Australia vs England - 3 Tests - June 2016

[Geordie]

Whats peoples thoughts on Henry Thomas.

I admit to not seeing every minute of his games recently, but from the times I have seen...he looks like he's got the bit between his teeth and playing some very good stuff at the moment.

If Cole is to be rested...would Thomas not take his place?

Brookes - Thomas

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I was gonna say he looks pretty **** whenever I've seen him this season, compared to last.
Brookes is far better and I'd say Hill is better too.

 

[johnmac99]

Brookes - Thomas

I'd rather see Paul Hill and Brookes

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Mind Hill didn't look great v Wasps either

 

[Geordie]

Ah I forgot about Paul HIll.

Maybe I have only seen the highlights of Thomas and its not accurate.

- - - Updated - - -

The only thing about Brookes is I want to see how he lasts over the full game. With us he struggled to play his type of game for the full 80mins and it was very visible.

That may have improved already with saints, but he needs to be able to do it at international level.

And it will be tested in Australia this summer.

 

[johnmac99]

Mind Hill didn't look great v Wasps either

No-one will look great on the end of a 28-6 drubbing.

Thought his scrummaging was good and strong.

Brookes doesn't look fit at the moment but hopefully that's temporary.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Whats peoples thoughts on Henry Thomas.

I admit to not seeing every minute of his games recently, but from the times I have seen...he looks like he's got the bit between his teeth and playing some very good stuff at the moment.

If Cole is to be rested...would Thomas not take his place?

Brookes - Thomas

His scrummaging still isn't up to scratch. His all round game is better than Hill's but I'd rank Hill as no3 as he's just a pup with lots of potential. But Brookes and Cole are way out ahead.

 

[Geordie]

No-one will look great on the end of a 28-6 drubbing.

Thought his scrummaging was good and strong.

Brookes doesn't look fit at the moment but hopefully that's temporary.

That's his problem. I don't believe he will ever be a player who can play the game people think he can for 80mins.

40 max at best I would say.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Whatever happened to Kyle Sinkler? I don't have BT sport, so not seen much of Harlequins' matches.

 

[stus768]

Whatever happened to Kyle Sinkler? I don't have BT sport, so not seen much of Harlequins' matches.

Adam Jones been starting I believe. He's said he has learnt a lot from him. Not a bad thing imo. He's very young for a prop

 

[ratsapprentice]

Sinckler's as good in the loose as ever, but still has scrummaging issues, I haven't been too many Quins games this season either so can't really say much more than that.

I still hold him up as one of our brightest propping talents along with Hill.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Also haven't seen much this season, but based on previous, if he could just reasonably hold is own in the scrum he would be right up there in England contention

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Like his loose game and his bolshiness but Hill leapfrogging him, and this being the first mention in despatches in ages probably says a lot.

Every Time Ref - We want our tight head's scrummaging to be much more than just holding their own.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Like his loose game and his bolshiness but Hill leapfrogging him, and this being the first mention in despatches in ages probably says a lot.

Every Time Ref - We want our tight head's scrummaging to be much more than just holding their own.

Depends, doesn't it? Whether you want a top notch scrummager who's quiet around the park or are willing to accept a decent scrummager in exchange for gains elsewhere?

Not making a judgement either way, jsut saying he doesn't need to be Adam Jones in the scrum to be useful IF he is a) capable at scrum time and b) good around the park

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Adam Jones isn't exactly the best choice for comparison considering he isn't that great in the scrum any more and is absolutely **** around the park.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

I think you need an all rounder at tight head in today's international game; not just a devastating scrummager who is rubbish in the loose.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Old school Adam Jones. Also, the bit about him being **** around he park was kind of my point

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Old school Adam Jones. Also, the bit about him being **** around he park was kind of my point

I know, it's more my point was he currently doesn't have redeeming scrummaging power, he is just a poor prop who didn't so much as peak and decline, more peaked and then fell off the edge of the cliff.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I think you need an all rounder at tight head in today's international game; not just a devastating scrummager who is rubbish in the loose.

They're few and far between, but if you have a consistently destructive scrummager I'd play them every day. It gives others a platform to play from, wears out the opposition - being stuffed in the scrum impacts on the rest of your game -, makes the scrum an attacking weapon, wins pens, sin binnings etc. That's far more value to the team than half a dozen carries that make 10 metres or the odd flashy offload. Sheridan, who wasn't actually that great a prop, was a good example. For a short period he used to beat Australia single handedly and was dominant against virtually everyone else. No-one really cared what he was like in the wide channels.

The very best can do it all, but there is space for the odd one trick pony if that trick's good enough. But there are very very few scrummagers of that calibre, so yes you generally have to balance out with the wider skill set.

As for Jones / Sinckler. I haven't seen much of either recently, but if a 900 year old declining Hair Bear is being picked above Sinckler whose loose game is light years better then it suggests that someone's prioritising the basics.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

They're few and far between, but if you have a consistently destructive scrummager I'd play them every day. It gives others a platform to play from, wears out the opposition - being stuffed in the scrum impacts on the rest of your game -, makes the scrum an attacking weapon, wins pens, sin binnings etc. That's far more value to the team than half a dozen carries that make 10 metres or the odd flashy offload. Sheridan, who wasn't actually that great a prop, was a good example. For a short period he used to beat Australia single handedly and was dominant against virtually everyone else. No-one really cared what he was like in the wide channels.

The very best can do it all, but there is space for the odd one trick pony if that trick's good enough. But there are very very few scrummagers of that calibre, so yes you generally have to balance out with the wider skill set.

As for Jones / Sinckler. I haven't seen much of either recently, but if a 900 year old declining Hair Bear is being picked above Sinckler whose loose game is light years better then it suggests that someone's prioritising the basics.

Maybe in the old days when you had scrums every 5 minutes, but nowadays with the new scrum engagement sequence, and props being daily replaced after 50 minutes, after emptying the tank, I think the scrum's pre-eminence in the game has slowly been eroded over time. Now rugby union has turned into a quasi- rugby league game where the breakdown and turnover ball is more important. In fact I'd say the line out and mauls are more important than the scrum today.

Hence, why I look st the ABs and Wallabies in the RWC and their props no longer being devastating scrummagers because they have both chosen all rounders who can hold up the scrum, but their mobility in the loose is equally important, which suits their game.

i think that is where the game is going and yes props core duties won't change, but they are no longer there just to destroy the other team's scrum.