England Squad for the 6N 2016

First topic message reminder :

Well, the dust is settling on our early exit, time to concentrate on the next disappointment.

We obviously have no idea who the Head Coach or team will be at this current point, but we can take a stab at the potential squad going into the 6N.

2 games into the AP season, who's looking impressive? Who can come in under the radar and steal a spot? Are any of the disappointing WC squad going to grab the bull by the horns and actually impress! Who should be captain? What could or starting 23 be? Do we starting blooding for 2019 now?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Can we please not even discuss O'Conner for England.

Agreed.

Though if he wins Player of the Season awards I may rethink that.

One thing that's often forgotten in comparing club and international appearances is that at club level there will generally be some players on the pitch who lack the brains or pace to be international class. Really good players can exploit that. At international level, you're generally up against a defensive system with fewer weak spots, and it takes more to break it down.

We saw with England over the last 4 years that you can put a good defensive system in place from Day 1, but creating and maintaining an attack takes time.

That said, Toulon are a side with more caps than many international teams, and Wasps made them look very ordinary. And the overall standard of English performances this weekend has been very high - I suspect a result of the improvement in share of European revenue and the resulting increase in salary cap which has allowed most teams to recruit a handful of good players in key positions.

There are a lot of good teams in the AP at the moment. The trick for Jones will be picking out the players who will gel into a strong squad. We are chucking around a lot of names on this board at the moment, but I really doubt he's going to make wholesale changes.

Lancaster's core selections were rarely the issue - the debate over the squad was almost invariably around the last 4 or 5 places. It was the inability to find a working centre partnership that could stay fit and in form for any length of time and the use of the bench that drew most of the flak. Plus, ultimately, whatever they did to the pack before the RWC.

I can't see Jones throwing out the available experience just for the sake of it. There are several guys already the wrong side of 30 who will probably get put out to pasture, and that creates space to try a few of the challengers.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Thank God we don't pick England sides on the last 2 games!

100% agree with this, we are just after a world cup. The last time we were Quins won the league and the next 3 years did very little. We can't just go forget about everything and go just by a few weeks, the teams who were missing loads of players and had hugely disrupted pre-seasons are all suffering. Has to be some sensible thinking when making squads in these circumstances. Northampton are not a mid table team, Toulon will win convincingly at home to Wasps and Leinster are another example. Think some people are getting ahead of themsleves somewhat.

Gaskell for England, well a quick giggle for the morning at least I suppose.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Therein lies the questions WPI - how come they play well for club and in Europe...yet fail to show their best for country.

I do wonder if it has been a coaching issue and tactics in the England situation.

I guess we'll see once and for all when Eddie and his team has had them for a while.

To be fair the last few years English havent been amazing in Europe but post world cup not suprisingly have faired better. Think its a bit early to be making judgements about European performances.

LondonTiger wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Can we please not even discuss O'Conner for England.

Agreed.

Though if he wins Player of the Season awards I may rethink that.

Nah he wont, because Mark Wilson is back injury free

Poorfour wrote:One thing that's often forgotten in comparing club and international appearances is that at club level there will generally be some players on the pitch who lack the brains or pace to be international class. Really good players can exploit that. At international level, you're generally up against a defensive system with fewer weak spots, and it takes more to break it down.

This is key, and why with the number of players we have we argue so much about who should play.

Really good players can look exceptional in club rugby. however it takes an exceptional player to look really good at international rugby. Yappy must have had anti-sarries glasses on when he selected his EQP team from the first two Euro rounds. Farrell and Goode were exceptional in both matches. however could either play like that against decent international sides?


Taking Farrell first - he showed a range of passing, and running ability not seen from him since the Lions tour where in the warmup games he stood flat and demonstrated real ability. those sides though were largely stripped of any super rugby players. Would an international defence give Farrell the time to execute the skills he showed over the last fortnight, or would the pressure placed on him see him step further back and reduce any effectiveness?

As to Goode. We should all acknowledge he is a highly skilled player. He constantly shines in club games because the skill he has overcomes the weaknesses in his game. Sadly so far the weaknesses are too easily exploited at international level.


so two players who played exceptionally well, but who could really struggle to replicate that at a more rarefied level.

As ever great points LT

Farrell is an interesting case. Sometimes he does do good things in internationals but that may be as much because nobody is expecting him to do so. He has got some good qualities that make him a decent international player. but what is hugely apparent is how much more threatening the back line plays when Ford is pulling the strings instead

GeordieFalcon wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Can we please not even discuss O'Conner for England.

Agreed.

Though if he wins Player of the Season awards I may rethink that.

Nah he wont, because Mark Wilson is back injury free

Well if Wilson keeps Falcons up he deserves a Knighthood


Back to O'Connor - I am never a fan of players being parachuted into any international squad with no, or little, experience of rugby in the country they elect to represent. Was critical of Cotter calling up Hardie, so would not be happy for O'Connor to be considered right now.


I would though be interested to hear from Sanzar posters as to a comparison between these two in Super Rugby.

Well if Wilson keeps Falcons up he deserves a Knighthood Run

We're plummeting...but there'll be a few quality players up for grabs when we go down. And Mark Wilson should be top of the list for most clubs...absolute quality premiership player who most likely wont be away for Internationals.

Well, I still reckon that the new agreement with RFU will see a 14 team ring fenced top divison. So I reckon you willbe safe.

Ah too be honest I think im beginning to doubt Dean and specifically John Wells.

LondonTiger wrote:Well, I still reckon that the new agreement with RFU will see a 14 team ring fenced top divison. So I reckon you willbe safe.

Whether the ring fencing is temporary or not, I would agree. Newcastle are critical to a ring fenced Premiership, for the geography if nothing else. We need a competitive team in Newcastle.

Lets see how we go over the next few weeks...although having said that Sarries up next on the 6th at KP...I think ill just stop in the West Stand bar all game

LondonTiger wrote:Well, I still reckon that the new agreement with RFU will see a 14 team ring fenced top divison. So I reckon you willbe safe.

That'll be for starting in July next year won't it? It'll be interesting to see what comes out of that and the differences.

HammerofThunor wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:Well, I still reckon that the new agreement with RFU will see a 14 team ring fenced top divison. So I reckon you willbe safe.

That'll be for starting in July next year won't it?  It'll be interesting to see what comes out of that and the differences.

Yes, thus the relegated team would stand a huge chance of being re-incorporated. Gut feel is they are desperate to be able to rinfence with the current AP teams plus Bristol and Leeds/Yorkshire/WhateverTheyWantToCallthemselves

That would make sense as it covers all regions near enough LT

Cornish Pirates would like to get in that mix, but their new stadium plans probably kiboshes them.

London Tiger wrote:Back to O'Connor - I am never a fan of players being parachuted into any international squad with no, or little, experience of rugby in the country they elect to represent. Was critical of Cotter calling up Hardie, so would not be happy for O'Connor to be considered right now.


I would though be interested to hear from Sanzar posters as to a comparison between these two in Super Rugby

LT - being a Highlanders fan I've always liked Hardie as a player. He filled a massive gap when Adam Thompson left in 2012 and he was probably our best player in our dismal 2013 season, consistently topping the tackling stats (believe me we needed it!!) Dynamic and abrasive he probably better in the loose than O'Connor.

O'Connor was always more of a typical open side flanker. Intelligent and technically very good over the ball he's a bugger to shift and always seems to win a lot of turnover ball. Blues player of the year this year he was Hawkes Bay captain as they got promoted to the ITM Premiership.

Each has his strengths over the other. Hardie more abrasive and stronger in the loose. But, despite being a big fan of Hardie, as a traditional open side I think O'Connor is the better player. From seeing them both often O'Connor is much better over the ball and is a very good link man for the backs.

I would have no problem him wanting to play for England. Any professional sportsman should want to play at the highest level. O'Connor was very highly thought of in NZ but with 3 very good young 7s ahead of him in Cane, Savea and Todd maybe he realised he wasn't going to get into the All Blacks squad any time soon, if ever. So fair play to him for wanting a new challenge and try to break into the England squad. I'm not suggesting he goes straight in a la Hardie with Scotland. But if he proves himself at Leicester I think we could have a tasty battle for 2016 with both Fraser and Kvesic looking very good so far this season.

Bit more than I planned to write but hope that helps LT.

I would be seriously peed off if O'Conner was to be selected....I have to say that.

We have young English 7's playing well...and it would be a seriously f......ing ridiculous and embarrassing decision if he was selected!!!

GeordieFalcon wrote:I would be seriously peed off if O'Conner was to be selected....I have to say that.

We have young English 7's playing well...and it would be a seriously f......ing ridiculous and embarrassing decision if he was selected!!!

Agree. Can't say it better.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I would be seriously peed off if O'Conner was to be selected....I have to say that.

We have young English 7's playing well...and it would be a seriously f......ing ridiculous and embarrassing decision if he was selected!!!

We've chosen an overseas coach and asked him to get us winning. Jones will have absolutely no qualms at all about selecting new arrivals from Super Rugby if they are qualified. He did it with Japan - after suggesting he wouldn't. That's part of the deal we've settled for.

I genuinely don't think Jones sees it as his responsibility to nurse a generation of young players to realise their potential. If those players can do what he wants, then that may still happen. He appears to demand very specific skills and attitudes from people, and he probably doesn't care too much about the age or background of players who can deliver.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I would be seriously peed off if O'Conner was to be selected....I have to say that.

We have young English 7's playing well...and it would be a seriously f......ing ridiculous and embarrassing decision if he was selected!!!

As I have said all along, I agree.

where my agreement is tempered is that if in a years time O'Connor has has been blowing the other 7s out of the water it would perhaps be a case of cutting off our nose to spite our face.

I dislike the grandparent rule (just as I dislike 3 years residency) but if a player is qualified and proven to be the best option over a sufficiently long period and is playing in the AP, then I guess they have to be considered.

I despise the grandparent rule, residency should be minimum 5 years (and there should be a residency period for anyone not brought up here regardless of parentage). But I don't want an English coach to apply his own level of judgement of people being English enough. If the EQ and in the premiership they should be considered. Some of the consideration is the judge their dedication the England shirt (on which basis I would have scrapped Ben Morgan when he refused to play for the Saxons, even though he was English born and raised, if that wasn't bull).

Edit: issues should be taken up with World Rugby to change their regulations.

I would rather cut our noses off in spite of our faces in this case.
We have to draw a line over the number of players being drafted in.

Whats the point in all the clubs doing so much good work?? They're producing players and I genuinely hope Eddie gets the right balance between the sheer desire to win...but the desire to give certain young lads a chance as well.

Fraser and Kvesic have shown they can handle it. They are young and in Kvesics case he is a club leader as well at a young age.

Im just fed up of it. Nathan Hughes is another one who can jog on if it was up to me...even though I know he'll be straight in the squad when he qualifies.

GeordieFalcon wrote:...I genuinely hope Eddie gets the right balance between the sheer desire to win...but the desire to give certain young lads a chance as well...

I hope so too, but Jones will always put winning first because that's the basis upon which the RFU hired him, and the basis upon which he will be judged.

And I appreciate that RF, but it just doesn't sit easy with me.

EDIT: Id rather break the no abroad rule and bring Armitage in than a Kiwi on Grandparents rule.

You know Steffon is a residency player and spent significant amount of time in France growing up?

Yes and his Trinidad background...but he is capped its done and dusted. Hypocritical of me yes maybe...but hes gone through it.

O'Conner is another start from scratch.

Time to stop these.

GeordieFalcon wrote:And I appreciate that RF, but it just doesn't sit easy with me.

I would have much preferred the RFU to have looked for a coach with a good record of finding and bringing on young talent because that's where our potential strength is likely to be.

Lancaster wasn't that bad at bringing through young players but the results show that he couldn't get them to gel consistently with experienced hands when it counted.

One of the reasons I hoped the RFU would examine Jones's record more closely is because he doesn't have a tremendous record of young player development. Whatever you think about Gatland, he has been pretty good in that respect. Steve Hansen is another.

Anyone who has been around international rugby as long as Jones, is bound to have overseen the rise of at least some players from their early days, but it seems clear he doesn't regard that as a priority. All the feedback you get about him is that he's not a great man manager, and has very fixed ideas about what he wants players to do. It may well be that he's flexible with regard to overall strategy but he makes very specific demands once that goal is settled in his own mind.

When he looks at England's player base, he won't think "Who are the best, and how can I get the best out of them." Instead, I believe he will think "With this number of professional players there's bound to someone in each position who will do exactly what I want".

In the best case, all our stars align and Jones finds that our new talent can do what he wants.

The concern is if some of them don't respond well to Jones, or can't match up to his early expectations, then he won't persevere. If they think the door is closed to international rugby, then we might see them head to France. It's one thing to lose 28 year old players for that reason, but it would be a concern if we started seeing people make the move under 25, like Charles Piutau did.

No. For too long now England has been about waiting for the next big thing. How long can you have potential before it’s no longer potential but disappointment. It’s not up to Eddie to nurture the callow youth with potential into the next big star. It’s the youth’s job and his club and the RFU. The England coach has to have a vision that suits the available players and pick the best that can carry out his plan. And win.

Lancaster didn’t have this. He'd rather watch the ABs and dream wistfully about what could be, rather than watch the AP and work with what we have. We’ll have to hope Eddie can do this.

RF

Indeed, im probably coming across as unrealistic, complaining about Lancaster then complaining about complaining about someone potentially going all out to win.

Ultimately I want to see England winning and winning well and yes I fully understand that sometimes you have to make certain "decisions" to do that regarding personnel.

I want the team to be picked to win games now...not built for the WC in 2019. Winning games now and progressing the team as required and the WC team will look after itself.

The team itself doesn't need a huge amount of changing just a few tweaks...so im hoping they will resist the test to bring in O'Conner and work with the young lads.

Anyway ill stop going on and on about that now

Barney McGrew did it wrote:No. For too long now England has been about waiting for the next big thing. How long can you have potential before it’s no longer potential but disappointment. It’s not up to Eddie to nurture the callow youth with potential into the next big star. It’s the youth’s job and his club and the RFU. The England coach has to have a vision that suits the available players and pick the best that can carry out his plan. And win.

Lancaster didn’t have this. He'd rather watch the ABs and dream wistfully about what could be, rather than watch the AP and work with what we have. We’ll have to hope Eddie can do this.

I agree 95% of that however if that is the case you run the risk of opening the door to every Kiwi, Aussie, SA, American etc who have some microbe of English blood through their granny or whoever coming straight in .

There has to be the correct balance. I want to see England win as much as every other Englishman but not if the team is full of SH people who couldn't make their own team so have grapsed on to their family lineage.... and at the expense of the young kids in the prem. And we're not talking about players just starting out.

Fraser has put in some blinding performances he's just been plagued by injury. Hopefully that is now fixed. And Kvesic has been top class for Gloucester in a poor side. He's a talisman for them. And he's now working under Laurie Fisher...the breakdown coaching king from Australia - pococks mentor.

More Dave Ewers and less O'Connors!

Aye fair call 7.5....

No 7&1/2 wrote:More Dave Ewers and less O'Connors!

That the Zimbabwean Dave Ewers who qualified on residence?

I'm not sure anyone else has a problem using anyone available to them though in all seriousness. Its up to World Rugby to change the rules and I hear very few calls from inside the game to do so.

Yes he is...

Yeah thats the joke lost!

Yup

Now if only Mr Haskell can sort his bloody consistency out and start bringing his club form to this level I wouldn't even be calling for Ewers, then I can get away with criticising picking foreigners

Edit: though in fairness Ewers has been here for about 6 years since he was about 18-19...

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm not sure anyone else has a problem using anyone available to them though in all seriousness. Its up to World Rugby to change the rules and I hear very few calls from inside the game to do so.

The only people who are bothered by it are us. And I think we are right.

No one within World Rugby wants a change because it suits everyone from a financial standpoint. The current process provides an avenue for higher salaries for more players from lower cost/salary markets. A dude like O'Connor is a good example. Limited upward potential at home, comes over to England and has the possibility of a larger payday at Leicester and potential for even more with England. Salary opportunities not really available at home.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Now if only Mr Haskell can sort his bloody consistency out and start bringing his club form to this level I wouldn't even be calling for Ewers, then I can get away with criticising picking foreigners

Edit: though in fairness Ewers has been here for about 6 years since he was about 18-19...

Oh definitely. He learned most of his trade in the UK and he obviously isn't going to be going back to Zimbabwe any time soon.

I wish Ewers was more like another Zimbabwian rugby player.....

Beast?

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I wish Ewers was more like another Zimbabwian rugby player.....

Don't worry Kvesic will be

Zimbabwe would have some team though....

Bathman_in_London wrote:Beast?

Mr Pocock!

Imagine it...

1 Beast
2
3 Mujati
4
5
6 Ewers
7 Pocock
8 Denton

Not a bad start....

Off the top of my head, Mike Williams in at lock, Dom Armand could cover there too.

Kyle Godwin at FH, Nils Mordt, Chavanga, Thom Evans, Ngwenya in the backs, Ian Prior at SH. Brad Barritt of course. Plus plenty in the Currie cup I'm sure.

Kvesic. Every bit as German as Heathcote is Scottish....

Fine then Fraser...

Although Kvesic was born in Germany to English parents (his dad was in the army)and went through English schools and English representative age groups.

He's English