England Six Nations Squad 2012

[j'nuh]

Which of the young players are you talking about? Most of the team have gone that won 35-18 at Twickenham.

Youngs, Croft, Hartley have all probably gone backwards by varying amounts. Flood and Cole have hit bad pockets of form over the last year. Ashton seems unsettled and probably isn't playing as freely as he did in the past. Happy with Foden and Lawes though.

Bar Foden and Lawes, I wouldn't lose too much sleep if the rest I've mentioned were dropped from the XV, though I don't doubt they can recover their form.

 

[stus768]

Croft and youngs are big worries. Croft will probably still be picked, just for lineouts and there are not a lot of options apart from youngs.

 

[Saintjay]

Youngs, Croft, Hartley have all probably gone backwards by varying amounts. Flood and Cole have hit bad pockets of form over the last year. Ashton seems unsettled and probably isn't playing as freely as he did in the past. Happy with Foden and Lawes though.

Bar Foden and Lawes, I wouldn't lose too much sleep if the rest I've mentioned were dropped from the XV, though I don't doubt they can recover their form.

I think Youngs would not be first choice if Care had not been a tool. If your going on form you would pick Dickson.

Ashton is happy enough at being Ashton it looks like his move to Sarries will be confirmed in a week or so.

I am not sure you can blame form at the feet of MJ.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I think Youngs would not be first choice if Care had not been a tool.

Yup - We should be looking forward to 9. Care, 20. Dickson
Instead we're looking forward to Youngs starting at 9 every game and box kicking at 90deg every phase

 

[Daniel Richards]

Forgive me if I'm wrong the foundation of the new England squad the front row , not one of them started for their club in crucial pool matches this weekend . Is the castle built on sand ?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

In a word....yes.


I'd have Nick Wood and Paul Doran-Jones in the squad (for Marler and Wilson), and have both of them starting too...

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Why does Wilson seeem to have this inherent right to always be in the EPS!? He's not even playing much for Bath

 

[stus768]

Forgive me if I'm wrong the foundation of the new England squad the front row , not one of them started for their club in crucial pool matches this weekend . Is the castle built on sand ?

Ha- directly from Stephen Jones' column in the Times

 

[jack6161]

Well quite frankly I am not basing this on one Heineiken cup match, but overall I do not think Turnet-Hall or Maler should not be in the EPS. Young players like Youngs, Ashton etc have not gone backwards at all, that is just people looking for ways to criticise Lancaster's choices.

 

[j'nuh]

Forgive me if I'm wrong the foundation of the new England squad the front row , not one of them started for their club in crucial pool matches this weekend . Is the castle built on sand ?

Hartley did. And no, most of these players didn't start because strong teams rotate their front row regularly. There are form worries over the front row, particularly at 1, and Wood should have definitely been picked, but I wouldn't be too concerned about players not starting one weekend.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Young players like Youngs, Ashton etc have not gone backwards at all

Ashton hasn't, but you can't say Youngs hasn't.
Back when we beat Australia twice Youngs looked like one of the most promising/exciting young 9s going (with Genia).
Now he can't pass, can't kick and doesn't run well.

He's turning more and more into Harry Ellis.

 

[Saintjay]

Looking at the front rows across the board, or the potential front rows. I know teams have good individuals but I am trying to work out if anyone has a destroy all in there path front row. Personaly I can't see any and think England should be able to hold there own and won't get smashed. Again I do think given the way scrums are these days much of it will be down to the ref's decision making.

Apart from prehaps France can England hold there own against the rest? I don't know.

 

[jack6161]

Ashton hasn't, but you can't say Youngs hasn't.
Back when we beat Australia twice Youngs looked like one of the most promising/exciting young 9s going (with Genia).
Now he can't pass, can't kick and doesn't run well.

He's turning more and more into Harry Ellis.

I don't think he has gone back, but I would still pick Care and Dickinson over him. And I would of picked Care over him back than anyway, but that is just personal preference.

 

[Peat]

Forgive me if I'm wrong the foundation of the new England squad the front row , not one of them started for their club in crucial pool matches this weekend . Is the castle built on sand ?

You're wrong

The front row is the most heavily rotated area of the pitch these days and the non-selection of players there for one-off games is a non-story.

Ashton hasn't, but you can't say Youngs hasn't.
Back when we beat Australia twice Youngs looked like one of the most promising/exciting young 9s going (with Genia).
Now he can't pass, can't kick and doesn't run well.

He's turning more and more into Harry Ellis.

He couldn't pass or kick then either! And, if you get a chance to watch the highlights, watch Youngs' work in creating Murphy's try this weekend. It was a beautiful pass. I think his passing has come on a fair amount but the big difference is that summer Youngs was playing behind a dominant pack and now he's routinely playing behind crap. There are very, very few scrum-halves who look as good in those situations. Care is horrendous behind a pack with slow ball, we've all seen it.

The real problem is the decision making - in that Youngs (and to an extent Care) have both abdicated the process to the coaching team upstairs. They'll shoot when they see a gap, but they're rarely changing what happens at the base depending on what's happening, and they don't always pick the right option when moving from a ruck. There's a good article on the Telegraph that touches on this - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...ve-given-way-to-gym-conditioned-athletes.html - and I'll quote the most relevant part here:

‘‘I’ve lost count of the number of times coaches have complained to me that players aren’t decision makers while showing me their 84-page play book. " - Nigel Redman

This is why I am increasingly desperate for Quins to do well, as they seem to be the team in the AP most likely to spark a revolution that recognises the players have to play what they see, as that's what they appear to be doing.

As for Ashton, he may not have gone backwards, but the weaknesses in his game have been exposed - and there are quite a lot of them.

 

[Aedaphon]

Whilst i agree that Turner-Hall is at best an okay saxons bench player and should not be in the EPS 32. marler is another matter he won a scrummaging penalty around the 69 minuet mark and carried over the gain line and made a fair few tackles, nick wood scrummaged averagely against a traditionaly weak scrummager (johnson) and was completely drained after 60 mins. at the age of 21 marler looked imo more effective during that game then nick wood. I dont understand why so many people think marler is so bad and should not be in the EPS I agree that marler will probably struggle at the start of his full international carrier (against the like of adam jones and mike ross) but it is pretty clear imo that he has massive potential and should be blooded sooner rather then later. Marler certainly looks a lot more promesing then Corbisiero atm imo. Also was it just me or was matt hooper really quite inpressive in that game, if only he could tackle a little stronger.

Agreed, it's a shame he's 26, unless he has an absolute stunner next season he's unlikely to get picked up by England for the Saxons or EPS <_<

 

[eot345]

wow Matt hopper is 26 i thought he was like 21-22 that sucks i watched him against quins last game against glouster several weeks ago and lesley vainacolo terrorised him. As for this whole front row debate if it were up to me: wilson would be dropped to the saxons for nick wood and Corbisiero into the saxons for PDJ the starting front row would be 1.Wood 2. Hartley 3.Cole then marler would come on at 60 minuets as an impact sub
that front row with lawes and attwood behind them should not be pushed back to easily by anyone. although the sad thing is that England are lacking any truely awesome scrummaging props at the moment, i would have been tempted to but dan cole on the fringes of that catagory except that he is a little off form at the moment

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Can anyone tell me whether Attwood has any sort of lineout ability? My feelings say no?

Which basically means, with current injuries and current EPS, either Croft should play second row (stupid), or robshaw should be moved to 7, croft in at 6, and wood onto bench. (stupid. probably less stupid than croft at lock though)

given current injuries and other problems, we could do worse than 4) palmer 5) attwood 6) croft 7) robshaw 8) morgan. 19) Wood. Still hate having 2 6's starting though. It's arguably the lesser of two evils however

I think the thing about Marler is we either decide that he can scrummage, or he can't. If we've decided that he can't, then it doesn't make sense having him in the match day squad at all. because penalties that can decide the game continue to occur late in the game, so thers little point having him as an 'impact' sub if the impact is going to be negative. we know that a front row of corbisiero hartley and cole can scrummage, even when out of form, so lets stick with that for now. I don't personally think Marlers scrummaging is that bad, my point is just that the damage isn't really limited by having a 'weak' scrummager on the bench as opposed to starting. Also, Stevens gave away an alarming number of penalties during the world cup so unless thats sorted out hes not exactly a more reliable guy than marler.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Stevens was mainly used as a loosehead during the World Cup, don't forget. His main position is tighthead, but he can play 1, just not as well.


Based on current form I think that we should see:
6. Robshaw
7. Wood/Clark (depending on Woods foot)
8. Morgan

19. Dowson/Clark

If Palmer is starting then Croft isn't as much a necessity, and his form certainly doesn't warrant a starting shirt.

I don't know whether Lawes would be fit or not, but if not then Palmer/Attwood/Parling is not a bad selection. Parling has come back from injury without missing a beat, and is on good form.
Botha played OK for Sarries earlier, but I wouldn't use him (however I expect him and Palmer to be starting locks, with either Attwood or Parling on the bench).



My squad for Scotland would be:

1. Corbisiero
2. Hartley
3. Cole
4. Palmer
5. Parling
6. Robshaw
7. Wood
8. Morgan
9. Dickson
10. Hodgson
11. Sharples
12. Barritt
13. Farrell
14. Sharples
15. Foden

16. Webber
17. Stevens
18. Attwood
19. Clark
20. Simpson
21. Trinder
22. Brown

It's a massive change up from the World Cup starting XV, and the players that remain aren't massively experienced internationally, but &*^$ it, you don't get experience watching from the stands.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Completely agree with your form choices for the backrow olyy, but Palmer is no lineout specialist and I really think we could do with one of those. Croft does not deserve to be in the matchday 22, but his running of the lineout could be good. in robshaw,palmer, attwood etc, we have people who can all jump as well as the next guy, but none of them are famed for their lineout running.

I was really impressed with Clark at the weekend, and I agree that he could cover 7 quite well (he's usually a blindside right?) but I can't really see him being given a starting spot at 6. Also I keep forgetting that Dowson exists.Not entirely sure if that changes anything however.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Palmer is a lineout specialist, isn't he?
Our lineout improved a LOT when he came in to the squad for Borthwick, and always goes pretty well when he's on the pitch.
Croft runs it when he isn't there, but Palmer is the one who runs it normally.