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?

England's best run of wins under EJ was when we had Ford 10 Farrell12. with Farrell out injured England never tried the Ford 10 Smith m12 0r visa versa.
Would England's style of play been any different?

No 7&1/2 wrote:He hasn't been hidden at international level. Not sure entirely what you'd expect him to do tbh. I'd lay the blame for attack at Gleeson's feet at the moment. And if the best attacking 10 can't perform wonders not sure why Farrell would.

Agreed. Him and/or Jones. When one player isn't performing you have a problem with the player, when no-one is performing there's a problem with the coach.

majesticimperialman wrote:England's best run of wins under EJ was when we had Ford 10 Farrell12. with Farrell out injured England never tried the Ford 10 Smith m12 0r visa versa.
Would England's style of play been any different?

It's an okay idea on paper, but they are just too small when combined in a backline. We'd just give up too much ground when defending a set piece. I dare say there are certain no.8 who could carry them both over from the base of the scrum.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He hasn't been hidden at international level. Not sure entirely what you'd expect him to do tbh. I'd lay the blame for attack at Gleeson's feet at the moment. And if the best attacking 10 can't perform wonders not sure why Farrell would.

Gleeson has got a lot to answer for. Not that I think Smith gets a free pass because his performance Vs France was pretty bad but it came after some better performances where he out credit in the bank. He deserves more of a chance than an attack with no structure whilst he has barely 10 caps to his name. Now he's the incumbent he should have the rest of 2022 to stake his claim and then England evaluate before next season's six nations. If Smith has got a cohesive attack we are much more likely to see him pull the strings the way he does at club level. We know the ceilings of Ford and Farrell and they aren't going anywhere, no point turning back to either at this point in time, got to give Smith chance to grow into the role.

Gleeson will do well to keep hold of his position for the AIs if the summer tour shows an attack as unfinished as we've seen in the 6N.

Incidentally if the world cup final was tomorrow, Farrell would be third choice at best for me at 10.

majesticimperialman wrote:England's best run of wins under EJ was when we had Ford 10 Farrell12. with Farrell out injured England never tried the Ford 10 Smith m12 0r visa versa.
Would England's style of play been any different?

Ford/Smith combined to go from 22 to nearly a try in one set of phases Vs Italy. Most fluent England were all game though the Italians were a bit tired.

Ford 10 and Smith at 15 for the last 5 Vs France. England went 20m in three (ish) phases before a forward knocked on on contact. Shame Eddie didn't hit that gamble button a bit earlier.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Ford 10 and Smith at 15 for the last 5 Vs France. England went 20m in three (ish) phases before a forward knocked on on contact. Shame Eddie didn't hit that gamble button a bit earlier.

I'm amazed he hit the gamble at all. I think there were 3.5 mins left on the clock when he did it... if you are really viewing this as a stepping stone to RWC 2023 this is hardly enough time to see what they can actually do together.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:England's best run of wins under EJ was when we had Ford 10 Farrell12. with Farrell out injured England never tried the Ford 10 Smith m12 0r visa versa.
Would England's style of play been any different?

Ford/Smith combined to go from 22 to nearly a try in one set of phases Vs Italy. Most fluent England were all game though the Italians were a bit tired.

Ford 10 and Smith at 15 for the last 5 Vs France. England went 20m in three (ish) phases before a forward knocked on on contact. Shame Eddie didn't hit that gamble button a bit earlier.

I don't think Smith is a full back or is needed to play as a full back. What it did highlight was the tactic of using Genge to carry back was the first and only option. I enjoy the baby rhino going on a stampede as much as the next man but just seemed stupid to me to use him this way. I've seen him do it for Leicester a couple of times but you're not having to scrum against that French pack. When we had Simmonds there and also the fact that Furbank was picked presumably for his running it jsut seemed stupid.

Big wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Ford 10 and Smith at 15 for the last 5 Vs France. England went 20m in three (ish) phases before a forward knocked on on contact. Shame Eddie didn't hit that gamble button a bit earlier.

I'm amazed he hit the gamble at all.  I think there were 3.5 mins left on the clock when he did it...   if you are really viewing this as a stepping stone to RWC 2023 this is hardly enough time to see what they can actually do together.

Yeah that was kind of my point. It showed a flicker of promise as a hail mary option but to small a period of time for it to be deemed success or failure.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:England's best run of wins under EJ was when we had Ford 10 Farrell12. with Farrell out injured England never tried the Ford 10 Smith m12 0r visa versa.
Would England's style of play been any different?

Ford/Smith combined to go from 22 to nearly a try in one set of phases Vs Italy. Most fluent England were all game though the Italians were a bit tired.

Ford 10 and Smith at 15 for the last 5 Vs France. England went 20m in three (ish) phases before a forward knocked on on contact. Shame Eddie didn't hit that gamble button a bit earlier.

I don't think Smith is a full back or is needed to play as a full back. What it did highlight was the tactic of using Genge to carry back was the first and only option. I enjoy the baby rhino going on a stampede as much as the next man but just seemed stupid to me to use him this way. I've seen him do it for Leicester a couple of times but you're not having to scrum against that French pack. When we had Simmonds there and also the fact that Furbank was picked presumably for his running it jsut seemed stupid.

Smith moved to 15 when Ford came on just because he had to go somewhere. They both played in the line in attack and Smith dropped to field the kicks as he'd done that a lot during the game. Can't see it as a recurring tactic.

The Genge in the backfield works but not from every kick. He looked shattered by half time and ended up running something like 100m ball in hand that game. Ridiculous to ask him to do that and then scrum against the French as you say. Not a tactic I'd abandon entirely but one that should be used far more sparingly. Genge ended up doing an 8s shift in carrying, not sure what Simmonds was doing. Noticeable England knocked that tactic off a bit in the second half so that Genge could get his breath back.

Ford-Smith was only on together to chase the game when France was already ahead by two scores and playing defense.  I don't think any conclusions can be drawn.  About Farrell,  England lost badly in the last 6 Nations with him and lost badly in this 6 Nations without him.  Not sure what that means, but his return does not mean there will be any improvement.  

There certainly seemed to be a real disconnect between the players selected and what appeared to me to be the game plan.  I don't get the lack of players running off Smith or even Slade.  We know the ball took forever to get out of the rucks, but still.  The poor lad was screwed from the very start.  Furbank was not a popular selection, but he is a runner-distributor type.  Why pick him if the game is a tactical kick fest?  The ball appeared to get outside the centres, but frequently with defenders right in front giving the wings no options at all.  

In other words, I am really laying more of this on EJ, his coaching staff, and those unnamed reviewers at the RFU.  I wonder how they had a chance to meet and agree 'progress is being made' before issuing that statement.  Why not simply be open and admit the results stink, but EJ is the coach through the RWC?

As a Quins fan, I'm also a huge fan of Smith. He can and does do the basics and does not have the... personality defects... that other creative fly halves have tended to have, and when players give him options, he is almost unique in his ability to take the ball to the line and choose the best option very late, when the defence have already committed.

What I saw in the 6N was him doing the basics well (you don't end up as the top points scorer without being able to get your team within kicking distance), but only sporadically showing the creativity we have come to expect of him.

I think there were 4 main reasons:
1) Sometimes he made the wrong decision. In particular, he tried a number of kicks that didn't come off, and his corner kicking was unusually tentative. I suspect that's a factor of confidence and experience and as he gets more used to International rugby he'll find his radar

2) Sometimes he took a running option because it looked like a good bet; this often resulted in him being isolated and always resulted in him being at the bottom of a ruck. That should improve as players get used to following his breaks - and we did see it improve in the France game where one of his runs resulted in a major break.

3) Sometimes he took a running option because there was no other option available. This was really noticeable against Scotland and Wales in particular, but it improved against Ireland and France. The style that England want to play relies on having multiple players able to make the decision in real time to offer themselves as a target. When players were committed to running hard lines, Smith was using them pretty effectively. Too often, there were not enough players doing enough to interest the defence.

4) Sometimes he was hitting a ruck after a carry. This was rarely unnecessary, but I am baffled that England so frequently got themselves in a position where the closest support to a tackled player was the fly half. The need to fix that.

Poorfour wrote:As a Quins fan, I'm also a huge fan of Smith. He can and does do the basics and does not have the... personality defects... that other creative fly halves have tended to have, and when players give him options, he is almost unique in his ability to take the ball to the line and choose the best option very late, when the defence have already committed.

What I saw in the 6N was him doing the basics well (you don't end up as the top points scorer without being able to get your team within kicking distance), but only sporadically showing the creativity we have come to expect of him.

I think there were 4 main reasons:
1) Sometimes he made the wrong decision. In particular, he tried a number of kicks that didn't come off, and his corner kicking was unusually tentative. I suspect that's a factor of confidence and experience and as he gets more used to International rugby he'll find his radar

2) Sometimes he took a running option because it looked like a good bet; this often resulted in him being isolated and always resulted in him being at the bottom of a ruck. That should improve as players get used to following his breaks - and we did see it improve in the France game where one of his runs resulted in a major break.

3) Sometimes he took a running option because there was no other option available. This was really noticeable against Scotland and Wales in particular, but it improved against Ireland and France. The style that England want to play relies on having multiple players able to make the decision in real time to offer themselves as a target. When players were committed to running hard lines, Smith was using them pretty effectively. Too often, there were not enough players doing enough to interest the defence.

4) Sometimes he was hitting a ruck after a carry. This was rarely unnecessary, but I am baffled that England so frequently got themselves in a position where the closest support to a tackled player was the fly half. The need to fix that.

Dare I whisper that when Lawes plays 6 the lack of a quick ruck clear out can happen. Especially without Curry there.

I noticed that Smith was hitting far to many rucks against France
Without Curry the England back row was coming up short.

Also Genge receiving ball a la #8 and running it back. Fine once or twice to catch opposition off guard but then becomes ineffective and he gets knackered as others have pointed out.

Still, have to at least credit Jones for trying a few different tactics even if ultimately not successful. To be honest, whatever Eng tried on Saturday I think just have to credit France being better team.

The other one I completely forgot is that Paulo Odowgu needs to be taken on the Summer tour...

GeordieFalcon wrote:The other one I completely forgot is that Paulo Odowgu needs to be taken on the Summer tour...

If he's fit and firing then yes.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:The other one I completely forgot is that Paulo Odowgu needs to be taken on the Summer tour...

If he's fit and firing then yes.

I imagine the Italians will be watching him aswell if Jones decides against it Sam...and i think that would be a loss, as hes a player who can get you on the front foot.

Odogwu should have been given cap last year, if Jones omits him this season can see him going for Italy especially if he watched Wales match! Seems crazy, every man and his dog identified that centres were where England were not firing(along with wings) and yet Jones seemingly didn't so kept playing a let's be honest, ineffective Slade at 12. Yes Odogwu really a 13 but should have been given a chance just as quite of few others should have.

Odogwu is a winger...but i think many see him as someone who could offer alot in the centres...

Given the centre problem I think England simply have to take
Kelly and Odugwu

GeordieFalcon wrote:Odogwu is a winger...but i think many see him as someone who could offer alot in the centres...

Plays a lot in centre for Wasps also.
Quick look at Wasps team stats over last couple seasons he played 18 times on wing, 10 times in centre. Several more listed as replacement but didn't specify position.
He is listed as a wing but has enough experience in centre.

Better as a centre I'd say. Makes more breaks from there, defends well enough. Another realistic option. Makes it more frustrating if anything that we've wasted 5 games with Slade plodding along.

TBF hes another that was out long term with an injury which probably forced Jones hand a bit...however if hes fully fit and still showing his form...then he needs to be taken.

Not saying hes the messiah...just someone who offers something a little different and can make things happen on the pitch.

Marchant certainly pressed his case for the 13 spot aswell of course over the last 2 games.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Better as a centre I'd say. Makes more breaks from there, defends well enough. Another realistic option. Makes it more frustrating if anything that we've wasted 5 games with Slade plodding along.

Odogwu has played 13 and wing for Wasps so he wouldn't be replacing Slade he'd be competition for Marchant.

Slade did a passable job in the 6N, options at 12 are thin on the ground and to be honest Slade did a decent job at first receiver it's just as a running threat he falls down. In the right set up he could still work there.

Sorry Sam I have to disagree there, I thought Slade was pretty poor to be honest. OK not his favoured position but even if he was passable which I'm not sure, that's not good enough for an Int.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Better as a centre I'd say. Makes more breaks from there, defends well enough. Another realistic option. Makes it more frustrating if anything that we've wasted 5 games with Slade plodding along.

Odogwu has played 13 and wing for Wasps so he wouldn't be replacing Slade he'd be competition for Marchant.

Slade did a passable job in the 6N, options at 12 are thin on the ground and to be honest Slade did a decent job at first receiver it's just as a running threat he falls down. In the right set up he could still work there.

Think he could play 12 myself. And I think Slade has been given long enough, I don't think he adds enough in attack at either 12 or 13. Thing is we have all these options and Jones went with stodge.

mountain man wrote:Sorry Sam I have to disagree there, I thought Slade was pretty poor to be honest. OK not his favoured position but even if he was passable which I'm not sure, that's not good enough for an Int.

Then most of the backline are out because very few were much better than passable this 6N.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Better as a centre I'd say. Makes more breaks from there, defends well enough. Another realistic option. Makes it more frustrating if anything that we've wasted 5 games with Slade plodding along.

Odogwu has played 13 and wing for Wasps so he wouldn't be replacing Slade he'd be competition for Marchant.

Slade did a passable job in the 6N, options at 12 are thin on the ground and to be honest Slade did a decent job at first receiver it's just as a running threat he falls down. In the right set up he could still work there.

Think he could play 12 myself. And I think Slade has been given long enough, I don't think he adds enough in attack at either 12 or 13. Thing is we have all these options and Jones went with stodge.

Maybe he can and maybe he can't. Playing 12 is a different set of skills than playing 13, particularly when you've mainly played wing previously. I don't believe he's ever played 12 previously and the lack of space might restrict his skill set as he's used to having time for his steps and blasting past soft shoulders. Going to be a lot more running into contact if he's deployed how you are suggesting. 

Given there's young 12s emerging as go to options in the Prem are you shoehorning Odogwu into the side at 12 this summer or giving someone like Kelly or Ojomoh the minutes?

formerly known as Sam wrote:

mountain man wrote:Sorry Sam I have to disagree there, I thought Slade was pretty poor to be honest. OK not his favoured position but even if he was passable which I'm not sure, that's not good enough for an Int.

Then most of the backline are out because very few were much better than passable this 6N.

Pretty much yes. I'd say only ones in backs with any credit are Steward, Marchant and at times Randall, Smith although those two weren't great but good enough. In negative column are Youngs, Daly, Slade. Nowell for Wales game but he was superb against Ireland and didn't last long enough to really judge against France. I'm sure I'm missing someone but can't think at moment who.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Better as a centre I'd say. Makes more breaks from there, defends well enough. Another realistic option. Makes it more frustrating if anything that we've wasted 5 games with Slade plodding along.

Odogwu has played 13 and wing for Wasps so he wouldn't be replacing Slade he'd be competition for Marchant.

Slade did a passable job in the 6N, options at 12 are thin on the ground and to be honest Slade did a decent job at first receiver it's just as a running threat he falls down. In the right set up he could still work there.

Think he could play 12 myself. And I think Slade has been given long enough, I don't think he adds enough in attack at either 12 or 13. Thing is we have all these options and Jones went with stodge.

Maybe he can and maybe he can't. Playing 12 is a different set of skills than playing 13, particularly when you've mainly played wing previously. I don't believe he's ever played 12 previously and the lack of space might restrict his skill set as he's used to having time for his steps and blasting past soft shoulders. Going to be a lot more running into contact if he's deployed how you are suggesting. 

Given there's young 12s emerging as go to options in the Prem are you shoehorning Odogwu into the side at 12 this summer or giving someone like Kelly or Ojomoh the minutes?

I'm saying that there have been a number of players already given a chance, wanted Odogwu tried before his injury. This 6Ns I wanted primarily Kelly and Ojomoh tried, and think those 2 could actually play together well and offer a great balance. As I said there are actually a lot of guys who should have caps now, its always going to be an issue of too many players and pick some; just don't pick tripe like Jones has. Marchant has finally started to bloom at outside centre, after being picked on the wing and swapped around. I'm not overly fussed who gets a run of games out of some of these youngsters but they should be getting them.

mountain man wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

mountain man wrote:Sorry Sam I have to disagree there, I thought Slade was pretty poor to be honest. OK not his favoured position but even if he was passable which I'm not sure, that's not good enough for an Int.

Then most of the backline are out because very few were much better than passable this 6N.

Pretty much yes. I'd say only ones in backs with any credit are Steward, Marchant and at times Randall, Smith although those two weren't great but good enough. In negative column are Youngs, Daly, Slade. Nowell for Wales game but he was superb against Ireland and didn't last long enough to really judge against France. I'm sure I'm missing someone but can't think at moment who.

See I think Marchant and Steward maybe pulled themselves above passable with the performance against France but even then it's close. Rest were all passable at best. I don't think anybody has enhanced their International reputation this 6N in the backs.

Steward has for me for sure, especially since his performance on wing whereas think most of him as soley a FB. I don't think Steward would look out of place in any team.
I will add FB is position I would only put him though, unless injury forced change in a match.

Id say at the moment...

Pack is not really far away...
1 Genge
2 George
3 (Sinckler, but still not happy with him)
4 Itoje
5 Whos the Tight head lock
6 Lawes
7 Curry v Underhill
8 Dombrandt

The backs however are a very different situation...
9 Whos the 9's
10 Smith
11 Whos left wing
12 Whos the 12
13 Slade
14 Whos the right wing
15 Steward

With that pack I'd go Lawes and Itoje as locks. Curry, Underhill, Dombrandt BR.

Backs though, blimey. Are we picking who we think should be in or who we think Jones will pick. Two mighty differences it seems.
9 I guess so far Randall but I think Quirke better if he gets opportunity.
On showing so far I'd go Marchant 13, Slade bench. 12 is key, seeing as we assume for next Eng game he'll be fit maybe Farrell? We know Jones will definitely pick him. Not ideal but he'll offer something.
I think Nowell not totally out of contention for wing spot seeing as he is versatile(a Jones plus!). However, might be better to see someone new in summer games.
Then select one of Radwen, Joe C, OHC, Lynagh....

I agree with those who say Slade was poor - Marchant outshone him.
Also Slade is no 12.
England will be fine on the wing the talent is there just not selected.
With Steward at 15 they have to pick pace on the wings.
Nowell, Malins etc don't cut it.

Youngs needs to be put out to grass - take Randall, Quirke and one other

Odogwu long term is a centre not a wing.

Its harsh on Slade aswell mind.

In the right set up he can control the game as the 2nd playmaker...as he does at Exeter. At the moment though its pretty difficult to shine in the England backline.

It depends what people want at 13. I prefer a strike runner...a Jonathan Joseph, Marchant, Tuilagi...

Slade is not that...hes a playmaker. Maybe with a Manu / Esterhuizen sized lump at 12...he would excell. But England just dont have that option at the moment (Manu is just unreliable)

Slades had a good number of games now though. He was better at 13 but for me only ever in his defensive reading of the game. He's never consistently looked like a playmaker despite some good kicks. He picks the wrong option too many times, never brought a passing game to England, isn't electric quick, not a guy who will bowl people over with size. When he came through I thought he was going to be great but he's just that level below good or consistent enough for me.

Reflecting on the out come of the 6ns England was very poor this year. Played a good game against Italy, a really poor to average game against Wales. Played ok with an up tempo game against Ireland even if it was with 14 men.
France really showed us up and was deserved Team of the tournament.

Going forward to the summer we need to really look at some of the players. We should for get Manu, he is unreliable. we need  a Odogu, Marchant, or some one else in the centre i think Slade will be around.

Time to say good by to Ben youngs, posibly Daily too.

And why are we now building for the next RWC 18 months  out? Why have we not been building 4 years ago?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Slades had a good number of games now though. He was better at 13 but for me only ever in his defensive reading of the game. He's never consistently looked like a playmaker despite some good kicks. He picks the wrong option too many times, never brought a passing game to England, isn't electric quick, not a guy who will bowl people over with size. When he came through I thought he was going to be great but he's just that level below good or consistent enough for me.

Slade wouldnt be my option either...as i said i prefer more of a strike runner at 213...but in the right backline he is decent.

GeordieFalcon wrote:
Slade wouldnt be my option either...as i said i prefer more of a strike runner at 213...but in the right backline he is decent.

If we could field 213 players we'd definitely have a better chance of winning, but I'm not sure we'd get away with it!

GeordieFalcon wrote:Its harsh on Slade aswell mind.

In the right set up he can control the game as the 2nd playmaker...as he does at Exeter. At the moment though its pretty difficult to shine in the England backline.

It depends what people want at 13. I prefer a strike runner...a Jonathan Joseph, Marchant, Tuilagi...

Slade is not that...hes a playmaker. Maybe with a Manu / Esterhuizen sized lump at 12...he would excell. But England just dont have that option at the moment (Manu is just unreliable)

It goes back to the balance of the backline and our inability to find it. With Farrell and Slade in the centres and three players with speed who all wanted to attack wide in the backline we have Ford nothing to work with last 6N. This 6N Smith got considerably more to work with when he got Marchant who'd run lines and Steward at 15 but the lack of pace or invention on the wings definitely hampered us.

Nowell on the wing makes sense, he comes off the wing looks for work and has a great kick chase but we need it more regularly which when we play intentionally with so little structure is difficult to arrange.

Ideally we need either a member of the back three to become the secondary playmaker and then two direct centres or an additional strike winger from the wing and retain the playmaker at 12 be it Slade or Farrell.

That's pretty much what I think, Farrell 12, Marchant 13, Nowell one wing and pace on other.

Sorted...RWC assured

Lots of youngsters if given a chance could still put their hands up for selection -
Odogwu, Tom Willis, Jack Willis, Will Evans, Alfie Barbeary, Louis Lynagh, Obano (before injury), Raffie Quirk

Experienced players that have been injured or out of form -
Ant Watson, Billy/Mako Vaunipola, Farrell, Cockanasinga

All these guys could come in and shake up a pretty stagnant England attack.  

Whats the time limit on residency now?  Just wondering when Tyrone Green could be eligible for England

mountain man wrote:That's pretty much what I think, Farrell 12, Marchant 13, Nowell one wing and pace on other.

Sorted...RWC assured

Still feel like we need a unit in the centres to commit defenders and create space outside. Thats not Faz and Marchant!

Lets assume the RFU changed their mid about keeping EJ and his staff and they had to go and go now.

Who would take over?

My choice
Ugo Monyae (head coach)
Danny Care(Attack coach)
Sam Warburton( scrum coach)
Chris Jones(performance coach)

Sorted.

I vote Maj for RFU president.

mountain man wrote:That's pretty much what I think, Farrell 12, Marchant 13, Nowell one wing and pace on other.

Sorted...RWC assured

I'd like to experiment on the summer tour for at least one game with Steward as the secondary playmaker. He will offer enough running threat in the first receiver role that Slade and Farrell do to attract defenders before hitting Smith out the back but if he can operate in that role then it frees up space for something in the rest of the backline like;

11. May
12. Manu/Kelly
13. Marchant
14. Watson/Radwan

Two punchy centres and pace out wide. Farrell in the number 12 shirt if it's not working revert to type plus Farrell covers 10 like Eddie always likes.

My comment was somewhat tongue in cheek. For summer I'd definitely try other centres but if all else fails we know Jones will definitely pick Farrell so I'd be reasonably happy if and it's only fit he showed some form.

majesticimperialman wrote:Lets assume the RFU changed their mid about keeping EJ and his staff and they had to go and go now.

Who would take over?

My choice
Ugo Monyae (head coach)
Danny Care(Attack coach)
Sam Warburton( scrum coach)
Chris Jones(performance coach)

Sorted.

Monye? God no! Mr Hindsight and boring with it.
Care yes.
Does Warburton know abnout scrummaging?
Chris Jones the journalist?

I can only assume you are jesting.

How about Nigel Owens for scrum coach, he is always telling what every how to bind and set himself, he must know so much about being a front row player.