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)

Goode was a 10 but I think he had a bad time of it a couple of years back when given the 10 shirt so was moved back to 15 and his form there has cemented his position. He's a creative player but I'm not sure he has the ego for 10.

Manu is back training with England.

As is Yarde

Londontiger Goode did have some games at 10 for Sarries during the 2010-11 season. He was okay but never really made the 10 shirt his own.

Yes formerly known as Sam that is the case. It didn't help that at the time Sarries were in the HC pool of death - Leinster,Clermont,Saracens,Racing Metro.

He's struggled to get a run of games at 10.

I am not sure about that. I think Goode does have the required ego but if he is to ever develop into a consistent 10 option he needs gametime there. I can't see anyone taking the risk.

beshocked wrote:Why do you say that? Goode is a better place kicker than Ford. More attacking than Ford. Better defender. More experienced.

The only area Ford wins is kicking from hand - he is very good at that.

You let yourself down with these sorts of comments Beshocked. Just when it might seem your club bias has subsided a little it comes rearing back with a vengeance.

The point I made re: Smith and Twelvetrees was to illustrate the argument about judging a player on one mistake. Please re-read the post and amend your snide and ignorant remark.

You also seem to forget that one of the people adding to the 'hype' around 36 was your good self. Advocating, as you were, him starting at 12 back in January. The fact is he's played well without being exceptional.

As far as Goode over Ford for the FH spot I don't even think it's worth addressing.

Chjw131 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Why do you say that? Goode is a better place kicker than Ford. More attacking than Ford. Better defender. More experienced.

The only area Ford wins is kicking from hand - he is very good at that.

You let yourself down with these sorts of comments Beshocked. Just when it might seem your club bias has subsided a little it comes rearing back with a vengeance.

The point I made re: Smith and Twelvetrees was to illustrate the argument about judging a player on one mistake. Please re-read the post and amend your snide and ignorant remark.

You also seem to forget that one of the people adding to the 'hype' around 36 was your good self. Advocating, as you were, him starting at 12 back in January. The fact is he's played well without being exceptional.

As far as Goode over Ford for the FH spot I don't even think it's worth addressing.

Can't be talking about Twelvetrees then.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Why do you say that? Goode is a better place kicker than Ford. More attacking than Ford. Better defender. More experienced.

The only area Ford wins is kicking from hand - he is very good at that.

You let yourself down with these sorts of comments Beshocked. Just when it might seem your club bias has subsided a little it comes rearing back with a vengeance.

The point I made re: Smith and Twelvetrees was to illustrate the argument about judging a player on one mistake. Please re-read the post and amend your snide and ignorant remark.

You also seem to forget that one of the people adding to the 'hype' around 36 was your good self. Advocating, as you were, him starting at 12 back in January. The fact is he's played well without being exceptional.

As far as Goode over Ford for the FH spot I don't even think it's worth addressing.

Can't be talking about Twelvetrees then.

How droll. It was in regards to a separate discussion. But yes, well done, 36 has made more than one mistake. As has Owen Farrell, Jonny May, Luther Burrell, Jack Nowell, Danny Care, Joe Launchbury, Courtney Lawes, Billy Vunipola, Chris Robshaw....

chjw131 when did I advocate Twelvetrees? I would have picked Barritt - is that bias yes perhaps but there is no bias when I say Burrell-Tuilagi should be the centre partnership for the future.

Perhaps I exaggerate but it does alarm me a bit as an England fan when Ford (who I still think is good) gets outplayed by a 15 who got told he was starting at 10 30 seconds before kick off and who has only played a handful of games at 10 in the last two years. One game does not make or break a player but it does make one cast doubts upon a player/enhance another.

It worries me when supposedly the 2nd best 10 in the country struggles to break down a stubborn defence despite supposely being an attacking genius. With all the pressure (over 60% possession and territory) I expected more.

My expectations of Ford and 36 are high because they have been hyped up. You should have heard the commentary - Ford was praised again and again.

If you are rated highly you need to back up the hype with a performance worthy enough.

Have to admit I have some of the same concerns about Ford.
Clearly a lad with a future. But ready for the big time now? Really not sure.

I don't think Goode did play particularly well. He was solid and made no real mistakes allowing Sarries defence to stop the Bath forwards on the gain line and force the errors from the outside backs that led to the Sarries tries. Got to respect Goode's composure but as a 10 he didn't shine particularly. Everything good Bath did came from Stringer and Ford. Bath needed a bosh at centre.

beshocked wrote:chjw131 when did I advocate Twelvetrees? I would have picked Barritt - is that bias yes perhaps but there is no bias when I say Burrell-Tuilagi should be the centre partnership for the future.

Perhaps I exaggerate but it does alarm me a bit as an England fan when Ford (who I still think is good) gets outplayed by a 15 who got told he was starting at 10 30 seconds before kick off and who has only played a handful of games at 10 in the last two years. One game does not make or break a player but it does make one cast doubts upon a player/enhance another.

It worries me when supposedly the 2nd best 10 in the country struggles to break down a stubborn defence despite supposely being an attacking genius. With all the pressure (over 60% possession and territory) I expected more.

My expectations of Ford and 36 are high because they have been hyped up. You should have heard the commentary - Ford was praised again and again.

If you are rated highly you need to back up the hype with a performance worthy enough.

You're being willfully stupid.

Ford has had some quality games this season for Bath. He plays in a team that wants to kick for territory and keep the ball in the forwards which means his options to shine are limited, just like another 10 for another top Prem club that only recently started to change their tactics... Oh wait he's Englands starting 10 and looking far better there   

To be honest you've made an idiotic post based on one cherry picked game. If we're just going by this last round of performances then Cipriani is the new England 10.

beshocked wrote:
It worries me when supposedly the 2nd best 10 in the country

Surely Flood?  

LondonTiger wrote:I am sure Beshocked can correct me, but as a young player at Sarries I am sure it was stated that the aim was to move him up from FB as he matured (was he at 10 to Ben youngs 9 for the U20s?). However it never really happened and now with Farrell and Hodgson at the Barnet club is unlikely to ever happen.

That ws my understanding too, hes just never really had the opportunity to play there and had to find another role. Its just as well his dad wasnt a coach at Bath

I have to agree he looks a player better suited to that role than Fullback where his tackling and pace gets exposed at times. Hes a good footballer though

If Manu does waltz back into the XV for saturday's game it shows just how problematic england's centre selections are and just how much the whole england midfield relies on the big nosher Manu Tuilagi. But this will play right into Wales hands, he has been shown to react poorly to a quick defensive line and i think Roberts and George/JD2 will have no issues handling him

Tuilagi won't start against Wales

If any one is likely to get straight back in it's Yarde for one of the wings, neither have really done enough to cement a spot.

Twelvetrees/Burrell should start against Wales. Manu perhaps will be on the bench if Stu wants to stick his fingers up at Ford again. Depends how much character he wants to build.

Manu is in training camp to ease back into the squad. He will not be playing this weekend, or on the bench but will be kept under review for further 6N games. This is my expectation.

What happens with Manu tells us everything about england's confidence in their midfield.

 

[quote="gregortree"] but will be kept under review for further 6N games - What Italy you mean

It's possible Manu will make the bench. He didn't look out the way for fitness on the weekend. Got caught out in defence quite a bit in the first half but that tightened up after half time.

Personally I don't think he should feature until the summer tour. There's an argument to bring him onto the bench ahead of Goode though who offers very little in the way of cover.

It might also go some way to lessening the loss of Billy V and having Morgan coming off the bench. Johnson, whilst a good carrier in open spaces isn't destructive in that regard. Manu certainly is.

It's an LV weekend and Tigers don't have a game. I won't be surprised if Tigers have given the squad 4 or 5 days off to get some rest before coming back in and building back up. Manu probably needs to train more so rather than be in the gym at Oval Park Lancaster has him running drills with England.

I might be wrong but I think Lancaster just wants to keep him integrated and see how he's doing rather than looking at him as a potential starter for Saturday.

formerly known as Sam wrote:It's an LV weekend and Tigers don't have a game. I won't be surprised if Tigers have given the squad 4 or 5 days off to get some rest before coming back in and building back up. Manu probably needs to train more so rather than be in the gym at Oval Park Lancaster has him running drills with England.

I might be wrong but I think Lancaster just wants to keep him integrated and see how he's doing rather than looking at him as a potential starter for Saturday.

Sounds likely. He made a point of saying several times re: Ford not making the bench that he felt players should have more time in training to be comfortable with the systems. MT hasn't trained with the squad since before the AIs I don't think.

He hasn't trained with the squad since this time last year, makes sense to bed him back in. Ford should be on the bench we need another play making option if we're struggling as despite Farrell's improvements he's not the most creative option when chasing a game.

formerly known as Sam wrote:He hasn't trained with the squad since this time last year, makes sense to bed him back in. Ford should be on the bench we need another play making option if we're struggling as despite Farrell's improvements he's not the most creative option when chasing a game.

And he was injured before that.

Hes in the EPS, it would be daft not to invite him for training and ensure hes doing what suits England rather than his employers. He might make the Italy game, I wouldnt be fussed if he didnt

I am firmly against rushing players back from injury. Playing one game after a long layoff doesn't mean he is really in fighting trim. In fact, just the opposite. He is neither mentally acute after only one match and not match ready at the top level. I agree with England bringing him in if only to measure his progress and ensure he is doing what has been asked of him. But I would leave him with Tigers who will take good good care and let him get a run of matches. He can then be ready for the June tour.

Ha ha ha, oh my God! I almost didn't do it, I almost didn't do it! I thought, is this in bad taste? But you know what, I went for it. I went for it and I'm so glad I did! Ooooh, worth it, totally worth it. - Stewie Lancaster after picking Manu!!

Scratch wrote:Ha ha ha, oh my God! I almost didn't do it, I almost didn't do it! I thought, is this in bad taste? But you know what, I went for it. I went for it and I'm so glad I did! Ooooh, worth it, totally worth it. - Stewie Lancaster after picking Manu who went on to score the winning try in Englands victory over Wales

  

yappysnap wrote:

beshocked wrote:chjw131 when did I advocate Twelvetrees? I would have picked Barritt - is that bias yes perhaps but there is no bias when I say Burrell-Tuilagi should be the centre partnership for the future.

Perhaps I exaggerate but it does alarm me a bit as an England fan when Ford (who I still think is good) gets outplayed by a 15 who got told he was starting at 10 30 seconds before kick off and who has only played a handful of games at 10 in the last two years. One game does not make or break a player but it does make one cast doubts upon a player/enhance another.

It worries me when supposedly the 2nd best 10 in the country struggles to break down a stubborn defence despite supposely being an attacking genius. With all the pressure (over 60% possession and territory) I expected more.

My expectations of Ford and 36 are high because they have been hyped up. You should have heard the commentary - Ford was praised again and again.

If you are rated highly you need to back up the hype with a performance worthy enough.

You're being willfully stupid.

Ford has had some quality games this season for Bath. He plays in a team that wants to kick for territory and keep the ball in the forwards which means his options to shine are limited, just like another 10 for another top Prem club that only recently started to change their tactics... Oh wait he's Englands starting 10 and looking far better there   

To be honest you've made an idiotic post based on one cherry picked game. If we're just going by this last round of performances then Cipriani is the new England 10.

Yappysnap you are entitled to criticise me but to call me stupid and idiotic is a bit harsh in my opinion.

It's not stupid - Ford had an opportunity to lay down a marker, not just for the England 10 shirt but for Bath as a title contender. He did not.

If there is a brick wall in front of you - do you continue to try and run through it or do you go over the top or around it?

I agree it's just one game but it was a big one - it will probably make the difference between getting a home semi and not.

Personally I expect more from the "attacking" and "playmaking" 10 just as I expect more from the "playmaking" 12. Both have been hyped up - time to deliver.

I did not see the Bath/Sarries match, so cannot comment on Ford's performance. However basing your opinion on whether he has what it takes on a single match is, lets be polite here, rather silly. After all why not choose his MotM performance in a Play-off semi-final also against Saracens?

Or we could flip this on its head and be selective about the performances we choose to judge Owen Farrell on. Now I believe that he is clearly the best 10 available to England right now, and has a good match-day temperament. Yet if you only showed me his performance for en gland against Wales last season, or his goal-kicking against Scotland this year or his performances for Sarries against Toulon last season and at home to Toulouse this year!!! Well if those were what I had to go on I would change my mind. However players have good games and bad and should be judged across a series of matches and not ones cherry picked to prove an argument.

Londontiger I am just pointing out that he did not deliver in the last match. You can talk about previous performances where Ford was world class but I am talking about the present.

I know criticism of Ford is not appreciated - he supposedly can do no wrong. I just try and add a bit of balance to the overwhelming hype and adoration that Ford has, just as I do the same with Twelvetrees.

Farrell is different because he is one of the most maligned players in England, it's always an uphill battle to change opinions.

Ford is supposedly an "exciting" option like Twelvetrees. Two "playmakers" with bundles of talent.

I just want to see them deliver.

You are right one poor match does not make Ford a bad player but he has more to prove than Farrell. Farrell has over 20 England caps to his name and a Lions tour under his belt. He also had some very good games at international level.

I think Ford will bounce back but I was personally disappointed to not see Ford be the all round 10 he is portrayed as.

I still thought Ford was much better than Goode. He played well and was far from poor barring his kicking.

Criticism is fine, even better if you also acknowledge that he spent most of the previous x weeks with England and not with his club running drills. And boy Bath at times a a very rigid team.

Where I think people often have problems with your criticism is that too often it is directed at players who are supposedly competing with Sarries players. the majority of English posters are saying that Farrell is the right man atm for England - yet you ignore that to concentrate on the wums MsBlaBlaBlaHaslet or whatever.

George ford is not the messiah (nor is he a very naughty boy) but right now he seems to be Englands second choice 10, but has zip internationakl experience. I wish he had been on the bench for the first two matches - then he could have come on when Farrell had cramp against France, and the match won against Scotland.

Farrell is our top Fh at the moment. He is improving his play and offers a big physical presence in there aswell. And i like his aggression...he winds up the opposition.
I will say however (and Beshocked you must agree) im not happy with the amount of kicks he's missing for England lately. He needs to sort that out as it could be very costly.

Ford and Burns are the contenders. Ford is the darling of the moment...but I like Burns. I hope we see him sort his head and his form out and start to show last seasons form which was outstanding. He was beginning to show an excellent ability to control the game - play territory etc...not just show the silky skills we know he has.

I do also suspects we will see the below midfield soon...maybe in NZ and it will certainly be interesting to see what it offers.
10 Farrell
12 Burrell
13 Tuilagi

George ford is not the messiah (nor is he a very naughty boy) but right now he seems to be Englands second choice 10, but has zip internationakl experience. I wish he had been on the bench for the first two matches - then he could have come on when Farrell had cramp against France, and the match won against Scotland..

I totally agree with that mind LT.

Ford is the form back up 10 to farrell...though i do prefer an on form Burns. But we should at least have the back up 10 on the bench to gain some experience.

Can you imagine Farrell getting injured...or not being available for the 1st test in NZ (because of the AP final) and we need to start a test in NZ with Burns or Ford... :erm

LondonTiger wrote:Criticism is fine, even better if you also acknowledge that he spent most of the previous x weeks with England and not with his club running drills. And boy Bath at times a a very rigid team.

Where I think people often have problems with your criticism is that too often it is directed at players who are supposedly competing with Sarries players. the majority of English posters are saying that Farrell is the right man atm for England - yet you ignore that to concentrate on the wums MsBlaBlaBlaHaslet or whatever.

George ford is not the messiah (nor is he a very naughty boy) but right now he seems to be Englands second choice 10, but has zip internationakl experience. I wish he had been on the bench for the first two matches - then he could have come on when Farrell had cramp against France, and the match won against Scotland.

I agree. For example, you (and others!) hold Twelvetrees to a far higher standard than you do Barritt, seemingly you want to see absolute brilliance from 36 or move on to Burrell (I don't actually disagree that much here) but you would be happy to see Barritt plodding away and defending well.

I have no real club allegiance, so it really irks me when people (not just you) push their club favourites forward blindly (and I would probably include anyone who thinks Ford should start ahead of Farrell as first choice at the moment)

Billy 36 - I am Glaws fan and a 36 fan, but he does things to make my toes curl at times.
I think he can improve, and far more importantly.. needs to, mainly in accuracy, and decisons, or I'd be calling for his head.

no 7 & 1/2 you probably feel that way because Ford probably had the ball in his hands far more than Goode. I respectfully disagree. Goode had limited ball but was involved in all the points scored.

Londontiger surely you can acknowledge that Goode faced more problems than Ford in preparation for the match.

Ford was playing at home, his team were performing very well at the set piece and his team had over 60% territory and possession.

I suppose there is a bit of that but it's not always the case. Ford does warrant his spot in the England side. I just want to see him prove himself at international level.


Bambam that's because of how both players are perceived. It's also how other centres are perceived. Barritt is perceived as a one dimensional plodder. Burrell is perceived as an one dimensional plodder. Ditto Tuilagi. Not that simplistic of course but many people believe Burrell-Tuilagi would be too predictable.

Twelvetrees in comparison is supposedly a "playmaker", the next Will Greenwood, the missing piece in the centres.

Not asking for brilliance. I am asking for a notable impact. Most other players in the backline have done that.

Not really pushing my players forward blindly - I would have Brown ahead of Goode, Burrell ahead of Barritt, Marler ahead of Mako at the moment. No problem with Morgan at 8 - he seems to be very good at international level.

Geordiefalcon I agree. Bit disappointed in Farrell's kicking but I hope and think he'll improve it.

I feel that way because in all facets of his game I think he's better than Goode barring place kicking but then I've only seen Goode take about 10. I think we all want to see the next 10 prove themselves be it Ford or Burns, if he ever gets back to his best. It comes back to your initial point that I'm not particularly comfortable with either Twelvetrees or Goode covering 10 at international level, I prefer an established player. We'll not know whether Ford could be that cover until he plays although this season he's been right up there among the best.

I know you don't like Twelvetrees and would prefer 2 players who make ground but I don't think many people are saying or were sayng he's the new Greenwood although I've seen people say he could be the best since.

no 7 & 1/2 you think he's a better tackler, more threatening with ball in hand and better at catching the high ball? I would say the only area Ford actually beats him is kicking from hand (an area where Ford seems to excel) if we are talking about player vs player in terms of all round skills.

You also forget that Goode was basically thrown into the 10 shirt with next to no warning.

Both Twelvetrees and Goode have more international experience than Ford. If there was an important kick at goal I would definitely want Goode, then Twelvetrees then Ford in that order to kick it.

I only don't like Twelvetrees because he's not doing what people have said he would. I would rather move forward with Burrell-Tuilagi. Like Nonu I think they can improve aspects of their game.

Tuilagi is one of the best attacking threats England have had, Burrell has in his short England career so far shown similar attacking threat. Putting them together could be a devastating combo. There is the assumption that they are not the finished article.

beshocked wrote:

Bambam that's because of how both players are perceived. It's also how other centres are perceived. Barritt is perceived as a one dimensional plodder. Burrell is perceived as an one dimensional plodder. Ditto Tuilagi. Not that simplistic of course but many people believe Burrell-Tuilagi would be too predictable.

Twelvetrees in comparison is supposedly a "playmaker", the next Will Greenwood, the missing piece in the centres.

Not asking for brilliance. I am asking for a notable impact. Most other players in the backline have done that.

Not really pushing my players forward blindly - I would have Brown ahead of Goode, Burrell ahead of Barritt, Marler ahead of Mako at the moment. No problem with Morgan at 8 - he seems to be very good at international level.

Sorry, pushing forward blindly is a bit harsh, didn't mean it to sound so strong.

I definitely disagree that Burrell/Tuilagi could be classed as one dimensional plodders similar to Barritt. Direct ball carriers yes, but far more pace and line breaking ability than Barritt ever showed

I can probably be accused of being one of those hyping up Twelvetrees, but even I never called him the new Greenwood! Potentially our best 12 since Greenwood, yes. I still maintain that he has been good, not amazing but far better than Barritt and has shown (in flashes) the ability that we are looking for in terms of passing and kicking

Not seen Ford have to go for many high balls to be fair but i would think that Goode should win that one yes. I've over egged it haven't I? I think they're on par defensively and Ford is better with ball in hand. I'd personally let Ford have the kicks as if he does need to be intergrated in the team it's likely he would need to take them as there is a likelyhood that there wouldn't be the option of twelvetrees or Goode in the future.

I still think twelvetrees' done what it was said on the tin. Coming in as the 1st receiver more and showing some nice passes amongst some mistakes. I think people are wanting too much from him while quite happily ignoring the limitations of others or saying they will improve.

Bambam that's the thing. I can't see what he has done that Barritt couldn't.

Burrell. Yes. Tuilagi. Yes. Twelvetrees? No.

I would concede that Twelvetrees has looked good twice vs Scotland but against tougher opposition in my opinion he has struggled.

Come on now no 7 & 1/2. Ford better with ball in hand than Goode? Really? Than a player who scores more tries, beats more defenders and makes more breaks is worse? Ford could not play at full back.

I would say Ford is the more comfortable 10 but if Goode could find himself at ease at 10 on a permanent basis I would say he has just as much skill as Ford if not more so.

I feel you are a Twelvetrees apologist no 7 & 1/2.

Was watching some Manu highlight reels last night and saw him do more thing creative (including clever passing & off-loading) versus SA and NZ than 36 has done this 6N.

He's more than just a bosh man.

I'm all about realistic expectations! If you want him to be as good as greenwood he's not going to be but I've said before I like a bit of vaiety and balance in midfield. I'd like to think that having Twlevetrees there is helping Farrell by taking a bit of pressure off him. If we play burrell and tuilagi neither of whom have a kicking game and neither of whom are exactly known for their passing I think it'll be easier for teams to defend against them and reduce their breaks rather than see them increase.

I'm just going to say here that I don't see Goode as a realistic option for full back or fly half for England and I think he's been far from impressive coming from the bench and it norally means shunting one of our best players out to the wing where he's average at best.

Exactly tophat 24/7. Tuilagi vs NZ was utter class. Not just boshing but some nice passes/offloads to set team mates up. That match showed Tuilagi's potential.

It's not just the power game but the awareness of team mates and making that last pass to set them up (making sure it's not forward of course).

We also sometimes forget how quick he is. Big bloke but very pacy.

Burrell runs such great supporting lines, something that Ashton used to get praised for. You always want a man running in support from a break, especially a back.


no 7 & 1/2 who do we ignore the limitations of?

Manu - He gets a lot of interceptions too, which I think is ironic given the perception of him as just a bosh merchant

Manu - world class centre. Need him fully fit for NZ tour.

no 7 & 1/2 I would say that Care is helping Farrell far more. Not saying I want him to be as good as Greenwood, I want him to prove he is better than Barritt (something I have not seen).

I think Goode can do a job at full back, not as good as Brown no but Brown is proving himself to be one of the best full backs in the NH.

I would not say that Twelvetrees is anywhere near the best 12 in the NH.

None of the main attacking moves from England have revolved around Twelvetrees. Most of the impact has come from Care,Brown,Burrell,Farrell in that order.

I think Tuilagi and Burrell have limitations. As above neither have a kicking game or a great passing game. They're both known for getting over the gain line. Yes I'm well aware that both can pass, they're international midefielders it's the least you could expect but I don't think it's an exceptional part of either of their games. Before Tuilagi got injured he was getting stick for not passing wide and getting the back 3 involved and electing to take the ball into contact too often. What you're saying is they have the potential to add these to their games. Fair enough but theoretically Twevetrees has these aspects now but we do need to see them more to the fore.