6N Rugby - Italy v England

First topic message reminder :

England team to face Italy - Sunday

1 Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 28 caps)
2 Dylan Hartley (captain, Northampton Saints, 67 caps)
3 Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers, 57 caps)
4 Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 43 caps)
5 George Kruis (Saracens, 11 caps)
6 Chris Robshaw (Harlequins, 44 caps)
7 James Haskell (Wasps, 63 caps)
8 Billy Vunipola (vice captain, Saracens, 22 caps)
9 Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 53 caps)
10 George Ford (Bath Rugby, 18 caps)
11 Jack Nowell (Exeter Chiefs, 11 caps)
12 Owen Farrell (vice captain, Saracens, 36 caps)
13 Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 17 caps)
14 Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 16 caps)
15 Mike Brown (vice captain, Harlequins, 44 caps)

Replacements
16 Jamie George (Saracens, 4 caps)
17 Joe Marler (Harlequins, 38 caps)
18 Paul Hill (Northampton Saints, uncapped)
19 Joe Launchbury (Wasps, 29 caps)
20 Maro Itoje (Saracens, uncapped)
21 Jack Clifford (Harlequins, 1 cap)
22 Danny Care (Harlequins, 54 caps)
23 Alex Goode (Saracens, 19 caps)

Bin Robshaw and if Simpson was available I'd also bin Youngs. That's all that needs to change. Start Clifford with Haskell and put Beaumont on the bench. Jobs a good un.

beshocked wrote: I agree Eddie Jones isn't out to annoy me but he will if he doesn't make the changes I want to see. Changes I think will be best for England.

Really?

Is it possible, just possible, that Eddie Jones knows a little more about how to build a successful rugby team than you do?

Is it also possible that the requirements to a) select the best possible team available, and b) ensure that a strong squad is built with succession planning in mind, will mean that sometimes selections are occasionally conflicting and that as a result a selection decision can be criticised on one of these two fronts?

I think most people are united in their desire to see Itoje, Daly and George (among others) get game time. However, given this is only Jones' second game in charge, isn't it a bit soon to be criticising him so vehemently?

Sgt Pooly it's for the best. It's evident you'll never understand my reasonings.

jbeadlesbrighthand well his experience and track record would suggest he knows how to build a successful rugby team, more so than myself. Doesn't mean he's necessarily right though on every decision. Afterall he's still human.

Doesn't make my questioning of his decisions go away.

how many games do we give Eddie Jones before he makes the changes we want to see?

How long should the honeymoon period stay?

You say I am criticising him so vehemently. I do not want to see him sacked, I praised him for his good tactical change of bring Mako on, I gave credit for bagging a win vs Scotland.

The start to Eddie Jones' England career I would say 6/10.

I am sorry that I am not praising every single one of Eddie Jones' decisions. It's because I don't agree with all of them.

I can't show the same positivity that some of you can because I personally think there are still improvements that must be made.

Putting in Clifford is something I would approve of though.

Have you noticed, no comment about MV being elevated from the bench and Marler relegated accordingly. Wonder why?

Sounds like more Jones common sense to me.

As for BV getting dropped to the bench, it has to happen at sometime. England need to get another two players integrated and they can't if BV is always playing. Presumably EJ thinks Beaumont has the potential, so expect it to happen soon. Completely different playing styles though.

Kruis will have been told that he has not been dropped for his performance, if he takes it badly it simply shows that he is not a team player and thinks of himself.

beshocked wrote:Sgt Pooly it's for the best. It's evident you'll never understand my reasonings.

jbeadlesbrighthand well his experience and track record would suggest he knows how to build a successful rugby team, more so than myself. Doesn't mean he's necessarily right though on every decision. Afterall he's still human.

Doesn't make my questioning of his decisions go away.

how many games do we give Eddie Jones before he makes the changes we I want to see?

How long should the honeymoon period stay?

You say I am criticising him so vehemently. I do not want to see him sacked, I praised him for his good tactical change of bring Mako on, I gave credit for bagging a win vs Scotland.

The start to Eddie Jones' England career I would say 6/10.

I am sorry that I am not praising every single one of Eddie Jones' decisions. It's because I don't agree with all of them.

I can't show the same positivity that some of you can because I personally think there are still improvements that must be made.

Putting in Clifford is something I would approve of though.

There you go Beshocked, adjusted it to what you really wanted to say

Eddie wants to win the tournament. have no doubts about that.

He will play a side that is the most boring, predictable load of tosh..if it means he can win the title. But Eddie is not stupid...he knows you need a little bit of flash aswell.

He wanted a win against Scotland. He got it.
He wanted the set pieces sorted. He got it.
Was it perfect...not by any means...but we won.

Now next up Italy.
Suggestions are we need more carrying in the pack.
Mako looks to be starting. And is the form EQ LH.

We want more kids coming through..
Clifford looks to be starting. Young quality player

But he still keeps the solid basics that he had v Scotland.

Kruis was very good v Scotland, but Jones wants to see what else he has in the squad. Hence Itoje will more than likely come off the bench.

Small steps...as Eddie Jones views what he has. And I agree totally with that!

Eddie's made it very clear in conversation that he will pick Itoje and probably before too long. FFS, he would have been on the bench on Saturday had Lawes failed to recover or Launchbury's squits not cleared up.

But Eddie's selection priorities are not ours. His priorities, as far as I can see are:
1. Win
2. Identify which experienced players will meet his standards, and which won't.
3. Bring new players through as (2) creates opportunities.

As fans, we're all behind him on (1), but we're getting a bit overexcited about (3) and forgetting (2).

(2) is important because experience matters in international rugby. I think Geech recently made the point that it's about 20 caps in that a player starts to settle and play fully to their strengths. The squad that Lancaster left behind was, with a couple of exceptions, young enough to see 2019, some way up the experience curve but collectively 200 or so caps short and by-and-large the right picks given where we were in 2015.

What has changed? The usual. Form goes up and down, new players emerge, people get injured.

Oh, and we have a new coach. Ironically, that probably slows down the process of getting new players in, because he wants - rightly - to evaluate the ones he's got. Lancaster made some bad calls at the end, but was always facing an uphill challenge for 2015 because he had to start from such a low experience base.

Eddie, on the other hand, has an initial squad with 500-ish caps. He will want to get that to 750 or so by 2019. There are around 40 games between now and the RWC, so about 900 additional caps to hand out.

He can afford to "lose" around 650 caps over the course of 4 years. If we assume that that splits fairly evenly between experienced, say 50-cap, players retiring (whether forced or not), 20-cappers being unavailable through injury or not making the grade, and newcomers having a few games but not cutting it, then he will probably use 25-30 players in the 4 years who won't make the final squad. (Sense check - Lancaster used around 55 players in the last cycle, Hansen, who used next fewest, around 65. Lancaster began with a squad that had around 200-300 caps, and "lost" around 600 - which left the RWC squad a couple of hundred behind).

By the same token, he will bring the same number into the squad. He probably needs a hit rate of 2 to 1 for things to work out - i.e. for every three players he tries, he needs 2 to make the grade AND be fit and firing come the RWC. So there is reason for him to be cautious about picking the right ones and bringing them in in the right way to give them the best chance of success.

Well-past it if you read some other posters opinions you'll notice the changes I want are very similar to what other posters want. Even Bambam who calls my opinions ridiculous agrees on at least two selections.

Others are just more accepting that those changes might not happen.

To be honest I don't care if Mako starts or doesn't. Starter or bench is fine, as long as he's in the 23. Mako showed vs Scotland what he could do off the bench.

Geordiefalcon that's well and good but it doesn't fix the centre conundrum. Is it unrealistic to expect Eddie Jones to pick Farrell at 10 and Devoto at 12?

I don't think I am being that demanding. I am not expecting England to throw in numerous new starters, just a few tweaks here and there that quite a few posters would agree with.

Personally I couldn't care less about the minor tinkering around various combinations where we have strength - I'd like to see a real attempt at sorting out our 2 more obvious weaknesses: the BR balance and the IC problem. We pretty much know the candidates for FR, SR, BS & no 8 etc. The Italy selection mostly seems like playing with starters vs the bench. And players like Itoje will get his chance - I don't see any rush. But working out what we want from an OS and who fits the bill is a matter of urgency for me. As is developing a centre combination. Looks like Eddie has put the centre question on hold pending the return to fitness of Hill & Slade (& Manu). He doesn't seem to trust Devoto. So the only point of interest for Sunday for me, selection wise, is how Clifford fares - I really hope he starts.

Yeah it does seem from little comments that Slade, Hill and Tuilagi are marked for inside centre. I suppose the question is do we use Farrell as a stop gap as a (perceived) safer pair of hands or blood Devoto perhaps earlier than is ideal?

beshocked wrote:

Geordiefalcon that's well and good but it doesn't fix the centre conundrum. Is it unrealistic to expect Eddie Jones to pick Farrell at 10 and Devoto at 12?

Yes when Devoto doesn't even play for his Club side.

Bottom line...he wants to win this tournament!

You wont see kids galore. You'll see players regardless of age who do their specific roles to the level Eddie wants - which in this particular case wont be fancy dan rugby. It'll be people who can tackle, scrummage, pass basically...etc etc There wont be any pretty rugby..it'll be brutal basics.

Come the summer tour of Australia you'll see more changes.

It's pretty much the same priority list of every coach. Win the next game. Introduce youngsters when you think they and the team will benefit from it.

Certainly is 7.5

GeordieFalcon wrote:Bottom line...he wants to win this tournament!

You wont see kids galore. You'll see players regardless of age who do their specific roles to the level Eddie wants - which in this particular case wont be fancy dan rugby. It'll be people who can tackle, scrummage, pass basically...etc etc There wont be any pretty rugby..it'll be brutal basics.

Come the summer tour of Australia you'll see more changes.

This a good pragmatic approach and is very sensible in my opinion. If he can just keep on making small improvements and building up a bit of positive momentum I'll be very happy.

Geordiefalcon fair point but Devoto is one of the players Eddie Jones has picked rightly or wrongly. If he's not going to utilise him no point having him in the squad in my opinion. Might as well send him back to Bath to get some vital game time.

Would say the same about other players too.

At least Daly won't be holding tackle bags this week. Good news for Wasps fans.

Vital game time? He's not been playing.

Jones rates him. He'll give him game time when he thinks it's time to play him.

Sgt Pooly surely that's why game time is vital for Devoto?

If Jones rates him, should either give him game time for England or let him go back to Bath.

Doesn't help a player to be messed around, given mere scraps of gametime or used as a tackle bag holder.

Eddie Jones want's to win each and every game not just the 6ns.

Eddie will pick the best players that he tinks will win the game.

So if he thinks that Maco and Iotje is the better players for this game. then so be it.

No body should say any think about Eddie Jones selections, untill the 6ns is over, and see where England end up in the tournament 1st or 5th, or what ever the final result is.

Then fans can either congratulate him, or condem hjim.

You just don't really understand how international rugby works do you Beshocked....

Is the matchday 23 named today?

Friday I think.

beshocked wrote:Sgt Pooly surely that's why game time is vital for Devoto?

If Jones rates him, should either give him game time for England or let him go back to Bath.

Doesn't help a player to be messed around, given mere scraps of gametime or used as a tackle bag holder.

Devoto is in the squad because there is no one else who can cover 12. If you send him back to his club, in the event of an injury to Farrell or Ford, we're up sh1t creek

Interesting that Itoje has been retained. I can only assume there is an issue with the fitness of Launchbury or Lawes. No doubt he'll impress if he gets a go.

I'm excited Beaumont has been retained. There's lots of chat about Clifford, who is a superb prospect, but I think Beaumont is pretty much unique in the English game and has the potential to be a very fine player indeed.

So if we are being radical the Beaumont could start at 8, with Vunipola moved to 6. I suspect Haskell will stay at 7 in this scenario, with Clifford on the bench. It would be interesting to see this.

The other thing I'd like to see is Devoto start with Ford dropping to the bench.

Do you think Beaumont will get on Dave?

Maybe with Billy at 6? Has Billy V played much at 6? I can only remember a couple of occasions for Saracens.

Otherwise, he may get a run out from 70 mins?

BamBam wrote:

beshocked wrote:Sgt Pooly surely that's why game time is vital for Devoto?

If Jones rates him, should either give him game time for England or let him go back to Bath.

Doesn't help a player to be messed around, given mere scraps of gametime or used as a tackle bag holder.

Devoto is in the squad because there is no one else who can cover 12. If you send him back to his club, in the event of an injury to Farrell or Ford, we're up sh1t creek

The other possibility is that Jones is being pragmatic and thinking that Devoto may not feature much in his plans once Slade and Manu are fit. He has already stated that he views both as his first choice 12s by a distance, plus he wants Daly to be '60 cap player at least'.

Perhaps he'd rather get Farrell and Ford more experience if they are part of his long term plans.

Plus if they feature well at 10/12 then it gives him more options in terms of the bench even when Slade and Manu are fit. I.e. if one of Ford or Farrell were starting with the other on the bench then he could have a back three player on the bench knowing that if a centre gets crocked he can more confidently put Ford and Farrell together to cover centre if required.

Personally I don't like Farrell at 12, think he's the form 10 who deserves to start and I rate Devoto highly so hope he gets a go at 12.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Do you think Beaumont will get on Dave?

Maybe with Billy at 6? Has Billy V played much at 6? I can only remember a couple of occasions for Saracens.

Otherwise, he may get a run out from 70 mins?

I think he might start. Upon reflection at 6 rather than 8. I've now read that Jones wants a faster pack, so it might be that Beaumont and Itoje come into the squad for Robshaw and Launchbury.

So if the telegraph are roughly correct the pac is something like:

1 Mako
2 Hartley
3 Cole
4 Launchbury
5 Lawes
6 Haskell
7 Clifford
8 Vunipola

16 Marler
17 George
18 Hill
19 Itoje
20 Beaumont

DaveM wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Do you think Beaumont will get on Dave?

Maybe with Billy at 6? Has Billy V played much at 6? I can only remember a couple of occasions for Saracens.

Otherwise, he may get a run out from 70 mins?

I think he might start. Upon reflection at 6 rather than 8. I've now read that Jones wants a faster pack, so it might be that Beaumont and Itoje come into the squad for Robshaw and Launchbury.

Just read the same thing...

GeordieFalcon wrote:So if the telegraph are roughly correct the pac is something like:

1 Mako
2 Hartley
3 Cole
4 Launchbury
5 Lawes
6 Haskell
7 Clifford
8 Vunipola

16 Marler
17 George
18 Hill
19 Itoje
20 Beaumont

That would be fine, albeit it a bit harsh on Kruis.

Just going on what Jones has said mate. He said Kruis was class, but he just wants to see what he has available.

The only change that could likely be made in the back line is Devoto at 12.

Given that Jones seems to have earmarked Ford/Farrell as his 10/12 for the tournament I can't see a change happening there though. I reckon he'll rather just get Ford and Farrell some more game time together before Wales and Ireland visit HQ.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

DaveM wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Do you think Beaumont will get on Dave?

Maybe with Billy at 6? Has Billy V played much at 6? I can only remember a couple of occasions for Saracens.

Otherwise, he may get a run out from 70 mins?

I think he might start. Upon reflection at 6 rather than 8. I've now read that Jones wants a faster pack, so it might be that Beaumont and Itoje come into the squad for Robshaw and Launchbury.

Just read the same thing...

So he is literally becoming Lancaster...

And a faster pack isn't what any of us wanted pre 6Ns. We wanted power, grunt, mongrel, explosive force and all that.

Funny how things change

I want power, aggression and more carrying in the tight 5 yappy. If that is in place then I'm quite happy to see a quicker back row though, especially as a big tight 5 should give them the set-piece needed to get quick ball.

With Slater injured our best option (IMO) to add real weight to the second row is missing though. Itoje being steadily introduced will be an increase in power from the options that Lancaster chose, Kruis has also looked much more dynamic this season.

Mako starting would be interesting to see from a carrying perspective.

Cole also seems to have been given liberty by England and Tigers to start edging his weight back up to where it was when he played at his best. Rumour has it that he was  asked to trim down by Lancaster et al and he never looked as effective after that. Brookes can offer real competition at TH and some bulk from the bench when fit as well.

1.Mako/Marler
2.George/Hartley
3.Cole/Brookes
4.Launchbury/Itoje
5.Kruis/Slater
6.Haskell/Robshaw/Hughes
7.Clifford/Kvesic
8.Vunipola/Beaumont

If our options look like that for the summer tour then it will be a quicker pack but also a much more powerful and explosive one!

As has been said many times I think Lancaster was for a long time building a very good pack. It was just far too reliant on his number 8 for carrying and often lacked bench impact. Then he just seemed to lose the plot with conditioning and tactics leading up to the RWC. Hopefully Jones adds a couple more heavy carriers and keeps up with a more physical forward game plan.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Just going on what Jones has said mate. He said Kruis was class, but he just wants to see what he has available.

That's fair enough.

king_carlos wrote:I want power, aggression and more carrying in the tight 5 yappy. If that is in place then I'm quite happy to see a quicker back row though, especially as a big tight 5 should give them the set-piece needed to get quick ball.

With Slater injured our best option (IMO) to add real weight to the second row is missing though. Itoje being steadily introduced will be an increase in power from the options that Lancaster chose, Kruis has also looked much more dynamic this season.

Mako starting would be interesting to see from a carrying perspective.

Cole also seems to have been given liberty by England and Tigers to start edging his weight back up to where it was when he played at his best. Rumour has it that he was  asked to trim down by Lancaster et al and he never looked as effective after that. Brookes can offer real competition at TH and some bulk from the bench when fit as well.

1.Mako/Marler
2.George/Hartley
3.Cole/Brookes
4.Launchbury/Itoje
5.Kruis/Slater
6.Haskell/Robshaw/Hughes
7.Clifford/Kvesic
8.Vunipola/Beaumont

If our options look like that for the summer tour then it will be a quicker pack but also a much more powerful and explosive one!

As has been said many times I think Lancaster was for a long time building a very good pack. It was just far too reliant on his number 8 for carrying and often lacked bench impact. Then he just seemed to lose the plot with conditioning and tactics leading up to the RWC. Hopefully Jones adds a couple more heavy carriers and keeps up with a more physical forward game plan.

Lawes, Underhill, Ewers, LCD, Hill and either Mullan or Auterac should also be there or thereabouts. We should be quicker to the breakdown, better at carrying and have a stronger set piece than in the WC.

king_carlos wrote:I want power, aggression and more carrying in the tight 5 yappy. If that is in place then I'm quite happy to see a quicker back row though, especially as a big tight 5 should give them the set-piece needed to get quick ball.

With Slater injured our best option (IMO) to add real weight to the second row is missing though. Itoje being steadily introduced will be an increase in power from the options that Lancaster chose, Kruis has also looked much more dynamic this season.

Mako starting would be interesting to see from a carrying perspective.

Cole also seems to have been given liberty by England and Tigers to start edging his weight back up to where it was when he played at his best. Rumour has it that he was  asked to trim down by Lancaster et al and he never looked as effective after that. Brookes can offer real competition at TH and some bulk from the bench when fit as well.

1.Mako/Marler
2.George/Hartley
3.Cole/Brookes
4.Launchbury/Itoje
5.Kruis/Slater
6.Haskell/Robshaw/Hughes
7.Clifford/Kvesic
8.Vunipola/Beaumont

If our options look like that for the summer tour then it will be a quicker pack but also a much more powerful and explosive one!

As has been said many times I think Lancaster was for a long time building a very good pack. It was just far too reliant on his number 8 for carrying and often lacked bench impact. Then he just seemed to lose the plot with conditioning and tactics leading up to the RWC. Hopefully Jones adds a couple more heavy carriers and keeps up with a more physical forward game plan.

Unlike in last weekends game where Vunipola did all the carrying?

Almost half his carries were off the back of the scrum, and not really something anyone else can do.

Of course he was the carrier of first choice in open play, but the other forwards got their hands on the ball much more than usual. Also worth pointing out that only Ireland did not have their Number8 carrying the most.

I just hope that if Mako is selected to start his scrummaging has greatly improved. He could be found out against a very strong Italian front row. That could mean poor possession and penalties and points against. We have rarely seen Mako start for England.. He usually comes on against second choice tight-heads when the game is opening up. Fingers crossed if he does start but its a real 'maybe'..

I think Ewers needs to be looked at in the summer. Hes potentially the beast at 6 we all want! Hes not far away from getting his first game back for Exeter apparently.

I just hope that if Mako is selected to start his scrummaging has greatly improved. He could be found out against a very strong Italian front row.

If he has a good game though, it may be that he finally can be the big carrying LH we have been looking for. One that does scissor passes etc...

LondonTiger wrote:Almost half his carries were off the back of the scrum, and not really something anyone else can do.

Of course he was the carrier of first choice in open play, but the other forwards got their hands on the ball much more than usual. Also worth pointing out that only Ireland did not have their Number8 carrying the most.

All true.

I was just pointing out that it's not like Jones has made any changes in how the pack carries from Lancaster's time. Vunipola/no8 does nearly all the yard making, the rest do a few yards into/around rucks.

Obviously he's only had a few weeks with the players though.

I just get the feeling that people are projecting their hopes/ideas onto Jones' team without actually seeing what's happening.

I'd be happy with the same again for Sunday, with a tweak at 10/12

Nice shape to the team Geordie - its early days and there are acid tests to come but at least you can see what Eddie is trying to achieve

Good looking team.

Eddie stated in his interview that he wants 3 quality players at each position. Kruis has established himself as the current number 1 based off his performance against Scotland, so now EJ wants to know who's number 2. Hence Kruis dropping back for this game.

"Hence Kruis dropping back for this game."

And probably very unhappy about it. He's only just this one game (after Scotland) been touted as 1st choice. Up to now hes been second choice. It seems you only get one game as first choice then you get dropped. Hmm.

Does it not suggest Jones will start Kruis if fit and available against Ireland?

EJ wants to win above all else, so I'd expect him to start with Kruis and Launchbury. Hopefully Itoje can come on at 50 minutes - probably to replace Kruis as Launchbury had a rest last week. A bit tough on Lawes, who looked OK.

(And Eddie Jones made a mistake playing Launchbury last week - unless Launchbury didn't tell EJ about where he spent Friday night)

GeordieFalcon wrote:So if the telegraph are roughly correct the pac is something like:

1 Mako
2 Hartley
3 Cole
4 Launchbury
5 Lawes
6 Haskell
7 Clifford
8 Vunipola

16 Marler
17 George
18 Hill
19 Itoje
20 Beaumont

Even I would be happy with that as long as the youngsters of the bench get enough game time.

Interested to see how Beaumont does. Having an alternative to Billy is important of course.

Heavy reliance on Billy by Lancaster in last year's 6 nations, the RWC and Eddie Jones in the Scotland game.

Lost to Wales when Billy went off injured,missed the Australia game, could have made a difference if he missed the Scotland game.

We had a backup strategy for no.8. Its tough when both guys break down, although Easter should have been in before Morgan (given his general condition) from the start. Those 3 have generally been the best potential international and EQ no.8's in the AP the last few seasons.

Beaumont wasn't an option then, Hughes still isn't and nobody really wanted to see Waldrom.

lostinwales what was the backup strategy in the RWC?

Morgan had a poor RWC, allegedly wasn't fully fit. He's a great asset to England when in form but he wasn't. His AP form hasn't been that good really.

I am not suggesting Lancaster should have looked at Beaumount just pleased that Eddie Jones is if the rumours are true.

As for Easter... come on... a fully fit in form Morgan and Billy have always been better international no 8s in my opinion. Easter is 37 too. Good club no 8 - probably one of the best actually but never really excelled at international level.

Strangely Easter is a bit like Alex Goode in my opinion. Both excellent club players, neither really shone that much at international level, had their moments, both lack pace but have good rugby brains. The difference is Goode still might turn it around hopefully. Still has a lot of proving to do though.

With Billy injured, Morgan off colour, England were very weak at no 8.