Your England team for Le Crunch

First topic message reminder :

The game dubbed "Le Crunch" as it was often the winner takes all clash in the Six Nations will round off this years tournament. Although not winner takes all, England will go into the match with a shot at the title.

This match could be seen as crunch time for Lancaster's nearly men of the last 4 years. But who does he pick to try to win England's fifth Six Nations Championship?

Does he stick with the guys who have got him to the final day party? Does he load the bench with attacking flair in case Wales or Ireland score big early in the day? Does he look towards the World Cup and bring in any new faces? Or does he go with someone completely left field like Armitage or Burgess?

For me, he has to stick largely with the same team and trust them to finish the job. However, Youngs, Parling and Wood all showed up well off the bench against Scotland and in the latter two cases have more recent experience and are more likely to make the World Cup squad, so I'd consider a triple change in the forwards, however with the same 13 involved in the match day squad.

In the backs Burrell is on the shakiest ground, although with no decent replacement is likely to get the nod to continue. It's the bench that interest me most here. Wigglesworth is probably fine to stay, although I would only use him if Youngs is having a shocker or the trophy is in the bag.

But it's always puzzled me as to why we have a 10 and a 10/12 on the bench. Cipriani should have come on for Ford against Ireland and Twelvetrees should have come on for Burrell against Scotland. Neither starter was having a good game and that Lancaster didn't replace them shows he doesn't have all that much faith in either replacement. Neither make the World Cup for me, so I would drop them both.

I'd have World Cup hopeful Slade in the 22 shirt as he can cover 10, 12 and 13 and can therefore come on in a wider variety of situations.

That leaves back three cover in the 23 shirt. May coming on as the game breaks up would be some prospect to have, but the devil in me would be tempted by Christian Wade. Not the finished article, but if England are chasing tries in the last 15 I can't think of anyone else I'd rather have sitting on the bench.

So two call ups for me and three changes to the starting line up.

1. Marler
2. Youngs
3. Cole
4. Lawes
5. Parling
6. Wood
7. Robshaw C
8. Vunipola
9. Youngs
10. Ford
11. Nowell
12. Eastmond (if fit)
13. Joseph
14. Watson
15. Brown

16. Hartley
17. Vunipola
18. Brookes
19. Croft
20. Haskell
21. Wigglesworth
22. Cipriani
23. Slade

The big question is how that midfield would cope with Basteraud.

They can all tackle very well actually...but they are small...and he might be a prop playing at centre but you know he would probably get over the gainline quite a bit against them.

I may be proved wrong of course.

There was a lot to like in Nowell's performance at the weekend, really gritty and industrious, with good attacking instinct and ability bringing him off his wing to effect on numerous occasions, but also obvious concerns with critical moments of poor composure and decision-making.  He definitely warrants another match to see if he can iron out those lapses.  I've got further concerns over him under the high ball though, he came away with the ball a decent amount at the weekend and certainly wasn't lacking in commitment, but he really needs to work on his timing and positioning in the leap.  Too often his body was unbalanced and far too outstretched with no solidity in his take.  Against a better aerial team (as in Dublin) he wouldn't be so successful.

A few people are calling for May's return, but he's far too random in his performance for me.  He's certainly capable of exciting moments, but those moments are too few and far between.  He doesn't come looking for enough work in attack, isn't forceful or decisive enough when he is on the ball. His best use seems to be in putting pressure on the kick chase, where he's mainly succesful in containment but not particularly in regaining the ball.

Some are keen for Wade, and although I'm a big fan of his at club level and am keen to see how he might perform, realistically I think there are some areas that still need too much development this close to the WC and significant doubt that there will be enough opportunity on the fine-margined international stage to make what he does offer count in balance.  It's a real shame that injuries prevented an earlier, less pressured look at him over the previous couple of seasons.  It'll be interesting to see how he gets on with Wasps against Toulon and Habana, because it's a player like him or Savea that I really fear Wade's particular shortcomings being ruthlessly exploited by in an England shirt.  I'm not sure he'll ever be a 1st choice wing for England but I could definitely see him offering us a great impact option from the bench, though I suspect Eastmond's superior rugby brain and wider position range might make him fit that role even better.

GF

I'm not so keen on that pack either. Vunipola aside it's pretty much the same one that got the absolute **** kicked out of them in Wales 2 years ago. Some have improved a lot and Lawes is magnificent, but it just seems to lacking a bit of ballast, particularly when combined with that backline.

whocares wrote:why not start with Wade and Cipriani to see what they're really made of? if the incumbents like Ford get injured prior the world cup it will be too late to give decent game time to them as pre world cup friendlies are not exactly the same.

George ford is still extremely inexperienced with just 6 starts for England. He needs as much time in the middle in genuine test matches as possible. As you say this is the last chance for him to continue his international education.

So I completely disagree. Ford needs to play, and unless he is struggling should play the entire 80 minutes.

That's fair enough LT. But it means that the only real replacement at FH will be Owen Farrel come the RWC.

whocares wrote:That's fair enough LT. But  it means that the only real replacement at FH will be Owen Farrel come the RWC.

it's okay. If they get injured, Jonny Wilkinson will come out of retirement to kick us to victory.

Parling is class. Attwood is a wuss. Runs like a girl. Easter on the Bench please.
Burgess at 12. Can't possibly be worse than Bone Head Burrell or Calamity Bill Twelvetrees.

Leave the rest as it is BUT:-
Nowell needs to stop falling over with excitement.
T. Youngs is nippier than Hartley but gets too over excited to pass a rugby ball.

whocares wrote:That's fair enough LT. But  it means that the only real replacement at FH will be Owen Farrel come the RWC.

SL clearly has Farrell as the next or main 10. Giving Cipriani 2.5 minutes against Scotland says it all.

englandglory4ever wrote:Burgess at 12.

If Lancaster does that, I will get the incriminating photos I have of his boss and ensure Bomber never selects another England side.

Requirements for England twelve:
1) runs with the ball in two hands
2) has pace
3) is not a great lump who runs into contact but a genuine rugby player who tries to avoid it

Burgess and Burrell are excluded by not having any of the required qualities. Elliot Daly and Slade both have all three. I would go for Slade as he is more of an all round player giving an extra kicking option. He can also place kick if required.

Exiledinborders wrote:Requirements for England twelve:
1) runs with the ball in two hands
2) has pace
3) is not a great lump who runs into contact but a genuine rugby player who tries to avoid it

Burgess and Burrell are excluded by not having any of the required qualities. Elliot Daly and Slade both have all three. I would go for Slade as he is more of an all round player giving an extra kicking option. He can also place kick if required.

The 12 also tends to be a defensive organiser, and certainly has to tackle. Slade can (apparently). Daly is more like an English version of Earls with added kicking ability.

Daly never ever passes the ball. Many more botched tries.

Well Bath and England seem to see Burgess as more of a 13, probably moving to 6 or 8 next year.

They probably have him playing in a fat suit pretending to be Basteraud for this weeks training

thomh wrote:GF

I'm not so keen on that pack either. Vunipola aside it's pretty much the same one that got the absolute **** kicked out of them in Wales 2 years ago. Some have improved a lot and Lawes is magnificent, but it just seems to lacking a bit of ballast, particularly when combined with that backline.

Thomh

I totally agree...and that's why everyone has been calling for Attwood and Haskell for some serious muscle and carrying. The problem is that they have failed to deliver. And the old reliables...Parling and Wood etc came on and improved the performance.

We cant really blame Lancaster for that. Attwood and Haskell should now be ruled out of the WC squad.

I think Slater is the one that was missed. Had he not got that injury he could have nailed a spot hes got some serious ballast.

Post world cup...the like of Itoje and Dom Barrow (whos a monster 6'8 nearing 20 stone, but just having a few injury issues at the moment) can come into the equation.

For the France game...you must go with what we know unfortunately...

1 Marler
2 Youngs
3 Cole
4 Lawes
5 Parling
6 Wood .....or Garvey
7 Robshaw
8 Billy V

Lancaster has given Attwood and Haskell a chance which is what we wanted...but I also wonder if he's missed the chance to try a few others out...maybe Kvesic, Calum Clark who was in ridiculous form , Garvey or Evers maybe. What about Jaime George at hooker.
A few players who could bring some real ballast to the side but keep the mobility going.
If they don't perform then you can draw a line through them....but at least he would know one way or another.

1. Marler
2. Youngs
3. Cole
4. Lawes
5. Parling
6. Wood
7. Robshaw C
8. Vunipola
9. Youngs
10. Ford
11. Nowell
12. Eastmond (if fit)
13. Joseph
14. Watson
15. Brown

16. Hartley
17. Vunipola
18. Brookes
19. Attwood
20. Haskell
21. Care
22. Cipriani
23. Burrell

GeordieFalcon wrote:

thomh wrote:GF

I'm not so keen on that pack either. Vunipola aside it's pretty much the same one that got the absolute **** kicked out of them in Wales 2 years ago. Some have improved a lot and Lawes is magnificent, but it just seems to lacking a bit of ballast, particularly when combined with that backline.

Thomh

I totally agree...and that's why everyone has been calling for Attwood and Haskell for some serious muscle and carrying. The problem is that they have failed to deliver. And the old reliables...Parling and Wood etc came on and improved the performance.

We cant really blame Lancaster for that. Attwood and Haskell should now be ruled out of the WC squad.

I think Slater is the one that was missed. Had he not got that injury he could have nailed a spot hes got some serious ballast.

Post world cup...the like of Itoje and Dom Barrow (whos a monster 6'8 nearing 20 stone, but just having a few injury issues at the moment) can come into the equation.

For the France game...you must go with what we know unfortunately...

1 Marler
2 Youngs
3 Cole
4 Lawes
5 Parling
6 Wood  .....or Garvey  
7 Robshaw
8 Billy V

Lancaster has given Attwood and Haskell a chance which is what we wanted...but I also wonder if he's missed the chance to try a few others out...maybe Kvesic, Calum Clark who was in ridiculous form , Garvey or Evers maybe. What about Jaime George at hooker.
A few players who could bring some real ballast to the side but keep the mobility going.
If they don't perform then you can draw a line through them....but at least he would know one way or another.

Attwood has had a couple of dodgy performances but I really think people are going too far on this. Haskell will almost certainly be in the world cup squad.

Haskell also played very well vs Wales, has a load more experience than any of the alternatives, has excellent club form and can play across the back row.

It is most likely he will go to the RWC but won't be first choice

geordiefalcon I agree. Haskell and Attwood have not delivered on their promise.

Why are some players are allowed to keep their place in the team when playing poorly but others aren't?


lostinwales unfortunately Haskell has only played well vs Wales, since then he's been largely a passenger in my opinion.

Hartley is meant to be a better lineout thrower but he's not really shown that in the 6 nations. I would certainly drop him and give Youngs a start.

Theres a call for replacements every time someone is mediocre for a game beshocked no one is safe!

There is no way Haskell and Attwood won't go to the WC (if fit). Both have faded slightly since the Wales game but both bring bulk and more importantly have trained with the squad for the entire international season, and so know the set up/calls now. Attwood will probably be 3rd/4th choice lock and Haskell 2nd choice backrow/ bench option.

There is a slight tendency amongst us fans to ditch players the minute they don't give a 10/10 performance and plump for the next flavour of the month.

With regards to the France game, I reckon unless there is an injury in training, the squad will be the same, possibly with Parling and Wood starting. That said, I liked the way they came off the bench and there is something to be said for having your best players on the pitch at the end, particularly when in theory that's when a championship could be won or lost.

no 7 & 1/2 except some people get dropped, some don't. Certain players do seem safe when they shouldn't be.

Bathman in london their supposed bulk is irrelevant if they don't use or show it.

Not expecting a 10/10 performance every game but I do expect England to have some standards.

Joseph was was basically invisible in attack against Ireland.

Billy had a quiet game vs Wales.

Robshaw had an off day vs Ireland.

Ford was outclassed and outmuscled by Sexton.

Youngs looked like a headless chicken against Ireland.

I don't think any of them should be dropped though.

It's the likes of Burrell,Attwood,Hartley and Haskell whose spots are under threat IMO.

On the contrary, im not making rash calls because Attwood nor Haskell have dropped below 10/10

They were brought in for a purpose to add muscle, and high level carrying. Neither have done that bar the Wales game.
When those two don't bring their carrying game to the fore there are other players who have a far better game. Its a fair point.

Its like my argument about Twelvetrees.

The guy is brought in for his distribution. From my observation his passing fails to hit the level it should. How many of his passes go to the players feet, above their head behind them etc.

Then I get the argument...but he's a leader, he has a strong defence. Barritts is WAY ahead of him in that regards and in crash ball carrying but I get slated for calling for him. And his passing is solid.

I don't demand 10/10 each game...but I want to see international players doing the job they were brought in for. If they aren't doing that...then they are not worthy of their place.

Well said geordiefalcon.

You could use the same argument against Hartley - he's meant to be better at the lineout than Youngs but has he really shown that?

Unfortunately for Burrell he's just not playing well - I don't think anyone would complain if he was playing like he did last season but he's not.

Hartley had wonderful stats for lineouts last year. Not this one. I wouldnt mind seeing Youngs on from the start. That would almost certainly mean Parling starting also

I would say Hartley is certainly under threat from Youngs for this game.

Hartley has been one our best players, but this 6n he just looks a shadow of himself. Not sure why.

Burrell is another that should make way. But we don't have huge options at the moment. Maybe he's better suited for 13.

I would keep Haskell, but bring in Parling. I know he's not the most popular, but he's a leader, strong at the line-out, and judging from his appearance last week his carrying game is as strong as Attwood's too. If Launchbury were fit I'd have him, but he isn't. With that in mind, I'd possibly give Hartley another chance, but Youngs is pushing hard.

Burrell as beshocked says simply isn't playing particularly well. If he were I think him and Joseph could actually work very nicely as a partnership, which is a shame. I'm not entirely sure who's a better option though: Eastmond maybe? Would be slightly worried about the Bath midfield trio at international level though (I know Joseph and Ford have gone fine in defense so far, but Scotland got over the gainline a few times by attacking the 10 channel, and I would worry about the big French ball carriers). Once more, I'd be tempted to stick for this one.

So really the only change I'd make is Parling for Attwood. Maybe think about switching someone else on the bench for Twelvetrees (May?).

England weren't great against Scotland, but neither were they terrible. The biggest issue was their finishing, they should probably have scored at least 50 points TBH, but I remain convinced that it's better to be creating 7-8 chances and taking 3 than to be creating only one or two chances but taking them. No other team has made Scotland's defence look as porous as we did (nor indeed Italy's), though obviously we struggled much more against Ireland.

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 except some people get dropped, some don't. Certain players do seem safe when they shouldn't be.

Bathman in london their supposed bulk is irrelevant if they don't use or show it.

Not expecting a 10/10 performance every game but I do expect England to have some standards.

Joseph was was basically invisible in attack against Ireland.

Billy had a quiet game vs Wales.

Robshaw had an off day vs Ireland.

Ford was outclassed and outmuscled by Sexton.

Youngs looked like a headless chicken against Ireland.

I don't think any of them should be dropped though.

It's the likes of Burrell,Attwood,Hartley and Haskell whose spots are under threat IMO.

Theres always calls for them to be dropped by fans though. Ive generally been impressed with how England have identified players and given them a run ofg ames to settle in. There have been few occasions where they are out straight away but normally down to injured 1st choice being fit again.

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 except some people get dropped, some don't. Certain players do seem safe when they shouldn't be.

Bathman in london their supposed bulk is irrelevant if they don't use or show it.

Not expecting a 10/10 performance every game but I do expect England to have some standards.

Joseph was was basically invisible in attack against Ireland.

Billy had a quiet game vs Wales.

Robshaw had an off day vs Ireland.

Ford was outclassed and outmuscled by Sexton.

Youngs looked like a headless chicken against Ireland.

I don't think any of them should be dropped though.

It's the likes of Burrell,Attwood,Hartley and Haskell whose spots are under threat IMO.

Definitely Burrell. He just does not have the basic skills. How a professional centre has not learned to run with the ball in two hands is beyond me. Even when I was at school and we had practice games the rugby master would blow the whistle and give a penalty for not using two hands. We soon learned.

Against France I would keep Attwood and Hartley but I would drop them against a weaker scrummaging team. I am in two minds about Haskell.

Englands game just got easier, Camille Lopez is ruled out and Eddy Ben Arous was ruled out yesterday. Two of Frances best players out injured, could be decisive.

I thought Pillson looked better than Lopez to be honest. Arous is a loss but they have plenty of depth.

Lopez has been a mixed bag and poor kicking goals

France don't lose much with Plisson for Lopez in the starting line-up, true, but it does mean Talès comes onto the bench (probably), and he's rubbish, so France will be hoping nothing happens to Plisson.

Not completely up to date so apologies if this has been covered but what's the deal with Manu Tuilagi's recovery? Has it again been pushed back?

than you PSA for ruining ASM Clermont chances in the champions cup who are now out without their 9-10-12 for a while
seriously the amount of injury in France trainings or games is quite worrying. does not help to have some sort of consistency.

France team

France: 15 Scott Spedding, 14 Yoann Huget, 13 Gaël Fickou, 12 Maxime Mermoz, 11 Noa Nakaitaci, 10 Jules Plisson, 9 Sébastian Tillous-Borde, 8 Loann Goujon, 7 Bernard le Roux, 6 Thierry Dusautoir (c), 5 Yoann Maestri, 4 Alexandre Flanquart, 3 Nicolas Mas, 2 Guilhem Guirado, 1 Vincent Debaty.

Replacements: 16 Benjamin Kayser, 17 Rabah Slimani, 18 Uini Atonio, 19 Romain Taofifenua, 20 Damien Chouly, 21 Rory Kockott, 22 Rémi Talès, 23 Mathieu Bastareaud.

BamBam wrote:France team

France: 15 Scott Spedding, 14 Yoann Huget, 13 Gaël Fickou, 12 Maxime Mermoz, 11 Noa Nakaitaci, 10 Jules Plisson, 9 Sébastian Tillous-Borde, 8 Loann Goujon, 7 Bernard le Roux, 6 Thierry Dusautoir (c), 5 Yoann Maestri, 4 Alexandre Flanquart, 3 Nicolas Mas, 2 Guilhem Guirado, 1 Vincent Debaty.

Replacements: 16 Benjamin Kayser, 17 Rabah Slimani, 18 Uini Atonio, 19 Romain Taofifenua, 20 Damien Chouly, 21 Rory Kockott, 22 Rémi Talès, 23 Mathieu Bastareaud.

WTF!
Debaty hardly lasts more than 30 minutes per game and we have 2 THs on the bench ?! why did he call Domingo then??

EDIT: Atonio did play a couple of times on the left but hardly a specialist...

To be fair that is two changes, both injury enforced. Not very French!

A surprise selection is when Ireland change their team or France don't.

England drop Attwood. Parling into starting line-up, Easter to bench, otherwise unchanged. Not really surprised by that, Attwood's been subbed off early in both previous games with his replacement making a real impact. Slightly surprised he's dropped out of the squad altogether, but Lancaster must feel Easter will offer more from the bench.

Easter gives another option at 8 if he wants BV to go flat out from the start with Easter coming on after 50 minutes or so. Surprised Wood is not playing, but Haskell offers 8 cover if a lock gets injured, could do that from the bench though.

Notch wrote:To be fair that is two changes, both injury enforced. Not very French!

A surprise selection is when Ireland change their team or France don't.

Indeed. the secret behind PSA selection policy has finally been unveiled : it's generated automatically by a computer ! just need to press on a buttom and here's your french team for the next game :
http://boucherie-ovalie.org/2015/03/18/psa-selection-manager/

Apparently those who played every game for England stand to get a bonus a shade under 100k if they win, wonder what Easter will have to say about that if they blow it. 

Don't see the value in Parling. Attwood flatters to deceive but it's a big drop in power in the scrum. Parling is solid with a decent work rate, nothing more. Seems a depressingly English conservative pick.

Hood83 can't really say that was the scrum was particularly good vs Scotland or Ireland.

I do agree with you about Parling. Don't really think he offers that much. His lineout ability is certainly overhyped in my opinion. His workrate is no higher than any other 2nd rower.

beshocked wrote:Hood83 can't really say that was the scrum was particularly good vs Scotland or Ireland.

I do agree with you about Parling. Don't really think he offers that much. His lineout ability is certainly overhyped in my opinion. His workrate is no higher than any other 2nd rower.

But Borthwick, the saracen, you were a staunch defender of right?

What about Borthwick? Borthwick was a far greater lineout operator than Parling plus he also had superior workrate.

Borthwick's weakness was his lack of carrying ability yet I don't think any of the current 2nd rowers are that impressive in that area.

Also Borthwick was never liked for his supposed lack of passion and poor post match interviews. His England captaincy was not popular because he didn't appear charismatic to the media. Yet he's always been very popular with fellow players.

What England have missed is power in the engine room and a bit of edginess in the 2nd row since the likes of Grewcock,Johnson and Shaw.

Attwood was supposedly meant to add power but he hasn't.

The movement in England has been towards more athletic 2nd rowers instead of hardened lunatics.

I just want a bit of balance. I want to see an enforcer partnering up with a 5.5.

its a shame we have so many injuries at the moment.

Launchbury and Slater are huge misses. I'd like to have seen what Slater could offer...maybe something we hoped Attwood would but hasn't quite.

Post world cup...we'll have Lawes, Launchbury, hopefully an injury free Dom Barrow, Elliot Stooke finding his form again, Mario Itoje...a fit again Slater all battling for the spots.

It would put us in a good position for locks.

Parling is becoming massively under rated. The guy is very good. I'd agree we have a lot of very good options coming through at lock, and elsewhere to be fair. Next couple of years are important to integrate the right ones and build experience.

I think Launchbury and laws were Lancasters desired pairing. Not a bad thing in all honesty. I think i'd be looking to mix up the back row abit post world cup.

See if Fraser or Kvesic can make a claim for that 7 spot and maybe bring in more of a bruiser carrier at 6.

But that's a while away yet.

Plenty to play for in the next 10 months.