[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.

As long as England are competive at set piece then likes of Dombrandt and Earl assuming they are picked could cause havoc running with ball in hand, strong in carry and as 7.5 says Dombrandt excellent off loading. Earl so dynamic.

On the point about lack of 12s for Eng, wishing and hoping some SA becomes available is not way I want to see England go. Whilst Estherhuizen would be a dream 12 for England, he's a South African. We have one of the biggest player bases in world rugby, for Gods sake let's develop our own players rather than rely on a mercenary cast off from another nation.
Rant over. For now.

Anyone seen the law changes to the tackle height in England?
Been announced to start in July but now held as half the members of the council werent even present to vote and would go against it.

No 7&1/2 wrote: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.

Dombrandt is capable of carrying into heavy traffic, he's just not very good at it. As you say he's much better carrying a little bit further out where he can cut lines and get his hands free. One of his big strengths which I don't think has been mentioned is that he's good over the ball for a big man.

He's got to increase his work rate and physicality though. He's a bit of a one phase in three type of player, whereas Borthwick has tended to go for highly mobile and high workrate options. If you look at Weise Borthwick's hand picked 8 then the only phase he isn't trying to carry or make a hit is when he's held into the breakdown. The physicality (now controlled) is brutal. Those are things Dombrandt could incorporate into his game, he's bigger than Weise and I reckon Borthwick's looked at him as a player that could be improved and turned into a real beast as opposed to Billy where he'd be trying to wind the clock back.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote: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.

Dombrandt is capable of carrying into heavy traffic, he's just not very good at it. As you say he's much better carrying a little bit further out where he can cut lines and get his hands free. One of his big strengths which I don't think has been mentioned is that he's good over the ball for a big man.

He's got to increase his work rate and physicality though. He's a bit of a one phase in three type of player, whereas Borthwick has tended to go for highly mobile and high workrate options. If you look at Weise Borthwick's hand picked 8 then the only phase he isn't trying to carry or make a hit is when he's held into the breakdown. The physicality (now controlled) is brutal. Those are things Dombrandt could incorporate into his game, he's bigger than Weise and I reckon Borthwick's looked at him as a player that could be improved and turned into a real beast as opposed to Billy where he'd be trying to wind the clock back.

That was probably true when Dombrandt was first plucked from Cardiff Met, but it isn't any more. As I said above, this season he's carrying into heavy traffic (as evidenced by the lack of line breaks) but still making 6 metres per carry. If that's "not very good" then I'd like to know what your definition of "good" is.

In terms of work rate, that was the big work on that Eddie gave him before considering him for England. His fitness has improved immeasurably, as has his breakdown work. In one recent game (IIRC the Saints one) he picked up a card (for stopping a breakaway illegally) and Ben Kay pointed out that he'd made 19 tackles in the first 50 minutes.

Comparing him to Weise isn't a sensible comparison. He's a different type of player and they pose different kinds of threat.

It's true that you don't want Dombrandt carrying into heavy traffic off a slow ruck, but that's because he can do so much more if he's playing off the fly half and picking an unexpected line. I stand by what I said when he first started playing for Quins - he arrived in a DHL crate labelled "Nick Easter v2.0 - now much faster!"

Easter wasn't everyone's cup of tea, but Brian Ashton played to his strengths and got a lot out of him. Nick Evans is likely to do the same with Dombrandt.

Poorfour wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote: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.

Dombrandt is capable of carrying into heavy traffic, he's just not very good at it. As you say he's much better carrying a little bit further out where he can cut lines and get his hands free. One of his big strengths which I don't think has been mentioned is that he's good over the ball for a big man.

He's got to increase his work rate and physicality though. He's a bit of a one phase in three type of player, whereas Borthwick has tended to go for highly mobile and high workrate options. If you look at Weise Borthwick's hand picked 8 then the only phase he isn't trying to carry or make a hit is when he's held into the breakdown. The physicality (now controlled) is brutal. Those are things Dombrandt could incorporate into his game, he's bigger than Weise and I reckon Borthwick's looked at him as a player that could be improved and turned into a real beast as opposed to Billy where he'd be trying to wind the clock back.

That was probably true when Dombrandt was first plucked from Cardiff Met, but it isn't any more. As I said above, this season he's carrying into heavy traffic (as evidenced by the lack of line breaks) but still making 6 metres per carry. If that's "not very good" then I'd like to know what your definition of "good" is.

In terms of work rate, that was the big work on that Eddie gave him before considering him for England. His fitness has improved immeasurably, as has his breakdown work. In one recent game (IIRC the Saints one) he picked up a card (for stopping a breakaway illegally) and Ben Kay pointed out that he'd made 19 tackles in the first 50 minutes.

Comparing him to Weise isn't a sensible comparison. He's a different type of player and they pose different kinds of threat.

It's true that you don't want Dombrandt carrying into heavy traffic off a slow ruck, but that's because he can do so much more if he's playing off the fly half and picking an unexpected line. I stand by what I said when he first started playing for Quins - he arrived in a DHL crate labelled "Nick Easter v2.0 - now much faster!"

Easter wasn't everyone's cup of tea, but Brian Ashton played to his strengths and got a lot out of him. Nick Evans is likely to do the same with Dombrandt.

Yep 19 tackles and how many were dominant? Saints ran all over Quins in that game. Four missed tackles to go with the 19 he made and the yellow card was really unnecessary, he just had to stay on his feet and he just fell to the ground and basically begged to be sin binned. Not the best performance but there's a lot to work with for Dombrandt and I think Borthwick will be looking to improve him the last little bit.

Incidentally I always thought Nick Easter was a fantastic number 8, lost a bit too much pace towards the end but that's hardly unusual.

The Weise comparison was because that's who Borthwick went out and picked when he was looking for an 8, he wanted someone that would dominate physically. I definitely think Dombrandt can adapt to do that and still run the nice lines off of the flyhalf.

That's what Borthwick did with Tigers, but quite a few pundits think the squad he's selected for England suggests that he's doing something different and going for more of an All Blacks style mobile team.

The other thing is that Quins defence isn't based on dominant tackles. It's based on containing the attack until there's an opportunity to catch a player behind the gain line. And yes, it was a bad loss to Saints, but than can happen when one team has three weeks to prepare for a game and the other has 5 days and has half its starting pack on the physio table.

Poorfour wrote:That's what Borthwick did with Tigers, but quite a few pundits think the squad he's selected for England suggests that he's doing something different and going for more of an All Blacks style mobile team.

Tigers was a very mobile pack under Borthwick. It was a very physical and well equipped at the set piece pack but mobility was key. There was no place for Lavanini who got shipped out quickly and the likes of Cole and Heyes underwent significant fitness regimes to enable even the tightheads to be keeping up with the kick chase. The lack of innovation in the Tigers attack made them a bit ploddy at times but hopefully that's been solved for England with Evans coming in as attack coach. Dombrandt is very close to the type of 8 Borthwick likes he just needs to turn the intensity up.

Also, nobody coaches a defence to make non-dominant hits, you might not encourage coming out the line but you don't tell your forwards not to smash the opposition backwards if they can. I'm interested to see what Sinfield can get out of the England pack because he likes an aggressive defence and targeting the opposition ball carriers with two man hits.

Dombrandt is a better player than Wiese so I'm looking forward to any improvements Borthwick and his team can bring.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Dombrandt is a better player than Wiese so I'm looking forward to any improvements Borthwick and his team can bring.

Better is somewhat non-specific and dependent on the team and general environment. Dombrandt's certainly more skillful and a little bigger so he could be just as good for England as Weise is for SA just as both are somewhat integral to their club sides.

I think he's already reached the heights that Wiese has for England, plenty more to come I'm sure else we will have to move on quickly.

Is Dombrandt used as a main go to lineout option with Quins? Would he be with England?

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Poorfour wrote:That's what Borthwick did with Tigers, but quite a few pundits think the squad he's selected for England suggests that he's doing something different and going for more of an All Blacks style mobile team.

Tigers was a very mobile pack under Borthwick. It was a very physical and well equipped at the set piece pack but mobility was key. There was no place for Lavanini who got shipped out quickly and the likes of Cole and Heyes underwent significant fitness regimes to enable even the tightheads to be keeping up with the kick chase. The lack of innovation in the Tigers attack made them a bit ploddy at times but hopefully that's been solved for England with Evans coming in as attack coach. Dombrandt is very close to the type of 8 Borthwick likes he just needs to turn the intensity up.

Also, nobody coaches a defence to make non-dominant hits, you might not encourage coming out the line but you don't tell your forwards not to smash the opposition backwards if they can. I'm interested to see what Sinfield can get out of the England pack because he likes an aggressive defence and targeting the opposition ball carriers with two man hits.

How is having a mobile pack going to work against the Boks?  I thought EJ got a bit caught between a strong pack so England would not be blown up b the Boks, and mobile to be able to play some up tempo Rugby at times.  Perhaps, since England have no orcs anymore going mobile is the only way?  Maybe some messages got confused going down to youth and age groups levels telling them it is still OK to be able to scrummage?  And running Rugby players are only one approach amongst many?

Geordie wrote:Is Dombrandt used as a main go to lineout option with Quins? Would he be with England?

I hope not, kind of negates one of his strengths. You want him in the midfield running a line off of the 10. He picks great lines why not use him as a third centre, run a hard line and the use the backs to play off it. If the opposition don't buy him as an option then give him the ball and they soon will.

Dombrandt should only be in our lineouts when we want a big shove on the rolling maul.

doctor_grey wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Poorfour wrote:That's what Borthwick did with Tigers, but quite a few pundits think the squad he's selected for England suggests that he's doing something different and going for more of an All Blacks style mobile team.

Tigers was a very mobile pack under Borthwick. It was a very physical and well equipped at the set piece pack but mobility was key. There was no place for Lavanini who got shipped out quickly and the likes of Cole and Heyes underwent significant fitness regimes to enable even the tightheads to be keeping up with the kick chase. The lack of innovation in the Tigers attack made them a bit ploddy at times but hopefully that's been solved for England with Evans coming in as attack coach. Dombrandt is very close to the type of 8 Borthwick likes he just needs to turn the intensity up.

Also, nobody coaches a defence to make non-dominant hits, you might not encourage coming out the line but you don't tell your forwards not to smash the opposition backwards if they can. I'm interested to see what Sinfield can get out of the England pack because he likes an aggressive defence and targeting the opposition ball carriers with two man hits.

How is having a mobile pack going to work against the Boks?  I thought EJ got a bit caught between a strong pack so England would not be blown up b the Boks, and mobile to be able to play some up tempo Rugby at times.  Perhaps, since England have no orcs anymore going mobile is the only way?  Maybe some messages got confused going down to youth and age groups levels telling them it is still OK to be able to scrummage?  And running Rugby players are only one approach amongst many?

We always seem to have some front row ogres at U20 but they do take a while to make it at the grown up level

doctor_grey wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Poorfour wrote:That's what Borthwick did with Tigers, but quite a few pundits think the squad he's selected for England suggests that he's doing something different and going for more of an All Blacks style mobile team.

Tigers was a very mobile pack under Borthwick. It was a very physical and well equipped at the set piece pack but mobility was key. There was no place for Lavanini who got shipped out quickly and the likes of Cole and Heyes underwent significant fitness regimes to enable even the tightheads to be keeping up with the kick chase. The lack of innovation in the Tigers attack made them a bit ploddy at times but hopefully that's been solved for England with Evans coming in as attack coach. Dombrandt is very close to the type of 8 Borthwick likes he just needs to turn the intensity up.

Also, nobody coaches a defence to make non-dominant hits, you might not encourage coming out the line but you don't tell your forwards not to smash the opposition backwards if they can. I'm interested to see what Sinfield can get out of the England pack because he likes an aggressive defence and targeting the opposition ball carriers with two man hits.

How is having a mobile pack going to work against the Boks?  I thought EJ got a bit caught between a strong pack so England would not be blown up b the Boks, and mobile to be able to play some up tempo Rugby at times.  Perhaps, since England have no orcs anymore going mobile is the only way?  Maybe some messages got confused going down to youth and age groups levels telling them it is still OK to be able to scrummage?  And running Rugby players are only one approach amongst many?

Worked when Tigers ran rough shod over Clermont's big pack last season. Mobile and physical isn't the same as lightweight. Tigers pack is mobile, so is Sale's for that matter if you look at the Prem this season. Locks that equally capable of playing in the backrow but still physical and getting the job done at the set piece. Front rows that are leading the kick chase and carrying hard.

We can't base everything we do around having a pack that's big enough to bully the Boks. That was Eddie's folly. We can set a tempo that is hard to match and offy a variation in attack that tests their defence. The ABs manage to beat the All Blacks without just being physically dominant.

We've got props coming through but it's not a short development window for those guys, takes time.

Interview with Dan Kelly

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2023/01/19/meet-sale-reject-poised-key-part-steve-borthwicks-england/

And an impressive stat breakdown on Cadan Murley

https://twitter.com/OptaJonny/status/1616079899940499459?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1616079899940499459%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

I agree what worked for Leicester last season was effective.  Maybe people caught on or caught up a bit this year.  

I'm not saying Borthwick was not the right choice - he was probably the only choice.  For all the drivel coming out of the RFU for year after year about an English coaching progression, Borthwick was not just the last man standing, he was the only man standing.  And had a good cv to back him.  

But right now the Springboks are the benchmark.  England were not just beaten by them but physically taken out behind the woodshed.  When the ABs were the benchmark all everyone wanted to do was throw the ball around.  And now ball handling skills, especially amongst the forwards, are orders of magnitude better.   Clearly in training, starting at junior levels, that was prioritised over the fundamentals.  And now we can't scrummage with the best.  

So then, perhaps England can't put out a pack who can scrummage with the best.  If that is not physically possible, we should be open and say England are playing to their strengths.  Just like Borthwick going for hybrid 2nd row/back rows.  As you say, mobility.  But then it makes it hard to believe England can put the Boks away.

As a final thought, maybe none of this matters.  I still believe that England have many top level players who can beat anyone.  It may all come down to Borthwick and his team (admittedly a huge step up from EJ's rotating coaching carousel) and EJ and his.  Frequently, just the fact of the change has a positive kick.  And all I want is for that kick in the rectum to last until.... about November.

And an impressive stat breakdown on Cadan Murley

https://twitter.com/OptaJonny/status/1616079899940499459?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1616079899940499459%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

doctor_grey wrote:I agree what worked for Leicester last season was effective.  Maybe people caught on or caught up a bit this year.  

But right now the Springboks are the benchmark.  

Two points in there for me.

Tigers loss of Ford and injuries to Pollard have dented severely the area of weakness and the club's inability to bring in an experienced attack coach has only made it worse. Borthwick hasn't made the same mistake with England, he's gone out and got his own man.

I don't think the Boks are the Benchmark either. Ireland and France are both better all round teams.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:I agree what worked for Leicester last season was effective.  Maybe people caught on or caught up a bit this year.  

But right now the Springboks are the benchmark.  

Two points in there for me.

Tigers loss of Ford and injuries to Pollard have dented severely the area of weakness and the club's inability to bring in an experienced attack coach has only made it worse. Borthwick hasn't made the same mistake with England, he's gone out and got his own man.

I don't think the Boks are the Benchmark either. Ireland and France are both better all round teams.

I certainly agree with you bringing Nick Evans into the fold is a brilliant move. We will see how he and Borthwick meld together, but I expect this to work great, and for the attack to improve as the tournament develops.

Unfortunately, I still think the Boks have to be the benchmark until England can front up and beat them. Ireland look very good but might be a bit fragile due to Sexton's health. France look really scary good. But something about them make me think they can be turned over. Interesting that neither of us mention the ABs...

doctor_grey wrote:But right now the Springboks are the benchmark. England were not just beaten by them but physically taken out behind the woodshed. When the ABs were the benchmark all everyone wanted to do was throw the ball around. And now ball handling skills, especially amongst the forwards, are orders of magnitude better. Clearly in training, starting at junior levels, that was prioritised over the fundamentals. And now we can't scrummage with the best.

I agree on this certainly regards pack and scrum. SA demolished England in scrum and I do wonder regardless of team Eng put out can they compete with SA and also Ire/FRA/NZ in scrum. Going on last couple years under Jones no is the answer so it's whether Borthwick and coaches can improve things.
6N be a good gauge as to where Eng are up front, they need to be equal to IRE/FRA in scrum to have a chance. If not, RWC be a very tough ask.
Bit obvious but if Eng cannot at least get parity then they will struggle big time.
As doctor_grey says, I also wonder if Eng just don't have the physicality in the forwards to match the best.

mountain man wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:But right now the Springboks are the benchmark.  England were not just beaten by them but physically taken out behind the woodshed.  When the ABs were the benchmark all everyone wanted to do was throw the ball around.  And now ball handling skills, especially amongst the forwards, are orders of magnitude better.   Clearly in training, starting at junior levels, that was prioritised over the fundamentals.  And now we can't scrummage with the best.  

I agree on this certainly regards pack and scrum. SA demolished England in scrum and I do wonder regardless of team Eng put out can they compete with SA and also Ire/FRA/NZ in scrum. Going on last couple years under Jones no is the answer so it's whether Borthwick and coaches can improve things.
6N be a good gauge as to where Eng are up front, they need to be equal to IRE/FRA in scrum to have a chance. If not, RWC be a very tough ask.
Bit obvious but if Eng cannot at least get parity then they will struggle big time.
As doctor_grey says, I also wonder if Eng just don't have the physicality in the forwards to match the best.

I don't really remember us struggling at scrum time Vs Ireland and France last year. In fact didn't out 7 man scrum do a number on Ireland?

Physicality in the forwards as a unit is a big area to work on as is discipline as I think the lack of discipline was one of the major reasons we lost games.

i don’t think the scrum itself is a problem (though Mako vs the Bomb Squad was and will remain so). It was more that, as my dad put it, the forwards didn’t look as if they were playing in the same team. Their patterns outside the set piece were disjointed and it gave the Boks more room than you can allow them. I suspect Borthwick will simplify things and bring some clarity - but it might be at the expense of the full power of whatever system Eddie was trying to build.

My point is Fra and Ire are better teams overall, hard to argue they are not so if Eng don't get at least parity up front the chance of winning severely diminished. The days of Eng dominating up front are over so something else is required.

mountain man wrote:My point is Fra and Ire are better teams overall, hard to argue they are not so if Eng don't get at least parity up front the chance of winning severely diminished. The days of Eng dominating up front are over so something else is required.

Yep that's why I said they were the benchmark. I just don't see the scrum as the key element to getting back parity.

I think Poorfour is fairly on with what he says but I'd expect a big emphasis on discipline. Hopefully some new found continuity will help that side of things.

I’d drop all Tigers players for causing the sheer embarrassment of losing to a Welsh region at home in Europe

formerly known as Sam wrote:

mountain man wrote:My point is Fra and Ire are better teams overall, hard to argue they are not so if Eng don't get at least parity up front the chance of winning severely diminished. The days of Eng dominating up front are over so something else is required.

Yep that's why I said they were the benchmark. I just don't see the scrum as the key element to getting back parity.

I think Poorfour is fairly on with what he says but I'd expect a big emphasis on discipline. Hopefully some new found continuity will help that side of things.

Agree about discipline.  The front row must be - at the minimum - solid enough to avoid giving scrum penalties.  Also, pens for holding on across the team.  Last Saturday at Munster-Saints, a lot of the people my section in the stands were commenting how the ref would blow the whistle for not releasing within nanoseconds.  Both sides more of less equally, but gave the match much more of an annoying stop-start feel to it.  If I had to guess probably half the pens given were scrum or holding on.   And those are gimmee turnovers.

Lawes off injured. May be an opening for Hill.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lawes off injured. May be an opening for Hill.

Not the best news for England. Ted Hill or Alex Coles would be the like for like replacements whilst George Martin is still injured.

My guess would be Isiekwe as Lawes first backup looking at the original squad. A lot of his best rugby for Sarries has been at 6. He's a similar quality in both positions IMO.

1.Genge 2.George 3.Cole 4.Itoje 5.Hill 6.Isiekwe 7.Earl 8.Dombrandt
9.JvP 10.Farrell 11.Daly 12.Kelly 13.Slade 14.Freeman 15.Steward

16.Walker 17.Mako 18.Sinckler 19.Chessum 20.Willis 21.Youngs 22.Smith 23.Manu

I think there's the makings of a good side. Curry, Lawes and LCD are big losses all in the pack though. How the pieces fit together is going to be the interesting part.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lawes off injured. May be an opening for Hill.

ABH
(anyone but Hill)

doctor_grey wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lawes off injured. May be an opening for Hill.

ABH
(anyone but Hill)

Bum. As with Smith this may get confusing. I did mean Ted. And I'm assuming no one dislikes that as much as jonny.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lawes off injured. May be an opening for Hill.

ABH
(anyone but Hill)

Bum. As with Smith this may get confusing. I did mean Ted. And I'm assuming no one dislikes that as much as jonny.

Yep, sorry, wrong Hill. I would absolutely like to see Ted get a run. As long as he doesn't grow a mullet.

doctor_grey wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lawes off injured. May be an opening for Hill.

ABH
(anyone but Hill)

Bum. As with Smith this may get confusing. I did mean Ted. And I'm assuming no one dislikes that as much as jonny.

Yep, sorry, wrong Hill.  I would absolutely like to see Ted get a run.  As long as he doesn't grow a mullet.

I thought it was a burn on Geordie.

Cumbrian wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lawes off injured. May be an opening for Hill.

ABH
(anyone but Hill)

Bum. As with Smith this may get confusing. I did mean Ted. And I'm assuming no one dislikes that as much as jonny.

Yep, sorry, wrong Hill.  I would absolutely like to see Ted get a run.  As long as he doesn't grow a mullet.

I thought it was a burn on Geordie.  

"Anyone but Hill" !!???

I nearly dropped my Ted Hill fan club January 2023 subscription Magazine

Ps going back to the 12 point. Watching 36 pulling the strings for Gloucester just makes you wonder what if. If you could put together a 12 it would be him..had the lot and yet just couldn't put it together.

Geordie, I hope you realise you are derailing a perfectly adult conversation about the future of Hills and England??????

But, to your point about Mr. Twelvetrees, I think we have seen glimpses of what could have been off and on throughout his career. Sometimes he plays with incredible vision, speed, and so much talent. Other times it's almost like he spent his pre-
game in a pub.

doctor_grey wrote:Geordie, I hope you realise you are derailing a perfectly adult conversation about the future of Hills and England??????  

But, to your point about Mr. Twelvetrees,  I think we have seen glimpses of what could have been off and on throughout his career.  Sometimes he plays with incredible vision, speed, and so much talent.  Other times it's almost like he spent his pre-
game in a pub.  

Sorry it was a bit of tongue in cheek humour...as I know I go in a bit about his selection.

If you want an adult chat about Hill....I have suspicion he will end up the next in the line of fantastic premiership 6s (Matt Garvey, Dave Ewers) who excell week in week out but were not selected by a succession of international managers for whatever reason.

Geordie wrote:Anyone seen the law changes to the tackle height in England?
Been announced to start in July but now held as half the members of the council werent even present to vote and would go against it.

https://www.patreon.com/posts/77489775

That piece by Prof Ross Tucker is by a distance the most informative thing I've read on the matter and is well worth a read.

How this change tried to be made and the level it's been made at (league one is too high) I disagree with. A change in tackle height as seen in French rugby and from this year NZ rugby isn't something I'm against though. The opposite in fact, I think it is necessary.

As Tucker correctly says there the reason the red cards aren't working isn't just application of the laws or the attempts to water them down (20 min red cards for instance). The issue is that the reward for tackling high in dominating tackles and preventing offloads still outweighs the risk. The only realistic solution I see is a change in tackle height which will have to start in community rugby as seen in France and now NZ.

There's a great 90 sec clip floating around of VPR at the weekend. He's obviously a very good scrummager but some of the skills on show are very impressive.

I think he carries twice, makes a few big hit...clears a ruck were Gloucester were under the cosh and then throws 3 delightful backhanded passes. Just watching this he should be ahead of Mako and Rodd (certainly Rodd anyway).

Agree Sgt. Not sure wht he's not in the squad...

If interested....

https://twitter.com/jaredwright17/status/1616910197737275393?t=Z9SSaik_JpnDhpKZqYDfVA&s=19

king_carlos wrote:My guess would be Isiekwe as Lawes first backup looking at the original squad. A lot of his best rugby for Sarries has been at 6. He's a similar quality in both positions IMO.

1.Genge 2.George 3.Cole 4.Itoje 5.Hill 6.Isiekwe 7.Earl 8.Dombrandt
9.JvP 10.Farrell 11.Daly 12.Kelly 13.Slade 14.Freeman 15.Steward

16.Walker 17.Mako 18.Sinckler 19.Chessum 20.Willis 21.Youngs 22.Smith 23.Manu

I think there's the makings of a good side. Curry, Lawes and LCD are big losses all in the pack though. How the pieces fit together is going to be the interesting part.

Yes, agree big Nick Isiekwe has looked good at 6 and lock. Looking at the wider squad though it appears England don't have any locks as good as Will Rowlands or AWJ. Could be costly.

Ah man....the inexperienced Chessum is better than Roland's!!! And they'll be sending AWJ out with his Zimmer frame

Rowlands is a good player but AWJ best years are long gone, surely Gatland only kept him around to lend experience to new players.

Geordie wrote:Ah man....the inexperienced Chessum is better than Roland's!!! And they'll be sending AWJ out with his Zimmer frame

Who's this Roland bloke you speak of, England's new boy? Will Rowlands is one of the top locks in the 6N, a position held by AWJ for a decade . If Itoje is at 6, England don't have that .

mikey_dragon wrote:

Geordie wrote:Ah man....the inexperienced Chessum is better than Roland's!!! And they'll be sending AWJ out with his Zimmer frame

Who's this Roland bloke you speak of, England's new boy? Will Rowlands is one of the top locks in the 6N, a position held by AWJ for a decade . If Itoje is at 6, England don't have that .

I assume he meant Rowlands, the guy not good enough to play for England?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Geordie wrote:Ah man....the inexperienced Chessum is better than Roland's!!! And they'll be sending AWJ out with his Zimmer frame

Who's this Roland bloke you speak of, England's new boy? Will Rowlands is one of the top locks in the 6N, a position held by AWJ for a decade . If Itoje is at 6, England don't have that .

I assume he meant Rowlands, the guy not good enough to play for England?

That's a dim and arrogant view to take, one can only assume you watch rugby whilst living under a rock . Hopefully we get a few pre-RWC games against your boys, so you can have the pleasure of seeing Rowlands beat up England some more.

Soz mikey. Thems the breaks. England didn't want him hence his fall back.