[2014 Mid-Year Tests] England

[ratsapprentice]

There are also a few players already of age at Gloucester, who I can see getting very good under a decent coach. Gareth Evans and Tom Savage in particular.

Oh, yeah... goes without saying - the backs included.

Just checked out the Glos academy page to see who Hill is - that Reece Broughton lad looks like the kid from American History X.

So, yes totally unfair just to pick on his stature as the cause for his 1st half 3test performance; that's just a mark and comment given by a journalist straight after the game, without any proper thought

A totally erroneous comment, which a lot of casual rugby fans will take at face value and judge Kyle on in the future.

 

[Maverick1987]

A totally erroneous comment, which a lot of casual rugby fans will take at face value and judge Kyle on in the future.

I truly hope it's not kyles last game in an England shirt .

He's class . Maybe he needs to move from bath to really show it . I for one would love Leicester to get him . Would be great to get him and Manu together all the time even if Lancaster wants to overlook him

 

[TheSaffycen]

It's so annoying with the talk of size when it doesn't matter. In the forwards I can see how size matters if you look at Thomas and Wilson you can clearly see a problem with size, I dont think its important in the backs. Too me the ability to cover ground is so much more important and to have a great rugby brain. Eastmond might have been run around a few times but he still had the pace which both 36 and Barritt couldn't recover from. I say it all the time someone with a creative mind is so much more important than a gym monkey. Everyone would rather have Conrad Smith over Banahan.

 

[goodNumber10]

It's so annoying with the talk of size when it doesn't matter. In the forwards I can see how size matters if you look at Thomas and Wilson you can clearly see a problem with size, I dont think its important in the backs. Too me the ability to cover ground is so much more important and to have a great rugby brain. Eastmond might have been run around a few times but he still had the pace which both 36 and Barritt couldn't recover from. I say it all the time someone with a creative mind is so much more important than a gym monkey. Everyone would rather have Conrad Smith over Banahan.

Is about getting the happy balance and Smith isn't exactly small though is he?

Importantly NZ don't defend square they play a drift, so it's a less aggressive style of tackling. It's about isolating attackers and getting turn over to counter on.

England get off the line early to beat the gain line and look for aggressive hits that send a team backwards until they surrender possession.

Eastmond is not suited to this style of defending, so he needs to get up early and low as Burns did in test one. Eastmond tackles, he's scramble tackling in test 3 was good but he's not going to stop a big 110kg monster running down his channel by going high as he did.

He got it wrong in the last test that doesn't mean he's suddenly a bad player but his indecision was a major factor in why we were so porous.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Is about getting the happy balance and Smith isn't exactly small though is he?

Importantly NZ don't defend square they play a drift, so it's a less aggressive style of tackling. It's about isolating attackers and getting turn over to counter on.

England get off the line early to beat the gain line and look for aggressive hits that send a team backwards until they surrender possession.

Eastmond is not suited to this style of defending, so he needs to get up early and low as Burns did in test one. Eastmond tackles, he's scramble tackling in test 3 was good but he's not going to stop a big 110kg monster running down his channel by going high as he did.

He got it wrong in the last test that doesn't mean he's suddenly a bad player but his indecision was a major factor in why we were so porous

Smith is 95kg's which nowadays is pretty small ! But the point i was making is that the brain is better than the brawn, and i think that Eastmond has that. In the first test Eastmond wasn't a problem but in the 3rd we where just far too open. The 10-12 looked like they wanted to play drift where as the 13-14 were playing the blitz and the all blacks exploited the space not Eastmonds tackling, i can't remember any of our players making tackels so Eastmonds tackling isn't anything to focus on. At the end of the day we looked most dangerous in the first test when Eastmond got on the ball and i think Eastmond- Tuilagi combo should be tried more.

 

[goodNumber10]

Smith is 6'1" 95kg.
Nonu is 6' and 105kg.

He is 15kg heavier than eastmond, Nonu is 25kg heavier. Hell I'm 4kg heavier than eastmond.

If you don't think that makes a difference in defence you are deluded.

*edit - that deluded comment isn't aimed directly at you Saffy

Smith is 95kg's which nowadays is pretty small ! But the point i was making is that the brain is better than the brawn, and i think that Eastmond has that. In the first test Eastmond wasn't a problem but in the 3rd we where just far too open. The 10-12 looked like they wanted to play drift where as the 13-14 were playing the blitz and the all blacks exploited the space not Eastmonds tackling, i can't remember any of our players making tackels so Eastmonds tackling isn't anything to focus on. At the end of the day we looked most dangerous in the first test when Eastmond got on the ball and i think Eastmond- Tuilagi combo should be tried more.

It was a problem in the first test as well.

Burns got it right in the first test, he got off the line and cut Nonu down - why did Eastmond suddenly decide he couldn't do the same in this test? The answer is he didn't it was an issue in the first test but just wasn't exploited as the Ab's hadn't picked up on it.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Jonny Wilkinson 89kg and one of the greatest defenders Englands had.

 

[Big Ewis]

Jonny Wilkinson 89kg and one of the greatest defenders Englands had.

hilarious to think that he actually could make a cameo return as the starting 10 for England in the coming RWC, at 35 (would be 36 then). If he wouldn't shine, that's *IF*, he would at least not disappoint, even at that level. I guarantee he could, if he kept in shape and trained with ENG. He'd be a bit shaky MAYBE against Fiji in the first pool game, and eventually would get to the right level.

 

[welshglory]

Jonny Wilkinson 89kg and one of the greatest defenders Englands had.

5"7 and a midfielder. Pretty important things to consider

 

[goodNumber10]

Jonny Wilkinson 89kg and one of the greatest defenders Englands had.

Was waiting for that one....

Wilkinson was at his most prominent in a time before the behemoth's of today's game, he also did serious damage to his body from his tackle techniques and essentially is the exception to the rule.

The point is you can coach skills but you can't coach size or ability... And a big skilful guy will always beat a small skilful guy.

 

[j-dawg]

Disagree. Jason Robinson.

 

[goodNumber10]

Disagree. Jason Robinson.

Disagree all you want. Do you think Robinson would have been as effective against saves our lomu?

There are exceptions to the rules but Eastmond isn't one of them

 

[j-dawg]

I think Robinson would have been as effective against anyone. Lomu was also an 'exception to the rule', size for the most part hinders speed and agility.

What I am saying has nothing to do with Eastmond.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Was waiting for that one....

Wilkinson was at his most prominent in a time before the behemoth's of today's game, he also did serious damage to his body from his tackle techniques and essentially is the exception to the rule.

The point is you can coach skills but you can't coach size or ability... And a big skilful guy will always beat a small skilful guy.

In some aspects they will beat smaller guys and in others the smallers guys will beat them. Benson Stanley is under 100kg and 6ft, still one of the best defenders in the world. Pocock is 6ft, Seymour 5ft11, Hooper 6ft. All flankers- Hooper and Seymour under 100kg. Also the bigger guy always beats the smaller ones ? You might want to look at the Australian backline. Toomua, Beale, Cooper, Ashley-Cooper, Lealiifano, Horne all under 100kg's.

 

[goodNumber10]

I think Robinson would have been as effective against anyone. Lomu was also an 'exception to the rule', size for the most part hinders speed and agility.

What I am saying has nothing to do with Eastmond.

Well considering that is exactly where the discussion started it has everything to do with eastmond.

Lomu was agile and fast so god knows where you think his size was a hindrance. *edit: just seen that's not what you were saying*

In some aspects they will beat smaller guys and in others the smallers guys will beat them. Benson Stanley is under 100kg and 6ft, still one of the best defenders in the world. Pocock is 6ft, Seymour 5ft11, Hooper 6ft. All flankers- Hooper and Seymour under 100kg. Also the bigger guy always beats the smaller ones ? You might want to look at the Australian backline. Toomua, Beale, Cooper, Ashley-Cooper, Lealiifano, Horne all under 100kg's.

I never said little guys couldn't be good defenders or beat big guys, but we're talking about defending and i just said they are less effective at stopping people on the tackle line (or at least that's what i'm getting at).

Regardless lets look at the guys you've mentioned,

Benson stanley is 98kg,
David Pocock is 104kg
Hooper is 97kg
Ashley-Cooper - 98kg
Lealiifano - 95kg

So yes under 100kg, well done (not that i ever said 100kg was the cut off) they are not giving up 20-30kg each time they take the field like eastmond is, the entire England midfield excluding easmtond is around the 106-110kg weight category, so someone like Stanley is giving up 6-7 kg not 20-30kg.

Beale is 90kg and a sh*t defender so hardly a great example.

Toomua is the odd one out because he's under 90kg and a destructive tackler in a way that Eastmond has never been - so you're not really doing your Eastmond is a effective defender argument any good here because Tommua shows how ti should be done - he's hardly the norm though and the NZ and Australian teams play a drift defence not a square on defence.

The question is does Eastmonds attacking skills outweigh his defensive deficiencies? I dunno, maybe.... but I'd say there is less of a differential between 36 or barretts defense and their creative skills than Eastmonds, i.e. they are more solid all round players than eastmond.

Look, we're getting bogged down in the detail, you can bring up individuals to try and pick holes in the arguments but wingers don't play and defend in midfield so Robinson is irrelevant to this discussion, Wilkinson was an anomaly and no one tackles like that anymore (or seldomly does).

Eastmond is a technically sound tackler, so is George Ford, but both of them are passive momentum tacklers which is not what England want. So unless Farrells going to change the whole defensive system just to accommodate Eastmond this is all redundant.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Lomu was agile and fast so god knows where you think his size was a hindrance.

He literally said the opposite.
He said Lomu's an exception because he size didn't ​screw with his speed/agility.

 

[goodNumber10]

He literally said the opposite.
He said Lomu's an exception because he size didn't ​screw with his speed/agility.

yes, hence my edit saying:

*edit: just seen that's not what you were saying*

 

[j-dawg]

Well considering that is exactly where the discussion started it has everything to do with eastmond.

World War two started with the invasion of Poland. Had very little to do with the rest of it.

What I am saying is, a big guy does not always beat the small guy given an even skill set. It is purely individual vs individual, you cannot average something like that. Eastmond is a smaller guy and that is as far as his involvement in my point, very little to do with Eastmond.

 

[goodNumber10]

World War two started with the invasion of Poland. Had very little to do with the rest of it.

Jesus wept!

What I am saying is, a big guy does not always beat the small guy given an even skill set. It is purely individual vs individual, you cannot average something like that. Eastmond is a smaller guy and that is as far as his involvement in my point, very little to do with Eastmond.

of course it's not an exact science, but it's highly likely that given an even skill set the bigger heavier guy will win out - certainly in defence or in collision management - which is what this entire discussion is about.

Rugby is a game of momentum, attackers trying to gain it, defenders trying to stop it, if a defender consistently lets the opposition gain momentum then he is ineffective - certainly at elite level. Smaller guys will the majority of the time give the opposition team momentum, that's just a fact of the game. You can all claim it doesn't matter but it does.

Here is a question, who would you rather have defending in a one on one against Nonu 5 out form the line? Tuilagi or Eastmond, and why?

 

[TheSaffycen]

I never said little guys couldn't be good defenders or beat big guys, but we're talking about defending and i just said they are less effective at stopping people on the tackle line (or at least that's what i'm getting at).

Really....

And a big skilful guy will always beat a small skilful guy.

The point i was making is that Australia with a smaller more skillful backline is one of the best teams in the world, last year was poor but on average they are 2nd best in the world.

Toomua is the odd one out because he's under 90kg and a destructive tackler in a way that Eastmond has never been - so you're not really doing your Eastmond is a effective defender argument any good here because Tommua shows how ti should be done - he's hardly the norm though and the NZ and Australian teams play a drift defence not a square on defence.

Never said he was a destructive defender just making the point that size doesn't matter, you don't need to be 110kg + to be a good defender. In the first test Eastmond wasn't a problem and i think it was the system that failed not the players in the third, that was my original comment.