[2015 Six Nations] Wales vs England (Round 1)

[yaboyjj]

Vunipola did certainly get better as the game went on- this is often the case simply because the defences become more tired and less organised. When taking on a tackler 1 on 1 he tends to make ground (as opposed to the group tackling early on). His defense and general physicality at the breakdown are what impressed me the most though, a few times he managed to shift some big guys out of the ruck to ensure quick ball.

Is everyone agreeing that Launchbury and Lawes come back into the starting XV when fit?
Personally I feel that, while both are quality players, neither offer the physicality, carrying or tight work of Attwood- thus one should be picked to start alongside him while the other makes the bench. My preference being Attwood/Launch.

 

[goodNumber10]

Vunipola did certainly get better as the game went on- this is often the case simply because the defences are becoming more tired and less organised. When taking on a tackler 1 on 1 he tends to make ground (as opposed to the group tackling early on). His defense and general physicality at the breakdown is what impressed me the most though, a few times he managed to shift some big guys out of the ruck to ensure quick ball.

Is everyone agreeing that Launchbury and Lawes come back into the starting XV when fit? Personally I feel that, while both are quality players, neither offer the physicality, carrying or tight work of Attwood- thus one should be picked to start alongside him while the other makes the bench. My preference being Attwood/Launch.

I'd keep Attwood and pair him with one of them...probably same as you.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Vunipola did certainly get better as the game went on- this is often the case simply because the defences become more tired and less organised. When taking on a tackler 1 on 1 he tends to make ground (as opposed to the group tackling early on). His defense and general physicality at the breakdown are what impressed me the most though, a few times he managed to shift some big guys out of the ruck to ensure quick ball.

Is everyone agreeing that Launchbury and Lawes come back into the starting XV when fit?
Personally I feel that, while both are quality players, neither offer the physicality, carrying or tight work of Attwood- thus one should be picked to start alongside him while the other makes the bench. My preference being Attwood/Launch.

Launchbury comes straight back in on pure ability, but Lawes doesn't. Bench at most, and I'd be tempted to make him work for that. The fact is, Kruis looks a find and we've gone from being hugely confused in the seocnd row position to being incredibly strong there. I can't really emphasise that enough.

In order of 'goodness'

Launchbury
Attwood
Lawes
Kruis
Parling
Slater
Kitchener

This is even before Stooke comes into the frame..

Arguably, though, we're severely lacking in the tighthead lock area when you look past Attwood.

 

[TheSaffycen]

I dont know, Kruis could be considered a TH lock as he plays there for Saracens. Not too much smaller than Attwood, 115kg for both of them. If you believe the stats....

 

[ratsapprentice]

Attwood is definitely more than 115kg - a very, very large human being.

 

[goodNumber10]

RFU list him at 118kg

 

[TheSaffycen]

Attwood is definitely more than 115kg - a very, very large human being.

I would've had him at 120kg. Kruis is pretty big as well though.

 

[yaboyjj]

I think we seem to have swung from one extreme to another in the locking department this year- I always thought that Lawes/Launch, while being supremely athletic, were perhaps a bit lightweight. However now we have two monsters there (in fact the whole back 5 are) and carrying/breakdown physicality is much improved. This is possibly offset by line-out work (not sure if this is as much to do with Wood being out?) and speed/covering tackles in a quick game. For the time being I'm liking the new power game though.

I'd have thought England's TH locks (or in that mould) are: Attwood, Kruis... Kitchener?
While Launchbury, Lawes, Parling are the looser/better lineout/open play options.
Thus it's a pick'n'mix from those two lists imo.

 

[Maverick1987]

Just caught up with Scrum V . Gwynn Jones was asking why Wales didn't send Roberts down JJ channel as his defence is poor . Really ?!?? No wonder your average armchair rugby fan is full of crap with idiots like him giving his 10p worth ! If Scrum V have actually paid him to be on that show they want shooting !

 

[j'nuh]

Attwood is definitely more than 115kg - a very, very large human being.

Being as big as he is, and as mobile in the lineout as he is, makes him a paradox to me. Enforcer or lineout guru? How about both?

That being said, I do wish he would carry like a second 8, like his physicality suggests he may be able to. He'd be pretty unstoppable then.

For all the depth we are said to have, Launchbury-Attwood is very clearly my favourite partnership.

 

[Peat]

I strongly doubt whether Attwood has the fitness to push properly in scrums and mauls and then maraude around the place like an 8.

 

[j'nuh]

I'd take him doing it for 50-60 minutes then swap out to Lawes if/when he tires, quite happily.

 

[Peat]

I'd take him doing it for 50-60 minutes then swap out to Lawes if/when he tires, quite happily.

Maybe we mean different things by carrying like an 8.

To me, it means carrying regularly and carrying in the midfield/wider out as opposed to close in to the ruck.

And I don't think he can do it for 50-60 minutes. I just don't think he can do it. I think if he could, he would be doing so, and he's not. But after he's done pumping his legs in the tight, he's just not in the right position to get into places to carry like an 8. I don't think he's got the pace left in his legs at that moment to get there. Not with the extra weight he's carrying himself.

I agree he's got massive physicality and does well in contact and it would be great to get the most out of it. I'd really like to see him carry more; in his five recent English starts, he's only had the most carries of the tight five once. The other 4 games, there's been at least two other tight five members with more carries. That's mad when he's possibly the best tight five carrier we've got. But I just don't think it can be done with him carrying like an 8.

If you want someone carrying like an 8, I'd far rather pick a 6 or 7 that can do that, and rely on the tight five to dominate the tight enough to allow said player to drift wide; not saying tight five guys can't get out there, but you're looking for freaks really, guys who are immensely powerful without much extra muscle, and imo, you're also looking for guys that aren't taking the brunt of the set piece for that. And Attwood's the guy taking that brunt.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Especially since Bill and Ben have both shown they can go the full 80, with lock being such a strong point for us I would be happy for Attwood and Launchbury to give it their all. Any combination of Lawes, Parling and Kruis to then come on would not exactly weaken our locks, just change the dynamic a bit.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Seriously, does anyone in the world have the depth we do at lock?
It's utterly ridiculous that we can get down to our 5th choice and he still look international class, and dominate his opposite number.

 

[Peat]

Seriously, does anyone in the world have the depth we do at lock?
It's utterly ridiculous that we can get down to our 5th choice and he still look international class, and dominate his opposite number.

Maybe South Africa and New Zealand. Although to be pedantic Kruis probably was 6th choice until Slater got injured.

I would also add a note of caution that a) Ball's hardly an outstanding international lock himself and I find it weird he was in front of Charteris and Davies and b) Ball was part of a misfiring unit... if you swapped Kruis and Ball, I don't think the result would have been any different Ball would have looked the better player.

 

[yaboyjj]

Seriously, does anyone in the world have the depth we do at lock?
It's utterly ridiculous that we can get down to our 5th choice and he still look international class, and dominate his opposite number.

Don't think so (NZ have Rettalick, Whitelock, Romano, Tuipolotu,...Thrush/Bird?). It's certainly a golden era in English rugby in terms of the tight 5... to think we were playing the likes of Borthwick and Botha not that long ago.

I've just been watching clips of Eastmond and Wade on youtube- I still kinda want to see these guys given a go, despite their obvious drawbacks. The romantic in me still yearns for a back-line of: Simpson, Ford, Wade, Eastmond, Joseph/Tuilagi, Roko, Watson
to be given one game; the thought of this present England pack, delivering quick ball that that back-line, has me salivating at the carnage that would ensue (until the other team has the ball that is).
The Wade situation is still vexing me a bit, given the ball in a bit of space he is perhaps the most lethal finisher in world rugby- is there no way we can accommodate this guy in the current set up, or are his defensive frailties/kick chase weaknesses too severe? It just seems such a waste of talent. (not that I'm unhappy with the current choices)

 

[psychic duck]

Maybe South Africa and New Zealand. Although to be pedantic Kruis probably was 6th choice until Slater got injured.

I would also add a note of caution that a) Ball's hardly an outstanding international lock himself and I find it weird he was in front of Charteris and Davies and b) Ball was part of a misfiring unit... if you swapped Kruis and Ball, I don't think the result would have been any different Ball would have looked the better player.

Ball turns up for all Gatland's extended camps and has a dual contract.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Maybe South Africa and New Zealand. Although to be pedantic Kruis probably was 6th choice until Slater got injured.

I would also add a note of caution that a) Ball's hardly an outstanding international lock himself and I find it weird he was in front of Charteris and Davies and b) Ball was part of a misfiring unit... if you swapped Kruis and Ball, I don't think the result would have been any different Ball would have looked the better player.

While I don't disagree with this, as the worn out old saying goes: You can only play what's in front of you.
Both Charteris and Davies are fit so the Wales coaches classed ball as their first choice for that game.

 

[j'nuh]

Seriously, does anyone in the world have the depth we do at lock?
It's utterly ridiculous that we can get down to our 5th choice and he still look international class, and dominate his opposite number.

I think we could go lower than 5th choice and still have an international class player tbh:
Launchbury, Attwood, Lawes, Parling, Kruis, Slater, Kitchener, Garvey

Where we are better than most nations, is in how young these players are. Bar Parling, they should all make the 2019 WC. Most are young enough to even make the 2023 WC. But if we lose one or two players? Well, there's Itoje, Stooke and Matthews developing and whoever else pops up in that time.

I would suggest converting some to backrowers, but we're not exactly short there either. It's a good time for England fans, but you get the impression that there will be great players with capless careers at the end of this. (Like, Tom Savage is in danger of this happening.)