England Team announced

First topic message reminder :

3 new caps guaranteed - with more uncapped players on the bench.

Ben Foden; Chris Ashton; Brad Barritt, Owen Farrell, David Strettle; Charlie Hodgson; Ben Youngs; Alex Corbisiero, Dylan Hartley, Dan Cole; Mauritz Botha, Tom Palmer; Tom Croft, Chris Robshaw (captain), Phil Dowson.

Replacements: Rob Webber, Matt Stevens, Geoff Parling, Ben Morgan, Lee Dickson, Jordan Turner-Hall, Mike Brown.

Fair play Biscuit that's a nice appraisal

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Hodgson is the most talented English 10 of the pro era

Well England did beat Wales 47-13 last time he started against them....

Ran rings around the Welsh defence if I remember rightly.

RubyGuby wrote:Look guys Hodgson has played at this level before and he has been an absolute liability on numerous occasions - For someone to say he is the best 10 of the english professional era I find amazing. He has plenty of time and protection at Saracens, if things start getting fierce at Murrayfield then would you really want this guy in the trenches with you. Good luck but after so many changes I would be disappointed to see him at 10 when there are better options IMO.

I never said he was the best - just the most talented.

also I dispute that he has been a liability for England. His defence is nowhere near as bad as people say. I admit his goalkicking has suffered at times - but he is not the kicker this weekend (and as PSW mentions Wilkos kicking at goal in 2011 was dismal). With a 22 year old SH and two uncapped centres his selection is rather predictable - especially as there is no-one else banging on the door demanding selection.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2ncPd7jJLk

RubyGuby wrote:Look guys Hodgson has played at this level before and he has been an absolute liability on numerous occasions - For someone to say he is the best 10 of the english professional era I find amazing. He has plenty of time and protection at Saracens, if things start getting fierce at Murrayfield then would you really want this guy in the trenches with you. Good luck but after so many changes I would be disappointed to see him at 10 when there are better options IMO.

Like who?
Lamb??? The fat kid from Newcastle who sits on the Quins bench? The Donought wasnt a realitic option. Burns...seems to have slipped down the internet love affair pecking order and like Owf blatantly isnt ready yet to be starting internationals in that role unless you get to the point Wales did with Preistalnd and get forced into taking a gamble on a child ( note failiure of previous attempt to do this with that idiot from Ospreys) . If youre talking about proven failures please dont bring up Barkley. Even Goodes gone now. Geraghty and Myler hit a wall with their development and never made the grade. Ford is way to inexperienced and small.
With Flood injured and Wilko finaly having done what needed doing England are short of cover in that area. Theyve gone with their 3rd choice FH whilst giving a chance to the next generation to come through ( although Burns really should be starting the Saxons games, he cant seriously be considering Lamb as a full cap international can he?)

Im not massively enamoured of Hodgson but I cant see where else England were going to go. They have been a good side with him at 10 in the past, it could happen again.

here is them humiliating Leicester, in Leicester. By no means a first choice Leicester team, but still...

Barely a second team. Pretty much everybody beat Tigers easily at that point of the season. Hopefully revenge will arrive in a couple of weeks!

His defence is nowhere near as bad as people say

Memories of a certain tour to NZ spring to mind where his tackling was worse than what people commonly accuse him of. Having said that his tackling has improved quite a bit since then and dramatically since he has been in the tender loving care of Gustard the Sarries defence coach.

ChequeredJersey wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2ncPd7jJLk

Jesus nice bit of fishooking ( and probably a gouge) from the Saf 7 at the start of that ! It does maze me when forwards say they miss the old style mauls....
For all they are known as a dirty side now they were real nasty *****s a few years back. I forget when it was now but they went out to ( and succeeded) in delibertaly injuring Wilko with some pretty nasty assualts. Its the sort of game now that would have resulted in multiple citeings.


Anyway getting back on topic this was over 7 years ago but Hodgson shows something of everything attack in those highlights. Crossfield kick for a try, running through the middle and breaking tackles for a try, goalkicking.... he was a player with a solid all round game.

I guess Robinson will be more wary of his name on the team sheet than many Scotland fans are.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

here is them humiliating Leicester, in Leicester. By no means a first choice Leicester team, but still...

Barely a second team. Pretty much everybody beat Tigers easily at that point of the season. Hopefully revenge will arrive in a couple of weeks!

His defence is nowhere near as bad as people say

Memories of a certain tour to NZ spring to mind where his tackling was worse than what people commonly accuse him of. Having said that his tackling has improved quite a bit since then and dramatically since he has been in the tender loving care of Gustard the Sarries defence coach.

No one did beat Tigers easily. Revenge will likely come in couple of weeks if you play your two England players as you said you would.

I think we will see a lot of cross field kicks and oop and unders from CH -

well I am guessing the thinking is that the scots will get in hodgeson's face and he'll go to pieces - but as has been said when things did go wrong for him it was in his place kicking - and Farrell will be doing that.

He is a much older and wiser player now - if the scots dont get to him they could end up in a lot of trouble

absolutely PSW, I think Hodgson is a good player (minus the kicking duties at international level), its funny how views on players change when the more extreme come along (brilliance to flake in the flash of an eye - cipriani/lamb/Gregharty sp?)

I was more aiming my comment at the "most talented english 10 for a decade'" comment with a wry smile.

Hodgson is the best option at the moment, unless you want to throw Farrell in, but then who goes to the centres with Barritt?

His distribution and tactical kicking will be big plusses, especially if he keeps the variation in his game we see at club level, but yes, he hasn't the threat flood would bring and to me that just diminishes the chances of Ashton coming off his shoulder and to me limits one of Ashtons great strengths (coming against the grain - again as beshocked pointed out).

Also, if Farrell does have to defend at 12, having hodgson inside him at 10, thats a half gap screaming to the likes of Picamoles/Faletau/Roberts/SOB/Denton/Gray/Fofana (etc etc etc). Perhaps thats a bit strong, but the big runners at international level will be licking their lips should they get that opportunity.

Still, its a team that looks TTTAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSTTTTTTYYYYY when Wood/Flood/Tuilagi make their comebacks.

Sort out the locks and the balance in the back row, all of a sudden you have a side capable of taking on the world in all honestly.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Memories of a certain tour to NZ spring to mind where his tackling was worse than what people commonly accuse him of. Having said that his tackling has improved quite a bit since then and dramatically since he has been in the tender loving care of Gustard the Sarries defence coach.

Do you mean the one in 2008 that rob Andrew took down? Noon and Tindall were the centres in those games I think. For two 'defensive' centres they were shockingly bad in the defence. The All Blacks were playing with them. However, it's Hodgson people remember for being bad in defence and yet Tindall and Noon still get talked about being good in defence. Funny that.

HammerofThunor wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Memories of a certain tour to NZ spring to mind where his tackling was worse than what people commonly accuse him of. Having said that his tackling has improved quite a bit since then and dramatically since he has been in the tender loving care of Gustard the Sarries defence coach.

Do you mean the one in 2008 that rob Andrew took down? Noon and Tindall were the centres in those games I think. For two 'defensive' centres they were shockingly bad in the defence. The All Blacks were playing with them. However, it's Hodgson people remember for being bad in defence and yet Tindall and Noon still get talked about being good in defence. Funny that.

IIRC Barkley and Tindall were the centres in the first game. Hodgson was dropped for the second, Barkley came in to fly half and Noon at 12. You're right that Noon had a defensive nightmare that day.

Comfort wrote:absolutely PSW, I think Hodgson is a good player (minus the kicking duties at international level), its funny how views on players change when the more extreme come along (brilliance to flake in the flash of an eye - cipriani/lamb/Gregharty sp?)

I was more aiming my comment at the "most talented english 10 for a decade'" comment with a wry smile.

Hodgson is the best option at the moment, unless you want to throw Farrell in, but then who goes to the centres with Barritt?

His distribution and tactical kicking will be big plusses, especially if he keeps the variation in his game we see at club level, but yes, he hasn't the threat flood would bring and to me that just diminishes the chances of Ashton coming off his shoulder and to me limits one of Ashtons great strengths (coming against the grain - again as beshocked pointed out).

Also, if Farrell does have to defend at 12, having hodgson inside him at 10, thats a half gap screaming to the likes of Picamoles/Faletau/Roberts/SOB/Denton/Gray/Fofana (etc etc etc). Perhaps thats a bit strong, but the big runners at international level will be licking their lips should they get that opportunity.
Still, its a team that looks TTTAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSTTTTTTYYYYY when Wood/Flood/Tuilagi make their comebacks.

Sort out the locks and the balance in the back row, all of a sudden you have a side capable of taking on the world in all honestly.

I take it you've not seen Farrell Tackle then? He hits hard for his size and has no fear in going for the bigger guy. Plus with Robshaw covering as well hitting the 10 - 12 channel wont give any edge.

Best hope for Scotland is to spin in wide from Parks....sorry what was i thinking, get the centers to chase parks kicks

Team is pretty much as I expected. Lancaster said all along he prefers a distributing 12 and before Tuilagi got injured the papers were speculating it would be Flood at 10, Farrell at 12 and Tuilagi at 13 so I’m not surprised to see the combination he’s picked. I’m sure I read an interview with Barritt (think it was the telegraph, will check) where he said he has defended at outside center for most of the season (I’m not deliberately saying your wrong Beshocked, it’s just what he reportedly said). Turner-Hall isn’t the choice I would have for the bench, as others have said no plan B. Would have preferred a more flyer type outside center on the bench as opposed to another basher in the Barritt mode.

Only reason I can think that Sharples hasn’t made the bench is that Lancaster doesn’t trust him to be a backup full back in the event of a Foden injury. I’m pretty sure that when Foden first got into the Sale team it was on the left wing so he has got some experience there and as others have said most backs can cover wing in an emergency. It’s strange that after everyone seemed to report that SL liked his replacements to cover a number of positions that Turner-Hall and Brown are on the bench when they only cover one position each. I can’t even remember seeing JTH even play at 13 in the past although I’m sure he must have at some point.

It’s the backrow I expected once Wood was injured. Think if Wood had been fit then Morgan would maybe have started along with Robshaw with Croft on the bench but now SL probably feels we need more presence at the breakdown in both defense and attack. Be interesting to see that if England finally get the best out of Croft then who will drop out of the starting 15 once Wood is fit.

Agree we lack ball carriers and all the front 3 are going to have to do their bit in this area. Thing is all 3 have shown they are capable in the past for their club sides but it’s a worry expecting them all to step it up for this game. One thing with Hartley is that he will give it is all – he may give away stupid penalties from time to time but he will give 100% and will not disappear, even if England are on the back foot.

I think Botha is only there until Lawes regains fitness and then it will be Lawes and Palmer. Really happy that Parling had been included, if he can stay injury free then I think he has the ability to make a mark at this level. In the future if the rest of the pack complements them then a second row partnership of Lawes and Parling could be more than useful.

Hopefully we will be okay in the lineout. Before Wood arrived at Saints then Dowson was often utilized at both the front and back of the lineout and Robshaw is another option towards the back. I guess Grey will mark Croft if he goes to the front on England’s ball and Hamilton will follow Palmer around so England may be forced to throw long more often than not.

Do you mean the one in 2008 that rob Andrew took down? Noon and Tindall were the centres in those games I think. For two 'defensive' centres they were shockingly bad in the defence. The All Blacks were playing with them. However, it's Hodgson people remember for being bad in defence and yet Tindall and Noon still get talked about being good in defence. Funny that..

Yeah it is funny how Tindall and Noon got little blame for their calamities on that tour. Hodgson was blasted after that first game for his lack of effort in contact, he didn't even both putting his shoulder into the tackles. That has changed quite a lot now though.

No one did beat Tigers easily. Revenge will likely come in couple of weeks if you play your two England players as you said you would..

Hmm not sure we'll be so lucky now. Flood is due to be on the bench this weekend and set to start vs Exeter so if the opening weekends go wrong he may be recalled in order to rest over the week off before the next game. Hopefully both Flood and Manu will play, it's only fair.

Knackeredknees wrote:I take it you've not seen Farrell Tackle then? He hits hard for his size and has no fear in going for the bigger guy. Plus with Robshaw covering as well hitting the 10 - 12 channel wont give any edge.

Best hope for Scotland is to spin in wide from Parks....sorry what was i thinking, get the centers to chase parks kicks

KK, Ive seen enough of his defence to form an opinion, i would class his tackling as decent, however, its ok for a 10/he gets away with it at 13. and thats at club level, Sarries wont let him defend at 12 yet (from what ive seen so far this season - admittedly, you will probably have seen him more so please put me right if thats incorrect).

at international level, if he does get stuck in the 12 channel, next to Hodgson, that is a very weak channel defensively in my eyes, especially when you think about the calibre of the ball-carriers that will always have one eye watching the space/cover surrounding hodgson. the 12 needs to (invariably) be able to tackle like a backrower these days.

of course, just imo.

Again we get back to " OMG hes gone and picked the sort of side we always critizied MJ for not picking"

If FArrell can be anything like Riki Flutey who tackled the hell out of Ireland a few years ago England are more than fine there.
10/12 is pretty much always going to be a weak point, thats why England kept picking guys like Hape to attack the oppsoition there. It didnt really work to often though.

I dont see SLamont/Parks as any more intimidating for Englands runners, and nor do I see either of those as players who would try and runs straight over their opposite number. If England were facing Nonu then the concern would be greater. Instead the ability to move will be as valuable as the ability to stop a moving truck head on.

Scotland do have a limited backline so behind the scrum this is a relatively gentle introduction for the midfield trio

Well I seem to remember SL probably making more yards from inside center than just about anybody else in the 6N - not that he ever had any back up mind you.

The mid-field is raw and could get horribly exposed. If they do England could easily pick up the wooden spoon this year?

Englands midfield will only be exposed if the forwards lose the battle upfront.

Scotland will use Parks to kick them into the 22. With a 6"10 & 6"8 Locks they will put the pressure on. Denton is 6"5 as well so will probably cancel out England have of an advantage with Croft. If England lose key lineouts there they could be in trouble.

I know people have said Englands lineout is good put please keep in mind that although good individual players none have any experience playing any length of time together there - except maybe Hartley and Palmer.

England also have to do a number on Rennie because if Scotland do turnover quick ball that will almost certanly disorganize the England defence and expose the midfield. I would imagine England would be ok though because given the amount of bulk they are giving away to the Scots makes me think they may be more mobile.

I expect England to play a similar type of game to Scotland for at least the opening 60 mins of the match. They may open it up a bit later. I dont see Hodgson doing well if his pack are not going forward. Thats why the first 20 mins will be key because if Scotland start with a bank and England fail to hold on to them, once the crowd get behind Scotland, they could end up in big trouble! I got a funny feeling that Jones may even score a try on his debut.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:OK so now Corbiserio cant scrummage or the carryuthe ball,,Farrell is a 13 not a 12 and cant tackle or run, JTH and Dowson cant play rugby, Botha cant carry scrum or operate in the lineout, Tom Croft is a winger, Strettle is a defensive player who cant run, Hodgson cant run or tackle or kick goals, Ben Youngs doesnt exist any more, and if a winger gets injured the entire world will cease to function.

If you say so, PSW - may as well give us the game now then?

Well it looks to me as though Lancaster has picked a team to move the ball as opposed to carry it.

All well and good, I just hope they're up to speed on the gameplan, otherwise they'll get smelted.

If they can move the ball around, get over it quickly when it goes to ground and move it out one way then t'other, Scotland could have a very busy time chasing shadows...... but this is Murrayfield, this is Scotland vs England, and this will rarely go to plan. Looking at the matchday 22 I'm struggling to see who's going to get any joy amongst the muck and bullets.

If the game breaks down into a slogfest, England are toast of the Melba magnitude, small and easily broken.

I like the look of the team bit concerned that Sharples did not get in the team. Glad to see Dowson starting at 8 and not Robshaw, would like to see how mutch time Morgan gets in the game.

Botha in the second row, Would have liked to have seen Garvey instead.

Hodgson, Barrit, Farrel, i think is a good choice all 3 play together for sarries, they will be used to how each other plays, and although Sharples did not get a shot, Strettle, Foden, Ashton if all three play to their strenghts, they will be lethal.

Alot of posters are saying that the pack looks under strenght, i am not to worried about that the pack will take care of its self.

Looking forward to the game now the team as been announced.

Interesting that 5 out of the 7 backs are Northern. And one is from South Africa.

Just watching Rugby Club. I wonder how long it'll be before they turn on Lancaster et al. At the moment they're praising them (especially Barnes and Morris)

Well, it comes down to performance I think HoT, a good performance but a loss is better short-term than a bad performance and a win.

Long term it has to be results.

Bad performance and a bad loss on Saturday and I'd say by 19.15 SL's stock will have bottomed out for Barnes.

Beyond the lineout and cross field kicks to the pace men i can't see what else this team offers,
but and i say but! they may just get away with this because its only Scotland.

Scotland for all their passion and chest beating are still pretty rubbish.

I'm concerned about Farrell being handed the 12 shirt. A lot of people have been saying it's alright, Barritt will be in the 12 spot for defence, but it's that he won't be there in attack that worries me (Farrell is a pretty good defender).

If you're lining up 2 playmakers in the 10-12 axis, these days one of them should really offer something with ball in hand, be it pace, step or power. Neither of them do.

The only use I see would be for a pure territory & kicking based game plan, but that's not the most profitable tactic anymore and I don't think we've got the pack superiority to target it, plus Hodgson & Farrell are both right footed, with Hodgson being a perfectly capable kicker out of hand, so that almost identical 2nd option at IC really seems quite limited and not asking many questions of the opposition's defence.

It won't matter who is at 10 and 12 because this pack will struggle for ball,
Scotland will attack the fringes bringing in Youngs and put old Charlie boy under tremendous pressure ,Ashton will be identified along with Foden as defensively weak if made to think quick so i reckon Parks will be putting some nice grubber kicks in for Evans and Lamont to bear down on.

But if England play a smart kicking game and bring in the athleticism of Croft on close range line outs Scotland won't cope with the pace this back row can bring.

This should be a good game.

viewtothegym wrote:This should be a good game.

Have you ever watched Scotland and England play each other before?

Well I'm worried about Corbs - I think he's had a poor season in the scrum.

And are we really sure that Dowson, who rarely plays 8, is a better 8 than Easter? I'm no huge fan of Easter, but I don't see the point of playing an out of position 30 year old at 8 instead of him.

The centres are interesting, and it suggests that the preferred line up for England later in the tournament is Flood, Farrell, Tuilagi. At this stage I'm not convinced that Barritt is an international player, but I'm pretty confident he isn't a 13 given his lack of pace. As Sam said, he might feel hard done by. No idea why JTH is on the benmch - I don't think his form justifies his place.

I suspect England will be on the back foot for much of the game as the pack does look underpowered, and we'll be replying on the kicking of Hodgson and Farrell to get us a victory, or maybe a try or two out of nothing from the back 3.

Didn't Corbs struggle against Edinburgh the other week? when chunk was playing against him?

viewtothegym wrote:if England play a smart kicking game and bring in the athleticism of Croft on close range line outs Scotland won't cope with the pace this back row can bring.

Scotland's back row will have the better of England's, I'd say. Ross Rennie in particular could have a field day without a specialist openside to compete with him.

viewtothegym wrote:Didn't Corbs struggle against Edinburgh the other week? when chunk was playing against him?

Worse, it was Geoff Cross, who is not exactly a renowned scrummager

Was it Cross?!! oh dear the rev the captain and chunk will love facing,
The yank the kiwi and the over rated tigers player.

Maybe the RFU can ask permission to have Castro on the bench to replace Dan Cole at 50mins and save his blushes when he is exposed as extremely average, just like the Tigers do.

Maybe the RFU can ask permission to have Castro on the bench to replace Dan Cole at 50mins and save his blushes when he is exposed as extremely average, just like the Tigers do

It's not Dan Cole that is likely to struggle (he's also had a pretty good season and is certainly not average). As long as he keeps the old pie hole firmly shut around the referee he'll be fine. Given the form of Corbs and Hartley I'm hoping for a late Mullan call up and errr no idea what to do about the hooker issues!

I may not be posting that much before match time. So I'll say this now while I have the chance. It's been nice to have some real debate without it sinking into interracial bickering. It has kept some of the banter though! All the best for Saturday guys, if you are travelling up enjoy your stay in Scotland and if you see an ex frontrow forward who has clearly had too much whiskey, come and give some banter!

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I may not be posting that much before match time. So I'll say this now while I have the chance. It's been nice to have some real debate without it sinking into interracial bickering. It has kept some of the banter though! All the best for Saturday guys, if you are travelling up enjoy your stay in Scotland and if you see an ex frontrow forward who has clearly had too much whiskey, come and give some banter!

Eugh, big fella, what'll you be doing drinking that muck?!?!

At the risk of sounding like Im trying to kick off a major international conflict can I just say I really dont get whisky at all. I keep getting bought single malts ( its a sign of middle age) and cant get through them without it seeming more like a chore. Many of them seem to have a slight petroly taste.

Maybe Im stereoytypical Englishman but I prefrer smooth gin that can be drank with water. Ill probably take a real kicking for this but I actually quite like Bushmills too.

Is it just because you lot urinate in the stuff thats exported past the wall?

luckless_pedestrian wrote:

viewtothegym wrote:if England play a smart kicking game and bring in the athleticism of Croft on close range line outs Scotland won't cope with the pace this back row can bring.

Scotland's back row will have the better of England's, I'd say. Ross Rennie in particular could have a field day without a specialist openside to compete with him.

When was the last time we actually played a specialist 7 against you? There is no universe in which moody is a natural 7

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I may not be posting that much before match time. So I'll say this now while I have the chance. It's been nice to have some real debate without it sinking into interracial bickering. It has kept some of the banter though! All the best for Saturday guys, if you are travelling up enjoy your stay in Scotland and if you see an ex frontrow forward who has clearly had too much whiskey, come and give some banter!

Eugh, big fella, what'll you be doing drinking that muck?!?!

Yeah are you drinking Irish or something?

Damn auto spelling correct on my android smart phone! Whisky!!!

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:At the risk of sounding like Im trying to kick off a major international conflict can I just say I really dont get whisky at all. I keep getting bought single malts ( its a sign of middle age) and cant get through them without it seeming more like a chore. Many of them seem to have a slight petroly taste.

Maybe Im stereoytypical Englishman but I prefrer smooth gin that can be drank with water. Ill probably take a real kicking for this but I actually quite like Bushmills too.

Is it just because you lot urinate in the stuff thats exported past the wall?

PSW, no harm in you not having a taste for the good stuff - feel free to send on over any you don't want

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:At the risk of sounding like Im trying to kick off a major international conflict can I just say I really dont get whisky at all. I keep getting bought single malts ( its a sign of middle age) and cant get through them without it seeming more like a chore. Many of them seem to have a slight petroly taste.

Maybe Im stereoytypical Englishman but I prefrer smooth gin that can be drank with water. Ill probably take a real kicking for this but I actually quite like Bushmills too.

Is it just because you lot urinate in the stuff thats exported past the wall?

Sorry Pete but your contradicting yourself there matey....you dont like Scottish Whisky (no e) but you like Bushmills...which is still whiskey (with an e) but Irish Whiskey. Curious?

Ill stick to my bottles of Dog...

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:At the risk of sounding like Im trying to kick off a major international conflict can I just say I really dont get whisky at all. I keep getting bought single malts ( its a sign of middle age) and cant get through them without it seeming more like a chore. Many of them seem to have a slight petroly taste.

Maybe Im stereoytypical Englishman but I prefrer smooth gin that can be drank with water. Ill probably take a real kicking for this but I actually quite like Bushmills too.

Is it just because you lot urinate in the stuff thats exported past the wall?

Sorry Pete but your contradicting yourself there matey....you dont like Scottish Whisky (no e) but you like Bushmills...which is still whiskey (with an e) but Irish Whiskey. Curious?

Ill stick to my bottles of Dog...

Yep it tastes very different though as any scot will tell you. Whisky and whiskey are different drinks, made differently. Like coke and pepsi (massivley offended two nations now!)

Ill stick to my bottles of Dog

Hehehe I remember a guy I went to Uni with trying to explain what a pint of "ol' dog" (in a heavy geordie accent) was to an Essex waitress. He was bladdered and she seemed to be getting more and more angry the more he babbled on. Many a good night had on that stuff.

Generally I steer clear of the Whisky and Whiskey because Whisky makes me a messy drunk and Whiskey does my insides no favours. Bourbon has always been a friend of mine though.