[2015 Six Nations] England

[Geordie]

Is that based on his indiscipline in the past....or his performances now?

 

[goodNumber10]

His breakdown work aswell GN10. I've made a point of watching him closely in the last few games of the Christmas period and he's really top class in there.

He will be in the EPS and I would agree with that on this form where I have disagreed with his inclusion at times in the past.
Is this the form that Lancaster and others like Neil Back have said could make him such a classy player?

I agree, he has been one of the best 6's over the last couple of months.

I guess the fundamental point is does he deserve that second chance after what he did? I dunno, i can see why people are aggrieved about it, i can't like him but he is playing really bleeding well.

I suppose in the bigger scheme of things lots of players the world over have been given that second chance. But it does leave a very bad taste.

 

[Every Time Ref]

I suspect a lot will come down to how the incident is seen by other EPS players. Lancaster will see his job as simply to pick the best squad, without any duty to safeguard the morality of the game (not saying I agree with that, but that's how it is from his perspective). If other players are as disgusted as fans are and it would negatively impact the atmosphere then he won't be picked. If they believe either that he deserves a second chance, or simply that they don't care what he's done and want the best players in the squad regardless, then he'll be in the running.

Whose arm was it he broke, I don't remember? Was it someone with a lot of teammates in the EPS?

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Is that based on his indiscipline in the past....or his performances now?

Would call what he did before more than just indiscipline.

I suspect a lot will come down to how the incident is seen by other EPS players. Lancaster will see his job as simply to pick the best squad, without any duty to safeguard the morality of the game (not saying I agree with that, but that's how it is from his perspective). If other players are as disgusted as fans are and it would negatively impact the atmosphere then he won't be picked. If they believe either that he deserves a second chance, or simply that they don't care what he's done and want the best players in the squad regardless, then he'll be in the running.

Whose arm was it he broke, I don't remember? Was it someone with a lot of teammates in the EPS?

Rob Hawkins in the LV cup final against Leicester (In which we won).

Rob was certainly popular with the Leicester players, but I think pro players can move past things like that.

Biggest shame was that he was pushing Youngs for the starting shirt as well at the time.

 

[Geordie]

Well yes, I do understand what he did was particularly bad. Its a tricky one.

I guess the way I look at it...he's served the punishment given to him, his discipline has been particularly good (better than his captains) but he still plays a tough game.
Personally I would have him in the squad, but I can understand those who would not.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

He purposefully broke another players arm.
That's not like getting into a scrap or something.


**** shouldn't be anywhere near the England squad.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Well yes, I do understand what he did was particularly bad. Its a tricky one.

I guess the way I look at it...he's served the punishment given to him, his discipline has been particularly good (better than his captains) but he still plays a tough game.
Personally I would have him in the squad, but I can understand those who would not.

Yeh but the 32 weeks was nothing to what he should of got all the reports on the hearing showed it was badly done.

http://rugbylaw.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/calum-clark-citing-decision.html

 

[Geordie]

Yes 32 weeks was not enough it should have been longer, much longer....but that in itself is not Clarks problem...he served the ban given to him.

Maybe he should never have been allowed to play the game again...he has been however.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Yes 32 weeks was not enough it should have been longer, much longer....but that in itself is not Clarks problem...he served the ban given to him.

Maybe he should never have been allowed to play the game again...he has been however.

It should of been his problem, if he lied to the court and got any away with it.

If he wasn't a Leeds boy Lancaster wouldn't of defended him like he did when it happened.

 

[Geordie]

Very true I dont think he would have been in the squad...purely on form and performances he didn't deserve to be there anyway.

 

[Every Time Ref]

I personally would go with absolutely no ****ing way should this piece of **** play rugby for England. I don't want him representing my country, I wouldn't feel comfortable cheering for him (I'm not going to lie and say it would cross my mind if he scored the winning try in the World Cup final, but I'd rather it didn't come to that ... ), in short I don't feel "he's served his time" is (in this case) enough justification for overlooking that act. Committed outside a sporting context, that would probably qualify as grievous bodily harm with intent (according to my sister, a criminal solicitor) which carries a minimum 5 year sentence. 32 week ban? The ****er should've done jail time.
Professional athletes are a pretty pragmatic bunch though, generally they just want to win and that means having the best players on their side. I really think it might be that simple, unfortunately.

 

[Muse_Cubed]

I have to say, I never liked Clark as a player before The Incident (he was always a bit of a meathead - I know he headbutted someone at some point) and it has been tough to support the guy as a Saints fan given that he committed a criminal offence on the field. That said, I have to admit he's been excellent all round for Saints for the last 18 months and to leave him out of the EPS would be England's loss.

On the disciplinary side, apparently he's only had one yellow card in the past couple of seasons which is pretty impressive. And unlike Hartley, he's acquitted himself really well even when being wound up by the opposition. I think 12-to-18 month ban would have been more appropriate, but so far it does seem like he's worked hard to rehabilitate and redeem himself - whilst I think he should be on probation for the rest of his playing career, to this point there is good evidence to suggest that he's genuinely changed his attitude and if this run of good behaviour continues, I believe he should be given a second chance. How one deals with one's sins is just as important, ultimately.

 

[Mumbles119]

I am torn over Clark. I believe second chances should be allowed, but his actions and the manner he did them in are also so very against my personal principles. I think it will come down to how it feels to actually see him in an England shirt and feel about cheering him on.

On another note:
http://www.espn.co.uk/england/rugby/story/252099.html

Again a divisive subject. Armitage has proven performance, but not in the England team. Plus, if you set a rule (for the right reasons of helping homegrown talent) and bending or relaxing of this rule just nullifies and negates it... Doesn't it?

 

[Big Ewis]

Again a divisive subject. Armitage has proven performance, but not in the England team. Plus, if you set a rule (for the right reasons of helping homegrown talent) and bending or relaxing of this rule just nullifies and negates it... Doesn't it?

just learned the news. England are bunkers for not picking him up earlier. I mean Robshaw and Wood are big, strong, active flankers but they're not anywhere near that World XV. England (like any team, anywhere as far as my conclusions about modern Rugby) could use a fetcher. There are "exceptional selections" England allows, like they did for Wilko when he played for the RCT. Apparently Eng will only allow for a player to partake in the WC event, and not any other int'l. So no 6N. Silly, if you've got "exceptional selections", might as well include him in *any* event. It would give him a taste of int'l Rugby again and he'd settle into the team a little.
England with Armitage scares me a little. He brings his own flavor and a whole dimension to an already well established and dominant pack. Hopefully England use him awfully and he's a flop and returns home errr I mean 'to Toulon' where he belongs safe and sound !

 

[ratsapprentice]

Terrible idea.

Either they agree with the rule or they don't - you can't half arse it.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Terrible idea.

Either they agree with the rule or they don't - you can't half arse it.

England should stand by this rule imo.

Or the PRL will not be happy.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Agreed.
I dont really get why it keeps being brought up - play in england to play for england. Simple as that.
Armitage has known that for years and chose to stay in France instead. Nothing wrong with that but you can't have your cake and eat it (despite what his waistline would suggest).

 

[goodNumber10]

Terrible idea.

Either they agree with the rule or they don't - you can't half **** it.

sounds like BS to me, but then I never cease to be amazed by the ability of the RFU to smack itself in the face with a brick...

 

[Peat]

On grounds of sheer talent, Clark should probably be in the England discussion. And he's been in the EPS a fair few times, so his presence there can't be that poisonous.

But I don't think I'd pick him. His discipline has been generally good, but having it fly to absolute pieces in two finals is a black mark imo. He needs to be excelling above and beyond the other options for that sort of thing to be forgotten imo.

But then I'm biased, as my rage at the whole Hawkins thing and subsequent whitewash hasn't died down much.

As for Armitage - yes, I am interested in what he can bring. Yes, I would be ok in just ignoring/doing away with that rule in some ways. No, I don't see the point in ignoring the rule for one tournament only. Either use him or don't; the halfway house works for no one.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Will say when Armitage played against Salvi he didn't dominate then.

He is good but he isn't break the rules good imo.