England 22 Announced

First topic message reminder :

http://www.rfu.com/News/2012/February/NewsArticles/210212_players_retained.aspx

Joe Marler and Charlie Sharples don't appear on either list, which I assume means they're reserves, although I could have sworn Lancaster said Sharples was out of contention with a knock.


Players retained by England

Forwards (12)

Mouritz Botha (Saracens)
Alex Corbisiero (London Irish)
Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers)
Tom Croft (Leicester Tigers)
Phil Dowson (Northampton Saints)
Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints)
Ben Morgan (Scarlets)
Geoff Parling (Leicester Tigers)
Chris Robshaw (Harlequins)
Matt Stevens (Saracens)
Rob Webber (London Wasps)

Backs (10)

Chris Ashton (Northampton Saints)
Brad Barritt (Saracens)
Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints)
Owen Farrell (Saracens)
Toby Flood (Leicester Tigers)
Ben Foden (Northampton Saints)
Charlie Hodgson (Saracens)
David Strettle (Saracens)
Manusamoa Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers)
Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)

Returning to their clubs

Chris Brooker (Harlequins)
Mike Brown (Harlequins)
Calum Clark (Northampton Saints)
Paul Doran Jones (Northampton Saints)
Tom Palmer (Stade Francais)
Joe Simpson (London Wasps)
Jordan Turner-Hall (Harlequins)
Thomas Waldrom (Leicester Tigers)

PJHolybloke wrote:I went to a Nandos for the first time on Sunday, I had no idea about the Saffer/Portuguese tie in. But I did find out what a Nandosecond was, the time elapsed between biting into a "very hot" chicken and realising there's no word for "fecking" in Portuguese..... "very" just doesn't cover it I'm afraid.

didnt know nandos was anything to do with saffers. anyway i love the new black bottle xxx hot sauce- lick that up all day

mystiroakey wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:I went to a Nandos for the first time on Sunday, I had no idea about the Saffer/Portuguese tie in. But I did find out what a Nandosecond was, the time elapsed between biting into a "very hot" chicken and realising there's no word for "fecking" in Portuguese..... "very" just doesn't cover it I'm afraid.

didnt know nandos was anything to do with saffers. anyway i love the new black bottle xxx hot sauce- lick that up all day

Then you are sick brother, you need help.... possibly even a new a55hole before long.

mystiroakey wrote:

biltongbek wrote:Yeah food is becoming expensive over here but still relatively cheap compared to europe.

you can go to your local butcher and buy 1kg of prime quality beef, let's say a rump as it has more flavour than a fillet for roughly 8-10 pounds.

On tuesday's our local Portuguese restaurant will offer you.

1kg of prawns (queen) for 8 pounds and oyster for the low price of 50 pence each.

wow- thats good, but whats it like for average earners (in real terms)

not a massive rump fan myself- Rib eye is the way forward for me!

I am a bit out of touch with acerage income earnings for the various classes in SA, but if you look at those earning first world incomes (roughly about 20% of the population) then the middle class family will be earning about 3000 pounds per month, middle upper about 5000 pounds per month, the very comfortable about 8000 + per month, the well off about 10 000+ per month and then probably 2% of the population more than that.

mystiroakey wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:I went to a Nandos for the first time on Sunday, I had no idea about the Saffer/Portuguese tie in. But I did find out what a Nandosecond was, the time elapsed between biting into a "very hot" chicken and realising there's no word for "fecking" in Portuguese..... "very" just doesn't cover it I'm afraid.

didnt know nandos was anything to do with saffers. anyway i love the new black bottle xxx hot sauce- lick that up all day

From what I heard last, there is roughly 500 Nando's franchises in SA

The only nandos in Wales is my nan falling asleep

biltongbek wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

biltongbek wrote:Yeah food is becoming expensive over here but still relatively cheap compared to europe.

you can go to your local butcher and buy 1kg of prime quality beef, let's say a rump as it has more flavour than a fillet for roughly 8-10 pounds.

On tuesday's our local Portuguese restaurant will offer you.

1kg of prawns (queen) for 8 pounds and oyster for the low price of 50 pence each.

wow- thats good, but whats it like for average earners (in real terms)

not a massive rump fan myself- Rib eye is the way forward for me!

I am a bit out of touch with acerage income earnings for the various classes in SA, but if you look at those earning first world incomes (roughly about 20% of the population) then the middle class family will be earning about 3000 pounds per month, middle upper about 5000 pounds per month, the very comfortable about 8000 + per month, the well off about 10 000+ per month and then probably 2% of the population more than that.

so food is very cheap for 20% of your population- south africa i take it(i probally knew in honesty) has a large disparity in income

PJHolybloke wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:I went to a Nandos for the first time on Sunday, I had no idea about the Saffer/Portuguese tie in. But I did find out what a Nandosecond was, the time elapsed between biting into a "very hot" chicken and realising there's no word for "fecking" in Portuguese..... "very" just doesn't cover it I'm afraid.

didnt know nandos was anything to do with saffers. anyway i love the new black bottle xxx hot sauce- lick that up all day

Then you are sick brother, you need help.... possibly even a new a55hole before long.

dude i lived in tooting bec for years- place is basically south asian, you get used to heat!

thomh wrote:Why is an injury at wing so much more likely than one at centre?

Strettle cant get BUPA or AXA to give insurance with his injury record!

yes, a large portion of the population earn in the region of 200 pounds per month, their traditional food is very cheap however.

Our domestic lady for example earns 10 pounds a day and works for my household twice a week and twice a week at my mothers house, plus another day per week elsewhere. In addition to that we pay her transport and we provide her with food twice a day when she works here.

Her husband works in a factory somewhere. They have a RDP house which is a small standard material house which usually consists of a 5 room house and that they got for 1200 pounds from the governemnt development program.

She has to cook one meal a day for her family and it costs about 3 pounds per meal. that includes cheap cuts of meat and maize meal, their traditional staple diet.

Why does Lancaster need to put cover for the back three on the bench?
So far in the two games England have played the back three have only
beat 1 defender!
and made 3 offloads!
Running only 200 meters with ball in hand between them
and ZERO tries.

The back 3 might as well wear woolly gloves to keep warm with the current style Lancaster wants them to play.

Just saying like.

Back to the rugby (not that I don't enjoy a good diversion in conversation/nandos as much as the next guy!), and I've been flip-flopping in my mind about what I'd do.

Part of me would have picked this 22 and made two or three changes to the starting line-up (Parling, Morgan and Dickson in, as we are likely to see). Build on the winning team but by adding a bit with a couple of changes, and see how we go. Then we can bring on Lawes, Youngs, Flood and Tuilagi in the second half to have more of a go at Wales.

Another part of me wants to see Barritt and Tuilagi in the centres together. The other three changes as well, but I want to get that together from the off. It's a hard decision then as to who starts, who's benched and who is left out (between Flood, Farrell and Hodgson), but one that would have to be made.

The dynamic of the 22 does suggest though that Tuilagi is going to be on the bench (although I suppose Barritt could drop to the bench with Tuilagi starting, I wouldn't bet on it though). I'll let you know how I feel about that decision at 6pm on Saturday. It isn't Lancaster's job to placate the masses with his team selections, it's his job to win rugby matches. He'll have a definite plan to win this match, and let's see how he goes.

biltongbek wrote:Yeah food is becoming expensive over here but still relatively cheap compared to europe.

you can go to your local butcher and buy 1kg of prime quality beef, let's say a rump as it has more flavour than a fillet for roughly 8-10 pounds.

On tuesday's our local Portuguese restaurant will offer you.

1kg of prawns (queen) for 8 pounds and oyster for the low price of 50 pence each.

Beef is about half the price of the UK over here, and is vastly superior in quality and taste. Was really surprised by the high cost and crap quality of all meats (other than bacon) when I last visited the motherland. It all seemed really bland and tasteless or the chicken had been pumped up with that much water that it only resembled meat in looks and not in texture or taste.

Don't really eat fish (other than fish finger sandwiches or fish and chips ) so no idea what the cost is like.

biltongbek wrote:yes, a large portion of the population earn in the region of 200 pounds per month, their traditional food is very cheap however.

Our domestic lady for example earns 10 pounds a day and works for my household twice a week and twice a week at my mothers house, plus another day per week elsewhere. In addition to that we pay her transport and we provide her with food twice a day when she works here.

Her husband works in a factory somewhere. They have a RDP house which is a small standard material house which usually consists of a 5 room house and that they got for 1200 pounds from the governemnt development program.

She has to cook one meal a day for her family and it costs about 3 pounds per meal. that includes cheap cuts of meat and maize meal, their traditional staple diet.

it doesnt seem that bad a life in fairness,you paint a decent picture-Still abit shocking perhaps- but not really the place to get political.

btw an oyster in my local taps is £1.70- so dont complain to much about 50p, as i take it your one of the ones on the same sort of money we are!!

I don't mean to worry people but didn't Flood play the odd game at 15 in his early days at Newcastle?

Perhaps if a winger got injured then Foden would move to wing and Flood at fullback . Please do not shoot the messenger, just trying to work out what SL is thinking. Seems very stupid to me, he should have decided on 2 out of 3 regarding Flood, Hodgson and Farrell (Flood to start with Farrell on the bench would be my choice). So far I think his bench selections in the backs have been poor.

I to thought Flood has covered fullback at the Falcons but i couldn't tell you how often or if he did it well.

Whether Flood did a good job some years back playing fullback at Falcons, I don't think it makes him an international class 15. It would be like asking Ben Foden to go back and play scrum-half after not playing is for a number of years. Would probably be better than some random flanker, but not a recipe for winning an international.

Like a lot of folks, I am concerned about back three cover and really don't get having Farrell, Hodgson, and Flood in the same 22.

Love it if someone could assuage my doubts.

Don't worry the game will be won or lost by the forwards and it is very unlikely a back 3 injury would occur

Are you talking about a back 3 injury to the Welsh team viewtothegym?

Good squad in my opinion! Happy to see Parling and Lawes kept in though tough on Palmer who hasn't particularly played badly I just like a player with Parlings workrate especially against a side that plays a fast paced game like Wales, and Botha has impressed in first two games.

Should have left Sharples or Brown in the 22 though and for me it would have been for Flood. Lancaster has bottled the hard decision of dropping one of Hodgson,Farrell or Flood in my eyes.

I would have sent Flood back to Leicester and kept faith in Hodgson at FH for another game,harsh to trust Hodgson's attacking capabilities when he's got Farrell and Barritt at centre. Whilst they're both solid players defensively neither have looked likely to make a line-break at any point in the Scotland and Italy games hence why I'd select Tuilagi and put Farrell on the bench.

My team from that would be;

1.Corbs
2.Hartley
3.Cole
4.Lawes
5.Parling
6.Croft
7.Robshaw
8.Morgan

9.Dickson
10.Hodgson

11.Ashton
12.Barritt
13.Tuilagi
14.Strettle
15.Foden

16.Webber
17.Stevens
18.Botha
19.Dowson
20.Youngs
21.Flood
22.Farrell

I think its fine for Lancaster to state that its important to keep the majoirty of the team the same.. but Wales are a completely different side than England have faced previously in this tournament.

Their backline is huge... I think perhaps only a bok backline has ever been bigger.

How will ENG combat North & Cuthbert? David Strettle is not known for his tackling ability and gives over 20kg to either wing. Using the Tony Underwood (Lomu 95 - I can mark him) approach is brave but perhaps a little naive.

Tuilagi needs to start... he's the only one who can go toe to toe & perhaps even surpass the Welsh backline in terms of physicality... if ENG are to win this match they need to confront these boys head on and knock them back time and time again.

Charlie Hodgson is a very poor tackler... Gatland will be throwing Roberts down his channel all afternoon if he starts. Flood is a far better choice in my view regardless of his form. Ok he has scored a couple of opportunist tries but he has done very little else, not enough to warrant being kept on especially given his test form is at best, indifferent.
Additionally if Farrell was to be dropped you would have to go with Flood. Hodgson cannot be trusted with the kicking tee, he has had enough chances to prove himself but always tends to freeze in the big moments.

I do like the idea of keeping Farrell at 12 and dropping Barritt to the bench. I think Farrell is strong enough to cope with the onslaught and offers a lot more than Barritt does either ball in hand or off the boot.

Have a plan to take the game to the welsh.... don't just say that well lets hope what worked against Italy will work against Wales too.... if it means changing multiple personnel then so be it.

Starting team listed in Telegraph which is normally accurate

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/9097226/Six-Nations-2012-Englands-ruthless-Stuart-Lancaster-picks-Geoff-Parling-ahead-of-Tom-Palmer-to-face-Wales.html

Tuilagi, Lawes and Flood all on the bench. Eng view the bench as a match winner.....if they are that good why not start them before the match is lost?

If ENG are more than 10 points down by the time they bring on his heavyweights then it won't matter who he brings on.... they will lose.

When was the last time Charlie Hodgson stood tall in a big match such as this?

I think Hodgson maybe the one to go. Flood will possibly start at 10 with Farrell and Barritt holding down their positions.

It wouldn't surprise me though if the plan all along was to move Farrell to fly half against Wales.

Well I'd be stunned if OF starts at FH or even features there during the game, you wouldn't want 2 FH's on the bench, it doesn't make sense.

The only logic that makes any sense from the matchday 22, is if the same midfield lines up as the last 2 games.

I am still bemused at Palmers exclusion to be honest.

Is an 80% fit Flood really worth using against a Welsh side full of confidence? Not sure myself.

The other thing is that Tuilagi can cover wing so the full back position is the only one that seems like it really isn't covered but SL must have a plan in mind (well you would hope so anyway)

B91212 is correct, Flood did play a lot of early rugby at 15. Most 10s seem to, a natural progression I assume; being a very large lump from the back row, I can't say I actually know.

I would have few problems with Flood or even Chargedowncharlie going to 15 in an emergency.

I would be very tempted to play Lawes and Botha to start with Parling taking over from Lawes when he runs out of steam. We are going to have to take the game to the well physically and a few of Lawes' big hits on Davies and Roberts will take the steam out of them, most players take a 5 minute rest after being hit by Lawes. We may lose a bit in the lineout but Croft, Robshaw, Morgan are all good lineout operators and neither Lawes or Botha are bad.

My worry is the wings, neither Strettle or Ashton are defensively strong against big lumps running at them, we need to stop the ball in midfield or make sure they get the ball standing still, how we do that..................... if I knew that I would be in SL's seat.

regardless of what we think or want I believe that SL will mainly stick with his team and the only changes being Parling for Palmer, Morgan for Dowson, Dickson for Youngs. Same midfield as for first two matches. It is a gamble, but he must be praying that the continuity pays off. If England are not out of it with 20 minutes to go then I do think Flood, Tuilagi and Lawes could win the game for England. But the reality is the 1st 20 minutes of the 2nd half is when Wales will win the match and our bench will only be playing catch up.

The Torygraph is suggesting a centre pairing of Farrell and Barritt - is that really England's best option?

Wales will be very strong in the last 20 minutes - SL needs to take a leaf out of Gatlands coaching book - If your better players are fit for the bench then they are fit for the first XV - Rhys Gill and Ryan J have played great but as soon as the first choices were ready they were chosen. England should be looking at the following to start - maybe someone's daddy is having too much influence as kicking aside Farrell has been dross:

15 - Foden
14 - Ashton
13 - Tuilagi
12 - Barritt
11 - Strettle
10 - Flood
9 - Dickson

That is the first choice IMO and he should play them all first up.

Ruby I like your backline and I hope that's what SL chooses, although I'd switch Barritt and Tuilagi around- think Manu performs much better at 13, and Barritt's got a decent kicking game too, so fits 12 much better

bluestonevedder wrote:Ruby I like your backline and I hope that's what SL chooses, although I'd switch Barritt and Tuilagi around- think Manu performs much better at 13, and Barritt's got a decent kicking game too, so fits 12 much better

That's what I actually meant - too much adrennaline inside my body at the mo!

haha, I know the feeling! Hoping that Flood starts, but looking at the selection, looks as though he'll be benched, along with Manu and Lawes

So it looks as though the back line will start unchanged except perhaps for Dickson at 9. I'm not as depressed about that as some - having played together only twice (and in conditions not conducive to running rugby) and won both times I can live with them getting a chance third time out to show what they can really do, with Manu and Toby coming on either at half time or sixty mins depending on the situation.

Still, games are won and lost up front. And that's where I hope we see something special from the English lads. I like our front row, engine room looks decent (glad to see Parling there) and if Morgan starts, there seems a better balance about the loosies than there has been.

Do feel a bit sorry for Mike Brown - he's been in great form for Quins and must be wondering what he has to do.

Cowshot - You lost 2 against the head against Italy and 3 lineouts went south - It's the 2 against the head that surprised me. Forwards look pretty even but I think we have a more powerful back row - For a change I think this game will be won outside the front 8.

B91212 is correct, Flood did play a lot of early rugby at 15. Most 10s seem to, a natural progression I assume; being a very large lump from the back row, I can't say I actually know.

I would have few problems with Flood or even Chargedowncharlie going to 15 in an emergency.

Farrell would probably cover well there as well. He's calm, has a big boot and is a good tackler. Might serve in an emergency.

Side I'm hoping for;
Corbs, Hartley, Cole
Lawes, Parling
Croft, Morgan, Robshaw
Youngs, Flood
Barritt, Manu
Strettle, Foden, Ashton

Bench; Stevens, Webber, Botha, Dowson, Dickson, Hodgson, Farrell.

What we'll actually get;
Corbs, Hartley, Cole
Botha, Parling
Croft, Dowson, Robshaw
Dickson, Hodgson
Farrell, Barritt
Strettle, Foden, Ashton

Bench; Stevens, Webber, Lawes, Morgan, Youngs, Flood, Manu.

Sam you don't think SL will start Morgan?

It looks to me as if England are a bit more conservative than Wales - We've been happy to put Priestland at Full back and also Hook. Jamie was a FB orignally but we experimented and he is now a powerful centre. 1/2 p was a winger now he's a solid atacking FB - Are you guys just a bit more rigid with your approach.

Ruby,
Were those changes trialled in International matches or in club matches first? I like the idea of the best players having some flexability. We know Flood can play 12 acceptably at International level, but no real idea about 15. Would have liked to see that at his club.

Sam you don't think SL will start Morgan?

Unsure, Lancaster seems to like consistentcy at the minute as did Johnno before him. I think he is being a bit to rigid in structure and starting personnel but maybe Palmer dropping out the squad is the start of a mini shake up and a sign he intends to adapt the squad from what he's learnt so far.

We know Flood can play 12 acceptably at International level, but no real idea about 15. Would have liked to see that at his club.

He did for Falcons in the past but there is no chance Tigers would have played him at full back at the weekend. Nor is there any chance they are likely to anytime soon.

Dr Grey you've just confirmed my conservative hypthesis by suggesting they are trialled at club level first. Sometimes the changes have been forced on us and hence we have had to play people out of position who have then gone on to play well there. England traditionally have probably had more strength in depth and perhaps are more likely to call up a winger for a winger etc. I think Mike Brown offers so much in attack and its a shame he's not involved somewhere. I think Johnny played FB for England on the odd occasion as well as centre but I dont think he played much club rugby there. I'm a bit for getting your best players on the park to some extent and taking it from there (within reason)

Ruby,
I guess thats my personality as well. I like your point, I have to say.

I like Mike Brown, or at least how he is playing at the moment. His challenge is he is still the number 2 fullback in England.

I think realistically we know what the starting team is. The Telegraph generally seems to be right about this. Morgan, Dickson and Parling will start, with the others on the bench.

"I do like the idea of keeping Farrell at 12 and dropping Barritt to the bench. I think Farrell is strong enough to cope with the onslaught and offers a lot more than Barritt does either ball in hand or off the boot."

Farrell offers a lot more than Barritt with ball in hand??????? Of 5 defenders beaten in 2 games(shocking stat) Barritt has 2 of those.

All Farrell does is pass the ball along the line or kick it, he offers zero attacking threat with ball in hand.

I think people are stressing bit too much over the bench. It was four years ago that we lost two opensides to injury in the first 40min and ended up with 3 locks on. You can only plan so much. This is partly about winning and partly about bringing back Flood and Tuilagi. Yeah we might get an injury that's difficult to cover but it's always the same (in fact in the first game didn't we have Brown, Foden, Stettle and Ashton on at one point due to Hodgson and Barritt injuries?

Yeah but this is asking for trouble especially as there is no need for CH, Flood and Farrell in the 22- they are hardly such radically different players to each that having them all there can change a game and in terms of replacement, you'd only need 2. That's part of Farrell's usefulness, that he covers 10, 12 and 13. If you chuck in another 10, and a player who can also cover 12, and a 13 who can cover 12, and CH and Flood are both good kickers (which they are, CH has been kicking goals for longer than Farrell and has the most Premiership points ever) then what's the point in having Farrell (or Flood, or whoever) in the team?!

And my only criticism of Lancaster's selection policy prior to this was his stupid stupid bench choices, which neither covered all the positions nor offered any impact or gameplan changes, so saying that we had an awful bench last match doesn't mean that it's any less stupid having an awful bench this match!

RubyGuby wrote:It looks to me as if England are a bit more conservative than Wales - We've been happy to put Priestland at Full back and also Hook. Jamie was a FB orignally but we experimented and he is now a powerful centre. 1/2 p was a winger now he's a solid atacking FB - Are you guys just a bit more rigid with your approach.

Well we experiemented with Foden, and we are doing so with Farrell. And our entire back row. But some changes like Tuilagi as a wing or Flood as a Fullback or Foden as a centre are just silly as these players play well in their current positions, don't seem as well-suited to the other positions and we have perfectly good young talented players to play there instead! Moving people about is fine if they look like they're not playing to their ability in one position and another looks better or if we didn't have a player in a position (hence Robshaw at 7) but otherwise what's the point?

Bring back the Tindal/Flood centre partnership, that was genius !!

Chequered I have to disagree with you to some extent - you have Hodgson, Flood and Farrell in the 22 and I would have seen Mike Brown as a serious strike runner compared to those who can slot into the cantre, wing or FB position if need be with relative ease and with a degree of penetration, the other 3 are so static its unbelieveably defensive - Can you inagine a Foden injury and Charlie goes to FB - Nightmare

Oh, in terms of the 22, I'd happily have Brown as long as we had someone who could cover wings on the bench. And Brown or Foden would make a better wing for me than any of our other players at fullback.