Barritt ruled out of 2nd test - available for 3rd

https://twitter.com/Official_RFU/status/211850817546891265

He's had a minor operation on his eye apparently. So which of Farrell or Tuilagi do people think will end up playing 12 next week? Or maybe Allen or Turner-Hall could come in?

12 Allen
13 Tuilagi

for me

With Flood and Youngs at 9 and 10 maybe? It's a proven combination at least.

Completely agree

9. Youngs
10. Flood
12. Allen
13. Tuilagi

Best combination I think we have in the squad at the moment and certainly one which offers a lot in attack

jamesandimac wrote:Completely agree

9. Youngs
10. Flood
12. Allen
13. Tuilagi

Best combination I think we have in the squad at the moment and certainly one which offers a lot in attack

Personally i feel Allen is no more than a good club player, but it is a combo that knows each other.

How will people feel if Lancaster puts out:

Dickson, Hodgson, Farrell,Manu ?

LondonTiger wrote:

jamesandimac wrote:Completely agree

9. Youngs
10. Flood
12. Allen
13. Tuilagi

Best combination I think we have in the squad at the moment and certainly one which offers a lot in attack

Personally i feel Allen is no more than a good club player, but it is a combo that knows each other.

How will people feel if Lancaster puts out:

Dickson, Hodgson, Farrell,Manu ?

Livid

I think I'd turm the bloody TV off

Extremely dissapointed...and i will have to start questioning his mangerial and selection skills already....

It wouldn't be bad to go with a leicester 9-13... I haven't seem them play a lot being in SA but they came 2nd in the league right so must be a decent outfit and will know each other very well.

Is Allen big enough to play 12 however? From what I recall he was quite a smallish type guy, perhaps good enough for club rugby but would struggle in a test environment... esp against the 6'3 16st each centre combo of Frans & JDV.

Could Lancaster try a Youngs, Flood, Farrell & Tuilagi?

That would give ENG the go forward, Farrell is certainly a big lump, didn't mss a tackle on the weekend and could keep the tee over Flood.

This could be a good thing for ENG. Injuries force decisions which may be necessary.

I recall Johnson only dropping Borthwick due to injury and then realised his side worked better without him so dropped him once he got back to fitness.... he went from captain to not even being in the elite squad/saxons within a few months and has never played again for ENG. Could have a similar impact but less brutal in terms of Barritt and his ENG career.

Well he won't, its pretty clear that Flood is the next option and that Hodgson was a stop gap to make him sweat and really work hard to earn his spot back. He is now doing the same with Care to make sure they have the desire to play for England again and reinforce that bad off-field behaviour has serious consequences.

For me, I would now go with the tigers backline with Care and Farrell on the bench as well as Joseph who I think looks made for test rugby.

LondonTiger wrote:
How will people feel if Lancaster puts out:

Dickson, Hodgson, Farrell,Manu ?

This could be a Borthwick moment: When the supporters can see something that the coach can't see, and when it becomes obvious that this is the case.

The BBC is suggesting Flood, Farrell, Tuilagi. I don't think so - with practice Farrell can make a good fly half, but there are better ICs. I don't think Allen is poor in defence - he once missed Carter and that lost him two years of internationals. Aside from that, he played well in that test.

Alternative is Tuilagi + Joseph, with Flood having to decide whether to miss out Tuilagi.

Lacerated eyeball, sounds nasty. I'd like Manu and Joseph, though I'm sure SL will be trying combs out mid-week.

A no-brainer for SL:

Youngs (without the kicking gameplan cuz not even SL is that much of a special)
Flood (cuz even SL is getting embarrassed now)
Farrell (SL's lovechild)
Manu (England's 'beast')

I actually think Allen is very underated and still suffers from his debut against the All Blacks. He's a very capable centre more in the mould of Aaron Mauger, who he was understudy for during he early days at Leicester. Mauger came out at the time and said how highly he rated him and we all know Cockers prefers him over the more fashionable option of Twelvetrees. I even remember reading somewhere that Flood was pleading with Johnson to bring him into the squad. He obviously offers something considerable to sides he plays for, just people don't notice him because he's not ripped like Sonny Bill.

On the size thing, he's around the same height and build as Brian O'Driscoll, Aaron Mauger and Conrad Smith (albiet 2 inches shorter but same weight as) and I can't remember anyone saying they were/are too small for international rugby. If anything they're praised for their intelligence and skill. Is it any wonder that the teams that have these guys playing for them (All Blacks, Crusaders, and Leinster) are considered top notch attacking teams?

JTH any one? He adds a lot more power in the backs and knows how to offload

They said it for Neil Back: "If you're good enough, you're big enough".

I think someone like Allen could really get the best out of Tuilagi - especially if Ashton is lurking to pick up the scraps.

I rate Allen very highly, easily our best choice in my opinion

yappysnap wrote:JTH any one? He adds a lot more power in the backs and knows how to offload

Tuilagi is a certain starter though and I'm not sure they'd go well together. Allen or Joseph would be a better foil to Manu I suspect.

I would like to see Tualghi and Joseph.

Is Johnny May in the squad? would like to see him get some game if he is.

majesticimperialman wrote:I would like to see Tualghi and Joseph.

Is Johnny May in the squad? would like to see him get some game if he is.

Nah he's not, would love to see him carving it up out there though. Next time.

fa0019 wrote:It wouldn't be bad to go with a leicester 9-13... I haven't seem them play a lot being in SA but they came 2nd in the league right so must be a decent outfit and will know each other very well.

Is Allen big enough to play 12 however? From what I recall he was quite a smallish type guy, perhaps good enough for club rugby but would struggle in a test environment... esp against the 6'3 16st each centre combo of Frans & JDV.

Could Lancaster try a Youngs, Flood, Farrell & Tuilagi?

That would give ENG the go forward, Farrell is certainly a big lump, didn't mss a tackle on the weekend and could keep the tee over Flood.

I had to take a double take there FA....Farrell is NOT a big lump and has showed zero ability with ball in hand.

yappysnap wrote:JTH any one? He adds a lot more power in the backs and knows how to offload

I do rate JTH, more highly than Barritt, and actually think Lancaster will choose him as he's next in line and fits exactly how he wants to play. But I personally don't like the way we attack and don't particularly like having two centres in there who offer the same qualities, as we would have with JTH paired with Tuilagi and currently do, sort of, with Barritt. If JTH were to start then, for me, there would have to be a change at 13 with either Joseph or Lowe coming in (preferably Lowe thus keeping a known combination).

But I like having a proper ball playing traditional 12 rather than a big ball carrying option, I think the later limits the width you can achieve in attack somewhat unless you're prepared to bypass them when opting to go wide (causes its own problems unless done effectively) or if the lump has good distribution. Thats why I prefer Allen.

I think England have two realistic options...

10. Flood 12. Farrell 13. Tuilagi

or

10. Flood 12. Tuilagi 13. Joseph

I personally would prefer the latter. However, Farrells goalkicking has been a positive aspect and his defence is solid, so he may get the call at 12, despite showing limited creativity and game management at the weekend.

No matter what, Flood has to come in at 10. He showed more in the 10-15 minutes that he was on the field, than Farrell did all game. Flood's partnership with Youngs, and his ability to get the best out of Tuilagi means he must be included.

I see many people are calling for... 10. Flood 12. Allen 13. Tuilagi.
Whilst I wouldn't be unhappy with that, I feel this is very unlikely and reckon Lancaster still see's Turner-Hall ahead of Allen in the pecking order at the moment. Would be a safe option though and Allen does work well with Flood and Tuilagi at prem level.

Tuilagi isn't a 12 and playing him there would be wasting his ability. He works best when he has space on the outside shoulder of 13 for him to power into, something England aren't creating enough of at the moment for him to exploit. Moving him to 12 would place him right in traffic and he could only be used as a carrier into this to try and create space for others as he doesn't have either the kicking ability or the handling ability for anything else.

England are favouring slice moves at the moment and if this were the case he would be the behind the back, wider option, but it would be wasted on him as he won't distribute it on and again would be too far behind the gain line to take advantage. He works best at 13 in this case coming from out to in on the crash to suck in the 13 and hold the 12, but sadly Barritt neither has the distribution for to be effective here.

Unless he can either improve his skillset or England change their tactics I wouldn't pick him at 12.

Flood's goalkicking is just as good as OF's.

EnglishReign wrote:Flood's goalkicking is just as good as OF's.

It isnt, in the big games Farrells is far better that was shown in the 2010 AP final.

Actually surprised to see they're both very similar

Kicker: Farrrell / Flood
Conversion Attempts: 12 / 30
Conversion Success: 12 / 29
Penalty Attempts: 37 / 37
Penalty Success: 37 / 37
Total Attempts: 61 / 67
Total Success: 60 / 66
Percentage: 98.36% / 98.51%

Source: http://www.statbunker.com/rugby/btb/index.php?PL=competition&Code=8217249&statType=ksr

The other key stat to consider there is just how many more conversions Flood has attempted. Indicates something about the other aspects of their game.

jamesandimac wrote:Actually surprised to see they're both very similar

Kicker: Farrrell / Flood
Conversion Attempts: 12 / 30
Conversion Success: 12 / 29
Penalty Attempts: 37 / 37
Penalty Success: 37 / 37
Total Attempts: 61 / 67
Total Success: 60 / 66
Percentage: 98.36% / 98.51%

Source: http://www.statbunker.com/rugby/btb/index.php?PL=competition&Code=8217249&statType=ksr

Neither Flood or Farrell have nearly 100% records so those stats are void.

That site is listing every kicker as having a 100% penalty kicking record. Something fishy going on there. Or maybe just a copy paste mishap.

robshaw4england wrote:I think England have two realistic options...

10. Flood 12. Farrell 13. Tuilagi

or

10. Flood 12. Tuilagi 13. Joseph

I personally would prefer the latter. However, Farrells goalkicking has been a positive aspect and his defence is solid, so he may get the call at 12, despite showing limited creativity and game management at the weekend.

No matter what, Flood has to come in at 10. He showed more in the 10-15 minutes that he was on the field, than Farrell did all game. Flood's partnership with Youngs, and his ability to get the best out of Tuilagi means he must be included.

I see many people are calling for... 10. Flood 12. Allen 13. Tuilagi.
Whilst I wouldn't be unhappy with that, I feel this is very unlikely and reckon Lancaster still see's Turner-Hall ahead of Allen in the pecking order at the moment. Would be a safe option though and Allen does work well with Flood and Tuilagi at prem level.

Right you could colour me amazed if Lancaster/Catt didnt pick flood/farrell/Tuilagi for the second test regardless of what the rest of the universe thinks. Who knows maybe the extra running threat from 9/10 might make up for the complete lack of go forward from 12 and finally give Tuilagi some space to exploit.

The extra kicking may be handy too, england had real trouble in the territory battle despite doing well at the lineout. trying to even out the styen effect in tactical kicking and reducing the amount of tackles our forwards have to make ( or fail to make more to the point) in the game are every bit as important as sorting out flashy back play.

jamesandimac wrote:Tuilagi isn't a 12 and playing him there would be wasting his ability. He works best when he has space on the outside shoulder of 13 for him to power into, something England aren't creating enough of at the moment for him to exploit. Moving him to 12 would place him right in traffic and he could only be used as a carrier into this to try and create space for others as he doesn't have either the kicking ability or the handling ability for anything else.

England are favouring slice moves at the moment and if this were the case he would be the behind the back, wider option, but it would be wasted on him as he won't distribute it on and again would be too far behind the gain line to take advantage. He works best at 13 in this case coming from out to in on the crash to suck in the 13 and hold the 12, but sadly Barritt neither has the distribution for to be effective here.

Unless he can either improve his skillset or England change their tactics I wouldn't pick him at 12.

I can't decide if I see Tuilagi as an IC or a winger going forward, probably the former. I think as a 13 he will just cut the supply route to the other outside backs and if he is just going to run into and over the opposition I'd rather he did it in traffic than slightly wider because it will create more space when done at 12 than at 13.

When the last time Tuilagi made an outside break for Tigers or England? He's more and more about runnng through his opposite number. He did that several times on Saturday, and frankly England needed him to do it. England need someone who can carry in traffic - Allen can't and JTH (please, no!) is nothing like as good at it as a player who is really a biff merchant should be.

Moving Tuilagi to 12 allows one of the other highly promising 13s in English rugby to get gametime. Tuilagi creating space for JJ (England's longterm 13 I have no doubt) could be devasting. He will threaten to run at 10, pulling 12 across, and give JJ half a yard and he will consistently break the gainline. Over time Tuilagi will develop a basic passing and off-loading game, and with his power that's almost certainly all he needs to be a highly effective 12 if there is a good 10 and 13 either side of him.

I'd go for Allen. I'm not convinced he's got what it takes to make it on the international stage, but quite happy for him to be tested out and it to be against the Boks because it's exactly the sort of game that I think will show his limitations and so we can find out one way or another.

I'd be tempted to fit Joseph into the midfield, but I have serious doubts about Tuilagi working at 12 (he hasn't looked right there before for Tigers), and with Brown out I want to see Joseph on the wing rather than bringing Strettle back in.

thomh wrote:That site is listing every kicker as having a 100% penalty kicking record. Something fishy going on there. Or maybe just a copy paste mishap.

Yeah, those stats look highly suspicious.

The Telegraph stats page is powered by OPTA, they don't give them for every player but they do list the league's top 10 for conversions, missed conversion, penalties and missed penalties. The only rates I could deduce from those were:

Flood has made 29 conversions and missed 14, which is 67%.

Farrell has made 53 penalties and missed 16, which is 77%.

They had a little snippet of Barrit when he was at school and interviewed his principal, some coaches and a few Shark rugby players, he seems to have been a very nice guys, until of course he defected.