Keeping the Wheels on - AKA England's next EPS

First topic message reminder :

After a remarkable finish to the Autumn series Stuart Lancaster and his coaches next mission will be the new years EPS. Chosen in January it will not be open for change until Sep that year (except swaps for injuries) so he'll need to plan well and pick not only on current form but prior experience and future potential.

In the final game of the AI's the starting team that day showed the route that England rugby needs to take on the pitch; hard and aggressive up front with the pack sharing the duties of fetching, carrying and rucking amongst a core group of multi skilled players rather then selecting various specialists for one or two specific roles. In the backs we say a few glimpses of the Catt/Farrel/Lancaster triumvirate in action with Youngs getting some quick ball and kicking well, and the 10 drawing his centres up to the line at pace and actually giving Tuilagi good ball to use. The left wing and full back then create momentum from the back by beating their first man when countering and staying tall in the tackle to wait for support.

Of course there were players who failed to cover themselves in glory like wise others who were never deemed good enough to get a chance or who were only in because of multiple injuries. These I expect to see fall by the road side next year.

The current England Elite Player Squad

Forwards (17)
Props
Alex Corbisiero (London Irish), Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers), Joe Marler (Harlequins), David Wilson (Bath Rugby), Mako Vunipola (Saracens)
Hookers
Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints), Rob Webber (Bath Rugby) Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers), David Paice (London Irish)
Locks
Mouritz Botha (Saracens), Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints), Tom Palmer (London Wasps), Geoff Parling (Leicester Tigers) Joe Launchberry (London Wasps)
Flankers
Tom Croft (Leicester Tigers), Phil Dowson (Northampton Saints), Tom Johnson (Exeter Chiefs), Chris Robshaw (Harlequins), Tom Wood (Northampton Saints) James Haskell (London Wasps)
No 8's
Ben Morgan (Gloucester Rugby), Thomas Waldrom (Leicester Tigers)


Backs (15)
Scrum Halfs
Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints), Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers), Danny Care (Harlequins)
Fly Halfs
Owen Farrell (Saracens), Toby Flood (Leicester Tigers), Freddie Burns (Gloucester Rugby)
Centers
Anthony Allan (Leicester Tigers), Brad Barritt (Saracens), Manusamoa Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers), Jordan Turner-Hall (Harlequins), Johnathen Joseph (London Irish) Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester Rugby)
Wings
Chris Ashton (Northampton Saints), Charlie Sharples (Gloucester Rugby), (Ugo Monye (Harlequins))
Fullbacks
Mike Brown (Harlequins), Ben Foden (Northampton Saints), Alex Goode (Saracens)

Players in italics were the latest changes allowed through injury or retirement (potentially the most likely to lose their spots again).

So to me the bulk of that 32 man squad looks about right, there are still quite a few players that are potentially a little worried about their places now:

Mako Vunipola (only came in for an injured Corbs but didn't look too comfy at times)
Rob Webber (Youngs looked a lot better and Hartley is still first choice)
David Paice (only came in for an injured Webber, didn't play better then Youngs or Hartley)
Mauritz Botha (just not an international lock, shown up completely by Launchberry)
Tom Palmer (anonymous around the park and not good enough at lineout time)
Courtney Lawes (injured a lot, is he big enough to partner Parling or athletic enough to partner Launchberry)
Tom Johnson (just doesn't play the style that England seem to need)
Tom Croft (injured and does his style fit England)
Phil Dowson (over 30 and can't make the match day 23)
James Haskell (Only came in for injuries, not sure if he did enough to stay)
Thomas Waldrom (pushed out of the starting lineup and hardly likely to make the bench)
Lee Dickson (can't make the match day 23)
Anthony Allan (can not make the 23, average club player)
Brad Barritt (bar one game looked out of his depth, potentially a new Noone)
Jordan Turner Hall (Like Barritt but less pace and no real vision, injured at a bad time)
Chris Ashton (A media darling but lazy in defence and pretty anonymous in most games, riding on rep at the moment)
Ugo Monye (only called up for injuries, didn't do enough)
Charlie Sharples (poor defence let him down)
Ben Foden (unlucky with an injury and now has two critical players in front of him)

Now I don't think all of these players will go, but there are a few who are near certainties.

Yappysnap's Elite Player Squad
Forwards (17)
Props
Alex Corbisiero (London Irish), Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers), Joe Marler (Harlequins), David Wilson (Bath Rugby), Nick Wood (Gloucester Rugby)
Hookers
Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints), Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers)
Locks
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints), Geoff Parling (Leicester Tigers), Joe Launchberry (London Wasps), David Attwood (Bath Rugby)
Flankers
Tom Croft (Leicester Tigers), Chris Robshaw (Harlequins), Tom Wood (Northampton Saints), James Haskell (London Wasps)
No 8's
Ben Morgan (Gloucester Rugby), Billy Vunipola (London Wasps)

Backs (15)
Scrum Halfs
Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers), Danny Care (Harlequins)
Fly Halfs
Owen Farrell (Saracens), Toby Flood (Leicester Tigers), Freddie Burns (Gloucester Rugby)
Centers
Brad Barritt (Saracens), Manusamoa Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers), George Lowe (Harlequins), Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester Rugby), Kyle Eastmond (Bath)
Wings
Chris Ashton (Northampton Saints),Christian Wade (Wasps)
Fullbacks
Mike Brown (Harlequins), Ben Foden (Northampton Saints), Alex Goode (Saracens)

The changes are
David Wilson did enough to get in to the EPS permanently
Nick Wood comes in to replace Vunipola as a trial
Tom Youngs replaces Webber as very real competition for Hartley
Dave Attwood comes in for Palmer to add some bulk and physicality if needed
James Haskell takes Johnsons place as he adds a bit more physicality and covers the back three
Billy Vunipola is trialled in Waldroms place to see his carrying game
Freddue Burns gets a permanent spot for Hodgeson
George Lowe, Billy Twelvetrees and Kyle Eastmond all come in to the squad to trial different attributes in the centres as well as cover the wings if needed.
Christian Wade comes in on the wing

Bathman_in_London wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:Let Lancaster do what he wants. To be honest, in my eyes, he hasn't put a foot wrong yet, and he's instilled respect and honour in the England jersey again. It's a pleasure to be an England fan at the moment, so whatever he thinks he has to do to motivate our players, I'm right behind him.

While I agree with you, I feel that the NZ game (great as it was) has clouded everyones judgments a little. He has instilled some pride in the shirt and made us less of a laughing stock but our play has been naive at times so I think a really strong 6 Nations is needed to show he has advanced the playing squad, not just stopped the players acting as if they are on a stag do.

I certainly agree that some people have got carried away with the NZ win, but I don't think we should take anything away from SL because of that. He hasn't been the one coming out say 'we're world beaters now', 'World Cup winners' etc. He's actually kept a very cool head and so have the players. We need a really strong Six Nations to prove that we can play consistently well.

Our play has been very naive, but I think we've seen progression in this respect over the last few games. It's by no means where it should be, but it is getting there.

bluestonevedder wrote:

Bathman_in_London wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:Let Lancaster do what he wants. To be honest, in my eyes, he hasn't put a foot wrong yet, and he's instilled respect and honour in the England jersey again. It's a pleasure to be an England fan at the moment, so whatever he thinks he has to do to motivate our players, I'm right behind him.

While I agree with you, I feel that the NZ game (great as it was) has clouded everyones judgments a little. He has instilled some pride in the shirt and made us less of a laughing stock but our play has been naive at times so I think a really strong 6 Nations is needed to show he has advanced the playing squad, not just stopped the players acting as if they are on a stag do.

I certainly agree that some people have got carried away with the NZ win, but I don't think we should take anything away from SL because of that. He hasn't been the one coming out say 'we're world beaters now', 'World Cup winners' etc. He's actually kept a very cool head and so have the players. We need a really strong Six Nations to prove that we can play consistently well.

Our play has been very naive, but I think we've seen progression in this respect over the last few games. It's by no means where it should be, but it is getting there.

Well said Bluestone. It's pretty much all the usual suspects apart from Lancaster & the players that have been having the hysterical reaction to the Kiwi win. Enjoy the moment for what it was, learn from it, move on whilst keeping expectations grounded and staying level headed. It's the bottom-feeders in the press that have spouted the 'world beaters' and other hysteria.

bluestonevedder wrote:

Bathman_in_London wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:Let Lancaster do what he wants. To be honest, in my eyes, he hasn't put a foot wrong yet, and he's instilled respect and honour in the England jersey again. It's a pleasure to be an England fan at the moment, so whatever he thinks he has to do to motivate our players, I'm right behind him.

While I agree with you, I feel that the NZ game (great as it was) has clouded everyones judgments a little. He has instilled some pride in the shirt and made us less of a laughing stock but our play has been naive at times so I think a really strong 6 Nations is needed to show he has advanced the playing squad, not just stopped the players acting as if they are on a stag do.

I certainly agree that some people have got carried away with the NZ win, but I don't think we should take anything away from SL because of that. He hasn't been the one coming out say 'we're world beaters now', 'World Cup winners' etc. He's actually kept a very cool head and so have the players. We need a really strong Six Nations to prove that we can play consistently well.

Our play has been very naive, but I think we've seen progression in this respect over the last few games. It's by no means where it should be, but it is getting there.

Spot on I think bluesotne. The NZ win was superb for morale and had it been any other nation in the NH we'd have seen much the same press coverage I think. It's important to remember we're not even 12 months down the line from changing half the EPS and a whole new management team, Lancs has done pretty well with the ethos and PR since then and perhaps we're starting to see some progression on the playing front.

Chjw131 wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:

Bathman_in_London wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:Let Lancaster do what he wants. To be honest, in my eyes, he hasn't put a foot wrong yet, and he's instilled respect and honour in the England jersey again. It's a pleasure to be an England fan at the moment, so whatever he thinks he has to do to motivate our players, I'm right behind him.

While I agree with you, I feel that the NZ game (great as it was) has clouded everyones judgments a little. He has instilled some pride in the shirt and made us less of a laughing stock but our play has been naive at times so I think a really strong 6 Nations is needed to show he has advanced the playing squad, not just stopped the players acting as if they are on a stag do.

I certainly agree that some people have got carried away with the NZ win, but I don't think we should take anything away from SL because of that. He hasn't been the one coming out say 'we're world beaters now', 'World Cup winners' etc. He's actually kept a very cool head and so have the players. We need a really strong Six Nations to prove that we can play consistently well.

Our play has been very naive, but I think we've seen progression in this respect over the last few games. It's by no means where it should be, but it is getting there.

Spot on I think bluesotne. The NZ win was superb for morale and had it been any other nation in the NH we'd have seen much the same press coverage I think. It's important to remember we're not even 12 months down the line from changing half the EPS and a whole new management team, Lancs has done pretty well with the ethos and PR since then and perhaps we're starting to see some progression on the playing front.

Yeh, it's funny to think it's roughly 12 months now, and SL has achieved a lot in that time. More than some people would have thought he could I reckon.

AlastairW wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:

Bathman_in_London wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:Let Lancaster do what he wants. To be honest, in my eyes, he hasn't put a foot wrong yet, and he's instilled respect and honour in the England jersey again. It's a pleasure to be an England fan at the moment, so whatever he thinks he has to do to motivate our players, I'm right behind him.

While I agree with you, I feel that the NZ game (great as it was) has clouded everyones judgments a little. He has instilled some pride in the shirt and made us less of a laughing stock but our play has been naive at times so I think a really strong 6 Nations is needed to show he has advanced the playing squad, not just stopped the players acting as if they are on a stag do.

I certainly agree that some people have got carried away with the NZ win, but I don't think we should take anything away from SL because of that. He hasn't been the one coming out say 'we're world beaters now', 'World Cup winners' etc. He's actually kept a very cool head and so have the players. We need a really strong Six Nations to prove that we can play consistently well.

Our play has been very naive, but I think we've seen progression in this respect over the last few games. It's by no means where it should be, but it is getting there.

Well said Bluestone. It's pretty much all the usual suspects apart from Lancaster & the players that have been having the hysterical reaction to the Kiwi win. Enjoy the moment for what it was, learn from it, move on whilst keeping expectations grounded and staying level headed. It's the bottom-feeders in the press that have spouted the 'world beaters' and other hysteria.

Can't agree with that any more I bloomin' hate the press in this country!

Let's be honest it was a big win. It should be applauded but of course it's important that the side hit the ground running in the 6 nations.

The win won't mean a lot if we have a poor showing in the 6N - what is the minimum we should expect of Lancaster? A GS? The title? Or 2nd or 3rd place?

For me it's a title win - that would show real progression and that the All Blacks game wasn't just a flash in the pan.

I don't know if a GS is likely - I really don't know what Ireland or France are going to be like - but I do hope to see good wins over Wales, Scotland and Italy. Wales are just suffering too many injuries to their key players and their confidence may be down after 7 (is it 7?Apologies if I've got it wrong) consecutive defeats. Scotland are rebuilding and Italy although tough are not yet clinical enough IMO.

We have gone toe to toe with the IRB top 3, and matched (RSA) or beaten them, Aus (well mixed, but home / away wins, one home defeat) and win over ABs.So not exactly a flukey one off from a developing team, but consistently in there with the big boys. . This young England team needs to kick on from here.
A full GS is often a crap shoot over the 5 games, no telling, but I will feel disappointed with anything less than 4/5 wins from the 6n.

Yep, I reckon 4/5 wins minimum. As has already been said, a GS is difficult to predict considering Ireland and France's unpredictability.

Anything less that 4/5 for England in the 6 Nations will be seen as a poor showing. England have mighty tasks in both Ireland and particularly Wales (last game and we will have our players back) - France v England looks a good match up and at the moment is a 50/50 and beware the Scots - 4/5 would be a good return and every team needs a bit of luck to win a GS. It's the 6 Nations and it looks fascinating - Good luck

Erm...in the most recent games v the big 3...

Summer - South Africa
1st Test - Got humped
2nd Test - Got humped
3rd Test - Got a fortunate draw

AI's
OZ - Got out smarted, out thought and beaten
SA - Got beat
NZ - Beat a NZ team floored by the Norovirus.

Now performances have improved...but to be called world beaters after that shows how out there the press is.

We need to start seeing "W's" on the page not "L's but we played ok"..

They really do have to secure the title I would say and a Grand Salm must be their target. It's not long until the AI's come around again and I would want England to be going into those games as the No.2 ranked team in the world.

I'd take 4 wins this year as I can't see anyone winning a slam.

RubyGuby wrote:Anything less that 4/5 for England in the 6 Nations will be seen as a poor showing. England have mighty tasks in both Ireland and particularly Wales (last game and we will have our players back) - France v England looks a good match up and at the moment is a 50/50 and beware the Scots - 4/5 would be a good return and every team needs a bit of luck to win a GS. It's the 6 Nations and it looks fascinating - Good luck

Cheers Ruby - I hope it goes well for Wales - a decider in Cardiff would be fantastic - although 606 might just melt...

nobbled wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Anything less that 4/5 for England in the 6 Nations will be seen as a poor showing. England have mighty tasks in both Ireland and particularly Wales (last game and we will have our players back) - France v England looks a good match up and at the moment is a 50/50 and beware the Scots - 4/5 would be a good return and every team needs a bit of luck to win a GS. It's the 6 Nations and it looks fascinating - Good luck

Cheers Ruby - I hope it goes well for Wales - a decider in Cardiff would be fantastic - although 606 might just melt...

Ai, cheers Ruby

Hopefully Wales will have the majority of their injured players back for the final game against England. Best of luck to you boys too

I just bought Nobbled a pint, now skint - I'll pop down the cashpoint and get you one in later

By the way, I live in Cornwall and 2 of the english lads; mad as myself on rugby have agreed the old shirt wearing bet with me having to wear an England jersey into the club if Wales lose. This might soung a bit of a nothing but if you knew them and me you would understand, maybe we can call the bet off

RubyGuby wrote:I just bought Nobbled a pint, now skint - I'll pop down the cashpoint and get you one in later

By the way, I live in Cornwall and 2 of the english lads; mad as myself on rugby have agreed the old shirt wearing bet with me having to wear an England jersey into the club if Wales lose. This might soung a bit of a nothing but if you knew them and me you would understand, maybe we can call the bet off

Ha, I can imagine how that would make you feel!

I spent 4 years at university in Wales, and we always used to watch England v Wales at the Prince of Wales pub in Cardiff- safe to say, I was always pretty much the only English supporter in there, and actually feared for my life when I had to go to the toilet.

Cheers Ruby, mine's a DoomBar from Rock please.

nobbled wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Anything less that 4/5 for England in the 6 Nations will be seen as a poor showing. England have mighty tasks in both Ireland and particularly Wales (last game and we will have our players back) - France v England looks a good match up and at the moment is a 50/50 and beware the Scots - 4/5 would be a good return and every team needs a bit of luck to win a GS. It's the 6 Nations and it looks fascinating - Good luck

Cheers Ruby - I hope it goes well for Wales - a decider in Cardiff would be fantastic - although 606 might just melt...

No problem, HERSH already set up the special 'bickering' thread for the 606 Cardiff meltdownn.

Gregor - a pint of doom bar in Truro is £3.60 - A pint of doom bar from Rock is about £9 - Where do you want to meet?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Erm...in the most recent games v the big 3...

Summer - South Africa
1st Test - Got humped
2nd Test - Got humped
3rd Test - Got a fortunate draw

AI's
OZ - Got out smarted, out thought and beaten
SA - Got beat
NZ - Beat a NZ team floored by the Norovirus.

Now performances have improved...but to be called world beaters after that shows how out there the press is.

We need to start seeing "W's" on the page not "L's but we played ok"..

Or 1st test outplayed, lost by 9 points
2nd stepped it up looked to attack more lost by 5 points
3rd test bought physical intensity and matched the boks in their own back yard for the first time since custard was invented
Oz..wore purple, lost by 6 points
SA ...Outplayed them but still a ridiculously tight game
NZ....spunked on them in an impolite way


Steady progression with just the pink wearing debacle a genuine step back. Theyve only been firmly second best in one of those matches and never lost by a large margin.
Aside form the All blacks themselves theres no other team that can say that about their last 6 games against Sanzars.

Yes they need to add more W's to avoid being Wales, the narrow loss specialists, but they are firmly there being not quite as good as the best 3 sides in the world on a regular basis. Heck their points difference is only -4.....Ireland managed -60 in one game

Ruby
well I meant Rock brewery, but I'll drink it with you in Truro at those prices.
Actually Doom in the Kingsholm is just ~ £3.00 a pint.
Greg

Geordie Falcon just brings a sense of balance and a realistic perspective - Its refreshing to see. A proper rugby fan IMO - knowledgable and not getting carried away on the wave of emotion

gregortree wrote:Ruby
well I meant Rock brewery, but I'll drink it with you in Truro at those prices.
Actually Doom in the Kingsholm is just ~ £3.00 a pint.
Greg

You could just buy a couple of bottles of Thunderbird and get tw@tted in the park?

Not again EE, last time I woke up and thought I was thunderbird 1 - Scott to Virgil FAB

RubyGuby wrote:Geordie Falcon just brings a sense of balance and a realistic perspective - Its refreshing to see. A proper rugby fan IMO - knowledgable and not getting carried away on the wave of emotion

Cheers Matey

GF we need to start stringing the wins together, yes, but expecting that to happen consistently without making performance priority doesn't work. You can't magically go from, frankly, the 3rd best NH team at best to the best in the world

CJ,

As i said above i have seen improvements...absolutely. Our scrum looks a serious weapon...our breakdwon work has improved significantly...and is matching most teams now in an area we were so far behind in...

However our ball carrying until the NZ game has been extremely poor...our decision making has been not brilliant (and kick kick farrell is a big culprit) and our defence has not been a solid white wall...i mean we dont seem to cope with teams who have that one destructive carrier like alberts etc.

Even in the NZ game when they went up a notch just after half time...they looked a different level to us.

Now im not a negative guy...im normally a glass half full type of guy...but im just not convinced yet that we're there.

If i see a few more performances like that against NZ...with some serious carrying from the forwards...and good decision making then ill be happier...

GeordieFalcon wrote:CJ,

As i said above i have seen improvements...absolutely. Our scrum looks a serious weapon...our breakdwon work has improved significantly...and is matching most teams now in an area we were so far behind in...

However our ball carrying until the NZ game has been extremely poor...our decision making has been not brilliant (and kick kick farrell is a big culprit) and our defence has not been a solid white wall...i mean we dont seem to cope with teams who have that one destructive carrier like alberts etc.

Even in the NZ game when they went up a notch just after half time...they looked a different level to us.

Now im not a negative guy...im normally a glass half full type of guy...but im just not convinced yet that we're there.

If i see a few more performances like that against NZ...with some serious carrying from the forwards...and good decision making then ill be happier...

I've got to agree with a lot of that outlook Geordie. Half the problem in attack is that if our playmakers can't get the ball to the wings we only realistically attack either tight to the ruck or down the middle. When only a few of our runners are very effective down the middle (Tuilagi, Morgan ... Haskell?) it's a bit of a problem. Hence why I'd love to see 36 or Burns given a go in the 6N, they can get the ball to the wings and bring more options into play. More options and runners in attack means more indecision for the defenders, which should create more tries.

Whilst Farrell is a very good place kicker and defender which is more dangerous for us - Farrell trying to use Tuilagi in attack or Burns/36 trying to use Tuilagi, Ashton, Brown, Foden and Morgan in attack with Burns' added ability to break the line himself.

I think you need your 10 to be a genuine running threat among other things.

This opens up opportunities for others. If that 10 is good enough in his vision and passing game then he can exploit those opportunities and put people into space.

This is why Farell in spite of everything else does not quite float my boat.

It is early days with both Farell and Burns so i would like us to have a really good look at both in the starting jumper this 6N.

I can see the attraction in starting Farell, accumulating a lead and then if necessary bringing on Burns to chase the game or turn the screw with the game already won.

I think we need to start Burns in a couple of 6N games though and see what he can do.

Also i think Burns' kicking at goal is very good and his defence is adequate so im not sure that we really lose anything by starting him over Farell.

p.s following on from this the question is then how do you integrate Billy 36. Is Burns + 36 too much change in one hit OR is it far better to slot them in as a proven working unit?

king_carlos wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:CJ,

As i said above i have seen improvements...absolutely. Our scrum looks a serious weapon...our breakdwon work has improved significantly...and is matching most teams now in an area we were so far behind in...

However our ball carrying until the NZ game has been extremely poor...our decision making has been not brilliant (and kick kick farrell is a big culprit) and our defence has not been a solid white wall...i mean we dont seem to cope with teams who have that one destructive carrier like alberts etc.

Even in the NZ game when they went up a notch just after half time...they looked a different level to us.

Now im not a negative guy...im normally a glass half full type of guy...but im just not convinced yet that we're there.

If i see a few more performances like that against NZ...with some serious carrying from the forwards...and good decision making then ill be happier...

I've got to agree with a lot of that outlook Geordie. Half the problem in attack is that if our playmakers can't get the ball to the wings we only realistically attack either tight to the ruck or down the middle. When only a few of our runners are very effective down the middle (Tuilagi, Morgan ... Haskell?) it's a bit of a problem. Hence why I'd love to see 36 or Burns given a go in the 6N, they can get the ball to the wings and bring more options into play. More options and runners in attack means more indecision for the defenders, which should create more tries.

Whilst Farrell is a very good place kicker and defender which is more dangerous for us - Farrell trying to use Tuilagi in attack or Burns/36 trying to use Tuilagi, Ashton, Brown, Foden and Morgan in attack with Burns' added ability to break the line himself.

Agree 100% with this.


AND lest we forget the first of our tries was not as good as we might have thought.

terrible error from Smith pushing up early.
Barrit went through the hole - good. BUT then his pass to Tuilagi was behind the target.

Tuilagi picked it up ok. BUT the cover looked to be dealing with the threat ok and then Tuilagi's pass back to Barrit skimmed off the defender's (Cory Jane i think) arm!

Call me a nit picker but we need more precision than that.

Farrel makes us a very difficult team to beat - his defense is not far off the saintly JW (he is a lot bigger though) and his temperament and kicking is top notch. He can help us win a lot of close games - but we all want more.

I am really looking forward to seeing more of Burns. I'd love to see Flood get back to form but there hasnt been enough sign of that happening yet

Triangulation - my thoughts exactly on the Barritt try vs NZ. A very poor and uncharacteristic mistake from Conrad Smith, the exploitation of which was almost ballsed up in the finishing (which should have been a simple draw the FB and pass - not a complicated skill).

In the SA game we saw the similar problem with Ashtons lack of all round skills. Tuilagi intercepted then ran 40m, threw a pass to Ashton (though Manu probably passed too early) and then Ashton threw a terrible pass behind Brown and at his feet which killed the attack. Not good to see at all from International players.

king_carlos wrote:Triangulation - my thoughts exactly on the Barritt try vs NZ. A very poor and uncharacteristic mistake from Conrad Smith, the exploitation of which was almost ballsed up in the finishing (which should have been a simple draw the FB and pass - not a complicated skill).

In the SA game we saw the similar problem with Ashtons lack of all round skills. Tuilagi intercepted then ran 40m, threw a pass to Ashton (though Manu probably passed too early) and then Ashton threw a terrible pass behind Brown and at his feet which killed the attack. Not good to see at all from International players.

Or what we saw was Browns inexperience as a winger drifting inside and overunning where he shouldve been to receive a perfectly good pass from Ashton. *shrug*

Often that kind of thing has been Englands undoing, players simply not being on a wavelength with each other or even really knowing what it is they are supposed to be doing at a given time, forwards and backs. Modern rugby is very structured, and relies on players working together as a unit to create spaces for one another...England have been poor at that. Look at the All Blacks in attack and defence, they are quick up and quick to reorganise, then always seem to have a guy in the right place at the right time. All the basic skills in the world cant compensate for that.
Its arguably a consequence of replacing almost the entire side and most of the coaching staff overnight, largely with a bunch of raw kids, and then chopping and changing how they line up.
Now though we are starting to see a more settled team and hopefully some more organisation on the field. the more time they spend playing and training together the better things should get.

If they can stay fairly injury free then theres no real excuses any more...except for the French just being better.But not for losing to Wales. ABW

That's official then - No more excuses for losing to Wales

Can't say I agree with the analysis of the Barritt try. Tuilagi was tackled by Jane hunting him down from behind and just grabbing on to him. You could see Barritt look back to Tuilagi a few times before he passed and spot Jane catching up. Passing later to fix Dagg wouldn't have avoided this, if anything it would have made it more certain. Sometimes you need to fix the man in front, and sometimes you need to get the ball earlier to someone outside if they are faster and you are holding them up with defenders approaching to cover. For someone like Tuilagi lassoing them from behind and dragging them into touch is an easier tackle than trying to stop him head on in full flight.

The pass to Tuilagi was at his body, not behind, so not a tricky catch, but more in front and maybe a fraction earlier might have seen him escape Jane's grasp and be able to just batter through Dagg, who without Jane slowing him down he would have hit pretty much on the tryline, which you would expect to result in a score.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Triangulation - my thoughts exactly on the Barritt try vs NZ. A very poor and uncharacteristic mistake from Conrad Smith, the exploitation of which was almost ballsed up in the finishing (which should have been a simple draw the FB and pass - not a complicated skill).

In the SA game we saw the similar problem with Ashtons lack of all round skills. Tuilagi intercepted then ran 40m, threw a pass to Ashton (though Manu probably passed too early) and then Ashton threw a terrible pass behind Brown and at his feet which killed the attack. Not good to see at all from International players.

Or what we saw was Browns inexperience as a winger drifting inside and overunning where he shouldve been to receive a perfectly good pass from Ashton. *shrug*

Often that kind of thing has been Englands undoing, players simply not being on a wavelength with each other or even really knowing what it is they are supposed to be doing at a given time, forwards and backs. Modern rugby is very structured, and relies on players working together as a unit to create spaces for one another...England have been poor at that. Look at the All Blacks in attack and defence, they are quick up and quick to reorganise, then always seem to have a guy in the right place at the right time. All the basic skills in the world cant compensate for that.
Its arguably a consequence of replacing almost the entire side and most of the coaching staff overnight, largely with a bunch of raw kids, and then chopping and changing how they line up.
Now though we are starting to see a more settled team and hopefully some more organisation on the field. the more time they spend playing and training together the better things should get.

If they can stay fairly injury free then theres no real excuses any more...except for the French just being better.But not for losing to Wales. ABW

Indeed, I think i'd put a fair bit more of the blame Brown's way. If you watch Ashton specifically during a lot of the England games you can see the lines he is running and trying to give options. His work rate is really top drawer. Admittedly his defence is questionable at times but it's not really for a lack of appeite. Whilst it has become fashionable to knock Ashton in reality he's the only top class proven finisher in the EPS and Saxons. Ditching him would be a huge mistake.

Chjw131 wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Triangulation - my thoughts exactly on the Barritt try vs NZ. A very poor and uncharacteristic mistake from Conrad Smith, the exploitation of which was almost ballsed up in the finishing (which should have been a simple draw the FB and pass - not a complicated skill).

In the SA game we saw the similar problem with Ashtons lack of all round skills. Tuilagi intercepted then ran 40m, threw a pass to Ashton (though Manu probably passed too early) and then Ashton threw a terrible pass behind Brown and at his feet which killed the attack. Not good to see at all from International players.

Or what we saw was Browns inexperience as a winger drifting inside and overunning where he shouldve been to receive a perfectly good pass from Ashton. *shrug*

Often that kind of thing has been Englands undoing, players simply not being on a wavelength with each other or even really knowing what it is they are supposed to be doing at a given time, forwards and backs. Modern rugby is very structured, and relies on players working together as a unit to create spaces for one another...England have been poor at that. Look at the All Blacks in attack and defence, they are quick up and quick to reorganise, then always seem to have a guy in the right place at the right time. All the basic skills in the world cant compensate for that.
Its arguably a consequence of replacing almost the entire side and most of the coaching staff overnight, largely with a bunch of raw kids, and then chopping and changing how they line up.
Now though we are starting to see a more settled team and hopefully some more organisation on the field. the more time they spend playing and training together the better things should get.

If they can stay fairly injury free then theres no real excuses any more...except for the French just being better.But not for losing to Wales. ABW

Indeed, I think i'd put a fair bit more of the blame Brown's way. If you watch Ashton specifically during a lot of the England games you can see the lines he is running and trying to give options. His work rate is really top drawer. Admittedly his defence is questionable at times but it's not really for a lack of appeite. Whilst it has become fashionable to knock Ashton in reality he's the only top class proven finisher in the EPS and Saxons. Ditching him would be a huge mistake.

The problem is Ashton isnt doing that any more, when you watch him take the ball he looks for contact and doesn't seem to back himself to beat a man one on one anymore. I'd say Foden has proved to be just as deadly in tougher games for England and Manu and Youngs are probably our only other proven danger men against gritty opposition.

Not trying to jump on the Ashton bashing train but you have to admit he's off form and looks very different to the danger man of last season.

Looked like Clark won't be available for England after injury today. Lawes went off as well but hopefully nothing serious.

It'll be interesting who they call up as cover for Clark. Slater is another player in the Saxons who can play lock and blindside, otherwise it will be an out and out lock or backrow. I think most feel Clark is a pet project of Lancaster and that it should and now will be an out and out lock that replaces him. Personally I'd go for Kitchener as someone who can be further developed to run the lineout and also offers plenty round the park, more so than other players in the Saxons who are meant to be enforcers and carriers.

johnpartle wrote:It'll be interesting who they call up as cover for Clark. Slater is another player in the Saxons who can play lock and blindside, otherwise it will be an out and out lock or backrow. I think most feel Clark is a pet project of Lancaster and that it should and now will be an out and out lock that replaces him. Personally I'd go for Kitchener as someone who can be further developed to run the lineout and also offers plenty round the park, more so than other players in the Saxons who are meant to be enforcers and carriers.

I think we all know Clark was about as likely to start (or even sit on the bench) as a lock as Lancaster himself was. Had we seen an injury to Parling, Launchberry or Lawes I think most were expecting another second row to be called into the squad as a replacement rather than use Clark. He's a talented player but in no ways an International SR which I think we'd all agree Lancaster knows - pet project is a pretty apt description I'd say.

Personally I'd be happy to see Deacon come in as a replacement for the simple reason that with Croft just returning from injury and unlikely to start we only have one guy in squad (Parling) capable of running the line out really well. I'd really like to see some cover for the sort of player Parling is, i.e. a very good line-out operator, solid carrier and huge workload in the tight which Deacon fits the bill for.

Croft is a top quality lineout option, but as far as I'm aware he's never actually run a lineout before. I've been told Wood has been running the Saints' lineout most of this season though.

I don't think anyone would doubt that Deacon would do a decent job if called upon, but given his injury history and age he's more of a stopgap than a longterm answer. For the EPS training sessions I'd rather see us back and bring on the younger players who might still be adding to their lineout leading ability but are as able if not more so elsewhere. We need a longterm backup to Parling, we might even lose him to the Lions for the summer tour.

niwatts - I'm pretty sure Croft has run the line-out before and in defense he is very good at reading the opposition line-out and attacking their jumpers. Unfortunately I can't see him being more than a bench option this 6N due to his injuries which means I'd happily see Deacon as a stop gap.

People talk about bringing young players in and giving them confidence but the best way to get the young players already in the squad confidence is to see them winning games, series and tournaments. IMO the best way to do this is pick the best squad and side available, Deacon is very much a part of that squad at the moment in my eyes.

No way will croft play this 6N,he is being brought back very tentatively by tigers and rightly so,won't see him until the summer tour.I also agree about deacon,he isn't that old for a lock and could easily go through until 2015.every successful squad has a pool of players with varied ages.you need that mix of rookies,mid20's with a couple of veterans thrown in.

Why so much deliberating over a matter any of you have zero control over?

Lets just tear the flesh off the subject and bring it down to it's bare bones-

Who said the wheels are on the wagon?
Worlds largest and richest Union wins a 6 nation championship in a decade,no slam or crown just beat Italy by more than everyone else that year.
Beat a virus ridden AllBlacks team,even Lancaster looked shocked at the win.

No obvious game plan beyond inside ball and defend.

A raft of Journey men have made England a harder team to beat but not world class, Scotland and Italy can be hard to beat.

Hard facts along with a healthy dose of reality is prescribed for you lot from Doctor View, take twice daily.

Yes, why is anyone discussing the England rugby squad and its recent performances, on a thread about English rugby on a rugby forum.

Madness I tell you, madness

viewtothegym wrote:Why so much deliberating over a matter any of you have zero control over?

Lets just tear the flesh off the subject and bring it down to it's bare bones-

Who said the wheels are on the wagon?
Worlds largest and richest Union wins a 6 nation championship in a decade,no slam or crown just beat Italy by more than everyone else that year.
Beat a virus ridden AllBlacks team,even Lancaster looked shocked at the win.

No obvious game plan beyond inside ball and defend.

A raft of Journey men have made England a harder team to beat but not world class, Scotland and Italy can be hard to beat.

Hard facts along with a healthy dose of reality is prescribed for you lot from Doctor View, take twice daily.

That's not even true either, Six Nations 2011 England finished on 8 points whilst France, Ireland and Wales finished on 6. The number of points scored against Italy had nothing to do with it in the end.