The England Line Up for France

SL has announced an unchanged starting 15, with two changes on the bench. Palmer for Lawes and Hodgson for Flood.

15 Ben Foden (Northampton Saints)
14 Chris Ashton (Northampton Saints)
13 Manusamoa Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers)
12 Brad Barritt (Saracens)
11 David Strettle (Saracens)
10 Owen Farrell (Saracens)
9 Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints)
1 Alex Corbisiero (London Irish)
2 Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints)
3 Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers)
4 Mouritz Botha (Saracens)
5 Geoff Parling (Leicester Tigers)
6 Tom Croft (Leicester Tigers)
7 Chris Robshaw (Harlequins, capt)
8 Ben Morgan (Scarlets)

Replacements

16 Rob Webber (London Wasps)
17 Matt Stevens (Saracens)
18 Tom Palmer (Stade Francais)
19 Phil Dowson (Northampton Saints)
20 Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)
21 Charlie Hodgson (Saracens)
22 Mike Brown (Harlequins)


Comments please.

Only comments on Mike Brown (Quins) at 22?

Just a question, I see Saints, Saracens, Harleguins and tigers are the leading clubs in the Premiership which is usually an inidication where the form players are coming from.

Everyone of those are well represented apart from the Harlequins, are there any players there that you feel should be in the squad or are missing out?

My views are that I do not have a clue how this one is going to go. The England team is such an unknown quantity at the moment; they should on paper lose, but if they can improve as much again as they did for the Wales game, who knows? Certainly not me.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Only comments on Mike Brown (Quins) at 22?

Just failed to correct it before you got there

Quins have two players in th 22 including the Captain? Also Lee Dickson is in the overall squad. Not sure what you mean there Bilt?

I think the starting XV did enough against Wales to justify being given another opportunity at this stage. I do have some issues with the bench though.

Stevens and Dowson provide little impact and in recent outings Stevens has looked short of international quality. As risky as it may be, I would have preferred to see Marler on there to bring some dynamism in the final quarter (I would have had PDJ if I was coach but he's not in the squad).

Also in the backs replacements, all three only play one position, which means a potential backline re shuffle if they have to come on because of injury. I prefer seeing players ont he bench who can just step into wherever they are needed in the backline rather than having to shunt people around.

biltongbek wrote:Just a question, I see Saints, Saracens, Harleguins and tigers are the leading clubs in the Premiership which is usually an inidication where the form players are coming from.

Everyone of those are well represented apart from the Harlequins, are there any players there that you feel should be in the squad or are missing out?

I think that Quins are one of those teams where the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, the type of game they play is suited to their players and especially if orchestrated by Evans. Marler is in the squad, Brown is benched and Robshaw is the skipper; I can't really see any other EQP who is better than the players SL has in the squad.

I just can't see the logic of having Hodgson as the bench option. Flood offers much, much more - particularly in the context of a second half where a game is breaking-up. Also, Flood is the long-term option. If England have any attacking ambition then they should be looking to put Flood in a position where he has the chance to play himself back into the starting 10 jersey.

Time will tell, but this looks like Lancaster's first real selection error to me...

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

biltongbek wrote:Just a question, I see Saints, Saracens, Harleguins and tigers are the leading clubs in the Premiership which is usually an inidication where the form players are coming from.

Everyone of those are well represented apart from the Harlequins, are there any players there that you feel should be in the squad or are missing out?

I think that Quins are one of those teams where the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, the type of game they play is suited to their players and especially if orchestrated by Evans. Marler is in the squad, Brown is benched and Robshaw is the skipper; I can't really see any other EQP who is better than the players SL has in the squad.

cheers.

I am surprised that underperformers like Ashton, Foden and Hartley are not being dropped or subbed out quicker to give other players in the squad a chance.

Foden looked great against Scotland but has been poor against Italy and Wales. Hartley has thrown in well but done little in the tight, the lose or the scrum. Ashton has not only been anonymous but has also been a weak link in defence.

You could possibly add Croft to that list though he has been quiet he has still had an instrumental involvement in what has been good about England.

The mantra of this England team has been about building for the future not sticking with the old guard who are not playing well.

Brown, Sharples, Webber, maybe Wilson over Dowson on the bench.

My personal opinion is that Flood should definitely be in over Farrell and Hodgson. Probably with Farrell on the bench and Hodgson out of the squad. Flood is England's best available flyhalf and one that makes the opposition wary. Farrell is a good goal kicker but not a good enough flyhalf to warrant a place.

maestegmafia wrote:
My personal opinion is that Flood should definitely be in over Farrell and Hodgson. Probably with Farrell on the bench and Hodgson out of the squad. Flood is England's best available flyhalf and one that makes the opposition wary. Farrell is a good goal kicker but not a good enough flyhalf to warrant a place.

I agree that Flood should be in over Hodgson, for me that is a no brainer, but I disagree that he deserves the 10 shirt this week over Farrell. Flood has been patchy for England, whereas Farrell displayed good game management (ok, he made on or two debatable decisions but on the whole was good), and confidence and composure. Taking the shirt off him after that performance would be a wrong call.

Agree with some of what you say maestegmafia. Lancaster's mantra has appeared to be 'pick on form', and he's been bold enough to make decisions that others might have shied away from (dropping Youngs, naming an inexperienced skipper, caps for newbies Morgan etc). So following that rationale, the likes of Ashton - especially - and, to an extent, Foden and Hartley are on borrowed time. But in the context I think all of those decisions are ok. Firstly, there's a limit to how much he can chop and change without totally destroying any continuity and understanding. Secondly, there's the individual cases: Ashton has looked poor, but the reality is that he was never brought into the team for his defence, and that's pretty much all we've seen him do! There's an argument that he needs to look for more work, but there's also an argument that the opportunities haven't been coming his way...I can understand him being given another chance. Foden - to me - hasn't looked bad. Couple of defensive howlers in the Italy game, but generally he has been fairly industrious - if not massively effective - in running the ball back, and has generally done his job well. Hartley is getting unfair stick IMO: he's been solid - he was part of a physical effort that fronted up to a big Welsh side the other week and - whilst not conspicuous carrying - held his own in the contact. Plus, his would-be replacement is Rob Webber.....enough said.

Flood's omission is the major mistake for me: all else I can understand

My personal opinion is that Flood should definitely be in over Farrell and Hodgson. Probably with Farrell on the bench and Hodgson out of the squad. Flood is England's best available flyhalf and one that makes the opposition wary. Farrell is a good goal kicker but not a good enough flyhalf to warrant a place..

This is also my opinion but there's a whole thread on this arguement so we better leave it there.

maybe Wilson over Dowson on the bench.

The Newcastle Falcon?

You could possibly add Croft to that list though he has been quiet he has still had an instrumental involvement in what has been good about England.

He was quiet but helped win the vital penalty against Scotland, was barely seen against Italy but was one of, if not, England's best player against Wales. He is a horses for courses player, if you play a style that suits him he will be invaluable if you play to a tight game with little attacking intent then you might as well select somebody else.

For me Brown should have come in for Foden and a better 10 utilised. Beauxis vs Farrell will be an interesting kicking duel but they have a better full back for the territory battle.

maestegmafia wrote:I am surprised that underperformers like Ashton, Foden and Hartley are not being dropped or subbed out quicker to give other players in the squad a chance.

Foden looked great against Scotland but has been poor against Italy and Wales. Hartley has thrown in well but done little in the tight, the lose or the scrum. Ashton has not only been anonymous but has also been a weak link in defence.

You could possibly add Croft to that list though he has been quiet he has still had an instrumental involvement in what has been good about England.

The mantra of this England team has been about building for the future not sticking with the old guard who are not playing well.

Brown, Sharples, Webber, maybe Wilson over Dowson on the bench.

My personal opinion is that Flood should definitely be in over Farrell and Hodgson. Probably with Farrell on the bench and Hodgson out of the squad. Flood is England's best available flyhalf and one that makes the opposition wary. Farrell is a good goal kicker but not a good enough flyhalf to warrant a place.

Maesteg,

Im can be one of Crofts biggest critics...based on the fact i like a bruising man mountain at 6. However...this season and most noteably against Wales he was one of the key reason Wales were getting slow ball. Even if he wasnt bulldozing in the rucks...he was getting to the rucks quick almost like a traditional 7 might and stopping the backs getting much decent ball.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

My personal opinion is that Flood should definitely be in over Farrell and Hodgson. Probably with Farrell on the bench and Hodgson out of the squad. Flood is England's best available flyhalf and one that makes the opposition wary. Farrell is a good goal kicker but not a good enough flyhalf to warrant a place..

This is also my opinion but there's a whole thread on this arguement so we better leave it there.

maybe Wilson over Dowson on the bench.

The Newcastle Falcon?

You could possibly add Croft to that list though he has been quiet he has still had an instrumental involvement in what has been good about England.

He was quiet but helped win the vital penalty against Scotland, was barely seen against Italy but was one of, if not, England's best player against Wales. He is a horses for courses player, if you play a style that suits him he will be invaluable if you play to a tight game with little attacking intent then you might as well select somebody else.

For me Brown should have come in for Foden and a better 10 utilised. Beauxis vs Farrell will be an interesting kicking duel but they have a better full back for the territory battle.

Mark Wilson our young No.8 or Dave Wilson Bath prop?

Mark Wilson has been class recently and at 20 is a serious prospect...but not for England just yet...

If Beauxis doesn't get it spot on with the angle of his kicking, his big boot is going to give the England back three an awful lot of space to run back into

They might not be the best defensive back three around but they are all very good open field runners that can cause problems to any side if given the opportunity.

"maybe Wilson over Dowson on the bench."

The only Wilson I know of a comparable standard is Roger Wilson and he is Irish and unfortunately going back to Ulster next year. He will be sorely missed.

I agree with you guys over Croft, as I said he is someone who I wouldnt have been surprised to be dropped for a bruiser. The backrow needs something else as its not working. It definitely needs to tackle a lot more the front five do all the tackling.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:"maybe Wilson over Dowson on the bench."

The only Wilson I know of a comparable standard is Roger Wilson and he is Irish and unfortunately going back to Ulster next year. He will be sorely missed.

Who is the Wilson in the EPs then.

Shame for England as roger wilson is what they need. Dowson is not up to it.

Flood has had enough game-time and shown enough (albeit not 100%) form to be in the 22, especially as he covers a few positions from the bench. He seems to have the game to best use our talented back 3, who were playing good rugby even when Hape and Tindall were our centres. In particular, Flood and Ashton seem to have a good understanding.

And if Lancaster’s selection philosophy is based on ‘he’s done nothing wrong’ (and I have a little cry every time I hear this said) then he’s not long for the job.

biltongbek wrote:Just a question, I see Saints, Saracens, Harleguins and tigers are the leading clubs in the Premiership which is usually an inidication where the form players are coming from.

Everyone of those are well represented apart from the Harlequins, are there any players there that you feel should be in the squad or are missing out?

Another issue is that our squad is very young and still a work in progress- Lowe/Hopper might play for England but they play in the same position as Tuilagi so right now they were never going to start! Care ruled himself out with his behaviour. Easter was dropped for age/comments (I think Care and Easter might be in the squad on play alone but their exclusion makes sense). Wallace looks like he might play for England but he is too inexperienced. JTH is the other player who could play England but he is basically a slightly less in form version of Barritt so there is no point in having him on the bench, I'm actually glad he has been sent back to us

Also, watching England vs Wales yesterday, I have been away on holiday and wanted to see my recorded BBC version, I noticed that one of the reasons Ashton looks isolated is that Tuilagi always backs himself rather than pass when the play is going towards the left hand touch line.

maestegmafia wrote:Also, watching England vs Wales yesterday, I have been away on holiday and wanted to see my recorded BBC version, I noticed that one of the reasons Ashton looks isolated is that Tuilagi always backs himself rather than pass when the play is going towards the left hand touch line.

That might be helped by the fact that they don't exactly like each other. If they are letting that affect the way they play together it's highly unprofessional, but it is my suspicion

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Flood has had enough game-time and shown enough (albeit not 100%) form to be in the 22, especially as he covers a few positions from the bench. He seems to have the game to best use our talented back 3, who were playing good rugby even when Hape and Tindall were our centres. In particular, Flood and Ashton seem to have a good understanding.

And if Lancaster’s selection philosophy is based on ‘he’s done nothing wrong’ (and I have a little cry every time I hear this said) then he’s not long for the job.

Yeah I just don't see Hodgson as a bench player

Yes Maes, i mentioned that after the game, he doesn't offload, but I was reminded that he hasn't played with these guys before and it will get better as time goes on.

I will be watching for that specifically this weekend.

Who is the Wilson in the EPs then.

Shame for England as roger wilson is what they need. Dowson is not up to it..

That would be Wilson the Bath tighthead who can also cover loosehead. Waldrom is in the extended squad and would certainly offer more carrying capability.

The backrow needs something else as its not working. It definitely needs to tackle a lot more the front five do all the tackling.

That's what Robshaw is supposed to be there for, he's the tackle machine.

If Beauxis doesn't get it spot on with the angle of his kicking, his big boot is going to give the England back three an awful lot of space to run back into

They might get to run it back but the French have a good defensive line that will be up quick. The English back three will be attacking from deep in their own 22. They might get to the English 10 metre line or half way. Then France have England where they want them. Middle of the park, France have the kicker with the bigger range and the better backrow. England lack a playmaker and will make little progress before kicking the ball away, being turned over or giving away a penalty. The only reason for optimism is that the French defence doesn't realign quickly around the breakdown so we might be able to make good yards there if we can get quick ball.

That might be helped by the fact that they don't exactly like each other. If they are letting that affect the way they play together it's highly unprofessional, but it is my suspicion

They apparently get on quite well off the field (apparently Youngs and Farrell are also good mates), Manu took Ashton for an apology meal when the met up for the England training camp and the rumours were that Johnno made them bunk together. Manu will only pass if he thinks it's on out wide, he won't just shovel ball on if the winger will only make a couple of metres before contact he'll back himself to do more than that. At the minute the England backs moves are too predictable so the opposition defences are easily drifting across and there's isn't room on the outside.

Manu also backs his strength over any other options. That fell short two weeks ago, a more intelligent player would have utilised his team mates more.

Wales had a similar problem with Scott Williams who showed his immaturity when he should have passed to North to score after his break in the start of the third Quarter, he backed himself and was tackled.

maestegmafia wrote:I agree with you guys over Croft, as I said he is someone who I wouldn't have been surprised to be dropped for a bruiser. The backrow needs something else as its not working. It definitely needs to tackle a lot more the front five do all the tackling.

Hmmm.... Against Wales, Parling admittedly made 14 tackles, but Robshaw and Croft each made 9 (3rd most in pack and 4th in team, even if Croft missed 2). Against Italy, Robshaw led the tackles with 16 (no misses) and Croft made a reasonable 8 (4th in team, a couple of which were vital and impressive off the chase). Scotland- Croft only down for 5 plus a miss, but Robshaw second on the list with 15 (including some forcing turnovers, from memory) and Dowson 11. So I'm not sure you are correct- our back row may be flawed but it is making plenty of tackles.

In fact, our total backrow tackles are 92 out of 390 (40 by Robshaw) which gives 24% of all tackles (12% by Robshaw!). The tournament leading Welsh back row made 102 (looking at overall tackle stats, Lydiate has made more than I realised!) out of 390, which is 26%, only just ahead. Ireland- 104/370 = 28%. France- 113/371= 30% Scotland- 86/291 = 30%. So actually you may have a point in a game where fine margins matter. The key aspect for me is that Robshaw has made nearly 50% of our back row tackles (including substitutes!) which means that the other back row need to make a few more, and they have missed a few too. But Croft has been better, I think, at getting to the breakdown than Robshaw, so I'm not sure who you drop.

The obvious answer there would be to move Robshaw to 6, and bring in a real 7...which aside from Armitage we dont have any ready.

But then Croft has played well and doesnt deserve to be dropped, especially if we are going to try to open the ball out more from the last game.

Wonder where Wood fits into all this when he gets fit..

The key aspect for me is that Robshaw has made nearly 50% of our back row tackles (including substitutes!) which means that the other back row need to make a few more, and they have missed a few too. But Croft has been better, I think, at getting to the breakdown than Robshaw, so I'm not sure who you drop..

I suppose in that case the finger is pointed at the 8s. Though as Dowson made quite a few in the first game and was then dropped because his ball carrying skills for Morgan then I suppose the right balance at 8 isn't there. Well until Jordan Crane is fit again.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:I agree with you guys over Croft, as I said he is someone who I wouldn't have been surprised to be dropped for a bruiser. The backrow needs something else as its not working. It definitely needs to tackle a lot more the front five do all the tackling.

Hmmm.... Against Wales, Parling admittedly made 14 tackles, but Robshaw and Croft each made 9 (3rd most in pack and 4th in team, even if Croft missed 2). Against Italy, Robshaw led the tackles with 16 (no misses) and Croft made a reasonable 8 (4th in team, a couple of which were vital and impressive off the chase). Scotland- Croft only down for 5 plus a miss, but Robshaw second on the list with 15 (including some forcing turnovers, from memory) and Dowson 11. So I'm not sure you are correct- our back row may be flawed but it is making plenty of tackles.

In fact, our total backrow tackles are 92 out of 390 (40 by Robshaw) which gives 24% of all tackles (12% by Robshaw!). The tournament leading Welsh back row made 102 (looking at overall tackle stats, Lydiate has made more than I realised!) out of 390, which is 26%, only just ahead. Ireland- 104/370 = 28%. France- 113/371= 30% Scotland- 86/291 = 30%. So actually you may have a point in a game where fine margins matter. The key aspect for me is that Robshaw has made nearly 50% of our back row tackles (including substitutes!) which means that the other back row need to make a few more, and they have missed a few too. But Croft has been better, I think, at getting to the breakdown than Robshaw, so I'm not sure who you drop.

My observation were made without stats to back them up. As I was reading your research I thought the Englands backrow tackle count was a great deal closer than I had remembered from the game. But as you pointed out Robshaw is doing all the work.

England need a dIfferent dynamic I their backrow. One who can be athletic lie croft. But with more strength and power and most importantly one who makes a lot more tackles.

Well until Jordan Crane is fit again.

Its a big shame he has been injured....this would have been the perfect opportunity for him...

Does anyone really think Jordan will be the force at interntaional level he is ( was) at club level thogh?

Fopr now Morgan is a big step forward on Dowosn. Not the most athletic of guys, and maybe not really ready for this level, but at least he gets the ball going forward. Bit like Nick Easter ....

[b]Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Does anyone really think Jordan will be the force at interntaional level he is ( was) at club level thogh[/b]?

Fopr now Morgan is a big step forward on Dowosn. Not the most athletic of guys, and maybe not really ready for this level, but at least he gets the ball going forward. Bit like Nick Easter ....

I think he is worth a shot Peter...we dont know until he is given a few games. I happen to think yes becuase he performs in the HC etc...and if England are looking for a no nonsence 8 to make the yards, tackle etc...and bring captaincy experience to the team then you could do a lot worse than Jordan.

Big opportunity in general this season. Tigers were in a HEC pool full of big packs and Crane thrives in physical confrontations. There was the start of the season where Tigers needed a leader and Jordan is a very good on the pitch leader (Corry esque in his manner). The hard working physical grafter able to make a metre through a brick wall would certainly have been handy against that Welsh defence.

Sorry but i just had to write this. Everytime i look at the page i only see this.

The England Line Up for France
WELL-PAST-IT

Its caught me several times now

I think in the summer we need to try a backrow of:

6.Robshaw/Lawes
7.Wallace/Armitage
8.Haskall/Morgan

The more I think of it the more I like the idea of Lawes at 6, especially as we have so many potentially talented locks coming through.

As to the actual team? It looks good, there's a few calls that could have gone either way and a couple of players owe Lancaster a big game.

To me the only issues are on the bench, none of them look like match winners and I worry that for the second game running we'll lose in the final 20 as Lancster unloads the bench to some kind of pre planned timings rather then if they're actually needed.

Sorry Yappy but im not easy with Lawes at 6. Yeah hes a big tackler...but so is Robshaw and robshaw works his backside off for 80+ mins. Him over Lawes by a country mile.

We also have Wood who i rate very highly.

maestegmafia wrote:Manu also backs his strength over any other options. That fell short two weeks ago, a more intelligent player would have utilised his team mates more.

Wales had a similar problem with Scott Williams who showed his immaturity when he should have passed to North to score after his break in the start of the third Quarter, he backed himself and was tackled.

Why do you dislike Manu so much?

Why would I dislike Manu Tuilagi.

maestegmafia wrote:Why would I dislike Manu Tuilagi.

i don't know that's why i was asking. Just picking up a sense of hatred (perhaps a strong word) against him in all yours posts. I maybe wrong, if i am i apologise!

Same reason we hate North

Envy?

eirebilly wrote:Sorry but i just had to write this. Everytime i look at the page i only see this.

The England Line Up for France
WELL-PAST-IT

Its caught me several times now

Good one Billy. Good job my moniker is not "Bend-Over"

Perverse that the England line up is just the opposite of past it.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Well until Jordan Crane is fit again.

Its a big shame he has been injured....this would have been the perfect opportunity for him...

I am not so sure about that to be honest, Jordan as been a great club player for Leicester Tigers. but could he realy bring his club form in to international level? That is realy a big ask, in my opinion.

But if he does get himself back to full fitness, then i guess we will have to wait and see.

majesticimperialman wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Well until Jordan Crane is fit again.

Its a big shame he has been injured....this would have been the perfect opportunity for him...

I am not so sure about that to be honest, Jordan as been a great club player for Leicester Tigers. but could he realy bring his club form in to international level? That is realy a big ask, in my opinion.

But if he does get himself back to full fitness, then i guess we will have to wait and see.

you said exactly the same about Ben Morgan and you and a few others were raving about his impact after you had seen him...! Crane will surely impress you too?

No issue with the first 15 (although for Christs sake please swap Ashton & Strettle around), they deserve another go after the last outing but totally uninspired by the bench, just no impact or real ability to change a game if required. Personally would have gone for a bench of

Webber, PDV, Garvey, Dowson,
Youngs, Flood, Sharples (or May if not fit)

I agree with Ozzy and others - we need a more versatile 22 than Brown.

I actually think that by picking Beauxis and Dupuy that the French are going to try and put pressure on our back 3 with plenty of up and unders, try and get Malzieu jumping against Strettle & Ashton.

He is right it will depend on how he comes back from injury as he missed a chunk of last season and now all of this one. If he can get back to his 2009/10 form he will walk into the England squad. Parling came back from similar rubbish luck and refound his 2009/10 form, he's now a fixutre of the England team.