• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2022 Six Nations] Italy vs England (13/02/22)

Anyone else expecting the back row to be Dombrandt, Curry, Simmonds with Ewels/Chessum as bench options?

Think Eddie will keep the front 5 the same, Isiekwe seems to be a better potential tighthead lock option compared to Ewels who really is a line out operator.
 
Wanted to see some stats for Iseikwe as I wasn't left thinking he did an amazing job but also didn't think he did a poor job.

Really can't wait for Jones to screw the selection up again though. I really hate him now.
 
Wanted to see some stats for Iseikwe as I wasn't left thinking he did an amazing job but also didn't think he did a poor job.

Really can't wait for Jones to screw the selection up again though. I really hate him now.
And I think that sums it up. He went perfectly well enough to get further chances. Give him a run of games and he'll only get better. One thing I did notice a few times, that I've seen at club level too, is that he's often the first player into a ruck after the carrier and spreads himself well to stop opponents getting near the ball. That's thankless, but necessary, work.

But you hide it so well…….

In fairness I'm not far behind you. Ita though only has downsides for a coach. Win by a load and it's so what, don't win by a load and the fur starts flying. Similar for players, newer ones especially, - what they do v Ita doesn't tell us much about how they'd go vs Fra or Ire.
 
I'm becoming increasingly frustrated by Eddie and I don't like a lot of his decisions, but I don't 'hate him'. Some posters here (and on other forums) seem to dislike him to a slightly weird extent.

Quite often it's the same people who have no respect for our opponents and seem to think we somehow have a divine right to winning every game.

For the most part Italy gave France a good game and had plenty of positives to take away. I don't think they'll be overly scared of us, particularly playing at home and I definitely don't think we should have been sending an even more callow squad than we already are.
 
I definitely don't think we should have been sending an even more callow squad than we already are.
If you can't trial the likes of Quirke, Barbeary, OHC vs Italy then when can you? Do we just wait until after the WC when we play against a token Tier 2 side, or the barbarians or something?

Nobody's suggesting changes for changes sake, these are changes that could potentially have a big impact on weak spots
 
I'm becoming increasingly frustrated by Eddie and I don't like a lot of his decisions, but I don't 'hate him'. Some posters here (and on other forums) seem to dislike him to a slightly weird extent.

Quite often it's the same people who have no respect for our opponents and seem to think we somehow have a divine right to winning every game.

For the most part Italy gave France a good game and had plenty of positives to take away. I don't think they'll be overly scared of us, particularly playing at home and I definitely don't think we should have been sending an even more callow squad than we already are.
I don't think we have a divine right to win every game at all, but I think we do have the right to expect our team to be organised and cohesive and for us to be able to see clarity of thought from the coaching staff. I don't want us to play like the Boks but they have that clarity in spades - you know exactly what's coming from a Boks team irrespective of which 15 players are on the pitch at any time.

Ita were competitive v Fra for a while but Fra pulled away easily enough without ever getting near top gear. That game seemed to be more about some French players shaking off rust than anything else.
 
If you can't trial the likes of Quirke, Barbeary, OHC vs Italy then when can you? Do we just wait until after the WC when we play against a token Tier 2 side, or the barbarians or something?

Nobody's suggesting changes for changes sake, these are changes that could potentially have a big impact on weak spots
I definatly want Quirke there and would like to see Barbs too but also Marchant is quite new, so is Smith and a isiekwe and Dombrandt and Simmonds, we are light on caps and experience in certain areas. We have relatively new centre combinations. Back row and second row combinations and who knows Radwan may get a shot(doubt it). We have some real inexperience players that we cant just throw them all in.

Now arguably Quirke is fit, played well and deserves a chance. I never hope for an injury to a player but youngs needs to do a Faz and take it out of EJs hands.
 
If you can't trial the likes of Quirke, Barbeary, OHC vs Italy then when can you? Do we just wait until after the WC when we play against a token Tier 2 side, or the barbarians or something?

Nobody's suggesting changes for changes sake, these are changes that could potentially have a big impact on weak spots
I definatly want Quirke there and would like to see Barbs too but also Marchant is quite new, so is Smith and a isiekwe and Dombrandt and Simmonds, we are light on caps and experience in certain areas. We have relatively new centre combinations. Back row and second row combinations and who knows Radwan may get a shot(doubt it). We have some real inexperience players that we cant just throw them all in.

Now arguably Quirke is fit, played well and deserves a chance. I never hope for an injury to a player but youngs needs to do a Faz and take it out of EJs hands.
 
we are light on caps and experience in certain areas
Yeah but those caps/experience are coming from Daly at 13 (who was poor and is pushing Marchant out to an unfamiliar position on the left wing) and Youngs who was very poor
I agree Barbeary is a tough one to fit in - have to see what kind of makeup the side is at 11.30, but if Chessum is on the bench then it should absolutely be Barbeary ahead of him (I do like Chessum, but he should be viewed as Lawes' replacement and be in for either Dombrandt or Simmonds if he's there at all, whereas Barbeary is a different style of player that we've not had in years/have been missing)
 
Yeah but those caps/experience are coming from Daly at 13 (who was poor and is pushing Marchant out to an unfamiliar position on the left wing) and Youngs who was very poor
I agree Barbeary is a tough one to fit in - have to see what kind of makeup the side is at 11.30, but if Chessum is on the bench then it should absolutely be Barbeary ahead of him (I do like Chessum, but he should be viewed as Lawes' replacement and be in for either Dombrandt or Simmonds if he's there at all, whereas Barbeary is a different style of player that we've not had in years/have been missing)
My thoughts on Daly is he is very good quick and a player but very uncreative in terms of distribution and the lines he runs. His use is at 23 same as i think Simmonds will end up at 20.
 
A 9 who just keeps things moving will make such a huge difference.

Barbeary is vexing. Love the attitude, physicality and carrying, he also seems to be decent over the ball and can offload. We need all that. But he's also in nappies as far as the subtleties of 8 goes - probably wouldn't get too exposed vs Ita but would against others. Bench probably, but if he starts I'd think 6 would be more logical as there's just a bit more license to concentrate on wrecking there. But that just brings us back to balance…..wonder if he's ever thought about trying hooker?
 
If you can't trial the likes of Quirke, Barbeary, OHC vs Italy then when can you? Do we just wait until after the WC when we play against a token Tier 2 side, or the barbarians or something?

Nobody's suggesting changes for changes sake, these are changes that could potentially have a big impact on weak spots
Quirke - yes, absolutely.

Barbeary - I get it, I really do, but is our backrow really a weak spot? Now Barbeary has a point of difference, and has the potential to become world class, possibly in time for 2028, so I get it, but backrow really isn't a weak spot for England - if anything, it's an embarrassment of riches - if mostly potentially so currently.

OHC? - Now, I'm no fan of playing centres on the wing (except Daly after he'd played a few games there, and where he's played the best rugby of his career), but again, wing is hardly a weak spot for England. On this one, I don't even see OHC as having a point of difference versus other options, or that potential to be a world beater. Yes I'd personally pick him on the wing this weekend - given the 28* players to choose from, but he's hardly "have a big impact on weak spots".


* Sorry, 27, not 28
 
Last edited:
Barbeary - I get it, I really do, but is our backrow really a weak spot? Now Barbeary has a point of difference, and has the potential to become world class, possibly in time for 2028, so I get it, but backrow really isn't a weak spot for England - if anything, it's an embarrassment of riches - if mostly potentially so currently.
I think it is in terms of what our gameplan is - it's still built around having a big carrier in the backrow and we don't have that/haven't had that since Binny was last in form, back when TV was still in B&W
It's a gameplan issue more than personnel one, but EJ sticks rigidly to his gameplan regardless of personnel so might as well try and find someone who will improve our game there

wing is hardly a weak spot for England.
I think it is when we've not got a winger in the starting XV,
This one ties more into the midfield not functioning than the wings, though - Slade and Marchant worked well vs SA, Slade and Daly were poor vs Scotland
Marchant isn't a left wing and OHC is the only left wing in the EPS (admittedly I am a fan boy, though)
 
In terms of "within our gameplan" - then I can see the point that we've a weakness at 8 (though Billy seems to be tearing up trees again for Sarries) - but it's a fairly substantial qualifier.

Equally OHC on the wing - the "within the 27 players in camp" is a pretty substantial qualifier, as he's one of 2 specialist wingers in there (plus Daly). It's also an odd qualifer given that Barbeary isn't in the 27.

With those separate qualifiers in place, then yes, both address weaknesses. I'd thought you were talking longer term than this weekend though, and wider picture than current game plan, given that it will have changed again by the summer.
 
In terms of "within our gameplan" - then I can see the point that we've a weakness at 8 (though Billy seems to be tearing up trees again for Sarries) - but it's a fairly substantial qualifier.

Equally OHC on the wing - the "within the 27 players in camp" is a pretty substantial qualifier, as he's one of 2 specialist wingers in there (plus Daly). It's also an odd qualifer given that Barbeary isn't in the 27.

With those separate qualifiers in place, then yes, both address weaknesses. I'd thought you were talking longer term than this weekend though, and wider picture than current game plan, given that it will have changed again by the summer.
I just take each game as it is with EJ these days, who knows WTF is going to happen in the next one, so my changes are based on last week's performance/gameplan

Smash the All Blacks? We must be half decent...go on massive run of terrible form
Oh look, we just beat the Boks with an injury riddled side...oh and now we're back to dross again
 
I just take each game as it is with EJ these days, who knows WTF is going to happen in the next one

Smash the All Blacks? We must be half decent...go on massive run of terrible form
Oh look, we just beat the Boks with an injury riddled side...oh and now we're back to dross again
Oh yes, I don't understand Eddie - I THINK I can see some reason in the madness, but I'm really not confident in it.


His target is to win the RWC - to do that, you need to beat both NZ and SA - and there's basically no gameplan that is well suited to one, whilst not playing into the hands of the other. Which means you need variety of game styles - which he learned to his cost in 2019 (though I still say that 60 minutes of Sinckler and it's a completely different game).
Last cycle, he was working on confidence, then physical and mental toughness - and was brutal about it; with a gameplan to beat NZ and hope it'd be good enough against SA. It wasn't.

This cycle, it seems to be that he's doing a lot of experimenting - new players all over the place (often feeling too many, and not letting an individual get used to international rugby, and with the sad exception of Youngs and Farrell, and understandable exceptions of Sinckler, Itoje and Curry) and the game plan - as much as we viewers can tell, is changed for each window.
Now I give Eddie more credit than most - I think he's got a brain that never stops working, that he's always got a cunning plan, and that he plays the long game with his eyes firmly on the RWC. Others thing he's a rambling idiot barely (if at all) short of drooling on his shirt collar and would be better off selecting teams by throwing darts at a board.
I think he's shown glimpses of what he wants the team to do in flashes here and there - in defence and attack; but wants the team as a whole to be comfortable with many different options - so he flits about, he hides his hand; and IMO he's got a plan for NZ and a plan for SA, and I think he believes we can beat anyone else without really needing a plan. The plans may not work, I don't claim enough knowledge to put my finger on what they are, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if we come a cropper by taking our eyes off a team he believes we can beat without showing our hand.
I also think he's flitting too much, I think that individuals risk ending up under-cooked by the time we land in France, I think it's a high-risk stategy. But I also think that anyone claiming that Eddie doesn't know what he's doing, is behind the times, or doesn't have a plan - is being blinded by dislike.
 
That backline....wow...

Itoje at 6....well hes made for it...but ....we shall see.

But ....EWELLS....arrgghhhh
 

Latest posts

Top