• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2013 EOYT] England

Players released back to club announced: Attwood, Burns, Burrell, Care, Eastmond, Foden, Goode, Johnson, Kvesic, Wade

Reading into it, the first squad should look something like:

1. Vunipola
2. Youngs
3. Cole
4. Launchbury
5. Parling
6. Wood
7. Robshaw
8. Morgan
9. Youngs
10. Farrell
11. Yarde
12. Twelvetrees
13. Tomkins
14. Ashton
15. Brown

16. Hartley
17. Marler
18. Wilson
19. Lawes
20. Vunipola
21. Dickson
22. Flood
23. Trinder

???

Or it could be that the released players need to prove themselves in one capacity or another. Burns, Eastmond and Attwood have been recently injured, and I can't see Lancaster going without a replacement fullback?
 
Last edited:
I dunno how much there is to read into the Bath and Glos players being released.

Attwood hasn't played for a couple of weeks, so needs to prove his fitness/form.
Likewise Eastmond, he was left out of Bath's Amlin squad and only played 3(?) Premiership games before that.

Burns needs to have a good game and I guess they feel Kvesic does too.
Also remember that Glos might have asked quite nicely to have them back considering their start to the season.

Just seen this too:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Lancaster was obliged to release 10 by Elite Player Agreement, but also wants game-time with three big Tests looming: <a href="http://t.co/Hm62akABxK">http://t.co/Hm62akABxK</a></p>&mdash; Official RFU (@Official_RFU) <a href="https://twitter.com/Official_RFU/statuses/392693487529132032">October 22, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Last edited:
Personally, I don't think Hartley is a bad guy BUT...
He cannot control himself at times, so whether he consciously recognises he shouldn't do things is irrelevant.

Disagree that it's irrelevant. He now knows he's on his last chance; anymore indiscretions and his international career is over: World Cup, the next BIL tour, financial bonuses. Everyone will know he only has himself to blame if he messes up again.
 
It's been shown to be irrelevant before, this is not his first "last-chance".
 
Unless they are sensible and play Robshaw at 6.































dtVJgC5.jpg
 
Unfortunately the 5 live interview with SL has been taken down on I player; otherwise I would have provided a link. A listener on the show asked him exactly the same question. SL just said he would take each player in their merits. Sounded like a politicians answer to me, but still I think SL thinks Hartley deserves one more chance and I do hope now he knows it. The guy does play on the edge and I think Lancaster and Gatland appreciate that, but he now knows where the line is.

Stuart Lancaster insisting that players have to be competent in all facets of their position and also show an x-factor in two areas to warrant selection was also there in the interview; if England are to have any hope of winning the 2015 WC. His words, not mine. Whether that's reflected in his selections is another matter. It will be worrying if they can't execute the basics well under pressure because that is what Test rugby is all about.

I'm not doubting those things were said. I just find them very inconsistent with the things he has said before and his selections.

It's quite obvious that Lancaster thinks Hartley deserves at least one more chance. I both disagree with Lancaster in general there and find his decision inconsistent. I still don't want Hartley near the squad and am somewhat less happy with Lancaster as an international coach as a result.

As for that competency thing - good words, words I agree with - but he is clearly willing to pick players who don't fulfill that. Hence me taking it with a pinch of salt. It's an end goal, not a current selection process.
 
It's been shown to be irrelevant before, this is not his first "last-chance".

But this will be his last chance otherwise it totally undermines Stuart Lancaster's authority, if Stuart were to pick Hartley again if Hartley messes up big time one more time. Rob Webber would then surely take his place as one of the two hookers.

Anyway it is clear Hartley has a temperament problem which he has to sort out; if does not he should not be picked in an England shirt again. But I still stand by that he should start this Autumn before Youngs because he has shown he can hook and Youngs has not; under the new laws that is vital. England's pack can't afford to be shoved off the ball by a weak Australian pack. Youngs has not shown he is competent at this facet of the game; I'm not convinced by his lineout throwing either; two fundamental facets of a Hooker's position. It will go along way to show if SL is true to his selection criteria of being good in all facets of their position whilst also providing an x-factor in two areas to distinguish them from their rival.
 
Hartley has literally 0 X Factor, though. At least Youngs is good in the loose/at the breakdown/has phenomenal work rate.
 
Lancaster is not going to make any changes unless forced into it......hence Foden will not be there, Robshaw stays as captain, Burns will not be selected etc! The exception that proves the rule is Care but in truth he has not been in a team for him to establish a convincing argument to ghet the better of Youngs and Dickson was always the close run third choice behind Care?
 
Dickson was an original Lancaster pick though, wasn't he?
You could say he's reverting? :p
 
Hartley is a hooker with leadership qualities and a great deal of integrity ( thus him speaking truthfully to Barnes). Youngs is a wonky eyed gym monkey
 
yep, Robshaw captain again.
Messed up last year in Nov...
A chance for him to prove his quality...
 
Hartley is a hooker with leadership qualities and a great deal of integrity ( thus him speaking truthfully to Barnes). Youngs is a wonky eyed gym monkey

I guess you mean like the way he lead his team in the final of the premiership last year ? Oh hang on a minute .....
If all you have got against Youngs is that he's not beautiful then your not a rugby fan my friend ......
 

Latest posts

Top