• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2014 Mid-Year Tests] England

<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>
And we're off! ✈️ #Touring pic.twitter.com/CAGs2RZuxn
— Rob Webber (@robwebber2) May 27, 2014
<script async="" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Looks like Mako = out, Catt = in.<iframe style="display: none;" allowtransparency="true" scrolling="no" id="rufous-sandbox" frameborder="0"></iframe>
 

Yeh because players like Goneva, Bowden, Croft, B.Youngs, Flood have and were coached out of it, the fact is Leicester don't try to get many skilful players but when they do they use them that way. Bowden although his defence has certainly improved hadn't lost any of his attacking edge.

When ever I have spoken to Back he doesn't have many nice things to say about the coaches (Cockers, O'Connor (when he was here or Burke) he likes Murphy thought. Freddie will have to the basics extremely well obviously (that's a given if he wants to be England 10) but Tigers won't coach out his attacking instinct imo otherwise why spend the money on him and get some of the cheaper players and have Williams as a def 10.

Cant think of in recent years one top Skilful player (so not Lamb) Leicester have brought in and coached it out of them, (maybe argue Allen but he is a way better player now than he was since moved from glous)
 
<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>
And we're off! ✈️ #Touring pic.twitter.com/CAGs2RZuxn
— Rob Webber (@robwebber2) May 27, 2014
<script async="" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Looks like Mako = out, Catt = in.<iframe style="display: none;" allowtransparency="true" scrolling="no" id="rufous-sandbox" frameborder="0"></iframe>
Wonder who'll get the nod for the Barbarians now? Presumably Harrison will start, but benchwise. Maybe Nick Wood?
 
Yeh because players like Goneva, Bowden, Croft, B.Youngs, Flood have and were coached out of it, the fact is Leicester don't try to get many skilful players but when they do they use them that way. Bowden although his defence has certainly improved hadn't lost any of his attacking edge.

When ever I have spoken to Back he doesn't have many nice things to say about the coaches (Cockers, O'Connor (when he was here or Burke) he likes Murphy thought. Freddie will have to the basics extremely well obviously (that's a given if he wants to be England 10) but Tigers won't coach out his attacking instinct imo otherwise why spend the money on him and get some of the cheaper players and have Williams as a def 10.
It does seem like a weird comment from Back, it's not like Tigers don't play a attacking brand of rugby. Saracens genuinely are a team that coaches players to be less attack minded and to work within a system, Barritt is probably the prime example. You can't have won as much stuff as Leicester without having a pretty decent attack.
 
Hy guys not sure if there is a steffon armitage thread on here I did look but couldn't find one . I've been thinking about the whole exceptional circumstances ruling and surely someone being voted the best player in Europe and frances best overseas player with all the players they have would be exceptional circumstances . I mean is have him in the team in a heartbeat a back row of
6. Wood/Robshaw
7. Armitage
8. Vunipola
Would be literally immense !
 
Those are not "exceptional circumstances".

As far as I am aware the actual definition of "exceptional circumstances" is 4 players injured in one position - I have no way to confirm that, but that's what I've heard it is.

Even if the source was erroneous that is practically what it means anyway - "unless we are absolutely ****ed during a RWC"
 
But then how were Wilkinson and Shaw able to play in he 2011 World Cup? I always thought the circumstances rule was basically whatever the current coach thought it would be.
 
Different coaches dierent views on the way forward. Lancaster has said he wont pick overseas players unless there is exceptional circumstances of injurys (according to some quotes)

but if Lancaster was fired or quit then a new coach could well decide to pick Armitage.
 
They were only selected during a grace period when the rules came in.

The "exceptional circumstances" are designed to be so exceptional that they never actually occur.
It's completely irrelevant who the coach is... the rule is enforced by the RFU through an agreement/understanding with the PRL.
 
Yeah, the exceptional circumstances thing started being reported a lot after the World Cup, from what I remember.
Shaw went to Toulon after the World Cup, n all.

I'm with ratsapprentice on what the circumstances entail, aswell - I read it as less "he's really good, that'll do" and more "we've got literally no other players, so let's use the guys abroad"
 
They haven't actually said or mentioned injuries though . Surely if Lancaster went and said to the RFU that he would help us to win a RWC then they should allow it . It could be a possibility that now teams are allowed 2 marquee signings that a club may be able to afford him
 
Hy guys not sure if there is a steffon armitage thread on here I did look but couldn't find one . I've been thinking about the whole exceptional circumstances ruling and surely someone being voted the best player in Europe and frances best overseas player with all the players they have would be exceptional circumstances . I mean is have him in the team in a heartbeat a back row of
6. Wood/Robshaw
7. Armitage
8. Vunipola
Would be literally immense !


This "should England make an exception for Steffon Armitage" has been covered pretty comprehensively by Brian Moore in the telegraph and the posts to the article.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...-stick-to-selection-policy.html#disqus_thread

The most comprehensive post by a poster going by the name of Kinlaw is below:

As regards Steffon Armitage, there are two perspectives to consider, playing and political.

On the playing front, the only spot SA could challenge for a spot in the England team would be at 7. He is not a strong enough ball-carrier for 8 and one of England's two main lineout operators plays in the 6 jersey, an area in which SA is a non-factor. So it comes down to a straight choice between SA and the current England captain Chris Robshaw. While Armitage is undoubtedly better than CR on the ground, the main questionmark [apart from SA's lack of lineout ability] would be his work rate - his ability to be effective in a much faster game. Saturday's match was slow and played on a gluepot pitch, very much to Toulon's liking. Test matches are far, far quicker than that and it would be useful to see if SA could handle one of England semi-opposed practices aerobically.

The other perspective is political. The RFU and the clubs have spent most of the last 5 years building a situation where 71% of the players in the AP are now England qualified, and most clubs have thriving academies are beginning to churn out a stream of good young English talent. Good English players have 99% of the time stayed in England to play their rugby, and the AP and the England national side has been all the better for it.

The selection of players plying their trade outside England would put a stop to all that. It would open up the top players to lucrative offers from France especially. It would both arrest their development as players - can anyone name one player who has actually improved by playing in the Top 14?? - give them inferior back-up [coaching and facilities] and encourage the English club owners to spend money on foreign imports to replace the top English players leaving these shores. Is that we want - all for the sake of Steffon Armitage??

For sure, guys like Boudjellal will say anything they can to prise open the market in England - and let's be honest he's just using Armitage as a pawn in his game. But ultimately, he doesn't give a flying frig about the effects on the game in England as long as Toulon are alright. In the final analysis he wants a European club champions league to be accepted as the apex of our game, not international rugby. It's not in my opinion an aim which we should be helping him achieve by selecting overseas-based English players. Let SA come to England and prove himself in the AP in time for 2015! :)
 
They haven't actually said or mentioned injuries though . Surely if Lancaster went and said to the RFU that he would help us to win a RWC then they should allow it . It could be a possibility that now teams are allowed 2 marquee signings that a club may be able to afford him

NO THEY WOULDN'T! This isn't optional!!

The rules are a fundamental part of the RFU and PRL's relationship - if they break them then the PRL with throw their toys out of the pram (quite rightly) and all of our players will **** off to France.

Since when were clubs allowed two marquee players?
 
NO THEY WOULDN'T! This isn't optional!!

The rules are a fundamental part of the RFU and PRL's relationship - if they break them then the PRL with throw their toys out of the pram (quite rightly) and all of our players will **** off to France.

Since when were clubs allowed two marquee players?

I don't think for a minute they would change the rules for armitage btw and I'm undecided on how I feel about trying to prise him into the squad anyway .

Isn't the 2 marquee players a change for next season along with the change in the salary cap ? Thought I read it somewhere on here but I may be wrong
 
Nope. No change to the marquee player rule.

Fraser Balmain replaces Catt in the Barbarians squad.
 
This "should England make an exception for Steffon Armitage" has been covered pretty comprehensively by Brian Moore in the telegraph and the posts to the article.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...-stick-to-selection-policy.html#disqus_thread

The most comprehensive post by a poster going by the name of Kinlaw is below:

Great post and I completely agree. If England were going the wrong way in terms of development then fine but we are not. The current England back row is performing as well as any in the international game and as the old saying goes...if it isnt broke its doesnt need fixing particular given the ramifications of fixing the non existent problem.
 
I don't. Lancaster is here to increase our chances of winning a World Cup, not be the moral champion of a restrictive eligibility policy. If having Armitage significantly increases our chances of winning, we ought to do it.

It doesn't have to be one-or-the-other between a shut-out of players playing overseas, and a completely open door. Armitage is by far our best back rower, therefore he should be picked. If, for example, Hartley went overseas, we'd just say, "Well, you're not that much better than the opposition and you wouldn't be missed much." If Cole went, we'd still pick him. If Twelvetrees went, we'd pick someone new. etc.
 
Top