[2015 Six Nations] England

[chippieolamus]

I'd love t see Slade and Burrell but not sure an opening 6N game in Cardiff is the right place for Slade's debut.

I think Burrell/JJ is the way to go, but I wouldn't be dissatisfied with 36/LB or KE/JJ

I want Twelvetrees to reach his potential so much, because in theory he could be the best 12 in the world. He has demonstrated that he has the entire package of skills at various points. He can be both aggressive and accurate in defence, a good kicking game for a 12, physical enough to carry well, great in the ruck zone, a distributor with great vision, cuts good angles, and so on. He was getting better and better and I thought he'd be a star. Most disappointing collapse of form for an England player I've seen in the last few years tbh. At this point, I've given up hope on him reaching that potential. Take him away from the limelight and let him get back to where he was tbh.

Spot on.

 

[Peat]

I'd go more extreme, maybe 80-20 in favour of backs being the problem.

If the Lions were to happen now, I think May might be the only player that would be in contention from the English backline, perhaps Tuilagi at a push, but there's also a possibility that we'd contribute no one. Compare to the pack, where we have quite a few contenders.

Actually, I think that Joseph could get in there too. (I was undecided on Joseph until I read Bath fans talking about him as player of the year and how he's a rock in both attack and defence for Bath. I don't see much of Bath, so I'm happy to go on their word.) Would love to see him given a chance for England.

Tuilagi at a push :lol:

I think you're overrating our forwards a lot, underrating our backs a bit (and overrating the other 3's backs), placing too much emphasis on individual talent and not enough on effectiveness as a unit, but I don't have time to go into detail so I'm just going to dwell on this one.

Lets pick a comparison. We'll call him Jiffy Junior and look at his last 8 games for Wales against 3N opposition.

He has failed to make 20m on 4 of those occasions. On each of those occasions he beat 1 or less defender. He has 5 clean breaks. He has not scored or assisted in any of them.

Lets look at Manu. I picked 8 because that's how many games he's played for England in the centre against that standard. I picked 20m because that's his lowest metres made total of the lot (and that came at 12 where there's less space too). His next lowest is 35m. He has made more than 50m 4 times. I picked that number because that's Davies' high point. He has only beat 1 or less defender 3 times. He has 9 clean breaks. He has 2 tries and 2 assists - in fairness, 75pc of that comes from the game where NZ had the plague, but that happened in Wales game against them too that tour and Davies didn't do it then.

Now, these are fairly raw statistics without a great deal of context. But I'd like to think they serve as a starting point for the premise that Tuilagi is probably in fairly good contention for a Lions side. The day has not yet dawned where being the most devastating carrier available doesn't give you a fairly good chance of a look in.

 

[Every Time Ref]

I want Twelvetrees to reach his potential so much, because in theory he could be the best 12 in the world. He has demonstrated that he has the entire package of skills at various points. He can be both aggressive and accurate in defence, a good kicking game for a 12, physical enough to carry well, great in the ruck zone, a distributor with great vision, cuts good angles, and so on. He was getting better and better and I thought he'd be a star. Most disappointing collapse of form for an England player I've seen in the last few years tbh. At this point, I've given up hope on him reaching that potential. Take him away from the limelight and let him get back to where he was tbh.

Absolutely. It's such a shame, he's such a complete 12 in principle, just obviously really struggling for form and confidence. The problem seems to be that he can just go to pieces, psychologically - the Aus game, and most of what I've seen for Gloucester since he has just looked like a club player who wandered in to the changing room and was accidentally given a shirt, it's excruciating, yet we know he is capable of being very good. He's still pretty young though, isn't he, there's time for him to find his feet and come back stronger. Due think the captaincy at Gloucester has had a negative impact? You mentioned needing to get away from the limelight, lacking form probably all he wants to do is keep his head down and work hard on his game in training and matches, but you can't do that when you're captain and everyone else is looking to you for leadership.

I think it's because in recent history, England centres have been large, and anyone less than 15st is perceived as being defensively weak. Barritt, Tuilagi, Twelvetrees and Burrell all have somewhere around 2-4 stone on Joseph. Eastmond also gets the same criticisms, even though he's a competent defender.

It's true, he also attacks in a certain way which makes him look like the kind of centre who doesn't defend very well, you know? I think we like to categorise centres as a) small, flashy, fast, runs an outside line, looks for space or b) big, powerful, hits it up, good defender and tend to assume all of those come together, even though most players in any position are a complicated hybrid of different skills and weaknesses.

We assume that a) can't tackle and b) can't pass, so I think you're right, Joseph suffers from assumptions about his style of play. Conversely, I think to some degree Burrell suffers from the opposite stereotype, that he can't pass. Although I certainly wouldn't call him a playmaker, criticisms of his passing from some quarters are unfair, he can and does give some decent passes, especially playing for Northampton at inside.

Lets pick a comparison. We'll call him Jiffy Junior and look at his last 8 games for Wales against 3N opposition.

If you're suggesting what I think you're suggesting, I'm with you ... JD is one of those players who we're always told is a world class centre. He keeps getting picked for internationals. He gets a big money contract at a major French team. He makes Lions test XVs. He's praised by coaches, players, pundits and journalists.

But ... I just don't see it. I think he's perfectly decent, there's nothing wrong with him, and I can see that he has a fairly good line in doing the simple things well. But doesn't, as far as I can see, offer any substantial point of difference that elevates him to the world class player he is perceived as.

 

[yaboyjj]

Absolutely. It's such a shame, he's such a complete 12 in principle, just obviously really struggling for form and confidence. The problem seems to be that he can just go to pieces, psychologically - the Aus game, and most of what I've seen for Gloucester since he has just looked like a club player who wandered in to the changing room and was accidentally given a shirt, it's excruciating, yet we know he is capable of being very good. He's still pretty young though, isn't he, there's time for him to find his feet and come back stronger. Due think the captaincy at Gloucester has had a negative impact? You mentioned needing to get away from the limelight, lacking form probably all he wants to do is keep his head down and work hard on his game in training and matches, but you can't do that when you're captain and everyone else is looking to you for leadership.




It's true, he also attacks in a certain way which makes him look like the kind of centre who doesn't defend very well, you know? I think we like to categorise centres as a) small, flashy, fast, runs an outside line, looks for space or b) big, powerful, hits it up, good defender and tend to assume all of those come together, even though most players in any position are a complicated hybrid of different skills and weaknesses.

We assume that a) can't tackle and b) can't pass, so I think you're right, Joseph suffers from assumptions about his style of play. Conversely, I think to some degree Burrell suffers from the opposite stereotype, that he can't pass. Although I certainly wouldn't call him a playmaker, criticisms of his passing from some quarters are unfair, he can and does give some decent passes, especially playing for Northampton at inside.



If you're suggesting what I think you're suggesting, I'm with you ... JD is one of those players who we're always told is a world class centre. He keeps getting picked for internationals. He gets a big money contract at a major French team. He makes Lions test XVs. He's praised by coaches, players, pundits and journalists.

But ... I just don't see it. I think he's perfectly decent, there's nothing wrong with him, and I can see that he has a fairly good line in doing the simple things well. But doesn't, as far as I can see, offer any substantial point of difference that elevates him to the world class player he is perceived as.

I think he's struggling to hold down a starting spot in the clermont side from what I've heard? Scott Williams may leapfrog him at some point.
I don't think 36 will make the 6 nations squad (lucky to get into the AI squad), Barritt doesn't have long to play himself into form- although he is starting tommorrow.

I would really like to see:
Cole, Hartley (meh), Marler, Atwood, Lawes, Kvesic, Robshaw, Ewers, Simpson, Ford, May, Slade, Joseph, Yarde, Brown
16. George 17. Brookes 18. Corbs 19. Kitchener 20. Vunipola 21. Care 22. Eastmond 23. Watson

Parling pushing Lawes close for a starting spot (he was immense in NZ), Vunipola covers 8 from the bench and Ewers covers 6- Robshaw covers 7. Plenty of power on the bench from the forwards and potential game changers in the backs.
Slade covers 10, leaving room for Eastmond on the bench to add something in the last 20, with Watson getting some time at 15 also.

 

[Maverick1987]

One of the three fly-halves, sure. But Sexton is starting and Biggar is benching and there's no way anyone else is getting a look in. Wouldn't have Brown ahead of Liam Williams at least.

I don't buy that give me Ford over Biggar any day . Given time he could be better than Sexton tbh he's already a better short kicker imo

 

[yaboyjj]

I don't buy that give me Ford over Biggar any day . Given time he could be better than Sexton tbh he's already a better short kicker imo

I agree, give it two years and Ford could be a world beater- he's still only 21! Launch would start (another lock would make bench), Robshaw would get a look in, May, both England props would at least make bench (Corbs/Cole would possibly start). I expect 2016 lions team to be 1/3 to 1/2 English.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Ford will be England's Preistland

 

[Maverick1987]

Ford will be England's Preistland

What reason do you have to say that ?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I like the idea of having a Marler/Corbs and Wilson/Cole props and subs, that's some pretty nifty forward work there (I hope Cole can still do his pseudo-flanker impression and get some turnover ball). Also it seems many of the Welsh players are overrated, victims of their own PR perhaps? Looking at them they are good but not anywhere near as good as the hype.

As long as England keep it together and keep the pressure up, I can see us winning all of the games except the Ireland game, which I think will be the decider. Having said that, England have a habit of not doing that and trying to find the magic pass whilst ignoring the basics.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Having said that, England have a habit of not doing that and trying to find the magic pass whilst ignoring the basics.

Weirdly that's the most accurate description of Twelvetrees I've seen in a while, too

 

[Peat]

All this talk about Twelvetrees is reminding me of Welshglory's point about cohesion, which I think we all mostly agreed was right.

The increased need for cohesion means international sides need to be more like club sides; they need to select from as small a pool of players as possible to help build up the levels of understanding. It also means sticking with out of form players and letting them play their way back into form a lot of the time. You're hoping that the out of form player's cohesion with everyone else will counterbalance the possible gains of picking a more in form player until such time as the player is back in form and offering both. Obviously you can take that to illogical extremes very easily, and in an ideal world the small pool of players contains enough options that you can pick the form player from among them, but in general the principle sticks. The purpose of an international team is not to reward the 15 form players in the top flight, it is to beat other sides, and that requires as much continuity as possible.

All this talk of being angry if Twelvetrees gets picked, giving up on his potential, reckoning Barritt's overtaken him... this, to me, is the sort of thinking that Welshglory was criticising. "Chopping and changing in the name of form". Twelvetrees has been out of form now, for, what? Half a season? Two test windows? That's nothing in the context of his whole career really. How are we meant to build cohesion if we give up on a player when he has a bad season? I feel that goes double for creative players, as a) failures in form are more notable in the players trying to do more b) a lot of creative players go through prolonged patchiness for a lot of their career as they work on their decision making, and if you don't back them, they're not going to do it.

I get that this is not an entirely fair thing to say; Twelvetrees' time in the sun as a top flight player is short enough to leave one in doubt as to whether he is the real deal or not, whether the patchiness is in fact the real player. But we just dismiss Twelvetrees, what next? Burrell, too, has mixed good with bad. Joseph flits around the England scene - he's just coming off a fairly indifferent season to have a scorching one. Do we play him this season, then drop him again if he's bad the next one? We are not going to get anywhere if we are unwilling to take gambles on players with talent and just cycle through players until we find a freak who is rock steady right from the beginning of his international career.

I know some of you were unconvinced by Twelvetrees' 6N performances; fair enough to not rate him now. But everyone who did think he showed something then but are dismissing him now are, imo, guilty of a knee-jerk reaction.

Problem is, we've blooded so many players a little that there's too many players who've shown the potential to be worth keeping to actually keep them all. Hard to know how you give both Twelvetrees and Eastmond, Burrell and Joseph a fair shot - while still having room for Tuilagi (when fit) and exploring the possibility of Slade (who might be that freakishly good player).

If you're suggesting what I think you're suggesting, I'm with you ... JD is one of those players who we're always told is a world class centre. He keeps getting picked for internationals. He gets a big money contract at a major French team. He makes Lions test XVs. He's praised by coaches, players, pundits and journalists.

But ... I just don't see it. I think he's perfectly decent, there's nothing wrong with him, and I can see that he has a fairly good line in doing the simple things well. But doesn't, as far as I can see, offer any substantial point of difference that elevates him to the world class player he is perceived as.

Ah, none of this was to damn, dismiss or denigrate Davies in any way; I would say, on the contrary, that picking him as a benchmark is in itself a compliment.

I mainly picked him because he has enough caps at 13 for a strong NH side to have a suitable number of games against NZ-esque opposition to compare with Tuilagi - that in itself is a very rare achievement - and because he's a clear candidate for the next Lions shirt. It just makes him the best comparison.

 

[Maverick1987]

All this talk about Twelvetrees is reminding me of Welshglory's point about cohesion, which I think we all mostly agreed was right.

The increased need for cohesion means international sides need to be more like club sides; they need to select from as small a pool of players as possible to help build up the levels of understanding. It also means sticking with out of form players and letting them play their way back into form a lot of the time. You're hoping that the out of form player's cohesion with everyone else will counterbalance the possible gains of picking a more in form player until such time as the player is back in form and offering both. Obviously you can take that to illogical extremes very easily, and in an ideal world the small pool of players contains enough options that you can pick the form player from among them, but in general the principle sticks. The purpose of an international team is not to reward the 15 form players in the top flight, it is to beat other sides, and that requires as much continuity as possible.

All this talk of being angry if Twelvetrees gets picked, giving up on his potential, reckoning Barritt's overtaken him... this, to me, is the sort of thinking that Welshglory was criticising. "Chopping and changing in the name of form". Twelvetrees has been out of form now, for, what? Half a season? Two test windows? That's nothing in the context of his whole career really. How are we meant to build cohesion if we give up on a player when he has a bad season? I feel that goes double for creative players, as a) failures in form are more notable in the players trying to do more b) a lot of creative players go through prolonged patchiness for a lot of their career as they work on their decision making, and if you don't back them, they're not going to do it.

I get that this is not an entirely fair thing to say; Twelvetrees' time in the sun as a top flight player is short enough to leave one in doubt as to whether he is the real deal or not, whether the patchiness is in fact the real player. But we just dismiss Twelvetrees, what next? Burrell, too, has mixed good with bad. Joseph flits around the England scene - he's just coming off a fairly indifferent season to have a scorching one. Do we play him this season, then drop him again if he's bad the next one? We are not going to get anywhere if we are unwilling to take gambles on players with talent and just cycle through players until we find a freak who is rock steady right from the beginning of his international career.

I know some of you were unconvinced by Twelvetrees' 6N performances; fair enough to not rate him now. But everyone who did think he showed something then but are dismissing him now are, imo, guilty of a knee-jerk reaction.

Problem is, we've blooded so many players a little that there's too many players who've shown the potential to be worth keeping to actually keep them all. Hard to know how you give both Twelvetrees and Eastmond, Burrell and Joseph a fair shot - while still having room for Tuilagi (when fit) and exploring the possibility of Slade (who might be that freakishly good player).

To be fair I think the trouble is we are undecided on almost any player in the backline . The back 3 have been swapped and changed God knows how many times and the centres are exactly the same we just simply don't know who our best pair is (injury is the cause of most to be fair) Farrell was nailed on then Ford turned up and our 9s are like yo yo's in and out of form . If, lets say 5 out of 7 backs were settled like they are in Wales it wouldn't make such an effect when we swap a player here and there due to form . It's only really been Brown that has been nailed on it the last 2 years and people have been calling for him to be replaced aswell . The first game in NZ caused more problems than it solved imo

I think for the 6N we should pick

9. Care/Youngs (fairly even just pick one)
10. Ford
11. May
12. Tuilagi (when fit Burrell until then)
13. JJ
14. Yarde
15. Brown

And stick with that until the RWC

 

[welshglory]

I think you guys are starting to come around now.

Look at all the teams that have a smooth well drilled style.
NZ, Australia (especially before 07/08 when they lost most of their older guys), Wales, Ireland.

If you can get more of that you'd be way more dangerous. Forwards for the most part are easy to drill but with backs cohesion is most important imo. I know it's easier said than done with the club system and injury list but Lancaster has still fiddled around too much in the name of his "philosophy" and pretty pedantic form reasoning. A clear out had to be made but he has to really start settling now.

 

[Patchey]

I question the sanity of anyone picking Manu at 12!

Unless we work our entire attacking game around a crash ball 12 and go full Gatlandball, I don't see how having him at IC would help.

 

[goodNumber10]

I think you guys are starting to come around now.

Look at all the teams that have a smooth well drilled style.
NZ, Australia (especially before 07/08 when they lost most of their older guys), Wales, Ireland.

If you can get more of that you'd be way more dangerous. Forwards for the most part are easy to drill but with backs cohesion is most important imo. I know it's easier said than done with the club system and injury list but Lancaster has still fiddled around too much in the name of his "philosophy" and pretty pedantic form reasoning. A clear out had to be made but he has to really start settling now.

That's just not true... He fine with consistency to the point of stupidity, even when people needed to be dropped he's stuck with them...

He's only really changed payers when his hand has been forced.

 

[Peat]

That's just not true... He fine with consistency to the point of stupidity, even when people needed to be dropped he's stuck with them...

He's only really changed payers when his hand has been forced.

I'd agree with you but for the centres - Joseph, in for a window, then out; Tomkins, in for a window, then out; Farrell's shuffled in for a few; Eastmond's had a sporadic sort of run; Twelvetrees has been a bit in and out; Barritt from regular to out then back in.

The only consistent is a fit Tuilagi to be there. edit: And then he had a totally unnecessary game on the wing.

 

[Maverick1987]

I question the sanity of anyone picking Manu at 12!

Unless we work our entire attacking game around a crash ball 12 and go full Gatlandball, I don't see how having him at IC would help.

He could be a world class 12 if used correctly . He'd do great outside of Ford or Cips . Not sure if play him they if Farrell was the out half . JJ would create a really nice blend there too.
To be fair he passes and offloads for Leicester just not for England for some reason or another .

 

[TRF_Olyy]

To be fair he passes and offloads for Leicester just not for England for some reason or another .

England want players to play how they want/fit a certain role, whether that's their natural/instinctive play style or not.

It's why Ashton was so effective under Johnson, and is for Saracens, but is then absolutely useless for Lancaster.

 

[white9]

Billy Vunipola looking nearly back to his best against Munster at the moment. Great to see.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Cips is only going to be in the Saxons according to the Telegraph.