Pretty well written (though double-check those apostrophes and semi-colons - you have a couple of rogue ones in there), but it's largely a collection of facts.
If I were in your position, I would be looking to get more opinion, analysis or both into the article. For instance, in Marler's case, there are several ways you could go:
You could look more at the competing claims of Lancaster's various options. You touch on Sheridan's age as a factor against him, and Stevens' commitment, but you don't really dig in to why they might each be chosen. Has Stevens really delivered on the international stage since his return? Does his versatility make him a better impact sub than a starting player? Is Sheridan's injury record the final nail in his coffin? Corbisiero is the man in possession - what are his strength and weaknesses? How does Marler stack up against them?
Or you could look at Marler? What makes him distinctive (apart from the Mohawk)? Where is he strong? Where does he need to improve?
Or you could (possibly along with one of the above) dig deeply into one aspect of his game. In Joe's case, I'd say his game in the loose is already exceptional, and his temperament has dramatically improved over the course of this season (which could also be a good topic to explore - it may be linked to the overall Quins focus on discipline), but his scrummaging is still controversial. Some people think he can't scrummage for toffee, others think he's solid but vulnerable to THs who know how to con the ref. What do you think? What's the evidence?
That last one is the article I'd probably most want to read, because I've not seen anything on it before. It might be good to ask some former players or amateur props what they think, if you can get access to them. But the most important thing is to be clear about what you're adding to the debate. What will people read in your article that they won't have read before?
girwin90 I'm trying to get more and more Harlequins articles on the website, I would love your thoughts on this article. I'll keep trying to get more on the website, thanks everyone and have a great christmas.
I'm writing one at the minute. you guys are welcome to it when it's done if you deem it good enough.
Without wishing to sound pedantic, I'd suggest getting a proof reader to go through it as well. It's not necessarily a criticism, as sometimes you can be almost "blind" to what you've written, but Poorfour was right in mentioning rogues apostrophes and semi-colons; there are also grammatical errors, and some of it just doesn't make sense in a linguistic sense.
Anyway, nit-picking hat now off, I also agree with Poorfour's suggestions on points of focus. I personally like an article to stand out from others rather than regurgitate what other people have written. Maybe more focus on Joes early career (wasn't he sent off in an England age group game? And didn't he also captain the side?) Perhaps also try and learn more about his mentoring by Sir Jase.
Nev's Left Boot Corbisiero is a very good player, i think he provides a good balance of tight and loose play. I've rated him for quite some time.
Joe is better in the loose imho, and i actually think he is a decent scrummager and will get better. THe best thing he offers is a very clear long bind.
I'd agree with that assessment. The long bind is something that will benefit Joe in the longer term as referees come to expect it. If Wayne Barnes's analysis at the (excellent) Meet the Ref session a couple of weeks ago is in anyway indicative, refs are looking for the TH without the put in to bind properly and stay up - the main thing they'll ping a loosehead for is binding on the arm. Once refs get that Joe always binds long, the onus will be on opposing THs to keep the scrum up.
That said, I'm sure I've heard one ref this season (I think it might have been Pearson) penalising Joe for binding on the arm - one of the more inexplicable decisions I've heard.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment.
We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals.
We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards.
If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing