England post 2022 6Ns, Aus tour and beyond

First topic message reminder :

Hate to say it and I don't wish him injured but I'm glad Ewels not available!
If you're disappointed with Malins and Daly being selected, imagine how most of us feel about Youngs being there.
In fairness, Malins and Daly been superb this season but please give Radwan and Arundell a run.

Head coach - Borthwick (presumably will take care of the lineout)
Forwards - Cockers or Proudfoot (scrum and contact area)
Defence - Sinfield
Backs - ???
S&C - Walters

It's the building blocks of a coaching team with all the bases covered but especially with Borthwick at the top that attack coach spot will be absolutely vital. Vesty would be my first choice. Either Joe Shaw or Kevin Sorrell from Sarries would also be interesting options as they have really good reps as backs coaches, the game plan they employ may mesh better with Borthwick's.

Geordie wrote:So if your picking two very young but inform centres...do you play an equally young slightly more experience 10...or a 100 cap general who plays for a club that wins ALOT.

Especially in a first game at home v Scotland.

If Marcus Smith is available you play him; he's unlikely to though. Then you'd probably pick Farrell or Ford depending on what you want, me I'd have Farrell and Ford is unlikely to be available. So then you're onto Fin Smith, Simmonds, Atkinson?

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:This hype around Robertson is truly baffling. Borthwick has achieved much more in the game and has better CV to boot.

I'm not Borthwick's biggest fan(the rugby isn't the most exciting to watch), but he's proven he would be a better option than Robertson who has so many question marks for such a job.

Anyway.....I'm still clinging onto McCall!

Robertson has won the ITM cup twice, won the under 20s world cup, won the Super Rugby title 3 times (in his first 3 years as coach of the Crusaders) & won 2 Rugby Aotearoa championships.

Unless you're counting what he has won as a player which is pointless as players don't necessarily make good coaches, see Gary Neville.

He took over the best side (by some distance) in Super Rugby and carried on winning.......great. He's never coached outside of this bubble...he's always had the best players at his disposal. He's never coached outside of NZ, he's never had to turn a team around (which he would need to)....he doesn't have any experience in the NH, has no experience of the English game (press, players, conditions etc etc).

Borthwick has a much better CV. He's coached at International level with Japan and England......having hugely successful spells with each and with much varied players at his disposal. He took over a frankly awful Tigers side and has turned them into a table topping, championship winning side. He knows the English game inside out....he knows the players, he knows the press...he knows the pressure.

Again....I'm far from a Borthwick fanboy, but he's a much better choice on paper than Robertson. Robertson may end up being a great International coach but he has nothing on his CV to overly suggest this. Robertson is the risky choice...this is not the time for a risky choice. If we were going to go for somebody like Robertson (and I can't believe we'd be looking at him tbh), it would be straight after a WC were he would have time.

So the main differences are the assistant roles at international level, not coaching in England and Robertson being more successful.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Geordie wrote:So if your picking two very young but inform centres...do you play an equally young slightly more experience 10...or a 100 cap general who plays for a club that wins ALOT.

Especially in a first game at home v Scotland.

If Marcus Smith is available you play him; he's unlikely to though. Then you'd probably pick Farrell or Ford depending on what you want, me I'd have Farrell and Ford is unlikely to be available. So then you're onto Fin Smith, Simmonds, Atkinson?

I'd pick Farrell ahead of Smith if we are going with one playmaker. I think Farrell is the better tactical kicker and vitally is better at varying the depth he plays depending on what's in front of him. Smith is quicker so threatens the line more and has a better short/attacking kicking game but on his interantional showings so far has often been easily shut down due to playing too flat against strong defences.

9.JvP 10.Farrell 11.Arundell 12.Kelly 13.Tuilagi 14.Watson 15.Steward

21.Youngs 22.Smith 23.Slade

Lawrence would definitely be my 4th centre in the squad. I'd keep May and Freeman around to round out the back three options. Quirke if fit would definitely be in my squad as well. I'd be very excited to see what that backline could do with a functioning pack in front of it though.

Myself with the forwards, I'd lean towards something like:

1.Genge 2.George 3.Cole 4.Itoje 5.Chessum 6.Lawes 7.Curry 8.Vunipola/Dombrandt/Mercer

16.LCD 17.Marler 18.Sinckler 19.Ribbans 20.Earl

I think the front row can be immediately improved by Marler and Cole returning, especially if Stuart is injured. I also think Earl's pace could add to the pack immediately. I'd be hopeful of Sinckler re-finding his best in an impact role from the bench alongside LCD.

Lock remains my biggest concern and has been for a while. I'd invest in Chessum, Ribbans and Tizard alongside Itoje but I'm unsure they'll quite get to where they need to be by the RWC.

Number 8 I think we have three good options with differing strengths so I'd wait to see what the game plan is, what strengths we need.

I'd have Willis in the squad backing up Curry and either Ted Hill or George Martin as challengers to Lawes at 6.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:This hype around Robertson is truly baffling. Borthwick has achieved much more in the game and has better CV to boot.

I'm not Borthwick's biggest fan(the rugby isn't the most exciting to watch), but he's proven he would be a better option than Robertson who has so many question marks for such a job.

Anyway.....I'm still clinging onto McCall!

Robertson has won the ITM cup twice, won the under 20s world cup, won the Super Rugby title 3 times (in his first 3 years as coach of the Crusaders) & won 2 Rugby Aotearoa championships.

Unless you're counting what he has won as a player which is pointless as players don't necessarily make good coaches, see Gary Neville.

He took over the best side (by some distance) in Super Rugby and carried on winning.......great.

They finished 7th the two years before Robertson landed the top job. They won the title in Robertson's first season 2017 but hadn't won it since 2008 before then. I think it's unfair to suggest he walked into an easy job and just kept things ticking along. McCaw and Carter were both gone by the time Robertson took over.

Robertson pickup up a team that had a lot of good parts, but no cohesion and had massively underperformed thanks to the previous coach (Blackadder). He turned it around in moments. That is a skill he isn't going to suddenly lose. He also took a talented 10 that many over here didn't rate, and helped make him arguably the best in the country.

He has a lot of skills, and whether you rate Super Rugby or not, the three countries that play/played in it also generally top the world rugby rankings so it's hardly a bad comp.

king_carlos wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Geordie wrote:So if your picking two very young but inform centres...do you play an equally young slightly more experience 10...or a 100 cap general who plays for a club that wins ALOT.

Especially in a first game at home v Scotland.

If Marcus Smith is available you play him; he's unlikely to though. Then you'd probably pick Farrell or Ford depending on what you want, me I'd have Farrell and Ford is unlikely to be available. So then you're onto Fin Smith, Simmonds, Atkinson?

I'd pick Farrell ahead of Smith if we are going with one playmaker. I think Farrell is the better tactical kicker and vitally is better at varying the depth he plays depending on what's in front of him. Smith is quicker so threatens the line more and has a better short/attacking kicking game but on his interantional showings so far has often been easily shut down due to playing too flat against strong defences.

George Ford has won 84 England caps largely off the back of Farrell not being good enough as an International Fly Half.  And Ford himself pre injury was jettisoned from the England squad.  Picking Farrell seems a backwards step, but in the likely absence of Smith is the best/only alternative. Hopefully under a more sensible coach than Eddie, Smith will be allowed to play his more natural game so we can see the best of him.

No. Farrell was picked in midfield as England coaches wanted a second distributor and decided he was the beat choice. Inevitably when coaches have turned to other options it has meant Ford being dropped, not Farrell.

I expect the Mercer support to start up again in vengeance after tonight. He will be missing for the fallow weeks in the 6Ns but surely it will be better for the new coach to bring him in that persevere with Simmonds? May just fancy Vunipola and Dombrandt of course?

I haven't followed Tigers too closely this season, but would I be right in saying that Borthwick would be willing to put his faith in young/ inexperience players? Could you see him picking a core of Leicester players, then building the team around that? To be honest, it would be understandable given how short of prep time he is before the six nations.

Just thinking aloud (more for fun really), if he wanted some kind of familiarity between players, he could do worse than have a Leicester/ Sarries combined team:

01. Mako Vunipola
02. Jamie George
03. Dan Cole
04. Maro Itoje
05. Ollie Chessum
06. George Martin
07. Ben Earl
08. Billy Vunipola

09. Jack van Poortvliet
10. Owen Farrell

11. Anthony Watson
12. Dan Kelly
13. Alex Lozowski
14. Elliot Daly
15. Freddie Steward

16. Nic Dolly (?)
17. An Other
18. Joe Heyes
19. Hugh Tizard
20. Nick Isiekwe (?)
21. Guy Porter
22. Ben Youngs
23 Max Malins

I wonder how many people will make it to your loosehead before wanting you rounded up Cumbrian?! That sort of thinking was used to great effect by Gatland when he came into the Wales job though. England have certainly used pods of players together as well for the same thinking.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I wonder how many people will make it to your loosehead before wanting you rounded up Cumbrian?! That sort of thinking was used to great effect by Gatland when he came into the Wales job though. England have certainly used pods of players together as well for the same thinking.

Yeah loosehead isn't the strongest postion for the two clubs (from and EQP point of view), but 70 plus caps probably sneaks him ahead of Ralph A-H, Sam Crean and James Whitcome!

No 7&1/2 wrote:So the main differences are the assistant roles at international level, not coaching in England and Robertson being more successful.

And that's why I think Borthwick is the better choice.

International coaching is different from club coaching, and the RWC in particular is very different. Borthwick has been through two RWC cycles as an assistant coach as international level; Robertson hasn't coached above age grade level internationally.

The last coach to win the RWC without prior RWC experience was Jake White (and he had Eddie Jones to help him) and the last one to do it without any help was Rod MacQueen. England's two worst RWC performances have come from coaches with no prior RWC experience. Taken together, having had some level of international experience, including going to an RWC as either a T2 head coach or a T1 assistant coach is a sensible minimum bar.

And given that a big part of the job is to turn around a struggling team with 10 months to go to the RWC, I'd say knowledge of the players (and of the clubs) is a pretty important criterion as well. It's one thing to bring a bunch of players together for the Barbarians; it's quite another to build a squad capable of winning a long, competitive campaign.

As for being more successful, given their relative experience in club coaching, what Borthwick has achieved in turning Tigers around and then winning the Premiership is pretty comparable to what Robertson achieved in his first couple of years. This year is looking a tad tougher - but then he's having to cope with losing captain and playmaker in one go.

Cumbrian wrote:I haven't followed Tigers too closely this season, but would I be right in saying that Borthwick would be willing to put his faith in young/ inexperience players?  Could you see him picking a core of Leicester players, then building the team around that?  To be honest, it would be understandable given how short of prep time he is before the six nations.

Borthwick has trusted a lot of young players, albeit helped by Tigers having a good crop when he arrived. Steward, JvP, Martin and Kelly were all teenagers whilst they became first XV players. Reffell was also very young. Porter and Potter had very little experience in interantional rugby.

He also discarded young players from the squad he inherited and signed the likes of Wigglesworth, Ashton and Gopperth though. Basically if he rates players they are either old or young enough.

In general I think most international coaches take that view too. It's just many very young players that get exposure can't quite cut it yet in the international so return to club rugby. The step up in physicality, which is most likely to be the issue for many young players, is huge after all. Backing youngsters in club rugby where there are a lot of lower profile games will always be easier.

As long as it's not Youngs.

I am looking forward to the start of the 6 nations will rge new coach continue with the same old faces or a brand new squad all together?

No 7&1/2 wrote:As long as it's not Youngs.

Prepare to be disappointed. Borthers does like experience at 9.

I think it was Cumbrian who mentioned that he might go with a Tigers orientated set up but Borthwick has coached a lot of these guys before. I think he'll tweak Eddie's squad rather than tearing it up to start again. He might look to address the 12 selection as he's tended towards giving his 10 to winning options and then sharing the secondary playmaking duties between one of the centres and the fullback rather than a dedicated option. His second row options will be good set piece options and he's tended to like at least one, often more, lineout options in the backrow. I can't see a return to dual opensides.

Borthwick has confirmed he expects to be in charge of Tigers for next weekend's game Vs Clermont. Seems more likely it'll be a release in times for the 6N then.

Announcement was supposed to be coming this week so it'll probably be slightly after the end of the Leicester game if it's offered to Borthwick. Then hopefully some detail in the next week or 2 on his plans for support staff.

Does anyone really believe that the new coach(we assume Borthwick) will have any more sucess than Jones unless he makes some fairly significant selection changes? There's usually a new coach feel good factor and enthusiasm which can result in a couple initial wins, get this in a lot of sports, but if same side plays SA under Borthwick would you expect England to win? Not sure I would.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Announcement was supposed to be coming this week so it'll probably be slightly after the end of the Leicester game if it's offered to Borthwick. Then hopefully some detail in the next week or 2 on his plans for support staff.

It's being offered to Borthwick. It's hashing out the details with Tigers. Been rumours for a while now that the deal was done for Borthwick to join England in the summer, get Eddie one of his best assistants back and then Borthwick to take the reigns after. Tigers had already started the succession process with Lancaster (before he agreed his stint in Paris) and MacDonald rumoured to have been contacted as possible options in the last couple of months. The issue is that the RFU have accelerated plans mid season.

Sometime next week an announcement will come through I'm sure. Borthwick to join England for the 6N. His chosen coaches to join up at the end of the season. Undisclosed fee to Tigers, that'll be a few hundred grand. Sir Kev to head up the Tigers coaching committee until the end of the season and then the replacement for Borthwick to arrive.

mountain man wrote:Does anyone really believe that the new coach(we assume Borthwick) will have any more sucess than Jones.

Don't think Sweeney is banking on getting more success. He just wanted to avoid the same lack of success with Jones still on board.

The RFU was under pressure for their botched handling of the Premiership bankruptcies, and started to sense Jones was losing the rugby public, which would be bad news for corporate and retail sales. It's arguable whether that was a genuine concerm - it's hard to imagine Six Nations tickets wouldn't have sold if Jones had been kept - but a number of pundits have pointed out the RFU's desire to change the mood music.

Whatever you think of the decision to ditch Jones, it is infuriating how incompetent the RFU continues to be when it comes to this key appointment. The last time they got it right was taking a gamble on Woodward. Every decision since then has been a bit of a shambles, with no-one planning far enough ahead for what happens in the event of success or failure.

mountain man wrote:Does anyone really believe that the new coach(we assume Borthwick) will have any more sucess than Jones unless he makes some fairly significant selection changes? There's usually a new coach feel good factor and enthusiasm which can result in a couple initial wins, get this in a lot of sports, but if same side plays SA under Borthwick would you expect England to win? Not sure I would.

Hes clearly a good coach but there does need to be a few changes which signals a new approach, a continuity appointment will do little to change the negativity. That's doesn't mean the whole team of course.

I suspect Borthwick keep most of same squad.

If fans, media, pundits all saying same thing about certain players hopefully coach thinks along same lines.

I can see why RFU want an English coach and fair enough but maybe an outsider would not have divided loyalties to club players he knows well. Whether subconscious or not, it'll be tough for Borthwick to be not slightly biased to Tigers.
Hopefully supporting coaches allowed to disagree if necessary. Something one suspects wasn't case with Jones but don't know that of course.

mountain man wrote:...Whether subconscious or not, it'll be tough for Borthwick to be not slightly biased to Tigers.

Borthwick's Leicester links are very recent. He has a longer association with Saracens and Bath, and even the early England squad, so he probably won't lean Leicester, so much as Baxter might lean Exeter, or McCall lean Saracens.

Rugby Fan wrote:

mountain man wrote:...Whether subconscious or not, it'll be tough for Borthwick to be not slightly biased to Tigers.

Borthwick's Leicester links are very recent. He has a longer association with Saracens and Bath, and even the early England squad, so he probably won't lean Leicester, so much as Baxter might lean Exeter, or McCall lean Saracens.

As you stated RF, I can't see that from Borthwick. He might bring a couple of players in that he rates highly at Tigers (Martin, Chessum etc?), but he's not a Leicester man.

Apart from being Tigers head coach.

I'm not saying he will be biased but will he drop Young's from Eng squad even though there are several better 9s around.

He has to drop Youngs surely?

I doubt Youngs will be dropped. I've already said Borthwick likes experience at 9 and if you look at the four Tigers scrum halfs they are very competent with the tactical kicking game.

Remember that Borthwick worked with a number of the players in the squad previously with England and the Lions. I don't think he'll be bringing in lots of Tigers, well more than have been capped by Eddie in recent times anyway (Dolly, Heyes, Chessum, Martin, JVP, Kelly, Porter and Steward).

Kelly might be the one that comes a bit from left field, he's been Borthwick's midfield lynchpin at Tigers and the England midfield is an area of weakness.

Yeah. When it's literally he's had a lot of caps so he should be in it kinda speaks volumes. If he's playing at the level he is now with 2 caps he's not in the discussion.

Kelly ain't left field for me. He's been in the conversation a lot and would have been in already without that injury layoff.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yeah. When it's literally he's had a lot of caps so he should be in it kinda speaks volumes. If he's playing at the level he is now with 2 caps he's not in the discussion.

The issue lies in that there's three reasonable options alternate to Youngs. JVP who rotates with him at club level (Borthwick would probably go with Youngs in a big game), Quirke who's as often injured as not and Mitchell who has stamina issues causing him to drift in and out of games. All three of those options combined have what, 10 caps? No international coach is going to go into the 6N or world cup with 10 caps across three scrum halfs when there's a 100 plus cap scrum half he trusts available, even if the experienced guy ends up being third choice it's an option to have and leadership in a key position should the side need it.

I'd be happy if Youngs was 3rd choice and didn't get on the pitch.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'd be happy if Youngs was 3rd choice and didn't get on the pitch.

Depends who's available. Wouldn't mind him as the bench option for some of the away games in the 6N.

100+ cap scrum halves should not be passing the ball to the floor in front of, or halfway to the supposed target. It's not like he only did it once. It was 3 or 4 times across the games he played in the autumn, as well as passing the ball directly into touch. 100+ caps or not, this is shocking from any scrum half, let alone a supposedly experienced player. I would prefer the verve of a younger player to watching someone clearly not in enough form to warrant a place in the squad. I would sooner take the risk than not.

Let's not forget the Youngs played some dreadful rugby in the first half against Argentina. JVP comes on and scores a try Youngs probably wouldn't have been able to within 30 seconds. Not saying it's all Youngs' fault as the rest of the team were poor, but he hasn't looked good for some time now. I don't see the point of having an experienced player if they can't do the basics right.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

mountain man wrote:...Whether subconscious or not, it'll be tough for Borthwick to be not slightly biased to Tigers.

Borthwick's Leicester links are very recent. He has a longer association with Saracens and Bath, and even the early England squad, so he probably won't lean Leicester, so much as Baxter might lean Exeter, or McCall lean Saracens.

As you stated RF, I can't see that from Borthwick. He might bring a couple of players in that he rates highly at Tigers (Martin, Chessum etc?), but he's not a Leicester man.

Borthwick was fairly ruthless with players in the Tigers squad he didn't rate. Players that the previous coaches were clearly keen to develop got completely side lined, sent on loan, released early, etc. He had no issue ruffling feathers either. It's easy to forget after his success but when he came in, quickly let Ben White leave and signed Wigglesworth many Tigers fans who had seen White develop weren't happy at all. Borthwick clearly felt Wigglesworth was better despite their respective ages and went with him.

His Tigers start also makes me think he wont join unless he gets the coaching team he wants. He originally joined as head coach with Murphy as DOR overlooking the wider club, taking care of the pathway from academy to senior, etc and Jan McGinity in charge of recruitment. Murphy went quickly as SB wanted full control then McGinity (a guy who did some really good stuff for Tigers) went so Richard Wilks (Borthwick's former agent, basically his man) could take over recruitment. I just can't see him joining unless he gets the team he wants. Even if Walters and Sinfield have to job share in some capacity until the summer.

Mr Bounce wrote:100+ cap scrum halves should not be passing the ball to the floor in front of, or halfway to the supposed target. It's not like he only did it once. It was 3 or 4 times across the games he played in the autumn, as well as passing the ball directly into touch. 100+ caps or not, this is shocking from any scrum half, let alone a supposedly experienced player. I would prefer the verve of a younger player to watching someone clearly not in enough form to warrant a place in the squad. I would sooner take the risk than not.

Let's not forget the Youngs played some dreadful rugby in the first half against Argentina. JVP comes on and scores a try Youngs probably wouldn't have been able to within 30 seconds. Not saying it's all Youngs' fault as the rest of the team were poor, but he hasn't looked good for some time now. I don't see the point of having an experienced player if they can't do the basics right.

And then Youngs comes off the bench and is central to the second half turnaround Vs the All Blacks. It's why you want the option of experience on the bench Vs big teams.

It's too close to the WC to be getting shot of Youngs now. Eddie's lack of future planning in the position has left the options behind him without enough experience in the pressure games. With JVP not fully settled in and prone to a stinker, it makes sense to keep him around.

Mitchell should be included for competition with JVP, I'm not buying this fitness issue. Quirke needs a good run of games but he really does seem extremely injury prone.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's too close to the WC to be getting shot of Youngs now. Eddie's lack of future planning in the position has left the options behind him without enough experience in the pressure games. With JVP not fully settled in and prone to a stinker, it makes sense to keep him around.

Mitchell should be included for competition with JVP, I'm not buying this fitness issue. Quirke needs a good run of games but he really does seem extremely injury prone.

The WC isn't the be all and end all. That's one of the reasons Jones is gone. On the other hand Youngs isn't good enough now so not sure how he's going to get better over the next year.

No issues with Mitchell stamina, maybe in past but no more.

My opinion and it's just an opinion so I'm sure plenty disagree is that if England keep nigh on same squad for 6N/RWC they won't win.
They might get odd decent win or performance(see NZ last 10 mins) but there will also be games like Argentina which was dire.

If Borthwick just makes one or two minor tweaks that won't cut it. If he goes for damage limitation mode then I just can't see Eng winning.

And this is the problem we've had with Jones' preoccupation with having Youngs with no back up since 2018. He's inexplicably left out Spencer when he was playing brilliantly, Mitchell has been in squads but not selected, he brought Care back then discarded him then eventually has got hold of JVP at a very late stage. Youngs was given the shirt regardless of when he was off form or playing brilliantly.

And in response to the ABs game suggestion, most decent 9s would have done better than JVP and would have made a difference.

Youngs on form is magical. He just hasn't been on form for a long Time yet kept getting picked. I agree he is not going to be got rid of now, but please don't keep starting him.

Jones was preoccupied with Youngs, Manu, Billy, May, Nowell and Hill. Add in bringing back Mako against SA there we have it.
He also kept playing Smith Farrell 10 12 when it was pretty clear it's not worked.

Wasn't it Einstein who said the definition of insanity is to keep doing same thing over and over and expect a different result?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's too close to the WC to be getting shot of Youngs now. Eddie's lack of future planning in the position has left the options behind him without enough experience in the pressure games. With JVP not fully settled in and prone to a stinker, it makes sense to keep him around.

Mitchell should be included for competition with JVP, I'm not buying this fitness issue. Quirke needs a good run of games but he really does seem extremely injury prone.

The WC isn't the be all and end all. That's one of the reasons Jones is gone. On the other hand Youngs isn't good enough now so not sure how he's going to get better over the next year.

No, but it's a big deal. Seeing JVP struggle (one of the worst scrum half displays I've seen in a long time)...it doesn't make sense to have another inexperienced scrum half as backup. I don't rate Youngs, but seeing some of these kids struggle, I'd stick with him a bit longer. He has poor basics but he doesn't cave under pressure.

And to quote Sam....nobody is exactly pulling up trees to replace him.

Key duty for new manager...

1. Finally fix midfield...10-13

2. Find the best partner for Itoje

3. Fix Sinckler....get a good coach for him.

4. Decide what he wants at 6. Dual openside or big lineout option (Lawes, G.Martin, T.Hill)...this then dictates the 8 option...Billy v maybe Dombrandt or Mercer as a lineout option.

5. Decide on the wings..assess the injuries and form of the oldies, May, Watson etc. Are Nowell , Cokasaniga ineffective now...is it time for the young pretenders..?

Geordie wrote:Key duty for new manager...

1. Finally fix midfield...10-13

2. Find the best partner for Itoje

3. Fix Sinckler....get a good coach for him.

4. Decide what he wants at 6. Dual openside or big lineout option (Lawes, G.Martin, T.Hill)...this then dictates the 8 option...Billy v maybe Dombrandt or Mercer as a lineout option.  

5. Decide on the wings..assess the injuries and form of the oldies, May, Watson etc. Are Nowell , Cokasaniga ineffective now...is it time for the young pretenders..?

1. Agree

2. Yes and it's not Hill.

3. Definitely.

4. Lawes is OK at 6 for me. Curry way below best at 7, get Earl in. Billy gone, Dombrandt at 8.

5. Still time for Joe C I think. May, Nowell past it. Watson? Too long out maybe. Definitely time to try the young guns.

So, as I mentioned previously just the front row, 2nd row, back row, half backs, centres and wings to resolve. Hope to God Steward stays fit.....

I think the idea of having the majority of the players from 2 sides is actually valid. Ireland and NZ are so successful because their players play for a limited number of clubs and know each other inside out. There is a lot to be said for familiarity in international rugby.

I few tweaks to bring in experience and where there is an obvious week spot and you could make a pretty good side.

01. Ellis Genge
02. Jamie George
03. Kyle Sinckler
04. Maro Itoje
05. Dave Ribbans
06. George Martin
07. Ben Earl
08.Alex Dombrandt

09. Jack van Poortvliet
10. Owen Farrell

11. Anthony Watson
12. Dan Kelly
13. Alex Lozowski
14. Tommy Freeman
15. Freddie Steward

16. Nic Dolly (?)
17. An Other
18. Joe Heyes
19. Courtney Lawes
20. Jackson Wray
21. Alex Mitchell
22.Guy Porter
23 Max Malins/A N Other if Watson not right.

That gives 10 of the starting 15 from Tigers/Sarries and 5 of the bench.

Cole is too old for international rugby these days and MV as has been proved cannot scrummage under the current laws. Genge and Sinkler are the best we have until someone else comes along who can match them.

You need a good experienced 5, Chessum may be one day, but at the moment not up to the standard of Ribbans.

Watson is an unknown, will he ever be back to international standard with all of his injuries, if not then Daly or Malins. Daly seems to be back at centre each time I have seen him this year, Malins keeping him out of the wing birth.

I would have Lawes over Martin every day of the year, but in keeping with the idea of familiarity I can see a case for Martin. I don't think Tizzard is close to being ready yet, so slot Lawes in there. He has been consistently one of England's few good performers over the last few years and would bring flexibility and experience to the squad.

Youngs is no longer good enough to play at this level, too many mistakes. too slow getting the ball away and too slow getting to the breakdown. To keep with the idea of as few clubs as possible being chosen from I have slotted Mitchell in at 21, but it could just as easily been Quirke.

The core being 7 Sarries, 7 Tigers, 4 Saints, 4 from other clubs.

So Smith not even on bench? Really?

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's too close to the WC to be getting shot of Youngs now. Eddie's lack of future planning in the position has left the options behind him without enough experience in the pressure games. With JVP not fully settled in and prone to a stinker, it makes sense to keep him around.

Mitchell should be included for competition with JVP, I'm not buying this fitness issue. Quirke needs a good run of games but he really does seem extremely injury prone.

The WC isn't the be all and end all. That's one of the reasons Jones is gone. On the other hand Youngs isn't good enough now so not sure how he's going to get better over the next year.

No, but it's a big deal. Seeing JVP struggle (one of the worst scrum half displays I've seen in a long time)...it doesn't make sense to have another inexperienced scrum half as backup. I don't rate Youngs, but seeing some of these kids struggle, I'd stick with him a bit longer. He has poor basics but he doesn't cave under pressure.

And to quote Sam....nobody is exactly pulling up trees to replace him.

Don't know why you have such a bee in your bonnet from that display. He'll come back much stronger for it and realise what you need to do following ref errors. As for youngs caving go back and watch the WC final.

Re that last point yes they are. I'll say it again if youngs was uncapped now nobody would be calling for him to be in the squad.

mountain man wrote:So Smith not even on bench? Really?

Which one.

It was not supposed to be a best 23, the idea is to keep the team from as few clubs a possible, not pick a team from all 11+2 prem clubs. Farrell can and does get the Sarries team moving and attacking, understanding and cohesion being the things I was looking for. Only pick from another club when there is no suitable option in Sarries or Tigers and then try to fill in the gaps from one other club i.e props, and 8.

Both Malins and Lozowski cover 10 so a benched 10 would be a waste of space.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

mountain man wrote:So Smith not even on bench? Really?

Which one.

It was not supposed to be a best 23, the idea is to keep the team from as few clubs a possible, not pick a team from all 11+2 prem clubs. Farrell can and does get the Sarries team moving and attacking, understanding and cohesion being the things I was looking for. Only pick from another club when there is no suitable option in Sarries or Tigers and then try to fill in the gaps from one other club i.e props, and 8.

Both Malins and Lozowski cover 10 so a benched 10 would be a waste of space.

Why? Surely pick best players from all teams then go from there. I can understand if you think for example Smith isn't your choice but seems a bit odd to restrict to only 2/3 teams.
That's whole point of an International coaching team, to bring together players from different club sides and get them to gel.
So Arundell who is with LI doesn't get in team because he's not a Saracens or Leicester player?