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.

Doesnt Attwood have a rib problem?

Itll be Launchbury and Parling..

Hartley probably has the best darts of any hooker in the mix, I just don't rate him highly at other aspect.

* subject to injuries. Attwood is making a return sometime soon and before the Cook Cup but you might be right.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Hartley probably has the best darts of any hooker in the mix, I just don't rate him highly at other aspect.

I was going to say that, for all his faults you can usually rely on Harley to hit his man pretty much every time. It's the strongest part of his game IMO.

Really? I don't remember Hartley being any better than Youngs at the lineout in the 6 nations but perhaps I am wrong. He has done well for Saints in that area though I should add.

beshocked wrote:Really? I don't remember Hartley being any better than Youngs at the lineout in the 6 nations but perhaps I am wrong. He has done well for Saints in that area though I should add.

I think the problem with Youngs is that mostly he is good, but certainly was prone to the odd spell where he would throw some real stinkers. From what I can remember this was at least partially due to how his body responds to the strains of being in the scrum, which you would hope will improve year on year with more experience.

beshocked

My impression of Hartley's throwing is similar to yours - can have spells where he is very solid, but then can miss his man 3 in a row, so is not significantly better or worse than Youngs (who was widely considered to be the most secure of the Lions hookers in this regard).

Hartley has the bulk and does good work in the tight, although he does have discipline and self-control issues. Early season accounts were that he was offering more in open play and carrying better. My concern always in this regard is that he passes about as frequently as Jason Leonard scored international tries, so once he has his hands on the ball you can be certain it's going to ground a couple of metres further. Not always a bad thing, but being able to slip an effective off-load would be a skill he should add to his game.

Obviously Youngs offers much more as a ball carrier and because of his previous incarnation in the centre his handling skills are far superior, while he makes up for a lack of height by being very bulky and powerful, so rarely loses out in the tight (he may be no taller than Lee Mears, but he is clearly more powerful).

As long as Youngs has sorted out his early issues with hooking, I'd say as an all-round player he offers more than Hartley, and so should start.

And given our usual inability to get forwards taking the ball at pace Young's ability to generate pace - his acceleration from a standing start is a vary valuable commodity

dummy_half wrote:beshocked

My impression of Hartley's throwing is similar to yours - can have spells where he is very solid, but then can miss his man 3 in a row, so is not significantly better or worse than Youngs (who was widely considered to be the most secure of the Lions hookers in this regard).

Hartley has the bulk and does good work in the tight, although he does have discipline and self-control issues. Early season accounts were that he was offering more in open play and carrying better. My concern always in this regard is that he passes about as frequently as Jason Leonard scored international tries, so once he has his hands on the ball you can be certain it's going to ground a couple of metres further. Not always a bad thing, but being able to slip an effective off-load would be a skill he should add to his game.

Obviously Youngs offers much more as a ball carrier and because of his previous incarnation in the centre his handling skills are far superior, while he makes up for a lack of height by being very bulky and powerful, so rarely loses out in the tight (he may be no taller than Lee Mears, but he is clearly more powerful).

As long as Youngs has sorted out his early issues with hooking, I'd say as an all-round player he offers more than Hartley, and so should start.

This doesn't match my observations at all.  Part of why Hartley doesn't carry as far as Youngs is because he passes and offloads a lot.  Thats always been backed up by stats for competitions and leagues in the past and these are the ones for the current premiership season:


Youngs/Hartley

Matches 4/5
Tries 0/1
Carries 22/29
Metres Carried 46/30
Passes 6/24
Offloads 0/8
Clean Breaks 0/1
Defenders Beaten 2/1
Tackles 33/34
Missed Tackles 4/4


Youngs is the option to make the metres, which mostly entails him holding onto the ball till he is held.  Hartley concentrates more on link play to the better carriers and then focusing on the ensuing rucks and mauls.  Two different styles and strengths of play that it's useful to have and pick depending on the opposition, gameplan and composition of the rest of your side.  An interesting one to call for the upcoming games, because sometimes we lack good carrying options, then sometimes we suffer from not shifting the point of carry in the tackle and not getting the ball cleared out well & quickly enough.

mbernz wrote:

dummy_half wrote:beshocked

My impression of Hartley's throwing is similar to yours - can have spells where he is very solid, but then can miss his man 3 in a row, so is not significantly better or worse than Youngs (who was widely considered to be the most secure of the Lions hookers in this regard).

Hartley has the bulk and does good work in the tight, although he does have discipline and self-control issues. Early season accounts were that he was offering more in open play and carrying better. My concern always in this regard is that he passes about as frequently as Jason Leonard scored international tries, so once he has his hands on the ball you can be certain it's going to ground a couple of metres further. Not always a bad thing, but being able to slip an effective off-load would be a skill he should add to his game.

Obviously Youngs offers much more as a ball carrier and because of his previous incarnation in the centre his handling skills are far superior, while he makes up for a lack of height by being very bulky and powerful, so rarely loses out in the tight (he may be no taller than Lee Mears, but he is clearly more powerful).

As long as Youngs has sorted out his early issues with hooking, I'd say as an all-round player he offers more than Hartley, and so should start.

This doesn't match my observations at all.  Part of why Hartley doesn't carry as far as Youngs is because he passes and offloads a lot.  Thats always been backed up by stats for competitions and leagues in the past and these are the ones for the current premiership season:


Youngs/Hartley

Matches 4/5
Tries 0/1
Carries 22/29
Metres Carried 46/30
Passes 6/24
Offloads 0/8
Clean Breaks 0/1
Defenders Beaten 2/1
Tackles 33/34
Missed Tackles 4/4


Youngs is the option to make the metres, which mostly entails him holding onto the ball till he is held.  Hartley concentrates more on link play to the better carriers and then focusing on the ensuing rucks and mauls.  Two different styles and strengths of play that it's useful to have and pick depending on the opposition, gameplan and composition of the rest of your side.  An interesting one to call for the upcoming games, because sometimes we lack good carrying options, then sometimes we suffer from not shifting the point of carry in the tackle and not getting the ball cleared out well & quickly enough.

I am assuming a pass can also be an offload? otherwise something doesnt add up

Well there's the stats.

I know who has looked more impressive in an England jersey and it isn't "talks a good game" Hartley.

Carries are certainly the thing that tends to impress most people, but shifting the point of attack with passes & offloads and making sure ball is secure and quick enough from breakdowns is just as if not more important.  For instance, last 6N against Wales we actually made slightly more metres than them (417 v 406), the bigger issue was that we were bullied at the breakdown. Like I said, player selection should depend on what is the most pressing attribute for that game and where the strengths or weaknesses lie within the rest of the team.


The difference between a pass and an offload would be that an offload is done during or at the point of being tackled.

mbernz

I take it the stats are from the club games do far this season. As such I think it highlights a significant difference between how Northampton use Hartley and how England do - Hartley doesn't get the ball in his hands anywhere near as often for England, who tend to use Robshaw as the first receiver who then shifts the point of attack.

The stats are interesting, because I don't see much club rugby and so my perception of Hartley is based mainly on how I've seen him play for England over the last few years. For a big and abrasive guy, he is not a great carrier and he does seem to be very conservative player in looking to go to ground with the ball rather than take any risks in shipping it on to a team mate. Now, whether this is purely about England's game plan around hiim or a lack of trust in his international team mates* is something we can only guess at.

* I think this is a criticism that can sometimes also be levelled at Manu Tuilagi - if he trusts the player next to him he's quite prepared to force a pass or off-load, but if not he does take the ball to ground a bit too often. It's not so much can't pass as won't pass.

dummy_half wrote:mbernz

I take it the stats are from the club games do far this season. As such I think it highlights a significant difference between how Northampton use Hartley and how England do - Hartley doesn't get the ball in his hands anywhere near as often for England, who tend to use Robshaw as the first receiver who then shifts the point of attack.

The stats are interesting, because I don't see much club rugby and so my perception of Hartley is based mainly on how I've seen him play for England over the last few years. For a big and abrasive guy, he is not a great carrier and he does seem to be very conservative player in looking to go to ground with the ball rather than take any risks in shipping it on to a team mate.  Now, whether this is purely about England's game plan around hiim or a lack of trust in his international team mates* is something we can only guess at.

* I think this is a criticism that can sometimes also be levelled at Manu Tuilagi - if he trusts the player next to him he's quite prepared to force a pass or off-load, but if not he does take the ball to ground a bit too often. It's not so much can't pass as won't pass.

Again, that doesn't match my observations in the past.  Looking at what the stats say again, for the last 6N when Youngs was starting and Hartley coming off the bench.  Hartley carried 9 times, passed 6 and offloaded once, a relative mix between holding on or passing it off when in possession of the ball, though a small sample size given his relative lack of game time.  Youngs by comparison carried 26 times, passed 3 and didn't offload at all.

As I've said, Hartley shouldn't start if carrying is our primary concern in a match, but if support work securing and clearing out the breakdown is, then I would.  This seems to be the area that England have asked him to concentrate on.

The stats could be twisted in any way though.

Hartley seems to pass much more than Youngs does. Are these passes little pops, are they shuffles across the line, is he taking it to the line and threatening the opposition or is he simply getting in the way of backs moves?

Stats are handy but the only way to judge a player is to watch him. I don't rate Hartley particularly high. I think he talks a good good game but rarley delivers at Int level.

Well, my impression from watching him is different.  Maybe we're both a mix of right and wrong, but the stats seem to point more to what I've observed.

There's not a huge amount between the two hookers in quality in my opinion, just their different skill sets, and I would make my choice depending on who comprises the rest of the team and who the opposition are.

Youngs has to be our starting hooker IMO both in terms of what he adds at the moment and his potential for the future. In terms of time playing at hooker (a very specialist position) he is still extremely inexperienced compared to the other options but the skills he has already developed and the speed at which he has shown he can improve is phenomenal.

When you talk about players with bags of potential we should give a chance to such as Twelvetrees, Yarde, Wade, etc they are guys who are talented no doubt, but for obvious reasons can't yet be compared to the top players in world.

With Youngs however he still has all that potential to keep improving and learning but already has attributes up there with the best hookers in the world. His play in the loose, especially in rucks, but also in carrying and tackling is massively impressive and his set piece is improving all the time.

Looking at the top hookers in the world, currently I'd say you have the SA duo of Du Plessis and Struass out in front followed by a big chasing pack of players who have their strong and weak suits but in reality are of similar ability at the moment:

Mealamu and Hore - Still performing but no doubt getting on and few NZ fans would argue that they don't need to find replacement soon.

Moore - Solid as any at set piece and gets round the park but viewed by many as not particularly explosive.

Best and Hibbard - Both strong in the loose in different aspects and looked excellent for much of last season but struggled for consistency (though to differing extents) on the Lions tour

I'm sure I've missed a few out many would like to throw into the mix there but my point being that other than Du Plessis and Strauss there aren't that many hookers really shining out at the moment in the international game. So to have a guy such as Youngs who is already very much challenging the chasing pack of Hibbard, Mealamu, Hore etc with so little experience and so much room for improvement he must be backed for the AI's.

I don't think the stats point to any direction, they're pretty ambiguous.

As I said, there's no information on the type of pass. As far as I'm aware Hartley just gets in the way. I wouldn't have him anywhere near an England shirt.

Pooly what Re you doing up?

Interesting snippet from the BBC website:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24543899

'Billy Twelvetrees is in pole position to fill the number 12 jersey while Jonathan Joseph, Joel Tomkins and Henry Trinder are competing to partner him in midfield.'

No mention of Burrell at all.  What do you reckon?  Inside information or idle speculation?

For Frak sake, Corbisiero is out.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/rugbyunion/article3895562.ece

Pure speculation I imagine CJ.

I can't see past a midfield of:

12. Twelvetrees
13. JJ/Tomkins

With perhaps Burrell getting a chance from the bench or in the Arg game.

I'm 3hrs ahead mate so is start work time for me.

So who starts Marler or Mako?

Cumbrian wrote:For Frak sake, Corbisiero is out.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/rugbyunion/article3895562.ece

He seems so unlucky with injuries that we'll probably be playing more without him than with him over the next couple of years. We'll just have to get used to it and hope Mako & Marler can hack, it or else someone else steps up.

Cumbrian wrote:For Frak sake, Corbisiero is out.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/rugbyunion/article3895562.ece

If this is true it'll probably be the biggest loss we could have experienced.

Marler and Vuinipola are nowhere near Corb's standard, huge loss.

Yea Sky are now saying he's suffered a recurrence of his old knee injury! Shut beans.

On the up side Marler has looked about 500x better this season then last. He suits the new scrum rules with his long bind and is the only Quins front 5 player to actually make an impact.

Vunipola as well isn't to be sniffed at.

Lots of pressure on Cole now though, he was really disappointing internationally last season so hopefully he'll be back on top thus year.

Cumbrian wrote:So who starts Marler or Mako?

Marler for me. Mako can make more of an impact and will benefit from the added pitch side analysis that he'll get.

Big loss judging by his Lions form and his start to the season. Marler must surely be next in line and I don't have as many butterflies about him as previously. Great chance for him to put a marker down.

Massive loss losing Corbs...i really worry that this injury proneness is going to become a serious problem now.

For me...Marler or Mako...how has Mullan been playing for Wasps?

I havent seen a lot of Marler this season so shouldnt really judge but going on sarries form...and the fact he's a lion i guess Mako will take the spot. On the plus side that gives us another major carrier.

Mako, Tom Youngs, Billy or Ben Morgan...three crackers straight away...add in Parling, launchbury and it looks decent.

EDIT - I think also many people think straight away about the half ano hour or so in the Lions game where Mako had a torrid time....but forget many other times when he was part of a scrum that destroyed tha Aussies...lets give him a bit of credit.

Marler and Mako will both getting starts and come off the bench. Just a shame we've never seen Marlers full array of carrying skills "yet" at international level.

"On the up side Marler has looked about 500x better this season then last. He suits the new scrum rules with his long bind and is the only Quins front 5 player to actually make an impact."

I don't see this one at all Yappy. I've been very unimpressed with Marler in the scrum, the only game I've seen him do well in was the Worcester game.

I would really worry for us if we have to start Marler.

Don't agree about Marler he's young and learning and is a better third choice option than any other home nations loose head.

I know he plays for a unfashionable club in Exeter but Tom Johnson has been in incredible form this season, carrying hard and scoring try's! I'd have him back in the elite squad in a heart beat, same with Dave Ewers! Sadly can't see Jack Nowell keeping his place in the Saxons!!

As of now Mako should start. He's still a work in progress but his all round play is better than Marler's in my opinion. His fitness is a problem in my opinion but whilst he's on the pitch he puts in a lots of effort making turnovers and tackling as well the obvious big carries. He's also in better form.

beshocked wrote:As of now Mako should start. He's still a work in progress but his all round play is better than Marler's in my opinion. His fitness is a problem in my opinion but whilst he's on the pitch he puts in a lots of effort making turnovers and tackling as well the obvious big carries. He's also in better form.

Totally agree on this, Marler isn't ready for Int rugby imo. I'd think Mullen would be better option from the bench with Marler back in the Saxons.

From lancaster on the BBC

Lancaster said the 25-year-old faces "a couple of weeks" of rehabilitation but he hasn't ruled the Northampton prop out of the Australia Test.

"He's not out of the series by any stretch of the imagination," said Lancaster. "Everyone is optimistically hoping he will come through and be available for some if not all the games.

"Long term it's obviously something he's struggling with, but we're optimistic that with good management - and his club Northampton have been excellent - we'll see him through beyond 2015.

"We're still quite a way away from the Australia game. We'll give him plenty of time but we'll do what's right for Alex."

I think this is a serious problem...and we need our understudies - Marler, mako, Mullan, Brookes whoever it is...getting some serious gametime against the top teams. Id pull Corbs out of this AI's altogether.

Yeah sadly he is starting to remind me of Trevor Woodman, he could have been a true great but had to retire at 29. Maybe it is a little premature to be talking like this about Corbisiero but you don't see him having a hugely long career and I don't expect to see him playing long into his 30's.

GeordieFalcon wrote:From lancaster on the BBC

Lancaster said the 25-year-old faces "a couple of weeks" of rehabilitation but he hasn't ruled the Northampton prop out of the Australia Test.

"He's not out of the series by any stretch of the imagination," said Lancaster. "Everyone is optimistically hoping he will come through and be available for some if not all the games.

"Long term it's obviously something he's struggling with, but we're optimistic that with good management - and his club Northampton have been excellent - we'll see him through beyond 2015.

"We're still quite a way away from the Australia game. We'll give him plenty of time but we'll do what's right for Alex."

I think this is a serious problem...and we need our understudies - Marler, mako, Mullan, Brookes whoever it is...getting some serious gametime against the top teams. Id pull Corbs out of this AI's altogether.

Totally agree. Corbs shouldn't be rushed back, so just say now to give him time off. My slight concern is that whilst we have Marler and Vunipola as back ups, both are known more for their loose play rather than their scrummaging. The new laws have powered the LH and whilst neither have looked out of place at club level, it could become more of an issue at international level. They are both the clear front runners to replace Corbs, but I just hope Rowntree is flogging them on a scrum machine!

It's a worry that Corbs keeps getting the same injury. Is it a case where he should bite the bullet and have some surgery to clean the knee up and strengthen it, accepting that he will miss a good few months now but benefitting his later career?

I think Mako is the most obvious replacement - OK, he may lack a little in fitness and conditioning, but he improved so much last year and has huge potential. Not sure Marler will end up being as good a player, even if they are at about the same level at the moment.

Well, i agree they arent as destructive a scrummager as i think Corbs is...they are still solid (not ideal but its something). I think they can still progress to very strong international LH's...they are both young.

I thought it was Corbs other knee that had flared up this time?

Didnt marler hold his own for two tests against south africa in 2012....Juan figallo if fit will provide a massive test but im not too worried about the other tightheads Marler will do fine. We are slowly losing our most impactfull players though Tuilagi, croft and corbs are world class beasts there aren't many left in the team you can say that about yet....very good but not immense (although croft probably wouldn't have started anyway !!) . I always forget the England AI curse, i remember johnson had 11+ players out in one AI series(erline, monye at 15...shudder,shudder), I guess a few more will drop about before the final test, although Manu is the truely irreplaceable one. You lot will rip my boys off for this but with corbs out i worry about starting youngs in the scrum.

I agree Chris, i think Both Marler and Vunipola are solid at International level, they are not poor, they are not destructive. Hopefully they will both be drilled constantly and can make massive improvements there.
Certainly with Makos size you would hope so.

Thats the first time ive heard Croft described as a beast. He's a world class lineout guy and a great athlete but i dont think the rest of his game is world class.

I also dont think manu is irreplaceable.

I think our lass is more of a beast than Croft!

I don't think Marler did hold his own v SA tbh, I think he struggled and he actually looks like he's gone backwards under the new rules, I'd be worried if had to start.

I just read last night Stephen Jone's starting XV from last Sunday's Times. I know most people do not agree with him and that he is a wind up merchant, but I did kind of agree with some of his points. He stated that the Eng team that lost to Wales had reached the end of the line and that defeat was not a learning/development point but the realisation that that team would never go far. He thinks SL realised this as well and that some different players need bringing in if we are ever to compete with Wales, All Blacks and South Africa. From memory he selected Corbs, Hartley, Wilson, Attwood, Lawes, Wood, Vuni/Morgan, Kvesic, Youngs,  and I forget the rest. But the big changes he proposes are in the pack. No Parling or Launchbury and out go T.Youngs and Robshaw. Interesting calls and I think the 2nd row may be worth a look although Launchbury we want to keep in the fray for the future. Parling is an enigma....good in the lineouts and works very hard in the loose making lots of tackles etc, but the pack looses go forward and hardness when he plays, which must be a priority. If only Attwood could really step into the enforcer role then Parling could be accomodated.

Overall I think Stephen Jones makes some valid points although there is a good case for keeping T.Youngs. Anyone else think England need to radically change the pack that played against Wales in order to progress?

Yes, we should play an actual backrow without 3 6/6.5s. Other than that, no. I am unconvinced Lawes is the answer to anything at INT level as a starter in any position. I am even more unconvinced by Kvesic on current form. I am hugely unconvinced that our lineout would even function with that pack. I think SJ has once again fails FTP sufficiently apply logic to his selections

We'll see how Mako and Marler do on the weekend vs two monster French packs - Toulouse and Clermont. Great experience for both. This is the kind of test our players need.

These are the benefits of taking part in the HC - you get to see if you're good enough to step up to international level.

Absolutely Beshocked...

It’s funny, the post 2003 malaise is still haunting us isn’t it? In a sense it is not really fair for us to pile all of this responsibility on two such young and experienced props. We should have at least one or two loosehead props who were 18-19 in 2003 and are now tough experienced international props in their late 20s/ early 30s. Yet we don’t, what happened?

Thats the problem...there was such a black hole / void after the WC its despairing.

I think this is one of the negative legacy's of Woodwards reign, lack of future planning - everything and everything was simply geared towards winning with no thought for after that..., then aided by Robinsons reign..

Cumbrian indeed. There was a huge hangover after the 2003 world cup win. Clive will be remembered for coaching England to a RWC win but he left England ill prepared for the future.

There was basically a lost generation of talent.

Lancaster has more talent to work with as the trickling effect of successful England U20s sides (I think from 2008 onwards). Also the academies have been pumping out more players in general - Exeter's academy has emerged as a real shining light which should reap dividends in the not too far future. The Sarries academy is far superior than it was 6 years ago for example too. Pretty much all clubs are doing their bit - Worcester with development of Mullan and Ksevic. Newcastle basically being the feeder for Tigers. London Irish becoming the new feeder for Bath.

Wasps contribution to the development of Billy Vunipola and Christian Wade for example cannot be underestimated.

Newcastle basically being the feeder for Tigers

 ahem...not anymore thank you Beshocked...

But you are correct and in part the RFU has to be praised for this by rewarding clubs for using home grown players... this is beginning to have a big result...and the knock on will be a stronger England..