Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Ollie Lawrence commits his future to Bath

Ollie Lawrence of Bath looks on during the Gallagher Premiership Rugby match between Northampton Saints and Bath Rugby at cinch Stadium on January 05, 2025 in Northampton, England. (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

England centre Ollie Lawrence is the latest player to have re-signed for Gallagher Premiership leaders Bath, with Quinn Roux and Beno Obano having also agreed new deals this week.

ADVERTISEMENT

Lawrence, who joined in October 2022 when Worcester went bust, has gone on to make 44 appearances for the Blue, Black and White, scoring 16 tries.

The 25-year-old has represented England 31 times including at the 2023 Rugby World Cup where the team secured a third-place finish and is in the team for this weekend’s Guinness Six Nations opener against Ireland in Dublin.

Reflecting on his new long-term deal, Lawrence said: “I’ve enjoyed my time at Bath over the last few seasons. It’s helped me grow as a player on and off the field. I believe we have so much potential within this group and I’m excited for what we can achieve over the next few seasons”

Related

Bath’s Head of Rugby Johann van Graan said: “Ollie has been magnificent for us, not only this season but since he first joined the club. He has established himself as a starting international player. I love the way Ollie has improved as a player and as a person whilst at Bath. We are excited to see Ollie continuing his journey with us and his best is definitely yet to come.”

Playing with real confidence and as a swagger as befits a jersey once worn by Jerry Guscott, Lawrence is averaging more offloads, clean breaks and carriers per match than he did for England throughout the Autumn Nations Series.

Whilst acknowledging his role for club and country differs slightly, in an interview earlier this month he said he’s happy with his rugby across the board.

ADVERTISEMENT

“In internationals, there isn’t always as much space as there is in the Premiership, and that does affect the way I play at times, so it’s difficult to compare the two,” he said.

“With England, I have played a more direct approach. Off strike phases at Bath, I’ve done that but more in the wider channels.

“I enjoy pulling on the jersey for England as much as I do playing for Bath. So whatever role I have to do, whether that is 12 or 13 and whether that is direct or in those wide channels, I’m trying to work on both aspects of my game.”

Related

Lawrence has played solely at 13 for Bath this season but had 12 on his back in the opening Autumn international against New Zealand, before reverting to outside-centre, his position this weekend.

ADVERTISEMENT


To be first in line for Rugby World Cup 2027 Australia tickets, register your interest here 

ADVERTISEMENT

Boks Office | Episode 35 | Six Nations Round 2 Review

O2 Inside Line: This Rose | Episode 3 | France Week

Second round of the Men's Six Nations | Whistle Watch

Harlequins vs Bristol Bears | PWR 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

Yokohama Canon Eagles vs Saitama Wildknights | Japan Rugby League One 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

Watch now: Lomu - The Lost Tapes

The Dupont Ploy: How France went from underdogs to Olympic gods | The Report

Former rugby player is truly an NFL superstar | Walk the Talk | Jordan Mailata

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

S
Spew_81 3 hours ago
'He wants players to be able to play four positions': Former All Black critiques Robertson's strategy

I have the selection opinion of ‘chuck them in the deep end, see if they swim’. Starting Mo’unga in the third test, in a series they had already won, would’ve been a perfect opportunity.


I also made it clear I would’ve kept Cruden in the mix, up until the end of RWC 2019. As he was a game manager. He isn’t Mo’unga which disproves your statement: “or should I say anyone not Mo’unga”. I would’ve had Mo’unga in the wider training group and in the end of year tours. At 10 I would’ve had: Cruden, B Barrett, and McKenzie (as McKenzie can cover: 9, 10, 14, and 15); but as Cruden was out of favour and departed, I would’ve had Mo’unga, B Barrett, and McKenzie as the 10 hierarchy; as Mo’unga is a game manager.


McKenzie had to have made his intentions clear that he wanted to transfer to 10 at least as far back as 2018. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have played at 10 for the Chiefs in 2018. The Chiefs had other options at 10. Why play someone out of position in Super Rugby, when they didn’t have to - unless McKenzie wanted to be the All Blacks 10 after B Barrett left? McKenzie played 10 in high school and never hid the fact that he wanted to have a shot at 10 and the highest level (nothing wrong with that). Also, McKenzie played 10 for the Maori All Blacks earlier in 2017:


[January 18, 2018] “It [10] has been a position I've always played and in the last few years I've played at 15, but now there is the opportunity to play at 10 and its one I'm looking forward too.


Damian McKenzie targets first-five role for Chiefs ahead of Super Rugby season | Stuff


Hansen seemed to think that McKenzie was a valid option at 10: “In World Cup squads, versatility is king. McKenzie's Test career has been at fullback; next year at the Chiefs he will be their first-choice fly-half”.


'When you're afraid you start second guessing yourself' - The Damian McKenzie All Blacks Interview - ESPN


It makes sense that Hansen and Foster’s logic was that McKenzie would follow the same path as B Barrett did to the 10 jersey for the All Blacks; from 15 to 10.


Why would McKenzie move positions from 15 to 10 at Super Rugby level, if he didn’t want to play 10 for the All Blacks? Just to be a better ‘dual playmaker’? He clearly wanted the All Blacks 10 jersey (nothing wrong with that). Hansen wanted a dual playmaker system, that’s why he wanted two 10’s that could play 15. It removes the need for a 10 on the bench (Cruden or Mo’unga) that’s why Hansen didn’t give Cruden a real shot at reclaiming the 10 jersey, and why he didn’t develop Mo’unga - until McKenzie got injured out of RWC 2019. This all fits the established narrative. Hansen could’ve had Mo’unga at 10 and B Barrett at 15 and had two pivots with different styles.


I brought it up as I it shows that Hansen and Foster would rather have a second 10, that played like the incumbent 10, instead of a game manager at 10. That was one of my main points. I’m saying that was the reason why Mo’unga wasn’t given a proper chance to develop into the international 10 he could’ve been.


All I’ve said is that I don’t think Hansen and Foster made the best choice, in hindsight. One of each type of 10 would’ve offered more options, making the job harder for opposition defense coaches. But without the benefit of parallel universes, where all the alternative ideas could play out, no one will really know.


I believe what the information shows, and what seems to be plausible, based on that information. There can be many, sometimes contradictory, conclusions that can be drawn from the same information. Without reading the minds of all involved we can just speculate based of the information that we have.


I brought those facts up to as I believe that both Hansen and Foster didn’t really want Mo’unga at 10 and only used him at 10 when they ran out of other ideas (which they both did). Foster and Hansen would’ve had long term planning discussions while Hansen was the main coach and Foster was the assistant. The next 10, after B Barrett would’ve been discussed during the 2016-2019 cycle as B Barrett (while very good) didn’t have the ability to consistently manage the really tight games (I’m not sure any 10, even Carter, could do it alone against the developed rush defenses that are common now). Also, as with any long term planning, they would’ve been thinking about B Barrett’s eventual replacement. They seemed to want another player who played like B Barrett.


Hansen and Foster seemed to be grooming McKenzie as the replacement 10. No wonder Mo’unga chose not to die for the team, and made sure he would be set for life by the time RWC 2027 comes around.


I have shown my reasoning and the information that led to those conclusions. If you have contrary information, post it, I’d be interested to see it. I’m happy to change my mind. I am very interested to discuss this type of thing, especially when someone has different views. It makes the discussion more interesting. I am happy to agree to disagree on this. You make some good comments, I’m sure we will sometimes agree and sometimes disagree in future :)


[Bonus Comment] Also, here’s an idea that is a bit left field that you can sink your teeth into. McKenzie should’ve made his primary position as a 9, covering: 10, 14, and 15 (McKenzie has been seen as valid 9 cover, he played 9 when Perenara got sin binned in Wellington, vs France in 2018). Start Aaron Smith and have Mo’unga at 10 and Barrett at 15; bring on McKenzie with 20 minutes to go. Three playmakers. That would’ve been a nightmare for defense coaches to defend against. Imagine A Savea taking the ball off the back of a mid-field scrum on the 22, with those three options to offload to. You can’t rush all three players. That is the way to beat a rush defense, create too many options to cover; but you need a 10 who is a game manager that can take advantage of the options.

106 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Six Nations: Rivalries and realities in round three Six Nations: Rivalries and realities in round three
Search