George Ford

First topic message reminder :

Having watched the Exeter v Bath game today I think it is clear that England need to pick Ford if we want to beat the top three teams on a regular basis.

I'm not into hyping players or claiming they are world class but this guy is very special and is in great form for Bath, he seems to grow in confidence every game I see him play and offers a lot more than Farrell IMO.

Yes he might not be international class for some but unless he is given some game time then we will know!

The Mail are rarely wrong!

Lets hope they're right this time.

Ford will get a good taste of Int rugger against the Irish

Yeah be good to see him get some gametime.

I hope Burns gets back to form next season aswell though and their battle will keep Farrell on his toes aswell...

When Flood first started out at Tigers he played the best rugby of his career. If they can get in some quality backs coaches and work out a better all round game then Burns could be immense.

Scrumpy wrote:The Mail are rarely wrong!

So long as you remember to turn the paper over before reading...

Well i was a big fan of Burns form last season and if he can find that then he will push Ford all the way.

That in turn will force Farrell to continue performing and progressing. We could be in a nice position come the 10 spot in the next year or so...

I think the Mail have been bang on the money for the previous two games.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well i was a big fan of Burns form last season and if he can find that then he will push Ford all the way.

That in turn will force Farrell to continue performing and progressing. We could be in a nice position come the 10 spot in the next year or so...

Agree GF it would be nice to see Burns settle in behind a decent Tigers pack and hopefully he'll be able to push both Ford and Farrell. Slade has looked good in the games i've seen him play as well so there's options.

DaveM wrote:Baseless apart from the fact the England coaching team of Lancaster, Farrell and Catt think that they are credible options. But what do they know?

Nobody is saying the bench is ideal - I've said above that I think Ford will be in the matchday 23 from the summer onwards. This will give England more ability to change the game. The team continues to evolve, but if Farrell gets injured in the 5th minute I think Goode would do a decent job for now.

They're also the coaching team who picked Tom Croft, Chris Robshaw and Tom Wood in a backrow for a crunch international match.

I don't think that bowing to a coaches' infinite wisdom is always the best call, do you? If so what on earth are Scotland complaining about?!

Just because a man is an international coach doesn't mean we can't question the logic of his coaching decisions. We all make mistakes and sometimes being further away from the problem (due to seeing a larger picture and also less bias) allows fans to see what the coaches cannot. It's like when Lancaster said his subs decisions against France weren't a bad idea and he doesn't pre plan subs. He obviously does and it obviously was but he clearly doesn't think so. He's biased and not that many people have the insight to admit it when this happens

The coaching team clearly did have Goode and 36 in mind as flyhalf cover, and I think both could have handled a stint at 10 in the last two matches.

In the end, though, Lancaster didn't have the courage of his convictions. He hauled Care off but left Farrell on, even though the younger man has been getting through a more physical workload.

Against France, he would have had half an eye on goalkicking options in such a close match. However, if he didn't trust anyone else to take the kicks from the 23 in his match day squad, then that suggests he got his selection wrong and ought to have another designated kicker.

If 36 and Goode were there as flyhalf and kicking back-up, then we should have been prepared to play one of them there to see if they could really hack it. If Ford is now in pole position then he needs game time. That doesn't mean ten minutes at the end of a match only if it is already in the bag.

CHj,

Whlst the choice of game to try out Wood and Croft together etc wasnt the wisest we had all been saying CAN we fit those three together? Is was emphatically proven not and thankfully never tried again.

GeordieFalcon wrote:CHj,

Whlst the choice of game to try out Wood and Croft together etc wasnt the wisest we had all been saying CAN we fit those three together? Is was emphatically proven not and thankfully never tried again.

I can't say I saw many people advocating those three in a BR.

I just hope that if Ford is selected and comes on and England lose that he isn't made the scape goat by fans, the media and Daddy Farrell. (to ease the pressure on his boy!)

Rugby Fan wrote:The coaching team clearly did have Goode and 36 in mind as flyhalf cover, and I think both could have handled a stint at 10 in the last two matches.

In the end, though, Lancaster didn't have the courage of his convictions. He hauled Care off but left Farrell on, even though the younger man has been getting through a more physical workload.

To be fair, Rugby Fan, I don't think Lancaster's conviction was that 36 or Goode were any more than emergency cover at 10 while he waited for Ford to get acclimatised to the setup, learn the calls, and have a home game to make his debut in. I don't think he bottled anything by leaving Farrell on. He was never going to play 36 or Goode there unless in a real crisis.

Chjw131 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:CHj,

Whlst the choice of game to try out Wood and Croft together etc wasnt the wisest we had all been saying CAN we fit those three together? Is was emphatically proven not and thankfully never tried again.

I can't say I saw many people advocating those three in a BR.

Yeah it was mate...there was a lot of discusion round it with many wanting to see it get a run out. Both ourselves and Lancs saw it in action and its safe to say we wont be seeing it again.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:CHj,

Whlst the choice of game to try out Wood and Croft together etc wasnt the wisest we had all been saying CAN we fit those three together? Is was emphatically proven not and thankfully never tried again.

I can't say I saw many people advocating those three in a BR.

Yeah it was mate...there was a lot of discusion round it with many wanting to see it get a run out. Both ourselves and Lancs saw it in action and its safe to say we wont be seeing it again.

Well indeed, thank the lord. Do you reckon Dickinson would come on to the bench of Morgan was to go down?

Well Dickinson really impressed in the Saxons game...more so than Ewers actually. So maybe.

I rate morgan so highly though. Lets just see what he can do when hes got a stronger pack in front of him. Get him back on form and fit and hes equally as good as Vunipola in my eyes.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well Dickinson really impressed in the Saxons game...more so than Ewers actually. So maybe.

I rate morgan so highly though. Lets just see what he can do when hes got a stronger pack in front of him. Get him back on form and fit and hes equally as good as Vunipola in my eyes.

Agree he played blindingly well in that Argentina test in the summer and his ball skills are better than BVs at the moment.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:CHj,

Whlst the choice of game to try out Wood and Croft together etc wasnt the wisest we had all been saying CAN we fit those three together? Is was emphatically proven not and thankfully never tried again.

I can't say I saw many people advocating those three in a BR.

Yeah it was mate...there was a lot of discusion round it with many wanting to see it get a run out. Both ourselves and Lancs saw it in action and its safe to say we wont be seeing it again.

Nah most of the Quins fans at least were saying that Lancaster should set his prejudice aside and pick the leagues form 8 Nick Easter to come in and do a job. Did he? Oh no....

Chjw131 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well Dickinson really impressed in the Saxons game...more so than Ewers actually. So maybe.

I rate morgan so highly though. Lets just see what he can do when hes got a stronger pack in front of him. Get him back on form and fit and hes equally as good as Vunipola in my eyes.

Agree he played blindingly well in that Argentina test in the summer and his ball skills are better than BVs at the moment.

Morgan's pace from static is scary as well, he seems to burst onto the ball when he catches it standing still. For a big guy he can do the 10 yard dash in a scary, scary time!

yappysnap wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well Dickinson really impressed in the Saxons game...more so than Ewers actually. So maybe.

I rate morgan so highly though. Lets just see what he can do when hes got a stronger pack in front of him. Get him back on form and fit and hes equally as good as Vunipola in my eyes.

Agree he played blindingly well in that Argentina test in the summer and his ball skills are better than BVs at the moment.

Morgan's pace from static is scary as well, he seems to burst onto the ball when he catches it standing still. For a big guy he can do the 10 yard dash in a scary, scary time!

Yea I wonder what his figures are over 20m?

Morgan's acceleration and tackling-breaking to set up Foden against France in 2012 was incredible.

About 01:05

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Lt_douDyFc

Yeah that's what he's capable of and I'd love to see him in that rampaging form and fitness for his club. What a battle for the 8 shirt we could have.

Likewise a fit and firing Ben Foden shouldn't be forgotten despite Browns fantastic performances.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah that's what he's capable of and I'd love to see him in that rampaging form and fitness for his club. What a battle for the 8 shirt we could have.

Likewise a fit and firing Ben Foden shouldn't be forgotten despite Browns fantastic performances.

Agree completely.

I'm delighted with how Brown is going but would love Foden to be back in contention too. He's genuine class.

Thats the good thing about our squad at the moment we have a good team forming and still alot of good players injured, that could easily push for a starting spot:

Corbisiero
Croft
Tuilagi
Yarde
Foden
(Burgess ) 

Brown is undroppable at the moment, but Foden beats Goode every time for me.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah that's what he's capable of and I'd love to see him in that rampaging form and fitness for his club. What a battle for the 8 shirt we could have.

Likewise a fit and firing Ben Foden shouldn't be forgotten despite Browns fantastic performances.

Yep Foden is a weapon and it'd be nice to see him get a go at FB again at some point. It's Brown's shirt for now but I like the extra pace a Foden/May/Yarde - Wade combination could bring!

It's possible that Morgs will be one of those players who always plays better for the international team than at club level a la Nonu. If that's the case he'll struggle to get a starting spot but each time he's come on as a replacement so far he's added notably.

With 36 playing and Ford now on the pitch I think Goode's place may be in danger. Brown has the shirt but Goode is in because he can play 10, centre and fullback at a reasonable level. Bring in Ford and already you cover 10 and 12 with a combo of Farrell, Ford and Twelvetrees.

Foden is the better out and out fullback and Watson is chomping at everyone's heels by the sounds of it.

It may make England more dynamic come replacement time.

fa0019 wrote:With 36 playing and Ford now on the pitch I think Goode's place may be in danger. Brown has the shirt but Goode is in because he can play 10, centre and fullback at a reasonable level. Bring in Ford and already you cover 10 and 12 with a combo of Farrell, Ford and Twelvetrees.

Foden is the better out and out fullback and Watson is chomping at everyone's heels by the sounds of it.

It may make England more dynamic come replacement time.

Agree fa, until the backs replicate the impact of the forwards it'll always be an under-used asset. Were Foden fit I suspect he may take the 23 shirt over Goode as he covers wing and 9. Watson i'd like to see given a go but I can understand the view that you don't want to end up with almost the whole backline as totally inexperienced.

Morgan will struggle to get the starting no 8 shirt for England when he's being poorly utilised by Gloucester.

On the weekend he should have been the go to ball carrier for Gloucester vs Leicester but he was barely used. I think Sharples who is obviously a winger touched the ball more times.

England use their no 8s far better in my opinion by making them primary ball carriers and why not? These guys generally get over the gain line.


As for Ford - he's got a place in the 23 now. He must make it count.

It does seem odd if, as seems likely, Goode is retained on the subs bench. With Ford there and the flexibility within the rest of the back line you could cover any position that Goode covers to a higher level than he offers.

You are also left with nobody to cover wing unless you move Brown out and put someone else at FB - and we all know how good an option that is.

In the absence of Foden and Youngs who both can cover a number of slots I would have thought you would want the 3rd back to be someone with some real pace and/or edge, i.e. someone like Eastmond, Watson or Daly.

lostinwales wrote:It does seem odd if, as seems likely, Goode is retained on the subs bench. With Ford there and the flexibility within the rest of the back line you could cover any position that Goode covers to a higher level than he offers.

You are also left with nobody to cover wing unless you move Brown out and put someone else at FB - and we all know how good an option that is.

In the absence of Foden and Youngs who both can cover a number of slots I would have thought you would want the 3rd back to be someone with some real pace and/or edge, i.e. someone like Eastmond, Watson or Daly.

Eastmond won't get a look in with Lancaster because he's not a full back!

Chjw131 wrote:

fa0019 wrote:With 36 playing and Ford now on the pitch I think Goode's place may be in danger. Brown has the shirt but Goode is in because he can play 10, centre and fullback at a reasonable level. Bring in Ford and already you cover 10 and 12 with a combo of Farrell, Ford and Twelvetrees.

Foden is the better out and out fullback and Watson is chomping at everyone's heels by the sounds of it.

It may make England more dynamic come replacement time.

Agree fa, until the backs replicate the impact of the forwards it'll always be an under-used asset. Were Foden fit I suspect he may take the 23 shirt over Goode as he covers wing and 9. Watson i'd like to see given a go but I can understand the view that you don't want to end up with almost the whole backline as totally inexperienced.

I appreciate that ...however lets not falll into the trap that experience is the be all. Experienced players may be totally out of form or indeed on the decline.

I would far rather put out a backline of young talented inexperienced lads (who are usually eager and have no fear) like Watson, Ford, Yarde, Wade, Burrell, Nowell etc etc than a backline of stuttering, riskless guys who are not performing.

So far the inexperienced guys in the backline have done a decent to good job - yes, Nowell had an awful first 20 against France, but came back well and was generally solid against Scotland. Burrell has scored tries with well timed runs in both matches, and carried pretty well generally while not obviously making any errors in defence, and May was very good v Scotland after his short cameo against France.

With a specialist 10 on the bench (and presumably a specialist 9), the remaining replacement has to be able to cover all the back 3 or 4 spots to a competent level - Goode simply doesn't do this, and so if we lose a winger or 13 it means shuffling players to different positions to compensate for having a sub who can only really cover 15. Heck, if we lose Burrell, do you shuffle Farrell and 36 out one each and bring on Ford, or put Goode to fullback, Brown to wing and May to 13?

Yes Nowell has looked good, and it was his break and pass that set up Browns try v Scotland.

I do believe however Englands forwards carrying has been better than anytime under Lancaster and this is helping the backline.
Aside from Billy and Ben Morgan, Wood, Lawes, Robshaw, Hartley have all carried with real purpose better and more effectively than i have seen in a long while - this creates space for the backs or alternatively allows a good angled run to fly away as Burrell has done for his tries...

Dummy Half, I dont really want to see Farrell in the Midfield. Id rather see Eastmond or Daly given a shot if that was the case

And Marler

Chjw131 wrote:

fa0019 wrote:With 36 playing and Ford now on the pitch I think Goode's place may be in danger. Brown has the shirt but Goode is in because he can play 10, centre and fullback at a reasonable level. Bring in Ford and already you cover 10 and 12 with a combo of Farrell, Ford and Twelvetrees.

Foden is the better out and out fullback and Watson is chomping at everyone's heels by the sounds of it.

It may make England more dynamic come replacement time.

Agree fa, until the backs replicate the impact of the forwards it'll always be an under-used asset. Were Foden fit I suspect he may take the 23 shirt over Goode as he covers wing and 9. Watson i'd like to see given a go but I can understand the view that you don't want to end up with almost the whole backline as totally inexperienced.

Would we actually be happy with Foden covering 9 now days though? Except in true emergency?

dummy_half wrote:So far the inexperienced guys in the backline have done a decent to good job - yes, Nowell had an awful first 20 against France, but came back well and was generally solid against Scotland. Burrell has scored tries with well timed runs in both matches, and carried pretty well generally while not obviously making any errors in defence, and May was very good v Scotland after his short cameo against France.

With a specialist 10 on the bench (and presumably a specialist 9), the remaining replacement has to be able to cover all the back 3 or 4 spots to a competent level - Goode simply doesn't do this, and so if we lose a winger or 13 it means shuffling players to different positions to compensate for having a sub who can only really cover 15. Heck, if we lose Burrell, do you shuffle Farrell and 36 out one each and bring on Ford, or put Goode to fullback, Brown to wing and May to 13?

This is the reason we need Eastmond, he can cover most of the backline and is dangerous is the ball in hand and is quick.... Goode is none of these, I'd love to defend against Goode

ChequeredJersey wrote:And Marler

Indeed CJ, i think Marler is one of the quiet ones just going nicely about his business but unfairly not getting any recognition.

His scrummaging has been very good, his carrying is starting to look like his club game...but for me its his tackling and breakdown work that has stood out and been very impressive.

Brad71090 wrote:

dummy_half wrote:So far the inexperienced guys in the backline have done a decent to good job - yes, Nowell had an awful first 20 against France, but came back well and was generally solid against Scotland. Burrell has scored tries with well timed runs in both matches, and carried pretty well generally while not obviously making any errors in defence, and May was very good v Scotland after his short cameo against France.

With a specialist 10 on the bench (and presumably a specialist 9), the remaining replacement has to be able to cover all the back 3 or 4 spots to a competent level - Goode simply doesn't do this, and so if we lose a winger or 13 it means shuffling players to different positions to compensate for having a sub who can only really cover 15. Heck, if we lose Burrell, do you shuffle Farrell and 36 out one each and bring on Ford, or put Goode to fullback, Brown to wing and May to 13?

This is the reason we need Eastmond, he can cover most of the backline and is dangerous is the ball in hand and is quick.... Goode is none of these, I'd love to defend against Goode

The thing is though Brad we dont want Eastmond becoming a jack of all. Great if he can cover for the odd game...but not in the squad purposly for that. Lets get him working on making 12 a real competitive position.

Having said that i would have him on the bench   

GF / Brad

Shows how valuable having someone like Matt Tait around a squad is. May not be the best 13 winger or fullback, but is good enough across all the positions to just slot in. Eastmond or Daly may be able to do likewise in the short term, and either they or Watson has to be a better bench option than Goode.

Also GF - good point re the carrying of the England pack. Hartley in particular has been a revalation in the AIs and so far in the 6Ns - I always used to consider him as someone who did not maximise their physical capabilities (for me he went to ground too readily with the ball), but he has really changed my opinion this season. The others I think are just benefiting from the extra go forward that is being generated in early phases by Billy V (and Morgan later in the game).

Now if we can get Manu T back on the pitch as well...

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

fa0019 wrote:With 36 playing and Ford now on the pitch I think Goode's place may be in danger. Brown has the shirt but Goode is in because he can play 10, centre and fullback at a reasonable level. Bring in Ford and already you cover 10 and 12 with a combo of Farrell, Ford and Twelvetrees.

Foden is the better out and out fullback and Watson is chomping at everyone's heels by the sounds of it.

It may make England more dynamic come replacement time.

Agree fa, until the backs replicate the impact of the forwards it'll always be an under-used asset. Were Foden fit I suspect he may take the 23 shirt over Goode as he covers wing and 9. Watson i'd like to see given a go but I can understand the view that you don't want to end up with almost the whole backline as totally inexperienced.

Would we actually be happy with Foden covering 9 now days though? Except in true emergency?

No not as THE 9 but in an emergency it's a very handy position to have extra cover in. He covers wing and FB though and i'd be happy with him starting in either slot. Perhaps that should be the acid test?

GeordieFalcon wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:And Marler

Indeed CJ, i think Marler is one of the quiet ones just going nicely about his business but unfairly not getting any recognition.

His scrummaging has been very good, his carrying is starting to look like his club game...but for me its his tackling and breakdown work that has stood out and been very impressive.

Yep Marler has come on leaps and bounds and it was starting to show in the AIs. He is getting recognition from some quarters and evidently the coaches, starting ahead of Mako.

Rob Baxter made a really interesting point about Ewers the other day. He said that where his development is concerned there will be periods of great advance and then fallow periods where he hit plateaus in development. I think this is the case so far with Marler. Let's remember he's still only 23!

dummy_half wrote:GF / Brad

Shows how valuable having someone like Matt Tait around a squad is. May not be the best 13 winger or fullback, but is good enough across all the positions to just slot in. Eastmond or Daly may be able to do likewise in the short term, and either they or Watson has to be a better bench option than Goode.

Also GF - good point re the carrying of the England pack. Hartley in particular has been a revalation in the AIs and so far in the 6Ns - I always used to consider him as someone who did not maximise their physical capabilities (for me he went to ground too readily with the ball), but he has really changed my opinion this season.  The others I think are just benefiting from the extra go forward that is being generated in early phases by Billy V (and Morgan later in the game).

Now if we can get Manu T back on the pitch as well...

Agree DH, Hartley always had and still sometimes has, a tendency to dip his shoulder and slow before contact massively reducing his momentum over the line. Contrast that to Tom Youngs and we can see why weight isn't the sole determining factor to a good pack.

dummy_half wrote:GF / Brad

Shows how valuable having someone like Matt Tait around a squad is....

I would have liked Tait in our World Cup squad. Sadly, I think he's just too injury prone to maintain top form. Judging by his performance at the weekend, he is still well short of match fitness. I suspect his career will now play out like Sinbad's - scintillating highs for his club, punctuated by injury, and no real sniff at an England spot again.

It's fine, Tait will always have the memory of setting up what should have been a World Cup winning try/penalty and yellow card depending on whether you believe Cueto's foot was in touch before De Villiers throws the ball away illegally

It was a try!

Sadly the record books say otherwise....

We know what we saw!