England v France, 15 August

First topic message reminder :

  
ENGLAND v FRANCE
15 August 2015
KO: 20:00 local
Twickenham, London

Live on telly

Referee: John Lacey (Ireland)
Assistant Referees: George Clancy (Ireland) & Leighton Hodges (Wales)
Television match official: Simon McDowell (Ireland)

A. Head to Head

99 Played 99
54 Won 38
7 Drawn 7
38 Lost 54
1,553 Points 1,230

B. Recent Form

21 March 2015
Twickenham, London
55 – 35 to England

1 February 2014
Stade de France, Saint-Denis
26 – 24 to France

23 February 2013
Twickenham, London
23 – 13 to England

11 March 2012
Stade de France, Saint-Denis
22 – 24 to England

8 October 2011
Eden Park, Auckland, New Zealand
19 – 12 to France

C. Teams

ENGLAND

Alex Goode; Anthony Watson, Henry Slade, Sam Burgess, Jonny May; Owen Farrell, Richard Wigglesworth; Mako Vunipola, Rob Webber, Kieran Brookes, George Kruis, Geoff Parling, Tom Wood, Calum Clark, Ben Morgan

Replacements: Luke Cowan-Dickie, Alex Corbisiero, David Wilson, Dave Attwood, James Haskell, Danny Care, Danny Cipriani, Billy Twelvetrees

FRANCE

Scott Spedding; Sofiane Guitoune, Remi Lamerat, Alexandre Dumoulin, Brice Dulin; Francois Trinh-Duc, Morgan Parra; Louis Picamoles, Fulgence Ouedraogo, Yannick Nyanga; Yoann Maestri, Alexandre Flanquart; Nicolas Mas, Dimitri Szarzewski, Vincent Debaty

Replacements: Guilhem Guirado, Xavier Chiocci, Uini Atonio, Sebastien Vahaamahina, Loann Goujon, Rory Kockott, Remi Tales, Gael Fickou

I've said it on another thread, but have no qualms about repeating it here.

Many are quick to jump on the 'he's a thug' bandwagon with some players - Tuilagi and Hartley to name but two. However, Clark is an out and out nasty piece of work (i'm not sure how deliberately breaking someone's arm could be construed as otherwise) and it can surely only be a matter of time before he really damages someone (Hawkins may argue that he already has). For me, I don't buy this 'he's done his time' stuff, he shouldn't be anywhere near the squad, but perhaps I should quantify that statement:

It was a ludicrous yellow card, and any rational person wouldn't hold it against Clarke (I'm not rational in this particular case - see above). Lacey made a lot of weird calls in that match - compare the Picamoles headbutt on Slade and the trip on Care, both of which the ref saw and didn't even penalise, to Clarke's questionable clear-out.

In this case, the yellow card should not be the focus when it comes to Clarke's performance. His being a totally ineffective flanker should be the focus. Card or not, that performance was simply not good enough. He's been decent for Saints, but there have been a number of games where the Saints back-row (with Wood and Clarke flanking) has been totally swamped. That happened again on Saturday, and wasn't even remotely resolved until Haskell came on.

Kvesic really should have been in the squad. His few England showings have been streets ahead of anything Wood has produced in years and certainly ahead of Clarke's performance against France. Plus his club form is better.

I wonder if we'll end up seeing one of our locks starting at blindside in the WC when it becomes apparent that our main lineout option at 6 - Wood - is also too far out of form to deserve a place.

Jimpy

Tuilagi and Hartley - have poor discipline - subjective whether you think they are thugs or not. They deserve their criticism for their stupidity.

As for Clark vs Ksevic - I mostly agree.

Think you are not giving much credit to Wood though - he's been good for England in general and has credit in the bank. Though his current form is a worry.

I just don't think Clark has ever struck me as a player who will excel at international level.

If Barritt is not available for the warm up game, id lie to see

12 Slade
13 Joseph
get a run out.

It may lack some physicality but if you get Haskell etc crashing through the midfield at times that should lessen the effect of that....

How much "credit in the bank " do you give though?

Geordiefalcon tough isn't it.

England are relying on Wood because you only have him and the inconsistent Haskell as 6 options. They have experience though.

Of course England could have tried out another 6 option in the warm ups but they've wasted that opportunity.

Form vs Experience - it's not easy sometimes.

It's a shame we don't have top options to challange Wood & Haskell currently.

This is the frustrating thing Beshocked under Lancasters reign. He has experimented vastly in certain areas, yet others....like the back row, he has barely made a change unless enforced through injury.

Would it have hurt to have a look at say Ewers in the 6n or AI's? Or Kvesic at 7 with Robshaw moving to 6?

Lancaster does puzzle me at times...

Only the RFU would have banned Hartley for what he did to a point he missed the world cup.
He "was" the most important player in the England team, the glue which the entire team was based... not because he was so special, because he was good at what he did and no substitute comes close.

Had discipline problems around his whole career but his exit for what is in reality an over zealous chest bump is ridiculous... especially with what is at stake.
Personally I think its what will be the undoing of Lancaster.

GeordieFalcon wrote:This is the frustrating thing Beshocked under Lancasters reign. He has experimented vastly in certain areas, yet others....like the back row, he has barely made a change unless enforced through injury.

Would it have hurt to have a look at say Ewers in the 6n or AI's? Or Kvesic at 7 with Robshaw moving to 6?

Lancaster does puzzle me at times...

Australia are set to play Pocock, Hooper and Fardy in the world cup. How will England combat that with Wood, Robshaw and Vunipola?

Hartley hasn't been on top form for some time FA and I would say its the lineout that separates him from Youngs.

Youngs is a better carrier by quite a distance, and is excellent at the close in stuff / breakdown. As long as hes been training with the starting locks I don't see too much of a problem with his throwing either....

Of course it could be that Jamie George comes in a makes that position his own. He's a big lad who has been excellent for Saracens this season.

Thing is if he experiments with players, or calls up an inexperienced guy, and they lose then the first people on his back are those who demand experimentation.

And to say he has experimented vastly in some positions is perhaps not wholly true. Most experimentation has been caused either by injury or complete lack of form by the incumbents.

If their tight five are under pressure that australian back row will suddenly look like a lightweight luxury.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Hartley hasn't been on top form for some time FA and I would say its the lineout that separates him from Youngs.

Youngs is a better carrier by quite a distance, and is excellent at the close in stuff / breakdown. As long as hes been training with the starting locks I don't see too much of a problem with his throwing either....

Of course it could be that Jamie George comes in a makes that position his own.  He's a big lad who has been excellent for Saracens this season.

Probably agree Geordie. Hartley is no Fitzy for instance... but he has little weakness (bar temperament). Decent in lineouts, scrums, tackling, carrying, floor work. That's what is needed at 2. Someone who puts in a 7/10 every game. Will never get a 9/10 but neither a 6/10 and below. All you want from a hooker is secured possession.

I also think Lancaster doesn't focus on 2 men being breakdown kings...he likes his whole pack doing the work.

And don't underestimate Wood and Robshaws ability at the breakdown.

LondonTiger wrote:If their tight five are under pressure that australian back row will suddenly look like a lightweight luxury.

Front five faired ok vs. the 3 other RC teams... all with so called superior front 5's and probably at worst equal to that of England at the moment.

I do think England have decent ruck operators, Cole is superb IMO. Robshaw too... but operating at a slow paced ruck is one thing. Operating at a fast pace quick recycle is another. They put the ABs on their knees for instance... and the Boks with Burger, Brussow & Coetzee.

Well its different styles FA...certainly be interesting to watch and see which comes out on top.

Robshaw for me is a class player and very strong at the breakdown. I don't think SH fans give him enough credit.
Everyone was shouting for S.Armitage as he had so many turnovers....but he also gave away so many turnovers and penalties.

Robshaw is more intelligent about which to go for and which not to....and gives away far fewer turnovers and penalties. If Lancaster wanted him to play like an out and out 7 then im sure he could be just as eye catching as Armitage.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well its different styles FA...certainly be interesting to watch and see which comes out on top.

Robshaw for me is a class player and very strong at the breakdown. I don't think SH fans give him enough credit.
Everyone was shouting for S.Armitage as he had so many turnovers....but he also gave away so many turnovers and penalties.

Robshaw is more intelligent about which to go for and which not to....and gives away far fewer turnovers and penalties. If Lancaster wanted him to play like an out and out 7 then im sure he could be just as eye catching as Armitage.

For me Robshaw is the best 6 in the world at the moment. His consistency has been outstanding. But a 6 he is.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's a shame we don't have top options to challange Wood & Haskell currently.

I'm going to say it - Burgess? Had a good game in the Prem final!

So why not experiment in a few games...trying say Matt Kvesic at 7 and moving Robshaw to 6.

It gives Lancaster more info on what he has and gives us a chance to see what depth we actually have.

bathmad wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's a shame we don't have top options to challange Wood & Haskell currently.

I'm going to say it - Burgess? Had a good game in the Prem final!

We have many options...only Lancaster hasn't trialled any?

Burgess and Ewers who had an excellent season with Exeter again.

Move Robshaw to 6 and try a different 7 in there.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

bathmad wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's a shame we don't have top options to challange Wood & Haskell currently.

I'm going to say it - Burgess? Had a good game in the Prem final!

We have many options...only Lancaster hasn't trialled any?

Burgess and Ewers who had an excellent season with Exeter again.

Move Robshaw to 6 and try a different 7 in there.

Woodward says it right - pick your team first, then the captain...

fa0019 wrote:For me Robshaw is the best 6 in the world at the moment. His consistency has been outstanding. But a 6 he is.

That is your opinion - but as he has not played at 6 for a long time now, it can only be supposition.

Sgt Pooly Lancaster could have picked Ewers,Itoje or Burgess as a 6 but didn't.

Londontiger it's about picking the right players to experiment with. It's not easy sometimes but that's SL's job.

OK - several observations from the game and things that I would like to happen.
K.Brooks still isnt the finished article - his scrummaging is a liability at the moment and Corbs is probably going to be selected above him (although Corbs scrummaging isnt great at present).
Mako looked great in the loose and is pushing Marler hard for a start (we dont know what Marler is like as he hasnt played for a long time)
Callum Clarke - Has now had his 1 cap after being in the squad for an eternity - he's done nothing to change my opinion that he isnt international quality, He is currently wasting a space and I feel that he should be cut from the squad.
T.Wood was also fairly anonymous.
Parling/Kruis - in my mind a lightweight combination - what was with all the slapping down of lineout balls! Just catch the dam thing.
Webber - average performance, but lineout was better than LCDs.
Morgan was fairly ineffective but needs much more gametime.
Farrell looked to be nicely competative and is looking for his starting spot back.
Slade looked class - and its no wonder that the creativity dropped when he was substituted off.
Subs - Care failed to lift the tempo when he came on - but by then the French pack were well and truely on the front foot. Haskell made a nice contribution and showed he ably covers the 8 spot (could mean Easter will miss out). Twelvetrees and Cipriani did nothing. Wilson struggled to stabalise the scrum but it looked like at times there werent any 2nd rows supporting! LCD has probably cooked his books, its a shame but he will get an oportunity post WC - George will be given a chance in the next game hopefully.

Next Sat I am hoping to see a team like this (reasons for selection)
Marler (needs gametime)
Youngs
Cole
Launchbury (needs proper gametime)
Lawes
Vaunipola (will move to 8 when Morgan is sub at 50mins)
Robshaw
Morgan
B.Youngs
Ford
May
Barritt
Joseph
Nowell (if Brown comes off then moves to 15 and Watson to wing)
Brown (needs game time)

Bench -
Corbs (on for Marler)
George (on for Webber about 50mins)
Wilson
Easter (on bench allows to experiment with more backs)
Watson (has done enough - but covers wing and 15)
Burrell
Care
Slade (gets another pop, can come on for Joseph)

LondonTiger wrote:

fa0019 wrote:For me Robshaw is the best 6 in the world at the moment. His consistency has been outstanding. But a 6 he is.

That is your opinion - but as he has not played at 6 for a long time now, it can only be supposition.

Outside of a scrum and their lineout roles (which is less positional specific and more to do with their individual attributes) how do Robshaw and Wood differ that much in their roles?

Robshaw sure takes a 2nd receiver option in attack but thats again due to him as a player not him as a perceived openside.

In this year's European games, Armitage turned the ball over five times more than Robshaw. And he also gave away five times more penalties and turnovers.

Question is, who gained or lost more yards for their team?

What the "not a proper 7" brigade often miss is that Robshaw actively chooses what the best option is each time. Often, the best bet is to slow the ball down without risking a penalty, and he does that very well. Hooper has been very subdued every time they've met.

But by the same token, when it's worth the risk it's surprising how many critical turnovers he makes.

Who has Lancaster truly tested though? Has he ever thrown Robshaw to 6 and properly tried alternatives?

Not about Robshaw at all. No.1 on teamsheet by merit. But balance is a little top heavy IMO. Looks a bit like the 95 backrow.

Those that are given their 1st caps against stern oposition! Surely thats the beggest test.

Front rowers that get cap1 against the French in a 6N! and dont look out of depth
Back rowers against Ireland, Debut matches against Wales in Cardiff etc.
Or generally anyone that stands out against Oz, SA or ABs.

not players but balance surely prop?

You can't bring guys in now and expect them to be like ducks to water. Burgess is different. He's a seasoned pro albeit in another sport, he know's the big stage, the big arena and expectation. Probably the one newby who can make a genuine difference to the test side.

No not now, But I was thinking of those that have been tested by SL. And what the criteria would be for a 'real' test of the players character.

No, to do that all now would be insane. Post WC, and I am sure that there are a number of names that could slot into that England side and probably make a difference.

fa0019 wrote:Who has Lancaster truly tested though? Has he ever thrown Robshaw to 6 and properly tried alternatives?

Not about Robshaw at all. No.1 on teamsheet by merit. But balance is a little top heavy IMO. Looks a bit like the 95 backrow.

FA what do you mean top heavy.

Many England fans think we look lightweight in the back 5. Or were you meaning something else?

I know what you're saying prop

think lewis moody in 2002. Started all 3 AI's vs. 3Ns. Each time instead of Hill, Back and Dillaglio. SCW wanted to a) keep his trio on the edge and also test the balance of the various options.

Its not simply about saying... I brought in Kvesic in a tour match vs. Argentina or when Robshaw is injured.

Look how McCaw or Burger are utilised. Both have played 6,7 & 8 in recent years... and not just for injury.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Who has Lancaster truly tested though? Has he ever thrown Robshaw to 6 and properly tried alternatives?

Not about Robshaw at all. No.1 on teamsheet by merit. But balance is a little top heavy IMO. Looks a bit like the 95 backrow.

FA what do you mean top heavy.

Many England fans think we look lightweight in the back 5. Or were you meaning something else?

Lightweight!

Vunipola and Morgan are probably at the tail end of tier 1 No.8 by weight.
Robshaw and Wood are probably both 17st chaps.

I think its naive to cater for reduced size at lock by beefing up your backrow.

Note that Bakkies and Victor were as a combo never over 230kg (115kg ave. per man).

BIlly or Ben will play 8...they are both monsters as you say.

On the other hand you could argue that the two starting locks - Launchbury, Lawes nor the back ups Parling, Kruis are heavyweights....nor Wood at 6

Even Marler and Youngs wont give you an enormous front row....

I know weight doesn't mean much, its about strength, power etc...but sometimes its nice to have a bit of bulk in there....

The Vunipola brothers do skew the figures a little. Makes the pack look bigger than they are. 130kg a piece???

propdavid_london wrote:OK - several observations from the game and things that I would like to happen.  
K.Brooks still isnt the finished article - his scrummaging is a liability at the moment and Corbs is probably going to be selected above him (although Corbs scrummaging isnt great at present).  
Mako looked great in the loose and is pushing Marler hard for a start (we dont know what Marler is like as he hasnt played for a long time)
Callum Clarke - Has now had his 1 cap after being in the squad for an eternity - he's done nothing to change my opinion that he isnt international quality, He is currently wasting a space and I feel that he should be cut from the squad.  
T.Wood was also fairly anonymous.
Parling/Kruis - in my mind a lightweight combination - what was with all the slapping down of lineout balls! Just catch the dam thing.
Webber - average performance, but lineout was better than LCDs.
Morgan was fairly ineffective but needs much more gametime.  
Farrell looked to be nicely competative and is looking for his starting spot back.  
Slade looked class - and its no wonder that the creativity dropped when he was substituted off.  
Subs - Care failed to lift the tempo when he came on - but by then the French pack were well and truely on the front foot.  Haskell made a nice contribution and showed he ably covers the 8 spot (could mean Easter will miss out).  Twelvetrees and Cipriani did nothing.  Wilson struggled to stabalise the scrum but it looked like at times there werent any 2nd rows supporting! LCD has probably cooked his books, its a shame but he will get an oportunity post WC - George will be given a chance in the next game hopefully.

Agree with all of that.

I was really shocked at just how bad our pack were. I knew we'd probably be second best but for the majority of the second half it was men versus boys out there, I still don't get how France didn't get any points with all their dominance up front!

Guys like Parling, Kruis, Wood and Clark were shown up in the loose, against their opposite numbers they looked very weak and ineffective, which is a worry when you look at the physicality of most other teams out there, and the fact that all of them are 1st/2nd choice players. There's a lot of pressure on Billy V now.

GeordieFalcon wrote:BIlly or Ben will play 8...they are both monsters as you say.

On the other hand you could argue that the two starting locks - Launchbury, Lawes  nor the back ups Parling, Kruis are heavyweights....nor Wood at 6

Even Marler and Youngs wont give you an enormous front row....

I know weight doesn't mean much, its about strength, power etc...but sometimes its nice to have a bit of bulk in there....

Plus a good rugby brain helps too!

beshocked wrote:Sgt Pooly Lancaster could have picked Ewers,Itoje or Burgess as a 6 but didn't.

Londontiger it's about picking the right players to experiment with. It's not easy sometimes but that's SL's job.

None of those players are as good as Haskell/Wood so it's pointless experimenting.

I agree, SL should know his first choice team by now and if he doesn't then we are doomed.

Weight is overrated. Just checked the FRFU website vs. the RFU for player size and the french front five was 565kg vs. 591kg of England yet there England were smashed.

The French often have a small pack by weight and yet are often always in the top 3 of scrum sides.

When Lawes isn't considered heavyweight it really does seem rugby doesn't have a big pool of people to choose from physically these days.

Lawes is like a beanpole - a basketball player.

He's no Martin Johnson

GeordieFalcon wrote:BIlly or Ben will play 8...they are both monsters as you say.

On the other hand you could argue that the two starting locks - Launchbury, Lawes  nor the back ups Parling, Kruis are heavyweights....nor Wood at 6

Even Marler and Youngs wont give you an enormous front row....

I know weight doesn't mean much, its about strength, power etc...but sometimes its nice to have a bit of bulk in there....

The club websites show Lawesbury at 115 and 117kg respectively, that is not lightweight 18st and 18.4 stone. Wood is 108 and Robshaw 110, again 17 and 17.5 stone, again not lightweight. Things change with BV and Morgan, BV being 126kg and Morgan only a mere 116kg.

The front row is however by todays standards lightweight, Marler weighs in at a sprightly 110kg, Youngs 102kg and Cole 115kg. Things change dramatically when replaced though, MV 130kg, Webber 115kg and Wilson 125kg. The sublime to the ridiculous springs to mind.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Lawes is like a beanpole - a basketball player.

He's no Martin Johnson

You tell him.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Lawes is like a beanpole - a basketball player.

He's no Martin Johnson

Have you seen him tackle?

Nevermind telling him, try telling opposition 10s he's lightweight.

@Below to save another post. Not saying it's a criticism, but telling of a real emphasis on size in the game today (I know it's been the same for second rows, but even centres/wingers have to be huge).

I don't think that's a criticism of Lawes. He may not be the biggest but then I never saw Martin Johnson sprinting 30m to make a try saving tackle on Adam Ashley-Cooper either (or Tim Horan etc back then).

How would people feel about Lawes at 6 in an emergency? He played horribly there against France but I think that was more a failure of his general play on that day, rather than a positional problem. He's our best second row so I wouldn't move him unprompted, but if form or injury turn 6 into a problem position would people be happy with shifting him temporarily?

I've seen him tackle backs

Nope, I wouldn't be happy, he's crucial in the second row for me

Pecking order at 6 is Haskell then Wood for me, if we have injuries i'd rather see a specialist 6 come in to the squad.

If we have injuries during a game, I guess its an option, but would rather see either Billy V (if Morgan is on the bench), or Burgess (if he makes the squad and is on the bench as a centre), be the cover at 6

Lancaster's used Robshaw, Wood, Croft, Haskell, Kvesic, Dowson, Clark, Morgan, Vunipola and Easter in the last 4 years - that's 10 players for 4 slots in the 23.

Only Croft and Haskell had any material number of caps at the outset, given that Easter was shelved until this year. There was a clear aim of finding an effective unit and giving it experience.

In terms of other players who could have been used, Kvesic was tried (and Argentina is a good balance of a low pressure tour against fairly tough opposition) and for some reason found wanting. Ewers was in the initial 6N squad, but Easter was preferred. Itoje and Clifford I suspect had not had enough time with the squad to learn the patterns, something Lancaster sets great store by. Burgess did not have the right skill set.

Wood had a tough game on Saturday, but bear in mind he had a rookie and a very rusty player alongside him, and a near full strength French pack in front of him.

Let's see how he does in a more rounded pack before we judge him.