[solved]England Pre 2023 6Ns and Beyond.

First topic message reminder :

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/jan/06/eddie-jones-mistakes-with-england-why-i-got-the-sack-rugby-union

Interview with Jones about being sacked there. Some interesting stuff in amongst it.

Who will be the new England captain? I heard Borthwick will make Genge captain and Dan Cole will be included in the squad.

England will be hard to beat if they get their act together, I bet under Borthwick they will be a lot better.

Sharkey06 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:Shock horror that he is available for the start of the 6 nations. Gets 2 weeks off for admitting the charge & showing good conduct during the hearing.....

Unsurprisingly given the nature of the challenge and process re admitting.

So if you admit fault you get weeks knocked off every time?

In most cases yes. Contrition involved, behaviour to the panel, past behaviour, how you accepted it on the pitch etc etc.

So keep doing what you do but as long as you say sorry each time....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54081068

Or change your name to Johnny Sexton, whereby you don't even get sited for a head on head collision - Jarrad Butler 'tackle'.

The difference between Sexton and Farrell's tackles in question and technique in general is the impact. Farrell's technique is impact focused, he often tries to hit and knock backwards players in contact whereas Sexton stands his ground in contact and rather than hit the player and drive them back on impact he tries to stand his ground and hold them up knowing he doesnt need to win the collision if he succeeds in holding them up.

This makes it less dangerous when Sexton gets it wrong than when Farrell gets it wrong and that is why I feel Sexton wasn't cited and Farrell was. There is obviously precedent for absorbing tackles to receive lower sanctions than impact focused tackles and to me that makes perfect sense. Think Farrell's sanction was fair enough.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sharkey06 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:Shock horror that he is available for the start of the 6 nations. Gets 2 weeks off for admitting the charge & showing good conduct during the hearing.....

Unsurprisingly given the nature of the challenge and process re admitting.

So if you admit fault you get weeks knocked off every time?

In most cases yes. Contrition involved, behaviour to the panel, past behaviour, how you accepted it on the pitch etc etc.

So keep doing what you do but as long as you say sorry each time....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54081068

Or change your name to Johnny Sexton, whereby you don't even get sited for a head on head collision - Jarrad Butler 'tackle'.

The difference between Sexton and Farrell's tackles in question and technique in general is the impact. Farrell's technique is impact focused, he often tries to hit and knock backwards players in contact whereas Sexton stands his ground in contact and rather than hit the player and drive them back on impact he tries to stand his ground and hold them up knowing he doesnt need to win the collision if he succeeds in holding them up.

This makes it less dangerous when Sexton gets it wrong than when Farrell gets it wrong and that is why I feel Sexton wasn't cited and Farrell was. There is obviously precedent for absorbing tackles to receive lower sanctions than impact focused tackles and to me that makes perfect sense. Think Farrell's sanction was fair enough.

I agree completely in terms of the absorption of the tackle knocking it into a lower sanction. It's still risky though from the perspective of it only takes the ref to think it was still forceful and find himself in trouble.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Off topic, but I didn't see the need for a new one as 24 after the event no one had set one up. David Duckham (Dai Duckham to our Welsh brethren), I have been looking at the old clips of him for England, Lions and the Barbarians, what a fantastic player. If you want to show an example of a swerve or step at pace, then he is your man.

In the amateur era by a considerable number of years, but still one of England's best ever backs, probably the best I can think of, only one that comes close is Jason Robinson, but he was pro and had a lot more advantages.

RIP David (Dai) Duckham

PS. I am getting worried, he was not that much older than me, as a number of recently deceased players have been, am I getting close to leaving this world?

My dad had a video of the 1973 Baa Baas v All Blacks game, I must have watched it hundreds of times when I was a boy. To this day, Duckham's the only player I've seen throw a dummy that fooled the cameraman.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sharkey06 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Oakdene wrote:Shock horror that he is available for the start of the 6 nations. Gets 2 weeks off for admitting the charge & showing good conduct during the hearing.....

Unsurprisingly given the nature of the challenge and process re admitting.

So if you admit fault you get weeks knocked off every time?

In most cases yes. Contrition involved, behaviour to the panel, past behaviour, how you accepted it on the pitch etc etc.

So keep doing what you do but as long as you say sorry each time....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54081068

Or change your name to Johnny Sexton, whereby you don't even get sited for a head on head collision - Jarrad Butler 'tackle'.

The difference between Sexton and Farrell's tackles in question and technique in general is the impact. Farrell's technique is impact focused, he often tries to hit and knock backwards players in contact whereas Sexton stands his ground in contact and rather than hit the player and drive them back on impact he tries to stand his ground and hold them up knowing he doesnt need to win the collision if he succeeds in holding them up.

This makes it less dangerous when Sexton gets it wrong than when Farrell gets it wrong and that is why I feel Sexton wasn't cited and Farrell was. There is obviously precedent for absorbing tackles to receive lower sanctions than impact focused tackles and to me that makes perfect sense. Think Farrell's sanction was fair enough.

I agree completely in terms of the absorption of the tackle knocking it into a lower sanction. It's still risky though from the perspective of it only takes the ref to think it was still forceful and find himself in trouble.

Yeah it definitely is. The only way to avoid sanction completely is to go low.

At international level both Farrell and Sexton have only ever received two yellow cards each and only once was that for a bad tackle. Farrell v Australia in 2015 so neither really have a history of getting penalised for dangerous tackles.

Collapse2005 wrote:Who will be the new England captain? I heard Borthwick will make Genge captain and Dan Cole will be included in the squad.

England will be hard to beat if they get their act together, I bet under Borthwick they will be a lot better.

I really don't care who is captain to be honest, I just want best team available out there then select a suitable candidate from those. Only thing I would say is maybe time for a change from Farrell, not sure his relationship with refs is always the best and because of who he is and he reputation it might be better for Borthwick to choose his own man.
Not sure about how hard to beat England will be, would like to see a different team and different game plan from Jones though.

This from the Guardian I think sums up the oddity of the current position with Farrell in regards to what games are counted within his ban. If he's in the England squad he misses the Scotland game, if he's not then he's free to play. Despite the stamping of feet that I've seen from Scottish, Irish and Welsh pundits on twitter it seems wholly appropriate to me for the Bristol game to be counted even if he's named next week, why should the RFU be penalised there for actually getting their house in order? The view that a chane in circumstance in regards to England may mean that he misses the Scotland game to me is astonishing when the same process has deemed it very likely that London Irish would be naming Colman to play 2 matches in 2 days.

As a relative late comer to rugby it still surprises me that domestic, European and international discipline and bans overlap each other. It's very rare that a club discretion would ever be applied across the board in footy, doesn't make sense to me. I did have to look up invidious too.

'Steve Borthwick is about to learn fast that invidious positions come with the territory as England head coach. The mess that surrounds Owen Farrell’s participation in England’s Six Nations opener against Scotland – and their preparations beforehand – is not one of his making but one he is likely to have to clear up.

To recap, Farrell is banned for three matches – all Saracens fixtures because the disciplinary panel decided not to consider England games before Borthwick has announced his squad. One of those, the Premiership game against Bristol on 28 January, was one he would never play in. The panel left the door open for Farrell’s ban to be amended to include the Calcutta Cup if his likely selection in Borthwick’s squad next Monday is deemed to be enough of a “change in circumstances”.

Eddie Jones, the England head coach walks off the pitch after the drawn match in the Autumn International match between England and New Zealand All Blacks at Twickenham Stadium.
England players told RFU chief that sacking Jones was ‘right decision’
Read more
First, Borthwick is unlikely to risk picking Farrell if there remains the possibility of the list of banned matches being changed. The RFU’s head of discipline is David Barnes, a former Bath teammate of Borthwick, and it would be remiss of the new head coach not to ascertain precisely what may happen if he names Farrell in his squad on Monday. The RFU has signalled that Borthwick is free to do so on the basis that Farrell could, in theory, be released back to face Bristol – a dubious claim because it would never, in reality, happen – but Borthwick would be wise to clarify that the disciplinary department would not disagree.


At present, the expectation is that Borthwick will pick Farrell on Monday, he will train fully with England before the Six Nations begin and he will face Scotland. The backlash that would cause could be avoided if Borthwick omits Farrell until his ban has concluded after 28 January and calls him into the squad at the first subsequent opportunity – the start of the Scotland week.

Farrell’s absence would be keenly felt, however, given a concussion delayed his arrival into camp before the autumn series and England began that campaign in defeat by Argentina. The challenge for Borthwick, then, is how he explains or justifies picking Farrell, assuming he does on Monday, and his options are limited. It is a high-wire act that he will have to perform.

Had Eddie Jones still been in situ it is easy to imagine him dismissing the issue with a one-liner and an invitation for his inquisitor to refrain from asking stupid questions. Playing the villain and insisting he pays no attention to the outside noise suited him in situations like this. It might have got him into trouble at other times – claiming he didn’t care what people thought after the defeat by South Africa was a misstep – but on the whole it was a strategy that served him. Borthwick, however, cannot afford to play the villain at this stage of his tenure. Not after he presented himself as a new broom just a few weeks ago, using words such as honesty and authenticity to describe his leadership.


Another option would be to double down on the idea that Farrell could be released for the Bristol fixture – he may have to claim that he planned to do so all along – and game the system. We may even enter some sort of Twilight Zone where Borthwick claims he will actually release Farrell back to Saracens for a match in which he cannot play. Borthwick could strengthen his argument by pointing out that while Jones would never have released players back to their clubs on the weekend in question, this is a new England era, but to accept the notion that he would have allowed Farrell to play against Bristol requires the suspension of disbelief.


Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The whole premise is flawed because the RFU pays good money – senior figures at the union privately think far too much – to have access to its players for this extra week before the Six Nations. It stops them playing for the clubs so to suddenly claim the weekend in question can be considered “club time” is tantamount to the RFU having its cake and eating it.

The final option – that which would limit the damage – is for Borthwick to engage with the perception that it is a messy situation, to acknowledge it is one that England and the RFU do not emerge from in the best of lights but to explain that ultimately the strict terms of the panel’s judgment and the elite player squad agreement mean that a loophole can be exploited. Furthermore, that Farrell is too important a player to leave out to avoid reputational damage. It is shaping up to be the first major test of Borthwick’s tenure and to pass it he has to at least stay true to his words.'

One solution is Smith fit so plays 10 and Farrell misses Scotland game, I'd rather someone else at 12 anyway. It's a mess though and feel sorry for Borthwick having to cope with this before he evens starts! We don't know that Borthwick was definitely going to pick Farrell anyway (he almost certainly will) but as no team announced yet he has option of saying he wasn't going to.
It is a mess though.

Just tackle lower, now there's a thought.

Ah who cares...mountain out of mole hill.

Crack on and prepare for the 6n with Farrell at 10.

England Rugby Facebook page says squad announcement will be 10:40 on Monday 16th

Geordie wrote:Ah who cares...mountain out of mole hill.

Crack on and prepare for the 6n with Farrell at 10.

Because the panel are playing silly b+ggers and there's potential that if he's picked in the squad he becomes ineligible!

Ah he'll not become ineligible. They wont let it happen. Its the RFU...they'll suit themselves.

They've never exactly played to the national teams advantage in the past though.

They just do what they want...much like the government, councils and any other major governing body.

Nick David had two games in three days count towards a ban last season I think. The ban for Farrell is completely in-line with recent hearings for similar offences. There's a lot of "man yells at clouds" in this 'story'.

I'm extremely critical of the RFU over many many things but this wouldn't be one of them.

People looking for moon landing conspiracy theories of corruption in the minutiae of sports whilst ignoring blatant and open corruption in the same sports is one of my pet peeves being a cricket nerd though. Theories around teams with bigger TV audiences getting favourable umpiring calls in World Cups to keep them in the tournament for financial reasons are rife. Meanwhile the governance of international cricket has openly been taken over by the boards of India, England and Australia as basically a cartel that tramples over all else before them.

The RFU will probably just not pick him in the squad until after the club matches are over and then bring him in as a late addition. One way or another he will play v Scotland.

As expected Quirke is back on the Sale bench. Excellent news.

No 7&1/2 wrote:As expected Quirke is back on the Sale bench. Excellent news.

And Smith starts for Quins. Very timely returns.

Lawes and Fin Smith back as well for Saints.

Lawes playing at 7, could be interesting. one 18 stone, one 19 stone flankers

Cracking news on Lawes, Quirke and Smith x 2. Ford is rumoured to be close as well. If Quirke, Smith and Ford can all return strongly over the next couple of weeks then the half-back options will be strong.

Lawes being fit is huge for England. I know some don't like him at blindside but his strengths will likely fit the game plan perfectly. With Curry and LCD already ruled out having Lawes back would be massive. He's had plenty of knocks over recent years but has also seemed to master the ability some experienced players have of returning from injury at close to his best. Hopefully this is the same.

Quirke is already a terrific player who would be in my first choice 23 with JvP. I'm hoping those two can have a Dawson and Bracken type battle for the 9 shirt for years to come.

Ah the perfect replacement for Curry! Hill, Lawes and Vunipola for the back 3.

You run out of open sides then WPI? I bet Dingwall is gutted to be on the bench with the squad round the corner.


Evans back for Harlequins too. Not someone I'd be jumping for but new staff, Curry out you never know.

Heard this from Jones several times over the last 3 years but new people bring new optimism that it may actually happen. The one word springing out (and pulled to the fore by the BBC): clarity. Looked so over complicated and confused for such a long time:

'Nick Evans hopes to bring "clarity, confidence, intensity and excitement" to England's game after being appointed as attack coach for the Six Nations.

The former New Zealand fly-half has joined Steve Borthwick's coaching staff on a short-term deal, and will combine his duties with his role at Harlequins.

"I want to bring a lot of energy when we have ball in hand," Evans, 42, told BBC Radio London.

"When the opportunity is there, I want fans on the edge of their seats."

He added: "We want to get a real excitement and buzz around when England have the ball in hand."

Evans started coaching at Quins in 2017 following his retirement from rugby, having played for the south-west London club for nine years and won 16 caps for the All Blacks.

Borthwick was named as Eddie Jones' successor as England head coach in December, an appointment Rugby Football Union chief executive Bill Sweeney declared would be the "launch of a new age of England rugby".

Jones' final match was a 27-13 defeat by world champions South Africa at Twickenham in November, and Evans is eager to be involved in improving the side's attacking game.

"I think there will be a certain way of playing that we will play," said Evans, whose time coaching at The Stoop has included Quins winning the 2021 Premiership title in thrilling style.

"My job is [that] when we have the ball in hand, there is real clarity around what we are doing. That is first and foremost.

"Clarity will bring confidence, and then confidence will bring intensity, and intensity will bring excitement. That is one of my big remits - to have that kind of clarity for the group and then just lead on from there.

"If you see the players are excited when we have ball in hand you will see a definite transference to the crowd. I am really looking forward to that opportunity."

England begin their Six Nations campaign at home against Scotland on 4 February and face Italy at Twickenham eight days later.'

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah the perfect replacement for Curry! Hill, Lawes and Vunipola for the back 3.

You run out of open sides then WPI? I bet Dingwall is gutted to be on the bench with the squad round the corner.


Evans back for Harlequins too. Not someone I'd be jumping for but new staff, Curry out you never know.

I did wonder myself as to the opensides, but Scott-Young can play either side and he is on the bench, so a tactical ploy of some kind. Should make the lineout interesting with 4 specialist jumpers plus Ludlam who is not bad.

I made exactly the same comment to a mate of mine about Dingwall, would have preferred Dingwall and Hutchinson myself but I trust the combined judgement of Vesty and Dowson, Saints do tend to pick a side that they think can play better against particular opposition than just the best side.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah the perfect replacement for Curry! Hill, Lawes and Vunipola for the back 3.

You run out of open sides then WPI? I bet Dingwall is gutted to be on the bench with the squad round the corner.


Evans back for Harlequins too. Not someone I'd be jumping for but new staff, Curry out you never know.

I did wonder myself as to the opensides, but Scott-Young can play either side and he is on the bench, so a tactical ploy of some kind. Should make the lineout interesting with 4 specialist jumpers plus Ludlam who is not bad.

I made exactly the same comment to a mate of mine about Dingwall, would have preferred Dingwall and Hutchinson myself but I trust the combined judgement of Vesty and Dowson, Saints do tend to pick a side that they think can play better against particular opposition than just the best side.

Yeah, whenever I look at your pack I always think it's packed with good jumpers, you very rarely challenge the opposition too much though which leaves me scratching my head (unless that's just something I don't notice happens for whatever reason.

Hello England folk.

Any new/surprising names your hoping borthwick will name in the 6n squad?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah the perfect replacement for Curry! Hill, Lawes and Vunipola for the back 3.

You run out of open sides then WPI? I bet Dingwall is gutted to be on the bench with the squad round the corner.


Evans back for Harlequins too. Not someone I'd be jumping for but new staff, Curry out you never know.

I did wonder myself as to the opensides, but Scott-Young can play either side and he is on the bench, so a tactical ploy of some kind. Should make the lineout interesting with 4 specialist jumpers plus Ludlam who is not bad.

I made exactly the same comment to a mate of mine about Dingwall, would have preferred Dingwall and Hutchinson myself but I trust the combined judgement of Vesty and Dowson, Saints do tend to pick a side that they think can play better against particular opposition than just the best side.

Yeah, whenever I look at your pack I always think it's packed with good jumpers, you very rarely challenge the opposition too much though which leaves me scratching my head (unless that's just something I don't notice happens for whatever reason.

Salakaia-Loto nicked a couple from Quins the other week and we have Lawes back so hopefully a bit more tomorrow. My query is who will be doing the lifting, with 4 jumpers and usually Ludlam out in the backs we are limited. Would be interesting to see Salakaia-Loto out there in the line though, that guy can motor and has some silky skills for his size, not just crash through.

carpet baboon wrote:Hello England folk.

Any new/surprising names your hoping borthwick will name in the 6n squad?

Looks like Jamie Blamire will be getting more game time at hooker with LCD injured. He's looked really good for Falcons recently.

The return of Dan Cole, he's been in great form and fitness for Tigers for a while now and with Stuart injured and the other options still developing the Colar Bear is an ideal short term option.

Dan Kelly could come in at 12. Young bloke who's developing nicely. Tigers really struggled when he was out the side. Tackles like a flanker, big work rate and good skills. Dingwall could also be contention but he has definite defensive frailties but also a brilliant instinctive passing game. They are both exciting talents.

Backrow is wide open as is the selection at 10, centre and wing. Monday will tell us a lot about Steve's thinking.

carpet baboon wrote:Hello England folk.

Any new/surprising names your hoping borthwick will name in the 6n squad?

Jones went through so many players in his squads that most aren't completely new!

I'd guess potential different names might be.

Potential experienced returnees: Joe Marler, Dan Cole and Anthony Watson

Potential inexperienced returnees: Jamie Blamire, Ted Hill, George Martin, Ben Earl, Raffi Quirke, Dan Kelly and Ollie Lawrence

Potential debutants: Val Rapava Ruskin, Hugh Tizard, Tom Willis, Ollie Hassel-Collins, Adam Radwan, Cadan Murley

We wont see anywhere near all of those of course with many in the same positions (LH, back row, centre and wing) but those are the players I'd expect to be thereabouts in areas that need strengthening.

I potentially used "potential" too many times in that post.

king_carlos wrote:I potentially used "potential" too many times in that post.

Only potentially

Potential debutants: Val Rapava Ruskin, Hugh Tizard, Tom Willis, Ollie Hassel-Collins, Adam Radwan, Cadan Murley

Radwan isn't a debutant, he's already capped by England unless you're thinking of 6N debut.

Just put Radwan in the wrong list by accident to be honest.

And bye bye Gleeson.

Unsurprising really. Given how the Wasps attack functioned under Gleeson I think there's a very good coach there. His rep will naturally take a hit due to that new structure never clicking for more than 10-20 minutes but how much of that was Jones and the overall plan versus Gleeson none of us know now.

It's a structure I expect sides with better suited (or maybe just better...) players to copy and perfect with great success. Usually when that happens in sport more light then gets shone on earlier attempts. At that point we may start hearing from the players and coaches how much input various individuals had, how many did and didn't believe in it, potential changes they wish they'd tried, etc etc.

I'd take Gleeson at Tigers as attack coach in heartbeat for instance despite England's recent attack frequently being so dire.

king_carlos wrote:
I'd take Gleeson at Tigers as attack coach in heartbeat for instance despite England's recent attack frequently being so dire.

I'll drive down to London and pick him up now.

Loads of ball and nothing happening with the Tigers attack again tonight.

The one big cross against Borthwicks Leicester. And it basically still is. His identification and appointment of Evans is a big positive early doors.

No 7&1/2 wrote:The one big cross against Borthwicks Leicester. And it basically still is. His identification and appointment of Evans is a big positive early doors.

The attack really opened up from the Six Nations onwards last season. Having the Rugby Championship players available, JvP/Reffell/Porter not called up yet, Nadolo still about, etc whilst other sides lost England players meant Tigers were strong and the attack really grew under Borthwick.

Then for the playoffs the game plan tightened right up. That happened pretty much straight after the first half humping from Leinster/Ireland in the quarter-finals. The game plan went back to basics and a lot of this season it's felt like they haven't been able to get the attack going again.

Evans fits the spot that they needed to fill perfectly though. He's got a great rep as a coach.

I think Slade’s red card was probably the wrong decision as the contact clearly started below the shoulder and rode up - I didn’t think it was more than a penalty as the tackle started legally. However, it’s a red, which means it’ll be up before the citing commissioner. I think there’s a good chance it will be overturned, but Borthwick won’t know until after his squad is announced. It’ll be interesting to see if he includes Slade - who’s in good form - and replaces him if the ban is enforced.

Some of the decisions by the French refs are just baffling ....

king_carlos wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:The one big cross against Borthwicks Leicester. And it basically still is. His identification and appointment of Evans is a big positive early doors.

The attack really opened up from the Six Nations onwards last season. Having the Rugby Championship players available, JvP/Reffell/Porter not called up yet, Nadolo still about, etc whilst other sides lost England players meant Tigers were strong and the attack really grew under Borthwick.

Then for the playoffs the game plan tightened right up. That happened pretty much straight after the first half humping from Leinster/Ireland in the quarter-finals. The game plan went back to basics and a lot of this season it's felt like they haven't been able to get the attack going again.

Evans fits the spot that they needed to fill perfectly though. He's got a great rep as a coach.

To be fair we had a pretty efficient attack for most of the season. It wasn't always pretty to watch but it was efficient. If you go back and watch the two regular season dismantlings of Saints (particularly at the Gardens) then there's a lot of really good rugby on show.

The loss of Kelly at 12 for the run in seemed to really dent our ability to open up and play more expansively. Very much agree that after battering away at Leinster and not getting any reward we reverted to kicking the three points and looking for rolling maul opportunities. Ford was struggling with an ankle niggle as well which wouldn't have helped the attacking prospects either.

I presume Borthwick built his Tigers coaching team with the budget he had. England had no doubt offered more leeway so he's gone out and tried to get who he thinks will benefit the team most. Hopefully Evans helps us open up attacking wise. Certainly Tigers are never short on possession and territory so if Borthwick takes those tactics and then adds in Evans skills in attack it could be a good time.

Poorfour wrote:I think Slade’s red card was probably the wrong decision as the contact clearly started below the shoulder and rode up - I didn’t think it was more than a penalty as the tackle started legally. However, it’s a red, which means it’ll be up before the citing commissioner. I think there’s a good chance it will be overturned, but Borthwick won’t know until after his squad is announced. It’ll be interesting to see if he includes Slade - who’s in good form - and replaces him if the ban is enforced.

Yeah it's not a red so can't see any ban. I'd be quite happy to see him miss out but there's alit of support for him and Daly. I'd rather see a Newby like James.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Poorfour wrote:I think Slade’s red card was probably the wrong decision as the contact clearly started below the shoulder and rode up - I didn’t think it was more than a penalty as the tackle started legally. However, it’s a red, which means it’ll be up before the citing commissioner. I think there’s a good chance it will be overturned, but Borthwick won’t know until after his squad is announced. It’ll be interesting to see if he includes Slade - who’s in good form - and replaces him if the ban is enforced.

Yeah it's not a red so can't see any ban. I'd be quite happy to see him miss out but there's alit of support for him and Daly. I'd rather see a Newby like James.

Slade has to be there if available, who else has any experience, Steward has 16 caps, of the others Freeman, Arundell, Kelly, Lawrence, Radwan, if Smith plays at 10 with JvP it makes it even more inexperienced, they will only have a hand full of caps between them whoever plays.

Slade Marshalls the defence, not sure if they still have them but he would have been defence captain in the old days.

He is in a run of good form.

He is a calming influence on the younger players.

He has a big boot and is left footed, useful, especially in live play.

Who else is there if you want the wingers to see some ball, I can't see them getting it from Kelly and Lawrence.

All points valid about Slade but he's had a lot of caps for England but I don't think he's ever fulfilled his potential in a white shirt. Last season I thought he was pretty average for England to be honest. Maybe it was the Jones factor and if he's picked by Borthwick we'll see the best of him.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Poorfour wrote:I think Slade’s red card was probably the wrong decision as the contact clearly started below the shoulder and rode up - I didn’t think it was more than a penalty as the tackle started legally. However, it’s a red, which means it’ll be up before the citing commissioner. I think there’s a good chance it will be overturned, but Borthwick won’t know until after his squad is announced. It’ll be interesting to see if he includes Slade - who’s in good form - and replaces him if the ban is enforced.

Yeah it's not a red so can't see any ban. I'd be quite happy to see him miss out but there's alit of support for him and Daly. I'd rather see a Newby like James.

Slade has to be there if available, who else has any experience, Steward has 16 caps, of the others Freeman, Arundell, Kelly, Lawrence, Radwan, if Smith plays at 10 with JvP it makes it even more inexperienced, they will only have a hand full of caps between them whoever plays.

Slade Marshalls the defence, not sure if they still have them but he would have been defence captain in the old days.

He is in a run of good form.

He is a calming influence on the younger players.

He has a big boot and is left footed, useful, especially in live play.

Who else is there if you want the wingers to see some ball, I can't see them getting it from Kelly and Lawrence.

I don't think Slade has been that good for England at getting the ball to the wingers though. For a guy who came through as a fly half he hasn't Brough the passing that I thought he would. The defensive leader while he's been there has mainly been Farrell. He is individually a good defender though, probably only behind Joseph at 13 in the recent past for me. I'd be looking more to Dingwall to give a more creative option.

mountain man wrote:All points valid about Slade but he's had a lot of caps for England but I don't think he's ever fulfilled his potential in a white shirt. Last season I thought he was pretty average for England to be honest. Maybe it was the Jones factor and if he's picked by Borthwick we'll see the best of him.

Average is being nice. Every time he got the ball he'd run into contact and lose it. But yes the attack was a dreadful complicated mess.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Poorfour wrote:I think Slade’s red card was probably the wrong decision as the contact clearly started below the shoulder and rode up - I didn’t think it was more than a penalty as the tackle started legally. However, it’s a red, which means it’ll be up before the citing commissioner. I think there’s a good chance it will be overturned, but Borthwick won’t know until after his squad is announced. It’ll be interesting to see if he includes Slade - who’s in good form - and replaces him if the ban is enforced.

Yeah it's not a red so can't see any ban. I'd be quite happy to see him miss out but there's alit of support for him and Daly. I'd rather see a Newby like James.

Slade has to be there if available, who else has any experience, Steward has 16 caps, of the others Freeman, Arundell, Kelly, Lawrence, Radwan, if Smith plays at 10 with JvP it makes it even more inexperienced, they will only have a hand full of caps between them whoever plays.

Slade Marshalls the defence, not sure if they still have them but he would have been defence captain in the old days.

He is in a run of good form.

He is a calming influence on the younger players.

He has a big boot and is left footed, useful, especially in live play.

Who else is there if you want the wingers to see some ball, I can't see them getting it from Kelly and Lawrence.

I don't think Slade has been that good for England at getting the ball to the wingers though. For a guy who came through as a fly half he hasn't Brough the passing that I thought he would. The defensive leader while he's been there has mainly been Farrell. He is individually a good defender though, probably only behind Joseph at 13 in the recent past for me. I'd be looking more to Dingwall to give a more creative option.

So would I, but I keep being told he is a defensive liability and he is a 12, not a 13.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Poorfour wrote:I think Slade’s red card was probably the wrong decision as the contact clearly started below the shoulder and rode up - I didn’t think it was more than a penalty as the tackle started legally. However, it’s a red, which means it’ll be up before the citing commissioner. I think there’s a good chance it will be overturned, but Borthwick won’t know until after his squad is announced. It’ll be interesting to see if he includes Slade - who’s in good form - and replaces him if the ban is enforced.

Yeah it's not a red so can't see any ban. I'd be quite happy to see him miss out but there's alit of support for him and Daly. I'd rather see a Newby like James.

Slade has to be there if available, who else has any experience, Steward has 16 caps, of the others Freeman, Arundell, Kelly, Lawrence, Radwan, if Smith plays at 10 with JvP it makes it even more inexperienced, they will only have a hand full of caps between them whoever plays.

Slade Marshalls the defence, not sure if they still have them but he would have been defence captain in the old days.

He is in a run of good form.

He is a calming influence on the younger players.

He has a big boot and is left footed, useful, especially in live play.

Who else is there if you want the wingers to see some ball, I can't see them getting it from Kelly and Lawrence.

I don't think Slade has been that good for England at getting the ball to the wingers though. For a guy who came through as a fly half he hasn't Brough the passing that I thought he would. The defensive leader while he's been there has mainly been Farrell. He is individually a good defender though, probably only behind Joseph at 13 in the recent past for me. I'd be looking more to Dingwall to give a more creative option.

So would I, but I keep being told he is a defensive liability and he is a 12, not a 13.

Dingwall at 13? I'd rather have Manu, Lawrence or Marchant
All are better ball in hand or in defence.

As an option at 12 Dingwall has a better chance as there's a lot less competition. Even when he lines up wearing 13 he seems to defend mostly in the 12 channel anyway. It will depend on whether Evans opts for two strike runners in the midfield like Quins seem to prefer or not.

Though I was thinking more about the balance of the midfield rather than saying I'd pick him to start at 13 I do think Dingwall can play there.

Well the French have just given Smith potm.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well the French have just given Smith potm.

He certainly didn't look like he was coming back from an injury did he.