England Six Nations squad 2022

[Vieux Talonneur]

Ewells must be pulling up trees in training

Just call him Eunice.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Lawes, Curry, Dombrandt back row v Wales?

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Lawes, Curry, Dombrandt back row v Wales?

Would love it. Have visions of Curry, lawes and ludlam with Sim and Dom on the bench tho

 

[higgik]

Lawes, Curry, Dombrandt back row v Wales?

Reminds me a lot of Hill, Back and Dallaglio.
A grafter that keeps annoying with their ability to be always there.
An 'idiot' that is not frightened to putting their head in where it hurts
A continuity player, who wouldn't be out of place in a backline.
I always remember Dayglo in the sevens world cup, storming around everywhere.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Reminds me a lot of Hill, Back and Dallaglio.
A grafter that keeps annoying with their ability to be always there.
An 'idiot' that is not frightened to putting their head in where it hurts
A continuity player, who wouldn't be out of place in a backline.
I always remember Dayglo in the sevens world cup, storming around everywhere.

 

[TW27BA]

The Ruck are suggesting Lawes and Itoje, with Ludlum, Curry and Dombrandt in the back row against Wales.
They also suggest Youngs back at s/h

Fortunately its only an opinion so far.

 

[Scotty]

The Ruck are suggesting Lawes and Itoje, with Ludlum, Curry and Dombrandt in the back row against Wales.
They also suggest Youngs back at s/h

Fortunately its only an opinion so far.

Ludlam is a mistake IMO, he's good but i dont think he's great tbh. I dont think he brings that much, its great lawes id back though.

Youngs is expected and the right choice out of Youngs and Randall. My issue isnt with youngs starting, its that against Wales you cant risk inexperienced 9 starting and we have 115 caps and 3 caps. Youngs is right to start because no one else is anywhere near experienced. I just hope to god Randall gets at least 20 min off the bench.

 

[Reiser99]

Youngs is expected and the right choice out of Youngs and Randall. My issue isnt with youngs starting, its that against Wales you cant risk inexperienced 9 starting and we have 115 caps and 3 caps. Youngs is right to start because no one else is anywhere near experienced. I just hope to god Randall gets at least 20 min off the bench.

See I disagree. It's got to the point where Jones has relied so much on Youngs that no other scrum half has even what, 20 caps outside of Care. There is only one way players are going to get experience and that's by playing. Otherwise it's a never ending circle. Pick the better player, simple as that.

 

[Which Tyler]

See I disagree. It's got to the point where Jones has relied so much on Youngs that no other scrum half has even what, 20 caps outside of Care. There is only one way players are going to get experience and that's by playing. Otherwise it's a never ending circle. Pick the better player, simple as that.

The trouble with that, is that you do want an experienced head in each unit if at all possible.
So if you're fitting Quirke/Randall, Youngs, Smith and Ford into the 23, then you want to start one of Youngs / Ford, rather than having them both on the bench.
Unless you're genuinely willing to sacrifice this (and the next 10 or so) match on the alter of a marginal gain in 10 matches time.

Now personally, I see SH as an issue that needs sorting - because our first choice isn't good enough, and FH as a position of strength that's better suited to gradual introduction, where our first choice is good enough, but the second choice could become better once he's got 15-20 caps under his belt.
Therefore, I'd prioritise the young SHs for maximum game time. But then, I'd also have Quirke ahead of Randall (and probably JVP as well, as the squad training option).

I then allow that individual psychologies play a huge part in this, and acknowledge that that's something we fans can only speculate about, and simply have to trust the coaches on.

 

[Reiser99]

The issue is really the same as it's been for a while. Jones has completely failed to develop any other real options at SH creating this mess. Ideally I would like these guys to gain experience over time, but we don't have time and Youngs have been proven to hold back out attack. Either we play it safe and probably lose more games due to poor performance or we take a risk and see if the young SHs can cope. I'm personally for the latter.

 

[BPM]

Not this again … you don't 'develop' players at test level. They're either good enough or they're not and the limited time an international coach has with a player isn't going to change that. That applies to any international coach - not just Eddie.

Arguably Robson or Spencer should have had more opportunities over time but ultimately neither has shown they're actually any better than Youngs so I think we'd have arrived at the same point regardless. I think Heinz only ever made the squad due to Robson's clotting issue and actually I think he served his purpose at the time.

Randall and Quirke are the future but they've only been around for a short time and Eddie has them in the squad so I'm not really sure what the problem is?

Personally I think Quirke is the most promising with the better all round game but he's 21 and has about 20 senior appearances in total. I'm not sure he's ready to be a test starter. Randall has some great qualities but IMO, is better suited to impact from the bench rather than being the starting 9.

Ultimately, I'd rather we weren't stuck with Youngs, but until we have a genuinely better option, that's the way it is. On his day, he can be very good. Admittedly that's not that frequent, but it's more than we can say about Robson or Spencer.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

See I disagree. It's got to the point where Jones has relied so much on Youngs that no other scrum half has even what, 20 caps outside of Care. There is only one way players are going to get experience and that's by playing. Otherwise it's a never ending circle. Pick the better player, simple as that.

The promising pup Wigglesworth has 33….

 

[Scotty]

See I disagree. It's got to the point where Jones has relied so much on Youngs that no other scrum half has even what, 20 caps outside of Care. There is only one way players are going to get experience and that's by playing. Otherwise it's a never ending circle. Pick the better player, simple as that.

Thing is they will get experience getting 30 off the bench and closing out a game. If it were me i would risk Quirke Nd Randall 9/21 but youngs will be starting and i dont see Randall as ready to start vs Wales in a big game and i definitely do see youngs dropping the tempo and going back to the kicking game soon as he comes on... start youngs, at 50 min bring on Randall IMO

 

[higgik]

Thing is they will get experience getting 30 off the bench and closing out a game. If it were me i would risk Quirke Nd Randall 9/21 but youngs will be starting and i dont see Randall as ready to start vs Wales in a big game and i definitely do see youngs dropping the tempo and going back to the kicking game soon as he comes on... start youngs, at 50 min bring on Randall IMO

The art of closing out big games, or chasing them is huge. You need to be able to control tempo or emotions, depending on the situation.
Youngs is quite good at controlling emotions, but poor at tempo.
The younger ones are good with tempo, particularly Quirke, with a good kicking game and good selections, but he needs to be able to control the teams emotions.
He can't do that without game time.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Not this again … you don't 'develop' players at test level. They're either good enough or they're not and the limited time an international coach has with a player isn't going to change that. That applies to any international coach - not just Eddie.

Arguably Robson or Spencer should have had more opportunities over time but ultimately neither has shown they're actually any better than Youngs so I think we'd have arrived at the same point regardless. I think Heinz only ever made the squad due to Robson's clotting issue and actually I think he served his purpose at the time.

Randall and Quirke are the future but they've only been around for a short time and Eddie has them in the squad so I'm not really sure what the problem is?

Personally I think Quirke is the most promising with the better all round game but he's 21 and has about 20 senior appearances in total. I'm not sure he's ready to be a test starter. Randall has some great qualities but IMO, is better suited to impact from the bench rather than being the starting 9.

Ultimately, I'd rather we weren't stuck with Youngs, but until we have a genuinely better option, that's the way it is. On his day, he can be very good. Admittedly that's not that frequent, but it's more than we can say about Robson or Spencer.

Yes we're stuck with Youngs and he'll seemingly get picked regardless of form, which is unhealthy in itself. But what happens if he pulls up lame?

Say he gets ruled out in training or early doors v Wales. Have Robson, Spencer and Quirke even started a test between them? Randall has but, with apologies to Ita, only against tier 2 opposition.

This eggs in one basket thing is v frustrating.

And you're very right about the lack of senior experience which has also applied to plenty of others. Players really ought to have demonstrated excellent Prem form for a good couple of years before being near an international squad, otherwise you're just buying potential which isn't really what the top level's about.

 

[Which Tyler]

Not this again … you don't 'develop' players at test level. They're either good enough or they're not and the limited time an international coach has with a player isn't going to change that. That applies to any international coach - not just Eddie.

Which is very binary.

It's possible to be the best option now, and not fully developed yet.

I'm not suggesting starting Quirke because he needs development (though he does).
I'm not suggesting starting Quirke because he's better than Youngs right now (though he is on his day, or a Youngs bad day - so a good 75% of the time).
Give him 15ish caps worth of experience (note, experience at international level, not "of development" not "of training", but 'just' enough time to get used to the pressure, time constraints, and better opponents) I think he would be better than Youngs + 15ish caps.

Personally, I'm not particularly interested in talking about what should have happened 6 years ago - I was discussing that 6 years ago.
Now, we are where we are, with only 1 SH who's trusted to start tests, and that 1 not being good enough, and getting worse.

It takes time to get accustomed to international rugby, and it's particular differences over club level. If we go by the binary good enough vs not good enough, then we'd still be playing the 2003 RWC winning team, because no-one else would ever have had a chance.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Lol Youngs is not better than Randell or Quirke overall, he certainly doesn't play better. He might have more experience but he's not better at all. He literally plays poorly for 80% of games, he shouldn't even be in the squad.

Bring back Wiggs or Care for the experienced SH role.

 

[BPM]

Which is very binary.

It's possible to be the best option now, and not fully developed yet.

I'm not suggesting starting Quirke because he needs development (though he does).
I'm not suggesting starting Quirke because he's better than Youngs right now (though he is on his day, or a Youngs bad day - so a good 75% of the time).
Give him 15ish caps worth of experience (note, experience at international level, not "of development" not "of training", but 'just' enough time to get used to the pressure, time constraints, and better opponents) I think he would be better than Youngs + 15ish caps.

Personally, I'm not particularly interested in talking about what should have happened 6 years ago - I was discussing that 6 years ago.
Now, we are where we are, with only 1 SH who's trusted to start tests, and that 1 not being good enough, and getting worse.

It takes time to get accustomed to international rugby, and it's particular differences over club level. If we go by the binary good enough vs not good enough, then we'd still be playing the 2003 RWC winning team, because no-one else would ever have had a chance.

I don't really disagree with you. The point I was attempting (and apparently failing) to argue is that it's not really up to Eddie Jones to develop Randall or Quirke.

I'm not a massive fan of Youngs. In fact far from it and I'd much rather see both getting game time, but at the same time I'd question whether they are ready to start in big games. Particularly when Smith (as much as I rate him) is still new to test rugby.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I don't really disagree with you. The point I was attempting (and apparently failing) to argue is that it's not really up to Eddie Jones to develop Randall or Quirke.

No it's not. But contingency planning / continuity / bench options are a big part of his role. Given the chance there's no reason why Robson (clots notwithstanding) or Spencer couldn't have become perfectly functional at this level, leaving JVP, Quirke and Randall to develop at their own pace. Instead it looks like we're skipping a generation and may need to fast track.

 

[Which Tyler]

I don't really disagree with you. The point I was attempting (and apparently failing) to argue is that it's not really up to Eddie Jones to develop Randall or Quirke.

Fair enough, and I agree. I'd thought you were putting in that "until they're ready, don't play them" - so it seems I was addressing a point you weren't making.

I'm not a massive fan of Youngs. In fact far from it and I'd much rather see both getting game time, but at the same time I'd question whether they are ready to start in big games. Particularly when Smith (as much as I rate him) is still new to test rugby.

I've a history of being harsher on Youngs than many others; but I think Quirke is already better; except on that 1 in 10 match, when Youngs is red hot. Consequently, I'd start Quirke, with an experienced FH in Ford to manage the game for him.
The only way of getting ready to start big games is to start smaller games, and the occasional big one.

I'm explicitly not suggesting starting Quirke alongside Smith - both need someone else to manage the game for them right now, and let them get on with doing what they do. So Smith gets Youngs, and Quirke gets Ford.
Then, IMO, finding a SH who isn't Youngs is more important than finding a FH who isn't Ford; so Quirke and Ford start, with Youngs and Smith on the bench.



It's also my opinion, and I'm not really here to change anyone's mind (well, I'd change Eddie's if I could, but that's not an option) - merely to express my opinion, and discuss those of myself and others.