Lod

[Rooster_6]

Fully disagree. Have a look at our back row, we've got attacking pieces to play out wide in SBW and Cordner and then you can use Aubusson off the bench if needed (regardless of how inconsistent he can be).

What we need is a workhorse who'll give us consistent tackling and the ability to take the ball up. You claim that in order to play in the backrow (or on the fringes as you state), one must need to be able to run overs/unders and the very least be able to have ball playing skills. Have a look at the Storm's model over the last couple of years. They've always multiple backrowers that can do the above, ball play, hit good lines, ect ect. However? They've always, yes, ALWAYS had a worsehorse in the pack (Dallas Johnson, Todd Lowrie, list goes on). Look at our team this year. Sure, Cordner could be viewed as such, but I'd rather have Cords play as a roving backrower that has the ability to break the line and offload.

There is absolutely no point having Aubusson play lock when he himself isn't known to be a workhorse, I'll put my head down and take the ball up back rower. Aubo runs lines, he's an attacking back rower and nothing more. Would you want SBW going through 40 tackles and having him ineffective in attack? Same with Cords?

We need a bloke who'll hit the ball up, make tackles and do the dirty work without looking spectacular. LOD is the perfect mongrel to have next to JWH.

To say that in order to play in the backrow, you must be a good attacking, quick forward is ridiculous. Look at some of the blokes running around today that are at best, "workers". By your logic, players like Shaun Fensom, Todd Lowrie, Dallas Johnson, Corey Parker, David Stagg, Ashley Harrison are all ineffective backrowers and shouldn't really be classed as "backrowers" simply because they don't really run lines or have any ball playing skills. Hell, Gallen isn't really a ball player either, he's got a solid offload but he's not really known for ball playing ability. This is why a lot of teams play their attacking, ball playing backrowers off the bench. Dave Taylor, Mateo recently, the list goes on. Why? Because they are impact players. Every team needs a workhorse, someone that'll do the hard work. Nathan Hindmarsh made a living off being that guy for years, as did Alan Tongue. Both weren't really "line breaking, ball playing" backrowers.

I myself would rather have two attacking backrowers and a worsehose in my backrow then have a backrow filled with attacking/ball handling backrowers. And before you say that an attacking backrower should be able to get through a workload, wouldn't you rather your best attacking forward do less defensive work and be ready in attack?

For me, I'd rather see:

8. Moa (30-40 minutes, 15-20 tackles, 100+ metres)
9. Friend (50 minutes, 30 tackles)
10. JWH (50-60 minutes, 25-35 tackles, 100+ meters)
11. Cords (50-60 minutes, 20-30 tackles, 80-100 metres, possible line breaks, offloads)
12. LOD (70-80 minutes, 30-40 tackles, 100+ metres)
13. SBW (70-80 minutes, 25 tackles, 100 metres, line breaks, offloads, line break assists)

Then your bench you spread out. Kennedy comes in for Moa, LOD rotates over for JWH when he's off for a spell, bring Maubs in for Cords, Morts in for Friend, and Frank Paul at best, become a 20 minute player (impact, as that's all he's really good for nowadays).

I actually agree with all your analysis and think that's a great post.

However you obviously don't understand the difference between a lock and a second rower. The term 'backrower' is essentially irrelevant; it describes the 3 players who make up the back row of the scrum. However the difference in roles between a lock and a second rower are vast, the lock defends centre field and is generally responsible for taking hitups and getting through the hard work. Like you said; Fensom, Lowrie, Parke r& Stagg are all great workers. They all play lock and get through a lot of work.

Second rowers defend 4 in and thus obviously aren't required to do as much defensive work as a lock who defends in the middle of the park. They also aren't required to take as many runs but they must be able to participate in attacking plays (this is why I said it's important they have ball playing skills and can run good lines) they also need to be mobile because there's a lot more space out wide that needs to be cut down.

The term 'backrowers' is misleading. A forward pack is essentially made up of middle third players (those who play in the middle third of the field), your lock & two props. In our case FPN, JWH & Moa. And Fringe players (those who play out wider in both defence and attack) your second rowers in our case Maubs, Guerra & SBW.

What you seem to be suggesting is that LOD take FPN's place in the middle third and help out with the workrate in taking runs and making tackles. In this case I agree and I even said so in another thread, he could add a lot to this team playing at lock if he keeps up this form.

[mightyrooster]

I was one who was against the signing of Luke O'Donnell but thought he had a great game the other night. If he can make that many metres from the bench every game I will be very happy. I'm beginning to change my mind on this signing.