State of the team: England

First topic message reminder :

What are your thoughts on where we are as a team at the end of the 6 nations.

I believe we are a lot better at creating chances which is certainly an improvement on last year, i think this is due to the half back partnership between B. Youngs and Ford. B. Youngs seems to have found his form again. For me Ford is miles ahead of Farrell at the moment, he improves our attacking play so much more than him. His work with his club mate Joseph is working well too. Talking of Joseph, he's had a really good six nations and probably one of our best players.

Still not sure why Care isnt in the match day squad, not sure what Wigglesworth brings other than being a different type of player to B. Youngs. What has been bit of an issue this year (i can't believe im about to say this about an england team) is our scrum. It hasn't been as powerful as years gone by, is that a result of our forwards being told to up their work rate around the park and being tied at scrum time?

This year we have been creating chances but not finishing them off, we also seem to have a fair few handling errors that needs stamping out. How are we going to do this? Can we? Is it just the players need some more game time with each other?

What are anyone elses thoughts on where we're at?

6 other players missed tackles on Mitchell too!

Bendy is susceptible in defence but offers things in attack that Goode could only dream of. You don't win European player of year for nothing.....

Sgt_Pooly wrote:You don't win European player of year for nothing.....

ROG won it once, that doesnt stop half of Ireland still hating him.

But yeah Abendanon must be doing something right out there

Sgt Pooly why did Abendanon not outplay Goode in their recent encounter then?

Yes but it doesn't change that Abendanon missed a tackle too.

Abendanon had a golden opportunity to prove that he's better than Goode. He blew that opportunity.

He had an opportunity to win a ERCC final at Twickenham - he blew it with an erratic performance.

Abendanon is still a good player but he didn't do anything which should suggest an exception should be made for him.

I wouldnt make an exception full stop but he s had a great season.

Did Goode outplay Bendy?

Let's say he did, Bendy was named EP of the year and put in some outstanding performances that Goode wouldn't be capable of. He makes the odd guff but he's an outstanding attacking talent.

Bendy is a very good player, but no better than when he was at Bath.

Agree with beshocked.... Let's leave abendedon in France.

Pennel, Watson, Nowell it'll probably be one of those.

Or goode. Lancaster is a fan.

burgess is getting better and better every game at 6. had a great game vs quins tonight. 13 carries in 50 mins and tons of tackles.

he will be going in the RWC squad. especially as wood/haskell isnt resolved.

I just dont get it…Burgess has a few good games at 6 and all of a sudden he is England material….just perfectly illustrates the problem England have with just too many options, too many attempts to find the X factor player instead of selecting and sticking with a player. Next week Ed Milliband will be the new solution at 12.

Its no worse than us rushing Anscombe in though who hasn't even has a few good games yet as far as I am concerned.

Quite so, should we or shouldn't we include a player of Burgess's pedigree - what a dilemma to have.

Then there's Europe's player of year Abendanon.

Or even last years European player of the year Armitage.

It just gets worse for us.  I'm distraught.

Gwlad wrote:I just dont get it…Burgess has a few good games at 6 and all of  a sudden he is England material….just perfectly illustrates the problem England have with just too many options, too many attempts to find the X factor player instead of selecting and sticking with a player. Next week Ed Milliband will be the new solution at 12.

I think Lancaster likes Burgess because he's a natural leader. You could see it right from the off with Bath he was talking and geeing up the other players. He doesn't know the game well enough to be considered for captaincy but in a pack that's short of natural leaders someone who has the mentality that running through a brick wall for the team is the norm and someone who can get those around him focused helps when the current captain isn't the most inspiring. Plus the best team have several leaders in the pack.

I thin one of the big factors about Burgess (and im not jumping on the Burgess train just yet) is that he's potentially the type of 6 most England fans have really been looking for, for quite a while. A real bruising hardman that tackles like a tank and carries just as hard.

It also takes a lot of responsibility off whoever is at 8 in regards to carrying workload.

Early days though...and lets not forget Tom Wood (when on top form) is a top class 6 as well who wont give that shirt up easily ....and is a lineout option.

bedfordwelsh wrote:Its no worse than us rushing Anscombe in though who hasn't even has a few good games yet as far as I am concerned.

Completely agree but no one is saying Anscombe is anything other than a replacement for Biggar and a utility and he has been playing Union. He isn't the new toy that will be dropped in, expected to be brilliant and then, when he isn't, dropped out.

Why are you so obsessed with English rugby?

Thought Launchbury looked really good in his cameo yesterday. Other Wasps players fared less well. Haskell was really annoying Barnes by constantly barking at him. Simpson was unfortunate to be injured, but had been outplayed by Youngs I thought, while Daly struggled to make any impact and Wade looked short of pace (is he carrying an injury?).

Burgess will play against the baa baas

sickofwendy wrote:Burgess will play against the baa baas

Not if Bath are in the Premiership final the day before.

Agreed I thought Launchbury looked very good when he came on which I good news for England.  

Many of the players mentioned in this topic will make the enlarged squad but few I fancy will make the final 31 because there are so few spare places.  Burgress is improving but not yet ready and really for him to make the final 31 would require someone like Haskell or Wood to drop out (depending how many BR's and SR's are taken).

Sorry for Brown but the WC is not for five months, so there is time for the concussion to be overcome.  Of the replacements to my mind Watson has the most talent but needs a bit more experience and confidence and it would be a brave decision.  However I think he is a better fullback than winger.

For whatever reason I think this WC has come too for England in terms of player development.

if burgess has 2 or 3 (if bath reach final which they should) more good AP games he will be included. Lancaster has already made clear Burgess is a favourite.

in the final 31 he will take 6 back rowers do we think? plenty of space for burgess in that 31...billy v, morgan (if back), robshaw, wood, haskell, burgess.

re Bendy. he has been excellent this season at Clermont. But it does take time to develop that understanding amongst team mates to be as effective as he has, so for that reason i would hesitate to include him as an exception for England. But am more than a bit worried about Brown's concussion situation...

quinsforever wrote:re Bendy. he has been excellent this season at Clermont. But it does take time to develop that understanding amongst team mates to be as effective as he has, so for that reason i would hesitate to include him as an exception for England. But am more than a bit worried about Brown's concussion situation...

Brown has tweeted that he's had no symptoms for a couple of days, and is back into light gym work. Quins have - to their credit - taken an ultra-cautious approach with him.

I'm actually a little more worried about Easter -who also went off with concussion symptoms on Friday. If he needs an extended recuperation period then England have a race against time to get two fit No 8s in shape for the training camp. That said, the latest news on Morgan sounds positive.

Waldrom's form all season has probably been ahead of Easter's. Certainly an option should Morgan not recover in time.

quinsforever wrote:if burgess has 2 or 3 (if bath reach final which they should) more good AP games he will be included. Lancaster has already made clear Burgess is a favourite.

in the final 31 he will take 6 back rowers do we think? plenty of space for burgess in that 31...billy v, morgan (if back), robshaw, wood, haskell, burgess.

5 back rows, 6 if they decide to use one as a utility lock which none of those you've named can.

If Morgan doesn't make it and Easter is named as No 8 and lock cover then things could get interesting as it opens up an extra spot.

Personally I wouldn't consider dropping a lock from the squad however and even if we did then I'd prefer that the extra back row spot was used to cover 7 - i.e. Kvesic at the moment.

Burgess hasn't done enough to leapfrog Haskell or Wood and 3 blindsides in a 31 man squad would be a waste IMO.

Incidentally, the Daily Mail seems fairly certain that Lancaster won't call up players from France when he announces his World Cup training squad.

Rugby Fan wrote:Incidentally, the Daily Mail seems fairly certain that Lancaster won't call up players from France when he announces his World Cup training squad.

Unless Sam Burgess is on holiday there.

I think Burgess' form at 6 has been really good Carlos. Certainly compared to Haskell who has gone off the boil since the start of the 6Ns for me. Haskell does cover 7 but so does Wood so you never know.

I'm not sure ready Burgess is ready but he's certainly a better 6 than a 12. I'd be worried about his breakdown work against the better teams and I imagine they'll be plans to isolate him if indeed he does get a chance.

I'd perhaps look to give him a spot and play him as an impact sub rather than starting.

Possibly, though his breakdown work has been top notch. The massive area of weakness is lineout.

His clearing out has been impressive but I'd worry about him making correct calls in pressure situations. Look at Haskell and COle, they're forever getting pinged and they've being playing the game much longer than Burgess.

If he made the WC he'd be a passenger in the lineout if we're honest. His lifting and being able to read plays is well off the level needed, could we take the hit there?

I'd take the risk and take him.

He will probably be in the 45 man training squad. After that it will all depend on what the coaches see in training.

I don't understand this obsession with Burgess. He has definitely been playing better at 6 than 12 but is he really already one of the top 6 back row English players? No way. He just doesn't have the depth of experience to play world cup rugby.

England have to get through Australia and Wales in the group and if they do the games don't get easier. Why would Lancaster risk a WC with a back row player who has played a handful of games at premiership level and none at international? England have more than enough back row talent - it would be stupid to throw him in.

He's going to be quality at 6 though. He'll defintiely make the wider squad, and I'd now be surprised he doesn't make the final squad.

I'm siding with you offload, I think his performances have been hugely overhyped. Problem is are the England coaches worried about losing him back to RL if they don't include him?

I understand Burgess is playing in the AP, but is his current situation any worse than that of Armitage. If you were Kvesic or Haskell for example, would you feel more annoyed at losing out to Burgess or Armitage? At least Armitage is a proven quality player imo, Burgess has done nothing.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's going to be quality at 6 though. He'll defintiely make the wider squad, and I'd now be surprised he doesn't make the final squad.

I am pretty sure he will be in the large squad, would be amazed if he was in the final squad.

I wouldn't care about Haskell's opinion on it to be honest as he's had plenty of opportunities and failed to consistently deliver. Kvesic has never really got a look in with Robshaw nailed on the bench spot mainly used as direct number 8 cover and I think Lancaster would use Wood there to replace Robshaw then maybe think about Kvesic. Just think Burgess is showing he's a bit special now.

You really think so 71/2? I've seen nothing but ok/good performances from him despite the hype. If you watched the games with no commentary I wonder if you'd have a different opinion?

I'm not suggesting you have been, but I think some people get drawn into the superlatives that get thrown about regarding Burgess. It's hard to listen to sometimes, as it's so over the top it's almost cringeworthy.

I didn't see anything from him as a 12 which made me think he'd be a success and you won't find a comment from me suggesting he'd be involved as far as I recollect. Since that first game at 6 though I was sold, he's perfect made for the role. I may be going off early and I even said it was premature when I was praising that first performance but given he now has an extra game or 2 I'm convinced he'll be there.

Personally I think Kvesic must be in the squad, but I think Haskell will cover the 7 spot. I also think Lancaster should have had a closer look at Ewers. The fact he hasn't suggests he wont be near the squad.

Robshaw
Wood
Haskell
BIlly V
Ben Morgan (If fit)
?? - Might be Burgess.

It's interesting that arguably the best no 8 in the AP has been Waldrom - I wonder if Lancaster will consider him.

Waldrom was the match winner on the weekend for Exeter.

Geordiefalcon you're right actually - perhaps Ewers is not on Lancaster's radar - I might change that in my 45 squad - Ksevic and Waldrom probably have a higher chance as it stands.

I'd possibly throw Hughes in as the form 8, but agree Waldroum has been very good.

Geordiefalcon you're right actually - perhaps Ewers is not on Lancaster's radar - I might change that in my 45 squad - Ksevic and Waldrom probably have a higher chance as it stands.

I think Lancaster has missed a chance with him...big tough 6/8.
I also think its ironic that everyone was chasing Kevisc to be in the England squad in dire form last season...yet this season he has been consistently excellent and you barely here his named mentioned.
I would go so far to say If we change the structure of the back row next season...post WC I would look at starting kvesic...if his form is the same.

Sgt, im really struggling with Hughes. I don't want to get into a eligibility discussion (we've done a million on here) but I hate the fact he could have played for Samoa or Fiji but deliberately chose to come here to get his 3 year residency.

I wouldn't pick him

I can't agree GF, the boy is super talented and would walk into the set-up currently. The rules are what they are, Ireland have a "project player", I don't see why we shouldn't take advantage if a top option comes our way.

Hughes has already been sounded out by the England management by all accounts, I guess this is why he's turned down Fiji & Samoa.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Hughes has already been sounded out by the England management by all accounts, I guess this is why he's turned down Fiji & Samoa.

Even if never capped by England, as an EQP he is much more valuable to clubs, and therefore can command a higher salary.

From my point of view, Hughes is some way from being ready from International duty. He is an exciting and aggressive ball carrier and physical tackler. BUT he is greedy, lacks real understanding of how to use teammates and is extremely naive and at times lazy in his defensive positioning.

I really rate him and he could be a huge asset. The last time I checked he was leading the chart in turnovers and was right up there with yards made and defenders beaten etc.

I understand he's very raw but I can't think of a player in the current England setup that gets close to his impact.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I'm not sure ready Burgess is ready but he's certainly a better 6 than a 12. I'd be worried about his breakdown work against the better teams and I imagine they'll be plans to isolate him if indeed he does get a chance.

I'd perhaps look to give him a spot and play him as an impact sub rather than starting.

This would be my worry too. Given the draw with a pool of death then comparatively welcoming quarter and semi-finals our priority has to be topping the pool, hence beating Wales and Australia.

If all are fit then we will be coming up against the Wales back row of 6.Lydiate 7.Warburton 8.Faletau. For all the debates about Lydiate and Warburton being limited, one thing they are excellent at is isolating big runners and dominating the breakdown. I'd be extremely concerned about a guy with Burgess inexperience facing that gameplan.

Likewise against Australia we could face 6.Pocock 7.Hooper 8.McCalman/Higginbotham. Two flankers with the work rate, experience, technique and breakdown nous of Pocock and Hooper could have a field day with Burgess in the back row.

I don't think Burgess would start against Australia.

We know it will be
6 Wood
7 Robshaw
8 Billy or Ben

That kind of draws the argument of why take him? If we get a couple of injuries would we want to start him against Wales/Aus?

If someone like Clark was in the rampaging form he was through most of the start of the season...surely he would be the preferred choice? Or would he not?