England's Elite Performance Squad - 2017/18

First topic message reminder :

I missed the Chiefs game on the weekend - did Slade have a good one?
Seems like he is starting to focus on 13 - I do wonder if that is a directive from RFU.
12 is quite well stocked with Teo and hybrid 12's in Farrell, Lozowski.
After Saints demolition - Is Piers Francis still in the mix for some people?
Joseph I am sure will come back into the mix.

propdavid well neither Malins or Mallinder have nailed down a preferred position yet.

I think Malins will be a 10 but of course becomes complicated when you have at Saracens - Goode,Lozowski and Farrell.

beshocked wrote:Brown was at his best in 2014 but has slowly declined year on year.

I just don't think he's making the same amount of ground he used to which makes it even more obvious about his inability to pass the ball.

He's not as good as he used to be.  I think he's a selfish player to be honest and in a team game that's not good.

I think you should be accurate. It's not an inability, it's a conscious decision. If the game is loose, he plays it accordingly (see 2nd test in Argentina for a good example) Otherwise he keeps it tight.

You might think that decision is the wrong one but have you asked yourself why Brown doesn't think it's wrong, and why Eddie Jones doesn't think it's wrong?

Teams play kick in behind to try put pressure on and turn the oppo over in their half, or at worst gain a territorial advantage if the ball is kicked back. Brown is continually excellent at making sure that when kicked to England are still in possession and in a decent position. I know the safety first approach might not look too exciting, but we are perfectly happy to stick the knife in when other players try and force things, why should an outside back be any different? Often, in a tight game, the right decision is keep hold of the ball and be sensible. I don't think that's selfish.

There's a couple for Saracens that have potential to be future england fullbacks there in lozowski or malins but as you say one of them needs to displace Goode.

cascough wrote:

beshocked wrote:Brown was at his best in 2014 but has slowly declined year on year.

I just don't think he's making the same amount of ground he used to which makes it even more obvious about his inability to pass the ball.

He's not as good as he used to be.  I think he's a selfish player to be honest and in a team game that's not good.

I think you should be accurate. It's not an inability, it's a conscious decision. If the game is loose, he plays it accordingly (see 2nd test in Argentina for a good example) Otherwise he keeps it tight.

You might think that decision is the wrong one but have you asked yourself why Brown doesn't think it's wrong, and why Eddie Jones doesn't think it's wrong?

Teams play kick in behind to try put pressure on and turn the oppo over in their half, or at worst gain a territorial advantage if the ball is kicked back. Brown is continually excellent at making sure that when kicked to England are still in possession and in a decent position. I know the safety first approach might not look too exciting, but we are perfectly happy to stick the knife in when other players try and force things, why should an outside back be any different? Often, in a tight game, the right decision is keep hold of the ball and be sensible. I don't think that's selfish.

You could say it's to do with decision making and Brown's isn't great. He has a tendency to keep hold of the ball instead of passing.

When you have forwards passing the ball with more skill, it's alarming. If you don't pass, you become predictable and easier to shut down.

Brown isn't making the yards and breaks he used to though. You can get away with holding onto the ball more if you are making ground and creating opportunities for others but because he rarely passes it limits options.

We don't let other backs get away with poor decision making so why should Brown be consistently let off the hook?

It's selfish if you starve your team mates of possession.

You say force things but a pass doesn't necessarily need to be flashy, just run straight, draw the opposition defence and get the pass away to a supporting team mate.

Sometimes the basics aren't done. How many overlaps or opportunities have you seen wasted by team mates not doing the basics of passing?

beshocked wrote:

cascough wrote:

beshocked wrote:Brown was at his best in 2014 but has slowly declined year on year.

I just don't think he's making the same amount of ground he used to which makes it even more obvious about his inability to pass the ball.

He's not as good as he used to be.  I think he's a selfish player to be honest and in a team game that's not good.

I think you should be accurate. It's not an inability, it's a conscious decision. If the game is loose, he plays it accordingly (see 2nd test in Argentina for a good example) Otherwise he keeps it tight.

You might think that decision is the wrong one but have you asked yourself why Brown doesn't think it's wrong, and why Eddie Jones doesn't think it's wrong?

Teams play kick in behind to try put pressure on and turn the oppo over in their half, or at worst gain a territorial advantage if the ball is kicked back. Brown is continually excellent at making sure that when kicked to England are still in possession and in a decent position. I know the safety first approach might not look too exciting, but we are perfectly happy to stick the knife in when other players try and force things, why should an outside back be any different? Often, in a tight game, the right decision is keep hold of the ball and be sensible. I don't think that's selfish.

You could say it's to do with decision making and Brown's isn't great. He has a tendency to keep hold of the ball instead of passing.

When you have forwards passing the ball with more skill, it's alarming. If you don't pass, you become predictable and easier to shut down.

Brown isn't making the yards and breaks he used to though.  You can get away with holding onto the ball more if you are making ground and creating opportunities for others but because he rarely passes it limits options.

We don't let other backs get away with poor decision making so why should Brown be consistently let off the hook?

It's selfish if you starve your team mates of possession.

You say force things but a pass doesn't necessarily need to be flashy, just run straight, draw the opposition defence and get the pass away to a supporting team mate.

Sometimes the basics aren't done. How many overlaps or opportunities have you seen wasted by team mates not doing the basics of passing?

"You could say it's to do with decision making" - It's purely decision making...unless you are seriously suggesting he is incapable of passing. He is making a decision to hold onto the ball. Why is doing that? Why does Eddie Jones continually pick a player who does that?

Beshocked, *you* think it's bad decision making, but you state it as a fact when it's only an opinion.

Another opinion is that in the situations when Brown gets the ball, England value possession over yards, and since he's the most reliable outside back going into contact, Eddie has instructed him to take into contact unless he is sure it's on. If that is the case, that would make it good decision making by the standards that the team has been set.

The fact that Brown has played that way for 2 years and not been dropped when there are other candidates available suggests very strongly that he is doing what he's been asked to do.

Eddie's opinion would appear to be that getting the ball back for the next phase is the most important thing.

We are all entitled to our opinions, but I am inclined to value Eddie's more than yours, because he has coached more teams to RWC finals than you have, and his winning record as England coach is better than yours or anyone else's.

Poorfour wrote:Beshocked, *you* think it's bad decision making, but you state it as a fact when it's only an opinion.

Another opinion is that in the situations when Brown gets the ball, England value possession over yards, and since he's the most reliable outside back going into contact, Eddie has instructed him to take into contact unless he is sure it's on. If that is the case, that would make it good decision making by the standards that the team has been set.

The fact that Brown has played that way for 2 years and not been dropped when there are other candidates available suggests very strongly that he is doing what he's been asked to do.

Eddie's opinion would appear to be that getting the ball back for the next phase is the most important thing.

We are all entitled to our opinions, but I am inclined to value Eddie's more than yours, because he has coached more teams to RWC finals than you have, and his winning record as England coach is better than yours or anyone else's.

Yes I do because I see him wasting attacking opportunities because of his reluctant to pass. I agree that you don't need to pass the ball all the time but pick the right time.

Brown should be the most reliable because generally he doesn't pass. Makes it easier to hold onto the ball if you simply run into contact without looking to pass.

Look I get it - you want to defend your club man. I can empathise with that.

The problem is Brown takes the ball into contact when a pass would be better plus he's not making the same impact he used to.

There's no one else really putting their hands up at 15. Doesn't mean Brown is ideal, he's just better suited to England than Goode for example.

England at 15 have not exactly been blessed with numerous options in the last few years.

It's not that Brown is playing well but he's done enough to keep Jones happy, just like Hartley.

It's others IMO who have contributed more.

England would be superior without both but Jones has his favourites and will continually reward them.

Sigh... your argument is England are winning so everything is all good.....

Improvements can be made. England aren't 1st in the world.

Jones has done a good job but he needs to start easing out players.

Without hartley at all? He's been excellent so far this season. If LCD and Taylor were fit and playing as they did last season maybe.just maybe he'd have a bit of pressure. As it is you'd drop him for who, dunn? Youngs? Yeandle?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Without hartley at all? He's been excellent so far this season.

??? Non existant more like.

Really scott? I've seen 4 or 5 of your games and he's been playing really well.

Seen multiple games where I forgot he was playing. Lawes has to save his throwing a lot recently too. As for his leadership, we are an absolute shambles mentally as a side.

Can't say that reflects what I've seen. Just another couple of years of Jim mallinder left though
...It'll get better!

Beshocked, do you ever bloody read what other people write? My argument is not "everything's fine because England are winning".

My argument is, as I wrote in so many words, that Eddie Jones's opinion counts more with me than yours because Eddie has won 19 out of 20 games with England, whereas you have no international coaching experience whatsoever.

It's utter Love sacks to suggest that not passing makes it easier to hold onto the ball in the tackle. If you want some evidence, look at Haskell's early games - he'd make several breaks a game only to lose the ball because he couldn't protect it in contact. Getting the ball back on your side cleanly time after time, regardless of the defensive pressure, is a skill, and at international level it's a difficult and under-rated one.

It's pretty clear that Eddie rates Brown's ability to do this more highly than any of the other outside backs, and that the instruction is to take it into contact rather than pass unless there is a good chance of a break.

Can we agree that there are other candidates at full back and that Eddie has a notorious ruthless streak and willingness to ditch players who can't play the system? If we can, then what other reason can there be for picking Brown than that he is doing what Eddie has asked of him?

For what it's worth, I saw enough from Watson on the Lions tour that I want to see him tried at full back sooner rather than later, and to be utterly bemused at why Liam "oops" Williams was preferred there other than for reasons of parochialism.

I am not defending Brown because he's a Quin, I am arguing against the unsupported opinions that you present as fact and repeat ad nauseam.

Hartley should perhaps stay for the AIs but be eased out in the next year or so.

To be fair Hartley has been better for England than Saints.

His discipline for England much better than Saints. Though he was unlucky to be cited for the recent clumsy challenge. Was a YC but no more.

Still think his leadership is a bit overrated though. Has had an armchair ride as captain for England but hasn't had the same impact for Saints.

Lawes has shown more leadership in a struggling team.

Also it's not as if Saints have a bad team on paper.

Sure of course it's not all Hartley's fault, Mallinder looks to be well past his sell by date, and I've said that Saints should have got rid of him.

When you have a poor coach it makes it harder. I guess it's why Hartley prefers to work with Jones than Mallinder.

Don't blame him - you'd much rather play in a successful England team than an inconsistent club side.

It's also pretty shoddy to reduce someones well reasoned opinion to existing purely because of club allegiances.

Such a ridiculous implication anyway, that to defend Brown means you must be a Quins fan. I'm no Quins fan.

Poorfour not as if Brown has contributed significantly to them IMO. I'd say his performances have varied from 5/10 to 6/10. Not any really poor performances but nothing that impressive.

You can be a lucky player who happens to be picked in a good side.

I'd say Brown is the starting back who has contributed the least.

You say Jones has a ruthless streak but certain players have their starting spots set in stone till proven otherwise.

Those 19 out of 20 wins were not single handedly won by Brown or any player!

Brown might well do that but surely England need more than just someone who can carry the ball into contact at 15? Surely it's about evolving?

I am not suggesting Brown is completely useless, he does some things well but he has his limitations.

You think Jones asks Brown not to pass the ball when there is a potential of scoring a try?

Not sure what L.Williams has to do with England - would be great if he was available but he's Welsh.

Okay so it's just a coincidence that Brown is a Quins player... right?

cascough I've been accused of that many times.

In regard to Brown the thing most likley to see him keep his spot is a lack of better test ready options right now who actually play full back, especially if Daly is injured and Watsons struggling for form taking away the "utility" options.

Your opinion, beshocked. Patently not Eddie's opinion.

But still, if we are not going to debate the coaches opinion, we may as well shut down the forum. Have to be careful of shutting down his criticism because Jones disagrees.

beshocked wrote:
..
You can be a lucky player who happens to be picked in a good side.

...

I am reminded of the old quote (Gary Player?) about the more he practiced the luckier he got.

beshocked wrote:
Not sure what L.Williams has to do with England - would be great if he was available but he's Welsh.
..

The comment was a reference to the Lions, where Liam Williams was chosen at FB in the tests instead of Watson, despite not being on best form.

Now I feel that players in general contribute to a team in two ways, one through their own actions and one through how they bring out the best in the players around them. I think Brown contributes both ways and as time goes on the second is getting increasingly important as his own ability to carry seems to be getting poorer. He should not or ever get a free ride because of past achievements, but EJ knows what he wants and in EJ we must trust.

beshocked wrote:Poorfour not as if Brown has contributed significantly to them IMO. I'd say his performances have varied from 5/10 to 6/10. Not any really poor performances but nothing that impressive.

Depends what you're rating. Some of his ball retention and defence have been top notch and hugely important in tight games. He also made the most metres in the last 6N. He was great in the second test in ARG.

beshocked wrote:You can be a lucky player who happens to be picked in a good side.

He's one of Jones' vice captains. He's making valuable contributions in games (see point 1). He's valued by Jones, clearly.

beshocked wrote:I'd say Brown is the starting back who has contributed the least.

See point 1.

beshocked wrote:You say Jones has a ruthless streak but certain players have their starting spots set in stone till proven otherwise.

Because they fit Jones' plan. Didn't you read what Poorfour said?

beshocked wrote:Those 19 out of 20 wins were not single handedly won by Brown or any player!

Who said they were? Odd comment.

beshocked wrote:Brown might well do that but surely England need more than just someone who can carry the ball into contact at 15? Surely it's about evolving?

Firstly, reducing what he does to one facet is a bit daft. Secondly, Why? If Jones thinks the plan is effective (19/20) and Brown is fulfilling the plan perfectly, then why?

beshocked wrote:I am not suggesting Brown is completely useless, he does some things well but he has his limitations.

He does some things better than any other player we have. Show me a player without limitations. What you really mean is, the things Brown does well, you don't value. And the things others do better, you do value. No-one is disputing your right to hold that opinion. But it's being suggested that in fact there's evidence to suggest Brown is quite a lot better than "completely useless", which you seem intent on dismissing. It's also being suggested that Eddie Jones holds a different opinion, and perhaps you should seek to understand why that might be, but again, you seem dismissive of that notion too.

beshocked wrote:You think Jones asks Brown not to pass the ball when there is a potential of scoring a try?

No-one has said that. Odd comment. I think Brown has either been instructed, or makes the decision himself, not to pass unless it is beyond reasonable doubt that the team will be in a better position if he passes. Either way, EJ clearly likes what he sees.

beshocked wrote:Not sure what L.Williams has to do with England - would be great if he was available but he's Welsh.

No one suggested L Williams has got anything to do with England. Odd comment.

beshocked wrote:Okay so it's just a coincidence that Brown is a Quins player... right?

Didn't you read Poorfour's post? He reasoned his opinion out quite well. I'm not a Quins fan, so clearly there must be other reasons to suggest that Brown is a good player.

beshocked wrote:cascough I've been accused of that many times.

So what? It's not a playground. I think if you explain your opinions and try produce examples/evidence to support them, it's pretty shoddy to dismiss them out of hand and ignore said reasoning and evidence. If you don't explain your opinions then I suppose they're susceptible to the club bias jibe. But I think Poorfour did a pretty good job in this case.

Does anyone dispute that it would be preferable to ease Mike Brown out of the team?

However the issue then is who should come in. I really hope they look at an alternative during the AIs but as has been mentioned ad nauseam who should come in? The form FBs in the AP are Telusa Veainu and Alex Goode - one a Tongan, the other deemed by Eddie to be surplus to requirements.

Other than that and looking purely at the current squad, Watson needs a break rather than more games. Daly is now injured. Lozowski and Slade have been mentioned as possibles, but have virtually no experience in the position.

Looking outside the squad - Nowell could easily do the job, but is injured. Haley has been looked at and seemingly rejected. Tait at Falcons is not of the class needed, nor is Bell at LI. Pennell is no upgrade on Brown, Gloucester seem to change FB every week and Saints & Wasps have mainly selected NQP options.

The biggest reason that we have seen little experimentation at FB (and hooker) is due to there being little in the way of valid options provided by the clubs.

cascough

He should make the most metres if he doesn't give the ball to anyone else.... and catches it in space when the opposition kicks to him.

Most metres can be a bit of a dodgy stat because you can make more if you get the ball more.

Brown might be vice captain but it's not exactly if England are an inexperienced side. I'd say his leadership is overrated.

Because England want to improve.

I didn't say Brown was completely useless. I am saying he's a limited player. You argue that what he is doing is enough - that's fair enough - that's your opinion. I just want more at 15 than a non passing 15 who specialises in ball retention. I want a 15 who will create more and help bring team mates into the game.

lostinwales Watson has barely played for England at 15.

See that's where we disagree. I don't think Brown brings the best out of players around him because he doesn't pass enough.

It's about making the right decisions.

LondonTiger wrote:Does anyone dispute that it would be preferable to ease Mike Brown out of the team?

Depends. I've no real loyalty to Mike Brown, so if there was a better option, I'd quite happily to see him eased out.

But I don't believe there is a player out there that performs the role Mike Brown does for England (which I happen to think is extremely effective) better than Mike Brown. So for that reason, I want to see him continue to start for England until there is a better replacement. As I said earlier, Nowell interests me, but possibly a bit risky given he hasn't played much fullback.

cascough wrote:Depends. I've no real loyalty to Mike Brown, so if there was a better option, I'd quite happily to see him eased out.

But I don't believe there is a player out there that performs the role Mike Brown does for England (which I happen to think is extremely effective) better than Mike Brown. So for that reason, I want to see him continue to start for England until there is a better replacement. As I said earlier, Nowell interests me, but possibly a bit risky given he hasn't played much fullback.

As a safe receiver who wont make mistakes or lose possession Goode is better at the moment. And has better ability to beat players.

Anyone think Smith may actually get a run out this autumn? I know he's there as an apprentice etc and no real need to rush him in given the players we already have but I think jones may well be tempted to bench him in that last game.

Goode is 29 now so it doesn't look like something jones would do..He's more looking to youth if undecided isn't he?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Anyone think Smith may actually get a run out this autumn? I know he's there as an apprentice etc and no real need to rush him in given the players we already have but I think jones may well be tempted to bench him in that last game.

Probably not but would be a good idea before long to have a Ford alternative without shuffling the backs around too much.

Scottrf wrote:

cascough wrote:Depends. I've no real loyalty to Mike Brown, so if there was a better option, I'd quite happily to see him eased out.

But I don't believe there is a player out there that performs the role Mike Brown does for England (which I happen to think is extremely effective) better than Mike Brown. So for that reason, I want to see him continue to start for England until there is a better replacement. As I said earlier, Nowell interests me, but possibly a bit risky given he hasn't played much fullback.

As a safe receiver who wont make mistakes or lose possession Goode is better at the moment. And has better ability to beat players.

Goode is definitely better at the moment at club level, but he seems to be one of those players who needs the extra fraction of a second you get at club level to perform. His international performances haven't matched his club form.

beshocked wrote:cascough

He should make the most metres if he doesn't give the ball to anyone else.... and catches it in space when the opposition kicks to him.

Most metres can be a bit of a dodgy stat because you can make more if you get the ball more.

Brown might be vice captain but it's not exactly if England are an inexperienced side. I'd say his leadership is overrated.

Because England want to improve.

I didn't say Brown was completely useless. I am saying he's a limited player. You argue that what he is doing is enough - that's fair enough - that's your opinion. I just want more at 15 than a non passing 15 who specialises in ball retention. I want a 15 who will create more and help bring team mates into the game.

lostinwales Watson has barely played for England at 15.

See that's where we disagree. I don't think Brown brings the best out of players around him because he doesn't pass enough.

It's about making the right decisions.

He made the most metres out of everyone in the 6N. Not just England. Earlier you said he doesn't make metres like he used to, now you're moving the goalposts and saying metres don't matter.

You keep saying he is limited as if that means anything. Every player is limited, that's just a cliche. Every player has some things that they do well, and some things that they do not so well. But because he doesn't do the things so well that YOU value, that means he's limited? That Owen Farrell eh? Can't scrummage for Toffee. Limited. Maro Itoje, have you seen his goalkicking? Limited. Okay. You might counter that and say, "come on now, Owen Farrell's game isn't to scrummage, or Itojes to goal kick". What about Mako Vunipola then? He's had more than his fair share of criticism over his scrummaging. He often falls foul of refs in this department. So is he limited? No. People are quite rightly aware that his scrummaging can be iffy, but his net contribution to the team is good. All I'm asking, is that you consider the same with Brown, instead of simply dismissing his attributes because he doesn't pass when you'd like him to.

Consider this...What do England lose if they DON'T pick Mike Brown at full back. Are any of the players being suggested capable of replicating his positive contributions. If they're not, will their positive contributions more than make up for what they don't do that Brown did? ie result in a Net improvement for England? I don't think that they will, for the reasons I and Poorfour outlined earlier. But if you consider that, and you still think Mike Brown needs to go. Fair enough.

For the record I think you make a positive contribution to this forum. It's interesting when views are challenged, and you certainly don't shy away from that. It's also admirable, that given the amount of flak you cop for some of your opinions, you never resort to ad hominen attacks (as some others do). But when challenged, I just wish you'd stop dismissing/ignoring what people say and explain it instead.

Brown is a very solid traditional full back who reads the game exceptionally well and so is positionally excellent. This means that he always has a yard or two more than others. Added to this he plays the game like an offensive eel, slippery and aggressive.
However his longevity is now a real issue and for all his current and past pro's, the negatives which are well known are stopping us progressing into a side who could regularly challenge and defeat the AB's. Basically the reason we should retire the Anglo Saxon is that he is not Charles Piutau.
Honestly from a personal perspective its a real sod, for the very simple reason that he plays in my old position and knowing my own games limitations I really respect the things he's always done well. The bloke is solid and reliable and as a last line of defence is everything you want, BUT its not the defence we need its the ATTACK!

We haven't got a Charles Piutau.

Also, you can't "out NZ" NZ. You have to play to your own strengths.

Should we also get rid of Kruis, Launchbury, Itoje and Lawes then? Because as good as they are, they're no Brodie Retallick.

Obviously I was making the point that on a balance of contributions, Brown's excellent defence fails to make up for his limited attack. Of course we don't have a CP but we do have Watson and others who's games significantly differ to Brown's and so in my view should be selected now. Time is limited (water is wet) and if we don't try things now then mores the case later will be too late. I rather experiment now and lose than hold on and lose in Japan.

Thought you wanted Daly and Watson rested this ais anyway.

cascough wrote:

beshocked wrote:cascough

He should make the most metres if he doesn't give the ball to anyone else.... and catches it in space when the opposition kicks to him.

Most metres can be a bit of a dodgy stat because you can make more if you get the ball more.

Brown might be vice captain but it's not exactly if England are an inexperienced side. I'd say his leadership is overrated.

Because England want to improve.

I didn't say Brown was completely useless. I am saying he's a limited player. You argue that what he is doing is enough - that's fair enough - that's your opinion. I just want more at 15 than a non passing 15 who specialises in ball retention. I want a 15 who will create more and help bring team mates into the game.

lostinwales Watson has barely played for England at 15.

See that's where we disagree. I don't think Brown brings the best out of players around him because he doesn't pass enough.

It's about making the right decisions.

He made the most metres out of everyone in the 6N. Not just England. Earlier you said he doesn't make metres like he used to, now you're moving the goalposts and saying metres don't matter.

You keep saying he is limited as if that means anything. Every player is limited, that's just a cliche. Every player has some things that they do well, and some things that they do not so well. But because he doesn't do the things so well that YOU value, that means he's limited? That Owen Farrell eh? Can't scrummage for Toffee. Limited. Maro Itoje, have you seen his goalkicking? Limited. Okay. You might counter that and say, "come on now, Owen Farrell's game isn't to scrummage, or Itojes to goal kick". What about Mako Vunipola then? He's had more than his fair share of criticism over his scrummaging. He often falls foul of refs in this department. So is he limited? No. People are quite rightly aware that his scrummaging can be iffy, but his net contribution to the team is good. All I'm asking, is that you consider the same with Brown, instead of simply dismissing his attributes because he doesn't pass when you'd like him to.

Consider this...What do England lose if they DON'T pick Mike Brown at full back. Are any of the players being suggested capable of replicating his positive contributions. If they're not, will their positive contributions more than make up for what they don't do that Brown did? ie result in a Net improvement for England? I don't think that they will, for the reasons I and Poorfour outlined earlier. But if you consider that, and you still think Mike Brown needs to go. Fair enough.

For the record I think you make a positive contribution to this forum. It's interesting when views are challenged, and you certainly don't shy away from that. It's also admirable, that given the amount of flak you cop for some of your opinions, you never resort to ad hominen attacks (as some others do). But when challenged, I just wish you'd stop dismissing/ignoring what people say and explain it instead.

cascough you make some good points.

You are right - it's up to those challenging for the 15 shirt to show more as to what they can offer that Brown can't. We don't know what anyone else can do because Brown has kept a firm grip on that 15 shirt whether we agree or not.

We do not know unless we give someone like Watson a go.

You are right perhaps I should look more at what players do rather what they don't but other players have to evolve or are dropped.

Making ground was perhaps the wrong word to use, I mean he's not having as much influence on the game as he used to like that 2014 6 nations.

When Mako's influence outside the scrum drops then he will lose the positive contribution he makes. Now if someone like Genge can improve in all aspects like discipline, scrummaging etc then he should be picked ahead.

I just feel with Brown he's not the same player he was. He's slower, he's not in good form.



On a side note, Ben Morgan's drop has been dramatic, thought he was poor vs Bath, seems to have lost all his power and effectiveness.


http://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/gloucester-rugby-fans-view-player-701017

From these ratings you'd think Gloucester stuffed Bath by 20-30 points.....

Those are crazy ratings, guess somebody is happy at beating their rivals.

On Brown...he needs to be challenged and EJ needs to blood an alternative....fast. We can't go into a WC year with no real alternative. Daly or Watson need to be given a start or 2 this AI imo.

7&1/2 I would like to say I've missed your wit

No wit there just a question. You said you would like to rest these lions guys and now it's they have to play ASAP. Just wondered if you were going to use it as.a.stick to beat the coaches with as.they're going to fall foul of one of these.

Are you a journalist? Its just your standards of bullsh1t are of their level. Don't reply because I won't ever be communicating with you again.

Thought it was an easy question. But good to know you'd rather sidestep it for whatever reason. I am on a good.roll with people blocking me though. Think that's at least 3 in a month.

To be fair it gets harder to rest Watson when the other wingers are dropping out like Nowell and Daly.

Plus if Brown gets injured, the FB options become even lighter.

Jamie George can't have a rest either because which other hookers can challenge Hartley?

At least in 2nd row, there is the option to rest Lawes and Itoje if need be.

Harder to rest Mako when Marler got himself banned.


It's ironic that so far it's the Lions players who haven't picked up injuries!

Depends if you've been raising it for a while due to player safety reasons. If a person truly believes that it's not a hard decision to leave them out. Personally I'm hoping that Jones isn't working on this in isolation and has been having these wider player welfare issues with the club staff.

If two of the senior wingers are injured do you think its a good idea to move a third to full back incase the fit fullback gets injured?

Wing isn't a huge area of concern though. I imagine May will start? With Watson, Denny....possibly Roko, Earle coming in?

Poorfour wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

cascough wrote:Depends. I've no real loyalty to Mike Brown, so if there was a better option, I'd quite happily to see him eased out.

But I don't believe there is a player out there that performs the role Mike Brown does for England (which I happen to think is extremely effective) better than Mike Brown. So for that reason, I want to see him continue to start for England until there is a better replacement. As I said earlier, Nowell interests me, but possibly a bit risky given he hasn't played much fullback.

As a safe receiver who wont make mistakes or lose possession Goode is better at the moment. And has better ability to beat players.

Goode is definitely better at the moment at club level, but he seems to be one of those players who needs the extra fraction of a second you get at club level to perform. His international performances haven't matched his club form.

Picking an international team is not about picking the best fifteen players. It is about picking the best team to execute the coach's plan.

Sarries play with two boshers in the centres. That is not a criticism - they are very good boshers but they are not play makers. This means that Goode's play making ability is needed. England play with Farrell in the centres. They do not need a third playmaker. They need the extra defensive reliability that Brown offers.

Goode is better at what Sarries need him to do than Brown would be. Brown is better at what Jones wants England to do.

Daly out for 3 weeks, Roko replaces him in the squad

http://www.englandrugby.com/news/rokoduguni-called-into-england-squad/

Ewels has been cited too, we will be lucky to have a squad at this rate!

Is anyone replacing Mullan?
Was Mullan a LH or TH? Or a utility prop?
Ewels may have had a run out in 1 game to give others a rest! Again though, this is an area that we can afford to loose a couple of players and still field quality alternatives.

Mullan was the spare LH prop (3 in squad vs 2 THs).

If Jones is insistent on resting Mako he can call up Marler for when his suspension ends I guess. After that I am not sure who is next in line (ie 5th choice)

So, Mako and Genge for the bigger games.
Marler to come back in and rest Mako.
Maybe another LH to be in early squad? (Who is next on the LH production line?) Having a brain fart!