606 Selects Englands EPS for 2016 6Ns - Take 2

First topic message reminder :

Name your 33 man EPS squad.
It must include 22 of the following players.
Keep any injured players in as they can be replaced later - but state who you would have on standby.

I will add up and produce the consensus next week.

Current Squad


Props
Kieran Brookes
Dan Cole
Joe Marler
Mako Vunipola
David Wilson

Hookers
Jamie George
Rob Webber
Tom Youngs

Second rows
George Kruis
Joe Launchbury
Courtney Lawes
Geoff Parling

Back rows
James Haskell
Ben Morgan
Chris Robshaw
Billy Vunipola
Tom Wood
Calum Clark

Scrum halves
Danny Care
Richard Wigglesworth
Ben Youngs

Fly halves
Owen Farrell
George Ford

Centres
Brad Barritt
Sam Burgess
Jonathan Joseph
Henry Slade
Luther Burrell

Back three
Mike Brown
Alex Goode
Jonny May
Jack Nowell
Anthony Watson

It emphasises that you need a leadership 'group' (yes, like SCW's side) and not just a captain and the rest.

Bambam if he picks Hartley as his captain he's shattering my confidence swiftly.

Londontiger just because I think someone is the right choice doesn't mean I can't change my mind if he starts making poor decisions.

Lancaster did not pick George enough, if Jones makes the same mistake then of course it's not good.

Funny calling it toys out of the pram, I am vindicated again and again....

You might believe I am a biased fool, then that makes you the fool. It is not just Jamie George I want to see. With Robshaw likely to move to 6 there has to be a new 7 - it doesn't necessarily need to be Fraser, if Ksevic is in better form or another contender then so be it.

I am not clamouring for Goode,Wigglesworth or Barritt to start. Only Goode deserves to be in the England squad.

I want the best for England regardless of whether they are Saracens players or not.

England cannot ignore certain Saracens players though.

doctor grey do you think Wigglesworth is Simpson's main competition? You don't think Care and Youngs are?

Vindicated how?

BamBam wrote:Its a funny one, I can't remember back that far, but what did SA do with John Smit before he moved to tighthead?

I guess it is manageable, Creevy captains Argentina then comes off, Moore was doing similar for Australia too

For SA, if I remember, that was when they were bringing Bismark DuPlessis into the squad. Moved Smit to Prop to accommodate the younger player. I don't recall how often Smit actually came off.

beshocked wrote:doctor grey do you think Wigglesworth is Simpson's main competition? You don't think Care and Youngs are?

I think at this moment, that is probably right. Youngs seems to me to be top to the heap for now, with Care his understudy. However both players have had significant dips in form which more or less coincided with improved form by the other. It has been this way for a while. I would like to see Simpson break into that to see what he can do. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have a young scrum half pushing for a spot the way it was when Care and Youngs were breaking through. I don't see Wigglesworth at that level.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Vindicated how?

Shouldn't have picked Nowell to start vs France and poor utilisation of the bench - shouldn't have taken off Hartley or Care- some of the reasons England did not win a GS
Lancaster shoud have picked a more intelligent RWC squad, poor selection and lack of gametime for some- cost England a place in the quarter finals.
Mentioning that England needed to counter Ireland's one dimensional gameplan in the 6 nations - they failed.
Shouldn't have picked a woefully out of form Farrell in last year's AIs - Farrell played poorly and damaged England.
Shouldn't have picked Farrell in the centres - England got woefully exposed by Wales and Australia.
Criticising numerous players being picked out of position - most of them ending in disaster.
George > Webber.

doctor_grey wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:As it goes I can see the logic of starting Hartley with George on the bench. It is the best way to be introduced to test match rugby. However I do not like having a hooker as skipper. Along with props and SHs they tend to be replaced with plenty of time to go - so you still need someone to take over the reins.

That's a good point abut the front row being replaced - really in almost every game.  It seems to virtually limit the captain role to lock or back row, unless there is a truly unusual player in the halfbacks or centres.  

As an aside, I find it truly annoying that like magic at the 60 minute mark some coaches replace the entire front row almost as if they would turn into pumpkins if they stayed on past 60 minutes.  

If they did would anyone notice?

I can't actually be bothered going around the same arguments about opinions.

beshocked wrote:Bambam if he picks Hartley as his captain he's shattering my confidence swiftly.

To be honest, beshocked, If you can get turned off Jones because he might choose Hartley, it does suggest you didn't look close enough at his career record before suggesting England sure hire him. That kind of decision is entirely in character for him.

The only thing which is a little different for Jones is to choose a front row player as his captain. To date, he's usually favoured the back row or a back.

Daily Mail (sorry) reckon that Jones is looking at Hartley as captain for the next 2 years

Don't worry beshocked, that points to Itoje being captain in 2 years!

I would have backed giving Hartley the armband for the 6ns. He is a experienced captain, has a lot of caps and is a niggly, in your face kinda chap, frankly what I think we need. Get Launch, B Youngs, Care and others into a leadership group and then pick a long term captain later.

I think the key selections for Jones are 12 and 6/7. Most other positions have stand out candidates or incumbents. No I don't rate Wood, would like to see either Fraser or Kvesic at 7, whoever is in better form.

little_badger wrote:I would have backed giving Hartley the armband for the 6ns. He is a experienced captain, has a lot of caps and is a niggly, in your face kinda chap, frankly what I think we need. Get Launch, B Youngs, Care and others into a leadership group and then pick a long term captain later.

I think the key selections for Jones are 12 and 6/7. Most other positions have stand out candidates or incumbents. No I don't rate Wood, would like to see either Fraser or Kvesic at 7, whoever is in better form.

agree completely. Definitely think we pick the team for now then let it evolve. The team at the next RWC will likely look very different than the one in the last RWC.

I would be happy for Hartley to captain England.

The comments from Eddie Jones around his selection are quite encouraging too and it seems to hint that he is going to want England to play with a new style and personality. He's said that he wants some bite and aggression to the England game, and that's why he is considering Hartley.

It's a welcome relief since under SL, our pack seemed too squeaky clean and their wasn't much grit.

bluestonevedder wrote:I would be happy for Hartley to captain England.

The comments from Eddie Jones around his selection are quite encouraging too and it seems to hint that he is going to want England to play with a new style and personality. He's said that he wants some bite and aggression to the England game, and that's why he is considering Hartley.

It's a welcome relief since under SL, our pack seemed too squeaky clean and their wasn't much grit.  

Too squeeky clean but giving away too many penalties. Not a good combo

Ive posted this before, but I think this gives a little insight to how he wants things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=040Zu9MQ0p8

Look at 2.53...far from impressed. "you've got to go out and physically smash teams!"

That's something I don't believe our pack has really done often or consistently enough for a long time. Lets hope he can get them playing like that..

The Saints pack certainly smashed the Racing pack tonight, even with Brookes off after 20 minutes, Hill was just as good.

Lawes looked back to his old self, not smashing 10s but making hard yards and tackling anything that was close ball in hand. Out pushed the much heavier French pack with both Matfield and Day, Saints only started going back abit when Patterson came on for Lawes.

A wild card for the England 7 shirt with Eddie watching; Harrison, MotM against the vaunted Racing back row, at least three turnovers and making the hard yards as well. That is the third consecutive game where he has looked the out 7 we are looking for. Not saying he is better than Kvesic or Fraser but he is playing very well and becoming the player that he was expected to be, just a couple of years later than expected. He is at least challenging them.

Burrell was taking the ball up and making good ground, seems to have recovered a bit of pace.

As much as I have been criticised by some, Waller had the 21st powerhouse Tameifuna in his pocket all the time he was on the field, Haywood was his usual mobile self, an English version of Brits and for the 20 minutes he was on Brookes simply owned Ben Arous.

Good news for England that the Saints EPS players are all beginning to play well and those pushing are going well.

Boggled that Saints barely struggled to a draw with all those guys playing so well.

My main issue is your appraisal of Burrell. Thought he looked one dimensional and slow. Every time he got the ball he looked to trucknit up, rarely breaking the gain line and losing the ball in contact far too often. Did he pass the ball today?

I really wanted Saints to shake off their lethargy and beat Racing. Yet against a team that looked largely disinterested they still look no more cohesive or threatening than they did on opening day of the season.

Agree with that LT - I was disappointed in Saints and I can't agree with well past it 's assessment of the game.
I thought the scrum was at best even & Saints lacked any incisiveness that was required tonight.

I think Hill is a prospect & stood up ok & hope Brooke's isn't injured too badly but no English players really would have Eddie thinking ' he is a definite starter'.

Think Trev and LT have put out very fair analysis if maybe a little harsh. The front 5 (6 including hill) can be pretty happy, felt the scrums became a 50 50 call once Brookes went off. Any side would miss him. The 7 today was excellent, haven't seen one that quick to get turnovers in a premiership team for ages.

As the two above pointed out the attack strategy was pretty poor, Myler and Burrell kill any move. To answer your question LT I think he did a pop pass once but he is not interested in actual passes though. The lines were awful apart from Matfield it seemed. Stephenson was ok,was at least seeming to want the ball and did make a few runs however North was the complete opposite.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Ive posted this before, but I think this gives a little insight to how he wants things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=040Zu9MQ0p8

Look at 2.53...far from impressed. "you've got to go out and physically smash teams!".

He certainly said that, but that's not really how Jones has coached. I know I've banged on about this before, but I wish people would look more into how Jones has gone about his job when they talk about what they want from him, or expect him to do.

Only the other day, Austin Healey in the Telegraph was saying he hopes Jones appoints an experienced coach alongside Borthwick and Gustard to give him some robust pushback. That's not how Jones works. If we wanted that set-up, Jones should have been appointed as a number two to such a figure (similar to his consultant role with South Africa). When Jones is in charge, he doesn't want argument, he wants people to do what he says.

On this forum, beshocked was taken aback by the idea that Jones might favour Hartley over George. I'm not saying that Jones will ignore George, but it's entirely in character for Jones to like experienced players in a team which lacks experience.

Jones like experienced players. He also likes skillful players. Above all, though, he likes players who will do what he demands of them (in training and on the pitch).

With England, Jones faces a situation he has never experienced before in his career: he has a large player base to choose from. I'm not sure how that will affect how he operates. There is a possibility that some players could fall out of favour with him early on and never get another look in because he prefers to cycle through England's numerous other options before thinking of trying them again. He couldn't do that with Australia or Japan because they didn't have the numbers.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:The Saints pack certainly smashed the Racing pack tonight, even with Brookes off after 20 minutes, Hill was just as good.

Lawes looked back to his old self, not smashing 10s but making hard yards and tackling anything that was close ball in hand. Out pushed the much heavier French pack with both Matfield and Day, Saints only started going back abit when Patterson came on for Lawes.

A wild card for the England 7 shirt with Eddie watching; Harrison, MotM against the vaunted Racing back row, at least three turnovers and making the hard yards as well. That is the third consecutive game where he has looked the out 7 we are looking for. Not saying he is better than Kvesic or Fraser but he is playing very well and becoming the player that he was expected to be, just a couple of years later than expected. He is at least challenging them.

Burrell was taking the ball up and making good ground, seems to have recovered a bit of pace.

As much as I have been criticised by some, Waller had the 21st powerhouse Tameifuna in his pocket all the time he was on the field, Haywood was his usual mobile self, an English version of Brits and for the 20 minutes he was on Brookes simply owned Ben Arous.

Good news for England that the Saints EPS players are all beginning to play well and those pushing are going well.

I saw things slightly differently, all of Saints England players seemed a little under par to be honest. Lawes understandably was no where near to his best but showed promise, he got through a lot of work although none of it stand out, he did muck in though. He was perhaps a 6/10

Harrison was a stand out. You can tell he's from NZ as his approach to the breakdown is so much smarter and quicker then most English 7's, just watch Kvesic flop about on the wrong side and get penalised repeatedly for Gloucester on Thursday night and compare. I don't know if he's EQ but if he carries on this form, and can manage to stay in the side when Clark and Wood return then he could be wildcard for the Eng/Wales 1 off game of the summer tour. 7/10

Burrell was woeful. Yes he runs with the ball, but too upright, too lateral and with no variation in his game. He is a far better player then that. He's bulked up over the summer and seems to now want to just batter everyone, unfortunately even the most average pro rugby player can generally deal with a direct running big guy with no guile. 4/10

Waller was good, but his opposite number has never been known as a quality scrummager. Saying that Saints still only managed to dominate in one scrum, gaining parity in most of the others.

All in all on those performances I don't think any of the Saints players will be wearing the Rose.

I have to agree, Burrell was awful. Lots of the time he just ran into a brick wall instead of passing the ball on where saints had a overlap

Also the saints line out was just as bad

yappysnap wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:The Saints pack certainly smashed the Racing pack tonight, even with Brookes off after 20 minutes, Hill was just as good.

Lawes looked back to his old self, not smashing 10s but making hard yards and tackling anything that was close ball in hand. Out pushed the much heavier French pack with both Matfield and Day, Saints only started going back abit when Patterson came on for Lawes.

A wild card for the England 7 shirt with Eddie watching; Harrison, MotM against the vaunted Racing back row, at least three turnovers and making the hard yards as well. That is the third consecutive game where he has looked the out 7 we are looking for. Not saying he is better than Kvesic or Fraser but he is playing very well and becoming the player that he was expected to be, just a couple of years later than expected. He is at least challenging them.

Burrell was taking the ball up and making good ground, seems to have recovered a bit of pace.

As much as I have been criticised by some, Waller had the 21st powerhouse Tameifuna in his pocket all the time he was on the field, Haywood was his usual mobile self, an English version of Brits and for the 20 minutes he was on Brookes simply owned Ben Arous.

Good news for England that the Saints EPS players are all beginning to play well and those pushing are going well.

I saw things slightly differently, all of Saints England players seemed a little under par to be honest. Lawes understandably was no where near to his best but showed promise, he got through a lot of work although none of it stand out, he did muck in though. He was perhaps a 6/10

Harrison was a stand out. You can tell he's from NZ as his approach to the breakdown is so much smarter and quicker then most English 7's, just watch Kvesic flop about on the wrong side and get penalised repeatedly for Gloucester on Thursday night and compare. I don't know if he's EQ but if he carries on this form, and can manage to stay in the side when Clark and Wood return then he could be wildcard for the Eng/Wales 1 off game of the summer tour. 7/10

Burrell was woeful. Yes he runs with the ball, but too upright, too lateral and with no variation in his game. He is a far better player then that. He's bulked up over the summer and seems to now want to just batter everyone, unfortunately even the most average pro rugby player can generally deal with a direct running big guy with no guile. 4/10

Waller was good, but his opposite number has never been known as a quality scrummager. Saying that Saints still only managed to dominate in one scrum, gaining parity in most of the others.

All in all on those performances I don't think any of the Saints players will be wearing the Rose.

He is, Dad is English. I remember the buzz about him coming over from a few people in the know (about four years ago) and then it went quiet. Good to see him start to make inroads.

I don't recall exactly, but I think Harrison was 18 or 19 when he came over. And was considered a bit of a project. It's good to see him fill out and ramp up his play. Still has to put on a bit more meat, but is really progressing nicely. I think England is a bit too much for him this season, but one never knows. For Saints, having a 6,7 rotation consisting of Clark, Wood, Harrison, Gibson will really pay off in the second half of the season.

Rugby Fan wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Ive posted this before, but I think this gives a little insight to how he wants things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=040Zu9MQ0p8

Look at 2.53...far from impressed. "you've got to go out and physically smash teams!".

He certainly said that, but that's not really how Jones has coached. I know I've banged on about this before, but I wish people would look more into how Jones has gone about his job when they talk about what they want from him, or expect him to do.

Only the other day, Austin Healey in the Telegraph was saying he hopes Jones appoints an experienced coach alongside Borthwick and Gustard to give him some robust pushback. That's not how Jones works. If we wanted that set-up, Jones should have been appointed as a number two to such a figure (similar to his consultant role with South Africa). When Jones is in charge, he doesn't want argument, he wants people to do what he says.

On this forum, beshocked was taken aback by the idea that Jones might favour Hartley over George. I'm not saying that Jones will ignore George, but it's entirely in character for Jones to like experienced players in a team which lacks experience.

Jones like experienced players. He also likes skillful players. Above all, though, he likes players who will do what he demands of them (in training and on the pitch).

With England, Jones faces a situation he has never experienced before in his career: he has a large player base to choose from. I'm not sure how that will affect how he operates. There is a possibility that some players could fall out of favour with him early on and never get another look in because he prefers to cycle through England's numerous other options before thinking of trying them again. He couldn't do that with Australia or Japan because they didn't have the numbers.

Lots of truth there.... only time will tell I guess.

I think that Jones has to take a look at Day - he'said in fantastic form right now.

*Daly, not Day!*

Jones must be pleased. Here's what I'd pick at the moment:

Goode, Ashton, Daly, Hill, Farrell, Simpson, Vunipola, George, Cole, Launchbury, Itoje, Robshaw, Harrison, Vunipola

Haywood, Mullan, Brookes, Kitchener, Clifford, Youngs, Cipriani, Joseph.

I should say I thoroughly expect the 12 to be Barritt again, but I'd see this as a backward step. Hill has a lot to learn, but is worth a look. If Slade was fit I'd play him at 12 and Watson at 15 (I think it's time to say thankyou to Brown and move on), but I'd select Goode at present as he's a 'fine footballer' and we need a second play-maker.  

Really excited by Harrison. I've been waiting for him to kick on. He certainly doesn't need to bulk up - he needs to continue to be quick to the breakdown. If Ewers had stayed fit he'd have challenged Robshaw. I wouldn't have Ford anywhere near England at present.

Plenty of Sarries players, but then they might just be the best English club side I've seen.

I agree with all of that DaveM but would have Rocko instead of Ashton.

Gotta love Stephen Jones in the Sunday times - having named 15 players who had to start for England last week (including 10 forwards, with 3 props) he has added another 7 this week.

Only 14 players Dave, you are confident.

Itoje & Laumchbury are not a viable lock combo, there's nothing there for the line out.

Gustard saying England are better with Barrett in the middle :S

nathan wrote:Gustard saying England are better with Barrett in the middle :S

Barritt is central to the Saracens defence, so Gustard always likely to push his case.

I wish we had Barrett in our backline.

Gustard is obviously coming in with a Saracens bias, thankfully Jones is his own man though and will go with what he wants. It always seemed Farrell had too much input which has often been brought up on the boards.

DaveM wrote:Jones must be pleased. Here's what I'd pick at the moment:

Goode, Ashton, Daly, Hill, Farrell, Simpson, Vunipola, George, Cole, Launchbury, Itoje, Robshaw, Harrison, Vunipola

Haywood, Mullan, Brookes, Kitchener, Clifford, Youngs, Cipriani, Joseph.

I should say I thoroughly expect the 12 to be Barritt again, but I'd see this as a backward step. Hill has a lot to learn, but is worth a look. If Slade was fit I'd play him at 12 and Watson at 15 (I think it's time to say thankyou to Brown and move on), but I'd select Goode at present as he's a 'fine footballer' and we need a second play-maker.  

Really excited by Harrison. I've been waiting for him to kick on. He certainly doesn't need to bulk up - he needs to continue to be quick to the breakdown. If Ewers had stayed fit he'd have challenged Robshaw. I wouldn't have Ford anywhere near England at present.

Plenty of Sarries players, but then they might just be the best English club side I've seen.

DaveM i suppose you are a sarries fan. Personal6y i would rather have Brown any day than Goode. Only thing about Goode is that he can play 10 if needed. Apart from that give me Brown any day of the week.

nathan wrote:Gustard saying England are better with Barrett in the middle :S

Recently?

If we are going Farrell Barritt and Joseph or Daly,Goode becomes a necessity even if Brown is the better player.

No 7&1/2 wrote:If we are going Farrell Barritt and Joseph or Daly,Goode becomes a necessity even if Brown is the better player.

Why?

I really hope we never see Goode in an England jersey again, he's just not good enough.

Because we end up with a really obvious attack without Goode.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Because we end up with a really obvious attack without Goode.

We've not even played a game under the new coaching team, how would you possibly know this? We have no idea what the style of play will be or how our attack will be formed.

All I know is Goode is not good enough to be playing international rugby, no matter what the system. You can't be that slow and play in the back 3 at the top level.

The second play maker plan never worked with Goode consistently at International level. In fact it only worked a few times in total let alone consistently.

The second play maker role requires that player to carry a threat to the defence themselves as a runner as well as from their distribution.

When the 'second play maker' is utilised it is usually in blind side attacks close to the oppositions line. It's a means to stretch the defence and force them to either defend short on one side or put fewer players into the ruck, which should allow the attack quick ball.

They are usually attacking with 2 or 3 players outside them and with 2 or 3 defenders in front of them. It requires that first man on the ball to be able to fix the first defender and shift the ball swiftly.

Goode has the skills at international level to shift the ball but because he doesn't pose much of a threat himself (mainly because of his lack of pace) the defence can too easily drift and close the attack out.

It's a shame as I really like Goode as a player. His skill set is good and he delivers consistently strong performances for Sarries. He just lacks the pace needed to threaten international defences where everything is that little bit stronger.

Brown and Nowell aren't electric. Relying purely on Farrell or any 1 fly half is just too predictable. If want to be the best we'll need a proper ball player elsewhere.

That's a good summery Carlos.

Brown isn't electric but he's quicker that Goode and a threat with ball in hand. He's also a much better player at the higher level which seperates the good from the very good.

Stick May & Watson on the wings and that's plenty of gas.

And will they see enough of the ball if they're not chasing kicks? Thats my concern.

No 7&1/2 wrote:And will they see enough of the ball if they're not chasing kicks? Thats my concern.

We have no idea how Jones is going to set things out, why do think we're going to play this negitive style of rugby?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Brown and Nowell aren't electric. Relying purely on Farrell or any 1 fly half is just too predictable. If want to be the best we'll need a proper ball player elsewhere.

Nowell is much faster than many give him credit for, especially of the mark.

Brown isn't rapid but he is significantly faster than Goode. He also carries much more of a threat than Goode because he is so hard to get to ground. Almost always beating the first man is a very valuable skill to have!

At current we are best of attacking wide. We have young wingers with real pace and two potentially electric options at 13 in Daly and Joseph. Get the ball in that 13s hands and let him run at his opposites numbers outside shoulder with the back three out there with him.

I'd like to see our wings popping up all over the field much more. If someone such as May has shown he is capable of being lethal running in the 13 channel - ask Conrad Smith for starters. Allow him to come of his wing and run lines of our centres.

Nowell is excellent at taking one out balls from his scrum half and sucking in 2 or 3 defenders whilst barraging over the game line. Let him show that.

I don't feel we need that designated 'ball player' for our talented outside backs to run lines off. If you are being selected at centre at international level then you should have the basic distributions skills to identify a team mate who is running a good line and pick a pass out to them.

king_carlos wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Brown and Nowell aren't electric. Relying purely on Farrell or any 1 fly half is just too predictable. If want to be the best we'll need a proper ball player elsewhere.

Nowell is much faster than many give him credit for, especially of the mark.

Brown isn't rapid but he is significantly faster than Goode. He also carries much more of a threat than Goode because he is so hard to get to ground. Almost always beating the first man is a very valuable skill to have!

At current we are best of attacking wide. We have young wingers with real pace and two potentially electric options at 13 in Daly and Joseph. Get the ball in that 13s hands and let him run at his opposites numbers outside shoulder with the back three out there with him.

I'd like to see our wings popping up all over the field much more. If someone such as May has shown he is capable of being lethal running in the 13 channel - ask Conrad Smith for starters. Allow him to come of his wing and run lines of our centres.

Nowell is excellent at taking one out balls from his scrum half and sucking in 2 or 3 defenders whilst barraging over the game line. Let him show that.

I don't feel we need that designated 'ball player' for our talented outside backs to run lines off. If you are being selected at centre at international level then you should have the basic distributions skills to identify a team mate who is running a good line and pick a pass out to them.

I just don't think Barritt will do that consistently.

I've seen no indication from Jones that Barritt is going to be picked.

Gustard quote hence why I said if he were to be picked it would have to be Goode.

Well, Gustard doesn't pick the team so it's irrelevant.