• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2014 Mid-Year Tests] England

I don't.
Dickson is boring, uninspiring and slow but Youngs can be an absolute liability, while also being the other three at times.
 
I don't.
Dickson is boring, uninspiring and slow but Youngs can be an absolute liability, while also being the other three at times.

Is there an example of youngs costing us/being a liability?

I seem to recall the same accusations were levelled at Care a few years ago, needless yellow cards and what not...
 
Is there an example of youngs costing us/being a liability?

I seem to recall the same accusations were levelled at Care a few years ago, needless yellow cards and what not...
When Youngs first broke out on the scene, his ability to spot a gap was second only to Genia. He darted round the fringes frequently and the pace he put on the England game was fantastic. Care's problem around that time was that his passing/delivery was slow, and it suffocated England's ability to play flowing rugby.

A few years later, and it's like Care and Youngs have traded places. Youngs barely ever looks to run and he's slow to deliver the ball when playing for England, and his box kicking is frequent and mostly too long. England's attacks flow with Care at the helm, they do not with Youngs. This is why Youngs is a liability. It isn't necessarily that he's an obvious liability in that he makes many blunders in a game, it's that England struggle to build any kind of momentum in attack with Youngs guiding them from 9.

This is why I prefer Dickson to Youngs in general: Dickson doesn't do much flash, but he's got a decent pass. If that means that the 6 other backs in the backline can play better, then so be it.

I have high hopes for Robson.
 
Last edited:
When Youngs first broke out on the scene, his ability to spot a gap was second only to Genia. He darted round the fringes frequently and the pace he put on the England game was fantastic. Care's problem around that time was that his passing/delivery was slow, and it suffocated England's ability to play flowing rugby.

A few years later, and it's like Care and Youngs have traded places. Youngs barely ever looks to run and he's slow to deliver the ball when playing for England, and his box kicking is frequent and mostly too long. England's attacks flow with Care at the helm, they do not with Youngs. This is why Youngs is a liability. It isn't necessarily that he's an obvious liability in that he makes many blunders in a game, it's that England struggle to build any kind of momentum in attack with Youngs guiding them from 9.

This is why I prefer Dickson to Youngs in general: Dickson doesn't do much flash, but he's got a decent pass. If that means that the 6 other backs in the backline can play better, then so be it.

Good points.

It is weird that Youngs and Care have never been both on form with England at the same times.
 
When Youngs first broke out on the scene, his ability to spot a gap was second only to Genia. He darted round the fringes frequently and the pace he put on the England game was fantastic. Care's problem around that time was that his passing/delivery was slow, and it suffocated England's ability to play flowing rugby.

A few years later, and it's like Care and Youngs have traded places. Youngs barely ever looks to run and he's slow to deliver the ball when playing for England, and his box kicking is frequent and mostly too long. England's attacks flow with Care at the helm, they do not with Youngs. This is why Youngs is a liability. It isn't necessarily that he's an obvious liability in that he makes many blunders in a game, it's that England struggle to build any kind of momentum in attack with Youngs guiding them from 9.

This is why I prefer Dickson to Youngs in general: Dickson doesn't do much flash, but he's got a decent pass. If that means that the 6 other backs in the backline can play better, then so be it.

Everytime Dickson came on this 6 nations we lost all our shape in attack. Some of that was to do with the mass of Subbs but a lot so do with his ponderous decision making.

Also look back at last year's AI's. Dickson started for us and our shape was non existent in attack.... Look at the New Zealand game our pace on the attack was awful and Dickson's box kicking did nothing to pin the AB's back... Against a team with quick line speed his delivery is found wanting... on Sunday against sarries who play quick off the line he was missing in action pretty much all game and offered his 10 almost no protection with snipes etc...

I agree Young's hasn't been great this season but an on form Young's is light years ahead of Dickson IMHO.
 
Good points.

It is weird that Youngs and Care have never been both on form with England at the same times.

I actually don't think so. If you think about it, neither of them are used to having to fight very hard for their starting places. Even when they're off form their still the best nines their clubs have. Put them in an England set up and make them fight it out when they're not used to and whoever loses out is going to lose confidence, the real key to form, rapidly...
 
I actually don't think so. If you think about it, neither of them are used to having to fight very hard for their starting places. Even when they're off form their still the best nines their clubs have. Put them in an England set up and make them fight it out when they're not used to and whoever loses out is going to lose confidence, the real key to form, rapidly...

Yep and both seem to suffer more for both club and country when they are on the bench for England, But if they get dropped altogether they seem to eventually find form again, Youngs the recent example was crap for Leicester from the AI when he was benched they were lots of calls for Mele to start, but since he has been dropped altogether by England his form has gone up basically since the London Irish game.
 
I guess in a way its easier to go back to your club, where you are first choice, and work really hard to improve than it is to sit on the bench as second choice and stew because you're not used ti that.

Another issue with 9s is the pack they play behind. Youngs, Wigglesworth and Dickson are play behind monstrous sets of forwards and frankly, none of them really impress as much as Care, Robson or Simpson when they're on top form. Robson is labouring behind a very weak tight five, Simpson has to content with a Wasps eight that blows hot and cold and Care, although much better off than the other two, is hardly getting an armchair ride. Its another reason I hope we get one of Robson or Simpson involved this summer.
 
simpson too me is the player to go for, his pace is phenomenal and coming off the bench he could really cause some damage. If we want too play a fast and loose game then he is the guy we go for. On I biased note Ben Spencer will be very good, if De Cock does retire then he will be our number 2 and he will finally get more game time.
 
Seeing Kyle Sinckler against Ayerza tomorrow evening will be very interesting indeed.
If he does a half decent job I think he will have nailed himself a touring spot TBH.
 
Hopefully he does anyway. Has looked far more comfortable than Thomas has in the premiership.
That said: I'd expected him to get munched by Ayerza.
 
It depends, from memory Ayerza scrummages fairly honestly - which I'd expect Kyle to cope pretty well with.
 
So Sinkler did really well on Friday. For anyone who didn't see the game, he got the upper hand on Ayerza, then lost in in the second half and showed a lot of strength to get back on top.

Just rewatched Wasps v Glos from yesterday, could of good things from an England POV:

Burns started because of a late injury withdrawal and looked quite a bit better than he has for a while. Erratic still but must more creative. Haskell has to make the touring squad. He is playing like a monster right now. That being said, Kvesic looked pretty handy opposite him as well. Finally, Elliot Daly showed just how complete a player he;s becoming. Some good attacking stuff but also some nice defense and eve one a turn over (after Goodes binned drop goal). He's developed a real rugby brain so to speak.
 
I'd take Haskell over Kvesic 100% of the time right now, really has to tour and I think will be pushing hard for the bench backrow spot (and potentially even threatening Wood).

Just watching Sale vs Exeter now, but the reports I've read said that Cipriani was outstanding, with Faz in the crowd watching.
 
I'd still have Kvesic over any other English openside.

Noon saying England should relax their foreign selection policy: http://www.espn.co.uk/england/rugby/story/222369.html

I love it when people say they understand why the policy is there, and then they procede to say:
"I could get to Twickenham from home here [Brive] in the same time it took from Newcastle. Also, coverage of the Top 14 is so much more widespread nowadays so it's not as if you're out of sight, out of mind."

If you really understand the reasons, Jamie... then why are you talking about the distance to France and the coverage?
Nothing to do with the fact that you're now a player agent based in France is it?

The number of people who do not understand the (very simple) reasoning behind the foreign player rules is astonishing.


 
Last edited:
I'd take Haskell over Kvesic 100% of the time right now, really has to tour and I think will be pushing hard for the bench backrow spot (and potentially even threatening Wood).

Just watching Sale vs Exeter now, but the reports I've read said that Cipriani was outstanding, with Faz in the crowd watching.

Yeah, already seen a couple of articles online this morning saying that he has to be in serious contention for a recall now. Faz may not have explicitly gone to watch him but if he was that good he must have been noticed.


Rats, Kvesic > Hask why? Just curious.
 
You have to go off current form, not past and/or potential, and Haskell blows Kvesic away in that regard.
Looking like a true leader at wasps as well, and it never hurts to have more natural leaders in a side.
 
You have to go off current form, not past and/or potential, and Haskell blows Kvesic away in that regard.
Looking like a true leader at wasps as well, and it never hurts to have more natural leaders in a side.
But we keep seeing that Ben Morgan is so much more for England than for Gloucester. I bet with competent coaches, Kvesic would step it up to a level higher than what he and Haskell are showing right now.
 
You also have to look at what they are doing in the context of their club, and what they could do in the context of England.

If Haskell replaced Wood you'd gain physicality in the carry and maybe one turnover per game.
So yes, you'd take him over Tom Johnson any day of the week.

Kvesic coming in for Wood would give you more physicality as a ball carrier (not as much as with Hask), pace and maybe one turnover per game.
What Kvesic has over Haskell is footballing ability and his attacking instincts.

Look at what has changed in the England team since they've improved... to a man they've improved their basic footballing ability and decision making in attack.
Through those two things and raw work-rate we're striving for fluency and, to an extent, achieving it.
Kvesic and Fraser are two guys who could slot into this England team as (look away now, Tallshort) proper traditional opensides in place of Tom Wood, IMO.

To reiterate what I've said before though - I would still replace Johnson with Haskell.
 
Top