My England Pack for Italy

So we're going into the Italy match chasing a 50pt difference with Ireland to win the Championship. Ignoring this for the moment though Lancaster has done well to start almost exactly the same side all tournament, only really on the bench and at 3 have we had any changes mainly due to injury (Cole) and poor selections in the opening game.

Now I know this won't be what happens but I'd quite like the Italy match to be a chance for a lot of the bench players to get a run out and pick up the gauntlet from the starting side who've done so well so far. This'll help build more competition and confidence in the squad as all players should feel that the management believe they could be starters. It can also be a bit of a well done to a lot of guys who've had to sit on the bench and twiddle their thumbs for the majority of some of the most epic games we've seen lately.

The players who are replaced can drop to the bench and come on as and when needed or at SL's favourite time of the game (60 mins and 76 mins).

England's Revised Pack
Mako Vunipola
Tom Youngs
Roger Wilson
Dave Attwood
Courtney Lawes
Tom Wood
Chris Robshaw
Ben Morgan

Hartley, Marler, Thomas, Launchberry, Johnson

So Mako, Tom and Dave Attwood all drop in to the side and the others take their bench spots. I left Thomas on the bench as in all honesty he's only in there due to injury and he may or may not be involved in the England side once Cole is fit again, it's more important for Wilson to get more gametime.

What are your thoughts?

In the modern game it's all about the 23 man team now, and we shouldn't be afraid to swap players in and out. If we are then there's probably some problems with the bench.

Hasn't it already been reported that he won't make changes?

Yes, matchday squad has been named and the only change is Tuilagi for Goode.

Whos Roger Wilson?

And Italy may not be the toughest opponent but you just cannot underestimate them. Happy to bring on all the substitutes we have but I'd rather we were 20 points up on them first

I think like most games Italy will be competitive and difficult for 40-50 then England should pull away, can they get the 50pts difference they need well not quite sure. If it was at home then I would have said yes they could have.

Yeah , i think we need to win the game first without worrying about by how many points. That mentality will get us a big fat loss.

If we are up by quite a few then yes maybe consider a few changes.

But lets be fair...depending on whos in the AP Final ...theres going to be some raw experience starting that 1st test v NZ in NZ....  

Yappysnap surely it would be better to play the more expansive players in the 2nd half when the game opens up? Italy have shipped many points in the 2nd half when you consider the games vs Scotland,Ireland and France.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Whos Roger Wilson?

Secret weapon, big ball carrier. that he is Irish, and a no 8 is merely an inconvenience to be brushed under the carpet.

Possibly the only change I might make would be Mako for Marler. Castro is not the force he once was and may be injured, his replacement also went off injured and Mako is a big bruising ball carrier.

But the reverse is I would love to see Mako running at tired defenders.

So for me I would start the same XV and bring on the likes of Mako, Youngs, Attwood, Ford and Tuilagi with 20 to go to try and really destroy a tired Italian defence. Dickson however can stay on the bench

Londontiger I completely agree.

Job number one for Saturday is to win the match. Only once we have the win secured should we even start thinking about the margin of victory. Lets be honest, the chances of us beating Italy by 60ish points are minimal, so to win the Championship we are relying on France remembering how to play and putting one over Ireland. France in Paris in March is never an easy fixture...

I think the team selection is about right - the forwards were always going to stay the same after the good showings of the last two matches, and the back line has been improving through the tournament, while this game has come a little too soon for Manu or Yarde to be properly match fit and sharp.

As yappy says this isn't going to happen and I can see a valid point for giving game time to the reserves to build experience, however, all things being equal I'd want the pack remaining as it is. The only area where we are desperately low in experience is at 7. Robshaw is the just owner of the shirt, but if he were to be injured we have very little experience to take his place bar moving a 6 across. The reality is of course we won't rest him whilst we can still win the 6N, but I would like one of Kvesic, Fraser or Wallace to get some game time in NZ.

Maybe start Mako and rest Marler. Otherwise, let's play the best pack we can

HKC

If Robshaw was missing I think we'd just move Wood across - both are really '6.5s' in style and offer similar strengths at the breakdown and in carrying. Wood is obviously more of a lineout operator, but is as adept on the ground as Robshaw even if I don't think he (or anyone) could quite match Robshaw's workrate. I am though not convinced that our back up at 6 is good enough (yet) either.

Launchbury (or possibly Slater) to 6 for me if Wood has to go to 7

Wood usually plays 7 for Saints, so not much of a problem, both B.V> and Johnson can play or are 6s.

Roger Wilson would not like to play prop, he left Saints as it was rumoured that all backrowers should experience what it is like. Currently starring for Ulster and is one of the most under rated players in the game.

In fact, Attwood/Slater at lock and Launchbury at 6 would be incredible at the lineout without the ridiculous loss of balance we saw with Wood at 8!

4 Launchbury
5 Lawes
6 Slater
7 Wood
8 Morgan

That has size, aggression, athleticsm, lineout...and keeps the much celebrated lock duo together.
Though i could understand moving Launchbury to 6 and bringing on Attwood. That two has the same affect.

As it is i think Stuart would pick Johnson at 6.

Without getting too numerical Robshaw is far more in the mold of a 7 than Wood. Wood may play 7 for Saints, but Saints equally do not play with a traditional 7 in their pack. Nutley is really the only player they have in that style. We may well just move Wood over if Robshaw were to be injured, however, against sides that have specialist 7s we would struggle at the breakdown. Robshaw has rightly been criticised for his breakdown work in the past, however, there is no doubt he has vastly improved in this area and is now more of a 7 than a 6; perhaps a 6.75...

I did say I know this won't happen...

I just thought it'd be interesting to see other peoples take on using the subs a bit more and getting the whole 23 man squad to play from the start.

Mako for Marler may be a good move as the Italian scrum isn't the best and he'll at least have renowned scrummager Roger Wilson to help him, by the way I spoke to Roger and he told me he's 'definitely not Irish, 100% English boyo.' I don't know why he said boyo.

I was contemplating taking Robshaw out and leaving Hartley in then giving him the captaincy.

We could then have
Mako, Hartley, Wilson
Attwood, Lawes
Launchberry, Wood
Morgan

With Slater on the bench

Yappysnap I see what you are doing. Wanting to give Robshaw and Marler a rest before the 22nd.  

Robshaw is a man of steel, rest is for weak mortals


But seriously, good plan Yappy

play full strength from the start with no changes. Hopefully get a game winning lead and then empty the bench on the 55 minute mark. We need to guard against complacency and ensure we get the win. Italy are not a bad side and England will have to front up. We are trying to win the championship after all.

As its been announced no changes then I think it need to settle quickly then go for the juggler, if they can get a 15-20 lead there is no way Italy would come bvack into other than through England taking foot of gas and letting the lead slip.

There in lies the problem with mass subs and utilising the bench, whilst its nice to get players on the field we have seen time and time again in laods of different games involving different teams that once you make the mass changes we tend to see the structure goes and the team chasing the game tend to come back into it a bit.

So keep as many as 1st choice on field for as long as possible nd go for it form the 55-60 minute mark.

Agree, keep the same starting XV and go secure the win. Then if we want to go for Ireland's point differential we can consider it. I would want the team focused on the fundamentals, doing the things right which did not go so well previously, and looking to lock up the win before all else.

England haven't scored more than two tries in a match this tournament.Maybe a bit disrespectful to Italy to think we can score six just by deciding we want to "go for it".

Italy will be smarting from a poor 6 nations especially the loss against Scotland at home. Last game of the tournament, in Rome against the only side they haven't beaten in their nations history. They will be up for this BIG TIME. So same pack, match their intensity and let's win the game well. If we do then the points difference will take care of itself.

sickofwendy wrote:England haven't scored more than two tries in a match this tournament.Maybe a bit disrespectful to Italy to think we can score six just by deciding we want to "go for it".

Id go beyond disrespectful to delusional. England havent managed to beat Italy in Rome by more than 5 points in their last 3 attempts, and never by the margin required...only the all Blacks have ever managed that. England havent beaten anyone by that margin since

Suddenly a side that has consistently struggled to score tries even when trying to play open rugby is going to put on a big winning margin? Of the starting backs only Burrell and Care have anything like respectable try scoring records. Aside from the friendly against Wales in 07 they havent beaten any team by 50 points since the 2000-2003 era when they were a class above and many sides where struggling to come to terms with professionalism...and even in 2000 when Italy first came into the competition they only managed to win by 47 in Rome.

I dont really know how many ways there is to say this but if they do win this on pojnts difference it will be over France, not Ireland.

And on that basis do they need to worry about racking up a massive win to beat France? Not really. Its a sh1te France side and they will struggle to win at all. Theyd have to take Ireland by well over 30 points, something again thats not been attained for over a decade and with a very strong French side.

Really Englands winning margin is hugely unlikely to be a factor. Get the win first, Italy have come close to England the last 3 times theyve played in Rome.

If they apply themselves then I think England certainly have the personnel to go for the win but like I said and others have backed up they need to secure the win first.

It is a good point about England not scoring many tries. England have had a lot of possession in these matches but for some reason struggle to finish. We need to focus strongly on finishing in this match, not because of Ireland, but because it is a necessary part of this team's growth. When/if the win is secure then work on getting over the line. Not sure if the lack of finishing is due to the players or coaching, but needs to change if we really want to consider England a solid threat to the big boys.

doctor_grey wrote:It is a good point about England not scoring many tries.  England have had a lot of possession in these matches but for some reason struggle to finish.  We need to focus strongly on finishing in this match, not because of Ireland, but because it is a necessary part of this team's growth.  When/if the win is secure then work on getting over the line.  Not sure if the lack of finishing is due to the players or coaching, but needs to change if we really want to consider England a solid threat to the big boys.  

It would help to have finishers on the wings. 

doctor_grey wrote:It is a good point about England not scoring many tries.  England have had a lot of possession in these matches but for some reason struggle to finish.  We need to focus strongly on finishing in this match, not because of Ireland, but because it is a necessary part of this team's growth.  When/if the win is secure then work on getting over the line.  Not sure if the lack of finishing is due to the players or coaching, but needs to change if we really want to consider England a solid threat to the big boys.  

In general much of the problem has been due to wrong options/white line fever by players. Add in poor execution of basic skills, such as passing or grounding a ball, and we have seen rather a lot of points left on the paddock.

So far Nowell has been called upon to do quite a bit of defensive work and May has been quite restricted when he has had the ball (ie lots of defenders around him thus running sideways) . i hope we get to see a bit more from them attack wise...in open space..or with fewer defenders around them, just to see what they are capable of.

But as for the title...try to win the game first...and too be honest i really cant see us A) Chasing the 50-60 points or B) Actually achieving it!!

LondonTiger wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:It is a good point about England not scoring many tries.  England have had a lot of possession in these matches but for some reason struggle to finish.  We need to focus strongly on finishing in this match, not because of Ireland, but because it is a necessary part of this team's growth.  When/if the win is secure then work on getting over the line.  Not sure if the lack of finishing is due to the players or coaching, but needs to change if we really want to consider England a solid threat to the big boys.  

In general much of the problem has been due to wrong options/white line fever by players. Add in poor execution of basic skills, such as passing or grounding a ball, and we have seen rather a lot of points left on the paddock.

Agree completely.

When ever we've got in to the red zone the ball never gets past 12, and unfortunately one of those players usually die with it without getting the offload/pass.

Against France it was mainly the pack getting white line fever and 36's poor passing. Against Scotland it was Care going himself a few times and getting smashed and Farrel taking contact and not passing. Then against Ireland it was Farrell and 36 both taking contact and not passing wide, not helped by the two times the ball did go wide May fracked a clear opportunity. In the Wales game Farrell chose contact while dithering on an offload twice while we had overlaps and were playing the advantage. It's slowly getting better but honestly these guys should have these skills anyway surely?

Just thinking about it I'd like to see some mauls from England in this game. We've not used them at all this tournament so perhaps time to crack them out and see if we can get a score.

sickofwendy wrote:England haven't scored more than two tries in a match this tournament.Maybe a bit disrespectful to Italy to think we can score six just by deciding we want to "go for it".

Exactly what Lancaster said

Marler might not make it, for the best of reasons

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26557099