England post 2022 6Ns, Aus tour and beyond

First topic message reminder :

sensisball wrote:
With Bath enduring a terrible season how many tries has Cokonasiga scored?

In five starts and four sub appearances he's bagged five tries. One appearance and one try for England.

It's a bench lacking experience but it's the type of players we'd like to have as options come the world cup.

Ignore the front row that pretty much picked itself.

Chessum - covers lock and 6 highly mobile and physical, good lineout option and we've been desperate for a young lock to come through.

Ludlam - covers 8 and 7 which is what the bench needs, club captain so adds much needed leadership here.

JVP - no one likes the current 9 options for last season's Under 20 captain and player of the J6N gets a chance. Best kicking game of the three 9s on tour and likes to play high tempo.

Porter - covers every position in the backs outside of 9 and 10, could probably do a job on the flank as well. Eddie likes a versatility option as they very much help the overall squad come world cup so audition time for Guy.

Arundell - exciting young player, not ready yet but Eddie will be hoping some international game time might speed up his development. Unlikely starter but potential game changer off the bench, always handy to have one of those at a world cup. Porter's inclusion means Arundell won't have to go in early unless there's multiple injuries.

Would you have played Freeman at 15 instead? Similar-ish replacement...

doctor_grey wrote:You don't think EJ is under some kind or pressure? I did not know Steward was playing on Saturday in violation of agreed game limit standards until now.  This should not be allowed (though as is typical in Rugby every rule has an exception):  

The Times, Thursday July 14 2022, 11.59pm BST:
Eddie Jones has picked Freddie Steward for the deciding third Test between England and Australia despite the full back having already exceeded the agreed number of competitive minutes set for players this season.  

This was known before the game and is unacceptable.  EJ made the move to save his ass.  Steward's health v. EJ's job.  And if indeed the RFU signed off on this then all the verbal diarrhea about player welfare and safety is just diarrhea.  

This is not about Steward who is tough and did his job well.  It is about malfeasance and a lack or responsibility.  If Steward got hurt there would be hell to pay.  Rightfully so.

This is also down to rugby's lack of research and professionalism when setting these limits, sadly. The limit used to be 32 but there were worries that was too high. Those worried it was too high wanted some proper research done into what the limit should be that would do a deep dive looking at contact training, playing minutes, number of starts/bench apps, differences between leagues, nations, positions, etc etc. Rugby didn't want to do that so they went, "meh just reduce it to 30 and hope everyone forgets about it because it's never enforced anyway".

Rugby obviously needs these limits but this is the problem with setting a limit with no solid evidence behind how that limit was set. It's then all to easy to question why it's there and whether it should be followed because they have nothing quantifiable to justify it with. The sport still operates in an amateur manner in many ways.

As a whole I'd say this tour does feel like some things have fallen into place. At least certain problem positions certainly improving a touch. My biggest concerns  were second row, scrum-half and TH depth. Wing also concerned me with May and Watson out.

Chessum is looking good whilst Hill has shown more of his best. Still definitely my biggest worry but some improvement.

JvP has been very good for such a young SH and suits the game plan well. Alongside Quirke hopefully returning I'd consider this an enormous boost.

Stuart has shown his best England form yet by a distance and Heyes looked solid.

Freeman looks a cracking prospect, Nowell has shown his best England form for a while and Arundell has been involved. Cokanasiga is a slight downside there but his Bath form had hardly been stellar.

I also think the move to George starting with LCD as an impact sub to help the third quarter issues has been a massive success. Overall I think LCD is slightly the better starter too these days but he is by a mile the better impact player so I think having them that way around benefits the team as a whole.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Would you have played Freeman at 15 instead? Similar-ish replacement...

He was in the squad, and 15 is his best position. Great acceleration, shifty runner, very good defensive game, kicking game, and all the stuff one would want. Should have been a no-brainer.

king_carlos wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:You don't think EJ is under some kind or pressure? I did not know Steward was playing on Saturday in violation of agreed game limit standards until now.  This should not be allowed (though as is typical in Rugby every rule has an exception):  

The Times, Thursday July 14 2022, 11.59pm BST:
Eddie Jones has picked Freddie Steward for the deciding third Test between England and Australia despite the full back having already exceeded the agreed number of competitive minutes set for players this season.  

This was known before the game and is unacceptable.  EJ made the move to save his ass.  Steward's health v. EJ's job.  And if indeed the RFU signed off on this then all the verbal diarrhea about player welfare and safety is just diarrhea.  

This is not about Steward who is tough and did his job well.  It is about malfeasance and a lack or responsibility.  If Steward got hurt there would be hell to pay.  Rightfully so.

This is also down to rugby's lack of research and professionalism when setting these limits, sadly. The limit used to be 32 but there were worries that was too high. Those worried it was too high wanted some proper research done into what the limit should be that would do a deep dive looking at contact training, playing minutes, number of starts/bench apps, differences between leagues, nations, positions, etc etc. Rugby didn't want to do that so they went, "meh just reduce it to 30 and hope everyone forgets about it because it's never enforced anyway".

Rugby obviously needs these limits but this is the problem with setting a limit with no solid evidence behind how that limit was set. It's then all to easy to question why it's there and whether it should be followed because they have nothing quantifiable to justify it with. The sport still operates in an amateur manner in many ways.

My experience as part of a NFL med team as they worked through it is instructional.  You never learn what you do not really want to learn.  Until it is foisted on you.  Willful ignorance.  But when they had their moment to face it openly, they embraced it (at the cost of $1 bil.).  The NFL brass may or may not like it but the General Managers, Coaches, Players, and med staff all appreciate it and the information stays in the public domain and players get better treatment.    

The information about many of the dangers of head trauma has been in the public domain for 50 years (actually a lot of the research goes back to the war).  Everyone of us has seen and clearly recognises when someone is punch drunk so it ain't new.  

You make a great point about the research into the numbers of games as a max..  The problem is I can't see how to build the data set.  We all know 30 games is too much.  We also know the NFL Players Association had data showing that increasing the number of their games from 16 to 18 (plus the playoffs) is harmful and the players were opposed, despite the additional game cheque.  Through a quirk of the wording of the contract with the NFLPA the NFL was able to push through increasing from 16 to 17 games, plus the playoffs.  But the players knew this was bad.  

Our players know their situation is bad too.  But they are screwed because they have no leverage outside of withholding services.  So even now we are still beating the ever-loving merde out of our players.   And the Steward situation pi$$es me off royally.

doctor_grey wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:You don't think EJ is under some kind or pressure? I did not know Steward was playing on Saturday in violation of agreed game limit standards until now.  This should not be allowed (though as is typical in Rugby every rule has an exception):  

The Times, Thursday July 14 2022, 11.59pm BST:
Eddie Jones has picked Freddie Steward for the deciding third Test between England and Australia despite the full back having already exceeded the agreed number of competitive minutes set for players this season.  

This was known before the game and is unacceptable.  EJ made the move to save his ass.  Steward's health v. EJ's job.  And if indeed the RFU signed off on this then all the verbal diarrhea about player welfare and safety is just diarrhea.  

This is not about Steward who is tough and did his job well.  It is about malfeasance and a lack or responsibility.  If Steward got hurt there would be hell to pay.  Rightfully so.

This is also down to rugby's lack of research and professionalism when setting these limits, sadly. The limit used to be 32 but there were worries that was too high. Those worried it was too high wanted some proper research done into what the limit should be that would do a deep dive looking at contact training, playing minutes, number of starts/bench apps, differences between leagues, nations, positions, etc etc. Rugby didn't want to do that so they went, "meh just reduce it to 30 and hope everyone forgets about it because it's never enforced anyway".

Rugby obviously needs these limits but this is the problem with setting a limit with no solid evidence behind how that limit was set. It's then all to easy to question why it's there and whether it should be followed because they have nothing quantifiable to justify it with. The sport still operates in an amateur manner in many ways.

My experience as part of a NFL med team as they worked through it is instructional.  You never learn what you do not really want to learn.  Until it is foisted on you.  Willful ignorance.  But when they had their moment to face it openly, they embraced it (at the cost of $1 bil.).  The NFL brass may or may not like it but the General Managers, Coaches, Players, and med staff all appreciate it and the information stays in the public domain and players get better treatment.    

The information about many of the dangers of head trauma has been in the public domain for 50 years (actually a lot of the research goes back to the war).  Everyone of us has seen and clearly recognises when someone is punch drunk so it ain't new.  

You make a great point about the research into the numbers of games as a max..  The problem is I can't see how to build the data set.  We all know 30 games is too much.  We also know the NFL Players Association had data showing that increasing the number of their games from 16 to 18 (plus the playoffs) is harmful and the players were opposed, despite the additional game cheque.  Through a quirk of the wording of the contract with the NFLPA the NFL was able to push through increasing from 16 to 17 games, plus the playoffs.  But the players knew this was bad.  

Our players know their situation is bad too.  But they are screwed because they have no leverage outside of withholding services.  So even now we are still beating the ever-loving merde out of our players.   And the Steward situation pi$$es me off royally.

This was after the game having won 2 1. I don't think he has much pressure on him bit I do think it's a Poopie thing to say. 

I guess in this situation if Jones is told he can't pick Steward he wouldn't have been able to. Its an agreement with the clubs too isn't it so if Leicester haven't signed it off could cause issues.

doctor_grey wrote:You don't think EJ is under some kind or pressure? I did not know Steward was playing on Saturday in violation of agreed game limit standards until now.  This should not be allowed (though as is typical in Rugby every rule has an exception):  

The Times, Thursday July 14 2022, 11.59pm BST:
Eddie Jones has picked Freddie Steward for the deciding third Test between England and Australia despite the full back having already exceeded the agreed number of competitive minutes set for players this season.  

This was known before the game and is unacceptable.  EJ made the move to save his ass.  Steward's health v. EJ's job.  And if indeed the RFU signed off on this then all the verbal diarrhea about player welfare and safety is just diarrhea.  

This is not about Steward who is tough and did his job well.  It is about malfeasance and a lack or responsibility.  If Steward got hurt there would be hell to pay.  Rightfully so.

Wow - I didn't know that these limits existed. I can't access the link from here - are the limits agreed by the RFU?

Presumably there will be at least a fine because of this?

mikey_dragon wrote:Well Eddie likes to give it out a lot, it’s only reasonable he takes some back. Eddie usually leaves it for press conferences though, where he usually blames the ref.

Congratulations on the series win

You'd crap yourself the same way the chap in the yellow hat did

I have just poste d this on the Wales web sight.
I did not see any of the games due to not having Sky sports but did any person who played on this tour should not play for England again? or do you expect every to play ion the next 6nations?

George Carlin wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:You don't think EJ is under some kind or pressure? I did not know Steward was playing on Saturday in violation of agreed game limit standards until now.  This should not be allowed (though as is typical in Rugby every rule has an exception):  

The Times, Thursday July 14 2022, 11.59pm BST:
Eddie Jones has picked Freddie Steward for the deciding third Test between England and Australia despite the full back having already exceeded the agreed number of competitive minutes set for players this season.  

This was known before the game and is unacceptable.  EJ made the move to save his ass.  Steward's health v. EJ's job.  And if indeed the RFU signed off on this then all the verbal diarrhea about player welfare and safety is just diarrhea.  

This is not about Steward who is tough and did his job well.  It is about malfeasance and a lack or responsibility.  If Steward got hurt there would be hell to pay.  Rightfully so.

Wow - I didn't know that these limits existed. I can't access the link from here - are the limits agreed by the RFU?

Presumably there will be at least a fine because of this?

No fine, because players can go over with some exceptions.  Most players do not go over.  This was agreed between the Premiership clubs, RFU, and the Players Association and had been followed.  The clubs want their players back healthy, not broken.

The points I was trying to make was that Here is a kid who almost never comes out of games, plays tough, and here at the tail end of a very long season on the heels of another long season (almost 2 consecutive seasons) England already had another 15 who had been playing well on the wing.  

I am sure EJ was concerned about the young players who would have come in on the wing if Freeman was moved to 15. This is about the health of our players and now we see how seriously it is taken.  As I said, if Steward copped an injury, there would be hell to pay. It seems to me the only reason Steward was out out there was to save EJs skin - what else could it be?.

majesticimperialman wrote:I have just poste  d this on the Wales web sight.
I did not see any of the games due to not  having  Sky sports but did any person who played on this tour should not play for England again? or do you expect every to play ion the next 6nations?

Yes

Players are supposed to have a 10 week sit-down period at the end of a season before playing again. So anyone who played for England should not suit up for their clubs until mid-September. Many players waved that at the end of last season simply due to the need to keep the sport going financially. That was then, this is now.

https://twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status/1549001040678326272?t=DI5k93aSTeQBCAHeddaewg&s=19


This is nice.

BamBam wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Well Eddie likes to give it out a lot, it’s only reasonable he takes some back. Eddie usually leaves it for press conferences though, where he usually blames the ref.

Congratulations on the series win

You'd crap yourself the same way the chap in the yellow hat did

What from Eddie? No, he's a lot shorter than me. I guess you're both the same height, as the small boy syndrome traits you share are uncanny .

Sure thing big man

No 7&1/2 wrote:https://twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status/1549001040678326272?t=DI5k93aSTeQBCAHeddaewg&s=19


This is nice.

After all the head injury stories and fan behaviour incidents recently this is great to see.

As an aside to this, I thoroughly enjoyed Justin Harrison and David Flatman on commentary for the second England/ Aus test last week. Two blokes with a genuine love for the game and not just their team.

BamBam wrote:Sure thing big man

Don't forget .

mikey_dragon wrote:

BamBam wrote:Sure thing big man

Don't forget .

My dad is bigger than your dad's

Old Man wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

BamBam wrote:Sure thing big man

Don't forget .

My dad is bigger than your dad's

Their dad's what?

Heaf wrote:

Old Man wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

BamBam wrote:Sure thing big man

Don't forget .

My dad is bigger than your dad's

Their dad's what?

Dads

MichaelT wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:https://twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status/1549001040678326272?t=DI5k93aSTeQBCAHeddaewg&s=19


This is nice.

After all the head injury stories and fan behaviour incidents recently this is great to see.

As an aside to this, I thoroughly enjoyed Justin Harrison and David Flatman on commentary for the second England/ Aus test last week. Two blokes with a genuine love for the game and not just their team.

I always enjoy Flats - great self-effacing humour ...

Any complete bolters at the moment then that are going to burst into the light? We've seen how Arundell came from absolute no where, fewer problem positions now though. Reckon there's a big chance for a midfielder, though as above I'd expect Kelly and Ojomoh to be involved in the next set of games if available. Quirke will surely be vying with van Poortvliet as 1 and 2 SH.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Any complete bolters at the moment then that are going to burst into the light? We've seen how Arundell came from absolute no where, fewer problem positions now though. Reckon there's a big chance for a midfielder, though as above I'd expect Kelly and Ojomoh to be involved in the next set of games if available. Quirke will surely be vying with van Poortvliet as 1 and 2 SH.

Can't see any bolters now unless injuries have an impact. Possibly barbeary but now Billy looks hungry again and even getting turnovers can't see him breaking into the squad. I don't know if quirke will have enough time from injury and surgery to warrant inclusion in eddy's mind, however he should be main sale scrum half so who knows. Still think we have room for a young strong massive second row. As for midfield I think it's going to be smith, Farrell and one other with little time given to test new combos.

Bolters

George Hendy is a proper left field option that could come in on the wing. He looks a bit raw at the minute but he's quick, good step and should fit into the Saints side nicely. Likely to be a winger initially and his size would fit in with Freeman and Steward.

Just as out there and left field is Finn Smith. There would have to be some injuries and some serious form on his part for him to come in. Plays with a maturity well beyond his years. Knows how to play on the back foot as well.

Cam Henderson, if you like Ollie Chessum then this is likely his long term partner in the row at Tigers and he's got similar strengths (and size). Lineout leader as well. Missed nearly all of last season with injury. Scotland have had him in a squad previously but Covid stopped him being capped. He's still EQ.

Hugh Tizard another young lock who's a physical ball carrier. Playing alongside Itoje each week may help his cause in terms of selection. He was in good form this season.

Finn Smith also sounds like he has had some serious discussions with Townsend about coming into the Scotland camp.

Could be a serious bolter for this autumn!

Tizard for me could be in with a shout - lock still seems a bit of a problem position, especially if 1 or more injuries occur and Tizard has all the attributes requried for Int rugby. Hopefully he'll get enough game time at Sarries.

Interestingly I saw a post online saying that in theory the Eng Int players should play 11 Prem games next season so that leaves plenty of chances for uncapped players to shine.

Finn Smith played and captained England under 20s whilst Scotland went on tour with limited flyhalf options. I suspect if he'd been vocal about changing allegiance a place in the squad would have been found. He has massive potential, both Eddie and Gregor would be remiss if they hadn't had a chat with him.

The league season has been compressed for next season. More overlap with internationals so there will be opportunities for others. The numbers aren't quite as bad as it seems as the players will be available for the European games which increases the amount of club games they will play. For the teams that don't go through in Europe the second mandated rest week for the England players can be taken in an empty European weekend which gets a league game back.

Kenningham could be another potential bolter as an understudy to Lawes.

1.Genge, Marler, Mako
2.LCD, George, Blamire
3.Sinckler, Stuart, Heyes
4.Itoje, Chessum
5.Hill, Isiekwe
6.Lawes, Underhill
7.Curry, Ludlam, Willis
8.Vunipola, Dombrandt

9.JvP
10.Smith, Ford

11.May, Freeman
12.Farrell, Tuilagi, Dingwall
13.Marchant, Slade, Porter
14.Watson, Nowell
15.Steward, Arundell

I'd guess those are the fairly certain names to be around the squad if fit?

Big chance for Quirke at 9. Mitchell too I'd say.

Second row obviously screaming out for options. Tizard is a player I rate highly.

In the back row any of Martin, Kenningham and Barbeary are very talented but there's a log jam of good players.

I'd be surprised if a centre broke into that group now. Probably be those 6 jostling for pole positions. Maybe Kelly or Ojomoh for Dingwall or Porter if they want an out and out 12? I'd be surprised if there were significant changes at centre though.

Lots of potentially good backrows. Only Curry and Lawes are really outstanding though, and both have lots of injuries. It feels like quite a drop off after those two.

Lawes is getting shed loads of love. I can see the tackles, a few good turnovers and still ask is it worth making our breakdown work poorer, and why he can't be the answer to questions of lack of experience in the 2nd row. I really don't like the big, lumbersome blindside flankers though. It does seem nailed on to continue though, Proudfoot seems to have stamped his mark there, and the likelihood of Borthwick or Baxter taking over would suggest size will still be a priority after Jones takes on a role at Australia.

I do like a lot of the names above as bolters. Centres is obvs the area I think there is going to be (further) new blood. It's all gone quiet on whether Marchant was injured or not, Dingwall didn't get a look in, Porter reminded me a bit of Tomkins insofar as I think it may be 2 and completely out.

yappysnap wrote:Lots of potentially good backrows. Only Curry and Lawes are really outstanding though, and both have lots of injuries. It feels like quite a drop off after those two.

What do we all think is going on with Underhill? Still struggling with return from injury?
He has had a pretty hard time with head injury.

Lawes body wouldn't stand up to playing lock all the time. It's most likely why he moved. It's been a brilliant move for his career. If he hadn't he'd probably be in the Launchbury bracket of slowing down after a lot of injuries. Instead Lawes has turned himself into one of the best blindsides in rugby and one of England's best players.

Is there anything solid to back up the being slow to offensive rucks thing either? I thought his offensive rucks hit were always sky high. Worth mentioning as well that there are 7 other forwards and 14 other players that can hit a ruck too.

To me the compromising offensive breakdowns shtick just feels like a last resort from a rapidly reducing number of fans who decided early on Lawes couldn't play flanker and don't want to budge regardless of his performance there. First he wasn't quick enough which was laughable as he covers a ludicrous amount of ground. Then he couldn't carry enough, he's obviously proved that wrong. Then he couldn't threaten the opposition breakdown, that's been proved wrong as he wins jackal penalties. Now he's slightly too slow at hitting rucks when we have the ball...

king_carlos wrote:Lawes body wouldn't stand up to playing lock all the time. It's most likely why he moved. It's been a brilliant move for his career. If he hadn't he'd probably be in the Launchbury bracket of slowing down after a lot of injuries. Instead Lawes has turned himself into one of the best blindsides in rugby and one of England's best players.

Is there anything solid to back up the being slow to offensive rucks thing either? I thought his offensive rucks hit were always sky high. Worth mentioning as well that there are 7 other forwards and 14 other players that can hit a ruck too.

To me the compromising offensive breakdowns shtick just feels like a last resort from a rapidly reducing number of fans who decided early on Lawes couldn't play flanker and don't want to budge regardless of his performance there. First he wasn't quick enough which was laughable as he covers a ludicrous amount of ground. Then he couldn't carry enough, he's obviously proved that wrong. Then he couldn't threaten the opposition breakdown, that's been proved wrong as he wins jackal penalties. Now he's slightly too slow at hitting rucks when we have the ball...

Like you I think that debate is over. As skipper he seems to have the refs ear a bit more compared to faz and doesn't get pinged so paints a good picture for officials.

king_carlos wrote:Lawes body wouldn't stand up to playing lock all the time. It's most likely why he moved. It's been a brilliant move for his career. If he hadn't he'd probably be in the Launchbury bracket of slowing down after a lot of injuries. Instead Lawes has turned himself into one of the best blindsides in rugby and one of England's best players.

Is there anything solid to back up the being slow to offensive rucks thing either? I thought his offensive rucks hit were always sky high. Worth mentioning as well that there are 7 other forwards and 14 other players that can hit a ruck too.

To me the compromising offensive breakdowns shtick just feels like a last resort from a rapidly reducing number of fans who decided early on Lawes couldn't play flanker and don't want to budge regardless of his performance there. First he wasn't quick enough which was laughable as he covers a ludicrous amount of ground. Then he couldn't carry enough, he's obviously proved that wrong. Then he couldn't threaten the opposition breakdown, that's been proved wrong as he wins jackal penalties. Now he's slightly too slow at hitting rucks when we have the ball...

Just how I view things. Do people think the breakdown work is as good as it was with underhill and Curry? Or is there another reason it's gone downhill? I just don't like the balance and as I said it's in my head anyway I don't like the bigger 6s anyway. And I don't think he's quick enough to breakdowns on the whole. And I still don't think he's that great a carrier for his size, indeed I think there are any number of thebother flankers we have. And I don't think the lineout has been great.

For all the things above you day he does well, the others do better, bar lineout.

I do appreciate there are other players to do the grunt while he's in midfield.

Yoda wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Lawes body wouldn't stand up to playing lock all the time. It's most likely why he moved. It's been a brilliant move for his career. If he hadn't he'd probably be in the Launchbury bracket of slowing down after a lot of injuries. Instead Lawes has turned himself into one of the best blindsides in rugby and one of England's best players.

Is there anything solid to back up the being slow to offensive rucks thing either? I thought his offensive rucks hit were always sky high. Worth mentioning as well that there are 7 other forwards and 14 other players that can hit a ruck too.

To me the compromising offensive breakdowns shtick just feels like a last resort from a rapidly reducing number of fans who decided early on Lawes couldn't play flanker and don't want to budge regardless of his performance there. First he wasn't quick enough which was laughable as he covers a ludicrous amount of ground. Then he couldn't carry enough, he's obviously proved that wrong. Then he couldn't threaten the opposition breakdown, that's been proved wrong as he wins jackal penalties. Now he's slightly too slow at hitting rucks when we have the ball...

Like you I think that debate is over. As skipper he seems to have the refs ear a bit more compared to faz and doesn't get pinged so paints a good picture for officials.

I too think the debate is over. Sadly. As it leaves us weaker.

I've posted a topic on Ed Slater on the club section. In case people don't know he's been diagnosed with MND. Very very good player who if he was coming through now I'd love to have partnering Itoje. Unlucky not to have more caps. Apparently a lovely guy too.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lawes is getting shed loads of love. I can see the tackles, a few good turnovers and still ask is it worth making our breakdown work poorer, and why he can't be the answer to questions of lack of experience in the 2nd row. I really don't like the big, lumbersome blindside flankers though. It does seem nailed on to continue though, Proudfoot seems to have stamped his mark there, and the likelihood of Borthwick or Baxter taking over would suggest size will still be a priority after Jones takes on a role at Australia.

I do like a lot of the names above as bolters. Centres is obvs the area I think there is going to be (further) new blood. It's all gone quiet on whether Marchant was injured or not, Dingwall didn't get a look in, Porter reminded me a bit of Tomkins insofar as I think it may be 2 and completely out.

I think I agree with you about Lawes, but he actually got more turnovers then any other player from any team in the summer series (5). He's getting a load of love because he makes big impacts but like you i'm not totally sold on him.

I think he's one of those guys who patches a hole, but if we suddenly got a top quality out and out 6 we'd see what we were missing.

propdavid_london wrote:

yappysnap wrote:Lots of potentially good backrows. Only Curry and Lawes are really outstanding though, and both have lots of injuries. It feels like quite a drop off after those two.

What do we all think is going on with Underhill?  Still struggling with return from injury?  
He has had a pretty hard time with head injury.

Yea I think the constant injuries can't help, and Bath's form must have an effect. Playing for a truly terrible club with all the Poopie going on behind the scenes must effect him.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I've posted a topic on Ed Slater on the club section. In case people don't know he's been diagnosed with MND. Very very good player who if he was coming through now I'd love to have partnering Itoje. Unlucky not to have more caps. Apparently a lovely guy too.

Such awful news, I posted it on the Doddie Weir thread but probably did deserve a thread of its own

This from the Guardian, but there's also the same interview on the beeb:

'“We’ve got to improve a lot to be competitive,” said Sweeney, suggesting Ireland’s series triumph in New Zealand had raised the bar for all concerned. “We are not blind to some of the areas that need to be addressed. Ireland are clearly on a really strong path and we all know how the French have evolved. So we are matching and comparing ourselves to that.”

“I hear people say Ireland were ranked No 1 a year before 2019, they don’t peak at the right time and have never been to a [World Cup] semi-final but this looks, to me, like a different type of squad. The challenge for us is to improve at the rate we think is good enough to be fully competitive in 2023. And we do believe Eddie is the guy to take us there.

“I think we saw enough in the last two Tests in Australia to know we are heading in the right direction. If we have all the players we want fit and ready to play, we believe it is a really strong and powerful squad going into 2023.”

Sweeney has confirmed, nevertheless, that the RFU received plenty of feedback from England fans unhappy at the team’s disappointing efforts in the last two Six Nations campaigns and that the 2023 championship would be an important staging post. “To be competitive in a World Cup you’ve got to be able to beat France and Ireland along the way – not just southern hemisphere teams,” said Sweeney, who could not travel to Australia after suffering a pulmonary embolism earlier this year.

“We feel we are on track for 2023 but it’s coming out of that transition phase now into putting consistent performances together back-to-back. We have a demanding set of fans, they’re not shy about making their feelings known and that comes in to the RFU. When we’re not doing well that’s pointed out in pretty direct terms. You can only talk about transition for so long, you need to also deliver the results. Eddie was under intense pressure.”

Jones’s past record in World Cups, including guiding England to the 2019 final, has long been among the factors that “rank pretty highly” in the RFU’s strategic thinking but the identity of Jones’s post-2023 successor remains up in the air. Sweeney made little attempt to downplay Twickenham’s admiration of Ireland’s head coach Andy Farrell – “He’s doing well, isn’t he?” – but insists the RFU has not yet identified their preferred option.

“He’s regarded very highly but we also have a huge respect for the Irish Rugby Football Union. He’s under contract through to 2023 and then whatever happens after that happens.”

Sweeney also says RFU officials are increasingly concerned about the issue of drunken and boorish spectators at games, following last weekend’s incident in Sydney when Jones was abused by Australian fans, and will shortly be meeting to discuss ways to combat the problem.


The union, meanwhile, is hopeful the long-mooted world club championship will finally happen in 2025 if certain potential logistical issues, not least extra travel and player welfare implications in a Lions year, can be ironed out.

“There is still a long way to go, it’s not a completely done deal yet,” said Sweeney. “But in terms of direction as a union we certainly support it and the clubs are very keen to get it done. We think it can be achieved.”'


I still dislike this obsession about the WC be it from fans or the blazers. The pack back ups look decent and we now know that Steward is as safe as houses and we have a whizz kid in the backs coming through. But there are an awful lot of questions I have about Proudfoot, Cockerill and Gleeson. I do not see improvement in those 3 in comparison to what we have had before.

Great, when players are already playing too much, add in a World Club Championship.

RugbyPass has an article with Warren Gatland talking about Smith. The main points are praising his commitment in defence, and putting the view that the main thing he needs is game time to adapt to the pace of test rugby.

Warren Gatland wrote:By the time of the World Cup, he could be seeing the game in slow motion, and without wanting to disappoint my dinner guest, that is a frightening prospect for England’s opponents.

Gatland on RugbyPass

I still don't know what to make of where we are. A series win in Australia is good, though Ireland also managed a 2-1 victory over Australia in 2018, and both those sides went out at the quarter final stage during the 2019 World Cup.

Our best back row feels like it should be a barnstorming Vunipola at eight, with two hard-working flankers. For all the third test heroics, Lawes at six, and Vunipola at eight doesn't seem like a good balance, no matter who is at seven.

If, however, Lawes is captain, then we have to figure out which two back row players work best with him. When you exclude the matches Lawes started as flanker against against Italy, Japan, and Tonga, he doesn't have a great Test win rate from that position.

Whoever the open side is, Lawes/Vunipola, Lawes/Simmons and Lawes/Dombrandt all feel unbalanced against teams like France, Ireland, and the Welsh back row. Although the argument about Lawes at second row is apparently over, Tadhg Beirne did well enough against New Zealand.

If we have the roles of our pack sorted, then it's easier to work out who will work best in the back line.

A story bubbling up that the RFu have given Jones the green light to change his coaches. I'd welcome it, Proudfoot and Gleeson out please.

Yeah awful...get some good coaches...but Jones needs warned...stop treating them like cr@p and keep these till the world Cup!!

What is people's problem with Lawes? He's outstanding...he proves it all the time. Bar injury he'll be the world Cup 6...so its who works with him.

Probably Curry at 7 and you then have a few options at 8.

Jack Willis, Ludlum and Underhill (if he's concussion free) will be the back up....

No 7&1/2 wrote:A story bubbling up that the RFu have given Jones the green light to change his coaches. I'd welcome it, Proudfoot and Gleeson out please.

Hmm I'm not sure where we'd get new coaches so close to a new season. Certainly no Prem or other NH side will want to lose a coach with pre season under way. Replacing the coaches is all well in theory but only if you can source an upgrade. There's only two international windows plus world cup warm ups to come in and make a difference.

Proudfoot could be replaced by Plumtree potentially as NZ have decided to dispense with his services, which is slightly odd unless Robertson is going to do the forwards coaching part time. Eddie has long wanted Sam Vesty as his attack coach but he's just become Saints head coach so that isn't likely to happen.

GeordieFalcon wrote:What is people's problem with Lawes? He's outstanding...he proves it all the time. Bar injury he'll be the world Cup 6...so its who works with him.

Probably Curry at 7 and you then have a few options at 8.

Jack Willis, Ludlum and Underhill (if he's concussion free) will be the back up....

Back row balance goes to pot when he's there. If he's 6 we really need simmonds at 8.
And I'm in a minority in not wanting him at 6.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:A story bubbling up that the RFu have given Jones the green light to change his coaches. I'd welcome it, Proudfoot and Gleeson out please.

Hmm I'm not sure where we'd get new coaches so close to a new season. Certainly no Prem or other NH side will want to lose a coach with pre season under way. Replacing the coaches is all well in theory but only if you can source an upgrade. There's only two international windows plus world cup warm ups to come in and make a difference.

Proudfoot could be replaced by Plumtree potentially as NZ have decided to dispense with his services, which is slightly odd unless Robertson is going to do the forwards coaching part time. Eddie has long wanted Sam Vesty as his attack coach but he's just become Saints head coach so that isn't likely to happen.

You never know. If the rfu have given it the go then they could be thinking any compo they would use on Jones could go to the new coaches. May even be given permission to job share to an extent.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:A story bubbling up that the RFu have given Jones the green light to change his coaches. I'd welcome it, Proudfoot and Gleeson out please.

Hmm I'm not sure where we'd get new coaches so close to a new season. Certainly no Prem or other NH side will want to lose a coach with pre season under way. Replacing the coaches is all well in theory but only if you can source an upgrade. There's only two international windows plus world cup warm ups to come in and make a difference.

Proudfoot could be replaced by Plumtree potentially as NZ have decided to dispense with his services, which is slightly odd unless Robertson is going to do the forwards coaching part time. Eddie has long wanted Sam Vesty as his attack coach but he's just become Saints head coach so that isn't likely to happen.

You never know. If the rfu have given it the go then they could be thinking any compo they would use on Jones could go to the new coaches. May even be given permission to job share to an extent.

So now you want the RFU to pick Jones successor, get him out of his contract before the AIs (no NH club are going to take that). Then get him and Eddie to sit down and agree on recruits together from a limited pool that are currently available. Great in an ideal world but the logistics of that look somewhat difficult.