[2013 EOYT] England

[Crapspray]

Mako's breakdown work seems to have improved a lot as well. He's won a good few turnovers when I've watched him, and his work rate seems to have gone up as well.

 

[Peat]

So, if we're going to read a lot into Lancasters comments and Robshaw doesn't single handedly win both of Quin's European games then it looks like Kvesic at 7, Wood at 6 and with the armband and Burrell at 12 with Twelvetrees missing out mainly due to Glos not having a pack.

What was the context of him comments about Dickinson? Was he being asked whether he'd pick him off the back of his start to the season?

Some more Lancaster quotes

"I would have no problem going into the autumn internationals playing Chris at seven," Lancaster said. "I have always been comfortable playing Chris there. He has delivered for England on a consistent basis. No one can say, in any of the games he played for England, he didn't do what we wanted him to do. I'm certainly happy with what he is doing. What we want to see develop there is competition for places."

'There were areas of the game we wanted him to work on and areas he wanted to work on, I'm certainly happy with what he is doing. What we need is more competition in that position. Matt Kvesic had a good tour, and Will Fraser played his first game of the season at the weekend, but I would have no problem going into the autumn internationals playing Chris at 7.'

Also, I can't find a newspaper giving the quote (first two were ESPN and DM), but I saw someone post elsewhere Lancaster talking about captaincy candidates and he named four guys - Robshaw, Wood, Hartley and Parling.

So... Lancaster certainly doesn't want it to feel like its done and dusted.

 

[ratsapprentice]

He mentioned Parling on the BBC radio interview yesterday.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Considering Hartley for captain is the most hypocritical thing I've heard in a long time.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

I'm pretty sure Robshaw will keep the armband - Kvesic clearly has a case and will be next in line, but Gloucester's start to the season won't have done him any favours.

I'd like to say: Early doors it may be, but Jake Cooper-Wooley is a young guy who is really thriving under the new laws and should be in contention for the saxons at the next opportunity. In general it seems to me some of the taller (but also bigger) props are doing well because they have the reach, longer legs etc, to take a step back before engaging and thus emulate the 'hit' effect, even if they're already bound. JCW is also a really big guy and an excellent carrier.

Anyway, as for the games coming up I don't think there will be that many changes to the first choice side - I just think that Lancaster wants to reinforce that nothing's a given and players don't own a spot unless they continually play to the highest level.

for me the talking points are:

• Whether lancaster will be a bit brave and go for Wilson at tight-head. This said, the Leicester scrum seems to be doing very well with Cole and Youngs.
• Who has impressed more out of Lawes and Attwood to bench for the first game.
• Whether Lancaster still rates Joseph highly enough to be first choice at 13
• Whether Burns has done enough to retain the England bench spot for now(with Flood as the obvious competition).
• Whether Lancaster has at last recognised how ****e youngs is and will he therefore go for an efficient, speedy and organised 9 such as Dickson - only Dickson actually, and have Care on the bench for inspiration
• Whether lancaster recognises that he doesn't have to keep Goode in the match 23 just out of pity for how bad he is. I'm 100% certain that the two wings will be actual wingers - my only question is whether Lancaster tries to keep a full-back such as Goode on the bench as cover. I hope not.
• Whether Foden has done enough to oust Brown. I think he has, I doubt that Lancaster agrees.
• Whether Vunipola or kvesic will the bench spot

These are the things that jump to mind: If I haven't mentioned the first 15 much it's because I think in most positions it will remain the same.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I guess that means Hartley would be captaining from the bench as surely Youngs is starting at Hooker!


As for Ben Kays 15, is he a ritard?

Goode is still rubbish, Borwn is not better than Foden or yarde.
Corbs must start at 1 - as he did for the lions!!!!
Just stupid

1 Corbs
2 Youngs
3 Willson (show Cole he has to work on things)
4 Lauchberry
5 Parling - Captain (you don't have a selection probelm in the backrow then)
6 Wood
7 Robshaw (see how the 6/7 combo works and then see if you need to bring in kvesic)
8 Morgan (start with him and see if he gains any form coming off a better platform)
9 I'd love Dickson to start but have a feeling super slow Youngs will
10 Farrell
11 Ashton/ Wade - whoever trains better, i don't rate ashton but who esle? Brown again?
12 12 trees - maybe eastmond if 12trees doesn't cut it in training
13 JJ - no choice really
14 Yarde
15 Foden - in amazing form

I'm so excited about the November games!!!!

 

[Crapspray]

Some interesting stats provided in this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24400280 Though they don't include last weekend's games.

Stand-outs for me being:

- Robshaw has won as many turnovers as Kvesic.
- Farrell has kicked the ball less than both Burns and Ford, and has poor defensive stats.
- Yarde is miles ahead of the other wingers in all areas bar passing.
- Morgan has averaged the same metres per carry as Vunipola.

 

[j'nuh]

Some interesting stats provided in this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24400280 Though they don't include last weekend's games.

I say this a lot, but you have to be A LOT more thorough with stats to actually make any use of them. Speaking from the perspective of a maths/stats grad, I actually feel that currently, rugby statistics mislead people, and some stats are even red herrings.

- Robshaw has won as many turnovers as Kvesic.

Firstly, turnovers per game is not a totally useful stat since it doesn't take into account the amount of rucks the flanker has been able to contest. It's much easier to rack up the turnover stats if you're playing against a team that has gone through 100 rucks in a game, than one who goes through 40. A much better stat is turnovers per number of opposition's rucks (and to stop decimalisation, better yet would be turnovers per 100 rucks). Robshaw and Kvesic had 4 turnovers each, but Quins faced 271 whereas Gloucester faced 218 rucks. This gives Robshaw a 1.476 turnovers/100 rucks and Kvesic 1.835 turnovers/100 rucks. This starts to demonstrate that Kvesic fared better in turning over rucks.

To now put a context onto what I've seen with my own eyes, Kvesic has been very unlucky in the first four games in terms of opposition. He was up against Braid and Seymour, two rucking specialists, when playing Sale. Against Saracens, he played in a team down to 14 men and had more of a duty standing in the defensive line than actually going for the ball in rucks (and also, Saracens kicked the ball away at any opportunity in their territory game), against Northampton Gloucester dominated possession and there was barely anything to steal. Newcastle was really the only game he had a chance of rucking.

It's also worth pointing out that I don't believe penalties won at the breakdown for the opposite team holding on actually count in the turnovers won stat.

But my biggest point is that some people would like to draw the conclusion that Robshaw is as good a breakdown specialist as Kvesic after this stat, when it doesn't factor in how much each player slows the opponent's breakdown. Kvesic is a total nuisance. Even if he can't make the turnovers, he can slow it down. But there isn't a stat that really picks up on this.

- Farrell has kicked the ball less than both Burns and Ford, and has poor defensive stats.

Farrell also plays behind the Sarries pack.

Also, the Sarries game plan often relies on a kicking 9 for clearance box kicks. (Whereas Gloucester prefers to shovel it back to the 10 for an exit strategy.)

- Yarde is miles ahead of the other wingers in all areas bar passing.

Yarde has been impressive, but he's also been Irish's go-to guy.

- Morgan has averaged the same metres per carry as Vunipola.

(Click to enlarge. Left screen = Morgan, right screen = Vunipola. Red mark = gain line. Upper left oval is the scrum-half, bottom-right is the number 8.)

This is the best way I have of describing Morgan vs. Vunipola right now. (10m is just an arbitrary number.)

Another thing to bear in mind is that Morgan regularly drops into the pocket with the back three and runs the ball back. One of these runs can make you 10-20 meters with ball in hand, and aren't necessarily impressive. Just one or two of them sets you up for a good meters/run stat every game, regardless of how you do in your normal carrying role.

I'd like to see their gainline breaks/not gainline breaks stats.

 

[Peat]

Not gainlike breaks, but a quick look at ESPN shows they've made the same number of clean breaks: zero. Vunipola has beaten 10 defenders, Morgan's beat 6. I haven't watched enough to really comment but it would seem to suggest Morgan's not doing a great deal worse with less gametime; if he can step it up, he'll certainly beat Bill to it. The fact Guscott hasn't seen fit to mention Sam Dickinson however tells you everything you need to know about him.

On Farrell's defence - Saracens play a very kamikaze style defence, there's lots of missed tackles but it doesn't matter if you slow the man down and the next man can nail him. Far from the only side that does that. Wayne Smith wrote a very informative article on this recently.

Finally, as for Robshaw... he's not the breakdown specialist Kvesic is, no, but neither is he the no-hoper some people will tell you he is. He is the safest pair of hands there, and he's in form; I think Kvesic needs to play his way in here.

 

[Galbraith]

Some interesting stats provided in this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24400280 Though they don't include last weekend's games.

Good lord some of the comments on this article that you have linked are hysterical!

 

[Crapspray]

Christ. Lies, damned lies, and statistics would have saved you time.

I'm more than aware that stats don't tell the whole story. Once a statistic is published and official anyone can purport whatever they want with it.

A brief rebuttal:

some people would like to draw the conclusion that Robshaw is as good a breakdown specialist as Kvesic after this stat

Some might instead say that the gulf between them is no where near what is often portrayed as the case- hence the 1.476 vs 1.835 (not that Kvesic and Robshaw hit every team ruck) and equal number of turnovers and lower number of penalties conceded.

Also, the Sarries game plan often relies on a kicking 9 for clearance box kicks.[/COLOR]]

He's still miles behind either. I was more surprised as it's a reflection of the change in Sarries' playstyle. I'd take a bet that the comparative stats last year included far more kicks.

Yarde has been impressive, but he's also been Irish's go-to guy.

Wade and Ashton aren't too far behind in number of carries. His tackle stats also bode well for selection, given Lancaster's penchant for the safe option.

---

Good lord some of the comments on this article that you have linked are hysterical!

As far as I can tell, the BBC's rugby articles are just put up so English and Welsh fans can squabble.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Good post, j'nuh. Stats can be good, but very rarely will any single stat tell you anything useful, in isolation.

Defenders beaten per carry is the best way to tell a ball carrier's effectiveness, after watching the player IMHO.
Taken over at least 5 games; you can get reasonably good comparisons.
What that still doesn't take into account is the effort required to tackle someone, or how many players were needed to tackle said player.
I can say with quite a lot of confidence that Billy is attracting more defenders (even if they are completing the tackle) and being the unit that he is - is draining the opposition more.
What Billy (and Sarries' forwards as a unit) has been doing really well is being a presence at the breakdown.
He's been getting in early over the tackled player in a good body position and latching on, so that it slows down the oppo ball.
And again, because he is so heavy it takes a lot of effort for them to do so.

I also feel the need to emphasise how much of a nuisance Kvesic has been at the breakdown.
The canniest operator of any Englishman by a long way IMO.
He has a hand or foot on the ball at pretty much every other breakdown, and he knows how to get away with it.

 

[Patchey]

Good lord some of the comments on this article that you have linked are hysterical!

First time I've seen Steff Armitage suggested for England in a while. I thought we'd put that all behind us.

Good post, j'nuh. Stats can be good, but very rarely will any single stat tell you anything useful, in isolation.

Defenders beaten per carry is the best way to tell a ball carrier's effectiveness, after watching the player IMHO.
Taken over at least 5 games; you can get reasonably good comparisons.
What that still doesn't take into account is the effort required to tackle someone, or how many players were needed to tackle said player.
I can say with quite a lot of confidence that Billy is attracting more defenders (even if they are completing the tackle) and being the unit that he is - is draining the opposition more.
What Billy (and Sarries' forwards as a unit) has been doing really well is being a presence at the breakdown.
He's been getting in early over the tackled player in a good body position and latching on, so that it slows down the oppo ball.
And again, because he is so heavy it takes a lot of effort for them to do so.

I also feel the need to emphasise how much of a nuisance Kvesic has been at the breakdown.
The canniest operator of any Englishman by a long way IMO.
He has a hand or foot on the ball at pretty much every other breakdown, and he knows how to get away with it.

Couple of really good points. I'd add a couple of things in regards to Morgan v Binny:

Experience - I think the factor that might get Morgan the starting eight shirt is his test experience and track record with England to date. We all know Lancaster is apt to give players some leeway if they've done well before. Morgan has, since his debut, been England best ball carrier and rarely made any mistakes. Taken on international form alone he certainly doesn't deserve to be dropped. Binny was very good in Argentina but compared to Morgan he is still a bit of an unknown. He seems to have matured in leaps and bounds since joining Sarries but if I was Lancaster I'd still worry that some of the ill discipline and lack of confidence from the end of last season might show up again. Better to start him from the bench than throw him into the fire and start him against Australia in front of a packed Twickenham.

The set piece - Scums aren't an issue here. However the role each of them play at the line out. Obviously neither of them are being lifted but if its a close call I can see their role in here being a deciding factor in who starts.

Back row balance - There is an outside chance of getting both in the back row. With Binny playing mostly at 6 there is score to build a stupidly big 6/8 combo. To be honest I don't rate Wood and would be really intereted to see a 6. Binny, 7. Robshaw/Kvesic 8.Morgan back row.


Personally I can't make m mind up. Part of be thinks Binny isn't ready but then I see him being a monster for Sarries. I also think that if Morgan does loose out it will be as much because he is playing at the back of a very weak tight five as it is his own dip in form. If you put Morgan at the back of the Sarries pack I'd bet you all the money in my pocket he'd look a lot better.

 

[ratsapprentice]

It's a shame that Glos don't use Morgan as a "punt returner".
That has probably been his biggest asset for England.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Didn't want to double post, but:

http://www.espn.co.uk/blogs/rugby/story/202219.html

Just seen on the Quins board that some of them are even questioning how Robshaw fits into a back row.
Surely one of the signs of the Apocalypse?

 

[Patchey]

Quins seem to be unvarreling at a rate of knots this week. I suppose people are saying we should play Wallace there instead?

 

[ratsapprentice]

Not necessarily - it was fairly reasoned, but not all that optimistic.

I think Quins have just recruited terribly.
With Kohn having to retire they were put in a tricky situation.
But replacing Johnston with PDJ? I'm sure CO'S could explain why he wanted him - I can't see why.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Very happy to see Attwood on the mend!
I wouldn't have Robshaw for England, at the moment.
I remember thinking, at the start of the season, that Quins wouldn't do well this year - the signs were there last year, and then failing to recruit two key players in their pack was just madness.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Last year they were 10-15% off what they were when they won it.
And you could see what they needed -

1) A big ****-off TH to maintain ballast (and then a big ****-off lock when Kohn retired)

2) A center that they could hang their hat on

They didn't get either.

 

[Peat]

Rats, you got a link for that?

My best guess for the Quins logic is that they're gambling on bringing Collier and Sinckler through as their next generation of TH props - Sinckler in particular can be that brute of a TH you say they need - and didn't want to spend too much. I never thought it sounded particularly intelligent, but there we go. That said, can't blame him for a loss when he isn't there!

I think the centre issue might be even bigger tbh, and its possible that the lack of threat from there is one of the things dragging Nick Evans down. From O'Shea's comments, defence was a big issue, they need a defensive general as much as an attacking threat - that gets expensive. I'm guessing Lowe is their regular general, but he's not been in the best form.

Quins need some major surgery and they've made some interesting choices that will make it difficult. Committing to Evans and Easter until they fall apart just doesn't sound smart.

Robshaw is one of the few players I've seen emerge from that game with credit. His skillset might have been idiosyncratic to the point where it is difficult to fit into a balanced backrow, but that's ok, because you should be building it around him.