England EPS 2017/18 edition.

[MarkyH]

I really rate Launchbury and would want him in my XV for England. He's always seemed athletic to me, and is always involved.

I like the other 3 potential starters too. I need someone to break down why Launch and Itoje can't work together? Is Kruis a better scrummager? Lawes a harder tackler? We have an embarrassment of riches at lock and I think it might be a case of playing horses for courses. Or one goes to 6, but that might mean stifling the development of a player like Underhill or a Curry bro.

I

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Or one goes to 6, but that might mean stifling the development of a player like Underhill or a Curry bro.I

Almost certain that will be the case and don't think it will be at Underhill's expense.

 

[Reiser99]

Marler has 3 weeks, so can play against Samoa if needed. TBH I think he's lucky as it looked to me that rather than hitting with the arm he missed with his fist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41751064

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Ellis Genge come on down.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Watch him get banned this weekend now

 

[ratsapprentice]

Matt Mullan, M8.... search ur feelings, you know it to be true....

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Matt Mullan, M8.... search ur feelings, you know it to be true....

I'd trust Mullan, after all they did stop the Hun invasion of China.

 

[ratsapprentice]

 

[ratsapprentice]

Was gonna do it properly, then decided I really couldn't be ******.

Use your imaginations.

 

[RedruthRFC]

As for Launch, it's tough. But the game is encouraging more athletic locks - Launch is good, but Itoje and Lawes are better and probably hit harder as well.

Maybe I'm being unfair by quoting this in isolation, but the berry can do a job a 6, if anything, this makes a case for leaving Kruis out in the cold. Not that that's something that I would ever advocate. It's a little bit like the "unseen work" thing, but to my mind, you've got to have a lock who's bloody awkward / annoying to play against. Aside from his other outstanding attributes, Brian Retallick is head and shoulders the best in the world at this. Depending on what they're putting their minds to at the time, Etzebeth and Lavanini are up there in this role, but Kruis is an utterly relentless menace in forward exchanges whenever the opposition have the ball and that's why at the moment he would be half of any England second row pair I picked.

Isiekwe's not one of them, but by 2019 he might be. He's an enormous bloke, visibly taller than both Kruis and Itoje, and very athletic. Raw certainly, but he's starting to make waves in the Sarries first XV at just 19. His potential is frightening and he's at the best club in the land for schooling top class forwards. He could be one of the bolters Eddie is looking for.

Amen! Frightening potential, think what he's going to be like when he finishes growing!

 

[RedruthRFC]

I think, in a perverse way, his ordinarity is deceptive. People like to fetishise players who "do the "unseen" work", to the point where a player who only does this is often looked at favourably over players who do more than just this.

This is an interesting point, this has become a rather trite journalistic phrase. It's fundamentally a stupid phrase - if said work is unseen, how can anyone get the credit for doing it? It hasn't been seen. Being obsessed with quantifying everything with a stat, basketball uses the phrase "intangibles" in this sort of context and I feel like it's much more apt. If this wasn't the case, Opta would pick every team and the game would be "solved".

Don't get me wrong, I understand and agree with your point, to me the question to me is how do you assess the value of what I'm terming the "intangibles"? Generally I'm not a fan of the school of thought that says that you have to have played the game and / or watched for x number of years, but in this instance, because I have no other way of quantifying / verbalising, I do think it's something that a time forged and to an extent innate understanding of the game brings.

The usual time that an "unseen work" player's value comes to light is when he isn't there.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

This is an interesting point, this has become a rather trite journalistic phrase. It's fundamentally a stupid phrase - if said work is unseen, how can anyone get the credit for doing it? It hasn't been seen. Being obsessed with quantifying everything with a stat, basketball uses the phrase "intangibles" in this sort of context and I feel like it's much more apt. If this wasn't the case, Opta would pick every team and the game would be "solved".

Don't get me wrong, I understand and agree with your point, to me the question to me is how do you assess the value of what I'm terming the "intangibles"? Generally I'm not a fan of the school of thought that says that you have to have played the game and / or watched for x number of years, but in this instance, because I have no other way of quantifying / verbalising, I do think it's something that a time forged and to an extent innate understanding of the game brings.

The usual time that an "unseen work" player's value comes to light is when he isn't there.

If I could give multiple likes for this, I would.

Take a TV show - you only see the actors, you don't see the scene shifters, the camera men, the script writer etc yet without those there's no show. Every time Jonny May goes dancing down the wing a Cole or Barrow has hit a couple of rucks - big clear outs are obvious, but sometimes it can be a just a subtle shift of an opponent's weight or arm that frees up quick ball. The unglamorous, the unseen are essential, every team needs their share of piano shifters for the piano players to do their stuff. You also summed up my view of Kruis perfectly.

As for the stats, a pet bugbear. In one league game a few weeks ago they showed that Underhill had made his usual shed load of tackles - only the number not the effectiveness but we'll park that. They also showed he'd carried something like twice for 3 metres - appalling, dreadful etc.....except that they also showed he'd passed half a dozen times. If the pass was the right option on those occasions, that's a far valuable contribution than sticking his head down and making 10m and stalling momentum of a couple of moves. I think Eddie's smart enough to see the big picture; with Lancaster I always felt that the stats tail wagged the dog a bit.

 

[BenJeffrey]

EPS Squad for the AI's

Backs

Mike Brown (Harlequins), Elliot Daly (Wasps), Jonny May (Leicester Tigers), Denny Solomona (Sale Sharks), Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby), Danny Care (Harlequins), Owen Farrell (Saracens), George Ford (Leicester Tigers), Piers Francis (Northampton Saints), Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby), Alex Lozowski (Saracens), Henry Slade (Exeter Chiefs), Marcus Smith (Harlequins), Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)

Forwards

Tom Curry (Sale Sharks), Charlie Ewels (Bath Rugby), Nathan Hughes (Wasps), Nick Isiekwe (Saracens), Maro Itoje (Saracens), George Kruis (Saracens), Joe Launchbury (Wasps), Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints), Zach Mercer (Bath Rugby), Chris Robshaw (Harlequins), Sam Simmonds (Exeter Chiefs), Sam Underhill (Bath Rugby), Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers), Tom Dunn (Bath Rugby), Ellis Genge (Leicester Tigers), Jamie George (Saracens), Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints), Matt Mullan (Wasps), Mako Vunipola (Saracens), Harry Williams (Exeter Chiefs)


Farrell 12 and Slade 13 looks possible now. Haskell being dropped leads the way for an Underhill start you'd imagine?

 

[curtbob7]

First time I've looked at an Eddie Jones England squad and thought 'Bit p*ssed there Eddie mate'.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

First time I've looked at an Eddie Jones England squad and thought 'Bit p*ssed there Eddie mate'.

Really? I'm happy with it.

 

[curtbob7]

Really? I'm happy with it.

That's the thing. Its probably his best yet.

No Armand is surprising though. As is Dunn and Mullan being included.

 

[ratsapprentice]

This is an interesting point, this has become a rather trite journalistic phrase. It's fundamentally a stupid phrase - if said work is unseen, how can anyone get the credit for doing it?

I completely agree, I hate the phrase, particularly as it's fairly consistently used to describe fairly fundamental parts of forward play, and often things that are very, very noticeable if you are actually watching a game with any degree of focus.

 

[Which Tyler]

Or to make that list of names make a bit more sense:

1. Mako Vunipola, Ellis Genge, Matt Mullan
2. Jamie George, Dylan Hartley, Tom Dunn
3. Dan Cole, Harry Williams
4. Maro Itoje, Courtney Lawes, Joe Launchbury, Charlie Ewels
5. George Kruis, Nick Isiekwe
6. Chris Robshaw
7. Tom Curry, Sam Underhill
8. Nathan Hughes, Sam Simmonds, (Zach Mercer)

9. Ben Youngs, Danny Care
10. George Ford, Alex Lozowski, (Marcus Smith)
12. Owen Farrell, Piers Francis
13. Jonathan Joseph, Henry Slade
11./14. Elliot Daly, Jonny May, Denny Solomona
15. Mike Brown, Anthony Watson

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I do like how Jones calls Mercer and Smith apprentice players, letting them know in no uncertain terms that he has his eye on them but they are there to learn, not be in the senior side yet. Hopefully keep a few egos in check.

Also nobody commented on yarde being dropped?

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

That's the thing. Its probably his best yet.

No Armand is surprising though. As is Dunn and Mullan being included.

Ah sorry, misunderstood what you meant.