[2015 Six Nations] England

[Peat]

Anyone else still angry at Haskell? Can.not.be.trusted

No, and I'm not sure I ever was. Disappointed, but not angry. Based on his performances he doesn't seem capable of stringing together consistency and still has a tendency to brainless, so I'd rather we found someone better, but I still might have him in front of Wood, who's been nearly as brainless but without as many plus points. Croft can't stay fit, Ewers is unproven, Kvesic looks out of the picture... for the moment, he might be the best.

He did a stupid thing at a vital moment and that should count heavily - but I dislike defining players by single moments. That vital moment might have cost us the Championship - but there were an awful lot of other vital moments where we missed an opportunity for that converted try that he wasn't at fault for.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Agree with that mostly, Peat.

I'd back the coaches entirely if they were to select either Ewers or Kvesic, though.

 

[yaboyjj]

Ewers is the answer at 6.
Cowan-Dickie or Webber at 2
Manu at 12.

Bring back Morgan
Bring back Corbs - god knows we better get the most out of him before he gets crocked again
Bring back Launchbury

Do that and job's a good un'***

***By which I mean we will shaft the world by how great we are

God help us if LCD plays, I think the saxons performance shows that his lineout throiwin is errtic at best (give him a year or so to sort it out), Webber is firmly second choice at Bath also.
I don't know how much Morgan is going to add- Vunipola has been pretty imense tbf, has Corbs proven himself under the new scrummaging laws yet? Launch, yes, he will bring an impact.

 

[j'nuh]

Isn't this the part where I get to gloat about having misgivings about Haskell before it was cool to?

My feelings about Ewers/Kvesic are the same as with Slade. We've just about lost our opportunity now. (And it's immensely frustrating. There has been more than enough time to involve these players.)

So now I'm starting to think we should play three locks or two 8s:

4. Parling 5. Lawes 6. Launchbury 7. Robshaw 8. Morgan 19. Easter 20. Vunipola
or
4. Launchbury 5. Lawes 6. Vunipola 7. Robshaw 8. Morgan 19. Parling 20. Easter

 

[The Jones Boy]

I thought Ford played well and kicking was exemplary.
Spare a thought for the French kicking.
They were truly awful.
Had they been able to muster even a measly 50% kicking ratio the Poms would never have got close.

 

[Peat]

Agree with that mostly, Peat.

I'd back the coaches entirely if they were to select either Ewers or Kvesic, though.

So would I. Or maybe Itoje if he finishes on a massive high. I might even back them if they picked Clark.

Although, having seen Attwood and Haskell display the sort of flaws where I can see why they didn't pick them initially when I wanted to, I have a new-found sympathy for their selection credentials.

Isn't this the part where I get to gloat about having misgivings about Haskell before it was cool to?

Fair

My feelings about Ewers/Kvesic are the same as with Slade. We've just about lost our opportunity now. (And it's immensely frustrating. There has been more than enough time to involve these players.)

Yes and no. I mean, yeah, that was the moment to blood unproven hyper-talents - but Tuilagi had less international involvement than any of those three named at this point in 2011. There is still time for a natural test match talent on a hot streak to force his way in if there's a position of weakness.

Personally, I think I'd have Slade in the WC squad if in form. He can cover 10, 12 and 13 in the minnow matches where you don't want to risk certain key players, which is handy. If an actual long-term injury occurred to any of the positions he was covering, I'd probably call up a veteran from outside the squad as a replacement and promote them straight past Slade, but I like the idea of someone who can cover a lot of positions for the weeks we don't care too much.

So now I'm starting to think we should play three locks or two 8s:

4. Parling 5. Lawes 6. Launchbury 7. Robshaw 8. Morgan 19. Easter 20. Vunipola
or
4. Launchbury 5. Lawes 6. Vunipola 7. Robshaw 8. Morgan 19. Parling 20. Easter

I want to see the Launchbury at blindside experiment but am slightly nervous about it actually working. I'd love to see Itoje become a specialist blindside.

 

[Irishkid]

They won't put Easter on the bench.

 

[Raggs]

Launchbury is a lock, let's not have another Lawes at 6 moment.

Ewers doesn't seem to get in the air at lineouts (someone please show me I'm wrong). Haskell can, he even managed a steal this series. There's a huge difference between someone who doesn't go up often, and someone who doesn't go up.

Itoje is the new great hope at 6 for me, but I'm still thinking a Vunipola + Hughes combo could be the long term, with Itoje on the bench.

 

[Peat]

Launchbury looked far more comfortable at blindside in the Prem than Lawes ever has imo, and has a more rounded skillset. Doesn't mean it works at international level mind - but he's more time at blindside than Vunipola.

 

[Raggs]

He's not had more time recently at blindside than BV. And he's been working on his lock skills more and more (obviously).

 

[Peat]

And none of those things make him any less of a blindside than Vunipola, who's spent very little time in that position and doesn't seem to change roles once there.

 

[ratsapprentice]

There's a huge difference between someone who doesn't go up often, and someone who doesn't go up.

There's also a huge difference in the quality and number of contributions Ewers makes in open play.... that difference renders the lineout thing practically irrelevant IMO.

I can see he's been given credit for some lineouts won, but I'm not entirely sure whether that's him going up or not.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

No, and I'm not sure I ever was. Disappointed, but not angry. Based on his performances he doesn't seem capable of stringing together consistency and still has a tendency to brainless, so I'd rather we found someone better, but I still might have him in front of Wood, who's been nearly as brainless but without as many plus points. Croft can't stay fit, Ewers is unproven, Kvesic looks out of the picture... for the moment, he might be the best.

He did a stupid thing at a vital moment and that should count heavily - but I dislike defining players by single moments. That vital moment might have cost us the Championship - but there were an awful lot of other vital moments where we missed an opportunity for that converted try that he wasn't at fault for.

Mostly agree with a tiny bit of disagree. You rightly caution against defining a player by one moment but as you've also alluded to its not just one moment. Remember two years ago his card against Ireland in Dublin ? (Think it was this game but could have been another) repeated discipline problems throughout his year. Do you ever see Robshaw collecting yellows like trophies? Good player, too stupid for international level it would seem..

 

[Peat]

I'd forgotten about that yellow. You're right that his poor discipline is more than one moment.

In fact, it's got worse. 7 penalties and 1 yellow conceded in this 6N compared to 5 penalties and 1 yellow. But I don't think that's all Hask as a lot of other players have picked up bad habits too. I think they're being encouraged to be a lot more streetwise and cynical - only problem is they lack what it takes.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Even though I go on about him all the time and have shouted for his inclusion a while back, pretty proud of myself for getting one right for once, George Kruis has actually put in MOTM performances at 6. He was amazing when we played Munster 2 years ago when he might of even been making his European debut ?
He has all the skills we want from a 6. Great jumper on the lineout, makes loads of tackles, hits rucks all he lacks is a real strong right carry but honestly Wood/Haskell/Launchbury aren't that great at it either. Only thing stopping Kruis playing 6 is that Itoje will most likely move there.

 

[msf]

I think the back row is like the centres, we are never going to have a balanced world-class unit there in the World Cup. We won't in the centres because we don't have any potentially world-class 12s, and we won't in the centres because of, as someone pointed out before, Robshaw and Vunipola/Morgan are already penciled in. As the poster said, that leaves the breakdown/line out/support play/2nd ball carrier role to the no.6. I guess Croft ticked the first 3 boxes before his injuries, but that option has probably gone for good now. None of the other candidates tick more than 2 of these boxes, so whoever we pick we won't have a balanced unit. Since there is no good solution apart from dropping Robshaw for Kvesic or Armitage, which won't happen, I would go for Wood since he has proven himself at this level, even if his recent performances haven't been so good - he has put together good series before, unlike Haskell. I guess we will go for Haskell though since he has ticks 2 1/2 boxes, breakdown, 2nd ball carrier and a limited line out option. I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but without Lawes and Wood our line out is merely average, which won't be good enough against South Africa or even Ireland. So perhaps a horses-for-courses approach is best, play Wood against those two and Haskell against the other teams. In any case, it won't be balanced and it won't be settled.

 

[Peat]

Kruis has done well at 6 in the Premiership, but I don't think he's good enough at the breakdown in international rugby to play there, would question his decision making ability in those wider channels and have mild if probably groundless doubts about his hands. Also, as noted, Itoje totally blocks that route (probably).

Tuilagi is imo a potentially world class 12.

Morgan/Robshaw can get away with a contributing rather than amazing jumper. Tbh, Robshaw to 6 and Kvesic to 7 could have wheels.

 

[msf]

Yeah, if Robshaw is undroppable (as he seems to be) then that would probably be the best option against teams that don't have a brilliant line out.

 

[cornishpirate]

The tackle by Lawes on Plisson in the final match of the Six Nations was late, dangerous and thus illegal. France should have been awarded a penalty and Lawes a red card. The guilty, apprehensive look on Lawes face as the referee considered his decision confirms this view. Any tackle that results in contact when a player does not have the ball is illegal. If it is accepted that a rugby player may tackle an opponent who has released the ball then it would be equally within the rules for a player to tackle an opponent in anticipation of that player receiving the ball. Tackling a player who does not have the ball is and must remain illegal.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Funny how the professional referees disagreed with you completely.