Foden has been constantly the best full-back in Europe. If all those named players are on form I'd still back Foden ahead of them.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
New England starting 15?
- Thread starter sdr
- Start date
- Status
Foden has been constantly the best full-back in Europe. If all those named players are on form I'd still back Foden ahead of them.
I think OF does need to be blooded this Six Nations but I sense it won't go too well... He's good enough to be worth a shot but I have a sneaking feeling that he won't do enough to get the backline moving and might well just not make the grade. He'll be away from the special ones and most likely without the dominant pack that he has come to rely on seeing him versus France, Ireland and Wales shall be interesting and will prove whether he is up to the task. If he isn't there is no real need to worry as there are a fair few young flyhalves developing in various academies that look to be suitable to make the grade.
Need is a strong word. He's 20 and time is on his side. There will be a tour in the summer (quite a big one presumably), games in the autumn - there is no shortage of international rugby to chuck a young man into. Nor, if picked, should he be written off if he fails to perform. I am puzzled as to why you'd pick him if you think he won't do enough to get the backline moving.
Apparently Lancaster has been talking about wanting a second 10 at 12 - which could be a hint that he's going to go for Farrell there. Its either him or Twelvetrees that can offer that; well, and Barritt, but he rarely shows his FH skills at Sarries. Allen as a very outside bet (Barkley's currently injured right?) If there's a place for Farrell in the England set-up at the moment, imo its at 12.
I'm biased and one eyed, but I think he's got a great future ahead of him. He's a workaholic blindside who's been age level England captain in the past.
Not certain he'll ever be a regular international, but he has all the makings of a club legend in prospect. Think of a young Budge Poutney.
Was very highly rated as a kid, but seemed to be struggling along at Northampton for a bit. However, he's got over his poor disciplinary record, and seems to be playing well again. He came through as a 7 but Northampton mainly play him at 6. Think he's currently injured though, that or very out of favour, hasn't played mid-November.
Broken thumb when I spoke to him in December.
I guess it kind of makes sense. Two 10s = two kicking options. Whatever Lancaster's trying to do, I just hope he can involve our OBs a little more, since that's probably where our talent lies.
When is he due back? Can't see him being involved in the EPS, not just returning, but I'd like to see him get some more Saxons games.
And even if he isn't, he's going to be very important to Saints with Wood in the squad. Who's likely to play 7 in that situation, Clark or Dowson? Or even Nutley?
I'd pick him because he's doing fairly well at Sarries and needs to be tried out, even if he isn't up to the job it is better to find out whether he is or is not rather than leave him out in the cold. He could also be a dependable player who nails all of his kicks and works well with a set of forwards going forwards as part of a set piece dominated display. A forwards fly-half as opposed to a backs one like Burns...
Barkley is injured ATM (thumb IIRC) but TBH he hasn't been doing himself any favours as all he seems to do is to kick away possession - at Bath we'd be better putting Hipkiss at 12 since he'd just run with the ball and not gift it away to people like Foden. 12 could be a good call for Farrell but I'd also like to see Twelvetrees there - it's almost like he was named for it - I was very impressed by his performance from 10 last weekend he could give the kind of flexiblity between 10 & 12 that SL is after. Finally lets just hope Farrell doesn't play at 13, t'would be a disaster, even Banahan would be better there (ok maybe not
).Whilst I think 10 is the most symbolic change for England I think 9 and 13 are the most worrying areas for England. With no Care England might have to resort to Simpson or somebody relatively untried and tested. 13 is a worry for me as it Manu's injury leaves England weakened there and I am not entirely convinced that there is anyone ready to fill the slot ATM.... god forbid we might see Banahan re-emerge there (who now seems to be playing as badly for Bath as he did for England).
I'm hoping Lancaster isn't a Banahan fan: really really hoping.
I think he got his Saxons caps before Lancaster was in charge....
I think he got his Saxons caps before Lancaster was in charge....
Am fairly sure Johnson picked the Saxons teams, not Lancaster, and that past selection is not a guide. Although obviously players he's worked with will have a slight advantage.
I'd be tempted to use Allen at 13 in the Scotland match and then get Trinder involved vs Italy the next week
gingergenius
First XV
I think Farrell's best suited to playing 12, alongside a real ballplayer at 10 (ie. Flood). Which is why he and Hodgson are going well at Sarries.
The problem is, England won't have that luxury. (This is all assuming, of course, that they are ignoring anyone old)
What is left is a conundrum at 10. Flood is likely injured, and therefore the premiership has literally 0 capped candidates. The options are: Farrell, Burns, Lamb.
To fit the Flood - Farrell model, it would be easy to replace Flood with either Burns or Lamb, because both are ballplayers who I think would work well with Farrell outside them.
However, the 6 Nations is not a competition known for the high quality of its rugby, and especially not Murrayfield. It's more about pressure and intensity. Personally, I think a Burns/ Lamb - Farrell combination would be a huge risk, since we don't know how Burns/ Lamb will handle the pressure and he'll have a debutant outside him.
With Farrell at 10, you can pick Barritt at 12. Which gives two benefits, especially considering the nature of the 6N and Murrayfield. You'll have the most reliable option at 10, undisputably. And outside him he'll have a debutant, but one who is his clubmate and who is also the definition of reliable.
For me, Farrell-Barritt is blatantly obvious. The question of 13 remains, and whoever Lancaster picks here will be either a gamble (Trinder or a half-fit Allen) or painful (Tindall or Banahan).
The problem is, England won't have that luxury. (This is all assuming, of course, that they are ignoring anyone old)
What is left is a conundrum at 10. Flood is likely injured, and therefore the premiership has literally 0 capped candidates. The options are: Farrell, Burns, Lamb.
To fit the Flood - Farrell model, it would be easy to replace Flood with either Burns or Lamb, because both are ballplayers who I think would work well with Farrell outside them.
However, the 6 Nations is not a competition known for the high quality of its rugby, and especially not Murrayfield. It's more about pressure and intensity. Personally, I think a Burns/ Lamb - Farrell combination would be a huge risk, since we don't know how Burns/ Lamb will handle the pressure and he'll have a debutant outside him.
With Farrell at 10, you can pick Barritt at 12. Which gives two benefits, especially considering the nature of the 6N and Murrayfield. You'll have the most reliable option at 10, undisputably. And outside him he'll have a debutant, but one who is his clubmate and who is also the definition of reliable.
For me, Farrell-Barritt is blatantly obvious. The question of 13 remains, and whoever Lancaster picks here will be either a gamble (Trinder or a half-fit Allen) or painful (Tindall or Banahan).
If flood is injured i'd rather have hodgson at 10 rather than any young player simply because it will help farrell at 12 and the other youn players around to ahve some experience.
In a year or 2 players like burns can work off the bench and eventually take over but we do need some kind of experienced old head in there. It would also help farrell ten fold having his club partner at international level.
10. Flood or hodgson
12.Farrell
13. Trinder/ barrett (played there a little bit) ?
Also one mroe question i have noticed that marler and many other props are quicker and more mobile/ agile than tindall was at the world cup. Makes me laugh for a while before i cry!
In a year or 2 players like burns can work off the bench and eventually take over but we do need some kind of experienced old head in there. It would also help farrell ten fold having his club partner at international level.
10. Flood or hodgson
12.Farrell
13. Trinder/ barrett (played there a little bit) ?
Also one mroe question i have noticed that marler and many other props are quicker and more mobile/ agile than tindall was at the world cup. Makes me laugh for a while before i cry!
Any 10 playing for the Saracens would look to have composure - he has the gift of playing behind an excellent pack. Similarly, I don't think it's a coincidence that Lamb looks to have a lot more composure now he plays for Northampton. (I do think his game has come on, and I'm a fan of his, but he's infamous for lacking in composure, something which seems to have been eradicated since he moved to Northampton.) For someone playing behind a not-so-obviously good pack, Burns is incredibly composed. He matches Farrell in the kicking percentages this season, has really come on in his in-field kicking game, but more importantly, has a great attacking instinct - something invaluable in a team looking to unleash the likes of Foden.
Not that I'm entirely opposed to Farrell, just that I'm not sure why he's "undisputably" more reliable. For now, I'd go:
10. Burns 12. Barritt 13. Farrell
If Burns doesn't do well, Farrell to 10 and a center comes in off the bench.
Last edited:
Glos don't play massive games, we're currently a mid-table Premiership side, and in a Heineken cup group with Harlequins and Toulouse... we're not going to be competing in finals or what have you.
But he kicked a 78th minute penalty from 45m out to draw the game against Saracens on new years day... which is about as big as a game will come for Glos this year.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
