2014 QBE Internationals [EOYT] England

[goodNumber10]

Haskell Injured?

No it was a joke.

He said "Jesus", i said no he's injured with nail infection - geddit?

I would also like to add to 'Farrellgate' that personally, I never felt he should be dropped out of the squad for Australia. I still think he has a role to play especially in tight games against big opposition - I just don't feel that is a starting role, right now especially. I also would have kept him on the bench for South Africa.

I don't have a particular preference for Myler over him and would probably therefore have Farrell back on the bench for the Oz-Tralians

so pretty much what I've been saying all along?

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

I do now!

But GN10 please stop trying to move the goalposts

You defended Farrells selection for New Zealand, as well as arguing his corner despite poor form.
When the team to play South Africa was announced you declared you were "happy with that" - I presume including Farrell playing at 10.

You also said

"i think Farrell is clearly the first choice 10, why hold back team and player development because you want to give someone else experience - especially against the top 3"

This strongly implying you agreed with the selection.

You also have yourself to blame if you feel you are grandly misunderstood because you frequently justify selections based on the fact that 'the coaches think he's the best and thats what matters..'

"You may not think he's first choice but they clearly do and that is what matters......

With that in mind he has only 26 caps, so hardly a decades worth of experience, especially for a fly half, but by playing ford you eat into Farrells exposure and end up with two fly halfs with low numbers, and neither with the relevent experience."

More evidence again suggesting you were pretty happy with Fazzles selection. Can I add, it 'what the coaches think is all that matters' none of us would be writing on this forum. Coaches can be wrong, and frequently are, and you need to accept that.

You also predicted

"it's very simple really, if england get it right up front Farrell will play well enough.".

It's not really that simple at all - sure our pack wasn't brilliant but they were not completely terrible, and especially set-piece wise Farrell had more than enough freedom to do what we could with it. And he didn't play "well enough"

In addition you have gone out of your way to defend a pretty poor performance against South Africa. You need to acknowledge that when a player is felt to be out of sorts and not warranting being first choice, he will come under scrutiny -that doesn't mean you have to defend him, because ultimately its s constructive, not a personal debate, and designed to make sure we get the best team out so we can win.

Unfortunately for you, you can't divorce this selection debate from previous context, which includes the fact that you have historically defended Farrells selection and largely ignored the issue or going into a world cup with only one real option.
In short you have frequently been wrong about Farrell and are attempting to tone down your arguments for posterity which isn't "right"

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Although I guess Sarries won a Premiership final with him at 13 right?
@TRF_Olyy Would you actively feel like booing Clark if you were at the game? I really find it hard to stomach him being selected myself, not sire what my reaction would be if I saw him in an England shirt live.

Urgh, I wish everyone would - 82k people all booing the POS and he might actually realise that the things he does aren't right.

 

[Maverick1987]

Urgh, I wish everyone would - 82k people all booing the POS and he might actually realise that the things he does aren't right.

I'm with you Olyy I wont watch it if he plays . It's bad enough he's been selected over people like Kvesic and Fraser anyway never mind with what he did to Rob Hawkins . He's a foul person and I'd be hoping huge Samoan knees him in the ******** if he does get on the field

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

What if Clark score the winning try to help us beat Wales in the last minute? #Conflicted.

 

[Maverick1987]

What if Clark score the winning try to help us beat Wales in the last minute? #Conflicted.

Well I live in Wales and all of my friends are Welsh so I might have to pretend I like Clark whilst I'm out then come home and repeat "I hate him" over and over . Haha to be fair I have to pretend I rate people like Rhodri Jones and others so not to upset the welshies anyway so won't be too out of character

 

[goodNumber10]

But GN10 please stop trying to move the goalposts

how have i even remotely moved the goalposts?

You defended Farrells selection for New Zealand, as well as arguing his corner despite poor form.
When the team to play South Africa was announced you declared you were "happy with that" - I presume including Farrell playing at 10.

You also said

i think Farrell is clearly the first choice 10, why hold back team and player development because you want to give someone else experience - especially against the top 3"

This strongly implying you agreed with the selection.

Do you want to present that quote in it's true context or just cherry pick to suit your argument?

I said he is clearly the first choice in the coaches eyes, and that's what matters - and that's still true. i have said all along they should pick their first choice 10 for these games - and i have said all along that i understand why they will do that.

That's hugely different to what you are now presenting which is at best disingenuous and has never been the point i was making - and THAT is frustrating. you repeatedly refuse to read the context it is presented in even with clarification you present it out of context to suit your argument.

You also have yourself to blame if you feel you are grandly misunderstood because you frequently justify selections based on the fact that 'the coaches think he's the best and thats what matters..'

again what i have said, and repeatedly clarified through all this, and for some reason you really are having trouble grasping this, is that I understand the selection - frequently i have said Ford is the form player and that i would select him - but that if they think Farrell is the better 10 he should start.

I have said continually they shouldn't start someone against the best teams in the world just to give him experience and they should start the best player in that position.

Again vastly different to me saying i would pick Farrell over ford or that Farrell is exempt from critcism.

More evidence again suggesting you were pretty happy with Fazzles selection. Can I add, it 'what the coaches think is all that matters' none of us would be writing on this forum. Coaches can be wrong, and frequently are, and you need to accept that.

You are again purposefully taking my comment out of context and using that as your argument.

I've not said Lancaster and co are right, I've said i understand their selection process and the decisions they have made, and that i would probably make similar decisions.

You also predicted
It's not really that simple at all - sure our pack wasn't brilliant but they were not completely terrible, and especially set-piece wise Farrell had more than enough freedom to do what we could with it. And he didn't play "well enough"

Yes, that's called an opinion and it's my opinion that the pack and Danny Care gave him crap ball, and he had very few options outside him.

In addition you have gone out of your way to defend a pretty poor performance against South Africa. You need to acknowledge that when a player is felt to be out of sorts and not warranting being first choice, he will come under scrutiny -that doesn't mean you have to defend him, because ultimately its s constructive, not a personal debate, and designed to make sure we get the best team out so we can win.

I've got no issue with a player being under scrutiny or receiving criticism if valid, but your reasoning behind his performance is erroneous, and i'm trying to explain why.

Outside of the poor kicks and the Watson incident people say he's stifling our attack - show me where? give me game clock and i'll pull the video and like with the Watson incident we can all look at it together and see what is happening and if it is actually his fault or not - doesn't mean we will agree but at least it will be objective and accurate unlike the accusations many people are currently throwing around as factual when they've watched the game once live on TV with Stuart Barnes talking out his backside all over it.

Unfortunately for you, you can't divorce this selection debate from previous context, which includes the fact that you have historically defended Farrells selection and largely ignored the issue or going into a world cup with only one real option.
In short you have frequently been wrong about Farrell and are attempting to tone down your arguments for posterity which isn't "right"

simply not true.

I do rate him, but i have frequently and consistently said i would select Ford at the moment - i said it leading up to the games and i'm still saying it now. Now you can trawl back through all the pages if you don't believe me but it's there in legend for all to see.

What you are mistaking is me saying i understand the coaches point of view and in that context I understand them selecting Farrell - this rubs against your "Ford needs experience and that should take precedence" BS which i simply don't agree with - and for that you seem to think i'm favouring Farrell over Ford which again is not true.

Looking at both NZ and SA i don't think Farrell played as bad as any of you are making out - especially in attack - he made a couple of kicking errors before he came off, but then so did a fresh player in Ford. In attack you are all criticising him but you don't seem to know why - i've just run through the first 30 minutes of the game and he's made 0 errors on ball outside fo the Watson incident which i still don't think is down to him - he's played on the gain line and not shovelled on sh*t. In fact the player who has made more errors is Eastmond, lost ball in contact and chucked a hail mary pass.

So i'm interested to know what you expect? From your fly half, because despite the fact he puts in a couple of poor kicks, when clearly injured, he hasn't really done much wrong.

I might have to pretend I like Clark whilst I'm out then come home and repeat "I hate him" over and over .

I can just imagine you curled up in a scolding hot shower hugging yourself as you chant it.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

After reading all this stupid stuff 1 thing is obvious.....

Goodnumber10 doesn't know what a good number 10 looks like!

Got to agree with Olyy here I t hate Clark and am bloody going to watch this game live.

I get to see the joys of Faz @ 12 and Clark on the bench.

I don't know what to do!!!!

 

[goodNumber10]

Charlie Hodgsons comments in their proper context:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/30095698

"If they need that extra ball player in the centre, Owen is potentially the player to go to," added Hodgson, who announced his international retirement in 2012 .
"It's a difficult situation putting Farrell and Ford on at the same time. Owen is a strong character himself and he wants to have control of what's going on. He might find that a bit difficult to do that from 12 and it might go against what George is trying to do at 10."

also:

Following defeat to the Proteas, Lancaster denied his team are in crisis but added that they must recapture momentum quickly.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Charlie Hodgsons comments in their proper context:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/30095698



also:

Tell those morons at the BBC the Proteas are our Cricket team FFS!!

 

[Patchey]

Brainless sub editors, that's a paddlin'.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Wigglesworth, Haskell and Twelvetrees replace Care, Vunipola and Eastmond in the match day 23.

 

[Wendigo7]

10. Ford
12. Farrell
13. Barritt

IF ANYONE can possibly defend that selection I dare you to? There isn't a single thing in the world that makes sense with this.

I'm sorry but this is shoehorning now. I'd defend Farrell as much as possible, but this is pathetic.

 

[goodNumber10]

I look forward to the inevitable meltdown on here this week when Farrell is named at 12 with 36 on the bench... or even better at 10 with 36 at 12.

 

[Maverick1987]

I look forward to the inevitable meltdown on here this week when Farrell is named at 12 with 36 on the bench... or even better at 10 with 36 at 12.

We don't want to talk about it .....

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Wtf is Lancaster doing? Haskell coming in is good but at 8!? Morgan has been in great form and should be starting at 8 with Haskell replacing Wood. Farrell still seems to be in with rumour of him starting at 12... He's off form in a position he plays for so why in the love of all that is holy do you expect him to play in better form in a position he doesn't normally play!? What is it with Lancaster and playing people out of position? Remember Wood at 8 when we lost of Wales? A fine experiment that was. Fullbacks on the wings, centres on the wings, halves at centre... Ffs man play the best person in their best position!

 

[goodNumber10]

it's a good job, no other coaches move players around out of their normal positions isn't?

I mean, can you imagine if New Zealand picked full back on the wing, or Wales picked a wing in the centre, or a fullback at 15 or what if steve hansen picked a center on the wing and he won the world cup?

Thank god no one ever took a centre and converted him to hooker, i mean how ridicolous would that be?

Yes, it's a good job no one ever experiments.

 

[Patchey]

Burrell, Clark, Care, Vunnipola and Eastmond returned to their clubs this evening.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

@goodNumber10 Not anywhere near as regularly as Lancaster.

This would have been a great time to give some of the less established players a chance to prove they are better than the encumbants in their position yet it looks like instead we are going to be playing a tried, tested and failed setup. Can't see any creativity in there at all.

 

[ratsapprentice]

When was the last time NZ picked a FH with a skillset like Farrell's and then put him at 12 when he didn't perform?