The debate about 12
-
Just read interesting article quoting Eddie Jones. Said he was traditionally in the second 5/8 camp, but now sees 12/13 as dual centres. Yadda, yadda.
But one thing which did chime was an observation that the number of times a game a passing sequence of 10-12-13 occurred could be counted on one hand. Hence 12 (and 13) were in essence running backs, to use NFL parlance.
Passing skills a bonus.
Not sure I entirely agree but do think there’s some truth in all that. -
was it this?
less likely (for him) this?
Why Eddie Jones is ripping up the midfield rulebook to keep England ahead
England's head coach says Test rugby is entering uncharted waters where centres have ditched passing to become running backs
Eddie Jones always had to rebuild – but now there is scaffolding everywhere | Robert Kitson
A year on from England’s World Cup win against New Zealand, the head coach has picked a squad for a sport that is changing rapidly
-
@nostrildamus said in The debate about 12:
was it this?
less likely (for him) this?
Why Eddie Jones is ripping up the midfield rulebook to keep England ahead
England's head coach says Test rugby is entering uncharted waters where centres have ditched passing to become running backs
Eddie Jones always had to rebuild – but now there is scaffolding everywhere | Robert Kitson
A year on from England’s World Cup win against New Zealand, the head coach has picked a squad for a sport that is changing rapidly
It was the Barclays Brothers rag (the former).
But Guardiad also interesting, thanks!
-
@pakman said in The debate about 12:
Just read interesting article quoting Eddie Jones. Said he was traditionally in the second 5/8 camp, but now sees 12/13 as dual centres. Yadda, yadda.
But one thing which did chime was an observation that the number of times a game a passing sequence of 10-12-13 occurred could be counted on one hand. Hence 12 (and 13) were in essence running backs, to use NFL parlance.
Passing skills a bonus.
Not sure I entirely agree but do think there’s some truth in all that.Jones ruing the fact that Tompkins - a passing 12 - chose Wales over England.
-
What is Toomua for the Wallabies? Seems to be a second 5/8 and important to the Wallabies. They lose a bit of organization when they have dual centres.
For the ABs I perhaps dual centres with Laumape and possibly with ALB. (As for Goodhue at 12, not sure, he seems to be more of a second 5/8 at 12 more than at 13, if that makes sense). -
@nostrildamus said in The debate about 12:
What is Toomua for the Wallabies? Seems to be a second 5/8 and important to the Wallabies. They lose a bit of organization when they have dual centres.
For the ABs I perhaps dual centres with Laumape and possibly with ALB. (As for Goodhue at 12, not sure, he seems to be more of a second 5/8 at 12 more than at 13, if that makes sense).He's a second 5/8, and was a key component of first 110 minutes of Bled's so far.
If one follow's Eddie dual centre rationale Laumape fits the bill well at 12. Jack has good left hoof, but for me is Super-level 12 but test-level 13. Love his draw and pass there.
ALB probably closest to second 5/8 in squad.
-
Yes I read it as a sweeping strategy, a lot depends on what sort of player is at 10 IMO.
-
@nostrildamus said in The debate about 12:
Yes I read it as a sweeping strategy, a lot depends on what sort of player is at 10 IMO.
And in today’s game, what sort of fullback you have matters too.
If you have a playmaker at 10 and a 15 that comes into the line as a playmaker too, then there’s less need for a Snakey type centre or 2nd 5/8 You can have more ball running players in the midfield.
Remember when the Wallabies tried Nathan Grey at 10, they needed that genuine 2nd 5 because (Giteau, Flatley) to do the majority of playmaking.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in The debate about 12:
@nostrildamus said in The debate about 12:
Yes I read it as a sweeping strategy, a lot depends on what sort of player is at 10 IMO.
And in today’s game, what sort of fullback you have matters too.
If you have a playmaker at 10 and a 15 that comes into the line as a playmaker too, then there’s less need for a Snakey type centre or 2nd 5/8 You can have more ball running players in the midfield.
Remember when the Wallabies tried Nathan Grey at 10, they needed that genuine 2nd 5 because (Giteau, Flatley) to do the majority of playmaking.
And vice versa in Wallabies' case.
-
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.
