England's Summer Tours

First topic message reminder :

First team to Australia

Fixtures
11th June v Australia, Brisbane 11.00 BST
18th June v Australia, Melbourne 11:00
25th June v Australia, Sydney 11:00

All games on Sky Sports 1


Squad

Forwards:
D Cole (Leicester), L Cowan-Dickie (Exeter), J Clifford (Harlequins), E Genge (Leicester), J George (Saracens), T Harrison (Northampton), D Hartley (c) (Northampton), J Haskell (Wasps), P Hill (Northampton), M Itoje (Saracens), G Kruis (Saracens), J Launchbury (Wasps), C Lawes (Northampton), M Mullan (Wasps), C Robshaw (Harlequins), K Sinckler (Harlequins), B Vunipola (Saracens), M Vunipola (Saracens).

Backs:
M Brown (Harlequins), D Care (Harlequins), E Daly (Wasps), O Farrell (Saracens), G Ford (Bath), A Goode (Saracens), J Joseph (Bath), J Nowell (Exeter), H Slade (Exeter), B Te'o (Worcester), A Watson (Bath), M Yarde (Harlequins), B Youngs (Leicester). Luther Burrell (Northampton Saints)




Saxons in South Africa

Fixtures
Friday 10th June v South Africa A, Bloemfontein 18:10 BST
Friday 17th June v South Africa A, George 18:10 BST

Cannot find these games on TV, will update if anything announced.


Squad

Forwards:
Ross Harrison (Sale Sharks), Alec Hepburn (Exeter Chiefs), Tommy Taylor (Wasps), George McGuigan (Newcastle Falcons), Jake Cooper-Woolley (Wasps), Kieran Brookes (Northampton Saints), James Craig (Northampton Saints), Mitch Lees (Exeter Chiefs), Charlie Ewels (Bath), Dave Attwood (Bath), Dave Ewers (Exeter Chiefs), Donovan Armand (Exeter Chiefs), Matt Kvesic (Gloucester), James Chisholm (Harlequins), Sam Jones (Wasps).

Backs:
Dan Robson (Wasps), Michael Young (Newcastle Falcons), Oliver Devoto (Bath), Danny Cipriani (Wasps), Christian Wade (Wasps), Semesa Rokoduguni (Bath), Sam Hill (Exeter Chiefs), Nick Tompkins (Saracens), Luther Burrell (Northampton Saints), Alex Lewington (London Irish), Sam James (Sale Sharks), Mike Haley (Sale Sharks).

LondonTiger wrote:Lots of talk that Itoje may move to 6 to accommodate Launchbury. Do not like it myself, too similar to Lancaster selecting players out of position just so he can have the best players on the pitch.

Or Eddie Jones selecting his best flyhalf to play at centre throughout the 6N.

Londontiger depends if moving Itoje to 6 would damage the Itoje-Kruis combo. I've seen plenty of times this season, Kruis makes tackle, Itoje clamps on the ball, turnover. If it would adversely effect the performance then it's not worth doing.

An in form Launchbury is an asset though. I criticised the potential selection of Launchbury in the 6 nations because he clearly wasn't fully fit.

Difference between let's say Lawes at 6 and Itoje at 6 is Itoje makes a lot of turnovers, more per game than any other English backrower.

LondonTiger wrote:Lots of talk that Itoje may move to 6 to accommodate Launchbury. Do not like it myself, too similar to Lancaster selecting players out of position just so he can have the best players on the pitch.

Lots of talk on here. I doubt there's much in camp. Eddie has described Itoje as "a lock who can play 6 in a pinch" which doesn't sound like the talk of a man who plans to play him there.

Putting Farrell at 12 is a different thing. Absent Tuilagi, having a second playmaker on the pitch is a better option for generating the kind of unstructured play that Eddie wants. With Slade injured at the time, Farrell was a reasonable option. Not sure how long term it is, but I don't seem to have the visceral objection that others do to 10s playing 12. As long as they are physical enough to cope with the defensive demands of the channel (and both Farrell and Slade are), I would rather have a Toby Flood than a Jamie Noon...

Nah I wouldn't play Itoje at 6. Let him, Kruis and Launchbury (and Lawes he impressed me on Sunday, first time in an awfully long time) just keep competing against each other. It will raise the level of performances.

Robshaw is nailed on for the 6 spot in the first test. Probably Haskell at 7 though Clifford will have raised the challenge and might sneak it. Curious one.


Starting 8 v Oz 1st Test
1 ??
2 Hartley
3 Cole
4 Itoje
5 Kruis
6 Robshaw
7 Haskell / Clifford
8 Billy V

Im not sure on the LH spot. Probably Mullan...but hell Genge's aggression and attitude might see him get a start!

LondonTiger wrote:Lots of talk that Itoje may move to 6 to accommodate Launchbury. Do not like it myself, too similar to Lancaster selecting players out of position just so he can have the best players on the pitch.

I think I agree LT, I'd consider it in a wet and windy 6N game, but on the hard grounds with Haskell the incumbent 7, against Pocock and Hooper? No thank you

Genge start vs Australia? That would be madness.

Mako should start with Mullan on the bench IMO.

Bam Bam,
Will Haskell be the 7 though.

Is everyone assuming Mako is definitely not starting at LH then?

I would personally start Mullan and bring Mako off the bench, but the big man probably deserves a shot at starting a game

GF I'm not sure .. just based on him being the incumbent at 7. I just doubt Jones would want to change both flankers for the first game

beshocked wrote:Genge start vs Australia? That would be madness.

Mako should start with Mullan on the bench IMO.

That was more tongue in cheek Beshocked as I don't think we are at our strongest in that positions at the moment and its wide open.

I would actually go the other way - Mullan starting with Mako on the bench. Would be a great impact player on the hard grounds.

I could see Genge being on the bench actually.

It depends what Eddie is wanting i guess.

I honestly think eddie will Start
Mako.

and then it will depend on if he wants a solid stability Mullan or impact player like Genge

I think it'll be an impact player from the bench. That's clear...so for me its Mako. But Genge did look useful, and the big thing is his attitude and aggression. Something Jones loves.

But I still say - Mullan starts, Mako off the bench.

Saxons games are being televised live on Sky Sports 3

Not sure if already mentioned, but the South Africa A squad has been named. Apologies for the unhelpful format, notable names to me are Du Toit, du Preez, Carr, Oosthuizen, Koch, Marx, Venter, Peterson and Snyman. Should be a good test

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/ackermann-to-coach-sa-a-team-20160528

South Africa A squad:

Saxons?


Saxons?


That bleddy name makes my blood boil.

Why use the name of a historic tribe that was based in the South and South East of England to represent the multi cultural concept that is English Rugby?

Or am I missing something and is it a reference to the rock band?

I would be amazed if Mako is not starting in T1, though feel at Int level that tends to emasculate him.

The talk about Itoje to 6 is coming from the same sources that seem to be eerily accurate when predicting teams, and reportedly Gustard has mentioned thebpossibility.

If Itoje starts at 6 then presumably the plan to negate the Oz back row influence is to flood the breakdown with heavy bodies to clear things out quickly. With our current squad it feels a sensible approach. Playing it smart by forcing the jackal threats to commit as tacklers, finding ways to take Pocock/Hooper/Fardy out the game for a phase and off loading around contact to keep the ball off the floor are all tactics that our current players have proved poor at in the past. Going for a tighter game around the fringes to ensure quick support and then flood the breakdown with bodies is probably a smart way to go.

I can't see that tactic working without a rock solid scrum and strong line-out though. I'd start Mullan at LH to solidify the scrum but I expect Mako to start and given his strong performances throughout the 6 Nations I can't argue that it isn't fair for him to get the shirt now.

If Mako starts do you think Genge will get on the bench as another impact player? Or the more solid Mullan.

I'm not sure that Genge is ready for it .. I wouldn't play him in the tests barring injury or a dead rubber after England win the first two tests

So Mullan then Bam ?
Ps whats the point having Genge in the squad then.

Yeah I'd start Mako and bench Mullan

Think Genge is a real talent, and the exposure to the squad will do him no harm

I just think its a bit soon to be throwing him into a test when we've got a real shot at winning down there based on half a dozen AP games

If there's injuries then sure, he's the next man in

Ah no I can totally see what you mean, I just sometimes think being in the squad is useful but is it not a wasted space in the squad having someone that is not going to play?

Surely you should expect everyone in the squad to be good enough to get on the pitch.

We criticised Lancaster for playing players who "weren't ready" saying the England squad shouldn't be a development team....and now we are praising Jones for potentially doing the same.

I don't think he'd let anyone down off the bench if needed, but Mako and Mullan are the obvious choices for the matchday 23

Its a shame we haven't got a midweek game like Wales have against the Chiefs, but I guess we have the Saxons tour instead

Im surprised he wasn't selected for the Saxons actually.

Its a tricky one

If Jones thinks he is the 3rd best loosehead and we need 3 of them in the squad for the tour, it'd be silly to take an inferior player to Oz, given that is a far more important tour than facing a South African A team

But then someone like Genge misses out on 2 games where he could have started against some strong opposition

I think Genge will get some game time. Purely on that basis Bam....he is considered good enough for the senior team so he is good enough to get on the pitch. And he was fine when he came on against wales..

In relation to Itoje at 6.....SCW was the one who selected him at 6 in his post Wales match interview. His point of view was what would the Aussies least like to see and he reckons it is this. A full on attack up front to try and starve the Aussies of possession.

I quite like this idea as it enables Launchbury to start and that means getting more top class and in-form players on the pitch. Itoje certainly plays 6 for Sarries so it is not an unusual role for him. Plus when compared to Robshaw I don't think England would lose too much? Tackling, turnovers, ball carrying without mentioning the lineout.

I am sure EJ will not do this and in which case I would retain Kruis and Itoje knowing that a world class Launchbury will be ready for the final 20 minutes. Nice to have these options, but I am sure that SCW is right in that they do not fear Robshaw.

Other than the obvious RWC game, Robshaw's been pretty successful against the Aussies in the past, I doubt they'll underestimate him

I think Itoje should stay at lock personally, but can definitely see the reasoning

GeordieFalcon wrote:If Mako starts do you think Genge will get on the bench as another impact player? Or the more solid Mullan.

Mullan and Mako should be the two in the test squads. Along with Marler they are the three strongest LHs in the Prem, although each has different strengths. I'd happily have EJ tell the two of them that they will each start one of the first two test with whoever performs best starting the third. Create some real competition for them, if either has a really sub standard game then Genge is waiting to take a chance.

I'd like to see rotation with both starting a test along with Hill and George hopefully getting a start as well.

1st Test : 1.Mullan 2.Hartley 3.Cole - 16.George 17.Mako 18.Hill

2nd test: 1.Mako 2.George 3.Cole - 16.Hartley 17.Mullan 18.Hill

3rd test: 1.Mako/Mullan 2.Hartley 3.Hill - 16.George 17.Mullan/Mako 18.Cole

That sort of rotation would allow all involved to have their workload managed somewhat whilst giving all 6 of the likely squad members a chance. I hope that if rotation happens then club teammates are taken into account with George getting a start next to Mako and Hill starting next to Hartley.

Still can't believe there isn't a single midweek match...

hugehandoff wrote:In relation to Itoje at 6.....SCW was the one who selected him at 6 in his post Wales match interview. His point of view was what would the Aussies least like to see and he reckons it is this. A full on attack up front to try and starve the Aussies of possession.

I quite like this idea as it enables Launchbury to start and that means getting more top class and in-form players on the pitch. Itoje certainly plays 6 for Sarries so it is not an unusual role for him. Plus when compared to Robshaw I don't think England would lose too much? Tackling, turnovers, ball carrying without mentioning the lineout.

I am sure EJ will not do this and in which case I would retain Kruis and Itoje knowing that a world class Launchbury will be ready for the final 20 minutes. Nice to have these options, but I am sure that SCW is right in that they do not fear Robshaw.

Would be pretty stupid of them, given how well he played against Aus the time before the world cup and the year before that!

I strongly suspect that Jones sees Genge and Sinkler as perhaps the 5th best available in their position right now. if we have a prop injury I expect he would fly in someone from Saxons party.

He obviously sees promise in them, and perhaps just wants to see them closer up.

LondonTiger wrote:I strongly suspect that Jones sees Genge and Sinkler as perhaps the 5th best available in their position right now. if we have a prop injury I expect he would fly in someone from Saxons party.

He obviously sees promise in them, and perhaps just wants to see them closer up.

I wouldn't assume that at all. Looking at the Saxons squad the only front rower who you could argue is better established than Sinckler or Genge is Brookes, and it's clear that Eddie is quite happy to look past him - as evidenced by how Hill has been fast-tracked.

The way I would see it is that there are a handful of established props (Marler, Mako, Cole and probably Mullan) and then he has a number of tyros who will have to step up. It seems pretty clear from his comments about Genge (and other players) that he's spoken to everyone he sees as a potential EPS player and told them what he expects of them, and the ones who have responded best to that are the ones he's taking on tour.

It's also clear that he's favouring mobility over traditional scrummaging skills. Both Genge and Sinckler have got a turn of pace that can embarrass backs over a short distance. Sinckler in particular moves faster than anyone that size has any right to.

I think it's very possible that Genge and Sinckler won't play on tour - but they will gain a huge amount by being part of the squad. They may not make a breakthrough for some time, though - Genge has to get past Marler, Mako and possibly Mullan and maybe even Corbs. Sinckler will probably need a bit more scrum experience (though improved sharply towards the end of the season and the tour plus a preseason with Rowntree and Adam Jones working on him will accelerate that further), but an injury to Cole or Hill makes it more likely that he will get his chance early.

I'd guess a front row of Genge, George and Sinkler is being pencilled in for the Argentina tour next year while the Lions are out, if they can continue their development. You'd assume Hartley and Cole at least will go if they are fit and on form, and if they aren't why would we pick them for England?

In the more immediate term, I'd keep Itoje and Kruis where they are and bring in Harrison and Clifford as flankers. Robshaw and Haskell did a good job in the Six Nations, but if we want to take our game on we have to look past them in my opinion. Both Harrison and Clifford impressed against Wales.

If two changes are too much, start T1 with Robshaw and Clifford with Harrison on the bench, but look to phase Harrison into the starting line-up by T2 or T3.

My 15:

Mako, Hartley, Cole, Itoje, Kruis, Harrison, Clifford, Vunipola
Care, Farrell, Nowell, Burrell, Joseph, Watson, Goode
George, Hill, Mullan, Launchbury, Robshaw, Youngs, Ford, Daly.

I think that's probably the case Robbo, the first test should be the strongest squad possible to get the best start in the series. Then, if we need to can tweak the match day squad to address deficiencies or cover injuries.

I think we are overlooking Mullan here a bit - He is likely to get more gametime than he's had before and I am hoping that he will really take his opportunity.

So who are you looking to really shine on this tour...and really make it impossible for EJ to ignore!

propdavid_london wrote:I think that's probably the case Robbo, the first test should be the strongest squad possible to get the best start in the series.  Then, if we need to can tweak the match day squad to address deficiencies or cover injuries.  

I think we are overlooking Mullan here a bit - He is likely to get more gametime than he's had before and I am hoping that he will really take his opportunity.

For some reason Mullan always seems to me to have potential for better, but just under-produces in every game I watch. I agree I would like to see him take that opportunity, but I am starting to see him as an 'almost' type of player.

Very impressed with Hill's contribution against Wales. Very good scrummager and mobile. He just needs a bit more game time to 'relax' in to the role and then I think he could be one of the best.

On a general point England seem to be making more of an effort to keep the scrums up and push. Under Rowntree I think we came very defensive at scrum time and preferred to drop them on the ground. What a difference a coach makes.

englandglory4ever wrote:Very impressed with Hill's contribution against Wales. Very good scrummager and mobile. He just needs a bit more game time to 'relax' in to the role and then I think he could be one of the best.

On a general point England seem to be making more of an effort to keep the scrums up and push. Under Rowntree I think we came very defensive at scrum time and preferred to drop them on the ground. What a difference a coach makes.

At Saints, Hill is highly regarded. Earlier this season I thought he was a year or two away from contention for a spot in the England squad, but he has been a nice surprise. I think Eddie is really trying to look to the future.

Well, with wins for all three teams within 24 hours, a weekend that far surpassed my expectations.

Absolutely.

Been a great weekend. Some players really showed their quality. One or two others maybe put a nail in the coffin of their international careers.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Absolutely.

Been a great weekend.  Some players really showed their quality.  One or two others maybe put a nail in the coffin of their international careers.

I suspect you're talking about Burrell GF?

I've always said (usually behind closed doors) that he's not international standard. I just don't think he's an intelligent rugby player, and at international level that gets found out pretty quickly. He's always maintained a decent try scoring record, so he's had credit in the bank.

I'd still rather Burrell over Te'o though.

bluestonevedder wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Absolutely.

Been a great weekend.  Some players really showed their quality.  One or two others maybe put a nail in the coffin of their international careers.

I suspect you're talking about Burrell GF?

I've always said (usually behind closed doors) that he's not international standard. I just don't think he's an intelligent rugby player, and at international level that gets found out pretty quickly. He's always maintained a decent try scoring record, so he's had credit in the bank.

I'd still rather Burrell over Te'o though.

Don't think you necessarily need to be an intelligent player if you are coached to do a specific job well. I still believe Burrell is more suited to outside centre than inside centre.

In the 2014 6 nations Burrell ran good support lines and used his strength, he did well at 13, at 12 I just haven't been convinced by him.

Haskell is an example of a player who I wouldn't say is that intelligent but with the right structure, players around him and instructions, Jones has managed to get the best performances from him we've seen in some time. Could be down to Gustard and Borthwick too.

Utilise a players' strengths is the most obvious thing to do too.

Combinations and balance are underappreciated things that a coach must implement.

beshocked wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Absolutely.

Been a great weekend.  Some players really showed their quality.  One or two others maybe put a nail in the coffin of their international careers.

I suspect you're talking about Burrell GF?

I've always said (usually behind closed doors) that he's not international standard. I just don't think he's an intelligent rugby player, and at international level that gets found out pretty quickly. He's always maintained a decent try scoring record, so he's had credit in the bank.

I'd still rather Burrell over Te'o though.

Don't think you necessarily need to be an intelligent player if you are coached to do a specific job well. I still believe Burrell is more suited to outside centre than inside centre.

In the 2014 6 nations Burrell ran good support lines and used his strength, he did well at 13, at 12 I just haven't been convinced by him.

Haskell is an example of a player who I wouldn't say is that intelligent but with the right structure, players around him and instructions, Jones has managed to get the best performances from him we've seen in some time. Could be down to Gustard and Borthwick too.

Utilise a players' strengths is the most obvious thing to do too.

Combinations and balance are underappreciated things that a coach must implement.

I think you do need to be an intelligent player to understand what you're being coached and to implement it successfully.Especially when the tactics have to be changed midway through a game. Haskell is more clever than given credit for. Just because he's a bit of a comic or gym-monkey, it doesn't make him unintelligent.

The ominous thing for Burrell was that he had arguably spent the entire week leading up to this game learning how to defend from the 12 channel, and got it so wrong on Saturday. Farrell had spent the week (or at least a majority of it) preparing to play fly-half but slotted into the 12 channel when required and improved the defence immeasurably.

Maybe you're right that Burrell is just suffering from his switch to 12, but it still doesn't look good for him. He's too much of a tweener for me- he's not a great distributor, and he's not a fantastic crash-ball player in the mould of Tuilagi. He's somewhere inbetween without excelling at anything.

Burrell is a big center but you don't often see much evidence of it.

I thought he was pretty indifferent, and England play so much better when Ford is on the pitch.

I am not completely decided about the Foley non try. No worries about the try being disallowed. Foley ran through a hole where Burrell should have been and he had tangled with Arnold who was in front of the ball. ButI don't know if there was a mistake by Burrell in coming up too slowly and leaving a hole in the first place regardless of the obstruction

The issue with Burrell was that he didn't trust the guys inside him to make the tackle. If you look at him defending, he stays tight and doesn't drift wide - and that pulls the whole system out of shape. Contrast that with what Farrell was doing once he moved to 12, or Yarde - who had a couple of very clear moments where he clocked the defence drifting and immediately left the ball carrier to cover the wide channels.

He just doesn't look like a good on-the-pitch decision maker. He works better at 13 because although there's more space to cover the calls are generally more straightforward, and similarly in attack, because his job is to pick a line and run it rather than work out how to bring other players into the game.

Similarly Haskell. Although I think he's much brighter outside of pressure situations, he can make bad decisions under pressure. Eddie has given him a very clear role and decision-making framework and it's paying dividends.

I am beginning to wonder, thinking along these lines, whether Farrell might actually be better suited to 12 at international level than 10. At 10 he doesn't have the instinctive sense of where to send the ball that Ford does, but at 12 he has fractionally more time to read the game and that seems to bring out the best in him.

There was a few I was thinking of.

The main one was Burrell...however I was also thinking about Mr Kvesic.

On a weekend where you saw two performances of complete contrast in the fleet footed livewire Hooper and sheer physical Haskell, I'm not sure Kvesic did anything to show he will move up to the seniors.
He was great at the breakdown, but did nothing of note anywhere else.

Hooper on the other hand scored 2 rampaging down the wing, Haskell was a physical beast smashing everything in sight and winning 3 turnovers.
I'm a huge fan of Kvesic but I think he should be concerned now if he does have international ambitions.

Haley put an interesting marker down also!

There was some muttering about whether we should have taken a slightly larger squad to Oz and played a midweek game, as some players on the main tour will not feature.

However, especially considering the Wales games today (more that they have flogged some starters rather than the result) what do people think now?

I suppose that what is important is that the players who do not feature in the actual games feel they are part of the bigger effort and are getting something out of it - which is all down to man management by Jones.

I guess it comes down to whether you would rather be Genge and Sinkler - training with the big boys but not playing, or Hepburn and Brookes starting against SA A.

I suspect Brookes would much rather be with the full squad, even if he were not to play - but he is on Eddie Jones naughty step for failing to achieve the fitness goals set him

Two wins down this weekend, now we just need the U20s to beat SA in their semi on Monday.

Its been breathtaking following last October LT hasn't it.....