Will Lancaster learn anything from the Lions win?

First topic message reminder :

Or will he blindly keep calm and carry on? Some tips from me are:-

#1. Power blended with pace wins rugby matches. Soften them up with the bludgeon and then apply the finish with pace.

This means:-
1. Tom Youngs is too under-powered to start a test match. Much better off the bench.
2. Corbs is the real deal at loose-head.
3. Cole is a little under-powered at scrum time but may get better. Hopefully.
4. Croft was found out by Gatland. He is lightweight and goes absent from the coal-face too often. Let him go like Gatland did.
5. Stop playing people out of position FFS. Put wingers on the wing, #8s at #8 and full-backs at full-back for goodness sake.
6. Let Chris Ashton go even though you think he's a nice boy. He has had his chance to show he can tackle and failed.
7. You must power-up the back-line. Will Greenwood stood well above both Roberts and Davies when he interviewed them. You must find some big boys and develop them. You only have 2 years left.

Oh and lastly, under-estimate the power of the Welsh team at your peril. They were magnificent in Aus.

GeordieFalcon wrote:HOw would people feel if the back three for the 1st Ai's was...

11 Brown
14 Ashton
15 Goode

 Then I'd feel that Lancaster has learned nothing from his tenure so far, and would really start to worry about his coaching ability!

So a back line of Youngs, Farrell, Brown, Barritt, Tuilagi, Ashton, Goode wouldn't be to your liking Blue?

jeffwinger Lancasters likes Barritt because he is dependable. He did not harm England's attack against NZ and Scotland. He seemed to perform better in the centres with 36 than he has with Tuilagi.

I know they are 606 darlings but the likes of Burns and 36 are still unproven at international level.

Give me unproven ahead of proven not to be good enough any day.

yappysnap wrote:So a back line of Youngs, Farrell, Brown, Barritt, Tuilagi, Ashton, Goode wouldn't be to your liking Blue?

 
 No mate, not at all.
 
For me personally, 36 has to be there if we are going to play Farrell at 10. Granted Farrell appears to have improved his attacking game a lot over the Lions, but 36 at inside centre would take a lot of pressure off him. 36 also runs some of the nicest support lines I have seen for a long, long time.
 
Brown on the wing is the equivalent of Wood at 8! Superb player, but totally out of position, although he did an admirable job there. Brown is an awesome player, but he's a fullback through and through. Foden and him to compete for the spot in my eyes. As much as I want to like Goode, he just isn't cutting it for me at the moment. Wonderful composure and temperment, but not enough attacking prowess.
 
How about you?

Brown should not be on the wing. Lancaster should pick between Foden, Goode and Brown at fullback, but should not seek to play one or two of them out of position - none of these guys are wingers.

Picking Brown at 11 ahead of Wade or Yarde would be a big mistake.

I'm pretty easy on Twelvetrees versus Barritt. Barritt is consistent, solid and dependable. Twelvetrees is gifted and has that additional potential to be a special player - which Barritt will never be. At the moment I'd say that they are neck and neck. Barritt has the experience, Twelvetrees the better longer term prospect. I'd go for Twelvetrees personally, but that's a decision you can argue both ways.

That's the thing Fes, Barritt never puts a foot wrong so it is hard to criticise him. Regardless of who becomes the starter out of him and 36, I believe Barritt will definitely have a role within the squad. Like Beshocked said, the partnership of Barritt and 36 didn't look too bad at all!

Yeah might be a good exercise..

If Farrell starts at 10...then Twelvetrees or Eastmond should start at 12
If Burns starts at 10 then maybe Barritt initially at 12.

That would be a quick way to stifle Burns attacking talents. Barritt has served his purpose, but he is not the way forward. The sooner he makes way the sooner this team can move forwards.

jeffwinger depends how you define not good enough.

FES well summarised.

bluestonevedder I agree about Goode. I would like to see him work on his attacking game. Perhaps get coaching expertise to help with his pace. It worked for Brown.

beshocked wrote:jeffwinger depends how you define not good enough.

FES well summarised.

bluestonevedder I agree about Goode. I would like to see him work on his attacking game. Perhaps get coaching expertise to help with his pace. It worked for Brown.

It certainly did work with Brown. His speed has improved greatly, as well as his acceleration over the first couple of meters. Such a boistrous runner, he never knows when he's tackled.

Goode and Brown are very different runners though. Brown very much attacks the space with his pace, whereas Goode seems to almost drift and glide through the line. He could do with some speed work, defnitely, but is he deceptively quick? Regardless, Goode's limitation is currently his attacking (and at a push, his defence). His kicking and catching is excellent though.

Where Goode offers so much promise is coming into the line as a second distributor, given his background at 10. Funnily enough England haven't really used that option very much, which is a shame in my view. His skillset is pretty good. My query is whether he has the pace - but as pointed out above, that can be improved.

I still think on top form Foden is the pick of the three. When his confidence is up he's such a dangerous runner. Poor last season, but showed signs towards then end and over the summer that he's getting his mojo back. How he links up with George North will be very interesting.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah might be a good exercise..

If Farrell starts at 10...then Twelvetrees or Eastmond should start at 12
If Burns starts at 10 then maybe Barritt initially at 12.

The only issue I have with that is why you'd not play an established pairing together? Burns and 36 have proven themselves to work well together and looked like and excellent combination during the summer tour. Incidentally Burns' defence was excellent, something which he has been widely criticised for. Really stand-out, perhaps thanks to a chat with Paul Gustard?

I think if we play Farrell at 10 it's the pragmatic wet rugby approach. Hence Barritt fits with him well and that as a combination of defensive rugby works well. We did see glimpses of something else from Farrell on the Lions tour and hopefully he can improve on that. Right now though i'd want Burns and 36 starting.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Where Goode offers so much promise is coming into the line as a second distributor, given his background at 10. Funnily enough England haven't really used that option very much, which is a shame in my view. His skillset is pretty good. My query is whether he has the pace - but as pointed out above, that can be improved.

I still think on top form Foden is the pick of the three. When his confidence is up he's such a dangerous runner. Poor last season, but showed signs towards then end and over the summer that he's getting his mojo back. How he links up with George North will be very interesting.

 The Premiership final springs to mind! The entire match was basically a 'full-back' off between him and Tait. Wonderful viewing.

jeffwinger wrote:That would be a quick way to stifle Burns attacking talents.  Barritt has served his purpose, but he is not the way forward.  The sooner he makes way the sooner this team can move forwards.

I agree with this, he's proven himself to be excellent but limited. He played a wider role for Natal but i've not seen that at all from him over here. Interestingly I wouldn't mind seeing Farrell and Eastmond as a pairing. With Farrell's excellent defence and Tuilagi to work off outside him Eastmond could become the creative pivot in the backline.

bluestonevedder wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Where Goode offers so much promise is coming into the line as a second distributor, given his background at 10. Funnily enough England haven't really used that option very much, which is a shame in my view. His skillset is pretty good. My query is whether he has the pace - but as pointed out above, that can be improved.

I still think on top form Foden is the pick of the three. When his confidence is up he's such a dangerous runner. Poor last season, but showed signs towards then end and over the summer that he's getting his mojo back. How he links up with George North will be very interesting.

 The Premiership final springs to mind! The entire match was basically a 'full-back' off between him and Tait. Wonderful viewing.

 

Forgot about Tait. He could genuinely make a case if he continues the trajectory he's been on for Tigers. Doesn't look as quick as before but I wouldn't bet against him coming back into the squad; even in such a congested position.

On form what is the FB pecking order? My choice would be: Foden - Brown - Abendanon - Goode - Tait

Yeh Chjw131, Tait's certainly finding his form again, but like others have said on others topics, it is a little early for him to posh for EPS selection quite yet. Another season, and he'll be there I think. Such a great player, and so much international experience I often forget!
 
I imagine the pecking should be like that, but in reality, I think Goode is probably higher. Possibly something like Foden, Brown, Goode, Abendanon, Tait, May?
 
Certainly after the 6 Nations, I think it looked very different:
 
Goode, Brown, Foden....

But I'm hoping this has now changed. Fodes and Brown on level, Goode, Abendanon, May, Tait.

There's also Homer at LI and Rob Millar at Sale - plus the ever humble Delon Armitage at Toulon. No shortage of options.

Jesus, you're right FeS, completely forgot about those guys. Miller was pushing really hard for selection 2 seasons ago, but last season he was off his best. I think he got shifted to winger for a lot of the games? Hopefully this season we'll see him return to FB and flourish again. He's certainly got time on his side!

Amazing how many options England have at 15, and yet none of them fit to shine Stuart Hogg's boots.....  

Ha, well, depends on where Hogg is playing! If someone was silly enough to line him up at fly-half for instance, I'm sure Goode could give him a run for his money!

And there is Arscott of the Chiefs

rosbif wrote:And there is Arscott of the Chiefs

Indeed, actually Arscott i'd have only just behind the established players.

I think Rob Miller could do very well but like Hogg there was some suggestion of moving him back to 10. With Sale doing better Miller could come back into the reckoning for a Saxons place. Homer did well for the U20s but barring his generally excellent kicking game i've not seen much from him.

rosbif wrote:And there is Arscott of the Chiefs

 God damn it. Shall we just play it safe and say every starting fullback in the Premiership has the potential to be in the EPS?

Let's just play a backline of fullbacks

And a pack full of Calum Clarkes?

Um... No

Think you're dismissing it too soon CJ. Give it another minute of thought.

Actually, I have changed my mind. Clark would be a great tighthead

Clark could be the first to wear a multiple numbered jersey. 1-15.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Let's just play a backline of fullbacks

9 Foden
10 Goode
11 Abendanon
12 Armitage
13 Tait
14 Arscott
15 Brown.

Did you put Armitage at 12 just so the opposition inside centre could run over him? If so, good call.

Chjw131 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah might be a good exercise..

If Farrell starts at 10...then Twelvetrees or Eastmond should start at 12
If Burns starts at 10 then maybe Barritt initially at 12.

The only issue I have with that is why you'd not play an established pairing together? Burns and 36 have proven themselves to work well together and looked like and excellent combination during the summer tour. Incidentally Burns' defence was excellent, something which he has been widely criticised for. Really stand-out, perhaps thanks to a chat with Paul Gustard?

I think if we play Farrell at 10 it's the pragmatic wet rugby approach. Hence Barritt fits with him well and that as a combination of defensive rugby works well. We did see glimpses of something else from Farrell on the Lions tour and hopefully he can improve on that. Right now though i'd want Burns and 36 starting.

I hear what your saying, Barritt and Farrell play for Sarries and the other two for Glous so keep them together.

If thats the case id much prefer to go for Burns and 36...as i personally dont think either of their defence is remotely as bad as people keep making out, and offensively they are another level. Unproven? maybe yes...and they need to show form against the big 3...but Burns has played and won against the AB's...in his last 15 cameo he looked very good.

I have a sneaky suspicion its going to be Farrell at 10 with either of Barritt or 36 at 12.

Burns defended well vs a 3rd string Argentinian side? Bravo. Shame he couldn't do that throughout the season for Gloucester.

Geordiefalcon giving Burns huge credit for the NZ win would be the equivalent of me giving huge credit for Farrell in the 3rd Lions test win.

Both players came on when the match was basically won. Both had similar amount of game time.

Offensively on another level? Why is it that Gloucester don't actually score that many tries then? Less than Quins,Sarries,Leicester,Exeter,Bath,Wasps,Saints last season in the AP.

Low amount of try bonuses too - just 2 equal with LI and Sale.

Not even that many tries in the Amlin either. Getting outscored by most other teams in the competition (all the English ones too).

For supposedly one of the most exciting teams around I expect better. It's just strange how popular the Gloucester backs are yet are less effective than quite a few teams in the AP.

Its becoming comical Beshocked....how dare i prefer another player over a Saracens player eh? You need to chill out and stop chastising anyone who doesnt prefer a Saracens player mate...

I wasnt giving Burns credit for the NZ win...i was saying that he has faced them and didnt look out of place for the ten mins or what ever he was on. Merely an observation.

I think who plays in the AIs will depend largely on early season form, especially in Rounds 1 and 2 of the Heineken Cup. I reckon Lancaster will be more inclined to lean towards Farrell and Barritt starting at 10 and 12 for the first Autumn International, but if Burns and Twelvetrees could guide Gloucester to wins at home to Perpignan and away to Munster they could easily force their way into the side.

My choice would probably be Farrell at 10 with Twelvetrees and Tuilagi in the centres. I'd put Burns on the bench with Eastmond.

You know despite me saying i prefer Burns...i wouldnt actually have a problem with Farrell if he showed some offensive ability and not just an overeliance on his boot.

The main issue for me is Barritt. He's been a big player for us...and been hugely dependable..but there comes a time when you need to move forward and progress and we wont do that with him at 12.

Geordiefalcon I feel like I need to challenge the belief that Burns and 36 are the coming messiahs to save England from the tedious Farrell and Barritt as I have with other players.

Perhaps you are right. Perhaps Burns and 36 are the perfect fit at 10 and 12. Burns is the new Dan Carter and 36 is the new Will Greenwood.

Personally I need a lot of convincing. I think writing off Barritt and Farrell like you have would be a mistake.

It's not about Saracens players solely. They just happen to upset England fans the most with their presence in the team. They seem to be the only players whose positions are questioned.

I feel like you are trying to make the 15 minutes more important than it is. Why do you think Burns was brought on? It's a nice experience to be part of a 23 who beat the ABs but the job was done before he came on.

Farrell's attack looked good vs the Rebels

Playing v the rebels is the equivalent of playing the Argies 3rd string...

Beshocked...i dont think people do question Saracens players. They have welcomed their input for England.

People have queried for specific reasons...

Farrell needs to take off the Saracens shackles and show he can actually lead the England line offensively. Not just play a tactical game. Ive seen glimpses of it for England...but not large periods of it. I totally repsect hes only 20/21...he could be one hell of a prospect.

Mako has been a revelation this season for his club....but has been queried for his scrummaging...and i believe rightly so. However i have also acknowledged many times  that even for the Lions he was part of scrum at times which took the Aussies apart.  So he proved he is more than capable. He's a work in progress.

Ive defended Barritt many times...but now feel his time is up. We need more than a big defender there now...and it may be Tweletrees, it maybe Eastmond or whoever...im not championing anyone in particular.

Fraser, Kruis etc...others that could be players challenging for EPS spots are also welcomed.

People have also had a go at Croft, Youngs etc from Tigers, people question Attwood, Garvey etc of Bath...

Its not just Saracens...

Oh right so 2/3 out of the Leicester England contingent get criticised. Not quite the same as all of a club's contingent getting criticised. Who got the most criticism in the Lions 2nd test and England's loss to Wales for example?

Farrell's man of the match performance vs Scotland is conveniently ignored as is Barritt's try vs NZ (people even criticise him for that).

Do you think the proportion of criticism is equal? Certain players are forgiven if they have a poor game or two or more. Others aren't so lucky.

Garvey is not even on the England radar currently let alone criticised. Garvey is another of those players who you for example talk up but he hasn't delivered yet.

Attwood is like Burns and 36 a player with a lot to prove.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Playing v the rebels is the equivalent of playing the Argies 3rd string...

Beshocked...i dont think people do question Saracens players. They have welcomed their input for England.

People have queried for specific reasons...

Farrell needs to take off the Saracens shackles and show he can actually lead the England line offensively. Not just play a tactical game. Ive seen glimpses of it for England...but not large periods of it. I totally repsect hes only 20/21...he could be one hell of a prospect.

Mako has been a revelation this season for his club....but has been queried for his scrummaging...and i believe rightly so. However i have also acknowledged many times  that even for the Lions he was part of scrum at times which took the Aussies apart.  So he proved he is more than capable. He's a work in progress.

Ive defended Barritt many times...but now feel his time is up. We need more than a big defender there now...and it may be Tweletrees, it maybe Eastmond or whoever...im not championing anyone in particular.

Fraser, Kruis etc...others that could be players challenging for EPS spots are also welcomed.

People have also had a go at Croft, Youngs etc from Tigers, people question Attwood, Garvey etc of Bath...

Its not just Saracens...

Pretty much spot on I would say GF. I certainly don't have an issue with any Sarries players purely on the basis that they come from a rather stayed team. I would like to see Will Fraser in an England shirt asap to see what he has to offer.

Beshocked, damning Burns with feint praise for his defence should be beneath you. If you can't genuinely give the lad some credit for his attitude in defence as much as his tackle completion ratio then that's a rather poor show in my opinion. I even credited Gustard! It was an area of his game he clearly worked on improving and it paid off across two physical Test matches.

On the point about Gloucester's attacking back line, I would point out that statistics don't tell the full tale. Glaws have been struggling to find consistency in their game, particularly up front and with a new coach coming in a few weeks before the start of that season. If you genuinely hold the view, contrary to nearly all the domestic game, that Gloucester have a dearth of attacking talent, I would respectfully request you seek some assistance.

beshocked wrote:Oh right so 2/3 out of the Leicester England contingent get criticised. Not quite the same as all of a club's contingent getting criticised. Who got the most criticism in England's loss to Wales for example?

From memory Manu

Barritts try v NZ...which he very nearly messed up. But aside from that ive seen nothing else from him in an England shirt v tackling.

Well its only 2/3 of the Saracens England contingent that are getting questioned!! So its all even!

Yes garvey is one i have talked about...but he is a player that should have been in the England squad. We all know why he's not...because he obviously upset Mr Lancaster. But he too comes under criticsim about his ability...

Everyone on 606 have their players...noone just hits out at Saracens players...but then if so many people are saying the same things...then maybe theres something in it...

LondonTiger wrote:

beshocked wrote:Oh right so 2/3 out of the Leicester England contingent get criticised. Not quite the same as all of a club's contingent getting criticised. Who got the most criticism in  England's loss to Wales for example?

From memory Manu

Walsh surely!

Who is Walsh?

It happens with all Clubs, Beshocked, from Quins point of view calls to Robshaw to be dropped, claims that Marler is crap and Brown not being good enough because he wasn't flawless playing out of position all spring to mind. In the end, we will back our own players and if they are good enough they will prove us right.

beshocked wrote:Oh right so 2/3 out of the Leicester England contingent get criticised. Not quite the same as all of a club's contingent getting criticised. Who got the most criticism in the Lions 2nd test and England's loss to Wales for example?

Farrell's man of the match performance vs Scotland is conveniently ignored as is Barritt's try vs NZ (people even criticise him for that).

Do you think the proportion of criticism is equal? Certain players are forgiven if they have a poor game or two or more. Others aren't so lucky.

Garvey is not even on the England radar currently let alone criticised. Garvey is another of those players who you for example talk up but he hasn't delivered yet.

Attwood is like Burns and 36 a player with a lot to prove.

Give Barritt credit for taking that try fair enough. The fact that Davy Wilson could have strode through that gap is neither here nor there. As ever beshocked you are not looking beyond the simply black and white. Yes Barritt has played very well for England but he has not offered the distribution or running lines that other centres can/do.

He has operated as a quasi-flanker and done a superb job of it. Defence alone will not get us to No.1 in the world rankings it's as simple as that. Until Barritt can show as much in attack as he does in defence he will always come in for criticism.

Not sure LT, from googling him he looks like a surfer or a rock star of some sort, maybe an actor. I heard he played the role of a referee reasonably unconvincingly in the 6N, won't be getting an Oscar for that

Londontiger I criticised Manu but I am a lone voice. Most of the criticism was levelled at Ashton and Farrell.

chjw131

Okay I will give credit to Burns - well done. You showed you can defend in two matches vs a 3rd string Argentina.

Sounds like a pretty poor excuse for not scoring tries. You could level the same thing at Wasps - struggling to find consistency... struggling up front etc. Okay they haven't got a new coach but that hasn't stopped sides in the past.

Gloucester do have attacking talent but sure but I think it's a bit overstated. I expect more from players who have praise heaped on them so much.

I'd take the Saints,Quins,Sarries,Leicester,Bath and Wasps backlines over Gloucester to be honest. Perhaps the underrated Exeter one too and even London Irish give Gloucester's backs a run for their money.