England's RWC Preparations

First topic message reminder :

Original thread about to explode

https://www.606v2.com/t59064-englands-50-man-training-squad-for-rwc

Fanster wrote:


Sexton always looks good with a platform, when the Irish have shown forward dominance, when the Irish pack is on the back foot however Sexton always looks average (Like against Wales).

As good a player Sexton is he rarely has to defend the 10 channell, and when he does SOB is constantly on hand to cover the tackle! He is very much on par with Ronan O Garas ability without ball in hand!

How can anyone be so wrong?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Fanster wrote:


Sexton always looks good with a platform, when the Irish have shown forward dominance, when the Irish pack is on the back foot however Sexton always looks average (Like against Wales).

As good a player Sexton is he rarely has to defend the 10 channell, and when he does SOB is constantly on hand to cover the tackle! He is very much on par with Ronan O Garas ability without ball in hand!

How can anyone be so wrong?

Every time I see Sexton play for Ireland he has been bumped to wing, why would this be? His natural speed on the wing allowing for a better wing defencive option?

Look at the France game, and his movement away from Basteraud was hilarious, Basteraud switched between 12 and 13 to correspond with Sextons defencive position, it didn't work for France, but Sexton certainly wasn't going to sit at 10 with Basteraud coming at him all day!

I'm not saying it doesn't happen to other 10's, Bigger does the same thing too, as does Finn Russel, I wouldn't call any of those 3 solid defencive 10's, in the mould of Carter, Wilkinson or dare i say it Farell!

Still the best 10 in the world for me. For England though Ford has cemented his place going into the world cup. Lovely to see some quality options behind him as well.

Fanster wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Fanster wrote:


Sexton always looks good with a platform, when the Irish have shown forward dominance, when the Irish pack is on the back foot however Sexton always looks average (Like against Wales).

As good a player Sexton is he rarely has to defend the 10 channell, and when he does SOB is constantly on hand to cover the tackle! He is very much on par with Ronan O Garas ability without ball in hand!

How can anyone be so wrong?

Every time I see Sexton play for Ireland he has been bumped to wing, why would this be? His natural speed on the wing allowing for a better wing defencive option?

Look at the France game, and his movement away from Basteraud was hilarious, Basteraud switched between 12 and 13 to correspond with Sextons defencive position, it didn't work for France, but Sexton certainly wasn't going to sit at 10 with Basteraud coming at him all day!

I'm not saying it doesn't happen to other 10's, Bigger does the same thing too, as does Finn Russel, I wouldn't call any of those 3 solid defencive 10's, in the mould of Carter, Wilkinson or dare i say it Farell!

Halfpenny is a poor kicker from the tee,McCaw isn't great at the breakdown,Etzebeth isn't physical enough and North is a handy winger but a bit slow.All these statements are as correct as your assessment of Sextons defense.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Fanster wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Fanster wrote:


Sexton always looks good with a platform, when the Irish have shown forward dominance, when the Irish pack is on the back foot however Sexton always looks average (Like against Wales).

As good a player Sexton is he rarely has to defend the 10 channell, and when he does SOB is constantly on hand to cover the tackle! He is very much on par with Ronan O Garas ability without ball in hand!

How can anyone be so wrong?

Every time I see Sexton play for Ireland he has been bumped to wing, why would this be? His natural speed on the wing allowing for a better wing defencive option?

Look at the France game, and his movement away from Basteraud was hilarious, Basteraud switched between 12 and 13 to correspond with Sextons defencive position, it didn't work for France, but Sexton certainly wasn't going to sit at 10 with Basteraud coming at him all day!

I'm not saying it doesn't happen to other 10's, Bigger does the same thing too, as does Finn Russel, I wouldn't call any of those 3 solid defencive 10's, in the mould of Carter, Wilkinson or dare i say it Farell!

Halfpenny is a poor kicker from the tee,McCaw isn't great at the breakdown,Etzebeth isn't physical enough and North is a handy winger but a bit slow.All these statements are as correct as your assessment of Sextons defense.

Thats a nice little way of being wrong, but wrong you are, Sexton is not a good defencive player, and certainly on par with the likes of Ford, Biggar and Russell in the tackle stakes!

Meh wrong thread to have this debate on but it's a statement that's as worthy of debate as my statements about Halfpenny,McCaw,Etzebeth and North so I'll just leave it at that.

Ford has very good defence. May not push people back but I can't remember a missed tackle.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Still the best 10 in the world for me. For England though Ford has cemented his place going into the world cup. Lovely to see some quality options behind him as well.

He's up there, but with Cruden around Sexton doesn't quite stand up to best 10 in the world I think. He'll be the best 10 at the RWC though I think.

It's odd, not too many teams have a standout 10 right now, the entire world seems to have 10 problems, including settled 10's like Biggar, Farell etc.

I would personally be basing the English team around Farells abilities, he's the better kicking option and defencive player.

I think Englands further adventure into an exapnsive game gives them a better chance at beating the SH teams, but also makes them a bit more vulnerable against NH teams.

Realistically England could win their group, and reach the final, or not qualify through and neither result would surprise me!

Cruden is a bit down the list for me. Still struggling with Carter's shadow. England aren't struggling with 10 either Ford, Farrell even Cips could comfortably stand in. Slade as the young pretender soon.

Are you feeling confident as a Wales fan facing the likely fly half of Ford over Farrell?

Carter looks way off the pace to me - seems to be the ABs preferred choice to start but looks a pail imitation of the guy who ripped teams to pieces a decade ago....

I wouldn't swap Sexton on his day for anyone...but sometimes it doesn't click - the wrap arounds don't work and his kicking game can go - and unlike when ROG was around Ireland have no credible alternative. Madigan has been poor this year and Jackson lacks experience.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Cruden is a bit down the list for me. Still struggling with Carter's shadow. England aren't struggling with 10 either Ford, Farrell even Cips could comfortably stand in. Slade as the young pretender soon.

Are you feeling confident as a Wales fan facing the likely fly half of Ford over Farrell?

Cruden is firmly first choice for NZ right now, without injury obviously. Cruden was arguable NZ's talisman also, I know numerous kiwi fans who believ NZ aren't the same team without him!

England are very much struggling, Ford has off days that he doesn't get his pack going whatsoever, Farells style doesn't suit what Lancaster want to do, and Cipriani has had 1 or 2 decent performances back in a white shirt!

If England lose to Wales with Ford at the helm, I wouldnt be surprised for a total tactic reshuffle with Farell leading the team form 10! There is nothing between those 2, but as a Wales fan I would prefer to face Ford or Cipriani than Farell any day of the week! The English pack can be neutralised right now, Ford and Cipriani aren't anywhere near as effective as putting the pack in the right areas than Farell is!

Can't agree about Ford or Farrell. Farrell before injury was great for us. Ford since he's come in has been great for us. Ford's kicking from hand is generally very good, not sure if you saw many games from the Prem other than London Welsh who everyone destroyed?

Not sure your want for Ford to start games is going to last much longer either! Really is gonig to be very top quality.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Can't agree about Ford or Farrell. Farrell before injury was great for us. Ford since he's come in has been great for us. Ford's kicking from hand is generally very good, not sure if you saw many games from the Prem other than London Welsh who everyone destroyed?

Not sure your want for Ford to start games is going to last much longer either! Really is gonig to be very top quality.

Why you felt the need to patronise me with the London Welsh comment i'm not sure, but i'd prefer a grown up debate!

Ford is Englands future no doubt, but this RWC is a bit soon and he is still prone to those mistakes and errors young players make, similarly like Russell of Scotland, who is a potential future possibility but behind Ford also in development and thus more prone to errors.

Farell is ahead of Ford in his development, and has faced SH teams regularly, beating Austrlia in the process. The English pack lacks dominance it once had, therefore giving them the best platform possible is key, and Farell was superb at that pre injury.

You make a good point with the injury though, it may have hampered Farells selection case, but If I was Lancaster I would very much start Farell and use Ford off the bench to open things up.

Not patronising, not sure if you saw any other games as it's not easy to judge from Welsh's games! Thought detroyed was apt personally, but you could go with humbled, soundly beaten etc!

England didn't do too badly when they played Aus in the Autumn with Ford there of course. Ford is ahead and he'll go into the WC as the starter. Can't see that changing but for injury the way he's played for the last 12 months. Think the way we're trying to play obviously helps him a little as he's naturally a flatter player than Farrell who's under rated in this area for me.

Lets be honest, the Aus team you recently played wasn't the same animal as the one that will be at Twickenham in October, no Pocock, Moore, Kuridrani, Giteau, Genia, Tomane, and Skelton is twice the player he was back then as a sub!

On the day the English scrum and pack really had Aus on toast, I wouldn't use the would armchair ride that day but it was somewhere near that and good platform!

Come October Wales and Aus packs won't be anywhere near as submissive as Aus were on that day!

so everyone else will have ramped up their performance level while we will have stood still. That seems to be the best argument against us at the moment.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Interesting to hear people raising issues about Lancaster. Not his actual coaching, but how he has used the large number of players available to him.

By and large, I can understand what he's tried to do, I think he's had some poor luck along the way too, which hasn't helped.

Take, for instance, his obvious desire to put out a first XV with a good total of caps under their belt. Manu won 24 of his 25 England caps under Lancaster, and would have had more if he's been fit. Even with 25, he would have been our most-capped centre. Now he's out of the tournament.

Dylan Hartley has 66 caps, and they are all lost to the cause.

Owen Farrell has 29 caps for England but if George Ford is going to be pulling the strings then he'll be on the bench, or being Brad Barritt-lite at inside centre.

That's 91-120 caps which may no longer be in the count for our starting XV. That's quite a loss when you think his target was a total of 600. Our first choice side could easily have under 400. However, I'm not going to take the coach to task for selecting those players, because it was almost always the right decision.

I was banging on again in this thread about our lack of place kicking options. The great hope was that Twelvetrees would slot in at centre. Our captain would then have an option to call on someone, if our kicker got the yips, without having to reorganize the whole back line to do so. Similarly with Alex Goode, who was our first choice full back at one point.

Twelvetrees never really seized his chance, and Mike Brown proved a better 15 than Goode. I wouldn't argue for either man to be included just because they can occasionally kick for goal.

Personally, I'd have asked Delon Armitage to think about coming back to the Premiership. He's deeply unpopular with some, but his long range goal kicking, and ability to cover full back, wing and centre would have been hugely valuable. With him off the menu, I would have tried to get an earlier look at Slade in some capacity.

And there's part of the problem. At the same time as Lancaster was trying to find combinations and build experience within the squad, he was trying to win. There was almost never a game which didn't matter., and so rarely a settled side into which a new player could be dropped.

Also, developing options in one area, often closes down the chance to do so in another. I complain about the lack of experimentation in the back row, but a big reason for that was the need to play both Billy and Ben because neither could last 80 minutes. I would have ditched one, but I can't deny that Lancaster's decision has now given him two good options at number 8. We'll soon know whether that was a worthwhile trade-off.

Fanster wrote:Lets be honest, the Aus team you recently played wasn't the same animal as the one that will be at Twickenham in October, no Pocock, Moore, Kuridrani, Giteau, Genia, Tomane, and Skelton is twice the player he was back then as a sub!

On the day the English scrum and pack really had Aus on toast, I wouldn't use the would armchair ride that day but it was somewhere near that and good platform!

Come October Wales and Aus packs won't be anywhere near as submissive as Aus were on that day!

Yeah England have moved forward a bit from there as well. Ford has now settled in nicely, the back play has come on leaps and bounds and the likely improvemnet to a pack which comfortably contained Wales away with the return of some key players looks promising. Any of the teams can beat each other, even though Wales haven't beaten them in a while they are capable. I don't think that England will be beaten twice in the group but it's byong realms of possibility and that top spot looks important.

Fanster wrote:Lets be honest, the Aus team you recently played wasn't the same animal as the one that will be at Twickenham in October, no Pocock, Moore, Kuridrani, Giteau, Genia, Tomane, and Skelton is twice the player he was back then as a sub!

On the day the English scrum and pack really had Aus on toast, I wouldn't use the would armchair ride that day but it was somewhere near that and good platform!

Come October Wales and Aus packs won't be anywhere near as submissive as Aus were on that day!

You could argue Toomua is better than Giteau and Genia is pretty poor of late. I don't think they'll be too much between the Aus teams of then and the WC tbh

I certainly expect Australia to be better than the team that lost to France in the AIs.

With regards to the Aus AI comment it was in context of Fords ride on the back of a dominant England pack! The Aus pack were missing 3/4 key players and 3 captain would be's!

Kuridrani and Tomane have been Aus best backs sinc last season, and Giteau has had 2 good RC games!

If Ford is the go to man against Aus he won't have anywhere near as much of a ride he did last AI, that was my point if anyone bothered to read the context of the thread!

With regards to Englands pack being comfortable last time out, you could argue with an 8 point lead at half time Wales just stopped playing due to overconfidence, or you could argue Wales have become very poor at starting tournaments, and have a tendancy to lose their first game of the 6N, and AI's, a worry that won't be there come the RWC.

There are so many reasons for their last meeting that all mean nothing come October, scenarios are totally different, except 1, England have home game advantage in a tournament where the pressure on them to succeed will be the highest they have ever had!

Like I said, Farell worries me more than Ford does come the RWC, at Twickenham the winner of the battle will be the cooler heads on the day.

1 James Slipper
2 Saia Fainga'a
3 Sekope Kepu
4 Sam Carter
5 Rob Simmons
6 Sean McMahon
7 Michael Hooper (Captain)
8 Ben McCalman

9 Nick Phipps
10 Bernard Foley
11 Rob Horne
12 Matt Toomua
13 Adam Ashley-Cooper
14 Henry Speight
15 Israel Folau

That isn't too far off a first choice Aus XV. You could argue Skelton has came through but Carter would have been there or there abouts, only Moore would be a large upgrade.

England also missed Cole and Launchbury, possibly out two best forwards?

I just can't see how things will drastically change come the WC. The Aus scrum is still shocking but they now have kicking issues.

Fanster wrote:With regards to the Aus AI comment it was in context of Fords ride on the back of a dominant England pack! The Aus pack were missing 3/4 key players and 3 captain would be's!

Kuridrani and Tomane have been Aus best backs sinc last season, and Giteau has had 2 good RC games!

If Ford is the go to man against Aus he won't have anywhere near as much of a ride he did last AI, that was my point if anyone bothered to read the context of the thread!

With regards to Englands pack being comfortable last time out, you could argue with an 8 point lead at half time Wales just stopped playing due to overconfidence, or you could argue Wales have become very poor at starting tournaments, and have a tendancy to lose their first game of the 6N, and AI's, a worry that won't be there come the RWC.

There are so many reasons for their last meeting that all mean nothing come October, scenarios are totally different, except 1, England have home game advantage in a tournament where the pressure on them to succeed will be the highest they have ever had!

Like I said, Farell worries me more than Ford does come the RWC, at Twickenham the winner of the battle will be the cooler heads on the day.

Its all perception innit. Wales had the usual quality goal kicking but had a slightly fortunate try (aren't they all) but after about 20 minutes or so was up proceeded to create a grand total of zip. They looked more dangerous last year at Twickenham in an equally toothless performance. Their defense did look strong and they were unlucky with North's blows to the head (and stupid considering how much better Liam Williams looked when he came on) but generally clueless. They played a good deal better later on in the tournament, especially vs Ireland, but I still believe that game was one of the most comfortable 5 point wins that you'll see

Apparently Stewie has published an edict on media exposure and conduct to the English squad; assume Haskell gets his own, separate set of rules?

Seems a bit draconian; teaching grown men how to behave may backfire and one hopes no incidents such as occurred in 2011 are recorded on cctv at home.

I'm really happy with the expected set of forwards starting (Bill or Ben it doesn't really matter both quality assuming fitness is there). Subs a little less so. Currently not so strong at replacement hooker but george and C-D could announce themselves on the big stage just hoping Webber doesn't go now to be honest. Quite a fall from him as I thought he was challenging Hartley 18 months ago.

Fanster to be honest the scoreline flattered Wales.

Haskell running into the post instead of putting the ball down and a very harsh obstruction call against Easter certainly made the game look closer than it was.

Welsh scrum was well beaten. I expect England will want to do a similar job on the Welsh scrum in the RWC.

lostinwales you are right. Wales will need to find some extra bite in attack.

Beshocked,

If Lancs puts out the pack we expect, whats your thoughts on it...Pro's and cons

I think England will be hurt in the set piece without Hartley. He's a huge loss, its not that he's amazing but he does his job and secures ball, can't say the same about Youngs.
With reduced possession and Halfpenny being superior in both range and accuracy to Ford I can see the Wales game being very very tight.

All Wales need is to nudge ahead and England will start chasing the game. You need a dead ball specialist in that circumstance something England do not possess in Ford. Wales can play this game though.

You keep saying that but the stats and actual games don't back up the theory fa, for both Youngs and Ford.

Agree that Youngs can have major off days but the 6N wasn't a good set of games for Hartley in the set piece.

Wales have a pretty poor line out by Int standards so I can't see them really upsetting us too much. Halfpenny is a superior kicking but Ford is steady and we managed to turn them over pretty easily last time out.

With Lee just coming back and Jenkins poor of late I'd imagine a good scrum advantage for England too. I really can't see us losing to Wales at home.

Plus in Youngs case and the way subs are normally about a 50 min to 30 min split you probably need to compare Webber, C-D and for me the likely bench spot George.

Go back and watch the NZ match in 2013 at twickenham or the 2013 match in Cardiff. In Twickenham Youngs came on about 65 mins with England 2 points ahead. He lost 4 lineouts, gave away a penalty, was shoved in the scrum (whereas prior England were dominant).
It changed the game, NZ scored from those lost lineouts. I can't remember a worse cameo, its not a one off.

How many times do England have to realise that mobile hookers who are really no.7s or centres are not hookers if they can't do their basics right. He was chosen by the Lions yes... but only because a) if there is one thrower worse than Youngs in the world its Hibbert and the Lions were never going to be shoved back by that AUS pack.
Vickery's career was smashed in 2009... it was nothing to do with him... it was having a paper tiger in Mears next to him which did the damage.

"oh but did you see him make a 30 yard break vs. Quins at the end of the year".

The other thing with Youngs is that he takes the ball in far too often. He should know his role. He never makes yards, is very susceptible to the turnover and should concentrate on clearing rucks which is short and stocky body is well suited to. I recall a match when he took about half a dozen carries for 1 yard each and the person clearing him out was Tuilagi ever time. It should have been the opposite.

Tom Youngs < Schalk Brits, its not even close. I can't imagine anyone arguing with that... and yet Schalk has 7 bokke caps only and has been on the first class scene perhaps 5-6 years longer. There is a reason for this and its not because Brits has more talented players in front. Its that the boks know the possession is key esp. for robotic set piece based teams such as ENG and SA.

I don't think Youngs is as bad as you say Fa. And you cant compare him to Mears...Youngs is a tank compared to him.

He will be practicing with the first choice jumpers and I don't think his scrummaging is weak at all. He's a demon at the breakdown due to his low sense of gravity.

His size is the only issue I see but it hasn't proved that way for tigers yet. And in all fairness he hasn't had a chance to show over 80 mins from the start for England.

Keep an eye out Saracens hooker Jamie George. Now he's a big boy with all the required skills. And he can carry. And LCD again another corker but his lineout is an issue.

So go back 2 years and see one game. You can't judge players on that. Look at the 6Ns this year Hartley was well below par. Judge players on a wider basis. I'd have Youngs over Brits every day of the week personally though I fear this may start World War 3 with beshocked and Jimpy!

I would say one thing... he had a halfdecent record with Parling but I think thats because Parling knew his limitations and worked with him at Leicester. Lawes on the other hand, Kruis etc, they don't have the luxury of being with him day in day out.
So if Youngs plays I would play Parling just to make sure possession is maintained to an adequate standard, yet that destroys a potential lethal partnership in Lawes and Launchbury... all because Youngs is not a natural 2.

The hooker who should play is the one who can scrum the best and throw the best. Nothing more.

Its such a key position and just think about this. To win the RWC England will have to play AUS, WAL, IRE & NZ. Think Youngs will be able to maintain a far better than standard performance in all of those games? Its simply unrealistic.

Pros -


Looking good at TH and LH - the props will be disappointed if they can't get the upperhand on their opponents. Nice continuity with Mako and Wilson likely on the bench.

One of the stronger scrummaging sides in the competition.

The pack will have a lot of workrate if the likes of Launchbury,Wood and Robshaw start. Should also be able to put some pressure on the opposition.

In Billy and Ben they have a very strong no 8 who acts as an attacking focal point for the pack.

Cons

It's not the biggest or most powerful pack. Lack of a powerful carrier other than whoever starts at no 8.

Could struggle to make inroads into the strongest defences like Wales and Ireland (potential semi final opponent if England make it that far).

Question marks over lineout proficiency, hooker replacements have plenty to prove.

Don't really excel in any particular area.


More attacking sides can still get the English pack moving around and expose England out wide.

As I said, Youngs has his melt downs, usually from sub.

He's a decent starter though and the game you suggested was almost 2 years ago.

fa0019 wrote:I would say one thing... he had a halfdecent record with Parling but I think thats because Parling knew his limitations and worked with him at Leicester. Lawes on the other hand, Kruis etc, they don't have the luxury of being with him day in day out.
So if Youngs plays I would play Parling just to make sure possession is maintained to an adequate standard, yet that destroys a potential lethal partnership in Lawes and Launchbury... all because Youngs is not a natural 2.

The hooker who should play is the one who can scrum the best and throw the best. Nothing more.

Its such a key position and just think about this. To win the RWC England will have to play AUS, WAL, IRE & NZ. Think Youngs will be able to maintain a far better than standard performance in all of those games? Its simply unrealistic.

How is it unrealistic? Judge him by his record over the last 18 months. His lineout has been fine. Personally I don't think the quality matches Hartley most of the time but you started off talking about retaining possession, look at his England stats they're good and for the majority of the Prem season he had the highlest winning % of lineouts.

Do England worry about the lack of a genuine poacher in the side?

Robshaw has an outstanding workrate, his tackling probably second to none and  his place in the pack is warranted but has anyone noticed that the amount of turnovers in the RC is particularly high with teams putting huge emphasis on this aspect of the game.
Cole is good but I still think England's backrow is unbalanced. Too late in all probability, perhaps even lack of quality available.

The whole Armitage thing was a joke though.... say its unfair he's parachuted into the side is rubbish... will they say the same for someone who makes the side as a surprise such as Mike Catt in 2003??? Of course not. Its another reason why I find Lancaster a joke, he makes moral decisions on Armitage, Tuilagi, Hartley, all non rugby reasons, I can tell you few other coaches would do the same and I can't see it not biting him.

Means England won't have many options to turn a game around. If Plan A doesn't work, there will be no plan B.

no 7 & 1/2 based on the last year or two I would agree. Brits hasn't really been back to his best and Youngs has been more consistent.

Though saying that I think Brits has been a very consistent lineout thrower though having a 2nd rower like Borthwick probably helped.

Geordiefalcon you are right about Jamie George. He's as big as Hartley and he can move. We'll see whether he or LCD can make the move up.

It's up to both the hooker and the lineout jumpers to coordinate well.

Let's not forget Hartley has over the years benefitted from having fellow Saints - Lawes and Wood to help with the England lineout.

Fa, why are you so concerned with English rugby issues? Where exactly are you from?

fa0019 if Armitage wanted to play for England he should have come back to England.

Armitage would have likely made the RWC squad.

Hartley had a poor 6 nations and has a discipline problem he hasn't shaken off. Even if you discount the "headbutt" of George he still got red carded in last autumn against Leicester.

Tuilagi is another with disciplinary issues that he cannot shake. Can imagine he's frustated being injured but assaulting police officers is not the way to vent that.

Don't forget England had the disciplinary controversy in NZ RWC 2011. Better to get some of the problem players out of the squad.

LCD and George have been in much better form than Hartley this season - both have size and power, both can scrummage - only thing they lack is experience but England have needed more depth at hooker anyway.

As for 13, Joseph has been in excellent form.

Im sure Fa is Scottish.

I think Robshaw is a hell of a breakdown exponent. He just chooses which to go for and which to hold off. Hence he might not get as many as say Armitage but he doesn't mess up nearly as many either. I wouldn't swap Robshaw for Armitage.

My only problem with the pack is one i've mentioned all along - i'd like a bit more dumb strength and muscle in there. Some raw nasty power.

Scottish (and British) expat Capetonian. I like many on here like rugby, outside of SH rugby I don't watch a lot of domestic stuff bar the odd HC match.
The England team are very interesting because its one which has a lot of talent but I am continually bemused by their selection policies, lack of breakthroughs etc.

I also have interest in Welsh, Irish rugby etc but am not either etc. But the one thing with England I see is that it is probably the one with so much ability etc and should be dominant in the NH yet fans seem to be happy with them coming 2nd all the time and not beating teams like SA and NZ at home. This summer though the only thing I've read about England has been Lancaster making morale decisions on Armitage, then Tuilagi, then Hartley. Its mind blowing.

Are non English opinions not allowed on here? Not a wind up, never been my style. Been away since the 6Ns but the older members should recall me being one who is interested in rugby and not just trying to take the mickey.

Sgt Pooly what's wrong with Fa0019 wanting to discuss English matters?

Geordiefalcon the issue with Armitage is that he's not proven himself at international level - you never know - he might be more effective than Robshaw but we don't know.

I would have liked to have seen what Armitage could do but he's burnt his bridges.

Surely Haskell was meant to bring the dumb strength and muscle you were craving Geordie?

Certainly seemed to do it vs Wales. Unfortunately against France and Ireland Haskell was dumb but didn't bring the strength or muscle too.

Also Attwood too was meant to bring the brute force but he didn't deliver that.

Fa0019 I am certainly an England fan who is not happy with England coming 2nd again and again, also I have mentioned my disappointment in England's inability to beat SA in recent years. I have mentioned my frustations at some of Lancaster's decisions quite a few times!

Thought he was South African. A bit of a pattern that our hooker is below par as is our 7 and his views on B Vunipola are I would say quite rare.

I never said Robshaw is bad. Think he's one of the best players in rugby at the moment but think he's more a 6. He would be I reckon in nearly all sides in the world as a starter... but not at 7.
Probably one of the most obvious things in rugby at the moment concerning the number of turnovers and profiles of big poachers such as Pocock, Brussow, Burger, Bissie etc. Didn't think it was controversial.

I wouldn't say any one of your views is that unbelievable bar Billy. Put them together and I think you may have slighlty got some of your ratings wrong that's all.

What does fa0019 say about Billy?

Check out the NZ SA thread.