willing to concede that some might rate Sexton but doesn't think there's much argument that they would still have 4 of the top 5.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/gregor-paul/news/article.cfm?a_id=196&objectid=11361341

Well that's not true obviously but Sexton doesn't rate overly well here because of his performances versus the AB's recently. He, like others, didnt do a lot on the NZ tour and he panicked a little with the- for him- easyish kick that would have nailed the win last year.

He's ahead of Carter and Slade for game time alone but probably behind Cruden and perhaps Barrett.

Sextons ahead of anyone else though, partially because no one else can decide who their 10 is. I think Ireland are the only side with a dead cert idea on their 10. Farrell perhaps but NZ, OZ, SA, Wales...all over the place.

by InjuredYetAgain Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:49 am

We need to remember, though, that a 10 is only as good as the 8 donkeys in front of him. Of course the Kiwi and Safer stand off's are held up as great players but they aren't under the same pressures as, just for example, Scotland or Samoa, whose packs rarely have more than equality against their opponents.
That said, England are an exception in that they are normally in the ascendancy up front but Farewell (who I was impressed with on the Lions tour) seems to have regressed.

by whocares Fri Nov 21, 2014 9:09 am

Injuries are so important nowadays specially as it takes time to settle at 10. Someone like Biggar has been unlucky with those in my opinion. that said, if it wasnt for them, Michalak would still be our flyhalf vomit

Lopez is not settled at 10 yet, he was probably number 4 in the pecking order not so long ago but while not world class he at least has some variety in this game (can kick ok-ish, attack the line sometimes, decent pass, good vision and also good tackler).

by **Rugby Fan** Fri Nov 21, 2014 9:54 am

Taylorman wrote:...but Sexton doesn't rate overly well here because of his performances versus the AB's recently....

You've mentioned that attitude before. I can understand it in a world where there was no chance to see any international rugby other than your own team on tour, and teams coming to play you. It's a bit more puzzling when there are fewer such limits. It would be like West Indies fans from the early 80s saying Ian Botham wasn't much of a cricketer because he never performed against them.

It's surely possible to rate a player on his whole career rather than just on one set of head-to-heads.

I think it still works the other way, mind you. When an opposition player has a blinder against you, you rarely forget him, and his deeds that day tend to outweigh any subsequent mediocrity.

by GunsGerms Fri Nov 21, 2014 9:59 am

In fairness Sexton did choke against the ABs last year and his kicking isnt up to standard at times. That is a fact as hard as it is to admit as he is arguably Ireland's best player now.

However, that said I reckon if he did maintain an 85% kicking ratio he would be streets ahead of Cruden and Barrett who are both excellent but dont have the same range of skills as Sexton.

His defense is much better and he is more of a try scoring threat. Sexton has scored 9 tries in 49 tests, Cruden 5 in 37 tests.

Would be nice if Sexton beat Australia on his 50th cap.

by WELL-PAST-IT Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:04 am

whocares wrote:Injuries are so important nowadays specially as it takes time to settle at 10. Someone like Biggar has been unlucky with those in my opinion. that said, if it wasnt for them, Michalak would still be our flyhalf
Lopez is not settled at 10 yet, he was probably number 4 in the pecking order not so long ago but while not world class he at least has some variety in this game (can kick ok-ish, attack the line sometimes, decent pass, good vision and also good tackler).

Lopez is a bit like Myler, has the best alround game of any of his contempories, but dosen't excel at any one thing.

Attribute Myler Farrell Ford Cips

Defence 8 9 7 6

Attack 8 6.5 9 8

Play flat 7.5 6 9 9

Play deep 8 9 7 8

Snipe 8 6 8.5 8

Mix it up 8 7 8 8

Kicking hand 7.5 7.5 7 7

Goal kicking 8 9 7 7

63 60 62.5 61

My take on individual skills shows that Myler is not best at anything, neither is he worst. i may be a bit biased in some regards, but I still think he is the most rounded of all our options in that he has no weakness and can play any game plan of mix it up.

He has never been given the chance to actually show if he can cut it at international level despite being close to the top of the premiership in his position in just about every attribute a 10 needs. Interestingly OF comes last because he has two glaring weaknesses in his game, both attack related that he has not as yet sorted out at international level, playing flat and running with the ball, he is just too predictable.

I await the Myler knockers to start throwing their bricks

by whocares Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:26 am

good post W-P-I. am not too familiar with Myler and you also have to take into account that it is not straightforward to translate club form at international level. it is difficult for an OH to get a chance, more so than any other position, so he might have to wait some time I suppose.

I like your comparison table : could almost replace Farrel by Tales (defense, kicking) and Cipriani /Ford by Michalak / Plisson and have an accurate description of the french flyhalves.

by **LondonTiger** Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:38 am

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Lopez is a bit like Myler, has the best alround game of any of his contempories, but dosen't excel at any one thing.

Attribute Myler Farrell Ford Cips

Defence 8 9 7 6

Attack 8 6.5 9 8

Play flat 7.5 6 9 9

Play deep 8 9 7 8

Snipe 8 6 8.5 8

Mix it up 8 7 8 8

Kicking hand 7.5 7.5 7 7

Goal kicking 8 9 7 7

63 60 62.5 61

I await the Myler knockers to start throwing their bricks

Not going to knock Myler at all - however, and just my opinion, I feel some of your rankings are wrong. Just to compare Myler with Ford:

Defence equal - Ford misses less tackle, but Myler brings players to ground quicker. (Farrell best)
Attack - ford superior (ford and Cipriani similar)
Playing flat - Ford superior (Ford best)
Playing Deep - Myler marginally better as he has greater kicking range. (Farrell best)
Snipe - Ford sueperior (Cipriani best as most speed)
Kicking from hand - Ford superior, just. He is a better tactical kicker, but Mykler has greater range (ford best)
Kicking from tee - Myler just - both have off days - but fords %s are much improved. (Farrell best)
range of Passing - Ford just. This part of Mylers game is much under-rated and he does the simple things well. (Ford and Cipriani)

Overall I would say that Ford is best by these combined measures. However until we see him on the international stage we cannot be sure.

by Taylorman Fri Nov 21, 2014 4:29 pm

Rugby Fan wrote:
Taylorman wrote:...but Sexton doesn't rate overly well here because of his performances versus the AB's recently....

You've mentioned that attitude before. I can understand it in a world where there was no chance to see any international rugby other than your own team on tour, and teams coming to play you. It's a bit more puzzling when there are fewer such limits. It would be like West Indies fans from the early 80s saying Ian Botham wasn't much of a cricketer because he never performed against them.

It's surely possible to rate a player on his whole career rather than just on one set of head-to-heads.

I think it still works the other way, mind you. When an opposition player has a blinder against you, you rarely forget him, and his deeds that day tend to outweigh any subsequent mediocrity.

yep, absolutely agree, and the article is at one end of the kiwi view. I've seen Sexton play blinders for Ireland and of the few Leinster matches I saw he played well every time. Versus the Boks he was excellent but even then I was left in that 'gee he doesn't do that against us' way of thinking. So rightly or wrongly the litmus test for us is how he goes in our matches, and the columnist is taking that just a little too far, bordering onto disrespect and ignorance.

I think Ireland would have beaten all 3 SH sides that day they beat the Boks as they had just enough under the radar elements working for them for the Boks to be a touch complacent, especially after the AB win. Two games on and the threat to Oz is very clear so that won't work for them here. Still think they'll win but it won't be easy. But if Sexton plays like he did, game over.

by doctor_grey Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:24 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Lopez is a bit like Myler, has the best alround game of any of his contempories, but dosen't excel at any one thing.

Attribute Myler Farrell Ford Cips

Defence 8 9 7 6

Attack 8 6.5 9 8

Play flat 7.5 6 9 9

Play deep 8 9 7 8

Snipe 8 6 8.5 8

Mix it up 8 7 8 8

Kicking hand 7.5 7.5 7 7

Goal kicking 8 9 7 7

63 60 62.5 61

I await the Myler knockers to start throwing their bricks

Not going to knock Myler at all - however, and just my opinion, I feel some of your rankings are wrong. Just to compare Myler with Ford:

Defence equal - Ford misses less tackle, but Myler brings players to ground quicker. (Farrell best)
Attack - ford superior (ford and Cipriani similar)
Playing flat - Ford superior (Ford best)
Playing Deep - Myler marginally better as he has greater kicking range. (Farrell best)
Snipe - Ford sueperior (Cipriani best as most speed)
Kicking from hand - Ford superior, just. He is a better tactical kicker, but Mykler has greater range (ford best)
Kicking from tee - Myler just - both have off days - but fords %s are much improved. (Farrell best)
range of Passing - Ford just. This part of Mylers game is much under-rated and he does the simple things well. (Ford and Cipriani)

Overall I would say that Ford is best by these combined measures. However until we see him on the international stage we cannot be sure.

At the worst case (which I don't believe is the case), Myler is not more than only slightly behind any of these other guys and, therefore, should have his shot. He has performed consistently well and consistently clutch at the highest level in which he has competed. What else does he have to do?

The basic problem is Lancaster hung his hat on Farrell a couple of years ago believing he was going to recreate Jonny Wilkinson's development. Farrell may or may not have hit his max. We don't know. But we certainly needed to evaluate Plan B (Ford) who is unproven, Plan C (Myler?) unproven, Plan D (Burns?) unproven, Plan E (Cipriani?) unproven. Frankly this was an opportunity lost.

by GunsGerms Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:26 pm

Myler is too old. He is 30 and hasnt hit the heights of international rugby yet so his ship has sailed.

by doctor_grey Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:32 pm

GunsGerms wrote:Myler is too old. He is 30 and hasnt hit the heights of international rugby yet so his ship has sailed.

If he offers the best chance to win, then the ship is still floating nicely at the quay and won't sail without him.

The problem we are really discussing in what to do for the next 12 months. Not beyond. And that other players needed to be tried in case Farrell struggles or gets injured. There is no tried and tested Plan B at the moment. Only some hope.

by **Rugby Fan** Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:41 pm

doctor_grey wrote:The basic problem is Lancaster hung his hat on Farrell a couple of years ago believing he was going to recreate Jonny Wilkinson's development. Farrell may or may not have hit his max. We don't know. But we certainly needed to evaluate Plan B (Ford) who is unproven, Plan C (Myler?) unproven, Plan D (Burns?) unproven, Plan E (Cipriani?) unproven. Frankly this was an opportunity lost.

I think that's exactly what Lancaster did, and Farrell repaid him to sufficient degree.

Has Lancaster really been so remiss in his fly half selections? He tried to bring Farrell in alongside his club mate Hodgson, but then Charlie retired from the international game (as had Wilkinson before). George Ford wasn't given game time at Leicester, so was only a real contender for England from last year. He was all set to get a start in New Zealand but was injured.

I think Lancaster is worried about fielding a matchday 23 which doesn't feature Farrrell. Not because he thinks Daddy Andy might beat him up, but because he doesn't think we'll have options to change the gameplan otherwise.

by doctor_grey Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:53 pm

Problem is we don't know Lancaster's logic. There were other options, but Lancaster didn't play them. I understand why Flood went to France because Lancaster couldn't guarantee him the 10 jumper. Burns was on the up a year or so ago and didn't really get a shot.

by aucklandlaurie Fri Nov 21, 2014 9:28 pm

I find John Mitchell as very rugby wise, and whenever he is either quoted or he himself places comment in the media, its compusory reading.

I also agree with his comments on Jonathan Sexton, and i think it goes further than that, as I dont think the Rugby World has yet seen the best of Sexton.

by doctor_grey Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:07 pm

Rugby Fan wrote:
doctor_grey wrote:The basic problem is Lancaster hung his hat on Farrell a couple of years ago believing he was going to recreate Jonny Wilkinson's development. Farrell may or may not have hit his max. We don't know. But we certainly needed to evaluate Plan B (Ford) who is unproven, Plan C (Myler?) unproven, Plan D (Burns?) unproven, Plan E (Cipriani?) unproven. Frankly this was an opportunity lost.

I think that's exactly what Lancaster did, and Farrell repaid him to sufficient degree.

Has Lancaster really been so remiss in his fly half selections? He tried to bring Farrell in alongside his club mate Hodgson, but then Charlie retired from the international game (as had Wilkinson before). George Ford wasn't given game time at Leicester, so was only a real contender for England from last year. He was all set to get a start in New Zealand but was injured.

I think Lancaster is worried about fielding a matchday 23 which doesn't feature Farrrell. Not because he thinks Daddy Andy might beat him up, but because he doesn't think we'll have options to change the gameplan otherwise.

I agree with your last sentiment, that Lancaster picks Farrell not because of his old man. Rather, I think, it is because Lancaster has a plan and doesn't deviate from his plans very well. Which may be the reason the game plan doesn't change much or seem flexible.

One thing is strange is the way England did change game plan for the Italy match in last year's Six Nations. England went balls to the wall and did OK. I am not suggesting an all or nothing game plan, which would be naive. But it shows change can happen and England does have the horses to put up points if the game plan frees them to do so.

by ChequeredJersey Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:45 am

GunsGerms wrote:In fairness Sexton did choke against the ABs last year and his kicking isnt up to standard at times. That is a fact as hard as it is to admit as he is arguably Ireland's best player now.

However, that said I reckon if he did maintain an 85% kicking ratio he would be streets ahead of Cruden and Barrett who are both excellent but dont have the same range of skills as Sexton.

His defense is much better and he is more of a try scoring threat. Sexton has scored 9 tries in 49 tests, Cruden 5 in 37 tests.

Would be nice if Sexton beat Australia on his 50th cap.

Barrett has 4/27, most as subs...

by Geordie Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:02 pm

Wow people talking about a plan B... Erm

We've barely shown a plan A in recent times....

For me if you have enough power and leadership in the centres - Burrell, Barritt, Tuilagi ...hell even though I have criticised him hugely If Twevletrees can ever fulfil his potential with consistency etc then we can afford to risk a weaker defensive fly half for a real playmaking creative player...thus for me Ford or Cips must start.

I rate Burns highly...he just seems lost...

And in all honesty Slade I cant comment on as I haven't seen huge amounts of him...but maybe from what ive heard he offers the mix of Fords creativity with Farrells more robust game.

Will he settle at 10 though or will he remain in one of the centre spots.

by Sponsored content

John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.

Re: John Mitchell on international Flyhalves.