[2013 EOYT] England

[McTallshort]

What could happen to make you think Kvesic is better than Robshaw or Wood that Kvesic actually has the power to decide? Basically you need one of the former to lose form before Kvesic gets a look in. We won't know how Kvesic performs in comparison to Robshaw/Wood without actually giving him a go. For all we know Kvesic could fit perfectly into the England team and strengthen our pack, which is already capable of worrying pretty much any other pack in the world.

It's as I said about England post 2003, the mentality was that we already had very good players in all positions so why try out new people? Because that first team may not always be available and you need to have backups and replacements. You talked about NZ having a strong team so they could feed players in, we did as well but the difference between us and NZ is we never fed new talent in. The result is that when much of the 2003 team left, England came crashing down. We are now doing exactly the same with our pack. They are good therefore there is no point in letting non-established players try. If we maintain this mentality then I guarentee that we will be screwing ourselves in the future when our current pack starts leaving and we have no alternatives because they never got any game time.

Thats because NZ have a team full of world class established players and can feed players in. We just dont have that luxury. There are many areas where the England team is still not settled and you want to play about with the back row which is possibly the only settled area we have? If Kvesic was that good, if he was playing so fabulously well and Robshaw was having a serious dip in form then yes start him but that just not the case. I really wish we would end this bloody obsession with finding this "out and out 7" or a "jackel" or whatever the media sound bite is. We have far more pressing things to worry about than replacing our captain with an untested and frankly out of form player, like our entire back line for instance........

 

[Peat]

I don't need one of them to lose form, I just need one of them to get injured. Or to give him midweek tour games in NZ. Or if everything's going swimmingly well and he's in hot form, then maybe give him some time in a Scotland/Italy game. His time will come, he's only 21 for crying out loud.

 

[McTallshort]

In the meantime lets worry about our midfield combination, a flyhalf who stands too deep and shovels the ball and getting a decent winger in the team

 

[Crapspray]

Speaking of midfield, it seems to be doing the rounds in the press (Grauniad and Daily Wail) that Burrell and Twelvetrees will be the centres in the Six Nations. Is it just me who thinks that's a terrible idea?

While there's no doubt in his good form, the thought of Burrell defending the outside channel is frightening to say the least; Twelvetrees' try against Saints early in the season ironically proved his poor defensive alignment in his natural position, never mind wider out. What's more, it denies the opportunity of playing Trinder, or A.N. Other at 13. Unless Saints plan on moving Burrell- or Lancaster asks them. Or Twelvetrees is played at 13.

It would be nice to give Burrell a go, but sacrificing the opportunity to build depth in probably the shallowest position seems a poor compromise.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I believe it - I thought it would be the case ever since I saw Burrell sitting next to Lancaster in the coaches box during the AI's.
It's clear he was being groomed for the 6N - but I'm still undecided on him generally, I can't tell whether I rate him or not.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

That's a shame.
We never seem to play players in their natural position, shoehorning them in elsewhere instead. That said, with the exception of Trinder (who is becoming quite injury prone, and still has questions over his defence) who else is there at 13? JJ has looked poor this season (maybe poor is harsh, but certainly not international level), Tuilagi is broken, aaaaandddd......who else is there?


Scrap that, actually - Daly should be there.

 

[Patchey]

Daly is basically Ben Smith. He started at 15 for Wasps at the weekend, moved to 13 following one injury and then played half the game at 9 following a further injury. And he kicked a 60m penalty. And he still isn't in the EPS.

Riddle me that.

 

[Peat]

While Burrell has international potential in terms of his athleticism, unlike Tomkins, this reeks of the same principle behind the selection of so many of the Sarries backs - they've got a bit of talent, they're going well in the AP, maybe some selection on team familiarity... performing well in the AP behind a dominant pack is no guarantee of doing so in international rugby behind a much less dominant beast.

Throw in one guy marginally out of position at the very least, inexperience and a lack of definite international class, and a few defensive frailities and I don't feel sold on this. I suppose it beats the alternative of Barritt. Maybe. I'd rather have Barritt in the centres and raw exciting youngsters on the wing, than Burrell and Strettle/Ashton, which is where I feel we're headed. If we're on the train to Gambletown, I'd rather pick Elliot Daly at 13. Or Trinder I suppose.

edit: I had not seen Olyy/Patchey's posts before posting. All aboard the Daly bandwagon.

 

[Crapspray]

Daly was 24th man against the All Blacks, so perhaps he was being groomed as well. He might satisfy Lancaster's fetish for full backs playing in every three-quarters position too.

As Peat said, we'll probably end up with Strettle and Ashton, so it's all academic anyway.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I agree on the preference for quality outside backs over midfield.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/dec/16/england-injuries-danny-cipriani

At least one of the England coaches to be in attendance for Sale's match this friday. Please please please have a good game Danny!

I can but dream for this six nations:

9. Care
10. Cipriani
11. May
12. Twelvetrees
13. Daly
14. Nowell
15. Brown

If Danny Care had a better box-kick he'd be by far our best scrum half.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I agree on the preference for quality outside backs over midfield.

If our midfield isn't up to scratch, we may struggle to utilise our backs no matter the quality. 10 man rugby anyone?

 

[Aristodemus]

That would be too much ego in the half backs I think Henry. Mentality plays a huge role and I just worry about Cipriani, I am also not a big fan of Care. Other than that I would be happy if Lancaster named an ambitious backline such as that, which of course he won't. As for Daly I would love to see him in the 23 even if he isn't starting because his versatility would be very good for the bench. I am also not convinced by Burrell or Trinder to be honest.

 

[ratsapprentice]

If our midfield isn't up to scratch, we may struggle to utilise our backs no matter the quality. 10 man rugby anyone?

The quality of our midfield has been far better than that of our wingers, who have been utter ****e.
I'm not saying our midfield has been good, but it's been better than the wingers.

But there isn't really any reason to not pick the best players we have available, so this shouldn't be an "either, or" situation.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

The quality of our midfield has been far better than that of our wingers, who have been utter ****e.
I'm not saying our midfield has been good, but it's been better than the wingers.

But there isn't really any reason to not pick the best players we have available, so this shouldn't be an "either, or" situation.

I agree, I just think having a poor midfield with great wingers is less effective than a great midfield with poor wingers. My previous posts show my views on it, I'm for stirring up the team in all places, including our pack. I'd like to see England not become a good team, I want to see them become a great team and I feel that requires taking risks with players, something I'm not convinced Lancaster is going to do.

 

[McTallshort]

I agree, I just think having a poor midfield with great wingers is less effective than a great midfield with poor wingers. My previous posts show my views on it, I'm for stirring up the team in all places, including our pack. I'd like to see England not become a good team, I want to see them become a great team and I feel that requires taking risks with players, something I'm not convinced Lancaster is going to do.

Got to get a good team before you get a great one! Currently our pack is good (so lets leave it alone!) but our backline without Manu is poo and I have to think Farrell snr is now a busted flush as a coach.

 

[ratsapprentice]

In your clamoring for a "crash ball center" you've shown yourself to be the puppet of the media that you are there, mate.

 

[McTallshort]

Sorry is that aimed at me?

 

[Maverick1987]

In your clamoring for a "crash ball center" you've shown yourself to be the puppet of the media that you are there, mate.

Nearly all international teams have 1 crash ball centre and 1 with the top 2 inches to use the man as a dummy etc .

No problem with tuilagi in 13 . We need to find someone to do the clever stuff not entirely convinced 36 can do that . But hasn't had a single game with Manu to prove it to be fair

 

[ratsapprentice]

Sorry is that aimed at me?

"Maybe".