Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 6:11 am  

The Changing Man wrote:

All the blame lies with the selection. The continued comments referring to Burgess in the article can all be traced back to the initial premise that 'he was promoted too early"...it;s not his fault!
Burgess has taken no more or less flack than the rest of the England side in the press. A few click-baiters have published inflammatory that is designed to drive traffic, which we gleefully respond to but the reality is that Sam Should never have been played at Centre nor against Wales.

SBW played a bit part in RWC 2011....17 minutes including 10 in the bin for the QF/SF & Final. He was used as a sub in the pool game v France too but played against Tonga and Japan. The AB's knew that they needed SBW, but as an impact player.....not as their key centre!

The original premise you speak of is wrong. This premise was made by people who resented Burgess being in the squad and who laid blame in totally the wrong direction. Hence my argument about an agenda from certain former players who are pals with the second rate "experienced" centres who were not picked. These same centres have had plenty of chances to prove they should have been in the squad but they are at best mediocre.

This premise of yours is flawed because the England defeat was not the fault whatsoever of Burgess who had done everything expected of Barritt had he played inside centre. With him on the field England twice had a 10 point lead in the second half which would have been greater had the "experienced" England players not given away silly penalties within kicking distance. It was after Burgess was subbed that the wheels fell off. The "experienced" Barritt making a schoolboy error to let in Roberts for the first time in the game. Followed by a penalty from Brown and failure to take the chance of a draw or win in the last minutes.

Plenty of culprits to choose so why choose one who put in a good performance?

Your SBW analogy proves that he had to overcome some anti league sentiments too. It took NZ a long time to warm to his skills and he was only a sub in their first match in this WC.

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 6:27 am  

May as well change the thread title to RUWC15 or just merge it with the Burgess RU thread.

This clearly isn't about our international game.

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:39 am  

Agreed. I wish the mods would take a much stronger line on this (as they would on many other forums).

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 10:30 am  

Juan Cornetto wrote:

Burgess came in because JJ was unfit. JJ is now fit so we revert to the first choice line up. Burgess will come on as originally planned as an impact sub unless the 'experience Union centre' Barritt continues his errors and bad form in which case Big Sam will make an earlier appearance. But it makes better headlines for you envious anti League chaps to continue your agenda by saying he is dropped.

You didn't mention MOM Farrell retaining his 10 spot, but of course form isn't something you notice is it?

If Burgess is as good as O'driscoll as you laughably claim then he would get in ahead of Barritt as BOD is in the top 3 centres of all time and Barritt isn't in the top 50, which proves you are talking poop. To be a world-class centre you need to be able to kick well, something that SB did twice and failed miserably, which also proves you are talking poop (if proof were needed).

You are like an 8 year old talking about his favourite comic-book hero

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 4:56 pm  

galliant wrote:

If Burgess is as good as O'driscoll as you laughably claim then he would get in ahead of Barritt as BOD is in the top 3 centres of all time and Barritt isn't in the top 50, which proves you are talking poop. To be a world-class centre you need to be able to kick well, something that SB did twice and failed miserably, which also proves you are talking poop (if proof were needed).

You are like an 8 year old talking about his favourite comic-book hero

You really don't like accuracy or reading much do you? I did not claim Burgess is as good as BOD. What I said was:

"What the former Union International players are really upset about is that in Burgess you have a Rugby League prop who in a very short space of time is able to do most of what they did at Union International level just as well. Now because it took a couple of Irish 3 years to learn how to play centre at test match level is rather the point. A top League International already has the key skills to make the switch quickly and as I say this is what has pricked their bubble. (Burgess he can also play at 6 too!)"

Did you spot the difference this time? I do not think that anybody has suggested that Burgess is a world class centre just yet have they?

What was being discussed was; firstly the objections to his selection in the squad over some other centres that had not proven their worth consistently despite plenty of previous chances. And secondly the objections, mostly from those same sources, to his being on the bench and subsequently in the starting line up.

I have not sought to prove Burgess is the finished ticket or a World class centre. I think I have provided a strong case to show in each of the matches that he did not look out of place or let the team down as other more experienced players in fact did.

Did Burgess make a few errors - YES. Were those errors crucial or cost us points - NO.
Did other vastly more experienced players including the first choice inside centre make errors - YES. And were they crucial and cost points and a try - YES
Did Burgess restrict the "world class" Wales & Lions centre and stop him getting over the gain line - YES
Did this same vastly experienced Roberts & co stop Burgess crossing the gain line - NO
Did Burgess run a good dummy line and execute very well a training field move that led to our try - YES
Were England winning with the defence well intact when Burgess was substituted - YES

So Burgess, despite his lack of experience, in his International Union performances to date have shown he can tackle as well, cross the gain line as well, even offload effectively as both his opposite numbers and co centres. In fact on current form he should be starting at 12 before Barritt.

Our first choice inside centre Barritt is not exactly known as a good kicker is he? When Ford came on he put in two poor kicks that "failed miserably" (to use your term) and gave away possession at a time when we needed it. I also recall you would have selected him before Farrell remember?

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:36 pm  

Juan Cornetto wrote:

You really don't like accuracy or reading much do you? I did not claim Burgess is as good as BOD. What I said was:

"What the former Union International players are really upset about is that in Burgess you have a Rugby League prop who in a very short space of time is able to do most of what they did at Union International level just as well. Now because it took a couple of Irish 3 years to learn how to play centre at test match level is rather the point. A top League International already has the key skills to make the switch quickly and as I say this is what has pricked their bubble. (Burgess he can also play at 6 too!)"

Did you spot the difference this time? I do not think that anybody has suggested that Burgess is a world class centre just yet have they?

What was being discussed was; firstly the objections to his selection in the squad over some other centres that had not proven their worth consistently despite plenty of previous chances. And secondly the objections, mostly from those same sources, to his being on the bench and subsequently in the starting line up.

I have not sought to prove Burgess is the finished ticket or a World class centre. I think I have provided a strong case to show in each of the matches that he did not look out of place or let the team down as other more experienced players in fact did.

Did Burgess make a few errors - YES. Were those errors crucial or cost us points - NO.
Did other vastly more experienced players including the first choice inside centre make errors - YES. And were they crucial and cost points and a try - YES
Did Burgess restrict the "world class" Wales & Lions centre and stop him getting over the gain line - YES
Did this same vastly experienced Roberts & co stop Burgess crossing the gain line - NO
Did Burgess run a good dummy line and execute very well a training field move that led to our try - YES
Were England winning with the defence well intact when Burgess was substituted - YES

So Burgess, despite his lack of experience, in his International Union performances to date have shown he can tackle as well, cross the gain line as well, even offload effectively as both his opposite numbers and co centres. In fact on current form he should be starting at 12 before Barritt.

Our first choice inside centre Barritt is not exactly known as a good kicker is he? When Ford came on he put in two poor kicks that "failed miserably" (to use your term) and gave away possession at a time when we needed it. I also recall you would have selected him before Farrell remember?

If you think SB can do 'just as well' (your words) in a couple of games what BOD could do you are quite deluded. For a start Bod could kick, he also didn't need to be told where to stand defensively (by both Slade and Barritt in both games, if you went on RU forums you'll see fans from both sides commenting on this basic error). You're right, Barritt isn't known as a good kicker, hence why I said he wouldn't be in the worlds top 50 centres (and you said I don't like accuracy or reading much?). You also never answered why 2 Irish ex-players would be 'anti-league' when, coming from Ireland, they wouldn't give a rats about a regional sport in England. Mainly because it blows your theory that it's because they are 'anti-league' (to use your term) rather than that they might actually be telling the truth. And not only does Lancaster think the same about SB's lack of nous in playing in the centres (because he's DROPPED him), but Mike Ford at Bath was so unimpressed with his centre play that he moved him to number 6 and has no intention of moving him back to centres. I suppose Mike Ford is 'anti-league' too is he?

You think you provided a strong case? Only in your dream-world

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 6:37 pm  

galliant wrote:

If you think SB can do 'just as well' (your words) in a couple of games what BOD could do you are quite deluded. For a start Bod could kick, he also didn't need to be told where to stand defensively (by both Slade and Barritt in both games, if you went on RU forums you'll see fans from both sides commenting on this basic error). You're right, Barritt isn't known as a good kicker, hence why I said he wouldn't be in the worlds top 50 centres (and you said I don't like accuracy or reading much?). You also never answered why 2 Irish ex-players would be 'anti-league' when, coming from Ireland, they wouldn't give a rats about a regional sport in England. Mainly because it blows your theory that it's because they are 'anti-league' (to use your term) rather than that they might actually be telling the truth. And not only does Lancaster think the same about SB's lack of nous in playing in the centres (because he's DROPPED him), but Mike Ford at Bath was so unimpressed with his centre play that he moved him to number 6 and has no intention of moving him back to centres. I suppose Mike Ford is 'anti-league' too is he?

You think you provided a strong case? Only in your dream-world

"...able to do most of what they did..... as well" Why can't you quote accurately?

Inside Centre play includes tackling with a strong physical presence, putting your side on the front foot by crossing the gain line often in heavy traffic, running dummy running lines to fix defenders, being strong in the breakdown area, being able to offload in tight situations, backing up with good angled runs and having a strong presence. These are the basics and of course there are other skills like kicking. But as I said Burgess in his limited international game time so far has shown that he has this basic and important skill set and his mistakes have been minimal and not crucial. He has not been outplayed and has made a game changing impact when he came on as a sub and in fact has been better than the 'experience and ready' Barritt who is England's first choice inside centre.

So for you and others to pretend that his selection is in anyway a reason for the loss against Wales or was wrong is arrant nonsense and one can only presume in the absence of facts to disprove my points you have an agenda against Burgess.

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:47 pm  

https://youtu.be/9JLASzADsaI I'm a Sam burgess fan, but he's not even close. England made a bad decision in picking him for the wales game....not his fault.

https://youtu.be/9JLASzADsaI I'm a Sam burgess fan, but he's not even close. England made a bad decision in picking him for the wales game....not his fault.

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:22 pm  

Juan Cornetto wrote:

"...able to do most of what they did..... as well" Why can't you quote accurately?

Inside Centre play includes tackling with a strong physical presence, putting your side on the front foot by crossing the gain line often in heavy traffic, running dummy running lines to fix defenders, being strong in the breakdown area, being able to offload in tight situations, backing up with good angled runs and having a strong presence. These are the basics and of course there are other skills like kicking. But as I said Burgess in his limited international game time so far has shown that he has this basic and important skill set and his mistakes have been minimal and not crucial. He has not been outplayed and has made a game changing impact when he came on as a sub and in fact has been better than the 'experience and ready' Barritt who is England's first choice inside centre.

So for you and others to pretend that his selection is in anyway a reason for the loss against Wales or was wrong is arrant nonsense and one can only presume in the absence of facts to disprove my points you have an agenda against Burgess.

I haven't said his selection was responsible for the loss against Wales, why do you make things up?

You also say that SB is strong at the breakdown, that shows that you are making it up as you go along, he was hopeless at the breakdown as well as kicking, which according to you are two of the basics. I also notice that you didn't mention his paucity of any positional sense of where he was supposed to stand, especially at lineouts, which should be a pre-requisite for any international centre. You never did answer my question asking if Mike Ford is 'anti-league' because he agrees with BOD and D'arcy that SB is not even a centre at club-level because he moved him to flanker and won't play him at centre again. I ask you again: is Mike Ford anti-league for thinking SB isn't a centre? You want there to be an agenda against Burgess because you want RL to be that important, but unfortunately for you it isn't.

Re: International game : Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:34 pm  

The Changing Man wrote:

https://youtu.be/9JLASzADsaI
I'm a Sam burgess fan, but he's not even close. England made a bad decision in picking him for the wales game....not his fault.

Spot on, in time SB could be a handy International player but I and many others think at 6. Over the years BOD given us (Wales) a few beatings but I don't know anyone who doesn't admire him. He's a legend. For anyone to think SB is anywhere near BOD is just laughable.