[2015 Six Nations] England

[Every Time Ref]

I'd go for a 6/2 split on the bench for the extra forward power towards the end of the game

Most players in our backline can play multiple positions with Farrell covering 12 ONLY in emergency

That's a big risk ... no position outside inside centre is actually covered, except for 15 being covered by Watson ... which is meaningless, because Waton's position isn't covered.

Is Corbs going to be fit? He hasn't started a game yet, has he? I'd play him if fit, but assuming not:

1.Marler
2.Youngs
3.Wilson
4.Attwood
5.Kruis
6.Haskell
7.Robshaw
8.Vunipola
9.Care
10.Ford
11.May
12.Burrell
13.Joseph
14.Watson
15.Brown

16.Webber
17.Marler
18.Brookes
19.Parling
20.Wood
21.Youngs
22.Farrell
23.Yarde

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I think Corbs has started a game or two, but he's not looked better than Marler/Mullan in any of his appearances.

Think Mako has looked better than him as well, to be honest.

 

[Maverick1987]

I think Corbs has started a game or two, but he's not looked better than Marler/Mullan in any of his appearances.

Think Mako has looked better than him as well, to be honest.

I think he's taking it easy to be fit for 6N tbh . He was pretty immense when he came on against quins at twickers . Even if it was just for 20 minutes or so. also he played a whole game without a proper lock playing behind him . Against sale Clark and Dickinson started at lock

Re: the 6/2 split I'd have thought Eastmond could go on the wing for May/Watson to cover FB so all positions would be covered for 1 injury . If we got 2 we would be ****ed even with a 5/3 split bench

 

[Every Time Ref]

Re: the 6/2 split I'd have thought Eastmond could go on the wing for May/Watson to cover FB so all positions would be covered for 1 injury . If we got 2 we would be ****ed even with a 5/3 split bench

He has played wing before for Bath (when he first came to union, to acclimatise) but I'm a Bath supporter and it didn't occur to me that he might cover wing, that's how much of a winger he is. I'm not sure if consider him "cover", but I guess if your game plan relies on crossing your fingers you don't need him he might be good enough for an emergency.

 

[Maverick1987]

He has played wing before for Bath (when he first came to union, to acclimatise) but I'm a Bath supporter and it didn't occur to me that he might cover wing, that's how much of a winger he is. I'm not sure if consider him "cover", but I guess if your game plan relies on crossing your fingers you don't need him he might be good enough for an emergency.

I know it's a risk . I see it that wales have a strong tight 5 then the quality drops of fairly steeply when you start talking about their replacements . In my eyes it's going to be one of those that will either work or it it won't . It's a shame Cole is injured if he wasn't we would have 2 high quality front rows that wouldn't look out of place in a lions front row imo

That's going to be the difference imo Corbisiero is either going to be coming on the pitch against a tired Sam Lee or against a very under par Rhodri Jones

 

[Every Time Ref]

I know it's a risk . I see it that wales have a strong tight 5 then the quality drops of fairly steeply when you start talking about their replacements . In my eyes it's going to be one of those that will either work or it it won't . It's a shame Cole is injured if he wasn't we would have 2 high quality front rows that wouldn't look out of place in a lions front row imo

That's going to be the difference imo Corbisiero is either going to be coming on the pitch against a tired Sam Lee or against a very under par Rhodri Jones

I do see the logic, but the way I see it if we have the strongest bench forwards we have the strongest bench forwards, and that's a strength. The added advantage of one more is pretty small compared to the disadvantage of not having proper cover for most positions in the back line. If we end up playing 30, 40, 50 minutes with a weakened back line (for example, we have Eastmond on the wing and Farrell at twelve) that could put us under enormous pressure which totally negates our advantage. An entire front row, one lock and one back row is enough to push that advantage home, surely.

 

[Maverick1987]

I do see the logic, but the way I see it if we have the strongest bench forwards we have the strongest bench forwards, and that's a strength. The added advantage of one more is pretty small compared to the disadvantage of not having proper cover for most positions in the back line. If we end up playing 30, 40, 50 minutes with a weakened back line (for example, we have Eastmond on the wing and Farrell at twelve) that could put us under enormous pressure which totally negates our advantage. An entire front row, one lock and one back row is enough to push that advantage home, surely.

Yeh you're probably right to be fair . Maybe it's the fact we don't have a stand out player for the 23 shirt made me think we'd be better with an extra forward

 

[Every Time Ref]

Yeh you're probably right to be fair . Maybe it's the fact we don't have a stand out player for the 23 shirt made me think we'd be better with an extra forward

It's true, back three in general is a strange one, we've got May nailed on, Brown not on great form but earned the right to stay plus a lot of wingers who are in the running but no standout obvious favourite. So we're picking one starting slot and one bench from a large crowd of equally OK players. There's no-one so good that even off form they merit sticking with.

 

[Patchey]

Nowell would be a great 23 IMO.

 

[Maverick1987]

Nowell would be a great 23 IMO.

Yeh forgot about Nowell ! Noticed he played 13 on the weekend too and didn't play badly . Had some lovely line breaks

 

[Patchey]

Squad:



saxons:

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

The squad isn't the issue it 's what's going to be the 23.

 

[goodNumber10]

Pretty much as we expected then.

Although i'm actually surprised to see Daly in the Saxons Squad - he's 23, and unlikely to out any of those players. not really sure what the point of his inclusion is.

Think we will see a back line of:

09: Youngs, 10: Ford, 11: May, 12: BB, 13: Burrell, 14: Nowell, 15: Brown

Subs: Care, Farrell, Watson

If Watson starts at 14, expect Nowell to drop out and Goode to come into the bench.

 

[Patchey]

Well we've got a while to wait on that!!

Goode back is a blow, but other than that it's quite a good squad. Obviously I doubt many of the more exciting players will get game time c Wales.

The Saxons is interesting. What is the point if having Ashton there? But other than that it's quite a handy squad. Itoje and Harrison good inclusions in the pack, nice to see Daly involved. Not sold on Burgess.

 

[goodNumber10]

Well we've got a while to wait on that!!

Goode back is a blow, but other than that it's quite a good squad. Obviously I doubt many of the more exciting players will get game time c Wales.

The Saxons is interesting. What is the point if having Ashton there? But other than that it's quite a handy squad. Itoje and Harrison good inclusions in the pack, nice to see Daly involved. Not sold on Burgess.

agree about Ashton, if he's not in the full squad why have him in the Saxon's, he's not a leader so it's not even an experience thing.

 

[Patchey]

agree about Ashton, if he's not in the full squad why have him in the Saxon's, he's not a leader so it's not even an experience thing.

Exactly. It's not like having an old hand like, say, Phil Dowson in there to help bring the young lads through is it? He's a known entity as well so no really need to give him game time. If he gets picked over Yarde or Wade...

I disagrees with you on daly though, still worth a look IMO.

Good to see Pennell there, albeit probably injury related.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Gibson should have been ahead of Croft imo as Croft doesn't need the Saxons experience imo.

Saxons squad for me would be
1) Waller, 2) Webber, 3) Brookes
4) Garvey, 5) Day
6) Croft, 7) Kvesic, 8) Waldrom
9) Dickson, 10) Salde
12) Burgess, 13) Daly
11) Wade, 14) Yarde, 15) Pennell

16) LCD, 17) Mullan, 18) Thomas, 19) Itoje 20) Ewers, 21) Simpson, 22) Devoto 23) Ashton.

 

[Patchey]

Gibson should have been ahead of Dowson imo.

Saxons squad for me would be
1) Waller, 2) Webber, 3) Brookes
4) Garvey, 5) Day
6) Croft, 7) Kvesic, 8) Waldrom
9) Dickson, 10) Salde
12) Burgess, 13) Daly
11) Wade, 14) Yarde, 15) Pennell

16) LCD, 17) Mullan, 18) Thomas, 19) Itoje 20) Ewers, 21) Simpson, 22) Devoto 23) Ashton.

Yeah I'd quite like that squad tbh. Although maybe Simpson to start and Ashton to be shackled to the bench...

I wonder if Gibson will ever get a cap?

 

[goodNumber10]

also good to see that Slade and Devoto are the only OH options in the Saxons.... I presume we'll get Burgess at 12, with one of Slade or Daly at 13. If Daly plays 13 then i guess Slade will play 10.

It's actually quite an interesting squad in how they see young players.

Just a shame they'll be working with such a gash coach.

 

[Every Time Ref]

No Yarde is a surprise, no?