Lions Watch: Six Nations Report

by whatahitson Sun 14 Mar 2021, 5:08 pm

First topic message reminder :

Well we're nearly done with the Six Nations so if the Lions goes ahead who do you like the look of and who do you think will be touring?

by mikey_dragon Wed 31 Mar 2021, 10:23 pm

Interestingly, and maybe harsh, the fans Guinness team of the championship contains no England players and just one French player (Dupont obviously).

Wyn Jones, Ken Owens, Tadhg Furlong, Tadhg Beirne, Super AWJ, CJ Stander, Hamish Watson, Taulupe Faletau, Antoine Dupont, Johnny Sexton, Duhan VDM, Robbie Henshaw, George North, Louis Rees-Zammit, Stuart Hogg.

If you put in Ben Youngs at 9 then we have a fair and accurate pick of the Lions test team Very Happy

.

by lostinwales Wed 31 Mar 2021, 10:47 pm

flyhalffactory wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:Talk about an over reaction based on three matches.

I tend to think the performances of Curry and Itoje during the world cup and since show your opinion to be a fallacy.

Do you mean my opinion? or someone else's opinion

How can an opinion be a fallacy?

I am talking about Itojes and Curry's performance in the World Cup Final (pretty average) and of course their match against NZ (best match England have played in my memory, Itoje & Curry were awesome) and the 5 matches in the 6Ns. We cannot really use the ANC as most coaches used that for development their squads

I think the whole situation with the pandemic, and in particular the extended and very strange bubble in which the teams have opperated, has done nothing for the players. It feels like England have been affected worst than most. As a result I wouldnt read much into current performances, although obviously it would be dumb to not read anything into them at all.

On that basis I think your claims that Jones has ruined Curry are hard to prove, particularly since Curry has, so far, been made by Jones.

I also think that Curry hasn't been helped by being paired with Billy, who is great at tackling players who make the mistake of coming within reach but won't ever run another player down, and Wilson who sadly has been anonymous.

by TJ Thu 01 Apr 2021, 5:16 am

lostinwales wrote:
I also think that Curry hasn't been helped by being paired with Billy, who is great at tackling players who make the mistake of coming within reach but won't ever run another player down, and Wilson who sadly has been anonymous.

I think this is very true. Curry was trying to do the work of two men. Its always easier to look good in a winning team

by No 7&1/2 Thu 01 Apr 2021, 7:26 am

I think it's right to say that Curry hasn't been the standout player consistently for England along with Itoje who is really struggling with his game. Neither will go to South africa. Gatland will prove what a great sector he is again and hopefully then drop both when he's the next England manager.

by Soul Requiem Thu 01 Apr 2021, 9:07 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think it's right to say that Curry hasn't been the standout player consistently for England along with Itoje who is really struggling with his game. Neither will go to South africa. Gatland will prove what a great sector he is again and hopefully then drop both when he's the next England manager.

For the first time I want as few England players selected as possible, in the current climate i'd want the tour cancelled and the knock on effect it has on teams is too great.

by whatahitson Thu 01 Apr 2021, 10:01 am

flyhalffactory wrote:
whatahitson wrote:
TJ wrote:Lets have a look at the Stats off the 6N stats page

Curry 217 m in 41 carries, 63 tackles made, 11 missed, turnovers won 1, conceded 6, broken tackles 8

Tips 112 m in 22 carries, 86 tackles made, 2 missed turnovers won 3, conceded 1. broken tackles 1

the Mish 321 m in 67 carries. 55 tackles made. missed none. turnovers made 4. conceded 3. broken tackles 14
https://www.sixnationsrugby.com/statistics/

Good stats, it shows how different each 7 plays for each team.

Which is also why stats in isolation are misleading. Each team plays differently. Each player has a different task i.e. Stander and Vunipola carrying, whereas Watson problably carries more than the Scottish 8 as he's better at it.

That to me just reaffirms that Watson is probably going to end up playing number 8 for the Lions. Dark horse as a test 8? Stranger things have happened.

Stats in isolation can be misleading I agree.
However this proves (in my opinion) how Eddie Jones takes a potentially great player and ruins him all for the sake of fitting into his "system". The 2021 Curry is much worse than the 2019 version (six months before going into the WC), admittedly he was only 21 but he was 6' 1", 17st lean, good distribution, fast, played with a smile but now.... same height but close onto 17.5st, just a snarling, "on the edge" in yer face flanker who has lost his way.
If you take Tipuric as an example in the WC S-F against SA, his rugby brain highlighted the difference between his play (recycling, quick at distribution, varying his play, not getting into an arm wrestle) and on top of his opponent, where Curry's "all out war, gung-ho, dominant tackles, niggly" and came out very much second best. Like most of Eddie's forwards Curry looks great in a forward dominated game but poor otherwise.
Fast forward into start of 2021, Tipuric comes back from serious injury, suspiciously not totally match fit going into the 6Ns but trounces Curry in every facet of forward play except one....Dominant Tackles and there lies the rub "Eddies Law" I want yer big enough to strangle the very soul of of the opponent, there is no other option, there is no Plan B
This is not a difference in playing style, this is one player allowed to express his innate intelligence, being allowed to adapt throughout the game and another who is programmed to play one way.
If you process this to the tour then Curry will have to be re-programmed or he'll have to be dumped for a more natural player Watson or a more intelligent player Tipuric
Personally I think the best balance we have is
6 Beirne
7 Tipuric or Watson
8 Faletau

I can see your line of thought but it's not right to put it in such black and white terms. Jones isn't 'ruining' Curry and Curry isn't somehow world class without Jones/England. International rugby is a tough game and no one team has been able to dominate from game to game. That's why, for the first time, the world champions lost a group game. This six nations was the ultimate example of 'everyone beating everyone' with big swings from week to week between the winning team becoming the losing team.

It looks like the same thing applies to Curry. When he's on it, he's fantastic, but he's struggling to find consistency which is understandable. Behind a beaten pack, he doesn't look very good at all, but then who does? It's a problem for England in particular as, unlike Wales or Australia, they don't train in a way that they can counter attack or just play the game when they lose the physical battle.

Underhill is the real star of the England team. Curry is more visible but Underhill has the real class and a far better rugby head. Together they play exceptionally well but it's no surprise that Jones moved Curry to 6 as he's much more about the physical confrontation than he is about linking the play. Underhill isn't Tipuric but he has better passing/handling/awareness.

I wouldn't read too much in to England this last tournament. They tried to win games while on the back foot with predictable tactics and it didn't work. A lot of what makes teams beatable from one week to the next is down to tactical preparation and England looked like they didn't do any opponent-specific tactical prep. They look like they're trying to build a gameplan for South Africa and New Zealand - which makes sense as it is just a continuation of what worked in 2019.

Tipuric didn't play for Wales for years because Lydiate and Warburton were Gatland's preference. That was his gameplan. I don't think you can call a coach having a gameplan and demanding players play to it 'ruining'. Rugby is about winning as a team, it's not about making an individual player play to their best potential (Townsend, Scotland, and Russell should take note).

It's horses for courses with the Lions. The team will need X ball carrying power, Y aggressive tackling, Z efficient tackling, Q handling ability etc. It doesn't really matter how you split that up between players, that's where the detail of coaching comes in. Obviously if you pick Billy Vunipola you don't pick Stander because you don't need him. With Curry, he's a solid, aggressive all-rounder but I think the balance of Underhill and Tipuric would be ideal for the two flankers - that is, if they decide to go with two flankers. Beirne looks like he is tailor made for the Lions 6 shirt, like a more physical Tom Croft. That might mean you go for the all-rounder at 7 which would be Curry, or maybe Watson, or possibly still Underhill if he proves his fitness. I don't think you can play Tipuic and Beirne together from the kick off as you're missing tackling power. Tipuric and Beirne might be good and accurate but they're not stopping players behind the gainline like Curry and Underhill.

It's very close between all those players. Gatland will have an idea of what he wants already but I also expect to see rotation between the test sides as well, particularly in the back row and bench option.

by Sgt_Pooly Thu 01 Apr 2021, 10:37 am

I struggling to comprehend this notion that Curry had a bad 6N or that he's somehow regressed as a player. Curry was outstanding on the whole and improves almost every time he steps foot on the field. That he still managed to shine in an English side that struggled shows just how good he is.

I've seen a number of articles that suggest he was probarbly the best player in world rugby in 2020, I wouldn't disagree with that.

by whatahitson Thu 01 Apr 2021, 11:09 am

He played well in one game, v France. That would be why.

by Sgt_Pooly Thu 01 Apr 2021, 11:58 am

whatahitson wrote:He played well in one game, v France. That would be why.

That's just not the case though is it. His best game was against France without question, but to suggest he had one good game is incorrect.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 01 Apr 2021, 12:01 pm

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I struggling to comprehend this notion that Curry had a bad 6N or that he's somehow regressed as a player. Curry was outstanding on the whole and improves almost every time he steps foot on the field. That he still managed to shine in an English side that struggled shows just how good he is.

I've seen a number of articles that suggest he was probarbly the best player in world rugby in 2020, I wouldn't disagree with that.

April Fools from me at least.

by Collapse2005 Thu 01 Apr 2021, 12:07 pm

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I struggling to comprehend this notion that Curry had a bad 6N or that he's somehow regressed as a player. Curry was outstanding on the whole and improves almost every time he steps foot on the field. That he still managed to shine in an English side that struggled shows just how good he is.

I've seen a number of articles that suggest he was probarbly the best player in world rugby in 2020, I wouldn't disagree with that.

I thought he was Englands best player, he was partially at fault for Conans try in the Eng v Ireland game though.

by bsando Thu 01 Apr 2021, 12:32 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
GeordieFalcon wrote:11 May
14 Van Der M
15 Hogg

14 Van Der M ??????????????

He has done nothing what so ever this 6N to justify being a Lions starter. Never mind to actually go on tour.

He did score a couple of tries

by LordDowlais Thu 01 Apr 2021, 12:35 pm

bsando wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
GeordieFalcon wrote:11 May
14 Van Der M
15 Hogg

14 Van Der M ??????????????

He has done nothing what so ever this 6N to justify being a Lions starter. Never mind to actually go on tour.

He did score a couple of tries

In my defence I typed that before the 6N was finished. Laugh

by whatahitson Thu 01 Apr 2021, 12:42 pm

Sgt_Pooly wrote:
whatahitson wrote:He played well in one game, v France. That would be why.

That's just not the case though is it. His best game was against France without question, but to suggest he had one good game is incorrect.

No, it wouldn't incorrect, because we're dealing with opinions here. Steady on.

Your opinion is he played well in every game. I disagree, he played very well v France and had very mixed performances in every other game. Which is clearly an indication of how England played as a team as well. Some players transcend their pack's performance, Curry so far doesn't appear to be such a player. That doesn't mean he isn't a top player, clearly he is. Claims that he is world class or the best player in the world are just hyperbolic (not to mention pointless). It reminds me of the PSDT chat around 18 months ago. Rugby is the ultimate team game. Any attempt to talk about individuals, particularly in the forwards (i.e. not a player like Kolbe or Hogg) quickly turns in to mindless media chat that resembles public relations. You can't get a better example than the 3 sets of statistics for Watson, Tipuric, and Curry. Even ignoring Connors who looks like a top 7 in the making as well.

It's a team game and each player is part of a team that often play different styles of rugby, with different demands for individuals. Trying to treat any discussion like it's an objective comparison is flawed from the start. Some people are also much better judges than other people, and some people are prone to getting stuck on the basics - look no further than the chat around Sam Simmonds and the fact he wears the 8 shirt for Exeter, in spite of how he actually plays the game. Those three 7s mentioned earlier have totally different skillsets and I think Watson will end up at 8 for the Lions to reflect his strengths.

Curry is good but he's by no means flawless. Underhill remains the better player.

by lostinwales Thu 01 Apr 2021, 12:51 pm

Thorin sits down and starts singing about gold

by flyhalffactory Thu 01 Apr 2021, 12:51 pm

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I struggling to comprehend this notion that Curry had a bad 6N or that he's somehow regressed as a player. Curry was outstanding on the whole and improves almost every time he steps foot on the field. That he still managed to shine in an English side that struggled shows just how good he is.

I've seen a number of articles that suggest he was probarbly the best player in world rugby in 2020, I wouldn't disagree with that.

He hasn't regressed as a player he is an absolute awesome world class player for 22, however he certainly was not the best player in 2020 (OF was the best player in the world 2016, MI was the best player in the world 2018 and now TC is the best player world 2020 by certain media columnists.....see the trend).

He however is a different player to the Sale youth that suddenly was fast tracked to the England side. I don't agree that he was outstanding in the 2021 6Ns comparably to his opposite numbers he was second best, especially against Scotland and Wales where I though Watson and Tipuric has better games and better overall tournament.

He along with Itoje were Englands best players in 2021

by BamBam Thu 01 Apr 2021, 2:57 pm

We'll see what Blockhead thinks in a month or so.

For my money I'd take Curry over any other back rower in the home nations. A fully fit and firing Underhill would be in the top 4 too

by doctor_grey Thu 01 Apr 2021, 3:47 pm

So we are pishing about a group of players who are all very good and are 95%+ guaranteed to be picked for the Lions, barring injury or illness. So now we have to wait until Uncle Warren makes his choices known. When is that, by the way?

by whatahitson Thu 01 Apr 2021, 4:07 pm

The squad is announced first week of (not Johnny) May.

by doctor_grey Thu 01 Apr 2021, 4:34 pm

Muchísimas gracias.

by 123456789. Thu 01 Apr 2021, 5:27 pm

As a general aside, where do people rank Gatland in terms of the Lions generally?

For someone who played a key part in the resurgence of the Lions in 2009, won the first tour in 16 years in 2013 as head coach and drew a series in 2017 against the world's best ever rugby side he is not particularly well liked (outwith Wales).

Is that because of his close association with Wales, dropping BOD, not picking Scottish players or being a New Zealander? I understand their are very good/ obvious reasons for all three but I do wonder if a victory in 2021 would change this.

by Soul Requiem Thu 01 Apr 2021, 5:34 pm

I don't think it's necessarily a Gatland issue but a more general issue with selection since 1997. That tour is remembered fondly not just because the Lions beat the world champions but because they represented all four nations. There were three starters from Scotland, Ireland and Wales at a time when England were the dominant home nations force. Fast forward to now and there's little to separate the team so even less reason for it to be representative.

The Lions isn't primarily about winning as stupid as that sounds.

by flyhalffactory Thu 01 Apr 2021, 5:39 pm

123456789. wrote:As a general aside, where do people rank Gatland in terms of the Lions generally?

For someone who played a key part in the resurgence of the Lions in 2009, won the first tour in 16 years in 2013 as head coach and drew a series in 2017 against the world's best ever rugby side he is not particularly well liked (outwith Wales).

Is that because of his close association with Wales, dropping BOD, not picking Scottish players or being a New Zealander? I understand their are very good/ obvious reasons for all three but I do wonder if a victory in 2021 would change this.

I've never heard a Scot say much for/against Gats....very much like we haven't much of a bad/good word for Pivac/Farrell/Jones (ok Jones is a marmite). The "fans" who don't like him generally are the green eyed monster bunch
The Scottish/Lions fans (there are a few of us who go on the tours) are Lions fans on tour, respected him for having the gonads to make the hard calls e.g. Foxy replacing BoD was a genius call as the Davies became player of the series 2017.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 01 Apr 2021, 5:56 pm

It was a terrible call at the time. Lucky that corbisiero's fitness and Warburton's injury made it redundant.

Gatalnd for me has been poor as the lions should be about unity first and foremost which he's failed at. Results wise we should have been wiping the Australians 3 0 and frankly got very fortunate scraping past a 14 man nz. I am expecting him to butcher this tour tbh.

by TJ Thu 01 Apr 2021, 6:14 pm

I tend to agree with 7 1/2

by doctor_grey Thu 01 Apr 2021, 6:15 pm

flyhalffactory wrote:
123456789. wrote:As a general aside, where do people rank Gatland in terms of the Lions generally?

For someone who played a key part in the resurgence of the Lions in 2009, won the first tour in 16 years in 2013 as head coach and drew a series in 2017 against the world's best ever rugby side he is not particularly well liked (outwith Wales).

Is that because of his close association with Wales, dropping BOD, not picking Scottish players or being a New Zealander? I understand their are very good/ obvious reasons for all three but I do wonder if a victory in 2021 would change this.

I've never heard a Scot say much for/against Gats....very much like we haven't much of a bad/good word for Pivac/Farrell/Jones (ok Jones is a marmite). The "fans" who don't like him generally are the green eyed monster bunch
The Scottish/Lions fans (there are a few of us who go on the tours) are Lions fans on tour, respected him for having the gonads to make the hard calls e.g. Foxy replacing BoD was a genius call as the Davies became player of the series 2017.

Jones is an Aussie. He is Vegemite.

I think Gatland is not terribly user friendly. And he seems to rub a lot of people the wrong way. I know some people will think this is old fashioned, but I think the ultimate B&I team should be led by B&I coaches as well. I know that is really another debate.....

by flyhalffactory Thu 01 Apr 2021, 8:55 pm

doctor_grey wrote:
flyhalffactory wrote:
123456789. wrote:As a general aside, where do people rank Gatland in terms of the Lions generally?

For someone who played a key part in the resurgence of the Lions in 2009, won the first tour in 16 years in 2013 as head coach and drew a series in 2017 against the world's best ever rugby side he is not particularly well liked (outwith Wales).

Is that because of his close association with Wales, dropping BOD, not picking Scottish players or being a New Zealander? I understand their are very good/ obvious reasons for all three but I do wonder if a victory in 2021 would change this.

I've never heard a Scot say much for/against Gats....very much like we haven't much of a bad/good word for Pivac/Farrell/Jones (ok Jones is a marmite). The "fans" who don't like him generally are the green eyed monster bunch
The Scottish/Lions fans (there are a few of us who go on the tours) are Lions fans on tour, respected him for having the gonads to make the hard calls e.g. Foxy replacing BoD was a genius call as the Davies became player of the series 2017.
Jones is an Aussie. He is Vegemite.

I think Gatland is not terribly user friendly. And he seems to rub a lot of people the wrong way. I know some people will think this is old fashioned, but I think the ultimate B&I team should be led by B&I coaches as well. I know that is really another debate.....

I kinda agree, I also think national teams should be coached by their own national coaches but it's going further and further away from that, shame but there you go!
Wouldn't surprise me if Steady is the 2025 Lions coach

by Cyril Thu 01 Apr 2021, 9:13 pm

flyhalffactory, would you agree that if national teams should be coached by their own nationality then the players should reflect that too? Scotland are like a Barbarians side these days. Not judging, just interested.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 01 Apr 2021, 9:33 pm

Cyril wrote:flyhalffactory, would you agree that if national teams should be coached by their own nationality then the players should reflect that too? Scotland are like a Barbarians side these days. Not judging, just interested.

I've long advocated for the same rules to apply for coaches as they do players.

by flyhalffactory Thu 01 Apr 2021, 10:07 pm

Cyril wrote:flyhalffactory, would you agree that if national teams should be coached by their own nationality then the players should reflect that too? Scotland are like a Barbarians side these days. Not judging, just interested.

Hey Cyril
In an ideal world yes. In an ideal world you would expect them to be born, bred, schooled, playing for their local professional team etc....the issue with that is Scotland would have one of the worse national teams in world because we haven't got the infrastructure from birth to rugby retirement to support our objective "to be consistently competitive on a world stage". So that's when you say what about Scottish born, bred etc but playing in another UK country, Scarlets, Saracens, Exeter amongst others are in this group, then what about Scottish born bred but playing outside the UK......then Scottish links you get my drift.
Then we look at other countries behaviour in player selection e.g. do you realise that since 2015 Saracens spent more on senior player "acquisitions" that Glasgow Edinburgh expenditure combined. It can be argued that England success since 2017 has been built on the Saracens spine.
It's a difficult one but in a fair equal rugby world, yes I would say yes

by nlpnlp Thu 01 Apr 2021, 10:48 pm

Gatland has been coaching in the British Isles for 20 years so has shown a great deal of commitment to our game. I don't understand the antipathy that some people have towards him. I respect the fact he was very successful with Wales and that may have put the back up of a few England fans but he has also been a Lions stalwart.

This idea that the Lions should be a bit of a social side with players getting picked on the basis of 'we must have fair representation from each home nation' is a joke. I am an England fan and if no England players get picked in the Lions test team I will still be supporting them 100%.

Last time I looked, top level rugby had been professional for over 25 years, which to me means picking the best players available - and every team in the 6 Nations this year had several players not born and bred in their country of representation - and the best coach. Gatland is if not quite the only candidate for the Lions post, certainly head and shoulders the best available.

by TJ Thu 01 Apr 2021, 11:22 pm

Cyril wrote:flyhalffactory, would you agree that if national teams should be coached by their own nationality then the players should reflect that too? Scotland are like a Barbarians side these days. Not judging, just interested.

No different to any other side. Mind that beam in your eye

CJ Stander? Bundi Akee? James Lowe?
Vunipola brothers? tuilagi?

All teams do it and the 5 year qualification should reduce it

for me the key is is the player committed to the country?

Which non scots did you see in the last game? duhan Kebble and Sutherland. IIRC

there is this myth that scoytland uses more non scots than england ireland and wales use non natives. Its pish

by Soul Requiem Thu 01 Apr 2021, 11:31 pm

TJ wrote:
Cyril wrote:flyhalffactory, would you agree that if national teams should be coached by their own nationality then the players should reflect that too? Scotland are like a Barbarians side these days. Not judging, just interested.

No different to any other side. Mind that beam in your eye

CJ Stander? Bundi Akee? James Lowe?
Vunipola brothers? tuilagi?

All teams do it and the 5 year qualification should reduce it

for me the key is is the player committed to the country?

You can't really compare the Vunipolas or Tuilagi to the others mentioned. Their whole professional careers have been spent playing in England.

by TJ Thu 01 Apr 2021, 11:33 pm

Soul Requiem wrote:
TJ wrote:
Cyril wrote:flyhalffactory, would you agree that if national teams should be coached by their own nationality then the players should reflect that too? Scotland are like a Barbarians side these days. Not judging, just interested.

No different to any other side. Mind that beam in your eye

CJ Stander? Bundi Akee? James Lowe?
Vunipola brothers? tuilagi?

All teams do it and the 5 year qualification should reduce it

for me the key is is the player committed to the country?

You can't really compare the Vunipolas or Tuilagi to the others mentioned. Their whole professional careers have been spent playing in England.

Still not english born and bred are they. Where do you draw the line?

by **RDW** Thu 01 Apr 2021, 11:36 pm

For me we're absolutely spoilt for choice on the flanks and whoever gets picked will have justified their selection, and whoever missed out has the right to feel aggrieved. There really is very little little to differentiate them and it will ultimately come down to which players Gatland thinks will fit the way he wants to play.

As a Scotland fan I'd love to see Hamish Watson involved, and his form over the last 2 years was outstanding. His performances this 6N was incredible. I think he'd absolutely thrive in the Lions environment and be a huge asset to squad.

Thing is you could say the same about all the other front runners! Watson may miss out due to him being a pure out and out 7, similar to Underhill.

On Curry, England's poor 6N may count against him, even if his performances were generally still good. I do think there is a huge amount of hyperbole about him too, especially the "he could have as big an impact o the game as McCaw" chat. Just let the lad play and be his own man. I do think he'll travel though.

I'd be so happy if Watson made the cut, more so than any other Scotland player.

FWIW if there's 6 backrows I'd go for:

Tupiric, Curry, Watson, Faletau, Stander, Vunipola (if he gets fitter!)

With Bierne picked as a second row who also covers 6.

by Soul Requiem Thu 01 Apr 2021, 11:38 pm

The circumstances are not at all the same, all three players are a product of the English system so are rightfully entitled to play for England. Stander is nothing more than an international mercenary whom is heading home to South Africa which I presume James Lowe will also do.

If you'd have mentioned Nathan Hughes I would have agreed but you chose three players whom it does not apply to.

by flyhalffactory Fri 02 Apr 2021, 12:02 am

Soul Requiem wrote:The circumstances are not at all the same, all three players are a product of the English system so are rightfully entitled to play for England. Stander is nothing more than an international mercenary whom is heading home to South Africa which I presume James Lowe will also do.

If you'd have mentioned Nathan Hughes I would have agreed but you chose three players whom it does not apply to.

You are stretching it a bit with Billy and Mako, they were the product of Tonga, NZ, Australia and Wales (Pontypool) well before England influenced them. In fact their father wanted them to play for Wales, it was only when Bristol heard of their exploits did they have an opportunity to move as a family...amazing what strings can be pulled.

https://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/all/columnists/peter-jackson/6759/peter-jackson-vunipolas-defied-dad-to-play-for-england/

As far as Tuilagi is concerned well.... he was on £500k a season at Welford Road plus England dosh, even then he all but signed for Racing in 2019 when he was 27 for a lot more dosh (until he was talked out of it) You could argue he's just as mercenary as Stander who's given more to Ireland's cause then Tuilagi would ever do

As I said as long it's within the rules, regulations and laws......then its ok

by flyhalffactory Fri 02 Apr 2021, 12:14 am

RDW wrote:

FWIW if there's 6 backrows I'd go for:

Tupiric, Curry, Watson, Faletau, Stander, Vunipola (if he gets fitter!)

With Bierne picked as a second row who also covers 6..

You are damn right
Crazy strength in depth
I could even make a challenge with:

6. Richie 7. Underhill 8. Navidi.....you can argue that England, Scotland, Wales all play poorer when these players are not in the side

by flyhalffactory Fri 02 Apr 2021, 12:25 am

flyhalffactory wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:The circumstances are not at all the same, all three players are a product of the English system so are rightfully entitled to play for England. Stander is nothing more than an international mercenary whom is heading home to South Africa which I presume James Lowe will also do.

If you'd have mentioned Nathan Hughes I would have agreed but you chose three players whom it does not apply to.

You are stretching it a bit with Billy and Mako, they were the product of Tonga, NZ, Australia and Wales (Pontypool) well before England influenced them. In fact their father wanted them to play for Wales, it was only when Bristol heard of their exploits did they have an opportunity to move as a family...amazing what strings can be pulled.

https://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/all/columnists/peter-jackson/6759/peter-jackson-vunipolas-defied-dad-to-play-for-england/

As far as Tuilagi is concerned well.... he was on £500k a season at Welford Road plus England dosh, even then he all but signed for Racing in 2019 when he was 27 for a lot more dosh (until he was talked out of it) You could argue he's just as much a mercenary as Stander who's given more to Ireland's cause then Tuilagi would ever do

As I said as long it's within the rules, regulations and laws......then its ok

by alive555 Fri 02 Apr 2021, 12:46 am

R!skysports wrote:Sorry, whatahitson

gave up reading that after I got the gist

Everything Scotland did good was luck, the opposition not caring, no crowds or the ref

Everything others did to Scotland was not luck, the opposition not caring, no crowds or the ref

Thanks for the clarification

I agree. This was a disgraceful post. Utterly one sided drivel. I also stopped reading it was such obvious nonsense whereby every win was a bit lucky, and every loss was well deserved. And all presented as though reasoned fact

He then claimed a min of 1 scot in the entire squad. Very generous of him.

by Collapse2005 Fri 02 Apr 2021, 1:12 am

There will be at least 5 Scots Id say, on merit there should be at least 6 or 7 in my view. Duhan, Hogg, the good prop, Russell and Watson most likely. Especially Watson and Hoggie.

by king_carlos Fri 02 Apr 2021, 1:51 am

TJ wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:You can't really compare the Vunipolas or Tuilagi to the others mentioned. Their whole professional careers have been spent playing in England.

Still not english born and bred are they. Where do you draw the line?

Not born but very arguably bred. All three moved to England for their secondary schooling in their early teens, came through Premiership academies (Billy at Wasps, Mako at Bristol and Manu at Leicester) and played for the England age grade sides. Interestingly all three also lived in Wales for a time in their childhood as their father in Mako and Billy's case, brother in Manu's case were playing in Wales.

With residency changing to 5 years I personally I have far less issue with qualification. The nature of more people travelling these days is that players will feel kinship to more than one nation. I personally was born and schooled in England but have lived in Scotland since I was 18 and my mums side of the family are all Scottish. I feel a lot of attachment to both countries.

I'd like to see the grandparent rule go but being able to qualify through a birth, a parents nationality and a residency period of reasonable length would be set of laws that suit the modern world in my opinion.

Whenever these discussion come up I always feel it's worth noting that contrary to popular opinion players qualifying to play for more than one nation isn't a new thing sparked by professionalism either. Bill Hardcastle before the turn of the 20th century had played for Australia and New Zealand. Barry Holmes played for England and Argentina (the only to do so!) in the 40s. John Allan played for Scotland and South Africa in the 90s. The Bachop brothers, Pat Lam and the great Michael Jones. It's a long list.

by Soul Requiem Fri 02 Apr 2021, 6:48 am

flyhalffactory wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:The circumstances are not at all the same, all three players are a product of the English system so are rightfully entitled to play for England. Stander is nothing more than an international mercenary whom is heading home to South Africa which I presume James Lowe will also do.

If you'd have mentioned Nathan Hughes I would have agreed but you chose three players whom it does not apply to.

You are stretching it a bit with Billy and Mako, they were the product of Tonga, NZ, Australia and Wales (Pontypool) well before England influenced them. In fact their father wanted them to play for Wales, it was only when Bristol heard of their exploits did they have an opportunity to move as a family...amazing what strings can be pulled.

https://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/all/columnists/peter-jackson/6759/peter-jackson-vunipolas-defied-dad-to-play-for-england/

As far as Tuilagi is concerned well.... he was on £500k a season at Welford Road plus England dosh, even then he all but signed for Racing in 2019 when he was 27 for a lot more dosh (until he was talked out of it) You could argue he's just as mercenary as Stander who's given more to Ireland's cause then Tuilagi would ever do

As I said as long it's within the rules, regulations and laws......then its ok

Now who's clutching at straws. If you can show one instance when any of the three played any professional rugby outside of England go ahead. I'm well aware you don't consider the situations to be vaguely similar.

by **BigGee** Fri 02 Apr 2021, 6:56 am

The qualification thing has been done to death in so many threads before.

As KC says, it is not new either and has been going on as long as there has been international rugby, by all countries.

The rules are the same for everyone and everyone takes advantage of them.

Not sure why it keeps coming up really.

by Soul Requiem Fri 02 Apr 2021, 7:02 am

It keeps coming up because until something changes it will continue being relevant.

by No 7&1/2 Fri 02 Apr 2021, 7:48 am

Always thought that Curry was the more rounded player as him and underhill broke in. It was injuries to both, and curry's, brother which opened the door for both to put a foot in. I remember that the AIs curry came in there was a bit of worry with Underhill missing but Tom cemented himself straight away. Not too sure there are any England fans left who would have underhill ahead now? Luckily we have both.

by TJ Fri 02 Apr 2021, 8:23 am

flyhalffactory wrote:
RDW wrote:

FWIW if there's 6 backrows I'd go for:

Tupiric, Curry, Watson, Faletau, Stander, Vunipola (if he gets fitter!)

With Bierne picked as a second row who also covers 6..

You are damn right
Crazy strength in depth
I could even make a challenge with:

6. Richie 7. Underhill 8. Navidi.....you can argue that England, Scotland, Wales all play poorer when these players are not in the side

Ritchie and Watson complement each other well

this is the selection dilemma with the back row. Loads of great candidates. The best individual players may not make the best combinations. all the candidates have different attributes. I would say the two best back rows this series were Tipuric and Watson but do they make the best flank pairing to face SA?

by flyhalffactory Fri 02 Apr 2021, 9:31 am

Soul Requiem wrote:
flyhalffactory wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:The circumstances are not at all the same, all three players are a product of the English system so are rightfully entitled to play for England. Stander is nothing more than an international mercenary whom is heading home to South Africa which I presume James Lowe will also do.

If you'd have mentioned Nathan Hughes I would have agreed but you chose three players whom it does not apply to.

You are stretching it a bit with Billy and Mako, they were the product of Tonga, NZ, Australia and Wales (Pontypool) well before England influenced them. In fact their father wanted them to play for Wales, it was only when Bristol heard of their exploits did they have an opportunity to move as a family...amazing what strings can be pulled.

https://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/all/columnists/peter-jackson/6759/peter-jackson-vunipolas-defied-dad-to-play-for-england/

As far as Tuilagi is concerned well.... he was on £500k a season at Welford Road plus England dosh, even then he all but signed for Racing in 2019 when he was 27 for a lot more dosh (until he was talked out of it) You could argue he's just as mercenary as Stander who's given more to Ireland's cause then Tuilagi would ever do

As I said as long it's within the rules, regulations and laws......then its ok

Now who's clutching at straws. If you can show one instance when any of the three played any professional rugby outside of England go ahead. I'm well aware you don't consider the situations to be vaguely similar.

Not clutching at straws at all. That's absolute tripe
This is nothing to do with playing professional rugby, this is to do with professional clubs scouring the country for youngsters / juniors / seniors with a view of getting them into club/international framework.

The Guardian wrote:By the time the family moved to Bristol so that Singa could work as a minister the boys were so devoted to the game that the first thing they wanted to do was go to the local rugby club.

The Vunipolas went to Bristol for two reasons religion and education....only the lure of rugby could have supplied that. Because the church was a massive influence on the parents particularly with regard to the wife, it's no coincidence that when Bristol heard about the boys potential, that suddenly a position became available for Mrs Vunipola to begin her vocation and Mako was told he could get into Millfield (that's not easy) and later Billy (not the most academic boy) went to Harrow on a bursary!

Let's be clear about this, the boys were teenagers before they played any decent rugby in Bristol.

Mako
Born in Wellington, New Zealand, Vunipola was raised for much of his childhood in Wales and attended Porth Junior School, and later West Monmouth School. He started playing rugby in Wales, and played alongside brother Billy for New Panteg RFC.

They were playing for England 3 years later
Their father wanted them to play for Wales
The boys wanted to play for England - and who wouldn't with all the peer pressure they were enduring and all the better infrastructure they were now enjoying
The lure of "opportunity" i.e. religion and education was something that Pontypool couldn't compete with
Otherwise they would have been competing with the Evans, Jones, Warburtons, Lydiates, Tipurics not plying their trade for the red rose
Yes they have be made by England and given a fantastic education including rugby education and yes they are as much English as Farrell or Itoje

You are correct it's not the same as a Stander, Anscombe, Parks, DvdM, vdW......these guys made a mature conscious effort to better themselves at a later stage, where the Vunipolas as a family were driven by opportunity outside of rugby without realising that rugby was pulling the strings in the background

by No 7&1/2 Fri 02 Apr 2021, 9:49 am

Eligibility rules are the same for everyone bar Wales around the late 90s and early 00s. Scotland still celebrate that victory though!

For every rule that seems to fit eg residency for a rokodunguni theres one which feels less so to some extent flutey. Scotland ain't cheating. England ain't cheating. You can't tailor make rules unfortunately. And coaches should have to qualify.

by flyhalffactory Fri 02 Apr 2021, 9:52 am

Soul Requiem wrote:You spent a lot of time there writing a load of nonsense that has no relevance to the argument at all. You'll be giving WAHS a run for his money soon.

The old adage
“When the debate is lost, abuse becomes the tool of the loser.”

by Sponsored content