[2013 EOYT] England

[Aristodemus]

Tuilagi can pass when he wants to, he isn't a Jamie Roberts.

 

[Patchey]

Tuilagi can pass when he wants to, he isn't a Jamie Roberts.

Burn.

 

[McTallshort]

"Maybe".

and who else would play 13 if he was fit?????

 

[ratsapprentice]

Tuilagi is irrelevant.

I was referring to the way you do this every time someone suggests we try out a new flanker:

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.

 

[McTallshort]

ssssoooo, the crash ball merchant at centre was about trying a new flanker?

Your more confused than zeeberdie mate

 

[ratsapprentice]

Christ, you're stubborn, aren't you?

It has nothing to do with Tuilagi, it was an attempt to point out that your continued use of inverted commas around terms pertaining to a style of openside flanker and general refusal to accept their existence in the face of patient explanation, is at best - ignorant; at worst - trolling.

 

[Maverick1987]

Christ, you're stubborn, aren't you?

It has nothing to do with Tuilagi, it was an attempt to point out that your continued use of inverted commas around terms pertaining to a style of openside flanker and general refusal to accept their existence in the face of patient explanation, is at best - ignorant; at worst - trolling.

I'm not against playing a specialist open side but I'm not that bothered if the back row is robshaw wood billy . Between cole Launchbury wood and robbo we can turnover enough ball

As a matter of fact I tend to mostly agree with tall . Let's get the backs sorted before tinkering with the pack who are playing well so far .........

Famous last words lol

 

[Crapspray]

Surely the ambition is to constantly improve? If we can improve, why wouldn't we? So we shouldn't be satisfied with either unit until they're hammered every side in the world for a decade. Just because the backs are a higher priority shouldn't mean we neglect to discuss the pack.

The flankers are quite important to the future. Wood and Robshaw are the oldest forwards in the starting pack at 27. It's far from certain that they'll maintain their fitness and work-rate (their main strength, in my opinion) out until the 2019 RWC, when I think this side will peak. Add to that the three talented young opensides (Fraser, Kvesic, and Wallace) and it's an important discussion as to who are the de jure replacements. And how we can make sure their succession is a smooth one.

We'd be having a similar discussion about the backs if the boldness of forward selection was applied to them. For example, which young half backs replace Flood and Dickson in the medium-term? They're both 28, and at 34 are unlikely to outplay youngsters like Ford and Slade.

As an aside: In 2019 Corbisiero, Marler, and Mako Vunipola will be 31, 29, and 28 respectively. Six more year under Rowntree's wing, and that's a tasty selection.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

What's all this - I see no reason why Bath fans and Leicester fans can't get on

My 2 centimes: Personally I love the idea of England having a proper 7 who bring to the team an unmatched ability to perfect the body position at ruck time, get in fast to conetst ball, and to slow it down for the opposition at a breakdown. I'd love to have a Stuart Hooper.

HOWEVER: I think that there are some overly-reductionist streams of opinion which bring all questions which should be about pack/back-row balance more generally, to that of having a perfect 7 to compliment a perfect 6. These guys do exist, but are also a bit of a construct in the sense that looking out there at international sides, few teams have the true openside flanker: Dusatoir for France certainly isn't on; O'Brien for Ireland ain't one; Kelly Brown for Scotland aint' one, although Ross Rennie arguably is; How many absolute 7's have England had, ever? Besides Neil Back, and there was more to him than that anyway. We know that neither Wood or Rosbhaw fit this image. Zanni for Italy isnt' quite that either. Guys like Warbuton, Cane, Pocock etc are more the exception, or at least I would say. Most premiership teams do without a real 7. To state the obvious, rugby positioning isn't black and white and players can fall in between two positions. Being able to pilfer/jackle ball - is a skill-set, not aplayer type, and we are seeing more and more players in different positions who are worth their salt. Paul O'Connell for Ireland has always been good at this, and at Wasp I see Ashley Johnson, an 18st + behemoth, jackling the most ball.

I would like to see Kvesic and Wallace earn the right to be England starters because they excite me(not liek that) and because I think with the rigth balance England coudl really be on to a winner - but it's not something we need to rush.

 

[ratsapprentice]

My 2 centimes: Personally I love the idea of England having a proper 7 who bring to the team an unmatched ability to perfect the body position at ruck time, get in fast to conetst ball, and to slow it down for the opposition at a breakdown. I'd love to have a Stuart Hooper.

You can have him!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Hooper

Kvesic's style of play (or his skillset) weren't really what was being discussed though...

We were discussing the relative merits of strictly only playing your first choice players versus systematically bringing new players in.
I feel we are resting on our laurels and not properly preparing for the inevitable "winter" if we don't attempt to give other players experience/opportunity.

Yes, I would feel comfortable starting a player like Kvesic if Wood/Robshaw are injured, but it's far from ideal.

 

[Peat]

The thing is, we are giving other players an opportunity. Billy Vunipola just got his opportunity, Attwood's getting one from the bench. Marler, Vunipola major and Launch are all young and under 20 caps. In the backline - Dickson's just broken 10 caps, Farrell's learning his trade, and all our centers and good wings are mere babes in arms internationally speaking. I'd say there is plenty of progress towards a better team going on already before we decided whether to play Kvesic or not.

 

[McTallshort]

We have to give them a chance from a position of strength and stability which we currently dont have. Our pack has only just shown its getting to the finished article and our backline is a mess, so with that in mind we need to keep our more settled combos such as the backrow together were possible because the World cup is not far away.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Is having Morgan coming on from the bench really that crucial to our pack's continuity against teams like Scotland and Italy?
I guess that's where we don't see eye to eye.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

You can have him!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Hooper

Kvesic's style of play (or his skillset) weren't really what was being discussed though...

We were discussing the relative merits of strictly only playing your first choice players versus systematically bringing new players in.
I feel we are resting on our laurels and not properly preparing for the inevitable "winter" if we don't attempt to give other players experience/opportunity.

Yes, I would feel comfortable starting a player like Kvesic if Wood/Robshaw are injured, but it's far from ideal.

Thanks for pointing out the mistake re. Hooper! haha.. yeah, I don't want that Hooper

Well, Tallshort was expressing that he doesn't buy the whole 'out and out jackle thing' and to an extent it chimes with me - this is just me but it seems that part of the current demand to get Kvesic in and playing is as much for the general rugby theory that teams need genuine 7s, as much as a reflection of his current form - there's not enough consideration there of what strengths our pack puts together as a whole and therefore I think the whole debate has drifted in the wrong direction. Most of us on this forum were talking up the idea of a 7 a few years ago when Englabnd had a far less dynamic pack and when turning over ball that way was generally more of an issue. England are in a much better position now with the type of pack we have.

As for the 'Winter' thing and replying partly to ragerancher: I'll criticise lancaster where needs be, e.g around back selections, but as regards our pack I just can't fault his timing of bringing guys in; We've got Mako Vunipola, Ben Morgan, Tom Youngs, Joe Launchbury and Billie Vunipola all brought in when form demanded it - don't forget he also was the one who brought in Robshaw who had been left out in the cold by Martin Johnson! I would say that we currently have the best pack we could possibly have, given our options; in the case of Billy Vunipola, I'd actually say he was brought in earlier than I would have myself. The only position where there's room for debate at all is around Kvesic. Maybe also Tom Wood, but I think personally he's the best option for now - very valuable player to have.

 

[McTallshort]

Thanks for pointing out the mistake re. Hooper! haha.. yeah, I don't want that Hooper

Well, Tallshort was expressing that he doesn't buy the whole 'out and out jackle thing' and to an extent it chimes with me - this is just me but it seems that part of the current demand to get Kvesic in and playing is as much for the general rugby theory that teams need genuine 7s, as much as a reflection of his current form - there's not enough consideration there of what strengths our pack puts together as a whole and therefore I think the whole debate has drifted in the wrong direction. Most of us on this forum were talking up the idea of a 7 a few years ago when Englabnd had a far less dynamic pack and when turning over ball that way was generally more of an issue. England are in a much better position now with the type of pack we have.

As for the 'Winter' thing and replying partly to ragerancher: I'll criticise lancaster where needs be, e.g around back selections, but as regards our pack I just can't fault his timing of bringing guys in; We've got Mako Vunipola, Ben Morgan, Tom Youngs, Joe Launchbury and Billie Vunipola all brought in when form demanded it - don't forget he also was the one who brought in Robshaw who had been left out in the cold by Martin Johnson! I would say that we currently have the best pack we could possibly have, given our options; in the case of Billy Vunipola, I'd actually say he was brought in earlier than I would have myself. The only position where there's room for debate at all is around Kvesic. Maybe also Tom Wood, but I think personally he's the best option for now - very valuable player to have.

Amen brother! This really all started when Gatland (playing his normal mind games) questioned Robshaw playing at 7 since then the case for Kvesic has been gaining momentum, not because he is playing better than Robshaw (because he isnt) but because people see him as a true 7. If he was playing exceptionally well and Robshaw was playing badly then fine but that is not the case and I feel the whole debate is a red herring given the real problems we have in the backs.

On Morgan coming off the bench, I must admit I dont always think having a specialist 8 on the bench is a good idea but given Wood and Robshaw can manage 80 minutes in their sleep where both our 8s have questionable fitness levels I can see the reasoning behind it.

 

[Peat]

Well, no, it didn't. People have always been skeptical of Robshaw as a traditional openside and there has always been people looking for a more traditional openside to replace him. Gatland's utterances are neither here not there.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

chuggachuggachuggahchuggachuggachuggachuggachuggachuggachuggachuggachugga
CHOOCHOO

Here comes the Cipriani hype train!


Farrell/Tomkins wouldn't have scored the try at 1:27

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Olyy here's something to make you mad, a quote from Jeremy Guscott this week in his q&a

"Cipriani has certainly improved his defence, but apart from that there's not a great deal in his game that stands out at the moment."

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Olyy here's something to make you mad, a quote from Jeremy Guscott this week in his q&a

"Cipriani has certainly improved his defence, but apart from that there's not a great deal in his game that stands out at the moment."

 

[Patchey]

Baffles me how a player so good as Guscott can turn into such a bad pundit. How?