England EPS 2016/17 season.

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

He did play him there, in the second half of the 3rd test, and there was talk about him playing there from the off in the 1st. If we go on Jones´current selections, Ewers would do well to get in the squad, never mind team!

Sure, I think we just notice different things when we watch rugby matches! At least we can rest assured that there is someone who is a better selector than us coaching England now!

Him playing 6 for most of the 3rd test was down to Harrison being unimpressive, not because Jones particularly wanted Itoje there. If he had then he would've started Itoje at 6. The sand goes for all 3 tests.

There was talk in the media about it, but that's it. Just speculation. If EJ saw Itoje as a 6 I think he would've started him there with L&L in such good form. 4 is where Sarries see Itoje so I doubt EJ will try and make him a permanent 6. Especially seeing as Sarries will probably want him to bulk up a bit to be a real 4, which will faulter his mobility as a 6.

With Ewers, he spent most of the season injured. For EJ's first squad, he had Ewers in there but he was injured so Kvesic took his place. If he can get a good start of the Prem season, I would expect to see him in the 6 Nations team. Especially seeing as it's unlikely Underhill will be playing his rugby in England as soon as that.

For Ford vs Faz, absolutely. It's great that we can actually argue about who to start at 10 as it means we have 2 solid options. I'm looking forward to Slade getting more 10 time with Chiefs as I think he could be the right balance between Faz and Ford.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Ford has had the following problems at Bath this season:

- The entire squad were turning on the head coach, his dad. That would have damaged squad morale and particularly Fords.
- The forwards at Bath have been dire, some of the worst in the premiership
- He has frequently been playing in a team down 1 player due to Bath easily topping the yellow cards list
- He has had a scrum half who is a glory seeker or a scrum half who is the most carded player responsible for getting the ball to him. I think in 3 games he had to go for a period with no scrumhalf.
- The midfield pairing of Eastmond and Joseph was never used together, severely limiting his options

I remember watching Bath games and Ford was struggling but it didn't look like bad form, he simply had no help from anyone. Forwards wouldn't give him options, the backs were too deep and delivery was often poor. He was forced to either kick under pressure or force the game. No 10 in the world would have looked good at Bath from the 2015-16 season. Since he has been taken out of that environment and put into the England squad, he has rebounded really well. He still has some brainfarts but ultimately his turnaround in form has mirrored that of England as a whole since the world cup. Under Jones he may maintain this and if he starts improving on his best, he will outclass Farrell in pretty much every aspect except sheer physicality. Remember Farrell has been in the most controlling side in Europe off the back of premiership and European success. He has the best set of forwards to give him a platform. Granted this takes nothing away from him but he hasn't had anything to really knock his confidence or put him in bad situations. What happens when he is not given that comfort? He could implode and look just like Ford. He is a big game player because he has a team of big game players surrounding him.

 

[msf]

I don´t think Jones is as predictable or as one-track minded as you are making out. If playing Itoje at 6 is the best move for the team, that is what he will do, just as playing Haskell at 7 was. I can definitely see him playing there against a team like SA, who have a real lineout threat.

- - - Updated - - -

Totally agree, Ragerancher - I should have said he looked good when paired with Cook when Cook was actually on the field.

 

[Peat]

I'd agree with Living Sacrifice. Those on the outside must force their way in. Yes, there are situations where we badly need someone to do that, but the reality is if someone's not capable of forcing their way in, they're probably not the answer. There's a limit to how pro-active one can be when there's no obvious answers out there.

Lets flip the question. Who outside the current 15 are really kicking down the doors to get in?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I'd agree with Living Sacrifice. Those on the outside must force their way in. Yes, there are situations where we badly need someone to do that, but the reality is if someone's not capable of forcing their way in, they're probably not the answer. There's a limit to how pro-active one can be when there's no obvious answers out there.

Lets flip the question. Who outside the current 15 are really kicking down the doors to get in?

The slight problem with this is it's easier to look good in a good club. As club rugby is their only real chance of showing, if the club as a whole is not performing then it becomes hard for any player to look anything other than "good", certainly not enough to justify displacing a player already in the squad who is "good", even if they would actually perform better. If the Saxons are properly developed as the squad where these players can be first blooded and a stepping stone for the main team, then it becomes much better.

Personally I'd say Dave Ewers and Henry Slade are the 2 I'm most keen to see involved with England. I'd like Kvesic to get a look in too, the work he did in the Saxons games was pretty good, even with the rather one sided reffing of the breakdown.

 

[Raggs]

Still don't think Ewers is going to make it in the end. Though I do find the fact that Toby has seen him take lineouts in practice has convinced him that he's therefore a better lineout forward than Hask, rather amusing. Now I don't think Hask is anything to shout about by some way, but I don't actually recall Ewers being airborne in an actual premiership or above game lineout ever. Oh, and Hask having a poor season is an interesting one too, as is the fact that his physical defence was apparently a fluke in form... Some people have fixed perceptions of players that don't shift, and Hask seems to be a general favourite, but lacking physicality in defence is not normally part of that picture. He is also ridiculously effective in the breakdown (think he was the only one to cleanly remove Pocock in the first test).

Ewers is a hard worker, no doubt, and a big powerful guy, but I don't see what he offers that BV doesn't, and can't see the pair of them lining up at 6/8. I could believe Hughes or Beaumont, lining up alongside BV, albeit unlikely. My guess is he'll stay around the Saxons, depending on how the Saxons management group viewed him, and maybe fringes of EPS, but I'm really not seeing a blossoming international career.

 

[ratsapprentice]

We've been over this before, he does occasionally get lifted.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Why can you see Hughes and Binny at 6/8, but not Ewers? That seems ridiculous to me. Hughes and Binny are both players who's main aspect is their ball carrying. They'd step on each other's boots. While Ewers is a very effective ball carrier, it's far from his main feature as a player. His defence is far better than Binny or Hughes, he has a higher work rate than both and is better at the breakdown. His work at the break down is often overlooked as people don't expect a man of his size to be any good there, but he really is superb. The same goes for his work rate, he's unbelievably mobile for such a giant.

Binny and Hughes are both the kind of players who get their name in lights due to their monstrous ball carrying, but Ewers a real grafter which is what England need. Not 2 ball carrying 8s.

 

[Raggs]

Ewers may well have a higher workrate than Hughes, but Hughes is far more active in the lineout that Ewers, and I'd guess has a higher ceiling. I don't agree that Ewers has a higher workrate than Vunipola. Nor would I be so sure that he's better than BV at the breakdown.

As to working together, I see Ewers and BV as two tight carriers, the sort you send into a whole bunch of forwards, and still expect them to make 2-3 yards, giving you front foot ball from seemingly nothing. Hughes is more useful a bit further out in the midfield, with good pace and lines, meaning smaller men can be dragged for a few steps before giving an offload to oncoming support. Beaumont is another one that works better further out for me, hence more similarities between them. I think Beaumont and BV would likely be the most complimentary pairing if 2 of the 4 had to be paired.

Also, whilst he's far from over the hill, Ewers is the oldest of the 4, and still only has just a few saxons caps.

Could he make it? Absolutely. Will he? I doubt it, not so much due to lack of talent, more due to the fact there are better options currently in place, and options with more potential up and coming in my mind.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Sum up this argument:
Wasps fan wants Hughes to play for England
Exe fan wants Ewers to play for England

Shocker

Meanwhile we all know Mike Williams will be England's 6.

 

[Raggs]

I don't know if Hughes will make it. He's certainly not getting a starting shirt yet, nor would I have him on the bench, same as Ewers. In the future, I think Hughes has a better chance than Ewers of establishing himself in the squad, but even then there's no guarantees given the fact I think BV has the 8 shirt completely sewn up, and I don't know if Hughes would be a good bench option.

Right now I don't see much beyond our current 6,7,8. Would expect Robshaw to be the first to move aside, simply since Eddie seems to like pace, and I think Hask will shift to 6 if a replacement 7 is found. We have a number of young players scrambling to prove a point, but none of them seem ready, and I don't see any of the more proven performers (Croft, Wood etc) really coming back strong enough to shift them either.

 

[msf]

I agree with Raggs up to a point. I think if BV stays in place, Ewers won´t be picked for the starting team. They are not completely similar, but they have similar shortcomings (lack of lineout ability and do not attack the wide channels). I agree with Tigs Man that Mike Williams is a better bet. I´m not sure that BV has no.8 sewn up indefinitely though, it really depends on what game plan Jones wants. If he wants England to play wide, he will need to play one of Beaumont, Hughes or Clifford, probably at 8.

 

[msf]

Instead of each of us pushing the claims of our favourite players, how about a different angle? Which players who are currently in the team do you think Jones sees as indispensable?

Here are mine:

Hartley (as captain not hooker, although he is good enough there for us not to lose much).
Cole (I think Jones will want as much experience as possible in the front row, and Cole has been the best English tighthead since Johnson was in charge)
Itoje (not necessarily as a lock, but so good he has to be in the team)
Watson (ditto, but substitute wing for lock)

Plus: at least one of Ford/Farrell (they are other good playmakers, but none have the tactical sense of these two)
at least one of Haskell/Underhill (I don´t see anyone else filling the Jacques Burger role in defence)

If I am right, that means there are 7-9 positions actually up for grabs.

 

[Every Time Ref]

I'd agree with Living Sacrifice. Those on the outside must force their way in. Yes, there are situations where we badly need someone to do that, but the reality is if someone's not capable of forcing their way in, they're probably not the answer. There's a limit to how pro-active one can be when there's no obvious answers out there.

Lets flip the question. Who outside the current 15 are really kicking down the doors to get in?

Tricky to say, because we don't get to see training and club form is not necessarily the best indication of international quality (as per ragerancher's post). I don't think there is anyone at the moment who is universally agreed to be better than the incumbent - but that is my point, in some circumstances changes should be made before reaching that point.

Taking Daly and Kvesic, two example of unproven players who have a reasonable claim, illustrates my point. Daly obviously has good club form and has many of the weapons to be an international 13, but IMO (and from memory I think we agree on this?) that JJ, although not on mind-blowing form, is a very good player and even now contributes a lot to the team and the game plan. If I was head coach of England, I would not be looking to replace JJ with anyone in the short, medium or long term unless something changes quite dramatically.

Haskell on the other hand is on great form at the moment. But we all know he has his limitations, and the likelihood is this is a patch of form because he has not consistently performed for England in the past. If i was head coach, I would not look to be dropping him now, but my mid- to long-term plan would be to look out for potential replacements and be open to giving an alternative a chance to establish himself. It seems like EJ isn't a fan of Kvesic so maybe he is not the one, maybe in Eddie's mind it is Harrison or Clifford, but the principle is the same.

FWIW, I'm certainly not saying there isn't a balance to be struck, or calling for loads of changes (or even any changes) immediately. Too many changes at once are rarely good for a side, and never good for a winning one, if Jones decides other positions are more important so Hask and Farrell stay for the forseeable, I have no problem with that.

- - - Updated - - -

Instead of each of us pushing the claims of our favourite players, how about a different angle? Which players who are currently in the team do you think Jones sees as indispensable?

Here are mine:

Hartley (as captain not hooker, although he is good enough there for us not to lose much).
Cole (I think Jones will want as much experience as possible in the front row, and Cole has been the best English tighthead since Johnson was in charge)
Itoje (not necessarily as a lock, but so good he has to be in the team)
Watson (ditto, but substitute wing for lock)

Plus: at least one of Ford/Farrell (they are other good playmakers, but none have the tactical sense of these two)
at least one of Haskell/Underhill (I don´t see anyone else filling the Jacques Burger role in defence)

If I am right, that means there are 7-9 positions actually up for grabs.

I'd add Billy, and based on Eddie's decisions to this point I'd add Nowell and Joseph

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I'd add Billy, and based on Eddie's decisions to this point I'd add Nowell and Joseph

I'd say Billy is very much dispensable to Jones. Obviously Jones likes him, but there are other fully capable 8s available to him (Clifford, Beaumont and in particular, Hughes). Hughes could fill a very similar role to Billy and do it better, so I wouldn't have thought Binny resting too easy.

JJ too, I wouldn't have thought is particularly invincible in EJ's selections. Daly is snapping at his heels and in the Prem over took him on form. I would've thought that JJ, like Binny, is probably having some sleepless nights. Same goes for Nowell. I think he's England's best outside back but many don't seem to rate him nearly so highly and I fear EJ may be 1 of them. Yarde, May and Roko would all be fully capable of replacing him.

 

[BPM]

Haven't posted on here in a while so hello everyone ...

Going back to the 8 debate, why is everyone so adamant that Morgan is finished at test level?

IMO, he should never have gone to the World Cup. It looked to me as though he rushed his comeback and has basically paid for it every since.

Beaumont deserved to be picked ahead of him for Eddie's first EPS, but Morgan actually had a run of some decent games for Gloucester before getting injured again towards the end of the season.

Billy is 100% first choice, but I find it surprising that at the ripe old age of 27, Morgan has been so summarily dismissed in favour of uncapped options like Hughes and Beaumont and Clifford who is more of a utility back row player than a specialist 8.

Obviously, Morgan would need to build up a decent enough run of form to warrant consideration, but IMO, it's a bit premature to write-off a proven player at test level who (pre-injury) was most people's favourite for the 8 shirt over Billy.

I can't see him getting in the EPS immediately, but with a good season under his belt, I'd back him to challenge very strongly. With Billy having proven that he's an 80min player, it's not likely that the alternative options at 8 will get much game time either, so I'm not sure they'll have much chance to prove their test credentials. Morgan already has.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Haven't posted on here in a while so hello everyone ...

2 posts, joined 2012. Yeah I think that statement is pretty accurate

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Has Billy prove he's an 80 min player? In the 3rd test Daly had to be put on at 8 because Billy had knackered himself. Whether he can manage playing 80 minutes and whether he should be playing 80 minutes give 2 very different answers.

I think people have written off Morgan as him and Binny are very similar players and ATM Binny is simply much better. And I can't see that changing, especially not to the extent that Binny is replaced. I can see Beaumont, Hughes, Clifford getting a shot as they offer very different things to Binny, but Morgan is more or less the same player. Just not as good.

Morgan's leg injury was a huge shame as before it I rated Morgan much more than Binny, but sadly he just doesn't seem able to recover from it.

 

[BPM]

I changed computers, forgot my password and then just posted much more actively elsewhere ...

Unless you want to talk about politics there's not much going on in Planet Rugby right now and Rugby Rebels is quiet too.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Billy went off injured, didn't he?
He was getting a lot of medical attention, tried to battle on for a bit, then had to go