Tuilagi

Have to say, I am a little worried about taking Tuilagi on the Lions now.

This weekend Leicester had almost all the ball, and he was totally anonymous.

If he can not impose himself on a game with 60-70% possession, and it totally outplayed by his own team mate in center - who made countless line breaks and looked dangerous - I do start to worry

BTW - I hope that he re-captures some form, as I think he could be a great player, but should he go on this Lions tour if he is so off form?

He's saving himself for the Lions. It's obvious.

On the other hand we have seen that he can be a serious handful of a player who is possibly just out of form.

A lions tour could revitalise him.

Id take him and then England can give a real good look at Joseph, or Lowe or Trinder etc or in particular Joel Tomkins who could make that England spot his own..over the next few years.

GeordieFalcon - i think he will go and I am most likely ok with that, but should we not look at form first and foremost - rather than hope he gets form

It did not work for S Williams on the last tour

it all depends on how he's used, against Wasps Leicester used him in a more defensive manner.

Tuilagi scored two tries against Saints about two weeks ago (and was MOM?) so it's hardly like he's been woefully off form for ages.

He does seem to have a recent tendacy to disappear in big games, most notably and recently against Toulon and against Wales.

Never been a big fan of Tuilagi, I said he was a manageable threat in the Wales England game and that proved to be the case. However, I also think we are very short of true quality at 13. Jonathan Davies' vision and skills are in my opinion also pretty poor. He butchered a number of promising situations against Glasgow with his reluctance / inability take your pick to take the right option and deliver a pass. If he had Tipurics ability he would be a great player.

Despite his size and obvious power I don't think Tuilagi is that difficult to nulify. He will go as we are short of options but will he impress, I hope so but I am not so sure.

Wasps moved their best defender (Bell) to man mark Manu then had Hayter drifting fast from 12 to back him up. For a lot of Allen's breaks he's stepping past the drifting Hayter and powering through Robinson.

Manu carried pretty well but Wasps defence was set up to mark him heavily and as such he was quiet whilst Allen was given gaps to plunder.

Often happens with Manu. Against Toulon the wingers rushed in to back up Basteraud and left space out wide Tigers managed to exploit a few times but sadly not clinically. He doesn't always need the ball to create space.

he is marked out for the lions...the NZ game and because he is a blunt instrument. But he has questionable hands and seems off form....Jamie Roberts more than adequately performs the blunt instrument role. i would like to see someone of his stature being huge defensively but he does not stand out in that capacity either. On the other hand, on form he is simply destructive, potent and a finisher. My feeling is he will go but there is every chance he would not see a test match.

Hands haven't been questionable of late, his hands have been great in the last couple of games. His biggest weakness is that he's all weapon, he's only as good as those that wield him. If he's heavily marked he won't create something out of nothing but give him an inch and he'll take a mile.

Depends on who else is in the backline, put a playmaker at 12 have Manu at 13 and he'll attract the defence whilst the 12 supplies North and Wade on the wings.

for me it's got to be a backline of

Sexton
Davies/Roberts
BOD
wings of Cuthbert and North
with 1/2p or hogg at 15

With the brains of sexton and bod controlling those weapons coming from all angles, it could be deadly

keep BOD as a 13 pivot, tuilagi is more explosive but less the player that the Doctor is

formerly known as Sam wrote:Hands haven't been questionable of late, his hands have been great in the last couple of games. His biggest weakness is that he's all weapon, he's only as good as those that wield him. If he's heavily marked he won't create something out of nothing but give him an inch and he'll take a mile.

Depends on who else is in the backline, put a playmaker at 12 have Manu at 13 and he'll attract the defence whilst the 12 supplies North and Wade on the wings.

missed a try scoring pass against Wales!

Manu's hands ->

I have never been a fan. To me a one trick pony of a poor mans Lomu. His running is predictable and ponderous - perhaps he can get up to a decent pace but it takes him a while to get there and he tends to run straight into contact.

When a player first appears on the scene they can have success but once the opposition work out how to negate them that's when you see if they have real class.

100%beefy wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Hands haven't been questionable of late, his hands have been great in the last couple of games. His biggest weakness is that he's all weapon, he's only as good as those that wield him. If he's heavily marked he won't create something out of nothing but give him an inch and he'll take a mile.

Depends on who else is in the backline, put a playmaker at 12 have Manu at 13 and he'll attract the defence whilst the 12 supplies North and Wade on the wings.

missed a try scoring pass against Wales!

Manu's hands ->

Pathetic jibe.

It is true that Tuilagi doesn't have the best off-loading game, but that is developing. He made a sumptious offload on Sunday, despite being marked by half the Wasps backs line and being choke tackled by two of them. As was rightly pointed out by Sam, but seemingly ignored by you, Tuilagi is a very dangerous threat. He made several breaks on Sunday and the only reason he didn't get too far was because Wasps basically had to gang tackle him. Whenever he plays, teams have to take him seriously and commit numbers to defence, if they don't, he's through. I would like to see him take the ball with a bit more pace, perhaps my only criticism of him.

Jimpy wrote:

100%beefy wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Hands haven't been questionable of late, his hands have been great in the last couple of games. His biggest weakness is that he's all weapon, he's only as good as those that wield him. If he's heavily marked he won't create something out of nothing but give him an inch and he'll take a mile.

Depends on who else is in the backline, put a playmaker at 12 have Manu at 13 and he'll attract the defence whilst the 12 supplies North and Wade on the wings.

missed a try scoring pass against Wales!

Manu's hands ->

Pathetic jibe.

It is true that Tuilagi doesn't have the best off-loading game, but that is developing. He made a sumptious offload on Sunday, despite being marked by half the Wasps backs line and being choke tackled by two of them. As was rightly pointed out by Sam, but seemingly ignored by you, Tuilagi is a very dangerous threat. He made several breaks on Sunday and the only reason he didn't get too far was because Wasps basically had to gang tackle him. Whenever he plays, teams have to take him seriously and commit numbers to defence, if they don't, he's through. I would like to see him take the ball with a bit more pace, perhaps my only criticism of him.

It's the usual situation where a player is more comfortable back at club level than at international level. Tuilagi is now finding some good form for Leicester.

The same could be said of Ashton too. Club form vs international form. One is poor, the other is good.

Internationals consist of players thrown together whereas club means combinations are far easier to build and grow.

It's no surprise Manu performs better with his Tigers team mates. Bringing what these guys do at club level to the international stage is what we want to see but easier said than done.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Hands haven't been questionable of late, his hands have been great in the last couple of games. His biggest weakness is that he's all weapon, he's only as good as those that wield him. If he's heavily marked he won't create something out of nothing but give him an inch and he'll take a mile.

Depends on who else is in the backline, put a playmaker at 12 have Manu at 13 and he'll attract the defence whilst the 12 supplies North and Wade on the wings.

I entirely agree with this. The trick for the Lions in my opinion is going to be simple, making sure that Tuilagi and North get good ball to run onto. The backline should be built to optimise those individuals, as they are the two backs capable of destroying the opposition if used properly. Get those guys over the advantage line and Australia will struggle. This means that the selections at 10 and 12 are going to be key. Whilst I'm certain that Sexton is the right man to play 10, 12 is a bigger question mark. Roberts is a very fine player, but whether he has the footballing skills to make the most of Tuilagi and North is a big question mark. If Gatland and Howley can get that to work then they'll have achieved something special. Barritt is a very functional 12, tends to make the players around him look good whilst he grafts in defence. He isn't just a defensive player of course, but he isn't really a creative spark.

The 12's I find interesting are Luke Marshall, Matt Scott and Billy Twelvetrees. With these guys I see real potential to create something special, albeit that by going with any of these players you are taking a gamble. Gamble I would however, and take a really close look at these guys over the coming weeks.

I agree that 12 is critical and needs to be a creative player. 36 might well be the man for the job. I would have BOD outside of him tho not Manu

Well the Lions will need to look over all the options and combinations throughout the tour, to see which combinations work best.

The key is to take the right ingredients from the outset though.

I'm frankly still undecided about BOD, his 6 Nations was a mixed bag to say the least. But then again, Tuilagi had a mixed tournament as well, as did JD2.

In my mind Jamie Roberts and Manu Tuilagi are on the plane. I'd take three other centres, still trying to figure out who.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Hands haven't been questionable of late, his hands have been great in the last couple of games. His biggest weakness is that he's all weapon, he's only as good as those that wield him. If he's heavily marked he won't create something out of nothing but give him an inch and he'll take a mile.

Depends on who else is in the backline, put a playmaker at 12 have Manu at 13 and he'll attract the defence whilst the 12 supplies North and Wade on the wings.

Best summary I have seen.- I'd add that his other big weakness, at least in internationals - can be trying too hard- trying to be involved too much. He ends up hitting too many rucks when you just want him to be in some space and available to take the ball.

Its critical that we have variety in that backline...regardless of who plays.

If we think we can just have big guys crashing into Australia paying a pwoer game...we will lose as Australia will just soak that up all day long without even a sweat.

We need power mixed with guile and cleverness. Changing angles, jinking sidesteps, risk taking...

FES I agree it depends on your 10,12 and 13.

It's all about balance.

Barritt is underrated IMO. Outclassed Marshall in their recent encounter in the HC. Shut down BOD vs Ireland. Good vs Scotland.

With the right combo at 10 and 13 he is effective.

Unfortunately I don't think Barritt-Tuilagi has worked. Barritt-36 worked vs Scotland but that's one match.

You want your 13 to involve the wingers. Tuilagi did that well vs NZ - he looked like the complete 13 in that game but has failed to do that since then.

Unsurprisingly Barritt and Tuilagi work well with their club team mates Tomkins and Allen respectively but neither on the England radar so they cannot be considered for Lions.

For continuity it's probably best the Lions go for the Welsh centre combo of Roberts and Davies in my opinion.

Twelvetrees is unproven so I wouldn't pick him. Same reason why I wouldn't pick other unproven players.

100%beefy wrote: he is marked out for the lions...the NZ game and because he is a blunt instrument. But he has questionable hands and seems off form....Jamie Roberts more than adequately performs the blunt instrument role. i would like to see someone of his stature being huge defensively but he does not stand out in that capacity either. On the other hand, on form he is simply destructive, potent and a finisher. My feeling is he will go but there is every chance he would not see a test match.

????

it's one thing to say he's poor in attack but to say he's poor in defence is silly.

i do wonder if people actually watch him play at all?

Exactly why I think the choices at 12 are key.

Conventional wisdom says that Tuilagi, Roberts, BOD and JD2 all go, possibly Barritt as well.

If you're going to have North and Cuthbert on the wings, and possibly Farrell or Biggar at 10 (were Sexton to get injured), then I think you end up with a far too one dimensional backline, particularly to play Australia.

The Lions are going to need footballers to mix with the bludgeons. They have some awesome powerful athletes at their disposal, in that department the Lions have better options than Australia. But when it comes to the top two inches, the Lions sorely need one or two players who can find those gaps and put players into space. Finding the right combination is everything.

Geordiefalcon I don't think we have that.

FES I disagree. I think it's 10,12 and 13 who are equally important.

I would be tempted to go 10.Sexton, 12.Roberts,13.BOD

Tuilagi should definitely travel as he has the raw talent but at international level he needs to work at involving the wingers.

Shame the Lions haven't got an upcoming 13 in the mould of Conrad Smith or BOD. BOD is class but he's ageing now.

Well I think if you're going to have Roberts at 12, then BOD (or JD2) are the more likely options for 13 than Tuilagi, purely because of the worry that Roberts and Tuilagi are too direct and lack creativity. Not to say I wouldn't try it on the tour though.

When you say "unproven" though, I don't agree that Scott, Marshall and Twelvetrees necessarily fall into that category. Maybe relatively speaking, but all have international experience, and all have played well in the limited exposure they've had in the 6 Nations. I agree that I'm talking about taking a risk here, and I can well see the case for just going with Roberts or Barritt at 12, and Tuilagi, BOD or JD2 at 13, but I wonder whether the Lions will have enough creativity in those positions to unleash the likes of North and Cuthbert in doing so.

I know Wales won the 6 Nations with those sorts of combinations, but prior to (and during) the 6 Nations even the Welsh fans were conceding that the balance wasn't quite right in the backs.

Much will depend on how Gatland wants the Lions to play I feel.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Well I think if you're going to have Roberts at 12, then BOD (or JD2) are the more likely options for 13 than Tuilagi, purely because of the worry that Roberts and Tuilagi are too direct and lack creativity. Not to say I wouldn't try it on the tour though.

When you say "unproven" though, I don't agree that Scott, Marshall and Twelvetrees necessarily fall into that category. Maybe relatively speaking, but all have international experience, and all have played well in the limited exposure they've had in the 6 Nations. I agree that I'm talking about taking a risk here, and I can well see the case for just going with Roberts or Barritt at 12, and Tuilagi, BOD or JD2 at 13, but I wonder whether the Lions will have enough creativity in those positions to unleash the likes of North and Cuthbert in doing so.

I know Wales won the 6 Nations with those sorts of combinations, but prior to (and during) the 6 Nations even the Welsh fans were conceding that the balance wasn't quite right in the backs.
Much will depend on how Gatland wants the Lions to play I feel.

Some seem to be picking the Welsh midfield by default, based it would seem on one game against England. Prior to that (very good) performance, the entire team was distinctly average and had lost 8 on the bounce going in. Personally, I think that for whatever reason, the Welsh are consistently found out when playing the Wallabies, so the Lions needs to be mixed up a bit in midfield - well, all over really.

FES didn't see too much creativity from any those you mention in the 6 nations.

Possibly Billy in the Scotland game but that's one match. Most of the England side looked good that day too.

The problem is the lack of creativity collectively of most centres.

BOD stands out as the exception but he's obviously going to retire soon.

The Lions surely is not the time for experimentation?

At least with Tuilagi,Barritt,BOD,Roberts and Davies we know what they can do.

Taking the names you suggest would be far too risky IMO.

Tuilagi has to tour - I don't know if he'll make the test team but he's good enough to compete for it.

Does he have genuine pace? He doesn't look to have great distribution so long term would he make a better wing than centre.

Offload Tuilagi does indeed have genuine pace.

In terms of pace and power Tuilagi is a really impressive player. If he can continue to sharpen the rest of his game - particularly handling and distribution he'll be a real threat.

I think he can flourish at centre but he's definitely not the finished article.

We also know that they can't do Beshocked.

I wouldn't take all three of the names I suggested, but I do think I'd take one of them.

If you didn't see creativity from Marshall in the 6 Nations, it means you didn't watch the Scotland vs Ireland game.

If you didn't see creativity from Matt Scott in the 6 Nations, you missed the Italy and France matches.

Your suggestions wouldn't overly concern me. All good players. All experienced. I do worry about the balance of the backs though. Imagine if Sexton were to get injured. You'd have Farrell or Biggar at 10 most likely, with Roberts or Barritt at 12, potentially Tuilagi at 13, and North and Cuthbert on the wings.

You'll win the contact area, make no mistake, and you could form a very effective rush defence, but who of that lot is going to do the smart stuff, and put these powerful athletes into gaps? Sure, BOD might survive the end of the season, the tour and be fit for the Tests (highly doubtful in my opinion), but even then, I'm not convinced he's the answer.

I think its this reason that Wade has been coming into peoples thoughts...he's that wild card that can create something from nothing - your Shane Williams / Jason Robinson type...

More and more now i think he will go to OZ.

I did see the Scotland vs Ireland game. Remind me how that one went? He made a good break or two but didn't make the try scoring pass.

I admit I didn't see Scotland's games vs Italy and France but I have seen Scott in the HC and have not been impressed. Not impressed when I last saw Marshall or 36 too.

These are guys that need more time for their countries. The potential is there but too risky for a Lion's tour IMO.

FES I would rather have those experienced guys then players who I haven't seen enough from.

It's a collective effort. If the forwards give the backs good ball on the front foot I think it matters less who starts in the backs.

Geordie agree totally on Wade, he's a bit of magic.

Re Manu in the 6N I think England showed how not to use him. Playing deep and passing early made it far too easy for the opposition to gang tackle him on the gainline. He's big and explosive he needs to be hitting gaps or weak shoulders. Most international OCs are good tacklers he won't simply breeze past them if they get 5m to line him up, the Farrell/Barritt/Manu midfield has no creative outlet. The Lions shouldn't have that problem with Sexton at 10. Play flatter like Tigers and Manu will make yards and look a better player.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Geordie agree totally on Wade, he's a bit of magic.

Re Manu in the 6N I think England showed how not to use him. Playing deep and passing early made it far too easy for the opposition to gang tackle him on the gainline. He's big and explosive he needs to be hitting gaps or weak shoulders. Most international OCs are good tacklers he won't simply breeze past them if they get 5m to line him up, the Farrell/Barritt/Manu midfield has no creative outlet. The Lions shouldn't have that problem with Sexton at 10. Play flatter like Tigers and Manu will make yards and look a better player.

If in doubt blame the players surrounding him.

As I have said on a few occasions Tuilagi blew a golden opportunity vs Wales for a try. Not a particularly difficult pass. Can't blame the guys surrounding him for that.

I noticed that Flood at 10 vs Italy didn't magically improve Tuilagi.

Beshocked - you're completely right about getting the backs some good, quick front foot ball, that is absolutely key. But I disagree that it "matters less" who starts in the backs.

Good sides, likes Sarries and Wales, view rugby as a process. Hit rucks hard + quick ball + repeat = tries/penalties + good kicker = points. That works up to a point. What I think the Lions will need though are one or two players who can find the gaps and create without quick ball. The "plan B" players if you like.

Wade certainly fits that bill, and it may be why the likes of Hook and Madigan are being talked up as potential tourists, despite a lack of international rugby in the 6 Nations.

It's possible that I'm overrating Australia here, but my concern is that the Lions huff and puff and bluster their way through the game, dominating possession and territory, and chipping away with 3 pointers, only for Australia to run in a couple of tries and nick it. We already know that the Lions can dominate Australia physically, right across the park, but in terms of skill and tempo, and stringing together phases with real intensity and skill, well that's the trick.

FES I just feel like you are pinning too much on these mavericks when they are largely unproven.

The likes of Tuilagi and Ashton have performed strongly now they are back at their clubs. They were poor in the internationals.

There is no guarantee that the likes of Wade,Madigan etc will take to international rugby like a duck to water. Some players struggle.

Hook in particular has never properly nailed down a Wales position as his own. Hook is just as likely to throw away a match as win it.

Would I trust these mavericks to not make costly errors?

Discipline and defence are also very important areas.

It's true, there is a risk involved, an yet on the Lions tour in 2001, it was Wilkinson, a relatively trusted and experienced international, who threw the key intercept pass. In 2005, Sir Clive trusted a whole bunch of "experienced" players who didn't deliver, and in 2009, it was ROG, a hugely experienced player, who cost the Lions the chance to take the series to the final game.

Experience is important, of course it is, but I'd far rather Gatland et al just looked at each individual player, looked at their skillset with a view to trying to piece together the optimal Lions XV, and in particular trying to create a balanced backline, and midfield in particular.

Discipline and defence are key, as any faithful Sarries fan will tell you. Getting players to fit the chosen system is also key, and with Farrell in charge of the defence, I'm sure that Farrell and Barritt will be at the back of his mind as potential options. Good at not making mistakes. Good at executing the game plan. Rarely fail in following the paint by numbers instructions, and if the opposition wilt, Barritt has shown himself competent in terms of capitalising, and Farrell a good composed kicker. I'm certain the Lions will have a good healthy dose of pragmatism, and rightly so. For starters it's easier to build in a short timeframe, particularly with players already familiar with the system.

Again though, whilst that may well be enough to beat the Aussie, I'm not inspired. I worry that the Aussies won't wilt under the pressure, will handle the box kicks, and worse still, counter effectively. I think there's room for one or two "wildcard" players as you put it, and in the history of the Lions, a few mavericks have stepped forward as excellent tourists, even if not Test starters.

funnyExiledScot wrote:It's true, there is a risk involved, an yet on the Lions tour in 2001, it was Wilkinson, a relatively trusted and experienced international, who threw the key intercept pass.

He also missed 40% of his kicks at goal in the tests, but we don't talk about that, it just upsets people

I am with FES on this in that the lions wil lneed to score tries a plenty and playing a stodgy midfield like Wales or England have is not the answer. We need the BOD / Twelvetrees / Scott type players to create the spaces for the dangerous back 3 we will have on the pitch. No point in having great strike runners on the wing and at full back if they never get any decent ball with space to run.

Sexton is the best 10 available but he needs a creative imaginative centre to work with. I cannot predict who this centre will be but we must have someone other than the Roberts, Tuilagi, Barritt type of centre

In a sense it doesn't matter who the wingers are be they
Irish - Bowe, Zebo
Welsh - North, Cuthbert
Scottish - Visser, Mailtland
English - Ashton

They need the right midfield who are both defensively sound and provide
quality attacking ball.

That means
Sexton 10
BOD 13
12 I just don't know - not Roberts or Barritt. I am leaning towards Twelvetrees

Halfpenny is nailed on for 15

If I was to choose and everyone fit

Sexton, North, Twelvetrees, BOD, Bowe, Halfpenny

Twelvetrees ? Seriously you lot must be having a laugh, he cannot even get into the England team but some of you want him in the Lions, here's a list of all the players I think are infront of him at the moment:-

Manu Tuilagi
Brad Barritt
Jamie Roberts
John Davies
Brian O'Driscoll
Keith Earls
Max Evans
Matt Scott

I do not care about the no's on their backs, for me they are all centers and they all PLAY for their countries there for they are all infront of Bill Bloody Twelvetrees.

Calm down, Dowlais. You'll do yourself an injury, son.

Well - this Lions tour may have come too soon for Twelvetrees, but I've watched him a lot and I think he is the best English 12 since Greenwood. He could be the playmaker England need and not before time.

Dowlais - but several of those players you list are not the creative type of centres we feel we would need - and in the opinion of many of us twelvetrees should be playing. He looked very good the chance he got and I cannot understand why he was dropped again.

Will Greenwood went in 1997 despite not being England's first choice 12. Phil De Glanville, a completely average player, had that distinction.

Just because Lancaster thinks Barritt the better 12, does not necessarily make it so. He also picked Tom Wood at 8 and Mike Brown at 11. Barritt is very good, I'm not disputing that, but Twelvetrees offers something different.

Max Evans is a winger, not a centre.

What about the other suggestions I made, Luke Marshall and Matt Scott?

This discussion isn't about one player in particular, but how best to come to the right combination for the Tests, and whether the "incumbent choices", Roberts, Barritt, JD2, Tuilagi and BOD, will be able to form the right combination, along with the likes of Biggar, Farrell, Cuthbert and North.

Remember, between selection time and the Tests, there's a tour in which to take a look at options. But we won't get to the optimal outcome, if we don't have the right ingredients in the first place.

TJ wrote:Dowlais - but several of those players you list are not the creative type of centres we feel we would need - and in the opinion of many of us twelvetrees should be playing. He looked very good the chance he got and I cannot understand why he was dropped again.

I want to see the best players playing for the Lions, not players who could be creative, when he starts pulling up trees for England then I will change my mind, for now it is one of the ones I have metioned above.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Will Greenwood went in 1997 despite not being England's first choice 12. Phil De Glanville, a completely average player, had that distinction.

Just because Lancaster thinks Barritt the better 12, does not necessarily make it so. He also picked Tom Wood at 8 and Mike Brown at 11. Barritt is very good, I'm not disputing that, but Twelvetrees offers something different.

Max Evans is a winger, not a centre.

What about the other suggestions I made, Luke Marshall and Matt Scott?

This discussion isn't about one player in particular, but how best to come to the right combination for the Tests, and whether the "incumbent choices", Roberts, Barritt, JD2, Tuilagi and BOD, will be able to form the right combination, along with the likes of Biggar, Farrell, Cuthbert and North.

Remember, between selection time and the Tests, there's a tour in which to take a look at options. But we won't get to the optimal outcome, if we don't have the right ingredients in the first place.

His profile suggests differently.

Dowlais. the issue here is we are playing Australia who will soak up direct pressure all day. We will need guile to beat them so Barritt, Roberts, Tuilagi will not do the job without a creative partner and Earls and Evans are not up to standard.

A midfield containing nothing but bosh merchants will mean the back 3 get no attacking ball and we will have a great back 3. We need that back 3 to get ball at pace and with a bit of space - the midfield need to be selected to do this. The wales game plan will not work.

The problem is Dowlais that hes not picked by England because Lancaster for what ever reasosn wants to play a boring defence first style. That means Barritt suits because he is basically and extra flanker.

Ironically Tweveltrees is excellent defensively, but is way superior in attack.
Now i don think id take Twelvetrees either just yet, but if he went (like i think Wade will ) as a wild card then he wouldnt look out of place in the lions squad.

If not he MUST be selected for Englands tour and MUST start at 12. I wouldnt take Barritt to Oz either.