England vs Crusaders

First topic message reminder :

So what team do we want or expect to see in this one then?

I'd like to see:

1. Mullan
2. Ward
3. Brookes
4. Slater (c)
5. Attwood
6. Johnson
7. Kvesic
8. Haskell
9. Dickson
10. Cipriani
11. Pennell
12. Eastmond
13. Trinder
14. Forden
15. Goode

Bench: Catt, Gray, Thomas, Patterson, Vunipola, Youngs, Myler , Burrell.

Not much umph in the centres but the Crusaders won't be able to offer th any space as if they get in behind then it's try time. Give a few players a chance to stake a claim. Be interesting to see how Slater and Eastmond perform as they have a lot to potentially gain given the performance of their positional colleagues today.

Can't remember the squad exactly so might have to change it of I've missed any obvious omissions.

Although not black, I'd say Brussow and possibly Pocock fit into that mould.

Both have a low centre of gravity and are as wide as tall. Genuine fetchers seem to have this build I've found, George Smith etc

Yeah i would say most 7's (there are obviously exceptions) are all around the same. Not particularly tall ...6' probably the tallest but are quite broad and heavy set.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Richie Gray is a 6'9 bleach blonde second row. Not a 7

Damn you know what, I never knew! My point being You're going to notice Armitage more as he doesn't fit the default setting for your average 7, same as Gray got ntoiced more in another 'hidden' position'.

Well im glad i was able to point that out to you   

Ha!

Sgt, was talking in physcial terms so not a short stout black guy. I'm struggling to think of another like him in the back row of any team.

Salvi is halfway there, not as stout certainly, but relatively short and squat

Are we really trying to say Armitage isn't noticeable next to your regular back row forward?

No more so than I'd say Pocock or Brussow are imo both are instantly recognisable

No i think he's most noticeable...and i dont mean becuase of physical characteristics...i mean his game.

Other players can be quite devious and tricky....Stefon is just there in your face wrestling the ball or doing his work on the ground. The fact he never or rarely gets pinged he should be saluted showing he plays the game within the laws...unlike most top 7's.

Fair enough.

I think the noticing of whether a player gets pinged or not is in direct proportion to whether you are a fan of that player or not.
Eg NZ fans think McCaw is constantly picked on by refs and everyone else disagrees.

Marshall was the chippy interviewer. Embarrasses himself if you ask me every time I hear him commentate.

After England win 38-7, v comfortable, marshall asks slater how did England manage to pull that one off when crusaders had 70% of the possession....muppet. Doesn't marshall realise that this is how NZ play? Score when you have the ball, don't worry about them having possession when you can confidently defend.

nganboy wrote:I think the noticing of whether a player gets pinged or not is in direct proportion to whether you are a fan of that player or not.
Eg NZ fans think McCaw is constantly picked on by refs and everyone else disagrees.

+1000

Lancs has nothing to lose but his own reputation as a solid selector

Time to throw the dice and give Cipriani his chance. England will be hungry for this and if they pick their best side - including Lawes and Hartley - and play a game that suits them not try to play like NZ, then i think they have a chance of getting the edge.

Thought Slater played well and put Attwood in the shade. Attwood is starting to look like a show pony for my money. Big guy but no grunt.

quinsforever wrote:Marshall was the chippy interviewer. Embarrasses himself if you ask me every time I hear him commentate.

After England win 38-7, v comfortable, marshall asks slater how did England manage to pull that one off when crusaders had 70% of the possession....muppet. Doesn't marshall realise that this is how NZ play? Score when you have the ball, don't worry about them having possession when you can confidently defend.

Marshall was it? He didn't like nor congratulate Slater when conducting the post-match interview.

What a one-eyed toad. Was RTE covering the game?

I don't know, but I'll find out in a minute whether emack's being getting a kicking after his English 10-man rugby jibe on another post.
I suspect he deservedly has.

Very good showings and improved 1st team prospects for Watson, Slater, Dickson, Waller. Good showings from the hask, kvesic, cips, foden and pennell and completely anonymus or poor for attwood, johnson, trinder.

Too many choices now!

It could be so easy to change the majority of the starting team for every game leading up to the RWC just to give players who deserve it game time.

How do you build stability when you have circa 35 players all playing at similar levels?!

yappysnap wrote:Too many choices now!

It could be so easy to change the majority of the starting team for every game leading up to the RWC just to give players who deserve it game time.

How do you build stability when you have circa 35 players all playing at similar levels?!

Pick the ones who are most consistent, but make changes if there's a serious dip in form

Whoever has 'credit in the bank' according to SL basically I think the starting pack is about there, just inside centre and a wing berth to be nailed down. I think we have 2 genuine contenders that could slot in and do well for every position now.

Agree with that, then there's just the bench slots to fill.

Oh and while the majority of the team did well I thought Johnson was pretty ineffective, for me now he's past it. Not good enough to be the top 2 choices at 6, not young enough to be worth hanging onto to see how he turns out and with no real amazing skill that sets him apart when he's up against Croft, Garvey, Fearns, Wallace and all the other youngsters coming through.

He was fairly anonymous for 65 mins and then looked knackered for the remainder of the game.

I would say Johnson has fallen under that category for quite a while now.

England Reserves versus NZ`s most successful Super franchise nice throwaway line isn`t it.
Crusaders last won in 2008 under Robbie Deans,todays side isn`t even a Shadow Crusaders
side.
Now the strongest Crusaders side versus the strongest possible England side anywhere now
that I`d pay big money to see.
I.e with Crockett,Franks,Romano,McCaw,Whitelock[S],[G],Read,Flynn,Carter,Crotty;
Taylor,Ellis,Dagg.plus A and L Whitelock.Todd,and Slade also involved.

Sounds like it was a good workout for the England squad players and gave SL some thoughts regarding strength in depth.

Hopefully Kvesic can kick on and at least become competent back-up to Robshaw, while Haskell seems to have moved up the pecking order at the expense of Johnson.

Did Cips and Dickson do enough to be in contention for Saturday?

I would play Dickson over Youngs at the moment, we want pace on the game from the very start.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:I would play Dickson over Youngs at the moment, we want pace on the game from the very start.

Maybe, but it will take me a lot to get over that feeling of dread I had when Dickson replaced Care vs France and things all went downhill

Youngs is s concern for me.

Anyone else think that if Robson at Gloucester has a good start to the season getting some gametime he could over take Youngs?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Youngs is s concern for me.

Anyone else think that if Robson at Gloucester has a good start to the season getting some gametime he could over take Youngs?

He's got promise but then Youngs had a lot more at the same time. Also they've gone for Laidlaw haven't they? If he can take game time it would certainly look good for him.

And he's from Stoke so I want him to do well (same with Brookes)

When he first burst onto the international scene a few years back with that great performance against australia i thought youngs was the answer to our problems, and that care was a liability. In the last 12 months i've fully reversed that opinion. I'd prefer dickson to youngs, he lacks the sniping that care does, but generally seems to get the tempo ticking in a way youngs just doesn't.

Do we have any other young SH's coming through?
 
It just seems to be:
Care
Youngs, Dickson, Wigglesworth
.
.
.
.
Robson
.
.
The Abyss

you forgot Wigglesworth. Not exciting but perfectly competent with a very good kicking game. Also while Simpson has taken a bit of a step back these last couple of years he's still young enough to improve his game, so don't count him out yet.

Yes i did forget about Wigglesworth...but i deliberaterly forgot about Simpson    

What happened with spencer
He was seen as someone with promise
Stuck behind a 35 year old saffer probably hasn't helped him kick on

GeordieFalcon wrote:Do we have any other young SH's coming through?
 
It just seems to be:
Care
Youngs, Dickson, Wigglesworth
.
.
.
.
Robson
.
.
The Abyss

The other Dickson is a decent player. The elder Dickson if I remember right though.

Simpson is dreadful.

Henry Taylor looks a real talent, he's got great pace/break and being Sarries his kicking game is outstanding.

Micky Young once had a lot of potential too, then it all fell apart at Tigers for him and he's never been the same player.

Sam Stuart had huge potential but has had two horrendous knee injuries and is now waiting behind Care and Dickson. There were some glimpses of his talent last season, but I'd like to see if he can come through. Not one for next year, though he might have been had he not been crocked.

B. Youngs just looks knackered. He's never been the same since the Lions tour (which he shouldn't of even played). He needs a rest and a decent pre-season and hopefully he'll be back to full form.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Simpson is dreadful.

Henry Taylor looks a real talent, he's got great pace/break and being Sarries his kicking game is outstanding.

He's a great Prem player. Pass isn't good enough sadly but he's an extra winger essentially.

Dave Lewis formerly of Gloucester now at the Chiefs is a SH who impresses most times I see him.

Robson is a guy I really want given a run for Gloucester behind a better pack next season. Whilst still a bit raw I've always thought he looks to have a much more complete skill set than several others above him in the pecking order who are strong in some aspects but average in others.

Hood83 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Simpson is dreadful.

Henry Taylor looks a real talent, he's got great pace/break and being Sarries his kicking game is outstanding.

He's a great Prem player. Pass isn't good enough sadly but he's an extra winger essentially.

But Hood Simpsons a SH, he's supposed to have a good pass. If hes a winger he should play wing.

Its like having a prop whos excellent in the loose and open play but who cant scrummage...you know like the big American, Eric Fry who we have just signed....