Australia v England, 11 June

First topic message reminder :

      
AUSTRALIA v ENGLAND
11 June 2016
20:00 AEST (UTC+10)
Suncorp Stadium, Brisbane

Live on [tbc]

Referee: Romain Poite (France)
Touch judges: [tbc]
Television match official: [tbc]

A. Head to Head

44 Played 44
25 Won 18
1 Drawn 1
18 Lost 25
940 Points 674

B. Recent Form

3 October 2015 - Twickenham, London: 13 – 33 to Australia

29 November 2014 - Twickenham, London: 26 – 17 to England

2 November 2013 - Twickenham, London: 20 – 13 to England

17 November 2012 - Twickenham, London: 14 – 20 to Australia

13 November 2010 - Twickenham, London: 35 – 18 to England

19 June 2010 - Telstra Stadium, Sydney: 20 – 21 to England

12 June 2010 - Subiaco Oval, Perth: 27 – 17 to Australia

C. Teams

AUSTRALIA 

Israel Folau; Dane Haylett-Petty, Tevita Kuridrani, Samu Kerevi, Rob Horne; Bernard Foley, Nick Phipps; Scott Sio, Stephen Moore (captain), Greg Holmes, Rory Arnold, Rob Simmons, Scott Fardy, Michael Hooper, David Pocock.

Replacements: Tatafu Polota-Nau, James Slipper, Sekope Kepu, James Horwill, Dean Mumm, Sean McMahon, Nick Frisby, Christian Lealiifano

ENGLAND

15. Mike Brown; 14. Anthony Watson, 13. Jonathan Joseph, 12. Luther Burrell, 11. Marland Yarde; 10. Owen Farrell, 9. Ben Youngs; 1. Mako Vunipola, 2. Dylan Hartley, 3. Dan Cole, 4. Maro Itoje, 5. George Kruis, 6. Chris Robshaw, 7. James Haskell, 8. Billy Vunipola.

Replacements: 16. Luke Cowan-Dickie, 17. Matt Mullan, 18. Paul Hill, 19. Joe Launchbury, 20. Courtney Lawes, 21. Danny Care, 22. George Ford, 23. Jack Nowell.

This wouldn't be the right game to introduce Teo, too much riding on it. I think Jones will simply switch Burrell and Ford, and start with Farrell at 12. The pack will be the same, albeit I would ditch Lawes from the bench in favour of Clifford or Harrison.

The one player whose position I think will come under review, probably not on this tour but certainly for the AIs, is Mike Brown. He's been a wonderful servant to English rugby and I love his feistiness, but I think this England side should be aiming to be the best team in the world, and I don't see Mike Brown in that equation. His pace has never been a strength to me but I looked at times like he was running in treacle at the weekend, his coolness under the high ball is usually a given but he made a costly mistake at the weekend plus his kicking game looked off to me as well. The sooner Watson moves to 15 the better, and plenty strong candidates for his right wing slot (Nowell, Ashton, Wade, Rokodiguni etc.).

doctor_grey wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:I thought the Wallaby scrum was a disgrace. They clearly had no intention of scrummaging legally right from the start. Sio seemed to want to stuff his face in the ground rather than push against Cole. They were a disgrace.  In fact they were deliberately trying to con the ref and it worked to start with.  Surely that makes thema bunch of  cheats.

I had the Australian broadcast where I live and for most of the match one of their commentators was claiming Cole was boring in on an angle in every scrum.  He repeated it again in their post-match wrap up.  Cole did do that a few times early from what I saw, but not very much.  I presume once Cole knew he had his man he realised it wasn't necessary.  And one of the times he made the comment the scrum was shown from an overhead camera and Cole was completely straight.  I thought their TH was doing the same thing early but still lost the battle.

Well they would say that, wouldn't they?

From what I could see, Sio was boring in (something that it's much easier for a loosehead than a tighthead to do because they only have a load on one shoulder), and pulling Cole with him. Certainly, whenever Cole's angle was wonky, so was Sio's, and it looked to me as if Cole's hips generally started from a straighter angle.

As we saw in the RWC, the Aussies are masters of placing doubt in the mind of the ref through the media while getting away with tactics that exacerbate it. At least this time they weren't dancing sideways at every scrum!

Alex_Germany wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:As much as Brown's performance on Saturday is being knocked, it's still better than anything Goode has ever produced against a quality international side.

Grass isn't always greener guys

Perhaps Sarries fans can say more - but I think he's played well against quality international sides. They beat Toulouse twice, with Fickou who is a world class centre.

I've seen videos of Goode missing tackles, but then Brown let Foley through for his "try".

I haven't seen a lot of footage of Goode, nor seen him in training. Eddie Jones has, so I'll go with his judgement.

Goode is not my favourite player (shocker) but I do appreciate that he has a stack of skills and has had a stellar year for Saracens. Against the right opponents I'd even be prepared to let him have another go for England. But not against the Australians. Imagine him trying to tackle Folau.....

Horrible knock on aside Brown actually had a decent game on Saturday, including one cracking quite probably try saving tackle part way through the 2nd half

Sio was boring in and collapsing all game, Cole gave him a real lesson as the game went on.

Aus also pushed early pretty much every scrum which wasn't really picked up. I'm surprised we didn't milk this more and just take the pressure off making it look more obvious.

beshocked wrote:Really? Considering having Teo on the bench? He's still basically unproven.

There are exceptional players that hit the ground running - but that's what they are - an exception. Maro Itoje for example.

bluestonevedder I'll be honest I don't know much about Sean Mchahon but looking at his height and weight stats he looks like he might get overpowered by England.

Australia must find a way to deal with this big England pack. It's one of the most powerful packs we've had in a while in my opinion.

Certainly when you think that the likes of Wood,Parling and T.Youngs were packing down for us in the RWC.

Previously I would have said he could hold his own, but after seeing England dominate the contact on Saturday, I would be inclined to agree with you!

Still, he's an excellent player. Bruising carrier, super aggressive, decent jackal.

beshocked wrote:Really? Considering having Teo on the bench? He's still basically unproven.

There are exceptional players that hit the ground running - but that's what they are - an exception. Maro Itoje for example.

bluestonevedder I'll be honest I don't know much about Sean Mchahon but looking at his height and weight stats he looks like he might get overpowered by England.

Australia must find a way to deal with this big England pack. It's one of the most powerful packs we've had in a while in my opinion.

Certainly when you think that the likes of Wood,Parling and T.Youngs were packing down for us in the RWC.

How exactly would you ever give anyone a debut if you follow that logic!

Poorfour wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:I thought the Wallaby scrum was a disgrace. They clearly had no intention of scrummaging legally right from the start. Sio seemed to want to stuff his face in the ground rather than push against Cole. They were a disgrace.  In fact they were deliberately trying to con the ref and it worked to start with.  Surely that makes thema bunch of  cheats.

I had the Australian broadcast where I live and for most of the match one of their commentators was claiming Cole was boring in on an angle in every scrum.  He repeated it again in their post-match wrap up.  Cole did do that a few times early from what I saw, but not very much.  I presume once Cole knew he had his man he realised it wasn't necessary.  And one of the times he made the comment the scrum was shown from an overhead camera and Cole was completely straight.  I thought their TH was doing the same thing early but still lost the battle.

Well they would say that, wouldn't they?

From what I could see, Sio was boring in (something that it's much easier for a loosehead than a tighthead to do because they only have a load on one shoulder), and pulling Cole with him. Certainly, whenever Cole's angle was wonky, so was Sio's, and it looked to me as if Cole's hips generally started from a straighter angle.

As we saw in the RWC, the Aussies are masters of placing doubt in the mind of the ref through the media while getting away with tactics that exacerbate it. At least this time they weren't dancing sideways at every scrum!

I have been looking over the green and gold forums, originally for 'fun' but to be honest there is a lot of good analysis on there, and the view on Cole is pretty universal, he had Sio in his pocket. The main complaint was that Sio was not substituted earlier. There were a fair few complaints that he was given the YC too quickly but then as was frequently pointed out Poite did warn them the scrum before. They were also saying that losing Simmons didn't exactly help Sio either

It is funny how they have gone after the ref. I don't think they were complaining too much about him last time Australia played England

BamBam wrote:

beshocked wrote:Really? Considering having Teo on the bench? He's still basically unproven.

There are exceptional players that hit the ground running - but that's what they are - an exception. Maro Itoje for example.

bluestonevedder I'll be honest I don't know much about Sean Mchahon but looking at his height and weight stats he looks like he might get overpowered by England.

Australia must find a way to deal with this big England pack. It's one of the most powerful packs we've had in a while in my opinion.

Certainly when you think that the likes of Wood,Parling and T.Youngs were packing down for us in the RWC.

How exactly would you ever give anyone a debut if you follow that logic!

There is apparently an alternative route to being proven. It's called playing for Saracens....

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jun/12/england-james-haskell-eddie-jones-australia-first-test-rugby

I like what Haskell has said about Jones.

One thing I should add though is that Jones has so far been fortunate with injuries.

He's been able to play the pack he wanted to. Having certain players fit and in form has lifted the other players.

Don't think England are quite ready to deal with injuries to some key players just yet.

Ford has had the pressure taken off him to some extent by not having to worry about place kicking.

The breakdown issue has been eased by having players help the backrow, in that area.

England are doing well at the moment but in the long term we need to be comfortable with our 2nd choices in all positions.

I think that's where Lancaster fell down a bit, reliance on certain players too much and in the RWC that bit him in the backside.


lostinwales that's not true. Do you think that Itoje is a mediocre player? No, he's not. He's a trail blazer, an exception. Something I've said for a long time.

Bambam you choose the right moment to bring in a debutant. Sorry what exactly has Teo done to be so highly rated?

It was 3rd choice being great you wanted under Lancaster beshocked. Remember you criticising him for turning to Easter when his 2 first choice 8s were injured.

lostinwales wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:I thought the Wallaby scrum was a disgrace. They clearly had no intention of scrummaging legally right from the start. Sio seemed to want to stuff his face in the ground rather than push against Cole. They were a disgrace.  In fact they were deliberately trying to con the ref and it worked to start with.  Surely that makes thema bunch of  cheats.

I had the Australian broadcast where I live and for most of the match one of their commentators was claiming Cole was boring in on an angle in every scrum.  He repeated it again in their post-match wrap up.  Cole did do that a few times early from what I saw, but not very much.  I presume once Cole knew he had his man he realised it wasn't necessary.  And one of the times he made the comment the scrum was shown from an overhead camera and Cole was completely straight.  I thought their TH was doing the same thing early but still lost the battle.

Well they would say that, wouldn't they?

From what I could see, Sio was boring in (something that it's much easier for a loosehead than a tighthead to do because they only have a load on one shoulder), and pulling Cole with him. Certainly, whenever Cole's angle was wonky, so was Sio's, and it looked to me as if Cole's hips generally started from a straighter angle.

As we saw in the RWC, the Aussies are masters of placing doubt in the mind of the ref through the media while getting away with tactics that exacerbate it. At least this time they weren't dancing sideways at every scrum!

I have been looking over the green and gold forums, originally for 'fun' but to be honest there is a lot of good analysis on there, and the view on Cole is pretty universal, he had Sio in his pocket. The main complaint was that Sio was not substituted earlier. There were a fair few complaints that he was given the YC too quickly but then as was frequently pointed out Poite did warn them the scrum before. They were also saying that losing Simmons didn't exactly help Sio either

It is funny how they have gone after the ref. I don't think they were complaining too much about him last time Australia played England

It's one of life's great ironies that the country that invented the term whinging poms, are one of the few countries that would give us a run for our money in the world ref blaming championships.  

no 7 & 1/2 Lancaster's 1st choice 8 in the RWC - Morgan wasn't good enough let alone a 37 year old 3rd choice 8.

lostinwales I should add that Sarries players don't get fast tracked, they have to earn England call ups the hard way.

Don't get parachuted in. Even Itoje was held back.

Morgan wasn't fit, quality player though. Just reminding you that you wanted Lancaster to get good depth down to 3rd choice. Still not sure how he could have done that but there you go.

Morgan wasn't fit and yet he was Lancaster's first choice - picked him to start vs Fiji. Genius.

England need strength in depth yes as will injuries will inevitably happen.

Find it bizarre that some of you want Teo to feature but each to their own I guess.

Cole had Sio on toast - even early on when the Aus pack fooled the ref. I'd predict that if Aus have to start Sio nest week they'll lose. Aus's only hope is if we have to play 'Should have gone to SpecSavers'-LCD early. I'd say Hartley is one of the most important England players at the moment.

Might George come onto the bench? England's scrum actually started struggling after a couple of front row replacements on Saturday, including the normally dependable Mullan. I make no secret that I'm a big fan of George, but there's no doubt he's a beast in the scrum.

On the more general issue, the scrums were a complete mess on Saturday, you did feel Aus had little intention of actually completing them most of the time. Still think free-kicks for scrum infringements is the way to go, with yellows for repeat infringements, and penalty tries for pushovers stopped illegally.

beshocked wrote:Find it bizarre that some of you want Teo to feature but each to their own I guess.

I have not seen anyone who really wants Te'o to feature, but plenty who think he will.

Mad for Chelsea perhaps George didn't look top class in training. Perhaps he was carrying a niggle. We don't know.

Maybe he's not quite recovered from his long injury as Brits was picked ahead of George for the business end games at club level.

Londontiger fair enough.

Jones has done very well in a short amount time changing very little but the changes he made were ones everyone were screaming out for before the world cup;

1. No Tom Youngs, dynamic in the loose he may be but his set piece for a hooker is awful.
2. No Geoff Parling, was picked for the sole reason to call the line out for the above
3. No Tom Wood and picking a typically more English backrow full of strength and power.
4. No Brad Barritt, Farrell can do the defensive part as well as being a far better distributor

In isolation it doesn't look like he would make such a big difference but it has, we now have a world class set piece again and Cole dominated Sio like he should have done at the world cup.

beshocked wrote:..
lostinwales that's not true. Do you think that Itoje is a mediocre player? No, he's not. He's a trail blazer, an exception. Something I've said for a long time.
...

yes Maro is an exception. There are some talented young players coming through the England system but there is no question about who is the most promising of all of them. Nobody doubted the 'if', it was more a question of when and in what position. (The answer to the first is obviously now and the second is does it matter?). He's come through much faster than I or probably a fair few would ever had expected. The Saracens in the England squad are playing very well.

My worthless little dig was an attack on your overuse of 'proven'/ 'unproven' and the way you tend to judge non saracen players on a different scale to saracens.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Jones has done very well in a short amount time changing very little but the changes he made were ones everyone were screaming out for before the world cup;

1. No Tom Youngs, dynamic in the loose he may be but his set piece for a hooker is awful.
2. No Geoff Parling, was picked for the sole reason to call the line out for the above
3. No Tom Wood and picking a typically more English backrow full of strength and power.
4. No Brad Barritt, Farrell can do the defensive part as well as being a far better distributor

In isolation it doesn't look like he would make such a big difference but it has, we now have a world class set piece again and Cole dominated Sio like he should have done at the world cup.

Jones has also been fortunate with Itoje/Kruis coming through Sarries as a top class lock pairing, and the continuing development of Billy Vunipola as a top class number 8.

Still, he's made some quite bold decisions which have gone against the grain and turned out really well. The decision to pick Hartley as captain now looks obvious but I thought it was daft at the time (which was probably the consensus). His decision to play Farrell at 12 was also something which looked wrong when Lancaster tried it and again I couldn't see it working, but once again Jones has demonstrated that it can work well for both players.

You do wonder what might have been had England appointed a top class proven international coach in the past, rather than bumbling along with internal candidates with little/no experience of international rugby.

Speaking of Haskell and his great play, Billy V has been quiet. Good, but not great. Perhaps - as against Wales - the opposition back row mark him out, and therefore create space for Haskell to do the storming.

But I feel the time is right for Billy V to reclaim his man of the match award. Especially without Pockok threatening to pinch the ball from him, I hope to see some real surges from him.

Poorfour wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:I thought the Wallaby scrum was a disgrace. They clearly had no intention of scrummaging legally right from the start. Sio seemed to want to stuff his face in the ground rather than push against Cole. They were a disgrace.  In fact they were deliberately trying to con the ref and it worked to start with.  Surely that makes thema bunch of  cheats.

I had the Australian broadcast where I live and for most of the match one of their commentators was claiming Cole was boring in on an angle in every scrum.  He repeated it again in their post-match wrap up.  Cole did do that a few times early from what I saw, but not very much.  I presume once Cole knew he had his man he realised it wasn't necessary.  And one of the times he made the comment the scrum was shown from an overhead camera and Cole was completely straight.  I thought their TH was doing the same thing early but still lost the battle.

Well they would say that, wouldn't they?

With some justification I believe.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Morgan wasn't fit, quality player though. Just reminding you that you wanted Lancaster to get good depth down to 3rd choice. Still not sure how he could have done that but there you go.

Easter's age wasn't really relevant either. He would have done a job for us. The promising alternatives hadn't come through.

What a difference a few months make though. Now we have Clifford knocking on the door and Hughes about to become eligible. Morgan will have to do amazing things to even be worth consideration for the wider squad.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Jones has done very well in a short amount time changing very little but the changes he made were ones everyone were screaming out for before the world cup;

1. No Tom Youngs, dynamic in the loose he may be but his set piece for a hooker is awful.
2. No Geoff Parling, was picked for the sole reason to call the line out for the above
3. No Tom Wood and picking a typically more English backrow full of strength and power.
4. No Brad Barritt, Farrell can do the defensive part as well as being a far better distributor

In isolation it doesn't look like he would make such a big difference but it has, we now have a world class set piece again and Cole dominated Sio like he should have done at the world cup.

Jones has also been fortunate with Itoje/Kruis coming through Sarries as a top class lock pairing, and the continuing development of Billy Vunipola as a top class number 8.

Still, he's made some quite bold decisions which have gone against the grain and turned out really well. The decision to pick Hartley as captain now looks obvious but I thought it was daft at the time (which was probably the consensus). His decision to play Farrell at 12 was also something which looked wrong when Lancaster tried it and again I couldn't see it working, but once again Jones has demonstrated that it can work well for both players.

You do wonder what might have been had England appointed a top class proven international coach in the past, rather than bumbling along with internal candidates with little/no experience of international rugby.

It's not so much Itoje and Kruis specifically, we packed down with Parling and Lawes against Wales in the world, neither of whom are known for offering much in the scrum, we had two powerhouse locks in Launchbury and Attwood available at the time.

BamBam wrote:

beshocked wrote:Really? Considering having Teo on the bench? He's still basically unproven.

There are exceptional players that hit the ground running - but that's what they are - an exception. Maro Itoje for example.

bluestonevedder I'll be honest I don't know much about Sean Mchahon but looking at his height and weight stats he looks like he might get overpowered by England.

Australia must find a way to deal with this big England pack. It's one of the most powerful packs we've had in a while in my opinion.

Certainly when you think that the likes of Wood,Parling and T.Youngs were packing down for us in the RWC.

How exactly would you ever give anyone a debut if you follow that logic!

1/ autumn internationals; or
2/ other non-competition games, eg the recent one v Wales @ HQ; or
3/ with respect, Italy in the 6N; but absolutely...
4/ ...NOT through choice in the middle of a very competitive 3 Test Match series in the SH

lostinwales I don't really have a different scale. IMO Saracens players have to work harder to get into the England squad and stay there. Aren't just fast tracked like Genge,Hill,Clifford and Teo have in the last year.

I question the logic to fast track them but hold back others. Indeed holding back Itoje. Now you could say it's worked out but Lancaster might have benefitted if he had taken a calculated risk. Instead it's Jones profiting.

I want players regardless of club affliation to prove themselves. It's just generally Sarries players have to do more because of the perception that they get an armchair ride.

You don't hear me clamoring for a recall for Wigglesworth or Barritt do you? Or indeed for Fraser to be picked? No.


If I think someone has played well I will praise them - I congratulated Ford and Haskell for evidently playing well.

Simonofsurrey well said.

We just need a number of former England player's to publicly dissect Sio's scrummaging technique and heap pressure on the referee, a la Bob Dwyer and co on Joe Marler.

You'd think that England don't need to make too many changes from the 30-minute team, if any. Potentially a quick thought about Alex Goode, but otherwise the 15 guys who played in that middle period should get another crack.

There are a couple of issues regarding the bench;

Front row - any new faces on the bench? Perhaps Jamie George coming in for Cowan-Dickie? Maybe stick with the props as are and consider changes for the third test.

Back row - do we need a specialist sub here? In which case you'd imagine Lawes would drop out of the 23.

22 shirt - with Ford (probably) coming into the starting line-up, we could go with Burrell or Te'o in this shirt to switch the gameplan, or we could give Slade the spot so we can rotate the playmakers if there's an injury.

It will be interesting to see how Eddie Jones approaches this next week, but I'm not expecting too many changes.

robbo277 for this, pivotal, Second Test, if EJ is minded to shuffle the back three, I'd be much happier with Watson at 15, MY and JN on the wings with Goode on the bench (not inconceivable he could cover 10 for Ford if needed, rather than at FB - for this physically robust series I like OF at 12).

PS: anyone know who the ref is this Saturday? We're going to need a good one who's not afraid to call the Dark Arts, eg 'screening' the defensive receiver from chasers at restarts gets my goat just as much as 'lazy' dummy runners, ie blockers. And it would be good if the ref at least sort of understood the scrum. We know we have the upper hand and have no need to do anything other than play the rules. EJ - can you make this the focus of one of your ever helpful public comments during the week please?

SimonofSurrey wrote:

BamBam wrote:

beshocked wrote:Really? Considering having Teo on the bench? He's still basically unproven.

There are exceptional players that hit the ground running - but that's what they are - an exception. Maro Itoje for example.

bluestonevedder I'll be honest I don't know much about Sean Mchahon but looking at his height and weight stats he looks like he might get overpowered by England.

Australia must find a way to deal with this big England pack. It's one of the most powerful packs we've had in a while in my opinion.

Certainly when you think that the likes of Wood,Parling and T.Youngs were packing down for us in the RWC.

How exactly would you ever give anyone a debut if you follow that logic!

1/ autumn internationals; or
2/ other non-competition games, eg the recent one v Wales @ HQ; or
3/ with respect, Italy in the 6N; but absolutely...
4/ ...NOT through choice in the middle of a very competitive 3 Test Match series in the SH

Agree with that for the most part, however:

Assume Ford and Farrell start, which is my preference. You need a bench option, most likely a centre in the 22 shirt.

Option 1 - Slade, who is another 10/12 type who will play pretty similarly to Farrell
Option 2 - Te'o, who is at least a change of style of player - hard hitting, big carrier etc
Option 3 - Burrell, whose confidence is probably shot to pieces

Slade and Te'o both have pretty much no caps, and I think Burrell is done as an England player after this

As someone to put on the bench, I don't think it's madness to stick Te'o there.

As for him being in the squad in the first place, I didn't agree with it, but now he's there we use him if it's the right decision for the squad

I don't think Saracens players having to do more is true at all. I'm not overly fussed if we see debuts or newish players getting chances vs Aus away either. We saw the result of a 'safe' option in Burrell and the risky 'obviously doesn't work' Ford Farrell combo. Sod it, if someone like Slade is ready use him, if Jones' thinks Burrell is better for the team so be it.

The Ford Farrell combo can hardly be called risky when we just won the 6N with it.

Some were saying it would be a disaster (or similar sentiment) before the game.

no 7 & 1/2 they don't get fast tracked like other players have.

Many of these choices are risky but Jones and co have done well so far.

Te'o I am convinced is a risk too far but I might well be wrong.

Scottrf it was when Ford was in woeful form and short of confidence but having Farrell as his comfort blanket has obviously helped.

Players can improve of others. I believe Haskell has been given a new lease of life because of the players around him and encouragement from Jones.

The risk for me in ot comes from asking Farrell to not only be an agressive bodyline tackler (bear in mind first choice was Tuilagi, second Burrell) but also putting him in a position where he will be expected to run the crash ball from time to time. You wont wrap him in cotton woll at 10, but you will take off the requirement to actively seek out big contacts with and without the ball.
Wilkinson managed to get ruined pretty early career by a mixture of suidicde tackling and being targetted. If he'd played 12 reulalry theres a fair chance he wouldn't even have made it to 2003.

Right now though its pretty clear its as a minimum Jones' swith up formation if not his starting one. Its effective. There may be an insurance risk to Farrell but it seems like a no brainer selection for the remaining tests.

Gooseberry wrote:The risk for me in ot comes from asking Farrell to not only be an agressive bodyline tackler (bear in mind first choice was Tuilagi, second Burrell) but also putting him in a position where he will be expected to run the crash ball from time to time. You wont wrap him in cotton woll at 10, but you will take off the requirement to actively seek out big contacts with and without the ball.
Wilkinson managed to get ruined pretty early career by a mixture of suidicde tackling and being targetted. If he'd played 12  reulalry theres a fair chance he wouldn't even have made it to 2003.

Right now though its pretty clear its as a minimum Jones' swith up formation if not his starting one. Its effective. There may be an insurance risk to Farrell but it seems like a no brainer selection for the remaining tests.

There is that danger but JW was not a big guy, just a suicidally brave one. There is a risk for Farrell but he looks to be able to take more punishment that Johnny

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 they don't get fast tracked like other players have.

Many of these choices are risky but Jones and co have done well so far.

Te'o I am convinced is a risk too far but I might well be wrong.

Scottrf it was when Ford was in woeful form and short of confidence but having Farrell as his comfort blanket has obviously helped.

Players can improve of others. I believe Haskell has been given a new lease of life because of the players around him and encouragement from Jones.

Fast tracked how? Who? Not sure you'd be happy with anyone at 12 in the current squad would you?

Te'eo,Genge,Hill etc.

No not really no. Even if Farrell is doing a job in the centres, he's a 10. Slade is unproven at 10,12 and 13. Played poorly in the AP final.

Te'eo, the most unproven of the lot. Burrell is more comfortable at 13.

Farrell is the stop gap till someone like H.Mallinder makes the step up.

Genge has been a player mentioned as fast tracked - but it has not been into the team, just to train and be looked at. I would argue that Tompkins into the Saxons this summer of the back of bugger all club games, and Itoje in the Saxons 18 months ago were both fast tracked to the same degree.

Other players that some may argue were fast tracked into the side include Farrell, Mako and Joel Tomkins. All had limited club experience.

All depends on your definition of fast-tracked I guess. Of the 23 that played at the weekend, it could be argued that all bar Hartley, Robsaw, Burrell, Brown and Mullan were fast-tracked into the England set-up.

Apparently, despite his club coach saying he was not ready at the time, we would have won the RWC if Itoje had been selected.

beshocked wrote:Burrell is more comfortable at 13.

A position he has hardly ever played.

Sorry I didn't realise that the Saxons were the full England squad.....

http://www.premiershiprugby.com/matchcentre/fixtures/squads.php?player=108799&includeref=dynamic#m2V47qIOgu9sVo2O.97

Tompkins played over 700 minutes.

Genge's barely had any gametime for Leicester has he? http://www.premiershiprugby.com/matchcentre/fixtures/squads.php?player=116237&includeref=dynamic#8eCYQqgCQYGjfQoe.97

125 minutes and he's promoted to full England squad.

Farrell Jr's limited experience as you call it was winning the AP.....

Mako wasn't fast tracked. Tomkins is debatable but he had to play for the Saxons first, not parachuted into the full England squad.

Might have got past Wales with Itoje playing. Afterall he was MOTM vs Wales in this year's 6 nations.


Londontiger he played at 13 in the 2014 6 nations and played his best rugby there - scoring 3 tries.

Mako had made 6 starts for Saracens when he was first capped. If that is not being fast tracked then your definition of the phrase is far too narrow for any intelligent discussion.

Okay fine I will concede that Mako was fast tracked.

Some work, some don't.

LondonTiger wrote:Apparently, despite his club coach saying he was not ready at the time, we would have won the RWC if Itoje had been selected.

He's won every match he has started this season. Ergo, if Lancaster had started him, we'd be World Champions.

SimonofSurrey wrote:robbo277 for this, pivotal, Second Test, if EJ is minded to shuffle the back three, I'd be much happier with Watson at 15, MY and JN on the wings with Goode on the bench (not inconceivable he could cover 10 for Ford if needed, rather than at FB - for this physically robust series I like OF at 12).  

PS: anyone know who the ref is this Saturday? We're going to need a good one who's not afraid to call the Dark Arts, eg 'screening' the defensive receiver from chasers at restarts gets my goat just as much as 'lazy' dummy runners, ie blockers. And it would be good if the ref at least sort of understood the scrum. We know we have the upper hand and have no need to do anything other than play the rules. EJ - can you make this the focus of one of your ever helpful public comments during the week please?  

I'd say it would be worth consideration given Goode's form, but I would probably stick rather than twist.

And FYI the referee next week is Craig Joubert, and T3 is Nigel Owens.

Watching the NZ vs Wales game, the commentators were praising Fekitoa's development in his distribution game. Why are none of our lumps (like Burrell) working on their distribution game to the same extent? Is it the clubs? Do they just not value a 12 that can pass? It's all well and good saying we need a second playmaker, but Eddie Jones should be screaming at our 12s and telling them to learn to distribute, because that will be the better option long-term than shoe-horning in two 10s.

Nonu is the prime example of a lump who developed his all round game and he became the best 12 in the world. Every other big 12 should be looking to emulate him, including players like Roberts and Tuilagi who have had a degree of success at International level, without hitting Nonu's heights.

LondonTiger wrote:

beshocked wrote:Burrell is more comfortable at 13.

A position he has hardly ever played.

It's definitely his best position though. Mallinder-Burrell great Burrell-Pisi terrible.

beshocked wrote:Te'eo,Genge,Hill etc.

No not really no. Even if Farrell is doing a job in the centres, he's a 10. Slade is unproven at 10,12 and 13. Played poorly in the AP final.

Te'eo, the most unproven of the lot. Burrell is more comfortable at 13.

Farrell is the stop gap till someone like H.Mallinder makes the step up.

So Hill then after a ver impressive season. Genge hasn't played and T'eo is 29, quite a slow fast track for me! Slade is quality yet to have a chance but you've already written him off.

Lancaster's regime didn't fast track many players to be fair - Mako/Farrell/Watson/Nowell probably the notable ones

Jones has brought in his "fast track" players off the bench so far - Itoje started on the bench, Hill has benched and I have a feeling that Te'o will bench this weekend

Are there any Saracens players you think Jones should have fast tracked by now and hasn't? And I don't mean the same old debates about Ashton/Goode

No 7&1/2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Te'eo,Genge,Hill etc.

No not really no. Even if Farrell is doing a job in the centres, he's a 10. Slade is unproven at 10,12 and 13. Played poorly in the AP final.

Te'eo, the most unproven of the lot. Burrell is more comfortable at 13.

Farrell is the stop gap till someone like H.Mallinder makes the step up.

So Hill then after a ver impressive season. Genge hasn't played and T'eo is 29, quite a slow fast track for me! Slade is quality yet to have a chance but you've already written him off.

Slade has been on the radar for a while. One game in a losing team not long after coming back from a major injury is only good evidence if you are in a hurry to write a guy off.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I wouldn't call Ireland a quality international team

I forgot about the NZ game. I remember thinking at the time...even Goode looked half decent!

Well there's 2/20 games......

You could argue Brown has had very few poor games in the white shirt.

Goode has never let England down that I can recall, is a better player than Brown in better form and he deserves a go. If Australia want to kick to him then they will probably concede a lot of metres. He's also very familiar with Gustard's defensive system.

If he doesn't perform then Watson will soon have the shirt (or perhaps even the impressive Haley).