England pack's ability ball in hand

First topic message reminder :

Englands pack were pretty good this AI. Set pieces were very impressive, defence good etc and we even seemed to get the maul working again.

But there's one area that still concerns me and that's their ability with the ball. I just don't feel we are as affective in the pack when we have the ball either through hard yards or looking for gaps at pace.

What's your thoughts?

Though watching the dvd of the 2003 World Cup (as I did the other day), it was shocking how many lineouts we lost. Good job they managed to get it right at the end of extra time.

Stuart Barnes (I know most on here hate him but he does write some decent stuff!) wrote an article the other day about Henry Thomas and his skills with ball in hand and how England should be looking to build the team for 2019 around players like him, rather than trying to make minimal gains with players with a far lower skill base.

Actually I think ball in hand they are quite good.

Robshaw has excellent hands and if you watch him for England he often takes balls as a second receiver to distribute in often 2nd or 3rd phase ball.

Launchbury and Lawes both can distribute and Morgan himself is a top class old style 8.

Wood however just doesn't look that sort of player and its why I think the pack is not balanced. A chap like Haskell would be better IMO.

In terms of the front row, well, its all great have a chap like Tom Youngs who can spin a 20metre miss pass but if he can't hook, can't push in the scrum, is more likely to hit the juxebox then the treble 20 in darts and always gets turnover then all those luxuries seem to seem irrelevant.

Guys like Robshaw etc, they're not ball in one hand distributors like SBW but lets be honest about his flicks.... half the time he gives a beautiful flick pass on contact to set up another phase/a try, the other time he loses possession and breaks on turnovers are very very dangerous. However its a skill which those in the SH are developing.

Marler has been a dissappointment carrying...and Hartley has as well as Yappy rightly says.

But he also makes sense...maybe this is the tactics not to tire out the players with too much carrying.

I just worry about this...as its a vital part of the game.

robbo277 wrote:Would it be easier for a coach like Rowntree to teach Mako and Tom Youngs to scrum/throw then it would for the coaches to teach Marler and Hartley to carry like the aforementioned?

Mako and Youngs both went on the Lions tour in 2013 despite only having a handful of caps each and have barely got a game since, certainly missing the last two series. If they had been fit for the last year and stuck around the squad, would they be closer to the complete articles?

Both offer a carrying game that the incumbents don't, but both are definitely weaker in the set piece. Be intersting to see if they get fully fit if they can get it together.

At one point, carrying was the shining light in Marler's game, I think he really focused on the scrum for a bit!

Yep there was a time when Marler would never have had the know how to demolish the Leinster scrum like he and a bunch of academy/club players did over the last two weeks. Especially as they were almost the whole Irish pack.

Hopefully as he gets older and comfier in his role we'll see more of that old attacking game

I have no problems with Marler getting down and learning how to scrum properly...im sure Mr Rowntree has been dishing out the instructions and goals for Marler.

But it would be nice to see him do a few carries now and again...like a few years ago.

Do you mean in the open spaces?

Not that hard is it. Makes you realise how slow the game is now, watching Dawson whip those dive passes out and seeing most players including forwards taking the ball at pace.

Don't want to criticise the forwards, because in the core areas they are probably one of the most effective in world right now, but argh...if I have to watch another match where everyone is receiving the ball at a standstill....

What would an England pack look like in your opinion if you just focussed on solely carrying and ability with ball in hand?

1.M.Vunipola
2.T.Youngs
3.Cole
4.Attwood
5.Lawes
6.B.Vunipola
7.Haskell
8.Morgan


Not sure if those 2nd rows are the best ball carriers but I don't know.

Of course there are issues with that pack but it's got more ability to make ground with ball in hand in my opinion - taking pressure off the backs.

It's a shame S.Armitage doesn't want to come back to England because I would think a backrow of him, Billy and Morgan would be very powerful. 3 powerful ball carriers with S.Armitage also being strong at the breakdown, Billy being underrated there too.

Having just one big ball carrier allows the opposition to target them. I know Billy isn't technically a 6 but who wouldn't want to have Billy and Morgan in a backrow if they can work effectively?

Bruising backline to complement this - just based on size mostly and power.

9.Care
10.Farrell
11.Rokodiguini
12.Burrell
13.Manu
14.Watson
15.Brown

Beshocked...has Mako been playing? If so hows he been playing?

He started vs Sale in the recent game after a long injury layoff. I have heard that he's playing well which is a good sign.

Throw in Slater and maybe Thomas for Cole and it's a brilliant carrying team. Like you say if Armitage was there as well...

Would absolutely get owned though in practically every other aspect of the game.

I think Haskell's carrying is a little overrated to be honest. I can't remember who posted it during the AIs, but someone on here wrote a brilliant post with his season's carrying stats compared to Wood's, and they were by no means eye-catching. 

Someone like Ewers is probably one of the best EQ carrying-backrows in the league. Perhaps a fit and firing Fearns also.

beshocked wrote:What would an England pack look like in your opinion if you just focussed on solely carrying and ability with ball in hand?

1.M.Vunipola
2.T.Youngs
3.Cole
4.Attwood
5.Lawes
6.B.Vunipola
7.Haskell
8.Morgan


Not sure if those 2nd rows are the best ball carriers but I don't know.

Of course there are issues with that pack but it's got more ability to make ground with ball in hand in my opinion - taking pressure off the backs.

It's a shame S.Armitage doesn't want to come back to England because I would think a backrow of him, Billy and Morgan would be very powerful. 3 powerful ball carriers with S.Armitage also being strong at the breakdown, Billy being underrated there too.

Having just one big ball carrier allows the opposition to target them. I know Billy isn't technically a 6 but who wouldn't want to have Billy and Morgan in a backrow if they can work effectively?

Bruising backline to complement this - just based on size mostly and power.

9.Care
10.Farrell
11.Rokodiguini
12.Burrell
13.Manu
14.Watson
15.Brown

If we're saying 'to hell with the set piece', you'd have to have Henry Thomas at tight head, the guy can really carry. Maybe him or Kyle Sinkler, he has the best passing ability for a prop that I have seen for a while.

Sinkler will be able to scrum though Cumbrian...

bluestonevedder wrote:I think Haskell's carrying is a little overrated to be honest. I can't remember who posted it during the AIs, but someone on here wrote a brilliant post with his season's carrying stats compared to Wood's, and they were by no means eye-catching. 

Someone like Ewers is probably one of the best EQ carrying-backrows in the league. Perhaps a fit and firing Fearns also.

That may have been me.  Wood did ineed come out ahead of Haskell in terms of metres/run and runs/match.  Neither were impressive.  Some would claim that Haskell isn't particularly asked to fulfill a carrying role for Wasps with Johnson & Hughes often the rest of the backrow, but if he was a strong carrier he would still be a lot more effective when he did take the ball on.  Also, it's not exactly as if Wood is given a lot of carrying responsibility by Saints, but even he was able to produce more gains.

Around the same time I wrote another post that specifically looked at what he did in terms of carrying in an England shirt.

niwatts wrote:In the last 2 years Haskell has had 4 starts and 5 bench appearances for England, total number of runs = 39, total metres made = 42.

Since then he's had his start against Samoa and bench appearance against Australia.  In those games he didn't make any runs.

There are a number of very good reasons why you would have Haskell in the side, but carrying isn't one of them.

GeordieFalcon, you make many good points but you have a bit of an obsession with the carrying ability of the England pack. I think you hugely overplay this. I haven't seen many professional commentators raising this as an issue.

Personally I think England's pack is a match for anyone (I can't remember much impressive carrying against us autumn) and is good enough to be part of a WC winning side. The issue is with the backs, and in particular the centres.

I've seen a fair bit on a few other forums, and in the press, about the lack of carriers in the pack making it harder for the actual carriers we do have. Can't remember where but one pundit gave this as a reason for Billys drop in effectiveness. When he was by the ruck 3 defenders would rush out to tackle him because they knew that he was the only carrier we would use. I don't think anyone here is advocating an entire pack of carriers but we should have at least 2 or 3 really effective ones. Hartley and Marler used to be very good carriers but that appears to have gone from their game (at least in an England shirt).

Another point would be to just teach every forward how to carry properly. Pick a line into space (or a weak shoulder), run at pace and get the ball as flat as you can. Basic physics will tell you that an 18 stone forward at pace will get over the gain line virtually everytime, yet none of our players seem to do it.

DaveM wrote:GeordieFalcon, you make many good points but you have a bit of an obsession with the carrying ability of the England pack. I think you hugely overplay this. I haven't seen many professional commentators raising this as an issue.

Personally I think England's pack is a match for anyone (I can't remember much impressive carrying against us autumn) and is good enough to be part of a WC winning side. The issue is with the backs, and in particular the centres.

Dave ,

Your are correct maybe I do have a bit of an obsession...but I think it was Hammer who pointed out its not necessarily the hard yards...its the intelligence of forwards hitting space drawing in defenders making space for the backs etc which he was absolutely correct.

Either way, I think it is a critical part of the game, and I maintain we aren't very good at it. Morgan is excellent...(as is his defence work) but who else in the pack makes either the hard yards or runs excellent lines effectively.

It puts the opposition on the back foot and makes them defend.

I would go so far to say its the difference between beating the SA's and Kiwis and losing.

Yeah, I said our carrying wasn't Pulling in defenders meaning there was less space out wide. I don't think it needs bigger guys but a quicker carrying game, before defences can set.

But just to be clear, I don't know what I'm talking about (can you have sigs on here? I'd make that mine)

And you are completely right Hammer. I still want to see some more effective in close...but yes more clever running from the guys.

We cant defend for 80 mins against these guys. We need to get at them.

I thought Tom Wood's carrying v Leicester today was very impressive. He didn't make any huge breaks, but he came onto the ball at pace and crashed over the game lines at least 6-7 times and provided quick ball from it. I agree his carrying isn't one of his greatest traits, but I don't think it can be considered a weakness.

I don't think the problem is the physicality of the players (i.e I don't agree with the need to have a back row of guys the size of Billy V, Ben Morgan and Matt Garvey), I think what we need is to get the guys we do have to run at pace onto the ball with smart lines, something I think Northampton did very well today, especially Luther Burrell.

pledgeX wrote:I thought Tom Wood's carrying v Leicester today was very impressive.  He didn't make any huge breaks, but he came onto the ball at pace and crashed over the game lines at least 6-7 times and provided quick ball from it.  I agree his carrying isn't one of his greatest traits, but I don't think it can be considered a weakness.

I don't think the problem is the physicality of the players (i.e I don't agree with the need to have a back row of guys the size of Billy V, Ben Morgan and Matt Garvey), I think what we need is to get the guys we do have to run at pace onto the ball with smart lines, something I think Northampton did very well today, especially Luther Burrell.

Look at the hands of the Saints pack, that last try: Lawes with a superb pass that Dickson would have been proud of to Sherwood, onto Waller, who passed to Myler who passed to Elliot. Three forwards that all passed like backs.

The other thing that impressed apart from winning with 14 men for 63 minutes of the game, thanks a certain d1ckhead who shall remain nameless) was that mostly the Saints forwards took the ball flat and at pace. Waller was exceptional at this, he reminds me of a bigger Tom Youngs, very quick over twenty metres, great hands, looks to run into space of a half shoulder. He nearly always makes good ground. Big tackler.

When Corbs finally returns, I would love to see him converted to a hooker to replace a certain d1ckhead I could mention, but won't.

SL could do worse than talk to Jim Mallinder about how Saints always seem to be able to create space out wide, something England struggle to do.

Burrell was magnificent yesterday, made all the yards, kept the ball available and contained the Tigers backline when they were a back down for most of the game. But that is for a different thread.

The other vastly under rated forward was Day, he has great hands for a lock, his passing is technically excellent, just like I was taught at school, get the body out of the way and let the hands swing through, both ways. He would not let England down if we suddenly had three of four locks injured.

Well past it I agree. Saints were very impressive. Especially their willingness to attack from all Saints players on the pitch despite the loss of their captain. Plus they have those game breakers - you mention Burrell but Pisi was also a livewire in the Saints backline.

Myler's influence on the game was understated but crucial - he didn't do anything flashy but I thought his handling was the best of the Saints players.

As you say the handling of Saints was top notch. Forwards linking with backs in attack is always refreshing to see and allows a side far more options.

In contrast sometimes I feel that with England the forwards and backs are given different gameplans by the coaches instead of working together.

beshocked wrote:Well past it I agree. Saints were very impressive. Especially their willingness to attack from all Saints players on the pitch despite the loss of their captain. Plus they have those game breakers - you mention Burrell but Pisi was also a livewire in the Saints backline.

Myler's influence on the game was understated but crucial - he didn't do anything flashy but I thought his handling was the best of the Saints players.

As you say the handling of Saints was top notch. Forwards linking with backs in attack is always refreshing to see and allows a side far more options.

In contrast sometimes I feel that with England the forwards and backs are given different gameplans by the coaches instead of working together.

Beshocked,

I am fed up of saying it, Myler is immensely under rated by a lot of people, he doesn't do the flashy stuff, but apart from pace he has all the skills and the brains to control the game. His ability to link with the whole side and his positional kicking are crucial to Saints game. When Dickson plays they can play at an even faster pace, he gets to the ball quicker and gets it away to forwards coming on to the ball as well as Myler. Gives teams more to think about.

I agree about Pisi, he made some classic breaks. Foden did well as well apart from getting turned over for a Tigers try.

On the other downside, North missing such an easy tackle on Benjamin, it is becoming a habit.

Myler is a better player than he used to be certainly - last season and this season he's much improved.

He's 30 though and he has less international experience than the likes of Burns,Cipriani,Farrell and Ford.

Lancaster probably feels that Myler's chance has gone. club Form wise - Myler is right up there it's just his age and the lack of international experience which are significant issues.

Problem for Myler is that when we needed a fly half he was still tussling with Geraghty and only showing average form.

Since then the England 10 shirts been nailed down so he's never got close.

It's a bit more open now but still not sure if he'll ever get a chance.

Lastly for England he might not be the best fit, England need more of a threat at 9 or 10 or we struggle to generate momentum, if Myler did his Saints style of play then he'd quickly find it didn't work as we don't generate quick enough ball or pull the defence apart. He'd just be shipping crap ball to backs to get smashed.

At Saints, Mallinder has now got the team playing a style they are comfortable with. Can't say the same of England.

England should be looking to play with ball in hand from 1-15 but there hasn't been that emphasis.

Definitely agree with geordiefalcon that England need more big ball carriers. I think we do need more guys in the backrow who can make hard yards because it gives the opposition more players that they have to try and nullify.

If you're looking for additional ball carrying you could do worse than Carl Fearns at 6. Haskell probably offers more than Wood in that regard as well. Still, Wood is probably the most complete player at 6 in that he does a bit of everything.

Billy V is best used off the bench for me. Morgan looks to have the number 8 jersey nailed on. I think it's his pace that gives him the edge over Billy V.

I know it's boring and done to death, but with Robshaw out I would go straight to Toulon and get Steffon Armitage in the 7 jersey for the 6 Nations.

I thought Salvi was one of the only plus points from Leicester against Saints and showed how having a specialist at the breakdown, even if he's massively undersupported and surrounded by players getting bullied all over the park can still do a job against two 6/6.5's.

Burrell and Tuilagi in the centres?

yappysnap wrote:I thought Salvi was one of the only plus points from Leicester against Saints and showed how having a specialist at the breakdown, even if he's massively undersupported and surrounded by players getting bullied all over the park can still do a job against two 6/6.5's.

I'm a huge Salvi fan but, a bit like Armitage at Toulon, he is allowed to shine due to the fringe defence being built around him. If you watch how he plays for Leicester in defence he isn't expected to hit rucks unless there's a chance of the turnover. He is used with the intent of him hanging on the fringe defence in the firs 5-10 metres next to the ruck and waiting to pounce if there is a sniff of turnover ball. It's a similar plan to how Armitage is used at Toulon.

The problem with it is that you have to accept that players waiting for the turnover often won't make a huge volume of tackles. That's how the current England fringe defence works though to my mind however. A Solid wall of forwards with all of them looking to make tackle after tackle and stop their man behind the gainline.

Whilst that gameplan has been effective for the most part at stopping forward runners behind the gainline it has reduced the number of turnovers we make, which naturally cuts down the opportunity to 'break' from turnover ball.

FES has Carl Fearns even played much this season?

I just don't understand the hype to be honest.

If Steffon Armitage was playing for an English club, then of course I would want him in the England side but he chose to go to France and he's stayed there.


Salvi isn't English so I am not sure why he's even mentioned.

A big problem for England is a lack a top quality openside flankers.

king_carlos wrote:

yappysnap wrote:I thought Salvi was one of the only plus points from Leicester against Saints and showed how having a specialist at the breakdown, even if he's massively undersupported and surrounded by players getting bullied all over the park can still do a job against two 6/6.5's.

I'm a huge Salvi fan but, a bit like Armitage at Toulon, he is allowed to shine due to the fringe defence being built around him. If you watch how he plays for Leicester in defence he isn't expected to hit rucks unless there's a chance of the turnover. He is used with the intent of him hanging on the fringe defence in the firs 5-10 metres next to the ruck and waiting to pounce if there is a sniff of turnover ball. It's a similar plan to how Armitage is used at Toulon.

The problem with it is that you have to accept that players waiting for the turnover often won't make a huge volume of tackles. That's how the current England fringe defence works though to my mind however. A Solid wall of forwards with all of them looking to make tackle after tackle and stop their man behind the gainline.

Whilst that gameplan has been effective for the most part at stopping forward runners behind the gainline it has reduced the number of turnovers we make, which naturally cuts down the opportunity to 'break' from turnover ball.

Good analysis there Carlos. I guess it would mean a big change in how England approach defence but on the plus side surely working on more turnovers would benefit the whole team as they'd then a. not be making so many tackles and b. get a chance to attack a broken oppositions defensive line. The defence at the moment where it's built to soak up pressure all game and hope for a knock on is potentially giving too much impetuous to the opposition.

Just re-watched England's 2003 summer tour match against Australia in Melbourne.

It was striking how our tight five outplayed their Wallaby counterparts outside the set pieces. Woodman and Thompson showed some lovely touches in particular.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5mMYCjbQJA

yappysnap wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

yappysnap wrote:I thought Salvi was one of the only plus points from Leicester against Saints and showed how having a specialist at the breakdown, even if he's massively undersupported and surrounded by players getting bullied all over the park can still do a job against two 6/6.5's.

I'm a huge Salvi fan but, a bit like Armitage at Toulon, he is allowed to shine due to the fringe defence being built around him. If you watch how he plays for Leicester in defence he isn't expected to hit rucks unless there's a chance of the turnover. He is used with the intent of him hanging on the fringe defence in the firs 5-10 metres next to the ruck and waiting to pounce if there is a sniff of turnover ball. It's a similar plan to how Armitage is used at Toulon.

The problem with it is that you have to accept that players waiting for the turnover often won't make a huge volume of tackles. That's how the current England fringe defence works though to my mind however. A Solid wall of forwards with all of them looking to make tackle after tackle and stop their man behind the gainline.

Whilst that gameplan has been effective for the most part at stopping forward runners behind the gainline it has reduced the number of turnovers we make, which naturally cuts down the opportunity to 'break' from turnover ball.

Good analysis there Carlos. I guess it would mean a big change in how England approach defence but on the plus side surely working on more turnovers would benefit the whole team as they'd then a. not be making so many tackles and b. get a chance to attack a broken oppositions defensive line. The defence at the moment where it's built to soak up pressure all game and hope for a knock on is potentially giving too much impetuous to the opposition.

I agree that a change of tactic would be a good thing Yappy. However the tactics are what I feel needs to change most if we want turnover ball, rather than the personnel.

I don't deny Armitage is exceptional over the ball but with England's current defensive strategy I don't feel he would be nearly as effective as he is at Toulon. I also rate Robshaw highly enough that I feel he could do a similar job in this regard if we did alter our gameplan and allowed him to sacrifice tackle count in order to wait for the turnover.

In the coaches defence having Cole and Launchbury out also has led to us suffering in this regard as those two combined with Wood and Robshaw meant half our pack were very strong on the deck. On a different note this is another reason I'm a big advocate of Webber as he's also very good in this regard.

Talking of defence and breakdown work....not popular but i thought Clark was immense in that area yesterday v Quins.

Clifford was for Quins as well - which was arguably more impressive given how little time Quins actually spent defending.

Corbisiero came off the Bench for Saints Saturday, possibly too late for the 6N start, but IF he can stay fit, with Cole back as well England should have their ball carrier and groundhog props back in the team by the end of the 6N. It will be interesting to see what difference it makes as both Marler and Wilson have acquitted themselves very well.

Corbs is more destructive than Marler, but I am not sure that he does as much work around the park. Wilson is solid and again is a typical SL forward, tackles anything that moves. Cole is also a good tackler with the added bonus of his groundhog work. Wilson can be more effective as a ball carrier though.

Is Morgan injured at the moment? I noticed he didn't play for Glaws yesterday.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Corbisiero came off the Bench for Saints Saturday, possibly too late for the 6N start, but IF he can stay fit, with Cole back as well England should have their ball carrier and groundhog props back in the team by the end of the 6N. It will be interesting to see what difference it makes as both Marler and Wilson have acquitted themselves very well.

Corbs is more destructive than Marler, but I am not sure that he does as much work around the park. Wilson is solid and again is a typical SL forward, tackles anything that moves. Cole is also a good tackler with the added bonus of his groundhog work. Wilson can be more effective as a ball carrier though.

Is Corbisiero really that much more destructive or any better a ball carrier than present-day Marler? His reputation is mostly built on the Lions games against Australia, but that form isn't any more impressive just because he did it for the Lions rather than England. Marler has equally good form against Australia and also destroyed Mike Ross in the RCC, despite Quins not having a wholly convincing tighthead yet.

thomh wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Corbisiero came off the Bench for Saints Saturday, possibly too late for the 6N start, but IF he can stay fit, with Cole back as well England should have their ball carrier and groundhog props back in the team by the end of the 6N. It will be interesting to see what difference it makes as both Marler and Wilson have acquitted themselves very well.

Corbs is more destructive than Marler, but I am not sure that he does as much work around the park. Wilson is solid and again is a typical SL forward, tackles anything that moves. Cole is also a good tackler with the added bonus of his groundhog work. Wilson can be more effective as a ball carrier though.

Is Corbisiero really that much more destructive or any better a ball carrier than present-day Marler? His reputation is mostly built on the Lions games against Australia, but that form isn't any more impressive just because he did it for the Lions rather than England. Marler has equally good form against Australia and also destroyed Mike Ross in the RCC, despite Quins not having a wholly convincing tighthead yet.

Not sure Corbs is better than Marler or Cole better than Wilson. The good news for England is that whoever England go with they will do OK and in particular when they will have more impactful subs than anyone else.

I think Corbs is better around the park than the present-day Marler as Thomh put it. Marler has improved his scrummaging massively, but in doing so we seem to have lost the ball carrying Marler of old. Marler is very good these days at the scrum and we don't know what Corbs will be like, but I think the Corbs of old was a better scrummager than the present-day Marler, but not by a lot.

Same with Wilson, neither Cole or Wilson are that destructive, but both are solid anchors. Wilson's shorter stature may give him a slight advantage over Cole these hitless days, but Cole is like having another 7 on the field at the breakdown.

Seems we have about three quality international tight 5s at the moment as the lads on the bench this year have all done well with players like Waller, Sinkler ( maybe too early) still to break through and quality locks coming out of our ears.

It would be interesting to see Matt Garvey back at lock, he has the stature and would make a good alternative to L&L without loosing anything around the field.

Marler in his last couple of Quins matches has had his carrying and handling mojo back at last. And his workrate in the ruck and defence is still significantly better than Corbs'. Either way we will be sorted but for Marler to be dropped for Corbs at this point would be a kick in the face to the picking on form policy

ChequeredJersey wrote:Marler in his last couple of Quins matches has had his carrying and handling mojo back at last. And his workrate in the ruck and defence is still significantly better than Corbs'. Either way we will be sorted but for Marler to be dropped for Corbs at this point would be a kick in the face to the picking on form policy

CJ at the moment I would agree, but lets give Corbs until March to get back into it and then see. Corbs at his best can be "world class", Marler is merely approaching that level at the moment, but if he is getting his carry game back together he could awesome.

Cyril wrote:Is Morgan injured at the moment? I noticed he didn't play for Glaws yesterday.

I think I heard the commentators say that he tweaked his hamstring, nothing serious I believe.

I don't believe it should be a choice between Marler and Corbisiero, they are both first choice in my mind. They give us two excellent options and mean our propping resources can stay strong for the full 80 minutes, no let up for the opposition front-rowers.

Cumbrian wrote:

Cyril wrote:Is Morgan injured at the moment? I noticed he didn't play for Glaws yesterday.

I think I heard the commentators say that he tweaked his hamstring, nothing serious I believe.

Ah, that's good to hear. He's cemented his position well in recent games (for England).

Cumbrian wrote:I don't believe it should be a choice between Marler and Corbisiero, they are both first choice in my mind.  They give us two excellent options and mean our propping resources can stay strong for the full 80 minutes, no let up for the opposition front-rowers.

Agreed Cumbrian, well said.

It should also allow us to rotate our resources to avoid injuries. Given Corbs medical record and Cole coming back from a very serious injury for a prop that could be absolutely vital. Just look at how SA rotate BDP and Strauss at hooker. Admittedly they are probably the two best players in the world in their position which makes doing so easier! However Marler/Corbs and Wilson/Cole are not exactly bad players to rotate to avoid burnout and exhaustion.

I agree Marler should undoubtedly be first choice on merit but I'd actually like to see him on the bench for at least a game of the 6N as he's played a lot of rugby recently and we really can't risk burnout with him.

LH - Marler, Corbs, Vunipola and Mullan - MM showed up well when used in the AI's

TH - Wilson, Cole, Brookes

Am I right in saying that Brookes can play a bit at LH as well as TH?

For the 6N it isn't really relevant but for a RWC squad it is as there are 5 prop positions so ideally you'd want the 5th going to someone with a bit of versatility.

It could be a very harsh break for Mako if so however. I haven't seen the Falcons vs Sarries game yet. Any news on how Mako played, his fitness and scrummaging?

I think Mako will miss out unless Corbs/Marler are injured. I think England will take Cole, Wilson, Brookes, Corbisiero and Marler to the RWC, fitness permitting. That's an excellent roster of props.