Who's on the plane?

The thing with Youngs is I'm actually surprised when he hits his jumper rather that being surprised when he misses as I am with Hartley.

Didn't Youngs only have one line out?

Ozzy3213 wrote:As a loosehead or hooker Asbo?

Hooker

Sgt_Pooly wrote:. It hasn't been ok, it's been dreadful. He's missed the majority of his throws and often not by a small margin.

That just simply isnt true.

LondonTiger wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:T Youngs throwing has been dreadful for the majority of the AI & 6N, I can't believe people are still defending him.

I'd like Webber to be given a shot at some point and see if he can get the backup spot to Hartley who has the 2 jersey 100% nailed on.

I think Slater has a good shot of getting a spot being able to cover 6 and lock, he's also a good line out option. I'd have him ahead of Attwood personally but SL seems a fan.

I would disagree that Youngs throwing has been "dreadful". It has not been great, but the failings have grown in the retelling. Also I still stand by my previous statements that Youngs would have been pinged for not straight for the first two Hartley threw against Wales, and pilloried for the one that AWJ stole, even though that was a good read by Jones.

LT, the difference is that Hartley has a lot of credit in the bank due to his continued faultless lineout work for England. Tom Youngs just doesn't have that as in nearly every single Test he's mucked up a lineout, and unfortunately for England and him they've been crucial one's on either the opposition 5m line (like in the French game) or on our own 5m line (like in the NZ game). It's to be expected that he'll be monitored more closely.

I'd still take him though as he fits the England gameplan well and if they can just sort the lineout then he'll be brilliant. On the other hand I do want Webber to get game time as against SA he could be far more useful then either Hartley or Youngs (if he does live up to the expectation).

yappysnap wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:T Youngs throwing has been dreadful for the majority of the AI & 6N, I can't believe people are still defending him.

I'd like Webber to be given a shot at some point and see if he can get the backup spot to Hartley who has the 2 jersey 100% nailed on.

I think Slater has a good shot of getting a spot being able to cover 6 and lock, he's also a good line out option. I'd have him ahead of Attwood personally but SL seems a fan.

I would disagree that Youngs throwing has been "dreadful". It has not been great, but the failings have grown in the retelling. Also I still stand by my previous statements that Youngs would have been pinged for not straight for the first two Hartley threw against Wales, and pilloried for the one that AWJ stole, even though that was a good read by Jones.

LT, the difference is that Hartley has a lot of credit in the bank due to his continued faultless lineout work for England. Tom Youngs just doesn't have that as in nearly every single Test he's mucked up a lineout, and unfortunately for England and him they've been crucial one's on either the opposition 5m line (like in the French game) or on our own 5m line (like in the NZ game). It's to be expected that he'll be monitored more closely.

I'd still take him though as he fits the England gameplan well and if they can just sort the lineout then he'll be brilliant. On the other hand I do want Webber to get game time as against SA he could be far more useful then either Hartley or Youngs (if he does live up to the expectation).

Agree. And besides we do need another Hooker with some International experience against the time when Hartley or Youngs get injured. Forward looking, if nothing else.

Is Jaimie George getting regular time for Sarries? Could he be a dark horse?

Oh Youngs has at times been poor. Just not as bad as everyone has made out, nor always his fault (though often it is). Lawes himself has admitted that the two failures against France were his fault. Now some of that is attempting to build the confidence of a struggling player, but it also highlights that it is a team effort.

Personally I would like someone else to be really banging on the selection door at hooker. Youngs offers a lot, but his size can destabilise the scrum (though make hooking easier) and his throwing can as we have seen be flaky. We have also seen Hartley in this kind of form before, and suddenly it evaporates. After all, this time last season the roles were very much reversed.

I really hoped in the Summer that Webber, who was making progress in the throwing department having been shocking at some points, would kick on and thought he would be the starter by now. Injuries have prevented this.

So in short, I am not comfortable that Youngs or Hartley are the right men for RWC 2015, but for various reasons the people behind them are not banging on the door anywhere near as hard as they should.

Yappysnap agreed.

Plus when Hartley was messing up lineouts vs Wales it didn't have a decisive impact on the scoreline.

Hibbard's missed line out was far more costly for Wales as an example.

When a player has a supposed weakness people will scrutinise it far more like Mako's scrummaging and T.Youngs' lineout throwing.

killer938 Croft a cert in the squad? Really?

Sgt Pooly people defend T.Youngs because of club bias. Something I can understand as I do it myself with my club's players.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is Jaimie George getting regular time for Sarries? Could he be a dark horse?

No he's playing 2nd fiddle to Brits at the moment, till that changes I can't see it. I want the Sarries coaches to show a bit more faith in Jamie.

It's also worth noting that Quins have 3 Saxons hookers in Buchanan, Gray and Ward who should all be fit at the end of the season. At the start of the year I'd have expected Buchanan to be pushing Webber for that 3rd slot, but he's been out since the autumn with a torn pectoral [1] and probably won't be back until the very end of the season.

Gray is very good in the lineout and a strong carrier but is just coming back into form having also been injured. He's also an unusual shape for a hooker - while he's over 16st he's 6'2" so looks quite willowy.

So for most of the season, ex-Cornish Pirate Dave Ward has been our starting hooker and has seized his chance with both hands. Throwing was wonky at first but has improved immeasurably with practice and he didn't look out of place in the Saxons games. He also offers something quite different around the park. A similar shape to Gray, but a little stockier, he also plays 7 to a decent standard (has started there in LV games, for instance) and is quick enough to be Quins' 7s captain, where he has on occasion displayed a kicking game that wouldn't disgrace an IC. The big questions are whether he's too old (I think he's 30, but with lowish mileage) or too lightweight (but it never stopped Mears).

Given the fixture congestion at the end of the season - we've got the AP Final, potentially the HEC Final, the BaaBaas, midweek games and 3 tests - I would expect Lancaster to involve pretty large squad - probably the EPS, the top half of the Saxons and various injury replacements and we'll see some surprises on the bench at least.

[1] Can anyone explain what it is with torn pectorals this season? I'd never heard of it until the autumn, but now every other injured player seems to have it.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:As a loosehead or hooker Asbo?

Hooker

I've a theory that LCD may revert to prop, or at least cover prop from the bench, as he did last weekend against Bath. He's not showing international class as either yet, (barely Prem standard in some aspects), but the potential is there.

Statistically, England's only chance of victory at RWC is with a Cornish prop (or two).

Poorfour wrote:It's also worth noting that Quins have 3 Saxons hookers in Buchanan, Gray and Ward who should all be fit at the end of the season. At the start of the year I'd have expected Buchanan to be pushing Webber for that 3rd slot, but he's been out since the autumn with a torn pectoral [1] and probably won't be back until the very end of the season.

Gray is very good in the lineout and a strong carrier but is just coming back into form having also been injured. He's also an unusual shape for a hooker - while he's over 16st he's 6'2" so looks quite willowy.

So for most of the season, ex-Cornish Pirate Dave Ward has been our starting hooker and has seized his chance with both hands. Throwing was wonky at first but has improved immeasurably with practice and he didn't look out of place in the Saxons games. He also offers something quite different around the park. A similar shape to Gray, but a little stockier, he also plays 7 to a decent standard (has started there in LV games, for instance) and is quick enough to be Quins' 7s captain, where he has on occasion displayed a kicking game that wouldn't disgrace an IC. The big questions are whether he's too old (I think he's 30, but with lowish mileage) or too lightweight (but it never stopped Mears).

Given the fixture congestion at the end of the season - we've got the AP Final, potentially the HEC Final, the BaaBaas, midweek games and 3 tests - I would expect Lancaster to involve  pretty large squad - probably the EPS, the top half of the Saxons and various injury replacements and we'll see some surprises on the bench at least.

[1] Can anyone explain what it is with torn pectorals this season? I'd never heard of it until the autumn, but now every other injured player seems to have it.

Dave Ward is 28 so he still has some time on his side.

I would just like to restate what I have said as people are assigning their own values to my statements.


Youngs throwing has at times this season been poor.
I do not believe that he is the right man to play hooker for England, now or in the future.
Hooker is a position where I believe we have a real lack of strength in depth.
Nor do I believe that Ed Slater is good enough to play for England.
I do think the criticism of Tom Youngs has been over the top however.

beshocked wrote:Yappysnap agreed.

Plus when Hartley was messing up lineouts vs Wales it didn't have a decisive impact on the scoreline.

Hibbard's missed line out was far more costly for Wales as an example.

When a player has a supposed weakness people will scrutinise it far more like Mako's scrummaging and T.Youngs' lineout throwing.

killer938 Croft a cert in the squad? Really?

Sgt Pooly people defend T.Youngs because of club bias. Something I can understand as I do it myself with my club's players.

For the squad, for me, yes. There is a reason Lancaster brought him straight back in last year, like he has done for Manu this year. He is obviously very highly rated by the management. I didn't say he would start because at the moment Wood has got that sewn up, but I am sure he will be in the WC squad if he is fit. Of course this is just my opinion and you are more than welcome to disagree with it.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:. It hasn't been ok, it's been dreadful. He's missed the majority of his throws and often not by a small margin.

That just simply isnt true.

How is it not true?

I can't recall which game it was recently but Youngs came on and missed 3/4 throws, that's dreadful.

I'd be surprised if he got close to the 50% mark when coming on, he certainly didn't against NZ or France.

His throwing is simply not good enough, there's not much to debate.

Youngs's throwing has been fine when he has been starting - in fact better than his club throwing as far as I can see. However, he's been too unreliable coming on from the bench.

I think this is probably because he's not had the level of experience throwing that other hookers have, and so he's fine when he starts (because he's just warmed up and practiced the actions) but after 60 minutes on the bench he struggles to get the movement and timing right. He's said he has difficulty getting his muscles loose enough to throw well, and I think he just lacks some of the muscle-memory that other players have.

I'd be happy for him to start, but he's too much of a risk off the bench right now. This is one situation where we need a steady bench option rather than an impact player.

killer938 are you sure that's not bias talking? Croft is a good player but like certain other players he doesn't seem to have the right balance/skill set that Lancaster wants in my opinion.

Londontiger I think it's a little harsh to write T.Youngs completely off. If he can sort out his throwing he'll be a very good option for England at hooker. It's an area which he is heavily scrutinised at the moment.

I disagree that there is a real lack of strength in depth.

Ed Slater could play for England. Why do you not think he could?

Poorfour wrote:I'd be happy for him to start, but he's too much of a risk off the bench right now. This is one situation where we need a steady bench option rather than an impact player.

II made the same point when Lancaster rotated players for the Italy game last season - stating that you need someone more solid than Youngs on the bench. Of course on that day, Hartley had a mare and Youngs came on and looked good. However I do believe the point still stands.

Ive never been one of Crofts biggest fans, but appreciated his abilities and some of his performances. However i really wouldnt select him...it would unbalance the team and back row.

Id rather Garvey, Slater or some big unit was in Crofts place.

Croft is a luxury.

Great for a Lions tour or a one off exhibition match, but I'm not a fan.

I must have some anti Matt Garvey glasses, as I just do not see what others do. For me he is a poor man's Ed Slater - and as mentioned above I do not believe the Leicester man is good enough to play for England.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:As a loosehead or hooker Asbo?

Hooker

I've a theory that LCD may revert to prop, or at least cover prop from the bench, as he did last weekend against Bath. He's not showing international class as either yet, (barely Prem standard in some aspects), but the potential is there.

Statistically, England's only chance of victory at RWC is with a Cornish prop (or two).

I think that was a one-off tho, Dub - caused by Sturge's continuing injury absence, Mooner's missus dropping a calf, and he was backing up Carl Rimmer - there was no-one left basically! His darts clearly need work, but the rest of his game is pretty much there imo

LondonTiger wrote:I must have some anti Matt Garvey glasses, as I just do not see what others do. For me he is a poor man's Ed Slater - and as mentioned above I do not believe the Leicester man is good enough to play for England.

Why not?

Who are the top 6's around at the moment LT..

Obviously Johnson is still rated by Stuart and will travel.

What about outsideers...Mark Wilson at the Falcons?

Of all the 6s in the AP, I would argue that Callum Clark is in the best form. Tom Johnson for me is not all that far behind. Meanwhile since he got into the side, no-one has outplayed Jamie Gibson for us (ps I am NOT saying he should be in the mix).


People often hark back to Richard Hill - but there are very few Blindsides of his style in the AP. We tend to have the auxiliary lock (Garvey, Slater, Kruis) or the willowy, pacy lineout man (Croft, Johnson). The closest we have to a Richard hill style is Robshaw (of course hill was primarily a 7 at Sarries).

So if I were picking a back row for New Zealand, then considering current injuries, I would take BillyV, Morgan, Robshaw, Kvesic, Wood, Johnson and Clark.

I don't rate Tom Johnson at all, he adds nothing to the squad.

LT if we play all 7 of them in the back row I reckon we could beat NZ

We would probably still spurn try scoring opportunities, and let Savea score twice.

How about this suggestion...

Move Brad Barritt to flanker. Thats essentially what he is when he plays for England anyway and does a crackin job!

beshocked wrote:killer938 are you sure that's not bias talking? Croft is a good player but like certain other players he doesn't seem to have the right balance/skill set that Lancaster wants in my opinion.

Londontiger I think it's a little harsh to write T.Youngs completely off. If he can sort out his throwing he'll be a very good option for England at hooker. It's an area which he is heavily scrutinised at the moment.

I disagree that there is a real lack of strength in depth.

Ed Slater could play for England. Why do you not think he could?

I don't see how it is bias stating the fact that Lancaster brought him straight into the team when he came back from injury last season...?

For the record I will admit I am a big Croft fan and if England continue to try and play a 15 man game at a high tempo like they did against Wales then I think he can he a huge asset, especially coming off the bench.

However, all I was stating before was the fact that I believe he will be picked, not my opinion of who I would pick like you guys have been doing when commenting on him.

killer938 didn't exactly work well bringing Croft into the backrow vs Wales. Plus he flattered to deceive on the Lions tour in my opinion.

He's a good player but it's difficult to find the right backrow balance with him in my opinion.

I still feel that Croft and Lydiate should have not gone on the Lions tour - certainly not instead of Wood and Robshaw.

beshocked wrote:killer938 didn't exactly work well bringing Croft into the backrow vs Wales. Plus he flattered to deceive on the Lions tour in my opinion.

He's a good player but it's difficult to find the right backrow balance with him in my opinion.

I still feel that Croft and Lydiate should have not gone on the Lions tour - certainly not instead of Wood and Robshaw.

Agree with your last point, but he played very well with Robshaw in the previous 6N. The issue in Cardiff was more that Wood was not the right player at 8 for that game. I'd rather have had Easter or Waldrom to be honest.

I agree we paid the price for a lack of ball carriers in Wales with Wood at 8. Croft is a very good player and will put pressure on Wood once fit.

Tom Youngs   

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Tom Youngs   

Not sure what that means. The first lineout once he was on was poor, and probably his fault. However as the ball was thrown earlier than the jumpers were expecting we have no idea whether it was overthrown. Did nerves make him throw early, or were the jumpers not ready?

Englands lineout was not great when in attacking positions today. Hartley was giving it too much air and we failed to catch cleanly, while Youngs looked to be underthrowing slightly. We secured his balls cleanly but body position of jumper was poor.

Finally loved actually seeing a hooker hook for the ball, and take a hook against the head.


I guess I see the positive stuff, and gloss over the negative - and vice versa.

He's an awful thrower, he shouldn't be near an England squad imo

I disagree with the description of awful - but you know that. I will agree that his first throw of the bench is usually awful. I believe you judge him harder than you do Hartley - and if Youngs had thrown like Hartley did today you would have been all over him. If Hartley could have thrown to his usual standard when near(ish) to the Italy line - well there would have been real chances for maul tries.

I still believe that Youngs is too small to be an international hooker, and still wish Webber had not gone backwards and been injured this season, but it was great to see a hooker striking and winning the opposition put in.

I think Hartley was 15/15, Youngs would never get near that figure.

I just like a hooker to hit his jumpers as a standard, everything else is a bonus.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:He's an awful thrower, he shouldn't be near an England squad imo

I suggest you look into the workings of a lineout - a bad lineout isn't always down to the hooker. Everyone admits Youngs has issues throwing but to say he shouldn't be anywhere near the England squad is a load of rubbish. What he needs is time with the lineout callers/jumpers.

nathan wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:He's an awful thrower, he shouldn't be near an England squad imo

I suggest you look into the workings of a lineout - a bad lineout isn't always down to the hooker. Everyone admits Youngs has issues throwing but to say he shouldn't be anywhere near the England squad is a load of rubbish. What he needs is time with the lineout callers/jumpers.

The workings of a line out??? He can't throw, it's that simple.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

nathan wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:He's an awful thrower, he shouldn't be near an England squad imo

I suggest you look into the workings of a lineout - a bad lineout isn't always down to the hooker. Everyone admits Youngs has issues throwing but to say he shouldn't be anywhere near the England squad is a load of rubbish. What he needs is time with the lineout callers/jumpers.

The workings of a line out??? He can't throw, it's that simple.

Yes, say for instance if the jumpers are late to jump then it looks like it was youngs fault. You seem to think it just involves a bloke on the side of the pitch chucking the ball in.

Nathan, that's rubbish.

Hartley hits 15/15 yet when Youngs come on and misses it's the jumpers fault?

Take off the Tigers tinted glasses, I'm an England fan and want the best for us. Youngs is simply just not good enough at doing his primary role.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Nathan, that's rubbish.

Hartley hits 15/15 yet when Youngs come on and misses it's the jumpers fault?

Take off the Tigers tinted glasses, I'm an England fan and want the best for us. Youngs is simply just not good enough at doing his primary role.

which team do the jumpers and lineout caller come from exactly?

Considering Lawes has only started calling the Lineouts since Parling went on the Lions, I think it's helped massively having Hartley throwing in and Wood as another key jumper.

Perhaps this is one that should be agreed to disagree over?

So it's Hartley/Lawes fault that Youngs can't throw?

HammerofThunor wrote:Considering Lawes has only started calling the Lineouts since Parling went on the Lions, I think it's helped massively having Hartley throwing in and Wood as another key jumper.

Perhaps this is one that should be agreed to disagree over?

Agree.

Yea agree, Youngs is way off Int quality.

Hopefully Webber will get a good run of games.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Yea agree, Youngs is way off Int quality.

Hopefully Webber will get a good run of games.

I agree in that your not worth debating with.

nathan wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Yea agree, Youngs is way off Int quality.

Hopefully Webber will get a good run of games.

I agree in that your not worth debating with.

Tigers fan?