England - The Next Episode: Part Deux: Phoenix from the Ashes

First topic message reminder :

Net up...Summer Tour to NZ...and a game v Japan

Sharkey06 wrote:I am surprised that Ehren Painter and Josh Iosefa-Scott haven't been given much of a look in at International level.  They are both pretty substantial units at 135kgs+ and at only 26 and 28 have plenty of good years ahead of them.  We know what the South African team did to Genge and Sinkler in the world cup semi final and Stuart was dismantled in the 2022 Autumn international against South Africa.

The recent games against New Zealand have shown that we need to find 4 props who can scrummage.  Bevan Rodd may be halfway decent in the loose, but any Sale fan will tell you he cannot scrummage so seems a pointless pick against South Africa, New Zealand, France and Ireland. Do the South African props do much more than scrummage, lift at the lineout and make their tackles?  Uini Antonio isn't known for running in tries from 50m.

Other countries see our scrum as an easy target, so lets throw some big bodies in - they certainly can't do any worse than a lot of the options we have tried.

Ehren Painter is no where near international class, he seemed to stop improving once he reached his early twenties, left for Chiefs as he couldn't gat any game time at Saints. similar thing happening at Chiefs. Everything is there, he just does not seem to be able to put it together. That and the inability to run faster than an ancient snail.

Sharkey06 wrote:I am surprised that Ehren Painter and Josh Iosefa-Scott haven't been given much of a look in at International level.  They are both pretty substantial units at 135kgs+ and at only 26 and 28 have plenty of good years ahead of them.  We know what the South African team did to Genge and Sinkler in the world cup semi final and Stuart was dismantled in the 2022 Autumn international against South Africa.

The recent games against New Zealand have shown that we need to find 4 props who can scrummage.  Bevan Rodd may be halfway decent in the loose, but any Sale fan will tell you he cannot scrummage so seems a pointless pick against South Africa, New Zealand, France and Ireland. Do the South African props do much more than scrummage, lift at the lineout and make their tackles?  Uini Antonio isn't known for running in tries from 50m.

Other countries see our scrum as an easy target, so lets throw some big bodies in - they certainly can't do any worse than a lot of the options we have tried.

Ehren Painter is no where near international class, he seemed to stop improving once he reached his early twenties, left for Chiefs as he couldn't get any game time at Saints. Similar thing seems to be happening at Chiefs. Everything is there, he just does not seem to be able to put it together. That and the inability to run faster than an ancient snail.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Sharkey06 wrote:I am surprised that Ehren Painter and Josh Iosefa-Scott haven't been given much of a look in at International level.  They are both pretty substantial units at 135kgs+ and at only 26 and 28 have plenty of good years ahead of them.  We know what the South African team did to Genge and Sinkler in the world cup semi final and Stuart was dismantled in the 2022 Autumn international against South Africa.

The recent games against New Zealand have shown that we need to find 4 props who can scrummage.  Bevan Rodd may be halfway decent in the loose, but any Sale fan will tell you he cannot scrummage so seems a pointless pick against South Africa, New Zealand, France and Ireland. Do the South African props do much more than scrummage, lift at the lineout and make their tackles?  Uini Antonio isn't known for running in tries from 50m.

Other countries see our scrum as an easy target, so lets throw some big bodies in - they certainly can't do any worse than a lot of the options we have tried.

Ehren Painter is no where near international class, he seemed to stop improving once he reached his early twenties, left for Chiefs as he couldn't get any game time at Saints. Similar thing seems to be happening at Chiefs. Everything is there, he just does not seem to be able to put it together. That and the inability to run faster than an ancient snail.

Painter started last season well after moving over to Exeter but then his form nosedived over the course of the season. He was a big guy that Saints tried to slim down probably too much. I think he ended up to far the other way at Chiefs.

South Africa has some absolute genetic freaks. They are great at scrum time and do quite a bit round the pitch as well. Malherbe might be the only one that doesn't but he's so destructive in the tight he gets away with it.

The two big lads at the Chiefs just aren't mobile enough to play for England in the current set up. There's a lot more defensive and attacking sets than there are scrums in a game.

Against most teams other than South Africa then Genge is a perfectly good option at scrum time. Marler as we know is quality at scrum time and Baxter looks like another Marler in the making. Rodd only played because of injuries and could be overtaken this season by some other promising looseheads, though two are at Saints who don't have good previous with developing props which is a concern.

South Africa has some absolute genetic freaks. They are great at scrum time and do quite a bit round the pitch as well.

This is true but also they are often replaced wholesale after 50 mins or so and so therefore can give it all for time on pitch knowing their replacements won't diminish impact at scrum. Most nations have first choice front row and replacements often a slight drop off in quality and so starters required to put in more time.
Not an excuse for England or anyone else, good luck to SA for having such strength in depth. A lot of pundits (and players) though think the 6-2 or even 7-1 split shouldn't be allowed. Danny Care quite vocal in this, obviously as a back he wants to see more parity in subs but others think it's spoiling rugby.

I think it's currently fine by laws so that's it. If England had a similar super strength they would undoubtedly use it as would other teams.

Yeah i was really excited by Painters early Exeter career....and thought finally he may become what was hoped...but jeez the guy has the turning range and pace of an oil tanker. If you watch him closely...he really doesnt offer ANYTHING bar a strong scrummager...and you need more for international...

Maybe Baxter can work with him...but he wont be on SB's radar for a long time..and not likely if a few of the U20s come through in the next few years...

mountain man wrote:

South Africa has some absolute genetic freaks. They are great at scrum time and do quite a bit round the pitch as well.

This is true but also they are often replaced wholesale after 50 mins or so and so therefore can give it all for time on pitch knowing their replacements won't diminish impact at scrum. Most nations have first choice front row and replacements often a slight drop off in quality and so starters required to put in more time.
Not an excuse for England or anyone else, good luck to SA for having such strength in depth. A lot of pundits (and players) though think the 6-2 or even 7-1 split shouldn't be allowed. Danny Care quite vocal in this, obviously as a back he wants to see more parity in subs but others think it's spoiling rugby.

I think it's currently fine by laws so that's it. If England had a similar super strength they would undoubtedly use it as would other teams.

I would hate to see it banned. Rugby used to be a game for all shapes and sizes, and with different tactics and skills. Its up to everyone else to learn how to beat SA.

As mentioned above...this golden generation will be coming to an end soon and i dont think the replacements are as good.

Yep as I said, I think it's fine and England would do same if they could.

Agreed with above re subs. I love what the Boks have done for rugby with their new tactics around the bench. It's added another dimension to things. Given the number of subs allowed in rugby, it had been really poorly utilised on the whole. You'd get the odd impact player but often they just happened to be a 2nd choice player who was coincidentally suited to coming on as the game broke up. Younger Beauden Barrett being behind Carter at 10 and Smith at 15 comes to mind. He was second choice anyway, just perfectly suited to coming on late in a game and destroying opposing fans dreams. SBW was similar in that NZ side. Behind Nonu and Conrad Smith on merit, but usefully offered a unique difference when he came on.

Rassie, as annoying as he can be, and the Boks flipped that when they started using Marx and Kitshoff in particular off the bench. Then came the 6-2 with Snyman taking a very prominent role as a replacement lock. With that they could start telling Etzebeth to empty the tank in 50 minutes. Which is a scary prospect from one of the best locks I've seen in rugby. Even as their lock depth took a relative blow with Lood's injury, they added the freak that is Kwagga Smith and played with a 7-1 split.

If the sub rules are as they are, then I want to see teams at the top pushing the boundaries of what you can achieve with it. That's international sport to me.

Whether a trial with different sub rules could be interesting is a different debate. Maybe 6 subs total with a full front row still required. Then the natural balance for the other subs would be a second/back row, a SH and FH or utility back. Give it a go and see how it affects things. There is always the potential for unintended consequences though. Being able to call a mark from the KO was supposed to promote kicking shorter, hence attacking rugby. It really doesn't seem to be!

Some rule changes are obvious wins such as removing Dupont's Law. Most are shades of grey though. I really like the 50-22 for instance, but held up over a line being a goal line dropout still rankles for me. The trial for changing the SH offside line at the scrum seems to be working well in early trials, so I hope that's the next change to filter through.

I have no problem allowing changing the forward/back splits. As long as there is front row cover, it doesn't matter to me. If a team goes 7:1 then if a back gets injured, which they do, then teams will have to deal with it.

Regarding the other rules/laws I think:
The mark on a kickoff can be eliminated.
50/22 has been a great addition.
Held up over the line - goal line drop punishes the attacking team and I would eliminate it.
Need to see more of the SH offside line in games, but I do like the laws as current.

doctor_grey wrote:
Held up over the line - goal line drop punishes the attacking team and I would eliminate it.
 

It does but at the same time it encourages teams to have more plays close to the line than pick and go ad infinitum. I've got no problem with teams bludgeoning their way over but some of the straight banging the head against the brick wall we've seen from otherwise good attacking sides is depressing. Forcing teams to find some more innovative plays close to the line also makes the game a bit more watchable.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:
Held up over the line - goal line drop punishes the attacking team and I would eliminate it.
 

It does but at the same time it encourages teams to have more plays close to the line than pick and go ad infinitum. I've got no problem with teams bludgeoning their way over but some of the straight banging the head against the brick wall we've seen from otherwise good attacking sides is depressing. Forcing teams to find some more innovative plays close to the line also makes the game a bit more watchable.

Agree with that. The amount of times see forwards endlessly recycling ball in attempt to crash over line when there is a clear an obvious route via a quick pass to outside backs does get tedious for spectators and probably wings! Given todays data driven sport, probably find there's a stat that says % chance of scoring is higher by pick and drive hence teams do it. Or is it just white line fever. Whichever it does get boring.

How about a reverse 22 as an alternative? Attacking team restarts with a kick over the 22 into the red zone, defenders on the 5m.

Poorfour wrote:How about a reverse 22 as an alternative? Attacking team restarts with a kick over the 22 into the red zone, defenders on the 5m.

Now that is an interesting suggestion.

We could bring in 6 tackles then hand the ball over?

Geordie wrote:We could bring in 6 tackles then hand the ball over?

Good God no. I don't mind some influences from league but have to draw line somewhere.

And yes I'm sure you were joking.

mountain man wrote:

Poorfour wrote:How about a reverse 22 as an alternative? Attacking team restarts with a kick over the 22 into the red zone, defenders on the 5m.

Now that is an interesting suggestion.

I don't mind the goal line drop out. Generally allows the attacking team to attack from deep. I am slightly disappointed we haven't seen more set plays run from those situations. 99% of the time the ball is getting kicked to roughly halfway. Position a playmaker on either side of the pitch and get the backline ready to shape around them. Use it as another first phase set play style opportunity. The opposition are going to have to leave a couple of players back to cover any potential kick and the chase will be limited to the pace of the forwards (who've probably just had a defensive set).

mountain man wrote:

Geordie wrote:We could bring in 6 tackles then hand the ball over?

Good God no. I don't mind some influences from league but have to draw line somewhere.

And yes I'm sure you were joking.

Sladey's out for a bit. I wonder how the centres will look in the Autumn?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/articles/c0xjx7qdwewo

Mr Bounce wrote:Sladey's out for a bit. I wonder how the centres will look in the Autumn?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/articles/c0xjx7qdwewo

Probably wide open. Dingwall looks short on physicality and Freeman hasn't played enough at 13 you wouldn't have thought (added to the fact his work rate on the wing for us has been crucial). I suspect a lot might depend on early season form. Quins have a few options, Saints have a couple, Atkinson, Hartley, Kelly, Ojomoh. There's plenty with the promise, need one or two to really lay down a marker.

Talking to a few Saints fans they dont see Freeman moving to centre. They see him as a excellent back 3 player - wing or full back who should be developed there to his max.

Tom Litchfield might be one worth watching though...big unit, has some skills and developing nicely in a very good side.....

Tom can barely make the match day XXIII at the moment, he will need a couple of years to fully mature, Having said that he has limited competition, the 4 senior centres being, Dingwall, Hutchinson, Odendaal and if Saints want to play him there, Freeman. Saints have lots of kids that have come through the age grade international circuit but they have yet to be blooded in the Prem.

The player I would like to see progress is Sonny Tonga’uiha, his dad gave me so much pleasure when he played for Saints, I am hoping his lad will do the same.

Excluding the more senior signings this season, Saints have 22 you players in their squad (mostly U21) with less than 10 appearances, the vast majority have between 0 and 5. That is nearly 40% of the overall squad, they either have a lot of faith in them or the budget is stretched.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Tom can barely make the match day XXIII at the moment, he will need a couple of years to fully mature, Having said that he has limited competition, the 4 senior centres being, Dingwall, Hutchinson, Odendaal and if Saints want to play him there, Freeman. Saints have lots of kids that have come through the age grade international circuit but they have yet to be blooded in the Prem.

The player I would like to see progress is Sonny Tonga’uiha, his dad gave me so much pleasure when he played for Saints, I am hoping his lad will do the same.

Excluding the more senior signings this season, Saints have 22 you players in their squad (mostly U21) with less than 10 appearances, the vast majority have  between 0 and 5. That is nearly 40% of the overall squad, they either have a lot of faith in them or the budget is stretched.

Hes been managed well by a good coaching team, and has some good players ahead of him. But hes a powerful young player, and has covered other positions when injuries have required showing hes a good player. I fully expect he'll get more gametime with Saints this season...and SB might be keeping an eye out for an apprentice spot (if they still exist)

In all honesty bar Lawrence, it could be a bit of lottery...like Sam said could well come down to who starts the season well.

Is Marchant back? What happens with Dan Kelly...and his form, is Will Joseph ready?

Aside from that maybe Own Farrell can get a special clause...

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Mr Bounce wrote:Sladey's out for a bit. I wonder how the centres will look in the Autumn?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/articles/c0xjx7qdwewo

Probably wide open. Dingwall looks short on physicality and Freeman hasn't played enough at 13 you wouldn't have thought (added to the fact his work rate on the wing for us has been crucial). I suspect a lot might depend on early season form. Quins have a few options, Saints have a couple, Atkinson, Hartley, Kelly, Ojomoh. There's plenty with the promise, need one or two to really lay down a marker.

Is there any up date on his injury?

Ojomoh needs to step up...

One longer term option for Borthwick is to see if anyone emerges at 12 allowing Lawrence to move back across to 13. Olly Hartley looked very promising before his injury, and 3 of the probable options for Quins are EQPs - but none of them have long to make an impact before the AIs.

I'd have thought that they're more likely to stick with Lawrence at 12 and then bring someone else in at 13 for the AIs. I'd have thought Northmore might be the obvious option - a similar player to Slade, 13 is his best position but he's more physical than many OCs and has been around the camp for a while but with Slade and Marchant ahead of him until now.

Poorfour wrote:One longer term option for Borthwick is to see if anyone emerges at 12 allowing Lawrence to move back across to 13. Olly Hartley looked very promising before his injury, and 3 of the probable options for Quins are EQPs - but none of them have long to make an impact before the AIs.

I'd have thought that they're more likely to stick with Lawrence at 12 and then bring someone else in at 13 for the AIs. I'd have thought Northmore might be the obvious option - a similar player to Slade, 13 is his best position but he's more physical than many OCs and has been around the camp for a while but with Slade and Marchant ahead of him until now.

Yeah i think Lawrence will dictate quite a bit. As mentioned regularly on here...13 is often the defensive leader. Is Lawrence capable of doing that at this level? If he is then finding a 12 is a good shout...if hes not then they're looking for a 13 with those skills.

Plenty of young ones coming through...but few are a finished option or ready. Northmore would certainly be a shout. I never knew why Sam James didnt get more attention.

I think even when Slade is back we need some kind succession planning in place, he is 31 already and will be 34 by the time the next world cup rolls around. I'm not saying it is impossible for him to make it, but his position requires speed and agility.

You have to think that if England can develop some speed/ cutting edge in the centres we will be a different team (much more dangerous to play against). Slade is an excellent defensive marshal, but the thought of having a fast (or powerful) attacking threat at 13 to go along with Smith, Freeman, IFW and Furbank is tantalising.

Cumbrian wrote:I think even when Slade is back we need some kind succession planning in place, he is 31 already and will be 34 by the time the next world cup rolls around.  I'm not saying it is impossible for him to make it, but his position requires speed and agility.

You have to think that if England can develop some speed/ cutting edge in the centres we will be a different team (much more dangerous to play against).  Slade is an excellent defensive marshal, but the thought of having a fast (or powerful) attacking threat at 13 to go along with Smith, Freeman, IFW and Furbank is tantalising.  

A lot depends on whether Marchant comes back to England when his French contract ends. He left for France because Eddie was giving him occasional appearances on the wing rather than a shot at IC, but Borthwick preferred him to Slade during the RWC. Especially if Smith M retains the 10 shirt, Marchant is probably the strongest attacking option if he makes himself available.

Poorfour wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:I think even when Slade is back we need some kind succession planning in place, he is 31 already and will be 34 by the time the next world cup rolls around.  I'm not saying it is impossible for him to make it, but his position requires speed and agility.

You have to think that if England can develop some speed/ cutting edge in the centres we will be a different team (much more dangerous to play against).  Slade is an excellent defensive marshal, but the thought of having a fast (or powerful) attacking threat at 13 to go along with Smith, Freeman, IFW and Furbank is tantalising.  

A lot depends on whether Marchant comes back to England when his French contract ends. He left for France because Eddie was giving him occasional appearances on the wing rather than a shot at IC, but Borthwick preferred him to Slade during the RWC. Especially if Smith M retains the 10 shirt, Marchant is probably the strongest attacking option if he makes himself available.

You mean OC..13..

How will Quins starting back line look...ie where do you fit Will Joseph, Northmore and Beard?

Think this shows the issue England have in some positions. Notably 12 and to a lesser extent 13. This has been going on for what 5-6 years or more? Eddie banked the farm on Manu to the detriment of England at times.

If not Lawrence at 12 it's who. At 13 there are more options, Lawrence for one if he's freed up from 12. I would like Freeman to be tried there by England, maybe as a second half sub/move.

Joe Marchant is 28 himself. He'll be 31/32 by the next world cup, not like he's a long term option, particularly as he's away from the side over in France.

There's lots of questions. Northmore isn't like Slade, he has nowhere close to the all round game. He's big and quick though will he be playing 12 moving forward as Quins need an Andre replacement. Having toured in the squad he's got a good shout for getting a shot.

Litchfield looks a poor man's Lawrence currently. He's good in the wider channels where he can isolate a defender but running into contact he gets driven back. Not got the handling skills and whilst a handy squad player I'm not sure he'll kick on from there. Freeman has a better chance at 13 for Saints who might not want to specifically target changing his position but with the talent they have on the wings and a lack of centres in the squad a move inside for him might make sense.

I will be surprised if Northmore converts to 12. He has not played well when asked to play there in the past, and is Quins' best outside centre at the moment.

Marchant turned 28 two weeks ago. He will be 31 at the start of the next RWC, about the same age as Slade was in the 6N and Farrell was last RWC.

Twickenham to be renamed the Allianz Stadium

Not a fan of this!

mountain man wrote:Twickenham to be renamed the Allianz Stadium

Not a fan of this!

Would you have been more of a fan of the RFU selling the stadium and taking a half share in Wembley? Because that was supposedly the alternative.

I have no idea how effective naming stadia after your brand is as a marketing tool, but it's a relatively harmless way for a union to get a significant amount of cash, which it really needs right now.

I'm purely going on name. I'm not naive enough to not realise money talks and deals like this are required to ensure investment in improvements etc but for me England home if rugby will always be Twickenham.

If you are happy with the Allianz Stadium then fill ya boots

formerly known as Sam wrote:Joe Marchant is 28 himself. He'll be 31/32 by the next world cup, not like he's a long term option, particularly as he's away from the side over in France.

There's lots of questions. Northmore isn't like Slade, he has nowhere close to the all round game. He's big and quick though will he be playing 12 moving forward as Quins need an Andre replacement. Having toured in the squad he's got a good shout for getting a shot.

Litchfield looks a poor man's Lawrence currently. He's good in the wider channels where he can isolate a defender but running into contact he gets driven back. Not got the handling skills and whilst a handy squad player I'm not sure he'll kick on from there. Freeman has a better chance at 13 for Saints who might not want to specifically target changing his position but with the talent they have on the wings and a lack of centres in the squad a move inside for him might make sense.

I doubt Saints will be moving Freeman to 13 from what ive heard. Better to see just how good he can be as a wing or FB...probably wing.

I can't actually see a change at 12 for a good while as the options are either questionable (Dingwalls physicality) too far away (Hartley, Atkinson)or need to really step up this season (Ojomoh/ Kelly).

So it's OL at 12 and a new 13.
So who has the right fit for the tactics efc ..and of course who can cope with the defensive leadership role?
I'm a fan of Will Joseph...

Geordie wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Joe Marchant is 28 himself. He'll be 31/32 by the next world cup, not like he's a long term option, particularly as he's away from the side over in France.

There's lots of questions. Northmore isn't like Slade, he has nowhere close to the all round game. He's big and quick though will he be playing 12 moving forward as Quins need an Andre replacement. Having toured in the squad he's got a good shout for getting a shot.

Litchfield looks a poor man's Lawrence currently. He's good in the wider channels where he can isolate a defender but running into contact he gets driven back. Not got the handling skills and whilst a handy squad player I'm not sure he'll kick on from there. Freeman has a better chance at 13 for Saints who might not want to specifically target changing his position but with the talent they have on the wings and a lack of centres in the squad a move inside for him might make sense.

I doubt Saints will be moving Freeman to 13 from what ive heard. Better to see just how good he can be as a wing or FB...probably wing.

There's Hutchinson, Dingwall, Odendaal and Litchfield as specialist centres at Saints. Odendaal is injured for the staff of the season, Hutchinson has issues tackling and Litchfield is raw.

At fullback you'd have thought Furbank is nailed on. Young Hendy

On the wings they've got Hendy, Sleightholme, Freeman and Ramm. Cousins coming through as well.

That's four quality wingers, moving Freeman into 13 allows more of Saints best players to be on the pitch at the same time. Would you prefer Sleightholme, Dingwall, Freeman, Hendy, Furbank or Sleightholme, Dingwall, Hutchinson, Freeman, Furbank?

Odendaal returning from injury is possibly a fly in the ointment of that plan as he gives Saints a more physical presence and a direct carrying threat that helps create space for the others. Adds to the defence as well.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Geordie wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Joe Marchant is 28 himself. He'll be 31/32 by the next world cup, not like he's a long term option, particularly as he's away from the side over in France.

There's lots of questions. Northmore isn't like Slade, he has nowhere close to the all round game. He's big and quick though will he be playing 12 moving forward as Quins need an Andre replacement. Having toured in the squad he's got a good shout for getting a shot.

Litchfield looks a poor man's Lawrence currently. He's good in the wider channels where he can isolate a defender but running into contact he gets driven back. Not got the handling skills and whilst a handy squad player I'm not sure he'll kick on from there. Freeman has a better chance at 13 for Saints who might not want to specifically target changing his position but with the talent they have on the wings and a lack of centres in the squad a move inside for him might make sense.

I doubt Saints will be moving Freeman to 13 from what ive heard. Better to see just how good he can be as a wing or FB...probably wing.

There's Hutchinson, Dingwall, Odendaal and Litchfield as specialist centres at Saints. Odendaal is injured for the staff of the season, Hutchinson has issues tackling and Litchfield is raw.

At fullback you'd have thought Furbank is nailed on. Young Hendy

On the wings they've got Hendy, Sleightholme, Freeman and Ramm. Cousins coming through as well.

That's four quality wingers, moving Freeman into 13 allows more of Saints best players to be on the pitch at the same time. Would you prefer Sleightholme, Dingwall, Freeman, Hendy, Furbank or Sleightholme, Dingwall, Hutchinson, Freeman, Furbank?

Odendaal returning from injury is possibly a fly in the ointment of that plan as he gives Saints a more physical presence and a direct carrying threat that helps create space for the others. Adds to the defence as well.

Sleightholme, Dingwall, Hutchinson, Freeman, Furbank for me Sam. Hendy still developing and looks a prospect and another big unit..but he can come off the bench for the moment.

Geordie wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Geordie wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Joe Marchant is 28 himself. He'll be 31/32 by the next world cup, not like he's a long term option, particularly as he's away from the side over in France.

There's lots of questions. Northmore isn't like Slade, he has nowhere close to the all round game. He's big and quick though will he be playing 12 moving forward as Quins need an Andre replacement. Having toured in the squad he's got a good shout for getting a shot.

Litchfield looks a poor man's Lawrence currently. He's good in the wider channels where he can isolate a defender but running into contact he gets driven back. Not got the handling skills and whilst a handy squad player I'm not sure he'll kick on from there. Freeman has a better chance at 13 for Saints who might not want to specifically target changing his position but with the talent they have on the wings and a lack of centres in the squad a move inside for him might make sense.

I doubt Saints will be moving Freeman to 13 from what ive heard. Better to see just how good he can be as a wing or FB...probably wing.

There's Hutchinson, Dingwall, Odendaal and Litchfield as specialist centres at Saints. Odendaal is injured for the staff of the season, Hutchinson has issues tackling and Litchfield is raw.

At fullback you'd have thought Furbank is nailed on. Young Hendy

On the wings they've got Hendy, Sleightholme, Freeman and Ramm. Cousins coming through as well.

That's four quality wingers, moving Freeman into 13 allows more of Saints best players to be on the pitch at the same time. Would you prefer Sleightholme, Dingwall, Freeman, Hendy, Furbank or Sleightholme, Dingwall, Hutchinson, Freeman, Furbank?

Odendaal returning from injury is possibly a fly in the ointment of that plan as he gives Saints a more physical presence and a direct carrying threat that helps create space for the others. Adds to the defence as well.

Sleightholme, Dingwall, Hutchinson, Freeman, Furbank for me Sam. Hendy still developing and looks a prospect and another big unit..but he can come off the bench for the moment.

I'd ditch Hutchinson in a heartbeat and take Ramm or Hendy if I were Saints. Stack the attack.

Doesn't matter a great deal from an England perspective as of we remove Freeman from the back three we lose our primary chaser for the box kicks and the player we tend to position in order to collect opposition box kicks. It's not a particular strength of any of Sleightholme, IFW or Furbank though they are all passable at it.

From an England point of view, we are putting a lot of eggs in the Lawrence basket. What if he gets a bad injury early in the season, or his form goes into the toilet?

It still astounds me that with ten clubs and the passing years we still haven't managed to produce enough international class centres.

I wonder if it would be worth recreating something for the centres like the Nathan Catt's propping clinic.

This ^

Issue I think was partly Manu being such a game changer that coaches put everything into playing him if at all possible. Then we had Farrell was captain which forced hand into playing him even if not in best of form.
Then you get situation of several top level overseas players signed for English clubs and happening to be 12/13 which meant less opportunities for home developed talent.
Plus of course maybe the Englsih centres weren't quite up to it Internationally.

A variety of reasons but ultimately same outcome. A lack of Int class centres especially inside centre.

Hopefully though this will improve in time. For a while England seemed lacking in out and out wings, May was at end of career so not at his best, Daly was repeatedly played there etc. Now though we have Feyi-Waboso who is pretty much nailed on starter, Freeman, Sleightholme, maybe Murley gets another look etc.

mountain man wrote:This ^

Issue I think was partly Manu being such a game changer that coaches put everything into playing him if at all possible. Then we had Farrell was captain which forced hand into playing him even if not in best of form.
Then you get situation of several top level overseas players signed for English clubs and happening to be 12/13 which meant less opportunities for home developed talent.
Plus of course maybe the Englsih centres weren't quite up to it Internationally.

A variety of reasons but ultimately same outcome. A lack of Int class centres especially inside centre.

Hopefully though this will improve in time. For a while England seemed lacking in out and out wings, May was at end of career so not at his best, Daly was repeatedly played there etc. Now though we have Feyi-Waboso who is pretty much nailed on starter, Freeman, Sleightholme, maybe Murley gets another look etc.

It's got to be more than that. England seem to have really struggled to grow strong inside centres for 20 years now. That has to be down to more than a couple of individual players being favoured by coaches. If anything, I'd say it's the other way round: if England had had a strong stable of centres then coaches wouldn't have relied as much on Manu or Farrell.

There have been a fair few contenders, but none of them fulfilled their early promise. It's hard to tell whether England have just been really unlucky with injuries, or if they are just not bringing people through.

Well I did say a variety of reasons including maybe England players just not quite up to it :

Then you get situation of several top level overseas players signed for English clubs and happening to be 12/13 which meant less opportunities for home developed talent.
Plus of course maybe the Englsih centres weren't quite up to it Internationally.

A variety of reasons but ultimately same outcome. A lack of Int class centres especially inside centre.

Cumbrian wrote:From an England point of view, we are putting a lot of eggs in the Lawrence basket.  What if he gets a bad injury early in the season, or his form goes into the toilet?  

It still astounds me that with ten clubs and the passing years we still haven't managed to produce enough international class centres.

I wonder if it would be worth recreating something for the centres like the Nathan Catt's propping clinic.

We've got bags of potential talent. Just need some to come to fruition.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:From an England point of view, we are putting a lot of eggs in the Lawrence basket.  What if he gets a bad injury early in the season, or his form goes into the toilet?  

It still astounds me that with ten clubs and the passing years we still haven't managed to produce enough international class centres.

I wonder if it would be worth recreating something for the centres like the Nathan Catt's propping clinic.

We've got bags of potential talent. Just need some to come to fruition.

I don't know marra, I think we've been debating this question on one board/guise or another for well over a decade and I've lost count the number of times I've convinced myself that there is potentially a game changing centre partnership just around the corner.  

Sometimes I wish they would just pick a U20s young 6ft 2in & 17st flanker and give him videos of Andre Esterhuizen to watch, "Take this and run very fast at that!"

Looking at it objectively, I'm not convinced that Kelly is going to be the answer at inside centre.  I hope that he flourishes under Cheika and proves me wrong, but he seems really far from an international player at the moment.

You'd know better than me, is Woodward likely to get much time at Leicester next season?

Like you, I'm not convinced by Tom Litchfield, he seems like a good club player at best to me (as does Dingwall unfortunately), but I'm not sure he has that extra 10% to really make a difference.  Unfortunately that is also how I see Ojomoh at the moment too, he looks decent in premiership matches, but I don't really see him doing anything that might set him apart at international level.  He isn't freakishly powerful or fast, he doesn't have exceptional footwork or that X-Factor that will make defences frightened.  I'd put Seb Atkinson in this category too.

I had/have hopes for Hartley and Wimbush because they are big, but maybe I'm seeing what I want to see.  Indeed I raised that point about the latter underneath a video by the rugby analyst (to which he responded).  

I have hopes for Joseph, but he hasn't even broken into the Quins' first team yet.  

Who else is there? A bunch of players approaching/ in there mid twenties who have never really convinced.

I suppose a good exercise would be to imagine an opposition international 12 and 13 and mentally pit any of these our against them and ask yourself if in a match situation, how do you imagine the exchange going...

Unfortunately I see whoever we pick as somebody 'doing a job' rather than being a genuine threat, which to a degree is what the Slade/Lawrence partnership is, at least IMO.

Good work by the RFU on the money they got. To get ten times more than the WRU did when selling their naming rights, is insane.

Cumbrian wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:From an England point of view, we are putting a lot of eggs in the Lawrence basket.  What if he gets a bad injury early in the season, or his form goes into the toilet?  

It still astounds me that with ten clubs and the passing years we still haven't managed to produce enough international class centres.

I wonder if it would be worth recreating something for the centres like the Nathan Catt's propping clinic.

We've got bags of potential talent. Just need some to come to fruition.

I don't know marra, I think we've been debating this question on one board/guise or another for well over a decade and I've lost count the number of times I've convinced myself that there is potentially a game changing centre partnership just around the corner.  

Sometimes I wish they would just pick a U20s young 6ft 2in & 17st flanker and give him videos of Andre Esterhuizen to watch, "Take this and run very fast at that!"

Looking at it objectively, I'm not convinced that Kelly is going to be the answer at inside centre.  I hope that he flourishes under Cheika and proves me wrong, but he seems really far from an international player at the moment.

You'd know better than me, is Woodward likely to get much time at Leicester next season?

Like you, I'm not convinced by Tom Litchfield, he seems like a good club player at best to me (as does Dingwall unfortunately), but I'm not sure he has that extra 10% to really make a difference.  Unfortunately that is also how I see Ojomoh at the moment too, he looks decent in premiership matches, but I don't really see him doing anything that might set him apart at international level.  He isn't freakishly powerful or fast, he doesn't have exceptional footwork or that X-Factor that will make defences frightened.  I'd put Seb Atkinson in this category too.

I had/have hopes for Hartley and Wimbush because they are big, but maybe I'm seeing what I want to see.  Indeed I raised that point about the latter underneath a video by the rugby analyst (to which he responded).  

I have hopes for Joseph, but he hasn't even broken into the Quins' first team yet.  

Who else is there? A bunch of players approaching/ in there mid twenties who have never really convinced.

I suppose a good exercise would be to imagine an opposition international 12 and 13 and mentally pit any of these our against them and ask yourself if in a match situation, how do you imagine the exchange going...

Unfortunately I see whoever we pick as somebody 'doing a job' rather than being a genuine threat, which to a degree is what the Slade/Lawrence partnership is, at least IMO.

Woodward might get some game time, he's more likely to get more game time at Nottingham to build up his experience. Probably better for him spend some time in the Championship and then come into a settled team. It certainly hurt Kelly's confidence last season to be switching between 12 and 13 in an attack that was largely non-existent. Kelly has probably the shortest route to test rugby in that if he can refind his best form he's got the physicality, skill set and pace that you'd want to see. Been a little while not since we've seen that form though. The other thing with Woodward is that he played some age grade rugby at 10 and given the lack of flyhalf options in the Tigers squad we may see him trialled there during PRC games. Will Wand the young centre from Coventry has signed at Tigers and he seems both big and quick and was last year's Championship 13 in the team of the season. Be interesting to see if he adapts.

Ojomoh needs to either start regularly at Bath next season or move next summer. Very skillful and quick for a 12. Not going to get anywhere sat on the bench though.

Quins have a selection of centres in Northmore, Beard and Joseph that could all step up. Beard and Joseph bring plenty of pace and Northmore adds some physicality as well as pace. I'm sort of hoping they back Kerr at 12 in the same way they did with Smith at 10. Kerr could be a classy option.

I've got hopes Wimbush will develop nicely and become an English Rougerie though that may take some time. Not sure we'll see it soon enough for England to benefit.

Seb Atkinson reminds me of Ant Allen. The glue that holds the midfield together and makes everyone else look good. Like Allen not sure whether he's got the physicality for international rugby.

I'm cautiously optimistic that we have options. Far more than in prior years where it's been either option a or b and if we were lucky there was an option c.

I’ve been impressed by Kerr too, but I think he’s a couple of year from senior rugby. For one thing he needs to add some bulk, and for another if Quins are sensible they will make sure he has done the injury prevention prep he needs to survive in senior rugby.

The plan was never for Smith to play as much as he did at an early age, but that horrific injury to Dimitri Katrakilis didn’t leave them with much option. Fortunately he’s been fairly lucky with injuries, but inside centre is a much more abrasive position.

As for how to perm the centres, each of Joseph, Beard and Northmore got a run at OC last year because the other two were injured, but Northmore is probably first choice when they are all fit. None of them looks to me like an option at IC, so I am expecting that Quins will look to Anyanwu, Bradley or Hyde, or perhaps play Jarrod Evans there. Sadly the latter isn’t an EQP option…

RiscaGame wrote:Good work by the RFU on the money they got. To get ten times more than the WRU did when selling their naming rights, is insane.

It seems to me to be worth more than a measly £10 million per year.  

And though I don't like it at all, naming rights are becoming part of sporting landscape, part of the revenue stream.

I guess it was almost ten years ago, but it still seems very cheap.

I am not overly a fan of it, but as you say it's an easy way of getting cash.

doctor_grey wrote:

RiscaGame wrote:Good work by the RFU on the money they got. To get ten times more than the WRU did when selling their naming rights, is insane.

It seems to me to be worth more than a measly £10 million per year.  

And though I don't like it at all, naming rights are becoming part of sporting landscape, part of the revenue stream.

£10m is in line with top stadia from what little I understand on the subject. Allianz are paying Bayern Munich similar for their naming rights.