2014 QBE Internationals [EOYT] England

[TheSaffycen]

Didn't seem slower when using Parling instead of Lawes this summer, but fair enough, it's a valid point and worth looking at. Although I'd hate to bring in Fraser and not give him the opportunity to get over the ball because he's always shooting up.

I think that Haskell is a pretty fast back rower who actually would be a better pick than both Kvesic and Fraser thinking about it, good thought Peat.

Didn't Launchbury get back to make a crucial tap tackle in the 6N and Parling did the same for the Lions? Admittedly that's going backwards but they don't appear that slow. Also if you really want pace, Croft is pretty damn fast (don't think he really fits the team but he's definitely got pace).

Croft looked slow for some reason against Bath, hopefully just because he was rusty. The difference between being fast in open space and someone who can time themselve too stay onside and get the hit on the 10.
I personally couldn't see Parling making a tackle like this, but someone like Haskell, Fraser or Kvesic can make. Robshaw can't make this kind of tackle which is probably the reason why I can't see him as a 7, this is why Lawes is so useful for us and why I would start Bury on the bench with Attwood and Lawes starting.

 

[Peat]

I can't think of anyone who hits 10s like Lawes tbh. He's made it an art form.

 

[Wendigo7]

I'd like to see almost all of that Bath backline play frankly.

You lose a bit in defence, although to me the only question is team's running at ford.

Just because 1 man is slightly weaker that doesn't mean it's auto 7 points and conversely just because he misses 14 pts, they will single his 1 bad game of kicking and turn a blind eye to farrell because he gives a reassurance blanket.

9. Care
10. Ford
11. Yarde
12. Eastmond
13. Joseph (In as good a form as Eastmond and Ford, whilst Tuilagi has been really struggling this season.)
14. Rokodoguni (his defence is becoming immense.. I never thought I'd utter the words of an english winger who can defend and attack)
15. Brown

 

[TheSaffycen]

Well you still haven't uttered the words an English winger who can attack and defend as he's Fijian

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Well you still haven't uttered the words an English winger who can attack and defend as he's Fijian

Oh that will definitely come up if Roko gets on the team. Apparently the blood that flows through your veins is more important than the system you went through.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Didn't he come over aged 18 ? I have no idea of his rugby development but assuming he started the conventional way at 12/13 then he came through the Fijian system. Now I know he went into the army and has given more for this country than most, but he's still Fijian. I would select him still but I'm not going to kid myself and say he's a great product of English rugby like Manu or Vunipola. Unless I'm wrong and he came over when he was younger.

 

[Wendigo7]

Billy and Mako were in the Welsh system until 16, you cannot possibly use that as an argument.....

The only one technically is Manu and even then, your clutching at Straws. Roko's been on the frontline defence of our line and served in the infantry. I'd like to think that wipes out any issues with tribalism.

 

[TheSaffycen]

I thought the vunipola's came over at like 13, that's my mistake. Also how am I clutching at straws with Manu ?
Roko's work in the military is brilliant and I have no problem selecting him but as I said he's Fijian, that's all I'm getting at. The manu andd vunipola reference was just that some of our pacific islanders i can see as English. Roko I just can't, doesn't mean i wont get behind him. I just see him in the same category as Barritt and co.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I'm pretty sure the Vunipolas moved to England for secondary school (some private one in bristol) so that'd put them at like 11 (-however many years younger Binny is).

 

[Peat]

As far as I'm aware Rokoduguni received all of his pro training here. He got his opportunity here. Like Mouritz Botha or Hendre Fourie before him, he might have come over fairly mature, but pretty much everything about him as a pro rugby player who got a sniff of international rugby happened here. To my mind, that sort of makes him a product of the system.

Not that it bothers me that much either way.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Only ever played as a schoolboy in Fiji...

"I wasn't a first-choice as a schoolboy so I thought I had no chance of playing [professional] rugby."

He only started playing senior rugby in the army, and last season was his first professional season.

 

[Peat]

It's quotes like that that make a guy simultaneously sad and grateful that Fiji's not able to stick out a team with Tier 1 levels of preparation and player access.

 

[welshglory]

I heard that Fiji is one of the biggest exporters of rugby players in the world in terms of pure numbers as well as per capita. Most of them are developed in Fiji as well.

 

[ratsapprentice]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Jonny Wilkinson has been invited to spend time with the England coaches at Pennyhill Park before the November Tests.</p>&mdash; Ben Coles (@bencoles_) <a href="https://twitter.com/bencoles_/status/518301862442049536">October 4, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Will be interesting to see what he's actually doing, but I do think Jonny could already have a role in mentoring/coaching some of our younger guys (not exclusively) on a one to one basis throughout the season.

 

[goodNumber10]

It's quotes like that that make a guy simultaneously sad and grateful that Fiji's not able to stick out a team with Tier 1 levels of preparation and player access.

it's quotes like that that give every school boy rugby player and grass roots club man hope of chasing their dreams - when you have clubs like wasps saying we won't look at you for U18 "unless you have played representational rugby" or come through one of our "development" schools you have to wonder...

 

[j'nuh]

Semantics. Lancaster and Rowntree are reluctant to pick him as they don't see him as one of the best players. It's quite clear that, to date, they do not rate him that highly. His appearances basically boil down to "Due to problems with Lawes, Launchbury and Parling, we physically have to give him some gametime" and de facto 2nd XV games.

It shouldn't be about picking the two best locks. It should be about picking the best lock partnership. The best lock partnerships have a grunt lock and an athletic lock (well, ok, they have two freaks who are both, but that's super rare). Attwood has consistently been the best grunt lock available to England for the past 18 months or so at least. Lancaster and Rowntree seem to disagree with one of those statements - that or they really don't rate him that much to the point where they'd ignore the logic above. Which would seem to suggest they don't rate being effective in a maul that much. Which would be consistent with the possibility that they don't feel the need for a grunt lock either. One could reprint the last two sentences while replacing the word "maul" with "scrum" as well.

Maybe it'll happen this series. Or maybe not. Maybe they are happy to ignore a grunt lock in outstanding form because their plans do not require such players.

I'd also be very keen on seeing Attwood and Launch, I think they could be a tremendous pairing.

I suspect that they just don't see the automatic need for a grunt lock. The England management have never been transfixed by traditional squad roles (e.g. no "traditional" 7, fullbacks on wing, Tom Youngs).

On the case of whether you need a grunt lock, I'd probably agree with them. England sacrifice a bit in the maul/scrum for a bit in the contact zone/tackle by having two mobile second rows. I don't think that that is an automatically bad choice. I think Launchbury and Lawes, both in form, are vastly superior to Attwood. But I do think that they miss a trick by having two locks with high work rates, and then Wood and Robshaw in the back row. I think it's worth swapping one or both out for another carrier and/or a scavenger. Take your pick:
6. Vunipola 7. Kvesic/Robshaw 8. Morgan
6. Haskell/Ewers/Garvey 7. Kvesic/Robshaw 8. Vunipola/Morgan
or even (and tbh, my preference)
4. Attwood 5. Lawes 6. Launchbury 7. Kvesic/Robshaw 8. Vunipola/Morgan

 

[Peat]

it's quotes like that that give every school boy rugby player and grass roots club man hope of chasing their dreams - when you have clubs like wasps saying we won't look at you for U18 "unless you have played representational rugby" or come through one of our "development" schools you have to wonder...

Not good. You can see why they do it but its lazy - particularly in a game which a) is heavily centered around physical athleticism, which develops at different rates and b) is often by people who could have very good lives outside rugby. This country is extremely lucky to have picked up Easter and then Morgan late; not hard to think of other late blossomers like Slater, Tom Court, that Symons guy out in New Zealand... the game does pick up people who fall through the cracks, but it would be nice to see a bit of concerted effort about it.

I heard that Fiji is one of the biggest exporters of rugby players in the world in terms of pure numbers as well as per capita. Most of them are developed in Fiji as well.

Wouldn't surprise me. Know there's a lot of them in the French league.

I suspect that they just don't see the automatic need for a grunt lock. The England management have never been transfixed by traditional squad roles (e.g. no "traditional" 7, fullbacks on wing, Tom Youngs).

On the case of whether you need a grunt lock, I'd probably agree with them. England sacrifice a bit in the maul/scrum for a bit in the contact zone/tackle by having two mobile second rows. I don't think that that is an automatically bad choice. I think Launchbury and Lawes, both in form, are vastly superior to Attwood. But I do think that they miss a trick by having two locks with high work rates, and then Wood and Robshaw in the back row. I think it's worth swapping one or both out for another carrier and/or a scavenger. Take your pick:
6. Vunipola 7. Kvesic/Robshaw 8. Morgan
6. Haskell/Ewers/Garvey 7. Kvesic/Robshaw 8. Vunipola/Morgan
or even (and tbh, my preference)
4. Attwood 5. Lawes 6. Launchbury 7. Kvesic/Robshaw 8. Vunipola/Morgan

I suspect your view on Lancaster's views are correct and that worries me. It seems to me a very clear indifference to creating a side with WC credentials in the tight. I don't think I'd ever agree with that in general, but specifically in our case, I just don't see how we have the skill levels out wide to pull it off. Australia do it occasionally when they have a rake of geniuses in the back line. New Zealand do it, but always have a rake of geniuses in the back line. The idea of us having geniuses in the back line is enough to make me cry. Can Lancaster make it work? Is he ever going to think about creating a plan B? Is Rowntree the sort of man who can take a bunch of relatively light guys and get them so technically perfect they blast away in the tight anyway?

 

[ratsapprentice]

Sam Burgess has probably broken his cheekbone in his first tackle in the NRL grand final.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

How would people feel about Joseph being at 13 instead of Tuilagi? Tuilagi is a powerhouse at that position but Joseph seems more dynamic and pretty solid in all aspects of his game.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I'd be happy with it - been the best English 13 so far this year (Slade slightly behind).