The debate about 12
-
Also % Eddie has favoured as his first choice combo Tuilagi at 13 and Slade (a genuine playmaker) at 13, plus of course shoehorning another playmaker (Daley) at 15. Is that what he’d really like though or is that just because he really wants Tuilagi on the field in his favoured position?
-
@Catogrande is he strong, fast, and not born in England? Then Eddie probably likes him. Extra 7.84% bonus if he has a great size to weight ratio and PBs to 4 decimal places.
-
The English gave up the idea of having two Midfielders who could both pass in the late 90s. (Guscott/Carling was the last English midfield I can remember with two guys who could act as playmaker). Mike Tindall, Jamie Nonu, Luther Burrell and Manu Tuilagi were bulldozers with passsing skills inferior to most All Blacks Front Five players. Normally they were paired up with a playmaker.
I think you need four or five power, ball-carriers in your team. These can be Locks, in the backrow, midfield or on the Wing. Laumape gives the ABs the option of a ball carrier at 12, if needed.
-
Good point. But even with the playmakers, EJ seems to prefer them to take Route One. Notice how so many current England midfielders (don't) hold the ball compared to, say Conrad or O'Driscoll. More often than not, it's in one hand which limits the attacking/passing options and telegraphs your intentions to the defence. Dunno if it's the coaching or England tactics
Jamie Joseph is an exception who's really good at this - but he can't nail down a midfield slot
-
@sparky said in The debate about 12:
The English gave up the idea of having two Midfielders who could both pass in the late 90s. (Guscott/Carling was the last English midfield I can remember with two guys who could act as playmaker). Mike Tindall, Jamie Nonu, Luther Burrell and Manu Tuilagi were bulldozers with passsing skills inferior to most All Blacks Front Five players. Normally they were paired up with a playmaker.
I think you need four or five power, ball-carriers in your team. These can be Locks, in the backrow, midfield or on the Wing. Laumape gives the ABs the option of a ball carrier at 12, if needed.
Jamie Noon? IMO need one centre who is big enough to dent the line. Historically we've done better with same at 12. TBF most power players take a while to sort their passing, and some never do.
For me ALB and NL ought to be AB 12s, with JG at 13 and Roane as utility 3/4.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in The debate about 12:
Good point. But even with the playmakers, EJ seems to prefer them to take Route One. Notice how so many current England midfielders (don't) hold the ball compared to, say Conrad or O'Driscoll. More often than not, it's in one hand which limits the attacking/passing options and telegraphs your intentions to the defence. Dunno if it's the coaching or England tactics
Jamie Joseph is an exception who's really good at this - but he can't nail down a midfield slot
Seems as though Slade has supplanted JJ, who is a class act.
Part of problem is love affair with St. Owen's 'attitude'. He distorts England's back play. Ford at 10 is great off front foot ball. Then Tuilagi at 12 makes sense, and Slade/JJ at centre and you've got lots to make oppo think.
-
@sparky said in The debate about 12:
The English gave up the idea of having two Midfielders who could both pass in the late 90s. (Guscott/Carling was the last English midfield I can remember with two guys who could act as playmaker). Mike Tindall, Jamie Nonu, Luther Burrell and Manu Tuilagi were bulldozers with passsing skills inferior to most All Blacks Front Five players. Normally they were paired up with a playmaker.
I think you need four or five power, ball-carriers in your team. These can be Locks, in the backrow, midfield or on the Wing. Laumape gives the ABs the option of a ball carrier at 12, if needed.
Our two biggest problems over the last God knows how many years have been finding a 7 and what to do in the midfield. We have had guys that had all the skills in the centres but most have not really been given the chance. Jamie Noon was actually quite a creative centre, just not when he was drafted in to the England set up. We've had Greenwood, Catt, Ollie Smith, Stuart Abbott, ~~Jamie ~~ Edit: Jonathan (thanks @bone)Joseph, Farrell (jnr), Slade, Daley, Ollie Barkley, Matt Tait. Sadly very few got an extended look in.
-
Some good 7's available to England now though.....
Thought not sticking with Noon & Tait was a bad move as they looked pretty promising. I remember them opening us up in midfield when we played them years ago - think our 12 & 13 was pretty good too, Tana & Aaron Mauger IIRC.
-
@Catogrande said in The debate about 12:
@sparky said in The debate about 12:
The English gave up the idea of having two Midfielders who could both pass in the late 90s. (Guscott/Carling was the last English midfield I can remember with two guys who could act as playmaker). Mike Tindall, Jamie Nonu, Luther Burrell and Manu Tuilagi were bulldozers with passsing skills inferior to most All Blacks Front Five players. Normally they were paired up with a playmaker.
I think you need four or five power, ball-carriers in your team. These can be Locks, in the backrow, midfield or on the Wing. Laumape gives the ABs the option of a ball carrier at 12, if needed.
Our two biggest problems over the last God knows how many years have been finding a 7 and what to do in the midfield. We have had guys that had all the skills in the centres but most have not really been given the chance. Jamie Noon was actually quite a creative centre, just not when he was drafted in to the England set up. We've had Greenwood, Catt, Ollie Smith, Stuart Abbott, Jamie Joseph, Farrell (jnr), Slade, Daley, Ollie Barkley, Matt Tait. Sadly very few got an extended look in.
Agree about 7, but for some years after JW I felt 10 was the issue. Much better now. Ford can be excellent, and Umaga showed enough on Saturday to suggest he will be very good in a white jersey. Farrell (jnr) handy as a closer.
-
@Catogrande said in The debate about 12:
@sparky said in The debate about 12:
The English gave up the idea of having two Midfielders who could both pass in the late 90s. (Guscott/Carling was the last English midfield I can remember with two guys who could act as playmaker). Mike Tindall, Jamie Nonu, Luther Burrell and Manu Tuilagi were bulldozers with passsing skills inferior to most All Blacks Front Five players. Normally they were paired up with a playmaker.
I think you need four or five power, ball-carriers in your team. These can be Locks, in the backrow, midfield or on the Wing. Laumape gives the ABs the option of a ball carrier at 12, if needed.
Our two biggest problems over the last God knows how many years have been finding a 7 and what to do in the midfield. We have had guys that had all the skills in the centres but most have not really been given the chance. Jamie Noon was actually quite a creative centre, just not when he was drafted in to the England set up. We've had Greenwood, Catt, Ollie Smith, Stuart Abbott, Jamie Joseph, Farrell (jnr), Slade, Daley, Ollie Barkley, Matt Tait. Sadly very few got an extended look in.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in The debate about 12:
Jamie Joseph is an exception who's really good at this - but he can't nail down a midfield slot
I'm not surprised. He would be considered a bit of a bruiser in the midfield though eh.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in The debate about 12:
Some good 7's available to England now though.....
Thought not sticking with Noon & Tait was a bad move as they looked pretty promising. I remember them opening us up in midfield when we played them years ago - think our 12 & 13 was pretty good too, Tana & Aaron Mauger IIRC.
Yeah we’ve finally got a few options at 7 😀
Noon and Tait wee a promising combo but we’re not persevered with. On reflection I feel our problems lay in coaching/management. Noon got used as a battering ram and Tait got shifted around the field. Flood was Ok at 10 but was clearly only keeping the bed warm for Wilkinson. Should they have given Charlie Hodgson a dent run and tried to cover his defensive lapses?
So often with England (cricket and soccer too), so much emphasis is placed on what a guy can’t do rather than what he can. Like the argument re Glenn Hoddle v David Batty. When questioned why he couldn’t track back and defend like Batty, Hoddle asked why no- one questioned why Batty couldn’t send 45m pin point passes initial the opposition penalty area. Cue no answer whatsoever.
-
@Catogrande said in The debate about 12:
So often with England (cricket and soccer too), so much emphasis is placed on what a guy can’t do rather than what he can.
Great point. I recall someone criticising Lineker as, yes, he may score loads of goals but they are easy, simple goals and doesn't score any spectacular ones...
The other issue is England seem to pick players with the same physical characteristics as other countries and hope they will develop. The AB's have a big Samoan 12 called Nonu? No problems we'll Tualigi. He's big & fast and Samoan, the skills have just got to develop, right?
-
@Bones said in The debate about 12:
@Victor-Meldrew said in The debate about 12:
Jamie Joseph is an exception who's really good at this - but he can't nail down a midfield slot
I'm not surprised. He would be considered a bit of a bruiser in the midfield though eh.
Too old these days too
-
On the AB side of things, Eddies musings add weight to the selection of JG and ALB seemingly the wrong way around.
If rush defences are the problem then it makes sense for your faster more elusive centre to play 13. You either skip 12 to outside channels or 12 looks to take a tackle and provide quick ball that the “three quarters “ can use. -
@Crucial said in The debate about 12:
On the AB side of things, Eddies musings add weight to the selection of JG and ALB seemingly the wrong way around.
If rush defences are the problem then it makes sense for your faster more elusive centre to play 13. You either skip 12 to outside channels or 12 looks to take a tackle and provide quick ball that the “three quarters “ can use.Felt they were trying to do that with Roane in Bled One.
-
The other consideration is just how often is the backline 10,12,13. Maybe from lineouts or a Scrum without a blind. A lot of the time in phase play etc players are all over the place both sides of the field.
The 13 probably plays a lot as second receiver during a game anyway. So perhaps the roles are more similar then once upon a time.
-
@chimoaus said in The debate about 12:
The other consideration is just how often is the backline 10,12,13. Maybe from lineouts or a Scrum without a blind. A lot of the time in phase play etc players are all over the place both sides of the field.
The 13 probably plays a lot as second receiver during a game anyway. So perhaps the roles are more similar then once upon a time.
Yeah the backiline even from set pieces if often shuffled, to cover defensive weaknesses or try and trick the opposition. Positions outside of things like front row are becoming less and less 'formal' or fixed. Working in shifting pods, trying to generate mismatches etc.
-
My thinking is they are looking at JG as a guy who could provide that punch at 12 like Laumape, has a better passing game, has a kicking game and crucially, is smarter on defence than NL, also seems to be someone they use to try secure our ball at the breakdown alot too.
That said, I like most, see him and ALB as being the wrong way round.
