English opensides - a rare breed indeed...

First topic message reminder :

I pointed out on the Wilkinson thread about Neil Back being ignored by England prior to the 1997 Lions tour. Englands reluctance to pick Back led to Rowells selection of Rodber, Richards & Ben Clarke at 7 - a beast of a back row, but another example of the English 6.5.

Besides Back, in the last 20 years, I can only think of one true other English 7 with more than a few international caps: Peter Winterbottom.

Am I missing anybody else?

Why is this? Dont we like them or dont we produce quality? Or are we still obsessed, like Rowell with big is better?

Warbs 6 and Tupric 7 just wont work in my eyes not enough balance in the back row, also i don't think the Welsh tight five are good enough to take on extra work rate to leave 6 and 7 go for the turn overs.
Mc Caw could play at 8 as well but only due to size.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Warburton play a lot of his development rugby at 8? Also, McCaw has certainly covered all backrow positions in his career (even played 8 against Ireland on their summer tour, didn't he?). If you're talking about George Smith then he definitely played right across the backrow (remember seeing him at 8 as well as 6 - at international as well).

It would be wrong to suggest that the non-specialist backrower is a uniquely English thing: look at Ireland.....even when Wallace was around, his carrying and monster physicality in the tight made him equally effective at 6 as at 7 (or 8 for that matter), and as for Heaslip, Ferris and O'Brien, there aint a specialist breakaway in that lot. Similarly, SA flirted with a 'fetcher' in Brussow, but as someone already pointed out, this was in the ELV era when the defending team enjoyed the advantage at the breakdown....they have since routinely and indescriminitely selected monsters on either flank....

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Warburton play a lot of his development rugby at 8? Also, McCaw has certainly covered all backrow positions in his career (even played 8 against Ireland on their summer tour, didn't he?). If you're talking about George Smith then he definitely played right across the backrow (remember seeing him at 8 as well as 6 - at international as well).

It would be wrong to suggest that the non-specialist backrower is a uniquely English thing: look at Ireland.....even when Wallace was around, his carrying and monster physicality in the tight made him equally effective at 6 as at 7 (or 8 for that matter), and as for Heaslip, Ferris and O'Brien, there aint a specialist breakaway in that lot. Similarly, SA flirted with a 'fetcher' in Brussow, but as someone already pointed out, this was in the ELV era when the defending team enjoyed the advantage at the breakdown....they have since routinely and indescriminitely selected monsters on either flank....

gboycottnut wrote:Unbelievable that no one has mentioned Andy Robinson

He hasn't been forsaken! I put him up for consideration in the 4th post in this thread.

Warburton Captained Wales u20 whilst playing at 8,
But he is not big enough for top pro 8.

Tom Rees seemed like a good seven until injury ruined it for him

George Smith could play 6

Tom Rees is also a capital bloke, was a very good seven unfortunately can't really play rugby at all any more, though he is coaching defence now

You met him CJ? Seem to remember you saying he was going to study where you are?

Yeah, not a huge amount as he's a first year but enough to get an impression. Get the idea he wants to move on with a new chapter in his life generally

Can understand that really poor bloke.

Warburton kind of reminds me of the kind of player we were all hoping that Rees would be for Eng, sadly it only ever happened in that NZ tour.

yappysnap wrote:Can understand that really poor bloke.

Warburton kind of reminds me of the kind of player we were all hoping that Rees would be for Eng, sadly it only ever happened in that NZ tour.

Let's hope for his sake he doesn't suffer the same fate - but sadly Warburton already seems to be plagued with injury worries.

Just don't let him start to grow his hair long and learn the guitar=career killer!

I never rated Neil Back, he never entered a ruck onside also a bit of an armchair ride with a dominant pack to rumble the ball up field or disrupt oppose ball,
I think the game has changed so much over the last decade that he wouldn't last five minutes playing in England's current pack!
The likes of George North would be slapping him aside.

Why would George North be competing with Neil Back to get in to the English pack?

Lol, i think you misunderstand my statement.

viewtothegym wrote:I never rated Neil Back, he never entered a ruck onside also a bit of an armchair ride with a dominant pack to rumble the ball up field or disrupt oppose ball,
I think the game has changed so much over the last decade that he wouldn't last five minutes playing in England's current pack!
The likes of George North would be slapping him aside.

Neil Back was a ferocious competitor I'm sure he could adapt. The question is would England want him? I remember reading that after being rejected again by England, despite his outstanding form for Leicester, in an attempt to improve his already considerable fitness his re-jigged his training program to remove his post match rest day.

Your point that he never entered a ruck onside, but wasnt that his job? As for George, well he slaps a lot of folk aside now...why would someone who retired from international football 8 years ago be any different.

viewtothegym wrote:I never rated Neil Back, he never entered a ruck onside also a bit of an armchair ride with a dominant pack to rumble the ball up field or disrupt oppose ball,
I think the game has changed so much over the last decade that he wouldn't last five minutes playing in England's current pack!
The likes of George North would be slapping him aside.

Come on mate - WUM comment. "Never entered a ruck onside" is simply not true and pure bitterness - a good 7 will always be seen as a cheat by envious souls from other nations....see McCaw. And the things this guy achieved in the game considering the disadvantages he faced were unbelievable and cannot be denied - his size was a disadvantage in itself, and resulted in his being overlooked for a long time by a lot of coaches, but domestic titles, grand slams, world cups and Lions caps speak for themselves.

Could it just be that England were ruling world rugby at the time and you were hating it?

Also, that rugby has changed massively is a given - it doesn't mean you should disrespect the players of eras past. What if I suggested that the superlative Welsh team of the 70's would have been smashed to bits by the physicality of even a 2nd tier domestic side these days? True? Very probably. Relevant? No. Disrespectful? Absolutely.

Im not envious of Neil Back, he is a good player who played along with some exceptional players.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Yeh, both very in your face! Wood surprised me in that regard during the AIs. When he started against SA, he really seemed up for the physcial confrontation

Vedder, his performance v Ireland (2 years ago) when we went backwards at will, showed what he had...he was the only one that barely took a backward step...
It was actually that performance that made me such a fan and want him at 6 for England...and hopefully he will make that spot his own now.

Me too! I actually remember think him and Corbs were the only two who looked up for it, though Corbs was a little shell-shocked after a while.

I was slightly worried at first that he was a slower, slightly more physical Croft. I'd still ideally like at least one flanker who carries very well and stops people on the gainline like Alberts. But although Haskell is sometimes that man, he's too inconsistent at the moment I think. I wish he'd been moved to 8 earlier on, ah well.

The natural aggression of Wood is something I think we lack in the current pack and it's vital. If the lack of bulk gets punished, on comes Haskell.

Cockers was reporting in the Times this morning that Croft is back in training (ahead of schedule) and has added over a stone of bulk in his time off. It'll be interesting to see what that extra weight does to his game. If it adds power without too much trade-off in speed, then he could give Lancaster a selection headache.

Neil Back was a crazy trainer, unbeliveably fit and strong.

Speaking of training, it will interesting to see how adding a stone will change Crofts game, despite his frame, I don't think he was exactly light before.

I think Neil Back would do just fine in the modern game!

Crazy about Croft adding nearly a stone in bulk. Will be good to see how it adds to his game.

Hope Croft doesn't lose his pace as a result of gaining weight.

If the rationale is that bulking-up will allow him to carry better into traffic and be more effective in the tight then I think it's possibly misguided - you don't want to tinker too much with the type of player he is as, whilst unorthodox, he offers a mobility and a carrying threat in the wider channels that no other 6 in the world does.

Of course, if he's gained a stone and managed to keep all of his pace then lookout world!

I think England can make a good back row by having the following 6 players in the EPS.

Robshaw ( 6 /7)
Haskell ( 6/7/8)
Morgan ( 8)
Wood ( 6/7)
Croft (6)
Kvesic(7/8)

The above 6 players could be used in various combinations.
Kvesic is there to gain experience so he can develop into an international 7..

pbuk0 wrote:I think England can make a good back row by having the following 6 players in the EPS.

Robshaw ( 6 /7)
Haskell ( 6/7/8)
Morgan ( 8)
Wood ( 6/7)
Croft (6)
Kvesic(7/8)

The above 6 players could be used in various combinations.
Kvesic is there to gain experience so he can develop into an international 7..

That's a good combination - but with only one specialist 8 it's a bit vulnerable to an injury to Morgan. Would need to have some good 8s in the Saxons as injury cover. Waldrom? Who else?

Poorfour wrote:

pbuk0 wrote:I think England can make a good back row by having the following 6 players in the EPS.

Robshaw ( 6 /7)
Haskell ( 6/7/8)
Morgan ( 8)
Wood ( 6/7)
Croft (6)
Kvesic(7/8)

The above 6 players could be used in various combinations.
Kvesic is there to gain experience so he can develop into an international 7..

That's a good combination - but with only one specialist 8 it's a bit vulnerable to an injury to Morgan. Would need to have some good 8s in the Saxons as injury cover. Waldrom? Who else?

I would see Haskell covering 8.. however I would like to see Wood or Croft tried at 8 as they have the ball skills to play there..

Have been wondering this morning if an extra stone would give Croft the heft to play at 8... though he'd need an intensive course in control at the back of the scrum.

The other potentials who spring to mind (with apologies for the Quins bias - they're the ones I see regularly) are:
- Chris York (v young, but Deano has had a full year with him at Newcastle and I am looking forward to the impact he can make next year),
- Jordan Crane (always felt he was a solid performer, but scrapping with Waldrom for the 8 shirt at Tigers)
- Tom Guest (in many ways a direct comparison for the newly enlarged Croft. Has lost crucial time through injury and it may be too late for him, but putting in some big performances at the mo)

Your'll all probably disagree with me but I rated hendre fourie, during his England days he was a square of pure muscle, great ball carrier and also had the breakdown skills required of a 7...he had several things against him being a slow starter from the lower leagues not reaching international level until he was 30, also being a saffa in an England jersey never endears people to you, but he was a pupil of Neil back and in the pre Rwc warm up games he was everywhere...such a shame injury left him out of the squad as he would have been a much better pick than moody.

Other potential 8s- Billy V at Wasps
Don't forget Will Fraser as a form "real" 7 option, or Exeter's Scaysbrooke for that matter

Will Fraser is an option but I think Kvesic has the better potential long term ... Billy V still a bit raw for my liking...

sirtidychris - agree! Fourie's age and accent meant he was never gonna be a fan's favourite, but the season he had with Leeds to win his caps was awesome, and his performances in an England shirt were all decent and offered something different to the other flank options. Dare I say it, his style of play is like a better version of Steffan 'McCaw mark 2' Armitage.....low centre of gravity, energetic, awkward to bring down or shift off the ball.

....that ship has sailed, though.

Re: 8 - I love the style of 8 that Lancaster appears to favour.....Morgan and Waldrom both have a touch of the 'old fashioned' about them (especially their no-frills carrying) and I think having a guy like that at the back of the scrum gives you a bit more versatility in selecting your flank pairing - both Robshaw and Wood are sort of 6.5's in that they both do a bit more than your average 6 in the tackle area (without being bon fide 'fetchers') but neither of them are hole-punching carriers like a Ferris or an Alberts.....this balances well with what Morgan brings to the table

sirtidychris wrote:Your'll all probably disagree with me but I rated hendre fourie, during his England days he was a square of pure muscle, great ball carrier and also had the breakdown skills required of a 7...he had several things against him being a slow starter from the lower leagues not reaching international level until he was 30, also being a saffa in an England jersey never endears people to you, but he was a pupil of Neil back and in the pre Rwc warm up games he was everywhere...such a shame injury left him out of the squad as he would have been a much better pick than moody.

I actually agree. I really wanted to think he was rubbish but he looked excellent every time I saw him. Think it's a real shame for him he came on so late.

The S Armitage thing for me is this - I think he is a pretty unique talent, but it's not for the reasons people suggest. His work at the breakdown looks ok to me, but no better than anyone elses (would be keen to see stats on turnovers though). Of the turnovers he does get I think they're a result of being in the backs and targeting smaller players rather than doing it in the tight amongst forwards, not that that isn't an important skill, but it's different to someone like Dan Cole. His real exceptional skill for me is his role as a link man between the pack and backs. We talk about 7s being fetchers, but that link role seems to have been forgotten. Armitage does it exceptionally well, but i'm not sure it's enough to warrant a starting spot.

I thought Fourie did a cracking job - but I think Chris is spot on - England + another Saffa = frosty reception. Not fair really...

Hood83 wrote:

sirtidychris wrote:Your'll all probably disagree with me but I rated hendre fourie, during his England days he was a square of pure muscle, great ball carrier and also had the breakdown skills required of a 7...he had several things against him being a slow starter from the lower leagues not reaching international level until he was 30, also being a saffa in an England jersey never endears people to you, but he was a pupil of Neil back and in the pre Rwc warm up games he was everywhere...such a shame injury left him out of the squad as he would have been a much better pick than moody.

I actually agree. I really wanted to think he was rubbish but he looked excellent every time I saw him. Think it's a real shame for him he came on so late.

The S Armitage thing for me is this - I think he is a pretty unique talent, but it's not for the reasons people suggest. His work at the breakdown looks ok to me, but no better than anyone elses (would be keen to see stats on turnovers though). Of the turnovers he does get I think they're a result of being in the backs and targeting smaller players rather than doing it in the tight amongst forwards, not that that isn't an important skill, but it's different to someone like Dan Cole. His real exceptional skill for me is his role as a link man between the pack and backs. We talk about 7s being fetchers, but that link role seems to have been forgotten. Armitage does it exceptionally well, but i'm not sure it's enough to warrant a starting spot.

I thought Fourie was a very good player too (and still do), but agree with the consensus that it's a shame he was so South African. He was a typical SA flank- tough as nails, and gritty. Anyone remember that fantastic barrelling run he had against SA I think it was, when he came on as a substitute in the last few minutes? He was spinning out of tackles, got up off the ground and just kept on rumbling. It was excellent!

Any news on his injury? Likely to be seeing him again soon?

Im not sure that extra Bulk will make any difference to Crofts game.

You either play a certain way or you dont. Crofts game is not about being a physical animal...so hes not going to become that now. He has his game style...and unfortunaley its one i dont see as an England fit (he was excellent in the 6N...and maybe he will prove me wrong)...as opposed to someone like Wood whos is.

Someone above mentioned Chris York...hes coming along nicely...but has played many of his games at 6. Hes huge and has a serious turn of speed.

We also have Will Welch(7 and Captain) and Mark Wilson (who is a superb young back rower getting MOM's for fun) who will be worth a look next season...though following the current trend...Will has had his share of injury problems...

GeordieFalcon wrote:Im not sure that extra Bulk will make any difference to Crofts game.

You either play a certain way or you dont. Crofts game is not about being a physical animal...so hes not going to become that now. He has his game style...and unfortunaley its one i dont see as an England fit (he was excellent in the 6N...and maybe he will prove me wrong)...as opposed to someone like Wood whos is.

Someone above mentioned Chris York...hes coming along nicely...but has played many of his games at 6. Hes huge and has a serious turn of speed.

We also have Will Welch(7 and Captain) and Mark Wilson (who is a superb young back rower getting MOM's for fun) who will be worth a look next season...though following the current trend...Will has had his share of injury problems...

I can't believe York's weight is listed as 16.5 stone on the Newcastle website! He must be at least a stone heavier?!

He looks some size on the pitch...16.5 really? Id have him quite a bit over that.