breakdown wrote:Snipe I disagree about your comments of RP being a class 10. Yes he is a good 10 and a very good 9, but he is not 'nearly world class' at OH. He played there vs Edinburgh, didnt do anything spectacular and I think its fair to say that beagle won us that game. He is the best 10 we have but at 9 he is the best in the world and shouldnt be moved about therefore disrupting him at all.
I think everyone is hungover today.
I said if he played there every week he would be world class.
For the record I don't think he is the best 9 in the world.
Apologies Snipe, didnt see that bit but yes, if he played there he could well be, but then again, if PJ plays at 10 all next year he also could be world class
I think Pienaar is the best 9, no one really comes close in terms of accuracy and speed of distripution, and his kicking game is generally always on par. Brilliant 9.
Chris Henry is superhuman... I think he's half cyborg
Jackson was thrust in at the deep end and from his performances against Leinster and Edinburgh probably merited his selection for the final.
iHumph would probably have been the better call (in hindsight), but with his defence against their attack it may have been more than 42. That said, our score may have ended up more than 14.
Jackson will develop, no doubt. Outside RP and inside PW he should excel, and he is still progressing as a 10. Hopefully he will be challenging Madigan for the Ireland jersey in 3/4 years time. We've got to give him more time though.
One thing I don't like about PJ is he seems to be a conservative player, while iHumph (just to use him as an example) is a more gutsy player. If you combined Jacko's defence and iHumph's attack, you'd have some fly half.
You haven't seen me at my best yet. Let's be honest, you probably never will.
You clearly didn't see Jackson vs Ospreys when he scored. Very conservative... Jackson will have been told not to true anything If je wasn't certain it was on. its a cup final, and the last thing we need is our best 10 and one for the future messing up because he was too risky and losing all confidence.
Chris Henry is superhuman... I think he's half cyborg
Some and many clearly state that I am not talking about you I was talking about ‘people’.
Let me clarify. This was aimed directly at you:
Thanks for the attempted English lesson. I'll accept your qualification of your post, although offeriing a generality derived from a particular instance as a progression in discursive thought suggests a wee bit more of a link being made. Anyway we're both happy to leave it soooo back to the matter in hand: RP at FH
If it's correct that he could be world class (let's say for the sake of argument he could be at least as good a FH as he is a SH) through playing week in and week out at that position. Isn't this a qualified admission that he's not that good (and this isn't meant in absolute terms) at FH presently? Would we be required to play him week in, week out at that position until he is that good (i.e. as good on the relative rugby scale as he is presently at SH) and then have him mentor PJ to really get the best out of him? What then happens to his SH skills while we build him as a FH?
What about the benefits of competition for PJ from another FH, cover for the position? etc. etc.
breakdown wrote:You clearly didn't see Jackson vs Ospreys when he scored. Very conservative... Jackson will have been told not to true anything If je wasn't certain it was on. its a cup final, and the last thing we need is our best 10 and one for the future messing up because he was too risky and losing all confidence.
Are you on here just to argue with everything I say?
So what if he scored a try against the Ospreys - anyone can spot a gap and run through it. Doesn't mean he's a super attacker. The difference is if you look at Sexton yesterday, he was attempting all these wrap arounds, switch passes, inside flicks and they were majestic. Jackson didn't do that enough - he was too basic.
And if you think McGlocks told him to play conservative you must be joking. You cannot possibly beat Leinster by playing safe, it's like shooting yourself in the foot. Leinster's defence is too good to use simple passes and crash balls and expect to score.
You haven't seen me at my best yet. Let's be honest, you probably never will.
Snipe Watson wrote:83,000 people, HEC final, against the best side in Europe, being watched by millions, not nearly enough first team starts. It does not get any tougher than that.
He was not ready yesterday, but PJ is ready for any given Friday night in the Rabo
This.
Christ, this was Jackson's first bad game. And it wasn't all appalling either. Just watched the first half again. No problems with defence, and with the exception of one ropey pass, sweet and varied distribution. The less said about his kicking the better mind, but there we go. And probably should have given to Trimble. But worse mistakes were made.
In answer to the question do we have a problem I think probably not but we could have at times. Probably our three best OHs in no particular order are PJ, RP and Paddy Wallace, regardless of whether NOC signs. For the big games we must have Ruan at scrum half and Paddy Wallace at centre because they are both outstanding at those positions, so barring injury we are set. In terms of giving any of the three breaks or if they are selected for their international team or if injured we have a bit of a problem. Paul Marshall and Nevin Spence, Farrell or whoever would be backup inside centre cover those two positions, but we are lacking in a bit of depth for OH. But for the big matches I'm happy to go with PJ at OH and let him learn the ropes, I think he is an outstanding talent.
Jackson is good enough. By the heineken next season he will have had an U220 tour, a full summers preseason, and then half a dozen pro12 games.
The real problem is depth at 10, if Mckinney is going too, and NOC returns, we are still light in experiance. Luke Marshal can play 10, but no game time, Mckinney no game time, etc etc.
Some and many clearly state that I am not talking about you I was talking about ‘people’.
Let me clarify. This was aimed directly at you:
Thanks for the attempted English lesson. I'll accept your qualification of your post, although offeriing a generality derived from a particular instance as a progression in discursive thought suggests a wee bit more of a link being made. Anyway we're both happy to leave it soooo back to the matter in hand: RP at FH
If it's correct that he could be world class (let's say for the sake of argument he could be at least as good a FH as he is a SH) through playing week in and week out at that position. Isn't this a qualified admission that he's not that good (and this isn't meant in absolute terms) at FH presently? Would we be required to play him week in, week out at that position until he is that good (i.e. as good on the relative rugby scale as he is presently at SH) and then have him mentor PJ to really get the best out of him? What then happens to his SH skills while we build him as a FH?
What about the benefits of competition for PJ from another FH, cover for the position? etc. etc.
I wasn't giving you an English lesson, just pointing out what I though was obvious.
Anyway now that we have clarified that point. Let's have a go at clarifying RP at 10.
RP is our scrum half (I think he's in the top 5 in the world in that shirt)
If he didn't play 9 every week he would quickly drop out of that top 5. However he could still mentor a young scrum half even if he was playing 10 for us every week, because he knows what to do.
RP has played 10 at international level for RSA, so he knows how to get the job done in that shirt. He's not playing 10 every week so he is not as good as he could be in that spot. Does that mean he is not well equipped to mentor a young flyhalf? I'd say he's in a good position to mentor him and when you consider he will be in the team with him that makes it even better. Humph also knows a thing or two about playing in the 10 shirt.
Rum that is balderdash. If you think Leinsters backs did nothing but defend then you clearly did not watch the match but viewed the scoreboard.
For your benefit and for anyone else unfortunate not to see the game, Leinster's backs did creat a lot, an awful lot. They created gaps by drawing players and offloading to big ball carrying forwards in SOB, Strauss, Healy to name a few who were in the mood to exploit everything. Even the much maligned DArcy was at it.
I think everyone is hungover today.
