[2015 Six Nations] England

[Willodell100]

Another one to add to Lancaster's collection, alongside Wood at 8, Brown/Tuilagi on the wing, Farrell at 12 ... I could add Burrell at 13 but in fairness that worked.

Also Barritt at 13. I though that was a very strange decision. I'm not sure this English management team put enough emphasis on the differences between 12&13. Up until Joseph's inclusion Lancaster has predominantly picked inside centres at outside centre.

 

[Peat]

Barritt at 13 worked at least as well as Barritt at 12.

 

[Willodell100]

I'm not sure about that. He's a good effective 12 for Sarries and has been for England defensively a fair few times to be fair. However I thought he looked lost at 13 for England and it really doesn't suit his game.

Only highlighting this it for the purposes of management picking players out of position. I can never understand it unless forced upon due to injury.

 

[B10]

Lancaster comments in papers tonight sound like Nowell will get the nod over May.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ru...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Back line of:

10) Twelvetrees
11) Burrell
12) Tuailagi
13) Barritt
14) Joesph
15) cips

Would be a good potential backline for Lancaster

 

[McTallshort]

Back line of:

10) Twelvetrees
11) Burrell
12) Tuailagi
13) Barritt
14) Joesph
15) cips

Would be a good potential backline for Lancaster

36 doesnt like playing 10

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Not unhappy about that.

However.....the article also says that Mike Brown's fitness isn't assured, so does that mean we're looking at 11. Nowell, 12. 36, 13. Burrell, 14. JJ, 15. Watson ?

 

[Spartan]

Cips has snubbed a big move to Toulon and signed a new deal with Sale according to...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ru...oulon-sign-two-year-contract-Sale-Sharks.html

Finally.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Number 12 (or second five if you like) can charge the line and do a wiggle if it's in their arsenal but 13, centre, that needs someone who has a rugby brain to command the backbone defines and have the vision for organising a quick as a flash counter attack, Conrad Smith does it for us, Tana Umaga before him etc
Will Greenwood did it very well for England, they need to choose wisely for the player who fits that role, it's crucial, Barritt doesn't have the qualities needed to play centre.

 

[Raggs]

Two years is a bit of a surprise. He must really be enjoying his time there, and Diamond likely has some good signings coming in.

- - - Updated - - -

Number 12 (or second five if you like) can charge the line and do a wiggle if it's in their arsenal but 13, centre, that needs someone who has a rugby brain to command the backbone defines and have the vision for organising a quick as a flash counter attack, Conrad Smith does it for us, Tana Umaga before him etc
Will Greenwood did it very well for England, they need to choose wisely for the player who fits that role, it's crucial, Barritt doesn't have the qualities needed to play centre.

Greenwood was a 12.

 

[Mumbles119]

Back line of:

10) Twelvetrees
11) Burrell
12) Tuailagi
13) Barritt
14) Joesph
15) cips

Would be a good potential backline for Lancaster

Err... no. I assume you aren't serious. This is a step back in every position.

Wings must be finishers with pace, so not Burrell.
Joseph will be wasted on the wing in tougher games than Italy.
Ford and Cipriani have been excellent as the 10s, bringing excellent distribution that we have not had before.
Barritt at 13, is not as good as Barritt at 12, and certainly is not a good second distributor which helps the way Ford plays.
Tuilagi has not played for so long, I feel he needs to prove himself to knock Joseph out of the 13 spot. Tuilagi at 12 would also need to be proven that it would not just kill dead any back line distribution. Would probably like to see Tuilagi as a 23 impact player.
Cipriani at 15 is interesting, but worry that it is not his preferred position, with little experience there in recent years. Would prefer Nowell/Watson/Pennell from those fit and available.

 

[goodNumber10]

Err... no. I assume you aren't serious. This is a step back in every position.

Wings must be finishers with pace, so not Burrell.
Joseph will be wasted on the wing in tougher games than Italy.
Ford and Cipriani have been excellent as the 10s, bringing excellent distribution that we have not had before.
Barritt at 13, is not as good as Barritt at 12, and certainly is not a good second distributor which helps the way Ford plays.
Tuilagi has not played for so long, I feel he needs to prove himself to knock Joseph out of the 13 spot. Tuilagi at 12 would also need to be proven that it would not just kill dead any back line distribution. Would probably like to see Tuilagi as a 23 impact player.
Cipriani at 15 is interesting, but worry that it is not his preferred position, with little experience there in recent years. Would prefer Nowell/Watson/Pennell from those fit and available.

think the joke was about Lancaster playing people out of position rather than selecting a 12 to play 12, a 13 to play 13 a winger to play wing etc...

 

[Every Time Ref]

I also started an indignant, keyboard-mashing reply to that post - had written detailed and elegantly scathing rebutals to three of the positions before it dawned on me I'd been had. Excellent leg-pulling there, @Tigs Man

Could we name an XV composed entirely of players played out of position by Lancaster? Front row might be difficult since it tends to be specialist but we could maybe do a backline? I've got:

9)
10) Goode
11) Brown
12) Farrell
13) Barritt
14) Tuilagi
15)

 

[Raggs]

Did Lancaster ever actually play Goode at 10? Farrell could be argued to have been out of position at 10 when he started there, given he was mostly played at centre for sarries and u20s?

 

[goodNumber10]

Did Lancaster ever actually play Goode at 10? Farrell could be argued to have been out of position at 10 when he started there, given he was mostly played at centre for sarries and u20s?

He played 12 when he first started for england, but he'd been moving between 12 & 10 for Sarries, no?

***also, welcome fellow pest fan

 

[Raggs]

Fairly sure he'd only slotted in at 10 when Hodgeson was out, but the majority of his games were in the centres. Obviously since becoming the England 10 sarries were basically forced to play him there.

- - - Updated - - -

And thanks for the welcome.

 

[Every Time Ref]

I've obviously forgotten that. He's not much cop as a 12 though, in my opinion

 

[TheSaffycen]

He played at 10 in the prem final we won.

 

[Raggs]

He played at 10 in the prem final we won.

You're right, hmm, perhaps later he moved?

- - - Updated - - -

Yep, Hodgson arrived in 2011 right? Then Hodgson pushed Farrell to the centres.

That's also the season before his England debut (again in the centres as discussed).

Still, not really out of position at 10, fair enough.