Manu Tuilagi: Starting to look like the player we want him to be???

I remember around a year ago there was an article on Tuliagi (MT) in which a lot of englishmen (myself included) we talking about he was to be a world class centre. At the time bluesmancometh (i think, apologies if not) was fairly aghast at this assertion and stated him to be one dimensional and a good bosher yet nothing more. We argued about this for a while and ultimately it came to nothing.

In the last few months, having seen BOD back to his best i realised how far behind him MT was (i didn't previously believe them to be close, just the gap was even further than i thought) and started to despair that he would never progress beyond being a crash ball merchant and nothing else. I actually thought about how feasible it would be to steal BODs brain and put it into MTs body, imagine how good that player would be?!?!?!

Anyways, I was having these doubts, and was expecting the next great saviour of english rugby to be yet another dud. This changed in the Fiji game.
I'm fairly certain that MT made more passes and offloads in that game than he has in all his england career. I saw times when he looked up and passed the ball, others where he saw what was on, saw nothing and charged into the defence to recycle. He seemed to have a better understanding of what was required and when, he made fewer carries than him normally does but yet he still made the most yards of anyone on the pitch.

i know he's still young and has a lot more developing to do, but i thought that these were the first signs of him really developing a good footballing brain.

I await your comments, and the numerous Tigers fans telling me i clearly haven't seen him playing for them, because he does it on a weekly basis and i have no clue. Actually, on that note i remember someone once saying that he has to learn to trust those outside him, so that he doesn't feel the need to do everything himself. If this is the case, then has Lancaster managed to achieve this in a few weeks at training?

I know ESPN is not that reliable, but he apparently passed 4 times and offloaded 3 ( these are separate to passes as a Fijian player had several offloads but no passes)- I do not know how this stacks up but those are the stats

He still needs to pass more, or at least know when to bosh and when not to. When you're deep in the opposition 22 and there's an overlap, pass it for heaven's sake.

Potentially world class, but a work in progress still.

Let us not forget that this game was against (with due respect) Fiji.
Frankly it was a training run-out which for whatever reasons of their own, the rest of the home nations did not emulate.

Manu is not Alesana. He has better all-round skills and has been coached for years to be not one-dimensional. As Tigers' fans will attest.

He's so good that I fear that one of the top French clubs may being determined to woo him away for a king's ransom.

greytiger wrote:Let us not forget that this game was against (with due respect) Fiji.
Frankly it was a training run-out which for whatever reasons of their own, the rest of the home nations did not emulate.

Manu is not Alesana. He has better all-round skills and has been coached for years to be not one-dimensional. As Tigers' fans will attest.

He's so good that I fear that one of the top French clubs may being determined to woo him away for a king's ransom.

Even as a Tigers fan I think he has been pretty one dimensional at times - which is a shame as the few times I saw him with the academy that was never the case. However, I do think he has been looking a lot better this year and the Fiji game is far from the first that he has started using the ball and the players around him. I commented after the Ospreys game on here (or another board, can't remember) that he'd made more passes and offloads than all the other centres combined. Not the finished product by any stretch of the imagination but he's making good progress.

I think the other player that deserves a bit of credit for his style is Farrell. Granted I haven't seen much of Sarries this year, so maybe he's been playing better all season as well. However, I thought he was standing much flatter and passing a lot better than he was even in the summer tour to South Africa. He doesn't do it as well as Flood, but it's a massive improvement so credit where it is due.

Really impressed with his progress since the world cup. If he keeps improving at this rate he will be a top player for many years. I would have him for the Lions ahead of BOD at the moment and I really love BOD.

I think the other player that deserves a bit of credit for his style is
Farrell. Granted I haven't seen much of Sarries this year, so maybe
he's been playing better all season as well. However, I thought he was
standing much flatter and passing a lot better than he was even in the
summer tour to South Africa. He doesn't do it as well as Flood, but
it's a massive improvement so credit where it is due.

Hmm. When Farrell came on in a very advantageous situation he still stood so far back that the the scrum half needed a sat-nav x hubble F1 hybrid to locate him.

My view of Manu is - and I really don't mean to be mean - is that he's great when he can play instinctively, but struggles when he needs to play alien to that or to a more complex plan.

It is the reason he gets used as a decoy so much: not just that he draws people, but I wouldn't want him to get the ball without lots of time to decide what to do with it. He's great at driving into contact and securing good ball for the 9, he's great at sucking a couple of defenders in, but he's not a quick-thinking tactical player. When he finds himself with little time/room, he'll invariably just seek contact, as it's what he's most comfortable with and it usually works (although doesn't help our fluidity).

With Goode and Flood interchanging - and, it has to be said, a pretty poor Fiji - he was given a lot more time on the ball. Flood plays pretty flat, which I never think is ideal for Manu unless he is really coming in from deep. Because of having the extra distributing option, he was coming from deep more, and therefore penetrated more effectively, as well as had enough time to decide what to do in/before contact.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's really about him developing his rugby brain, more just giving him enough time to make the right decision, rather than just revert to "route 1".

If we can create gaps for him, something Goode was really helping to do, then he'll be able to cause more problems for defences. then as he gets used to this the passing will come, although what's probably more important with Goode in there now is not his passing but offloads from contact, if he can get half as good as SBW then him, Goode and Flood should be able to really test defences.

pjm1 wrote:My view of Manu is - and I really don't mean to be mean - is that he's great when he can play instinctively, but struggles when he needs to play alien to that or to a more complex plan.

It is the reason he gets used as a decoy so much: not just that he draws people, but I wouldn't want him to get the ball without lots of time to decide what to do with it. He's great at driving into contact and securing good ball for the 9, he's great at sucking a couple of defenders in, but he's not a quick-thinking tactical player. When he finds himself with little time/room, he'll invariably just seek contact, as it's what he's most comfortable with and it usually works (although doesn't help our fluidity).

With Goode and Flood interchanging - and, it has to be said, a pretty poor Fiji - he was given a lot more time on the ball. Flood plays pretty flat, which I never think is ideal for Manu unless he is really coming in from deep. Because of having the extra distributing option, he was coming from deep more, and therefore penetrated more effectively, as well as had enough time to decide what to do in/before contact.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's really about him developing his rugby brain, more just giving him enough time to make the right decision, rather than just revert to "route 1".

I don't understand how he's good when he plays instinctively but he's not good if he doesn't have time to think. Surely playing instinctively IS playing without time to think.

He's still got a long way to go. I think he could have passed more against Fiji, and his second try would have been a butchered overlap if the tackler hadn't bounced off him. He can't rely on that happening against better opponents.

He's still very young though and has loads of time to further develop his game.

he still managed to butcher a few opportunities. His running lines and passing is not great, but his boshing is still pretty good. some way short of being world class.

How was Nonu playing after a similar number of caps? It's a genuine question, I don't really know. I was under the impression that he was just a bosh merchant that has been turned into a genuinely world class centre.

Will Manu do the same? How far along that path is he? The guy is still very young, he has the aspects you can't really teach (being big and powerful and quick) and I see no reason why he can't be coached to become a very good decision maker.

He'll probably never be a truly creative player ala Dan Carter or Will Greenwood, but that's not his role.

Aquick google:
Manu is 21. 14 caps from age ~20.
Nonu is 30. 75 caps from age of ~23.

Looking at his career on ESPN, he got his first cap in 2003, but it wasn't until his 19th in 2008 at 26yo that he consistently started at centre, most of his caps were off the bench and a fair few elsewhere in the backline prior to that.

http://www.espnscrum.com/statsguru/rugby/player/14237.html?class=1;template=results;type=player;view=match

I suppose the point is that a 21 year old is a long way from the finished article. The world cup's not for another 3 years, at which point Manu will be 24 and probably have 40 caps and will hopefully be a complete player.

Right now.... He's improving. I'd save judgement until he has played the big boys.