England EPS

First topic message reminder :

Ok, the tour is over. The EPS for the 2012/13 season will be announced in early July (I think). It's named completely afresh and can have 5 changes in Jan 13 for the 6 nations. Who would be in you 32?

Injured players can be replaced no problem.

Actual EPS

Mouritz Botha (Saracens)
Alex Corbisiero (London Irish)
Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers)
Tom Croft (Leicester Tigers)
Phil Dowson (Northampton Saints)
Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints)
Tom Johnson (Exeter Chiefs)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints)
Joe Marler (Harlequins)
Ben Morgan (Gloucester)
Tom Palmer (London Wasps)
Geoff Parling (Leicester Tigers)
Chris Robshaw (Harlequins)
Matt Stevens (Saracens)
Thomas Waldrom (Leicester Tigers)
Rob Webber (Bath)
Tom Wood (Northampton Saints)
Anthony Allen (Leicester Tigers)
Chris Ashton (Saracens)
Brad Barritt (Saracens)
Mike Brown (Harlequins)
Danny Care (Harlequins)
Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints)
Owen Farrell (Saracens)
Toby Flood (Leicester Tigers)
Ben Foden (Northampton Saints)
Alex Goode (Saracens)
Jonathan Joseph (London Irish)
Charlie Sharples (Gloucester)
Manusamoa Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers)
Jordan Turner-Hall (Harlequins)
Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers).

Saxons

Nathan Catt (Bath)
Calum Clark (Northampton Saints)
Louis Deacon (Leicester Tigers)
Paul Doran Jones (Northampton Saints)
Carl Fearns (Bath)
James Gaskell (Sale Sharks)
Jamie Gibson (London Irish)
Joe Gray (Harlequins)
James Haskell (London Wasps)
Graham Kitchener (Leicester Tigers)
Matt Kvesic (Worcester Warriors)
Joe Launchbury (London Wasps)
Matt Mullan (Worcester Warriors)
David Paice (London Irish)
George Robson (Harlequins)
Henry Thomas (Sale Sharks)
David Wilson (Bath)
Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers)
Nick Abendanon (Bath)
Miles Benjamin (Leicester Tigers)
Tom Biggs (Bath)
Freddie Burns (Gloucester)
George Ford (Leicester Tigers)
George Lowe (Harlequins)
Jonny May (Gloucester)
Rob Miller (Sale Sharks)
Ugo Monye (Harlequins)
Joe Simpson (London Wasps)
David Strettle (Saracens)
Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester)
Christian Wade (London Wasps)
Richard Wigglesworth (Saracens).

Ozzy3213 wrote:I'm not sure why people are making Garvey/Parling comparisons to be honest as one is a definite 4 and the other a definite 5, so wouldn't be competing for a shirt anyway.

Ozzy - Behind the front row, I dont mind that I am fairly ignorant of what goes on in the pack.
But, what is the difference between 4 and 5 in the 2nd row, asside from left and right their roles are pretty much the same!
Thinking on a bit further, you would probably want the heavier or more powerful lock supporting the TH. But they should be interchangable, you may want the stronger Lock supporting a weaker Prop if a team is having issues on one side!

what is the difference between 4 and 5 in the 2nd row

PropDavid I think Ozzy is referring to the usual set up of having 1 enforcer (normally the number 4) providing the beef and the blood mindedness and then one more atheltic lock (normally the 5) who is normally the lineout leader and a bit more mobile. Good example being 4.Bakkies Botha and 5.Victor Matfield for SA.

Doesn't have to be that way but it tends to be.

propdavid

There are various ways of looking at or putting together a second row pairing. If you look at a pairing like Botha and Matfield or Thorn and Ali Williams, you would be hard pushed to declare that they are pretty much the same. The 4 is generally the heavier of the two and likely to be a front jumper who carries well and provides grunt (Botha and Thorn or in terms of potential EPS selections someone like Matt Garvey or Dave Attwood). The 5 is more athletic, a bit lightly and likely to lead the lineout (Williams and Matfield, or in EPS terms Parling and Borthwick). If you have balance through the pack, then this sort of lock balance is ideal.

What you have nowadays as well though is more hydrid locks, like James Horwill and Courtney Lawes (and others), who provide both grunt and are athletic enough to be primary lineout jumpers.

The issue England have with Lawes, is not quite enough grunt with ball in hand to be a traditional 4, and does not possess the experience to call an international lineout, albeit he is actually a very good jumper due to his athleticism.

Who I would select in the engine room for England at present would be largely dependant on who is available in the back row.

4 & 5 also depend on where they are in the pack.

In the scrum the "lineout guy" 4 will usually lineup on the loosehead side as he is lighter. The bigger heavier Shaw / Johnson type will go behind the TH prop as the TH goes up against the oppo Hooker and LH, so this gives him more support than the lighter Second row would give...

This is why you will get arguements defending some props when they have poor standard or weak second rows.

Hope thats clear

GeordieFalcon wrote:4 & 5 also depend on where they are in the pack.

In the scrum the "lineout guy" 4 will usually lineup on the loosehead side as he is lighter. The bigger heavier Shaw / Johnson type will go behind the TH prop as the TH goes up against the oppo Hooker and LH, so this gives him more support than the lighter Second row would give...

This is why you will get arguements defending some props when they have poor standard or weak second rows.

Hope thats clear

Precisely such as when Phil Vickery lost out to the Beast's illegal scrummaging in B&I Lions T2 v SA. He was err supported by Alun Wyn Jones and next to Mears. Nice one. Still the ref apologised afterwards to Vickery who told him " a bit late now!" and Vickery turned the tables on Beast in T3 with different scrum buddies with him.

The glue players.

You know what I mean the ones who while not being spectacular players themselves get on with doing the spade work that helps others to shine. The guys who do the hard yards but don’t necessarily get the plaudits. The tackles, the ruck clearing, lineout lifting, maul driving and killing, the guy who supports to take a pass and give one to keep play going.

Do you have to have a balance in any team of glue plauyers and stars?
Can a player be both? Is that what Richard Hill was?
Who are they in the England side?
Do we have too many glue players or not enough?

Balance is all.

You have to have carriers in your pack, you have to have spadeworkers and set piece guys who can deliver.

It is not the easiest thing in the world to get right im sure but i suspect that we have possibly too many glue players not enough athletic ability.

Triangle
Interesting point about 2nd row support.
Also in T2 I thought Beast was boring in illegally at ~ 45deg angle on the engage popping Vicks out. Is this what the ref apologised about after do you think ?

Will the Saxons actually get any games before their 6N's next year? And if not then what's the point in them being selected now? So that they can attend a few training camps?

I would love the Saxons to play midweek games against touring sides in the Autumn, sadly I don't think it'll ever happen.

Triangulation wrote:The glue players.

You know what I mean the ones who while not being spectacular players themselves get on with doing the spade work that helps others to shine. The guys who do the hard yards but don’t necessarily get the plaudits. The tackles, the ruck clearing, lineout lifting, maul driving and killing, the guy who supports to take a pass and give one to keep play going.

Do you have to have a balance in any team of glue plauyers and stars?
Can a player be both? Is that what Richard Hill was?
Who are they in the England side?
Do we have too many glue players or not enough?

Balance is all.

You have to have carriers in your pack, you have to have spadeworkers and set piece guys who can deliver.

It is not the easiest thing in the world to get right im sure but i suspect that we have possibly too many glue players not enough athletic ability.

I think you can certainly be both. Some guys seem to be able to do it all. Juan Smith is literally fantastic at everything. Since Wood has been described on here as a possible Juan Smith type player for England, he may fit the bill. He seems like he can do the work required in the tight exchanges, and offer a real attacking option if the game opens up.

It is not the easiest thing in the world to get right im sure but i suspect that we have possibly too many glue players not enough athletic ability.

I think we might have gone a bit to far the other way. Palmer and Parling are both athletic, Johnson is an athletic 6 using his pace to get around and make the tackles breakdowns, Morgan is a luxuary and Robshaw is a tackle machine that has recently added turnovers to his skillset but is hardly the man at the coal face type. I wonder whether an Olly Kohn/Louis Deacon type in the second row with a different 8 in the Easter/Crane sort of mold would allow the likes of Parling, Palmer, Croft, Johnson, Robshaw or whoever to go and play to their best a bit more.

More regular carrying from the otherwise good front row might help as well. Well the props have been good (Cole, Corbs and Marler).

gergortree

i dont know exactly the ref apologised to vickers for the scrum interpretation during the game. beast was driving vickery staight up vertically through the roof of the scrum and on an illegal angle.

vickers should have been able to stop it illegal or not support or not he got owned by the beast that day which was horrible to witness.

the ref did get it wrong though yes.


England should play probables v possibles games and belt the living sh*t out of one another. that is what the SH sides will bring so best get match hard.

Kieran Read is another.

wth a relatively lithe back row and middle and back lineout jumpers in croft and robshaw and wood to come in,

should we go for 2 two ball carrying monsters in the second row?

grewcock/ Johnson and
kay/johnson

were not exactly lightweight

would

johnson/shaw have worked after all?

i for one would have loved to have seen it tried at least!!

curse you woodward!

johnson/shaw have worked after all?

Not in the lineout. Those guys were massive, Phil Vickery used to moan about having to lift Kay let alone trying to get the heavier Johnno and Shaw up in the middle of the lineout. Those two were primarily front jumpers from memory with Hill/Moody/Dallaligio jumping at the tail. Ben Kay ran the show at the England lineout for years.

I've not seen a double heavyweight lock pairing work particularly well, as SAM says it compromises the line-out quite a bit. Toulon try it regularly in the T14 with 4. B Botha and 5. S Shaw, but it doesn't really give a great deal and they do suffer come line-out time with Armitage at 7 aswell!

It was Lions T1 that Vickery got stuffed by Beast's illegal scrummaging, then Simon Shaw was brought in for T2 in order a) to help the scrummage and b) stop us getting driven at the line-out.

He did both and put in one of the best performances around the park I have ever seen from a lock. He was everywhere and was the Lions best player in that Test.

From an EPS point of view we're struggling in the SR and that's clear. We know Garvey doesn't appear to be rated as he's not even mentioned as being on the cusp of the squads. Charlie Matthews, who is mentioned is certainly not an enforcer style lock from memory. He's more athletic along the lines of Robson. So once again it seems a heavyweight lock is still not on the agenda.

From Attwood's point of view I think it must be his attitude and training which has ruled him out. He was with the EPS in the 6N training and since then he's dropped right out.

I can accept the proposition that no one is really hammering the door down at number 4 and therefore drastic EPS changes would only be experimental at best. The only thing I can say is that this season there are some shirts wide open to be grasped with the right mentality:

2.

4.

12.

There are other areas, FH and No.8 for Morgan but these to me are the main ones and it could be key for us to find real quality here if we're going to have a good 6N. At present my forecast for the AI's is 2/4 which would be unimpressive to say the least.

Chjw131 wrote:I've not seen a double heavyweight lock pairing work particularly well, as SAM says it compromises the line-out quite a bit. Toulon try it regularly in the T14 with 4. B Botha and 5. S Shaw, but it doesn't really give a great deal and they do suffer come line-out time with Armitage at 7 aswell!
It was Lions T1 that Vickery got stuffed by Beast's illegal scrummaging, then Simon Shaw was brought in for T2 in order a) to help the scrummage and b) stop us getting driven at the line-out.

He did both and put in one of the best performances around the park I have ever seen from a lock. He was everywhere and was the Lions best player in that Test.

From an EPS point of view we're struggling in the SR and that's clear. We know Garvey doesn't appear to be rated as he's not even mentioned as being on the cusp of the squads. Charlie Matthews, who is mentioned is certainly not an enforcer style lock from memory. He's more athletic along the lines of Robson. So once again it seems a heavyweight lock is still not on the agenda.

From Attwood's point of view I think it must be his attitude and training which has ruled him out. He was with the EPS in the 6N training and since then he's dropped right out.

I can accept the proposition that no one is really hammering the door down at number 4 and therefore drastic EPS changes would only be experimental at best. The only thing I can say is that this season there are some shirts wide open to be grasped with the right mentality:

2.

4.

12.
There are other areas, FH and No.8 for Morgan but these to me are the main ones and it could be key for us to find real quality here if we're going to have a good 6N. At present my forecast for the AI's is 2/4 which would be unimpressive to say the least.

To address the points in bold in partlcular.......

I am calling for 2 heavy weight locks with Croft and Wood as lineout jumpers. That was the premise for my suggestion experimental as it might be. I am radical what can i say. I just want us to damned well look like an England rugby side again and not the halfbaked poor man's wallaby outfit that we currently resemble.

I stand corrected on the test.

12 is THE problem position for us since Greenwood retired in 2004 we have had 16+ inside centres and more than 90 midfield combinations.

It is a catatrophe at 12.

A hell of a lot of the 16+ 12s weve tried have had less than 10 caps.

I just hope Allen (being tried at 13 midweek games WHYYYYYYYYYYY?) , 36 or even JTH can become the next Greenwood and own the 12 shirt for 5 years.

I played 12 and i think its a fantastic position to play. You get a lot of the ball and you get to make lots of nice easy front on tackles, you get to make decisions though not perhaps with the game shaping pressure of the 10. You get to link with the back row on the inside and your fellow backs on the outside. You get to follow the ball as a support runner which is the most natural sporting instinct in the world.

Anyway i digress why we havent had a single decent 12 for England since Will Greenwood (my favourite England player) is BEYOND me and it seems our coaches down the years.

Rant over.

I am calling for 2 heavy weight locks with Croft and Wood as lineout jumpers. That was the premise for my suggestion experimental as it might be

Tri, there's a difference between a good lineout jumper and a good lineout leader. Croft is probably the best lineout jumper in the league but I've seen games when Parling and Deacon have been injured and Croft has called the lineout, it wasn't great. Wood is similar with Day calling the Saints lineout.

It is a catatrophe at 12.

Not really, the Barritt/Tuilagi combo has worked quite well given that they've not played together with an attacking 9/10. Catt improved the attacking tactics of the centres in the third test and Barritt went better in that set up once he came on. That could be a good way forward especially with Flood at 10.

The idea that the 2 shirt is open is probably not quite true. Hartley being given the captaincy showed he is pretty central to Lancaster's thinking (though apparently Flood was supposed to be the VC). I think the back up hooker spot is what is really open. Be interesting to see what happens if Hartley gets injured...

Chjw131 wrote:I've not seen a double heavyweight lock pairing work particularly well, as SAM says it compromises the line-out quite a bit. Toulon try it regularly in the T14 with 4. B Botha and 5. S Shaw, but it doesn't really give a great deal and they do suffer come line-out time with Armitage at 7 aswell!

It was Lions T1 that Vickery got stuffed by Beast's illegal scrummaging, then Simon Shaw was brought in for T2 in order a) to help the scrummage and b) stop us getting driven at the line-out.

He did both and put in one of the best performances around the park I have ever seen from a lock. He was everywhere and was the Lions best player in that Test.

From an EPS point of view we're struggling in the SR and that's clear. We know Garvey doesn't appear to be rated as he's not even mentioned as being on the cusp of the squads. Charlie Matthews, who is mentioned is certainly not an enforcer style lock from memory. He's more athletic along the lines of Robson. So once again it seems a heavyweight lock is still not on the agenda.

From Attwood's point of view I think it must be his attitude and training which has ruled him out. He was with the EPS in the 6N training and since then he's dropped right out.

I can accept the proposition that no one is really hammering the door down at number 4 and therefore drastic EPS changes would only be experimental at best. The only thing I can say is that this season there are some shirts wide open to be grasped with the right mentality:

2.

4.

12.

There are other areas, FH and No.8 for Morgan but these to me are the main ones and it could be key for us to find real quality here if we're going to have a good 6N. At present my forecast for the AI's is 2/4 which would be unimpressive to say the least.

That is baffling because Johnson rated him very very highly and saw him as the future in the 5 shirt.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

I am calling for 2 heavy weight locks with Croft and Wood as lineout jumpers. That was the premise for my suggestion experimental as it might be

Tri, there's a difference between a good lineout jumper and a good lineout leader. Croft is probably the best lineout jumper in the league but I've seen games when Parling and Deacon have been injured and Croft has called the lineout, it wasn't great. Wood is similar with Day calling the Saints lineout.

It is a catatrophe at 12.

Not really, the Barritt/Tuilagi combo has worked quite well given that they've not played together with an attacking 9/10. Catt improved the attacking tactics of the centres in the third test and Barritt went better in that set up once he came on. That could be a good way forward especially with Flood at 10.

The idea that the 2 shirt is open is probably not quite true. Hartley being given the captaincy showed he is pretty central to Lancaster's thinking (though apparently Flood was supposed to be the VC). I think the back up hooker spot is what is really open. Be interesting to see what happens if Hartley gets injured...

So what are you saying that Croft and Wood are morons and cannot learn to call the lineout? Feck me they are professional rugby players teach them how to damn well call the lineout. People have such fixed ideas.

No you are wrong. It is a catastrophe.

Since 2004 the 12 situation since 2004 is nothing short of a national disgrace and it is far too early to be proclaiming barrit as the solution after what he has shown so far: grit and defensive and tackling abilitiy.

yappysnap wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:I've not seen a double heavyweight lock pairing work particularly well, as SAM says it compromises the line-out quite a bit. Toulon try it regularly in the T14 with 4. B Botha and 5. S Shaw, but it doesn't really give a great deal and they do suffer come line-out time with Armitage at 7 aswell!

It was Lions T1 that Vickery got stuffed by Beast's illegal scrummaging, then Simon Shaw was brought in for T2 in order a) to help the scrummage and b) stop us getting driven at the line-out.

He did both and put in one of the best performances around the park I have ever seen from a lock. He was everywhere and was the Lions best player in that Test.

From an EPS point of view we're struggling in the SR and that's clear. We know Garvey doesn't appear to be rated as he's not even mentioned as being on the cusp of the squads. Charlie Matthews, who is mentioned is certainly not an enforcer style lock from memory. He's more athletic along the lines of Robson. So once again it seems a heavyweight lock is still not on the agenda.

From Attwood's point of view I think it must be his attitude and training which has ruled him out. He was with the EPS in the 6N training and since then he's dropped right out.

I can accept the proposition that no one is really hammering the door down at number 4 and therefore drastic EPS changes would only be experimental at best. The only thing I can say is that this season there are some shirts wide open to be grasped with the right mentality:

2.

4.

12.

There are other areas, FH and No.8 for Morgan but these to me are the main ones and it could be key for us to find real quality here if we're going to have a good 6N. At present my forecast for the AI's is 2/4 which would be unimpressive to say the least.

That is baffling because Johnson rated him very very highly and saw him as the future in the 5 shirt.

Attwood must have rogered Lancaster's mother, daughter, wife and sister in one unholy gangbang of epic proportions because from what i saw in Australia he looked to be be a bit raw but had the goods.

The goods.

Lancaster's signature move/vanity project seems to be to pick donkeys at lock and expect the backrow and front row to cover their carrying duties for them.

the really sickening thing is that if we sack lancaster in 12 months there already is not a coach worth his salt who wants to work for us and rob andrew and that situation will be far far worse.

the rugby world is more than happy to see us slide from 2nd tier rugby nation to 3rd.

bunch of prejudiced c*&s.

Attwood had a pretty average season at Bath, mostly outplayed by Caldwell who's hardly world class.

Perhaps this is the reason he's not involved?

frankly i am shocked at the apathy on these boards.

were all sleepwalking to disaster and 606 wants to shuffle deck chairs on the titanic.

what's the point?

ask yourselves that over the weekend.

we should probably think about withdrawing from international rugby union altogether, re-shape the laws for our own game (ie. reverse a hell of a lot of the law changes of the last 20 years) and have fun with ourselves again.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Attwood had a pretty average season at Bath, mostly outplayed by Caldwell who's hardly world class.

Perhaps this is the reason he's not involved?

Agreed - shame that Attwood's pretty large fan club don't see that!

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Attwood had a pretty average season at Bath, mostly outplayed by Caldwell who's hardly world class.

Perhaps this is the reason he's not involved?

Bath - oh yes Bath. The once mighty Bath. Now the biggest wastrels of rugby talent ever seen in the rugby firmament.

Good promising rugby player + a season or two with bath = ban for 10 years for substance abuse and/or sliding rapidly down the ranks to mediorcity and beyond.

God im sick of this.

have good weekends.

out.

Triangulation wrote:frankly i am shocked at the apathy on these boards.

were all sleepwalking to disaster and 606 wants to shuffle deck chairs on the titanic.

what's the point?

ask yourselves that over the weekend.

we should probably think about withdrawing from international rugby union altogether, re-shape the laws for our own game (ie. reverse a hell of a lot of the law changes of the last 20 years) and have fun with ourselves again.

What's the plan Triangulation? Are you going to march down to the RFU and give them a piece of your mind? Hey maybe you could work up the foodchain at the RFU and get on the gravy train.

Attwood wasn't playing well at Gloucester previous to his Bath move. He's one of these player who look better on paper than on the pitch.

formerly known as Sam wrote:
The idea that the 2 shirt is open is probably not quite true. Hartley being given the captaincy showed he is pretty central to Lancaster's thinking (though apparently Flood was supposed to be the VC). I think the back up hooker spot is what is really open. Be interesting to see what happens if Hartley gets injured...

Well the selection of Mears as backup for the summer kind of said what Lancatser thinks about the deputies,. that only one made the 32 even clearer : "if I could get away with it I wouldnt select a hooker at all, what this squad really needs is more full backs and centers. I like Fullbacks and Centers, they are fun."

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:
The idea that the 2 shirt is open is probably not quite true. Hartley being given the captaincy showed he is pretty central to Lancaster's thinking (though apparently Flood was supposed to be the VC). I think the back up hooker spot is what is really open. Be interesting to see what happens if Hartley gets injured...

Well the selection of Mears as backup for the summer kind of said what Lancatser thinks about the deputies,. that only one made the 32 even clearer : "if I could get away with it I wouldnt select a hooker at all, what this squad really needs is more full backs and centers. I like Fullbacks and Centers, they are fun."

I know Johnson felt that Attwood had the necessary, and to be frank there's not many that could judge a lock like Johnson can. He also selected Lawes, who could still be a 'world class' lock.

Having been involved in the EPS for the 6N I don't think it's quite accurate to allege that he's not there purely on a few opinions of his performance; and even if that was the case it would be the wrong move. You retain people with POTENTIAL for a while not just bump them up and down on a whim. I'm not saying he's the answer but i'd have like to seen him tried given the paucity of other options.

Triangulation wrote:..........Attwood must have rogered Lancaster's mother, daughter, wife and sister in one unholy gangbang of epic proportions..........

He must have terrific endurance and a lot of power.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Attwood had a pretty average season at Bath, mostly outplayed by Caldwell who's hardly world class.

Perhaps this is the reason he's not involved?

You see i'm not sure that he did; and I don't think Palmer's, Botha's or Parlings seasons were anything to write home about and they were all playing in packs that are a million times better then Barfs.

Palmer had a very poor season at Stade, bench warmed for the majority from what I can remember. He does have an extra but of class which Attwood has never shown though.

Attwood is very different to Palmer, but Attwood too has had flashes of class. Maybe if he had a few games at int level he'd surprise everyone. Especially away from the Bath coaching culture.

Tri, I think you need to take a moment and calm down. Yours is not a normal response to a rugby squad list that isn't all that bad though far from perfection

I think its important to remember that the saxons and EPS squads are pretty much interchangeable throughout the season and England are not actually playing for another 4 months. Potentially anyone from the 64 could be in the 22 come the autumn tests. Those of you who are unhappy with the selection ask yourselves this, which players, that could make a serious difference, are currently outside both squads?

It was always going to be unlikely for fringe players to be promoted to the EPS with little or no rugby being played in the off season and therefore no form to go by. It looks like we'll just have to be patient and wait for the start of the club season (i know its frustrating), to see which players step up and stake a claim for a test shirt or place in the EPS.

HQ matt wrote:I think its important to remember that the saxons and EPS squads are pretty much interchangeable throughout the season and England are not actually playing for another 4 months. Potentially anyone from the 64 could be in the 22 come the autumn tests. Those of you who are unhappy with the selection ask yourselves this, which players, that could make a serious difference, are currently outside both squads?

It was always going to be unlikely for fringe players to be promoted to the EPS with little or no rugby being played in the off season and therefore no form to go by. It looks like we'll just have to be patient and wait for the start of the club season (i know its frustrating), to see which players step up and stake a claim for a test shirt or place in the EPS.

Ive been saying for a while...this season is a monster as far as England goes....there are SO many potential players that have to show up this season...and ultimately players MUST be playing for their clubs to play for England

Just look a the list

1) Returing From Injury:
WHen will the following return and how will they perform?
Wood
Croft
Crane
Lawes

2) Finding form:
Will Fearns, Attwood etc find the form of a few years ago that really fired them into everyones attention.

3) Winning the starting shirt for their club.
Ford
Burns
Youngs
Lindsay
George
Cipriani
Farrell - will he start at 10?
Kitchener
Slater
Matthews
etc etc

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Attwood had a pretty average season at Bath, mostly outplayed by Caldwell who's hardly world class.

Perhaps this is the reason he's not involved?

Can't have been outplayed that much. They both made the same number of starts (17), Attwood played in one more game overall and managed to pick up a couple of MOTM awards. Attwood had a pretty turbulent 2011 with him switching clubs, the ban for stamping and an injury ensuring he missed the World Cup. Last season has seen him begin to get back on his feet, this season is going to have to see him get back into the groove and prove his supporters right.

Or his distracters right?

I like Attwood but I as I kind of said he's been outshone by Caldwell who's not a great lock. Attwood needs to nasty up a bit (in a good way). He's got nice hands and is a steady line out option but should be dominating opposition around the park at AP level.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Or his distracters right?

I like Attwood but I as I kind of said he's been outshone by Caldwell who's not a great lock. Attwood needs to nasty up a bit (in a good way). He's got nice hands and is a steady line out option but should be dominating opposition around the park at AP level.

That was implied.

See, I've seen quite a bit of Bath and I don't think he has out performed him that much. Caldwell's given a few eye catching performances, but it's not like he's shown Attwood up.

I just think Attwood should be really shining Cumbrian and he isn't. He was poor to steady throughout the season imo, maybe a good pre-season will help and Gold putting his arm round him.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I just think Attwood should be really shining Cumbrian and he isn't. He was poor to steady throughout the season imo, maybe a good pre-season will help and Gold putting his arm round him.

Agreed. For what it's worth even as a champion of his, I'd say at best he straddling the gap between the EPS and the Saxons rather than the first team squad at the moment.

Looking at the two squads in the round most of the right players are there.

I don't really see the point of Stevens, Dowson or JTH. I also see that Lowe has leapfrogged Trinder and that Garvey and Attwood are both absent and so are presumably nowhere near the first team.

The key remains sorting out a 10, 12, 13 combo which has some attacking teeth.

Oh yes, and what is Nathan Catt doing there?

Ok Chequered Jersey

I have taken a weekend and have calmed down.

We have all highlighted the same problems with the EPS and Saxons squads.

Remarkably for 606 we're all largely in agreement with the problems

We have also identified factors which might lead to an improved group come AI time - i.e long season, flexibility, scope for change with injuries etc.

Who knows perhaps Bomber has deliberately left out some of the better players/players with potential to actually improve England as a deliberate throwing down of the gauntlet?? I think that this must certainly be the case with Haskell.

There remains though a nagging sense that the coach should be able to pick the best players and the players that will best serve our cause.

The failure to do this in several notable instances leads to the conclusion that he cannot or will not do this for reasons best known to himself. Misplaced loyalty? Favouritism? Poor analysis? It eats our confidence.

My rant about our 12 catastrophe stands.

If you read it, it i don’t lay the last 8 years of indecision and mucking about at Bomber's door. That would be patently absurd. It does remain our achilles heel though I'm afraid.

I have championed Allen for a while but I now fail to see the point. We play him as a 13 in midweek games when he is a 12 and we were crying out for a fit 12 and then keep him in the EPS.

How good is JTH? Is he going to get a crack at 12 or should we scrap him now?

What the SH powers do is they very quickly work out if a player is good enough and they make a decision and stick to it.

We prefer to pick, drop, pick, chop and change and generally be "the world champions at wasting talent" Graham Henry.

Oh yes, and what is Nathan Catt doing there?

I presume he's included so that Rowntree gets to spend some time with him and sort out his srummaging technique, in a similar way as to what he did with Marler.

p.s Northampton and England should be pleased with the positive news on Tom Wood and Courtney Lawes.

They should both be playing in September apparently.

i think most people are questioning the selection of stevens, dowson, JTH and perhaps botha in the eps. apart from that i cant see a lot wrong.

with regards stevens i dont think anyone has really done enough to claim his place, i think the likes of hardin, thomas, wilson, pdj need to stake their claim in the first 2 months of the ap.

dowson i must agree seems unnecessary because when push came to shove in SA haskell was selected over him

jth had a good season for quins and his contribution on tour was ok, 12trees is an alternative but he has to prove himself at his new club gloucester. perhaps lancaster could have gone for another outside back but it may be wise to wait to see who starts the season in try scoring form.

the 2nd row situation is a bit of a problem and there doesnt seem to be an obvious solution, i think the current locks are probably the best avaible, the likes of attwood and garvey didnt do enough last season to force their way in and you cant just promote players to the eps because the current players arent performing the way you want, they have to play their way in. it is a bit strange neither was named in the saxons though.

The challenge at 12 is in deciding what England needs and finding a 10-12-13 combination that offers the right balance.

I think the problem actually starts with 10. Farrell and Flood are both good players but I don't think either of them can run a game (yet) without the right players inside of them. Flood seems to need someone who can take a bit of pressure off him when he's not getting quick ball; Farrell needs a bit of creativity. Unfortunately, neither Mike Catt nor Will Greenwood is available, so England have tended to go for a target man who can take the ball up in traffic but isn't necessarily the creator.

At International level, that's a bit obvious unless you have someone who's pretty unstoppable - or you have a 13 outside who can make something out of the tiniest gaps. Different era, but that was essentially how the Andrew-Carling-Guscott axis worked, and it worked pretty well.

It could work for this squad, given time. In Joseph and Lowe, England have players who can and do exploit minuscule gaps. Ashton and Brown are also adept at joining the line. But it relies on finding a centre who can reliably draw the defence, get over the line and then get the ball away quickly. It also relies on the 12 and 13 having a good understanding of each others' games.

That could be Manu, but he will need to adapt his style and learn his partner's game. JTH hasn't shown much on the international stage yet - but is clearly in Lancaster's thoughts; Mark Mapletoft has said that the England setup think he could develop into a Nonu-style player (and is ahead of where Nonu was at a similar age). Based on his season for Quins last year, he's got a lot of the required skills (including a quick, flat pass) - but needs to work on his timing and decision-making (doesn't always hit the line at speed and needs to work on knowing when to pass).