10.

[Rugbyintheblood]

Let's face it, if our 10 can only shine while playing alongside the best 9 in the league then they aren't a great first choice 10.

For his successful years Alex King had the best 9's in the league - Howley, Dawson, Reddan.
Before then Friday and Gomersall were pretty good too.
He never had a Porter or Wolstenholme at that stage of their careers. When Howley was out it was Richards.

The issue to me is not the 9.

It is the scrum.

Exactly right.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Let's face it, if our 10 can only shine while playing alongside the best 9 in the league then they aren't a great first choice 10.

For his successful years Alex King had the best 9's in the league - Howley, Dawson, Reddan.
Before then Friday and Gomersall were pretty good too.
He never had a Porter or Wolstenholme at that stage of their careers. When Howley was out it was Richards.

The issue to me is not the 9.

It is the scrum.

Exactly right.

Agreed. No 10 can perform without a stable ball winning scrum, not just in the set scrums and lineouts, but in the field. What ball we did win at set pieces was going backwards or under pressure, and good, clean turnovers were not much in evidence.

[Andywasp50]

Let's face it, if our 10 can only shine while playing alongside the best 9 in the league then they aren't a great first choice 10.

This. It’s spot on for me. Robson is outstanding and way ahead of anyone else in the league, to the point where he’s virtually a 9 and a half, doing a lot of thinking for the 10.

Umaga has been fortunate to play alongside him. Last season when Robbo wasn’t playing and we had Porter/Umaga we were awful, resulting in some abject performances, particularly at home against 14 and even 13 men.

[Heathen]

Let's face it, if our 10 can only shine while playing alongside the best 9 in the league then they aren't a great first choice 10.

Totally agree VV!

[HDAWG]

Let's face it, if our 10 can only shine while playing alongside the best 9 in the league then they aren't a great first choice 10.

To be fair, Wasps play off 9 the most. And the gap between Robson and any of our other scrum halves is still big. The thing is I see Jacobs individual performances are independent of 9 on the day.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

To be fair, Wasps play off 9 the most. And the gap between Robson and any of our other scrum halves is still big. The thing is I see Jacobs individual performances are independent of 9 on the day.

I think this is cause and effect reversed. We play off 9 because Dobby is so good. If we had a 10 who was as good as him we'd play off them more. We don't do that because we can't.

[Hymenoptera]

We appear to have nailed our colours to the mast on this but having just got back  from the game tonight it seems obvious if unpopular that Umaga is just not good enough at 10 for a team that should be a serious top 4 prospect. Forget the place kicking - albeit that regularly costs us 6-12 points per game. Dropped passes, aimless kicking, fizzed passes and bizarre decision making smack to me of a lack of competition. There was one incident where Jacob idled towards the perimeter of our in house goal area and attempted a ridiculous kick which served no purpose and actually instantly put all of our forwards offside. Glaws subsequently scored a try through our massively spaced out defence. Ultimately that play cost us the game. How long can we continue to indulge our talented but game costing 10? Because don’t be fooled by the score line - this was dreadful.

I was saying this over 12 months ago and got my usual lambasting on it...now everyone suddenly agrees because you say it..amazing but not unexpected. 
Charlie is the 10 that will drive this team..i'll comeback in 12 months and you can all agree with Shugs again

[Shugs]

Hymenoptera - to be fair I think most of us a year or so ago were recognising the flaws but hoping that time/more experience would iron them out and we would be left with a seriously talented 10. He is a talented 10. If you look at the bare stats from Friday he could be motm. Unfortunately we’re still seeing some of the inconsistency or rather poor decision making that we were a while back and the game management continues to cost us points. As a footnote not everyone agreed I’m sure those who did just felt the same way as I did.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

I still think he will improve, and he was often between a rock and a hard place on Friday night. Poor ball coming to him, with our pack going backwards meant Glaws had the line speed to be up on him so fast he couldn't pass or kick. Yes, he did make mistakes, but I would not be critical of him, not in the rabid way some posters here are.

[Steve from Cov]

I still think he will improve, and he was often between a rock and a hard place on Friday night. Poor ball coming to him, with our pack going backwards meant Glaws had the line speed to be up on him so fast he couldn't pass or kick. Yes, he did make mistakes, but I would not be critical of him, not in the rabid way some posters here are.

Spot on.

[Rossm]

Jacob's stats from Friday night,

[backdoc]

I still think he will improve, and he was often between a rock and a hard place on Friday night. Poor ball coming to him, with our pack going backwards meant Glaws had the line speed to be up on him so fast he couldn't pass or kick. Yes, he did make mistakes, but I would not be critical of him, not in the rabid way some posters here are.

Spot on.

Agree

[Neils]

I still think he will improve, and he was often between a rock and a hard place on Friday night. Poor ball coming to him, with our pack going backwards meant Glaws had the line speed to be up on him so fast he couldn't pass or kick. Yes, he did make mistakes, but I would not be critical of him, not in the rabid way some posters here are.

Spot on.

Agree

+1

[mike909]

I still think he will improve, and he was often between a rock and a hard place on Friday night. Poor ball coming to him, with our pack going backwards meant Glaws had the line speed to be up on him so fast he couldn't pass or kick. Yes, he did make mistakes, but I would not be critical of him, not in the rabid way some posters here are.

Spot on.

Agree

+1

+2 All players take the negative with the positive feedback and I'd imagine once we are in danger of having anything like 70% fitness, we'll be in a position to better judge - for now.

Whilst Ford at Tigers, is class and a regular international, his current good season is at least part based upon being behind a monster and dominant pack that's providing front foot ball.

Friday, Jacob was behind a retreating pack too often, inside a "never before" centre partnership (and probably never again) and with an out of form SH at wing and with two players replaced an hour before kick off. We probably over achieved in terms of the scoreline and no one person was really to blame for porous defence and lack of coordination in terms of defence and instinctive actions.

[HDAWG]

Whilst Ford at Tigers, is class and a regular international, his current good season is at least part based upon being behind a monster and dominant pack that's providing front foot ball.

But then Ford was also world class when Leicester were 11th in the table and arguably single handedly kept them from being relegated.

Smith too was sensational in his first season at Quins yet they were towards bottom of the table.

Fly halves can shine in struggling teams, not always, but sometimes.