England's centre pairing for the 6 Nations and NZ tests (x3)

Earlier this week I posted the following;

Re: England v New Zealand match thread
by kingelderfield on Wed 13 Nov 2013, 2:12 pm

.gregortree wrote:
Cowshot
would like to see a Twelvetrees/Tuilagi centre pairing in the future
+1 from meReally like Twelvetrees, and agree the future should be Twelvetrees/Tuilagi.

Right now as a fix I would play Twelvetrees with Burrell - Twelvetrees due to his ability and Burrell on form even though this has been playing IC.

I could also see Burrell and either Eastmond, Trinder or Joseph.

The Burrell Tuilagi option should be saved for special Samoan occasions only.

Sadly, and I'm trying to remain open minded, I have yet to see enough from Tomkins (at any time since his code conversion) to suggest he is or will become an international Union centre.

To my mind Barrett would be a retrograde step..

Tuilagi is out of the 6N and we will have to wait and see if he tours in the summer. Therefore if we assume (you may think otherwise?) that Twelvetrees and Tuilagi are our preferred option, then we have to give serious thought to where we go from here.

We have a plethora of candidates at our disposal and where injury does not intervene they will each have opportunities to make their case before the 6N in either the Aviva or European competitions.

The thing with all good centre partnerships is that it is like marriage and there has to be balance and give and take in strengths and abilities - Nonu and Smith for example.

Having watched all 3 of the autumn games I am certain the answer is not Twelvetrees and Tomkins. I thought Twelvetrees showed progression and had a reasonable game yesterday, however I just don't think Tomkins currently has the understanding and execution that the position requires. He is certainly a brave and able defender however it appears his instincts are still anchored in a contact first RL approach(I made this point on another thread yesterday - SCW pointed out that Tomkins did not pass at all in the entire game?). I would not simply turn my back on him but there are parts of his game that must be developed if he is to be a serious contender and not just another stop gap.

Sadly I could see Lancaster completely disagreeing and leaving the partnership in place however I am praying for some enlightenment and for Lancaster to reappraise our options. If he does seriously consider our options it must be firmly weighted in terms of creative ability - the vision to see and create with the ability to execute under pressure.

Twelvetrees/Burrell
Twelvetrees or Burrell/Eastmond,Trinder or Joseph

There are various other OC options who are worthy of consideration and it will be fascinating to see who puts there hand up in the coming months. I think we can exclude Barritt now we have real IC options in Twelvetrees and Burrell but with Tuilagi's injury it is definitely the OC which is the problem.

In the future with Tuilagi playing our options become mouth watering as anyone of Twelvetrees Burrell of Eastmond would offer exciting foils to the beast!

That’s for the future for now let’s reconsider the Twelvetrees/Tomkins experiment and try and provide a creative combination and winning reward to the forwards endeavours.

Your thoughts are all very welcome but please keep the debate centered on the centres!

The thought we had during the second half was to switch Twelvetrees and Farrell for a spell to see impact on attack. Slip Twelvetrees in at 10 and put Farrell at 13 where he has played a lot for Sarries when Hodgson was at 10 for them. Tomkins could be a link?

doctor_grey wrote:The thought we had during the second half was to switch Twelvetrees and Farrell for a spell to see impact on attack.  Slip Twelvetrees in at 10 and put Farrell at 13 where he has played a lot for Sarries when Hodgson was at 10 for them.  Tomkins could be a link?

I'm looking for creativity and balance and tbh I don't see a partnership of Tomkins/Farrell offering either of these. Tomkins just dosn't have the game, appropriate instincts as mentioned above and Farrell is not an international class OC even though he may fill gaps at Sarries to accommodate Hodgsons inclusion.
If you're implying the need for greater creativity from our 10 then I can understand your thinking, however thats another debate - center on the centres.

I would like to see Twelve trees/burrell or Twelve trees/ Barrit for the 6ns.

I would also like to see Eastmond get a chance. who to partner him with though is a tough one.

You need to select your centres based around your 10s abilities. Farrell's inability to orchestrate a cohesive attacking game suits a boshing partnership with ideally a creative 15 to offer incision in the wide channels. I'd go Burrell/Twelvetrees is Farrell remains at 10.

If Lancaster has the balls to tell Farrell Snr his son isn't the messiah then bring in Flood and pair him with Eastmond/Twelvetrees and Tomkins. Tomkins I think can make it but needs to be taking passes on the gainline not 10m behind it.

Youngs or Care at 9 to take the edge off the oppoaition's rush defence would help give our centres a little more room as well.

If we are looking for more creativity, which we are bringing Barritt back outside Farrell makes absolutely no sense.

Farrell looked more comfortable with Twelvtrees there and twelcetrees himself had his best game..keep this going.

This then leaves 13. Manu is the obvious one, Trinder on form for Gloucester or moving eastmond to 13.

Once that's sorted then we can look at the wings...

Actually all said and done, I would select Twelvetrees and Burrell with Eastmond on the bench offering cover across the backline though primary as a centre.

I'm not sure a pairing of either Twelvetrees and or Trinder, Joseph or Eastmond would offer enough go forward/balance. Again I could see Burrell with either of these three as his size enables the go foward plus he has the neccessary off loading/passing game. However this would require the ditching of Twelvetrees which I don't think is the way to go........

Thoughts?

formerly known as Sam wrote:You need to select your centres based around your 10s abilities. Farrell's inability to orchestrate a cohesive attacking game suits a boshing partnership with ideally a creative 15 to offer incision in the wide channels. I'd go Burrell/Twelvetrees is Farrell remains at 10.

If Lancaster has the balls to tell Farrell Snr his son isn't the messiah then bring in Flood and pair him with Eastmond/Twelvetrees and Tomkins. Tomkins I think can make it but needs to be taking passes on the gainline not 10m behind it.

Youngs or Care at 9 to take the edge off the oppoaition's rush defence would help give our centres a little more room as well.

If you select Tomkins at OC then I fear you negate any threat from the wing as I just don't think he has the distribution neccessary to release the likes of Yarde and Wade.

12. Twelvetrees
13. Barrett

I'd bet my life on it if there both fit

I think Farrell does a lot very well...but his lack of a running game is a problem. If we pick him I think we need to be more creative at mixing up out first receiver, or at least getting him to mix up his game with chips over the defensive line. At the moment a defence can simply ignore him and focus on our centres.

I still think Flood is a better all-rounder. It's a shame Burns is playing in a beaten pack because I also think he COULD be a better option. Ultimately it may be enough to have someone like that on the bench who can execute a different game plan. At the moment I don't think we're smart enough to switch styles.

I still think Manu at 13 also limits us. His passing, kicking and offloading game just isn't varied enough. Wish we could put Daly back at 13.

I actually think this is where Wade could be very useful. He can take the ball at first receiver, he can also pass it from the base when we need to increase the tempo and our 9 isn't there. If we play Farrell, 36, Manu for example, and Wade on a wing, I think we'd need to be much cuter about how we mix up our first receiver. Sadly I've seen nothing to suggest Catt is doing any coaching whatsoever.

Tiger/Chief wrote:12. Twelvetrees
13. Barrett

I'd bet my life on it if there both fit

For me Brad Barrett is a definite step backward. He has a very limited disribution game, no great pace and I would certainly not categorise him as a creative player blessed with vision.

For England he played as a stopper, a tackle machine. If there is more to his game then I for one have not seen it.

Only my opinion mind as I am sure he will be part of Lancasters considerations.

Hood83 wrote:I think Farrell does a lot very well...but his lack of a running game is a problem. If we pick him I think we need to be more creative at mixing up out first receiver, or at least getting him to mix up his game with chips over the defensive line. At the moment a defence can simply ignore him and focus on our centres.

I still think Flood is a better all-rounder. It's a shame Burns is playing in a beaten pack because I also think he COULD be a better option. Ultimately it may be enough to have someone like that on the bench who can execute a different game plan. At the moment I don't think we're smart enough to switch styles.

I still think Manu at 13 also limits us. His passing, kicking and offloading game just isn't varied enough. Wish we could put Daly back at 13.

I actually think this is where Wade could be very useful. He can take the ball at first receiver, he can also pass it from the base when we need to increase the tempo and our 9 isn't there. If we play Farrell, 36, Manu for example, and Wade on a wing, I think we'd need to be much cuter about how we mix up our first receiver. Sadly I've seen nothing to suggest Catt is doing any coaching whatsoever.

Given Tuilagi is injured, who would be your centre pairing for the 6N?

kingelderfield wrote:

Hood83 wrote:I think Farrell does a lot very well...but his lack of a running game is a problem. If we pick him I think we need to be more creative at mixing up out first receiver, or at least getting him to mix up his game with chips over the defensive line. At the moment a defence can simply ignore him and focus on our centres.

I still think Flood is a better all-rounder. It's a shame Burns is playing in a beaten pack because I also think he COULD be a better option. Ultimately it may be enough to have someone like that on the bench who can execute a different game plan. At the moment I don't think we're smart enough to switch styles.

I still think Manu at 13 also limits us. His passing, kicking and offloading game just isn't varied enough. Wish we could put Daly back at 13.

I actually think this is where Wade could be very useful. He can take the ball at first receiver, he can also pass it from the base when we need to increase the tempo and our 9 isn't there. If we play Farrell, 36, Manu for example, and Wade on a wing, I think we'd need to be much cuter about how we mix up our first receiver. Sadly I've seen nothing to suggest Catt is doing any coaching whatsoever.

Given Tuilagi is injured, who would be your centre pairing for the 6N?

12. 36
13. Trinder

Not sure Trinder is a long-term option so JJ on the bench to cover I guess. We need to develop a 13 who is more flash than bosh. Compared to Tomkins Trinder has a better pass, better running game and a better kicking game. His defence is pretty average but looks like it has improved - he does seem to shoot up a lot.

If Farrell is playing we will always crab across the field, we need either a 15 or winger who is going to enter the line running against the flow so to speak, unless that threat is there, we will get nowhere. Our only option then would be Burrell / Manu partnership as they at least will straighten up and if not go around players, go through them ad break the gain line.

I am going to get slated for this, but there is one English player in the AP that hasn't retired from Int. rugby who has the skill set to run an attacking back line, kick the goals and has a monstrous boot. He is currently making a back line tick quite well. He can also play just like Manu if need be.........................any guesses.






















Pie Man.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:If Farrell is playing we will always crab across the field, we need either a 15 or winger who is going to enter the line running against the flow so to speak, unless that threat is there, we will get nowhere. Our only option then would be Burrell / Manu partnership as they at least will straighten up and if not go around players, go through them ad break the gain line.

I am going to get slated for this, but there is one English player in the AP that hasn't retired from Int. rugby who has the skill set to run an attacking back line, kick the goals and has a monstrous boot. He is currently making a back line tick quite well. He can also play just like Manu if need be.........................any guesses.

Pie Man.

You got me...

And a belly which has been very well invested in.......

If we're going to get slated, and I'm not a fan the jumping infront of buses school of coaching, but if the one that can't be named continues to concistently play at a high level then he will make a lot of people feel very uncomfortable at the the thought of his selection.

I wanted a Twelvetrees & Burrell partnership in the lead up to to the AIs.  With Tuilagi out for the 6N, that would be my preferred choice again.

Burrell is playing 12 for Saints, but he's 26yo and the bulk of his career prior to Saints was at 13, he knows the position well.  He also played 13 outside Eastmond for England against the CONSUR XV in the summer.

His passing game has really come on in the last year and I think that would stand us in good stead in the outside channel, but critically he will straighten the backline (where the players currently inside 13 are tending to the lateral) and give us the ability to get over the gainline doing so.  He doesn't have dancing feet, but he does show nice shifts in his running line before contact to break through or between players.  I think the wingers that we want to play need that sort of gainline player to feed off.


Regarding the other possible options.  Tomkins was given a fair crack of the whip (important to do so once you select a player as not all can find their feet on their first appearance, particularly with so many changes to the rest of the backline for this series, Twelvetrees took until the third AI to show something of worth), but I don't think he showed enough of what he's demonstrated for Saracens and would need to develop a bit more to be warrant further starting.  I think the Saxons is where he is at present.

Trinder showed good form at the beginning of the season having struggled last and was unfortunate with injuries over the last couple of months to put him out of selection contention.  He's a very decent club player with good touches to his game and I'd be willing to see him given an opportunity, but in truth I don't see him as being any more above Saxons level than Tomkins.

Joseph looked quality a couple of seasons back, but has been a fair bit off that since.  He really needs to focus on his game at club level and show that he hasn't stalled.  Saxons at best at present.

Eastmond again showed some tantalising aspects at the beginning of the season before injury, but he's not a starting 13 for me, though he would be my 23 shirt selection.  Disappointed to hear about the recent incident at Bath though, doesn't fill me with confidence regarding his attitude and won't have impressed the English coaches.

Based on last season's performances my more agile 13 of choice would have been Daly.  Unfortunate with injury for most of this season so far and stuck at 15 for Wasps because of their injuries though.  If he has a strong season between now and the 6N as well as some outing at centre I'd definitely have him in the running.  At the least he's another very good 23 shirt candidate.

Obviously - and I'm not saying our opinions don't count - the decision maker in all this is one Stuart Lancaster. So who does everyone think he will select?

Injuries aside I fear Lancaster will keep as is with Twelvetrees and Tomkins versus the French in Paris. I just don't think SL has a scooby in terms of selection. He might however replace Tomkins with Eastmond - not for the right reasons but because he is a fool who is influenced by the fools in his ear who make decisions for the wrong reasons.

Would Twelvetrees and Eastmond actually work at test level? Well I can think of one Wesley Fofana who would offer some searching questions. The defensive combination would be the issue, however both players are genuine quality and if they run strait and hard and don't crab then I would happily prefer them to a Tomkins included partnership.

I wrote on another thread that Lancasters success or failure in selecting a creative attacking back line, that scores tries, will ultimately define him as a coach and this generation of England players as they attempt to win the 2015 WC.

SL is essentially fairly conservative and values solid defence as obligatory. So Barritt and Manu it is. And Farrell, because SL doesn’t trust Flood. 12T is an interesting option, but what exactly is he – a playmaker, a bosh merchant, primarily defensive..? – can’t see what all the fuss was about. He improved over the series but from a really low level to ok-ish. Barritt is solid and consistent, and can beat the ABs. Manu is simply streets ahead of the competition. He can beat the ABs as well – which is nice. Sorry, but England’s search for 4 excellent centre options continues, and shows no sign of being achieved anytime soon. Hurry back Brad & Manu.

We might not know what is going on with Eastmond. Seems there are issues to be sorted.
Will he stay in Union? Or is this misreported?
http://www.espnscrum.com/england/rugby/story/206181.html

If SL keeps Tomkins then he can give the wingers gardening leave. They'll never get a pass from him that's certain.

To me twelvetrees is the maybe best centre I have seen play for England for a generation. I know its not saying much but he appears to have the skills to unlock defences unlike any of the other contenders

Did anyone see the story about Eastmond walking out on his team at half time and reportedly saying he wants to go back to league?

Not sure if there is any substance to it but worth noting if his heart isn't in playing union

BamBam wrote:Did anyone see the story about Eastmond walking out on his team at half time and reportedly saying he wants to go back to league?

Not sure if there is any substance to it but worth noting if his heart isn't in playing union

bath said they have sorted it, he was disciplined, and they are working on resolved some personal/family type issues he has. not sure what that means.

Not too clued up on the domestic scene but as a team that orientates itself around forward dominance it depends whether you want variation or just one strong form of attack. Personal view is that the most dynamic we looked in years was with Flood at 10 and Tindall/Flutey at centre. Barrit, Tuilagi and Tomkins offer strength, powerful running and a strong defence but how much attacking intent does that actually create?

Twelvetrees offers something a bit different so is a certain starter and would like to see Eastmond partner him or someone equally dynamic. We need to move away from this crash, bang, wallop style we've got ourselves entrenched with.

Barney McGrew did it wrote:SL is essentially fairly conservative and values solid defence as obligatory. So Barritt and Manu it is. And Farrell, because SL doesn’t trust Flood. 12T is an interesting option, but what exactly is he – a playmaker, a bosh merchant, primarily defensive..? – can’t see what all the fuss was about. He improved over the series but from a really low level to ok-ish. Barritt is solid and consistent, and can beat the ABs. Manu is simply streets ahead of the competition. He can beat the ABs as well – which is nice. Sorry, but England’s search for 4 excellent centre options continues, and shows no sign of being achieved anytime soon. Hurry back Brad & Manu.

Wow! Unreconstructed or what! Listen England will never again beat NZ with a centre pairing of Barritt & Tuilagi - Barritt offers zero creativity and is too similar to Tuilagi. We have to score tries to beat the very top sides and this combination will not do this.

The fact is Tuilagi is out of the 6N so deal with it and try and think how we are going to move on from a losing 10 man rugby formula. Twelvetrees has the spatial awareness and skills to execute from another realm compared to Barritt - THAT IS WHAT ALL THE FUSS IS ABOUT!

Obviously alternative opinions are welcome  

TJ wrote:To me twelvetrees is the maybe best centre I have seen play for England for a generation.  I know its not saying much but he appears to have the skills to unlock defences unlike any of the other contenders

Agreed, I've been banging the drum for over 2 years now. SCW would have selected him a long time since, if we were OZ he would have 30+ caps by now.

Why do the english always seems surprised to have a turgid, uninspring, boring backline? In the history of the game this has been the case for 99% of their three quarters. Goes back to the nature of their game from age-grade all the way up to the senior game. They will always have a pack of orcs that are difficult to break down and a hard-working, albeit talentless 10

BigWilly wrote:Why do the english always seems surprised to have a turgid, uninspring, boring backline? In the history of the game this has been the case for 99% of their three quarters. Goes back to the nature of their game from age-grade all the way up to the senior game.  They will always have a pack of orcs that are difficult to break down and a hard-working, albeit talentless 10

Go away, this thread is for the discussion of the English centre pairing for the 6N and NZ summer tour. If you're not discussing that then just do the maths.

I think Lancaster has given Tomkins a fair crack of the whip this Autumn and will go for someone else in the 6N. With Eastmond seemingly out (apparently released this Autumn for personal reasons) I would say it's out of 3 to be outside 36: Trinder, Burrell and Joseph. Depends on who shows the form and who fits best. I would think Trinder at the moment.

I think JJ is a fairly safe bet. His defence is OK, he did alright against SA in SA so he's not going to get completely bowled over. Trinder looked in good form when I saw him though, and seems to have tightened up a bit defensively. I was leaning towards him but thinking we may need to pick on form closer to the date. It would be good if JJ can find some form by then because I'd rather bring a new cap in gradually.

formerly known as Sam wrote:You need to select your centres based around your 10s abilities. Farrell's inability to orchestrate a cohesive attacking game suits a boshing partnership with ideally a creative 15 to offer incision in the wide channels. I'd go Burrell/Twelvetrees is Farrell remains at 10.

If Lancaster has the balls to tell Farrell Snr his son isn't the messiah then bring in Flood and pair him with Eastmond/Twelvetrees and Tomkins. Tomkins I think can make it but needs to be taking passes on the gainline not 10m behind it.

Youngs or Care at 9 to take the edge off the oppoaition's rush defence would help give our centres a little more room as well.

Farrell is not the messiah but he's a much better choice than the other 10s at the moment.

Perhaps Burns should get an opportunity in the 6 nations but certainly not Flood.

Flood has looked so good with ball in hand for England hasn't he?

Look Sam I know you dislike Farrell intensely and  Flood but come on.... You're normally such an intelligent poster but seem to not acknowledge Flood's faults or to give any credit whatsoever to Farrell Jr. He does have strengths as well as flaws.

Flood had yet another opportunity to show himself better with Farrell with ball in hand but failed to make any sort of impact. Neither did B.Youngs for that matter.

13 is a real big problem.

I know people like to bash Tomkins. Fair enough, He wasn't good but his potential replacements hardly feel me with confidence.

Just got to hope some of the contenders like Joseph,Trinder and Eastmond find some form.

Burrell must get a run in the 6Ns. He is a good distributor and scores tries. He should come in for the League player Tomkins. Tomkins doesn't understand Union yet. He's still counts in 6s. Finally we must find 3 or 4 decent wingers who can perform well at test level. Job done.

englandglory4ever I don't think playing Burns at 13 is a wise idea.

Certainly would have Burns as 2nd choice 10 at the moment though.

13 is that key position. Tomkins did not play well. You are correct he needs to go back to club level and iron out his flaws.

I am not confident about any of the 13s.

At 12 it's a fight between Barritt,Burrell and 36.

36 barely passed the ball to Tomkins which stifled England's attack. He is meant to be an all round 12 but I didn't see any of that in terms of slick passing etc.

Think you're being a touch harsh there beshocked. After the initial poor game against Aus I think 36 really showed what he could offer. Tomkins did look a touch short of confidence. I think we're nearly there in terms of knowing our strongest team.

Tindall got a MOM at the weekend - surely paving the way for the magic that was "Tindall and Noon"  

No 7 and half I thought 36 made good carries but in terms of helping get the ball more to Tomkins and the back three I thought we should have done more personally.

His defence was pretty good but he did make errors like that chargedown.

Really? I don't think we are close to having a cohesive backline yet. Certainly in terms of attack.

Also is it the player's fault or is it the coaches?

I don't claim to be an expert on center play but as a forward I would have been very happy for 12T not to pass to Tomkins - every time he did it was either turned over or scrum time.

I'm not sure giving Tomkins more of the ball would have helped. The ball did get out to the back 3 on a couple of occassions and was turned over. Tomkins just had a game to forget. Looked a bit unsure to me as I'd heard good things about his off loading game but he seemed content in not giving NZ an easy pass to pick off and ironically lost it in contact a few times. In terms of strongest team I think if we had all players available Lancs would pick Corbs, Hartley, Cole
Lawes, Launchbury,
Wood, Robshaw, Vunipola/Morgan
Dickson/Youngs Farrell
Yarde, 36, Tuilagi, Ashton/Wade and Brown.

Not neccesarily what I would pick but I think this is how it's looking. In regards to attacking there were too many errors in the backs which weren't down to coaching.

On a serious note: imo of the backs only Brown looked the real deal on Saturday. England look to have a set of forwards with enough grunt to cause anyone problems and some strength in depth (maybe not at hooker). In the backs Dickson is not a smart enough footballer and the 10, 12, 13 positions asked nothing in attack. Can't see Ashton or Foden playing wing at the next WC. SL has a lot of work to do to find the ideal backline.

In matches like France away and Wales at home you need experience and good defenders.

I think it would be a little naive to dismiss Barritt. He's a very good player, very good tackler. If England have Yarde on one wing and Wade or someone else eager on the other I think the backline would be decent.

In the end 13 was a real issue for england this AIs and it meant the wings hardly ever got the ball. With Barritt you are a little more secure and open to risking the pass etc.

As a Muggle who doesn't watch the Jeff religiously, I have tried and tried to see what Tomkins brings to the table. And I've got nothing. He was very nervous against the ABs and his judgement of both offensive and defensive channels was off. He's not as much of a tank as Manu (few are) but doesn't seem to have the footballing skills of 36 (or a Luke Marshall/Cory Allen/Matt Scott for that matter).
 
Twelvetrees always threatened to break the ABs line. Tomkins never, ever did. I'm not sure how much better he's going to get. Then again, I did also say that about Barritt and he improved a lot in an England shirt.
 
I am not wumming or 'being funny' but why not use this period as an opportunity to try two well rounded centres again? Being able to distribute with the head up is the most underrated midfield skill but it's the thing that creates the most holes. I would go with 36 and Trinder and see how, say, three games together pan out. Not sure I understand the comments that Trinder's not a long term option. The kid's only 24.

no 7 and 1/2 I agree. Tomkins was poor but it doesn't mean that the 13 shouldn't be getting the ball more.

offload it's about that balance.

People like to criticise Farrell for what he doesn't do yet forget what he does do. His tackling was ferocious. 8/0 according to Chequeredjersey. When you have a 10 who makes his tackles and forces errors it helps (it was his tackle that would have led to Foden's interception try if wasnt pulled back).

36 has been talked up as a ball playing 12 but he's not done that yet.

With Tomkins not playing well the backs were going to find it tough.

Foden missed a tackle on Read for NZ's 2nd try but strangely enough he doesn't seem to get criticised for it.

Foden,Ashton and Brown simply is not a threatening enough back three on paper.

George carlin perhaps Trinder deserves a chance but I haven't seen anything special from him to warrant the 13 shirt. None of the 13 contenders fill me with confidence.

Pairing might depend on matching centres up to the threat of the team opposite.
If a bish bosh type pairing are opposite, then maybe 12T+ Barritt is a good compromise.
If a more open broken style of game is expected 12T+ Eastmond could be an exciting combo.
Or 12T and Trinder who work creatively together at club, albeit behind a gash pack at the mo' so unproven you might say at club level.
Long list:

12T
Manu
Trinder
Barritt
Burrell
Eastmond

Perm combos according to oppos. Also trial the green lads against some of the weaker oppos.
(no disrespect) but vs Italy Scotland rather than ABs or Aussie.

beshocked wrote:George carlin perhaps Trinder deserves a chance but I haven't seen anything special from him to warrant the 13 shirt. None of the 13 contenders fill me with confidence.

Have we seen enough of Tomkins though- its a tight choice and it is tough but we do have to explore other options. Manu is obviously no.1, and I think if JJ had shown some kind of form he'd be in there in Manu's absence, but he hasnt, so we are onto the next group.

There are more problems than getting the centres to gel.  36 was getting the ball plus the NZ defence as Farrell tends to play too deep and is a slow passer.  This gets worse with Youngs at the moment as he dithers at the breakdown.  If England can get the ball out quickly 36 might show what he can do...as V Scotland last 6Ns.

IMO Tomkins has had his chance.  He's too slow and doesn't read the game well enough to be an international 13.  I would like to see 36 & Manu (injury permitting)...looked good at the Tigers.  Otherwise Bath & England need to work on JJ to get him back into form.

In terms of centres I'm not sure what Trinder has done to force his way into this discussion.

Eastmond must be brought back into the fold as he is the most gifted play making centre we have. Those feet and that brain should not be subbed for Banahan at half time because the pack can't give him the ball at club level. What a spectacular waste by Bath so far this season.

Twelvetrees I'm a big fan of but I don't think he's playing close to his best. He muscled his way through a gap or two but so far we've seen none of his booming boot, pacey outside breaks or his flat passing to release the outside backs (he has a pass like a rocket). If that is down to Billy then he needs to be dropped or given a kick up the backside as he can go into himself in big games, if It's down to the coaches then they are failing.

Speaking of failing, Beshocked, Farrell has been dire for the entire AIs. In a 10 minute cameo off the bench Flood provided more gain line passes whilst the ABs were camped in his half than Owen has in three weeks. That must change or Owen must be sent back to Sarries.

Beshocked...i think peoples criticism of Farrell is the perceptions of that position.

FH is seen as an attacking position...players like Carter, Cooper, Sexton etc etc are selected for their attacking abilities, with any defensive issues picked up by the system and other players  like the back rowers etc.

We seem to pick FH's on their defensive and kicking ability first.

For me at the moment Farrell is doing well, as long as we keep Twelvetrees outside him. Give those a chance.
Add in Burrell or Trinder outside and Yarde and Wade then we begin to look on paper like a team that can create.
In fact the more i think of it the below offers quite a bit, and would still remain defensively solid as is necesity for Lancaster....

10 Farrell
11 Yarde
12 Twelvetrees
13 Burrell
14 Wade
15 Brown

But for me if Burns can find some form then he must move ahead of Flood on the bench.

What's the latest on Eastmond then?

Think we were watching a different game Sam as I thought Flood was poor coming off the bench in these AIs. Not sure he's done anything at international level to justify being picked ahead of Burns and should be counting his lucky stars he plays for Leicester rather than behind the Glos pack.

Sam I agree with you about trinder but not eastmond. Eastmond is unproven, seems a bit overrated to be honest.

I actually agree about Billy to an extent. Deserves more time though.

Such a shame that you're so one eyed when it comes to Flood and Farrell though.

Saying something like Farrell has been dire for the entire AIs is so off the mark it's disappointing. He's been far from perfect, he does have his flaws sure but he's done good things like kicking everything vs NZ and scoring that try vs Australia.

Perhaps you watched a different match? What most people saw was an ineffective spell by Flood where he made little to no impact whatsoever.

Only you would want Flood starting for England. Most see Farrell and Burns as the top two fly halves.