Hartley set to be named England captain

First topic message reminder :

According to the news Hartley is set to be England captain. I think this is great news! The non English amongst us can get back to disliking them.

I'm not necessarily judging every incident by itself. I'm talking more about the broad accumulation of incidents for a player still under 30. There's worse you can do than punch or headbutt but when that punch or headbutt is only the latest to a lengthening list of offences, some of them serious, nobody can really complain when the individual responsible starts to be seen in a certain way.

Really now, what other players are there currently who have amassed such a disciplinary record? And who have paid the consequences so often without seemingly learning much?

scottrf Jacques Burger might have got away with some incidents but he's still not in the same league as Hartley in terms of poor discipline. 54 weeks compared to I believe 2 weeks.

Plenty of incidents are missed. Some goes for you, some against you.

Ashton is banned, but squeezing someone's balls and punching someone in the eye are deemed acceptable.

Geordiefalcon people can have opinions but 6 incidents of varying sins, 54 weeks of punishment. Those are the facts.

There's only so much people can defend Hartley's actions.

Not my fault guv - Smith's face got in the way of my elbow, George shouldn't have put his head in my way, Wayne Barnes provoked me into swearing at him... etc.

I have no sympathy for a player who has such a poor disciplinary record. It's disappointing there are so many who want a thug like him as England captain.

Knowsit17 wrote:I'm not necessarily judging every incident by itself. I'm talking more about the broad accumulation of incidents for a player still under 30. There's worse you can do than punch or headbutt but when that punch or headbutt is only the latest to a lengthening list of offences, some of them serious, nobody can really complain when the individual responsible starts to be seen in a certain way.

Really now, what other players are there currently who have amassed such a disciplinary record? And who have paid the consequences so often without seemingly learning much?

Kind of my point though when you look at those incidents there's not much in a lot of them. As acknowledged in this thread they do start to work against him.

Would you drop Hartley out then or is this just against his captaincy?

Who will captain England for the 10 minutes Hartley is in the bin/suspended for his next offence? Presumably Robshaw?

Head butt - didn't happen a simple squaring up nothing more.

Biting, when fish hooked - 99% or people would say it is justified. No punishment for the fish hooking, double standards.

Swearing at the ref - Hartley still says and I have not seen Youngs contradict it, that he was talking to Youngs, not Barnes, perhaps he has a guilty conscience.

The elbow, looked accidental to me, pulling his arm away.

As 7 1/2 says, he is being judged on his rep and not his deeds. It would not be allowed in a court of law, so why by a disciplinary panel.

His record for England is not bad at all and the one way to make him play out of his skin is to verbally abuse him pre-match (isn't it Mr. Gatland?). He is a specialist at getting under the skin of the opposition and getting them to do stupid things, something I do not like about him.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Who will captain England for the 10 minutes Hartley is in the bin/suspended for his next offence? Presumably Robshaw?

Has Hartley been sin binned many times for England? Not sure he has myself, loads for club but not much for England...

Two saints fans defending a Saints thug. Shock horror! I get accused of bias. Double standards? Supported by one of the most deluded posters on here - no 7 & 1/2.

Well-past it

You believe it was simply squaring up but as a biased Saints fan is that surprising? No it isn't. It was unnecessary. Hartley paid the price for his behaviour.

Defending biting? Really?

Swearing at the ref - Hartley says he didn't so it must be true of course! We should of course believe a thug like Hartley is innocent because he said so.... so what if Youngs doesn't contradict it? Until Youngs comes out with a different side of the story we can only come to the conclusion it was aimed at Barnes.

Elbow - again unnecessary. There's a reason it's generally Hartley, he just can't help himself.

Hartley is judged both on his rep and deeds which go hand in hand. 6 different incidents spanning over 8 years shows someone who has not learnt. He should keep his head down.

Only one quite big ban for England is a definition of not bad at all is it? I agree his disciplinary record for England isn't as bad as his one for Saints but it's all relative isn't it?

You say he's a specialist of getting under the skin of the opposition. Well this quite clearly has backfired on a few occasions - notably his headbutt on Jamie George.

Hartley as Capt tells you more about Eddie than anything else so far

No BS about culture. He wants a mean abrasive temperamental leader a la Jonno leading a mean bullying pack.

Its the complete antithesis of the last regime and perhaps that is Stewie's legacy; this is how not to do it.

Alrready Jones is making some serious impact and its good to see; fascinated to see how it will translate on game day.

Is Hartley being made captain (yet to be confirmed by the way) an indication that Lawes will be at lock with Launchbury. I'm imaging Beshocked pouring over Lawes criminal record to justify Kruis' inclusion over Lawes.



On current form mind you, I might just agree with him.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Nothing worse than armchair rugby coaches!

I trust Eddie to make the right call.

Aye and you trusted Lancaster, Jonson and Robinson before him.

And Ashton.  This is the thing which confuses me though. The majority f the time I didn't think England had the players to mount decent or sustained challenges through those periods of coaching and most did a pretty good job. You seem to be suggesting they should have been picking up trophies though? Just so I know how to reply to the arrogance claims in the future.

I didn't include Ashton because I thought he did well to get England to the RWC final in 07

beshocked wrote:Two saints fans defending a Saints thug. Shock horror! I get accused of bias. Double standards? Supported by one of the most deluded posters on here - no 7 & 1/2.

Well-past it

You believe it was simply squaring up but as a biased Saints fan is that surprising? No it isn't. It was unnecessary. Hartley paid the price for his behaviour.

Defending biting? Really?

Swearing at the ref - Hartley says he didn't so it must be true of course! We should of course believe a thug like Hartley is innocent because he said so.... so what if Youngs doesn't contradict it? Until Youngs comes out with a different side of the story we can only come to the conclusion it was aimed at Barnes.

Elbow - again unnecessary. There's a reason it's generally Hartley, he just can't help himself.

Hartley is judged both on his rep and deeds which go hand in hand. 6 different incidents spanning over 8 years shows someone who has not learnt. He should keep his head down.

Only one quite big ban for England is a definition of not bad at all is it? I agree his disciplinary record for England isn't as bad as his one for Saints but it's all relative isn't it?

You say he's a specialist of getting under the skin of the opposition. Well this quite clearly has backfired on a few occasions - notably his headbutt on Jamie George.

I think that was me Beshocked.

If someone stuck their finger in my mouth and was wretching my cheek out then I would make sure they knew about it. Sorry but that's the truth. And im a well educated, 39yo ...most definitely not a football hooligan type.

When a Welsh WUM like Gwlad thinks Hartley is a good choice....think it says it all to be honest.

Well-Past-it

Lawes is a player I dislike in terms of his style of play. I think he's a bit of a bully, only takes on players smaller than him but his discipline is almost spotless compared to Hartley. In the past he's also been good for England, albeit in his way of bullying those smaller than him.

To be honest I could see the logic of starting Hartley and Lawes together as it would be a club combo even if I think neither deserves to start.

I want the best for England regardless of form. Hartley has been a pretty consistent player for England (before 2015) but I won't ever advocate him as captain, oh and of course his form/fitness is not good.

Lawes isn't in form either. I wouldn't want him as captain but I don't think he's seriously seen as a contender.

Geordie you may have done the same yourself but Hartleys reaction was idiotic.

He knows his reputation, he knows the benefit of doubt is always against him, he knows he struggles to control his temper and he knows he likes being "in the face" of the opposition, but he doesn't have the comonsense to make a decision not to break the rules.

That is not a mentality that most people in their right mind see as the leader of a nations rugby team.

I know that in the past captains like Johnson or even Sean Fitzpatrick for the ABs had an imperfect record for discipline but they were also great rugby brains and their actions rarely effected their national or club results.

Johnson recently stated he wouldn't select Hartley as captain.

Probably the best man to give an opinion having been both captain and coach

beshocked wrote:When a Welsh WUM like Gwlad thinks Hartley is a good choice....think it says it all to be honest.

Well-Past-it

Lawes is a player I dislike in terms of his style of play. I think he's a bit of a bully, only takes on players smaller than him but his discipline is almost spotless compared to Hartley. In the past he's also been good for England, albeit in his way of bullying those smaller than him.

To be honest I could see the logic of starting Hartley and Lawes together as it would be a club combo even if I think neither deserves to start.

I want the best for England regardless of form. Hartley has been a pretty consistent player for England (before 2015) but I won't ever advocate him as captain, oh and of course his form/fitness is not good.

Lawes isn't in form either. I wouldn't want him as captain but I don't think he's seriously seen as a contender.

New coach fresh start, I would have thought most England fans would want to see new ideas...?

Selecting lawen and Hartley doesn't seem progressive. Particularly compared to form players in their positions.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Would you drop Hartley out then or is this just against his captaincy?

Captaincy. It's ultimately up to Hartley how often he plays i.e. without the indiscipline he'd probably be first choice. As it stands he has ruled himself out of much England selection in the past directly through his indiscipline.

But my point is if Hartley was playing for Wales, I wouldn't want him as skipper even if he was my first choice hooker. End of the day I wouldn't want to give the captaincy to someone who isn't even guaranteed to be there on the day. He's been suspended before at times when England had need of him and that alone goes against any notion of adequate leadership for me.

Well Past It- If you were defending one or two patchy incidents you might have a point. I personally don't believe somebody can be convicted of foul play six times through sheer bad luck. There's no smoke without fire and the regularity of Hartley's suspensions just shows how often he participates in foul play, even if he's not always the sole participant in a given incident.

I don't see the argument for starting club combos unless they are the best players in their positions.

Looking at other international sides, Rory Best and POC, Dane Coles and Whitelock, Bismarck Du Plessis and Matfield/Etzebeth/De Jager, none of these guys play at the same club.

Seems like its only us that gets so hung up on it, and even then that was primarily due to Youngs and Parling.

I'd have no problem pairing either Hartley/George with Lawes/Kruis/Slater etc whoever was the best, fit, lock who calls the lineout

maestegmafia wrote:Geordie you may have done the same yourself but Hartleys reaction was idiotic.

He knows his reputation, he knows the benefit of doubt is always against him, he knows he struggles to control his temper and he knows he likes being "in the face" of the opposition, but he doesn't have the comonsense to make a decision not to break the rules.

That is not a mentality that most people in their right mind see as the leader of a nations rugby team.

I know that in the past captains like Johnson or even Sean Fitzpatrick for the ABs had an imperfect record for discipline but they were also great rugby brains and their actions rarely effected their national or club results.

Johnson recently stated he wouldn't select Hartley as captain.

Probably the best man to give an opinion having been both captain and coach

That's the direction I was trying to argue in. It demonstrates a lack of foresight and a tad too much reactionism which in the past has destabilised Hartley's chances of making the England 2 shirt his own. And neither attribute is preferable in a skipper.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Head butt - didn't happen a simple squaring up nothing more.

It was just squaring up, there was minimal violence, but Hartley did dip the forehead. Reminded me of the Zidane incident. Guilty verdict fair enough, length of ban did reflect his previous record (which courts do too)

Biting, when fish hooked - 99% or people would say it is justified. No punishment for the fish hooking, double standards.

This is the one I feel he was most hard done by. Technically he is guilty, but really what else are you meant to do when your arms are pinnned and someone shoves their fingers in your mouth intending to hurt you.

Swearing at the ref - Hartley still says and I have not seen Youngs contradict it, that he was talking to Youngs, not Barnes, perhaps he has a guilty conscience.

Youngs stated that he heard nothing from Hartley, as Hartley was not looking at him. Having been warned for the way he was talking to Barnes only minutes this was sheer stupidity. He may have been referring to Tom Youngs, but then why was he looking towards Barnes when he said it.

The elbow, looked accidental to me, pulling his arm away.

Hartley deliberately threw the arm out. He may not have intended to hit the head, but he did intend to hit the player.

As 7 1/2 says, he is being judged on his rep and not his deeds. It would not be allowed in a court of law, so why by a disciplinary panel.

His record for England is not bad at all and the one way to make him play out of his skin is to verbally abuse him pre-match (isn't it Mr. Gatland?). He is a specialist at getting under the skin of the opposition and getting them to do stupid things, something I do not like about him.

And of course there was the initial gouging when he was at Worcester.

His record is his own fault - there is no-one else to blame. Yet I would not preclude him from the captaincy because of his disciplinary club record (MJ was no saint after all) . I would preclude him because his form sucks. I do not believe he deserves to be in England's matchday 23.

More petty insults beshocked. I know you don't like to be challenged but come on be better than that. Do you think we should jettison Hartley for discipline or just for the captaincy? He's the only experienced guy which you deemed really important, just keep him until we build experience with another 3 hookers or does that matter if George is seen as number 1?

All this Hartley talk could just be a bloody good smokescreen

Knowsit17 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Would you drop Hartley out then or is this just against his captaincy?

Captaincy. It's ultimately up to Hartley how often he plays i.e. without the indiscipline he'd probably be first choice. As it stands he has ruled himself out of much England selection in the past directly through his indiscipline.

But my point is if Hartley was playing for Wales, I wouldn't want him as skipper even if he was my first choice hooker. End of the day I wouldn't want to give the captaincy to someone who isn't even guaranteed to be there on the day. He's been suspended before at times when England had need of him and that alone goes against any notion of adequate leadership for me.

Well Past It- If you were defending one or two patchy incidents you might have a point. I personally don't believe somebody can be convicted of foul play six times through sheer bad luck. There's no smoke without fire and the regularity of Hartley's suspensions just shows how often he participates in foul play, even if he's not always the sole participant in a given incident.

You don't have to believe it but it sounds as if you're judging on the descriptions of the bans and outcomes rather than your opinion after watching. Sorry if thats not the case.

I hope so, because we were all moaning when Lancaster wasn't picking on form and the choice of Hartley in the starting 15 let alone captain certainly isn't picking on form - for all of youngs faults he would would of been a better choice than Hartley at his current form.

nathan wrote:I hope so, because we were all moaning when Lancaster wasn't picking on form and the choice of Hartley in the starting 15 let alone captain certainly isn't picking on form - for all of youngs faults he would would of been a better choice than Hartley at his current form.

As would Haywood, Taylor, Ward.

Heck even McGuigan and Webber.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Would you drop Hartley out then or is this just against his captaincy?

Captaincy. It's ultimately up to Hartley how often he plays i.e. without the indiscipline he'd probably be first choice. As it stands he has ruled himself out of much England selection in the past directly through his indiscipline.

But my point is if Hartley was playing for Wales, I wouldn't want him as skipper even if he was my first choice hooker. End of the day I wouldn't want to give the captaincy to someone who isn't even guaranteed to be there on the day. He's been suspended before at times when England had need of him and that alone goes against any notion of adequate leadership for me.

Well Past It- If you were defending one or two patchy incidents you might have a point. I personally don't believe somebody can be convicted of foul play six times through sheer bad luck. There's no smoke without fire and the regularity of Hartley's suspensions just shows how often he participates in foul play, even if he's not always the sole participant in a given incident.

You don't have to believe it but it sounds as if you're judging on the descriptions of the bans and outcomes rather than your opinion after watching. Sorry if thats not the case.

It isn't. The biting incident alone is the only case where I have a measure of sympathy for Hartley. The others - he brought them on himself through behaving in an unacceptable way.

I've explained my reasons why I wouldn't choose him as skipper. He's not the right model of player to lead a side to big things imo. He's not disciplined enough for the role, meaning he doesn't always think ahead of his actions and he's too prone to knee-jerk reactions which land him in the ****. Like I said, not things you want to see in a captain.

No 7&1/2 wrote:To be fair knowsit I don't see a lot of venom directed at the likes of Cian Healy despite having similar issues.

And as I write that someone has pointed to him as well!

I take it you do not read any of chunkynowrich's posts then ?

Agree.... On performance alone I don't think he should be in the squad...let alone Capt.

I hope it is a smoke screen right enough and George starts. He's the form Hooker. And quality.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:To be fair knowsit I don't see a lot of venom directed at the likes of Cian Healy despite having similar issues.

And as I write that someone has pointed to him as well!

I take it you do not read any of chunkynowrich's posts then ?

He's not really serious though surely?

Knowsit17 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Would you drop Hartley out then or is this just against his captaincy?

Captaincy. It's ultimately up to Hartley how often he plays i.e. without the indiscipline he'd probably be first choice. As it stands he has ruled himself out of much England selection in the past directly through his indiscipline.

But my point is if Hartley was playing for Wales, I wouldn't want him as skipper even if he was my first choice hooker. End of the day I wouldn't want to give the captaincy to someone who isn't even guaranteed to be there on the day. He's been suspended before at times when England had need of him and that alone goes against any notion of adequate leadership for me.

Well Past It- If you were defending one or two patchy incidents you might have a point. I personally don't believe somebody can be convicted of foul play six times through sheer bad luck. There's no smoke without fire and the regularity of Hartley's suspensions just shows how often he participates in foul play, even if he's not always the sole participant in a given incident.

You don't have to believe it but it sounds as if you're judging on the descriptions of the bans and outcomes rather than your opinion after watching. Sorry if thats not the case.

It isn't. The biting incident alone is the only case where I have a measure of sympathy for Hartley. The others - he brought them on himself through behaving in an unacceptable way.

I've explained my reasons why I wouldn't choose him as skipper. He's not the right model of player to lead a side to big things imo. He's not disciplined enough for the role, meaning he doesn't always think ahead of his actions and he's too prone to knee-jerk reactions which land him in the ****. Like I said, not things you want to see in a captain.

Oh I agree he put himself in the situations but that doesn't alter my view of their seriousness etc.

As I said still to be confirmed.


"Two saints fans defending a Saints thug player. Shock horror! I get accused of bias frequently. Double standards? Of course, I invented them. Supported by one of the most deluded posters on here - no 7 & 1/2 and rundown by the most deluded.

Sorry Beshocked but your post just ask for it.

Blimey. The Welsh WUMs (and beshocked) are loving this thread!

GeordieFalcon wrote:Agree.... On performance alone I don't think he should be in the squad...let alone Capt.

I hope it is a smoke screen right enough and George starts. He's the form Hooker. And quality.

I don't remember if Eddie Jones liked to play the media when he last coached Australia. It was a long time ago now.

I wonder who England fans think would be a good long term captain..? Launchbury has been mentioned a few times, a talented player with age on his side and respect from the opposition.

Some good things have come out of this first squad selection. Firstly, now that Jones has made some decisions, people who supported his appointment have to some to terms with the fact he will makes choices they don't like - just as all managers do.

England fans have also just had an early lesson in something Australian and Japanese supporters already knew: what Eddie Jones says, and what Eddie Jones does, are often not the same.

maestegmafia wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Agree.... On performance alone I don't think he should be in the squad...let alone Capt.

I hope it is a smoke screen right enough and George starts. He's the form Hooker. And quality.

I don't remember if Eddie Jones liked to play the media when he last coached Australia. It was a long time ago now.

I wonder who England fans think would be a good long term captain..? Launchbury has been mentioned a few times, a talented player with age on his side and respect from the opposition.

The problem for England supporters is we don't have experienced leaders. Wales, for instance, have Warburton and AWJ. Like him or not, Hartley has proven to be an effective leader at club level. Will that translate to International level? Don't know, but it is more leadership experience than almost any other player in the England squad. (the question whether Hartley is in the squad on this season's form is another question, but Eddie knows what he wants). Launchbury is a good player, but can he lead a horse to water? Don't know. Many people would like to equate being the best player with being captain. Unfortunately, this does not frequently work which shows how rare and unusual a person like Martin Johnson really was.

doctor_grey wrote:   Many people would like to equate being the best player with being captain.   Unfortunately, this does not frequently work which shows how rare and unusual a person like Martin Johnson really was.    

Was Martin Johnson the best player in that England team? Not sure he was to be honest. A very good player in his own right but that team consisted of really quality players. He was the best leader but not the best player in my mind.

eirebilly wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:   Many people would like to equate being the best player with being captain.   Unfortunately, this does not frequently work which shows how rare and unusual a person like Martin Johnson really was.    

Was Martin Johnson the best player in that England team? Not sure he was to be honest. A very good player in his own right but that team consisted of really quality players. He was the best leader but not the best player in my mind.

Fair point, mate - maybe not best, but still very good.  My point was more about picking players as captain based only on talent.  MJ was very good and also a leader.

I see your point Doc

I think a truly balanced team has leaders over the team, not just one leader. The thing that made that England team so great was that the had leaders everywhere even if MJ was the captain, he had the support of many.

Cyril wrote:Blimey. The Welsh WUMs (and beshocked) are loving this thread!

And, as usual, you add very little.

Doctor grey you say that Hartley has been an effective leader at club level. Is getting sent off in an AP final and effectively costing your side the title something worthy of praise? Hartley has been stripped of the Saints captaincy because of his embarrassingly long disciplinary record.

Over a year of bans.

You are correct there isn't much leadership experience in the current England squad but a certified thug is not the answer.

Well past it you might well be accused of bias frequently and invented double standards. Don't see your point though.

Most of the reasons against Hartley are more reasons against having him in the squad/team. The captain is there to rally and make decisions like lineouts etc. He's one of the few to do the role well in club rugby. Other serious candidates? Probably Youngs or Care, Launchbury, Kvesic, Robshaw?

eirebilly wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:   Many people would like to equate being the best player with being captain.   Unfortunately, this does not frequently work which shows how rare and unusual a person like Martin Johnson really was.    

Was Martin Johnson the best player in that England team? Not sure he was to be honest. A very good player in his own right but that team consisted of really quality players. He was the best leader but not the best player in my mind.

Well, he was one of the "World Class" players in that side and along with John Eales the standout second row of the era. thing is with MJ you got a brooding intensity that almost demanded others would follow him anywhere, but also an intelligence to know what to do and when.

He was of course just a part of a very strong leadership cadre - something that England do not really have right now.

no 7 & 1/2 Hartley is no longer captain of Saints and rightly so. You say he rallies his team, Saints could do with that right now.

We will not agree on this - there is plenty of proof/evidence which shows that Hartley is a thug and unsuitable to be England captain. You can ignore it if you want but doesn't make your argument valid.

His discipline is only one factor of course, his fitness/form are poor too.

I am not saying that MJ was not a world class player LT, only a fool would say something like that, he was certainly one of the best. I just do not think that he was the best player in that team but he was by far the best leader.

Anyways, back on topic. I think that Hartley is a very good player (or has been, have not seen much of him in the last year) and if selected could do the captains job well. As I said before, his indiscipline has indirectly let England down but on England duty, I cannot remember if he has received many YC's or a even a RC?

Fair enough beshocked, I'd have Launchbury, who's your choice? And don't you think having a thug like Hartley in the team or squad at all is too much of a risk?

Launchbury or Robshaw as interim.

Having Hartley in the squad is different to captain. I think he can still offer something to the squad as a player because of his experience. Being one of 33 is different to being elevated above the others.

A captain is meant to represent the nation, be a role model, be an inspiration.

Hartley is not currently captain of Saints and he's arguably not first choice hooker either.

If Hartley was tearing it up in the AP and ERCC then you might have a good argument picking Hartley to start vs Scotland.

Hartley is in the England squad because he's the most experienced international hooker in England. I understand that decision. It is the captaincy that I am strongly against.

So it's mainly the impact on impressions rather than if he's good at the job?

beshocked wrote:Doctor grey you say that Hartley has been an effective leader at club level. Is getting sent off in an AP final and effectively costing your side the title something worthy of praise? Hartley has been stripped of the Saints captaincy because of his embarrassingly long disciplinary record.

No. He wasn't stripped.

beshocked wrote:Doctor grey you say that Hartley has been an effective leader at club level. Is getting sent off in an AP final and effectively costing your side the title something worthy of praise? Hartley has been stripped of the Saints captaincy because of his embarrassingly long disciplinary record.

Over a year of bans.

You are correct there isn't much leadership experience in the current England squad but a certified thug is not the answer.

Well past it you might well be accused of bias frequently and invented double standards. Don't see your point though.

I was wondering about this as I can't find any evidence. I did find an article on the appointment of Dickson as the new captain of Saints and at least in public there is nothing but praise for Hartley's record as skipper and emphasising his importance as one of the leadership group going forward

Lee takes over from Dylan, who has been a superb captain for the past six seasons - the most successful period in the club's history.

I know there was a feeling that making him captain and giving him more responsibility was thought to be helpful in controlling the temper, but 6 years in the job suggests that he was doing something right.

Depends what you mean by good at his job.

To be honest I favour the approach of picking a 23 first then picking a captain.

Saracens have been using that approach very effectively this season. Hargreaves is technically the captain but he's not been playing, the captaincy has been shared amongst the likes of Wigglesworth,Barritt,George and Itoje. It helps build a leadership structure by sharing the responsibility.


A good leader leads by example. Leading by example can also be not letting the opposition get under your skin, keeping a cool head and making the right decisions.

Hartley squared up to George and got done for headbutting. Who do you think lead by example better? The player who tried to wind up the opposition and failed or the one who shrugged off the provocation as if it was nothing and helped his team win the game?

Poor discipline can cost teams matches. Rhys Gill who I certainly would never pick as captain cost Saracens the match vs Quins. I would never pick Ashton or Farrell as Saracens captains - too hot headed.

So is it impressions that bother you or hot headed? The hot headed thing could cost us through being sin binned/sent off but that's if he's playing full stop. If he's playing doesn't really affect captaincy surely?