Cutter
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
cyclopath said:I'm with you fp, we have seen the problems before with an inexperienced front row, and semi-detached back row getting reamed backwards rapidly.fatprop said:Cutter said:Front row is a worry but both Mumm and Horwill are strong scrummaging locks. Smith will handle no. 8 ok. He is the only non specialist 8 who can handle it.
Smith will have his head up before the ball is put in. :angryfire:
I disagree with Cutter that Smith has shown himself to be a good 8. When? Just because he is a good 7 and generally talented does not imbue him with #8 skills that translate. With the rest of the pack being gazelles apparently, I would prefer a more solid option at 8.
And yeah, Gagger, the old "Rocky can't do it" chestnut loses some weight wiht the assumption that Smith can.
Of course, Deans probably knows better than any of us, and I will have egg on my face like many others. I hope so. I'll be very happy to be proved wrong.
Cyclo I didnt say Smith was going to suddenly turn into a ball running, crash tackling demon, I said he can handle the technical requirements at 8. Read my other post regarding why Smith can and Rocky cant. There is a reason why Rocky only played 8 when Leinster's first choice wasnt there. Ideally you want to put your most dominant backrower at 8 because they usually get more touches than the other back rowers (through picking from the back, taking kickoffs and covering kicks). Elsom was clearly the dominant backrower at Leinster but he clearly wasnt the best no.8.
I'm with Noddy. We will go ok. If Cowan and Alexander step up in the scrums, and providing TPN doesnt have a disaster with his throwing, our set piece will be fine too. Deans is giving these guys enough rope to hang themselves but also the opportunity to assert themselves.