Why have England dropped Palmer?

Not the official team announcement but according to the telegraph (usually correct), three changes from last week.

Armitage for Cueto
Stevens for Corbisero
Lawes for Palmer

All three could be argued but the last is the biggest surprise to me. Palmer has been the stand out second row of the tournament for England and one of the better forwards altogether.

difficult one really, slightly suprised, but i think it may have been expected.

Must say Id expected Lawes to come in for Deacon
Other than that the changes are as expected, if dissapointing in some cases.

Which one(s) do you find disappointing?

I'd have Palmer ahead of Deacon any day of the week.

Also I think Armitage is wasted on the wing i'd start him ahead of Foden who only seems to run sideways before he gets tackled by an angry/jealous Saturdays fan.

When is Banahan going to make his mark on the RWC he'd be effective against the Scots in the last 20mins.

screamingaddabs wrote:Which one(s) do you find disappointing?

Wilko for Flood ( OK thats not actually a change is it)
Armitage for Cueto Im neutral on, either is fine although Id expected him to go with Cueto
Tindal for Hape ... I think this is harsh on Hape. The thinking must partly be driven by the lack of experience in the backs, especialy with Armitage getting the nod over Cueto.
Stevens Im quite happy with and no great suprise, although he does have to step up his game.

Guess the bench competition
Hartley Corbs Palmer Waldrom(or easter if fit) Wiggles Flood Cueto

Deacon is the man who makes the lineout calls - on both throws. Palmer did it in the AIs but admitted he messed up and was stripped of the responsibility.
Deacon is the better scrummager.

Now i know that set piece ability is not sexy or flashy, but it is important - especially to Johnno.

Lawes for Palmer weakens the lineout - Lawes should grow into a damn fine lineout operator, but for now he is not international standard. Arguably Palmer is the better scrummager - again this should change. Pundits such as Dean Ryan believe that the Palmer/Deacon partnership should have stayed. I disagree and want Lawes in for his open field play - but feel that we could not afford to weaken the setpieces any further than we have.

Palmer has been the stand out second row of the tournament for England and one of the better forwards altogether.

Personally I think Palmer has been quiet since the 6N. He was average in the warm ups and has failed to deliver the all action style he seemed to demonstrate in the 6N. Deacon on the other hand is not only the best set piece operator we have he is also a real work horse and is even carrying well at the moment (normally his major weakness).

Of course Sam, we are a tad biased.

I dont think its a surprise Lawes coming back. Johno obvisouly rates him highly. And he is a physical player.
Deacon provides the set piece power to compliment him.

Cueto v Armitage...either or for me really.

Stevens is gonna have to up his game considerably if he gets picked.

And i have been a big fan of Banahan, and bigging him up for the England side....but even i am now forced to admit...he is not an international prospect.

Lets look to the smaller lads with real pace and ability....who can actually make thing happen

Deacon had a bit of a blinder against Romania, including some good off-loads (one in the run-up to iirc Ashton's first try). He's the line-out captain and a good scrummager. He's done plenty to merit keeping his place.

Palmer is a player that gets seen more around the pitch, but is less good in the lineout. Lawes is a similar type of player, although even moreso, so it makes sense that the selection is between the two. Given we are against Scotland, who's greatest strength is a powerful and athletic pack, it makes sense to play Lawes (especially as he should neutralise Richie Gray in open play).

Armitage has played really well and offers good heads-up attacking options, so is an excellent foil for Foden and Ashton. Cueto is more solid in defence and maybe has a bigger boot (although Delon can hoof it a good way as well), perhaps is a touch quicker but isn't as strong in contact. As with others, I think there's not much to choose.

I assume Corbs is struggling with his calf niggle, as he has been much more solid in the set piece than Stevens, and isn't far behind in open play (I like the idea of Stevens as the prop on the bench - solid enough on either side of the scrum and a good 'impact' player).

I'd keep Wood on the bench rather than Easter/Waldrom.

"I'd keep Wood on the bench rather than Easter/Waldrom.."

I'd start

6 Croft
7 Wood
8 Haskell

Of course Sam, we are a tad biased

Or more informed upon his strengths having spent a greater amount of time watching him play and seeing the effects of when he hasn't been playing (e.g. the collapse of the Tigers lineout at the tail end of last season).

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

screamingaddabs wrote:Which one(s) do you find disappointing?

Wilko for Flood ( OK thats not actually a change is it)
Armitage for Cueto Im neutral on, either is fine although Id expected him to go with Cueto
Tindal for Hape ... I think this is harsh on Hape. The thinking must partly be driven by the lack of experience in the backs, especialy with Armitage getting the nod over Cueto.
Stevens Im quite happy with and no great suprise, although he does have to step up his game.

Guess the bench competition
Hartley Corbs Palmer Waldrom(or easter if fit) Wiggles Flood Cueto

To be honest, I'm 50-50 on wilko/flood at the mo - if Flood plays well then he is the man, but I have my doubts about him if the forwards are not on top of the opposition. Wilko is Wilko, so he won't let the side down and is a rock in defence. People who say he can't run a back line clearly haven't seen his games for Toulon. I'd choose Armitage over Cueto, though if Cueto played I would be ok with it. Tindall/Hape? Well Hape had a very good game against weak opposition, but he is still distinctly average in my opinion. Tindall can also be distinctly average but he is good for Tuilagi to have with him so I'd go for Tindall. So long as Stevens remembers to bind in the scrum I'm ok with him playing - I think Corbs makes too many handling errors at this level from what I've seen so far - not that he's bad (plus handling for a prop is hardly the number one concern) I just feel Stevens is the better option for now.

The Lawes/Palmer pertnership worked well in the Ai's and summer tests, but since then Deacons come in and proved very good at what he does and doesn't seem to mind having any of the other 3 locks beside him.

The only concern is the frontrow, they need to be dynamic as Deacon isn't and although he does do the dirty work he doesn't keep up too well with play.

i think with the Hape and Cueto decisions people are forgetting just how poor they've been before the Romania game.

Tbh i'm impressed MJ hasn't jumped at this opportunity to bring them back in to the side, it bodes well for post wc.

Horses for courses my dear fellows:

Scotlands main threat is their scrum...Deacon is reknown for being a beast in the scrum...With Stevens out of position and under pressure from Murray, Deacon makes sense.

Richie Gray is a great great player, he is fast and extreemly athletic...Lawes is the perfect guy to neutralise him.

Corbisiero has been struggling with a calf strain therefore Stevens comes in.

Armitage is the main surprise for me but he deserves his shot having impressed in the last few games..for me cueto reads the game better from the wing knowing when to pop up in the middle.

Wilko vs Flood is the main selection conundrum for me as this decision shapes the whole team, i think wilko is a living legend but unfortunatly think he lacks the tools to unlock the Southern hemisphere teams while Flood stands flat and offers more of an attacking threat while wilko is very deep which the best defenses will storm up on and not stand back like Romania.

Lawes was always gonna back when suspension was over, palmer can feel hard done by though

BATH_BTGOG wrote:Foden who only seems to run sideways before he gets tackled

That doesn't match reality. Metres are only measured going forward and Foden made more than any other player against Argentina & Georgia. A couple of other players made more than him in the Romania game, but they were on the pitch for the whole game whereas Foden was replaced by Armitage after 50mins (Foden, 50mins, 79m; Armitage, 30mins, 12m).

Foden - if I remember right from the 6N his 'carrying' stats was the highest in the competition by some margin. That must be a lot to do with him running the ball back from deep, but then he has the pace to cause a lot of problems and hes a lot stronger than he looks. Then there is the way he works with Ashton.

I think hes a really good player - and even if he isnt running through the opposition its only usually because he scares them and they are putting a lot more effort into marking him - leaving space for others.

I really like the way Foden plays - he's always looking to run first, then kick only if there's no running opportunity. He's looked sharp in the world cup, though things haven't quite clicked always. I think there's a big game ready to come out from him.

No problem with the team for me, the major close calls could have gone either way but I think it's a strong team.

lostinwales wrote:Foden - ...he has the pace to cause a lot of problems and hes a lot stronger than he looks...

I think hes a really good player - and even if he isnt running through the opposition its only usually because he scares them and they are putting a lot more effort into marking him - leaving space for others.

One of the things that has impressed me in the last few matches about both Foden and Armitage is how well they stand up in contact and wait for support to arrive either to allow an off-load or so that they don't get pinged for holding on on the floor. As you say, Foden is a fair bit stronger than he looks and has exceptional balance as a runner, allowing him to change direction either way at pace.

I think Foden is an excellent full back but just wish he'd accept when it isn't on an use his boot, at least once a game he'll just run head long into the chasers without any support. Very frustrating when an up and under with his pace or a nudge to send the ball into touch in the opponents half would be better options.

formerly known as Sam wrote:I think Foden is an excellent full back but just wish he'd accept when it isn't on an use his boot, at least once a game he'll just run head long into the chasers without any support. Very frustrating when an up and under with his pace or a nudge to send the ball into touch in the opponents half would be better options.

thats the risk you take with a player that looks to run as the first option. there's always going to be times when it goes a little wrong, but so many full backs kick 9 times out of 10 for fear of being tackled behind the supporting players.

I'll forgive the odd 'wrong option' when it's done due to positive intent

Sam I wonder how much oif this comes form teh coaches though because its not just him thats running everything. Englands back 3 have a ridiculously low number of kicks per game between them recently. Its seems theyve lurched form one extreme to the other.

I posted this lesewhere but I suspect the theory is that against some of these pool teams the opportunities to get the backs 3 into the game running in space ( where they are very good) would be limited, so when the balls kicked to them have a go.
In some of the games against better opposition I suspect they may become a bit more pragmatic in their approach, play more territory, but also hope that the opposition displays more attacking intent and gives them opportunities to turn the ball over or not just look to wrestle them at every ruck and get the backs running in broken play elsewhere on the field.

Englands backs used to get slated for kicking everything.

The England management have certainly encouraged the amount of running rugby being played by England but at the same time there are occasions when players need to think for themselves and make decisions. Sometimes the best option is to take some territory or to put up a well chased tester for the opposition full back.

Cueto and Armitage tend to bring more of a kicking game, Foden seems to lack confidence when kicking and I don't think Ashton has a kicking game.

Deacon has more grunt in the tight and Palmer dropped a couple of easy passes last time out and Shawsy gave a stupid off side pen away having come on for 1 minute. Cueto may be carrying an injury after going down against Romania. Armitage is equally as good if not better.