England Post-WC discussion

[TRF_Olyy]

Yeah, i don't see the need for three specialist 8s.
Haskell can cover in an emergency - so could potential inclusions Ewers and Clifford (and Beaumont).

The only justification i can see is that Binny and Benny are relatively injury prone.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Theres another rumour going around of a quite public argument between some of the coaches and Dave Attwood. Its supoosedly is about the way he was wanting to play the game (big tackles on the fringes, big hard carries in traffic etc the way he plays for bath) yet the coaches did want that and were having a go at him. Again it may just be bull, but if (big IF) it is true and he was dropped for not adapting his game...then it concerns me alot.

You have a big powerful guy who always puts in strong performances in for his club with a specific game. Big Scrummager, Big tackling on the fringes. Hard carrying in the fringes. Basically a power game and lineout man.

Now he has been asked to play a totally different game to what he is used to and then been ceremoniously dumped because he couldn't do that. I find this crazy.

If you want players to play a certain way...pick the right players to play that game!!! Don't pick players who don't play that style and try to convert them. Its very rare that it comes off.

You wouldn't ask Lawes to perform the same style for his club that Attwood does.

It annoys me. And it makes me wonder what they have been trying to ask Kvesic, and some others to do in the squad get togethers.

If that's right, that makes his omission doubly barmy as its just stupidity overlaying the lack of judgement in not selecting him in the squad in the first place. It was patently obvious to most of us keyboard warriors that at least one of our locks had to be of his ilk. I do sometimes wonder if Rowntree needs the concussion protocols as he seems to have forgotten the value of the big hard nut lock who does the grunt work despite the years he spent with Johnson's head stuck up his arse.

Quite bizarre. I'm generally more evolution than revolution, but who can have confidence in the management team. Seriously?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

If that's right, that makes his omission doubly barmy as its just stupidity overlaying the lack of judgement in not selecting him in the squad in the first place. It was patently obvious to most of us keyboard warriors that at least one of our locks had to be of his ilk. I do sometimes wonder if Rowntree needs the concussion protocols as he seems to have forgotten the value of the big hard nut lock who does the grunt work despite the years he spent with Johnson's head stuck up his arse.

Quite bizarre. I'm generally more evolution than revolution, but who can have confidence in the management team. Seriously?

I trust Catt but none of the others. Even then I doubt Catt is the best out there. What I'd really like to know was just how involved Lancaster was in all this. If we was mostly letting his subordinates decide on who they wanted and then just had the final call, that puts it in a slightly different light to if he was right in there championing certain players/play styles.

 

[Mattybuck]

But he will then be equally to blame as he has not taken control of the situation and allowed poor selection to be made and bad tactics adopted.

Whichever way SL is heavily to blame.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Agreed. A leader's job is to have a clear vision and then choose the right team under him to deliver it. Doesn't matter whether you're talking rugby, Tesco or politics.

Sadly SL seems to have had neither.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Re Attwood there's two separate issues as far as I can see.. It's not unusual for a coach to choose a specific role for a player which the player needs to accommodate himself to and adapt to...Attwood needs to do as asked.

On the other hand that doesn't make the judgement of the coach right or sensible, so if a public argument as blown up then it's telling because it speaks of the players lack of confidence in the coach.

Re. Easter: I don't particularly want to see him play much more for England but his form under Johnson shouldn't rule him out. I remember Mike Brown underwhelming under Johnson and we wanted rid of him in favour of Foden. Yet he came back a different player under Lancaster and became one of the worlds best fullbacks.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Where did this info about Attwood come from?

 

[Mattybuck]

Easter form is not the problem. He has deserved his place, but we need to move on and no point taking him along for a ride

 

[Maverick1987]

Easter form is not the problem. He has deserved his place, but we need to move on and no point taking him along for a ride

Only thing is I'd like to see us become the best team in Europe before we talk about being the best team in the world . The short term goal should be win the 6N . If in February Easter is the right person for the job he should be picked ....

 

[Peat]

Only thing is I'd like to see us become the best team in Europe before we talk about being the best team in the world . The short term goal should be win the 6N . If in February Easter is the right person for the job he should be picked ....

I completely agree but feel things are in a fine mess if Easter is the right person.

If that's right, that makes his omission doubly barmy as its just stupidity overlaying the lack of judgement in not selecting him in the squad in the first place. It was patently obvious to most of us keyboard warriors that at least one of our locks had to be of his ilk. I do sometimes wonder if Rowntree needs the concussion protocols as he seems to have forgotten the value of the big hard nut lock who does the grunt work despite the years he spent with Johnson's head stuck up his arse.

Quite bizarre. I'm generally more evolution than revolution, but who can have confidence in the management team. Seriously?

What makes you think Rowntree was driving that decision? I mean, maybe he was, but who do you think is more likely to be behind the idea that all locks should be as comfortable in the loose as a blindside flanker in that big 13 man defensive line?

 

[McTallshort]

Claws out for Faz snr there Peat?

 

[Maverick1987]

I completely agree but feel things are in a fine mess if Easter is the right person.



What makes you think Rowntree was driving that decision? I mean, maybe he was, but who do you think is more likely to be behind the idea that all locks should be as comfortable in the loose as a blindside flanker in that big 13 man defensive line?

If Billy is injured and Ben isn't in form I wouldn't be sad to see Easter start the 6N . Think I'd rather Easter than Waldrom . Although I'd like to see Beaumont have a chance there's likely to be a few changes so having an old head there wouldn't be a bad thing

 

[Peat]

Claws out for Faz snr there Peat?

You know me too well! I have no evidence for this theory btw, but then I'd suggest there's no evidence the other way for Rowntree being the driving force. Just makes sense to me that if forwards were being picked on their ability in the defensive line rather than the set-piece, then it's probably the defence coach calling the shots...

If Billy is injured and Ben isn't in form I wouldn't be sad to see Easter start the 6N . Think I'd rather Easter than Waldrom . Although I'd like to see Beaumont have a chance there's likely to be a few changes so having an old head there wouldn't be a bad thing

I would describe that scenario as a fine old mess I idly wonder whether throwing in Ewers to 8 might be an option, I forget how much he's played there.

- - - Updated - - -

Claws out for Faz snr there Peat?

You know me too well! I have no evidence for this theory btw, but then I'd suggest there's no evidence the other way for Rowntree being the driving force. Just makes sense to me that if forwards were being picked on their ability in the defensive line rather than the set-piece, then it's probably the defence coach calling the shots...

If Billy is injured and Ben isn't in form I wouldn't be sad to see Easter start the 6N . Think I'd rather Easter than Waldrom . Although I'd like to see Beaumont have a chance there's likely to be a few changes so having an old head there wouldn't be a bad thing

I would describe that scenario as a fine old mess I idly wonder whether throwing in Ewers to 8 might be an option, I forget how much he's played there.

 

[McTallshort]

You know me too well! I have no evidence for this theory btw, but then I'd suggest there's no evidence the other way for Rowntree being the driving force. Just makes sense to me that if forwards were being picked on their ability in the defensive line rather than the set-piece, then it's probably the defence coach calling the shots...



I would describe that scenario as a fine old mess I idly wonder whether throwing in Ewers to 8 might be an option, I forget how much he's played there.

- - - Updated - - -



You know me too well! I have no evidence for this theory btw, but then I'd suggest there's no evidence the other way for Rowntree being the driving force. Just makes sense to me that if forwards were being picked on their ability in the defensive line rather than the set-piece, then it's probably the defence coach calling the shots...



I would describe that scenario as a fine old mess I idly wonder whether throwing in Ewers to 8 might be an option, I forget how much he's played there.

One look at the backline against Wales shows that.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I'm pretty sure Ewers only moved to Blindside fulltime last season - before that was mostly an 8.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Ewers is capable of playing 8, played most of his breakthrough season there, didn't he?

Can also cover lock (in the same way that Easter can, anyway).

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

We need Easter in the squad if we play 2 new flankers.

So 6 ewers, 7 kvesic 8 Easter works as he provides lots of experience.

If we end up with wood or robshaw in the back row still (please no) then Morgan would be fine at 8.

On a separate note after watching the satires game, who played better kvesic or Fraser?

I see Clifford is starting at 6 for quins.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Why, though?
These are all professional players, there will be other experienced players around them/leading them. If they need Easter to tell them where to stand and what to do then they shouldn't be there in the first place.

Like Peat said, if Easter is the best choice then we should probably pick him, but we shouldn't just pick him because he's old.

 

[Peat]

An old warhorse who can see what's going on and give the younger guys a bit of a nudge is no bad thing - particularly in a centre partnership - but it's not a must.

I appreciate it's the whole point of this thread, but there's an awful lot of speculation going on about where we'll be in three months or so, a level that doesn't make sense to me. There's about 6 or 7 guys you could chuck the England shirt to with reasonable expectations - who'll be fit? In form? Who's the flankers gonna be? What's our style gonna be? Who's our coach gonna be? So many questions. I couldn't guess at a XV. I could pick my own, but it would probably end up making no sense down the line.

For Nick Easter to be the correct choice, I think that would mean injuries to better players, an inexperienced pack/team needing some old heads, and either a very quick pair of flankers or a very attritional style. I think we're dealing with quite a string of conditions here and don't see it happening. We could do worse I guess, but it wouldn't be ideal.

I have a lot of time for the idea of Ewers at 8 and Croft/Itoje at 6.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I have a lot of time for the idea of Ewers at 8 and Croft/Itoje at 6.

I know I prefer him at 6 (if only because I like that style of abrasive blindside) but I've said before that I think of him as being reasonably comparable to Alberts, in his ability to play 8 or 6.

The premiership website (which I generally find to be accurate) is listing Dave as 128kg, that's 2kg heavier than Billy Vunipola.