[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.

No 7&1/2 wrote:McConnochie now in the Scotland squad.

I wasn't aware he was fit, poor bloke has had no luck and at 31 probably his last chance for a world cup appearance.

No 7&1/2 wrote:McConnochie now in the Scotland squad.

This is exactly the reason why I hate the "switch nationality" aspect of eligibility. I seem to remember him being delighted to represent England and to be picked for the World Cup Squad due to him having represented GB for the Olympics and thus being perfect to represent his country in such a tournament.

Now, deemed not at the top of the English pile, he is off to Scotland just 3 years later? It just makes a mockery of the whole eligibility process.

Mr Bounce wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:McConnochie now in the Scotland squad.

This is exactly the reason why I hate the "switch nationality" aspect of eligibility. I seem to remember him being delighted to represent England and to be picked for the World Cup Squad due to him having represented GB for the Olympics and thus being perfect to represent his country in such a tournament.

Now, deemed not at the top of the English pile, he is off to Scotland just 3 years later? It just makes a mockery of the whole eligibility process.

God knows how he got to top pick, or among them in 2019. Can't imagine the Scots are delighted in securing him, all the talk was about Smith.

Has to be said though there was plenty of concern from people at the time that although the reason for bringing in the rule was to help the PI nations it would simply be used to hop among the T1 nations. Bit of both at the moment which I guess was inevitable.

Wonder if Fin Smith will get a few minutes against Italy?

No 7&1/2 wrote:...God knows how he got to top pick, or among them in 2019...

He was a shrewd pick. Not only was he in good form, his experience on the Sevens circuit meant he was very familiar with mixing extensive travel, and hotel life with the demands of high performance sport. He was one of the only squad members to have been to Japan before. Jones knew he wasn't a first choice, so it was useful to have someone who could look after himself, while being able to step up if called upon. In short, a good squad man.

And then he got injured, which meant he hardly contributed.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Mr Bounce wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:McConnochie now in the Scotland squad.

This is exactly the reason why I hate the "switch nationality" aspect of eligibility. I seem to remember him being delighted to represent England and to be picked for the World Cup Squad due to him having represented GB for the Olympics and thus being perfect to represent his country in such a tournament.

Now, deemed not at the top of the English pile, he is off to Scotland just 3 years later? It just makes a mockery of the whole eligibility process.

God knows how he got to top pick, or among them in 2019. Can't imagine the Scots are delighted in securing him, all the talk was about Smith.

Has to be said though there was plenty of concern from people at the time that although the reason for bringing in the rule was to help the PI nations it would simply be used to hop among the T1 nations. Bit of both at the moment which I guess was inevitable.

Seems a very good player and I know his name from watching occasional Bath highlights. It is a strange one, especially as there is an RFU video with him getting his first cap and his story through the English system. At the same time, the rules allow him to make a choice like this and it is obviously about gaining more international honours and playing at the highest level. Perhaps in time world rugby will consider amending the rule in some way, but for now it means we may see switches such as this more regularly.

Another player who recently swapped was Byron McGuigan who was a very good winger for Scotland and Glasgow. He'll now be playing in the 2023 RWC with Namibia.

Rugby Fan wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:...God knows how he got to top pick, or among them in 2019...

He was a shrewd pick. Not only was he in good form, his experience on the Sevens circuit meant he was very familiar with mixing extensive travel, and hotel life with the demands of high performance sport. He was one of the only squad members to have been to Japan before. Jones knew he wasn't a first choice, so it was useful to have someone who could look after himself, while being able to step up if called upon. In short, a good squad man.

And then he got injured, which meant he hardly contributed.

Back in 2019 I remember thinking that I rated McConnochie but personally would have taken Rokoduguni over him with McConnochie as first reserve. "Not the third Bath winger I'd have chosen", I believe was LondonTigers view which I agreed with.

McConnochie definitely wasn't a bolt from the blue though. He was in brilliant form, had bags of pace and good skills from Sevens. Had it not been for the injuries I think he might had more chances since the RWC.

Francis and Ludlam were bigger shocks than McConnochie for me in the last RWC squad selection.

The Rugby Paper podcast has got in early with disappointment over Borthwick's squad. They describe the retention of Sinckler and Vunipola, with Farrell as captain, as "conservative". They believe Borthwick sees England's problems as primarily coaching issues, rather than personnel, which is an opinion they do not share. One of the pundits was annoyed by the number of players who can cover more than one position (i.e. Freeman, Daly, Malins, Slade) at the expense of specialists.

If England don't deliver results and/or performances, then these kinds of complaints will likely come up.

This is the first time in English rugby that three head coaches - Lancaster, Jones and Borthwick - have had the chance to select similar players. (Given that Ben Youngs, Dan Cole, Courtney Lawes and Manu Tuilagi were all in Johnson's squads, you could even stretch the claim to four coaches).

For all that Jones baffled the media and public with his selections, he sometimes came up with the same kind of solutions as Lancaster. They both wanted to find a way to put Farrell on the pitch, while also having more playmaking options at 10. They both used hybrid lock/blind-side flankers (Underhill/Curry was a very late slection by Jones). They both fiddled about with the back three, using Brown, and even Tuilagi, on the wing. They both liked Ben Youngs.

You could even add Gatland to the coaching list. He selected Farrell at 12 on the 2017 Lions tour; selected Daly for his Test team at both wing and centre; and would have taken Ben Youngs on tour if he'd made himself available. In 2021, Lawes was his starting blind-side.

It would not be a surprise, then, if Borthwick agrees with the way other senior coaches have assessed England's resources, and initially tries to engineer change through clearer messaging.

Bit harsh really...
He's been dropped in after Jones going...and cant make massive changes anyway. Tweak the style of the current squad...focus on the basics and avoid the stupid penalties...and you'll be amazed how better we are.

Who does he pick over Sinckler? There ARE no other top class TH's at the moment...and as you know im not the biggest SInckler fan myself.

Mako yes i agree with...waste of a pick...but then hes playing great for Saracens so..SB is picking on form.

SB has a good solid coaching team around him for this 6n...i think we'll be quite a force actually...even without Ted HIll

And Slade has had his red overturned.

king_carlos wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:...God knows how he got to top pick, or among them in 2019...

He was a shrewd pick. Not only was he in good form, his experience on the Sevens circuit meant he was very familiar with mixing extensive travel, and hotel life with the demands of high performance sport. He was one of the only squad members to have been to Japan before. Jones knew he wasn't a first choice, so it was useful to have someone who could look after himself, while being able to step up if called upon. In short, a good squad man.

And then he got injured, which meant he hardly contributed.

Back in 2019 I remember thinking that I rated McConnochie but personally would have taken Rokoduguni over him with McConnochie as first reserve. "Not the third Bath winger I'd have chosen", I believe was LondonTigers view which I agreed with.

McConnochie definitely wasn't a bolt from the blue though. He was in brilliant form, had bags of pace and good skills from Sevens. Had it not been for the injuries I think he might had more chances since the RWC.

Francis and Ludlam were bigger shocks than McConnochie for me in the last RWC squad selection.

I remember Jones at the time saying (more or less) that picking the guys who will most likely only end up holding tackle bags is actually hard and important from the point of view of keeping the rest of the squad happy.

BBC Rugby Union podcast on squad announcement is good and Chris Jones basically saying exactly what I have regards questioning Farrell as captain, inclusion of Cole, not picking Lawrence etc.
Doesn't mean I'm right but at least Im not alone in my view

Geordie wrote:And Slade has had his red overturned.

Fair enough, it wasn't a red by any stretch. However, just gives more ammo to the "England get favourable decisions brigade".

mountain man wrote:BBC Rugby Union podcast on squad announcement is good and Chris Jones basically saying exactly what I have regards questioning Farrell as captain, inclusion of Cole, not picking Lawrence etc.
Doesn't mean I'm right but at least Im not alone in my view

Again i dont like going back...but Cole is the best scrummaging tight head we have....so what do you do?

It is tricky regards Cole, he's been very good this season and as you say who else do we have available at present.
However, think possibly it says more about lack of up and coming alternatives as opposed to how good Cole is. My fear is he had a very bad time in RWC final - yes I know some say it wasn't down to him - but if that's the case why then did Jones never pick him again?
We are now 3 years on, he's 35 so whilst he may be more than capable club wise is he up to rigours of Int rugby.
Guess we may well find out in a week or so. He must obviously be in Borthwicks mind to play him as otherwise why is he in squad. Not like he's a development player.

We are in a real problem at the moment with our props...form, scrummaging ability etc.

Fortunately there is a group coming through who will fix that...BUT that will be post world cup development. Till then we can only go with what is available.

Really surprised with the current form, experience and maturity that Vickery was not in the squad.  Surely first name on the sheet ...

Geordie wrote:We are in a real problem at the moment with our props...form, scrummaging ability etc.

Fortunately there is a group coming through who will fix that...BUT that will be post world cup development. Till then we can only go with what is available.

You have Genge & Cole who are very effective scrummagers, after that I agree it isn't the best.

Its poor!

We have players who perform round the park...ie Rodd and Mako etc...but poor scrummagers.

Telegraph reckons this comment by Sinfield is a sign Farrell will be selected at 10.

“I think it’s quite refreshing that we've got a 10 who wants to put his body on the line and wants to be physical,” Sinfield said of Farrell. 

“I think it’s a great message for our younger players around the country. He wants to tackle. The challenge for us – across the squad – is to ensure that we don't cross that line.” 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2023/01/18/how-steve-borthwick-kevin-sinfield-will-resolve-owen-farrell/

Rugby Fan wrote:Telegraph reckons this comment by Sinfield is a sign Farrell will be selected at 10.

“I think it’s quite refreshing that we've got a 10 who wants to put his body on the line and wants to be physical,” Sinfield said of Farrell. 

“I think it’s a great message for our younger players around the country. He wants to tackle. The challenge for us – across the squad – is to ensure that we don't cross that line.” 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2023/01/18/how-steve-borthwick-kevin-sinfield-will-resolve-owen-farrell/

Let's hope the Telegraph is right then. Farrell at 10 is fine by me, at 12 not so much. That's from the interview Sinfield gave to Chris Jones on BBC pod.

So does that mean its potentially Manu v Kelly for 12?

i know who id pick.

Rugby Fan wrote:Telegraph reckons this comment by Sinfield is a sign Farrell will be selected at 10.

“I think it’s quite refreshing that we've got a 10 who wants to put his body on the line and wants to be physical,” Sinfield said of Farrell. 

“I think it’s a great message for our younger players around the country. He wants to tackle. The challenge for us – across the squad – is to ensure that we don't cross that line.” 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2023/01/18/how-steve-borthwick-kevin-sinfield-will-resolve-owen-farrell/

Smith had a 100% tackle completion rate vs Racing at the weekend… and no red cards ;-)

mountain man wrote:It is tricky regards Cole, he's been very good this season and as you say who else do we have available at present.
However, think possibly it says more about lack of up and coming alternatives as opposed to how good Cole is. My fear is he had a very bad time in RWC final - yes I know some say it wasn't down to him - but if that's the case why then did Jones never pick him again?
We are now 3 years on, he's 35 so whilst he may be more than capable club wise is he up to rigours of Int rugby.
Guess we may well find out in a week or so. He must obviously be in Borthwicks mind to play him as otherwise why is he in squad. Not like he's a development player.

Eddie dropped Cole to focus on bringing through Stuart and slightly later Heyes. A good plan Stuart is now 26 and enter his prime years in time for the world cup. Pre injury he was playing very well at both club and international level. Joe Heyes isn't quite there yet but he's only 23 so is going to hit prime years around the next world cup. Even with players breaking through earlier 23 is still young for a starting international tighthead at a T1 nation.

I'm sure Eddie would have liked to see Harry Williams at Exeter step up but he hasn't or Nic Schonert develop an all round game but he hasn't, Collier to show he's got the required work rate but according to Eddie he hasn't. The time for development of individual players has pretty much ran out, we're 8 months before the world cup and it's time to pick on form. Cole is on form and can do a job. By the world cup you'd hope that Stuart is back and that it's Sinckler and Stuart in the 23 but Dan could still be there as the third choice and a reliable back up.

What ever happened to the good old days when English props were referred to as Great White Orcs? Instead it seems our front rows are drinkers of Frappicino-latte-with baby goats milk and hazlenut coffee beans from a remote mountain pass in Antioqua, Colombia.

Eff me, boys, the end is nigh.

Personally I don't see an issue with Farrell starting and Smith off the bench, it gives us a chance to see them both at their best and fair competition for the 10 shirt. I also think Smith is just the sort of character to come off the bench focussed and fired up to prove a point and win matches for England. Seems win win to me.

Will we see Smuth 10 Farrell 12?

Or will we Farrell 10 Smith n the bench?

Rugby Fan wrote:This is the first time in English rugby that three head coaches - Lancaster, Jones and Borthwick - have had the chance to select similar players. (Given that Ben Youngs, Dan Cole, Courtney Lawes and Manu Tuilagi were all in Johnson's squads, you could even stretch the claim to four coaches).

For all that Jones baffled the media and public with his selections, he sometimes came up with the same kind of solutions as Lancaster. They both wanted to find a way to put Farrell on the pitch, while also having more playmaking options at 10. They both used hybrid lock/blind-side flankers (Underhill/Curry was a very late slection by Jones). They both fiddled about with the back three, using Brown, and even Tuilagi, on the wing. They both liked Ben Youngs.

It's a point I've made before that we've seen several players cast as "not good enough" or "done at international level" go back to club level and with a run of games at that level look head and shoulders above the competition replacing them. Both Vunipola's did it last season. Ford after being dropped. Daly this season. Cole has been excellent for 18 months. Farrell "doesn't have the distribution skills to play 10" according to some England fans but is sublime there for Sarries.

It's why I think club form does have to be taken with a pinch of salt as it's so different to international rugby. Especially when the hot new things are playing for one team in one system (and importantly playing when the internationals are away and standards drop...) whilst regular internationals come and go so may not show the same 'form' for their club even if they are clearly better rugby players.

It's why when assessing new players I like to look at obvious skills successful internationals in that position share and ask whether a new players either has that already or could develop it. When Randall was picked at 9 for instance I said I rated him but doubted he could be a long term international 9 as he lacks length on his box kicks. He simply hasn't got a big boot. This was met with scorn by many. I was told it wasn't important, box kicking is boring, Tigers bias with Youngs, etc etc. My simple counter was, are there any strong international 9s with long term success who don't have a big enough boot to consistently clear their lines when under pressure in their 22? As boring as that may sound I can't name one.

I have similar worries with OHC for instance. When I think of top international wingers without strong kicking or aerial skills they need to be absolute freaks in attack. Koroibete, Duhan and Tuisova being the obvious ones I can think of. Even someone like Caleb Clarke for his attacking ability isn't quite working for the ABs due to weaknesses elsewhere. OHC has a canon of a boot but needs to learn how to use it. I don't think he's poor in the air but it's not a strength. As such I then think, does he have that freakish attacking upside of Koroibete or Duhan? He's quick, pretty big, decent footwork but ultimately, no I don't quite think so. I rate OHC (delighted with rumours he's joining Tigers for instance) but I do wonder whether he's yet an international winger for that reason. I'd predict some significant improvements are needed in rounding that kicking game, positioning and high ball work first.

Did any pundits go on record saying Steve Borthwick was the wrong choice as England coach? There didn't appear to be any naysayers. Even James Haskell, a firm supporter of retaining Jones, said Borthwick is the right man.

The question arises, as there are already some seeds of doubt appearing in early coverage of his first squad announcement, and it would be good to keep track of how quickly some pundits disavow their earlier support. At this stage, it's more the raising of a quizzical eyebrow than exasperation., so everyone can still pat themselves on the back if all goes well.

The appointment of Jones as Wallaby coach has thrown the cat amongst the media pigeons. If he does well with Australia, then it will raise the possibility that journalists were wrong to call for his head, especially if his success comes at the expense of England.

The Telegraph has a piece questioning Borthwick's decision to dispense with Billy Vunipola:

While there are positive quandaries, emanating from the impressive depth that England have accrued in most positions, Borthwick's problem child is at No 8.

At the back of the scrum the options are concerning. Borthwick has chosen to dispense with the services of the incumbent, Billy Vunipola, and has placed his faith in Sam Simmonds of Exeter and Alex Dombrandt of Harlequins, the only two out-and-out No 8s in the squad. A curious decision, on many levels, not least because Simmonds has never set the world of international rugby alight - flitting between six and No 8 under Jones - and Dombrandt has struggled to recapture his 2021 brilliance after his return from injury.

On his day, Vunipola is undoubtedly England's most destructive No 8. Borthwick is, and has made his name as, a tracksuit coach, shunning the jacket and tie; hands-on and exceptionally diligent. It came as a surprise, therefore, that he did not back himself to coach the best out of Vunipola. At his best, no other No 8 - not Dombrandt nor Simmonds - can match Vunipola's game-defining demolitions.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2023/01/18/steve-borthwick-must-solve-englands-problem-no-8-position/

Odd article.

"England's most destructive No 8" & "Vunipola's game-defining demolitions"...................these two comments would suggest the guy hasn't watch much of Billy since 2019. I'm a big Billy fan, but he's hardly the wrecking ball that he used to be. I'll side with him on Simmonds though...not an international 8 in way or shape.

king_carlos wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:This is the first time in English rugby that three head coaches - Lancaster, Jones and Borthwick - have had the chance to select similar players. (Given that Ben Youngs, Dan Cole, Courtney Lawes and Manu Tuilagi were all in Johnson's squads, you could even stretch the claim to four coaches).

For all that Jones baffled the media and public with his selections, he sometimes came up with the same kind of solutions as Lancaster. They both wanted to find a way to put Farrell on the pitch, while also having more playmaking options at 10. They both used hybrid lock/blind-side flankers (Underhill/Curry was a very late slection by Jones). They both fiddled about with the back three, using Brown, and even Tuilagi, on the wing. They both liked Ben Youngs.

It's a point I've made before that we've seen several players cast as "not good enough" or "done at international level" go back to club level and with a run of games at that level look head and shoulders above the competition replacing them. Both Vunipola's did it last season. Ford after being dropped. Daly this season. Cole has been excellent for 18 months. Farrell "doesn't have the distribution skills to play 10" according to some England fans but is sublime there for Sarries.

It's why I think club form does have to be taken with a pinch of salt as it's so different to international rugby. Especially when the hot new things are playing for one team in one system (and importantly playing when the internationals are away and standards drop...) whilst regular internationals come and go so may not show the same 'form' for their club even if they are clearly better rugby players.

It's why when assessing new players I like to look at obvious skills successful internationals in that position share and ask whether a new players either has that already or could develop it. When Randall was picked at 9 for instance I said I rated him but doubted he could be a long term international 9 as he lacks length on his box kicks. He simply hasn't got a big boot. This was met with scorn by many. I was told it wasn't important, box kicking is boring, Tigers bias with Youngs, etc etc. My simple counter was, are there any strong international 9s with long term success who don't have a big enough boot to consistently clear their lines when under pressure in their 22? As boring as that may sound I can't name one.

I have similar worries with OHC for instance. When I think of top international wingers without strong kicking or aerial skills they need to be absolute freaks in attack. Koroibete, Duhan and Tuisova being the obvious ones I can think of. Even someone like Caleb Clarke for his attacking ability isn't quite working for the ABs due to weaknesses elsewhere. OHC has a canon of a boot but needs to learn how to use it. I don't think he's poor in the air but it's not a strength. As such I then think, does he have that freakish attacking upside of Koroibete or Duhan? He's quick, pretty big, decent footwork but ultimately, no I don't quite think so. I rate OHC (delighted with rumours he's joining Tigers for instance) but I do wonder whether he's yet an international winger for that reason. I'd predict some significant improvements are needed in rounding that kicking game, positioning and high ball work first.

But we all have players we don't think are good enough or have a preference for others. For anyone's view point that Youngs is in because he has excellent box kicking skills there are others who say his passing is shocking for a sh let alone one with 100 caps.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Odd article.

"England's most destructive No 8" & "Vunipola's game-defining demolitions"...................these two comments would suggest the guy hasn't watch much of Billy since 2019. I'm a big Billy fan, but he's hardly the wrecking ball that he used to be. I'll side with him on Simmonds though...not an international 8 in way or shape.

He was good in the summer. Pretty rank in the autumn. I can't think of anyone since 2019 who has been consistently good. For me the go to 8 should be Dombrandt. Then we have Mercer and Barbeary soon to be on their way. Balance of the back row though has been iffy for a while.

But we all have players we don't think are good enough or have a preference for others. For anyone's view point that Youngs is in because he has excellent box kicking skills there are others who say his passing is shocking for a sh let alone one with 100 caps

Exactly. We all have players we'd pick and those we wouldn't, it's just an opinion on a forum. Everyone's an expert online.
For what it's worth I wouldn't have Hill, Mako or Youngs but then others definitely would. I would have Lawrence in for sure, others wouldn't.
Think we have to rely on Borthwick knowing best for now.

yappysnap wrote:Personally I don't see an issue with Farrell starting and Smith off the bench, it gives us a chance to see them both at their best and fair competition for the 10 shirt. I also think Smith is just the sort of character to come off the bench focussed and fired up to prove a point and win matches for England. Seems win win to me.

But then you have to prise the 'leader', Farrell, off the pitch to get Smith on. I am not sure it is as easy as it sounds.

To be honest if Smith starts on the bench that they'll sub a center with Farrell moving over when they bring Smith on, which is not ideal.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Odd article.

"England's most destructive No 8" & "Vunipola's game-defining demolitions"...................these two comments would suggest the guy hasn't watch much of Billy since 2019. I'm a big Billy fan, but he's hardly the wrecking ball that he used to be. I'll side with him on Simmonds though...not an international 8 in way or shape.

He was good in the summer. Pretty rank in the autumn. I can't think of anyone since 2019 who has been consistently good. For me the go to 8 should be Dombrandt. Then we have Mercer and Barbeary soon to be on their way. Balance of the back row though has been iffy for a while.

Funny but Vunipola's greatest strength these days would appear to be defense.

lostinwales wrote:

yappysnap wrote:Personally I don't see an issue with Farrell starting and Smith off the bench, it gives us a chance to see them both at their best and fair competition for the 10 shirt. I also think Smith is just the sort of character to come off the bench focussed and fired up to prove a point and win matches for England. Seems win win to me.

But then you have to prise the 'leader', Farrell, off the pitch to get Smith on. I am not sure it is as easy as it sounds.

To be honest if Smith starts on the bench that they'll sub a center with Farrell moving over when they bring Smith on, which is not ideal.

I think that is probably best we can hope for, Farrell starts at 10 as he should then when Smith comes on at 10 Farrell goes to 12 displacing whoever is there. That to me is better than Smith 10 Farrell 12 starting.
I can't see Farrell going off to allow Smith on at 10 but then again none of us know 15/23 for match yet nor do we know how Borthwick is planning his team/tactics.
At present it's all guesswork.

I'd be happy with the Smith/Farrell axis but we need a running threat at 13 and not Slade. If only Andre Esterhuizen was English.....Andrew Easterhouse?

Just think of the 12's we've had since Greenwood......

Ollie Smith (13?), Abbott, A Allen, A Farrell, Erinle, Geraghty, Hipkiss (more 13??), Tom May, Flutey, Hape, Turner-Hall, Barritt, Burrell, Eastmond, Burgess, Francis, Lawrence, Atkinson, Kelly.

I'd love us to target some kids 18/19 with the physical attributes....6'2 - 90kg upwards with the ability to get bigger (105-110kg style), quick etc......and just mould them into 12's. Bang them out to clubs with the clear instruction that they play 12 and we'll pay you to play them...get them back in every 3 months for progress checks....and in 4 or 5 years time you have some genuine options. Easy peasy!

Theres lot of kids coming through at 12...we can only wait and see how they develop.

Seb Atkinson
Ollie Hartley - 6'4 moved to Saracens after Wasps
Max Ojomoh
Dan Kelly - Main contender
Ewan Greenlaw (Falcons)
Ethan Grayson
Added - Anwanyu Quins

king_carlos wrote:It's why I think club form does have to be taken with a pinch of salt as it's so different to international rugby. Especially when the hot new things are playing for one team in one system (and importantly playing when the internationals are away and standards drop...) whilst regular internationals come and go so may not show the same 'form' for their club even if they are clearly better rugby players.

It's why when assessing new players I like to look at obvious skills successful internationals in that position share and ask whether a new players either has that already or could develop it. When Randall was picked at 9 for instance I said I rated him but doubted he could be a long term international 9 as he lacks length on his box kicks. He simply hasn't got a big boot. This was met with scorn by many. I was told it wasn't important, box kicking is boring, Tigers bias with Youngs, etc etc. My simple counter was, are there any strong international 9s with long term success who don't have a big enough boot to consistently clear their lines when under pressure in their 22? As boring as that may sound I can't name one.

I agree - the classic example is Alex Goode, who has been exceptional for Sarries at both 15 and 10 but for whatever reason has never been able to bring that form to International level - I suspect because his game relies on exploiting gaps that are there with the quality of opposition at club level but not at international.

In terms of wingers, it's one of the reasons I'm pleased that Borthwick is looking at Cadan Murley. He doesn't stand out for any one thing (except quietly scoring lots of tries), but of the young wingers in England he probably has the most rounded skill set and lowest error rate. It'll be interesting to see if that can translate onto the international stage, or if he lacks the point of difference to make it. I'd put a tenner on him making it if he's given the chance, though.

England seem to have had trouble with 12s for quite a while now. They're usually fly halves at 12 (Farrell, Flood, did Geraghty play there?), not quite good enough (Atkinson) or converted 13s (just about everyone else). Plus there are the imports in Flutey and Hape as well as the league converts in Eastmond (too small), Andy Farrell in 06/07 and Burgess (better as a 6).

The only half decent 12s I remember since Greenwood were Burrell (discarded by Jones) and Barritt. Farrell's done a half decent job but I don't understand why it's such a problem position for England. Is it because the Premiership has lots of non EQ 12s playing for the teams?

Can Dan Kelly step up? Please?

Mr Bounce wrote:England seem to have had trouble with 12s for quite a while now. They're usually fly halves at 12 (Farrell, Flood, did Geraghty play there?), not quite good enough (Atkinson) or converted 13s (just about everyone else). Plus there are the imports in Flutey and Hape as well as the league converts in Eastmond (too small), Andy Farrell in 06/07 and Burgess (better as a 6).

The only half decent 12s I remember since Greenwood were Burrell (discarded by Jones) and Barritt. Farrell's done a half decent job but I don't understand why it's such a problem position for England. Is it because the Premiership has lots of non EQ 12s playing for the teams?

Can Dan Kelly step up? Please?

Flutey was actually good while his form lasted (and he got a Lions tour), but that didn't last long.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I'd be happy with the Smith/Farrell axis but we need a running threat at 13 and not Slade. If only Andre Esterhuizen was English.....Andrew Easterhouse?

I'm beginning to wonder if the Boks throw him a cap every so often just to stop him becoming eligible for England...

Anyanwu looks like he could grow into a decent successor / alternative to him. Not quite there yet, and probably one for after the RWC but worth keeping an eye on.

But I agree with you that the one player from 2003 that England have never satisfactorily replaced is Greenwood. It really puzzles me why we don't seem to be able to develop a top notch home grown 12. I do know that some players who might have made excellent 12s ended up in the forwards. We'll never know, but Jack Clifford had the pace and hands to play 12 and did play there growing up. I can't help wondering whether if he'd stayed there he'd not have picked up the shoulder injury that curtailed his career.

i forgot about Anywanyu...hes defo one to watch

Jack Clifford...a blast from the past.

Geordie wrote:Jack Clifford...a blast from the past.

Sadly. He'd have been in his prime around now if he'd been able to continue playing. One of the most talented players I think I've ever seen, but didn't get a senior call up until his shoulder was already failing, so the best we saw of him was in the U20 RWC Final where he pretty much single handedly forced a second half turnaround against Wales.

Quins may have a long term successor to him in Lucas Schmid (son of former Canada captain Mike Schmid), who has been impressing for the U18s the past few weeks.

Poorfour wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I'd be happy with the Smith/Farrell axis but we need a running threat at 13 and not Slade. If only Andre Esterhuizen was English.....Andrew Easterhouse?

I'm beginning to wonder if the Boks throw him a cap every so often just to stop him becoming eligible for England...

Qualifying for a second nation is only through birth, parents and grandparents rather than residency so unless Estherhuizen has got some British ancestry he's tied now anyway.

The same question keeps coming up about Liebenberg becoming eligible as well. He's tied by playing for the Baby Boks when they were SAs designated second team.

Two terrific players who are just unfortunate to have PSdT and de Allende/Am playing at the same time.

Is that true, though? I thought the wording was "close ties" so that if you had settled in a country and intended to stay it could still count.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Odd article.

"England's most destructive No 8" & "Vunipola's game-defining demolitions"...................these two comments would suggest the guy hasn't watch much of Billy since 2019. I'm a big Billy fan, but he's hardly the wrecking ball that he used to be. I'll side with him on Simmonds though...not an international 8 in way or shape.

It's funny he cites Dombrandt struggling to find form this season, when Billy has struggled for 3 years and still is.

yappysnap wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Odd article.

"England's most destructive No 8" & "Vunipola's game-defining demolitions"...................these two comments would suggest the guy hasn't watch much of Billy since 2019. I'm a big Billy fan, but he's hardly the wrecking ball that he used to be. I'll side with him on Simmonds though...not an international 8 in way or shape.

It's funny he cites Dombrandt struggling to find form this season, when Billy has struggled for 3 years and still is.

It’s also clear he’s been looking at Quins’ results rather than Dombrandt’s individual performances. Quins have struggled this year with injuries to the pack - at various times Dombrandt, Collier, Louw, Walker, Lewies, Lamb, Kenningham, Evans, Chisholm and Lawday have all been injured, often several of them at the same time (and Marler has been banned). Quins have struggled without at least a couple of strong carriers in the pack.

As a result, Dombrandt is carrying into traffic more often as he’s often the only big forward carrier on the pitch. So he’s not making as many breaks or scoring as many tries. But he’s still averaging 9 carries per game at 6m per carry, and 8-9 completed tackles, which is consistent with the past two seasons (and not with a loss of form).

And Dombrandt is capable of the heavy traffic carrying in but for me the thing that sets him apart at 8 is the size speed combo allied to one of the best set of offloading skills I've seen since SB Williams a few years back.