[Six Nations 2018] Round 1: Italy Vs England (04/02/2018)

[Reiser99]

For me we need more discipline and more competition at the break down. Once Italy had made a break, we were too slow to react and struggled to get back into position, which then often led to more breaks, especially out wide. As for when people say who would they take from another nation, I'd take Ireland's discipline. They are superb and rarely give away kickable penalties. England really need to tighten up there so that they don't give teams easy points. However we played well overall, attack looked sharp. I'm hoping it was a bit of rustiness and that England can push on to the next level, next week.

As for Italy they were brilliant, far better side than in the Autumn. Connor O'shea is definitely on the right path. They looked like a team playing together, rather than individuals trying to make something happen. They made good decisions and their fitness has improved massively. I hope they give everyone else just as good a game, because it will be great for the tournament and great for us.

 

[MikeTheNative]

It's the back row that was an issue, Lawes is a great player but not an international 6, Robshaw get's through a lot of work but is not a 7. Sam Simmonds had a dream debut and played very well but that back row doesn't have the balance. Italy's two flankers had 4 caps I think between them but showed up Robshaw and Lawes. Clinical performance as ever from England though, I think they are probably better off with Brown injured to give Watson a chance at FB. Backs still look incredibly dangerous even if there is question marks in the pack.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I didn't think much of lawes either tbh,
Robshaw did his usual work but, as you say, the balance is terrible.
The thing is, though, until Hughes or Billy is back we don't have anyone to come in at 8. The only other 8 close to the EPS is Mercer and he's not going to get dropped in to the backrow for the Wales game, and I don't think a Robshaw/Simmonds/Mercer backrow is particularly more balanced at this stage

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Underhill, Simmonds and Mercer does have a nice balance to it, but way too green. If Mercer's fit there'd be an argument for bringing him on to the bench instead of Kruis.

Expecting same starting back row for Wales.

 

[MikeTheNative]

I don't understand why Jones didn't pick a guy who may not have many caps but is a lot more experienced, like Armand for example. Navadi and Shingler don't have too many caps but are experienced at European rugby level and have come straight into the team and done well. I tend to think that if your good enough your old enough but it may be a step too far for a Underhill/ Simmonds/Mercer back row.

 

[ncurd]

The only two changes I could conceiveable see happening for Wales (apart from Care for Youngs) is JJ<->Te'o and May<->Nowell

I'd like to see Nowell for Brown but don't think think that will happen and same for Hartley and George.

As for blooding the new guys it would happened last weekend properly if it was going to happen we are not going to give up a third championship chance by trying untested guys no matter how good they are at European level. If we try new things it will be in the Saffer tour and the AI's but I honestly doubt we will see many changes unless its injury/suspension enforced and the only permently if that guys shines like Simmons did yesterday.

 

[MikeTheNative]

There's a difference between blooding new guys by breaking up a good back row and giving one a chance because your current one isn't working.

 

[Which Tyler]

There's a difference between blooding new guys by breaking up a good back row and giving one a chance because your current one isn't working.

This; with the addition of injuries.
Simmonds took to international rugby like a duck to water; so I've no problem playing him alongside another rookie now. I'd certainly bring Mercer onto the bench for Wales and introduce him gradually from there. As it is; I'd be very tempted to push Itoje to the bench, pair Lawes with Launch, and start Robshaw, Simmonds and Mercer as my backrow. There's no particularly beefy hard carrier there; but it's not like that's Lawes' forte either, and absent Billy, we don't really have anyone who's great at that; whilst Simmonds looks a flanker every day of the week (hardly surprising as it seems to be where he played all his rugby before this season). Mercer is an 8 in the Faletau mold - which is hardly a bad thing. He'll make ground in the tight by using his feet and shifting his weight, but he won't blast through players. With 2 more rapid guy in the backrow, we should be able to contest better at the ruck.
My main concern with Mercer is that he still hasn't got his head 100% around the fact that he can't blast through people at adult level, and still tries to do a touch too much. Which is why he takes a few matches to get used to things at each step up, and why I'd be moe comfortable giving him half a dozen bench appearances first; however, needs must, and there's not much in it between that compromise, and the compromise of Lawes at 6.

 

[MarkyH]

This; with the addition of injuries.
Simmonds took to international rugby like a duck to water; so I've no problem playing him alongside another rookie now. I'd certainly bring Mercer onto the bench for Wales and introduce him gradually from there. As it is; I'd be very tempted to push Itoje to the bench, pair Lawes with Launch, and start Robshaw, Simmonds and Mercer as my backrow. There's no particularly beefy hard carrier there; but it's not like that's Lawes' forte either, and absent Billy, we don't really have anyone who's great at that; whilst Simmonds looks a flanker every day of the week (hardly surprising as it seems to be where he played all his rugby before this season). Mercer is an 8 in the Faletau mold - which is hardly a bad thing. He'll make ground in the tight by using his feet and shifting his weight, but he won't blast through players. With 2 more rapid guy in the backrow, we should be able to contest better at the ruck.
My main concern with Mercer is that he still hasn't got his head 100% around the fact that he can't blast through people at adult level, and still tries to do a touch too much. Which is why he takes a few matches to get used to things at each step up, and why I'd be moe comfortable giving him half a dozen bench appearances first; however, needs must, and there's not much in it between that compromise, and the compromise of Lawes at 6.

I agree with a lot of what your saying here, interesting to read too. You've seen a lot more of Mercer than I have and while he's a decent carrier and no slouch I see him similar in a way to Moriarty for Wales as an 8 who might not have that many stand out attributes, but no real weakness either. I think they are quite similar in height and weight also. What would you say his strengths could be? And how is he around the breakdown?

 

[Which Tyler]

As I say - think of him as being Faletau Jr; who's training with Faletau; and getting some game-time across the backrow... alongside Faletau.
What he hasn't got yet, is enough experience of being an adult amongst adults; he's still a bit too accustomed to being a big kid amongst other kids. His footwork is absolutely fantastic; and he's really learned off... well, Faletau; how to lunge forward to take contact, and semi-bounce the tackler, but to then backpeddal or spin his way past. He's big enough to do it (still lacking a good 5-10kg IMO), but thinks he's big enough to do that, and then carry on through as he expecte the tackler to fall off, rather than adjust and go again, or have backup arriving in double-quick time.
When he moves his point of contact in the tackle, and gets half-through he ties in defencers, and has a pretty good offload; and it really is that footwork that sets him apart IMO.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I think in the future Mercer will probably be looked at by England as a 6 more than an 8. At 105kg he doesn't have the size that EJ wants in his 8 options, although looking at him I'd have thought that he could get ~7kg more on him without it faulting the rest of his game.

 

[Which Tyler]

I think Mercer would top out around 115kg - ish before starting to compromise his game, can certainly reach 110kg without any problems* and could probably reach 120kg if you didn't mind sacrificing some agility and acceleration.
As for Eddie - what does he actually want at 8?
England have 1 single world class player; who is a very specific type of #8; and he gets picked when fit. Is that because Edie wants Billy's type of #8 or because Billy is by far and away our best option at #8?
When Billy was initially unavailable, the next best #8 we had was Hughes - who plays differently, but is also a big lad, but again, that decision was kinda forced. With Mercer and Simmonds he would actually have options (though neither currently close to being as good as Billy) - which I would see as best being used off the bench until they're up and running, and fully tested / trusted at international level - or being played on the flank, where Simmonds specialises.
Playing Mercer at 6 long-term would be a waste of his talents IMO, much like playing Lawes at 6, Robshaw at 7, or Simmonds at 8 - they can all do the job, but it's not what they're best at.


* for comparison:
Zach Mercer: 190cm; 105 kg (BMI: 29.09) - probably more by now, I think he's added a bit this season
Sam Simmonds: 184cm; 103kg (BMI: 30.42)

Louis Picamoles: 192cm; 116kg (BMI: 31.47)
Sergio Parisse: 196cm; 112kg (BMI: 29.15)
Kieran Read: 193cm; 110kg (BMI: 29.53)
Jamie Heaslip: 192cm; 110kg (BMI: 29.84)
Taupe Faletau: 189cm; 110kg (BMI: 30.79)
David Pocock: 183cm; 103kg (BMI: 30.76)

Nathan Hughes: 196cm; 125kg (BMI: 32.54)
Billy Vunipola: 188cm; 130kg (BMI: 36.78)

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I think Mercer would top out around 115kg - ish before starting to compromise his game, can certainly reach 110kg without any problems* and could probably reach 120kg if you didn't mind sacrificing some agility and acceleration.
As for Eddie - what does he actually want at 8?
England have 1 single world class player; who is a very specific type of #8; and he gets picked when fit. Is that because Edie wants Billy's type of #8 or because Billy is by far and away our best option at #8?
When Billy was initially unavailable, the next best #8 we had was Hughes - who plays differently, but is also a big lad, but again, that decision was kinda forced. With Mercer and Simmonds he would actually have options (though neither currently close to being as good as Billy) - which I would see as best being used off the bench until they're up and running, and fully tested / trusted at international level - or being played on the flank, where Simmonds specialises.
Playing Mercer at 6 long-term would be a waste of his talents IMO, much like playing Lawes at 6, Robshaw at 7, or Simmonds at 8 - they can all do the job, but it's not what they're best at.


* for comparison:
Zach Mercer: 190cm; 105 kg (BMI: 29.09) - probably more by now, I think he's added a bit this season
Sam Simmonds: 184cm; 103kg (BMI: 30.42)

Louis Picamoles: 192cm; 116kg (BMI: 31.47)
Sergio Parisse: 196cm; 112kg (BMI: 29.15)
Kieran Read: 193cm; 110kg (BMI: 29.53)
Jamie Heaslip: 192cm; 110kg (BMI: 29.84)
Taupe Faletau: 189cm; 110kg (BMI: 30.79)
David Pocock: 183cm; 103kg (BMI: 30.76)

Nathan Hughes: 196cm; 125kg (BMI: 32.54)
Billy Vunipola: 188cm; 130kg (BMI: 36.78)

I think whether EJ specifically wants a big 8 or not, we need one. In the front row, Vunipola's our only ball carrier and in the second row, although the likes of Itoje, Launch, Lawes etc. can all do a job, they're not at all good international ball carriers - they specialise elsewhere. In the back row too, Robshaw will (unfortunately) remain at 6, probably with Underhill taking residence in the 7 shirt. You're not getting any carrying out of those 2. That means that ball carrying is realistically going to primarily be shared between Mako and No. 8. Mercer just isn't enough of a ball carrier for that responsibility.

 

[Which Tyler]

If you're hamstringing the #8 by selecting 2 blindsides; then yeah, you need a primary carrier at 8.
I'm suggesting Robshaw and Simmonds on the flanks though, which is an entirely different proposition. Mind you, I'm also suggesting Mercer on the bench covering 6-8 with Billy starting anyway; and considering the option of Mercer starting currently given that Billy and Nathan aren't available - and I still wouldn't be pairing him with Underhill (7).
I'd also suggest that there's a difference between not being a ball carrier; and not busting holes through the middle. Simmonds is a better carrier than Billy at 1 pass further out (and a little more space), Mercer is somewhere between the 2, being a good ball carrier who relies on nouse and agility to break the line, rather than brute force. They're just different. Billy is currently (much) better; but then he's also 5 years older and 40 caps more experienced.
As my BMI comparison above shows, there's more than one way to skin a cat at #8. Currently England are the only team to skin it the BillyV way - and that's probably because we're the only team to have access to a BillyV player - the guy's a physical freak; he's also got 2 RWCs left at his peak; so Zach is going to have to wait his turn regardless, or become just as good but different, and give the selectors a headache.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

If you're hamstringing the #8 by selecting 2 blindsides; then yeah, you need a primary carrier at 8.
I'm suggesting Robshaw and Simmonds on the flanks though, which is an entirely different proposition. Mind you, I'm also suggesting Mercer on the bench covering 6-8 with Billy starting anyway; and considering the option of Mercer starting currently given that Billy and Nathan aren't available - and I still wouldn't be pairing him with Underhill (7).
I'd also suggest that there's a difference between not being a ball carrier; and not busting holes through the middle. Simmonds is a better carrier than Billy at 1 pass further out (and a little more space), Mercer is somewhere between the 2, being a good ball carrier who relies on nouse and agility to break the line, rather than brute force. They're just different. Billy is currently (much) better; but then he's also 5 years older and 40 caps more experienced.
As my BMI comparison above shows, there's more than one way to skin a cat at #8. Currently England are the only team to skin it the BillyV way - and that's probably because we're the only team to have access to a BillyV player - the guy's a physical freak; he's also got 2 RWCs left at his peak; so Zach is going to have to wait his turn regardless, or become just as good but different, and give the selectors a headache.

I don't disagree with what you've said , but what I would say about those other 8s is that they all have shared carrying responsibility throughout the pack. I don't know enough about the French or Italian sides to comment on Picamoles or Parisse, but:
Read is part of an All Blacks set up that also contains the likes of Coles, Retallick and Squire as dominant ball carriers while Franks, Whitelock and Cane are all also better carriers than their English counterparts. On top of that, they have SBW at centre to offer a threat in the midfield aswell as Ioane on the wing - we just don't have that level of ball carrying threat in our backs.
Heaslip is surrounded by the likes of Healy, Furlong, Henderson, Stander and O'Brien in what is almost certainly the bets carrying pack on the planet.
Wales are actually in a similar situation to England in the pack in that they don't have many dominant ball carriers, but Evans, Owens and Moriarty all take a significant amount of pressure off of Faletau. The big thing here is that in the past they haven't needed dominant ball carriers in the pack as they've had the likes of Roberts, Davies, North and Cuthbert in the backline. Now that they've ditched that gameplan they'll have to readdress their pack makeup IMO.
Pocock with Australia has guys like TPN, Kepu and McMahon to hep him.

Other than Mako, the English 8 is going to have very little assistance from the rest of the pack, and so without a freak like Vunipola or Hughes in that position they are going to seriously struggle. For that reason I just can't see Mercer coming in as an 8; surely it'll be as a 6.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Pretty sure there's some deja vu around these posts!

But anyway, this question hits the nail on the head.

England have 1 single world class player; who is a very specific type of #8; and he gets picked when fit. Is that because Edie wants Billy's type of #8 or because Billy is by far and away our best option at #8?

Binny's uniqueness is a real issue for us. When he's not around, as has been increasingly the case, the dynamic of the back row and even the whole pack changes. Personally I'd like to see more hard carriers in the front 5 allowing a more mobile back row. Post Japan with Hartley and Cole presumably both stepping back, this may happen naturally.

 

[Which Tyler]

I don't disagree with what you've said , but what I would say about those other 8s is that they all have shared carrying responsibility throughout the pack. I don't know enough about the French or Italian sides to comment on Picamoles or Parisse, but:
Read is part of an All Blacks set up that also contains the likes of Coles, Retallick and Squire as dominant ball carriers while Franks, Whitelock and Cane are all also better carriers than their English counterparts. On top of that, they have SBW at centre to offer a threat in the midfield aswell as Ioane on the wing - we just don't have that level of ball carrying threat in our backs.
Heaslip is surrounded by the likes of Healy, Furlong, Henderson, Stander and O'Brien in what is almost certainly the bets carrying pack on the planet.
Wales are actually in a similar situation to England in the pack in that they don't have many dominant ball carriers, but Evans, Owens and Moriarty all take a significant amount of pressure off of Faletau. The big thing here is that in the past they haven't needed dominant ball carriers in the pack as they've had the likes of Roberts, Davies, North and Cuthbert in the backline. Now that they've ditched that gameplan they'll have to readdress their pack makeup IMO.
Pocock with Australia has guys like TPN, Kepu and McMahon to hep him.

Other than Mako, the English 8 is going to have very little assistance from the rest of the pack, and so without a freak like Vunipola or Hughes in that position they are going to seriously struggle. For that reason I just can't see Mercer coming in as an 8; surely it'll be as a 6.

All very fair points.
I'd look to solve it by adding some carriers elsewhere in the pack (eg. Genge; George, Taylor, LCD; Sinckler; Simmonds) whilst encouraging the likes of Launch to do a bit more carrying; you can also add the likes of Te'o OR Tuilagi, or a Cokanagisa / Nowell into the backline. The alternative is to basically that without BillyV we're screwed, because we don't have a back-up BillyV.

FTR I'd also be doing that alongside BillyV at 8 - as he'd only be MORE effective if we had more viable threats that a defence has to be interested in.

Suggesting Mercer at 6 in the absence of BillyV doesn't solve the problem that the absence of BillyV causes.

 

[Triple Exe]

.Playing Mercer at 6 long-term would be a waste of his talents IMO, much like playing Lawes at 6, Robshaw at 7, or Simmonds at 8 - they can all do the job, but it's not what they're best at.

Not that I disagree, but Rob Baxter does. He's played Simmonds at 8 even when he had other options.

 

[Which Tyler]

Not that I disagree, but Rob Baxter does. He's played Simmonds at 8 even when he had other options.

I'd highlight "can all do the job, but it's not what they're best." The balance of those available may make him an 8; but his skill set doesn't make that his best position. Much like Pocock or RHill at 8; or Itoje at 6; or Underhill at 7.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Not that I disagree, but Rob Baxter does. He's played Simmonds at 8 even when he had other options.

I'd quite like to see a little switch around in the Exe back row; i think 6. Armand 7. Simmonds 8. Ewers looks a lot better than 6. Ewers 7. Armand 8. Simmonds. Don't think that Armand's a 7 or that Simmonds is an 8. Also that way they're all playing the positions that they grew up playing and the positions with which they have the best chances for England. The 125kg Ewers is about as close to a direct replacement for BillyV as we're going to get while he's injured IMO.

All very fair points.
I'd look to solve it by adding some carriers elsewhere in the pack (eg. Genge; George, Taylor, LCD; Sinckler; Simmonds) whilst encouraging the likes of Launch to do a bit more carrying; you can also add the likes of Te'o OR Tuilagi, or a Cokanagisa / Nowell into the backline. The alternative is to basically that without BillyV we're screwed, because we don't have a back-up BillyV.

FTR I'd also be doing that alongside BillyV at 8 - as he'd only be MORE effective if we had more viable threats that a defence has to be interested in.

Suggesting Mercer at 6 in the absence of BillyV doesn't solve the problem that the absence of BillyV causes.

Well it does a bit. No one's going to directly replace BillyV but the combination of Mercer on the flank and Hughes/Ewers at 8 would come close.