Eddie's England squad for summer

First topic message reminder :

Hello you lovely lot.

I've very much enjoyed your posts over this six nations. Great stuff.

I don't post much as I'm a bit of a novice (well a lot of really) but I'm always intrigued by your far more experienced wisdom. So:

The summer will bring a chance for Eddie to put more of his stamp on the team; who do you think stays the same and who changes? And who, if any, so you think might be bolters? (I know it's an oxymoron asking about bolters this early, but I'm going to do it anyway)

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well I hope he turns out to be good enough for all this cafuffle....

For me Kvesic is still the best England 7 by quite some way!

I've been impressed with the impact that Underhill has on the games I've seen - the other backrowers always seem to play better when he's on, which is often the mark of a class back row. Reportedly he and the Ospreys were used for opposed practice by the Wales squad before anyone knew he was, and he made an impression on Warburton and Gatland.

I did hear something about Warburton asking who the lad was.

We shall see how everything unfolds ....

LondonTiger wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Underhill will be selected in an England squad in the next 6 month.

http://www.planetrugby.com/news/england-working-on-underhill-resolution/

Still need to overcome the opposition from Glaws, who would have been due compensation from Ospreys if he had signed with them rather than with Bridgend. As supposedly the main reason Underhill left them was because the full contract offered (rather than academy one that he was on)  only allowed for part time studies, I do hope that a compromise can be found. After all this is very different to the likes of Steffon, Bendy and Flood heading off to France.

What is the issue? Surely Jones can say it's an "exceptional circumstance" and call him up. The rule was made to stop players like Toby Flood going off to France, not to stop young players coming into the England squad - or persuade them to join Wales.

Would his employer's - Ospreys - have a veto. I gather clubs get paid for their England players being away, and obviously this will have to extend to Osprey.

If Glaws have an issue with Ospreys, that's between them.

Alex_Germany wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Underhill will be selected in an England squad in the next 6 month.

http://www.planetrugby.com/news/england-working-on-underhill-resolution/

Still need to overcome the opposition from Glaws, who would have been due compensation from Ospreys if he had signed with them rather than with Bridgend. As supposedly the main reason Underhill left them was because the full contract offered (rather than academy one that he was on)  only allowed for part time studies, I do hope that a compromise can be found. After all this is very different to the likes of Steffon, Bendy and Flood heading off to France.

What is the issue? Surely Jones can say it's an "exceptional circumstance" and call him up. The rule was made to stop players like Toby Flood going off to France, not to stop young players coming into the England squad - or persuade them to join Wales.

Would his employer's - Ospreys - have a veto. I gather clubs get paid for their England players being away, and obviously this will have to extend to Osprey.

If Glaws have an issue with Ospreys, that's between them.

The issue is about relations between the RFU and the PRL. They are pretty good at the moment, and the RFU incentives to keep players in England are part of that. Underhill is clearly an exceptional case for the RFU, but the PRL would clearly be worried that it would set a precedent - so the two sides are clearly negotiating how to resolve that.

Given the time it's taking, I am wondering if what's actually happening is that Underhill is being brought back to an English West Country club with an arrangement that he can continue his degree. There would need to be some kind of settlement with Ospreys and probably some delicate "how do we do this under the salary framework" stuff, which would explain why it's taking so long.

Pretty sure I read Underhill state he's staying in Wales for the 3 years.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Pretty sure I read Underhill state he's staying in Wales for the 3 years.

He said he would honour his contracts I think - which implies that but is not explicit.

They can either get Underhill to move, probably not highly likely as having already missed a season he knows how fragile life in rugby can be so sensibly is preparing for post rugby life. Or they can persuade the PGB to deem it an exceptional case. That however requires unanimous consent from all PRL members.

I think his case is very different.

If they reject the "exceptional" clause in this case due to him being at uni, then I think that's really poor show.

Its not like Stefon or such being abroad. Its a very different case in my eyes.

Richie has came out and said he'll be selected.

It only takes one club to refuse to sanction it.

I agree it is a very different case, but there will be lots of conflicting agendas at play.

LondonTiger wrote:It only takes one club to refuse to sanction it.

I agree it is a very different case, but there will be lots of conflicting agendas at play.

It's not the League's choice though end of the day. The RFU obviously don't want to upset their relationship but if Richie wants to select him they will I imagine. Quite excited to see him in an England shirt, he looks a unique talent.

It is the decision of the Professional Game Board as to what triggers the exceptional clause, rather than Ian Ritchie.

Ritchie and Jones keep mentioning selection within 6 months as that is the window during which the new Clubs/RFU agreement will be negotiated.

Clearly the AP clubs won't want all their best players clearing off to the Pro12 for more money. Very difficult to select anyone outside the AP. The clubs won't allow it.

They may just tell the clubs they want to pick him to tie him to England then allow him to develop further in Wales and get on with his studies.

And make it clear post uni he moves back to England.

I wonder if Bristol need a highly talented young flanker?

They've not made it up quite yet.

DaveM wrote:I wonder if Bristol need a highly talented young flanker?

He's not expensive enough for them.

We'll take him at Falcons, he can study at the best city in the UK with the classiest women in the NH

Sunderland?


I'll get me coat...

Ok, so right now what I'd like to see starting in the First Test is:

Marler
Hartley
Cole
Kruis
Itoje
Ewers
Harrison
Vunipola
Youngs
Farrell
Nowell
Tuilagi
Slade
Watson
Goode

George
Vunipola
Brookes
Launchbury
Robshaw
Care
Cipriani
Joseph

Pace, power and creativity in the backline, and a backrow which is potentially a step up from the 6 Nations.

Ewers, Slade and Goode don't deserve a spot imo.

I'd just like to see rotation throughout the tests with different options tried. In test 1 it's probably best to stick as close to the 6 Nations side as possible. From there I'd like EI to mix in some fresh players and combinations.

Of course rotation is harder in practice than theory, especially with Hartley, Kruis and Billy are way ahead of their replacements for this tour. That said I wouldn't mind seeing changes such as below from test to test in order to get a look at new players/combinations and reduce the work load for some.

Test 1
Marler, Hartley, Cole, Itoje, Kruis, Robshaw, Haskell, Billy
Care, Farrell, Nowell, Tuilagi, Joseph, Watson, Brown
Reps: LCD, Mako, Brookes, Launchbury, Clifford, Youngs, Ford, Daly

Test 2
Mullan, Hartley, Brookes, Launchbury, Kruis, Clifford, Haskell, Billy
Youngs, Ford, Nowell, Slade, Joseph, Rokoduguni, Watson
Replacements: Taylor, Mako, Hill, Itoje, Kvesic, Robson, Farrell, Tuilagi

Test 3
Mako, Hartley, Cole, Launchbury, Itoje, Robshaw, Kvesic, Billy
Robson, Farrell, Nowell, Tuilagi, Daly, Wade, Brown
Replacements: LCD, Marler, Brookes, Kruis, Clifford, Care, Slade, Joseph

Obviously those sides include some personal preferences with players (no Ewers and Wade getting a test) but rotation such as that would get the best from the tour IMO.

In certain positions it would also create very healthy competition. For instance at TH it would be reasonable to tell Cole and Brookes that each will start one out of the 1st and 2nd test with whoever performs better then getting to start the 3rd.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Ewers, Slade and Goode don't deserve a spot imo.

I'd have to disagree with Goode, in very good form and we need to see what he can offer for England. Against Ireland in the past few seasons we've seen him be excellent and really poor, needs a bit more time in the white shirt. Slade has to be integrated as soon as possible. Personally not bothered if thats at 10,12 or 13, or a mixture of them all. One of the best backs we have. Ewers, well we need a bruising option there, but there is a lot of choice at flanker at present.

king_carlos wrote:

In certain positions it would also create very healthy competition. For instance at TH it would be reasonable to tell Cole and Brookes that each will start one out of the 1st and 2nd test with whoever performs better then getting to start the 3rd.

What if Hill outperforms them both?

Hill will be seriously good if he pushes on next season. Don't remember a prop as young as him who looks as good.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Ewers, Slade and Goode don't deserve a spot imo.

I'd have to disagree with Goode, in very good form and we need to see what he can offer for England. Against Ireland in the past few seasons we've seen him be excellent and really poor, needs a bit more time in the white shirt. Slade has to be integrated as soon as possible. Personally not bothered if thats at 10,12 or 13, or a mixture of them all. One of the best backs we have. Ewers, well we need a bruising option there, but there is a lot of choice at flanker at present.

Problem is that I believe we have seen what Goode offers in an England shirt at 15. He has had 19 caps. I think he's got some great skills and a good brain and I'd love to see him prove me wrong, but I don't have any confidence in him at international level unless the circumstances are exactly right (like that Ireland game in what was appalling conditions).

Slade does deserve a spot. He's done very little in the last few months because of the leg break but he was knocking on the door before and hes been doing some good stuff since hes come back. He's got huge potential and the only reason for not getting him involved is if it affects his continued recovery

I'm willing to say Goode has bags of talent and if we change our game slightly he could be very good. I do expect Jones to move away from a game plan that seems very much like Lancasters so far.

I think Watson is the next 15 and expect him to have some time there this summer.

Watsons an option but I'd be loathed to move him from the wing at present.

I know what you mean...but I think he ticks all the boxes and we have numerous wingers that could come in and do a very good job.

And we have Goode who's club form does merit a try surely.

Do we know when is EJ going to name the touring senior squad?

I guess it depends on what you want (and to an extent what we are used to)

Lets just think what happens with Goode at FB when the other side kicks long. On a good day he returns the ball with interest. Or he tries to run it back and gets turned over behind the game line.

Now if Watson was playing at FB. I have no idea about his kicking and yes it won't be as good as Goode. But if he runs it back....

Possibly 7.5 in a slightly different style. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

My choice would be put Watson in now and he'll potentially be there for the long term future. He's good enough now and is only going to get better.

Not sure when the squad is named.

As for Underhill surely its the perfect name for a 7. It might help to explain the temporary invisibility when going for a turnover. Is it true he refers to the ball as the 'precious'?

Hes no prancing pony that's for sure...

It had completely evaded my attention that Jamie George returned for Sarries against Worcs last week!

With 2 more knock out games guaranteed for Sarries and a 3rd likely, it will be a big boost for the tour if he comes through those looking good. With Hartley just returning as well and massive drop off in quality after those two having George back will allow some much needed rotation.

king_carlos wrote:It had completely evaded my attention that Jamie George returned for Sarries against Worcs last week!

With 2 more knock out games guaranteed for Sarries and a 3rd likely, it will be a big boost for the tour if he comes through those looking good. With Hartley just returning as well and massive drop off in quality after those two having George back will allow some much needed rotation.

Is it a massive drop off in quality? Or rather a massive drop off in experience.

Though I do agree it would be a massive boost to have George back .

He's looked decent for England but not proven himself yet.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

king_carlos wrote:It had completely evaded my attention that Jamie George returned for Sarries against Worcs last week!

With 2 more knock out games guaranteed for Sarries and a 3rd likely, it will be a big boost for the tour if he comes through those looking good. With Hartley just returning as well and massive drop off in quality after those two having George back will allow some much needed rotation.

Is it a massive drop off in quality? Or rather a massive drop off in experience.

Though I do agree  it would be a massive boost to have George back .

A bit of both IMO GF.

LCD is excellent around the park but shouldn't be featuring at international level with his line-out where it is at the moment - I trust he will be an important England player in time he just needs development.

Tommy Taylor looks a very useful player so is more a case of experience. His scrum work is solid and he can actually hook the ball plus his line-out is OK even if he does have the infuriating tendency to stand in line with his teams jumpers instead of the centre of the line-out - a new pet peeve from this season which refs need to look at more.

Neither offer the same level of set-piece solidity that Hartley and George do.

Yeah probably a fair assessment.

Whats your thoughts on Thacker?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Whats your thoughts on Thacker?

If by some miracle refs start forcing scrum halfs to put the ball into the scrum straight again he could be a star. His strike when hooking is as good as any I've seen and his line-out work is up there with the best in the Prem. On top of that he is something else around the park with his acceleration, power in contact and footwork in tight spaces. On top of this his handling and passing is fantastic - look at his pick up of his toes running at full pace before scoring against LI or his 20 metre miss pass to Manu which set-up a try against Gloucs.

If the ball isn't going into the scrum straight he will struggle against huge hookers who don't need to have the agility to hook the ball properly. In order to survive against the best THs he also needs a very strong scrummaging loose head next to him to prevent the opposition TH from boring in (or teach a TH who does bore in a lesson by driving his side of the scrum 5 metres backwards as Ayerza often does the second a TH tries to target the hooker).

As things stand I think he's already a very good Prem hooker who will only get better but with the current scrum state he may need to play openside to reach his potential.

With players only getting bigger the contrast when a smaller player shows something is much starker though and it's much easier to knock a guy for being small, something that can be very imminently proven, than to knock them for a lack of skill on the field, which is much more subjective to opinion. Whilst you lose a bit at the scrum with the current rules I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the negative effect of a line-out thrower as bad as LCD currently is would cause more damage to the sides performance over 80 minutes than the negative effect of Harry at hooker.

I totally agree.

I don't think he really has the size for scrums in the international game. But at 7 he could be quite outstanding!

Yes, he definitely needs to move to 7. Think he may have already had Youngs not been injured.

Yeah Youngs will be back next season. But that young Evans looks decent.

But I think Thacker is another level altogether.

Evans looks a lot better than decent when he has played esp for a 19 year old with limited experiance.

Thacker could be a fine 7 but I'm not sure he would be on another level to what Evans might be able to do.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Ewers, Slade and Goode don't deserve a spot imo.

Goode is the best English FB by a mile. It isn't remotely close. Watson will take over in due course, but there's no way he's currently better than Goode at 15.

Slade is a fantastic talent, is playing better than JJ, and brings slightly more than Daly. I can only see him playing at 13 in the short-term, and I think we just have to have him on the pitch as I'd say he's potentially the best English back of his generation - he can do everything.

Ewers being a combination of physicality and work rate which puts him ahead of the admirable Robshaw. Clifford isn't going to play 6 for England, or probably anywhere else this summer (he wasn't even in the starting line up for Quins this evening).

DaveM wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Ewers, Slade and Goode don't deserve a spot imo.

Goode is the best English FB by a mile. It isn't remotely close. Watson will take over in due course, but there's no way he's currently better than Goode at 15.

Slade is a fantastic talent, is playing better than JJ, and brings slightly more than Daly. I can only see him playing at 13 in the short-term, and I think we just have to have him on the pitch as I'd say he's potentially the best English back of his generation - he can do everything.

Ewers being a combination of physicality and work rate which puts him ahead of the admirable Robshaw. Clifford isn't going to play 6 for England, or probably anywhere else this summer (he wasn't even in the starting line up for Quins this evening).

Goode is not an international FB. He's got 20 caps, that's enough to be able to sum a player up at that level. You can't be that slow and weak physically at the top level.

I really like Slade but he's not got the gas for 13. JJ, Daly and Manu are ahead of him in that position and rightly so.

Ewers is too cumbersome and slow. He won't suit the hard pitches in Aus, I don't really get the fuss about him. We've got plenty of other flankers with a better all round skill set.

I agree with all that Sarge.

Ewers I was hugely impressed with last season as he seemed to be finding consistency and not going missing for large portions of games anymore. This year, albeit affected by injury, he has gone back to that inconsistency IMO.

If we are going to give Slade a go in the centre then I say you give him the quickest backline possible outside him possible. Get a back three of 11.Nowell 14.Yarde/Roko/Wade 15.Watson with either Manu or JJ at 13 then let Slade give them good ball. A backline such as that would also be an interesting game to try Robson in. He should give quick service to two playmakers at 10/12 who can then feed those outside backs.

Agree Carlos.

Ewers is a real physical player, I think he'd be better suited to the AI or 6N than Aus.

Slade needs to be developed as a 10/12, he could replace Ford tbh who's drastically short of form.