[2014 Mid-Year Tests] New Zealand vs England (1st Test)

[goodNumber10]

that's only focusing in on one small part of the point I'm trying to make though. And yes of course Burns can't have been expecting to start, or even be in the match day squad... but like i said selecting on form doesn't mean outsiders drop into the starting 15 - so by that i don't think Lancaster is preaching double standards or showing similar traits to coaches who have gone before.

I think selecting on form comes with some caveats and that's why i think he's shown loyalty and put Burns in.

I think Lancaster has sent out a very certain message here, and i think it actually reaffirms the point he often makes about stability and cohesion within his squads.

The interesting point will be when he names his next EPS - if Burns and not Cipriani gets named.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I think Lancaster has sent out a very certain message here

To be extremeley hyperbolic for a moment p) the message he's sent out is "It doesn't matter how good or bad you play in the premiership, if you're not in the EPS you won't get a look in and if you are then you don't have to perform at club level."

 

[goodNumber10]

haha! well i see where you're coming from but i think A; that's not really the message, and B: these are exceptional circumstances.

 

[Crapspray]

Don't know why Parling is starting. Even if he was playing better, he's the worse bench option once Lawes is back. Give Attwood the start. If the side needs bulk for the rubbish front-row replacements, then put Slater on the bench. I don't buy the lineout excuse either: it was, if I recall correctly, around 77% in the 2013 Six Nations (the lowest) under Parling; it jumped to 91% this year. He's not quite the guru he's made out to be.

It seems to me that it's another case of Lancaster's loyalty trumping reason. Johnson's another example. What does he do that Kvesic can't, not to mention better? It's not like he's in dazzling form. And the less said about Burns...

It's not the end of the world, but it's been made worse by a few puzzling decisions. I reckon it'll be a similar result to last December: England will clamber level after 50-60 minutes, then the Dam will burst and the score will widen once the starters tire and the substitutions fail to make an impact.

 

[goodNumber10]

Don't know why Parling is starting. Even if he was playing better, he's the worse bench option once Lawes is back. Give Attwood the start. If the side needs bulk for the rubbish front-row replacements, then put Slater on the bench. I don't buy the lineout excuse either: it was, if I recall correctly, around 77% in the 2013 Six Nations (the lowest) under Parling; it jumped to 91% this year. He's not quite the guru he's made out to be.

It seems to me that it's another case of Lancaster's loyalty trumping reason. Johnson's another example. What does he do that Kvesic can't, not to mention better? It's not like he's in dazzling form. And the less said about Burns...

It's not the end of the world, but it's been made worse by a few puzzling decisions. I reckon it'll be a similar result to last December: England will clamber level after 50-60 minutes, then the Dam will burst and the score will widen once the starters tire and the substitutions fail to make an impact.

Parling is in because Wood is missing and Parling runs the lineout - they only have one lineout option with Attwood in the 15***. Parling moves it up to two.



*** not looking to debate this point, attwood might be an awesome jumper but that's the reasoning.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

I really disagree with that Henry.

Lancaster, as most coaches do, has always shown a sense of loyalty to his players - he has to, to build a squad. He has to identify a collective of guys whom he thinks will make the world cup in 2015 and work with them.

So when he says he is selecting on form he means from within that group so if it's a call between Ford and Farrell and Ford has the form that he'll select him - not that he'd parachute someone in because they've had a better season than someone within his elite players squad and that they'll drop straight into the starting team.

I think people really are misunderstanding what "Selecting on form" means. Cipriani has been rewarded with selection int he touring squad - his form has been recognised and rewarded. Lancaster has shown loyalty to someone within his EPS (burns) because that's what players expect, want and need - sometimes people need an arm around their shoulders..

The concept of loyalty to players is only defensible within strict bounds. It helps to separate players of similar ability who are in similar form, and we need it because England have too many professional players who will each come in and out of form that without it we would be changing EPS all the time. I agree that players need that level of protection.

But make no mistake with Burns Lancaster isn't operating within reasonable bounds of loyalty - he has been off the required standard even at premiership level and would be second or third choice at most premiership clubs right now.
My question to you would be what does Burns have to do to merit being dropped?

There's very little evidence that out of form players come back into form through perseverance from international coaches; most will be dropped and will regain form with their clubs and then re-enter the picture. Why does Burns get to do it playing the best side in the world? Hartley for example found himself second choice but has now re-emerged as the obvious first choice. Surely working to get back to the top is a good incentive for a player to improve.


And I'm not sure how you think Cipriani has been rewarded? Farrell and Myler unavailable, Ford injured, Burns next in line. That makes Cipriani the 5th choice, preferred only to the extremely Green Henry Slade, the extremely fat Andy Goode and I'm not sure who else. It would have been insanity to not take him to New Zealand - the fact that he has been taken does not constitute sufficient reward in my view if he's still going to be kept as a back-up player.

 

[goodNumber10]

The concept of loyalty to players is only defensible within strict bounds. It helps to separate players of similar ability who are in similar form, and we need it because England have too many professional players who will each come in and out of form that without it we would be changing EPS all the time. I agree that players need that level of protection.

But make no mistake with Burns Lancaster isn't operating within reasonable bounds of loyalty - he has been off the required standard even at premiership level and would be second or third choice at most premiership clubs right now.
My question to you would be what does Burns have to do to merit being dropped?

There's very little evidence that out of form players come back into form through perseverance from international coaches; most will be dropped and will regain form with their clubs and then re-enter the picture. Why does Burns get to do it playing the best side in the world? Hartley for example found himself second choice but has now re-emerged as the obvious first choice. Surely working to get back to the top is a good incentive for a player to improve.

And I'm not sure how you think Cipriani has been rewarded? Farrell and Myler unavailable, Ford injured, Burns next in line. That makes Cipriani the 5th choice, preferred only to the extremely Green Henry Slade, the extremely fat Andy Goode and I'm not sure who else. It would have been insanity to not take him to New Zealand - the fact that he has been taken does not constitute sufficient reward in my view if he's still going to be kept as a back-up player.

RE: Hartley.

He was never dropped form the EPS and was always the next inline should Youngs be injured and vice versa - the point is he didn't parachute a form player from outside the EPS into take an EPS players position. i don't really care if people think this is right or wrong it's lancasters call, but it's consistent.


RE: Burns.

Second Third choice yet signed by one of the biggest clubs, not just in England but, in the World. Obviously it's more than just Lancaster and Catt who see something in him.

Regardless, Lancaster has been consistent in his selection process, he selects from within the EPS unless injury occurs. Cipriani was always pencilled into play in the Canterbury game - if he isn't i think people can moan .

 

[Gena_ZA]

Get the feeling England going to be ripped a new one...

 

[Big Ewis]

Get the feeling England going to be ripped a new one...

huh......well what makes you say that ?

 

[Gena_ZA]

Do not think their second stringers will get close the the All Blacks on home soil

"With a slew of first-choice players unavailable because they were involved in last week's Premiership decider, there are eight changes to the starting 15 that turned out for England's last fixture against Italy in the Six Nations." Now Danny Care injured his shoulder in training and in doubt

 

[Icemn]

Get the feeling England going to be ripped a new one...

b4 you get ahead of yourself... what is the weather going to be like?

 

[Gena_ZA]

Not getting ahead of myself at all, merely stating what I think will happen.
State your case and use google to get a weather forecast

 

[Big Ewis]

Not getting ahead of myself at all, merely stating what I think will happen.
State your case and use google to get a weather forecast

yeah plz Gena, stop getting ahead of yourself. It's really, really annoying. Getting ahead of yourself like that.

 

[Gena_ZA]

lol, no comment

 

[Peat]

Don't feel worried about the second stringers, its the third and worse that are exercising me. I can't keep track of all the injuries and therefore can't gauge quite how its going to look, but the front row looks problematic and half-back looks very problematic, with the likely guys being Flaky & Flakier on recent evidence.

Tbh, a lot of the guys coming in are guys who were first choice a year ago - Geoff Parling, Ben Morgan, Yarde and Tuilagi back from injury... not too worried there.

Suspect the Kiwis are straining at the leash for this one.

 

[Tony Manx]

Don't feel worried about the second stringers, its the third and worse that are exercising me. I can't keep track of all the injuries and therefore can't gauge quite how its going to look, but the front row looks problematic and half-back looks very problematic, with the likely guys being Flaky & Flakier on recent evidence.

Tbh, a lot of the guys coming in are guys who were first choice a year ago - Geoff Parling, Ben Morgan, Yarde and Tuilagi back from injury... not too worried there.

Suspect the Kiwis are straining at the leash for this one.

Score predictions......................more or less than 100 points difference?

 

[Peat]

Score predictions......................more or less than 100 points difference?

Anything less than 100 is clearly a moral victory against their Blackness when selection is restricted to players named Michael.

 

[goodNumber10]

Score predictions......................more or less than 100 points difference?

under 50 - more than 10.

I reckon 45-21

 

[Gena_ZA]

huh......well what makes you say that ?

View attachment 2972

Seems I am not alone in my thoughts on this the first match

 

[Big Ewis]

mmmm....37-13.