England Six Nations thread

[j'nuh]

Really strange that we are talking about the England Six Nations squad in the EOTY tests thread. Thought I'd start a new thread. Mods, please move this over when the 6N sub-forum gets opened!

Realised I hadn't put up any thoughts about the squad release.

Mixed bag, wasn't it?

I'm sure that we are all agreed that everywhere other than the back three, England are in a good position. The best 23 that England can put out are in the EPS. There are some minor changes I'd have liked to have seen, but nothing substantial. Not expecting much to change until the WC now, which is good because the pack is looking pretty formidable.

So I'll just get to the point about the back three. I was disappointed at first to see Goode and Ashton in. However, I'm starting to think that there's good reason. I bet Lancaster doesn't know which (or which two) of May/Nowell/Watson that he was going to pick until he saw them in camp. I bet a decision isn't made until quite late. Putting one of the players in the EPS and not the others would have invited so much scrutiny from the press. I bet what happens is that one or two will be picked, and if they perform better than Ashton/Goode, they will keep their place. Lancaster is flaunting the rules a little by picking Myler from the Saxons to be in his 6N squad rather than Burns in the EPS. I reckon he'll do the same for the Saxons wingers if they happen to prove their worth, and then they'll be fully promoted in July.

Or at least, I'm hoping this is the case. Thankfully, there's not a great deal of chance that Goode will be starting ahead of Brown.

The only other contentious point is who will play 13. Help? My problem is that we don't actually have any 13s in the squad. It's difficult to pick a good player and just shift them into another position, hoping they'll still be as good... not that Lancaster had too much choice.

Saxons-wise, would have liked to have seen Lancaster be brave and fast-tracked Stooke (for Robson). IMO, the form player at Glos. By far the most physical. Never seems to get knocked back in his tight carries, presents good front-foot ball. Who knows where Stooke will be in two years time, but I know for sure that Robson would be a last resort option. Also, how imposing would 4. Stooke 5. Attwood 6. Launchbury 7. Wood 8. Vunipola 19. Lawes 20. Morgan be? Would scare the **** out of teams.

 

[Aedaphon]

I don't like change.

 

[Crapspray]

Thankfully, there's not a great deal of chance that Goode will be starting ahead of Brown.

What concerns me is that the pundits have suddenly taken a liking to Goode. I've read both Ian McGeechan and Will Greenwood saying he's 'one of the best readers of the game'. The Grauniad also ran something similar.

With only two players officially selected as fullbacks, one injury and Goode will be in. Also, if Burrell outplays Twelvetrees Goode becomes 'second playmaker'.

The only other contentious point is who will play 13.

Against France, for me, Barritt. The ship needs steadying, and against the French the idea of Burrell's defence out of position fills me with dread. Barritt did the job there against Scotland last year; if England's back do as well as they did then they stand a decent chance of winning. Burrell gets his go at Murrayfield.

Playing it safe, yes, but I think the France game is crucial. With both Ireland and Wales at Twickenham this year, if England leave Paris with a win they're in a very good position to challenge for the ***le.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Eastmond is the best "second playmaker"

 

[Maverick1987]

Burrell is going to play 13 . Lancaster basically said that .

http://www1.skysports.com/rugby-uni...luther-burrell-to-thrive-in-englands-midfield

Without actually saying he's starting that to me looks like a 36 Burrell midfield partnership

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Not sure how I feel about that.
I've never been impressed by Burrell at 13, but he's a very talented player and is improving every game so hopefully he can do well enough. Will certainly be able to punch a few holes. If he is there, though, we simply cannot afford to have Ashton on the wing. If Burrell is caught out of position and lets his man through, then I don't want Ashton tracking back to make the try saver.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Not sure how I feel about that.
I've never been impressed by Burrell at 13, but he's a very talented player and is improving every game so hopefully he can do well enough. Will certainly be able to punch a few holes. If he is there, though, we simply cannot afford to have Ashton on the wing. If Burrell is caught out of position and lets his man through, then I don't want Ashton tracking back to make the try saver.

As a saints fan I've never actually seen him play 13. So the last time must have been at sale.

I know what you mean about his defence, his positioning at time isn't great so I hope that gets worked on in training.

As for attack he will enable us to use the tuilagi plan that we are used to.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Yeah, he mainly played 13 or Wing for us - and played 13 a bit at Leeds too - despite being a 12.
One thing Burrell has is he is deceptively quick, for the size of him. He was an age-grade sprinter, so that combined with his strength/size will hopefully catch a few defenders off guard.

 

[Peat]

We could get results from that if Farrell can finally turn those flickers of potential into solid creativity and if he doesn't, we've sacrificed one of our strong points for nothing i.e. good defence.

Struggling to be motivated tbh. There's nothing new to be said, it's about hoping that the improvements we've needed for about a year and a half finally happen. Not a huge amount of evidence for it happening.

 

[Maverick1987]

We could get results from that if Farrell can finally turn those flickers of potential into solid creativity and if he doesn't, we've sacrificed one of our strong points for nothing i.e. good defence.

Struggling to be motivated tbh. There's nothing new to be said, it's about hoping that the improvements we've needed for about a year and a half finally happen. Not a huge amount of evidence for it happening.

I'm excited about it tbh . Would be even better if eastmond played IC instead of 36 . Got to be better than Tompkins though yeh ?

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Yeah, he mainly played 13 or Wing for us - and played 13 a bit at Leeds too - despite being a 12.
One thing Burrell has is he is deceptively quick, for the size of him. He was an age-grade sprinter, so that combined with his strength/size will hopefully catch a few defenders off guard.

I noticed that just yesterday now you mention it. He sometimes received the ball at a standing start, and just put his head down and ran hard and fast at gaps. That speed and power together as well as offloading ability could be quite devestating it seems to me.

That said, it's become an all too familiar story to see guys at premeirship level offloading out of hard contact, yet when they get to play for England they don't/can't/are unwilling to offload at all.

Also, I knwo twelvetrees and Burrell are roughly the same size but seeing Burrell in the flesh I swear he must be bigger

 

[ratsapprentice]

I'm pretty sure I remember Burrell playing at 13 at least once for Saints last season, I think right at the beginning.

I also completely disagree that he can fulfill the role of Manu - he simply isn't physical enough.
Yes he's pretty big, but he doesn't use his size in the same way as people like Manu or Bastareud do.
It's not like he's absolutely monstering guys... he just breaks through more attempted tackles than average, or to get his hands free for an offload.

Also, I knwo twelvetrees and Burrell are roughly the same size but seeing Burrell in the flesh I swear he must be bigger

Same height.... Burrell is 9kg heavier.

 

[Big Ewis]

ah finally !...the aass itch is over, there is a 6N thread finally and it no longer feels sinful to discuss in the EOYT thread...fk, you guys realize FRA ENG is in 2 weeks ?!!
we gon beat yo azz boys !!

 

[Aristodemus]

ah finally !...the aass itch is over, there is a 6N thread finally and it no longer feels sinful to discuss in the EOYT thread...fk, you guys realize FRA ENG is in 2 weeks ?!!
we gon beat yo azz boys !!

Like you normally do?

 

[Maverick1987]

ah finally !...the aass itch is over, there is a 6N thread finally and it no longer feels sinful to discuss in the EOYT thread...fk, you guys realize FRA ENG is in 2 weeks ?!!
we gon beat yo azz boys !!

Probably but then I thought u would beat us last year, and the year before and the year before that

 

[Big Ewis]

Like you normally do?

that's right. About 2 out of 5 times, we're totally due man, don't you know anything !!

 

[Maverick1987]

Going to talk about the forwards now . Fed up of all the fanny backs talk

Anyone think like I do that marler has overtaken mako as second LH behind Corbs now ? Makos discipline letting him down a bit lately

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I think he should have - he had a very good EOYT. He's still working as hard in the loose, but his scrummaging has improved massively.
Not sure he's ahead of Mako, they're probably about equal in terms of skill, imo, but it's Marler's shirt atm so that should see him through.

 

[Peat]

I'm excited about it tbh . Would be even better if eastmond played IC instead of 36 . Got to be better than Tompkins though yeh ?

They could put Conrad Smith's brain Tuilagi's body and I'm not sure it would make too much difference outside of our current half-back axis. It had provided a genuine platform to the backline on such an intermittent basis that, honestly, we're mainly relying on them to do it all themselves.

Pack's decent. Would look Webber to emerge and challenge the current pair, would like a genuine openside to offer an option, would like a powerhouse blindside to come into the reckoning... we'll get none of them. Attwood at lock, now that I'm looking forwards to seeing, albeit from the bench.

I think the biggest thing going for us at the moment is that Lawes/Launchbury is the most monsterously athletic second row going just about anywhere... but where's the grunt? Besides, what good two quick, indefatigable monsters who will blast open any ruck and carry handily if required, if the backline isn't going anywhere?

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

They could put Conrad Smith's brain Tuilagi's body and I'm not sure it would make too much difference outside of our current half-back axis. It had provided a genuine platform to the backline on such an intermittent basis that, honestly, we're mainly relying on them to do it all themselves.

Pack's decent. Would look Webber to emerge and challenge the current pair, would like a genuine openside to offer an option, would like a powerhouse blindside to come into the reckoning... we'll get none of them. Attwood at lock, now that I'm looking forwards to seeing, albeit from the bench.

I think the biggest thing going for us at the moment is that Lawes/Launchbury is the most monsterously athletic second row going just about anywhere... but where's the grunt? Besides, what good two quick, indefatigable monsters who will blast open any ruck and carry handily if required, if the backline isn't going anywhere?

I don't know of it's just me but I don't rate lawes carrying at all. I think he goes to ground way to easily and is an easy target for a turnover.

Great at everything else though