[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.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I think Ben Curry is a better player than Willis personally, not by much mind....they're quite similar.

If that's JVP playing well, we're in trouble. I really hope Mitchell comes in to start or at least a bench spot, he's a cut above. I could see him nailing the shirt if he gets any kind decent run in the side.

Really? I'd given Ben the benefit of the doubt given that Sale fans do rate him so highly, but he's never been as classy as his brother and a fair bit behind with ball in hand. His debut I think is one to forget for him, that fall off on White I'm sure kept him up. It's harsh on him to in a way but there's a bit of a queue at flanker and he made some really big erorrs. Willis on the other hand is to the manor born.

Don't really get your dislike for vP, much like Kelly and Steward.

mountain man wrote:Well as I said yesterday my picks be JvP Farrell Manu Lawrence at 9 10 12 13 but doubt it will be.

Will Farrell be 10 or 12 is the thing. If Slade starts is he at 12 or 13? I'm asking what Borthwick will do not what I'd do.
He could go JvP Farrell Slade Lawrence maybe. Guess we'll find out Friday.

Good question on 12 or 13, my guess he'll have 13 on his back but will be popping up at 12. Farrell to me benefits more from a second playmaker than Smith does.

king_carlos wrote:
I'm really not convinced by Dombrandt. He just looks a bit lost against international defences. The speed with which they reset mean the gaps around the ruck Dombrandt usually exploits for Quins are very rarely there. He then just seems to be running into a brick wall ineffectively. Personally feel that Mercer has a bit more to his game so hope he can come back in over the summer.

Dombrandt hasn't looked at home at international level - but for all but the last game he's been playing in a system that wants him to be something he's not. Against Scotland, he did a bit of running into brick walls - but he also picked a lot of nice lines, most of which ended in knock ons because of bad timing on the pass and his own outbreak of butterfingers.

I think he's worth persisting with because he is clearly seeing the space and finding the lines - but he's not on the wavelength with his teammates where it's coming off. International level is quicker and it's not surprising if he needs to adjust his timing given how he plays - he's taking the ball closer to the line and at different angles from other players and both he and his passers need to know when to move the ball.

If it starts to click, there's enough there to suggest he'll be very effective. But there's also a question of how much longer to persist with it. One of the things we lose by not having regular England A games is that we don't have a place to develop players who bring something extra that needs time to adapt.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:A bit on the Chessum's via Mrs Chessum.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-11724405/amp/Mum-Ollie-Lewis-Chessum-reveals-pride-Leicester-Tigers-pair-set-England-stardom.html

3 ginger kids.......at what point do you stop trying?

It was rural Lincolnshire 20 years ago, not much else to do of an evening.

I wonder if they've fed the youngest what the two others have had, I know they say in the article both are 6ft7 but Lewis is clearly taller than Ollie. Three 6 and a half foot plus Chessum's would certainly assist the Tigers lineout for the next decade and a half at least.

Poorfour wrote:

king_carlos wrote:
I'm really not convinced by Dombrandt. He just looks a bit lost against international defences. The speed with which they reset mean the gaps around the ruck Dombrandt usually exploits for Quins are very rarely there. He then just seems to be running into a brick wall ineffectively. Personally feel that Mercer has a bit more to his game so hope he can come back in over the summer.

Dombrandt hasn't looked at home at international level - but for all but the last game he's been playing in a system that wants him to be something he's not. Against Scotland, he did a bit of running into brick walls - but he also picked a lot of nice lines, most of which ended in knock ons because of bad timing on the pass and his own outbreak of butterfingers.

I think he's worth persisting with because he is clearly seeing the space and finding the lines - but he's not on the wavelength with his teammates where it's coming off. International level is quicker and it's not surprising if he needs to adjust his timing given how he plays - he's taking the ball closer to the line and at different angles from other players and both he and his passers need to know when to move the ball.

If it starts to click, there's enough there to suggest he'll be very effective. But there's also a question of how much longer to persist with it. One of the things we lose by not having regular England A games is that we don't have a place to develop players who bring something extra that needs time to adapt.

Dombrandt looks the very good club player struggling to adapt to international level at the minute. He's probably got this tournament to set a marker down and claim the shirt. Hopefully the run of games is what he needs to settle in. However, he's the 8 he's not a centre he's going to have to put on his big boy pants and carry hard into contact because this is international rugby and defences are much better, we can't carry an 8 that's holding out for a nice line. Yes running the nice lines is definitely a bonus but it's a bonus and not the day job. He isn't going to play like he does for Quins because no top tier international team play like that.

He's also got to up his fitness because lasting 55 mins and then looking cream crackered isn't ideal.

All fixable things and a case of finding a few more percent for him rather than any massive problems. He's got at least four more games you'd have thought so let's hope for more Vs Italy.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:A bit on the Chessum's via Mrs Chessum.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-11724405/amp/Mum-Ollie-Lewis-Chessum-reveals-pride-Leicester-Tigers-pair-set-England-stardom.html

3 ginger kids.......at what point do you stop trying?

It was rural Lincolnshire 20 years ago, not much else to do of an evening.

I wonder if they've fed the youngest what the two others have had, I know they say in the article both are 6ft7 but Lewis is clearly taller than Ollie. Three 6 and a half foot plus Chessum's would certainly assist the Tigers lineout for the next decade and a half at least.

I've spent a bit of time around there with the military....I don't think there's much more to do now tbh.

Issue is if not Dombrandt then who is England 8? Does Borthwick go back to Billy for his carrying? I agree Dombrandt needs to do the hard yards as well as the running and offloading but not sure it's his thing. Simmonds again a bit too lightweight for making hard yards, he's more of a running 8. I suppose Van De Flier isn't massive but he manages OK for Ireland.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I think Ben Curry is a better player than Willis personally, not by much mind....they're quite similar.

If that's JVP playing well, we're in trouble. I really hope Mitchell comes in to start or at least a bench spot, he's a cut above. I could see him nailing the shirt if he gets any kind decent run in the side.

Really? I'd given Ben the benefit of the doubt given that Sale fans do rate him so highly, but he's never been as classy as his brother and a fair bit behind with ball in hand. His debut I think is one to forget for him, that fall off on White I'm sure kept him up. It's harsh on him to in a way but there's a bit of a queue at flanker and he made some really big erorrs. Willis on the other hand is to the manor born.

Don't really get your dislike for vP, much like Kelly and Steward.

Willis must be approaching 10 caps now as done pretty much nothing of note. I'd put in with the "gets better with each injury" group personally.

7 caps but has he started yet in a proper game? A few of those in the tradition of Jones have been 5 mins here and there, so when we talk caps is 10 seconds the same as 80 mins? Quite a big gap of course between some of those after he cam on vs Italy, turned the ball over, scored a try and then got a bad injury. I don't put him in the bracket of gets better with each injury myself, he's just a step above the other flankers we have bar T Curry.

Would you believe Jack Willis (26) is 2 years older than Tom Curry (24)!

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Willis must be approaching 10 caps now

He's got 6 caps and a Baa-Baas fixture, and has only started once (his debut against Georgia). He scored two tries in his first three matches, and got that horrific injury in his third, when he came off the bench against Italy.

Coming back from injury, Jones gave him around 10 minutes in a win over Australia, 5 minutes against Argentina, and 13 minutes against New Zealand. Hardly any time on which to judge him, though his stint aganst New Zealand coincided with England's three try comeback.

mountain man wrote:Issue is if not Dombrandt then who is England 8? Does Borthwick go back to Billy for his carrying? I agree Dombrandt needs to do the hard yards as well as the running and offloading but not sure it's his thing. Simmonds again a bit too lightweight for making hard yards, he's more of a running 8. I suppose Van De Flier isn't massive but he manages OK for Ireland.

That's why Dombrandt probably has the 6N to set his stall out and show he can play at this level. In the summer Mercer and Tom Willis become far more accessible than they are now and it's not unusual to start with a big squad at the start of the summer and then whittle it down as you close in on the world cup so Borthwick might have one or both in camp.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Willis must be approaching 10 caps now

He's got 6 caps and a Baa-Baas fixture, and has only started once (his debut against Georgia). He scored two tries in his first three matches, and got that horrific injury in his third, when he came off the bench against Italy.

Coming back from injury, Jones gave him around 10 minutes in a win over Australia, 5 minutes against Argentina, and 13 minutes against New Zealand. Hardly any time on which to judge him, though his stint aganst New Zealand coincided with England's three try comeback.

So quite little game time really.....yet he's up there with Pocock according to some posters. Ah....he's injury prone, explains a lot.

Lets give him a go eh! There must be at least 4 games left before the start of the World Cup......

Is this going to be it now then, any time we mention a Leicester player or Willis we'll be hailing the second coming?

What's your team for Italy anyway just so we know you're picking all these absolutely proven 20 cap internationals.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Is this going to be it now then, any time we mention a Leicester player or Willis we'll be hailing the second coming?

Ben Youngs is a Leicester player

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Is this going to be it now then, any time we mention a Leicester player or Willis we'll be hailing the second coming?

Ben Youngs is a Leicester player

I'd be happy starting Youngs tbh....he just doesn't add much from the bench.

And you've said he wouldn't be starting for you elsewhere, so Mitchell and vP on the bench for you. What's the rest of your squad?

Youngs starts or isn't in the squad for me. I'd prefer Mitchell obviously.

You a bit nervy about the squad you;d pick then obviously.

From the ones available I think I'd go

Genge George Sinckler
Itoje Chessum
Willis Earl
Dombrandt

vP Smith
H-C Tuilagi Lawrence Watson
Steward

Rodd Walker Cole Ribbans Ludlam Mitchell Farrell Arundell

Ideally before I'd have been looking to get the other Smith to the bench but think it's a touch too risky needing the win and seeing how close France were pushed.

I think dropping Ludlam is a bit harsh - he played the best of the backrow players against Scotland.

I would go with a backrow of Earl, Willis and Ludlam at 8.  Not the biggest backrow in the world, but as big as the Irish and Welsh backrows.  Dombrandt looks like he is just keeping the shirt warm until Mercer is available, so I am not overly bothered about giving him game time.

And Ludlam for me is stepping in covering injuries, don't think he's a starting 8 either.

I put my side straight after the game I think, nothing crazy.

Murley isn't there and no bench, but ok.

Sharkey06 wrote:I think dropping Ludlam is a bit harsh - he played the best of the backrow players against Scotland.

I would go with a backrow of Earl, Willis and Ludlam at 8.  Not the biggest backrow in the world, but as big as the Irish and Welsh backrows.  Dombrandt looks like he is just keeping the shirt warm until Mercer is available, so I am not overly bothered about giving him game time.

I agree be harsh to drop Ludlam who was by far best of England backrow but not sure he's an out and out 8. Pre Scotland my backrow pick was Willis 6, Earl 7, Dombrandt 8 so I would like to see how they go.
Maybe Italy game is one to try it as shouldn't be as tough as other matches to come.
As for Mercer, not sure he offers more than those currently in squad?

Youngs drops out.....JVP and Mitchell the scrum halfs. Watson not involved.

Finally. Curry gone too.

As Michael Ironside said in Total Recall:

"It's about godd**n time!"

Players left out
Curry
Heyes
Hill
Rodd
Simmonds
Watson
Youngs

Wonder if Watson has picked up a niggle. He's still good when he plays but is increasingly made of glass

Blimey, could actually get a team most of us would pick ourselves.

Heard rumours Arundel to start at 15 and Freddie steward dropped. (Telegraph) but then they had Watson starting on the wing so all smoke and mirrors.

Can't believe Steward be dropped unless to bench but Id be amazed if a fit Steward not in 23. If Arundell at 15 I reckon Steward be on wing.

Wonder if they played The End by The Doors to Youngs?

Great news on Ben Youngs and long overdue. As for the back 3 it is a case of having the right blend/combination. A 15 who can catch high balls all day long is extremely valuable so we need to be careful before we dispatch Steward to the sidelines. If we had wingers with gas, power and /or stepping ability (X factor?) then he could compliment them nicely. In the opposition 22 he is very handy coming into the line. To be fair OHC deserves another chance and hopefully Arundel gets a start.

And of course we really need the 10,12,13 axis sorted as the back 3 cannot really be effective until that is resolved.

After all that time under Eddie Jones, noe under Steve Borthwick England still do not have a settked side 8/9 months out from the RWC.

Well Borthwick team has only played one game so far and after losing last week did you not expect changes?

Poorfour wrote:Dombrandt hasn't looked at home at international level - but for all but the last game he's been playing in a system that wants him to be something he's not. Against Scotland, he did a bit of running into brick walls - but he also picked a lot of nice lines, most of which ended in knock ons because of bad timing on the pass and his own outbreak of butterfingers.

I think he's worth persisting with because he is clearly seeing the space and finding the lines - but he's not on the wavelength with his teammates where it's coming off. International level is quicker and it's not surprising if he needs to adjust his timing given how he plays - he's taking the ball closer to the line and at different angles from other players and both he and his passers need to know when to move the ball.

If it starts to click, there's enough there to suggest he'll be very effective. But there's also a question of how much longer to persist with it. One of the things we lose by not having regular England A games is that we don't have a place to develop players who bring something extra that needs time to adapt.

I do wonder if Mercer were in the Prem currently or Simmonds not going abroad next season whether Dombrandt would be starting. I think Simmonds has similar issues in attack at international level with the increased physicality and the same gaps in defences just not existing as much. But I think Simmonds is the stronger in defence as he's got the line speed of flanker and gets back to his feet so quickly.

Hopefully Dombrandt can come good as his handling around contact is absolutely fantastic and he's got natural talent as a jackal. I'm just not quite seeing it currently though.

majesticimperialman wrote:After all that time under Eddie Jones, noe under Steve Borthwick England still do not have a settked side 8/9 months out from the RWC.

I think you are right, and this is probably one of the reasons Eddie Jones was fired.  At this point there should have been a settled, or more accurately, a mostly settled side.  Outside of not knowing the best partner for Itoje (though Chessum may have put that to bed for the moment), no idea who will start in the back row, no settled 9-10-12 combo, no 13 if Slade is not healthy, nor our wingers, England are in great shape.....

One of Borthwick's many problems, of course, is he has to make decisions quickly due to the lack of game time and training time between now and the RWC warm-ups.  He was parachuted into a pile of merde.  So if players get dropped or added quickly it's only because Borthwick has no other choice to try and figure out what he thinks is his best side.  And a lot of players who might be in contention are fairly close in ability, too.  Yes, there will be some of the horses for courses selections. But he has to see his horses at the courses to pick his horses.  I think it's probable no one will see a side they can be totally comfortable with.  For me, I just want to drop the players who clearly are not at the races and hopefully the rest can get sorted.  I think it's a 5/50 proposition.

doctor_grey wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:After all that time under Eddie Jones, noe under Steve Borthwick England still do not have a settked side 8/9 months out from the RWC.

I think you are right, and this is probably one of the reasons Eddie Jones was fired.  At this point there should have been a settled, or more accurately, a mostly settled side.  Outside of not knowing the best partner for Itoje (though Chessum may have put that to bed for the moment), no idea who will start in the back row, no settled 9-10-12 combo, no 13 if Slade is not healthy, nor our wingers, England are in great shape.....

One of Borthwick's many problems, of course, is he has to make decisions quickly due to the lack of game time and training time between now and the RWC warm-ups.  He was parachuted into a pile of merde.  So if players get dropped or added quickly it's only because Borthwick has no other choice to try and figure out what he thinks is his best side.  And a lot of players who might be in contention are fairly close in ability, too.  Yes, there will be some of the horses for courses selections.  But he has to see his horses at the courses to pick his horses.  I think it's probable no one will see a side they can be totally comfortable with.  For me, I just want to drop the players who clearly are not at the races and hopefully the rest can get sorted.  I think it's a 5/50 proposition.

To be fair I think Borthwick knew exactly how he wanted the problem areas to be dealt with. Chessum in alongside Itoje which as we saw worked a treat. If not for injuries then Lawes and Tom Curry would have been on the flanks with Dombrandt at 8. JVP at 9, Farrell at 10 and Kelly was the ever present in often rotated Tigers side and would have taken the same role at 12. Slade or Marchant I'm not sure which way he'd have gone at 13.

Having to revert back to the dreaded 10/12 axis was a failure and Marchant at 13 didn't cover himself in glory. Ben Curry was ok at openside but nothing more, Ludlam in the 6 role was fantastic though and would have been man of the match had we won.

Be interesting to see what his back up options are now we know Kelly is out for 10 weeks.

Dombrandt has stayed in presumably because Evans is singing his praises as he works with him each week and knows him. Most players have a bad game in them and if a couple of those passes had stuck we'd be singing Big Alex's praises. The first one was no real surprise that he dropped it as he was coming at speed and the replay showed the ball being chucked at his shoulder and slightly behind. Timing there was an issue. Here's hoping he's improved with some training.

I cannot believe that it has taken this long for a coach to realise that Youngs has deteriorated over the past 4 years. He's slow to the breakdown, plus his passing has got worse to such an extent that he seems to pass primarily to the floor, above players' heads or to no-one in particular (I seem to recall him chucking a couple of balls into touch in the Autumn). I know he's been a great English servant etc, but surely the coaches who view what's going on both on the training pitches and at the matches cannot be that blinkered. Does he get extra credit because of what he did 5-8 years ago? He shouldn't, not anymore. He should be told (as I was after an ill-advised move as a 14-year old from Prop to Hooker) "You are not good enough".

I really hope we'll get a chance to see some Arundell magic this time round, and also that Mitchell will play a blinder, be it starting or from the bench.

What ever the situation with selection and fall out from eddy Jones we will have to be patient. One rugby online journalist suggested that Jones had gaslighted the England players to the point where they were so scared of making errors that all off the cuff instinctive play has been sucked out of them.

Another name to throw into the hat for 8 is tom Willis. Not a flair player in anyway however a workhorse who will battle through 80 mins and carry hard. He's a good all rounder. Oh and he can tackle too.

Mr Bounce wrote:Dombrandt has stayed in presumably because Evans is singing his praises as he works with him each week and knows him. Most players have a bad game in them and if a couple of those passes had stuck we'd be singing Big Alex's praises. The first one was no real surprise that he dropped it as he was coming at speed and the replay showed the ball being chucked at his shoulder and slightly behind. Timing there was an issue. Here's hoping he's improved with some training.

I cannot believe that it has taken this long for a coach to realise that Youngs has deteriorated over the past 4 years. He's slow to the breakdown, plus his passing has got worse to such an extent that he seems to pass primarily to the floor, above players' heads or to no-one in particular (I seem to recall him chucking a couple of balls into touch in the Autumn). I know he's been a great English servant etc, but surely the coaches who view what's going on both on the training pitches and at the matches cannot be that blinkered. Does he get extra credit because of what he did 5-8 years ago? He shouldn't, not anymore. He should be told (as I was after an ill-advised move as a 14-year old from Prop to Hooker) "You are not good enough".

I really hope we'll get a chance to see some Arundell magic this time round, and also that Mitchell will play a blinder, be it starting or from the bench.

I have always been a big fan of Dombrandt.  Part of the reason is I saw him as a real difference maker at 8 for Quins.  And because he seems (to me at any rate) to play with real joy, not afraid to show he really enjoys what he is doing.  There is something to that with pro athletes these days.  The opposite of that below.   But at the top level, I am really not sure.  I hope he comes good but he can't be given too much more time.  For now England could put Ludlum at 8 because he plays all over the back row at Saints.  And usually delivers performances like he did against Scotland.  But he is better on the flank, methinks.  

Regarding Youngs and being told his career with England is over is a very hard message to deliver and frequently awful to receive.  Back in November I had to tell an NFL player his NFL career was over.  He had a Lisfranc whch didn't heal well and his team's med staff told him to get a second opinion.  He camer to us and we tried feck-all everything but there was no possibility he would be able to bear the forces in a cut or tackle.  I had to deliver the news and he reaction tore me up.  Just imagine a young man with hope and a future being told the thing he did virtually his whole life was over just as his career was coming good.   Even for Youngs I would bet losing his England career would be heart breaking.  But I think it is the right thing to do.  For him and England.

I suspect Youngs England career isn't as dead as people assume. There are only three other realistic options of which Mitchell is famously hit and miss and Quirke made of glass. Borthwick will have challenged him to come back better but to tell him his career is dead at this point is frankly foolish. We don't have a lot of options and the options we do have are lacking experience with the world cup round the corner. You challenge the player to improve knowing you might need him at the world cup whilst looking to get some caps into the others, if they deserve them as there's no free rides and dropping your most capped player really helps demonstrate that.

I don't believe that they've told him that his career is done. But he's been cruising for some time now, mainly because Eddie would not pick anyone else with long term prospects. Willi Heinz was a surprise pick for the RWC 4 years ago let's be honest. He only picked Spencer because he had no other option then dumped him. Since then, aside from very recently it's pretty much been all Youngs - some deserved, other times not so much.

Let's see what Mitchell can do. This is a good chance to show what he's got. Let's hope he doesn't do a Ben Curry,

formerly known as Sam wrote:I suspect Youngs England career isn't as dead as people assume. There are only three other realistic options of which Mitchell is famously hit and miss and Quirke made of glass. Borthwick will have challenged him to come back better but to tell him his career is dead at this point is frankly foolish. We don't have a lot of options and the options we do have are lacking experience with the world cup round the corner. You challenge the player to improve knowing you might need him at the world cup whilst looking to get some caps into the others, if they deserve them as there's no free rides and dropping your most capped player really helps demonstrate that.

Which are all good reasons for dropping his captain....

formerly known as Sam wrote:I suspect Youngs England career isn't as dead as people assume. There are only three other realistic options of which Mitchell is famously hit and miss and Quirke made of glass. Borthwick will have challenged him to come back better but to tell him his career is dead at this point is frankly foolish. We don't have a lot of options and the options we do have are lacking experience with the world cup round the corner. You challenge the player to improve knowing you might need him at the world cup whilst looking to get some caps into the others, if they deserve them as there's no free rides and dropping your most capped player really helps demonstrate that.

I don't think Youngs' England career is finally over, but he has to be further down the list now.  The problem from an England perspective is Youngs is older, slower.  And some of the other contenders are hurt or recovering.  Except JvP and Mitchell.  I presume JvP would start but Mitchell needs a good 25 minutes off the bench to get in the game and really stamp his influence.  As he is more in the Marcus Smith mode, Mitchell feeding Farrell is the same as rushing as fast as possible to the sloth races.    

Last season, to me, Mitchell was equal or better than any EQ 9 - did attacking things other 9s weren't doing -  especially down the stretch of the Premiership season.  This season has not been as good - not bad, but not sure if he was playing at a level England needs.  Perhaps with some of the Boyd influence coming off he can find his balance again.  When he gets his blood up he is terrific.  A similar energy boost that Cobus Reinach gave Saints and then he went from Saints to the Boks.    

I really worry more about Farrell.  At times he was ponderous.  A few times I recall Smith had the ball and started to run in Farrell's direction but had to stop or change course because Farrell was literally in the way.  One way or another Smith-Farrell doesn't work - we have enough game film to show that now - So the approach is similar to the glass half-empty or half-full.  If half-empty then start Farrell and Smith comes on to salvage the win.  If half-full the Smith has started and Farrell can come in to seal the win.  Of course Farrell can go help his dad coach in the RWC and save everyone a lot of agro (as well as killing about half of what we discuss here).

I'd be surprised if anyone had been told they will no longer be selected for England down to their form. Youngs England career should now be in the past but there's no guarantee of it.

lostinwales wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:I suspect Youngs England career isn't as dead as people assume. There are only three other realistic options of which Mitchell is famously hit and miss and Quirke made of glass. Borthwick will have challenged him to come back better but to tell him his career is dead at this point is frankly foolish. We don't have a lot of options and the options we do have are lacking experience with the world cup round the corner. You challenge the player to improve knowing you might need him at the world cup whilst looking to get some caps into the others, if they deserve them as there's no free rides and dropping your most capped player really helps demonstrate that.

Which are all good reasons for dropping his captain....

Similar problem with his captain to be honest. Not much in the way of flyhalf options and when Farrell stood in at first receiver we looked better than when Smith stood in at 10. The issue was Farrell's incredibly bad defensive reads in defence from the 12 channel.

Similar problem with his captain to be honest. Not much in the way of flyhalf options and when Farrell stood in at first receiver we looked better than when Smith stood in at 10. The issue was Farrell's incredibly bad defensive reads in defence from the 12 channel.

Yep which adds more to argument Farrell is a 10 not a 12 and England should play one or other of him and Smith not both same time.
Farrell to start at 10 Smith bench. Issue of Farrell being captain defused a bit as plenty of teams sub their captain after 50/60 mins.
This time last year I was one calling for Smith Farrell at 10 12 but it plainly has not worked.

Hopefully Borthwick doesn't go down Jones route of virtually everyone else seeing something but he being blind/stubborn to it.

Is Borthwick picking Smith Farrell against Italy a case of being blind/stubborn, or a case of not wanting to 'throw someone under the bus' by picking them out of position at 12?  If not Farrell then who would you pick?  As 7 1/2 has said, playing Slade at 12 would just give you the same if not more problems as playing Farrell there.

I personally think part of the problem is that we are all being told Marcus Smith is a generational talent and I think with the odd high quality flashes he shows, we can all see the potential upside that he has.  But in this side Farrell looks the better option at 10.  All credit to Farrell for playing out of position at 12, it certainly isn't doing his reputation/legacy any favours.

Well Smith Farrell at 10 12 has not worked. Unless you think otherwise?
I say Farrell at 10 as that is by far his best position and so ergo Smith has to be on bench.
At 12 there are options although not ideal. As I said before, given who is currently available I would go Farrell Manu Lawrence at 10 12 13. I think Manu best days gone but needs must.
If Manu in the highly unlikely scenario gets injured(!) then yes maybe have to revert to Farrell at 12.

Jones was unquestionably stubborn in his team selection. His continued picking of players who didn't deserve to be in and ignoring those who did was pretty obvious. Not just me saying all this by the way.

Jones continued to play Smith Farrell at 10 12 when there were other options available and not injured as is case now unfortunately(Kelly for example).

You have just contradicted yourself by saying Farrell looks better option at 10 but should play him at 12?