[England] Post-6N/Pre-RWC Player Watch

[Every Time Ref]

...except the one wearing 7...

 

[j'nuh]

I think he was just speculating rather than advocating it. To be fair to him as well, Billy Vunipola does occasionally play six for Saracens, notably his excellent performance against Munster (I think it was Munster). I can actually see a back row including Vunipola and Morgan working with a quick, jackaling seven, I'd go for Kvesic. That's three good (two excellent) ball carriers, three players happy to hit rucks with at least one an excellent jackaler. Can Kvesic jump at the lineout (or Morgan)?

If this was played I'd want a flanker on the bench though, not Easter.

I can't remember Kvesic having done so (he's "only" 6'1!). His usual role for Gloucester is to control the ball at the back of the rolling maul. However, Morgan has done a bit of jumping for Gloucester.

tbh, I think that Morgan and Vunipola might tread on each others shoes a little too much, both specialising in carrying. Ewers is a better fit because he can provide that "secondary" carrying option, but also hit a tremendous number of rucks and get through a ridiculous number of tackles. I also still like the idea of Morgan/Vunipola coming on 20 minutes from the end.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

When vuinipola wears 6 he still plays 8. The same way we had robshaw wearing 7 and playing 6.

Additionally of kvesic was made to jump in the line out you'd miss the quick 6 shooting accords to help the backs.

The modern day 6 at international level needs to be quicker the. Billy v is unfortunately.

 

[Peat]

tbh, I think that Morgan and Vunipola might tread on each others shoes a little too much, both specialising in carrying. Ewers is a better fit because he can provide that "secondary" carrying option, but also hit a tremendous number of rucks and get through a ridiculous number of tackles. I also still like the idea of Morgan/Vunipola coming on 20 minutes from the end.

I don't think the tackle count is a problem. Vunipola made 79 tackles in the 6N. Cherrypicking Ewers' 5 best performances from his 10 most recent gives a total of 80.

The rucks might be an issue - my ruck mark project got a little derailed - but as we have a very athletic tight five that ruck well but carry not so well, there's a pretty decent balance there.

Billy Vunipola offers the close in smash (both ways); Launchbury and Lawes play a little wider and ruck like blindsides. Everyone playing to their strengths. Morgan gets a big supply of good ball against ragged defences, where he is super dangerous.

It's very tempting and persuasive logic. The lineout would be a minor issue and despite seeing how it could work, I'd want to see the breakdown actually work (not that's our ever does properly)... but elsewise, it seems an increasingly obvious use of resources.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Sorry, but could you please the explain the different jobs a 6, 7 and 8 do, besides the obvious (where they're placed in the scrum, 8 pick ups etc.)

 

[MrTea_32]

You want 3 8's in the 23 player team? No. Vunipola is an 8 and barely has any experience at 6, and nine at international level. Why would you want to do that anyway when we have players like Haskell, Wood and an ever improving Burgess who could fill that spot?

With that comment about Billy at 6, it was just an idea but like you say haskell, wood and if burgess continues at 6 he could be something special, are there its just Billy has played 6 and it's a way to get two massive ball carriers on the pitch ( seen as though ewers hasn't been given a chance).
Next year with hughes I wouldn't want any of those 3 left out the match day squad as their all massive effective carriers.
In the future the back row.competition for places is gonna be even more fierce than it is now

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I see what you were getting at, but I don't think you can have Morgan and Vunipola in the same starting team, as someone said previously, they'd step on eachothers boots. They both love to carry the ball and I don't think you could have both of them playing at once. It'd be fine to have 1 start and the other as a sub, but playing 2 huge ball carriers in the back row at once can't work...

 

[Raggs]

I see what you were getting at, but I don't think you can have Morgan and Vunipola in the same starting team, as someone said previously, they'd step on eachothers boots. They both love to carry the ball and I don't think you could have both of them playing at once. It'd be fine to have 1 start and the other as a sub, but playing 2 huge ball carriers in the back row at once can't work...

You may want to explain that to Chiefs, Wasps, the Boks and the ABs (with Kaino)...

It can work, but you need to give them differing roles. BV offers great carrying close to the breakdown, one pass from the breakdown and smash. Hughes and Morgan, operate very well a bit further out, they have a bit of a step to go through gaps and use their strength to crash through the backs. The chiefs can really generate some momentum these days by just giving a pass to Ewers, then a pass to Waldrom, puts them on the front foot every time.

I think Hughes and BV offers the best balance of a pairing, with Hughes offering the lineout option, and a fairly good turnover operator.

 

[goodNumber10]

I've said for a while I'd quite like to see a back row of 06: Billy V, 7: Wood, 8: Morgan.

 

[Patchey]

Has Lancaster ever mentioned Ewers in an interview? Maybe when the Saxon squad was announces. Just interested.

I've said for a while I'd quite like to see a back row of 06: Billy V, 7: Wood, 8: Morgan.

Stop it Andy, you can't convince us to pick Beanpole Wood as WELL as loving Eoin Farrell. I won't allow it.

 

[goodNumber10]

Stop it Andy, you can't convince us to pick Beanpole Wood as WELL as loving Eoin Farrell. I won't allow it.

you know as well as i that sooner or later this whole forum comes around to my way of thinking

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

you know as well as i that sooner or later this whole forum comes around to my way of thinking

Tom wood was the better 7 than robshaw.....now his form is average week in week out.

I have no idea why he lost weight as he was already quick and he doesn't really focus on rucking any more

 

[yaboyjj]

Has Lancaster ever mentioned Ewers in an interview? Maybe when the Saxon squad was announces. Just interested.

Stop it Andy, you can't convince us to pick Beanpole Wood as WELL as loving Eoin Farrell. I won't allow it.

I think Rowntree and Lancaster place a big emphasis on lineout ability and athletisism for a no.6- why else would Croft and Wood been anywhere near the 23 in the 6 nations? Right now, I'd take Clarke over Wood since he is in far better form.
I'm still trying to find highlights of that Saxons match, but that back 5 of Itoje, Garvey, Ewers, Kvesic and Waldrom, had a good Ireland pack on toast at the breakdown for most of the match- they probably would (unfairly) have been judged on the poor lineouts though (which was imo because Gaskel wet off early and LCD can't throw). Still, Itoje, Ewers and Kvesic would be an awesome breakdown/rucking unit.

 

[goodNumber10]

I think they place the emphasis on Set piece dominance, and build from there.

 

[yaboyjj]

I think they place the emphasis on Set piece dominance, and build from there.

Yep, which pretty much puts Kvesic and Ewers at a distinct disadvantage. I've said before- but Robshaw/Vunipola combo is an obstruction to any player who is not proficient in the line-out, Haskell just about scrapes through because he can jump, but England were under pressure more than once in the 6 nations. Not much will change untill/if Robshaw is ousted from the shirt or we get an 8 who can jump.

 

[Peat]

Further to the Francis chat, looks like we might be losing Alex Lozowski to Italy as well.

edit: Also, interesting look at the Francis - Corbs scrum battle here - http://sport.bt.com/lee-mears-scrum-masterclass-91363975433086

 

[Duck a l'Orange]

I think they place the emphasis on Set piece dominance, and build from there.

The problem being that if you're light and tall enough to be lifted effectively at the lineout to gain that dominance, the odds are pretty heavily stacked that you won't be a six in the mould we want to boss the breakdown. Is Lancaster right to prioritise set piece (more particularly, the lineout) over the breakdown? I can think of a few times England have scored off the back of a strong lineout or through rolling mauls from lineouts (slightly different) but it's obviously tricky to point out examples of where England could have scored with a better breakdown, but didn't.
Looking at the fact that so many tries are scored off a low number of phases and especially turnover ball, I'd say that Lancaster's wrong not to select a traditional fetcher at openside, but maybe not so illogical to want an athletic six. For example a back row of Croft, Kvesic, Vunipola with the right second rows (Launchbury, Attwood?) actually looks pretty good to me.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Apparently Alex Lozowski is being targeted by the Italians.

 

[yaboyjj]

Apparently Alex Lozowski is being targeted by the Italians.

Makes sense on both sides really- Italian FH stocks are pretty poor (being generous) and Lozowski is unlikely to get a look in with England, what with Ford/Slade/Farrell more or less the same age.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Be interesting to see what that means for his club career.
Will he feel pressured into moving to one of the Italian clubs? His stock would drop (slightly) with English clubs as he'd take up a non-EQP spot in a matchday 23.