Will there be a place for Haskell on his return?

Hi guys,

My friends and I got into a heated debate the other night over whether or not Haskell would feature in the EPS again once he has returned from his travels. I know there will be a lot of people who say 'depends on his form' or 'we can't say at this moment', but based entirely on his 6N and WC form, would you expect him to be included again come the 2013 6N?

Personally, I think that his game improved so much from the 6N and into the WC that he would feature in the EPS. He proved that his all-round game has improved, and his power with ball in hand was a great asset. For the life of me, I can't understand why he was relegated to the bench for the France quarter-final. He had great acceleration for a man his size, as well as the physical presence. His work on the ground has improved a lot as well, but is not quite where it should be for an out-and-out 7.

I'm torn as to where he would fit in in the backrow though. Many people say he's a prototype 6, but he's played 7, and I also really liked him at 8 during the WC warm-ups. Where do you think he would fit in?

Assuming he doesnt have a disater during his exile tour and gets a Jeff club willing to pay him, its pretty much a given that any England coach would look hard at him and most likely recall him to the EPS.
As for position thats more difficult. Its always been assumed he'd move to 8 ( partly through LOL seeing him as an adopted child and wanting to relive his glory days through him) but it seems the game has shifted back to wanting heavy ball carriers there, Haskell althopughh a big chap is better running in the lose than he is being used as a bulldozer. He also showed in the WC that he struggles with the speacilist skills of a genuine international 8. If hes not been playing their at club level it would be a leap for England to put him there.
England have alot of utility flankers taking up the 6/Im not really a 7 position. Rowntree talked about their desire to find a proper 7, a role again that its seems hasnt dissappeared in importance. 18 months ago Haskell said he saw his interntaional future at 7, something I found a bit odd right up untill he played there and did well. But is he ever going to be a ball winning ferret? No. Hes going to be another utility flanker fighting for a place ina backrow that never looks quite right.

Yup, I agree with you. His future doesn't lie at 7. It's a 6 or 8 I believe. That being said though, a backrow of:

6. Robshaw 7. Wood 8. Haskell

does look very nice! But now Morgan's in the mix and Crane will be back from injury soon, i'm not sure if this will ever materialise...

He is not an out and out 7 and probably will be a 6.5 like all the others, massive competition with Robshaw, Wood, etc. He has the makings of a great 8 but needs to spend a lot more time playing there at club level to learn the nitty gritty of playing there.

I think he is best at 6 and will slot in there.

6) Haskell
7) Robshaw
8) Morgan/Crane

To me, that has a lovely balance to it. It may not have your natural 7, but Robshaw is no wimp at the breakdown, and to me is becoming more and more suited to wearing the 7 shirt. Wood on the bench.

Absolutely, I thought Robshaw performed very well operating as a 7

What about Croft though? Is Robshaw really fast enough for a 7, I dont really think so

What about Croft? He looks rubbish these days (IMO anyway). He is a winger playing flanker. Robshaw looks fast enough yeah. Also, speed isn't really needed at 7 I don't think. A rugby brain and being in the right place at the right time is though.

Haskell has all the physical attributes needed to be a top notch international player.

All he is missing is a rugby brain.

As he has not developed from an athlete into a real rugby player with all his experience to date - I cannot see it ever happening. shame we cannot give him Phil Dowson's brain.

Think the entire Tigers pack looked rubbish last time you saw them Rory, exceptw hen they were stealing your lineout ball.

Its a real cliche that Croft is a winger etc and one of thos ethings that seems to have gotten exageratted out of all proportion. He started as a lock. He is more physical than people give him credit for, although speed jumping and fitness are obviously his key attributes.
The way the breakdown is suppossed to be reffed now ( and was most of last season) being first of the scene should be king when it comes to wiinning the ball. Yes thats about anticipation as well as speed but I see nothing to suggest that Croft doesnt have an excellent rugby brain. Hes certainly more sexperienced playing aginst international packs than any of the other contenders. Trouble he and Tigers have had this season ( and to some extent England did at the world cup) is that they still seem to be playing the breakdown by last seasons rules. There is a greater need to have players getting really stuck in there, and thats a problem the England pack as whole has, but with the absence of a Warburton or a Pocock under the currnet play sure yeah Id cede that Robshaw would be the better breakdown guy than Croft.
From the comments Rowntree made they may well play Croft 6, Robshaw 7 and Morgan 8 ... then see when Woods fit what happens. Its certainly got a good variety to it.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What about Croft? He looks rubbish these days (IMO anyway). He is a winger playing flanker. Robshaw looks fast enough yeah. Also, speed isn't really needed at 7 I don't think. A rugby brain and being in the right place at the right time is though.

That depends on the rest of the back row. They do need to be quick enough to get to the first breakdown after a set piece.

thomh wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What about Croft? He looks rubbish these days (IMO anyway). He is a winger playing flanker. Robshaw looks fast enough yeah. Also, speed isn't really needed at 7 I don't think. A rugby brain and being in the right place at the right time is though.

That depends on the rest of the back row. They do need to be quick enough to get to the first breakdown after a set piece.

Thats why I'm not convinced that Robshaw is up to it, put him against Sam the man and I think he'd struggle......

If he makes an impact with the Highlanders then people should sit up and notice. Jamie Joseph is a good coach and will be looking to get the best out of Haskell because they need some spark. They had a good start to the season catching other teams off guard but fell away near the end of the tournament.

Lord knows England could do with some more options at 8 with all the injuries they´ve been getting as well as cover for 6. If he can catch some headlines down under then whoever´s in charge would be a mug to omit him from the EPS.

I have always been a bit critical of Haskell and seen him very much as your version of Andy Powell but over the last season or so he has been impressive.

If he comes back gets a club (has he got one lined up) and just gets on with playing the game I think he can still be a success.

Is this 'Brand' you talking about. He really is a complete tw*t - garbage at rugby too.

Peter - I have absolutely no doubt that Croft is a great athlete and has great potential. It may sound cliche'd, that he is a back playing flanker, but he doesn't do his duties at 6 (from anytime I have seen him). It is justified most of the time. If he changes his attitude, gets aggressive for a change and shows the opposition he means business, maybe I will change my mind. Like I said, he has a good rugby brain and has potential.

It's not about his attitude it's about how he's played. If he's on the wing it's because he's been told to be there. If he kept wandering off there against the coaches orders he'd soon get dropped. He wins a lot of ball at the breakdown that he rarely gets credit for, puts in big tackles (often tracking back for try saving ones) and is great in the lineout. The whole key is balance. I think Leicester are really missing Crane in their back row. Crane, Croft and Woods had a really good balance that we haven't seen this year. The balance in the English backrow is another very documented problem.

I'm not saying he's the best or God's gift or anything but he's nowhere near as bad as suggested by many.

EDIT: I'm talking about Croft BTW. Regarding Haskell, you can say on 6N/WC form but what's the point of that? You're basically asking if he would be in the squad now. And he probably would. Whether he gets back in next year completely depends on what happens between now and then (his form and his replacements in the squad)

HammerofThunor wrote:It's not about his attitude it's about how he's played. If he's on the wing it's because he's been told to be there. If he kept wandering off there against the coaches orders he'd soon get dropped. He wins a lot of ball at the breakdown that he rarely gets credit for, puts in big tackles (often tracking back for try saving ones) and is great in the lineout. The whole key is balance. I think Leicester are really missing Crane in their back row. Crane, Croft and Woods had a really good balance that we haven't seen this year. The balance in the English backrow is another very documented problem.

I'm not saying he's the best or God's gift or anything but he's nowhere near as bad as suggested by many.

EDIT: I'm talking about Croft BTW. Regarding Haskell, you can say on 6N/WC form but what's the point of that? You're basically asking if he would be in the squad now. And he probably would. Whether he gets back in next year completely depends on what happens between now and then (his form and his replacements in the squad)

It has a lot to do about his attitude actually. When you get dumped into touch by the smallest player on the pitch and you yourself are 6 foot 5, 105kg, you really must be running in like a fairy. Where is the aggression? There is none. That all has to do with attitude. It has nothing to do with how he is played. Look at North. He looks like a monster with ball in hand and he is smaller than Croft is. He is played like a winger (obviously). He isn't a flanker. But he is an aggressive ball carrier. See?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:
It has a lot to do about his attitude actually. When you get dumped into touch by the smallest player on the pitch and you yourself are 6 foot 5, 105kg, you really must be running in like a fairy. Where is the aggression? There is none. That all has to do with attitude. It has nothing to do with how he is played. Look at North. He looks like a monster with ball in hand and he is smaller than Croft is. He is played like a winger (obviously). He isn't a flanker. But he is an aggressive ball carrier. See?

Straw man argument there. Citing an example when he was drawing the player to release his winger into space. His winger (Tuilagi) was lazy and didn't make any sort of run, leaving Croft to get smashed (which often happens when you draw the man because you are trying to make the opposition tackle you)

The criticism of Croft is b*llocks. His percieved dip in form has nothing to do with attitude or lack of aggression or any of that - the fact that he is a cool customer who thinks on a rugby field is now being portrayed as a flaw, which is rubbish. The truth is that Croft is an unorthodox 6. 'A back playing flanker' is the idiot's way of expressing this, but he does bring different attributes to the shirt. As such you have to accomodate him in a backrow to an extent, and when this doesn't happen (e.g misused by England and recently in an unbalanced Tigers backrow) people start saying he's playing badly.

If England want a traditional 6 who will make hard yards round the fringes and spend most of their time at the bottom of a ruck then they should not select Croft. But if they don't select Croft then they won't get the world-class carrying and support running in outside channels and lineout dominance that he undoubtedly brings. If they do select him then they have to think carefully about 7 and 8 to cover the things that he doesn't do. My analogy would be this: Shane Williams is one of the greatest wingers of the past decade, but if you used him coming inside on the crash ball then he would look like a mug.

As for 'the Hask', I think he gets a bit of a raw deal with fans basically because he's a bit of a t*sser (or certainly comes across that way at times). But the reality is that he was one of England's best players at the world cup and in the last 6 nations and - actually - has had very few bad games in a white shirt. He can still look a bit like a jack-of-all-trades - if Lol and Wasps thought he was going to be an 8 then they should have had the balls to pick him there regularly - but he is a proven international quality 6 and an asset to England.

OK so Croft isnt a good flanker because his wing play isnt up to scratch now?

Nope he just isn't a good flanker.

Adam wrote:The criticism of Croft is b*llocks. His percieved dip in form has nothing to do with attitude or lack of aggression or any of that - the fact that he is a cool customer who thinks on a rugby field is now being portrayed as a flaw, which is rubbish. The truth is that Croft is an unorthodox 6. 'A back playing flanker' is the idiot's way of expressing this, but he does bring different attributes to the shirt. As such you have to accomodate him in a backrow to an extent, and when this doesn't happen (e.g misused by England and recently in an unbalanced Tigers backrow) people start saying he's playing badly.

If England want a traditional 6 who will make hard yards round the fringes and spend most of their time at the bottom of a ruck then they should not select Croft. But if they don't select Croft then they won't get the world-class carrying and support running in outside channels and lineout dominance that he undoubtedly brings. If they do select him then they have to think carefully about 7 and 8 to cover the things that he doesn't do. My analogy would be this: Shane Williams is one of the greatest wingers of the past decade, but if you used him coming inside on the crash ball then he would look like a mug.

As for 'the Hask', I think he gets a bit of a raw deal with fans basically because he's a bit of a t*sser (or certainly comes across that way at times). But the reality is that he was one of England's best players at the world cup and in the last 6 nations and - actually - has had very few bad games in a white shirt. He can still look a bit like a jack-of-all-trades - if Lol and Wasps thought he was going to be an 8 then they should have had the balls to pick him there regularly - but he is a proven international quality 6 and an asset to England.

World class carrying?

I am yet to see it. You want to see a "world class" carrying back-rower, look no further than Kaino, Parisse, Read, Ferris, SOB, Harinordiquy, Picamoles etc. There are a good number of them, but Croft is well short of the mark. Every time Croft is criticised his usual defenders come in saying "oh but he isn't a traditional flanker, he has so many other qualities. He has a good rugby brain, he is so good in the line-out, he is an amazing support player, great at covering tackles" etc etc. Yet all those players I mentioned do all of that, except better and do the job required of them as a back-rower (for some, that is including the line-out - have you seen how good Harinordoquy is at line-outs?)

Well who else have England got to lay down:

THE DOMINATION !

Getting back to Haskell though...

I hope he's played at 8 by the Highlanders, does any one know if they have any other 8's or is it just him? And when he's back here I kind of hope he doesn't go to Wasps as I think he'd do alot better at Saints or Saracens, Where he could play HC rugby.

I can't see him not being in the EPS, he just seems completely comfortable at international level and at the current time Eng need as many players like that as possible!

With Thomson there, he probably will be at 8. I think he is best at 6 though.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

Adam wrote:The criticism of Croft is b*llocks. His percieved dip in form has nothing to do with attitude or lack of aggression or any of that - the fact that he is a cool customer who thinks on a rugby field is now being portrayed as a flaw, which is rubbish. The truth is that Croft is an unorthodox 6. 'A back playing flanker' is the idiot's way of expressing this, but he does bring different attributes to the shirt. As such you have to accomodate him in a backrow to an extent, and when this doesn't happen (e.g misused by England and recently in an unbalanced Tigers backrow) people start saying he's playing badly.

If England want a traditional 6 who will make hard yards round the fringes and spend most of their time at the bottom of a ruck then they should not select Croft. But if they don't select Croft then they won't get the world-class carrying and support running in outside channels and lineout dominance that he undoubtedly brings. If they do select him then they have to think carefully about 7 and 8 to cover the things that he doesn't do. My analogy would be this: Shane Williams is one of the greatest wingers of the past decade, but if you used him coming inside on the crash ball then he would look like a mug.

As for 'the Hask', I think he gets a bit of a raw deal with fans basically because he's a bit of a t*sser (or certainly comes across that way at times). But the reality is that he was one of England's best players at the world cup and in the last 6 nations and - actually - has had very few bad games in a white shirt. He can still look a bit like a jack-of-all-trades - if Lol and Wasps thought he was going to be an 8 then they should have had the balls to pick him there regularly - but he is a proven international quality 6 and an asset to England.

World class carrying?

I am yet to see it. You want to see a "world class" carrying back-rower, look no further than Kaino, Parisse, Read, Ferris, SOB, Harinordiquy, Picamoles etc. There are a good number of them, but Croft is well short of the mark. Every time Croft is criticised his usual defenders come in saying "oh but he isn't a traditional flanker, he has so many other qualities. He has a good rugby brain, he is so good in the line-out, he is an amazing support player, great at covering tackles" etc etc. Yet all those players I mentioned do all of that, except better and do the job required of them as a back-rower (for some, that is including the line-out - have you seen how good Harinordoquy is at line-outs?)

Getting side tracked by Croft again...

I agree with this, Croft at his best does run very quickly and is an assured player, but at the moment and for what ever reason he isn't doing that and no matter how many excuses are made basically he isn't playing well.

But he isn't a world class 6, his link play and and ground work is more like a 7's but then he doesn't track the ball as much, so he ends up not doing either to a particularly high degree. A quality coach (ala Geech) could make him brilliant though, he has the components.

I'd prefer to have Hask play 8 and be able to cover 6 well, rather then play 6 and try to cover 8.

Agreed, people have chose to gloss over the parts where I have said he has the potential to be a world class player. He has shown glimpses. He just needs to add more to his game, and do his basic duties. It isn't an either or situation.

Yeah Rory_Gallagher, if you read my post back you might notice that I said "world-class carrying and support running in outside channels", as opposed to the more usual close quarters stuff that the likes of Ferris, SOB and Read are so much better than Croft at. In the outside channels he is one of the best.

Also, your Harinordoquy argument is against you: he is not a 'traditional' 8 and stuggled, initially, to win-over fans in France. He wasn't making barrelling runs from the base or round the fringes, he was pioneering a new breed of athletic back rowers: great in the air, and fantastic as a support runner. Now people realise his value, but it's taken a long time.

Harinordoquy still does the job required at 8 (or flanker, where I think he will start at the 6 nations), but yes he is a very dynamic type of player, who will look for gaps and run great supporting lines. He is still monstrous in the contact area however, which is important for an 8. Nobody wants their 8 getting beaten in the contact area. Harinordoquy has always been highly rated, for years now. Before that, he was struggling with injury and form.

I wouldn't say he was 'monstrous' in the contact area. If you were looking for a battering-ram 8 you wouldn't choose Harinordoquy would you? He plays to his strengths: runs at gaps, uses his pace. These are the things that he is valued for, and the French use their backrowers in this way: the likes of Nyanga and Ouedraogo and even Dusatoir are far lighter and nippier than any flanker that England have selected in recent years (around the 14st mark I seem to remember, and not short men), because the French have traditionally favoured the type of backrower who can enable and support an expansive attacking game and used their tight five to do the bulk of the close-quarters carrying (the likes of Nallet and Pierre are selected over arguably better technicians for this reason).

All of which proves my point: there are different types of backrowers with different attributes and it is up to teams and coaches to use them correctly and find the balance.

Then you need to watch Harinordoquy in contact more. He isn't as good as Picamoles at this, but he will always make ground. Just because he is dynamic and goes for the gap doesn't mean he isn't good in contact. They aren't mutually exclusive. Hence why Croft needs to work on this.

And what about Nyanga and Ouedraogo being asked to perform very different roles from English flankers to suit a different gameplan? You don't think that point is relevant in this debate? What about the fact that you can balance a pack - not just a backrow - to accomodate a range of strengths and weaknesses? Horses for courses.

Harinordoquy may well be better than Croft at close quarters carrying, but the fact is that this is not his strength, so he would always look to avoid this and run at space given the chance. And this, and his athleticism, is what sets him apart as a great player.

Adam wrote:And what about Nyanga and Ouedraogo being asked to perform very different roles from English flankers to suit a different gameplan? You don't think that point is relevant in this debate? What about the fact that you can balance a pack - not just a backrow - to accomodate a range of strengths and weaknesses? Horses for courses.

Harinordoquy may well be better than Croft at close quarters carrying, but the fact is that this is not his strength, so he would always look to avoid this and run at space given the chance. And this, and his athleticism, is what sets him apart as a great player.

Nyanga hasn't played for France in years (wrongly, as he is so good IMO). Ouedraogo is second fiddle to other options also. But yes the two of these players are both very effective and play a different sort of game to many flankers. However, watching these two players once again they are very good ball carriers. Once again, it isn't mutually exclusive. You present a good argument about the balance of the pack, which is of course vital, but Croft isn't the same player as Nyanga/Ouedraogo either. Even they seem to be better in contact then he is. Croft needs to show aggression. Also Harinordoquy's ball carrying is one of his strengths, definitely. He looks for space because he has the vision, speed and agility to do so. The size is an added bonus.

Rory, why do you turn every thread into a Croft-bashing exercise? There only has to be a slight mention of him or back-row play and you're off on one.

I think we've got the picture about how you feel about him by now.

I can not remember the last time I saw croft go on a "world class run" on the outside channel. I just don't think that opportunity arises in top level rugby unless your Australian.

Going through the first tackle from a standing start though, that happens quite often.

Not sure what you are talking about tbh. Someone asked why I hadn't included Croft in my back-row and I said why. Glad you've got the picture, you can ignore my posts on him from now on then.

Nah, to be honest mate is sounds like you just plain dislike Croft. You'd never see Harinordoquy, Ouedraogo or Nyanga being used as a close-quarters battering ram. And if you did, when they failed to make a massive impact you wouldn't say 'wow, what a terrible player' you'd say 'wow, what an idiot of a coach deploying a nippy ball-player in such a way'. The Croft situation is no different.

Yappy, agree - especially in the types of games that England more often than not find themselves in. Croft may not be the right man for the job. But it's not because he's a 'bad' player - he just brings a different set of attributes.

Adam wrote:Nah, to be honest mate is sounds like you just plain dislike Croft. You'd never see Harinordoquy, Ouedraogo or Nyanga being used as a close-quarters battering ram. And if you did, when they failed to make a massive impact you wouldn't say 'wow, what a terrible player' you'd say 'wow, what an idiot of a coach deploying a nippy ball-player in such a way'. The Croft situation is no different.

Yappy, agree - especially in the types of games that England more often than not find themselves in. Croft may not be the right man for the job. But it's not because he's a 'bad' player - he just brings a different set of attributes.

Do I have to waste my time finding examples of the three of those players using their power in contact? They look for space first, but obviously they can break the gain-line as well. You keep saying close-quarters battering ram. What do you mean, the pick and go? Quick tap and throw it to your biggest guy, like school-boys do? Every player 1-8 must be able to pick and go when required. In-fact if you want to argue that, Nyanga has scored plenty of tries from those positions on the try-line. He picks, drives, and scores. Flip me, most backs these days are able to break the gain-line. There is no excuse for weakness in the contact. And please tell me you aren't seriously describing Croft as "nippy". Shane Williams is nippy. Not a 6 foot 5, 105kg flanker.

I have said a million times now Croft has the potential to be a very good player but he wastes his time standing in the backs. Nyanga, Ouedraogo and Hari do not do this, and will get their hands dirty. And they can do what Croft does. For the millionth time, it isn't mutually exclusive.

Rory

You need to calm down pal.

Yes, they can all make ground on the pick and go, or off the scrum half from a standing start in-close - so can Croft (as you say "Flip me, most backs these days are able to break the gain-line") - but the point is that it's not their strenght, and they would be foolish not to play to their strenghts.

I feel that some pretty reasonable arguments have been made against you, but you have this unshakeable anti-Croft agenda that just isn't worth countering.

I think he's just annoyed that Croft was the Lions blindside rather than Ferris

Ferris was injured

Why do I need to calm down when I am already calm? Or rather, where have I shown myself not to be calm? Anti-croft agenda?

You have made some good arguments also, I have already pointed that out. But they don't explain why Croft isn't actually all that good atm.

Doesn't mean he would have be selected if he wasn't. Would have stood a good chance as he's a decent player. But it's just hypothetical

Think you guys are being a bit harsh on rory to be honest. Hes not mindlessly bashing a player like some on here do and has made reasoned and valid points as well as good counter arguments.

I'm unsure as to croft, i think with an old school beats of an english front 5 he would be a very handy player to have in the backrow. However, at this stage engand simply do not have that and as such i would prefer to go with a Robshaw, Wood, Morgan backrow for the 6n (when all are fit).

To the original post though i would say that i think going to the super 15 will be the making of haskell. He has come on very well the last few seasons and been englands best backrower in a lot of games imo. The fast hard grounds will suit him and playing at that level of intensity will make him raise his game. I agree with the other poster that i'd prefer him to be an 8 who can cover 6 when need rather than vice-versa. Hopefully when hes back england could field a backrow from;

6. wood/croft
7 robshaw/a genuine fetcher (maybe Wallace or Saul)
8 haskell/morgan

With a big lump at 8 i think croft would have more of a chance to do what he does best.

yappysnap wrote:Getting back to Haskell though...

I hope he's played at 8 by the Highlanders, does any one know if they have any other 8's or is it just him? And when he's back here I kind of hope he doesn't go to Wasps as I think he'd do alot better at Saints or Saracens, Where he could play HC rugby.

I can't see him not being in the EPS, he just seems completely comfortable at international level and at the current time Eng need as many players like that as possible!

Highlanders have Nasi Manu who played 8 for them last year. He plays 8 for the Canterbury provincial side. Haskell will be doing well to take the 8 jersey from Manu. He's one of the most devestating running 8's in the S15.