Back row balance

So England have gone from a relatively bare cupboard to, a pretty much universally acknowledged, 3 class acts in Curry, Vunipola and Underhill. The problem now being 2 of those guys are pretty much out and out open sides albeit slightly different strengths.
We've seen a few coaches and Jones himself go with getting the best players on the pitch rather than worry about numbers on their backs but is it the right way to go leading to the world cup? With vunipola the antithesis of a lineout option do one of the flankers drop out or will dropping a world class 8 even come into the equation for a better pack balance?
Have we already got the guys cemented into the side or are they about to be parachuted in? For me the 2 guys who could force themselves in are Dombrandt an option at 6 or 8 or Willis a 6 who could cover 7 and 8. Useful utility options.
I'd personally love to see Willis Curry Vunipola with Underhill on the bench. Nuisance at the breakdown string carrying throughout and 4 if the hardest workers around.

Suspect Jones is mainly wondering whether to select Robshaw or Shields. A lot of fans are unimpressed with both but I'd bet one of them is going to go to the World Cup.

Shields has a place right now but Quins might get into the Premiership play-offs, which could be a chance for Robshaw to show again what he offers on a big stage.

Robshaw has been playing great for Quins, doing what he does best, being everywhere and cleaning things up. He's never going to be x-factor but he is reliable, experienced and (touch wood) durable.

Against Scotland you could say that was exactly what we needed. Some one just to slow things down and steady the ship. Personally i'd go with Robshaw

Its also an interesting area for the ABs where 6 and 7 are concerned. Ardie Savea has morphed into top shelf quality if his last 12 months and particularly his recent Super rugby form is anything to go by.

Last Fridays effort vs the Highlanders was massive and if theres now a better 7 out there than he then I'd like to see it. Scary stuff.

Cane gets back in a few weeks and how he recovers from that injury in a way he can keep crunching players backwards as he did remains to be seen. No doubt Ardie's motivating him to do just that.

At 8 Read looks like he's going to get back to his usual self in time and all interest is on 6, several putting their hands up and Tom Robinson has entered the equation which now has Vaea Fifita, Squire and Frizzell in there fighting for the first selection. Akira Ioane, whos starting to show some form and consistency at 8 with a resurgent Blues side, might also be in the mix for 6. hes certainly the best for the old Kaino hard hitting role.

Jury's still out on that one but the players sure know they're in a world cup year. Lot of excitement about.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So England have gone from a relatively bare cupboard to, a pretty much universally acknowledged, 3 class acts in Curry, Vunipola and Underhill Wilson. The problem now being 2 of those guys are pretty much out and out open sides albeit slightly different strengths.
We've seen a few coaches  and Jones himself go with getting the best players on the pitch rather than worry about numbers on their backs but is it the right way to go leading to the world cup? With vunipola the antithesis of a lineout option do one of the flankers drop out or will dropping a world class 8 even come into the equation for a better pack balance?
Have we already got the guys cemented into the side or are they about to be parachuted in? For me the 2 guys who could force themselves in are Dombrandt an option at 6 or 8 or Willis a 6 who could cover 7 and 8. Useful utility options.
I'd personally love to see Willis Curry Vunipola with Underhill on the bench. Nuisance at the breakdown string carrying throughout and 4 if the hardest workers around.

Fixed that for you....

After this 6 nations can we move beyond pretending he's good enough GF? Forgot all about robshaw the yappy. Him Underhill and vunipola is still decent though he was falling down the pecking order pre injury. If 1 of our 7s suddenly became amazing in the lineout it would help.

NZ are in that in between phase still Taylor. Bit like England in as much as you appear to have a lot of players who could go.onto to be great but are in the process of proving it. Or indeed not yet 1st choice.

I've never been a big proponent of Don Armand, and he seemed to go a bit quiet, but his recent performances have convinced me that he deserved a chance as much as Brad Shields. I appreciate that his moment has passed, as it has for Kvesic, who is probably playing as well as he's ever done.

Still, you can't give every one a shot.

No 7&1/2 wrote:After this 6 nations can we move beyond pretending he's good enough GF? Forgot all about robshaw the yappy. Him Underhill and vunipola is still decent though he was falling down the pecking order pre injury. If 1 of our 7s suddenly became amazing in the lineout it would help.

Ok mate no bother!

Rugby Fan wrote:I've never been a big proponent of Don Armand, and he seemed to go a bit quiet, but his recent performances have convinced me that he deserved a chance as much as Brad Shields. I appreciate that his moment has passed, as it has for Kvesic, who is probably playing as well as he's ever done.

Still, you can't give every one a shot.

Some of the rugby he is playing is top class though...Baxter said he needed to round his game more, and clearly he's doing that. He shoudnt be ruled out.

Post World Cup the back row challenge will be tough...but some of these kids have to fulfil their potential.

Curry is starting to realise his potential. He was class in the 6n.
Underhill when he's fit is playing well also.
Jack Willis seems to have come back from injury at the level he left it, which is good.
Sam Simmonds was playing top class rugby

However others like,
Zach Mercer,
Jack Clifford
Dombrandt
Ted Hill
Tom Willis
All have to prove how good they are / can be...

GeordieFalcon wrote:...However others like...

I heard someone talking up the recent form of Teimana Harrison, who is still only 26, just slightly older than Jack Clifford. Sam Simmonds is 24. So many of these players have good patches of club form but there just aren't enough matches in a the calendar to give everyone a chance, while also allowing your main selection choices to settle into the roles. There are going to be some players who might well thrive in a long run in a balanced Test back row but we'll never know.

It's the issue of having so much choice. The reason I'd go with the players I'd picked out is looking to that great bunch coming through all with youth very much on their side. I want to see England get to the point where we have the 4 or 5nundisputed world.class performers rather than a group of late 20s early 30 s guy who we know can do a job. I think the best way to get that is to select the youth now when perhaps they are neck and neck with older contenders or even slightly behind.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's the issue of having so much choice. The reason I'd go with the players I'd picked out is looking to that great bunch coming through all with youth very much on their  side. I want to see England get to the point where we have the 4 or 5nundisputed world.class performers rather than a group of late 20s early 30 s guy who we know can do a job. I think the best way to get that is to select the youth now when perhaps they are neck and neck with older contenders or even slightly behind.

Something a coach with short term targets is less likely to do.

LondonTiger wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's the issue of having so much choice. The reason I'd go with the players I'd picked out is looking to that great bunch coming through all with youth very much on their  side. I want to see England get to the point where we have the 4 or 5nundisputed world.class performers rather than a group of late 20s early 30 s guy who we know can do a job. I think the best way to get that is to select the youth now when perhaps they are neck and neck with older contenders or even slightly behind.

Something a coach with short term targets is less likely to do.

It's also something a coach might back away from, if their initial selections don't bear fruit (through form and injury), and they worry about handing out debut caps to young players close to decisive tournaments.

Lancaster and Jones have been pretty good with going with younger guys in general. I wont be surprised should a young blindside be starting the world cup or Cokanasiga. Thoughdoubt we'd see a Maunder of Smith coming through before .

Rugby Fan wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:...However others like...

I heard someone talking up the recent form of Teimana Harrison, who is still only 26, just slightly older than Jack Clifford. Sam Simmonds is 24. So many of these players have good patches of club form but there just aren't enough matches in a the calendar to give everyone a chance, while also allowing your main selection choices to settle into the roles. There are going to be some players who might well thrive in a long run in a balanced Test back row but we'll never know.

I forgot all about Clifford and Simmonds.

Your right about Harrison aswell. He's playing very well.

I think we're missing a real power option in that back row.

Billy is immensely powerful, but he's not a "hard nut" so to speak. I think we are missing that at 6. Underhill has the strength and power to be that but im not sure that's his game.

Dombrandt is a big guy...can he play that role.

I think we're missing that in a few positions in the pack actually, players like Sinkler seem to think they're tough nuts but just come across as cheap shot charlies to me.
Genge looks like he could be the business though but he is way short of Mako for that 1 spot at the moment.

What would be your first choice back row and bench for world cup then post WC then?

Its a tough one.

For the world Cup as it stands
7 - Curry was outstanding (Underhill challenging if fit)
8 - Vunipola

6 is wide open.
Wilson has the shirt

But I admit I like a big powerhouse at 6.
Willis is looking very impressive and is 6'3 and over 17st.
Dombrandt looks another powerhouse who is very impressive. 6'3 and almost 19st.
Then theres Ted Hill playing well for Worcester and 6'5 and just shy of 18st.
All ones to watch.

Shields is out of the picture for me. Just not good enough.

Too be honest if everyone was fit, for the world cup I may be incline to go:

6 Underhill - I just cant ignore his sheer power, strength and physicality
7 Curry - Was outstanding in the 6n
8 Billy - Who else is there.

23 Wilson or Willis (if he is playing real quality rugby) on the bench.

Post world cup you can start looking at the new breed....

Do you think Underhill has a strong enough carrying game for 6? I'm in favour of just letting him and Curry fight it out for the 7 shirt, similar to Cane/Savea for NZ

No I don't Bam Bam, but at the moment I feel the next batch at 6 are a little too raw for this WC and id rather go with the other aspects that Sam brings.

After the world cup, everything changes. Or maybe Eddie may plump for one of them ...you never know.

Dombrandt is a beast of a carrier.
And Jack Willis looks simply a top player in the making.

If Jones is using his 6 primarily to clear rucks though Underhill could be perfect. Wilson didn't carry much at all.

[quote="GeordieFalcon"]

Rugby Fan wrote:

However others like,
Zach Mercer,
Jack Clifford
Dombrandt
Ted Hill
Tom Willis
All have to prove how good they are / can be...

I would add James Chisholm to that list too. He's an abrasive back rower who carries very well - Stood out in a poor Quins side last season.

Josh Beaumont was looked at, but I'm not sure he is up there at the moment.

No 7&1/2 wrote:If Jones is using his 6 primarily to clear rucks though Underhill could be perfect. Wilson didn't carry much at all.

That's something that Wilson has as a +
Jones has used him in a variety of roles.

A ruck clearer / tackler with little influence carrying wise.
A number 8 where he carried well.

So Jones knows he has a very good physical versatile player, which is why I think he'll go to the world cup as possibly a starter or most likely as a bench option.
Though I cant see him being there post world cup.

Underhill v Curry are both a little unlucky they have come around at the same time when for years we've been crying out for just one of them.

Yeah I'm.of the same mind that him and shields are place holders. Just think it'll be before the world cup when they are surpassed.

Possibly...there are some much larger talented guys coming through .

Mind I think only Jack Willis would realistically challenge for a spot pre world cup.

No 7&1/2 wrote:NZ are in that in between phase still Taylor. Bit like England in as much as you appear to have a lot of players who could go.onto to be great but are in the process of proving it. Or indeed not yet 1st choice.

We are always in that phase. Our experience leaves far too prematurely. This year Read and a whole host of hardened test players are heading north. We need to be filling those positions now at both Super and test level. We dont even wait for the WCup year to be over now.

If theyre not fully fledged super rugby or test experienced when those players leave it leaves a huge gap for the next and subsequent years.

Kaino, Read and Mccaw does seem a lifetime away.

It is hard to say Read is leaving prematurely when he is 34 later this year.

Hes playing professional rugby somewhere else as a new phase to his career. How is that not leaving prematurely?

Sexton is 34 end world cup. Is he going elsewhere?

Barrett is touted to go and would you like me to reel off the list that so far arent contracted to nz rugby that arent 34?

How many NH test players over 34 are staying put for next years 6N?

Curry was fantastic in the Six Nations, but Underhill was equally good in the Autumn. I'd have both men in the 23, starting 7 decided on World Cup form. Similar to how Gatland used to bench Tipuric even though he was a better rugby player to Lydiate, he wasn't as useful for the team starting most matches (unless you're going out to target the breakdown).

I'd have a proper 6 at 6. Wilson, Shields and Robshaw are all in contention, and I'd expect to see at least 1 bolter added to the pre-World Cup training squad/Barbarians game. But it would take something special for Ted Hill or similar to get into the World Cup squad.

All the 6s can cover 8 to an extent, so I'd have Lawes on the bench (Itoje and Kruis to start). Then you've got Maro and Billy due to play the 80 (injuries however being covered for) and you can use your other 2 subs across the 3 positions as you see fit. Personally for those 6s it goes Wilson, Robshaw, Shields for me in that order. So Wilson to start at 6, Robshaw into the squad, Shields missing out.

Going forward, we are apparently well stocked with some promising talent, but obviously not all those will be realised as international quality players.

Taylorman wrote:Hes playing professional rugby somewhere else as a new phase to his career. How is that not leaving prematurely?

Because he will no longer be good enough to stay.

The service he has given to NZ rugby he deserves a payday in the last throes of his career. You should be proud of what he has achieved, what he has contributed. Up to you whether you wish him well, but not imo churlish not too.

LondonTiger wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Hes playing professional rugby somewhere else as a new phase to his career. How is that not leaving prematurely?

Because he will no longer be good enough to stay.

The service he has given to NZ rugby he deserves a payday in the last throes of his career. You should be proud of what he has achieved, what he has contributed. Up to you whether you wish him well, but not imo churlish not too.

Not about being proud of what theyve achieved and we have them going all the time and being proud of our players goes without saying.

its about resourcing those dozens that leave early and there are many under 30 doing the same. (yet you choose to focus solely on Read to avoid that)  And who are you to say he'll no longer be good enough to stay? hes ok to captain a World cup final win and a day later not good enough? Nonu's in the mix at nearly 37.

Please.

Using your logic should Sexton also leave cos he wont be good enough? No, he'll drag on until the day they dont pick him anymore. As fans we don't get to see many last pro matches of our guys, they end up whithering away in some back drop third rate side in the north.

Definitely leaving:

Kieran Read, Ben Smith, Owen Franks, Liam Squire, Ryan Crotty, Luke Whitelock and Nehe Milner-Skudder. Jackson Hemopo, Matt Proctor (one test) and Jordan Taufua (named but didnt play)

Yet to re-sign:
Beauden Barrett, Brodie Retallick, Jack Goodhue, Richie Mo'unga, Jordie Barrett, Waisake Naholo and Sonny Bill Williams.

Which of the 6N sides wll potentially lose that number and calibre of players post World cup?

The closest Northern comparison to Read's situation might be Paul O'Connell, who agreed a move to Toulon after the last World Cup when he was 35. He still thought he had some seasons left in him (Simon Shaw played on until he was nearly 40) but, as it turned out, the injury he picked up at the tournament ended his playing career.

Most thought it was a fair reward for him to pick up a healthy cheque elsewhere. Also, POC already had coaching ambitions, so experiencing a different playing environment was a good way to broaden his experience.

Many players look at the World Cup cycle when thinking about career changes. In The North, the Lions tour also looms as a prospect. While it might be hard to imagine lasting another for years to the next World Cup, two years to a Lions tour seems more doable, in terms of the age you'll be, and the commitment required. The same obviously applies for the teams hosting the tours. If 2021 was due to be in NZ, you wonder whether that might have influenced Read's decision.

Well it didnt influence Mccaws, Conrad Smiths, Nonu's, Dan Carters, Kaino's and the several more that left between 2015 and 2017...so somehow...I doubt it.

And its not just the oldies leaving, Barrett is 27 and hasnt re-committed. Cruden has already gone, Piutau, Luatua and many more

Taylorman wrote:..Mccaws, Conrad Smiths, Nonu's, Dan Carters...

They played against the Lions in 2005. Kaino's last Test was against the Lions.

robbo277 wrote:Curry was fantastic in the Six Nations, but Underhill was equally good in the Autumn. I'd have both men in the 23, starting 7 decided on World Cup form. Similar to how Gatland used to bench Tipuric even though he was a better rugby player to Lydiate, he wasn't as useful for the team starting most matches (unless you're going out to target the breakdown).

I'd have a proper 6 at 6. Wilson, Shields and Robshaw are all in contention, and I'd expect to see at least 1 bolter added to the pre-World Cup training squad/Barbarians game. But it would take something special for Ted Hill or similar to get into the World Cup squad.

All the 6s can cover 8 to an extent, so I'd have Lawes on the bench (Itoje and Kruis to start). Then you've got Maro and Billy due to play the 80 (injuries however being covered for) and you can use your other 2 subs across the 3 positions as you see fit. Personally for those 6s it goes Wilson, Robshaw, Shields for me in that order. So Wilson to start at 6, Robshaw into the squad, Shields missing out.

Going forward, we are apparently well stocked with some promising talent, but obviously not all those will be realised as international quality players.

I think Jack Willis is the one who could make a bolter, if he continues his impressive post injury form. he's a big unit at 6 and has the potential to be a top class international 6.

Willis strikes me as another 6.5

Tman, I focused on Read because he was the ONLY person you namechecked in your original moan. Sexton is not the best comparison as he left Ireland to play in France in his peak years. He will now stay in Ireland as with the tax breaks it makes sense and this will reduce the opportunities for his successors. Good for him, bad for the development of the Ireland team.

Any way I have allowed this thread to be sidetracked and apologise to the OP.

Willis is already class. 6 with a great grounding ability for turnovers.

LondonTiger wrote:Willis strikes me as another 6.5

he has good alround skills, and the added size. He's only 22 and 17+ stone, so could still add some muscle aswell. He could be some unit.

But im still keen to see how Ted Hill and Dombrandt progress.

I didn't realise how big Hill actually was.

The backrow balance is a debate many countries have and ultimately it comes down to the tactics you want to employ.

For Scotland we seem to like playing with two fetcher types or 7s on the flanks - aka John Barclay at 6 and Hamish Watson at 7. This is because we want to play a pacey game and want to get to rucks to disrupt and hopefully turn over before the big lads arrive to clear out.

Wales don't play that way and they love a defensive set up so they'd be more suited to a chopper type traditional 6 like Lydiate

England may well prefer a almost playing with someone like a second number to carry hard to keep the power game going.

It horses for courses in reality.

PS - Robshaw is one of the most under-rated players in England. He can play 6 and 7 and does a hell of a lot of unnoticed work. He really needs to be in the England squad for the WC.

tigertattie wrote:The backrow balance is a debate many countries have and ultimately it comes down to the tactics you want to employ.

For Scotland we seem to like playing with two fetcher types or 7s on the flanks - aka John Barclay at 6 and Hamish Watson at 7. This is because we want to play a pacey game and want to get to rucks to disrupt and hopefully turn over before the big lads arrive to clear out.

Wales don't play that way and they love a defensive set up so they'd be more suited to a chopper type traditional 6 like Lydiate

England may well prefer a almost playing with someone like a second number  to carry hard to keep the power game going.

It horses for courses in reality.

PS - Robshaw is one of the most under-rated players in England. He can play 6 and 7 and does a hell of a lot of unnoticed work. He really needs to be in the England squad for the WC.

Im a massive Robshaw fan....however I firmly believe we have to look at the new batch now. I think some of them can take our back row to another level.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

tigertattie wrote:The backrow balance is a debate many countries have and ultimately it comes down to the tactics you want to employ.

For Scotland we seem to like playing with two fetcher types or 7s on the flanks - aka John Barclay at 6 and Hamish Watson at 7. This is because we want to play a pacey game and want to get to rucks to disrupt and hopefully turn over before the big lads arrive to clear out.

Wales don't play that way and they love a defensive set up so they'd be more suited to a chopper type traditional 6 like Lydiate

England may well prefer a almost playing with someone like a second number  to carry hard to keep the power game going.

It horses for courses in reality.

PS - Robshaw is one of the most under-rated players in England. He can play 6 and 7 and does a hell of a lot of unnoticed work. He really needs to be in the England squad for the WC.

Im a massive Robshaw fan....however I firmly believe we have to look at the new batch now. I think some of them can take our back row to another level.

Yes. Even over the 6N you could argue that Wilson's all round game gave us more options, although we could debate over him going missing in the Wales game (possibly Scotland?)

GeordieFalcon wrote:...m a massive Robshaw fan....however I firmly believe we have to look at the new batch now. I think some of them can take our back row to another level.

Difficulty I have (not just with rugby, mind you,) is ignorance. When I think of the Scottish, Irish and Welsh back rows, I have a rough idea of what each players is supposed to be good at, and how that is supposed to fit together.

Among current England players, I only really know that about Robshaw, Haskell and Vunipola. I've started to understand what Wilson, Curry and Underhill do but everyone else is a bit of a black hole. It's not that I haven't seen them play for their clubs, it's more that I can't form a clear picture of who everyone would work with best. This is partly because I've seen experiments like Lawes and Itoje on the flanks, and never really knew what role they were supposed to be playing.

I like the idea of a lot of young tyros tearing up trees at Test level but Jones will either have to trust his training camps and warm-up games to reveal the gems, or end up relying on players he already knows.

It's a bit like rock, paper, scissors, isn't it.
Backrow combination A might get the better of B, who gets the better of C who gets the better of A etc.

Or back row D, that dominates the lot...

I think the thing (and it was mentioned before) is how the Coaches want England to play which determines the back row set up.

Either way we have serious options, some starting to realise their potential (Curry, Underhill) and others still to do so.

For example..Sam Simmonds is a fantastic player. But where does he fit in the England back 3? Ive said before...I wish he was a 12.

Matt Kvesic is starting to play extremely good rugby, his game is not just a fetcher. Is he in consideration?

The young guns as mentioned above will be in contention post World Cup.

Zach Mercer. Will he come through to challenge Billy V? Is he a potential leader?

Simmonds is a class bench option. Great impact against tiring legs but could cover to a good standard if forced to come on after 5 min.

Taylorman wrote:Hes playing professional rugby somewhere else as a new phase to his career. How is that not leaving prematurely?

Sexton is 34 end world cup. Is he going elsewhere?

Barrett is touted to go and would you like me to reel off the list that so far arent contracted to nz rugby that arent 34?

How many NH test players over 34 are staying put for next years 6N?

What you've done here, Taylor, is take someone's statement regading an individual player, and deflected the point. Your mind is clouded.

Is Read likely to have much more rugby in him at 34? Certainly not another ABs test after the World Cup, in which case you're looking at him deciding where to finish his career playing club rugby. Premature? Not really - most people would call premature leaving before your test career is over.

Sexton's unlikely to leave Leinster because he's unlikely to get significantly more money playing outside Ireland - i.e. the IRFU has paid him very well to come back from France. The same isn't true for Read.