Review/Discussion of the state of the England team

First topic message reminder :

Just a quick review/discussion on the status of the England team.  Not necessarily a complete analysis but I sure others will fill in the missing gaps and provide their own views.

England were very disappointing and stalled during the Autumn Internationals. Without a dominance scrum they could very easy have lost to Australia.

FORWARDS:

Generally went well, but England should not complacent as next up is Wales away at the MS, where they were bullied last time.

If Corbisiero and Cole can regain form and fitness, England will be strong at prop.  Brookes quietly improving with some younger guys waiting in the wings.

Hooker seems to be a weak area though, Webber did not look wonderful over the week-end.  Hartley a bit undisciplined.

Quite a good groups of locks, but I would still prefer an Attwood or Slater type.  Occasionally Lawes and Launchbury look a little light-weight.  Also though competition is very tight, I would like to have seen how Kitchener would fare.

Backrow is a point of discussion and debate.  The number eights look good with Vunipola coming back to form and future options in Ewers and others (Hughes?).  I think Robshaw almost always plays well but I would not mind seeing Garvey at blindside, to do the tight stuff and allow the other back five forwards to excel in the loose.


BACKS:

Not totally bleak but how to get them playing?

Fullback seems set with Brown and I wonder if Watson should be seen as his successor.

Scrum-half is fairly well served by Youngs and Care if he can recover his form.  Also Simpson can look a good player?

Fly-half is well stocked with Ford, Farrell, Myler and Cips.  Indeed at the week-end I thought Myler had a great game.

At wing there are lots of options in May, Watson, Rokoduguni, Nowell, Wade, Yarde and Benjamin has come on a bit as well. I would love to see Wade get a go sometime.

Centre has been a problem which is annoying has there seems to be talent available.  Tuilagi, Burrell, Eastmond, Joseph, Barritt, Slade, Twelvestrees, etc. all seem good players

So if everyone was fit and on Form, I would go with: -

Corbisiero
Hartley
Cole
Attwood
Launchbury
Garvey
Robshaw
Morgan

Youngs
Ford
Watson
Burrell
Tuilagi
May
Brown

Would definitely have Lawes on the bench in case the line went belly-up. Have not yet found room for Wade but would have Eastmond on the bench.  However in most positions there is a lot of competition, so sometimes the choice could go either way.
Perhaps England’s real weakness is having several good players (with the sum being better than the parts), but with very few world class options.

Cumbrian wrote:So if Tom Wood and Geoff Parling are out (hopefully a big if) starting pack looks like this?

01. Joe Marler
02. Dylan Hartley
03. Dave Wilson
04. Dave Attwood
05. George Kruis
06. James Haskell
07. Chris Robshaw
08. Billy Vunipola

The injury situations is frustrating but to be fair that is still a pretty good pack. Haskell is in great form at the moment and may add a little more power than Wood.  

I think back to  when we had injury lists like this in the pat and we'd be heading to Cardiff with players like Tim Payne, Lee Mears, Steve Borthwick, Andy Goode and Jamie Noon.  I'd have given us no chance back then, now I reckon we've still got a very good chance.

Will Hartley be allowed to play.. Straight back in after a ban from a red card he is sin binned in the next game???

Surely Youngs is a better option.

Surely you have someone else to haunt MM, did you actually see the game or the incident you are becoming worse than

Hartley will be more worried about his crap form and leadership then any issues with cards, Tom Youngs looked a lot better then him yesterday.

Eastmond off injured

BamBam wrote:Eastmond off injured

He looked quite annoyed. He probably wanted to make his England case in this match. If he has done his arm, though, I'd rather he went off than risked making it worse.

joseph was quite simply outstanding against Glasgow today. not sure if we won motm but he absolutely should have.

HE HAS TO BE STARTING 13 ON FEB 6th

Garvey won it, but Joseph was also very good.

Watson does some great things but also seems to have a higher error rate than you'd hope. He's got the attributes to be immense though.

quinsforever wrote:joseph was quite simply outstanding against Glasgow today. not sure if we won motm but he absolutely should have.

HE HAS TO BE STARTING 13 ON FEB 6th

I would agree, the only Bath back who made any real yards against the Glasgow defence. Looked very good indeed. Reminds me of Guscot. doesn't look like he is running fast and suddenly he is in behind.

Eastmond will be disappointed he had to go off, as his only contribution was a poor missed tackle. Webber did nothing to enhance his chances with Batty looking much better.

garvey was good to. fair enough.

agree re watson. one or two knock ons, and a slightly bad decision to go for it rather than pass outside, leading to him being held up. i know ashton is out of the england setup, but he would always score from that situation with his greater strength - watson is a little easily held up/isolated.

quinsforever wrote:watson. one or two knock ons, and a slightly bad decision to go for it rather than pass outside, leading to him being held up. i know ashton is out of the england setup, but he would always score from that situation with his greater strength - watson is a little easily held up/isolated.

Disagree. There was a man on Agulla outside and a lot of cover. Running hard and straight, so as not to chew up space, was the right thing to do. Agulla then went wider still to make any pass impossible. He comes close to Watson and it is an easy pass and also distracts the cover. Agulla's mistake for me.

Great defence for me. Initially thought Watson had bo chance but blimey he s quick.

This unreal, it looks like Farrell is limping off now!

Owen Farrell has limped off. He seemed to twist his knee but looked like he might stay on. He then put weight on his leg and it was clear he wouldn't continue. He walked off unassisted, mind you.

It's meant to be a 10 minutes substitution so he might come back

As it stands all four away teams in the quarters would be English.

whocares wrote:It's meant to be a 10 minutes substitution so he might come back

Surely only if they outright dishonestly claim that he's being checked for concussion?

thomh wrote:

whocares wrote:It's meant to be a 10 minutes substitution so he might come back

Surely only if they outright dishonestly claim that he's being checked for concussion?

Agree with you. That's what the french commentator on the pitch was claiming though

Not particularly, when it comes to England Hartley has rarely committed any serious offences, other than that stamping on Vermeulen,  which Vermeulen  was sort of asking for considering he was at the bottom of a driving maul

thomh wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:So if Tom Wood and Geoff Parling are out (hopefully a big if) starting pack looks like this?

01. Joe Marler
02. Dylan Hartley
03. Dave Wilson
04. Dave Attwood
05. George Kruis
06. James Haskell
07. Chris Robshaw
08. Billy Vunipola

The injury situations is frustrating but to be fair that is still a pretty good pack. Haskell is in great form at the moment and may add a little more power than Wood.  

I think back to  when we had injury lists like this in the pat and we'd be heading to Cardiff with players like Tim Payne, Lee Mears, Steve Borthwick, Andy Goode and Jamie Noon.  I'd have given us no chance back then, now I reckon we've still got a very good chance.

If Wood and Parling are out then that might bring Easter, a strong lineout forward, into realistic contention. If they're happy with Haskell/Robshaw as lineout options then it will still be Vunipola.

You could argue that it could bring Kitchener into the thinking for a starting spot as well due to his strong jumping. Personally I'd have him ahead of Kruis anyway as I think he's a bit more dynamic.

1.Marler
2.Hartley
3.Wilson
4.Kithchener
5.Attwood
6.Haskell
7.Robshaw
8.Vunipola

16.Youngs 17.Corbisiero 18.Brookes 19.Kruis 20.Clark

If Wood is out I'd promote Kvesic and put him on the bench but can't see it happening.

I would agree with your pack KC and have Attwod and Kitchener as the locks with Kruis on the bench.  Love to see Garvey play at blindside, though Haskell gives a bit more muscle than Wood.  Even with the injuries, the pack should still be good, though whether it is better than the Welsh one, only the match will tell.

Injuries don't help but England still has good players, but needs to use them properly.

Splendid, a home RWC around the corner and we can't field our 1st team because:

1. we don't know what it is yet

2. half of it is injured

The important thing about going 'on a journey' Stewie, is you've got to know where and when to get off

Not sure what criticism Lancaster warrants. Injuries happen. We know our 1 + 2 (and some 3) choices for every position except centres....not through lack of trying, but lack of performances to secure the position (and injuries).

au contraire - we've lost our 1st choice props to injury and SL has established an excellent replacement option. That's how it's done, well done Stewie.

However, he's left developing a centre (and possibly even a back 3) combination far too late in the RWC cycle and consequently we're floundering. The injury problem has admittedly made things worse.

Time to be a leader SL: assume Manu is out indefinitely and choose the form centres, and stick with them (personally I'd say Barritt, Burrell & Joseph). Just maybe Manu could play a bench/impact role but I'm not holding my breath. SL appears to have decided on the back 3 (I think, but who knows) - time to stick with them.

Farrell apparently left the stadium wearing a knee brace and on crutches
Eastmonds shoulder injury is being reported as not serious

Manu is 23 and he'll be back. And yes that does mean he overshadows the other options, but we have the resources to create a strong unit from what is left. Given the time constraints it would make sense to go for the bath unit, more or less, for the sake of familiarity.

Back three is fixed for now. Wings are easy to sort out if there are problems. The alternatives on the wings are really good on their day. (Wade, Nowell, Yarde, Ashton). Full back is much more awkward, as Foden is out, Tait not considered, always broken and going to France. Pennell in the championship and Goode at full back at international level just makes me want to cry (unless we are playing aerial ping pong in a gale....)

Barney McGrew did it wrote:au contraire - we've lost our 1st choice props to injury and SL has established an excellent replacement option. That's how it's done, well done Stewie.

However, he's left developing a centre (and possibly even a back 3) combination far too late in the RWC cycle and consequently we're floundering. The injury problem has admittedly made things worse.

Time to be a leader SL: assume Manu is out indefinitely and choose the form centres, and stick with them (personally I'd say Barritt, Burrell & Joseph). Just maybe Manu could play a bench/impact role but I'm not holding my breath. SL appears to have decided on the back 3 (I think, but who knows) - time to stick with them.

The main places for debate are centre as ever, and a few places where youngsters are coming through. Fly half and wing. Who would you have settled on?

Lostinwales,

Fullback should be easy, even without Foden, Watson moves from wing and one of the fairly long line of wingers comes in (Roko or Wade would be interesting).

In response to some of the other posters, there are always going to be injuries.  To my mind England seem to play better with a bit of a challenge and a few new faces.

When they have not needed to change, they seem to be a bit staid and boring.

Not 100% convinced by Watson at FB personally ..

Fraser out for the season.

cb wrote:Lostinwales,

Fullback should be easy, even without Foden, Watson moves from wing and one of the fairly long line of wingers comes in (Roko or Wade would be interesting).

In response to some of the other posters, there are always going to be injuries.  To my mind England seem to play better with a bit of a challenge and a few new faces.

When they have not needed to change, they seem to be a bit staid and boring.

Could be an exciting choice, I just want it to not be the too scared to look kind of exciting

I do think Nowell could be an excellent long term FB replacement, but there are some interesting contests ahead

No 7&1/2 wrote:Fraser out for the season.

More injuries for the poor lad? 

Have to admit, the early signs don't look great for Fraser.

Report says back operation

There are some calls for Lancaster to go with the 'form' centres. But does this not lead to lack of continuity, as players come in when they are on form and drop out when they are not? Would Lancaster not be better picking the best 4 or 5 players and sticking with them even where there is a temporary drop in form (Twelvetrees) ? If you are always picking on form, then you are constantly changing the team. Form is temporary and Class is permanent. It is just that we need to find out who the class centres are.

nlpnlp wrote:There are some calls for Lancaster to go with the 'form' centres.  But does this not lead to lack of continuity, as players come in when they are on form and drop out when they are not?  Would Lancaster not be better picking the best 4 or 5 players and sticking with them even where there is a temporary drop in form (Twelvetrees) ?  If you are always picking on form, then you are constantly changing the team.  Form is temporary and Class is permanent.  It is just that we need to find out who the class centres are.

that is true. but the form centre/midfield combinations at the moment all play together, which is a degree of communication that we have not had before.

it's a win-win. they are the form players. and they already attack and defend very fluently together for bath. complete utter no-brainer for me. if SL doest pick the below then he needs to explain why. really he does.

ford
eastmond/barritt
joseph
watson

may
brown

The BBC reports the following as out of action, we can assume for the majority of the 6N in most cases:

C Lawes
G Parling
T Wood
B Foden
M Tuilagi
O Farrell
K Eastmond (?)
B Morgan
E Slater
J Launchbury
W Fraser

That's quite a list of top line players unavailable. That's without accepting the fact that Dan Cole has had very little game time in the last 12 months or so.

The front runners to replace Wood and Parling have to be Haskell and Kitchener as the form players. I think Kruis is still a bit raw at international level. No doubt we'll see Clark on the bench but i'd personally rather see more of an impact player there. Either Kvesic or Ewers for my money.

More than likely we'll see Barritt and Joseph starting in Cardiff, I don't go along with those suggesting the coaches have something against him. His form deserves a place. That means 36 on the bench covering FH/Centre and potentially Yarde at 23.

I don't think the coaches would be happy with just Ford and 36 as place kicking options in the squad. If Farrell is injured then Myler or Cipriani will come in.

I wonder if Easter will be in to cover the last 20 minutes after Vunipolo runs out of steam?

Nowell would be a good 2nd choice FB.

bluestonevedder wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Fraser out for the season.

More injuries for the poor lad? 

Have to admit, the early signs don't look great for Fraser.

BAck operation now?

Wow the lad is going to be another Tom Rees.

Its irrelevant anyway as Lancaster only wants 6.5's.

thomh wrote:I don't think the coaches would be happy with just Ford and 36 as place kicking options in the squad. If Farrell is injured then Myler or Cipriani will come in.

Yes that's a good point, I wouldn't be comfortable with 36 covering FH at international level anyway. Having said that, neither Myler nor Cipriani are on top form with the boot at the moment either. GF's percentage was quoted as 86% yesterday, Myler at 73% apparently.

What we could really do with is someone else in the back division being a good place kicker. Care or Youngs for example.

I think a second row of Kitchener and Attwood would deputise really well. Considering Clarke's form this season, I'd be more than happy seeing him start or providing cover from the bench.

nobbled wrote:I wonder if Easter will be in to cover the last 20 minutes after Vunipolo runs out of steam?

Nowell would be a good 2nd choice FB.

Possible, but I think Easter will most likely start or not be in the 23. His engine over 80 minutes, rugby brain and lineout work are his main selling points at this level I think, rather than his ability to put in a big 20 minutes when the game opens up. That said, a similar point probably applies to Clark, so Easter could play bench if Wood is out and Haskell starts.

thomh wrote:

nobbled wrote:I wonder if Easter will be in to cover the last 20 minutes after Vunipolo runs out of steam?

Nowell would be a good 2nd choice FB.

Possible, but I think Easter will most likely start or not be in the 23. His engine over 80 minutes, rugby brain and lineout work are his main selling points at this level I think, rather than his ability to put in a big 20 minutes when the game opens up. That said, a similar point probably applies to Clark, so Easter could play bench if Wood is out and Haskell starts.

In that context, one of Easter's selling points is the complete contrast he offers with Haskell. If the latter's physicality isn't cutting it, Easter offers a degree of cunning that can subtly change the momentum of a game.

Poorfour wrote:

thomh wrote:

nobbled wrote:I wonder if Easter will be in to cover the last 20 minutes after Vunipolo runs out of steam?

Nowell would be a good 2nd choice FB.

Possible, but I think Easter will most likely start or not be in the 23. His engine over 80 minutes, rugby brain and lineout work are his main selling points at this level I think, rather than his ability to put in a big 20 minutes when the game opens up. That said, a similar point probably applies to Clark, so Easter could play bench if Wood is out and Haskell starts.

In that context, one of Easter's selling points is the complete contrast he offers with Haskell. If the latter's physicality isn't cutting it, Easter offers a degree of cunning that can subtly change the momentum of a game.

Ignoring impact, which is obviously a big part of picking subs, what about injury cover?

If Haskell was to get injured in the first 10 mins, would you be happy playing Billy at 6 with Easter at 8 for 70 mins?

Or conversely, if Billy was to get injured in the first 10 mins, would you be happier with Clark at 6, Robshaw 7 and Haskell at 8?

Alternative might be a lock like Kruis moving to 6, but not a fan of that either

BamBam wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

thomh wrote:

nobbled wrote:I wonder if Easter will be in to cover the last 20 minutes after Vunipolo runs out of steam?

Nowell would be a good 2nd choice FB.

Possible, but I think Easter will most likely start or not be in the 23. His engine over 80 minutes, rugby brain and lineout work are his main selling points at this level I think, rather than his ability to put in a big 20 minutes when the game opens up. That said, a similar point probably applies to Clark, so Easter could play bench if Wood is out and Haskell starts.

In that context, one of Easter's selling points is the complete contrast he offers with Haskell. If the latter's physicality isn't cutting it, Easter offers a degree of cunning that can subtly change the momentum of a game.

Ignoring impact, which is obviously a big part of picking subs, what about injury cover?

If Haskell was to get injured in the first 10 mins, would you be happy playing Billy at 6 with Easter at 8 for 70 mins?

Or conversely, if Billy was to get injured in the first 10 mins, would you be happier with Clark at 6, Robshaw 7 and Haskell at 8?

Alternative might be a lock like Kruis moving to 6, but not a fan of that either

I'd probably be happier with Billy at 6 than Haskell at 8, to be honest. One of Billy's better qualities is that he has many of the skills of a 6, whereas IIRC it's a while since Haskell has played 8 seriously.

Poorfour wrote:

thomh wrote:

nobbled wrote:I wonder if Easter will be in to cover the last 20 minutes after Vunipolo runs out of steam?

Nowell would be a good 2nd choice FB.

Possible, but I think Easter will most likely start or not be in the 23. His engine over 80 minutes, rugby brain and lineout work are his main selling points at this level I think, rather than his ability to put in a big 20 minutes when the game opens up. That said, a similar point probably applies to Clark, so Easter could play bench if Wood is out and Haskell starts.

In that context, one of Easter's selling points is the complete contrast he offers with Haskell. If the latter's physicality isn't cutting it, Easter offers a degree of cunning that can subtly change the momentum of a game.

I agree on the comparison between the two, but surely that substitution would only occur if Haskell was playing 8 (not likely), unless you'd advocate moving Vunipola to 6 and bringing Easter on?

EDIT: just seen this has already come up and been answered

we need haskell to put in big defensive hits on key welsh runners (roberts, jd2, north). lawes and launchbury imo won us the match last year by stopping all those guys in their tracks behind the gain line.

if we let those guys run at us we wont get to see the attacking prowess of joseph, watson and may as we will be trundles backwards by gatball.

so whoever we pick needs to smash players backwards behind their gainline.

haskell can do that. who else?

Vunipola Attword Marler Hartley Robshaw would be the main men there? Kruis as well.

Robshaw doesn't smash players but will tackle all of them. Attwood can do a job at set piece and mauls to disrupt their ball in the first place. Marler can be handy in defence as well. Barritt will probably be the key though.

yeah. its going to be a big game for barritt. if he gets the better of roberts and jd2 i think we win.

i was very worried when he looked like he took a big knock vs glasg this weekend, but he played on so maybe it was only really serious rather than life threatening. he is such a hardman