England Centre Combinations

Clearly the most prominent problem facing England during the autumn internationals was our centre options.

Tuilagi, our first choice outside centre was injured. This meant England opted for Barritt at outside centre as a stop-gap. Some may deem this a harsh decision on the premierships form outside centre Joseph, who has been in tremendous form for Bath, making breaks at will, distributing fantastically, scaring the day lights out of defenders and looking very solid in defence too.

Burrell, was also unfortunate to miss the first couple of games out injured, before England deemed him not quite ready to return to the international fold for the final two matches. Therefore we went with Eastmond at inside centre who has been excellent for Bath this season. Eastmond wasn't convincing enough against the all blacks and picked up a minor injury in the defeat to South Africa, which led to England playing Ford at fly-half and trying out Farrell at 12, this lasted only one game before Lancaster decided to give Twelvetrees another chance. Twelvetrees played relatively well against Australia, however his partnership with Barritt was stagnant and uninspiring.

The Six Nations is just around the corner. Ford is as consistent as ever and Cipriani has been in such mesmerising form, he could potentially overtake Farrell's spot on the reserve bench. Burrell is also back fully fit and firing on all cylinders. Eastmond and Joseph continue to be the form and most exciting partnership in the premiership and I'm hearing Tuilagi is set to return at the beginning of the New Year. I think the four centres Lancaster will pick if all players are fully fit will be Barritt, Eastmond, Tuilagi and Burrell. However, I would personally choose Burrell, Eastmond, Tuilagi and Joseph.

It all comes down to combinations...

12 Barritt 13 Tuilagi

This is Lancaster's tried and tested combination. Very solid in defence and subtle yet powerful in attack. Barritt has been England's defensive leader in the backs and although he is not the most creative centre, he is trusted to make up for any defensive issues Tuilagi might concede. I have a feeling this will be Lancaster's first choice combination. If Tuilagi is unfit, I can't see Barritt fitting into any other effective combination.

12 Burrell 13 Tuilagi

I think this is the combination most fans will be hoping for. Sheer brute force. Both players are very powerful ball carriers and with a creative fly half such as Ford or Cipriani, they would cause havoc to opposite defences on front foot ball. Defensively they would also be particularly strong, with both players in their natural positions. The real question is, would this limit our expansive game plan? but then again would that really matter as we've hardly been playing expansive flowing rugby in recent times.

12 Eastmond 13 Tuilagi

This was England's preferred combination in New Zealand over the summer. On paper it seems like a magical combo. However with a conservative fly half inside him and without an attacking threat outside him, Eastmond has looked out of sorts for England. Their is a chance Eastmond may get another shot in the six nations, but he will have to make a real difference over the next month for Bath.

12 Eastmond 13 Burrell

If worst comes to worse and Tuilagi is deemed unfit to play in the six nations, England may try a new centre partnership of Eastmond and Burrell. This combination also looks very effective on paper, with Eastmond the foil to Burrells brawn. With Ford inside him, and Burrell distracting defenders, Eastmond will have more space to work his magic.

12 Eastmond 13 Joseph

They have been simply electric together for Bath this season. Ford has given them time and space to really express their attacking abilities. They've been tearing opposition defences to shreds and are almost telepathic when one player makes a break. However Lancaster doesn't seem convinced that they can do this together on the international stage. I think Joseph should feel very hard done by for his non-selection in the Autumn.

12 Burrell 13 Joseph

Not many people remember that Joseph came on as a sub for England against New Zealand in our victory at Twickenham on December 1st 2012. I think if he can carry on showing the form he is now and England want to go with a more balanced midfield he may get the chance to start outside Burrell at 12. Burrell would draw in defenders and create a lot of space for Joseph to exploit.

12 Tuilagi 13 Joseph

This was actually a combination used by England in the summer tour against South Africa in 2012. However, Joseph was a lot more raw and Tuilagi looked a little confused about his role at 12. I think both players have developed a lot in this time and with England's pack thriving at the moment and England trying out a more creative 10 with Ford, this could actually be England's most exciting choice.


Of course I know that there are lots of other combinations England could go with. Some may argue Barritt deserves more recognition, whilst I know there are many fans of Twelvetrees and Slade too.

What centre combination would you choose and why?

Barritt and Tualagi have been the tried and tested combo.

But i would like too see Burrell and Joseph given a go.

Would not mind seeing Cipriani given a run out at 10 as well.

I think this will be a real headache for Stuart Lancaster come the 6ns. I think he will be hoping that whoever he selects will be the partner ship for the RWC. But we will have to wait and see about that.

If he's fit, it's got to be Tuilagi at 13. However it's just come out that he's not expected back now until mid-January.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11316888/Manu-Tuilagi-faces-fresh-race-to-be-ready-for-the-start-of-Six-Nations-after-setback.html

Twelvetrees' performance against Australia aside, there would be a strong argument for going with him and Burrell again after their Six Nations last year.

I mainly hope they give Ford some weapons outside him. Twelvetrees and Barritt, whatever their respective merits, aren't a centre partnership that particularly threatens defences. Twelvetrees needs a runner outside him to take his delayed passes and straighten the line. In Tuilagi's absence I think Burrell will be a pretty ideal centre to play outside Ford. He picks good lines, which will suit Ford's style in taking the ball to the gainline, and has hit form again recently.

Eastmond outside Ford is another obvious option but against Roberts, Faletau, Davies, North etc I don't fancy it, even if they can both make their tackles.

Who is this Tuilagi some speak of? I vaguely remember someone of that name who used to be good, but it's so long since I've seen him play I'd assumed he'd retired.

Burrell and Joseph sound worth a look at. But I wouldn't worry at Barritt and Burrell tbh.

majesticimperialman wrote:Barritt and Tualagi have been the tried and tested combo.

But i would like too see Burrell and Joseph given a go.

Would not mind seeing Cipriani given a run out at 10 as well.

I think this will be a real headache for Stuart Lancaster come the 6ns. I think he will be hoping that whoever he selects will be the partner ship for the RWC. But we will have to wait and see about that.

When does the time come though that he will have to decide on who he thinks is best, you have to give combinations a chance to gel and not keep swapping them about.

It'll probably be Barritt and Tuilagi under Lancaster, with Burrell on the bench.

I thought Slade would get a look in. Great player.

If Tuilagi is not back in time, the six nations is a good time to bed in an effective combo and then have Tuilagi as an impact sub when needed come the RWC.

Has the Sam Burgess experiment not got time to come to fruition?? Surely Burgess is an option.

With Tuilagi out I would go with Eastmond and Burrell. If Tuilagi makes it back then I'd either go with Eastmond/Tuilagi, or Burrell/Tuilagi.

I think the latter combination is certain to be tried at some point. With Ford at 10, and possibly Goode at 15, you could certainly forge a powerful combination from those two - slap May and Wade on the wings and you've got real finishing speed as well.

maestegmafia wrote:I thought Slade would get a look in. Great player.

If Tuilagi is not back in time, the six nations is a good time to bed in an effective combo and then have Tuilagi as an impact sub when needed come the RWC.

Has the Sam Burgess experiment not got time to come to fruition?? Surely Burgess is an option.

Far too early, he's only played about half a dozen games of union. May still get a shot with the Saxons though (which is a bit ridiculous).

Agreed. Talk of Burgess is far too premature. First step is for him to earn the 12 or 13 jersey at Bath, until then Eastmond and Joseph are ahead of him in both the Bath and England pecking order.

At the moment it almost seems to be a case of who is fit rather than who is best. I think Barritt is a better all round player than most people give him credit for - he can do more than just tackle. Eastmond has had a few international chances and hasn't really done that much - the negatives at least match the positives. Whilst I don't think you need to be 6'2" and 16 st to play centre, Eastmond and Joseph look too light weight - Mathew Tait springs to mind. Burrell has done nothing wrong when picked for England - in fact has done some good things - and is playing well for his club. Twelvetrees on the other hand has consistently struggled since moving to Gloucester - on paper he has all the tools, but they aren't coming together on the pitch. Tuilagi needs to get fit and stay fit and play some consistent rugby at club level before he can be considered.
So by a process of elimination it is Barritt and Burrell for me for now, with Tuilagi coming into the frame if and when fully fit and in form.

nlpnlp wrote:At the moment it almost seems to be a case of who is fit rather than who is best.  I think Barritt is a better all round player than most people give him credit for - he can do more than just tackle.  Eastmond has had a few international chances and hasn't really done that much - the negatives at least match the positives.  Whilst I don't think you need to be 6'2" and 16 st to play centre, Eastmond and Joseph look too light weight - Mathew Tait springs to mind.  Burrell has done nothing wrong when picked for England - in fact has done some good things - and is playing well for his club.  Twelvetrees on the other hand has consistently struggled since moving to Gloucester - on paper he has all the tools, but they aren't coming together on the pitch.  Tuilagi needs to get fit and stay fit and play some consistent rugby at club level before he can be considered.
So by a process of elimination it is Barritt and Burrell for me for now, with Tuilagi coming into the frame if and when fully fit and in form.

I actually thought Eastmond looked good playing for England. Just about the only centre to show any spark for a while. I do agree that Eastmond and Joseph are too light a combination for international rugby. Particularly with Ford at 10 and May/Wade on the wings. If Eastmond plays then Burrell or Tuilagi should be at 13, and likely if Joseph plays 13 I would put 36, Barritt or Burrell at 12.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Agreed. Talk of Burgess is far too premature. First step is for him to earn the 12 or 13 jersey at Bath, until then Eastmond and Joseph are ahead of him in both the Bath and England pecking order.

To be honest, I thought Ollie Devoto was shaping up into an excellent inside centre too for Bath.  I actually worry that Burgess is going to give it a lash, fail and head back to RL and rob Ollie of some really important game time.  I might be over egging it but IMO Devoto should be the one talked up for the Saxons, not Burgess.

Tuilagi has got to be forgotten about in the short term, so for the six nations I would like to see Ford, Twelvetrees and Burrell. I would like to see Slade given a chance against scotland/italy.

When everyone is fit its a real conundrum isn't it, Tuilagi is nailed on then whoever puts there hand up, likely to be the usual toss up of twelvetrees and Burrell and if they still cant defend at international level then in comes Barritt again. Eastmond sadly has been cast into the mire after given zero ball from off form farrell. Burgess to captain the team at blindside in 2016/7.

Cumbrian wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Agreed. Talk of Burgess is far too premature. First step is for him to earn the 12 or 13 jersey at Bath, until then Eastmond and Joseph are ahead of him in both the Bath and England pecking order.

To be honest, I thought Ollie Devoto was shaping up into an excellent inside centre too for Bath.  I actually worry that Burgess is going to give it a lash, fail and head back to RL and rob Ollie of some really important game time.  I might be over egging it but IMO Devoto should be the one talked up for the Saxons, not Burgess.

Spot on Cumbrian, Devoto against the babas was immense and has real class, sadly bath have Eastmond and Devoto at 12 and Garvey and Fearns at 6, Wonder if Burgess would have been better off joining a club with less strength in depth in those positions.

I do agree about Burgess. Although Bath have been great this season I'm not convinced it was the right choice for him. Saints could have worked, as could Leicester or Exeter.

Still, until he picks a position, wins the jersey at Bath and excels to the requisite standard, England should forget about him. He should not under any circumstances be parachuted in for special treatment.

Cumbrian wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:I thought Slade would get a look in. Great player.

If Tuilagi is not back in time, the six nations is a good time to bed in an effective combo and then have Tuilagi as an impact sub when needed come the RWC.

Has the Sam Burgess experiment not got time to come to fruition?? Surely Burgess is an option.

Far too early, he's only played about half a dozen games of union.  May still get a shot with the Saxons though (which is a bit ridiculous).

Probably right though I'm sure a player of his caliber will do well in the international game.

Do people not think Burgess (rightly or wrongly) will be rushed in. Maybe not for the 6 nations but I would be very surprised if they don't give him a shot in some of the WC warm up games.

As for current options I think if all fit and on form then it has to be Burrell/Manu and as a Welsh fan that is the combo I would be more uncomfortable facing.

bedfordwelsh wrote:Do people not think Burgess (rightly or wrongly) will be rushed in.  Maybe not for the 6 nations but I would be very surprised if they don't give him a shot in some of the WC warm up games.

As for current options I think if all fit and on form then it has to be Burrell/Manu and as a Welsh fan that is the combo I would be more uncomfortable facing.

Assuming a certain rate of progression then he probably will be, but it's too soon to say whether he will progress at that rate. They don't even know 100% what position he'll be playing yet.

thomh wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:Do people not think Burgess (rightly or wrongly) will be rushed in.  Maybe not for the 6 nations but I would be very surprised if they don't give him a shot in some of the WC warm up games.

As for current options I think if all fit and on form then it has to be Burrell/Manu and as a Welsh fan that is the combo I would be more uncomfortable facing.

Assuming a certain rate of progression then he probably will be, but it's too soon to say whether he will progress at that rate. They don't even know 100% what position he'll be playing yet.

thomh,

Again rightly or wrongly I just feel, (like with Anscombe for us) that he will be rushed in which could do more harm than good. Yes Anscombe comes from Union so there is in theory no learning curve but I just think they think will both be fast tracked, maybe I am more cynical than others.

bedfordwelsh wrote:Do people not think Burgess (rightly or wrongly) will be rushed in.  Maybe not for the 6 nations but I would be very surprised if they don't give him a shot in some of the WC warm up games.

As for current options I think if all fit and on form then it has to be Burrell/Manu and as a Welsh fan that is the combo I would be more uncomfortable facing.

I think Lancaster will use him in the Saxons and see how he gets on in that environment. The idea that he could be a 6 in time for the World Cup is ridiculous though, and he should focus all his efforts at 12.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:Do people not think Burgess (rightly or wrongly) will be rushed in.  Maybe not for the 6 nations but I would be very surprised if they don't give him a shot in some of the WC warm up games.

As for current options I think if all fit and on form then it has to be Burrell/Manu and as a Welsh fan that is the combo I would be more uncomfortable facing.

I think Lancaster will use him in the Saxons and see how he gets on in that environment. The idea that he could be a 6 in time for the World Cup is ridiculous though, and he should focus all his efforts at 12.

Yeah I was thinking more he would be fast tracked as a back.

bedfordwelsh wrote:

thomh wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:Do people not think Burgess (rightly or wrongly) will be rushed in.  Maybe not for the 6 nations but I would be very surprised if they don't give him a shot in some of the WC warm up games.

As for current options I think if all fit and on form then it has to be Burrell/Manu and as a Welsh fan that is the combo I would be more uncomfortable facing.

Assuming a certain rate of progression then he probably will be, but it's too soon to say whether he will progress at that rate. They don't even know 100% what position he'll be playing yet.

thomh,

Again rightly or wrongly I just feel, (like with Anscombe for us) that he will be rushed in which could do more harm than good.  Yes Anscombe comes from Union so there is in theory no learning curve but I just think they think will both be fast tracked, maybe I am more cynical than others.

I agree he'll probably be rushed in ahead of time, but he'l still have to improve from his current position to be considered. I think Lancaster probably realises what it would do to Eastmond etc's confidence if Burgess was thrown in before he's even got close to overtaking them at club level.

thomh wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

thomh wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:Do people not think Burgess (rightly or wrongly) will be rushed in.  Maybe not for the 6 nations but I would be very surprised if they don't give him a shot in some of the WC warm up games.

As for current options I think if all fit and on form then it has to be Burrell/Manu and as a Welsh fan that is the combo I would be more uncomfortable facing.

Assuming a certain rate of progression then he probably will be, but it's too soon to say whether he will progress at that rate. They don't even know 100% what position he'll be playing yet.

thomh,

Again rightly or wrongly I just feel, (like with Anscombe for us) that he will be rushed in which could do more harm than good.  Yes Anscombe comes from Union so there is in theory no learning curve but I just think they think will both be fast tracked, maybe I am more cynical than others.

I agree he'll probably be rushed in ahead of time, but he'l still have to improve from his current position to be considered. I think Lancaster probably realises what it would do to Eastmond etc's confidence if Burgess was thrown in before he's even got close to overtaking them at club level.

The one difference I guess (and this is the cynic in me) between Burgess and Anscombe is that Anscombe is reportedly getting one of the WRU dual contracts which I feel will only enhance is chance of being fast tracked.  I have said before that if there are 2 players in same position on similar sort of form, 1 is on a DC and 1 isn't then the DC player will get picked.

bedfordwelsh wrote:

thomh wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

thomh wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:Do people not think Burgess (rightly or wrongly) will be rushed in.  Maybe not for the 6 nations but I would be very surprised if they don't give him a shot in some of the WC warm up games.

As for current options I think if all fit and on form then it has to be Burrell/Manu and as a Welsh fan that is the combo I would be more uncomfortable facing.

Assuming a certain rate of progression then he probably will be, but it's too soon to say whether he will progress at that rate. They don't even know 100% what position he'll be playing yet.

thomh,

Again rightly or wrongly I just feel, (like with Anscombe for us) that he will be rushed in which could do more harm than good.  Yes Anscombe comes from Union so there is in theory no learning curve but I just think they think will both be fast tracked, maybe I am more cynical than others.

I agree he'll probably be rushed in ahead of time, but he'l still have to improve from his current position to be considered. I think Lancaster probably realises what it would do to Eastmond etc's confidence if Burgess was thrown in before he's even got close to overtaking them at club level.

The one difference I guess (and this is the cynic in me) between Burgess and Anscombe is that Anscombe is reportedly getting one of the WRU dual contracts which I feel will only enhance is chance of being fast tracked.  I have said before that if there are 2 players in same position on similar sort of form, 1 is on a DC and 1 isn't then the DC player will get picked.

And that Anscombe had previously displayed that he can play rugby union very well at a high level in the Super XV. Form that he has also transferred to his new team The Blues.

Has he really transferred it, not seen that much of it and he's still being tested at 10 and XV. Surely if he was as good as some say then he would have worked into th Blues 10 shirt especially with Patchell out injured.

Again if he is as good as some say then the ABs would have played him in some game or other to make sure he didn't go elsewhere.

To be honest both Burgess and Anscombe are pushing at relatively open doors.

12 has long been a problem for England, ever since Greenwood retired, and whilst Biggar has recently stepped up at 10 for Wales after Stephen Jones hung up his boots a while back, behind him there's a bit of a gulf. I'm personally a big fan of Hook, but he seems to divide opinions even amongst Welsh fans, and Priestland is seems to be persona non grata amongst everyone bar die hard Scarlets fans. I also thought Matthew Morgan looked a real prospect at 10, but he seems to be out of the picture currently. I like Patchell as well, but he's yet to impress Gatland seemingly. I don't think it will take much for Anscombe to make the Wales RWC squad, and unlike Burgess he is at least experienced in Union and playing regularly as first choice in his chosen position for his team.

Personally id rather see some real creativity at 12...however with a year to go to the WC...i'd settle for creativity at 10 with Ford...or Cipriani though I think that boat may have sailed.

With that in mind i'd go...

10 Ford
12 Burrell or Barritt
13 Tuilagi - of course surmising hes fit..he seems as injury prone as Corbs!!!

Not a hugely flamboyant midfield however it would have power pace and defence and hopefully Ford can pull the strings.

Post World Cup we look at finally fixing this flaming position!!!!

GF,

If Ford Burrell and Manu were your 10, 12 and 13 come the first Friday of the 6 Nations then I would be a rather nervous Welshman. Flamboyant it may not be but then again neither is Roberts and JD but overall it has worked for us and I think that is what you would see as an English man on that night to.

The 2 centres could well cancel each other out and whilst Ford is more flamboyant than Biggar, Dan has grown a lot through the AIs and can control a game extremely well.

Yeah BW I think we need to just go with those now.

If Ford can pull the strings then he can put Manu through holes (not just use him as a bull dozer) and Burrell can run the lines he did in the 6n. Plus he's actually a decent player not just a big lump.

I'd go for that and hope Johnny May and Watson (or Yarde / Wade) can make use of any space created.

If fit for the Italy game would quite like to see 10 Ford 12 Burgess 13 Manu. I know it wouldn't be pretty but who do you double up on.

What is this unnatural obsession with big players for the sake of being big? I mean Sam Burgess has played how many games now? People are getting weak at the knees because he is a big option but has he shown anything to prove he is test class material at 12? There is a lot more to it than being a big lad.

If I were an England fan I would like to see something dangerous and exciting rather than the "safe" options. I think Eastmond and JJ look to be the most electric combination available, let them off the leash. They are the smallest option, but since when was centre all about big oafs in the midfield? I'll take the classy players every day of the week. Their defence is the only real question mark, where their size could be an issue. Has it been an issue for Bath though?

IF Manu is even available for the 6 nations I don't think I'd play him against Wales. He'll seriously lack game time. Look what happened to Farrell.

With that in mind if we want size/defence go Barritt and Burrell or for more balance Eastmond/Burrell or perhaps Burrell/Slade. Flair Eastmond/JJ.

Just whatever it is for gods sake get it right. I'm actually almost past caring who it is as long as its consistent and it works.

bedfordwelsh wrote:Has he really transferred it, not seen that much of it and he's still being tested at 10 and XV.  Surely if he was as good as some say then he would have worked into th Blues 10 shirt especially with Patchell out injured.

Again if he is as good as some say then the ABs would have played him in some game or other to make sure he didn't go elsewhere.

As good as who say?


In my opinion he is a very good player with both skill and vision. Whether at flyhalf or fullback. Whether he makes the national team is to be seen but his presence has improved the blues options remarkably.

Not the thread to discuss whether Ascombe is being fast tracked or not. Start another thread or just add it one of the many suitable ones still on going (Blues or Central Contracts threads jump to mind).

As for the topic, we need to decide what we're doing. Are we going for multiple options of different styles or settling on a style a picking players to fit it. If we're looking at the World Cup, rather than just general development, then I think we need to pick the large pre-world squad (around 40 players?) and stick largely too it. We have so little experience, and even less for combinations, that we need to build them with the guys we've tried so far. I'd be happy with Ford and Eastmond, personally. If their defence is too week then so be it, but I'd rather see it than people just being worried about it. From what I've seen, their defence is significantly better than some other players are supposed to steady in defence. The big issues is that they aren't driving players back as much (but still do) and if they're the only guy around they can be easily cleared out of a ruck (or give a penalty away). To me that means you need to sort your forwards out (and one of the befits of keeping a flanker wide, like Croft).

broadlandboy wrote:If fit for the Italy game would quite like to see 10 Ford 12 Burgess 13 Manu. I know it wouldn't be pretty but who do you double up on.

Problem is that the top international sides won't need to double up. They have players in the centres who won't be even slightly fazed about a couple of big guys running straight at them, that's without considering the lack of technique Burgess currently has in protecting the ball.

Sean Fitzpatrick made the point after the last England vs New Zealand game when the pundits were talking up the prospect of Burrell and Tuilagi playing together. He quite rightly said that if England are hoping Burrell/Tuilagi will steam roller the likes of Nonu, Money-Bill or Smith then they will be sorely disappointed. Let's be blunt here, it's NZ and SA that England should be preparing to beat. Picking two blokes who may look flash against Scotland, Italy, Samoa, Wales and other tier 2 sides is not really relevant - England should be beating these sides anyway (and generally do). Lancaster should be aiming for number 1 spot, and I don't think you can be as simplistic as saying "pick two big blokes and the opposition will have to double up". SA and NZ will do no such thing.

England need to be more sophisticated, and look to blend ball players with bludgeons, and preferrably find players who can be both. Stephen Jones at the Sunday Times made a good point (for once) a few weeks back in saying that if England are going to go with Burrell and Tuilagi in the centres (or Burgess), as he believes they should, then they need also to consider someone like Alex Goode at 15 who can come into the backline and assist Ford in putting these guys through gaps. Where the big guys really earn their corn is when the half backs put them onto a soft shoulder at pace, or draw them onto a good angle. Then their power either busts the tackle or enables them to get in the offload, and even then you need intelligent players (both forwards and backs) reading the play and flooding in with support. That's when the likes of Chris Ashton or Jonny May come in handy. NZ are the best side in the world, by some distance, and I don't think I can remember a single line break by them not being supported.

I digress. I guess the point I'm making is that England shouldn't pick centres in isolation. If you're keen on picking big blokes because they are big, don't think the best sides will necessarily struggle with that. You need to build a backline in its entirety.

Look.

Just go with George Lowe at 12 and Slade at 13 and we'll be sorted, stop faffing around people!

fes
My memory may be deceiving me but when England beat NZ didn't the tries come about because the NZ mid field were worried about Manu ready to double up creating space for other players. If you don't go low on Manu it often needs more than one player to stop him but it then allows the off load if he is being supported. From what I've seen of Sam in League he does the same. With Ford playing at the gain line who do you go for, Ford can hit a gap if there is one with the choice of Manu or Sam with the other ready for the off load with hopefully a support player ready to make the most of any gaps. Should the defending team bring the winger in this creates space outside for the winger. Also Sam at 12 should help with Fords defence at 10.

Just going back to first principles.  In my view the in-form centres in the premiership have been: -

Burrell and Eastmond at inside centre with Barritt playing fairly well for England (I have not seen him play much for Saracens) and Twelvetrees being a bit indifferent for Gloucester.

At outside centre Joseph has caught the eye and Slade has not played badly in his first season in that position.

Tuilagi, Trinder and Lowe have all been injured for much of the time, though Tuilagi is proven resource (and class act?).

Burrell and Barrit to an extent can play both positions.

I hope Eastmond has not been permanently, disgarded as he is playing much better this season and defensively seems capable.

At international level I would not mind seeing Burrell and Tuilagi as the pairing, but Eastmond and Burrell would also be interesting (if Tuilagi was not back to full fitness).

As a wildcard option, Burrell and Slade (with Ford at flyhalf) would also have possibilities, particulary with fast wingers (May/Watson or even Wade).

Lancaster has "toyed" with a second flyhalf rather than a "proper" inside centre, but why not move the second playmaker to outside centre (like Exeter).  Ford/Burrell/Slade would give Ford a crash-centre option (and some protection), with Slade more able to bring the wings into play.

I do belive England need to pick a side who can score tries.  When a more negative (defensive) approach is adopted, England seem to play badly.

Also what about horses for courses, if it was wet night would not Tuilagi and Burrell offer some solidity? Likewise on a dry, firm pitch maybe different combinations could come to the fore.

cb wrote:Just going back to first principles.  In my view the in-form centres in the premiership have been: -

Burrell and Eastmond at inside centre with Barritt playing fairly well for England (I have not seen him play much for Saracens) and Twelvetrees being a bit indifferent for Gloucester.

At outside centre Joseph has caught the eye and Slade has not played badly in his first season in that position.

Tuilagi, Trinder and Lowe have all been injured for much of the time, though Tuilagi is proven resource (and class act?).

Burrell and Barrit to an extent can play both positions.

I hope Eastmond has not been permanently, disgarded as he is playing much better this season and defensively seems capable.

At international level I would not mind seeing Burrell and Tuilagi as the pairing, but Eastmond and Burrell would also be interesting (if Tuilagi was not back to full fitness).

As a wildcard option, Burrell and Slade (with Ford at flyhalf) would also have possibilities, particulary with fast wingers (May/Watson or even Wade).

Lancaster has "toyed" with a second flyhalf rather than a "proper" inside centre, but why not move the second playmaker to outside centre (like Exeter).  Ford/Burrell/Slade would give Ford a crash-centre option (and some protection), with Slade more able to bring the wings into play.

I do belive England need to pick a side who can score tries.  When a more negative (defensive) approach is adopted, England seem to play badly.

Also what about horses for courses, if it was wet night would not Tuilagi and Burrell offer some solidity?  Likewise on a dry, firm pitch maybe different combinations could come to the fore.

The trouble with that cb, is that the side is announced 3 days before the match and the British weather is known for being as cantankerous as possible in February to April, especially in Wales and Ireland.

yappysnap wrote:Look.

Just go with George Lowe at 12 and Slade at 13 and we'll be sorted, stop faffing around people!

So an outside centre at inside and a fly half at outside. Looks like the kind of thing Lancaster would do

LondonTiger wrote:

yappysnap wrote:Look.

Just go with George Lowe at 12 and Slade at 13 and we'll be sorted, stop faffing around people!

So an outside centre at inside and a fly half at outside. Looks like the kind of thing Lancaster would do

Then we'll just get Burgess in at 10 Eastmond and Manu on the wings and Goode at 15. Perfect

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

cb wrote:Just going back to first principles.  In my view the in-form centres in the premiership have been: -

Burrell and Eastmond at inside centre with Barritt playing fairly well for England (I have not seen him play much for Saracens) and Twelvetrees being a bit indifferent for Gloucester.

At outside centre Joseph has caught the eye and Slade has not played badly in his first season in that position.

Tuilagi, Trinder and Lowe have all been injured for much of the time, though Tuilagi is proven resource (and class act?).

Burrell and Barrit to an extent can play both positions.

I hope Eastmond has not been permanently, disgarded as he is playing much better this season and defensively seems capable.

At international level I would not mind seeing Burrell and Tuilagi as the pairing, but Eastmond and Burrell would also be interesting (if Tuilagi was not back to full fitness).

As a wildcard option, Burrell and Slade (with Ford at flyhalf) would also have possibilities, particulary with fast wingers (May/Watson or even Wade).

Lancaster has "toyed" with a second flyhalf rather than a "proper" inside centre, but why not move the second playmaker to outside centre (like Exeter).  Ford/Burrell/Slade would give Ford a crash-centre option (and some protection), with Slade more able to bring the wings into play.

I do belive England need to pick a side who can score tries.  When a more negative (defensive) approach is adopted, England seem to play badly.

Also what about horses for courses, if it was wet night would not Tuilagi and Burrell offer some solidity?  Likewise on a dry, firm pitch maybe different combinations could come to the fore.

The trouble with that cb, is that the side is announced 3 days before the match and the British weather is known for being as cantankerous as possible in February to April, especially in Wales and Ireland.

I was more trying to suggest we should be smart in our selections (and these days weather forecasts are not that bad). If the pitch was heavy (and not likely to change), Burrell & Tuilagi might be better than say Eastmond & Joseph. Just suggesting we should think things through. Also take account of the opposition. Again more a suggestion of trying to be informed and smart.

To me the whole discussion hinges on who plays at FH. 36 (and to a lesser extent Goode) were brought in to help Farrell out with added creativity. Thats fine, a backline should be made of players that compliment each other and iron out weaknesses.

Problem we've had is that 36, bar a couple of moments, has not been the player that we all want him to be and Goode is just useless. If Farrell is playing at 10 Eastmond is the best bet at 12 for me, with Tuilagi/Burrell outside him. With Ford being a more creative player (and a threat himself) we can just pick the best weapons for him to use. So thats Burrell and Manu, Burrell also has a more rounded game than hes given credit for. Ford can take the ball to the line and put either of those centres through gaps, use them as dummy runners for himself or a wide pass out to the wingers/Brown. If Manu is still injured i would like to see JJ at 13, very strong player but has plenty of pace, a good pass and a decent footballer.

We have plenty of good options out there, its about time we started using them in their correct positions when they're in good form.

broadlandboy wrote:fes
My memory may be deceiving me but when England beat NZ didn't the tries come about because the NZ mid field were worried about Manu ready to double up creating space for other players. If you don't go low on Manu it often needs more than one player to stop him but it then allows the off load if he is being supported. From what I've seen of Sam in League he does the same. With Ford playing at the gain line who do you go for, Ford can hit a gap if there is one with the choice of Manu or Sam with the other ready for the off load with hopefully a support player ready to make the most of any gaps. Should the defending team bring the winger in this creates space outside for the winger. Also Sam at 12 should help with Fords defence at 10.

England beat NZ because the England pack smashed NZ at the breakdown giving England a stream of quick front foot ball. Yes, Manu bust through the midfield, but in my view that had nothing to do with NZ "worrying about him" or "doubling up". They were frankly overrun on the day by the pace generated by the England pack.

International defences like NZ don't think "who do I go for"? Whether it be Cruden, Nonu, SBW or Smith, provided the defensive line has time to take shape (and this is key), they'll line up and handle whatever comes down their channel. Scoring against NZ off first phase is extremely difficult and I've yet to see a team bash their way through.

Just watched a clip of one of Yardes tries in NZ in the 3rd test. The final play was when youngs offloaded to Manu who was instantly tackled by 3 ABs, Nonu got bumped off and he made another 10yards with the other 2 on him and fell just short of the line. Yarde followed up and dived over from the base of the ruck. Had it not been Manu there we probably wouldn't have got that close to the line and probably panicked and messed up the next phase.

To me it just goes down to physics, big players running at pace and at gaps will make more yards than smaller players doing the same. The issue we've had for so long in england is that our players don't run at pace or at space, they jog into whoever is in front of them. If we ran at weak shoulders or gaps between defenders we'd get over the gainline, we'd get faster ball from the ruck and have more space to attack on the next phase. We just haven't been doing this consistently for the last few years.

Hmm, I remain unconvinced. It isn't just physics - the bigger man does not always get you over the gain line. It's the running at gaps which is key, and with modern defences you need a good breakdown in order to generate the quick ball that enables those gaps, or mismatches, to form. You also need half backs with the distribution skills to bring players onto the ball at pace and at the right angle. There's so much more to it than picking big blokes and expecting the opposition to double up.

My choice of combinations with Ford would be: -

Burrell & Tuilagi
Eastmond & Tuilagi
Eastmond & Burrell
Burrell & Slade

In total, four players all with good attacking potential and not neccessarily bad defensively.  I am not sure who should be chosen with Farrell though.

I do agree with the comments above though, even if Burrell and Tuilagi were selected, then they should still run into gaps and not straight into opponents.

well it looks like Manu could miss the start of the six nations.

With Manu likely to be unavailable I would like to see Burrell and Joseph. Chance of that happening? Zero.