Argentina vs England - 8.10pm KO

First topic message reminder :

I haven't seen a match thread for the game yet so thought I'd get one up and going, with the game on BBC hopefully plenty will be watching!

Argentina

M Bustos Moyano (Montpellier); M Orlando (Huirapuca), G Tiesi (unattached), F Contepomi (Stade Francais), M Montero (Club Pucara); B Urdapilleta (Oyonnax), M Landajo (CASI); P Henn (Brive), M Garcia Veiga (Buenos Aires C & CR), M Bustos (Montpellier), E Lozada, (Agen) M Galarza (University of La Plata), J Farias Cabello (unattached), B Macome (Tucuman), T Leonardi (Southern Kings).

Replacements: M Guidone (La Plata), G Roan (Cavalieri Prato), F Gomez Kodela (Biarritz), T Vallejos Cinalli (unattached), T De la Vega (CUBA), N Vergallo (Southern Kings), G Ascarate (Carcassonne), B Agulla (unattached).

England

M Brown (Harlequins); C Wade (Wasps), J Joseph (London Irish), B Twelvetrees (Gloucester), D Strettle (Saracens); F Burns (Gloucester), L Dickson (Northampton); J Marler (Harlequins), R Webber (Bath), D Wilson (Bath), J Launchbury (Wasps), D Attwood (Bath), T Wood (Northampton, capt), M Kvesic (Worcester), B Morgan (Gloucester).

Replacements: D Paice (London Irish), H Thomas (Sale Sharks), P Doran-Jones (Northampton), C Lawes (Northampton), B Vunipola (Wasps), R Wigglesworth (Saracens), K Eastmond (Bath), B Foden (Northampton).

Looking at the teams both sides are unsurprisingly putting out some new faces with Argentina fielding a very experimental side.

For those wanting to watch the BBC 2 coverage starts at 7.30pm with KO at 8.10pm. Hopefully we'll see a good game with some bruising forward battles up front and some skill from the backs in behind them - as an England fan I yet live in hope of the Burns, Twelvetrees and Wade rejuvenation of the backline!

Yep I remember that tournament well. Etzebeth and Launchberry really shone I felt and they've backed it up on the international stage since then. It is impressive the number of guys from that 2011 JWC side that have now progressing.

Farrell
Launchberry
Kvesic
Vunipola
Thomas
Wade
Ford

Also Buchanan and Daly

Daly too Carlos I think?

England U20 team v New Zealand:

15) Ben Ransom (Saracens)
14) Andy Short (Worcester Warriors)
13) Elliot Daly (London Wasps)
12) Owen Farrell (Saracens)
11) Christian Wade (London Wasps)
10) George Ford (Leicester Tigers)
9) Chris Cook (Bath Rugby)
1) Mako Vunipola (Saracens)
2) Mikey Haywood (Northampton Saints)
3) Henry Thomas (Sale Sharks)
4) Joe Launchbury (London Wasps)
5) Charlie Matthews (Harlequins)
6) Sam Jones (London Wasps)
7) Matt Kvesic (Worcester Warriors)
8) Alex Gray (Captain) (Newcastle Falcons)

Replacements:

16) Rob Buchanan (Harlequins) on for Mikey Haywood 73 mins
17) Will Collier (Harlequins) on for Henry Thomas 61 mins
18) Sam Twomey (Harlequins) on for Matt Kvesic 75 mins
19) Matt Everard (Leicester Tigers) on for Same Jones 73
20) Dan Robson (Gloucester Rugby) on for Chris Cook 61mins
21) Ryan Mills (Gloucester Rugby) on for Owen Farrell 49 mins
22) Marland Yarde (London Irish) on for Andy Short 43 mins

Jesus, that's a hell of an under 20 side.

Ransom's had a few run outs for Saracens, and Short for Worcester too I think. Very, very good pack, and all apart from the captain oddly have kicked on!

Generally really impressed with some of the performances. Yes the second half was a let down but it was nice to see some adventure in attack from England and Rob Baxter having some effect with the forwards' offloading game.

Notable players were clearly Morgan, Wade and 36. Ben Morgan's pass in the second half from a turnover by Webber on our try line illustrated what a great footballer he is. Excellent.

Those who I thought did extremely well without being in the lime-light were Davy Wilson with some excellent work all round.

Dave Attwood who ran the line-out well and took advantage of a flaky Puma one. He also put in some super covering tackles and the odd carry.

Matt Kvesic not so much for the stand-out things but did seem to be at every breakdown working hard.

All in all I thought it was a good game and Saturday will sure be interesting. I'd like to see May or Yarde come in for Strettle and Buchanan on to the bench.

Those pressing their Test claims from the tour so far:

Christian Wade - looked sharp against the Barbarians and has really backed that up and improved on it so far. He not only utilised his pace but passing and often stood in at SH. Really promising indeed from him so far and will edge out Ashton for the AI's given another good game on Sat.

Bill Twelvetress - Generally his play has been a revelation to Barritt's extra flanker role. It's added width, carrying and variety. He has demonstrated some good defence but has been caught out a couple of times. With more game time he'll easily be no.1. Likely to edge out Barritt for the AIs.

Dave Attwood - Has so far led a great line-out against some unsettled opposition but his work in the scrum and loose puts him on a par with Parling for me. I don't think he'll start but is fighting it out with Lawes for a bench spot come the AIs. I think we need him in there.

Freddie Burns - He's gone well across the two games. Has had some lovely passes and kicks from hand. His goal-kicking has been as good as Farrell's. Had the odd stray pass but his work in defence has made up for that I feel. He'd be my starter for the AIs but I think he'll edge Flood for the bench spot.

Rob Webber - Has put in some hard-working performances and has been great at the breakdown. His carrying needs to pick up a bit for me but he's in with a good shout of stealing Hartley's bench spot for the AIs.

So far I think that's it as far as the AIs goes. Davy Wilson i'd like to see get a couple of starts. He has gone really well. Joseph has been better than most thought and needs some more game-time.

Thus far my revised AI team would be as follows:

1. A Corbisiero
2. T Youngs
3. D Cole
4. J Launchburry
5. D Attwood
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw
8. B Morgan
9. T Youngs
10. F Burns
11. M Yarde
12. B Twelvetrees
13. M Tuilagi
14. C Wade
15. M Brown

16. R Webber 17. M Vunipola 18. D Wilson 19. C Lawes 20. B Vunipola 21. D Care 22. T Flood 23. B Foden

That to me looks a hard-core well balanced Test side. There's power up front with more on the bench and there's some real class in the backs. Left wing was my only issue. I put in Yarde because he's different from Wade but i'd be open to other suggestions.

blues and thomh

Looking at the side LT posted I missed Daly, Yarde and Buchanan. It wasn't half a bad side that was it!

From the other guys there I'm hopeful that Robson can start staking a claim for the Saxons next season. Disappointing players from there thus far would have to be Alex Gray unfortunately - his move to LI really hasn't gone his way so far. In terms of core skills he could be one hell of player though, definitely not short of talent. In fact he was the guy in that side I was most excited about a couple of years ago.

He is now with England 7's.

mystiroakey wrote:This team would crush the Lions...


This is not a wum . But my 100% opinion...

But I will still leg it. Because its not what you want to hear

I said before the match that they were a Front Row and a scrum half away from being a better team than the Lions could put out.

After Saturday, I'd say Corbisiero (probably not Marler), Weber and Wilson could hold their own against the Lions front row.

I'm aware this is immaturely hypothetical but given that we currently seem to be developing a bit of depth in many positions with players of in some cases similar styles and other cases opposing styles, am I the only person who would love to see the below XVs play one another?

1.Corbisiero - Vunipola
2.Youngs - Webber
3.Cole - Wilson
4.Atwood - Slater
5.Lauchberry - Parling
6.Wood - Croft
7.Robshaw - Kvesic
8.Morgan - Vunipola

9.Youngs - Care
10.Farrell - Burns

11.Ashton - May
12.Twelvetrees - Allen
13.Tuilagi - Barritt
14.Wade - Yarde
15.Brown - Foden

Across the board I really think it would be a fascinating battle!

It would be instructive but a bit of an injury risk.

Would they not do something like that in training anyway? In other words, Lancaster gets to see it. We don't.

I think current England touring team versus the Lions would have been much more interesting than England v Barbarians or Barbarians v Lions. But there would have been too much scope for embarassment.

Taking aside my feelings for the turncoat Dave Attwood, I am delighted he is finally hitting the form he is capable of and he was certainly one of the stand out forwards on Saturday. Nevertheless, I am surprised to see so many people choosing him as their starting lock for the AIs ahead of Parling. The guy is a class act and deserves his place in the Lions and has done nothing to deserve losing his place. Attwood should rightly be called up to the full EPS, but equally whilst he was impressive against Argentina, it was as bad an Argentinian side as I've seen in many a year.

I think with Parling its about the second row balance and combos....ie his partnership with Launchbury. And people have identified that we maybe need a little more oomph in the pack...so naturally they look at the second rows..

Most people see Launchbury as the (current) and future starlet in the second row. However is still more athletic and lightweight (still 18st i think) and people want to see a big, nugget alongside him.
This obviously means people are putting Parling on the bench. I honestly believe if Launchbury wasnt around most people would be saying Parling and Attwood etc..

The question is who is currently better - launchbury or Parling...and who has the greater potential...
Im guessing maybe Parling better at the moment...but Launchbury can reach the heights of a top class international...

Whoever gets the shirt will have to play very well to keep it and that's the most pleasing thing for me,competition for the jersey.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I think with Parling its about the second row balance and combos....ie his partnership with Launchbury. And people have identified that we maybe need a little more oomph in the pack...so naturally they look at the second rows..

Most people see Launchbury as the (current) and future starlet in the second row. However is still more athletic and lightweight (still 18st i think) and people want to see a big, nugget alongside him.
This obviously means people are putting Parling on the bench. I honestly believe if Launchbury wasnt around most people would be saying Parling and Attwood etc..

The question is who is currently better - launchbury or Parling...and who has the greater potential...
Im guessing maybe Parling better at the moment...but Launchbury can reach the heights of a top class international...

I do think there is an obsession about the weight of locks and a belief that there needs to be a heavy one to act as the grunt in the boiler room. But I don't think that is strictly true. Ultimately the power of the scrum comes from the props. A lighter weight scrum can still cause damage if the technique is there. I think Tigers scrum is a great example; they may have the likes of Deacon and Slater, but the scrum is just as effective when Kitchener and Parling are there and this is largely driven by the quality of their front row. Kitchener weighs in at 17st8 and Parling 17st13 whereas Slater is 18st3 and Deacon 18st5 - we're only talking a few pounds and the difference on the pitch isn't noticeable in terms of scrum power. Attwood does top the scales at 18st8, but does his few extra pounds over Parling and Launchbury (18st1) justify his inclusion? Of course weight isn't just about scrummaging, but is a factor in ball carrying ability, but that is again more about technique than shear size. Sione Kalamafoni was arguably the most destructive ball carrier in the Jeff last season, yet he is nearly a stone lighter than Attwood at 17st9.

The one thing I Attwood brings above all the others, which is nothing to do with his size, is his nasty edge. I do like a traditional enforcer at lock and he certainly brings this. I'm not trying to suggest he shouldn't be there, far from it, but that he hasn't done enough to get ahead of Launchbury and Parling yet. In the long term Launchbury and Attwood could make a very effective partnership, especially with the way Attwood is developing his lineout ability.

Do you think Lancs will stick with Launchbury and Parling for the AI's...and how much do you think Morgan (or Vunipola ) missing the 6n affected this idea that we were lightweight??

It would be interesting to see...

I reckon that SL will stick with Launchbury and Parling for the AI's - but as others have said, we are building good backups, or better than good backups.

Attwood seems to deserve his chance to get into the EPS. Lawes is still being used as a bench impact but is looking good when he comes on (shame about the yellow card though). And then there is Slater, I was excited to see what he could do on tour but he was injured at the wrong time. He may get a chance in the AI's but I don't think that SL will see that as a time to experiment (barring injury to front line players).

The lack of a decent ball carrier from 8 in the 6N certainly aided the perception of a light weight pack. Not just in the 2nd rows selected but also with the perception of Croft and T.Wood........it cant have helped much.

To be fair on Lawes that yellow card was really just due to England commiting a number of penalties at the breakdown and Lawes was the unlucky one to transgress when the ref decided it was time for a yellow.

I think Lancaster will go with Launchberry and Parling (deservedly) for the time being but I can see Launchberry and Atwood being an exciting partnership. Parling's only 29 (not old for a lock) and in the form of his life.

I'd like to think Lawes would be pushing them too and hope he stays free of injury and gets on top form again. I hope he doesn't become a 'nearly' man.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Do you think Lancs will stick with Launchbury and Parling for the AI's...and how much do you think Morgan (or Vunipola ) missing the 6n affected this idea that we were lightweight??

It would be interesting to see...

I think it had a huge impact. The backrow of Croft, Robshaw and Wood for the Welsh game whilst individually talented was immensely unbalanced and there were no ball carriers amongst them - however, SL was largely forced into this due to injury rather than choice. A Grand Slam decider at the Millennium was not the place to give the likes of Kvesic or Fraser their first cap and SL was never going to go back to Easter to provide the ball carrying.

propdavid_london wrote:I reckon that SL will stick with Launchbury and Parling for the AI's - but as others have said, we are building good backups, or better than good backups.

Attwood seems to deserve his chance to get into the EPS. Lawes is still being used as a bench impact but is looking good when he comes on (shame about the yellow card though). And then there is Slater, I was excited to see what he could do on tour but he was injured at the wrong time. He may get a chance in the AI's but I don't think that SL will see that as a time to experiment (barring injury to front line players).

The lack of a decent ball carrier from 8 in the 6N certainly aided the perception of a light weight pack. Not just in the 2nd rows selected but also with the perception of Croft and T.Wood........it cant have helped much.

I think the perception of a light weight pack was spot on. The effectiveness of our pack in the 6Ns defensively was built on a very quick defensive line with two forwards 'swarming' the opposition carrier behind the gain line. In terms of attack it was a result of waiting for opposition players to commit to a tackle before an quick offload, moving the point of contact and freeing up the carrier to make more ground a little wider out. We then, initially, had quick rucking from those behind the carrier. Against Wales, they (Wales) realised that once they made ground, they simply needed to adopt a quick pick and go around the fringes, as none of our defenders where powerful enough to stop them on the gain line. In defence they similarly swarmed us but also worked out our attempt to move the point of contact. The result was us just shifting the ball wider away from our forwards where their massive backs could work with their forwards and hit us back.

So partly our pack is a bit light weight I think, and partly we lacked/lack a plan B when we're being bossed in an arm wrestle. Teams like Oz and arguably the ABs have shown you can survive without a really heavyweight pack, but to do so you need far more savvy forwards and coaches than I think we currently have.

We may never have a pack the size of SAs but we do need to have players who can prevent another 'Alberts Atrocity. I don't want to ever again see an opposition give one player the ball to carry 50 times against us for an average gain of about 80 yards!

The current pack without Morgan or BV lacks a specialist carrier and it hurts us, Parling and other can carry better than given credit for due to good technique, but you need more players who can punch a hole in a defence.

Alberts still gives me the shudders thinking about that game

I think youve made a very good post there Hood...pretty much spot on.

Whilst i have been critical of the packs lack of a tough edge...i do think we massively missed the likes of Morgan or Vunipola at 8. Someone to just take the ball and crash it up the middle when we were under the cosh...to get os a bit on the front foot.

I also think it is Wood Or Croft...not both. And if we decide on Croft...id be inclined to put a bit more of a nasty guy in the second row.
But hey thats just my opinion.

The thing has also impressed me (yes i know its weak opposition) has been the link play between the backs and forwards...the interlink between Morgan, Wade and Twelvetrees for instance...

Wade must get a chance in the Ai's...

I also suggest that whilst he has his critics...Ashton would flourish in this lineup...certainly playing off Morgan...

Some valuable analysis above I feel. The issue for me is always one of balance in the pack. Launchbury is no Johnson (YET) and as such at present he needs to be paired with a heavier lock alongside who offers better carrying in the tight and stopping tackles on the gain-line.

Attwood has done well so far and perhaps the rush to see him in the Test side is born out of frustration that he hasn't achieved much until now with a lot of potential.

Parling has been good for England but his line-out wasn't good in the past few 6N games and with a world-class line-out pack that we had in the Wales game we got owned. That's not to say he doesn't deserve his Lions place or that his carrying is not far better than he's given credit for.

I think Lancs will stick with Parling and Launchbury but as I have said above, I can see Attwood making the bench which is a good call.

The issue for me is always one of balance in the pack. Launchbury is no Johnson (YET)

I think thats one of the issues thought Chjw...hes not the same type of player in my eyes...Johnson was just a physical beast of pure focus and intensity...launchbury is an athletic guy with the skills of a back rower. He will probavbly add a few pounds to his frame...which is why people are so interested in his progression...a big powerful lad with those skills...bodes well.

The thing about the lineout is despite me FAR prefering Wood at 6...Croft gives us a world class lineout option. Way better than Parling.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I think youve made a very good post there Hood...pretty much spot on.

Whilst i have been critical of the packs lack of a tough edge...i do think we massively missed the likes of Morgan or Vunipola at 8. Someone to just take the ball and crash it up the middle when we were under the cosh...to get os a bit on the front foot.

I also think it is Wood Or Croft...not both. And if we decide on Croft...id be inclined to put a bit more of a nasty guy in the second row.
But hey thats just my opinion.

The thing has also impressed me (yes i know its weak opposition) has been the link play between the backs and forwards...the interlink between Morgan, Wade and Twelvetrees for instance...

Wade must get a chance in the Ai's...

I also suggest that whilst he has his critics...Ashton would flourish in this lineup...certainly playing off Morgan...

Thanks Geordie, yeah I think I agree with you as well on balance in the team. Definitely agree it's Croft OR Wood and I also feel that a Croft at 6 requires a rebalancing elsewhere. I actually still think Haskell has a role to play at least in the squad. A bit of a forgotten man but as a powerful ball-carrying flanker with a surprisingly decent engine, we don't have much better. Also feels like a more 'traditional 6'. And yes to Wade, he'll have knock-backs but he reminds me of S Williams for Wales more than Robinson - a good rugby brain as well as quick feet.

We have a lot of depth in terms of international standard players, what we need now is to increase the number of world class players i.e. those in the top 2 in their position, with at least good international level players behind them keeping them honest.

Yeah thats the thing Hood, we ned a few to move up to World Class.

I think Wade, Launchbury are two that certainly could make that step.

Theres a few others that could or certainly be top class internationals...but it all depends on how they are worked with now...

Ill be monitoring Morgan and Billys progression with great interest aswell...

Looks like this tour is doing exactly as we hoped - exposing some younger players to success at international rugby against a side that is good enough to pose a challenge.

Hopefully the AIs will see something along the lines of this team:

1 - Corbs
2 - Youngs
3 - Cole

4- Launchbury
5 - Parling

6 - Wood
7 - Robshaw
8 - Morgan

9 - Youngs
10 - Burns

11 - Wade
12 - Twelvetrees
13 - Tuilagi
14 - Ashton / Yarde / Foden
15 - Foden / Brown

16 - Mako Vunipola
17 - Webber
18 - Wilson
19 - Attwood
20 - Kvesic
21 - Care
22 - Eastmond
23 - Tait

May be a little lightweight in the backs, but with so much ball playing ability that Manu and Ashton should be put into holes all over the place.

add May as an option? I do think that with his experience at 7 and 8, Kvesic is a top bench option

Hartley's certainly suffered a real fall hasn't he? None of the teams mentioned on this thread have him at starting hooker or replacement.

bluestonevedder wrote:Hartley's certainly suffered a real fall hasn't he? None of the teams mentioned on this thread have him at starting hooker or replacement.

Youngs has looked good for the Lions, Webber has really impressed me (though the opposition have been weak). Hartley had a great end season with Saints until his moronic comment, he needs to earn his place back. He clearly still has issues and they need to be fixed otherwise England could find themselves down to 14 and we can't afford that

ChequeredJersey wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:Hartley's certainly suffered a real fall hasn't he? None of the teams mentioned on this thread have him at starting hooker or replacement.

Youngs has looked good for the Lions, Webber has really impressed me (though the opposition have been weak). Hartley had a great end season with Saints until his moronic comment, he needs to earn his place back. He clearly still has issues and they need to be fixed otherwise England could find themselves down to 14 and we can't afford that

I find myself more often that not rather underwhelmed by Hartley's performances. When he first burst onto the scene I thought he had the potential to go on to be one of the World's leading hookers. The reality of the situation is whilst he has made it onto the International stage, you certainly would class him as one of the best and the large part of his tenure has been marked by a lack of competition in that position. Youngs doesn;t have the lineout ability of Hartley yet, but he offers a lot more elsewhere. If Webber can string a good period together without injury he will become a genuine option and with the likes of Buchanan and Lindsay in the wings I do feel he will find it increasingly difficult. On the other hand this competition may spur him on...

Hartley is a good set-piece hooker at international level but has never dominated games physically in the way he looked like he could.

That said, I think he's still a significant step up from Webber and Buchanan, who could be fantastic but are not at that level yet. Buchanan has only just broken into the Quins starting 15. Hartley was selected as a Lion this year.

HongKongCherry wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:Hartley's certainly suffered a real fall hasn't he? None of the teams mentioned on this thread have him at starting hooker or replacement.

Youngs has looked good for the Lions, Webber has really impressed me (though the opposition have been weak). Hartley had a great end season with Saints until his moronic comment, he needs to earn his place back. He clearly still has issues and they need to be fixed otherwise England could find themselves down to 14 and we can't afford that

I find myself more often that not rather underwhelmed by Hartley's performances. When he first burst onto the scene I thought he had the potential to go on to be one of the World's leading hookers. The reality of the situation is whilst he has made it onto the International stage, you certainly would class him as one of the best and the large part of his tenure has been marked by a lack of competition in that position. Youngs doesn;t have the lineout ability of Hartley yet, but he offers a lot more elsewhere. If Webber can string a good period together without injury he will become a genuine option and with the likes of Buchanan and Lindsay in the wings I do feel he will find it increasingly difficult. On the other hand this competition may spur him on...

I completely agree with both of you.

CJ he is too much of a liability, like you have said. We can't risk losing a man for 10 mins.

I've always felt he doesn't bring his excellent club form to the international stage. Against opposition like South Africa when you need a big, ball carrying, abrasive hooker, he goes missing. He's a bully that doesn't stand up to the other bullies. It's a little bit deflating as a spectator, because that's when you want your guys to stand up.

HKC- both Youngs and Webber are really impressing me this summer. Youngs throwing has got better and better with each game on tour, and he's continuing his solid work around the park. Webber too, and he adds some serious weight to the front row.

I really think Buchanan is a player for the future. His form for Harlequins has been excellent, and I think he will over take Gray in the pecking order. God only knows why he wasn't on the bench on Saturday against the Pumas. Paice is the biggest waste of space in my opinion.

Hartley's certainly got some talent to compete with now, as opposed to a few seasons ago when he was pretty much the only hooker we had. If Lindsay learns to throw straigh, god help us!

HongKongCherry wrote:SL was largely forced into this due to injury rather than choice...SL was never going to go back to Easter to provide the ball carrying.

The fact Lancaster wasn't going to select Easter was, nevertheless, a matter of choice on his part. Easter may not have stopped the rout but he would have offered the qualities we badly missed.

Even ignoring Easter, we should have considered Haskell at eight. He's not the best ball handler but would have given us stronger carrying options. Unfortunately, Lancaster showed himself a poor judge of combinations. He wanted his best three available back row players on the pitch, and didn't sufficiently consider how they would work together, or with the front five. We had the same issue with the back three.

One thing I hope Lancaster develops from this tour, is the courage to drop quality players from the team in favour of better options. He shouldn't just wait for lost matches before making changes. Wood and Croft can't both play six, he has to choose one. He may need to make similar difficult choices at lock, flyhalf, fullback, centre and wing. He may even need to change his captain at some point on the future.

One theme of this year's Six Nations was Lancaster's unwillingness to make difficult decisions. We can't afford that if England are to develop.

thomh wrote:Hartley is a good set-piece hooker at international level but has never dominated games physically in the way he looked like he could.

That said, I think he's still a significant step up from Webber and Buchanan, who could be fantastic but are not at that level yet. Buchanan has only just broken into the Quins starting 15. Hartley was selected as a Lion this year.

Probably more accurate to say that Buchanan has yet to break into Quins 1st XV. I think he only started 3 or 4 games last season in the AP and was on the bench for the play-off semi. While I feel SL was right to take him on this tour, and probably should have had him on the bench ahead of Paice, he really needs to own the Quins 2 shirt before really being in the England mix.

As we have seen in the last season though, a series of starts for an inexperienced hooker (youngs) at club level - allied to injuries for the first two hookers (Hartley and Webber) when the AIs come around and anything can happen.

LondonTiger wrote:

thomh wrote:Hartley is a good set-piece hooker at international level but has never dominated games physically in the way he looked like he could.

That said, I think he's still a significant step up from Webber and Buchanan, who could be fantastic but are not at that level yet. Buchanan has only just broken into the Quins starting 15. Hartley was selected as a Lion this year.

Probably more accurate to say that Buchanan has yet to break into Quins 1st XV. I think he only started 3 or 4 games last season in the AP and was on the bench for the play-off semi. While I feel SL was right to take him on this tour, and probably should have had him on the bench ahead of Paice, he really needs to own the Quins 2 shirt before really being in the England mix.

Broadly in agreement, but it was a surprise when he wasn't selected for the semi. He looked like he'd established himself as first choice by the end of the regular season and I suspect that Gray's selection was a horses-for-courses one, as they would have been concerned about Buchanan's inexperience coming up against Croft and Parling in the lineout. Fully expect him to be established first choice hooker next season.

Edit - looking now there was more rotation between the two than I thought, but people were definitely expecting him to be selected for the semi. He played against Northampton in the game to decide final league placings, for example.

Rugby Fan wrote:

HongKongCherry wrote:SL was largely forced into this due to injury rather than choice...SL was never going to go back to Easter to provide the ball carrying.

The fact Lancaster wasn't going to select Easter was, nevertheless, a matter of choice on his part. Easter may not have stopped the rout but he would have offered the qualities we badly missed.

Even ignoring Easter, we should have considered Haskell at eight. He's not the best ball handler but would have given us stronger carrying options. Unfortunately, Lancaster showed himself a poor judge of combinations. He wanted his best three available back row players on the pitch, and didn't sufficiently consider how they would work together, or with the front five. We had the same issue with the back three.

One thing I hope Lancaster develops from this tour, is the courage to drop quality players from the team in favour of better options. He shouldn't just wait for lost matches before making changes. Wood and Croft can't both play six, he has to choose one. He may need to make similar difficult choices at lock, flyhalf, fullback, centre and wing. He may even need to change his captain at some point on the future.

One theme of this year's Six Nations was Lancaster's unwillingness to make difficult decisions. We can't afford that if England are to develop.

I do hope that will be the case, but SL strikes me as someone who is overly loyal and I suspect the same players will come back into the fold in the AIs. 36 was dropped in the 6N as soon as Tuilagi was fit and the attack suffered for it; I can see Ashton walking back into the side, despite any form to call upon. The EPS may change but will the starting XV?...

If Lindsay learns to throw straigh, god help us!

Yeah he's definately one to watch.

HKC

I can see Ashton walking back into the side, despite any form to call upon.

I think the problem with Ashton is as i said on another thread...these tactics are stifling his game. He's a game reader and runner of the shoulder..support type player...not a Wade style creative player.

With Twelvetreees, Morgan etc in there suddenly you might see Ashton come to life again and he can be a dangerous weapon for us...with maybe Wade or May on the other flank.

HongKongCherry wrote:
I do hope that will be the case, but SL strikes me as someone who is overly loyal and I suspect the same players will come back into the fold in the AIs.  36 was dropped in the 6N as soon as Tuilagi was fit and the attack suffered for it; I can see Ashton walking back into the side, despite any form to call upon.  The EPS may change but will the starting XV?...

Don't you think this is a very common trait with all the national coaches/managers? When you read the threads following International games just about the most common theme is 'why does he not pick form players?'. About the only time this criticism is less common is when a new manager takes over and new player mixes follow.

I don't have much confidence this will change but I hope SL proves me wrong.

Does anyone think any player club moves this summer will affect their chances with England.

For example:
Matt Mullan should surely get more recognition with his move to Wasps.
Matt Garvey likewise to Bath and hopefully Jonathon Joseph can refind his form after also switching to Bath.

Any others?

GeordieFalcon wrote:

If Lindsay learns to throw straigh, god help us!

Yeah he's definately one to watch.

HKC

I can see Ashton walking back into the side, despite any form to call upon.

I think the problem with Ashton is as i said on another thread...these tactics are stifling his game. He's a game reader and runner of the shoulder..support type player...not a Wade style creative player.

With Twelvetreees, Morgan etc in there suddenly you might see Ashton come to life again and he can be a dangerous weapon for us...with maybe Wade or May on the other flank.

But Ashton florished in a backline that contained Hape and Tindall.  His club form is way off what it was 2 years ago too, so I'm not sure if it is tactics but more to do with him.  At his pomp he is genuinely one of the best wingers around, but he needs to re-find that pomp as he is some way of it at the moment.

Yes and whilst Hape and Tindall were hardly creative...they at least smashed holes in the defence carrying the ball...and had Flood creating the passes for him.

With this team he has the creativity of Farrell and the woeful carrying of Barritt...ie their doing NOTHING for him.

I still believe Barritt should have been a flanker...

Heos not fast enough or creative enough for a Flanker Geordie

I am actually very surprised about how Brad Barritt has developed... in his early SR career when he was named SA SR player of the year (think 06 or 07)... he wasn't simply this tackling machine and route one runner. He was a genuine second five-eigth in his shark days.

He had a lot going for him and I was very surprised he left in fact... especially given that JDV and Frans Steyn had moved to Europe in 2008... his only obstacle to a bok cap was Maisiekind who must have had filthy photos of someone high up as there is no other way he would have been capped otherwise.

The thing with Barritt is that we couldn't afford to discard him too quickly if we wanted to. I mean who else have we got to play inside centre if Barritt and/ Or 36 got injured? The lack of depth there worries me.

bluestonevedder wrote:Anyone seen this article? Interesting short read.

Kvesic made 29 tackles!!

http://www.rfu.com/news/2013/june/news-articles/090613_stats_arg_one

Interesting, the Welsh contigent were harping on about how good Lydiate did in making 13 tackles on Saturday.

I swear Argentina didn't have the ball enough for Kvesic to make 29 tackles!

Cumbrian - Though he's out of favour at the moment Anthony Allen can't do much more at the Tigers to warrant an EPS place. I'm pretty sure he wasn't considered for this tour on medical grounds but come the Autumn he really deserves a place IMO. Since his time at Tigers he's learnt to organise a defence well, his tackling is now very strong and his playmaking is still there as shown by the number of times he breaks the line with his foot work.

fa0019 - It is an interesting point many make about Barritt moving from a second 5/8th with a clever kicking and passing game to what he is now. I don't intend this to upset any Sarries fans, but whilst their game plan has proved effective in the AP I do have to seriously question whether it stifles a players chance of developing their game outside of the skills the coaches ask of them.