6N 2017: England vs Scotland

First topic message reminder :

     
ENGLAND v SCOTLAND
Saturday 10th March
16:00 GMT
Twickenham Stadium

Live on ITV, RTE, FR2, DMAX

Referee - Matthieu Raynal
AR1 - Romain Poite
AR2 - Marius Mitrea
TMO - Ben Skeen

A. Head to Head

134 Played 134
74 Won 42
18 Drawn 18
42 Lost 74
1,562 Points 1,141

B. Recent Form

6 February 2016
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
9 – 15 to England

14 March 2015
Twickenham, London
25 – 13 to England

8 February 2014
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
0 – 20 to England

2 February 2013
Twickenham, London
38 – 18 to England

4 February 2012
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
6 – 13 to England

C. Teams

ENGLAND


Starting XV:

15. Mike Brown (vice captain, Harlequins, 58 caps), 14. Jack Nowell  (Exeter Chiefs, 21 caps), 13. Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 31 caps), 12. Owen Farrell (vice captain, Saracens, 50 caps), 11. Elliot Daly (Wasps, 11 caps), 10. George Ford (Bath Rugby, 33 caps), 9. Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 68 caps), 1. Joe Marler (Harlequins, 49 caps), 2. Dylan Hartley (captain, Northampton Saints, 82 caps), 3. Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers, 72 caps), 4. Joe Launchbury (Wasps, 40 caps) , 5. Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 56 caps), 6. Maro Itoje (Saracens, 10 caps), 7. James Haskell (Wasps, 73 caps) , 8. Nathan Hughes (Wasps, 6 caps).

Finishers

16. Jamie George (Saracens, 15 caps), 17. Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 40 caps), 18. Kyle Sinckler (Harlequins, 6 caps), 19. Tom Wood (Northampton Saints, 48 caps), 20. Billy Vunipola (vice captain, Saracens 32 caps), 21. Danny Care (Harlequins, 69 caps), 22. Ben Te’o (Worcester Warriors, 6 caps), 23. Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 24 caps).

SCOTLAND


Starting XV

15. Stuart Hogg (Glasgow Warriors) – 51 caps; 16 tries, 3 pens, 89 points
14. Tommy Seymour (Glasgow Warriors) – 34 caps; 15 tries, 75 points
13. Huw Jones (Stormers) – 6 caps; 2 tries, 10 points
12. Alex Dunbar (Glasgow Warriors) – 22 caps; 6 tries, 30 points
11. Tim Visser (Harlequins) – 29 caps; 12 tries, 60 points
10. Finn Russell (Glasgow Warriors) – 25 caps; 2 tries, 5 cons, 8 pens, 44 points
9. Ali Price (Glasgow Warriors) – 3 caps

1. Gordon Reid (Glasgow Warriors) – 22 caps
2. Fraser Brown (Glasgow Warriors) – 23 caps
3. Zander Fagerson (Glasgow Warriors) – 7 caps
4. Richie Gray (Toulouse) – 63 caps; 3 tries, 15 points
5. Jonny Gray (Glasgow Warriors) – 31 caps; 2 tries, 10 points
6. John Barclay CAPTAIN (Scarlets) – 58 caps; 4 tries, 20 points
7. Hamish Watson (Edinburgh Rugby) – 8 caps; 1 try, 5 points
8. Ryan Wilson (Glasgow Warriors) – 25 caps

Substitutes:
16. Ross Ford (Edinburgh Rugby) – 105 caps; 2 tries, 10 points
17. Allan Dell (Edinburgh Rugby) – 6 caps
18. Simon Berghan (Edinburgh Rugby) – 1 cap
19. Tim Swinson (Glasgow Warriors) – 27 caps; 1 try, 5 points
20. Cornell Du Preez (Edinburgh Rugby) – uncapped
21. Henry Pyrgos (Glasgow Warriors) – 19 caps; 4 tries, 3 pens, 29 points
22. Duncan Weir (Edinburgh Rugby) – 25 caps; 2 tries, 7 cons, 10 pens, 1 drop, 57 points
23. Mark Bennett (Glasgow Warriors) – 19 caps; 6 tries, 30 points

Watson is at 11 for Bath, for those wondering.

beshocked wrote:No 7 & 1/2 you like to find ways to disagree with me even when you agree with me...sigh...

cascough no I don't but compared to Sexton,Biggar and Farrell, Ford's defence isn't up to scratch.

Ford's defence is perhaps on par with Russell but then again Russell's is one of the worst.

Ford doesn't stop opposition on the gain line generally, he's pushed backwards.

Even when you compare Ford to other previous England 10s like Flood and Wilkinson, Ford is worse in defence. Better than Hodgson sure though. Hodgson hasn't been known as a good defender though.

Londontiger pretty sure Faletau shrugged off Ford in that try.


I am not sure Scotland have enough big ball carriers to cause a lot of problems for Ford but the backs might do.

My recollection was that Haskell missed/fumbled with Faletau, the blindside winger (May?) jammed in to assist and Webb was in the corner. Could be wrong.

The word "outclassed" is really getting on my tits

Both from a Scottish and English perspective -

Mako and Billy starting

Maitland and Taylor starting (Taylor at full back)

Vs Newcastle

Could see all 4 featuring next week. Bad for Newcastle though...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWJ0KAiaOug

To be fair to Ford, May should have helped him but Faletau effectively took out 3 defenders on his own, allowing Webb to score.

Ford isn't a guy who can 1 v 1 stop Faletau. A strong defender doesn't normally need help.

Not all bad as Newcastle should have Jon Welsh at tight head.

He is  of the best scrummagers in the premiership but obviously not a strong enough player, (having started only around 150 games for Glasgow and Newcastle) to displace the mighty Simon Berghan and his giant beard (with about 6 starts for Embro)  from the Scottish bench.

beshocked wrote:

cascough wrote:

beshocked wrote:Poorfour except it's not just Jonny superior, why just focus on the best defending 10? You and cascough cherrypicking Wilkinson not me.

Why should Lawes or Itoje have to go on baby sitting duty? Ford already has Farrell to look after the goalkicking and extra playmaker. What else?

I mention Wilkinson and Sexton and Flood and Biggar, you just hone in on the one guy - Wilkinson.

Do you think Carter was a bad defender?

ruggerradge2611 seems a bit of an exaggeration, hammering Italy doesn't make you the best in the world.... Stander wasn't good enough against Scotland. That's the game he needs to perform for 80 in.

No Carter wasn't a bad defender. But you keep saying "bad" and then equate it to power in the tackle.

Do you really see it as that simple? If you're not powerful in the tackle then you are a bad defender, regardless of if (Like Ford) you are very good at the other facets of defence?

No it's not just about power in the tackle. It's about not needing to protect a player, not having a weakness that the opposition can exploit.

If you are knocked back more often than not you can't claim to be good. If you make a tackle but constantly need a team mate to help that doesn't make you a good defender.

It's just there is a system to make the weaker defender less exposed.

Most 10s don't need protection.


ruggerradge2611 Billy wasn't playing vs Italy though obviously. I don't think anyone would say England have a better ball carrier.

Stander IMO wasn't effective enough vs Scotland in the first half. If you think hammering Italy makes you best in the world fair enough.

Billy has nothing to prove personally.  Billy V outclassed him and the Irish backrow last year in the 6 nations.

Stander has to prove himself vs Billy V. It will be fascinating if they face in Ireland vs England.

Very Harsh!
Ford is a good tackler. He just lacks body weight. He's BOUND to get knocked back wards...it doesn't mean he's a bad tackler.

sensisball wrote:Not all bad as Newcastle should have Jon Welsh at tight head.

He is  of the best scrummagers in the premiership but obviously not a strong enough player, (having started only around 150 games for Glasgow and Newcastle) to displace the mighty Simon Berghan and his giant beard (with about 6 starts for Embro)  from the Scottish bench.

And one of the best line breakers aswell!

beshocked wrote:Both from a Scottish and English perspective -

Mako and Billy starting

Maitland and Taylor starting (Taylor at full back)

Vs Newcastle

Could see all 4 featuring next week. Bad for Newcastle though...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWJ0KAiaOug

To be fair to Ford, May should have helped him but Faletau effectively took out 3 defenders on his own, allowing Webb to score.

Ford isn't a guy who can 1 v 1 stop Faletau. A strong defender doesn't normally need help.

We shall see....

beshocked wrote:Both from a Scottish and English perspective -

Mako and Billy starting

Maitland and Taylor starting (Taylor at full back)

Vs Newcastle

Could see all 4 featuring next week. Bad for Newcastle though...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWJ0KAiaOug

To be fair to Ford, May should have helped him but Faletau effectively took out 3 defenders on his own, allowing Webb to score.

Ford isn't a guy who can 1 v 1 stop Faletau. A strong defender doesn't normally need help.

I thought it was a 2 on 2 that they had worked, that is even more impressive by Faletau than I remembered to interest 3 defenders.

Haskell should have put him down, but ended up just forcing him sideways. I'd disagree that May should have helped Ford, and Ford even brought Faletau down there - possibly because he was going sideways and not running straight through Ford. May should have stayed wide and trusted his inside defender.

Taylor starting for Sarries at 15? I know he's played wing before, in fact I think he started his career there, but I didn't realise he could play 15. I would have thought Maitland would play 15 and Taylor on the wing.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Taylor starting for Sarries at 15? I know he's played wing before, in fact I think he started his career there, but I didn't realise he could play 15. I would have thought Maitland would play 15 and Taylor on the wing.

Better keep our fingers crossed with Visser also playing this weekend that there are no injuries picked up by any of them.

I can't see him dropping Ford anyway. Ironically the last time we did it was Burrell clearly big and ugly enough to not.lose ground in the tackle who looked all at sea and has sunk without trace.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

IanBru wrote:

cascough wrote:

robbo277 wrote:If Billy starts for Sarries this weekend and comes through strong, I'd rather see him get 25/30 minutes off the bench for England against Scotland to prepare him for a similar or starting role against Ireland.

I'd probably drop Wood to make room.

Agreed. I think 20 mins in an England shirt will be better prep for the Ireland game than another week with Sarries.

I think we need to consider the competing priorities in play here:
1. V Vunipola's preparedness for the Ireland test
2. The effect on my psyche of said Vunipola playing against a team I support.

It's bad enough that he's turning out against Falcons on Sunday, I'm genuinely not prepared to see him appear at Twickers with 20 minutes to go and Scotland holding a six point lead...

Possibly got my wording a bit wrong. Putting him on the bench obviously wouldn't just be to prepare him from Ireland, I'd also be expecting an impact against Scotland. We've definitely missed his go forward, and against tired legs he could be lethal.

Billy will definitely offer more impact than Wood could offer, but if he comes through 25 minutes for England well, he could potentially start in Week 5.

Saying that, did anyone see the clips doing the rounds on Twitter? Ryan Wilson made 6 tackles in 90 seconds against Wales in minutes 73-74! If Billy comes on, a similar defensive shift may be needed.

https://twitter.com/topofthemoonGW/status/837398132208041984

Beshocked, that's not a bad team, and obviously ticks your boxes of starting Mako and George over Marler and Hartley.

The interesting one for me there is the midfield. Jones has backed Ford so thoroughly, the one time he's dropped Ford it took him a whole 20 minutes before he regretted it. Not sure if I can see him doing the same again, I definitely can't see him dropping him out the 23 altogether, as a Farrell injury would leave him with an inexperienced international centre running the game.

However, a midfield of Farrell, Te'o and Joseph (which some considered before Joseph was removed from the squad for the Italy game) is definitely worthy of consideration.

That turnover by Watson, at the end is one of the best I've ever seen. He's got Warburton and charteris I think litteraly hanging off him and he still doesn't let go. Billy V is big, strong and direct. He is a concern, but not a terminal one. France and Wales bashed it up all game long and only got a try each. Daly, Nowell are greater concerns IMO

England wont just bash it up all game though. We haven't been great this tournament...HOWEVER when we wake up, the one thing we have done is been brutally efficient with chances. That's the area that Scotland need to be focused on the most. Even if England are playing badly for 70 mins...if Scotland are only a few points ahead...they are capable of scoring rapidly.

Something that hasn't been said of an England team for along time.

It is all connected though - hence that article about how much having Billy around helps JJ do his thing. Billy may not always make a lot of yards but he tends to suck in a lot of defenders which makes space elsewhere.

I don't think we will need him for Scotland, but considering what he did last year I'd feel a whole lot happier going to Ireland with Billy playing.

Do England fans now see Itoje as a 6? Obviously the strength England have at lock is rediculous with Kruis being injured. Do you think Itoje making the shift to 6 will ensure he gets more game time.

In addition do you think he'll thrive in that position? He's tremendous at the breakdown and tackles very well. Do you think he'll be coached to improve his carrying to try and settle at the flank as opposed to at lock?

I think he will be a better lock than back-rower, but his carrying is pretty decent - but England tend to use a limited number of "planned" carriers so we only see him do it in more unplanned activity.

I think he can be very effective at 6, and it may suit England as the best way to use the available resources - however my personal belief is he is a yard short on the pace needed to be a world class blindside. I firmly believe that (with the improvements in his lineout play on own ball - always good defending) he can be a world class lock.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Do England fans now see Itoje as a 6? Obviously the strength England have at lock is rediculous with Kruis being injured. Do you think Itoje making the shift to 6 will ensure he gets more game time.

In addition do you think he'll thrive in that position? He's tremendous at the breakdown and tackles very well. Do you think he'll be coached to improve his carrying to try and settle at the flank as opposed to at lock?

There was a lot of talk of Lawes at 6 at a similar point in his career. It didnt last long.
A fit Haskell, Vunipola and Robshaw gives England similar depth in their back row to the locks.

Really I see him as playing whichever position has the most injuries keeping others out. Its also handy to have a guy who can do either in the side should there be in game injuries.

The forwards are increassingly interchnageable anyway, so really its just a case of getting the best 5 on the field as far as I see. So long as one of the can run a line out and ones a specialist 8 it doesnt make a huge deal which row of the scrum they stand in.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Do England fans now see Itoje as a 6? Obviously the strength England have at lock is rediculous with Kruis being injured. Do you think Itoje making the shift to 6 will ensure he gets more game time.

In addition do you think he'll thrive in that position? He's tremendous at the breakdown and tackles very well. Do you think he'll be coached to improve his carrying to try and settle at the flank as opposed to at lock?

I think if Robshaw hadn't been injured Itoje would have been playing at lock this tournament.

It's also an odd situation as Itoje has been packing down at lock, but with Lawes at 6 with weaker breakdown skills, Itoje has come to the fore more at the breakdown.

I think for now he'll fluctuate between the two. If Robshaw's fit, he'll compete at second row, if he isn't, he'll play blindside.

Going forward, Launchbury, Lawes and Kruis all have more miles left in them than Robshaw, so Itoje at 6 might be what works best for us, even if it's not what works best for him.

It will be interesting if he stays fit whether he gets a Lions call-up, how they use him and how England use him after that. By next Six Nations he should have 15 England caps and potentially a Lions tour under his belt, so he'll no longer be a rookie in International terms.

ruggerradge2611 depends what England want. I don't think he's got the engine/workrate of Robshaw but I think he has strengths Robshaw doesn't and because of a way he plays he's more combatitive IMO.

Itoje's biggest strength is perhaps his ability to step to the challenges thrown his way.

He's being calling the lineout for England, something he doesn't do for Saracens which increases his value and makes other more surplus to requirements.

Itoje is becoming an ever more vital cog in the England team. He can steal lineouts, make turnovers,call lineouts, smash people into touch.

To be honest I could see Lawes making way when Robshaw gets back with Itoje switching back to 2nd row even though Lawes has had a pretty good tournament.

Woop. I agree with beshocked. Assuming he means having Launchbury next to him and Kruis on the bench.

Lions 2nd row is exceptionally competitive - Its high enough in England with Lawes/Launchbury/Itoje and Kruis - but add into the mix AWJ/Charteris/Toner/Henderson/J.Grey/R.Grey.............

There is a lot of quality.

no 7 & 1/2 yes, we know Launchbury doesn't run the lineout for England.

With Itoje now being able to do it, means you can play Launchbury and Itoje together.

To be honest I think the only lock available from other nations I think is currently as good as the English options is J.Gray.

God. Complete agreement. Hells getting cold.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Woop. I agree with beshocked. Assuming he means having Launchbury next to him and Kruis on the bench.

As I said it is an embarrassment of riches you guys have at lock at the moment.

Do you think that you lack a proper jackaling 7?

Kvesic always impressed me, but you seem to go with more physicality with guys like Haskell or Robshaw instead of turnover guys like Barclay, Watson (for next weekend) or guys like O'Brien looking forward to the weekend after.

England used to be able to churn out some devastating breakdown operators, but it seems less of a focus in the Aviva and at English test level at the moment.

Gooseberry wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Do England fans now see Itoje as a 6? Obviously the strength England have at lock is rediculous with Kruis being injured. Do you think Itoje making the shift to 6 will ensure he gets more game time.

In addition do you think he'll thrive in that position? He's tremendous at the breakdown and tackles very well. Do you think he'll be coached to improve his carrying to try and settle at the flank as opposed to at lock?

There was a lot of talk of Lawes at 6 at a similar point in his career. It didnt last long.
A fit Haskell, Vunipola and Robshaw gives England similar depth in their back row to the locks.

Really I see him as playing whichever position has the most injuries keeping others out. Its also handy to have a guy who can do either in the side should there be in game injuries.

The forwards are increassingly interchnageable anyway, so really its just a case of getting the best 5 on the field as far as I see. So long as one of the can run a line out and ones a specialist 8 it doesnt make a huge deal which row of the scrum they stand in.

I don't think we have quite the same depth in backrow. If one of those are out, we're left scratching around. In recent times we've tried Harrison, Wood and Clifford with squad call-ups for Williams and Jones on the flank and Hughes at 8 and none of them have really nailed it. One injury to the first choice back row and your eyes would start glancing at Itoje and an extra lock.

We can play 2 international quality locks and a stronger sub than most other teams without even considering Itoje there. That shows a real strength in depth which we just don't have in back row.

Launchbury, Lawes and Kruis are also all in the 25-28 bracket, while Haskell and Robshaw have both passed their 30th birthdays, so the need to find the next generation of back row talent is on.

I think Itoje's position will probably depend largely on the progress of Clifford, Harrison, Hughes, Williams and Jones.

For me yes rugger. We wait with baited breath to see how good this underhill kid is in the prem.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Woop. I agree with beshocked. Assuming he means having Launchbury next to him and Kruis on the bench.

As I said it is an embarrassment of riches you guys have at lock at the moment.

Do you think that you lack a proper jackaling 7?

Kvesic always impressed me, but you seem to go with more physicality with guys like Haskell or Robshaw instead of turnover guys like Barclay, Watson (for next weekend) or guys like O'Brien looking forward to the weekend after.

England used to be able to churn out some devastating breakdown operators, but it seems less of a focus in the Aviva and at English test level at the moment.

Calum Clark.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Woop. I agree with beshocked. Assuming he means having Launchbury next to him and Kruis on the bench.

As I said it is an embarrassment of riches you guys have at lock at the moment.

Do you think that you lack a proper jackaling 7?

Kvesic always impressed me, but you seem to go with more physicality with guys like Haskell or Robshaw instead of turnover guys like Barclay, Watson (for next weekend) or guys like O'Brien looking forward to the weekend after.

England used to be able to churn out some devastating breakdown operators, but it seems less of a focus in the Aviva and at English test level at the moment.

With Lancaster, he wanted a collective responsibility and more rounded skillsets. So everyone able to tackle, everyone able to carry, everyone able to turn over ball. We struggled a little because we didn't have any real talismans when we needed a shot in the arm.

With Jones (and Gustard), it's definitely a ploy to go for a more physical pack and not to compete as much at the breakdown. Not to Italy levels, but a real focus on making the tackles, getting up, getting off the line and making the tackles again.

It is a bit chicken and egg though, as I'm sure both coaches would have picked a breakdown specialist if they had a world class operator available. It's just in the absence of a world class operator, both coaches have valued a more rounded skill set over a great, but not world class, breakdown specialist.

ruggerradge2611 well a backrower like Pocock or Mccaw would be nice... but Robshaw,Haskell,Billy combo did well last year.

I think the size of our backrowers in general gives you an idea of where English backrow play is at the moment.

Smaller guys just don't get picked for England in the backrow anymore - no more Neil back like players.

I think my own club Saracens haven't helped (though it's just one team) - we've had some smaller guys come through the academy into the backrow like Seymour,Saull and Fraser but they haven't made the step up. To be fair to Fraser he's been unlucky with injuries.

Their replacements in the team have been big enforcers in the 7 shirt like Jacques Burger, now Schalk Burger.

Interesting that a relatively lightweight 7 is being started vs Newcastle.

If you look at other players from other clubs like Dowson and Kvsevic it's been tough for them too.

Wouldn't say Robshaw is particularly physical, he's got impressive workrate though.

O Brien is very physical.

England did spend time and effort in the Lancaster era trying to develope a traditional 7. Even though he wasnt make the squads Kvesic did get specialist coaching but just never made the grade.
It was a constant criticism of Lancasters side they lacked a player who didnt exist. The current set up has accepted that and using the same personel hit on a winning combination with Haskell, Robshaw and Vunipola by asking them to do what they do best and forget trying to comepete with out and out ball snafflers, instead just hit them.
The likes of Itoje and Cole bring some additional ability to win turnovers from positions you wouldnt usually associate with jackling which reduces the impact of not having Neil Back.

Whetehr he'd like one or not isnt really the point, Jones doesnt have one. As with his adapatations of his prefered choice at 12 hes gone withe the best players and asked then to play the game that best suits them, rather than either trying to reinvent people or picking sub standard players to fulfill a role.
Its worked out pretty well for England so far.

beshocked wrote:He's (Itoje) being calling the lineout for England

Just wondering where have you seen this beshocked? It's about the 3rd time I've read it on these boards but I assumed it was still Lawes, who has played every minute of the tournament so far. Hasn't it been Lawes in any games that Kruis hasn't played since EJ took over? Seem to remember Borthwick stating as much at some point.

I know some of us England fans like to think that Itoje is the second coming but is this just wishful thinking in the hope so we can have a second row combo of Launchbury and Itoje in the near future? Is so I think that is doing a disservice to a fully fit Kruis and to some extent Lawes (although I agree he is the 4th best of the 4).

It's been discussed during the commentary b9

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yup should have made that tackle mid gen. So should george. So should brown.  I still consider all 3 good enough. Apart from Jonny gray and Tipuric everyone misses tackles occasionally.

I don't think Ford should be dropped...we know he's excellent behind a dominant pack and is usually a pretty good kicker out of hand, and good passer of the ball. But he doesn't appear to be improving on the areas of the game he's weak at.

In particular his decision-making tends to go to pot when playing against an aggressive pack that shuts down his time on the ball, his kicking off the tee is poor, and his tackling is weak.

Farrell on the other hand is just getting better. I'd really love to see us start a Farrell, Te'o, JJ midfield, or Farrell/Daly/Te'o for that matter.

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/rugby/maro-itoje-calling-the-shots-as-england-display-lineout-dominance-a3479721.html

So can we blame him for Hartley throwing into the back of someone's head and twice no one being their for long throws?

Gooseberry wrote:So can we blame him for Hartley throwing into the back of someone's head and twice no one being their for long throws?

Yep, he clearly called the throw to the back of the head move. I did see they said we've only lost one, which as you say I think is wrong.

Eddie has said that he sees Underhill as the long term 7 and from what I have seen I am inclined to agree. Very physical but you can see from how he shapes to enter contact that he understands fetching in a way that few players do. (I can't describe it better than that.)

Itoje is almost guaranteed a slot in the team if fit, especially now he is calling lineouts. But I think we have seen that he's not immediately going to replace Robshaw at 6. His absence has highlighted that the team just works better when he's on the pitch, even if you can't see what he's doing.

We may see the likes of Williams, Ewers, Clifford, Chisholm, Ellis given a chance in Argentina this summer, which will give us a better sense of where we stand.

Scottrf wrote:http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/rugby/maro-itoje-calling-the-shots-as-england-display-lineout-dominance-a3479721.html

Thanks Scott. Link won't work for me but your word is good enough. News to me, can see why the England management would want it mind.

There has always been an endless fascination on who should be the current England openside.

However, when you consider that there are roughly 200 rucks in a Test game and any side are probably are only going to achieve turnovers in single figures, then you can see why the current two best 6N sides operate a blindside at seven.
Rucks are interpreted massively in favour of attacking sides and so set piece possession and minimal kicking is the name of the game or a total kicking game with a suffocating defence. I believe England are better at both those approaches than Scotland - providing they perform better than against Italy.....

Scottrf wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:So can we blame him for Hartley throwing into the back of someone's head and twice no one being their for long throws?

Yep, he clearly called the throw to the back of the head move. I did see they said we've only lost one, which as you say I think is wrong.

The back of Cole's head was funny, and in large part was Itoje's fault. He made the call, which had him as a little then did not move into position. As he was throwing, Hartley replied this, stopped the Throw, then remembered he had to Throw and did it "interestingly". He was pinged for delayed the throw anyway.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's been discussed during the commentary b9

Ta. Must have missed it. I blame the Mrs' incessant nattering!

cascough wrote:

robbo277 wrote:If Billy starts for Sarries this weekend and comes through strong, I'd rather see him get 25/30 minutes off the bench for England against Scotland to prepare him for a similar or starting role against Ireland.

I'd probably drop Wood to make room.

Agreed. I think 20 mins in an England shirt will be better prep for the Ireland game than another week with Sarries.

Beyond that, actually think Billy could be the single most important player in the Lions campaign.

True recwatcher but those scavengers were determined to be a large part of what got Australia and to some extent Wales past England in the world cup. It's not jut about turnovers...also slowing ball and forcing the attack to commit men to the ruck.
England have found a way to counter people messing with their offense....haskell and robshaw skirting with the edge of charging. In defence they do suffer from not messing with the opposition enough which may be part of the reason why they ship so many tries for a side that dominates possession and territory.
It's a trade off though...and you can only pick the players you have. As mentioned above Itoje and Cole do some bonus breakdown work that you don't always get from players in their positions and the first choice back row brings a lot in other aspects of play that Neil back wouldn't.
The questions been around for years. We haven't found Richie Mccaw. Instead of trying to pretend we have and make players do things they aren't good at England have found another way. It's taken getting beat up by south Africa for many years to teach them it exists.
It's maybe not a perfect team but it's sure winning a lot more these days.

Really, really hope Billy Vunipola is not coming back to soon?

Ofcourse we've missed him, and I think everyone would agree that Hughes is quite a long way back along the development curve, and probably does not possess the same overall potential? However looking at the bigger picture, the longer term should definitely be the priority and by and large we have managed without the 3 Saracen's plus Robshaw - which I think has to be to the good in terms of squad development.

This weekend at Newcastle will tell us much. Baby steps Billy.

I have to say that if this game was being played at Murrayfield, I think Scotland would push England very far but as it is at Twickers, I think England will win by 10.

England has a much stronger bench and that will be the difference in this.

Recwatcher16 wrote:There has always been an endless fascination on who should be the current England openside.

However, when you consider that there are roughly 200 rucks in a Test game and any side are probably are only going to achieve turnovers in single figures, then you can see why the current two best 6N sides operate a blindside at seven.
Rucks are interpreted massively in favour of attacking sides and so set piece possession and minimal kicking is the name of the game or a total kicking game with a suffocating defence. I believe England are better at both those approaches than Scotland - providing they perform better than against Italy.....

True enough but I think that Ireland play much better with 6. Stander 7. Van Der Flier 8. Heaslip and have a proper openside.

6. Stander 7. O'Brien 8. Billy would be a thunderous amount of power but is that the best balance for New Zealand? Maybe, but not necessarily.

Well I don't think you are going to beat the All Blacks with speed and finesse. It is going to be Northern Hemisphere brute power, and nothing says more brute power than that back row. For me that is probably the starting 3 I would go for, with as powerful a front five as possible. With Gatland as coach, I think we can expect power throughout the team.

I think we can all take the fact that Itoje had only 60 minutes in the backrow before being sent back into the second row that he is not a future 6 for England. When Courtney Lawes is being picked ahead of you at 6, I think it is probably pretty clear you have no England future there. Which leaves Robshaw as our standout 6. With Haskell at 7 there seems little competition for the two of them. Clifford and Hughes are both 8's and Wood clearly is only a fill in. Whilst we look well stocked at second row and no 8, we look very weak at 6 and 7.

nlpnlp wrote:I think we can all take the fact that Itoje had only 60 minutes in the backrow before being sent back into the second row that he is not a future 6 for England.  When Courtney Lawes is being picked ahead of you at 6, I think it is probably pretty clear you have no England future there.  Which leaves Robshaw as our standout 6.  With Haskell at 7 there seems little competition for the two of them.  Clifford and Hughes are both 8's and Wood clearly is only a fill in.  Whilst we look well stocked at second row and no 8, we look very weak at 6 and 7.

That's not true though is it, so many people are getting confused by their scrum positions, Lawes has been playing as a lock and Itoje as a flanker.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

nlpnlp wrote:I think we can all take the fact that Itoje had only 60 minutes in the backrow before being sent back into the second row that he is not a future 6 for England.  When Courtney Lawes is being picked ahead of you at 6, I think it is probably pretty clear you have no England future there.  Which leaves Robshaw as our standout 6.  With Haskell at 7 there seems little competition for the two of them.  Clifford and Hughes are both 8's and Wood clearly is only a fill in.  Whilst we look well stocked at second row and no 8, we look very weak at 6 and 7.

That's not true though is it, so many people are getting confused by their scrum positions, Lawes has been playing as a lock and Itoje as a flanker.

It is actually a very grey area, and you could say that both Lawes and Itoje have been playing like "5.5's". Itoje has been wearing 6 but packing in the scrums at lock - but then there are so few scrums it has little or no effect on what they do around the pitch.

Just got me thinking, the current Scotland team, are they the best team since 1990? I think they're better than 1999.

23 June 1990 Eden Park, Auckland 21 – 18 New Zealand 1990 Scotland rugby union tour of New Zealand
16 June 1990 Carisbrook, Dunedin 31 – 16 New Zealand

I can't quite remember  but they may have beaten us that year, however what I do remember clearly was on 23rd June 1990 being as fit as butchers dog, in the form of my life and just getting mullard in some 7's competition in sowarth london. Those were the days.