England post 2022 6Ns, Aus tour and beyond

First topic message reminder :

A few things whirling around my head and most start with the fact that Eddie is likely to remain in charge. There are probably a lack of available alternatives and the RFU won't want to fork out more money. Therefore, he is likely to remain in charge until the RWC 2023 is done. Bearing that in mind what are the positives and negatives?

Positives
We have some decent forwards for sure and the set piece should be fine. Underhill was terrific yesterday and I think a return to Curry and Underhill playing around a big 8 would be very handy. Dombrandt should be that man.
Our defence is excellent and the team spirit is clearly there.
We have loads of quality players who can hopefully return to fitness and form and add to the mix. All countries lose players and of course we have more resources than anyone bar France, but we will no doubt look completely different if Launchbury, Hill, Curry, Cowan-Dickie, Manu, May, Watson, Cockanasiga, Farrell are all fit and firing.
We have some foundations to build on and it is not Eddie's fault that we have not had Manu, or a decent replacement, available to add some power to our midfield.
There is enough time to fix many of these issues.

Negatives
Inconsistent selection
Inconsistent tactics and coaching team (too many coaching changes). Taking over from Lancaster Eddie was very clear on what to do. Restore England's traditional strengths in the set piece, defence and back it up with good kicking. Now we are totally confused as what we are trying to do.
The whole thing about playing players not in their best positions
Everyone is bored with Eddie's comments - we need less of him

Aus Tour
What a statement he made by winning 3-0 last time post a grand slam. Ruthless in taking off Burrell after 25 minutes. And they were missing Manu then as well and ended up with Ford, Farrell and Joseph so if we assume that Manu is unavailable then there is still hope. But we need players in their correct position and we need some consistency. Considering we don't have too many options at 12 and Slade is not really working out should we revert to Farrell? Not exactly a running beast, but at least he will be fresh and might just add some toughness. I would love to see Youngs left behind and to back 2 of our younger 9s. Genge, Dombrandt, Smith, Steward etc all need exposure to a tough away series.

Autumn
Based purely on form this is now the time to select the 23 Eddie sees as our strongest RWC team. All bets are off now and if a Mako or Bill V are playing well and showing the form and hunger to return then why not consider them. We might need then in the RWC group even if they are back ups to the regular starters. So maybe give them a game to see where they are? And then hopefully we can enjoy some consistent selection allied with a revamped game plan.

Anyone else hopeful that Eddie can resurrect the team and our RWC ambitions?

You never know with him mountain.

Willi Heinz is back off to NZ. He was an odd pick for England, came in and did a job but why we were picking a journeyman over guys like Mitchell or Spencer left us short.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You never know with him mountain.

Willi Heinz is back off to NZ. He was an odd pick for England, came in and did a job but why we were picking a journeyman over guys like Mitchell or Spencer left us short.

And this is one of the issues people have with Jones...just random inexplainable selections.

I see Kieran Bracken has been mouthing off about Eddie. Actually some of it i agree with ....certainly about only focusing on World Cups and using the 6n merely for planning, trialing stuff.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You never know with him mountain.

Willi Heinz is back off to NZ. He was an odd pick for England, came in and did a job but why we were picking a journeyman over guys like Mitchell or Spencer left us short.

Could never understand either why he was picked. Likewise Brad Shields, as I recall never had a good game for Eng. Plenty others of course over the years.

Ironic to see that Manu is back and available for Sale this weekend! Put an England shirt on him and he breaks down quick time.

Manu should never be seen in an England shirt ever again. he so unreliable.

majesticimperialman wrote:Manu should never be  seen in an  England shirt ever again. he so unreliable.

I disagree, I think if and it is a big if he finally proves fitness and stay fit then I'd love to see him back for Eng. However, cannot rely on this so alternatives must be tried(not Slade!).

mountain man wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:You never know with him mountain.

Willi Heinz is back off to NZ. He was an odd pick for England, came in and did a job but why we were picking a journeyman over guys like Mitchell or Spencer left us short.

Could never understand either why he was picked. Likewise Brad Shields, as I recall never had a good game for Eng. Plenty others of course over the years.

I liked Shields. Better than Wilson.

majesticimperialman wrote:Manu should never be  seen in an  England shirt ever again. he so unreliable.

When he's fit he's a step above every body else though. Probably everyone else available to the home nations. Of course as you say keeping him fit is such a problem. 

They need to create a system that works without him and he can be the cherry on top if he's actually fit.

I find the suggestion that the poor 6N's form of England was down to experimentation some what bemusing.  The players new to the 6N's who made a reasonable number of appearances or minutes were: -

Dombrandt
Randall
Smith
Steward
Furbank

Of these Steward generally played well through out and was an improvement on Daly.  Randall was good to OK and always seemed better than Youngs.  Smith was not always flawless but did show ability and potential.  Dombrandt I thought was always good even if restricted by illness and I am still not sure why he did not start against France.  Furback was perhaps the exception but was only there for one match and not everyone's choice.

So the experimental players seemed generally to have performed well and if everyone had been playing to that standard I think England would have done better.

Injury might have been a better excuse though all teams suffer from this.

cb wrote:I find the suggestion that the poor 6N's form of England was down to experimentation some what bemusing.  The players new to the 6N's who made a reasonable number of appearances or minutes were: -

Dombrandt
Randall
Smith
Steward
Furbank

Of these Steward generally played well through out and was an improvement on Daly.  Randall was good to OK and always seemed better than Youngs.  Smith was not always flawless but did show ability and potential.  Dombrandt I thought was always good even if restricted by illness and I am still not sure why he did not start against France.  Furback was perhaps the exception but was only there for one match and not everyone's choice.

So the experimental players seemed generally to have performed well and if everyone had been playing to that standard I think England would have done better.

Injury might have been a better excuse though all teams suffer from this.

Bit optimistic.

Steward - was solid, came alive in the game Vs France.
Randall - wasn't Youngs so people were enthused (and willing to overlook some shonky passing), particularly as he's quicker round the field but wouldn't get close to being selected for any of the other teams bar Italy. Two new scrum halfs needed in the summer.
Smith - showed flashes of what he can do but was tethered and frustrated by the awful attacking system. Frustration manifested itself in unforced errors.
Dombrandt - failed to show he's the rampaging successor to BillyV, didn't play badly so the experiment should get another outing in the summer.
Simmonds - read Dombrandt's.
Furbank - out of his depth. Seems to be favoured only because he can cover multiple positions.

No one advanced their credentials this 6N. There's a few that are worth maintaining for the summer as they didn't play badly just struggled for impact. Some like Smith had credit in the bank from the AIs and were hamstrung by the game plan, I think Malins is a little in that boat as well.

Randall and Furbank join Youngs and Daly in being transitioned away from for the summer tour for me. There's other options who deserve the opportunity and should suit England better.

I agree in part with Sam but not all. I thought Steward was good this 6N especially against Ireland and France.
Randall was decent but maybe we were just happy to not see the alternative on there. Quirke offers more.

Smith not wonderkid some expecting, hyped too much by media and then everyone disappointed he didn't singlehandedly win every game. Best 10 option though for Eng so no change.

Simmonds finally showed what he can do against Ireland, strong ball carrying. Neither he nor Dombrandt have the sheer weight and power of a peak Billy V. Seems likely though him and Mako times up?

I can't for the life of me understand how Furbank got picked to start at 15 against France, given he's been pretty terrible every game for England bar Tonga which doesn't count. However, given situation he did OK. Could have been unmitigated disaster. Wouldn't want him again in Eng shirt though whatever position.

Will Stuart did actually show he was worthy of Int against Ireland and France having been poor in all other games for Eng he's played.

As for enhanced credentials I think Steward has. Possibly Genge for his scummaging?

As for being transitioned away, Youngs, Daly, Furbank need to go forever not just summer tour. Likewise Ewels and probably Isiekwe who in early games I though did OK but not sure up to it now. Malins? Dunno. He's a good player but 15 his position not wing and he's not going to oust Steward. Or maybe he will now as Steward is Eddies wing(!).

Biggest disappointment by far was wider squad players like Barbeary, OHC, Radwen, Northmore not given a chance even against Italy where a win was pretty much guaranteed.

I dont think we'll see mako back in now...Genge seemed to come of age at the this level through the 6n....and Marler is probably the other option.

Id look to take Rodd on tour...see what he can offer.

Billy...well thats different. If hes fully firing and fit...who knows. He doesnt need to be a lineout option as Lawes is pretty much inked in for the 6 spot meaning we already have 3 jumpers...
I still think Dombrandt is worth persevering though. He did a lot of good grunt work rather than flashy stuff which still important in a top 8. If we can get our attack working he can then bring the more flashy aspects of his game in aswell...

What will the squad size be for the tour?

formerly known as Sam wrote:
A squad of something like;

1. Genge, Marler, Rodd
2. George, Blamire, Dolly
3. Stuart, Heyes, Collier
4. Hill, Launchbury
5. Isiekwe, Chessum
6. Martin, Hill
7. Ludlum, Willis
8. Dombrandt, Simmonds
9. Quirke, Mitchell
10. Smith, Farrell
11. May, Nowell
12. Kelly, Ojomoh
13. Slade, Marchant
14. Radwan, Arundell
15. Steward, Malins

Any wild cards potentially? Or not much chance?
1. West or Goodricke-Clarke?
2. McGuigan?
6 Barbeary?
8. Tom Willis?

9. Quirke, can he actually stay fit!
12/13/14 Odogwu?
11/14 OHC, Loader, Sleightholme, Cockasaniga...?

I suspect the wildcards will go into the Barbarians game which will probably be missing most of the playoff teams players. So most if not all of those mentioned there will get a game you'd have thought. Show up well in camp and against the Baabaas and there's opportunities then potentially for the summer squad. Injuries and form fluctuations between now and the end of the season as well.

Very true

Understand the talk about various players for the Oz tour but that has to be based on what is to be the England game plan. No one really seems sure, but this 6N does throw up some interesting stats.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/stark-evidence-reveals-just-went-23468245

The article is from an obvious welsh perspective but some stats are very revealing, particularly France. EJ got castigated last season for the kicking tactics but France have basically won a Slam on that basis and yes they have some star backs which helps, whereas England lost a core of backs experience through injuries. France in terms of carries and metres made are surprisingly low but way out in front with kicking metres and highest number of turnovers, which makes France a counter attacking side in a NZ mould.
That can definitely be countered but the English backs are still working it out.
The Irish stats are also interesting with their high tempo, high risk carrying game, which used to be NZ but think they considered it too high risk and can be neutered with gainline physicality, so moved away from it.

This summer, Wales will risk getting crushed in SA, Ireland in NZ will be interesting, as will the England template against Oz.

Indeed. England get criticized for amount of kicking but NZ kick more than any other team and as you say this 6N been France.
However, it depends upon how effective said kicks are as is the chase.
Far too often Eng guilty of aimless box kicks which just hands possession back to opposition.

I dont care about the amount of kicking...the problem is the kicking has to be correctly chased, or the kick put in to the right areas to put pressure on the defence.

We dont do that at the moment...especially with Johnny may out...who was the king of the kick chase.

Actually what annoys me about the kicking is how slow we are to react when we get the ball back or how often we concede a penalty after successfully chasing down the catcher in or close to his own 22. The number of dumb penalties for sealing off or being offside for a charge down is painful. Steward reclaimed two or three kicks against France with no one there in support.

Looks like Nowell is out anyway with a broken arm. Haven't seen updates on Watson or May but can't see them parachuted in. Surely Jones now has to speed up integration of new players in the backline? He's not been afraid of picking new guys though so it does confuse me sometimes as to why some guys seem to get stuck at the training squad stage. I've understood it previously if there have been good players ahead of them but there seems to be a few players who have glaring flaws persevered with ahead of players who seemingly have a very high threshold of play. Sometimes even very good need that consistent run of games and arm round the shoulder, if we are aiming for the WC above or else (and yes its stupid to do so) then surely they need blooding now. I'm not really having much confidence that Jones wants to make these changes though and sees the people chosen as the best options.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Actually what annoys me about the kicking is how slow we are to react when we get the ball back or how often we concede a penalty after successfully chasing down the catcher in or close to his own 22. The number of dumb penalties for sealing off or being offside for a charge down is painful. Steward reclaimed two or three kicks against France with no one there in support.

Happened in carries too, especially when going out wide. Another cross for Gleeson for me.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Looks like Nowell is out anyway with a broken arm. Haven't seen updates on Watson or May but can't see them parachuted in. Surely Jones now has to speed up integration of new players in the backline? He's not been afraid of picking new guys though so it does confuse me sometimes as to why some guys seem to get stuck at the training squad stage. I've understood it previously if there have been good players ahead of them but there seems to be a few players who have glaring flaws persevered with ahead of players who seemingly have a very high threshold of play. Sometimes even very good need that consistent run of games and arm round the shoulder, if we are aiming for the WC above or else (and yes its stupid to do so) then surely they need blooding now.I'm not really having much confidence that Jones wants to make these changes though and sees the people chosen as the best options.

Regardless of what new changes, or resistance to changes is percolating through EJs mind, I think we can be confident he knows the results of the last two Six Nations are the types of results that gets England coaches fired.  Even if his bosses at the RFU have given him assurances in private and supportive statements in public, a run of results like this can cause a rapid rethink regardless of what has been promised.  This is business not a cuddle-fest. What the RFU and EJ do about it is something else.  But they are all sitting on the edge of the Dover cliffs and if a bad wind blows....

formerly known as Sam wrote:Actually what annoys me about the kicking is how slow we are to react when we get the ball back or how often we concede a penalty after successfully chasing down the catcher in or close to his own 22. The number of dumb penalties for sealing off or being offside for a charge down is painful. Steward reclaimed two or three kicks against France with no one there in support.

It’s things like this that annoyed me. His teammates must have known that Steward was not only likely to win the ball, but win it very cleanly. Why was nobody there to profit? A poacher like Ashton in his pomp would have eaten those opportunities for breakfast.

I would say that I agree with others about the propensity for kicking. I don’t mind that it is done frequently, I do mind that it seems to be done aimlessly, or because we don’t know what else to do. I hope that we can learn not to kick when there is a clear 2-on-1 for instance…

The RFU have said that the new head coach will be at least named before the world cup and possibly be involved in the set up.

No 7&1/2 wrote:The RFU have said that the new head coach will be at least named before the world cup and possibly be involved in the set up.

Supposed to be an Englishman as well. I wonder if they have already sounded out whom they expect to join the team.

It's likely Borthwick.

It’s either Gatland or Erasmus.

Well both will be free agents as no one will touch them with barge poles so cheaper options.

mikey_dragon wrote:It’s either Gatland or Erasmus.

Won't be either they want an English coaching set up.

Baxter's contract is up in time to takeover and he'd be the obvious choice. Borthwick will be in contention but has had little time in the top job despite the relative success so far at Tigers. Cockers is already under contract for the RFU though I'm unsure that he'd go down well with players nor media in the long term. Ali Hepher, Sam Vesty, George Skivington and Alex Sanderson could all be in the mix as well. Depends on what criteria the RFU are actually going to set.

If they offered Rob Baxter head coach. and talked Borthwick out of his tigers contract. What would his role be?
I assume Cockerill is scrum coach.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mountain man wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:You never know with him mountain.

Willi Heinz is back off to NZ. He was an odd pick for England, came in and did a job but why we were picking a journeyman over guys like Mitchell or Spencer left us short.

Could never understand either why he was picked. Likewise Brad Shields, as I recall never had a good game for Eng. Plenty others of course over the years.

I liked Shields. Better than Wilson.

Better at absolutely nothing.

Wilson's worst game in an England shirt was better than anything Shields ever managed. Wilson reached heights Shields could only dream of........Shields was not an International rugby player.

Overall Shields has had the better career. Wilson played for Newcastle.

mountain man wrote:I agree in part with Sam but not all. I thought Steward was good this 6N especially against Ireland and France.
Randall was decent but maybe we were just happy to not see the alternative on there. Quirke offers more.

Smith not wonderkid some expecting, hyped too much by media and then everyone disappointed he didn't singlehandedly win every game. Best 10 option though for Eng so no change.

Simmonds finally showed what he can do against Ireland, strong ball carrying. Neither he nor Dombrandt have the sheer weight and power of a peak Billy V. Seems likely though him and Mako times up?

I can't for the life of me understand how Furbank got picked to start at 15 against France, given he's been pretty terrible every game for England bar Tonga which doesn't count. However, given situation he did OK. Could have been unmitigated disaster. Wouldn't want him again in Eng shirt though whatever position.

Will Stuart did actually show he was worthy of Int against Ireland and France having been poor in all other games for Eng he's played.

As for enhanced credentials I think Steward has. Possibly Genge for his scummaging?

As for being transitioned away, Youngs, Daly, Furbank need to go forever not just summer tour. Likewise Ewels and probably Isiekwe who in early games I though did OK but not sure up to it now. Malins? Dunno. He's a good player but 15 his position not wing and he's not going to oust Steward. Or maybe he will now as Steward is Eddies wing(!).

Biggest disappointment by far was wider squad players like Barbeary, OHC, Radwen, Northmore not given a chance even against Italy where a win was pretty much guaranteed.

Genge really made the LH spot his own this 6N, very impressive. Crazy that it's took 20+ caps for him to really bring his cub form to the scene. To some degree Stuart also showed up well, at last.

Not sure I can agree with Simmonds and possibly Steward. Simmonds isn't a starting international 8 for me, he just lacks the physicality and we put too much on other players, Genge for example. Steward was steady, didn't really kick on in a unsettled backline (as expected). I thought he struggled defensively at times and was directly at fault for 2 tries with his positioning. He's still extremely young though and will no doubt work on this.

I'm not convinced at all with Randall, although the quick ball is good. He looks a bit lost a times and struggles with defence and kicking.....dare I say Youngs is still the better option.

Wingers.....no idea what Eddie is doing tbh.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Overall Shields has had the better career. Wilson played for Newcastle.

Shields did nothing on the Int scene....Wilson was a complete step above for England, it's not even a fair comparison.

Nah. Not for me. Another weird choice from Jones on that one.

I imagine you stand very much on your own there 7.5, Wilson was an absolute warrior in an England jersey....had some fantastic games against SA and France to name but a few from his 20+ caps.

Shields....erm....got capped and forgotten about as he didn't cut the mustard.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Overall Shields has had the better career. Wilson played for Newcastle.

Club rugby isn't international rugby; in an England shirt Wilson was the far better player.

majesticimperialman wrote:If they offered Rob Baxter head coach. and talked Borthwick out of his tigers contract. What would his role be?
I assume Cockerill is scrum coach.

Proudfoot is the scrum coach, Cockers lineout/forward skills. I presume they share the forwards coaching between them.

It would be Baxter or Borthwick, I can't see Borthwick coming back for anything other than the top job and maybe even he will think it's to soon for him to take that. Borthwick is only 42, if he jumps into an international role now and it doesn't work out then where does he go after that? Lancaster, Ashton and Johnson haven't exactly had lots of offers after their England tenures. Given how well things are building at Tigers Borthwick might consider staying their for another world cup cycle and then re-access in 2027. A bigger body of leadership work at Tigers will look better on his CV, if he brings back silverware doubly so.

Baxter is 51 and has so much history at Exeter he could go back there fairly easily if it didn't work with England. That or he could opt for an early retirement with occasional media work.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:If they offered Rob Baxter head coach. and talked Borthwick out of his tigers contract. What would his role be?
I assume Cockerill is scrum coach.

Proudfoot is the scrum coach, Cockers lineout/forward skills. I presume they share the forwards coaching between them.

It would be Baxter or Borthwick, I can't see Borthwick coming back for anything other than the top job and maybe even he will think it's to soon for him to take that. Borthwick is only 42, if he jumps into an international role now and it doesn't work out then where does he go after that? Lancaster, Ashton and Johnson haven't exactly had lots of offers after their England tenures. Given how well things are building at Tigers Borthwick might consider staying their for another world cup cycle and then re-access in 2027. A bigger body of leadership work at Tigers will look better on his CV, if he brings back silverware doubly so.

Baxter is 51 and has so much history at Exeter he could go back there fairly easily if it didn't work with England. That or he could opt for an early retirement with occasional media work.

Not sold on Borthwick as an International head coach. Yet. For me he is clearly on a strong trajectory, but let's see him put together a few seasons with this kind of performance. He certainly has gained cred with Tigers turnaround, but let's not anoint him next in line to the throne before he shows he can maintain this level of performance. On the other hand, he doesn't need Baxter's track record which is about as good as it gets at club level anywhere. Baxter's track record is absolutely remarkable. I think the media would want Cockerill because he is guaranteed to be good for the newspaper business.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I imagine you stand very much on your own there 7.5, Wilson was an absolute warrior in an England jersey....had some fantastic games against SA and France to name but a few from his 20+ caps.

Shields....erm....got capped and forgotten about as he didn't cut the mustard.

Got injured at the wrong time. But I'd describe Wilson more as a plodder than a warrior .

Soul Requiem wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Overall Shields has had the better career. Wilson played for Newcastle.

Club rugby isn't international rugby; in an England shirt Wilson was the far better player.

Nah. Not for me.

doctor_grey wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:If they offered Rob Baxter head coach. and talked Borthwick out of his tigers contract. What would his role be?
I assume Cockerill is scrum coach.

Proudfoot is the scrum coach, Cockers lineout/forward skills. I presume they share the forwards coaching between them.

It would be Baxter or Borthwick, I can't see Borthwick coming back for anything other than the top job and maybe even he will think it's to soon for him to take that. Borthwick is only 42, if he jumps into an international role now and it doesn't work out then where does he go after that? Lancaster, Ashton and Johnson haven't exactly had lots of offers after their England tenures. Given how well things are building at Tigers Borthwick might consider staying their for another world cup cycle and then re-access in 2027. A bigger body of leadership work at Tigers will look better on his CV, if he brings back silverware doubly so.

Baxter is 51 and has so much history at Exeter he could go back there fairly easily if it didn't work with England. That or he could opt for an early retirement with occasional media work.

Not sold on Borthwick as an International head coach.  Yet.  For me he is clearly on a strong trajectory, but let's see him put together a few seasons with this kind of performance.  He certainly has gained cred with Tigers turnaround, but let's not anoint him next in line to the throne before he shows he can maintain this level of performance.  On the other hand, he doesn't need Baxter's track record which is about as good as it gets at club level anywhere.  Baxter's track record is absolutely remarkable.  I think the media would want Cockerill because he is guaranteed to be good for the newspaper business.      

There does tend to be a pattern in English international sport to flip between coaches who appear at least on the surface are very different. Youth to experience. Quiet demeanour to fire brand. And around we go. So we'll have a nice polite guy this time followed by a South African nutter next.

Not entirely sure on what is meant by an English style of play either. Does that mean, Wasps, London Irish, Leicester, Saracens? I wasn't aware there was 1 style of play in the English game.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Overall Shields has had the better career. Wilson played for Newcastle.

Club rugby isn't international rugby; in an England shirt Wilson was the far better player.

Nah. Not for me.

Thank you for your expansive reasoning.

No probs. It's an old discussion anyway that was done at the time. There's only 1 of them still playing so very much done and dusted. I'd rather focus on who should start out of Willis, Curry, Dombrandt and Barbeary and why Lawes should be a lock.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I imagine you stand very much on your own there 7.5, Wilson was an absolute warrior in an England jersey....had some fantastic games against SA and France to name but a few from his 20+ caps.

Shields....erm....got capped and forgotten about as he didn't cut the mustard.

Got injured at the wrong time. But I'd describe Wilson more as a plodder than a warrior .

A plodder lol.....I'm not even biting.

No 7&1/2 wrote:No probs. It's an old discussion anyway that was done at the time. There's only 1 of them still playing so very much done and dusted. I'd rather focus on who should start out of Willis, Curry, Dombrandt and Barbeary and why Lawes should be a lock.

Lawes has put so much effort into losing the weight whilst maintaining the core strength needed to be a BSF that I cannot see him going back to lock now, he is 1st choice 6 for club and country and none of the other 4 mentioned are particularly good in the lineout. Unless you are SA, you need three quality jumpers these days, nor do they carry like Lawes does in the tight for this last year or so (Dombrandt excepting sometimes). Again the go to man to make a yard or two for club and country.

Lawes is fantastic in the lineout that I agree with.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:No probs. It's an old discussion anyway that was done at the time. There's only 1 of them still playing so very much done and dusted. I'd rather focus on who should start out of Willis, Curry, Dombrandt and Barbeary and why Lawes should be a lock.

Lawes has put so much effort into losing the weight whilst maintaining the core strength needed to be a BSF that I cannot see him going back to lock now, he is 1st choice 6 for club and country and none of the other 4 mentioned are particularly good in the lineout. Unless you are SA, you need three quality jumpers these days, nor do they carry like Lawes does in the tight for this last year or so (Dombrandt excepting sometimes). Again the go to man to make a yard or two for club and country.

To be fair the go to South African pack when all fit has mountains everywhere. Vermulen is 6ft5, PTSD at blindside 6ft7 and then you have the short one Kolisi at 6ft2. 

England did play a lot of the 2019 world cup with either Underhill or Curry operating as the third jumper but it seems Eddie has moved away from that option. I guess he's aiming for a big nasty pack and not quite finding the balance he wants. The summer will be interesting as to whether Eddie tries and gets both Curry and Willis into the same backrow or not.

Personally I'd give Curry the summer off focus at developing some alternatives but Eddie is under pressure to get results.

I agree, but would add that I think England - and Curry - would benefit from a fresher Curry going into the RWC year.