With all due respect I think he might know a bit more about it than us, no? He has been around a while, seen a few opensides in his time. Watches a bit of rugby now and again. You catch my drift?
Last edited:
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
[2016 RBS Six Nations] Round 1: Scotland vs. England (06/02/2016)
- Thread starter TRF_heineken
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2008
- Messages
- 100,019,949
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Such a ****ing stupid argument.
"Youre not an international coach so you're not allowed an opinion."
"Youre not an international coach so you're not allowed an opinion."
That was never said, so why make things up?
Everyone's allowed an opinion, it's a step further to call the actions of a seasoned coach dumb for doing something you disagree with. If the international coach is dumb, what does that make the armchair superstar?
Simply put, it's not "dumb" not to have a so-called specialist 7. Plenty of teams have gone this route over the years.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 11,723
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Such comments imply coaches can't actually make stupid mistakes.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2008
- Messages
- 100,019,949
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
People said the exact same when everyone was slating Lancaster.
How'd that turn out?
How'd that turn out?
That's something you've erroneously implied yourself.
I take exception to the notion that the only way to play is with a specialist 7 and that any other course of action is "dumb" because it patently isn't true.
It's all the more perplexing when it's some fan insulting the guy who has been around specialist opensides most of his career and in fact discovered one of the best opensides of this era. He might, just might not be dumb, and happen to know what he's doing.
- - - Updated - - -
Oh yes, Lancaster with that long list of glowing accomplishments that saw him hired ahead of Nick Mallett & Wayne Smith. Slightly different kettle of fish I would've thought.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2008
- Messages
- 100,019,949
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Why? All the best countries and clubs pick opensides.
England are the only one who actively ignore opensides, and it's no coincidence that we are comfortably the worst tier 1 nation at the breakdown.
I bet most tier 2 would do us as well (Fiji did).
Argentina, France, South Africa, England, Ireland...? they have all picked 6.5s over the years. There's obviously more than one way to skin a cat or they wouldn't do it.
Don't get me wrong, if there was a Pocock then I'd advocate his selection and I'd imagine Jones would pick him in a heartbeat, but there isn't, there's a Kvesic. You don't want to be in the situation where you're picking an inferior player just because he's a certain type of player.
I think where we part on this is the confidence in the coach. It has been put to Jones by the press in interviews about picking a traditional openside, and he has literally explained how it doesn't work as many think it does.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 11,723
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
ON what basis is Kvesic inferior? He hasn't had any chance to show either way but at club level frequently outperforms his opposite number, including those who have played for England or other international teams. Rokodoguni has 1 cap yet I highly doubt people could claim he is a worse winger than Ashton. Brown went ages without England caps at Fullback and the first time he got them, he won man of the 6N. Jones has apparently said he didn't rate Kvesic because his carrying wasn't good enough yet stats show he carries better than Haskell or Robshaw. He consistantly tops the tables for turnovers won and that doesn't include all the penalties he makes opposition concede for breakdown infringements. He is a similar height and weight to one of the best opensides in rugby history. Just what exactly is there to suggest he would not be better than the incumbants?
Last edited:
In the coach's opinion. It was a hypothetical statement. I wasn't saying he is inferior* merely outlining a trap that a coach would not want to fall into. It may be that Jones wants to see more of Kvesic before debuting him, he hasn't jumped in with both feet on that front - a policy I think is sensible at this stage.
*to Haskell, not Pocock, he is obviously inferior to Pocock
- - - Updated - - -
Out of interest, have you guys read Jones's responses when questioned about the breakdown and importance of a traditional openside? Are his justifications not satisfactory or do you still flat-out think he's wrong? I have some trust in his judgement, he hasn't (as yet) given me any reason to doubt him.
Just on Jones, he is reportedly not dogmatic, in that he won't bullheadedly stick to a certain tactic when it isn't working, i.e. if Haskell flops, he'll cut him.
Last edited:
Personally, Jones is a clear and obvious pedlar of media games and disinformation. I don't fully believe what comes out of his mouth and I mean that in a complimentary way.
I believe that he's not dogmatic and I believe he's fully alive to the importance of the breakdown. He's reportedly not happy on the breakdown. Where he ends up on this issue I don't know. But, right now, things don't make too much sense to me, and the omission of Kvesic is one of those things. And I'm not a fully signed up believer in Kvesic either.
Similar threads
