France team v England

First topic message reminder :

http://www.espn.co.uk/six-nations-2014/rugby/story/211933.html

23 players picked - only 9 backs, so you can probably work out the backs - Fickou and Doussain on the bench ?

Forwards: Thomas Domingo (Clermont), Yannick Forestier (Castres), Benjamin Kayser (Clermont), Dimitri Szarzewski (Racing-Métro), Nicolas Mas (Montpellier), Rabah Slimani (Stade Français), Alexandre Flanquart (Stade Français), Yoann Maestri (Toulouse), Pascal Papé (Stade Français, captain), Bernard Le Roux (Racing-Métro), Antoine Burban (Stade Français), Yannick Nyanga (Toulouse), Damien Chouly (Clermont), Louis Picamoles (Toulouse).

Backs: Jean-Marc Doussain (Toulouse), Maxime Machenaud (Racing-Métro), Rémi Talès (Castres), Mathieu Bastareaud (Toulon), Gaël Fickou (Toulouse), Wesley Fofana (Clermont), Yoann Huget (Toulouse), Maxime Médard (Toulouse), Brice Dulin (Castres)

Lots of new names in there. Again. Tactic for England to beat this team = knacker Remi tales as early as possible ? Get Big Billy V running over him.

Bit disappointed not to see Michalak play in this years 6 nations. Will miss his comedy value.

I don't understand people suggesting Youngs is in terrible form then putting Dickson at 9. The latter has been very average of late.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Could we see:

9. Youngs
10. Ford

12. Farrell
13. Burrell

Suits in with SL's distributor at 12 and direct runner at 13.

The media reports all state with great confidence that Twelvetrees is starting. Whether that's a tip off or just watching training I don't know, but it seems decided.

Other than place kicking, what would the benefit of Farrell at 12 be over Twelvetrees in your view?

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Could we see:

9. Youngs
10. Ford

12. Farrell
13. Burrell

Suits in with SL's distributor at 12 and direct runner at 13.

If it's a distributor at 12 then it'll be 36 no question. I don't think Ford will even make the bench for France. It think we'll see 17. M Vunipola 18. H Thomas 19. D Attwood 20. B Morgan 21. R Wigglesworth 22. A Goode 23. C Ashton

So many of the young players just were not ready a year, or 2 years ago. At the time SL was fire fighting rather than building. Some are barely ready now.

Having said all that I really dont know what to expect of them at all.

Now I don't want to be over the top here but how many England fans genuinely think this team is anywhere near to being a complete side in time for the home RWC?

Aside from some good pack performances recently the rest is all at sea. Even with Tuilagi back we're not sure on style or positions.

Realistically we're about four seasons and an attack coach away from being genuine contenders for No.1

thomh wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Could we see:

9. Youngs
10. Ford

12. Farrell
13. Burrell

Suits in with SL's distributor at 12 and direct runner at 13.

The media reports all state with great confidence that Twelvetrees is starting. Whether that's a tip off or just watching training I don't know, but it seems decided.

Other than place kicking, what would the benefit of Farrell at 12 be over Twelvetrees in your view?

That would be horrendous. Not to say that it couldnt happen but jesus.

No Farrell 36 is a far more likely combination, I think even Lancaster accepts that both centers need the ability to at least step forward if not actually run.

The point above regarding Fords chances on the bench has merit. Lancaster rarely picked a second specialist 10 in his time as saxons coach, and we know theres noone seriously threatening Farrells place or an impact 10 who would fundamentally change englands style should things need spicing up when plan A has failed. 36 or Goode could cover 10/12 if theres an injury.

Sgt Pooly I think I would dread that selection more!

chjw131 I really hope those are not the selections on the bench.

You either start Ashton or leave him out completely. Ditto Wigglesworth.

You too have both made me realise that Lancaster's selection could get worse.

Chjw131 wrote:Now I don't want to be over the top here but how many England fans genuinely think this team is anywhere near to being a complete side in time for the home RWC?

Aside from some good pack performances recently the rest is all at sea. Even with Tuilagi back we're not sure on style or positions.

Realistically we're about four seasons and an attack coach away from being genuine contenders for No.1

But then with 2 centers, 3 wings and a full back injured plus no genuinely convincing option at 9 what more do you expect?

The pack looks good (aside form cover in some positions, again due to injuries).
The full back is settled and as much as hes limited the 10 is a solid player. The rest of the backline is waiting for the medics to do their job. You cant really expect a side to look complete when its battered by injuries, no different to when Johnson had to go in with his 3rd choice fly half and 4th choice outside center.

Wiggleworth does (sort of) cover 10 also, so maybe not the worst choice on the bench. Would still be surprising.

thomh wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Could we see:

9. Youngs
10. Ford

12. Farrell
13. Burrell

Suits in with SL's distributor at 12 and direct runner at 13.

The media reports all state with great confidence that Twelvetrees is starting. Whether that's a tip off or just watching training I don't know, but it seems decided.

Other than place kicking, what would the benefit of Farrell at 12 be over Twelvetrees in your view?

I wasn't a backline I was suggesting but something I could see SL putting out.

I don't think SL is fan of 36, he's hardly impressed at Int level so that would be understandable.

lostinwales I feel that Dickson and Wigglesworth are too similar so just have 1 in the 23. Not both.

Burrell at 13 in his first cap for England.....  

Two rookie wingers.  

Chjw131 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Could we see:

9. Youngs
10. Ford

12. Farrell
13. Burrell

Suits in with SL's distributor at 12 and direct runner at 13.

If it's a distributor at 12 then it'll be 36 no question. I don't think Ford will even make the bench for France. It think we'll see 17. M Vunipola 18. H Thomas 19. D Attwood 20. B Morgan 21. R Wigglesworth 22. A Goode 23. C Ashton

I think maybe Eastmond, maybe Watson, maybe Ashton but I agree - I see Goode and 36 covering 10

10 mins in and Farrell picks up an injury.......I'd hate to see 36 or Goode cover 10.

Id always put a good 10 on the bench rather than winger personally.

beshocked wrote:lostinwales I feel that Dickson and Wigglesworth are too similar so just have 1 in the 23. Not both.

Burrell at 13 in his first cap for England.....  

Two rookie wingers.  

Care injured and Youngs out of form --> not much choice there...

Is Dickson in better form than Youngs?

beshocked wrote:Sgt Pooly I think I would dread that selection more!

chjw131 I really hope those are not the selections on the bench.

You either start Ashton or leave him out completely. Ditto Wigglesworth.

You too have both made me realise that Lancaster's selection could get worse.

Ha, agreed beshocked it could be really bad. He's not renowned for good bench selections anyway. The bench pack is the only positive point if you accept we have a TH crisis and give Thomas a bye.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Is Dickson in better form than Youngs?

Having watched Tigers last few games with Youngs playing, I don't see how it is physically possible for him to not be, he'd have to be Freddie Burns to manage it

I personally think both are struggling for form.

I'd go Youngs every time, even on form Dickson isn't a Int player.

I wish Care weren't injured...

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:Now I don't want to be over the top here but how many England fans genuinely think this team is anywhere near to being a complete side in time for the home RWC?

Aside from some good pack performances recently the rest is all at sea. Even with Tuilagi back we're not sure on style or positions.

Realistically we're about four seasons and an attack coach away from being genuine contenders for No.1

But then with 2 centers, 3 wings and a full back injured plus no genuinely convincing option at 9 what more do you expect?

The pack looks good (aside form cover in some positions, again due to injuries).
The full back is settled and as much as hes limited the 10 is a solid player. The rest of the backline is waiting for the medics to do their job. You cant really expect a side to look complete when its battered by injuries, no different to when Johnson had to go in with his 3rd choice fly half and 4th choice outside center.

I agree the side's had injuries to deal with but look who those injuries are too: on the wing front Yarde (3 caps?) and Wade (2 caps?) hardly established top class players.

The two centres injured are Tuilagi and I assume you mean Johnathan Joseph? Tuilagi is the major missing piece but the whole playing philosophy seems to revolve around the guy there's no alternative and no like for like replacement. Joseph has only shown some signs of form recently and was dropped to the Saxons at the last squad announcement.

We'll have injuries for the RWC but are we seriously just holding out for Tuilagi to be ok in order to have any semblance of back play? And even then it mainly revolves around giving him the ball in little to no space and asking him to cross the gainline.

Any change in the midfield and wings is greatfully received at the moment. 36 deserves another chance after performing quite well for England apart from the AIs where hwas was mediocre at best. To be fair to him though Tomkins was well below par during those run of games and that would make any 9, 10 and 12 look worse than they are.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:10 mins in and Farrell picks up an injury.......I'd hate to see 36 or Goode cover 10.

Id always put a good 10 on the bench rather than winger personally.

But that comes back to a do you pick your team on the off chance something happens which hardly ever happens or to give you the best chance of winning assuming the game goes as normal?
Twelvetrees is not a bad FH by any means, and has a better kicking range that Farrell (just dont ask him to take one close in from the touch line)

Personally Id be just as worried by the prospect of Ford taking over 10 minutes in but hey ho.

Id like to see a bench that gives the option of covering for the three amigos incase their mums come to collect them at half time or they just get ripped to shreds by the French.

I see your point PSW but a good 10 at Int level is essential, especially away from home imo

Chjw131 wrote:
We'll have injuries for the RWC but are we seriously just holding out for Tuilagi to be ok in order to have any semblance of back play? And even then it mainly revolves around giving him the ball in little to no space and asking him to cross the gainline.

Yes and no. We are trying out a bunch of new players to find an alternative.

In some ways Id be more worried if they were sticking with what we already knew didnt work.

Im very torn on this to be fair. My inclination is to hate everything Lancaster does. In this case he appears to be leaning toward doing the exact opposite (aside from Dickson) of everything we recently critisize him for, although possibly doing something worse.

At least he keeps it interesting

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I see your point PSW but a good 10 at Int level is essential, especially away from home imo

Maybe Ive just forgiven Twelvetrees but not Ford yet   

I remember being horrified in one of the 2012 tests when Lancaster went in with just Hodgson as a specialist fly half and Farrell as the cover from center. Turns out even though he had barely played a game there at club level he probably shouldve been the starting FH
#justsaying

Care I thought was in full training with the squad and should be free for the first game.
The question is, is he sharp enough after missing a few matches.
Agree that Youngs and Dickson are not in form at the moment.

IMO - Barritt hasn't had enough gametime yet after long term injury. SL wouldn't stick 2 rookies in the centre together - he and they would be crucified by France and the Press.

I personally would like to see -

Care
Farrell
? Ashton
36
Burrell
? May
Brown

I know that would mean playing a 12 at 13. But the same would be for Eastmond who normally plays inside Joseph.

propdavid_london wrote:Care I thought was in full training with the squad and should be free for the first game.  
The question is, is he sharp enough after missing a few matches.  
Agree that Youngs and Dickson are not in form at the moment.  

IMO - Barritt hasn't had enough gametime yet after long term injury.  SL wouldn't stick 2 rookies in the centre together - he and they would be crucified by France and the Press.  

I personally would like to see -

Care
Farrell
? Ashton
36
Burrell
? May
Brown

I know that would mean playing a 12 at 13.  But the same would be for Eastmond who normally plays inside Joseph.  

If wish Wasps would play Daly at 13. I wish Lowe wasn't injured (for many many reasons). I wish Manu wasn't injured. How do we have no real 13s in the EPS?

I know - we have no specialist 13's in the EPS that are fit and ready to go.
Even Joseph is now out from the Saxons for a number of months.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I see your point PSW but a good 10 at Int level is essential, especially away from home imo

Maybe Ive just forgiven Twelvetrees but not Ford yet   

I remember being horrified in one of the 2012 tests when Lancaster went in with just Hodgson as a specialist fly half and Farrell as the cover from center. Turns out even though he had barely played a game there at club level he probably shouldve been the starting FH
#justsaying

Hadn't Farrell already played the majority of the previous Premiership season, including winning the final, at 10 by that point? He'd only shifted to centre to accommodate Hodgson.

thomh wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I see your point PSW but a good 10 at Int level is essential, especially away from home imo

Maybe Ive just forgiven Twelvetrees but not Ford yet   

I remember being horrified in one of the 2012 tests when Lancaster went in with just Hodgson as a specialist fly half and Farrell as the cover from center. Turns out even though he had barely played a game there at club level he probably shouldve been the starting FH
#justsaying

Hadn't Farrell already played the majority of the previous Premiership season, including winning the final, at 10 by that point? He'd only shifted to centre to accommodate Hodgson.

Well said.    I think PSW just wanted to blank that final out of his memory.

#itsnottwitter

Haha

beshocked wrote:

thomh wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I see your point PSW but a good 10 at Int level is essential, especially away from home imo

Maybe Ive just forgiven Twelvetrees but not Ford yet   

I remember being horrified in one of the 2012 tests when Lancaster went in with just Hodgson as a specialist fly half and Farrell as the cover from center. Turns out even though he had barely played a game there at club level he probably shouldve been the starting FH
#justsaying

Hadn't Farrell already played the majority of the previous Premiership season, including winning the final, at 10 by that point? He'd only shifted to centre to accommodate Hodgson.

Well said.    I think PSW just wanted to blank that final out of his memory.

Bit of that

I can say with certainty though that Twelvetrees has played more games starting at 10 in his career than Farrell had by the time he got his first cap there.

If I remeber correctly Gloucester only signed him on the condition that he would be willing to play 12 occasionally  

I wouldn't say Twelvetrees was a good 10 though, he scrapes through at AP level but is a long way off an Int 10.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I wouldn't say Twelvetrees was a good 10 though, he scrapes through at AP level but is a long way off an Int 10.

Which is exactly what everyone said about Farrell ( and many still do)

We are only talking about injury cover here, and whether or not 36 could offer that vs having Ford on the bench for no reason other than the chance Farrell gets a knock

Disagree.

Not many have suggested that Farrell isn't a good AP 10, the opposite is the general I think.

Twelvetrees on the other hand is average to poor at AP level.

10 is THE key position on the park, I don't want an average AP 10 playing there for England.

It's also not just injury cover, a different 10 to Farrell would allow us to alter our game plan if required.

Right but does Ford offer that much of a different option? I really dont think he does, nor enough solidity to be a close out player. Maybe Im just hating on him but really I dont see in the absence of Wilkinson, Hodgson, Flood, Burns and Cipriani that Englands 7th best fly half deserves a spot on the bench any more than Myler does.

People seem quite down on 36 as a fly half. He tool Burns spot and kept flood out of the tigers shirt for a while. He aint that bad, and if hes good enough to be a guaranteed starter at 12 in the "second fly half" role then hes not so bad that the world would stop revolving if he had to play at 10 for a few minutes in a game thats already lost. He also ..offers a different skillset to Farrell. And used to perform the cover role for Lancasters Saxons

Just throwing it out there.

On this seasons performances Ford is a much better FH than Twelvetrees.

I do think he would add something different to Farrell and we need to blood a viable option incase Farrell doesn't work or he gets crocked for a substantial amount of time.

We can't just have one option at FH going into the WC. We need to adopt some forward thinking.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:On this seasons performances Ford is a much better FH than Twelvetrees.

I do think he would add something different to Farrell and we need to blood a viable option incase Farrell doesn't work or he gets crocked for a substantial amount of time.

We can't just have one option at FH going into the WC. We need to adopt some forward thinking.

Is now the right time to experiment...?

I think Ford looks a great option and that he could do a great job.

It's not experimenting, it's blooding SL's second choice FH.

Ford needs game time, give him it from the bench.

Well thats true regarding the need to develop new options and probably the most convincing argument Ive heard to have included Cipriani in the squad

Its a pretty depressing state of affairs but with long term projects like Clegg and Burns flunking out and the early retirements of Hodgson and Flood England are short on choice despite there being a lot of english 10s out there.
I personally dont have the hard on for ford some people do, but each to their own. From the squad I dont see where we would go if farrell decided to join Toulon next week other than him.

I'm not Fords biggest fan either but he's in there so lets give him some game time. The boy has talent but he needs testing.

I'm quite happy with Cips nowhere near the squad.

We do have a specialist 13 there...Elliot Daly. He's in the Saxons but its essentially one big squad. He's been playing 15 more so to cover injuries at wasps. But he showed enough for me on Saturday that he is the type of player than can make things happen...he can break the line and open it up.

He also has a monstrous boot which is a huge bonus.

Having thought about it...seen the Saxons game etc...id go for it.

9 Whoever
10 Farrell
11 May
12 Burrell / Barritt
13 Daly
14 Ashton
15 Brown

But the forwards are critical and they simply have to do some much more with ball in hand aswell. We've hardly seen any of them really breaching the line making big yards...and I think its massive that we see the like of Mako, Billy, Hartley, Ben Morgan doing that on Saturday.

Is Daly a specialist 13 GF? He rarely plays there for Wasps

Well I appreciate hes played a bit at 15 recently...but most of his rugby has been at 13 so yes I would say he is a specialist...and even in the 40 mins on Saturday showed it.

I've rarely seen him turn out there over the years, usually just the odd game when players are injured.

Id worry about him defensively at centre, I don't think he's physical enough.

I was listening to an interview with Christian Wade last night and he thinks 15 is Daly's natural position, I'd tend to agree.

... He was a 13 in the u20 team with Ford and Farrell and played most (all?) of his first season and lots of the next one at Wasps at 13...

Over the years was suggesting he hasn't played there much for a while.

If he was playing there week in week out they'd be a case for him but he isn't.

Well if it turn out that he will become predominantly a 15 then I really do think that's a waste.

What our options:

Tuilagi - First choice, currently injured.
Joseph - Came to prominence after a great season, but not really produced those performances since
Lowe - Long term injury, doesn't seem rated by Lancaster
Tomkins - Didn't really shine in the AI's
Hopper - Not an international level in my eyes
Trinder - Done ok but not set the world alight.

Others..
Eastmond - More a 12
Burrell - More a 12
Banahan - ??

Who have I missed?

I'm a massive Daly fan though, be a great bench option.