T Youngs v Hartley v Webber?

First topic message reminder :

Tom Youngs is clearly performing extremely well after the Bath game last weekend. I've never been a fan of his due to his wonky throwing at the lineout and his lack of power in the scrum. However his form in the loose is very hard to ignore right now.

Hartley on his day is good allround but never seems to really excel at anything. His discipline is woefully inadequate. Wales will want to wind him up in Cardiff but it won't work because they've tried it before even before the match with gatland's big gob. If he starts he will be on his best behaviour.

That leaves Webber. Another good allround player who carries very well and very good defensively. He seems to go about his work quietly and thoroughly with no mistakes. His attitude reminds me of other great players who don't make a song and dance but just focus and get on with the job.

It's Webber for me.

makes you laugh what people make of things, Youngs throwing isn't as bad as everyone makes out (just because there has been a few high profile bad throws). Likewise Hartleys discipline isn't as bad as everyone makes out (again, because there has been a few high profile instances)

nathan wrote:...Youngs throwing isn't as bad as everyone makes out (just because there has been a few high profile bad throws)...

"Do they call me 'McGregor the Pier-Builder?' No. But ye **** ONE sheep ..."

It shouldn't really surprise you that it sticks in the mind how Tom Youngs has walked on the pitch as an England substitute, and promptly been involved with a series of disastrous set pieces which contributed to losing games.

As ever, people like to sensationalize things and many struggle to cope with anything more than sound-bites or one line arguments. I'd happily see Youngs in an England shirt on the Test stage again, it's just that I feel the combination of Hartley and Webber can give us what we need at present. Perhaps with the exception of Hartley's underpowered carrying.

With a few big games for Tigers coming up it'll be good to see Youngs get in the groove of things.

Rugby Fan wrote:

nathan wrote:...Youngs throwing isn't as bad as everyone makes out (just because there has been a few high profile bad throws)...

"Do they call me 'McGregor the Pier-Builder?' No. But ye **** ONE sheep ..."

It shouldn't really surprise you that it sticks in the mind how Tom Youngs has walked on the pitch as an England substitute, and promptly been involved with a series of disastrous set pieces which contributed to losing games.

and yet a line out throw isn't just down to the hooker, everyone seems to forget this.

nathan wrote:and yet a line out throw isn't just down to the hooker, everyone seems to forget this.

I think Youngs copped 100% of the blame at the time, because it seemed more than coincidental that our lineout became flakey as soon as he assumed throwing duties, given that the rest of the principals remained largely the same.

With more perspective, most of us have accepted that there's a lot more which can go wrong than just a wonky throw. Having said that, I've yet to hear anyone point out who instead was at fault for the lineouts which did go bad.

It's clear that Tom Youngs has some good qualities to offer in an England shirt. If he wins selection, I'll be hoping that he puts all of them on show for us. It won't be a fluke if he's part of a successful set piece, because he will have worked hard to get there. Don't be surprised, though, if there are a few of us who will watch his first throws from behind a sofa.

nathan wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

nathan wrote:...Youngs throwing isn't as bad as everyone makes out (just because there has been a few high profile bad throws)...

"Do they call me 'McGregor the Pier-Builder?' No. But ye **** ONE sheep ..."

It shouldn't really surprise you that it sticks in the mind how Tom Youngs has walked on the pitch as an England substitute, and promptly been involved with a series of disastrous set pieces which contributed to losing games.

and yet a line out throw isn't just down to the hooker, everyone seems to forget this.

The pedant in me feels I have to point out that the throw is entirely down to the hooker.

mckay1402 wrote:

nathan wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

nathan wrote:...Youngs throwing isn't as bad as everyone makes out (just because there has been a few high profile bad throws)...

"Do they call me 'McGregor the Pier-Builder?' No. But ye **** ONE sheep ..."

It shouldn't really surprise you that it sticks in the mind how Tom Youngs has walked on the pitch as an England substitute, and promptly been involved with a series of disastrous set pieces which contributed to losing games.

and yet a line out throw isn't just down to the hooker, everyone seems to forget this.

The pedant in me feels I have to point out that the throw is entirely down to the hooker.  

That sort of pedantry warms the cockles.

mckay1402 wrote:

nathan wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

nathan wrote:...Youngs throwing isn't as bad as everyone makes out (just because there has been a few high profile bad throws)...

"Do they call me 'McGregor the Pier-Builder?' No. But ye **** ONE sheep ..."

It shouldn't really surprise you that it sticks in the mind how Tom Youngs has walked on the pitch as an England substitute, and promptly been involved with a series of disastrous set pieces which contributed to losing games.

and yet a line out throw isn't just down to the hooker, everyone seems to forget this.

The pedant in me feels I have to point out that the throw is entirely down to the hooker.  

i would agree with you apart from the fact that the hooker is throwing to a moving target, that has been organised by the lineout caller. Lineouts are not a simple throw in.

I think he just meant that the actual throw is all down to the hooker. The guy catching it might not be in the right place but the throw is all hooker. That's what I took from the pedant bit