England 2022/23

[BPM]

Slade's inconsistency for England frustrates me. Mostly because he can be brilliant, but he often flatters to deceive.

Based upon his cameos in the AIs, I'd have no problem with him starting in the 6N. It looked like he was trying to prove a point and I think he did exactly that. Perhaps there was a degree of complacency creeping in and being in situation where he needs to prove himself to Borthwick will be a good thing?

I'd like to see what Lawrence could do at test level if he's given the ball. While it's true that his performances under Eddie were underwhelming, I remember being frustrated that he was picked for his carrying game and then practically ignored in attack. Although, be fair, you could say the same for whoever played 13 in most of England's games over the past couple of years!

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Slade will be 13...

That's very certain. How come? I guess he is the most experienced 13 we have.

 

[AngloScotsHybrid]

Slade's inconsistency for England frustrates me. Mostly because he can be brilliant, but he often flatters to deceive.

Based upon his cameos in the AIs, I'd have no problem with him starting in the 6N. It looked like he was trying to prove a point and I think he did exactly that. Perhaps there was a degree of complacency creeping in and being in situation where he needs to prove himself to Borthwick will be a good thing?

I'd like to see what Lawrence could do at test level if he's given the ball. While it's true that his performances under Eddie were underwhelming, I remember being frustrated that he was picked for his carrying game and then practically ignored in attack. Although, be fair, you could say the same for whoever played 13 in most of England's games over the past couple of years!

How many minutes did Lawrence actually play under Eddie? I remember him starting one game where he never touched the ball. Did he get much more time on the pitch?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Slade will be 13...

Second choice, though?
That's why I think it's Marchant, because he'll also cover wing

 

[BPM]

How many minutes did Lawrence actually play under Eddie? I remember him starting one game where he never touched the ball. Did he get much more time on the pitch?

Not sure on the minutes but he's made 5 starts 2 sub appearances (to be fair I thought it was only 3 or 4 in total).

One of those starts was against the USA where he scored and then got a head knock and had to go off after a few mins.

 

[BPM]

That's very certain. How come? I guess he is the most experienced 13 we have.

I'd say it's likely rather than 'certain'.

A lot depends what's happening at 10 and 12. If Smith and Ford are unavailable, I'd assume Farrell starts at 10 which potentially frees up a spot for Kelly and makes Slade's experience at 13 a useful asset. Being in good form also helps his case.

I just hope there's not too much Tigers bias towards Porter who I wouldn't even have in the squad.

 

[Reiser99]

How many minutes did Lawrence actually play under Eddie? I remember him starting one game where he never touched the ball. Did he get much more time on the pitch?

He was also playing in a system where the ball was kicked 90% of the time. Pointless him even being there if he was never going to get the ball.

 

[Which Tyler]

Think if Borthwick was in charge earlier then Marchant wouldn't have signed for Stade Francais?

No, because Eddie was always leaving post-RWC, so Marchant was always taking himself out of contention for the new coach.

 

[Scotty]

While ive seen him play a few times ive never made a point of watching Kelly, what kind of player is he?

Passing game?
Not that big but good carrier?
Defence?
Is he ready?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

No, because Eddie was always leaving post-RWC, so Marchant was always taking himself out of contention for the new coach.

Yeah it's the perfect time to test yourself abroad as well: two year contract means he can move back and make a challenge for the next RWC squad and also arguably in his prime so will command a decent wage

 

[Scotty]

No relevance to the current chat in any way shape or form but it made me smile, do love a good trick play.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I'm 100% in favour of having to play in England to play for England, anywho

Emotionally I agree, but I'm not so sure I think that any more. I get keeping all the best players in the country, even though there may soon be fewer clubs for them to play for.

But the prem is so familiar to them - come up through the academies and then playing the same old for years on end. If you want them to be better players that is likely to happen by them removing themselves from this comfort zone for a while and experiencing other cultures and playing cultures - see Marchant and Mercer. Haskell's man of the series in Aus came after spells in France, NZ and Japan. Going back Johnson in NZ and Richards in France.

You could structure it so that players were able to play abroad for X seasons while remaining available for selection. Plus a caveat in contracts that means they have to be available for Eng training which means they couldn't realistically be in Japan or the SH.

If you want players to be the very best they can be, broadening horizons will work for most. You can see similar principles at a more local level - Genge moving to Tigers away from what he knew was the making of him.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I prefer club rugby to international rugby, so my thoughts are mainly on that. Allowing the only players the general public have a chance of recognising to move abroad on mega bucks contracts would unplug the life support system the game is already on

Would also see wages jump to further unsustainable levels as well as everyone now has to compete with french/Japanese clubs to keep their best players as the England incentive is no longer there

 

[Crash Hamster]

No relevance to the current chat in any way shape or form but it made me smile, do love a good trick play.

Loved this when I saw it and there's no reason why it's not possible every time there's a penalty 5m out. Even top pro sides switch off (see also quick penalties) from time to time; it's not difficult to set up for (even a prop can do it...); it's not a difficult kick (what's the worst that can happen? You kick it too hard and it's a 5m lineout. I suppose the catching player might drop it, but the catching player can drop it at the lineout too)

Is there something in the laws specifically banning wall moves nowadays? Can't see that they'd be offside as long as the ball player wasn't behind the wall, but you never see them.

I loved me a good wall move...

 

[higgik]

Yeah it's the perfect time to test yourself abroad as well: two year contract means he can move back and make a challenge for the next RWC squad and also arguably in his prime so will command a decent wage

He has already been to NZ and come back a better player, so a stint in France should also help.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I prefer club rugby to international rugby, so my thoughts are mainly on that. Allowing the only players the general public have a chance of recognising to move abroad on mega bucks contracts would unplug the life support system the game is already on

Would also see wages jump to further unsustainable levels as well as everyone now has to compete with french/Japanese clubs to keep their best players as the England incentive is no longer there

Ultimately applying "protectionist" measures to defend our game is only a temporary thing. We need to find a way to grow the game domestically so we don't have to even worry about the large overseas wages. This is where the RFU are seriously failing. Promotion of rugby in this country is ****-poor and more and more effort is being thrown at propping up the top level rather than growing the game. English rugby will die if it keeps trying to put up barriers rather than actually growing the sport. Eventually the gap will become large enough that many of our best players will just say sod it and move abroad anyway.

 

[Scotty]

E

Emotionally I agree, but I'm not so sure I think that any more. I get keeping all the best players in the country, even though there may soon be fewer clubs for them to play for.

But the prem is so familiar to them - come up through the academies and then playing the same old for years on end. If you want them to be better players that is likely to happen by them removing themselves from this comfort zone for a while and experiencing other cultures and playing cultures - see Marchant and Mercer. Haskell's man of the series in Aus came after spells in France, NZ and Japan. Going back Johnson in NZ and Richards in France.

You could structure it so that players were able to play abroad for X seasons while remaining available for selection. Plus a caveat in contracts that means they have to be available for Eng training which means they couldn't realistically be in Japan or the SH.

If you want players to be the very best they can be, broadening horizons will work for most. You can see similar principles at a more local level - Genge moving to Tigers away from what he knew was the making of him.

Young players should be able to go for a season or 2 abroad, as long as they still resign with the club who's academy they went through, they remain eligible for up to 2 seasons, more difficult to find a system for players when capped.

This would mean young talent goes abroad and develops whilst retaining the player for their English club after their time away, England can pick them knowing they will come back eventually as already contracted to previous club.

Im sure there are many holes in the plan ive missed but i think it could work.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I wouldn't be against doing similar to what NZ do now and allowing players to go for short sabbaticals, ie. let them go and do a season in France, Japan or wherever and still be eligible.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

On the fence about it tbh.

On one hand with how tight money is it's a way of having cake and eating it.

On the other with how tight money is it makes clubs task of keeping players a lot tougher.

 

[Scotty]

On the fence about it tbh.

On one hand with how tight money is it's a way of having cake and eating it.

On the other with how tight money is it makes clubs task of keeping players a lot tougher.

What about player exchange program between us and the top 14. Mutually beneficial to both both teams and both players. Sure there will be alot of red tape though and alot to sort out. But could be an interesting option for ypung prospects.