[2014 Mid-Year Tests] England

[TRF_Olyy]

I think Burns should start while cips on the bench. its been a long time that cips hasn't played in an international test match while burns played in argentina last summer...

Have you not seen how utterly woeful Burns has been this season, though? I can't think of a single 10 who has played worse than he has, including 18yr old kids of their debuts.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I think he may end up starting the first test - knows the systems etc.etc.etc.etc.etc....

No doubt though - he has been utterly atrocious.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Does he, though?
He played against a load of semi-pro players as part of a side missing a chunk of it's players through rest, inury, bans or Lions callups. He also played under different coaches as Rowntree and Farrell were with the Lions.
I literally can't think of a single reason Burns should start.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

What Olyy said: I think if Lancaster chooses Burns to start ahead of Cipriani it will be the worst mistake of his 'reign' so far.

There's also twelvetrees as a back-up to Cipriani - Burns doesn't even have to feature in the first test!

 

[goodNumber10]

I think people are bing a bit unfair on Burns. He's had a difficult season in a poor team - there is nothing to say once brought out of that environment and into the England set up he won't click into gear and be the Burns of old.

Lots of stuff happens in training camps and seldom does season form transfer into these tours (they are very different to AI's and 6nations) cipriani won't have played for over a month by the time the 1st test comes around and neither will Burns - so how do you judge their form?

The important thing is that cipriani is in the set up on his season form and is being given a chance to blossom in the correct environment, Burns on reputation - that doesn't mean he should be the starting 10 nor that because he's in form DC should.

It should be whomever they feel is the best player for the job at the end of the training/test preperation.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I think you're being kind on Burns there... he has been ****house - he's one of the reasons Gloucester have faltered so badly from what I can tell.
He was equally **** in the Saxons games too.

I'm just making the point that Lancaster puts a lot of emphasis on what's done in his training sessions - and I'm not sure he will feel that someone who has been in the camp for a couple of weeks will understand the systems well enough to run a game.

 

[goodNumber10]

I think you're being kind on Burns there... he has been ****house - he's part of the reason Gloucester have faltered so badly.
He was equally **** in the Saxons games.

I'm just making the point that Lancaster puts a lot of emphasis on what's done in his training sessions - and I'm not sure he will feel that someone who has been in the camp for a couple of weeks will understand the systems well enough to run a game.

I'm not making an assesment on Burns, so i'm not sure how i am being kind on him - i'm saying taken out of his environment put into a decent set up and working with the right coaches etc... he might hit form, and equally in the time between his last game and the test match have hit better form than Cips.

He's been in the England set up before, played New Zealand before (the win in 2012) and the coaches know him and his game, and will have seen him in flow for the last 6 weeks or so all i'm syaing is basing the 1st test selection on purely Premiership form imho is foolhardy.

Regardless Gloucester struggled yes burns is part of the problem but it's very hard for a 10 to shine in a poor team, and I'm of the opinion the Saxons is pretty much a scratch team anyway with different coaches to the England set up, not sure anyone did themselves favours in that apart from maybe Watson.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

For the first test I would genuinely ask flood back. Just for this tour.

Burns is no better than having geherty at 10! Taking him out of Gloucester won't change the fact he is ****e at the moment.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I think you're being kind on him by not hammering him.

There are lots of other players who have clearly underperformed or struggled to find form in that team/environment.
But Burns is an outlier here - he has been so far beyond **** it's unreal - whereas other guys have just been a bit disappointing.

I do agree that he could potentially find some decent form quite quickly - because we know he's a talent and his issues have been mental.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Geraghty has played infinitely better than Burns this season. I would be ecstatic if he replaced Burns in the touring squad.


It's well and good saying "but Burns looked great" and "he's got so much potential" but you shouldn't pick an international squad on hopes and wishes.
Fact is that Burns has been f**king terrible this season. Why would you want your 10 to be someone who has been utterly sh*t all season?

If he starts playing well at Tigers,and chances are he will, then by all means bring him back, but you don't pick a player because you want him to be good.

I mean ****, we all slag off Ashton and Goode but at least they're playing well for their club so you can see where the selectors are coming from.

 

[Peat]

Burns *could* suddenly recover form away from Gloucester. The reality is that seems to be a long shot. His confidence is unlikely to return overnight. I would not consider it a prudent gamble.

As for Flood - why would he do it? He's got a new club to prepare for. He owes England nothing and gets no future favours for helping us.

 

[goodNumber10]

For the first test I would genuinely ask flood back. Just for this tour.

Burns is no better than having geherty at 10! Taking him out of Gloucester won't change the fact he is ****e at the moment.

He hasn't played for two weeks, by the time the test comes around he will not have played for 5 weeks. there isn't really any at the moment, 5 weeks is a long time in rugby and mentally everything can change.

Look, i'm not saying Burns should start, i'm not saying he's secretly hit form, all i'm saying is that the premiership finished two weeks ago.

Neither fly half is involved in any rugby between now and the 1st test other than the camp so we should probably keep an open mind towards who will start at 10 against New Zealand.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I might refrain from watching should Flood be asked back.

<iframe style="width: 1px; height: 0px; border: medium none; position: absolute; visibility: hidden;" class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" allowtransparency="true" scrolling="no" id="twitter-widget-0" frameborder="0"></iframe>

George Ford at RPA dinner on his shoulder injury: 'I'm ready to play Friday. I'm probably fitter than I've ever been'
— Duncan Bech (@DuncanBech) May 21, 2014​

<script async="" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

...bearing in mind he's not been officially ruled out yet: I have a feeling the England doctors might want to give him a second opinion.

Positive. Mindset.


I'm hoping that this is another case of the press jumping the gun a bit.
<iframe style="display: none;" allowtransparency="true" scrolling="no" id="rufous-sandbox" frameborder="0"></iframe>

 

[Big Ewis]

excellent news that Brown would be fit for England's first test after all.
I was just thinking yesterday it sucks England won't have their first choice LH again, and Cole's missing too if my memory's correct. A first choice LH changes everything, it's not like when a center goes down or a couple of first choice wingers or even SH for e.g. for a deep nation like England, there's always backup and sometimes it turns out to be even better (the Burrell example). But a first choice LH makes all the difference in the world, and I'm just saying Eng could've used that dominance up front, at least the scrum would be going their way and you need all you can get when in NZ.
Haven't read this thread, so my questions may sound way belated and inaccurate but I'm guessing you England fans are expecting Eng to have an advantage up front with the pack, but be subjected to NZ's backs basically. Last time NZ came to London, they got washed away by waves of white jerseys in the rucks consistently, the whole game.

Farrell not playing that first test though really puts England's 10 situation in perspective. It seems for an outsider like England have a similar situation to Ireland's: there isn't anyone close to Farrell's quality outside him, and England; like Ireland with Sexton; rely greatly on their first choice fly-half. Maybe they should call Jonnyboy back for this tour, tell him "uhh, yeah, sure...as a coach...ahemm...that's right....as a coach..." and just shove him onto the pitch when the first whistle goes off.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I wouldn't expect England to have an advantage anywhere, to be honest. Parity up front and two very different sets of back play is what I'd expect with our first choice team out.

Our pack works exceptionally well as a unit, however there's going to be so many changes to it it remains to be seen whether it'll function the same with different personnel.

 

[Big Ewis]

ye of little faith...

 

[j'nuh]

re: Burns, to be fair on him, he did have a mini-resurgence at the end of the season. Not enough to reach international standards, but enough to be encouragement that he'll leave this terrible season behind him.

I absolutely disagree with the notion of dropping him from the touring squad though. Whether or not Burns is in serious contention for the World Cup, introducing any more inexperienced fly-halves to the set-up when we have Ford, Cipriani and Slade (and Burns) currently in the set-up vying for that bench spot, would be beyond silly. It's the one position where we just cannot afford diluting the remaining playing time any further.

If Burns recovers form, then going on this tour and having the added experience of learning the calls will be beneficial to him down the line. If Burns doesn't recover form, then one of those already in the squad should be going ahead of him. I don't see the need to be adding any more fly-halves. And if there is a horrid injury scare in the run-up to the WC, then a recall for Flood or Hodgson would be our best bet.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

http://www.planetrugby.co.uk/story/0,25883,9817_9322584,00.html

Looks like Cole will miss the rest of the year; he's due to have neck surgery next week.

 

[Patchey]

Wish him luck in his surgery, lets hope it provides a long term fix to the issues.

As for Ford, while I'd love to be optimistic about the fact he has yet to be officially ruled out, any surgery that you can play professional rugby two weeks after has to be pretty dam minor, so why announce it? I imagines Saints will target him with their bigger runners tonight so we'll see how strong he really is.

Geraghty would be a pretty left field replacement, although he has had a good season. I think Lancaster is more likely to not name anyone else, trust Cips/Burns to cover the first test and then use Goode as an extra ten option later on.

 

[ratsapprentice]

No-one has made any official announcement about it - not Bath; not England.
It's only been reported in the press.