Owen Farrell vs Finn Russell: The Calcutta Cup's potentially decisive head-to-head battle
England and Scotland clash in the Guinness Six Nations at Twickenham on Saturday when Owen Farrell and Finn Russell will look to lay down markers for the role of British and Irish Lions Test fly-half.
The rivals offer different skill-sets that have pros and cons and each will view the Calcutta Cup showdown as a chance to impress Warren Gatland in the event the series against South Africa, scheduled for the summer, does not fall to coronavirus. Here, the PA news agency looks at how they shape up.
OWEN FARRELL
Point of difference: A ferocious competitor and the England talisman, Farrell is the heartbeat of Eddie Jones’ team. An outstanding goal-kicker and accomplished playmaker.
Weakness: The will to win can spill over into indiscipline at times, in particular leading to rash tackles. Now less inclined to get involved in niggles, but his communication with referees is still too forceful. Will also be coming into this Saturday's game without having played a match of any kind since the December 6 Nations Cup final win.
Lions verdict: The favourite for the Lions fly-half duties against the Springboks because of his generalship and presence. Lacks Russell’s imagination but farrell is more dependable in pressure-cooker moments such as the Six Nations.
FINN RUSSELL
Point of difference: Probably the game’s most inventive player with a box of tricks that can unlock any defence. Possesses a range of passing and a short kicking game to terrify any defence.
Weakness: As with any maverick, the genius that makes him so dangerous can also lead to wayward moments when the execution fails to match the vision. Game-management is a focus for improvement.
Lions verdict: To choose Russell as ringmaster would be a bold declaration of attacking intent as there is no fly-half better at igniting a back line, but there might be a cost to pay in cohesion. A riskier option.
Latest Comments
It is if he thinks he’s got hold of the ball and there is at least one other player between him and the ball carrier, which is why he has to reach around and over their heads. Not a deliberate action for me.
Go to commentsI understand, but England 30 years ago were a set piece focused kick heavy team not big on using backs.
Same as now.
South African sides from any period will have a big bunch of forwards smashing it up and a first five booting everything in their own half.
NZ until recently rarely if ever scrummed for penalties; the scrum is to attack from, broken play, not structured is what we’re after.
Same as now.
These are ways of playing very ingrained into the culture.
If you were in an English club team and were off to Fiji for a game against a club team you’d never heard of and had no footage of, how would you prepare?
For a forward dominated grind or would you assume they will throw the ball about because they are Fijian?
A Fiji way. An English way.
An Australian way depends on who you’ve scraped together that hasn’t been picked off by AFL or NRL, and that changes from generation to generation a lot of the time.
Actually, maybe that is their style. In fact, yes they have a style.
Nevermind. Fuggit I’ve typed it all out now.
Go to comments