[2015 Six Nations] England vs Scotland (Round 4)

[ncurd]

Isn't the issue with Slade is we are now 6 months from the RWC? Surely it's Ford or Farrell and the only choice there is Ford.

 

[yaboyjj]

By Slade bandwagon, I mean Slade at 10, preferably sooner rather than later.

I sincerely hope this is sarcasm!
I think the back-line is starting to come together and is being held together by the Ford-Joseph axis, as soon as the 12 position is sorted and they all click (maybe with May/Wade inclusion also) it could be special. Ford is a really good player- it looked like a one man band out there at times in terms of creating oppertunities.

I'm still not convinced at the leadership and tactical nous shown in the team- particularly from the forwards, experienced they may be, but none of Haskell, Hartley, Attwood, Robshaw fill me with any confidence on this front.

Does anyone expect changes for the France game? potentially needing to put points on the board, balanced with being the last chance to try out players in a competitive game. I think it will be an unchanged lineup, most at risk are Burrell, Hartley and Haskell imo

 

[martinspoonboy1]

I thought Lawes was MOTM, Youngs did have a good game as well but he and Ford linked well so a bit unfair to seperate the... also special mention for Robshaw who was immense again, and i thought Marler had a pretty solid game.

I'm a massive Marler fan, but he was average at best today. Pinged in the scrum too often.

 

[Crapspray]

Well that was frustrating, we've butchered more try scoring opportunities than anyone else. We seem to panic and try forcing things. Also the refreeing was an absolute shambled. At the end the England pack marched clean through the middle of the Scottish scrum, no England penalty. Scotland were driving early on pretty much all their put ins, never penalised. Doing all sorts of crap to collapse the mauls, never penalised, multiple knock ons by them where they got the penalties... truely shocking performance.

But it's a French ref. Not to prey on stereotypes, but French refs nearly always shrug when it comes it the difficult decisions - and seemingly have no clue what's going on half the time. The plus side is that they normally allow the game to flow a bit more than others whose pedantry tends to break games down (see: Steve Walsh). It wouldn't have mattered if England had converted more than a quarter of their opportunities. That's what will cost them the championship.

 

[goodNumber10]

I'm a massive Marler fan, but he was average at best today. Pinged in the scrum too often.

twice.

Just for persepctive every starting prop was penalised once during this game...

 

[yaboyjj]

twice.

Meh, there's a good case to say that if Vunipola is matching Marler in the scrum, then he gives a lot more go forward in the loose.

 

[goodNumber10]

Meh, there's a good case to say that if Vunipola is matching Marler in the scrum, then he gives a lot more go forward in the loose.

yes, at the tail end of the game when defences are tired and there are more opportunitues to carry - that's why he's a bench player.

 

[martinspoonboy1]

twice.

Just for persepctive every starting prop was penalised once during this game...

Twice too many. Wasn't a great day for our front row.

 

[goodNumber10]

Twice too many. Wasn't a great day for our front row.

when i said every starting prop I mean every starting prop including the scots.

Anyway, i thought he went well enough, i'd still pick him over Vunipola, Corbisiero? probably not.

 

[psychic duck]

Good to see Guscott calling out SCW on his "I'd play Maro Itoje at 10 with Tuilagi at Hooker" ********.

Clearly not having it :lol:

They're all literally laiughing at him after they back him into a corner and he admits that he'd "probably make the same calls as Lancaster has"... :lol:

Utter ***.

Seriously?

 

[ratsapprentice]

I was being flippant.

Cipriani at 10 and Slade at 12... the point is he's talking out his backside - he constantly flip flops between who he would and wouldn't pick.
He's being disingenuous - he knows he wouldn't be as impulsive as he's suggesting he would, which is pretty poor IMO, considering he's in a position to influence public opinion.

 

[martinspoonboy1]

when i said every starting prop I mean every starting prop including the scots.

Anyway, i thought he went well enough, i'd still pick him over Vunipola, Corbisiero? probably not.

Agreed.

- - - Updated - - -

Also Jack Nowell arguably had his best game in an England shirt. Looked very dangerous.

 

[McTallshort]

Nowell and Lawes were fantansic, Ford and Youngs seem good as a half back pairing and Tom Youngs should start ahead of Hartley otherwise it was just OK.

 

[j'nuh]

By Slade bandwagon, I mean Slade at 10, preferably sooner rather than later.

But why? Ford is improving by every game for England.

Flyhalves make, what, an average of 5-10 tackles a game? A meter or so conceded here or there compared to a stronger tackler is nothing compared to the authority that a 10 stamps on the game through the 50+ phases that a flyhalf is involved with in a game. If he was a complete liability in defence, I'd be more inclined to see this point. But finding a flyhalf with the game management and skill of Ford is so rare that I think slightly passive tackling can be accepted.

Also, when it comes to defence, there is no point of dropping Ford and keeping Burrell. Burrell is the defensive weak link. Putting Slade at 10 means we can't put him at 12, which means Barritt or Twelvetrees would be the ones to replace Burrell. Meh to that idea. Ford-Slade-Joseph > Slade-Barritt/Twelvetrees-Joseph.

 

[martinspoonboy1]

But why? Ford is improving by every game for England.

Flyhalves make, what, an average of 5-10 tackles a game? A meter or so conceded here or there compared to a stronger tackler is nothing compared to the authority that a 10 stamps on the game through the 50+ phases that a flyhalf is involved with in a game. If he was a complete liability in defence, I'd be more inclined to see this point. But finding a flyhalf with the game management and skill of Ford is so rare that I think slightly passive tackling can be accepted.

Also, when it comes to defence, there is no point of dropping Ford and keeping Burrell. Burrell is the defensive weak link. Putting Slade at 10 means we can't put him at 12, which means Barritt or Twelvetrees would be the ones to replace Burrell. Meh to that idea. Ford-Slade-Joseph > Slade-Barritt/Twelvetrees-Joseph.

Exactly my thoughts. Burrell was poor today. Butchered opportunities, gave away silly pens (especially the accidental offside). If we had scored then it could have been 14-0 after 10 mins.
Ford was excellent. The delayed passes and taking it to the line was vital in putting others into space. 4 assists in 4 games. Awesome.

 

[goodNumber10]

But why? Ford is improving by every game for England.

Flyhalves make, what, an average of 5-10 tackles a game? A meter or so conceded here or there compared to a stronger tackler is nothing compared to the authority that a 10 stamps on the game through the 50+ phases that a flyhalf is involved with in a game. If he was a complete liability in defence, I'd be more inclined to see this point. But finding a flyhalf with the game management and skill of Ford is so rare that I think slightly passive tackling can be accepted.

Also, when it comes to defence, there is no point of dropping Ford and keeping Burrell. Burrell is the defensive weak link. Putting Slade at 10 means we can't put him at 12, which means Barritt or Twelvetrees would be the ones to replace Burrell. Meh to that idea. Ford-Slade-Joseph > Slade-Barritt/Twelvetrees-Joseph.

How is Burrell the weak link in defence?

Not being a d*ck just curious as to what you're seeing.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Ford may be passive tackling, Burrel misses them completely, it has already cost us tries. He has not been good as far as I can see. Defensively weak, completely butchered a try today, distribution average, kicking non-existant. He occassionally runs decent lines and can hit a defense quite hard but he really needs to develop his game.

 

[goodNumber10]

I need to run the video again, but he made 8 tackles missed 3, Ford and Joesph each made 6 missed 1, so Burrell made two thirds of their combined tackles and missed 3 to their 2.

That's not exactly showing him as a poor defender or the weaklink in defence.

That's just the stats though and we need to look at the outcome of those missed tackles (i haven't, but will) but like i said missing a tackle 4 metres over the gain line is not as problematic as getting driven back over the gain line by 2-3 metres, likewise getting driven back 3 at the gain line is not as problematic as getting stood up and falling off the tackle in your own 5m area..

 

[Peat]

Yes I am serious and I'd have thought the reason would be really super obvious.

Ford is a defensive liability and that has not been improving. All tournament he has either been giving up cheap yards or has been requiring hiding. I don't see any particular reason to hope this will improve. His physique is too against him.

And therefore I don't see him as a long term England starting 10. He probably has all the other skills for it, but this is no longer an era where a 10 who's notably poor in defence can be received with a mere shrug. It's too costly. Ultimately, it means he will slip down the queue compared to any fly-half who can do all the rest on a more physical frame. And even if you do not agree with that for your own tastes, please look at Stuart Lancaster's record on this matter and tell me what you think his likely reaction is to a player who loses ground every tackle.

Enter Henry Slade. An outright more physical player (for all he does not fill out his frame much) and so far, fairly defensively sound at every level he's played. But also a guy with all the makings of a top notch attacking and kicking fly-half. A little rough around the edges in that respect, but he looks like he'll make it. And lets hope he does, and quickly, as neither Ford nor Farrell meet all the requirement for a top international fly-half and as previously noted, it would surprise no one to see Farrell given the nod right now. He is our best hope of a player who can end that impasse by overtaking both.


Yes, he won't make it for the WC, and more's the pity. But I want him in place for the 2017 6N by the very latest, assuming his talent plays out like it's looking to. I wish he was on the bench right now, as that'd increase the chance of him making the 2016 6N.


And yes, it means we're still looking for a 12. But hey ho. Maybe he can play 12 up until that point. Or maybe we'll soldier on without a really good one for a bit. Maybe Hill will come to the fore, or Burgess will finally do what Lancaster's dreaming of, or some young guy like Sloan will make a big bang there, or whatever. Or maybe the inevitable Tuilagi-Joseph combo will work second time around. I don't know, and compared to our one in a generation shot at a guy who could be an all round great 10, I don't really care.

 

[Maverick1987]

I'm keen to see Ford, Manu and JJ to be honest . It's too late for Slade which is a shame because he's identical to Farrell defensively but not so **** in attack . Please can we See Ford and Slade as starter and bench options ? Don't care which way round