• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2018 Six Nations] England Squad

T Curry - 6 foot 1 - 102kg - 19 y/o

B Curry - 6 foot 2 - 102kg - 19 y/o

As identical twins I find it surprising, verging on unbelievable that they are an inch different in height. (would assume they have been on a pretty similar diet given their rugby ambitions, unless of course their parents/Sale are conducting some interesting experiments)
 
As identical twins I find it surprising, verging on unbelievable that they are an inch different in height. (would assume they have been on a pretty similar diet given their rugby ambitions, unless of course their parents/Sale are conducting some interesting experiments)
Yes, I was about to comment, of course an injury or something like that could have stunted Tom's growth
 
As identical twins I find it surprising, verging on unbelievable that they are an inch different in height. (would assume they have been on a pretty similar diet given their rugby ambitions, unless of course their parents/Sale are conducting some interesting experiments)

Bear in mind rounding. I.e. one could be 6'1.49 and the other 6'1.5
 
There is a slight difference in their height which is clear when they're interviewed together, surprising I know.

Edit - badly worded.
 
There could be only 1-2mm difference and still be 6'1" and 6'2" respectively.
 
Sort of shows the difference here.
 

Attachments

  • 93842792-5247-4C2C-9D77-71F67132C6E6.jpeg
    93842792-5247-4C2C-9D77-71F67132C6E6.jpeg
    58.7 KB · Views: 22
What is the description of what makes a no.6?(and dont say blindside flanker lol) We talk so much about 7. And just put robshaw or underhill at 6. But whats makes a good 6 on paper different to a 7.
 
What is the description of what makes a no.6?(and dont say blindside flanker lol) We talk so much about 7. And just put robshaw or underhill at 6. But whats makes a good 6 on paper different to a 7.

On paper for me a good 6 is a massive workhorse, the kind of player that will tackle all game, hit rucks hard and run into traffic. (Basically Tom Croft).
 
What is the description of what makes a no.6?(and dont say blindside flanker lol) We talk so much about 7. And just put robshaw or underhill at 6. But whats makes a good 6 on paper different to a 7.

Big Strong bloke, makes lots of tackles, clears lots of rucks, more than fair share of carrying, often a lineout option, goes for turnovers but often not to the same extent as a 7.

Richard Hill vs Neil Back is probably the best examples of two players being exactly what their position asked of them, in the same back row. Size wise, and in terms of their qualities.
 
Robshaw, Haskell, Armand, Ewers, M.Williams all good examples of English Options at 6, arguably Underhill too.
 
Carl Fearns is the best English option at 6, don't @ me


Shame he couldn't take even vague criticism from EJ
 
Sounds a lot more Underhill than Robshaw.

Sounds a lot more like Courtney Lawes than either to me.

As Olyy did highlight though, Carl Fearns is an absolute beast of a blindside. One of the hardest men going but yeh, didn't like the criticism...
 
On paper for me a good 6 is a massive workhorse, the kind of player that will tackle all game, hit rucks hard and run into traffic. (Basically Tom Croft).

From your description that sounds like simmonds, last time he played for england at 8 he made 24 tackles amd had a really high workrate, hes good at the rucks but is not a jackler, and is a strong carrier. With hughes and billy for 8 should he be put on the list for 6 not 7 as we have been? I know we are talking on paper here as i cant see robshaw and underhill been dropped to put simmonds at 6.
 
Sounds a lot more Underhill than Robshaw.

It is.

If Robshaw was faster he'd be a great 7.
If he was more physical he'd be a great 6.

As it is, he's a great player, but doesn't really fit either of the traditional flanker roles.

Underhill could play either... at the moment, he's more a 6 than 7, but if he was given the responsibility to be a bit more of a link player for club or country, I think he'd be a 7 comfortably.
 
Simmonds is like Sean McMahon for Australia. Can play across the back row and will slot in where needed. For me though, he's not destructive enough in the tackle or dominant enough clearing out to be the 'traditional' 6
 
Sounds a lot more like Courtney Lawes than either to me.

As Olyy did highlight though, Carl Fearns is an absolute beast of a blindside. One of the hardest men going but yeh, didn't like the criticism...

Nah... not physical enough. He can smash people with missile tackles, but he doesn't have that whole "wrestler strength" thing.
You see some guys who seem to be built from stone, guys like Fearns, Underhill, Kaino, Alberts... they just have a very unusual strength/physicality that is hard to describe.

Physicality/abrasiveness really is the hallmark of a good 6 in my mind. That might be partly because that was my schtick when I played, I had ***s for hands, but I could tackle/wrestle/ruck far more intuitively than most people.
 
Nah... not physical enough. He can smash people with missile tackles, but he doesn't have that whole "wrestler strength" thing.
You see some guys who seem to be built from stone, guys like Fearns, Underhill, Kaino, Alberts... they just have a very unusual strength/physicality that is hard to describe.

Fair enough. Underhill for me has the potential to be a top top 6 but I don't see enough of him in the loose ball in hand or running intelligent lines. He's got a lot of time to work on that aspect of his game though.
 

Latest posts

Top