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

[TRF_Olyy]

That's simply not true, I've watched him take a handful this season.

Must've been after I checked, because I really remember that people were saying he never jumps and I thought he did so I went on the aviva stats and he had literally 0 lineout takes.


Edit:
Just checked the last 5 Chiefs games and he has 1 take from the 5.
This is only a lineouts won stat, though, I guess - he could've jumped but it was overthrown, or he was a dummy jumper or anything.
I can't see why he can't be an option - he's the same weight as Attwood so it's not a lifting issue

 

[Every Time Ref]

I suppose so, but Corbs' form has been absolure crap compared to Mullan who has been on fire.
If Corbs doesn't perform in the Warm Ups then I wouldn't think twice about dropping him.

I'd say 100% vs 100% I'd take Attwood every time, but Slaters been out for ages and Attwood has looked off since midway through the 6N so it's hard to judge atm.

Maybe you're right about Corbs, I just feel that even with his form off at present he's more likely than Mullan to have a serious impact at some point in the tournament, given either of them would likely be going as a squad/bench player. Would make it all slot easier if Corbs had a couple of stormer a in warm ups though.

Attwood's clearly not been 100% form for England recently, but he's definitely looking fetter for Bath. 3rd/4th second row spot could be one that's a straight shoutout in the warm up games.

I do think that the advantage of having one extra "real" lineout option is outweighed by having a stronger backrow overall.

Robshaw takes some too. I agree, 2 1/2 jumpers and another serious carrying threat in the back row is better than the World's Best Lineout and not enough gainline-breakers (our major deficiency at the moment) in open play. How many lineout said are there per game, compared to carries?

 

[ratsapprentice]

I can't see why he can't be an option - he's the same weight as Attwood so it's not a lifting issue

You don't need a million jumping options, three suffices for most teams, and Ewers not jumping simply frees him up to focus on battering people.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Completely agree - like i said, Ewers is pretty much my ideal 6, it's just that the England coaches seem to have lineout pretty high up their priorities for the 6.

 

[Raggs]

Robshaw isn't good enough to be a serious lineout option. Haskell + Robshaw gives enough options to be vaguely useful, but not amazing. Ewers rarely, if ever, goes up. The lineout take he did get btw, was a misthrow that he caught on the ground (90% sure I remember it). Until/unless we get an 8 that can compete at the lineout, Ewers at 6 is unlikely.

Itoje for 6 please.

Overall, I think England have created their own problems in the backrow. We need 2 carriers, a lineout option, and a breakdown guy. BV is a carrier, Robshaw is breakdown, and that leaves the 6 with a lot of pressure.

Wood becomes a better option at 6 when we have Youngs and Mako on the pitch, since they can more than cope with carrying duties.

 

[j'nuh]

Anyone reckon Lancaster is keeping Clark involved to **** with him? Give him the lingering hope of an England cap and crush his dreams every few months for three years.

You don't need a million jumping options, three suffices for most teams, and Ewers not jumping simply frees him up to focus on battering people.

Morgan's a semi-regular jumper for Gloucester, does it about as regularly as Kalamafoni after the locks. So he's another option (unless they go with Vunipola).

People also kind of neglect that lifters are important for quick lineout service too. As hench as he is, I reckon Ewers will do more there than the other flankers.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Anyone reckon Lancaster is keeping Clark involved to **** with him? Give him the lingering hope of an England cap and crush his dreams every few months for three years.

Team announcement:

"Number 4: Courney Lawes, Number 5: Joe Launchbury, Number 6: Ca....n Tom Wood come and collect his shirt"

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

If Clark wasn't a Leeds lad he wouldn't be in the England set up end of.

 

[Patchey]

Team announcement:

"Number 4: Courney Lawes, Number 5: Joe Launchbury, Number 6: Ca....n Tom Wood come and collect his shirt"

A delicious thought.

(Although really it should be 'Ca...n Maro Itoje come and collect the weight of English expectations')

 

[Peat]

Must've been after I checked, because I really remember that people were saying he never jumps and I thought he did so I went on the aviva stats and he had literally 0 lineout takes.


Edit:
Just checked the last 5 Chiefs games and he has 1 take from the 5.
This is only a lineouts won stat, though, I guess - he could've jumped but it was overthrown, or he was a dummy jumper or anything.
I can't see why he can't be an option - he's the same weight as Attwood so it's not a lifting issue

Depends if he gets the same spring up as Attwood. Helping a big man up on his way is very different to having to lift the stupid sod.

I mean, if his weight was the only issue, he's 6'4", of course he'd go up for lineouts. He doesn't, I think its fair to assume there's an issue.

I'm probably mad, but I keep wanting to see a team throw someone like George North up in a lineout. He's tall, he weighs nothing (comparatively) and he has really powerful legs. You could probably teach him to be a really good jumper, which frees your back-rows up for maximum violence. Sadly, England don't really have this option unless Devoto breaks through I guess.

 

[Peat]

I'm also biased and I'd take Attwood! Any neutrals care to weigh in ... ?

I'd want to see Slater international level before judging, but I felt let down by Attwood's 6N performances. Also, while midweek games are of dubious value, the last time I saw Slater and Attwood on the same pitch together, Slater looked comfortably the better player to me.

Scant evidence though, not enough to feel happy saying for sure. But at this point I think Slater might go on to have the better international career. Right now though? Hmm.

 

[TheSaffycen]

One man's "reputation" is another man's "big game experience" though. If we were talking 6 nations I'd agree with you, but for a World Cup I'll take the experienced international and key cog in a winning Lions tour any day, even if his form's a bit off.



I'm also biased and I'd take Attwood! Any neutrals care to weigh in ... ?

Attwood personally. His maul work is top notch and that will be needed against Wales and the Aussies, I have no idea what Slater will be like at intl level.
But if I was honest I would go for Kruis, outplayed Attwood and was probably MOTM v Wales with Robshaw. Then again he has the problem of being too much like Bury and Lawes

 

[Peat]

England head coach Stuart Lancaster believes the conundrum of where to play Sam Burgess may be solved by casting him in the role of "hybrid centre".

Uncapped rugby league convert Burgess has been included in Lancaster's 50-man training squad for the home World Cup with debate continuing to rage over what is his best position.

Bath have picked the 26-year-old at blindside flanker in recent weeks and he has responded by playing his best rugby of his six months in the new code, but England have previously stated that they view inside centre as his most natural home.

Lancaster has hinted at a softening of that position, however, by suggesting Burgess could operate in a similar capacity to Australia's outstanding openside flanker Michael Hooper.

"Sam is in a pretty unique situation. I can't think of another player who's played club rugby at Premiership level in the forwards and backs," Lancaster said.

"The only probable scenario I can equate it to is the way the Waratahs are playing Michael Hooper at the moment - he's playing almost as a hybrid centre.

"You look at the way they're using him in their games recently - he's so powerful and so dynamic. He could play centre or back row. And Sam's probably in that position.

"We're pretty open-minded. We certainly believe he can play in the centre."

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/r...t-for-hybrid-centre-role-20150520-gh69hr.html


*lights fuse and retires to a safe distance*

 

[ncurd]

Yeah but he was completely Unremarkable at center as opposed to flanker where he's continually impressed.

- - - Updated - - -

So the real question is what conundrum?

 

[nickdnz]

"Sam is in a pretty unique situation. I can't think of another player who's played club rugby at Premiership level in the forwards and backs," Lancaster said.

How about your assistant coach?...

Who turned into a marvelous England international...

 

[MrTea_32]

I'd like to see either Slade or Eastmond ar 12 but this is Lancaster so he'll probably go with burrell or twelvetrees.
Barritt offers great defence no attack.
Twelvetrees and burrell.shouldn't be in the final squad.
Burgess didn't perform at centre but he is improving in union every game and yes his best position is at 6 but at 12 I still.think he could offer more than the other 3, good attack, solid defence and be a good decoy runner so ford can unleash the other backs.
I'm not advocating him to be the England starting 12 I just think it's a better option than burrell or twelvetrees.

 

[LiRFCMatt]

I'd like to see either Slade or Eastmond ar 12 but this is Lancaster so he'll probably go with burrell or twelvetrees.
Barritt offers great defence no attack.
Twelvetrees and burrell.shouldn't be in the final squad.
Burgess didn't perform at centre but he is improving in union every game and yes his best position is at 6 but at 12 I still.think he could offer more than the other 3, good attack, solid defence and be a good decoy runner so ford can unleash the other backs.
I'm not advocating him to be the England starting 12 I just think it's a better option than burrell or twelvetrees.

If he goes with 36 it will be the biggest disappointment, considering the plethora of options available. Burrell shouldn't be there either.

Back to the Ewers point, my mates and I were just talking about how the more time goes on, the more we miss Ewers and realise he is exactly what we need in the England set up. Hopefully Lancaster will be having the same feelings and call him up soon... even if it is unlikely.

And it's disappointing not to see Wade included when Marland Yarde and Chris Ashton are there, Wade has improved a graet deal after all the 1 on 1 defence coaching and has proved himself time and time again as a world-class finisher. Ashton is a great finisher as well, but his defence is as useful as a chocolate teapot and Marland Yarde hasn't exactly set the Premiership alight.

If I'm being perfectly honest I'd replace the pair and bring in Wade and Lewington.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh! Also Easter over Waldrom is still grinding my gears, although it was expect.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Here is lancasters final squad

1) Marler, Vunipola
2) Hartley, Webber
3) Wilson, Cole, Brookes
4/5) Launchbury, Lawes, Kruis, Parling
6) Wood, Haskell
7) Robshaw, Clark
8) Easter, Vunipola
9) Wigglesworth, Care
10) Ford, Farrell, Myler
12) Barritt, Twelvetrees
13) Burrell, Joesph
11/14) Ashton, Strettle, May, Watson
15) Brown, Goode

 

[Crapspray]

So the real question is what conundrum?

The conundrum is that all of Lancaster's 12s are flawed and he's trying to find one that isn't. Since Burgess has played there at least once, he'll be thrown in as a desperate solution.

It's a problem of his own making. With Tuilagi now gone, the brilliant plan to base England's attack around one player who has been out for (effectively) two years is reaping what is sowed. Especially since he decided to use both Barritt and Burrell as poor-man's versions of Tuilagi, and leave England's attacking shape pretty much unchanged until this Six Nations.

The other reasoning may be the whole "big game experience". Burgess has won things and is determined to do so again. He might pick him in the 31 just to shoehorn him into the training camp and motivate the rest of the squad. Though him being parachuted in when not up to full speed would just as likely annoy everyone else as motivate them.

Personally, I don't think Burgess is ready for either position, and would be better off spending a whole pre-season with Bath. Pick him for the 2016 Six Nations; if he keeps up his current rate of development he'd justify selection then.

 

[Patchey]

Here is lancasters final squad

1) Marler, Vunipola
2) Hartley, Webber
3) Wilson, Cole, Brookes
4/5) Launchbury, Lawes, Kruis, Parling
6) Wood, Haskell
7) Robshaw, Clark
8) Easter, Vunipola
9) Wigglesworth, Care
10) Ford, Farrell, Myler
12) Barritt, Twelvetrees
13) Burrell, Joesph
11/14) Ashton, Strettle, May, Watson
15) Brown, Goode

Stop it. I have enough bad nights sleep as it is.