Manu Tuilagi and Englands Midfield

First topic message reminder :

Been having a discussion about Manu on another thread and i thought id open it up to everyone to see your opinons?

It seems to me that almost 100% on here are simply assuming Manu will walk back in to the England team.

Is Manu simply that good that he can do that, over those currently in the midfield? Is he Englands superstar player that they cant do without?

What about his competition? He has the power game..but what if Elliott Daly was to move back permanently to 13?

Many are advocating a midfield of

10 Farrell
12 Burrell
13 Tuilagi
It has huge power...but possibly missing a little guile?

Im merely putting out there...might the following have more balance?

10 Farrell
12 Burrell
13 Daly (once hes back playing permanently at 13)

http://www.totalrl.com/web/five-rugby-union-players-thrive-rugby-league/

Not joking at all   

BamBam wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Salford just came up with a wish list of players they thought would be able to hack it in RL. Others on the list included North, Lydiate, Farrell and Croft. (Croft as one of the few RU forwards who could survive the pace of RL)

Lydiate   

I like their reason too - he was born in Salford. Would be him going home.  

In terms of being suitable for RL - nope. Just an one dimensional player who can tackle well.

beshocked wrote:

BamBam wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Salford just came up with a wish list of players they thought would be able to hack it in RL. Others on the list included North, Lydiate, Farrell and Croft. (Croft as one of the few RU forwards who could survive the pace of RL)

Lydiate   

I like their reason too - he was born in Salford. Would be him going home.  

In terms of being suitable for RL - nope. Just an one dimensional player who can tackle well.

  

They forget in that article that Powell was a one-trick pony who had been found out at Club level and could no longer make an impact in Union. Can't believe he went on a Lions tour...

Can't believe they only have 1 winger on the list. No players from the SH.

Oh, I see they've only picked from the B&I Lions.

What a Poopie article

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I personally think Burrell's distribution has been stronger than Twelevetrees. I'd love to see Burrell/Tuilagi together.

With Top Hats hatred of Twelevetrees I'm starting to suspect he may actually be Kyle Eastmond........

Agreed, are you Kyle Eastmond Top Hat?!

36 makes mistakes but show me an international player who doesn't. Saying he cost us the game by kicking an overlap in our own half against France is absurd. He's not the finished article and he has some faults but none terminal to him or England. He offers a lot and is by no means a weak link in defence.

Agree with Sgt here that Burrell's distribution at club level has actually been pretty good. I'd have no problem seeing a Burrell/Tuilagi midfield but to my mind the 36/Tuilagi midfield hasn't been tried yet and has real potential.

Burrell has made himself a squad fixture with some good performances and he deserves to take Tomkins' place in the EPS.

Interestingly Tomkins didn't look too bad on the weekend but that was mainly due to Hodgson's play.

No, as per my previous answer to the same question, I am not.

I am yet, however, to see anything in the 6N (or previous) to suggest 36 is worthy of an international start. As others have articulated better, he brings nothing but makes bad mistakes. Meant to be 'creative' but hasn't created anything in 3 matches so far, what he has done is spill the ball, fluff passes, make bad decisions and get steamrolled through/over.

36 is why i am looking so positive.

the perfect fall guy for when man u comes through.

i realy want to see burrel and manu together..

I don't think Twelvetrees is really in decent form. If he was a fresh face, being given his first real run, then few would say he's made his case. He's played better than Tomkins but not as well as Burrell.

For my money, he's on a par with Alex Goode performances at fullback. We're told he's a playmaker with a clever kicking game but these skills are rarely on display.

The coaches seem prepared to play the long game with him. He's not so out of form that he can't cope at international level (which is the fear for Freddie Burns). These games are a chance to give him Test experience on the basis that he will probably be part of England's World Cup plans.

There also aren't too many other players demanding to be selected ahead of him. Mike Brown, on the other hand, was an easy choice ahead of Goode.

For all those saying Twelvetrees has done diddly...who would you have in his place?

Wales coming up? Manu is not ready for the 6n.

Would you play Eastmond in a game like this?
Would you bring back Barritt - hugely derided for a lack of creativity?
Would you move Burrell inside and bring in a 13? Who? Joseph? Trinder? Banahan? Tomkins?

Or do you stick with a guy who has been part of a side looking more threatening ball in hand and who was part of a brutal contest and victory v Ireland and almost a good victory in Paris?

Definitely keep the centres the same just need to be aware that so far 36 has not nailed his place, especially as Burrell is a 12 at his club

I agree CJ his place is definitely not nailed on...but im not sure Wales is the best game to start mixing things up again...regardless of peoples opinons of Twelvetrees

GeordieFalcon wrote:For all those saying Twelvetrees has done diddly...who would you have in his place?

At this stage, I wouldn't have anyone in his place. However, I had mixed feelings about his original selection because he wasn't in great form for his club. Lancaster does go with form, often when an incumbent drops out and his replacement plays better - Lawes/Parling Brown/Goode Vuniploa/Morgan. He has also gone with form with Hartley over Youngs and bringing Care back in.

Twelvetrees was not a form pick. He was chosen because the rest of the back line was seriously short of Test experience. The other option would have been playing Burrell at twelve with Eastmond outside him. That would have left us even shorter on caps, and I can see why Lancaster thought it was worth betting instead on Twelvetrees to do a job. I'd actually like to see the other pairing but Wales is hardly the right stage to try it. With other centres coming back from injury now, the chances of ever seeing it look slim.

Nevertheless, Care, Brown, Burrell and May have all looked more of a threat than Twelvetrees. He's closer to Farrell than anyone, so should be in pole position to shout out options just as Greenwood used to do to Wilkinson. Something must be going wrong with our communication when we miss so many overlaps. I don't think Twelvetrees' kick against France cost us a try but the fact he didn't spot that overlap when under no pressure does suggest he might share a large part of the blame on those other occasions.

Don't get me wrong, I think Twelvetrees has got it, and will play better in an England shirt. At the moment, though, he's not bringing the all-round game we are told he has. He's supposed to be a playmaker but it's hard to see what he has done for us that Barritt could not also have done.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well it's been unfortunate that Burns hasnt had a great season but I do think one of him or Ford should have had sometime this 6n from the bench and the recent AIs.

Maybe Lancs should also have looked at Eastmond aswell but it's getting a balance and not constantly using different players.

If we are looking for creativity...then it's twelvtrees or Eastmond...or possibly a 13 like Daly etc.

Eastmond needs to be given his chance at some point that's for sure. Deserves a bench spot at some point during the 6N, not looking like he'll get one though.

As for resting players personally there are only a few I'd rest outright, mainly thinking about the Lions. Cole would have been one I'd have rested but is now injured, Corbs will likely be missing anyway and Croft will depend on when/how he returns from injury. Other than those three I'd monitor Farrell and the Youngs brothers towards the end of the season to see how they're faring.

Ideally though I'd prefer to not rest players outright, but rather take a large squad to NZ then rotate guys. That way increasingly key players like Lawes, Launchbury, Care, Farrell, etc can get gametime against the best whilst allowing other players a chance.

1.Marler 2.Hartley 3.Wilson 4.Launchbury 5.Attwood 6.Haskell 7.Robshaw 8.Morgan
9.Care 10.Farrell 11.May 12.Twelvetrees 13.Burrell 14.Wade 15.Brown

1.Vunipola 2.Youngs/Webber 3.Wilson 4.Slater 5.Lawes 6.Garvey 7.Wood 8.Vunipola
9.Youngs 10.Ford 11.Yarde 12.Eastmond 13.Tuilagi 14.Nowell 15.Foden

I accept some players there such as Garvey and Haskell probably won't get a chance but just an example of how we could mix the side from test to test so as to get a good mix of more settled players and guys who could offer something different without knackering key players out.

Rugby Fan wrote:Nevertheless, Care, Brown, Burrell and May have all looked more of a threat than Twelvetrees. He's closer to Farrell than anyone, so should be in pole position to shout out options just as Greenwood used to do to Wilkinson. Something must be going wrong with our communication when we miss so many overlaps. I don't think Twelvetrees' kick against France cost us a try but the fact he didn't spot that overlap when under no pressure does suggest he might share a large part of the blame on those other occasions.

Don't get me wrong, I think Twelvetrees has got it, and will play better in an England shirt. At the moment, though, he's not bringing the all-round game we are told he has. He's supposed to be a playmaker but it's hard to see what he has done for us that Barritt could not also have done.

I agree with this, but at the same time I do think there's a marked improvement in 36's game across the 6N's so far. Against France he was incredibly jittery and either forced things or panicked and took the wrong option, against Scotland he carried hard and that's all that was needed and against Ireland he mixed it up more by carrying hard, passing and kicking well when we were under pressure.

He's not as flamboyant as Burrell but is doing a very solid job.

On the vision thing it's impossible to tell. He could be calling it all day but if Farrell isn't on the same wave length and if Care has white line fever then it's never going to be on. I'd lay the blame more at all three of them then just any one player. The biggest worry is that this problem of decisively creating clear cut opportunities and then wasting them has been around since the AI's and still it's pretty much exactly the same.

I'd still like to see Burrell and Manu run out though.

How about this as a monster team:
Vunipola, Webber, Wilson, Attwood, Lawes, Vunipola, Fearns, Morgan, Care, Farrell, Yarde, Burrell, Manu, Banahan, Brown. Not subtly but there's a fair bit of power there.

I think Gats' eyes would light up at that power team Yappy.

yappysnap wrote:
How about this as a monster team:
Vunipola, Webber, Wilson, Attwood, Lawes, Vunipola, Fearns, Morgan, Care, Farrell, Yarde, Burrell, Manu, Banahan, Brown. Not subtly but there's a fair bit of power there.

Only problem is you have a titch at SH. So if we take a leaf from Gatland and Mallet's book and play a flanker at 9, you need to replace Care with Robshaw.

GeordieFalcon wrote:For all those saying Twelvetrees has done diddly...who would you have in his place?

Wales coming up? Manu is not ready for the 6n.

Would you play Eastmond in a game like this?
Would you bring back Barritt - hugely derided for a lack of creativity?
Would you move Burrell inside and bring in a 13? Who? Joseph? Trinder? Banahan? Tomkins?

Or do you stick with a guy who has been part of a side looking more threatening ball in hand and who was part of a brutal contest and victory v Ireland and almost a good victory in Paris?

The fact there isn't a good/suitable replacement is different from saying he's done well.

I'd keep him for the remainder of the 6N then ditch him.

we have to keep 36 untill Man u is back. I see no major problem with his performance levels - i just think he is the ideal replacement because 36 hasnt been the creative passing player that others may have thought he was in the team to be.. that has been left to care and farrel. manu will just come in and do what 36 is doing but much better ..

I just hope the back 3 see the ball with the proposed Burrell and Tuilagi combo. We've seen more of them recently than when Barritt and Tuilagi played for example. Who's the next target after Twelvetrees? I think people will start criticising Wood or Yarde/May. There's always someone who gets it in the neck.

The problem is Mysti that they obviously want a playmaker at 12. For all the good he is...Manu is not a playmaker.

That goes back to what i asked above...who is there? You have Twelvetrees or Eastmond at 12...or you move Burrell / Manu to 12 and have a playmaker at 13?

EDIT: And regardless...the England team have attacked better this 6n. So theyre all doing something right.

Many have started on May allready. but thats unjustified..

36 just hasnt become the player he was touted to being. but then maybe this is because he like farrel before him are playing to a specific game plan

GeordieFalcon wrote:The problem is Mysti that they obviously want a playmaker at 12. For all the good he is...Manu is not a playmaker.

That goes back to what i asked above...who is there? You have Twelvetrees or Eastmond at 12...or you move Burrell / Manu to 12 and have a playmaker at 13?

EDIT: And regardless...the England team have attacked better this 6n. So theyre all doing something right.

they are doing something right. so - maybe it isn't about having a play maker there- m,ybe it is all about 36 playing a specific role that Manu will just come in to and retain the same shape of the team but do it better

chjw131 the 36-Tuilagi centre partnership has been tried - for Leicester. It flattered to deceive. Leicester preferred Allen, partly why Twelvetrees left.


Geordiefalcon unfortunately we have to stick with Twelvetrees for the 6 nations. Then as top hat says - he's got to go.

mystiroakey wrote:Many have started on May allready. but thats unjustified..
36 just hasnt become the player he was touted to being. but then maybe this is because he like farrel before him are playing to a specific game plan

Agree Mysti...hes a young lad. He'll learn from not grounding the try...he'll learn from the whole experience.

The one time he annoyed me was when he had a clear run to line, but elected to not go for it...i was shouting at the telly.

Hopefully he got a clip round the ear from Catty etc and told in those situations back yourself and go for it...i doubt anyone would have caught him. But he'll learn from that.

So we'll be seeing

12 Burrell
13 Tuilagi

in New Zealand?

GeordieFalcon wrote:The problem is Mysti that they obviously want a playmaker at 12. For all the good he is...Manu is not a playmaker.

That goes back to what i asked above...who is there? You have Twelvetrees or Eastmond at 12...or you move Burrell / Manu to 12 and have a playmaker at 13?

EDIT: And regardless...the England team have attacked better this 6n. So theyre all doing something right.

GF may I offer up the example of Nonu. Not entirely a grand leap between him and Manu. He was moved inside but told to improve his distribution. He worked hard on that and now has a sweet pass and has added a kicking game (sometimes too much). My point is just because Manu doesn't have the playmaker tag now doesn't mean that he can't add that string to his bow.

He also has Smith outside him though who is a different sort of player to him. My 1st impression is Burrell and Tuilagi have the same sort of game. The best 2 midfielders don't necessarily make the best combo.

GeordieFalcon wrote:The problem is Mysti that they obviously want a playmaker at 12. For all the good he is...Manu is not a playmaker.

And neither is 36.

He's meant to be, but he hasn't 'created' squat.

So why not have someone equally uncreative that's much better/more dangerous at the other stuff.

personally all I know is that I want Farrell to feed manu from the centre- because he will gain more yards- he will beat more men and he will hold on to the ball in the ruck..

maybe play a more creative player than Burrell.

But the reality is he is playing and playing well. And we have been the most expansive team this 6nations anyway. The backs are coming on in that regard, care may be a huge impact in this - Not 100% sure.. but anyway- he is probably very key to us.. and he more than anyone else may be the one to rest and look at his replacement/sub going forward

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:The problem is Mysti that they obviously want a playmaker at 12. For all the good he is...Manu is not a playmaker.

That goes back to what i asked above...who is there? You have Twelvetrees or Eastmond at 12...or you move Burrell / Manu to 12 and have a playmaker at 13?

EDIT: And regardless...the England team have attacked better this 6n. So theyre all doing something right.

GF may I offer up the example of Nonu. Not entirely a grand leap between him and Manu. He was moved inside but told to improve his distribution. He worked hard on that and now has a sweet pass and has added a kicking game (sometimes too much). My point is just because Manu doesn't have the playmaker tag now doesn't mean that he can't add that string to his bow.

Oh Kia, dont get me wrong i fully appreciate players can develop and even change their game...but he needs to do that with Leicester not with England and are Leicester going to move him to 12 when they have Allen etc..

TopHat24/7 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:The problem is Mysti that they obviously want a playmaker at 12. For all the good he is...Manu is not a playmaker.

And neither is 36.

He's meant to be, but he hasn't 'created' squat.

So why not have someone equally uncreative that's much better/more dangerous at the other stuff.

He is a playmaker, he's just not showing it particularly well for England at the moment...though it is progressing forward.

So who would you play in the midfield?

Fair point. I forget that national teams can't always give friendly club directives.

Burrell/Tuilagi is the way forward imo

I would say Burrell is underrated. He's done just fine at 12 for Saints - aren't they topping the try count? He runs great lines,gets over the gain line and has underrated distribution.

You can criticise the Burrell-Tuilagi potential combo but we don't know how it will work out until it's tried.

Manu was more at ease with Allen than 36 at Leicester.

We don't need Manu at 12.

People are forgetting how well Burrell has done out of position.

Totally agree Beshocked, Burrell has a very impressive all round skill set.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Fair point. I forget that national teams can't always give friendly club directives.

Oh they can certainly do that...the question is will the very stubborn Mr Cockerill listen?

GeordieFalcon wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:The problem is Mysti that they obviously want a playmaker at 12. For all the good he is...Manu is not a playmaker.

And neither is 36.

He's meant to be, but he hasn't 'created' squat.

So why not have someone equally uncreative that's much better/more dangerous at the other stuff.

He is a playmaker, he's just not showing it particularly well for England at the moment...though it is progressing forward.

So who would you play in the midfield?

I've already said, right now it has to be him as there are not suitable/appropriate alternatives.

Hindsight is 20:20 and with it I'd have preferred to take a risk with Eastmond from the start of the 6N. But now is too late to bring in anyone new, especially that inexperienced, so we're stuck with another 2 games of creativity-less 36 before we can start trying new centre combos.

Burrell has done well and to have him and Eastmond in reserve is great for England, but first choice combo if all fit will of course be 36 and Manu. Can't really see where the debate is on this issue.

"but first choice combo if all fit will of course be 36 and Manu. Can't really see where the debate is on this issue."






dude- there is clearly a massive debate on that issue

I agree i would also preferred to have seen Eastmond given a shot but its ifs and buts.

I also would have liked to see Daly back at 13...and Burrell and Daly in the midfield...now that would be interesting.

Trialling a new midfield in NZ though is going to be an interesting one...

Of course there's a debate, Burrell has thrown a welcome spanner in the works and Twelvetrees is still not able to put in a top performance.

It's a good conundrum

mystiroakey wrote:"but first choice combo if all fit will of course be 36 and Manu. Can't really see where the debate is on this issue."






dude- there is clearly a massive debate on that issue

On the internet

MissBlennerhassett wrote:Burrell has done well and to have him and Eastmond in reserve is great for England, but first choice combo if all fit will of course be 36 and Manu. Can't really see where the debate is on this issue.

Have you not been watching the 6N....??

Burrell has cemented his place in the squad and is a top performer in big games... but Manu is Manu. On form he is has the potential to become the standout 13 in world rugby in time if he gets a long enough run in the team with no injuries.

No one is pushing 36 close at the moment, not out of his performance but by lack of alternatives.. at least until England have a look at Burgess. Barritt can do a job but thats about it.

Burgess and Manu.... now that would be a dream combination although maybe one that suits Ford (a more secure and comfortable 10) than Farrell. The RWC is perhaps 1 year too earlier for these guys at least to get a good run together.

36 has been a disappointment to me in his game development for a number of seasons.

He's now at his rugby prime for a centre (25-28/9) or should be.

I'd hoped that he'd be an England fixture by now but as it turns out he's clinging on to his opportunity by his finger nails. But thankfully the car-crash experiment with Barritt is over at least.

For me it should have been by now a nailed-on 36/Manu partnership.

Practically (again imo) for the remainder of the 6Ns it should remain 36/Burrell and thence Burrell/Manu (injuries/form permitting).

Sceptics should note that both Manu and Burrell have developed their skills notably over the past two seasons.

Imo.

No one is pushing 36 close at the moment, not out of his performance but by lack of alternatives.. at least until England have a look at Burgess. Barritt can do a job but thats about it.

FA,

I thought Eastmond had been playing well for Bath. bath fans can confirm of course.

What would be the point of further experimentation with new blood at this point in the RWC cycle?

I'll answer my own question. England have only two more games with any possibility of experimentation between now and October 2015. Wales and Italy (particularly if the Welsh game is lost) this year.

Beyond that it's all about the blending of partnerships.

I think it would be a brave man to seriously consider Eastmond in the top class test arena... He is a smaller version of Jason Robinson yet the game is even bigger than it was 10 years ago and the centre's is a big place to defend.

Robinson never had sheer pace... remember he was once bested by Flatley in a foot race at Twickenham...can he not make it on the wing?

I have to say I was very very impressed with him on the attack in Argentina. Even Robinson would have been proud of those tries but as good as a tackler he may be can SL afford to risk a <13st man at 5'6 up against the Nonu's, Roberts, Basterauds & Steyns??? Can't see it myself.

PSW do you think the massive debate is just on the internet? I am sure there are plenty of England fans with doubts over 36 that aren't on 606v2.

fa0019 what does Ford being a more secure and comfortable 10 mean?

Portnoy's complaint 36 had plenty of opportunities to gel with Manu at Leicester. Allen kept him out of the Leicester team leaving him to grow frustated and leave.

Perhaps Allen could emerge as the saviour at 12?

Bath seem to rate Devoto - will he emerge as a centre contender too?