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

[Duck a l'Orange]

A test where he didn't play at 12 as evidence of how he'd go at 12?

Haha, no
A test where he played with a creative playmaker, i.e. Ford rather than Farrell, and was used cleverly as a half-decent option that couldn't just be ignored by the defence.
I don't see the need to make a case for him at 12, as that's where he has played the most for England anyway, I'm just trying to challenge the perception that if we pick Barritt, the defence can ignore him and mark other players more heavily.

 

[Peat]

Haha, no
A test where he played with a creative playmaker, i.e. Ford rather than Farrell, and was used cleverly as a half-decent option that couldn't just be ignored by the defence.
I don't see the need to make a case for him at 12, as that's where he has played the most for England anyway, I'm just trying to challenge the perception that if we pick Barritt, the defence can ignore him and mark other players more heavily.

Afraid to say I can't agree with that.

He's always looked better at 13 than he has at 12. The space suits him. At 12, he seems to lack the power and agility to make marked impressions on heavy traffic. So, if the argument is Ford will create circumstances which can gloss over that, I think you need proof of the actual circumstances i.e. Ford 10 Barritt 12 rather than Ford 10 Barritt 13.

I am open to that argument though - I certainly couldn't rule it out without seeing it. I am even open to the idea Barritt's just a better attacker than I give him credit for, although obviously I haven't seen it yet.

But what I am not open to is people saying "Barritt's bad in attack but it won't matter because Joseph" which is what my post was solely focused on.

 

[Tony Manx]

Barritt always been my choice!!!

 

[Duck a l'Orange]

Afraid to say I can't agree with that.

He's always looked better at 13 than he has at 12. The space suits him. At 12, he seems to lack the power and agility to make marked impressions on heavy traffic. So, if the argument is Ford will create circumstances which can gloss over that, I think you need proof of the actual circumstances i.e. Ford 10 Barritt 12 rather than Ford 10 Barritt 13.

I am open to that argument though - I certainly couldn't rule it out without seeing it. I am even open to the idea Barritt's just a better attacker than I give him credit for, although obviously I haven't seen it yet.

But what I am not open to is people saying "Barritt's bad in attack but it won't matter because Joseph" which is what my post was solely focused on.

Ah, and I took it as "Barritt is bad and Joseph can't work without space being made inside", rather than a combination of that and "actually Barritt will make some space".

I suppose I mean that although Barritt can't have the effect that Tuilagi might in the limited space at 12 (a point I hadn't considered, thanks), the threat is still there and has to be covered by the defence, and if used cleverly by Ford should be enough that it's not a disadvantage that rules out Barritt as an option totally- though I expect you agree with that anyway.

 

[Peat]

To clarify -

I think the argument that "Barritt is bad in attack but it doesn't because Joseph" is a bad argument regardless of whether you actually think he's bad and that's what I as trying to get across.


I do, independently of that, think Barritt's been very bad and a real problem for us, but he's also been part of a system and maybe a new system will get him working. I am dubious, as his athleticism is a big limiting factor but as you say, you can't not mark him at all (as NZ found out for his try against them) and so maybe it will work. You could also use big powerful wingers coming inside to cut lines off of Ford to help as well, although we're rather short of those.

 

[Duck a l'Orange]

To clarify -
You could also use big powerful wingers coming inside to cut lines off of Ford to help as well, although we're rather short of those.

To that end, I thought that Marland Yarde was excellent when I watched him yesterday at Kingston Park, took his try well and came in for a lot of work off his wing. He looked good under the high ball too, in really tricky wind.

 

[McTallshort]

You have to wonder how Barritt every made it as a pro rugby player......

How many teams have won the WC playing open expansive rugby? NZ 87? Possibly, Aus 91? no, SA 95? No, Aus 99 absolutly not, England 2003? Not really given how they could play, SA 2007? big pack with big kicks, NZ 11? see England 2003.

You win WC by making less mistakes than the other teams and having a good system based on a good kicking game and excellent defense. Barritt fits perfectly into that mould and SL knows it. Given how inconsistant 36 is who else is there?

 

[Mumbles119]

What are Geraghty's England chances now?

Given that he has been playing a fair bit at 12 with a resurgent London Irish team. Has had some consistent good form. Plus, he attended the England 6 Nations training camps too.

Lancaster portrays himself as someone who rewards form (I know this doesn't always appear to be case) so may be his bolter choice.

 

[McTallshort]

There is no chance

 

[Patchey]

What are Geraghty's England chances now?

Given that he has been playing a fair bit at 12 with a resurgent London Irish team. Has had some consistent good form. Plus, he attended the England 6 Nations training camps too.

Lancaster portrays himself as someone who rewards form (I know this doesn't always appear to be case) so may be his bolter choice.

It would be a weird one for sure. I mean I guess in theory he's in contention based on what you've said, but I don't think theres a chance.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

You have to wonder how Barritt every made it as a pro rugby player......

How many teams have won the WC playing open expansive rugby? NZ 87? Possibly, Aus 91? no, SA 95? No, Aus 99 absolutly not, England 2003? Not really given how they could play, SA 2007? big pack with big kicks, NZ 11? see England 2003.

You win WC by making less mistakes than the other teams and having a good system based on a good kicking game and excellent defense. Barritt fits perfectly into that mould and SL knows it. Given how inconsistant 36 is who else is there?

Yeah but teams that have done well have always had players that break the gain line which Barret doesn't.

Apart from tackling Barrett is so average it's unbelievable but he might be our best option available.

I do think we might see slade and Farrell at 12 during the warm up games.

 

[chippieolamus]

What are Geraghty's England chances now?

To actually play? Zero. In the original 45 man squad? Very low.

 

[LiRFCMatt]

I've actually heard a few guys talking about Geraghty being included... Not as far fetched as it seems at first.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Have I had a pretty big knock to the head or are people actually discussing Shane bloody Geraghty as a potential England player?

 

[yaboyjj]

Have I had a pretty big knock to the head or are people actually discussing Shane bloody Geraghty as a potential England player?

Desperate times call for desperate measures.... I've heard Jordan Turner-Hall is back from injury soon btw....... just saying

 

[Peat]

Desperate times call for desperate measures.... I've heard Jordan Turner-Hall is back from injury soon btw....... just saying

I'm pretty sure its an internet rule that when people talk about JTH in an England context, it means serious conversation is over.

And as such I'm gonna say lets play Ben Morgan there.

 

[Patchey]

i'm pretty sure its an internet rule that when people talk about jth in an harlequins context, it means serious conversation is over.

And as such i'm gonna say lets play ben morgan there.

ftfy

 

[LiRFCMatt]

Have I had a pretty big knock to the head or are people actually discussing Shane bloody Geraghty as a potential England player?

It does feel a little bit like 2007 again, but he is a good player. I personally wouldn't include him, but he's pretty versatile, still only 28, and probably better than 36.

 

[Maverick1987]

It does feel a little bit like 2007 again, but he is a good player. I personally wouldn't include him, but he's pretty versatile, still only 28, and probably better than 36.

Yeh you have a point .... Lol

Just on a side note how good do you guys think Tom Francis is ? Do we really want to allow him to walk away and play for Wales ?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

He had that excellent game vs Saints but since then hasn't done much since.
Very promising, and will likely be a good player - don't want him to go to Wales but he wouldn't make our RWC squad and would theirs (would be hard pressed to make the training squad, if he declared, considering how well Brookes and Thomas are coming along).