: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:01 am  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

I think you are failing to address that Roby's distribution in the Aus game was downright appalling, too.

You're correct, the options taken and the execution by roby at dummy half was very poor to.

: Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:52 am  

At the end of day if England had the best coaching team money can buy we'd still be as good as we are.

: Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:08 pm  

Stinky Turner wrote:

Scrum half who doesn't touch the ball for the first 25 minutes of a game might be open to criticism.

Let me guess that was down to the coaches tactics.

I know you copped some stick but IMO you do have something of a point. I'm not picking holes in SEB's passionate response to you (I wouldn't want him on my case!) but I have posted previously that, direction of play or coach's gameplan notwithstanding, Sam made quite a nervous start before showing he definitely belongs at this level.

: Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:11 pm  

jinkin jimmy wrote:

I know you copped some stick but IMO you do have something of a point. I'm not picking holes in SEB's passionate response to you (I wouldn't want him on my case!) but I have posted previously that, direction of play or coach's gameplan notwithstanding, Sam made quite a nervous start before showing he definitely belongs at this level.

You could say the same about every England player during the first half. I'm not sure why this would be a criticism levelled at Sam particularly. On a further note, I suggest you watch the game again Jimmy. He was doing all he could to get involved, supporting play on numerous occassions without ever receiving a pass! Not sure you can lay the blame for that at his door. At one point his frustration when yet another ball that would have put him in space never arrived was there for all to see.

: Thu Nov 12, 2009 2:41 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

You could say the same about every England player during the first half. I'm not sure why this would be a criticism levelled at Sam particularly. On a further note, I suggest you watch the game again Jimmy. He was doing all he could to get involved, supporting play on numerous occassions without ever receiving a pass! Not sure you can lay the blame for that at his door. At one point his frustration when yet another ball that would have put him in space never arrived was there for all to see.

I've watched it 3 times now and this simply isn't true. IMO a good debut overall but there's no disputing the fact that he made a quiet start. Whether you blame him or the coach for this is debatable. I only posted because I thought this

Stinky Turner wrote: Scrum half who doesn't touch the ball for the first 25 minutes of a game might be open to criticism.

was not unreasonable.

: Thu Nov 12, 2009 5:13 pm  

jinkin jimmy wrote:

I know you copped some stick but IMO you do have something of a point. I'm not picking holes in SEB's passionate response to you (I wouldn't want him on my case!) but I have posted previously that, direction of play or coach's gameplan notwithstanding, Sam made quite a nervous start before showing he definitely belongs at this level.

You make a perfectly valid point JJ, Sam did indeed make a nervous start on the left against aus - you could see from his body language and not quite timing his runs right (sometimes over running, sometimes being caught in 2 minds). And it's perfectly fine to point that out and even be a bit critical of it (he is after all 20 years old in his first full season).

Nowt wrong at all with saying his playing to the gameplan on the left could have been executed a bit crisper and less nervously - I would fully support that view, and I suspect Sam will be the first to admit he was a bit shaky at the start (if you know the lad at all, you'll know he's always the first to put his hand up when he gets something wrong or feels he could or should have done better)

My only issue is the forum warriors who try and slate him for being on the left in the first place and for not dictating play or forcing some ball to him, using phrases like 'anonymous' 'did nothing' for '20' '25' '40' minutes take your pick. - when quite clearly the coach never wanted the team to play like that in the first half. Second half came along (after a team talk/tactic change) and lo Sam starts getting ball and trying to create stuff.

At the end of the day you have to execute the play as you've been asked to, you might get away with it as a one off if you're an established superstar and it lucks out for you, but as a kid in your first matches for this coach your most likely just going to stuff things up for the team and have a coach loose all faith in your ability to do the job you've been asked, and never get picked again.

And when you're playing with your 6 and 13 as your playmakers trying to 'take charge' at 7 is a) nigh on impossible (especially for a kid when the 6 and 13 are established players, and the hooker is putting out pap ball) and b) likely to result in more errors (getting in each others way, obstruction, hesitation from the others who don't know why you're there).

You can 'do your own thing' as much as you like when you're playing on the park with your mates or playing it in PE at school, but as soon as you start to play RL at any sort of decent organised level (amateur or otherwise), and you have a coach you have to start playing as a team and having each player perform the role the coach has asked him to. Some people have clearly either never played for a decent team, or learnt bugger all during the process.

: Thu Nov 12, 2009 5:53 pm  

jinkin jimmy wrote:

I've watched it 3 times now and this simply isn't true. IMO a good debut overall but there's no disputing the fact that he made a quiet start. Whether you blame him or the coach for this is debatable. I only posted because I thought this



was not unreasonable.

On the first point we'll have to agree to disagree I'm afraid Jimmy. Just out of interest though what, in your opinion, should he have done to 'get his hands on the ball'?

As for the remainder, whilst I am quite willing to agree that he started nervously, as I pointed out, the same could be said of the whole team. In all my time watching RL, or indeed any other team sport for that matter, never have I heard it suggested that the responsibility for settling the side should rest with a 20 year old rookie in his first major competative international rather than with the senior players. Much less, the fact that he wasn't able to do so from within a team literally being overrun as being reasonable grounds for criticism! Could you give me another example where this has been the case? I suppose this speaks volumes of the expectation placed on Sam's shoulders that even otherwise reasonable posters such as yourself don't think this is unreasonable! However it still doesn't make it right! You might think differently but, again, we'll have to agree to disagree.

: Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:50 pm  

To jinkin jimmy - cheers for the support but it wasn't needed as the responses my point of conjecture brought in proved my point.

But as they say "love is blind" and there's plenty of man love going on around here towards Tomkins.

Oi! Oi! Oi!

: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:02 pm  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

Why?

It's my opinion. Certain positions need to work together and so at International level when you spend a small amount of time together you need to get to know each other asap.

: Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:42 am  

Stinky Turner wrote:

To jinkin jimmy - cheers for the support but it wasn't needed as the responses my point of conjecture brought in proved my point.

But as they say "love is blind" and there's plenty of man love going on around here towards Tomkins.

Oi! Oi! Oi!

Actually sod all proved your point chum, if you'd been critical about something that bore any possible semblance of being real (no matter how sodding unlikely) I'd have said bugger all. I was actually thinking he looked nervous myself and this was affecting the quality of his line running. I just won't blame a player regardless of team for things out of his control like the game plan being executed by the team meaning he's not getting any ball.

For the same reason I was not critical of Ryan Hall or Michael Shenton during the same period of play seeing far less ball than others.

If you're older than 14 then surely you expect points of conjecture to be attacked since by the very definition of the term they lack sufficient evidence for proof, but your man love statement makes me wonder otherwise, save yourself the trouble next time and just say Sam is Ghey!!!