England's back line

[ratsapprentice]

the 6 battle would be better for him if he were to go in the forwards, or he could discover he is a beast at turnovering rucks and go in at 7.

It would be insane if that actually happened - it is within the realms of possibility though, jackaling is instinctive to a certain extent, and he may turn out to be pretty good at it.
Unlikely to be outstanding in that regard though, going on the relative paucity of players who can consistently do it.

 

[Peat]

Must be honest I think it would be a waste using him as a lock. He doesn't know what a lineout is and even though he's a big guy he isn't big enough in my opinion. Being 6 foot 5 he obviously is a big bloke but I think really you need to be a bit taller or less bulky so you can spring up quickly like Croft or Lawes, also I don't want him using his energy pushing in the scrum, I want him running at people off set piece ball. The more I see of the guy he should play at 12, he has pace and footwork which makes no sense for a 6ft5-18st monster

Uhm... the lineout thing is a massive red herring. There are plenty of locks who aren't used much as jumpers, there are plenty of packs who work with shorter heavy locks like Burgess would be, and you could always just stand him in the backs come lineout time, plenty of teams remove a couple of forwards after all. Which is the primary source of set-piece ball anyway; how many scrums a match produce usable ball? England only won 44 of their own scrums in their last 8 matches going by ESPN stats, of which there's no mention how many we won by scrummaging until penalty, or how many we scraped bad ball out of before it went down.

And if he can push a scrum as hard as Brad Thorn could, there's probably a good argument for him using his energy there. Not like he won't have plenty of energy left.

 

[ratsapprentice]

When he was first announced I was fairly undecided about where he'd play - I'd only ever really seen highlight videos and loosely watched some of the RLWC.

I'm now pretty unequivocal in seeing him as a forward.

Unless he specialists as an 8, which is entirely possible, then I see no reason why he can't take on the increasingly common role of 4/6.
...A bit like Itoje (who is actually shorter than Sam) I think we are going to see more and more players like that.
Tom Croft was one of the first to do it fully, and while guys like Itoje and Burgess might not have quite the sort of top end pace Croft has, they are certainly fast enough to be backs.
What they have over Croft is their size - they aren't small by anyone's standards.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Shame bath didn't go for Thorn he could certainly have thought Burgess a thing or two.

Well not a shame but you know what I mean.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I have a lot of faith in the coaching department - the technical work they've done with Kyle has been outstanding.
Take the time to check out his body position at the ruck - i know he's short so it's easier, but his technique is great.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't think of another convert who has had as much support from players/coaches with RL experience - that's got to count for something.

Let's hope Brad doesn't mind having a coffee with him!

 

[goodNumber10]

I have a lot of faith in the coaching department - the technical work they've done with Kyle has been outstanding.
Take the time to check out his body position at the ruck - i know he's short so it's easier, but his technique is great.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't think of another convert who has had as much support from players/coaches with RL experience - that's got to count for something.

Let's hope Brad doesn't mind having a coffee with him!

I keep hearing this about Eastmond, and Flatman made the point in Rugby World, but he doesn't seem to shift bodies the way I'd expect from such a proficient rucker. He does get in a decent defensive position over the ball, low shoulders, chin up etc... but I kind of expected him to be blowing past the space the way people talk..

though I do recall he's pretty competent at the can opener.

 

[ratsapprentice]

He does get in a decent defensive position over the ball,

That's exactly what I'm saying.

He doesn't shift bodies because he's tiny and it's not really his job to.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Uhm... the lineout thing is a massive red herring. There are plenty of locks who aren't used much as jumpers, there are plenty of packs who work with shorter heavy locks like Burgess would be, and you could always just stand him in the backs come lineout time, plenty of teams remove a couple of forwards after all. Which is the primary source of set-piece ball anyway; how many scrums a match produce usable ball? England only won 44 of their own scrums in their last 8 matches going by ESPN stats, of which there's no mention how many we won by scrummaging until penalty, or how many we scraped bad ball out of before it went down.

And if he can push a scrum as hard as Brad Thorn could, there's probably a good argument for him using his energy there. Not like he won't have plenty of energy left.

If he isn't jumping then isn't that more of a hindrance ? It limits the amount of players that will actually compete in the air and makes it harder for you trying to get clean ball. And with the scrum ball, that's the point, if you have **** ball then give it too sam and you are already over line. I'm not against Burgess being a lock but i believe he would be more of an asset in the centres where he has lots of space to run at people.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Him being at centre doesn't allow him to get involved in the game as much - pretty much every forward position has significantly more involvement in the game than all the outside backs.

 

[Peat]

If he isn't jumping then isn't that more of a hindrance ? It limits the amount of players that will actually compete in the air and makes it harder for you trying to get clean ball. And with the scrum ball, that's the point, if you have **** ball then give it too sam and you are already over line. I'm not against Burgess being a lock but i believe he would be more of an asset in the centres where he has lots of space to run at people.

I am mildly confused as to what exactly you mean there re the lineout.

And it's a rarity to see poor scrum ball reach the centres. Most of the time the 8 ends up taking it into their flankers and staying up long enough for support to arrive. If it does get out, about a third of the time you want to boot the ball away anyway so that's what someone will do. I suppose the rest of the time, then yeah, it'd be nice to have him,but that's a corner case.

In any case, I am convinced that the most valuable use of Burgess will be in the tight collisions. He has the level of physicality where you can see him winning a lot more of those than he loses and forcing oppo forwards to gang tackle him, like Billy Vunipola does. Players like that are rarer than intact hymens in a south London compehensive. If he can do it, he pretty much has to. It's simply too valuable an ability not to use, no matter what other abilities he might have. It'd be cool if he can pop up to run at people in space as well but, lesbihonest, plenty of people can do that. Any plan for Burgess should, imo, be based on this logic.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

If Burgess gets to grip with the breakdown and can use his strength and raw power in the rucks, then with Croft at 6 who is IMO the best line out operator in the game and whoever his the other lock is to focus on the line out as main options. I don't see the problem with that tbh.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Yep, Burgess becoming really ****ing good at the breakdown might almost make up for Croft's ineptitude there.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Yep, Burgess becoming really ****ing good at the breakdown might almost make up for Croft's ineptitude there.

Why you little.....

Croft does work in the breakdown... Nope I'm not falling for it.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Oh... he tries... but there isn't much you can do when a twiglet could pass as your sibling.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Oh... he tries... but there isn't much you can do when a twiglet could pass as your sibling.

Well shame ford has decided burgess is a centre as we won't see them facing off.

Suppose the RFU have had they say to bath on the matter.

Manu will sort him out.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Sam will actually be closer to Croft in the centres.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Touché.

 

[winger11]

Touché.

I sent you a pm, not sure if you got it?

 

[Crapspray]

I don't know if this has come up yet, re Burgess:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...tar-Sam-Burgess-by-playing-him-at-centre.html

Torygraph has Ford saying he wants him as an 8, but an agreement with the RFU will see him start as a centre. With Ford quoted in the article saying "Bruce paid for him and he's our player", it would certainly seem he'll end up in the pack. Sensible plan, but will England want to give him up at 12 if he does well? Especially with Ewers, Morgan, and Vunipola having 8 covered for the foreseeable future.

 

[Peat]

What England/Lancaster wants doesn't come into it.