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.

Surely were not re-starting the balance of the pack debate. Scroll up if you want to read that.

I asked how Attwood went for Bath.

Does no one know?

Also what is the truth behind the Garvey thing?

Geordie you are the main protagonist of this one.

He went well for Bath, shaded by Fearns. Webber also did very well.

GF put forward a theory that Garvey must've said something at half-time in the Wolfhounds game 2012, as he was replaced by Kearnan Myall after putting in a storming performance at No.4 - he never played again.

On the second row piece, whats everyones honest opinions of Parling lineout abilities, i.e. how he runs it?

I spent the weekend, re watching all of our games from last season (living away from home on a course for a few weeks) and have to admit the lineout was at best average with a lot of ball going to 2, and very little was off the top.

I understand Parling ran the lineout in Tests 2 and 3 for the Lions, so it isn't just England and Leicester that have faith in him. The often quoted phrase comes to mind - "There are lies, damn lies and statistics". I don't think England's lineout was that bad and a lot does come down to the hooker, which is outside the control of whoever is calling the plays.

jamesandimac wrote:On the second row piece, whats everyones honest opinions of Parling lineout abilities, i.e. how he runs it?

I spent the weekend, re watching all of our games from last season (living away from home on a course for a few weeks) and have to admit the lineout was at best average with a lot of ball going to 2, and very little was off the top.

You are aware that Parling may call the line out but it still takes the other players to perform in it for it to be successful. also remember Tigers were missing 17 players.

For instance last season our line out was woeful at times purely because of T. Youngs throwing, your can't attribute that to the person calling the line out.

England Squad to face Australia


Forwards (13)


David Attwood (Bath Rugby)
Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers)
Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints)
Joe Launchbury (London Wasps)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints)
Joe Marler (Harlequins)
Ben Morgan (Gloucester Rugby)
Chris Robshaw (Harlequins)
Billy Vunipola (Saracens)
Mako Vunipola (Saracens)
David Wilson (Bath Rugby)
Tom Wood (Northampton Saints)
Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers)

Backs (10)

Chris Ashton (Saracens)
Mike Brown (Harlequins)
Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints)
Owen Farrell (Saracens)
Toby Flood (Leicester Tigers)
Ben Foden (Northampton Saints)
Joel Tomkins (Saracens)
Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester Rugby)
Marland Yarde (London Irish)
Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)

Alex Corbisiero (knee) and Geoff Parling (mild concussion) will also return to camp for continued treatment.

The following players have been released back to their Aviva Premiership clubs (11):

Freddie Burns (Gloucester Rugby)
Luther Burrell (Northampton Saints)
Danny Care (Harlequins)
Kyle Eastmond (Bath Rugby)
Alex Goode (Saracens)
Tom Johnson (Exeter Chiefs)
Matt Kvesic (Gloucester Rugby)
Henry Thomas (Sale Sharks)
Henry Trinder (Gloucester Rugby)
Rob Webber (Bath Rugby)
Christian Wade (London Wasps)

Some decisions i didn't see coming. Flood in for Burns. Dickson in for Care (can understand that one). Burrell Out (shame)

Attwood was a beast against gloucester, made the hard yards time and time again in orrible wet conditions, just when you need an enforcer to tuck it up the jumper and make some metres. Trouble is Lawes and Launchberry's last 2 games have also been immense!

Never like to see any players injured but i forgot juan figallo was injured for the argies (big sigh of relief) will save manu and marler having there heads shoved out there bottoms !!

The england six jersey is getting silly now
Wood
Croft
Johnson
Haskell
Fearns
Garvey
all very very good players and probably a few more there or there abouts as well...the lock situation is probably even sillier but at least there are two slots up for grabs...i wont make this post any longer by naming all the big lumps!!

ohh some new updates from nathan since posting...good looking squad, personally flood over burns is the right call for me, especially with a very inexperienced 12/13 combo. wish manu was there then i genuinely would think 3 from 3 was a possibility ,,,,also starting wonder about tompkins over burrell but then faz is there to support the sarries hopefuls. 

nathan wrote:

jamesandimac wrote:On the second row piece, whats everyones honest opinions of Parling lineout abilities, i.e. how he runs it?

I spent the weekend, re watching all of our games from last season (living away from home on a course for a few weeks) and have to admit the lineout was at best average with a lot of ball going to 2, and very little was off the top.

You are aware that Parling may call the line out but it still takes the other players to perform in it for it to be successful. also remember Tigers were missing 17 players.

For instance last season our line out was woeful at times purely because of T. Youngs throwing, your can't attribute that to the person calling the line out.

Apologies, I think you have misunderstood me, I didn't mean watching Leicester but England. Don't get me wrong I'm aware that there are other elements at play when it comes to success at the lineout, not just on the person calling it, however I was commenting on the calls which he tended to make last year. We tended to call front ball a lot and rely on the catch and drive or runners in tight. Now the catch and drive worked well on occasion but against the larger teams we were found wanting and it didn't really create a good platform from which we could launch attacks.

In the summer however the lineout went really well with some good variation and it provided a solid platform. Now I know the opposition weren't up to much but is it a case that the caller was more varied in what he wanted and, on the day, was a better tactician? Or am i being unfair to Parling and it was simply a case that Webbers set piece was a lot stronger than Youngs' that it allowed the caller, be it Attwood or Lawes, to call better?

Hell so looks like we're going to end up with the desired lock combination after all. Shame for Parling and I think he'll return next weekend regardless of how the team goes.

I'm assuming Attwood will have to start to run the line-out. Thus we could see 4. C Lawes 5. D Attwood 19. J Launchbury - that could be a top class combination.

Team as a whole then:

1. M Vunipola
2.T Youngs
3. D Cole
4. C Lawes
5. D Attwood
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw
8. B Morgan
9. B Youngs
10. O Farrell
11. M Yarde
12. B Twelvetrees
13. J Tomkins
14. C Ashton
15. M Brown

16. D Hartley 17. J Marler 18. D Wilson 19. J Launchbury 20. B Vunipola 21. L Dickson 22. T Flood 23. B Foden

That's the team I think Lancs will select. I like it, shame for Burns but Flood has shown some glimpses of real class for Tigers. Plus I don't think Lancs wants to lose him abroad.

jamesandimac wrote:

nathan wrote:

jamesandimac wrote:On the second row piece, whats everyones honest opinions of Parling lineout abilities, i.e. how he runs it?

I spent the weekend, re watching all of our games from last season (living away from home on a course for a few weeks) and have to admit the lineout was at best average with a lot of ball going to 2, and very little was off the top.

You are aware that Parling may call the line out but it still takes the other players to perform in it for it to be successful. also remember Tigers were missing 17 players.

For instance last season our line out was woeful at times purely because of T. Youngs throwing, your can't attribute that to the person calling the line out.

Apologies, I think you have misunderstood me, I didn't mean watching Leicester but England.  Don't get me wrong I'm aware that there are other elements at play when it comes to success at the lineout, not just on the person calling it, however I was commenting on the calls which he tended to make last year.  We tended to call front ball a lot and rely on the catch and drive or runners in tight.  Now the catch and drive worked well on occasion but against the larger teams we were found wanting and it didn't really create a good platform from which we could launch attacks.

In the summer however the lineout went really well with some good variation and it provided a solid platform.  Now I know the opposition weren't up to much but is it a case that the caller was more varied in what he wanted and, on the day, was a better tactician?  Or am i being unfair to Parling and it was simply a case that Webbers set piece was a lot stronger than Youngs' that it allowed the caller, be it Attwood or Lawes, to call better?

ah cool i see what your saying. Could the calls to the front be because on young's throwing?

Chjw131 wrote:Hell so looks like we're going to end up with the desired lock combination after all. Shame for Parling and I think he'll return next weekend regardless of how the team goes.

I'm assuming Attwood will have to start to run the line-out. Thus we could see 4. C Lawes 5. D Attwood 19. J Launchbury - that could be a top class combination.

Team as a whole then:

1. M Vunipola
2.T Youngs
3. D Cole
4. C Lawes
5. D Attwood
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw
8. B Morgan
9. B Youngs
10. O Farrell
11. M Yarde
12. B Twelvetrees
13. J Tomkins
14. C Ashton
15. M Brown

16. D Hartley 17. J Marler 18. D Wilson 19. J Launchbury 20. B Vunipola 21. L Dickson 22. T Flood 23. B Foden

That's the team I think Lancs will select. I like it, shame for Burns but Flood has shown some glimpses of real class for Tigers. Plus I don't think Lancs wants to lose him abroad.

i'm looking forward to this match, can't wait to see how some of the new players handle it.

Love that pack, my only gripe would be I would prefer to see Eastmond, Trinder or even Burrell at 13 over Tomkins, but I can definitely see why he has likely gone with him.

If that is the only change I can think of, I'm pretty damn happy with the selection (if that is the team obviously!)

I think Dickson might start, actually, and then it's still hard to call Billy vs Morgan

when was the last time two sets of brothers played for England?

Means Danny will be desperate to prove himself vs Tigers, Lancaster has made an awful mistake but Quins will gain hugely.

I mean, an awful mistake

Chjw131 wrote:Hell so looks like we're going to end up with the desired lock combination after all. Shame for Parling and I think he'll return next weekend regardless of how the team goes.

I'm assuming Attwood will have to start to run the line-out. Thus we could see 4. C Lawes 5. D Attwood 19. J Launchbury - that could be a top class combination.

Team as a whole then:

1. M Vunipola
2.T Youngs
3. D Cole
4. C Lawes
5. D Attwood
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw
8. B Morgan
9. B Youngs
10. O Farrell
11. M Yarde
12. B Twelvetrees
13. J Tomkins
14. C Ashton
15. M Brown

16. D Hartley 17. J Marler 18. D Wilson 19. J Launchbury 20. B Vunipola 21. L Dickson 22. T Flood 23. B Foden

That's the team I think Lancs will select. I like it, shame for Burns but Flood has shown some glimpses of real class for Tigers. Plus I don't think Lancs wants to lose him abroad.

I think you're pretty much spot on there, if he does go different it'll be Marler and Launchbury. I do like the look of it though and if Mako holds his own or gets assendancy in the scrum, that pack could well dominate the tight and the set pieces because it certainly isn't wanting for grunt and with Attwood, Lawes and Wood, there are 3 good lineout jumpers.

Referee is Clancy, expect penalties galore

jamesandimac wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:Hell so looks like we're going to end up with the desired lock combination after all. Shame for Parling and I think he'll return next weekend regardless of how the team goes.

I'm assuming Attwood will have to start to run the line-out. Thus we could see 4. C Lawes 5. D Attwood 19. J Launchbury - that could be a top class combination.

Team as a whole then:

1. M Vunipola
2.T Youngs
3. D Cole
4. C Lawes
5. D Attwood
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw
8. B Morgan
9. B Youngs
10. O Farrell
11. M Yarde
12. B Twelvetrees
13. J Tomkins
14. C Ashton
15. M Brown

16. D Hartley 17. J Marler 18. D Wilson 19. J Launchbury 20. B Vunipola 21. L Dickson 22. T Flood 23. B Foden

That's the team I think Lancs will select. I like it, shame for Burns but Flood has shown some glimpses of real class for Tigers. Plus I don't think Lancs wants to lose him abroad.

I think you're pretty much spot on there, if he does go different it'll be Marler and Launchbury.  I do like the look of it though and if Mako holds his own or gets assendancy in the scrum, that pack could well dominate the tight and the set pieces because it certainly isn't wanting for grunt and with Attwood, Lawes and Wood, there are 3 good lineout jumpers.

4, Robshaw is a reliable occasional option too, he takes plenty of ball for us

ChequeredJersey wrote:

jamesandimac wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:Hell so looks like we're going to end up with the desired lock combination after all. Shame for Parling and I think he'll return next weekend regardless of how the team goes.

I'm assuming Attwood will have to start to run the line-out. Thus we could see 4. C Lawes 5. D Attwood 19. J Launchbury - that could be a top class combination.

Team as a whole then:

1. M Vunipola
2.T Youngs
3. D Cole
4. C Lawes
5. D Attwood
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw
8. B Morgan
9. B Youngs
10. O Farrell
11. M Yarde
12. B Twelvetrees
13. J Tomkins
14. C Ashton
15. M Brown

16. D Hartley 17. J Marler 18. D Wilson 19. J Launchbury 20. B Vunipola 21. L Dickson 22. T Flood 23. B Foden

That's the team I think Lancs will select. I like it, shame for Burns but Flood has shown some glimpses of real class for Tigers. Plus I don't think Lancs wants to lose him abroad.

I think you're pretty much spot on there, if he does go different it'll be Marler and Launchbury.  I do like the look of it though and if Mako holds his own or gets assendancy in the scrum, that pack could well dominate the tight and the set pieces because it certainly isn't wanting for grunt and with Attwood, Lawes and Wood, there are 3 good lineout jumpers.

4, Robshaw is a reliable occasional option too, he takes plenty of ball for us

Yeah that is true, but i do think that with the Aussie backrow Robshaw will be better served aiming to win the first breakdown off set piece something we didn't manage last year with Robshaw jumping.

I don't think Lancaster will drop Launchberry, he often talks about the "player who owns the shirt"

For the same reason I'd expect Morgan who was brilliant in Argentina to keep his place for England, in an innocent till proven guilty kind of way, all this talk of him being unfit is probs bull****, the management at both Gloucester and England will have up to date GPS output stats from his most recent training seasons, if he was unfit Lancaster wouldn't have picked him!

to be honest I'd be very surprised if Marler doesn't start for the same reasons. Vunipola hasn't ousted him for the 1 shirt yet for country. Marler played very well in Argentina and deserves to keep his place.

I'd agree Robshaw is a reliable 4th jumper at the back if needed. He has the hands for the role but not really the height or 'leap' to jump further forward though.

Mostly I'd agree with the squad given injuries, only places I'd argue with would be:

Ashton over Wade - Was completely expecting it as Lancaster has stuck by Ashton through much but I just feel Wade is already the better player and with international experience could grow into a great one. Bit disappointed there but nothing drastic.

Tomkins over Trinder, Eastmond, Burrell, Daly, Joseph (Manu, Allen, Lowe out injured) - I don't think he's a bad player by any stretch but given the above options we have that either offer a more complete game or more of a threat in attack I don't feel he really deserves the chance before others. He's good in contact and has a strong offload but is still learning the code and could be targeted to quite harsh effect by the Australian backs I fear.

Really good squad. To me there are only two surprises and that's Burrell dropping out and Care's omission. Last time Dickson played for Eng he didn't take his chance while Care is a proven Int and in my opinion in better form then the other two options. Still it works out nicely for Quins at least.

king_carlos wrote:I'd agree Robshaw is a reliable 4th jumper at the back if needed. He has the hands for the role but not really the height or 'leap' to jump further forward though.

Mostly I'd agree with the squad given injuries, only places I'd argue with would be:

Ashton over Wade - Was completely expecting it as Lancaster has stuck by Ashton through much but I just feel Wade is already the better player and with international experience could grow into a great one. Bit disappointed there but nothing drastic.

Tomkins over Trinder, Eastmond, Burrell, Daly, Joseph (Manu, Allen, Lowe out injured) - I don't think he's a bad player by any stretch but given the above options we have that either offer a more complete game or more of a threat in attack I don't feel he really deserves the chance before others. He's good in contact and has a strong offload but is still learning the code and could be targeted to quite harsh effect by the Australian backs I fear.

I guess Ashton is a proven strike player and when confident he's lethal. Also knows the gameplan and will help his new 13 out (hopefully).

Tompkins is there as he's a Sarries payer so Darrel knows him and he's big.

All those back selections look like Farrells picks, does Mike Carr get a say? And after these games will we all be calling for the interim summer coaches to cone back?!

yappysnap wrote:Really good squad. To me there are only two surprises and that's Burrell dropping out and Care's omission. Last time Dickson played for Eng he didn't take his chance while Care is a proven Int and in my opinion in better form then the other two options. Still it works out nicely for Quins at least.

Care didn't take his chances for England at all that season, either, though.

[quote="yappysnap"]

king_carlos wrote:
All those back selections look like Farrells picks, does Mike Carr get a say? And after these games will we all be calling for the interim summer coaches to cone back?!

If it was just farrell i would be expecting to see goode at fullback and if barrit was fit twelvetrees on the bench. I have know idea about how good tompkins is, my only worries is that he has never caught my eye the way burrell did for northampton last week, he seems to be stuck behind an american winger/fullback at club level and he's a relatively new league convert which usually results in a couple of howlers in their early international games (every game if your big les, iestyn harris or henry paul). Can anyone/sarries supporters give me faith that he is ready for the wallabies/all blacks !!!

PARLING OUT
Concussion...media reckon launcberry and lawes to start attwood on the bench, i wonder if that will change things between hartley and youngs as well?

Hartley has a knock mate, would be surprising to see him over Youngs even if fully fit for me

Not long is it

shame to see parling out though

I hope it is Attwood and one of the other two, not Launchbury and Lawes together. If it is the latter it would suggest to me that Bomber hasn't learned what happens when you pick too much athleticism at the expense of beef and I would be pretty disappointed.

I can put up with it with Parling because he is the full time and experienced line-out caller, I'm happy(ish) to sacrifice power for this advantage. We don't have that luxury with out him, but would still be sacrificing power if Lawes and Launchbury start together.

Yeah i agree Cumbrian think id like to see Attwood and Launchbury in there. Lawes off the bench. But then if Lawes is playing to his best and is the physical lineout guy we're looking for...then him nad Attwood would make a hugely physical engine combo...

I imagine Wood will do a lot of lineout work on the weekend as well as Robshaw. England are known for having 4 jumpers in a given match unlike some who have 2/3.

If they play well then I could see Lancaster thinking, AUS are a decent lineout unit, if they can perform here then the extra loose play of Lawes & Launchbury makes sense.

It depends how Lawes develops but ENG should test it out now if they want it right for the RWC. No better time to do it.

Either one of Lawes or Launchbury is an upgrade on Parling in terms of bulk and power, so I don't think a pairing of the two of them would necessarily be a problem on that count, given that we were set for a Lawes/Launchbury and Parling pairing anyway. So long as Wood is able to call the lineout to a good enough standard, I don't see this as too much of a problem. The Lions smashed the Wallaby pack with a second row of AWJ and Parling. Physically I think we've got something similar here.

Any opinions on their scrummaging?

I like Parling and think his workrate is understated... but I do think that in terms of potential both Lawes and Launchbury supercede him and come the RWC thats what its all about.

fa0019 wrote:I like Parling and think his workrate is understated... but I do think that in terms of potential both Lawes and Launchbury supercede him and come the RWC thats what its all about.

His work rate is excellent of course. My point is that people are worried about Lawes/Launchbury being an unbalanced pairing, but actually it's not more unbalanced that either one of them with Parling, so long as they get the lineout right.

Suspect we're in agreement.

We could potentially be starting the game with 5 Blindside flankers !!

Lawes and launchbury are very much second rows for me Chris...but shows their athleticism that they play very well at 6 also.

Robshaw and Wood are 6's yes and if you refer to Billy V..playing a few games at 6 for Sarries...sorry but he's an 8 for me.

sirtidychris wrote:

yappysnap wrote:

king_carlos wrote:
All those back selections look like Farrells picks, does Mike Carr get a say? And after these games will we all be calling for the interim summer coaches to cone back?!

If it was just farrell i would be expecting to see goode at fullback and if barrit was fit twelvetrees on the bench. I have know idea about how good tompkins is, my only worries is that he has never caught my eye the way burrell did for northampton last week, he seems to be stuck behind an american winger/fullback at club level and he's a relatively new league convert which usually results in a couple of howlers in their early international games (every game if your big les, iestyn harris or henry paul). Can anyone/sarries supporters give me faith that he is ready for the wallabies/all blacks !!!

Burrell has been playing at 12. Tomkins has been playing all his rugby as a 13. Surely Lancaster has learnt his mistakes of picking players not in their preferred position?

You talk about being a relatively new league convert. Tomkins has over a season and a half of club rugby under his belt. He played every game in the AP last season. Hasn't played as much this season due to injury.

Tomkins has obviously been picked to try and bring the back three into the game more. Something that England could have done better in the past.

His familiarity with Ashton should help matters also.

Physically he's much bigger than Eastmond and Trinder too.

Ashton starting is no surprise at all. He's played quite well this season. Far more experienced than Wade. With a new winger,Yarde and a new centre and Brown being inexperienced playing for England at 15, a familiar face in the back three is welcome surely?

If you go on the premise that the guy in possession of the shirt keeps it until he drops a b*llock, then Attwood after his Argentina performances deserves to keep his place. I wasn't his biggest fan, but he really seems to have buckled down recently and I think with Lawes who i probably the form second row (and pretty experienced for someone only 24) would be an interesting combination.
Not shocked by the selection of Dickson over Care - he gives something different to the Youngs/Care option.
Sonny Bill Williams did a pretty good job as a new league convert - I am not saying though that Tompkins is in that class.
Whilst I like both Robshaw and Wood, I have concerns that we don't have the tough tackling, hard yard carrying 6 that New Zealand (and England of old) had. They are both 6 and a half players to me, quite mobile, nice hands, good when your pack is in the ascendency. Not sure who the answer is, maybe Vunipola, but I don't see Lancaster looking at that option.

I would still like to see Attwood and one of Lawes/Launchbury .. especially when it comes to the NZ game. We might get away with it up against the Aussies but need the bulk up against an angry All Blacks side

sirtidychris wrote:We could potentially be starting the game with 5 Blindside flankers !!

Or arguably none, given their preferred club positions
Lawes / Launchbury - better 2nd row but can cover 6 at club level and maybe in an emergency for England. I think none of us want to see Lawes start again at 6 in a Test.
Robshaw - Has played almost exclusively at 7 for about 3 seasons. Can cover 6 pretty well.
Vunipola - Really a specialist 8 who Sarries have shoe-horned into the side at 6 early this season
Wood - The archetypal 6.5. Made his England breakthrough in the 7 jersey and interchanges between 7 and 6 for Northampton and is adept in both positions.

sirtidychris wrote:We could potentially be starting the game with 5 Blindside flankers !!

Billy- clearly an 8 who covers blindside, also suspect he will sub
Launchbury- a 5.5, probably a bit better at lock
Lawes- clearly a lock, would like to see him never play flank again at this level
Wood- 6.5, in so far that there is such a thing
Robshaw- debatable between 6.5 or 7

I'd argue we might start with no blindside flankers

Firstly I think Lancs will start with this premise: 'I want all the Lions possible in the starting XV'. That makes sense, they have the most recent experience of an OZ team much changed from last AIs. Further, they have the added experience and edge that Lions experience should have given them.

As regards the locking combination I can't see past Attwood starting. He's in possession of the shirt after Parling, has already run the England line-out on three occasions and is back on form after playing on the Friday for Bath.

He might well go with Attwood and Launchbury given that was the Argie combination but i'd like to see Lawes start for once given his form.

I'd also prefer to have seen Trinder at 13 particularly against OZ but I think if Joel Tomkins can get into the game early we'll be pleasantly surprised with the variation in his game.

Really looking forward to Saturday now, anticipation is severely building!

Launcberry and or lawes will provide more impetus from the bench, with their pace and athletism, attwood will be better at grinding the ozzies down over 60 minutes before changing. Tomkins will have his work cut out with the Tevita Kuridrani at outside centre for oz and ben smith/conrad for new zealand, whatever happens by the end of this series we will know what he's made of ! Jamie Noon or Jeremy Guscott ?

Id love to know the actual real weights of the 4 second rowers. Everywhere you look the figures are different...

Aparently Lawes is either 17st 6 or 18st 8 depending on where you look. That would make him heavier than Attwood..

Launchbury is either 17'8 or 18'6 again depending where you look....

sirtidychris wrote:Launcberry and or lawes will provide more impetus from the bench, with their pace and athletism, attwood will be better at grinding the ozzies down over 60 minutes before changing. Tomkins will have his work cut out with the fijian lad at outside centre for oz and ben smith/conrad for new zealand, whatever happens by the end of this series we will know what he's made of.

Totally agree Chris, we'll see what he's made of, cos he's going to be up against some top class 13's...

GeordieFalcon wrote:Aparently Lawes is either 17st 6 or 18st 8 depending on where you look. That would make him heavier than Attwood..

18st 8 is closer to his actual weight. He was around 17st 6 before the start of last season but put about a stone on while recovering from one of his injuries.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/19718371

His biggest issue, and possibly a reason for some of his injuries (along with iffy tackling technique), was that he put on a lot of weight quite quickly in 08/09. I think he always intended to be 18-19st but had to take some time to put the last stone on.

So true frankston, the guys coming through have such a rush to put on muscle, all the tendons and ligaments dont have time to keep up. Guys like lawes and croft have a naturally quite slim build and i think it can take a while to put the suit of muscle on that people like myself are naturally born with