"Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

by Triangulation Thu May 03, 2012 2:43 am

First topic message reminder :

Q.Stuart, do you decide what amounts to "exceptional circumstances"
A Pretty much yes. Steffon Armitage is an example of that.

6.Robshaw
7.Armitage
8.Morgan

Devastating combination. Throw Haskell into the mix as well.

OUCH!

by timhen Fri May 04, 2012 10:13 am

You can't have seen Haskell play in a fair while bluesman, he's been getting better and better and last weekend he was the standout forward from either side with ball in hand (69m, 2 clean breaks, 5 defenders beaten and 4 offloads). Far from ineffective carrying.

He landed in NZ from Japan only 2 days before his first game, so it's hardly surprising that he was struggling to fit into a team in such a short space of time whilst the rest of the side would have had a month or two of preseason training to familiarise themselves with each other and learn how Joseph wanted them to play. He's now settled in and a very functional part of the squad.

There's no way a player who knows so much about backrow play like Jamie Joseph would continue to start Haskell if he was playing like you suggest when he still has a number of other players at his disposal (Hardie is the only injured backrow player).

by Triangulation Fri May 04, 2012 9:04 pm

To those whingers who say

"oooh no now there's going to be an exodus of players to foreign countries. were doomed!"

I say 5 things

1. Lancaster hasn't picked the squad yet.
2. If he does pick SA it still wont produce this exodus since any player with england ambitions would still be taking an enormous risk.
3. Some players have been completely re made for the better playing overseas out of comfort zones
4. SA's form has been exceptional. He is a unique type of player. We dont really have any 7s as good as him right now in the form that he is in. If all of these dont add up to = "exceptional circumstance" then my granny is my uncle.
5. Grow a pair. Stop worrying about so called principles. We should do what's best for our national team right now and back ourselves and the fact that players' overarching ambition is to play for national side to win the day.

by ChequeredJersey Fri May 04, 2012 9:06 pm

This approach seems to have worked for the All Blacks though- even if I think that they should have come calling for Evans

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Fri May 04, 2012 10:13 pm

ChequeredJersey wrote:This approach seems to have worked for the All Blacks though- even if I think that they should have come calling for Evans

It's easier for the AB's to insist on it - the distance (travel wise for the selectors) and timing-of-seasons factor make compelling arguments on top of the "keeping the home competition strong for development of the next generation" one. And ultimately we didn't need Evans (thank you Stephen Donald, and once again I'm sorry about all those things I said).

by Hood83 Fri May 04, 2012 11:48 pm

thebluesmancometh wrote:Guys the good reports you are hearing from Haskell must be sarcasm.

When he started I didn't even know he'd made the move, but he stood out in his first game for being a rag doll. He was well off the pace and wasn't competing at all. His few minute sub appearances were awfull.

He did get stronger and fitter, and started to compete better, but he is getting seriously beaten up around the breakdown, his carrying is ineffectuall, and defence a mess. I will say he's getting around the park pretty well mind.

It doesn't help when playing alomgside someone of the quality of Thompston mind, he really stands head and shoulders above!

Have to say bluesman, I saw it slightly differently. Fair enough you've probably watched a lot more of Haskell, but i thought his defence was pretty decent, as was his rucking (if a little slow to the breakdown, he was also leaning on a fair few). His carrying looked alright and generally i thought he looked physically up to it, if not likely to blow anyone away. I thought his workrate was below par though. Basically a B-

And Thompson did look a lot better than him.

by Triangulation Sat May 05, 2012 12:05 am

Haskell is basically a very athletic player who has time on his side. His brain and his hands have not been strong points historically. That is really why he must never be allowed to play 8 for England ever ever. That is not to say that he wont develop into a very handy flanker.

by DaveM Sat May 05, 2012 9:54 am

Triangulation wrote:To those whingers who say

"oooh no now there's going to be an exodus of players to foreign countries. were doomed!"

I say 5 things

1. Lancaster hasn't picked the squad yet.
2. If he does pick SA it still wont produce this exodus since any player with england ambitions would still be taking an enormous risk.
3. Some players have been completely re made for the better playing overseas out of comfort zones
4. SA's form has been exceptional. He is a unique type of player. We dont really have any 7s as good as him right now in the form that he is in. If all of these dont add up to = "exceptional circumstance" then my granny is my uncle.
5. Grow a pair. Stop worrying about so called principles. We should do what's best for our national team right now and back ourselves and the fact that players' overarching ambition is to play for national side to win the day.

1. It doesn't matter, he made clear he'll pick who he likes no matter where they are playing.
2. What risk? See point 1.
3. Playing abroad may well have made Armitage a better player, but that's an entirely different argument to whether Armitage should be considered whilst he's playing abroad.
4. As far as I can tell Armitage has been playing quite well. I'm not sure what has made his performances exceptional. If all you have to do to be considered exceptional is play well and be 'unique' then I'd say many of the current 1st choice 15 could make that claim.
5. Don't worry about principles? That's a great way to manage, and there's no way that could come back to haunt you.

by Triangulation Tue May 08, 2012 8:05 pm

DaveM wrote:
Triangulation wrote:To those whingers who say

"oooh no now there's going to be an exodus of players to foreign countries. were doomed!"

I say 5 things

1. Lancaster hasn't picked the squad yet.
2. If he does pick SA it still wont produce this exodus since any player with england ambitions would still be taking an enormous risk.
3. Some players have been completely re made for the better playing overseas out of comfort zones
4. SA's form has been exceptional. He is a unique type of player. We dont really have any 7s as good as him right now in the form that he is in. If all of these dont add up to = "exceptional circumstance" then my granny is my uncle.
5. Grow a pair. Stop worrying about so called principles. We should do what's best for our national team right now and back ourselves and the fact that players' overarching ambition is to play for national side to win the day.

1. It doesn't matter, he made clear he'll pick who he likes no matter where they are playing.
2. What risk? See point 1.
3. Playing abroad may well have made Armitage a better player, but that's an entirely different argument to whether Armitage should be considered whilst he's playing abroad.
4. As far as I can tell Armitage has been playing quite well. I'm not sure what has made his performances exceptional. If all you have to do to be considered exceptional is play well and be 'unique' then I'd say many of the current 1st choice 15 could make that claim.
5. Don't worry about principles? That's a great way to manage, and there's no way that could come back to haunt you.

1. No he hasn't. Exceptional circumstances still need to be made out one way or another.
2. The risk is massive DaveM. Firstly of all you are simply not seen as much by selectors, journalists or any other people who either make or influence selections: you not on the radar to anywhere near the same extent as if you played here. Secondly, you aren't playing with English comrades then you aren't in a combination. Club combinations are often tempting for national coaches. e.g the saracens back line selected for 6N. Thirdly, you will need to negotiate terms to allow England availability - if you dont have terms in your contract to this effect then you slide way down the list.
3. Why? If a player goes o/s and starts playing exceptionally well as a result of the new environment then that combined with other factors might add up to = exceptional circumstances. Point here is that EQPs going o/s is not ALWAYS a bad thing for every player and selection should be flexible enough to cope with that. Why should we fight with one arm tied behind our back?
4. I think i explained that IMO he has been playing exceptionally well AND we dont have any one quite like him AND were running low on quality cover.
5. I am all for principled approach but exceptional circumstances does not mean NEVER under any circumstance. Its about where you draw the line.

by DaveM Wed May 09, 2012 9:48 am

1. Lancaster admitted he determines what constitutes 'exceptional circumstances'. It is now entirely subjective and entirely down to one man.
2. All of those factors apply to Steffon Armitage. Let Lancaster has publically stated he might pick him. How do you interpret that as a player?
3. As stated above if a player becomes better playing abroad that is one thing, it's completely separate from whether that players should be picked without showing enough committment to the cause to do what basically ever other player with a serious interest in representing England has done and come home.
4. We still have plenty of options, and come next autumn we'll be burried in 7s: Wood, Haskell, Robshaw, Clark, Dowson, Johnson, Kvesic, Fearns, Gibson, Wallace, Saull. There is no 'exceptional' shortage of 7s.
5. What SL has done is taken a situation which was quite clear and which almost everyone had signed up to (even Delon Armitage said he wouldn't have gone to Toulon if he had still been involved with England), and muddied it.

by bluestonevedder Wed May 09, 2012 7:38 pm

1. I like writing all posts like this
2. It provides a good structure to any counter-argument.
3. Numbering is fun.
4. Look, I can count to 4.
5. Look, now I can count to 5.

Whistle

On a serious note, I do appreciate what you're both saying, but I do think that SL has to be careful over his selection of foreign players. Saying that, I think Steffon does meet the 'exceptional circumstances' criteria. DaveM i'm concerned that a lot of those 7s you've outlined in point 4 are 6s, not 7s...

by Triangulation Wed May 09, 2012 9:21 pm

bluestonevedder wrote:1. I like writing all posts like this
2. It provides a good structure to any counter-argument.
3. Numbering is fun.
4. Look, I can count to 4.
5. Look, now I can count to 5.

On a serious note, I do appreciate what you're both saying, but I do think that SL has to be careful over his selection of foreign players. Saying that, I think Steffon does meet the 'exceptional circumstances' criteria. DaveM i'm concerned that a lot of those 7s you've outlined in point 4 are 6s, not 7s...

Exactly Dave. Dowson? Seriously?

Lancaster has to be careful i agree with that.

If i were a player with England national ambitions NO WAY would i go and play o/s before Lancaster hinted at selecting Armitage OR after. Muddied waters ? Possibly to a very small degree but tell me DaveM what player in his right mind would gamble their future possible international career in muddy waters?

No one would in their right mind.

MASSIVE RISK in going O/s still and all the players and their agents know that even if DaveM thinks its a safe bet Very Happy

by DaveM Thu May 10, 2012 7:39 am

Lots of those players started as 6s, but almost all of them play most of their rugby at 7 now. Even Dowson turns out at 7 reasonably often.

Few of them are 'fetchers', but you can play international rugby without one of those, as various nations with strong backrows demonstrate.

by HammerofThunor Thu May 10, 2012 9:04 am

I wasn't like there was an 'exception circumstances' box they have to break open to pick foreign players. It was just an indicator that if they move away the EPS deal will mean England based players will be able to train with the squad for longer and stay during the 6 nations breaks. Also limited game time and some medical control. I feel bad now for taking the urine out of all the "Gatland's Law" guff from some of the Welsh fans on here.

by Triangulation Thu May 10, 2012 6:38 pm

DaveM wrote:Lots of those players started as 6s, but almost all of them play most of their rugby at 7 now. Even Dowson turns out at 7 reasonably often.

Few of them are 'fetchers', but you can play international rugby without one of those, as various nations with strong backrows demonstrate.

Ha ha ha DaveM keep digging

There's one side who seem to be able to do well without a highly mobile limpit on the ball /fetcher 7 and that is SA. It suits their bruiser style to pack in as much bulk as possible to their back 5 forwards and it works for them because they never really go wider than 12 or 13 channels in early phases. Also though it is worth bearing in mind that their bruiser 7s are generally also highly mobile if somewhat tall to be on the ball limpits. They do produce freak back 5 forwards on a regular basis.

I would argue though that even SA look a better side with Brussow at 7.

I don't think Ferris, Heaslip, O'Brein works long term for Ireland either. The raging potato agrees with me on that score too.

The best performing sides at last RWC all had quick 7s

NZ
France
Wales
Aus

by ChequeredJersey Thu May 10, 2012 10:33 pm

France don't though

by ChequeredJersey Thu May 10, 2012 10:35 pm

And many Welsh fans have noted that Warbs didn't start as a fetching 7, he developed into it after exposure to the role

by Guest Thu May 10, 2012 10:36 pm

They would get murdered by South Africa

by bluestonevedder Thu May 10, 2012 10:42 pm

viewtothegym wrote:They would get murdered by South Africa

by ChequeredJersey Thu May 10, 2012 10:50 pm

viewtothegym wrote:They would get murdered by South Africa

Who would? It is unclear from your post.

by bluestonevedder Thu May 10, 2012 10:52 pm

Think he's referring to the backrow in the OP.

Either way, it's a great contribution

by jeffwinger Thu May 10, 2012 11:55 pm

The way I saw it at the time the 'exceptional circumstances' rule that was written in may as well have been called the 'Wilkinson rule'. He was playing in France and they didn't want to formally exclude him given his previous contribution and potential to be world class. He has since retired from internationals so it became a non-issue. I think it will rightly be quite tricky for another player to get into an England squad while indefinitely signed up to French clubs from now on. It would have to be an exceptional player in exceptional form to constitute an exceptional circumstance.

by DaveM Fri May 11, 2012 9:10 am

Triangulation wrote:
Ha ha ha DaveM keep digging

There's one side who seem to be able to do well without a highly mobile limpit on the ball /fetcher 7 and that is SA.

The best performing sides at last RWC all had quick 7s

NZ
France
Wales
Aus

Sorry, I disagree. If we have a balanced backrow and a player like Wood, Robshaw or Haskell at 7 I wouldn't fear any other backrow. England competed very well against Wales, and France and dominated Ireland (a game you may remember as you were posting complete nonsence before it) despite the Irish backrow having destroyed us a year earlier. France don't have a 7, Wales developed one (although you could argue that Lydiate at 6 is actually the more important player for them).

The last 2 times we played Australia we beat them without a 'proper' 7 despite the presence of a great fetcher (Pocock) on the opposition side.

If you have a great fetcher then you will probably play them - this may well happen over the next couple of years with Kvesic. If you don't have a great fetcher, but you do some some high quality all-round flankers (even those who started their careers as 6s) then that's almost certainly fine.

by Effervescing Elephant Fri May 11, 2012 8:48 pm

Point of order Dave, Tri wasn't posting rubbish before the Ireland match. It was a carefully orchestrated campaign of reverse psychology and misinformation carefully formulated to prevent 'jinxing' the game.
I feel as a nation we owe Triangulation a huge debt of gratitude for pretty much single handedly securing the win.
clap

by Triangulation Fri May 11, 2012 9:41 pm

DaveM

I do sort of get your point. I wont concede mind but i get where you're coming from. The current interpretation of the laws around tackler releasing player and player releasing ball, next man in's rights etc slightly mitigates against the out and out fetcher. The golden age of the fetcher was a few years ago and was typified by the battles between mc caw and george smith and occasionally phil waugh.

Still though i think you are correct in saying and i agree that the logic goes something like this

1. if you have a gun fetcher - he plays 7.

if you dont then you make do and mend with two 6.5 or whatever combo gives you balance.

but 1. stands and it stands because it gives you an edge. possibly not one to induce "fear" as you say but an edge nonetheless.

I would LOVE to see 6.Robshaw, 7.Armitage 8 Morgan and i have no idea why viewtothegym thinks they are not physical enough for SA or anyone.

They absolutely are.

by DaveM Sat May 12, 2012 9:34 pm

Fine. Given we have so many other plausible options at 7 I can't see Armitage figuring now unless and until he returns to the AP. In the short-term I expect Robshaw/Wood/Haskell to play 7 for us (or possibly Fearns if he tours well). By autumn 2013 I think Kvesic may have taken the shirt, which gives us the potential to play a fully balanced backrow. If Armitage wants to come back and compete then that would be a good thing.

by timhen Tue May 15, 2012 1:45 am

HongKongCherry wrote: I think in general it's just a case of absence makes the heart grow fonder

Triangulation wrote:

He is pulling up trees. Give him a goddamed chance.

I think that's going over the top somewhat and buying into the journalistic hype.

England desperately need a proper 7 and I would love Armitage to prove me wrong, but I've seen quite a few games of his this season and I've seen nothing to suggest otherwise. Happy to stand corrected though

Armitage named Top 14 Player of the Season

http://www.espnscrum.com/france-top-14-2011-12/rugby/story/164073.html

by Triangulation Tue May 15, 2012 2:18 am

timhen wrote:
HongKongCherry wrote: I think in general it's just a case of absence makes the heart grow fonder

Triangulation wrote:

He is pulling up trees. Give him a goddamed chance.

I think that's going over the top somewhat and buying into the journalistic hype.

England desperately need a proper 7 and I would love Armitage to prove me wrong, but I've seen quite a few games of his this season and I've seen nothing to suggest otherwise. Happy to stand corrected though

No. Ignore that. I dont know what i'm talking about. I'm just buying into the hype.

Look ultimately it doesnt even matter that much. With or without him were going to lose all 3 tests.

3-0 to SA with at least one thrashing. You heard it here first.

We might win the midweek games though at a push.

Perhaps we should focus our energies more on those?

Armitage named Top 14 Player of the Season

http://www.espnscrum.com/france-top-14-2011-12/rugby/story/164073.html

by Sponsored content

"Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

"Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!

Re: "Exceptional circumstances"- great news!