[2019 Six Nations] England Squad

[Scotty]

Would like to see Hughes out for clifford, Ashton for Cokanasiga, Launch in for itoje, Cole for Williams just cause that french pack is ******* huge and we may need steadying at scrum time Bar that stay the same. Dunno what the point of Robson is if he isn't trusted against ireland but hey ho

I think Robson isnt trusted against the no.2 side in the world because he has barely any experience and its a risk giving irela d chance at a LBP. He will be used against france i suspect and in the rest of the games but was a risk against ireland. I think if the fixtures had fallen differently, say few 'easier' games first he may have got more game time and then been used against ireland.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Id start launchbury and kruis for the bulk and lawes on the bench.

Me too. Feel Lawes is more impact. Not a bad problem to have though

Would like to see Hughes out for clifford, Ashton for Cokanasiga, Launch in for itoje, Cole for Williams just cause that french pack is ******* huge and we may need steadying at scrum time Bar that stay the same. Dunno what the point of Robson is if he isn't trusted against ireland but hey ho

Agree except for Cole. Props were fine on Sat, and French are massive but not great scrummagers. Use our massive advantage in the loose of playing with basically two extra players, and let that fat **** Atonio have a little bit of scrum dominance if that's what he wants.

Cole is done for me

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I just dont think kruis would as much impact from the bench. Id not really mind if lawes started and Iseikwe on the bench tbh.

I was talking about who should start alongside Kruis.

If I was Lawes, having gone well on Sat, I'd feel pretty annoyed if someone who hadn't even been selected in the last match day squad came into the starting XV ahead of me. Arguably Lawes' athleticism and line out prowess is a bit more akin to Itoje's game anyway.

The French are big, but don't really punch their weight, so Lawes lack of weight (isn't he about the same as Itoje?) shouldn't count too heavily against him. We're at home, there's an argument to run them off their feet from the start. But either Lawes or Launch is fine.

 

[Mr Ruggleby]

Not sure why everyone is talking about resting players. Yes they put in a shift against Ireland, but we have 2 weeks between France and Wales and then another 2 weeks between Wales and Italy which will basically be a rest game for some players anyway. I agree with getting the bench on early if we are comfortable, but I don't think anyone needs to be rotated out after one game, especially after a 2 week camp leading up to the tournament too.

 

[Which Tyler]

Not sure why everyone is talking about resting players. Yes they put in a shift against Ireland, but we have 2 weeks between France and Wales and then another 2 weeks between Wales and Italy which will basically be a rest game for some players anyway. I agree with getting the bench on early if we are comfortable, but I don't think anyone needs to be rotated out after one game, especially after a 2 week camp leading up to the tournament too.

Define "Everyone"

 

[curtbob7]

Me too. Feel Lawes is more impact. Not a bad problem to have though



Agree except for Cole. Props were fine on Sat, and French are massive but not great scrummagers. Use our massive advantage in the loose of playing with basically two extra players, and let that fat **** Atonio have a little bit of scrum dominance if that's what he wants.

Cole is done for me

watched him play in the last few months?

 

[Every Time Ref]

watched him play in the last few months?

To be fair, no. But it's not just about form - it's style. Has recent domestic form included a sudden massive uplift in carrying/tackling/rucking ability? That's what it would take for me

 

[Scotty]

I was talking about who should start alongside Kruis.

If I was Lawes, having gone well on Sat, I'd feel pretty annoyed if someone who hadn't even been selected in the last match day squad came into the starting XV ahead of me. Arguably Lawes' athleticism and line out prowess is a bit more akin to Itoje's game anyway.

The French are big, but don't really punch their weight, so Lawes lack of weight (isn't he about the same as Itoje?) shouldn't count too heavily against him. We're at home, there's an argument to run them off their feet from the start. But either Lawes or Launch is fine.

I dod say launch and kruis for bulk and i stand by that as them big physical encounter will take it out of the big french pack then bring lawes on to exploit them and keep up the physicality. My other point was out of the 3 kruis would have least impact from the bench and launchbury would be my first choice for starter so i would either have

4. Launch or Launch
5. Kruis Lawes

19. Lawes. Kruis/Isiekwe over kruis as he has a different skillset and i rate him highly.

Launch has to start for me. And i only put kruis ahead of Lawes because lawes could do more than kruis off the bench. But i do see your point about keeping him happy but i think lawes at 19 keeps him fresher to start against the smaller packs where we need the athleticism more such as scotland wales.

 

[Mr Ruggleby]

Define "Everyone"

So that's what you took away from that comment...

To move us back into the realm of order and pragmatism, kindly replace everyone with two people:

I dont think mako should start this one or sinkler, swap the props,

Mako deserves a rest after his shift yesterday.

Basically I meant "everyone" in the same way that you mean "everyone" when you say "everyone thinks Ford is a better 10 than Farrell."

I'll be back to check the line in 30.

 

[curtbob7]

To be fair, no. But it's not just about form - it's style. Has recent domestic form included a sudden massive uplift in carrying/tackling/rucking ability? That's what it would take for me

Tbf there has been a very recognizable uplift since Eddie had words with him in the Autumn.

 

[Scotty]

So that's what you took away from that comment...

To move us back into the realm of order and pragmatism, kindly replace everyone with two people:




Basically I meant "everyone" in the same way that you mean "everyone" when you say "everyone thinks Ford is a better 10 than Farrell."

I'll be back to check the line in 30.

You hear it a few times it seems like everyone. I do the same thing.

But my point is simple, put mako and sinkler on the bench and start the other 2 thn we can see what they are like as starters while giving mako and sinkler more time to rest meaning they can train harder for the wales match. We need a team for the world cup that we trust to switch between foe games. So for france swap the front rows, bring in launchbury. Bring billy off at 60. Then for the next big game v wales away we have a squad thats fresher, less battered and we have learned what the bench options are like as starters with the experience on the bench as a safety net.

Last season for ireland didnt matter if they brought on healy or McGrath they were both players who would get the job done meaning you didnt have a a starter and a bench, you had 2 starters and picked which one started on the bench.

 

[Mr Ruggleby]

Tbf there has been a very recognizable uplift since Eddie had words with him in the Autumn.

For me the performance against Ireland adds weight to the notion that there isn't really a place for Cole in this England team. If we continue to play this all action game from a carrying and defensive standpoint, why would you have a player who is a liability in both?

If Sinckler or Williams get injured, then sure, call up Danny to ride the pines. Or, if Sinckler and Williams show any cracks in their international scrummaging ability, then the option is there to go to him. But based on the performance at the weekend against the worlds best Tighthead and a proven international Loosehead, it feels like that is unlikely.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Tbf there has been a very recognizable uplift since Eddie had words with him in the Autumn.

I'm happy to take your word for it, still not convinced he's the man for England though! It would have to be a monumental improvement to change my mind on that. I'm with Xsypher on this:

For me the performance against Ireland adds weight to the notion that there isn't really a place for Cole in this England team. If we continue to play this all action game from a carrying and defensive standpoint, why would you have a player who is a liability in both?

If Sinckler or Williams get injured, then sure, call up Danny to ride the pines. Or, if Sinckler and Williams show any cracks in their international scrummaging ability, then the option is there to go to him. But based on the performance at the weekend against the worlds best Tighthead and a proven international Loosehead, it feels like that is unlikely.

Both props did very well in the scrum against top class opposition, in both cases the scrummaging is considered their "weak suit" compared to contributions in open play. And both props excelled in open play, the success of the game plan was built on hard physical work at a high work rate across the pack including the front row. I just do not see Cole bringing enough marginal improvement to the scrum to counterbalance the loss of physicality and work rate in open play.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

If Cole learned to carry, ruck and make dominant tackles again then yes but until then no way. He was well off the pace of most international loose heads years ago. He might have upped his game but it's still a long way off an international prop these days.

It's a shame to say but he belongs in the Robshaw, Haskell, Cole retirement village.

 

[Scotty]

If Cole learned to carry, ruck and make dominant tackles again then yes but until then no way. He was well off the pace of most international loose heads years ago. He might have upped his game but it's still a long way off an international prop these days.

It's a shame to say but he belongs in the Robshaw, Haskell, Cole retirement village.

Im worried robshaw will be back this weekend if i honest. He got called up before so who knows

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

If Cole learned to carry, ruck and make dominant tackles again then yes but until then no way. He was well off the pace of most international loose heads years ago. He might have upped his game but it's still a long way off an international prop these days.

It's a shame to say but he belongs in the Robshaw, Haskell, Cole retirement village.

+ Hartley and Shields.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Barring injuries we should stay unchanged.

The players deserve it.

Momentum is hard won and easily lost.

Building continuity is important. Always seems to work for the ABs and we've had precious little of it. The time for experimenting is pretty much over.

France are in our RWC group. We should be looking to send a big message.

 

[Which Tyler]

So that's what you took away from that comment...

To move us back into the realm of order and pragmatism, kindly replace everyone with two people:




Basically I meant "everyone" in the same way that you mean "everyone" when you say "everyone thinks Ford is a better 10 than Farrell."

I'll be back to check the line in 30.

Well that escalated quickly.
I am genuinely sorry that my post annoyed you. Across the several hundreds of posts I've read over the last 3 days I had utterly failed to notice the swing in the conversation to how any player needed to be rested after that match. Probably because it still appears that no such conversation had actually happened - I has simply missed the one post by one person suggesting it.

I could have phrased my question better - but I was at work, and a patient arrived as I opened the dialogue box, so I kept it concise.

Pretty sure that 1 comment isn't quite as "everyone" as somewhere around 40% of regular posters here; not to mention that nobody have ever said "everyone thinks Ford is a better 10 than Farrell".

FTR I Disagree that anyone needs to be rested after the Ireland match. The only changes I would make for France is Launchbury for Itoje (injury); and Cokanasiga for Ashton (to get international minutes under his belt ASAP). I'm not sure I'd start either of those 2 replacements, there are good arguments to made either way for both of them.
Which pretty much means that I agree with your post that I relied to - but didn't state as much - partly because time was an issue, and partly because I'd have nothing intelligent to add.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

+ Hartley and Shields.

Hartley yes but think Shields may prove useful. He's not really in any form at the moment though and this World Cup might be a year too early for him.

 

[Pom in Exile]

Im worried robshaw will be back this weekend if i honest. He got called up before so who knows

Why would it be a worry? He's still a better option than Shields or Hughes.