m

GeordieFalcon wrote:Sam Simmonds should be a 12.

Poorfour wrote:Not necessarily coaches with England experience - I just think that going into Head Coach of England (or SA or NZ) as your first international coaching role is a very high risk move for both sides.

The skill set is different from being a club DoR - or rather it's a similar skill set with very different emphasis. You get far less time with the players, have to worry a lot more about selection and forming combinations from players who don't play together often. You need to be able to build a game plan that's simple enough to convey in limited coaching time but effective enough to beat other international teams, to pick specialist coaches who complement what you're trying to do.

And the RWC is sufficiently different as a tournament that it's very easy to get it wrong: once every four years you have unfettered access to the players for 3 months, but you then have to manage how to keep them effective when they're in a foreign environment for a long period and under media scrutiny every day. Of the past 4 England Head Coaches, 3 of them have lost their job because one way or another they lost the plot at the RWC - and one of them made it to the final, so it's not just about results.

The ABs have managed to have pretty good succession over the last 15 years or so and I think England ought to be able to do the same. One thing that Eddie's policy of regularly refreshing his coaching team has done is that the RFU has seen quite a few coaches in assistant roles who now do have relevant international experience.

For what it's worth, I'd see Borthwick as the leading candidate post 2023. Another candidate who's not often talked about is Conor O'Shea, though it's not clear whether he'd want to move out of the Performance Director role. He's managed Italy through a full RWC cycle but also knows the RFU arguably better than anyone still coaching, and is better suited to the Head Coach role than many more hands on coaches.

I'd be happy to see Baxter and McCall coaching at international level at some point, but the assumption that because they've been successful club DoRs they could step straight into the England role and not falter is to my mind a dangerous one.

Anyway, turning to the players, Smith - Tuilagi - Marchant would replicate the model that Quins have with Esterhuizen and which works very well.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Tuilagi has looked a class act...but can he genuinely stay injury free...?

I like Lawrence, and i think there's definitely alot of promise and much to work with. I think Odogwu is another who could be interesting at 13.

Im actually surprised Cokasaniga was not selected in this training squad...or did i miss that he is injured?

Poorfour wrote:

Anyway, turning to the players, Smith - Tuilagi - Marchant would replicate the model that Quins have with Esterhuizen and which works very well.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Tuilagi has looked a class act...but can he genuinely stay injury free...?

I like Lawrence, and i think there's definitely alot of promise and much to work with. I think Odogwu is another who could be interesting at 13.

Im actually surprised Cokasaniga was not selected in this training squad...or did i miss that he is injured?

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

Anyway, turning to the players, Smith - Tuilagi - Marchant would replicate the model that Quins have with Esterhuizen and which works very well.

In that case, be prepared for Farrell - Atkinson - Slade

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

Anyway, turning to the players, Smith - Tuilagi - Marchant would replicate the model that Quins have with Esterhuizen and which works very well.

In that case, be prepared for Farrell - Atkinson - Slade

Or Smith, Farrell, Atkinson for the slowest midfield pairing we've had in years. At least Atkinson will run a line for Smith though.

formerly known as Sam wrote:That's arguably worse for us long term because there was a really good chance to rotate the squad round the three games and explore different combinations. Now I fear it's all to easy for the coaches just to name what they consider to be their best line up for all three games with maybe a couple of chances handed out Vs Tonga. 

I really hope we don't see players like Blamire, Radwan, Smith, Marchant, Randall, Heyes and Steward. All miss out on game time for the same players we always pick.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:That's arguably worse for us long term because there was a really good chance to rotate the squad round the three games and explore different combinations. Now I fear it's all to easy for the coaches just to name what they consider to be their best line up for all three games with maybe a couple of chances handed out Vs Tonga. 

I really hope we don't see players like Blamire, Radwan, Smith, Marchant, Randall, Heyes and Steward. All miss out on game time for the same players we always pick.

You never know...he might now be able to field a more mixed side for the tests....newbies and experienced Lions etc...

Poorfour wrote:Squidge put out his long awaited "How Harlequins Won the Premiership" video yesterday, which has some interesting implications for England.

The key takeaways for me are:

1) Quins are hard to defend against because their whole system is geared towards giving Smith multiple options to choose between after the defenders commit to their course of play

2) It only works if the whole team are committed and on the same page - including lots of movement in running lines

3) A big factor in making it work may well have been Quins' use of the Protecht mouthguards to manage training loads - something that may be anathema to Eddie (given his love of intense training) or may be something he embraces (given his desire to constantly seek an edge)

4) Smith's role as fly half is different from most of his peers. Care manages the game - Smith's job is to manipulate the space on the pitch and put Quins into places where the opposition aren't.

What's exciting from an England perspective is that you can see how it could work at international level. It doesn't rely on breaking defensive systems so much as using the system's own weaknesses against itself by forcing defenders to make decisions while Quins still have the option to do something that runs counter to it. The two big concerns are: can Smith (or Ford) do it at the pace of international rugby, and will Eddie and England buy into it?

Squidge on Quins

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm shocked you believe the Leicester half backs will slot in!

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm shocked you believe the Leicester half backs will slot in!

You said form. I didn't say they'd slot in just if the selections are being made on form.

In hoping Randall gets a start in a rejuvenated Bristol team this week so he can stake a proper claim as at the minute not so great. Smith should be back soon and Quins are playing well so he should be able to make his case again. The other scrum half options are Robson who we know isn't good enough and Quirke who is a little raw and pulled out of the weekend's game with an injury.

Geordie I really hope we're not picking Smith and giving him that centre combo. He deserves more than that.

PourFour interesting, I'll have to watch that. Youngs can certainly do the tactical bit, not sure he can play at Quins pace but he certainly has done more for Tigers this season in attack. A system like that in regards to multiple ball carriers and let the flyhalf select, would suit both Ford and Smith but not Farrell which is where it might fall apart.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm shocked you believe the Leicester half backs will slot in!

You said form. I didn't say they'd slot in just if the selections are being made on form.

In hoping Randall gets a start in a rejuvenated Bristol team this week so he can stake a proper claim as at the minute not so great. Smith should be back soon and Quins are playing well so he should be able to make his case again. The other scrum half options are Robson who we know isn't good enough and Quirke who is a little raw and pulled out of the weekend's game with an injury.

Geordie I really hope we're not picking Smith and giving him that centre combo. He deserves more than that.

PourFour interesting, I'll have to watch that. Youngs can certainly do the tactical bit, not sure he can play at Quins pace but he certainly has done more for Tigers this season in attack. A system like that in regards to multiple ball carriers and let the flyhalf select, would suit both Ford and Smith but not Farrell which is where it might fall apart.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Is Randall's lack of game time worse than Youngs lack of form....it's a tough one.

If Smith does start, he's going to have to adapt to Youngs's errr....style shall we call it? And...he most likely will have Farrell outside him, poor kid. It's quite amazing that Ford can still shine when you think about it.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Is Randall's lack of game time worse than Youngs lack of form....it's a tough one.

If Smith does start, he's going to have to adapt to Youngs's errr....style shall we call it? And...he most likely will have Farrell outside him, poor kid. It's quite amazing that Ford can still shine when you think about it.

king_carlos wrote:I rate Simmonds but part of me thinks he has similar limitations to Farrell whilst being worse at their respective strengths. Unlike many I really rate Farrell though and think England's best chance of challenging in the next RWC will be with a side including him. As said many times before the best rugby I've seen England play since 2003 by an absolute mile has been under Jones with Farrell at the teams core. I wouldn't discard that so quickly.

Atkinson and Fin Smith look like really talented players but a few years away yet. Fin Smith is actually on loan with Ampthill in the Championship just now. They've got so much time left to keep developing that talent though.

Marcus Smith would be my starting 10 against Australia and South Africa in the Autumn, then hopefully continuing into the Six Nations. He looks a special talent that deserves a run.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

king_carlos wrote:I rate Simmonds but part of me thinks he has similar limitations to Farrell whilst being worse at their respective strengths. Unlike many I really rate Farrell though and think England's best chance of challenging in the next RWC will be with a side including him. As said many times before the best rugby I've seen England play since 2003 by an absolute mile has been under Jones with Farrell at the teams core. I wouldn't discard that so quickly.

Atkinson and Fin Smith look like really talented players but a few years away yet. Fin Smith is actually on loan with Ampthill in the Championship just now. They've got so much time left to keep developing that talent though.

Marcus Smith would be my starting 10 against Australia and South Africa in the Autumn, then hopefully continuing into the Six Nations. He looks a special talent that deserves a run.

And is that because of Farrell or in spite....

Mr Bounce wrote:Will Eddie go for a change of Captain? He's not known for being sentimental...

Poorfour wrote:I don't get the intense dislike that Farrell often gets, usually along with assertions about him wanting to run the show.

Farrell, I think, is the ultimate system player - which is one reason that coaches like him. He is excellent at executing a gameplan or following through on a call from someone else. What he's less good at is creating off his own bat. Farrell has played best at 10 (at least at International level) when he's had a creative 9 to play with; Lancaster played Care/Farrell a few times and the result was usually very effective. I genuinely expected that he'd play Care/Farrell and Youngs/Ford at RWC 2015 so that you always had a balance of execution and creativity. Instead you got Youngs/Farrell and the rest is history.

I wouldn't have a problem with Farrell playing alongside Smith. Having a second distributor is helpful against fast defences, and England will need a strong game manager somewhere in the 9/10/12 axis. I'd prefer Tuilagi, because I think that creates more attacking options, but I don't have a huge problem with Farrell.

The issue for me was that England in the 6N were too reliant on a number of players who'd not had enough game time against good teams, and missed an opportunity to try out some new players and combination. However, as I've said elsewhere, I think it's Eddie's style to provoke a crisis every so often so this may be a necessary part of the process from his point of view.

Poorfour wrote:I wasn't a fan of Manu playing 12, but he's done a decent job there in his recent games for Sale. I'd like to see if it could work.