England Rugby 2018/19 Thread

[TRF_Olyy]

He's just trying to fit in with the Ackermanns

 

[ratsapprentice]

I mean.... some fuckers just don't learn, do they?!

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

OMG Danny why oh why oh why.
https://www.gloucestershirelive.co....s/gloucester-rugby-star-signing-danny-1902500

Obviously innocent till proven anything else but Glous statement isn't a positive sign of support.

Welp... it was nice while it lasted.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

He won't need Ben Stokes' lawyer to get him off.

All he'll have to do is show a video of his defence and any jury will be convinced that he's not capable of the rough stuff.

 

[Which Tyler]

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Knew it, he can't help himself. ******* idiot

 

[Reiser99]

The fact that he has been remanded and not released pending charges etc...also adds to the seriousness of it.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Ashton now could face ban for punching a Castres player... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/45246509

To think people actually ask why the likes of Ashton and Cipriani struggle to get back into the England setup, it's because they are ******* idiots who seem to determined to ruin their chances the second they get them. This self-destructive attitude is just pathetic for professional sportsmen.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

While we endlessly debate our best back row combinations, call for Hartley and Cole to be dropped, wonder if Mako's scrummaging is up to it and ponder which of our 4 "world class" locks should play this week, the ABs have yet again demonstrated how much they value continuity, nous and experience up front. From Saturday's match:

Read 110 caps
Whitelock 100
Franks 99
Retallick 69
Cane 56
Moody 35
Taylor 33
Squire 18

Cane's the baby at 26, Squire, Taylor and Retallick 27, Moody & Whitelock 29, Franks 30 and somehow Read is only 32.

Think Mealamu, Woodcock and McCaw before them. Sure they're well looked after, but it's not all about lung capacity and bounce times. Food for thought.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

While we endlessly debate our best back row combinations, call for Hartley and Cole to be dropped, wonder if Mako's scrummaging is up to it and ponder which of our 4 "world class" locks should play this week, the ABs have yet again demonstrated how much they value continuity, nous and experience up front. From Saturday's match:

Read 110 caps
Whitelock 100
Franks 99
Retallick 69
Cane 56
Moody 35
Taylor 33
Squire 18

Cane's the baby at 26, Squire, Taylor and Retallick 27, Moody & Whitelock 29, Franks 30 and somehow Read is only 32.

Think Mealamu, Woodcock and McCaw before them. Sure they're well looked after, but it's not all about lung capacity and bounce times. Food for thought.

The difference is the ABs identify talent early and throw them in as soon as they can. If the incumbent isn't good enough to keep them out, tough. Those players then get many caps because others can't displace them. With England we have players with plenty of caps but it's arguable as to whether they are actually better than the alternatives. Also the way we hammer players means it becomes a rarity for a player to get a prolonged period of international caps due to injuries. The back row in particular, there is little case that can be made for giving the likes of Robshaw and Haskell caps beyond the fact they already have them. Based on the SA games, I'd say Robshaw is a fantastic player in the wet when the game is slow but any fast game and he is quickly shown to be a liability. In all the Lancaster years and a large chunk of the Jones years we didn't even look at an alternative, it was Robshaw every time. Now thanks to injury, we have been able to see the likes of Curry and Underhill, who I think would be our best balance 6-7 pairing.

 

[NickBD]

Hartley returning for Saints this weekend. If he passes the test he'll be straight back in the England squad. If he plays even just below average I think he's back in to start for England. Farrell didn't exactly inspire confidence as captain on tour and I don't think George took his chance as hooker either.

 

[BPM]

The difference is the ABs identify talent early and throw them in as soon as they can. If the incumbent isn't good enough to keep them out, tough. Those players then get many caps because others can't displace them. With England we have players with plenty of caps but it's arguable as to whether they are actually better than the alternatives. Also the way we hammer players means it becomes a rarity for a player to get a prolonged period of international caps due to injuries. The back row in particular, there is little case that can be made for giving the likes of Robshaw and Haskell caps beyond the fact they already have them. Based on the SA games, I'd say Robshaw is a fantastic player in the wet when the game is slow but any fast game and he is quickly shown to be a liability. In all the Lancaster years and a large chunk of the Jones years we didn't even look at an alternative, it was Robshaw every time. Now thanks to injury, we have been able to see the likes of Curry and Underhill, who I think would be our best balance 6-7 pairing.

I don't disagree with any of the points you've made here, but I'd argue that there weren't a great deal of alternatives to Robshaw and Haskell under Lancaster's tenure apart from Tom Wood who also saw plenty of game time despite being a shadow of the player he was prior to his foot injury.

As I recall, the other go-to options for Lancaster at the time were the likes of Tom Johnson and Phil Dowson. Good club players but somewhat shy of test class.

Injury really robbed us of the best 6 and 7 we had in Croft and Rees both of whom might have been our own centurions in other circumstances.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Now thanks to injury, we have been able to see the likes of Curry and Underhill, who I think would be our best balance 6-7 pairing.

From the breakdown point of view i'd agree. But with Binny at 8 that would limit our options at the lineout, without a third jumping option, which is why I think Shields will be picked in the November internationals and six nations at 6 with Curry/Underhill to compete for the 7 spot. We saw how Wallabies lineout is hindered now with only 3. Granted v th best lineout in the ABs.

Hartley's throwing in at the lineout and leadership were sorely missed. So I expect him to come straight back.

 

[Scotty]

I think if billy is fit then Simmonds should be in the 20 shirt not hughes as hughes never has an impact off the bench where as Simmonds brings real pace to the game and adds something different plus has hell of a workrate, that game where he put 24 tackles in 1 game for england. I just think hughes needs to show some real club form before getting back as bolted on for england.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I think if billy is fit then Simmonds should be in the 20 shirt not hughes as hughes never has an impact off the bench where as Simmonds brings real pace to the game and adds something different plus has hell of a workrate, that game where he put 24 tackles in 1 game for england. I just think hughes needs to show some real club form before getting back as bolted on for england.

That's a big if.

If Simmonds comes on at 8 to up the pace for the last 20 minutes that's one thing. But entirely different kettle of fish if he has to come on early like he did, unsucessfully, against France. At the moment Binny has to be considered injury prone so not having an out and out 8 on the bench is an unnecessary risk. A fit Hughes is fine, Morgan might be better.

 

[Scotty]

That's a big if.

If Simmonds comes on at 8 to up the pace for the last 20 minutes that's one thing. But entirely different kettle of fish if he has to come on early like he did, unsucessfully, against France. At the moment Binny has to be considered injury prone so not having an out and out 8 on the bench is an unnecessary risk. A fit Hughes is fine, Morgan might be better.

With ross moriarty leaving Gloucester maybe Ackerman will play 6 and morgan gets alot of game time at 8 to make a claim. And i agree a v good option

I get your point but simmonds covers all across the back row and does play 8 week in week out, just doesnt have the size we expect from an international no 8.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

From the breakdown point of view i'd agree. But with Binny at 8 that would limit our options at the lineout, without a third jumping option, which is why I think Shields will be picked in the November internationals and six nations at 6 with Curry/Underhill to compete for the 7 spot. We saw how Wallabies lineout is hindered now with only 3. Granted v th best lineout in the ABs.

Hartley's throwing in at the lineout and leadership were sorely missed. So I expect him to come straight back.

Why can't Curry and Underhill jump?
They both do for club, the curries are two of our main lineout targets.

People's obsession with having a lineout specialist in the backrow is why we got lumbered with shithouses like Tom wood for so long.

4 targets, 2 of them specialists, is more than enough.

 

[Which Tyler]

Why can't Curry and Underhill jump?
They both do for club, the curries are two of our main lineout targets.

People's obsession with having a lineout specialist in the backrow is why we got lumbered with shithouses like Tom wood for so long.

4 targets, 2 of them specialists, is more than enough.

Blame Tom Croft - same way you can blame St Jonny for the wankfest over Farrell for not taking a step backwards in defence and having an ice-man temprament

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Why can't Curry and Underhill jump?
They both do for club, the curries are two of our main lineout targets.

People's obsession with having a lineout specialist in the backrow is why we got lumbered with shithouses like Tom wood for so long.

4 targets, 2 of them specialists, is more than enough.

I didn't say they couldn't jump. But neither have the longest leavers against the 6 foot 4 plus back row forwards or if they are up against the Giraffes of test rugby. Look at Hooper trying to outjump Retallick on Saturday was embarrassing. I don't see Pocock much of an option either for the Wallabies.

Personally I like having at least one of the back row with a good line out ability and preferably over 6" 3, which neither Curry or Underhill are. I get that both Curry and Underhill can be lifted or can be lifters as well for Maro and other. Binny i've never seen jump or lifted at a lineout. Probably not quick enough off the grounds and being 125kgs plus doesn't help either.

 

[Mr Ruggleby]

I didn't say they couldn't jump. But neither have the longest leavers against the 6 foot 4 plus back row forwards or if they are up against the Giraffes of test rugby. Look at Hooper trying to outjump Retallick on Saturday was embarrassing. I don't see Pocock much of an option either for the Wallabies.

Personally I like having at least one of the back row with a good line out ability and preferably over 6" 3, which neither Curry or Underhill are. I get that both Curry and Underhill can be lifted or can be lifters as well for Maro and other. Binny i've never seen jump or lifted at a lineout. Probably not quick enough off the grounds and being 125kgs plus doesn't help either.

Pigs may fly!