Starting England XV for the november internationals.

First topic message reminder :

Based on current form in the premiership, what would your ideal starting XV look like?
Mine would be

Corbs
Hartley
Cole
Attwood
Parling
Wood
Robshaw
Vunipola
youngs
Burns
twelvetrees
Tuilagi
Strettle
Yarde
Brown.

1. Corbisiero
2. Hartley - Youngs before the season, but Hartley has looked great; think Lancaster will keep him on the naughty step a while longer though
3. Cole
4. Launchbury
5. Parling
6. Wood
7. Robshaw
8. Vunipola - Morgan before the season, but he isn't in form at the moment
9. Care - just looking a bit sharper right now
10. Farrell
11. Yarde
12. Twelvetrees
13. Burrell - played plenty of 13 and keen to see what he can bring given his form and Tomkins' injury; Joseph still not at his best for me
14. Ashton/Wade - Wade before the season, but Ashton has stepped up and Wade not quite in top gear yet
15. Brown

16. Youngs
17. Vunipola - good impact player; Marler looking better this season, not too far behind
18. Wilson - really pushing Cole on current form, wouldn't mind seeing him start
19. Attwood
20. Kvesic - can cover the whole backrow if needed and adds good breakdown ability from the bench should Australia bring their A-game there
21. Youngs
22. Burns
23. Eastmond - could start 13, but prefer him to come on as impact for the first match at least, plus covers most of the backline

When has Burrell played lots of 13? I can't remember him playing anywhere other than 12.

formerly known as Sam wrote:When has Burrell played lots of 13? I can't remember him playing anywhere other than 12.

Pretty much the whole of his career prior to joining Saints was at 13.  He played at 13 off the bench a few times for Saints last season.  He also played 13 for England outside Eastmond against the CONSUR XV in the summer.

Yeah I thought he was a 13 prior to joining saints - though not sure he made much of an impression while at Leeds or Sale.

As to the full lineup - well I will reserve judgement till after the two upcoming European rounds. I do suspect though that Lancaster will use loyalty ahead of form in any case where the decision is close. Thuis those who ended the 6Ns will be in the box-seat unless the contenders are performing much better.

XV That started against Wales:

Marler
Youngs
Cole
Launchbury
Parling
Croft
Robshaw
Wood

Youngs
Farrell
Brown
Barritt
Tuilagi
Ashton
Goode

Having done that I realise just how many changes there will actually be. Those in bold (imo) are unlikely to play, while two more (Wood & Brown) will probably play but in different positions. Meanwhile those in italics are players who I feel could be at risk of not starting. So that could mean we lineup against Australia with just 2 of the last 6Ns team in the same positions.


Lordy.

Difficult decision to make in regards to Morgan for example. He's played well for England but his form for Gloucester has been poor. He doesn't look match fit.

In contrast you have the unproven at international level Billy Vunipola playing well at club level.

Lots of really tough decisions in my opinion.

Cole vs Wilson

Youngs vs Hartley

The 2nd row situation

Robshaw vs Ksevic - perhaps even a late charge from Fraser

Morgan vs Billy

Care vs Youngs

Farrell vs Burns

The 13 shirt

Ashton vs Wade

Foden vs Brown


Only players I would say are truly nailed on are Corbisiero,Wood,36 and Yarde at the moment.

LT
Theres quite a difference between espically the back row...:
1 Marler
2 Youngs
3 Cole
4 Launchbury
5 Parling
6 Croft
7 Robshaw
8 Wood

and

1 Corbs
2 Youngs
3 Cole
4 Parling
5 Launchbury /Attwood
6 Wood
7 Robshaw
8 Morgan / Vunipola

beshocked wrote:Difficult decision to make in regards to Morgan for example. He's played well for England but his form for Gloucester has been poor. He doesn't look match fit.

In contrast you have the unproven at international level Billy Vunipola playing well at club level.

Lots of really tough decisions in my opinion.

Cole vs Wilson

Youngs vs Hartley

The 2nd row situation

Robshaw vs Ksevic - perhaps even a late charge from Fraser

Morgan vs Billy

Care vs Youngs

Farrell vs Burns

The 13 shirt

Ashton vs Wade

Foden vs Brown


Only players I would say are truly nailed on are Corbisiero,Wood,36 and Yarde at the moment.

That just about sums it up I think beshocked. I would agree with those four being nailed on. Barring that I think we're only dealing in likelihoods. Ie: Youngs is likely to start ahead of Care but certainly nowhere near guaranteed.

There are two factors which will act as a bit of a curve-ball in this upcoming selection I feel. One is Lancs' stated intentions to increase the attacking capability and his promotion of the likes of Attwood straight into the EPS from outside both squads. Does that hint at a realisation of more power in the pack and more potency out wide?

The second is the opportunity some players will have over others being in the Heineken Cup. Those matches will be really closely scrutinised in my eyes and certainly gives the likes of Cole and Tomkins some distinct advantages over their rivals for that spot. I hear Tomkins is back for Sarries this w/end, i'd like to see him and 36 in the midfield with Eastmond taking the bench spot.

Is Fraser near coming back yet?

I'd say Lancaster is more likely to go with what he knows, especially at the start.

1. Corbs 2. T Youngs 3. Cole 4. Launchbury 5. Parling 6. Wood 7. Robshaw 8. Morgan
9. B Youngs 10. Farrell 11. Ashton 12. Twelvetrees 13. Burrell 14. Wade 15. Brown
16. Hartley 17. Wilson 18. M Vunipola 19. Lawes 20. B Vunipola 21. Care 22. Flood 23. Goode

I would look to bring Yarde, Attwood, Burns and Foden into the 23 for Ashton, Lawes, Flood and Goode, and then there are some interesting battles for starting shirts.

Beshocked - would you start Fraser ahead of Burger? Burger's in cracking form, but as was Fraser before he got injured. Genuinely interested to hear your thoughts

Rotation?

Bathite Fraser needs a chance to show what he can do. Wasps at home as a good time as any. I believe he will start.

Plus Burger has been taking a beating already this season with his head being stamped on and his hair being pulled. A week's rest would help him. He's been great but his physical style means injury could be just around the corner.

Also flankers do seem to have the worst luck with injury: e.g. Croft and Ferris.

Chequeredjersey rotation indeed.

beshocked wrote:Bathite Fraser needs a chance to show what he can do. Wasps at home as a good time as any. I believe he will start.

Plus Burger has been taking a beating already this season with his head being stamped on and his hair being pulled. A week's rest would help him. He's been great but his physical style means injury could be just around the corner.

Also flankers do seem to have the worst luck with injury: e.g. Croft and Ferris.

Chequeredjersey rotation indeed.

The stamp didn't cause any injury and a hair pull!?! Come on man, the lads a rock hard African flanker, not Arjen Robben.

So, who would you actually start as first choice then assuming both were fit.

Bathite he might be rock hard mentally but his body isn't literally rock - it still takes a battering like everyone's. If you see him after matches he looks properly battered. Of course he's a tough bloke but the way he plays he needs a bit of time to recover occasionally.

It depends whether Fraser shows the same form of last season.

If you are saying Burger's form of this season vs Fraser's of last season that's a tough one.

From an England point of view obviously we'd all like to see Fraser start. If he can step back into form as Ed Slater did for Tigers this season he's got an outside chance of making the England squad. What impressed me was not just his excellent breakdown skills but some strong carrying for a chap his size.

Bathite wrote:The stamp didn't cause any injury and a hair pull!?! Come on man, the lads a rock hard African flanker, not Arjen Robben.

Yeah, but if Robben was pulled by the hair, there is a real risk of something more precious being grabbed too.

Ah i genuinely cant watch football now. Tried to watch the barcelona v Celtic match and had to switch it off the diving and play acting was just horrific...

Well lots of chat on here about the need for ball carrying forwards.

I have long advocated this and i have long cited the example of the great English packs circa 2000-2003. They always seemed to have a number of good ball carriers.

How or why did we suddenly forget about that?

Bit late so suddenly rush them into the pack now though isn't it?

We're in trouble this AIs and beyond.

Triangulation wrote:

Well lots of chat on here about the need for ball carrying forwards.

I have long advocated this and i have long cited the example of the great English packs circa 2000-2003. They always seemed to have a number of good ball carriers.

How or why did we suddenly forget about that?

Bit late so suddenly rush them into the pack now though isn't it?

We're in trouble this AIs and beyond.

I don't think we did forget about it, just that the team as a whole wasn't very good. At varying times in the dark ages we had Simon Shaw, Andrew Sheridan, Steve Thompson and Nick Easter who were all pretty reasonable carriers. Recently we've had some fairly unbalanced packs though. Hopefully it will be rectified.

00 - 03 cycle ... Dillaglio, Thompson, Vickery.

04 - 07 cycle ... Corry, Easter, Dillaglio, Vickery.

08 - 11 cycle .... Easter & Haskell at a stretch???

I think Tri you have a point about the 08-11 era but England have T Youngs, Launchbery, Morgan who are now good carriers.

At varying times in the dark ages we had Simon Shaw, Andrew Sheridan, Steve Thompson and Nick Easter who were all pretty reasonable carriers

Chjw, All but him id agree with. Sheridan frustrated me so much. His carrying could have been excellent but for me it always seemed like he was heading to the ground before he's even hit the contact. Imagine if he'd actually put his full force into smashing the opposition back.

Indeed i think that is one of Englands big problems. Is it ingrained from youth training or what...i dont know. Look at the PI's, the SA's etc they speed up into the collision trying to get beyond and through the opposition. The smash them as hard as they can......How often do you see our guys slowing down or going to ground at the point of impact. Its very frustrating.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

At varying times in the dark ages we had Simon Shaw, Andrew Sheridan, Steve Thompson and Nick Easter who were all pretty reasonable carriers

Chjw, All but him id agree with. Sheridan frustrated me so much. His carrying could have been excellent but for me it always seemed like he was heading to the ground before he's even hit the contact. Imagine if he'd actually put his full force into smashing the opposition back.

Indeed i think that is one of Englands big problems. Is it ingrained from youth training or what...i dont know. Look at the PI's, the SA's etc they speed up into the collision trying to get beyond and through the opposition. The smash them as hard as they can......How often do you see our guys slowing down or going to ground at the point of impact. Its very frustrating.

+1

and then the support doing similarly in bridging over the ball rather than clearing through the ruck and dominating the key space which is a metre or 2 BEYOND the ball

You're right there Geordie... came from the school of Johnson in terms of ball carrying... no real finesse, no look to offload, just take in and set up. Never looked like he was planning where to hit someone.... rather just build up max. speed like a unguided missile.

Schalk Burger used to do the same, he was/is just a maniac with the ball in hand mind... remember Tuilagi vs. Burger in 07.... I still have nightmares about that game.

I look at England though and I think with the Vunipola brothers, T Youngs, Launchbury, Morgan they have an excellent crop of carriers in the tight.... and also set piece experts like Corbisiero, Parling, Wood & Croft.

Youngs, Cole  are decent at the ruck but they need a class operator to help them... for me its now the one thing lacking from making them a world class outfit.

Given many seem to be struggling to fill the 13 shirt rather than the 12 shirt would anyone be opposed to putting Twelvetrees at outside with Eastmond or Allen at inside?

12.Eastmond or Allen
13.Twelvetrees

Whichever combination played they'd end up interchanging throughout the match but with Tuilagi and Tomkins injured, Joseph struggling for form (still) and Burrell, Daly, Lowe, Trinder, etc all either out of form, lacking all round skills or playing other positions it's worth thinking about IMO.

Personally I like the look of 12.Allen 13.Twelvetrees. With Tuilagi out most people are in agreement we need to start getting the ball outwide and using the back three more. Those two would ensure the ball got to the wider channels but could also offer defensive solidity and good line breaking ability themselves.

9.Youngs 10.Farrell 11.Yarde 12.Allen 13.Twelvetrees 14.Wade 15.Brown
21.Care 22.Burns 23.Eastmond

Allen's played a bit at 13 hasn't he? Would rather have an actual 13 there than 36 or Allen though

Allen has played 13 yes Chequered. He has this season alongside Bowden in fact if I'm not mistaken.

Twelvetrees has played a bit there as well though and has the bulk to carry into heavy traffic where necessary.

If we had a wealth of 13's available I'd agree with you but with Tuilagi out the cupboard becomes fairly bare at the minute for varying reasons:

Tuilagi and Tomkins - injured

Joseph - been struggling for form long term now and seems to have lost some of the spark. I'd back him to refind it if given time but being thrown into a new look centre partnership in international rugby isn't the place for that IMO.

Daly - Being played at 15 by Wasps, though I rate him very highly and would like him in the EPS come the AI's.

Lowe and Trinder - Two players I rate really highly but both have had injury problems plus both seem to be seen lacking in certain areas for test rugby. In current form I wouldn't complain about Trinder being in the EPS and if Lowe can get back to where he was a season ago I'd see it the same way.

EPS - Twelvetrees, Eastmond, Allen + One of Daly, Lowe or Trinder

With Manu and Barritt out the above would be my choice for the EPS with form separating the final three.

I think most people agree Twelvetrees looks like he could be the longterm answer at 12.  That being the case I don't think we should be messing him around and playing him out of position as we look to settle him in the side.  It's key that these matches against serious opposition are used to develop a relationship with Farrell and how they combine to orchestrate the rest of the backline.

Twelvetrees must play 12, with 13 taken by either Tomkins, Burrell, Eastmond or Joseph from the EPS & Saxons.  Tomkins is back for Saracens this weekend and has the HC matches to show what form he is in.  Burrell is in good form, has definitely added to his game this season and can play 13.  Eastmond looked good at the beginning of the season, back last weekend and has a few games now to fully shake off his injury (if fit I think Lancaster will go with him as he's the only other centre in the original EPS and I think they were considering him as a 13).  Joseph isn't in the form he showed a couple of seasons back, but is showing signs of starting to get back (heard he had a good game last weekend).

I am, I guess, in the minority in being very unsure if Billy Twelvetrees is a long term answer. Having seen quite a lot of him, I accept that there are some real talents in his arsenal, but at the same time there are serious flaws that are more than just easy to fix technique.

Instinctively in attack he looks to show and go making him predictable, while in defence he is always looking to the outside and heavily vulnerable to runners changing direction. I am not sure that these are things that can now be fixed, as they are part of who he is.

his kicking (importantly from hand as well as off the tee, which is not important) was always long but often inaccurate - I suspect that has been worked on. He has a godd long, flat pass - but not the best hands when in and around contact - not great for someone who likes to run a lot.

Of course this may be the bitterness of the one-eyed tiger, distraught at losing a player. To try and put that into context, I would like to say that I still believe that George Ford is the long term answer at 10.

king carlos I read that Tomkins is back from injury though I don't know if he's the answer at 13 though if he was played I could see him utilising the back three better than Manu.

Londontiger we'll have to see what 36 will do. It's likely he'll get his chance now.

Is George Ford big enough? I could see opposition teams mercilessly targeting him.

I stand to be put right by him being selected and showing up well, but for me Tomkins is not international class. He is an excellent Premiership performer with a good offloading game, but when I watch him I never get the feeling that he can go up a level.

I would prefer to see Eastmond looked at in the 13 jersey in the absence of Manu.

Ozzy3213 you can't know someone is not international class unless you try them out.

Morgan for example has looked better for England than he has for Gloucester.

Eastmond is also a small player. I would be worried that he would be thrown around like a rag doll.

At least Tomkins looks to have the physical attributes of a potential international level 13. 6,3 almost 16st.

+1

and then the support doing similarly in bridging over the ball rather than clearing through the ruck and dominating the key space which is a metre or 2 BEYOND the ball.

Triangulation....exactly, the SH teams are fantastic at this...they are brutal...clearing out and through. One of the reasons we beat the Kiwis last year (forgetting any virus discussions) was that we were brutal and aggressive in those situations. Carrying the ball at pace with intent to get beyond the gainline...clearing the rucks with no regard for safety...just clearing anyone in the way out.
Thats what i want to see this AI..

FA,

I think we do have the players now that are looking to offload etc and thats really great to see. Before I was refering to our players simply making the hard yards.

Look at Alberts, Sean O'brien, etc etc some of the premier carriers in the game...they hit the the collisions at pace...trying to run through the defenders...its almost like some of our guys past and present have slowed down going in to contact. It makes it so much easier for the defenders.

Size is not everything beshocked and does not necessarily equate to power, which is more important at international level. Tomkins lacks the pace to be really dynamic and just doesn't inspire me to believe that he would cut it at the top level. As I said I do stand to be corrected if of course he makes it.

Eastmond on the other hand, whilst small, is dynamic and hits with power in both attack and defence. He also has creativity and unpredictability in his armoury which I don't see from Tomkins.

Morgan has been gash for Gloucester this season no question, but prior to England selection I, and I think most people had seen enough from him at club level to believe that he could make an impact on the big stage.

I honestly don't think George Ford's size is an issue.  His defence seems fine and I haven't seen him overtly exposed in this respect. Lets face it,  he is not THAT much smaller than some of the other guys out there like Jonny Wilkinson,  Ian Madigan, Dan Biggar, Quade Cooper or Colin Slade.  Indeed Aaron Cruden makes Ford look like a physical Behemoth!

Saying that,  I still don't think he is ready for full international rugby; especially considering we have plenty of good options at the moment.  Let him spend a season (or even two! He is only 20...) proving himself in the Premiership and Saxons.

Ozzy3123 I really don't think Tomkins lacks pace. He doesn't make flashy breaks but he is effective. He scored a good try vs Gloucester for example and in the same game put good width on the ball for the 2nd. I think he's good at bringing his wingers into the game.

Cumbrian perhaps you are right about Ford.

Tomkins deserves his chance if fit. Eastmond must surely be in direct competition with Twelvetrees for the 12 shirt.

It depends on what Lancs wants though. If he wants a near enough replacement for Tuilagis bludgeoning style...then perhaps it'll be Burrell, whos had a good start to the season anyway.

Hasn't Burrell been playing at 12 too?

Surely the 13 options are Joseph,Tomkins,Trinder and Lowe?

Of them I would say Tomkins is currently the frontrunner.

Geordiefalcon surely someone who can bring the back three more into the game is a better bet.

Tuilagi is an excellent player but I feel like for England he hasn't utilised the back three well enough. The exception was of course the NZ game.

BS,

By all accounts Burrell has played quite a bit of 13.

I prefer a flyer / playmaker at 13 (Guscott) and a powerhouse at 12 (Gibbs / Roberts)

Lowe always impresses me. Eastmond might be the answer.
But im not averse to having Tomkins in there if he's fit and on form...acting like a pivot.

beshocked wrote:Hasn't Burrell been playing at 12 too?

Surely the 13 options are Joseph,Tomkins,Trinder and Lowe?

Of them I would say Tomkins is currently the frontrunner.

Geordiefalcon surely someone who can bring the back three more into the game is a better bet.

Tuilagi is an excellent player but I feel like for England he hasn't utilised the back three well enough. The exception was of course the NZ game.

It also depends on the back 3. If you think about last year, Brown was getting the ball a lot, somehow, but Goode only rarely seemed to come into the line. Ashton didnt seem to see much of the ball at all. I am hoping the back 3 this time around will be much more proactive

So basically the consensus on 13 is:

Tomkins is the front runner for the 13 jumper but is slow, lacks power for his size, lacks pace and is really just another middling player.

While the other options are too small and are all of roughly equal ability and no one can really say who it will be or why. No one has made an unanswerable case for 13.

Conveniently nothing has been said about the fact that our midfield combination will now be makeshift in attack and almost more importantly in defence

But that we're somehow going to beat the best side in the world at exploiting defensive weakness and turning over ineffective attack…..theWallabies and that in spite of lacking ball carrying forward power were going to beat Argentina

Great.

Blimey Tri,

And I am accused of being a pessimist.

Triangulation if you take Ozzy's opinion on Tomkins as gospel then yes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ALywws4aC4

Don't think that's the consensus at all. Are you really an England fan or someone like Glorious?

Triangulation wrote:
So basically the consensus on 13 is:

Tomkins is the front runner for the 13 jumper but is slow, lacks power for his size, lacks pace and is really just another middling player.

While the other options are too small and are all of roughly equal ability and no one can really say who it will be or why. No one has made an unanswerable case for 13.

Conveniently nothing has been said about the fact that our midfield combination will now be makeshift in attack and almost more importantly in defence

But that we're somehow going to beat the best side in the world at exploiting defensive weakness and turning over ineffective attack…..theWallabies and that in spite of lacking ball carrying forward power were going to beat Argentina

Great.

"Consensus" implies that someone other than you would have to voice that opinion...

No 7&1/2 wrote:Don't think that's the consensus at all. Are you really an England fan or someone like Glorious?

So what are you saying then - what is the consensus?

Or is there no consensus because as i said above the options at 13 are all quite underwhelming in equal measure.

I'm a passionate supporter of England. That is why i care so much.

What an impertinent question just because you don't agree with me.

Triangulation wrote:
So basically the consensus on 13 is:

Tomkins is the front runner for the 13 jumper but is slow, lacks power for his size, lacks pace and is really just another middling player.

While the other options are too small and are all of roughly equal ability and no one can really say who it will be or why. No one has made an unanswerable case for 13.

Conveniently nothing has been said about the fact that our midfield combination will now be makeshift in attack and almost more importantly in defence

But that we're somehow going to beat the best side in the world at exploiting defensive weakness and turning over ineffective attack…..theWallabies and that in spite of lacking ball carrying forward power were going to beat Argentina

Great.

In 2011 maybe the Wallabies could have fitted that criteria. Right now? I assume you are blind

Triangulation wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Don't think that's the consensus at all. Are you really an England fan or someone like Glorious?

So what are you saying then - what is the consensus?

Or is there no consensus because as i said above the options at 13 are all quite underwhelming in equal measure.

I'm a passionate supporter of England. That is why i care so much.

What an impertinent question just because you don't agree with me.

Because it's a strangely overly negative outlook you have. Most have discounted Tomkins and Eastmond due to being unsure about whether they're fit. that leaves choices around Joseph (not on form), Burrell very much on form and Trinder looking great going forward. A consensus would be everyone agreeing not taking any individuals negatives adding them together and claiming that everyone agrees with this.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Triangulation wrote:
So basically the consensus on 13 is:

Tomkins is the front runner for the 13 jumper but is slow, lacks power for his size, lacks pace and is really just another middling player.

While the other options are too small and are all of roughly equal ability and no one can really say who it will be or why. No one has made an unanswerable case for 13.

Conveniently nothing has been said about the fact that our midfield combination will now be makeshift in attack and almost more importantly in defence

But that we're somehow going to beat the best side in the world at exploiting defensive weakness and turning over ineffective attack…..theWallabies and that in spite of lacking ball carrying forward power were going to beat Argentina

Great.

"Consensus" implies that someone other than you would have to voice that opinion...

No. I didnt actually say any of those things about Tomkins.

Im trying to summarise about 100 opinions above.

I think that i have accurately summarised the position arrived at when you mesh all those opinions together.

But whatever. If you disagree then share with the group -

who has made an unanswerable case for 13 in tuilagi's absence?

Triangulation I get the impression you don't watch much club rugby.

None of the 13 options are as good as Manu but I wouldn't say they are underwhelming.

We'll have more of an idea closer to the AIs.