DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 141492--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: Yareet
Date: August 21, 2025, 10:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Banstead Quin link ---
>
> Blimey Sharkie, that's a bit nuanced, even for me. Let's just
say back a couple of seasons 😁
>
--- End Quote ---
My point being is that leaving players in their positions would
mean that Baxter would still be a tighthead. Likewise Asher
would just be a tighthead. As the game and players evolve,
coaches can see things that we mere mortals can't.
As I mentioned elsewhere, SA are being praised for the
innovation for turning Kwagga and Andre into hybrid players but
England are criticised for doing the same with Earl, Dombrandt
or even mentioning it for Nowell.
#Post#: 141493--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: TW Quin
Date: August 21, 2025, 10:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: thatchapcarnell link ---
>
> With Isgro, Petti and now Wegner the Stoop is beginning to
become a real Little Buenos Aires.
>
> Going to have to open a mate tea shop soon.
>
> Any other Argies we can attract? Kremer would be a great back
row addition. Justo Piccardo at 105kg is a big lump at centre!
>
--- End Quote ---
It may help there’s two excellent Argentinian steak houses in
Richmond!
#Post#: 141497--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: August 21, 2025, 11:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Yareet link ---
>
> My point being is that leaving players in their positions
would mean that Baxter would still be a tighthead. Likewise
Asher would just be a tighthead. As the game and players evolve,
coaches can see things that we mere mortals can't.
>
> As I mentioned elsewhere, SA are being praised for the
innovation for turning Kwagga and Andre into hybrid players but
England are criticised for doing the same with Earl, Dombrandt
or even mentioning it for Nowell.
>
--- End Quote ---
Wake me when they actually start Kwagga on the wing / in the
centres or Andre on the flanks rather than moving them there in
an emergency for a few minutes.
Besides, their obsession with having so many forwards on the
bench directly contributed to their loss at the weekend.
#Post#: 141499--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: Rocker
Date: August 21, 2025, 12:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Ignoring the argument above.
Great signing, very happy with that. Very good young prop, let's
hope he does better than the last Argie prop we had though....
#Post#: 141502--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: Quinky
Date: August 21, 2025, 1:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: JammyGit link ---
>
> Wake me when they actually start Kwagga on the wing / in the
centres or Andre on the flanks rather than moving them there in
an emergency for a few minutes.
>
> Besides, their obsession with having so many forwards on the
bench directly contributed to their loss at the weekend.
>
--- End Quote ---
Kwagga could do a very good job at centre IMO. Not sure he's
pacy enough for a wing, other than in an emergency. But Italy
picked Bergamasco on the flank and on the wing, and he did both
well. Besides, players convert; Malcolm Marx was a number 8,
Pierre Spies was a winger. And I won't mention that Keith Wood
thought he was a fly half [emoji1]
What cost SA the game on Saturday was over-confidence, against a
very good Aus team IMO.
#Post#: 141504--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: August 21, 2025, 2:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Quinky link ---
>
> Kwagga could do a very good job at centre IMO. Not sure he's
pacy enough for a wing, other than in an emergency. But Italy
picked Bergamasco on the flank and on the wing, and he did both
well. Besides, players convert; Malcolm Marx was a number 8,
Pierre Spies was a winger. And I won't mention that Keith Wood
thought he was a fly half [emoji1]
>
> What cost SA the game on Saturday was over-confidence, against
a very good Aus team IMO.
>
--- End Quote ---
Players convert very early on, generally speaking. Like Marx,
who was a hooker by the time he turned pro. Plenty of young
hookers move to the back row, and vice versa. Pierre Spies I
think was always a backrower but moonlighted on the wing in
emergencies; I don't think he ever started there. Tom Croft
ended up in the backs on occasion during a match. My memory of
Mauro Bergamasco on the wing was that he was deeply mediocre,
and I don't think he scored any points there - it was a short
lived gimmick selection by a desparate head coach short of
quality players. Can't imagine a top-tier rugby nation (or
England) doing it. That's not to say there haven't been players
who are genuinely capable of playing in the backs and the
forwards, but importantly they usually have a lot of experience
of both from a relatively early age...
Kwagga, like Tipuric or Ben Earl, can absolutely do a job as a
12, but would be horrendously exposed if he started there, just
like those two. All 3 players bring the ball skills, pace, and
carrying ability of an international 12 but the decision making
aspects of the position would elude them in attack and defence.
That's why they're talked up as players who _could_ play there,
but only ever did or do so when there's no alternative on the
pitch. You'd never start them there.
The important thing is that all of these players are standouts
in their primary position, and all this chat is just about
making use of their athletic abilities in a weird way in a very
niche situation for a short period of time. Dombrandt has
already ended up playing in the backs for England, for example.
What we don't want to see is players being forced into this
stuff as a gimmick taken so seriously that it impacts their
careers (see Marcus at 15) or it ludicrously unbalancing team
selection because of the idea that emergency options are as good
as genuine cover, let alone specialist players.
Burgess was mentioned earlier - that's a funny one. He was
actually ok at 12 for England, and had he stayed on the field
against Wales, England would have won. It was the idea of him
playing flanker for England that was a bit weirder; as a rugby
league prop he was more like an English crash ball centre
anyway, so it was flanker that was his odd-man-out position.
#Post#: 141509--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: Yareet
Date: August 21, 2025, 3:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: JammyGit link ---
>
> Players convert very early on, generally speaking. Like Marx,
who was a hooker by the time he turned pro. Plenty of young
hookers move to the back row, and vice versa. Pierre Spies I
think was always a backrower but moonlighted on the wing in
emergencies; I don't think he ever started there. Tom Croft
ended up in the backs on occasion during a match. My memory of
Mauro Bergamasco on the wing was that he was deeply mediocre,
and I don't think he scored any points there - it was a short
lived gimmick selection by a desparate head coach short of
quality players. Can't imagine a top-tier rugby nation (or
England) doing it. That's not to say there haven't been players
who are genuinely capable of playing in the backs and the
forwards, but importantly they usually have a lot of experience
of both from a relatively early age...
>
> Kwagga, like Tipuric or Ben Earl, can absolutely do a job as a
12, but would be horrendously exposed if he started there, just
like those two. All 3 players bring the ball skills, pace, and
carrying ability of an international 12 but the decision making
aspects of the position would elude them in attack and defence.
That's why they're talked up as players who _could_ play there,
but only ever did or do so when there's no alternative on the
pitch. You'd never start them there.
>
> The important thing is that all of these players are standouts
in their primary position, and all this chat is just about
making use of their athletic abilities in a weird way in a very
niche situation for a short period of time. Dombrandt has
already ended up playing in the backs for England, for example.
What we don't want to see is players being forced into this
stuff as a gimmick taken so seriously that it impacts their
careers (see Marcus at 15) or it ludicrously unbalancing team
selection because of the idea that emergency options are as good
as genuine cover, let alone specialist players.
>
>
> Burgess was mentioned earlier - that's a funny one. He was
actually ok at 12 for England, and had he stayed on the field
against Wales, England would have won. It was the idea of him
playing flanker for England that was a bit weirder; as a rugby
league prop he was more like an English crash ball centre
anyway, so it was flanker that was his odd-man-out position.
>
--- End Quote ---
I think the fundamental point I disagree with is that the only
possibilities are starter or emergency cover.
There is also the player who is picked as a sub for a position
with the intention of moving him there later in the game -
that’s to say not an emergency but a planned move.
23-man squads are picked based on the ability of a player to do
so.
You may see that as a gimmick but to me it is a reflection of
our ever-evolving game.
6:2 benches are seemingly becoming more prevalent than in
previous seasons. Or rather, they aren’t just used when it’s
going to be a slugfest.
I’m not sure I’d ever seen a 7:1 before Rassie did it. Those
squads almost require a forward who is prepared and able to
cover the backs.
That’s before we start looking at people like Macalou (and
further back Taione) who have started games in both the forwards
and the backs.
#Post#: 141518--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: August 22, 2025, 2:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ummm, saying Boris will be here to cover Baxter while away on
International duty is not necessarily so......
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Rugby_Nations_Championship#:~:text=The%20Nations%20Championship%20is%20a%20planned%20biennial%20international,edition%20set%20to%20take%20place%20in%202026.%20%5B1%5D
#Post#: 141575--------------------------------------------------
Re: new signing annoucement back
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: August 23, 2025, 4:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Yareet link ---
>
> I think the fundamental point I disagree with is that the only
possibilities are starter or emergency cover.
>
> There is also the player who is picked as a sub for a position
with the intention of moving him there later in the game -
that’s to say not an emergency but a planned move.
>
> 23-man squads are picked based on the ability of a player to
do so.
>
> You may see that as a gimmick but to me it is a reflection of
our ever-evolving game.
>
> 6:2 benches are seemingly becoming more prevalent than in
previous seasons. Or rather, they aren’t just used when it’s
going to be a slugfest.
>
> I’m not sure I’d ever seen a 7:1 before Rassie did it. Those
squads almost require a forward who is prepared and able to
cover the backs.
>
> That’s before we start looking at people like Macalou (and
further back Taione) who have started games in both the forwards
and the backs.
>
--- End Quote ---
The moment you put a player on the bench, you have to trust them
to essentially play a full 80. The moment you leave yourself
with only 1 back on the bench, you are essentially saying one of
your forwards can play in the backs for the full game if needed.
I am not denying the existence of true multi skilled players, I
am saying this sort of gimmick where a full time forward is
being asked to spend the time reskilling for these scenarios is
damaging to those players and the players who are losing out on
a squad place as a result.
It's also usually setting teams up for failure, or at least
saddling them with a built in weakness once they start
pretending this is a genuine option rather than emergency cover.
SA aren't an obviously better team for doing 7-1; they have an
Incredible squad and the 7-1 is a psychological ploy more than
anything else.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 4
DIR Previous Page