England 2023 - Post 6N and beyond

First topic message reminder :

Continued......

I don't think there's much to the story really. Genge is reliably one of our best players and has become a big leader in the squad. He was ill, Borthers asked if he could play on anyway and he said he could. At the time all is fans were annoyed Genge was coming off so early in the 6N games. We know why now. Most of us would have left him on for longer and played Mako less so it's not like Genge was struggling.

Just found it interesting that a player who is struggling with his fitness is also being asked to play while ill.

From the BBC:

'England head coach Steve Borthwick hopes stakeholders in the domestic game can come together to move English rugby to the "top of the world".

Borthwick has also reiterated his wish to see "England players in England", after some of his players chose to move abroad on lucrative deals.

Cash-strapped London Irish were the third Premiership club to be suspended by the English top flight this month.

Borthwick said he could not be prouder of the Exiles players in his squad.

The 43-year-old, who has included four London Irish players in his first 28-man pre-World Cup training squad, said "Our hearts go out to all of them".

Borthwick told BBC Sport: "When I talked to them on Sunday night as a group they wanted to get into training.

"I think it was a strong message from the players that they wanted to be named as London Irish players, as it was their pride."

Asked if he was guiding them on their futures, Borthwick added: "They have representatives helping them so they can focus on the rugby here this week.

"I sense it's been an incredible release for them. I can't be more proud, they are trying their hearts out."

Players from Leicester Tigers, Northampton Saints, Sale Sharks and Saracens - all of whom were involved in last month's Premiership semi-finals and final - have not been included in the 28-strong preparation squad.

It means several uncapped players, including 23-year-old London Irish back-row forward Tom Pearson, have been given a chance to join up with the squad.

Borthwick says Pearson, who is included alongside club-mates Henry Arundell, Ollie Hassell-Collins and Will Joseph, has been "phenomenal".

He added: "Tom was on a bike this week and achieved scores I've never seen before.

"Everybody stands back and sees that and say's it's just phenomenal, a young man jumping in and doing that. It drives competition.

"What he did in one session, not to single him out, was incredible and I've never seen it. He emptied everything he had and he should be very proud of himself."

'We all want England players in England'
As concern over rugby union's finances in England has grown over the past year, several players have decided to earn a living abroad instead.

Premiership salaries have been squeezed after the wage cap was reduced by £1.4m to £5m from the 2021-22 season and, although it is set to return to its former level from 2024-25, players are seeking better pay elsewhere.

Rugby Football Union (RFU) rules do not allow players based abroad to be selected for England - but an exception was made for former Wasps and Worcester players after those clubs folded.

"First of all, we all want England players in England," explained Borthwick.

"Right now is a time when the RFU, the Premiership and all the stakeholders of the game are talking so English rugby can be top of the world.

Is anyone surprised to see Tom Pearson raising eyebrows?

Not overly. He's signed with Northampton too so that ticks the RFUs checklist currently.

Pearson looks a brilliant talent to me. Credit where due to the previous coaching setup on him. When he was picked so young as an apprentice then a full squad member I honestly didn't see it and said as such. He's a hell of an athlete with a very rounded skillset though.

6.Lawes, Underhill, Ludlam
7.Curry, Willis, Pearson

Realistically I see that as 6 needing to fit into 4 for the 33-man RWC squad.

Are we expecting Lawes to come back fit and firing...or is it a wait and see?

Does a Mercer call up and selection remove the need for a 6'7 blindside...lineout option.

What is Pearson like in the lineout? He's 6'3.

Mercer isn't that much of a lineout option at interantional level realistically. At best a solid third choice but certainly not a strength as a 3rd option. In fact I'd say most the strong sides have significantly better 3rd jumpers.

We've had a few back rows mentioned as 'lineout options' recently. Ludlam and Dombrandt both mentioned as they jump at club level for instance. I'm not sure any are actually better or worse than Curry though. Pearson is probably the same mould. They're players you only want to throw to unopposed on your own ball and none are really going to be counter jumpers.

The big area you gain with a third genuine jumper in the lineout is actually defensive lineouts rather than attacking ones IMO. With two jumpers defences basically work in pods and can't be that reactive. Hence you then see sides either competing in the air or on the floor. Lineout defence gets very binary, so is easy for attacks to work against. With three genuine jumpers you can mark up either man for man or, as is the modern trend, mark areas. By that I mean sides will perhaps give teams front ball as it limits options but they'll then mark the middle and tail with three strong jumpers in sequence flanked by their two tallest lifters. Good jumpers tend to be good at defending mauls too. Which Lawes is. That's not an exact science of course. Launchbury for instance is poor in the air but brilliant defending mauls. But it does generally hold true when you talk to coaches and analysts about this.

I gave up keeping my own stats when I moved out of doing it freelance. It was simply taking up too much time though. This might sound pathetic but it had almost become an addiction that I wasn't enjoying but just kept doing. For a good few years I watched every Prem game and many internationals albeit fast forwarding through stoppages so it usually takes between 30-35 mins. The one area I miss from it is lineout stats though. There was a clear correlation for instance between sides (not just England but France with their back row jumpers, SA with PSdT, even Georgia prior to the decline) with three defensive jumpers and the attacking side cutting numbers at their lineout. Generally that improves retention but largely neuters the maul.

I think Lawes is nailed on to make the squad if fit. He has developed that ability some experience players get of being able to return from breaks and immediately find his peak form. Plus he was a vice captain when Borthwick took over. Even if other flankers kick on he can also be a brilliant bench option in the 19 shirt.

When's the last time we've consistently had the tactic of counter jumping though? Even with Lawes in the team it's often that we just go to counter the maul not contest in the air.

Itoje good at counter jumping so he's always option for that.
What England need is power in pack to compete with likes of SA and France, Pearson could fit that bill.

Number 8 though looks light, both Mercer and Dombrandt aren't massive and not sure they have power of say Aldritt.

Tom Willis is yer man.

No 7&1/2 wrote:When's the last time we've consistently had the tactic of counter jumping though? Even with Lawes in the team it's often that we just go to counter the maul not contest in the air.

England under Proudfoot generally adopted similar tactics to the Boks. In or around either 22 stay on the ground and target the maul. In the opposition 22 this raises probability of them kicking for touch rather than grass hence gaining lineout ball. In your own 22 most teams favour defending the maul for obvious reasons.

Then between the 10m lines and maybe a bit beyond depending on the game situation they compete in the air more. Higher risk, higher reward, hence sides are more selective with field position when competing in the air. Especially since refs cracked down on contact in the air and defensive jumpers closing the gap.

Geordie wrote:Tom Willis is yer man.

What about Alfie Barbeary (post WC)

Aww Alfie Barbeary.....

He could either become an England stalwart or one of the great What Ifs...

Geordie wrote:Tom Willis is yer man.

I think Willis is talented but having watched the La Rochelle vs Bordeaux final he didn't stand out much against a top side. Definitely no worse than Dombrandt's efforts against France though.

Whilst the score line looked much better than Racing's annihilation by Toulouse (Fickou's comments as Racing skipper after that are brutally honest!) La Rochelle really dominated the first half and could've been ahead by more than 21-3 at half time. They seemed to gear down in the second half and made some subs. The second half felt reminiscent of Tigers vs Leinster in 2021/22. Tiger scored more points than Leinster in a tighter second half where they improved but honestly it felt like Leinster were coasting home after doing the damage early.

Number 8 is looking weak. I think Mercer is a good player but not your typical international 8. Willis is more powerful but I wonder whether powerful enough. Dombrandt was poor during the Six Nations. His best game was against Wales but even that wasn't a big performance, just solid.

propdavid - Barbeary just needs to stay fit, unfortunately. He has areas to work on but also has the invaluable and rare ability to make yards after contact and against set defences. If fit I'd be picking him for the warmups despite his other weaknesses.

king_carlos wrote:

Geordie wrote:Tom Willis is yer man.

I think Willis is talented but having watched the La Rochelle vs Bordeaux final he didn't stand out much against a top side. Definitely no worse than Dombrandt's efforts against France though.

Well we'll see how Saracens develop him.

king_carlos wrote:Launchbury for instance is poor in the air but brilliant defending mauls. But it does generally hold true when you talk to coaches and analysts about this.

I would not necessarily call Launchbury poor in the air. I think that's doing him a disservice - you don't win 70 odd caps for your country at lock by only being so-so. I'd describe him however as solid rather than brilliant. Against an Itoje or a Lawes he's not as good, but he ain't bad. I think it's a misconception that he's poor because he's not thrown to as much as those. You throw to your better jumpers in general. Joe can jump well - and did often for Wasps.

He wouldn't let anyone down and would be a useful and experienced squad member to have. Obviously not a first choice pick, he would be an excellent pick providing he can stay fit. I would have him over Ewels and Jonny Hill in a heartbeat and if Chessum doesn't make it, he's got to be considered.

Mr Bounce wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Launchbury for instance is poor in the air but brilliant defending mauls. But it does generally hold true when you talk to coaches and analysts about this.

I would not necessarily call Launchbury poor in the air. I think that's doing him a disservice - you don't win 70 odd caps for your country at lock by only being so-so. I'd describe him however as solid rather than brilliant. Against an Itoje or a Lawes he's not as good, but he ain't bad. I think it's a misconception that he's poor because he's not thrown to as much as those. You throw to your better jumpers in general. Joe can jump well - and did often for Wasps.

He wouldn't let anyone down and would be a useful and experienced squad member to have. Obviously not a first choice pick, he would be an excellent pick providing he can stay fit. I would have him over Ewels and Jonny Hill in a heartbeat and if Chessum doesn't make it, he's got to be considered.

It's perhaps harsh but by the standard of modern international locks I'd argue justified. If looking for locks who are equal or weaker jumpers in international rugby from recent years I can only really think of Willemse (France's best back rows are largely excellent jumpers though) and Skelton (not kicked on with Australia yet) who basically don't jump so are weaker by default. Then Tomas Lavanini who is probably about on par with Launchbury but again Argentina have jumpers such as Petti and Kremer in the back row anyway.

Stretching beyond that Kote Mikautadze of Georgia was a similar mould to Lavanini but once again Georgia have Beka Gorgadze at 8. Mikautadze has struggled a lot with injury lately too, sadly. Then stretching to strong prospects who are yet uncapped there's also the gigantic Emmanuel Meafou in the France squad who's in the Willemse and Skelton mould.

It's a really short list of second rows jumping at that sort of level these days though.

No debating that Launchbury jumped a lot more and largely solidly for Wasps but it is a very different kettle of fish to the international game.

As said many times Joe was a long time favourite of mine but from what I've seen recently I felt his loose work had declined and given those standout skills were offsetting the lineout jumping I am sceptical. Though I take no joy saying it. Given the relative weakness at lock I'm happy for him to get a chance to prove me wrong in the warmups. I'd love it if the time in Japan has rejuvenated him after so many injuries.

Points taken. He has suffered injury wise and isn't getting younger.

His best years are definitely behind him but I think he is still a potential candidate. Borthwick certainly likes him.

I'd be surprised if Launchbury makes it though if he's been pulling up trees in Japan maybe less so. As it stands he's injured, isn't as mobile as he used to be and is a below average lineout jumper. Borthwick likes a team with mobile physicality and strong set piece at the heart of it. I'd take Itoje, Ribbans and probably Chessum/Martin first. There's a fourth spot there up for grabs as I'm not sure both Chessum and Martin will go.

RE Launchbury I'd honestly rather give Martin the experience of a world Cup. He's the future, he's the physical player we've been missing...and imagine how valuable a world Cup tournament will be to his experience and growth.

Martin and Chesusm could be the partnership we hoped Attwood and Lawes were going to be....

I see Borthwick is considering bring Billy V back in.

Attwood. Are you secretly Stephen Jones?

Hey when they both first came on the scene that's thw partnership everyone thought was going to be England's Dream team for years ...

I don't think even Wasps fans are as big a Launchbury fans as me, wonderful player, massively underrated. But I've always felt that if there are 2 players around the same level go with the youngster. The form of Launchbury since the return from injuries has been ok but much like May you'd be picking him from his previous England form than what he's recently shown. My caveat is that I haven't seen a jot of him since Wasps so don't know anything about his form etc.

Geordie wrote:Hey when they both first came on the scene that's thw partnership everyone thought was going to be England's Dream team for years ...

My abiding memory of Attwood is the break he made down the right wing for England, everyone going nuts for him. And just thinking he has no rugby brain to just hold his man and get it to his winger for the run in. Perhaps harsh to think of lock for that but just stuck with me in terms of rugby intelligence. For better or worse Isiekwe has illicited similar thoughts in terms of he's built like he should be amazing but just doesn't quite have the game.

Geordie wrote:I see Borthwick is considering bring Billy V back in.

Wouldn't surprise me and England do need a heavyweight 8. A top form Billy definitely a good thing, a below par one not so much.

Is Billy even fit though...

Good question although with England squads that doesn't seem to be a consideration...

I'm not getting back onto fitness too heavily as I think king is after my head but...everyone has 6 weeks without a game and now in camp with Walters, fitness doesn't come into it, they will be at their optimum (at least to the plan nod of the head to Lancaster's WC fitness plan). Vunipola wouldn't be how I would currently want to approach the game but if we want to go with a brutal (slow) set piece tight game complimented with kicking it alot then there are worse picks.

Do you continue giving Dombrandt his game hoping he'll come good?

Or Tom Curry at 8 lol

I don't think you can pick any member of a backrow in isolation.

Dombrant is a handy link man and will run lines off the 10. When he remembers to catch the ball that's a very useful think to have but it needs to be paired with a workhorse at 6 than will do the unflashy stuff in the tight exchanges.

Billy V - he'll do all the gritty tight stuff so would fit better with a couple of more mobile flankers. We saw Sarries use McFarland and Earl running riot with Billy V just relentlessly carrying hard to good effect in the Prem.

It's going to depend on the shape of the pack. We can make either work (probably) but what we've learned is that Dombrant can't adapt and Billy V isn't as explosive enough now so is unlikely to be able to either. A Ted Hill or a George Martin at 6 and Dombrant may be feasible.

Mercer is the wildcard somewhat. Be interesting to see if he can bring his all action game from France to the international level.

I think Dombrandt got some hard press in the 6Ns, his nuts and bolts were pretty good. Definitely better than Simmonds, Curry and the more recent version of Vunipola. But it does strike me that he's been asked to adapt his game to that of a Vunipola. Bit of a waste. Ditto with Mercer, good player but I hope if he gets his chance he's not just going to be asked to do Vunipola's old role.

Geordie wrote:Is Billy even fit though...

Already running was latest I'd heard. When he did the knee against La Rochelle it looked nasty but immediate reports the next week were that it wasn't as bad as expected, surgery went well and an early estimated return was early July. So he'd be fit (injury wise at least) for most the camp and warmups.

In terms of conditioning fitness Billy has been very good there for Sarries the last 2 seasons. A big plus with Billy is that when fit he usually plays the 80 as well. Because he's huge there's an odd prevailing thought occasionally posted that he needs subbing but he plays a full game with remarkable regularity for Sarries and England. In 19 starts this season (prior to the La Rochelle game where he did the knee) he only missed 48 minutes through substitution for instance. Largely in games that were clearly won when he came off too - such as when Sarries put 50 points on Tigers early in the season.

I still think Billy's form in the AIs and summer tour to Oz where he was very good were significantly better than Dombrandt getting dominated in contact, making panicked handling errors and walking about in cover in defence. I think Billy's a solid option now rather than a game breaking carrier. His skills do translate to the international game though vitally.

For talk of Dombrandt being used wrong it remains that against good sides defences are so much stronger. Dombrandt is outstanding for Quins when running those great lines off 9 to target weaker forwards defending on the fringes. Hence the eye catching breaks and offloads. Against good international sides those weaknesses don't exist though. Regardless of how he's deployed if Dombrandt can't make yards against international defences in attack and is a weakness defensively himself I don't see where an improvement comes from.

Geordie wrote:Is Billy even fit though...

Already running was latest I'd heard. When he did the knee against La Rochelle it looked nasty but immediate reports the next week were that it wasn't as bad as expected, surgery went well and the first estimated return was early July. So he'd be fit (injury wise at least) for most the camp and warmups.

In terms of conditioning fitness Billy has been very good there for Sarries the last 2 seasons. A big plus with Billy is that when fit he usually plays the 80 as well. Because he's huge there's an odd prevailing thought occasionally posted that he needs subbing but he plays a full game with remarkable regularity for Sarries and England. In 19 starts this season (prior to the La Rochelle game where he did the knee) he only missed 48 minutes through substitution for instance. Largely in games that were clearly won when he came off too - such as when Sarries put 50 points on Tigers early in the season.

I still think Billy's form in the AIs and summer tour to Oz where he was very good were significantly better than Dombrandt getting dominated in contact, making panicked handling errors and walking about in cover in defence. I think Billy's a solid option now rather than a game breaking carrier. His skills do translate to the international game though vitally.

For talk of Dombrandt being used wrong it remains that against good sides defences are so much stronger. Dombrandt is outstanding for Quins when running those great lines off 9 to target weaker forwards defending on the fringes. Hence the eye catching breaks and offloads. Against good international sides those weaknesses don't exist though. Regardless of how he's deployed if Dombrandt can't make yards against international defences in attack and is a weakness defensively himself I don't see where an improvement comes from.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think Dombrandt got some hard press in the 6Ns, his nuts and bolts were pretty good. Definitely better than Simmonds, Curry and the more recent version of Vunipola. But it does strike me that he's been asked to adapt his game to that of a Vunipola. Bit of a waste.  Ditto with Mercer, good player but I hope if he gets his chance he's not just going to be asked to do Vunipola's old role.

We've struggled a bit at 8 since Billy's fitness started to dip, and I think you've hit the nail on the head ther 7 & 1/2 - England's gameplan still has elements that work when you have Billy, and haven't adjusted fully to having a more dynamic 8 with less raw power (which would fit the description of any of the other candidates to a greater or lesser degree).

First things first: I think there's a caveat about passing judgement on most of the players who've been part of recent England squads, especially those who've been introduced since the Lions tour. They've been part of an unsettled and often unclear tactical picture, so we can't easily judge whether their impact in that period has been what it could be with a coherent plan and a team that have had time to gel around it.

Dombrandt is a case in point - his tackling, breakdown work and close carriers have been good and England have often dropped away in those areas when he's gone off, but when he's tried to cut his trademark running lines the timing of the run relative to the pass has often been off and he's knocked it on a lot. They've been good lines, though, and timing is something that gets fixed with familiarity.

You can say the same for most of the others. Earl and Willis have both had their moments of goodness and their disappointing moments. Ludlam is a bit of an exception in that he's done a huge amount of solid graft without having a standout area; he's not quite in the Richard Hill category yet, but perhaps like a more physical Wood or Robshaw.

But 3 months in camp can fix a lot of the stuff that needs fixing, and we will only get hints of that in the warmups - we won't really know if England have got it together until the tougher pool games.

I just hope we don't get the lazy Billy who couldn't even bothered to jog from one breakdown to another (think it was back in 2020). I appreciate what Billy brings when he's in form, but he's not been effective at international level for a while now. Here's hoping he gets back to his best.

That said, I would like Mercer to get at least a couple of games to show his wares. Everyone knows what Billy brings - is he the answer? I'd love to have a young pup in the mould of Ben Morgan. I always felt he should have had more caps.

With Simmonds out of the picture, it leaves Billy Cheeseburger, Dombrandt, and I guess the third choice is Ludlum.  He has played al over the back row, does all the donkey work well, and has a real attacking game.  Now I am not saying he is my first choice at 8, but no doubts he will have game time there.  Could easily see him as starting on the flank and moving to 8 later or possibly as the perfect back sub who can play each back row position and performs quite well as a jumper in the lineout.

Just realised I am missing Mercer. Hoping he can convert his club form into a dynamic English 8.

Doc I would say that Mercer has to be considered. Borthwick clearly likes him as he's been put straight into the squad on his return. I appreciate that not everyone will get selected for the final squad, but I'd sooner have a fit and firing Mercer than a "he might be fit for the first game" Billy.

I think that Ludlam has enough versatility and has shown enough during the 6 Nations to be an almost automatic pick for the final squad. I would have him as one of the flankers.

Mr Bounce wrote:Doc I would say that Mercer has to be considered. Borthwick clearly likes him as he's been put straight into the squad on his return. I appreciate that not everyone will get selected for the final squad, but I'd sooner have a fit and firing Mercer than a "he might be fit for the first game" Billy.

I think that Ludlam has enough versatility and has shown enough during the 6 Nations to be an almost automatic pick for the final squad. I would have him as one of the flankers.

You're right mate. I had missed Mercer originally then added him a bit later. Anyone who earns the Top 14 Player of the Year deserves his shot. And I agree, still leery about Billy V. because of how much he let himself go but still went out and embarrassed himself and Saracens and England. Of course, Eddie Jones let it happen.

Jack Willis starting on the blindside for Toulouse.....

Apparently President Macron is at Stade de France to evaluate Jack Willis.

Great game played at a very high level. Willis certainly not out of place there.

The Torygraph speculating the below will be called up from losing semi finalists Tigers and Saints this week:

Cole
Heyes
Ribbans
Martin
Lawes
Ludlam
Youngs
JvP
Mitchell
Smith
Dingwall
Porter
Watson
Steward

They are usually well informed on England rugby stuff so this will be an interesting test of whether there are still leaks in the England camp. Kelly missing out would be a surprise. OHC will have gone from starter to not making a massive training squad too.

Borthwick kept on infamously tight ship in terms of leaks to the media with Tigers. They gave basically nothing away on injuries and little leaked out. Doing the same with a national setup where journalists have so much more access will basically be impossible though.

I'd be very surprised should Borthwick leave out Kelly. It would give us what at least another 7 games to bed an inside centre in.

H-C doesn't play for Leicester yet though....check the initial list!

Be a real shame if Kelly isn't selected. He's probably our best hope of a long term 12 solution (though Seb Atkinson is looking pretty handy as well).

Freeman isn't on the list either which is a surprise. He's a very good player and if we wanted a wing option that could also be an understudy to Steward he'd be my choice.

Why does anyone think Kelly won't be selected if fit? Borthwick was going to pick him for 6N except he got injured.

I reckon just about every player in contention will be in wider squad when announced and then it'll be trimmed down from there.

Kelly’s not in the announced training group this morning - centres are: Dingwall, W Joseph, Marchant, Porter and Slade.

Poorfour wrote:Kelly’s not in the announced training group this morning - centres are: Dingwall, W Joseph, Marchant, Porter and Slade.

Annoying as Kelly is a better option at 12 than all of those.

I can only think that might have had some surgery at the end of the season and isn't fit.

Poorfour wrote:Kelly’s not in the announced training group this morning - centres are: Dingwall, W Joseph, Marchant, Porter and Slade.

So he is injured? Can be only reason.

Is Dingwall a 12 or 13 or just a centre who can play both?