(Very) early thoughts on the 2017 Lions

[Every Time Ref]

Ford's one of those players who just seems to attract criticism.

He's a much better playmaker than any other candidate, his tactical kicking is very strong indeed, his defence could be better I'll concede, he has proved he can perform well under pressure for ENgland many times.

And, his goalkicking is good. Not as good as Halfpenny, but much better than Cipriani, usually as good as Farrell (except when Farrell is on a hot streak), marginally worse than Laidlaw, better than Sexton, better than both the All Blacks' goalkicking options, both the Aussies' options, the Boks' current first choice ... he's in the top tier of goalkickers in the world.

 

[Peat]

All this talk of Gatland being wedded to one style, I'm watching the 1st NZ vs Wales game from the Summer and its really worth a watch. The ball's zipping from one side of the pitch to the other in a single phase pretty often, its not what I'd call Gatlandball. Whether he'll continue with this, who can say, but he's shown interest in him.



As for the Ford talk... not sure why people are so sure Gatland will have no interest in him. Gatland's not really had a fly-half like him other than Priestland in 2011 - who he played of course. Ford's better. He's also probably the best tactical kicker available. Its not Gatland only ever picks the biggest players either, or isn't fond of a gamble. The Lions party format rewards party selection gambles after all. You can always bury a gamble that didn't work in the midweek team.

I don't think he's interested in damage limitation on this tour either and I think he's well aware that the All Blacks are going to stick down 20-30 points guaranteed so you'd better score that many yourself. And they're too disciplined to give you that in multiples of three.

Also, while Ford does have his downsides, so do most fly-halves, and Ford's has cost England very few games so far.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

And, his goalkicking is good. Not as good as Halfpenny, but much better than Cipriani, usually as good as Farrell (except when Farrell is on a hot streak), marginally worse than Laidlaw, better than Sexton, better than both the All Blacks' goalkicking options, both the Aussies' options, the Boks' current first choice ... he's in the top tier of goalkickers in the world.

Not in my view. During the Welsh game Sky flashed up his international kicking stats - it was 60 something %, might even have been as low as 61. And that's even less impressive when you consider that others have a longer range where the chances of success diminish. And when his head goes, it really goes; when Faz starts off badly he usually turns it around.

I think he'd be a good bench option but not more than that.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Ford's one of those players who just seems to attract criticism.

He's a much better playmaker than any other candidate, his tactical kicking is very strong indeed, his defence could be better I'll concede, he has proved he can perform well under pressure for ENgland many times.

And, his goalkicking is good. Not as good as Halfpenny, but much better than Cipriani, usually as good as Farrell (except when Farrell is on a hot streak), marginally worse than Laidlaw, better than Sexton, better than both the All Blacks' goalkicking options, both the Aussies' options, the Boks' current first choice ... he's in the top tier of goalkickers in the world.

Do you have stats to back that up? Sexton hit 84.6% in the pro12 last year, I think he was on a hot streak in the 6n from memory too. The idea that Sexton is a weak kicker is dated.

 

[Groundhog]

Ford a better playmaker than Sexton? Mmmmmmmmm sounds like ork mischief to me.

 

[ncurd]

67%
http://rugby.statbunker.com/players/getPlayerStats?player_id=27816
You're right that's too low. His Bath stats are a more respectable at 79%

Farrell on the other hand 82% England, Saracens 84%

But as noted that's more likely to do with when Ford has a bad day he doesn't turn it around. However we're bound to have a second kicker on the bench (at least) if that's the case. Plus as many have said it's very likely 1/2p will starting anyway so having a solid kicker and fly-half isn't required.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Do you have stats to back that up? Sexton hit 84.6% in the pro12 last year, I think he was on a hot streak in the 6n from memory too. The idea that Sexton is a weak kicker is dated.

Looked for stats for this year / last year and couldn't find them except a graphic showing him, Farrell and Cips in the Prem in Feb 2016. Good, but outdated and not international.

Fair enough on Sexton, am judging on personal impressions which are prob outdated. Ford also suffers from outdated prejudice so I couldn't in all good conscience ignore you!

Ford a better playmaker than Sexton? Mmmmmmmmm sounds like ork mischief to me.

You're going to need to update me on yer bogtrotter slang there fella, not sure what you're driving at there

 

[ncurd]

Do you have stats to back that up? Sexton hit 84.6% in the pro12 last year, I think he was on a hot streak in the 6n from memory too. The idea that Sexton is a weak kicker is dated.

He only took 19 kicks in the Pro 12....it was just over two a match. He still missed 4 out of 10 conversions and it was 77%.
http://rugby.statbunker.com/players...ype=9871233&dates=-1&comps_id=504&clubs_id=-1
That's not really statistically relevant.

6 Nations it was 79%

 

[Every Time Ref]

67%
http://rugby.statbunker.com/players/getPlayerStats?player_id=27816
You're right that's too low. His Bath stats are a more respectable at 79%

Farrell on the other hand 82% England, Saracens 84%

But as noted that's more likely to do with when Ford has a bad day he doesn't turn it around. However we're bound to have a second kicker on the bench (at least) if that's the case. Plus as many have said it's very likely 1/2p will starting anyway so having a solid kicker and fly-half isn't required.

That is lower than I thought, maybe my impression is coloured by watching him at Bath - it's international that counts here to be fair.

Farrell does seem to have the ability to still get the ball over the bar when he's not hitting it well, which is something I have to admire. Kind of like a batsman who scratches out an ugly century or a golfer who loses his swing but still hits pars, it's a sign of quality.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

He only took 19 kicks in the Pro 12....it was just over two a match. He still missed 4 out of 10 conversions and it was 77%.
http://rugby.statbunker.com/players...ype=9871233&dates=-1&comps_id=504&clubs_id=-1
That's not really statistically relevant.

6 Nations it was 79%

Thats regular season kicks, 7 from 7 in the playoffs.

 

[ncurd]

Thats regular season kicks, 7 from 7 in the playoffs.

Where did you conjure that stat from?

- - - Updated - - -

Plus 7 from 7 for most kickers is a game or two. Look at Ford's meltdown against Wales he's 20% kicker there on that game along from 5 kicks.

You need long term stats to iron out inconsistencies.

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly though you look at these kicking stats and average kicks/game (for instance England took 6.6 during th last 6 nations) and you're talking the diffence of 2 points/game between Farrells 79 and Ford 67.

Now that can be a game winning margin but I don't think it's a significant enough difference to pick one over that other.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Ford a better playmaker than Sexton? Mmmmmmmmm sounds like ork mischief to me.

Ford is the only player in the NH who can pass off both hands.
Ford is the only 10 since wilko to kick two consecutive shots at goal.
Ford is the only 10 in the NH who has ever found touch from a penalty kick.

All hail our Lord and saviour.

 

[Peat]

Apart from kicks about 5-10m right of the post 30-40m out with pressure on, I have zero issues with Sexton as a kicker. I thought he should have been kicking last tour tbh, although I now recant of that. If Halfpenny's on the pitch, he kicks, and Halfpenny deserved to be on the pitch without even considering kicking.

Still, if Halfpenny's not the right man at full-back, you can plug in Sexton with no worries.


edit: I'm considering making an archive of Olyy's posts on Ford as they could be good for a laugh in five years. Way out of proportion.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Lions 10 = Burns or Harrison

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

http://www.leinsterrugby.ie/team/14989.php#.V9GAGjTOqc0 Between the 6n and pro12 last year he was +80%. Two games at 100% in a row is about as much as you can really ask for any kicker, same with an average higher than 80%. (Sorry about the format, on my phone here.)

Where did you conjure that stat from?

- - - Updated - - -

Plus 7 from 7 for most kickers is a game or two. Look at Ford's meltdown against Wales he's 20% kicker there on that game along from 5 kicks.

You need long term stats to iron out inconsistencies.

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly though you look at these kicking stats and average kicks/game (for instance England took 6.6 during th last 6 nations) and you're talking the diffence of 2 points/game between Farrells 79 and Ford 67.

Now that can be a game winning margin but I don't think it's a significant enough difference to pick one over that other.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

edit: I'm considering making an archive of Olyy's posts on Ford as they could be good for a laugh in five years. Way out of proportion.

I'm pretty obviously taking the ****, all the people going on like he's the new Dan Carter cause he kicked his goals vs Northampton are the ones that are way out of proportion.

Ford's a good player, but he should be 4th in the pecking order. He wouldn't be starting 10 for England if we had a better option at 12 than Farrell.

 

[ncurd]

So we've established Farrell is worth 2 points kicks/game

But how many trys are scored when either is playing at 10?

2013&2014 6 nations = Farrell @ 10 = 19 Try's @ 1.9/game or 9.5 points
2015&2016 6 nations = Ford @ 10 = 31 Try's @ 3.1/game or 15.5 points

So Ford's worth 6 poins more/game than Farrell at the moment it's a net 3.8 points/games more for Ford

Okay but Ford's defesively frail that means the opposition score more points....

2013&2014 6 nations = 143 score against = 1.43/game
2015&2016 6 nations = 170 scored against = 1.7 /game

Overall ford is worth 3.5 points more than Farrell/game

This is completely unscientific and tons of mitigating factors it was just a fun exercise.

 

[Peat]

I'm pretty obviously taking the ****, all the people going on like he's the new Dan Carter cause he kicked his goals vs Northampton are the ones that are way out of proportion.

Ford's a good player, but he should be 4th in the pecking order. He wouldn't be starting 10 for England if we had a better option at 12 than Farrell.

Obviously the last post was but you've been constantly negative about him since the Irish performance and I think we'll have to agree to disagree about who is out of proportion on this one.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I'm pretty obviously taking the ****, all the people going on like he's the new Dan Carter cause he kicked his goals vs Northampton are the ones that are way out of proportion.

Ford's a good player, but he should be 4th in the pecking order. He wouldn't be starting 10 for England if we had a better option at 12 than Farrell.

He's a an amazing play maker, great tactical kicker but doesn't play for sale so can understand why you don't like him.

 

[ncurd]

He wouldn't be starting 10 for England if we had a better option at 12 than Farrell.

I disagree (obviously) I think 1st Australia test proved who our number one guy is.

And it's not over the Northampton game I've long been a Ford over Farrell supporter. In fact I don't think anyone championing Ford here has ever said any different.