Yet Another Sam Burgess Discussion Thread

[LondonTiger]

Sam Burgess, demigod or not?

[LondonTiger]

Only speculation now until we get the line-ups for the Fiji game. Will England go full strength for the opener? Can they afford not to? What is full strength?

[SneakySideStep]

England have not adapted well to certain (mainly SH) referees over the past few years and this remains a real weak point in my opinion. However, in these pool games they only have SH refs for the two "weaker" sides, with two Frenchmen for the "crunch" games.

[BamBam]

Surely we'll go full strength, kicking off the tournament at home I'd hope they want to set down a marker

I'd imagine the side that lined up on Saturday will be the one that runs out against Fiji, with the possible exception of Billy Vunipola ahead of Morgan

Personally I'd start Jamie George too, both hookers in a squad will play a substantial part, and I think I'd rather have the extra solidity in the scrum and lineout, then have Youngs adding the impact

[Biltong]

I think both hemisphere's teams have issues with referees from opposite side of the equator

[beshocked]

Don't think England need to go full strength. You have to trust the squad. This is a tough pool - need to keep the likes of Youngs, Cole and Brown ready for the tougher games.

I would start this vs Fiji.

1.Vunipola
2.George
3.Wilson
4.Kruis
5.Lawes
6.Wood
7.Robshaw
8.Vunipola

9.Wigglesworth
10.Ford
11.Nowell
12.Barritt
13.Joseph
14.Watson
15.Goode

16.Marler
17.Webber
18.Brookes
19.Launchbury
20.Haskell
21.Care
22.Slade
23.Burgess

[sad_gimp]

I would be playing 1st choice team, no questions. We've a good squad but they've not played together that much, they need to get used to winning at Twickenham. Points difference could well be an issue so we have to be ruthless and put as many points on Fiji as possible.

[lostinwales]

Maybe but the way to put Fiji to the sword is smash them in set piece and not let them get the ball. That means going for a better, meaner scrum. I'd also think hard about starting with Farrell over Ford for this one.

[Jimpy]

Every match (with the possible exception of Uruguay) should be played by as full strength a side as is available. The team needs continuity going through the tournament now. Even Uruguay may require England to score a lot of points depending on how other matches have gone.

Full strength, all the way for me.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Beshocked, doesn't having Burgess and Slade on the bench leave us a bit short of back three cover? Watson can go to full back and Joseph on the wing but i'd much rather have Nowell to bring on to impact on the game if it is close. The one thing you can say about Fiji is that Burgess' physicality won't bother them but Nowell's footwork might.

[TightHEAD]

I agree, just ask any Welsh, French or even SA supporters if its worth risking a weakened team vs Fiji.

History has shown Fiji do cause upsets at he RWC

[lostinwales]

Beshocked, doesn't having Burgess and Slade on the bench leave us a bit short of back three cover? Watson can go to full back and Joseph on the wing but i'd much rather have Nowell to bring on to impact on the game if it is close. The one thing you can say about Fiji is that Burgess' physicality won't bother them but Nowell's footwork might.

I dunno, I have some reservations about Burgess but I think his physicality will bother everyone. He's also going to be able to take the hits as well as dish them out.

[dummy_half]

Fiji are a decent team and should not be taken too lightly. However, the England squad had good strength, and SL's selection policy through the squad seems to have favoured the next best starter over players who could have made an impact off the bench.

As such, I think we'll see something of a hybrid side for this match, probably with something close to the first choice backline but a few of the second string forwards - similar template to Beshocked's team, although I think I'd want Parling instead of Lawes (more likely to disrupt the Fiji lineout), maybe Haskell at 6 (as Wood is going to see a lot of game time), Care at 9 and with May on the wing and Watson at fullback (more pace in the back 3)

The balance of the squad means that there are a couple of players unlikely to get a break - Robshaw is likely to start every game and there isn't much cover for the outside backs.

[TightHEAD]

I still think Burgess is overrated as a Centre by the media and many fans. Surely he is only there as he adds big game experience to the young squad and as a poster boy for Canterbury?

[beshocked]

hammersmith harrier you are right - could take out burgess and put May or Nowell on the bench with the other starting.

Jimpy can't afford to get injuries though. Let's say England start Brown vs Fiji and he picks up an injury - then you'll be going into the Wales and Australia games with a FB who won't have the match experience.

At least if Goode or even Watson as Dummy Half suggests starts vs Fiji it keeps options open.

Tighthead do you think the team I picked is bad?

Dummy half I would pick Wood to help with the lineout hence why I left out Parling. Parling's presence in the team would only be for that.

If England have aspirations to win the RWC they have to trust the squad. It's squads that win RWCs because you never know when a key player will be absent.

[BamBam]

Just the 7 Saracens you've managed to squeeze in, sure you wouldn't prefer Farrell to Ford too?

Even if you were going with the squad players, I don't see the logic of starting Kruis ahead of Launchbury (assuming Parling is the starter, or vice versa)

For me, the likes of Kruis, Brookes, Wigglesworth/Care, Goode, possibly Nowell and one of Burgess and Slade (whoever the 4th choice centre is) should only be brought in for Uruguay.

We need to win the first 3 games, if we do that we can worry about rotating players. We play 3 weeks in a row in the 6N/AIs, I see no reason why we shouldn't have players doing that other than for injury concerns

[TightHEAD]

The trouble with Fiji is that they like nothing more than turning up at RWC and upsetting big teams, Doesn't get any bigger than the Host team in the 1st game.

I would play safe and field as strong as possible and maybe only protect Brown from a cheap shot.

I agree too many Sarries for my likening

[Rugby Fan]

Beshocked, doesn't having Burgess and Slade on the bench leave us a bit short of back three cover? Watson can go to full back and Joseph on the wing but i'd much rather have Nowell to bring on to impact on the game if it is close. The one thing you can say about Fiji is that Burgess' physicality won't bother them but Nowell's footwork might.

It's not that we don't have cover with that 23, it's more that Barritt and and Joseph need more time together, which won't happen if Joseph has to move to the wing to accommodate an early injury in the back three.

[LondonTiger]

What we need to remember, alongside not underestimating Fiji, is that there a 3 weeks between the game just played v Ireland and that against Wales. for players who are ring rusty anyway and short of match practice that could be too big a gap.

For me I would probably go with the XV that started over Ireland with only changes in the bench.

Front row - should be strong enough but Cole needs to up his game in the scrum.
Second Row - If Wood plays could see logic in bringing Launchbury back in
Back row - Morgan just seems to have a bit more rugby intelligence. May consider resting Robshaw again and starting Haskell at 7.
Half backs - could see logic in resting Youngs and Ford, but should really both or neither.
Centres - need time together
Back 3 - Could be tempted to call up Nowell and move Watson to FB as pace could be needed. However would prefer Lancaster to pick the guys he want to start against Wales to increase familiarity in a game situation.

[TightHEAD]

I really hope we don't underestimate Fiji, they are playing well at the moment.

I think they will beat Wales if the injuries keep taking their toll on their squad.

[beshocked]

Bambam no not Farrell -would slow the backline down too much. It's about balance. Farrell has his strengths but attacking is not one of them. Wouldn't even put him on the bench in this match.

Want more Sarries for familiarity and also because they need gametime. The Sarries guys happen to be 2nd choice. You could play Care instead of Wigglesworth - but I wouldn't start B.Youngs vs Fiji.

Kruis would be there to help George just as Parling helped Youngs.

It's about having players who can slot in if one of the starters get injured.

I can justify every selection.

Mako to keep Marler fresh.
George to give him gametime and see what he can do.
Kruis to help George.
Billy - because he needs to get himself into form.
Wigglesworth - familiarity with Billy and will help pin Fiji with his box kicking.
Barritt - needs to gel partnership with Joseph
Goode - extra playmaker and needs gametime as he hasn't played in the 1st warm up game.

It's not underestimating Fiji - I think the team I put would be able to beat Fiji comfortably.

[BamBam]

Undoubtedly every selection can be justified, but as LT mentions, if we rest a lot of starters, it will be 3 weeks between the game against Ireland and the game vs Wales, thats a long time

Let the first choice go all out against Fiji, Wales and Oz, rest them where possible against Uruguay after 3 wins (hopefully!) then they'll be raring to go for the quarter finals.

A second choice 23 from this squad will not lose to Uruguay, and will give them the match practice they need, not forgetting they will be getting game time off the bench in the first 3 games too

3 games in 3 weeks isn't a lot to ask IMO

With your justifications, i would argue that Marler and Cole need the time to sort out the scrum, George is the starter I would favour, and needs to get used to the first choice jumpers, Morgan is arguably just ahead of Billy and also needs the game time.

In the backs, Wiggles/Care is very close and I agree with you on Barritt, but Goode against Fijian backs is not something I want to see

[beshocked]

Bambam

Perhaps but Goode won't have played since the 1st warm up game. No point having him in the squad if you don't use/trust him. You obviously don't trust Goode but he needs an opportunity to answer his critics.

The problem with your theory is that there's bound to be injures - it's about being pro active instead of reactive.

Starting Marler and Cole risks them getting injured.

It's important to protect players for the biggest games IMO.

It goes back to my fundamental point about trusting the squad and players.

[BamBam]

RWC opening games aren't the time to allow players to answer their critics, he can do that against Uruguay. If Nemani Nadolo breaks the line in the first 5 mins and Goode has to cover some distance to make a cover tackle, how confident are you that a) he gets there b) he can stop him

We can try to wrap players in cotton wool, but we need our players to be in top form against Wales and Oz, the scrum hasn't been going brilliantly, if they work on this in training for 2 weeks, wouldn't you like to see it put to practice against a slightly weaker scrum before going up against the Welsh?

Marler and Cole could easily have got injured against Ireland

If we were in an easier pool I would be more inclined to use the squad, but think we need to go out all guns blazing for our first 3, can't afford for the starters to be undercooked against Wales or we'll be out at the pool stages and squad rotation will have got us absolutely nowhere

[LondonTiger]

And it goes back to our fundamental point that you need the players for the "biggest" games to be the best prepared they can be. For some that may mean rest, for others it will mean playing.

We have a horrible recent history of starting games slowly. i would not want that to be exacerbated against Wales by key players being short of match practice.

[funnyExiledScot]

I agree with Beshocked re: trusting the squad. You guys have a grim group and you can't go full throttle using the same 23 in each any every game. At least one game will require mass rotation, meaning the likes of Burgess, Slade, Nowell and Goode getting a start.

I would rest your 1st XV personally for the Fiji game. You should be able to win that contest without your key players. You just had a decent run-out against Ireland.

[TightHEAD]

Get the momentum going early, play your strongest team and set a marker for your squad and rivals.

You can't protect players from injuries and you can't risk players being undercooked for the BIG games.

[beshocked]

Bambam

If Goode isn't deemed good enough to start vs Fiji he shouldn't be in the squad.

It's a risk - you either go in with key players getting injured vs Fiji and miss out the biggest matches or you rest some of your most important players for Wales and Australia.

I am not suggesting you play a complete 2nd string vs Fiji. Just play some to keep them prepared if some players get injured they can slot right in.

[Cyril]

Six Nations is 5 games in 6 weeks.

Playing every game in the World Cup would be 7 games in 6 weeks (one of which is a gimme).

I wonder whether we sometimes over-estimate the intensity of a World Cup as England don't rest many players against Scotland and Italy in the 6 Nations to save them for Ireland or Wales (if the fixtures work like that). Every game in the 6Ns is a must win these days and high intensity.

I'd say there's more danger of under-cooking than fatigue.

If we're worried about player burn-out by the business end of the tournment (if England get there) it's worth remembering that there are two full weeks between the England/Australia game and the quarter-finals (with Uruguay in the middle). Assuming England do qualify then that's plenty of time for rest and niggles to clear up.

The first choice players (with a little bit of tinkering) should be well capable of playing the majority of the first 3 games. Anyway, you can't legislate for injuries. Start strong and don't take chances for future gains (that you may not end up being able to take advantage of). If you start out too careful in terms of selection/squad management you can come a cropper. While I think we'll beat Fiji pretty comfortably there's no reason not to come out full strength from the off, both in terms of momentum and ensuring that the Fiji game isn't closer than it needs to be. No point in giving Aus or Wales any reason to be cheerful

[Poorfour]

Isn't this all a bit academic? Lancaster has said in almost so many words that he will pick the best available team for every game from Ireland to Australia, and is only really looking at resting players for Uruguay.

Yes, that risks injuring players, but injuries are part of rugby. And it's not as if keeping players out of games protects them that much. Dan Carter's groin strain in 2011 was a training injury. Danny Care was ruled out to the 2011 RWC because he tripped over in training camp before the tournament. Richard Hill's infamous hamstring was also a training injury, if memory serves.

I think a case could be made for giving George a start, to see how he goes. Beyond that, I don't see a good case for resting Marler or Cole (both need game time, and Marler hasn't played since March so the issue is rustiness rather than overplaying).

Maybe you could rest Brown and Robshaw but historically they have not been injury prone and neither looks to be jaded.

There's be a case for starting Care over Youngs, in part because Fiji will not be as disciplined defensively and there's a good chance he would be able to make breaks. And there's something that says maybe Billy should start to give him maximum time to find his form. Morgan can come off the bench if needed. But I would not expect more than one or two tweaks between the Fiji game and the Wales one.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Six Nations is 5 games in 6 weeks.

Playing every game in the World Cup would be 7 games in 6 weeks.

I wonder whether we sometimes over-estimate the intensity of a World Cup as England don't rest many players against Scotland and Italy in the 6 Nations to save them for Ireland or Wales (if the fixtures work like that). Every game in the 6Ns is a must win these days and high intensity.

I'd say there's more danger of under-cooking than fatigue.

If we're worried about player burn-out by the business end of the tournment (if England get there) it's worth remembering that there are two full weeks between the England/Australia game and the quarter-finals (with Uruguay in the middle). Assuming England do qualify then that's plenty of time for rest and niggles to clear up.

The first choice players (with a little bit of tinkering) should be well capable of playing the majority of the first 3 games. Anyway, you can't legislate for injuries. Start strong and don't take chances for future gains (that you may not end up being able to take advantage of).

The six nations is 5 games across 7 weekends whilst the world cup is also across 7 weekends, that's two whole weeks of rest in the middle which is quite a bit.

[Jimpy]

Six Nations is 5 games in 6 weeks.

Playing every game in the World Cup would be 7 games in 6 weeks.

I wonder whether we sometimes over-estimate the intensity of a World Cup as England don't rest many players against Scotland and Italy in the 6 Nations to save them for Ireland or Wales (if the fixtures work like that). Every game in the 6Ns is a must win these days and high intensity.

I'd say there's more danger of under-cooking than fatigue.

If we're worried about player burn-out by the business end of the tournment (if England get there) it's worth remembering that there are two full weeks between the England/Australia game and the quarter-finals (with Uruguay in the middle). Assuming England do qualify then that's plenty of time for rest and niggles to clear up.

The first choice players (with a little bit of tinkering) should be well capable of playing the majority of the first 3 games. Anyway, you can't legislate for injuries. Start strong and don't take chances for future gains (that you may not end up being able to take advantage of).

The six nations is 5 games across 7 weekends whilst the world cup is also across 7 weekends, that's two whole weeks of rest in the middle which is quite a bit.

And as I've said before....

"Breaking News: RFU Exploitation Committee to investigate allegations that professional rugby players are being forced to play for 80 minutes each week..."

[TightHEAD]

ha ha ha

[LondonTiger]

Bambam

If Goode isn't deemed good enough to start vs Fiji he shouldn't be in the squad.

It's a risk - you either go in with key players getting injured vs Fiji and miss out the biggest matches or you rest some of your most important players for Wales and Australia.

I am not suggesting you play a complete 2nd string vs Fiji. Just play some to keep them prepared if some players get injured they can slot right in.

I believe in trusting the squad. Just think how you do that differs. I think the coaches should do whatever they feel is necessary to ensure their best team is fit and firing for Wales/Aus. For me the need to ensure match fitness outweighs the risk of injury so we should trust the squad to step up if needed.

[majesticimperialman]

I really think and agree with most posters, the RWC started on saturday against Ireland.

So for me it as to be the same team that started against Ireland.

[ChequeredJersey]

I'd say we should play the following:

1) Marler
2) George - I want to see how he starts a game
3) Wilson - give him some more game time and give Cole a rest
4) Parling
5) Launchbury (can easily understand why others would say Lawes though)
6) Wood
7) Robshaw
8) Morgan
9) Youngs
10) Ford
11) Watson
12) Barritt
13) Joseph
14) May
15) Brown

Mako, Youngs, Brookes/Cole, Lawes, Haskell/Billy (can't choose), Care, Slade, Nowell

BUt a change or two would be ok

NB we have NEVER lost to Fiji ever, nor as it happens Tonga or Samoa. We don't play them that often but that stat exists for a reason. The only thing is we cannot afford to start too fast and loose. We need to break them with structure to start with then cut loose in the second half and bring on Care, Slade etc to facilitate that

Goode at 15 or on the bench would also, I think, be perfectly reasonable

However Brown, Marler, Wilson, Morgan, Launch, Barritt (with Joseph to gel as a partnership) at least all need game time in proper matches due to their relatively recent injuries and lack of game time. That is why I believe if possible they should all start

[ChequeredJersey]

I agree with Beshocked re: trusting the squad. You guys have a grim group and you can't go full throttle using the same 23 in each any every game. At least one game will require mass rotation, meaning the likes of Burgess, Slade, Nowell and Goode getting a start.

I would rest your 1st XV personally for the Fiji game. You should be able to win that contest without your key players. You just had a decent run-out against Ireland.

In Pool A, winning against Fiji is frankly not enough. We need to aim to win the match in the first 50 and then rack up a decent score

[kingelderfield]

Was a bit knack'd last night and didn't see the existing thread when watching the Fiji Canada game at the Stoop.

Watching yesterdays game online, Fiji appear well worth their pacific nations cup success (http://www.worldrugby.org/pnc/video/82396)

Looking like the opening game on the 18th could well be a classic, especially if we try to go wide to early.

For all out thoughts of Wales and Australia we should first and formost give our full attention to Fiji..

[kingelderfield]

Seriously I could see bomber starting with Farrell and Haskell, benching Ford and Robshaw.

To start Wigglesworth would I think be a step to far in terms of blunting our attack.

Would love to see a back 3 of Nowell, Watson and May, in no particular order at some point. However, for this and other major games, we will need the genuine full blooded fullback .

Goode is to slow. Should Brown be injured I would have no hesitation of moving to the above aformentioned 3.

[Barney McGrew did it]

I'd say we should play the following:

1) Marler
2) George - I want to see how he starts a game
3) Wilson - give him some more game time and give Cole a rest
4) Parling

Funny, I thought he'd been taking his rest during the recent games

I'd play Wilson simply because his form might be better

[sad_gimp]

I kinda feel awful for thinking it....but there's one player I wouldn't mind seeing replaced in the squad. If Goode got injured against Fiji and Cips got brought in I wouldn't shed a tear....harsh but true.

[LondonTiger]

Goode is a better full back than Cipriani. In fact I think he is a better player. It is popular to hate on Goode, exaggerate his flaws and minimise his skills.

[propdavid_london]

Barney - I agree with that, Cole hasnt been himself in the last few games. Perhaps being benched will give him a kick up the backside.
Wilson deserves a start.

Apart from a bit of tweaking England need to put out the strongest side. The last thing England should do is to try and play the loose and expansive game that Fiji will excel at.

[LondonTiger]

I agree cole has struggled at scrum time.

However as a tigers fan I am not allowed to comment on Wilson's performance in the first warm-up.

[Bathman_in_London]

Points difference could be important in this pool, I hope we keep it fairly tight until the 55 minute mark and then hopefully look to build a score.

I'd probably start the team that beat Ireland but with Nowell on the bench to give more cover to the back 3. There is probably an argument to start Wilson and or George, but I think lets start the 1st team and then bring on the subs relatively early assuming that we are winning.

[englandglory4ever]

Goode is a better full back than Cipriani. In fact I think he is a better player. It is popular to hate on Goode, exaggerate his flaws and minimise his skills.

A bit like Burgess I s'pose!

[englandglory4ever]

Don't get too cocky boys. A few of my welsh mates were expecting Wales to put a cricket score on Italy and set them up nicely for the start. As we know it worked out horribly wrong for them on several counts. Keep your powder dry.

[LondonTiger]

Goode is a better full back than Cipriani. In fact I think he is a better player. It is popular to hate on Goode, exaggerate his flaws and minimise his skills.

A bit like Burgess I s'pose!

I wrote a massive reply, then thought no, will not let you hijack yet another thread. You want to discuss Sam's attributes (and flaws) create a new one.

[lostinwales]

Don't get too cocky boys. A few of my welsh mates were expecting Wales to put a cricket score on Italy and set them up nicely for the start. As we know it worked out horribly wrong for them on several counts. Keep your powder dry.

For these reasons I am trying to be good and not respond to the 'England only won 'cos Ireland let them' and the 'Actually Wales won't miss 1/2p and Webb at all' comments whatever I might actually think

[jamesandimac]

Looking at the scrum, it seemed to go a lot better after the replacements came on.  Is that more to do with our replacements are better than Irelands replacements or what?  Looking back at the first France game the scrum wasn't that bad either.  I wonder if its more a personality thing?  

I would rather England made individual replacements during a game rather than wholesale changes of the front row that way you can make a more informed view of individual performances.  For example, it would've been worth seeing how George went between Cole and Marler against a full strengh French and Irish front row, rather than bring on a new front row late on in the game.

[Sponsored content]