Michelak key to beating England

I have been watching the performances of the fly halves in the 6N and have come to the conclusion that they are primary reasons for a successful side- nothing new in that but its becoming increasing obvious on a match by match basis.
Looking at the matches so far, in every one the better 10 has come out in front, some marginally, some convincingly but in all theyve made a key difference to he outcome.

Ireland bt Wales:
Sexton kicked 15 points and was involved in two of the tries scored and had an all round better game that Biggar, who had one try scored through his charged down kick Healy scoring after a few phases.

Italy bt France:
Luciano Orquera was a star in this match and Michelak had a mare of a game. Nothing more need to be said.

England bt Scotland
Although several stood up for England Farrell's play was top notch and in kicking 7 from 8 far the best 10 on the day

Scotland bt Italy
This time it was Orquera who had an off day and Jackson, although not kicking goals or standing out over the Hoggs, Laidlaws etc, had a solid game, made some good half breaks and generally outplayed his opposite. An area perhaps Scotland need to work on as they have good strength in other areas.

Wales bt France
Not a great day for either 10- they both played ok in a difficult tussle. But Biggars beautifully timed and placed kick combined with Norths excellent timing and balance put the game away for France.

England Bt Ireland.
The rain turned this into a kickfest with Farrell nailing more than Ireland who had Sexton replaced by OGara.

So in all the matches so far, the winning side has also had the best performed 10. Not a lot of difference with the close matches as youd expect but the better he 10's were, the higher the margin.

So for this weekend this tells me that Michelak is the key for any possible upset over England. Hes played below par so far and its showed in their results. So if Michelak stars, France have their best shot in winning. If he fails, theyll be swamped.

In expanding this out to the international scene it tends to explain the Welsh situation with Priestands sharp decline in form from his best in 2011 mirroring Wales rapid drop off. Biggars efforts against France one of the few shining lights at 10 for nearly a year.

Its also no coincidence that with DC's career the AB's have enjoyed their best run of form over the last 10 years or so and why the Boks have struggled with a limited and out of form Steyn over the last few years. Oz also are so up and down it reflects Quade Coopers career to a tee. This is why I have been so critical of Steyn with the boks- its his presence that costs them matches. SA need to focus more on developing a good foundation around their 10 rather than just paying lip service to it- trying this one or that one. The position is key to winning tests, especially when they revolve their game around possession and retention.

So I know that a lot of a good performance by the 10 is due to the platform set by the forwards but from what I've seen in the close matches where the territory and possession are similar it is often the 10 than makes the pivotal difference- a la Biggar against France, Farrells goalkicking and steady all round play. And in any match where the score blows out you'll rarely find a 10 who hasnt played well, even if others dont.

I just think that some sides dont really appreciate how much of the play revolves around the 10 and when looking for answers often look in the wrong places. Start with the 10 first- his quality of ball, his options, his positioining in relation to others etc. I just dont think enough focus on resolving a teams performance is centered on the 10 himself.

Fix that and you fix an awful lot.

...and Michelak looks to be in the right frame of mind though being at scrum half all year explains a lot...his form at 10 has been woeful. And he'll have to outplay Farrell if the theory's correct- a tough ask.

http://www.rbs6nations.com/en/france/22260.php

I bet my gran's teeth Michalak is not picked at 10

If he as played most of the season for Toulon at 9. It then makes sence that playing at 10 for France would not be as good.

So bring in a proper 10 Trinduc, Beauxcis. and France might be a different team altogether.

Yeah at least it explains why hes so poor there. Its a pos you just cant muck around with- you need a form 10 going into these matches not a 9 that used to play 10. But now they may not have a choice. Hes ben there the last two.

This is a great analysis, mate. And I can't agree more.

This is why I hope France plays Lionel Beauxis at 10. When he is poor, he redefines the word awful.

Beauxis, Michalak and Trinh-Duc what a variety of potentially horrible fly-halves the French have.

I predict a dark few years for French rugby, they have lost a lot of influence in the pack - and the replacements have left be underwhelmed - and they have no control behind the pack with no good and experienced centres and nothing at halfback (unless Parra can finally get selected). Equally, I don't see much depth/quality at FB either (Medard will help)

If Michelak starts it will be a humiliiating day for Les Bleus. Saint Andre has been whining about a lack of preparation time, fair enough. But he is also saying there are no top class french qualified 10's playing well in the T14, which is utter nonsense. Jonathan Wisniewski at racing metro controls a game really well and is a great goal kicker. Cammy Lopez was playing 10 for Bordeaux when they beat Johnny wilkinson's Toulon 41 nil last week, totally outplaying Sir Johnny in the process. Oh and francois Trinh- Duc is a good interntational 10 when he is on form. Incidentally he was playing when Montpellier trounced Toulon in the 4th round of the Heinekin.

Looks to me that Saint Andre wants France to play the way his unsuccessful Toulon side did, namely with power, power and more power. The best of French rugby happens when the bludgeon is paired with the rapier . Unfortunately Saint Andre has left the rapier at home and his team are paying the price. How Parra, Trinh- Duc and Fofana have not been starting in their best positions, is down to one thing: Saint Andre's stubborn refusal to accept that he has got his selections horribly wrong.

doctor_grey wrote:This is a great analysis, mate. And I can't agree more.

This is why I hope France plays Lionel Beauxis at 10. When he is poor, he redefines the word awful.

Hi ya doc, yeah a busy weekend coming up with all our sxv sides on as well. One weekend I watched every sxv and 6N match- live or recorded. Had to take a day off for jetlag!. And that was all in front of the plasma.

Good to see theyre bring forward one of the SA matches as no doubt theyll clash with the 6N.

England should cruise in and shutting their 10 down is all they need to do as far as Im concerned. Us kiwis always look twice at France as you just never know.

My Blues come here for the Hurricanes in Wellington. High hopes for them this year under JK and GH. Theyre all so young and raw though. One of the players had not even known his coach JK was a top AB.

Geez...

Michelak is obviously in terrible form at 10 having played 9 all season, but the French have to make it work, as pointed out above there is nobody else for the 10 shirt. Trin Duch, Skrela and Beauxis are very very average players, not international standard 10s by any stretch. With Sexton, Wilkinson, Brock James, Luke McAllister and others occupying the 10 slots at all the top French clubs it doesn't look like the French will be producing an international standard 10 anytime soon either. Unless it comes from one of the weaker top14 clubs.

The French have always controlled the game from 9 in contrast to everywhere else in the rugby world where it is controlled from 10, but the standard of 10's they have right now really takes the biscuit. It also makes it all the more strange that Parra isn't starting as he has many of the qualities a top 10 would have. The French have always picked 9's like that, Jean Baptise Ellisalde beingn one of the recent stand outs who despite being a 9 was very comfortable at 10, Parra is of the same mould. Personally I think Saint Andre is out of his depth, leaving players like Rougerie, Malzieu , Medard, Heymans, Poitrenaud was bad enough and is the main reason why his whole backline has been playing out of position (Fofana on the wing, Fall at fullback, Michelak at 9). With the talent France have at their disposal that is really unforgivable, as is Parra not having been used yet. I can't see Saint Andre being around much longer.

The French have such a long list of terrible coaches now, Laporte, Lievremont and Saint-Andre are all fools, with someone like Guy Noves as coach the French would have done so much more in recent years.

Not sure I agree with the analysis to be honest. Farrell didn't actually have a higher kicking % than Sexton and O'Gara in that match, and if Orquera's stunning performance compared to Michelak's shocker was the key to that result then how come the difference was only 5 points? If fly half was all important then you'd expect an 8/10 performance vs a 4/10 to produce a much wider gap than that.

Obviously fly half is a key position, but I think our impressions of how well they are playing are overly shaped by how dominant their pack and scrum half are in front of them. Farrell is a good example of this. I thought he was outstanding against Scotland, but rhe idea that he out-place kicked Ireland comes purely from the fact that he had more actual attempts on goal than Sexton/O'Gara - his % was identical.

thomh wrote:Not sure I agree with the analysis to be honest. Farrell didn't actually have a higher kicking % than Sexton and O'Gara in that match, and if Orquera's stunning performance compared to Michelak's shocker was the key to that result then how come the difference was only 5 points? If fly half was all important then you'd expect an 8/10 performance vs a 4/10 to produce a much wider gap than that.

Obviously fly half is a key position, but I think our impressions of how well they are playing are overly shaped by how dominant their pack and scrum half are in front of them. Farrell is a good example of this. I thought he was outstanding against Scotland, but rhe idea that he out-place kicked Ireland comes purely from the fact that he had more actual attempts on goal than Sexton/O'Gara - his % was identical.

Perhaps...Why was the diff only 5 points? Because it was France. Italy needed to have players far outshine their equivalents just to beat them. All things being equal France would normally beat Italy at this point.
Farrell didnt have a greater % but he did kick the most goals amd when it counted. Ogaras needed to go over when they were trailing. But you pick two good examples. Ireland and England are a closer match, but Farrell still pipped them with the winning goals.

Farrell isnt anything special as a 10 but what he does well is uses the side that hes in well, and option taking is a big part of it. He's not gonna set the world on fire with his breaks but he knows how to get the best of others. And with this English side its the improving state of many of the side that is lifting the side's results. They play far more as a team and Farrell complements them well.

Taylorman wrote:Hi ya doc, yeah a busy weekend coming up with all our sxv sides on as well. One weekend I watched every sxv and 6N match- live or recorded. Had to take a day off for jetlag!. And that was all in front of the plasma.

Good to see theyre bring forward one of the SA matches as no doubt theyll clash with the 6N.

England should cruise in and shutting their 10 down is all they need to do as far as Im concerned. Us kiwis always look twice at France as you just never know.

My Blues come here for the Hurricanes in Wellington. High hopes for them this year under JK and GH. Theyre all so young and raw though. One of the players had not even known his coach JK was a top AB.

Geez...

Taylor,
To me, this is the start of a great time of year. Rugby everywhere. The end of winter beckons in the not too distant future. Overall, not too bad, eh?

Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately considering) I won't see much live on Saturday except the early Super rugby match. My 14 year old is playing in a Rugby tournament about 3 hours from where I live. I have to leave home at 5:45 and probably won't get back until late in the evening. My DVR will be on overload! Which means I don't have to get off the sofa at all on Sunday. Depending when I wake up, I might catch the end of your Blues match live. If not, I will have it recorded. Hoping for a better seasion for them.

But not for any french out-halves, for at least one day!

Agree with thomh, the OP analysis is flawed, the old age still applies

"The Forwards win matches, the Backs (Flyhalf) by how much"

The Flyhalf (or in Wales situation their Fullback) will usually win matches by the amount of pens he converts, or the amount of open space he can operate in...... both as a rule comes from forward pressure and control.

It is a pivotable position (and a poor performance can certainly lose you matches) but no more so than say the blindside or openside flanker. You can argue that McCraw was a more important player than Carter for the ABs over the last decade.

The 10s on show last weekend bore proof of the importance of the pack, not the flyhalf. The Les Blues FH Michalak missed what two or three kicks whilst the Red Dragons FH Biggar didnt miss any because he didnt take any but the FB Halfpenny was successful in all but one of his attempts.

Over the weekend we have Jackson v Jackson for the sexy stuff but I will guarantee my beer money that it will be numbers 1-8 who will decide the outcome of the match

The other thing about the 10's is look at the very great sides of the past- John with the 71 Lions, Bennet in 74 at his peak.

Mark Ella in the 84 tour to the UK where he starred, Foxy in the 87 World Cup. Lynagh in 91.

Stransky made the actual difference in the 95 final by kicking the winning goal.

Larkam in 99. Wilkinson not only stared in but also kicked the decide goal as Stransky did. Butch James in 2007 doesnt rate among the greats and 10 really is one position SA need to work on.

I thought the analogy with Wales and Priestland was the most compelling.

Priestland is a liability with anything other than kick or pass...he simply cannot compete physically at the top level ball in hand and almost always gets isolated an dturned over

100%beefy

Give examples when he has been found wanting physically compared to Biggar or Hook. I dont watch the welsh boys other than internationals now but I cant recall him been turned over that much.

I have never seen him been turned over any more than Jones Hook or Biggar. Rarely goes on headless chicken runs like Hook and much less liable to get turned over.

His physical stats at almost indentical as Biggar, and he is equally as good a defender. I would state that both RP and DB are better defenders than Hook

Taylorman wrote:
Farrell didnt have a greater % but he did kick the most goals amd when it counted. Ogaras needed to go over when they were trailing. But you pick two good examples. Ireland and England are a closer match, but Farrell still pipped them with the winning goals.

But he only kicked the most goals because his team won the most penalties in kickable positions, and as for 'when it counted' - he actually missed the one that would have put England 9 points ahead on the stroke of half time, and another similar one in the second half.

I'm not sure what point you're making on Italy vs France. Italy don't need to far outshine France just to beat them - it's just that expectations of Italy are lower so when they match or slightly better France there's the sense that they have way outperformed them, even if they were actually pretty even. I agree that the Italy fly half way outperformed the French one, so if there was still only a 5 point margin in it then fly half can't have been quite as important as you're making out.

There are 30 players on the field, more with replacements. Obviously the theory isnt going to be strictly about no. 10 vs no. 10 with nothing else impacting the result.

What I'm alluding to is those teams that have strong 10's, particularly over time, have strong sides. Do you think the demise of Wales has anything to do with Priestlands complete loss of confidence?

Is Farrells presence and Englands recent form in any way related?

Is Englands WC 2003 and JW in any way linked to them winning that year?

If Italy can beat France 'any old time' did you pick them to this time- in fact not a single vote for them in the 2 606 pick the score comps going. Easy comment to make after the fact.

All I'm suggesting is its a trend- a very strong trend and one that isnt given its due focus.

You are correct a player on form contributes to a team more than he would of he wasnt on form.

Its the chicken or the egg story

Did Wales general loss of form (Roberts not making those pentrating runs, Gethin Jenkins not as sharp as he was a few years ago, Warburton performance dipped, Matthew Rees worse, Adam Jones injured etc etc etc)contribute to Priestlands individual loss of form or way it the other way around?

I believe that Wales loss of their Lions front row

Gethin Jenkins - not as potent as he once was
Matthew Rees - not as potent as he once was
Adam Jones - Injured

Was more of a factor in their losing streak than RPs "loss of form"its just that as usual the Welsh media and fan base love to build their 10s up high and then equally love to tear them down when looking for a scrapegoat for defeat. Its all credit to him that he pulled a decent perform after his "chat to the squads sports psychologist

I think the 9's are key to how the 10 plays and prior to that it's about the 9 getting good ball from the rucks and scrums etc. If that is achieved then the 10 has a chance. At the moment England and Scotland appear to have the best platforms and that is why people are eulogising about their half backs who are just another cog in the machine. Put those half backs behind a retreating pack and you''ll see something different.

flyhalffactory wrote:You are correct a player on form contributes to a team more than he would of he wasnt on form.

Its the chicken or the egg story
Did Wales general loss of form (Roberts not making those pentrating runs, Gethin Jenkins not as sharp as he was a few years ago, Warburton performance dipped, Matthew Rees worse, Adam Jones injured etc etc etc)contribute to Priestlands individual loss of form or way it the other way around?

I believe that Wales loss of their Lions front row

Gethin Jenkins - not as potent as he once was
Matthew Rees - not as potent as he once was
Adam Jones - Injured

Was more of a factor in their losing streak than RPs "loss of form"its just that as usual the Welsh media and fan base love to build their 10s up high and then equally love to tear them down when looking for a scrapegoat for defeat. Its all credit to him that he pulled a decent perform after his "chat to the squads sports psychologist

Put it this way any fly halfs best mate should be his tight head prop. Was qatching QI the other day and they actaully said the egg came first because chickens evolved from dinosaurs/reptiles which also laid eggs. The egg came first. as did the tight head prop.

According to the thread France don't now have a key so they'll have to break down the back door instead with Fofana at centre and Basteraud and Fall alongside

thomh wrote:

Taylorman wrote:
Farrell didnt have a greater % but he did kick the most goals amd when it counted. Ogaras needed to go over when they were trailing. But you pick two good examples. Ireland and England are a closer match, but Farrell still pipped them with the winning goals.

But he only kicked the most goals because his team won the most penalties in kickable positions, and as for 'when it counted' - he actually missed the one that would have put England 9 points ahead on the stroke of half time, and another similar one in the second half.

I'm not sure what point you're making on Italy vs France. Italy don't need to far outshine France just to beat them - it's just that expectations of Italy are lower so when they match or slightly better France there's the sense that they have way outperformed them, even if they were actually pretty even. I agree that the Italy fly half way outperformed the French one, so if there was still only a 5 point margin in it then fly half can't have been quite as important as you're making out.

thomh I think the difficulty of the kicks needs to be taken into account. Farrell Jr's two misses were very tough.

Against NZ Farrell nailed 4 kicks and a drop goal in the first half to give England a 15-0 lead, in contrast Carter faltered twice.

Generally Fly halves turn the forwards efforts into points. Farrell in particular has done this well for club and country.

I don't think necessarily the french fly half is key. I think to beat England, France will have to score tries. Getting into a place kicking duel with Farrell Jr doesn't normally bode well for his opposite number.

Scotland showed the way I believe in how to attack England. Target the back three.

flyhalffactory wrote:100%beefy

Give examples when he has been found wanting physically compared to Biggar or Hook. I dont watch the welsh boys other than internationals now but I cant recall him been turned over that much.

I have never seen him been turned over any more than Jones Hook or Biggar. Rarely goes on headless chicken runs like Hook and much less liable to get turned over.

His physical stats at almost indentical as Biggar, and he is equally as good a defender. I would state that both RP and DB are better defenders than Hook

I can't recall specific games I am afraid...... but I am sure any Welsh supporter would support this point; i recall one game when he was isolated and dispossessed on at least 2 occassiosn and I am afraid that is his weakness; Hook is renowned for his beautiful flat floaitng miss pass which has often resulted in interception tries.

I would suggest most welsh "supporters" or any other nation who watches the 6Ns or any other matches that RP has been involved in would support the view, that one of his biggest strengths is positional awareness, hence he rarely gets turned over because he rarely runs into no mans land.

Then you might have viewed one singular game or even a few moments in a single game to perpetuate the myth that he gets turned over.

RPs "weakness" is his ability to listen to destructive (and often not totally founded on actual fact) criticsm and lose confidence in his ability to perform to his strengths as a playmaker and game manager. He is very much a confidence player.

Hook was reknowned (not for the "interception pass" which he did twice in internationals and as a result the "fans" who only watched the internationals latched onto that) for headless chicken running, and very much getting turned over as a result. Its clear now when you see him running the 10 channel he is a much more conservative and aware player often passing or distributing the ball when playing deep.

flyhalffactory wrote:I would suggest most welsh "supporters" or any other nation who watches the 6Ns or any other matches that RP has been involved in would support the view, that one of his biggest strengths is positional awareness, hence he rarely gets turned over because he rarely runs into no mans land.

Then you might have viewed one singular game or even a few moments in a single game to perpetuate the myth that he gets turned over.

RPs "weakness" is his ability to listen to destructive (and often not totally founded on actual fact) criticsm and lose confidence in his ability to perform to his strengths as a playmaker and game manager. He is very much a confidence player.

Hook was reknowned (not for the "interception pass" which he did twice in internationals and as a result the "fans" who only watched the internationals latched onto that) for headless chicken running, and very much getting turned over as a result. Its clear now when you see him running the 10 channel he is a much more conservative and aware player often passing or distributing the ball when playing deep.

Not sure what I can add to your definitive take on RP, well done

I think RP has been playing more like RIP for the past 12 months, his honeymoon period is over

I agree, his confidence has been dashed because he has been carp for months, not because he is getting slated for being carp.

Hopefully Freddy wont start. He isn't good enough. Trinh Duc is class and could rip England apart. Very under rated.

GunsGerms wrote:Hopefully Freddy wont start. He isn't good enough. Trinh Duc is class and could rip England apart. Very under rated.

Agreed, never understood why he got dropped. Ditto Parra.

RubyGuby wrote:I think RP has been playing more like RIP for the past 12 months, his honeymoon period is over

Nice analysis RubyGuby / Beefy

Its wonderful to see your wealth of knowledge and experience been put into this forum as a succint one-liner.

flyhalffactory wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:I think RP has been playing more like RIP for the past 12 months, his honeymoon period is over

Nice analysis RubyGuby / Beefy

Its wonderful to see your wealth of knowledge and experience been put into this forum as a succint one-liner.

Thanks flyhalf, not everyone can be as as locquacious as you

Its strange why the French management selected a player who has been playing scrum-half for the last 2 seasons at club level at flyhalf. Its pretty much throwing out all the wrong signals.

The only issue with Francois Trinh-Duc is that he is pretty inconsistent, having a fairly average season at club level, and having a mare when he last played for France last summer. If you play him at 10 then you need someone to support his quirkiness and oddball decisions by been a conservative scrum-half........ if you play Trinh-Duc then you want Morgan Parra to be his half-back partner

Probably why Saint-Andre hadn't picked him before.

He knows that in full flow Michelak is a world class pivot.... he knows that in full flow Trinh-Duc isn't.

But with Michelak playing in a different position and seemingly out of form he accepts that the team is not balanced with him and he stands a better chance with Trinh-Duc at the helm.

Not really a confidence boost for Trinh-Duc... you're so good that I'll put someone who hasn't played for FRA in 2 yrs ahead of you and isn't even playing in the given position.

100%beefy wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:I think RP has been playing more like RIP for the past 12 months, his honeymoon period is over

Nice analysis RubyGuby / Beefy

Its wonderful to see your wealth of knowledge and experience been put into this forum as a succint one-liner.

Thanks flyhalf, not everyone can be as as locquacious as you

"loquacious"............. thats someone who talks too much!

As we are messaging online its completely the wrong term.......... "Google search" has so much to answer for.

However as an Economist and Mathematician I could be completely wrong here.

I however would frown upon my consultants for issuing loose statements without the facts to support.

You know the old adage "say it often enough and it will become fact"

Nice try fella!

Now how would a google search have resulted in my discovering 'loquacious' as an adj to describe your tendency to wax lyrical?

As for it being the wrong term, please do feel free to suggest a word or phrase that correctly reflects said tendency. I was being polite.

Economist and Mathematician...what is the signficance of this please? Not trying to show your inevitable intellectual superioority are you?!!

flyhalffactory wrote:

100%beefy wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:I think RP has been playing more like RIP for the past 12 months, his honeymoon period is over

Nice analysis RubyGuby / Beefy

Its wonderful to see your wealth of knowledge and experience been put into this forum as a succint one-liner.

Thanks flyhalf, not everyone can be as as locquacious as you

"loquacious"............. thats someone who talks too much!

As we are messaging online its completely the wrong term.......... "Google search" has so much to answer for.

However as an Economist and Mathematician I could be completely wrong here.

I however would frown upon my consultants for issuing loose statements without the facts to support.

You know the old adage "say it often enough and it will become fact"

Like "Priestland doesn't turn the ball over much" and "Priestland and Biggar are better at defending than Hook."

Didn't see any stats backing up those pubtalk gems big man!

Good to see you back on here though.

I would never attempt to feel superior to your one liners beefy

flyhalffactory wrote:I would never attempt to feel superior to your one liners beefy

Good man, glad you know your limits...

Mr C
How the devil are you?....... Unfortunately have been out of the UK over the last three months but now back for a while

Well we could have a weekend of pouring over RP DB and JH defensive frailties watching every video over the last five seasons and sub-analysing every passage of play. I am quite convinced who would be in the standings of been the best defensive 10 of those three and who would be the worst.

The good thing like anything else in life rugby (and its players) evolves, Halfpenny is now a kicking FB not a winger, Michelak is a scrum-half not a free-spirit flyhalf, and Hook is now a more conservative and more aware 10.

flyhalffactory wrote:Mr C
How the devil are you?....... Unfortunately have been out of the UK over the last three months but now back for a while

Well we could have a weekend of pouring over RP DB and JH defensive frailties watching every video over the last five seasons and sub-analysing every passage of play. I am quite convinced who would be in the standings of been the best defensive 10 of those three and who would be the worst.

The good thing like anything else in life rugby (and its players) evolves, Halfpenny is now a kicking FB not a winger, Michelak is a scrum-half not a free-spirit flyhalf, and Hook is now a more conservative and more aware 10.

More conservative, more aware, probably the second best 10 in world rugby etc etc....

For what it's worth, all three are hopeless at head-on tackling. Hook adds something to the mix by being good at covering back in broken play. Probably something he picked up from being messed around out of position for 4 years.

Priestland's had his 15mins of fame - thoroughly decent regional player but no international. Biggar is much better and looks like he's the 'chosen one' now. Fingers crossed we get some beef back in the pack so that our bishbosh game has a chance.

You going to any games?

I have been to both our games and now eagerly awaiting the Irish. I along with my bretheren have had a few false dawns, but I like our match day squad and the bench looks decent (would have dropped Denton he hasnt been playing well for us or Scotland this season).

I disagree with you about Priestland I personally think he is the most potent playmaker of the the three, however I have always liked Biggar and would have selected him first last season.

I am well chuffed that Ryan Jones is starting for you guys and is captain, but not impressed that AWJ is on the bench bad mover

flyhalffactory wrote:I have been to both our games and now eagerly awaiting the Irish. I along with my bretheren have had a few false dawns, but I like our match day squad and the bench looks decent (would have dropped Denton he hasnt been playing well for us or Scotland this season).

I disagree with you about Priestland I personally think he is the most potent playmaker of the the three, however I have always liked Biggar and would have selected him first last season.

I am well chuffed that Ryan Jones is starting for you guys and is captain, but not impressed that AWJ is on the bench bad mover

Would be great to see a strong Scotland team again - the 6N would be all the richer for it.

Without Lydiate, Ryan J's bulk adds some comfort. Even if he does have the lowest power to weight ratio of any international backrow forward! Experience makes up for it. Same for AWJ - pretty limited but he's a seasoned pro now.

Basically, we need heavy boys back in the pack asap.

Hope Scotland/Ire is a cracker. If the Parra/Trinh-Duc/Fofana united nations axis can work some magic and tear the English apart then the tournament could spark back to life!

Trinh-Duc will start 10....

IMO Michalak is out of international opportunities, he has never really grabbed his shirt at international level by the scruff of the neck, and fought for it!

CF wrote:Trinh-Duc will start 10....

IMO Michalak is out of international opportunities, he has never really grabbed his shirt at international level by the scruff of the neck, and fought for it!

So its confirmed and the right call. TD at 10, I fancy France to win this one.

It will be close but I think England will just about come out on top...

I agree with stub

France's pride hurt, but that's a classy looking England 23

England by 7pts

This post should have been labeled <Add France no. 10 here> key to beating England.

Though Michelak is on the bench so who knows.

Good to see the French inconsistency thriving...7 changes...love it.

Michalak will come off the bench and score 2 tries to win now...:P