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.

Man no wonder Healy spends the whole show ripping him. Ben stop taking the mind bending drugs!!!

Anyone that thinks Goode is a fullback needs their head checked. Probably England's weakest player in the last 6 nations. He was very poor IMO.

Kay is smoking something for sure.

For Australia.....

Wilson - better ball carrier than Cole
Hartley - the better scrummager at the moment.
Corbisiero
Parling
Launchbury
Wood (c)
Robshaw
Vunipola - fitter at the moment will give more to the cause in 60

with Cole, Youngs, Vunipola, Lawes, Morgan as impact bench players. (Wilson is required to give us SOME ball carrying impetus in the 1st half)

Youngs
Farrell
36
Eastmond?? (interchanging with 36 at second receiver)
Yarde
Ashton
Brown

with Dickson (form 9 right now), Burns, Foden on the bench.

That is our best lineup as things currently stand in my opinion.

If your looking for second rows who are on fire check out young Dom Barrow...he's been simply outstanding. If i were the saxons selectors id definately have a look at him.

If Attwood is injured then we will have Launchbury and parling at 4 & 5. And despite ideally wanting another brute in there...im happy with those two...they are quality.

Lets see how the players go in Europe...

With all the injuries...

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

9 Youngs
10 Farrell
11 Wade
12 Twelvetree
13 Tomkins (Is Lowe fit..hows he playing)
14 Yarde
15 Brown

Is George Lowe playing to his usual consitant best...?

GunsGerms wrote:Anyone that thinks Goode is a fullback needs their head checked. Probably England's weakest player in the last 6 nations. He was very poor IMO.

Not disagreeing but he did have one stand out game that I can remember  

Is Attwood out then? Really wanted to see how he went in these games

BamBam wrote:Is Attwood out then? Really wanted to see how he went in these games

Attwood has a busted rib. It will be amazing if he is back in time to prove form and fitness for the Australia match.

Please get used to the idea of a lot of first choicers being out to injury.

It happens every time and really should not come as any surprise.

Corisiero
Hartley
Cole
Launchberry
Parling
Vunipola (6)
Wood (7)
Dickinson
Care
Farrell
Yarde
Twelvetrees
Burrell
Ashton
Foden

Its not a particularyl bruigin second row and didnt Robshaw come off at the wknd? Because of that I've moved Billy to 6 and put wood at 7. Dickinson's been on fire and starts at 8 because of his better all round game than Billy's (who has played at 6 a bit for Sarries so far).

I would have put Burrell/Tuilagi in the centres but again, injury strikes so Twelvetrees takes the 12 shirt to distribute to the strike runners in the backline.

Does BV have the work rate for an international no.6? Hell of a player to have around the squad but there has to be a better 6.

In Attwood's probable absent - what about Slater in the second row. He generally looks good (I know he played in the back row Saturday), but he was OK in the line out and seems to have bulk?

Any thoughts?

CB

Is Dickinson and Ewers suddenly the new darlings of 606 like?

The one thing in the England team that is clear as day is the flankers...Wood at 6 and Robshaw at 7. Billy is an 8 not a 6. The battle for 8 should be between him and Morgan. And Morgan still has 4 weeks to get his big ol' pie eating a$$ in shape. Thats easily achieved...

cb wrote:In Attwood's probable absent - what about Slater in the second row. He generally looks good (I know he played in the back row Saturday), but he was OK in the line out and seems to have bulk?

Any thoughts?

CB

Its strange even the Tigers fans dont seem to think he's international standard. He certainly looked it when he was on fire the end of last season. Or was he just playing above himself?
How is he playing so far this season.

GeordieFalcon wrote: Is Dickinson and Ewers suddenly the new darlings of 606 like?

The one thing in the England team that is clear as day is the flankers...Wood at 6 and Robshaw at 7. Billy is an 8 not a 6. The battle for 8 should be between him and Morgan. And Morgan still has 4 weeks to get his big ol' pie eating a$$ in shape. Thats easily achieved...

Seems like it, I noticed that somebody has created a thread asking if Ben Morgan is past it...! I know they were playing Devil’s Advocate, but why do we do this to our players? Morgan is only 24 and was universally considered pretty much indispensible (when fit) 6 months ago. He can’t pull up trees every match, give him a break! It needs improving, but his fitness levels are better than they were. He just needs to keep putting the matches in.

Ewers is a fantastic talent and I would like to see him get a chance with the Saxons, if he wants it (This point needs to keep being made).

Dickinson I am not sure about, I’m all for including late developers (Nick Easter didn’t get his first cap until he was 29), but I’d like to see if he is more than a one trick pony.

GF it seems that way, I was just trying to be a bit out there than the usual. I just think England need a bit more ballast with their hands on the ball to get over the gainline consistently. They did that in Argentina (discussions about the agrentinian squad strength withstanding) and they got their undoubtedly talented backs into the game. There's a few teams whose pack can overpower theirs and I think thats their shortcoming at the moment. Not suggesting they ahve a weak pack, only that there is certainly more powerful ones around.

If you look at their probable pack:

Corbs
Youngs
Cole
Launchberry
Parling
Wood
Robshaw
Morgan/Billy V

thats what, 2 big carriers (Corbs & the 8) and a fair few guys who offer themselves consistently but arent renowned for making the hard yards, their skills are elsewhere. Thats what I was getting at (Youngs is dynamic but still not big enough overall in comparison to his competition at test level imo and thats why I would start Hartley - incidentally who was everywhere against the Tigers).

I totally agree...ideally id want 3 or even 4 carriers...balanced with the required grunt workrate and breakdwon savy.

Especially as we might be missing any kind of that in the backs...ie Tuilagi, Burrell out. Unless we recall banahan.

I actually rate Youngs as a good carrier aswell..he always seems to make his yards (infact i think he's a cracking player, he carriers impressively, is very good at the breakdown etc.he might be small but hes a pocket battleship and by all accounts he's coming to terms with the new laws very well)...

Also to be fair to him Parling is very good at hitting the gaps. Hes not your heavyweight carrier...but makes plenty of yards in slightly looser areas...like Launchbury.

Absolutely, I didnt want to take away from their strengths and I think mobility is a huge plus for Englands current pack, when they're moving it there aren't many who can shift about as much and as quickly as them...

Its just the sheer power I think they're lacking when other ideas arent working, its a fall back of all international teams suffering slow ball, get the big runners involved around the fringes, then midfield then look to exploit because those runners will have sucked in numerous defenders, I just dont see England having that option (consistently successfully anyway) when things arent going their way.

I'm still not sold on Youngs at test level, I dont know why, I've never seen him have a bad game (per se) but never really seen him stand out either, perhaps I've never got over Gareth Williams (blues and wales) and its left a lasting impression on smaller hookers abilities. All the stats I've seen would back up what you're saying though, but yeah, there's just something about him which doesnt impress me. 

GeordieFalcon wrote:I totally agree...ideally id want 3 or even 4 carriers...balanced with the required grunt workrate and breakdwon savy.

Especially as we might be missing any kind of that in the backs...ie Tuilagi, Burrell out. Unless we recall banahan.

I actually rate Youngs as a good carrier aswell..he always seems to make his yards (infact i think he's a cracking player, he carriers impressively, is very good at the breakdown etc.he might be small but hes a pocket battleship and by all accounts he's coming to terms with the new laws very well)...

Also to be fair to him Parling is very good at hitting the gaps. Hes not your heavyweight carrier...but makes plenty of yards in slightly looser areas...like Launchbury.

In order to advance under the current game plan I think we need to be aiming for half the pack to be good standard carriers. That means four players capable of taking the ball consistently beyond the gainline. Supporting them four players adding to the ruck competition and clearance/support. For me these four in the first category are: T Youngs, D Wilson, D Attwood, B Morgan (Bench - M Vunipola, R Webber, B Vunipola). In the second category A Corbisiero, G Parling, T Wood, C Robshaw (Bench - D Cole, J Launchbury, J Haskell).

These are just examples not definitive selections. Players like Courtney Lawes are interesting ones. He seems to combine some elements of both, his carrying has improved and he was a star performer against Tigers. His line-out is also not to be overlooked.

With Attwood out I'd be a big advocate for getting Slater on the bench but Lawes will get the nod if fit as he is already in the EPS.

1.Corbs 2.Youngs 3.Cole 4.Launchberry 5.Parling 6.Wood 7.Robshaw 8.Morgan
16.Webber 17.Vunipola 18.Wilson 19.Slater 20.Kvesic

The above starting pack would offer a huge workrate in attack which will be very important if we want to play at a fast pace and get the ball wide. Also the likes of Youngs, Launchberry, Wood and Robshaw will put in huge shifts defensively which will be equally important with a new look centre partnership who will likely be targeted.

The bench then offers bruising carriers across the entire tight 5 and then the versatility of Kvesic who (if he finds form) can offer link play between forwards and backs later in the game when it should open up a bit.

king_carlos wrote:With Attwood out I'd be a big advocate for getting Slater on the bench but Lawes will get the nod if fit as he is already in the EPS.

1.Corbs 2.Youngs 3.Cole 4.Launchberry 5.Parling 6.Wood 7.Robshaw 8.Morgan
16.Webber 17.Vunipola 18.Wilson 19.Slater 20.Kvesic

The above starting pack would offer a huge workrate in attack which will be very important if we want to play at a fast pace and get the ball wide. Also the likes of Youngs, Launchberry, Wood and Robshaw will put in huge shifts defensively which will be equally important with a new look centre partnership who will likely be targeted.

The bench then offers bruising carriers across the entire tight 5 and then the versatility of Kvesic who (if he finds form) can offer link play between forwards and backs later in the game when it should open up a bit.

My only problem with that pack KC is that there's only one consistent carrier (Morgan) and one reasonable carrier in there. Tom Youngs punches far above his weight in terms of carrying, his acceleration into the tackle literally turns him into a cannon ball. Corbs, whilst a decent carrier is not consistent in crossing the gainline. In the opening stages of a match when play tends to be tighter I just feel we need more carrying options.

Dont forget Youngs is still 16 stone...packing all that in to someone whos about 5'8 is some serious muscle. In contrast Hartley is about 6'1 and 17 st 4 i think. Probably only Lindsay is heavier...and he's not ready yet.

Youngs has been excellent since he came on to the scene...yes we all maybe worried a litttle about the size...indeed many blamed him and his battle with Hibbard as an example of where it hasnt worked...but erm Brian Moore was hardly huge and i dont remember people saying he was too small!

I think Youngs offers so much. Especially if he adapts to the new scrums...he always get sover the gainline, always hits the rucks fiercely and is very strong there and tackles well...

Is Attwood definitely out? I can't find anything that confirms either way.

Cumbrian wrote:Is Attwood definitely out?  I can't find anything that confirms either way.

Not to my knowledge. Is it a bruised rib or fully broken?

He has 'popped' a rib I heard. Either way he isn't included in the Amlin cup squad for Bath (although he could be added later) so won't be playing over the next few weekends.

Corbs Hartley Cole
Launchberry Parling
Wood Vunipola Robshaw (C)
Youngs
Farrell
Twelvetrees Eastmond
Yarde Foden Ashton

That's my revised starting 15.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Dont forget Youngs is still 16 stone...packing all that in to someone whos about 5'8 is some serious muscle. In contrast Hartley is about 6'1 and 17 st 4 i think. Probably only Lindsay is heavier...and he's not ready yet.

Youngs has been excellent since he came on to the scene...yes we all maybe worried a litttle about the size...indeed many blamed him and his battle with Hibbard as an example of where it hasnt worked...but erm Brian Moore was hardly huge and i dont remember people saying he was too small!

I think Youngs offers so much. Especially if he adapts to the new scrums...he always get sover the gainline, always hits the rucks fiercely and is very strong there and tackles well...

Agree that Youngs has been really great since he came on the scene. And although I think that Hartley is the better hooker technically, he is a yellow card walking.

From an outsiders point of view I would be far happier seeing Hartley line up against us in the 6 Nations than Youngs.

Unless Hartley sorts his discipline out hes a points machine for other teams.

Chjw131 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:With Attwood out I'd be a big advocate for getting Slater on the bench but Lawes will get the nod if fit as he is already in the EPS.

1.Corbs 2.Youngs 3.Cole 4.Launchberry 5.Parling 6.Wood 7.Robshaw 8.Morgan
16.Webber 17.Vunipola 18.Wilson 19.Slater 20.Kvesic

The above starting pack would offer a huge workrate in attack which will be very important if we want to play at a fast pace and get the ball wide. Also the likes of Youngs, Launchberry, Wood and Robshaw will put in huge shifts defensively which will be equally important with a new look centre partnership who will likely be targeted.

The bench then offers bruising carriers across the entire tight 5 and then the versatility of Kvesic who (if he finds form) can offer link play between forwards and backs later in the game when it should open up a bit.

My only problem with that pack KC is that there's only one consistent carrier (Morgan) and one reasonable carrier in there. Tom Youngs punches far above his weight in terms of carrying, his acceleration into the tackle literally turns him into a cannon ball. Corbs, whilst a decent carrier is not consistent in crossing the gainline. In the opening stages of a match when play tends to be tighter I just feel we need more carrying options.

Understand that worry completely Chjw131 and was very tempted to put Wilson in at TH to offer some more ball carrying but the pack picked is also indicative of how I want to see us play in the AI's.

I'm probably sounding like a broken record by now but for far too long we've had very little (to nil) ability to offer a threat outwide or down the blindside with our only real attacking option crash ball up the centre until Manu hopefully breaks through. Personally I'd like to see that remedied this autumn by getting raw pace back in the back three and creativity back in the midfield. For that sort of formula to work however you need a huge workrate from your forwards in the loose hence the pack chosen.

9.Youngs 10.Farrell 11.Yarde 12.Allen 13.Twelvetrees 14.Wade 15.Brown

I'd love to see the pack I picked earlier (possibly with Wilson at 3) paired with the above backline looking to put width on the ball and bring the back 3 into the game.

I can't see Allen being anything more than an average international.  He's a quality club player, does most things pretty well, but to be a good international you need that extra level of at least one of power/bulk/speed/footwork/passing & kicking game that he doesn't.

At the weekend we saw what happens when he comes up against a more physical opposite number, 4 missed tackles, no metres made and generally bumped off or tossed around.  That's only going to be more the case against the likes of Nonu & de Villiers.

Allen isn't playing as well as he was a couple of seasons back. I would have been happy to see if could have made the step up back then, but I don't think he is making the same case currently.

Allan is a solid club man. He just doesn't have that extra spark for Internationals.

It's really between 36 and Burrell at the moment, depending upon Burrell's injury anyway.

I think the set in stones are:

1 Corbs
2 Youngs
3
4 Parling
5 Launchbury
6 Wood
7 Robshaw
8

9 Youngs
10 Farrell
11
12 Twelvetrees
13
14
15 Brown

Burrel's come on leaps and bounds over last season and the start of this and is improving all the time. Not sure if he's ready right now but he's deffo going to be soon.

The centre conundrum depresses me. Even 36 didn't convince for Gloucester. I know there's the whole pack being beaten up excuse but that hasn't stopped Wade or Yarde on the wings for Wasps and London Irish respectively.

Eastmond and Joseph have not convinced me they are the answer in the centres.

If Burrell is fit I would pick him at either 12 or 13.

I am hoping Tomkins can find some form.

I would look at

12.36
13.Tomkins

or

12.36
13.Burrell (if Burrell is fit)

or

12.Burrell (if fit)
13.Tomkins

Looking forward with some optimisim………I hope that the team for the RWC2015 will look like this.

There is a degree of extrapolation and hope in this of course. Will Corb's knee hold out? Will Vunipola M develop his scrummaging skills to supercede Corb's anyway? Will Vunipola B develop the handling skills to usurp Morgan?

I think that if things go well we could be looking good to at least make the semis of RWC2015 .

Where I have more than one option I am either unsure or it’s a horses for courses selection issue.

Wilson
Youngs
Corbs/Vunipola
Attwood
Launchbury
Wood/Robshaw
Fraser
Vunipola
Youngs
Ford/Farrell/Burns
Burrell
Tuilagi
Yarde
Wade
Daly/Foden/Brown

Caveat : I was delighted to see that Lancaster has been talking about the importance of upskilling our players. Something that I have carped on about on these pages too much for people's liking I'll wager.

Unless and until all our players improve their skill levels and game awareness by at least 25% we will be undermined no matter the selection.

I must admit that I don't understand why people seem intent on swapping Dan Cole for David Wilson. In my opinion Cole is one of the best tightheads in the world and the first name on the team sheet. Wilson is doing well at club level but never really set the world alight in his previous 28 caps. What are you guys seeing in him that I am not?

Cumbrian wrote:I must admit that I don't understand why people seem intent on swapping Dan Cole for David Wilson. In my opinion Cole is one of the best tightheads in the world and the first name on the team sheet.  Wilson is doing well at club level but never really set the world alight in his previous 28 caps.  What are you guys seeing in him that I am not?

Ball carrying. See above. Cole is a terrific TH and were lucky. Cole is also a good tackler and a good jackall.

But we need to import ball carrying into our current pack.

My pack above for RWC would be ok with Cole instead of Wilson but only because i have enough ball carrying cover.

I am also interested in trying to understand what Burrell offers above 36

lostinwales wrote:I am also interested in trying to understand what Burrell offers above 36

36 will be there or thereabouts and is currently ahead of Burrell

I am optimistically projecting forward to 2015

If burrell develops well then he will offer everything that 36 currently does + more power

lostinwales Burrell offers good form.

Cumbrian shame Cole couldn't show he was one of the best tight heads in the world vs Wales!

I feel like Cole has dodged a lot of criticism despite having a lacklustre 6 nations in my opinion.

Triangulation wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:I must admit that I don't understand why people seem intent on swapping Dan Cole for David Wilson. In my opinion Cole is one of the best tightheads in the world and the first name on the team sheet.  Wilson is doing well at club level but never really set the world alight in his previous 28 caps.  What are you guys seeing in him that I am not?

Ball carrying. See above. Cole is a terrific TH and were lucky. Cole is also a good tackler and a good jackall.

But we need to import ball carrying into our current pack.

My pack above for RWC would be ok with Cole instead of Wilson but only because i have enough ball carrying cover.

I think we're in danger of becoming carried away with the ball carrier issue. It's importance shouldn't be understated but I think other areas of the pack can cope with it. I’m probably old-fashioned, but I want the tight head prop to entirely focus on propping, he is the cornerstone of the pack and vital to the team. He should defend the fringes of the ruck and any carrying he does is a bonus. It’s an area of the game I would like Corbisiero to bring more to the fore actually. Indeed at one time he was seen as a very strong carrier (a bit like Marler) although that has gone off the boil as their scrimmaging has improved.

beshocked wrote:lostinwales Burrell offers good form.

Cumbrian shame Cole couldn't show he was one of the best tight heads in the world vs Wales!

I feel like Cole has dodged a lot of criticism despite having a lacklustre 6 nations in my opinion.

I think that was down to a number of factors. He suffered from having two quite lightweight second rows behind him. Marler still isn’t the most technical strong scrummager on the other side and Walsh completely ignored Welsh infringements. I remember seeing Adam Jones have absolutely no binding at one point and the penalty went against us!

Sounds like Lancaster might be planning a Twelvetrees & Burrell centre combination.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/10365573/England-coach-Stuart-Lancaster-backs-Chris-Robshaw-to-deliver.html

Launchbury and Parling are the lightweight 2nd rows you are referring to. The two that many want to see start in the AIs! Plus of course Tom Youngs at hooker - another player most want to see start.

Launchbury is 6,6 and 115kg

Parling is 6,6 and 114kg.


Dave Attwood - the player many think would give us more power is 118kg.

Is it that much a difference?

Come now, you know as well as I do that weight doesn't always equate to power (especially when so many stats are fudged). For instance, Nick Kennedy is listed as being heavier than both of them, who do you think has more power? Like I said, I think it was a combination of factors. For instance, I think the fact that (in my opinion) they are lightweight (pushing power wise) will be felt much less when you have a superior scrummager in Corbisiero on the other side.

beshocked wrote:Launchbury and Parling are the lightweight 2nd rows you are referring to. The two that many want to see start in the AIs! Plus of course Tom Youngs at hooker - another player most want to see start.

Launchbury is 6,6 and 115kg - 18st 1

Parling is 6,6 and 114kg. - 17st 9

Dave Attwood - the player many think would give us more power is 118kg.

Is it that much a difference?

Beshocked, i still think those weights are fairly lightweight in todays heavyweight game. But again.... as mentioned weight doesnt really mean lot when its a few KGs difference.

They are athletic mobile second rows...i think launchbury could be World Class...BUT to me...and its only my opinion of course neither are a Johnson, or a Botha, or a Simon Shaw or even a Dean richards type player etc...a player who just has that rediculous dumb strength in the tight to make a difference...and i d like to see one of those alongside a guy like that.

Do we have a guy like that at the minute...im not sure...Attwood possibly..need to see more...who else ?

Cumbrian wrote:

Triangulation wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:I must admit that I don't understand why people seem intent on swapping Dan Cole for David Wilson. In my opinion Cole is one of the best tightheads in the world and the first name on the team sheet.  Wilson is doing well at club level but never really set the world alight in his previous 28 caps.  What are you guys seeing in him that I am not?

Ball carrying. See above. Cole is a terrific TH and were lucky. Cole is also a good tackler and a good jackall.

But we need to import ball carrying into our current pack.

My pack above for RWC would be ok with Cole instead of Wilson but only because i have enough ball carrying cover.

I think we're in danger of becoming carried away with the ball carrier issue.   It's importance shouldn't be understated but I think other areas of the pack can cope with it.  I’m probably old-fashioned, but I want the tight head prop to entirely focus on propping, he is the cornerstone of the pack and vital to the team.  He should defend the fringes of the ruck and any carrying he does is a bonus.  It’s an area of the game I would like Corbisiero to bring more to the fore actually. Indeed at one time he was seen as a very strong carrier (a bit like Marler) although that has gone off the boil as their scrimmaging has improved.

Cumbrian

I disagree that were too carried away with it. Our great packs circa 2000-2003 had a balance of ball carriers and scrappers/set piece specialists and our current pack is short of ball carrying power.

We need a correction. I think Lancaster knows this now and will make that correction permanent.

Re Wilson over Cole in 2015 - i may not have put it clearly enough. Of course for our props scrummaging is no.1 selection criteria and i'd only have Wilson if his scrummaging was at least as good as Cole's AND he brought the rest of his A game to the party.

If you're thinking i expect a lot from England props you're right.

I do.

We have a long tradition of excellent scrummaging and ball carrying props.

I think the problem is the type of carriers we are missing not the amount.

Parling, Launchbury, Youngs, (Wood to a degree) are very capable carriers and clearly do alot of work in that area for England, though I dont think Robshaw is a great carrier...better linkman.

What i think we need though is that heavy duty carrier...the guy that gets through a few yards in heavy traffic...the guy that gets us that bit of momentum when there is nothing on and a brick wall defence lined up. The likes of Morgan, Both Vunipolas are that type.

Brown has done that every game he has had so far!

mystiroakey wrote:Brown has done that every game he has had so far!

Brown for no.8 then - sorted!

Thats true Mystiroakey, and Brown would be my 15 without question. Even from wing he outplayed most of the other backs...he must have his chance these AI's.