England v Scotland, 02/02/13

[mstar]

Disappointed with that team Lancaster has named. Both Foden and Brown are better full-backs than Goode,

The reason why Foden/Brown are not in full-back is that they are being sacrified for indefeciencys of lack of creativity/options to play a different way elsewhere in the side. Nothing to do with their form etc its to fill that gap. It was an experiment by Lancaster but Goode played so good and was so effective that we will go with this direction.

I would have played TT with JJ too since Tuilagi was out.

The problem you have with that formation is that it lacks experience and defensive cover to the way Lancaster wants to play. I posted earlier the philosophy lancaster wants his side to play JJ does not fit that, hence why he will never start ahead of Barrit. TT is unknown (yet) at international level, so you need an experienced/defensive person alongside him. Never ever would Lancaster replace his 2 centres for inexperience of JJ and TT.

Flood and Burns are preferable to Farrell,

Farrell suits the way Lancaster wants to play and hence why we have Goode as the 2nd reciever, as Farrell is not creative enough. Burns gives us more creativity but Farrell has really not done anything wrong to drop him. Flood is interesting i am not sure he is Lancasters cup of tea to be honest, if he was No.1 he would of started regularly. Lancaster doesn't see Flood as the solution is how i read it.

also I would have Vunipola and Hartley in the front row.

Hartley Yes, Vunipola i am not sure of yet...

 

[lucky number 7]

I should have known you'd bloody argue over that.

Getting ****** for getting ****** sake is alcoholism, regardless of frequency. Same as somebody who smokes one fag a week or 20 per day is still a smoker. DC got caught out several times over a short period of time indicating a deep rooted problem.

The way Youngs gets selected over him however throws the "form" theoreys out of the window.

I'd disagree here.

I drink frequently not for the sole purpose of getting drunk but because I enjoy drinking. If I get drunk well hell not a problem it's enjoyable to be under the influence occasionally.

I also am partial to the odd cigarette , I might smoke a box every few weeks but not much I might be a smoker but it does not make me addicted to smoking in the same sense that drinking does not make me an automatic alcoholic.

 

[Thingimubob]

Gonna have to agree with Olyy and lucky no.7, alcoholic is probably a bit strong of a term. If what you say Mite defines alcoholism, then me and pretty much the entire British student population should be rocking up at AA meetings, since we're apparently all alcoholics. I enjoy getting drunk a fair bit, hell my entire year abroad is centred around doing exactly that, but I don't get picked up on it because I'm not a big name rugby player like Danny Care (who I'm actually a big fan of, and reckon has a chance of fighting for a Lions spot if he keeps up his form)

 

[Aristodemus]

In response to that mstar, I sometimes wonder if I am the only one who thought Goode didn't play well. Brown (who after waiting patiently for his chance) was dumped on the wing and still did everything very well. Farrell and Barritt is an awful, uncreative combination, without these two we would not need a "second receiver". How can a player who can't get in his team at 10 be first choice for England and on the IRB shortlist? Is it a joke I am missing? His kicking (albeit he has kicked better for England) is very average too. Other than good defence, what reason should he have to be ahead of Flood and Burns. In the centre's, you say Lancaster would never pick two inexperienced players but most of his squad was inexperienced a year ago, you should pick whoever your best options are. As for Vunipola, I am not certain of him yet either, however I am certain that Marler is not good enough.

 

[Peat]

The problem you have with that formation is that it lacks experience and defensive cover to the way Lancaster wants to play. I posted earlier the philosophy lancaster wants his side to play JJ does not fit that, hence why he will never start ahead of Barrit. TT is unknown (yet) at international level, so you need an experienced/defensive person alongside him. Never ever would Lancaster replace his 2 centres for inexperience of JJ and TT.

Joseph is a better defender than Tuilagi. His positioning is better, he has a better ratio of completed tackles to missed ones, and he's a better ballhog. He mightn't possess the same ability to cut people in half, but he's a better defender. It would be really illogical if Joseph was axed for Twelvetrees to improve defence, particularly as it involved moving Barritt.

The real reason I suspect is that if Twelvetrees goes well, when Tuilagi returns, Twelvetrees will remain and Tuilagi will come into 13.

Alcoholism?!
Think that's putting it a little bit strongly...

A 25yr old getting caught acting like a dick while drunk doesn't make them an alcoholic, just means they can't handle their booze (and/or are a dick).

For a professional sportsman in the public eye, to get caught in breach of the law that often in that short a time is a fairly good indicator of a problem. More over, I've heard it from someone who should know, that Care's behaviour was such that it was absolutely no surprise when the police picked him up. I don't think Mite put it particularly strongly actually - certainly in terms of his actions at the time. Couldn't stick to his character now.

 

[Crapspray]

How can a player who can't get in his team at 10 be first choice for England and on the IRB shortlist? Is it a joke I am missing? His kicking (albeit he has kicked better for England) is very average too. Other than good defence, what reason should he have to be ahead of Flood and Burns.

Ahh, that old one. I take it you didn't watch the Racing Metro vs Saracens game? Or Saracens vs Edinburgh? Or Munster? Or Quins? Etc. Etc. Saracens play him at 10 for all the big fixtures, and let's face it, most people would rather have him there under pressure than Hodgson or Flood. Why is he ahead of Burns and Flood for England? For the former, experience and he's proven (ignoring the injury to Burns). For the latter, will another 30 or so caps before the World Cup reveal some latent talent we've not seen in 53? Burns and Farrell will both be better players with 30-40 caps than Flood is now. For all this talk of Farrell stifling our attack when we played with Flood in the Autumn Internationals, with Alex Goode as a second-receiver, we didn't exactly set the pitch alight. Almost like it's more than just who plays at 10...

----------------

As for the announced team; it's good to see Twelvetrees start. It looks like it's pragmatism first from Lancaster. While I can't imagine the backline being huge in attack, it should be solid enough in defence. Only question mark is over the scrum, but Rowntree will probably conjure a performance out of them.

 

[mstar]

In response to that mstar, I sometimes wonder if I am the only one who thought Goode didn't play well. Brown (who after waiting patiently for his chance) was dumped on the wing and still did everything very well. Farrell and Barritt is an awful, uncreative combination, without these two we would not need a "second receiver". How can a player who can't get in his team at 10 be first choice for England and on the IRB shortlist? Is it a joke I am missing? His kicking (albeit he has kicked better for England) is very average too. Other than good defence, what reason should he have to be ahead of Flood and Burns. In the centre's, you say Lancaster would never pick two inexperienced players but most of his squad was inexperienced a year ago, you should pick whoever your best options are. As for Vunipola, I am not certain of him yet either, however I am certain that Marler is not good enough.

Its why i said Goode is in the side simply because of the major deficiency in the side. Farrell plays the game how Lancaster sees his side playing and needs a player at with strong kicking ability for points (see earlier post) as they sacrifice is attacking ability. Burns is the only threat to Farrell IMO, Lancaster is already made his mind up on Flood.

Marler was found out against Australia so its interest how he does.

 

[mstar]

Joseph is a better defender than Tuilagi. His positioning is better, he has a better ratio of completed tackles to missed ones, and he's a better ballhog. He mightn't possess the same ability to cut people in half, but he's a better defender. It would be really illogical if Joseph was axed for Twelvetrees to improve defence, particularly as it involved moving Barritt.

The real reason I suspect is that if Twelvetrees goes well, when Tuilagi returns, Twelvetrees will remain and Tuilagi will come into 13.

Manu is a beast and brings more to the table then JJ (i can't be bothered to list the reasons why he is in the side rather then JJ). If Lancaster had confidence in JJ he would play him. He doesn't so JJ's potential is irrelevant. Lancaster has his ideas how his centres will play and i don't see him changing it. If TT has a blinder then it be interesting, however Barrit has enough credit in the bank that i can't see him being dropped soon.

 

[04perryo]

I think Lancaster has made a decent solid team here. It would have been nice to see TT and JJ in the centre but I personally think Barritt will do the job and i bet he puts in quite a decent ball carrying display now he is outside centre and will have more opportunity to exploit weaknesses in the scots defence. I think its a very safe side who will go out there to get the win even if its going to be an ugly one.

 

[mstar]

I really like to see Lawes play/start but as Parling being our "lineout master/organiser" and JL is just a great player, his playing time be limited to coming on off the bench this 6N.

Also, its a shame about Calam clarke, Lancaster is a big fan of him if he was fit i think he would play in the 6N off the bench at some point.

 

[j'nuh]

I actually think Lawes providing an impact off the bench might play to his strengths.

I hope Lancaster starts trusting Morgan to finish games. It seems standard now for Morgan to come off after 50-60 mins, he deserves a full game for once.

Twelvetrees isn't there to provide creativity, I think he fits exactly into the "territory-is-more-important-than-possession" train of thought that England are using (which does explain just about every decision made in the backline). The best "second 10" in the country (although he is not a 10), provides another kicking option, now has great defense and makes turnovers. It gives me hope that England selectors might be open to a Twelvetrees-Tuilagi partnership.

I am worried by the fact that 5/10 of the backline are Sarries. I think that the Sarries game plan is effective at club level and might have decent results on the international scene, but it won't be enough to be consistently beating the Southern Hemisphere. NZ have been the best team for years and years, and imagine the day that they abandoned all of their strike runners for players who could play the percentages. It's sad, because I think that the pack is looking formidable and will carry the backline to recognition but that England won't realise it's potential until it invites more flair into the backline and has some proven try scorers (other than Tuilagi and kind of Ashton).

 

[Zed]

A good solid team. Lancaster needs a pat on the back for selecting TT instead of the 'safe' option of Flood and Farrell. Flood isn't a bad player and I've seen him have a few good games, but he hasn't quite got what it takes. Farrell certainly isn't Mr Creativity, but then neither was Wilkinson. Farrell, is dependable, a good defender and most of all he gets points. If you've got someone with a reliable boot, you can get 15 – 20 points up whilst still playing a pretty conservative game, 4 or 5 penalties and then you have a big enough gap to start playing more expansively. Personally I prefer a 10 with pace & invention like Cipriani or Burns, but reliability and consistency win every time over razzamatazz. As far as the centres go, Barritt was good against the ABs and deserves another shot, he is lacking in pace and power however, so I'd expect his position to be challenged over the next few years. In saying that if him and Tuilagi develop a decent partnership and play well together he could have a long England career. Tuilagi is going to be dangerous at 12 or 13, it doesn't matter where he goes. He is quick and powerful and despite what others have said he's got a good pass and a step. He's not just a big lump. Where he plays really depends on who is going to partner him in the centres. As far as fullback goes, the press were going bananas over Goodes performance in the Nov/Dec games, which surprised me. He looked solid and dependable, but nothing more.

 

[Peat]

Marler was found out against Australia so its interest how he does.

The main thing we found out about Marler against Australia is he can't scrummage very well with a knee ligament injury. He shouldn't have been on the field after it happened, but there should be absolutely no blame attached to him for what happened.

Manu is a beast and brings more to the table then JJ (i can't be bothered to list the reasons why he is in the side rather then JJ). If Lancaster had confidence in JJ he would play him. He doesn't so JJ's potential is irrelevant. Lancaster has his ideas how his centres will play and i don't see him changing it. If TT has a blinder then it be interesting, however Barrit has enough credit in the bank that i can't see him being dropped soon.

Tuilagi is slower than Joseph. Joseph has a better step. He is more likely to concede a turnover than Joseph. He is less likely to get an offload away than Joseph this season (in the Prem). The main thing Tuilagi brings ahead of him is immense raw power which does mean he tends to create line breaks and the fact he's had a good rack of international caps to prove himself, while Joseph has had a couple of caps in South Africa behind a beaten pack and malfunctioning backline. I do believe there is a genuine question about which one should be picked with both fit - or, indeed, if we can fit them both in, as Greenwood suggested (Leicester do believe Tuilagi might be a long term 12). I'd give the shirt to Tuilagi at the moment, but it should be close.

However, this is somewhat besides the point. The point is you said Joseph didn't fit into Lancaster's safety first mentality, when actually he's statistically a better defender than Tuilagi and has been for a season and a half at the very least. Those statistics say you are wrong. He is a very secure defender who, in the words of an England coach, "hardly ever makes an error".

And of course, to get into tomorrow's England side, Joseph didn't have to better than Tuilagi. He just had to be a better 13 than one of Twelvetrees and Barritt; considering that's not the accustomed position of either, you wouldn't have thought it that hard. He hasn't, I think Lancaster might have made a mistake. You can see his reasoning, he wants his playmaking 12, and he wants Barritt to babysit him, and I'm happy to see Twelvetrees get a shot, but he's left his next best available 13 out to accomodate this. If Lancaster doesn't trust Joseph at all, that would be an incredibly peculiar volte face as so far he's trusted him 4 times against South Africa and New Zealand (he's missed a grand total of one tackle in those games), bringing him straight back from injury to participate in the Autumn tests. Lancaster's own words on him:

“I’ve never been afraid to give young players the opportunity if they have shown that they have the temperament,†Lancaster said. “And No 13 is an area we need to look at. Jonathan is one of those who has done well and is in the mix.â€

In short, you're quite demonstrably wrong on everything you've had to say specifically about Joseph.

(quotes taken from the Daily Telegraph - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...Joseph-against-Springboks-in-second-Test.html)

 

[mstar]

Peat JJ can have all the stats you want to throw here. Fact is he isn't ahead of barrit or TT. That's the facts, all your points are valid but JJ isn't what Lancaster wants unless he is forced to play him. TT has moved ahead of JJ that's the truth right now.

 

[Peat]

Peat JJ can have all the stats you want to throw here. Fact is he isn't ahead of barrit or TT. That's the facts, all your points are valid but JJ isn't what Lancaster wants unless he is forced to play him. TT has moved ahead of JJ that's the truth right now.

Ah yes, how cruel fate forces you to stick a player straight back from injury into the match day squad against the best teams in the World.

You have no proof for your guesses about the reason for this selection or Lancaster's views on Joseph and most of the reasons posted for your theories have been factually wrong. That is what I have objected to. And, given your complete lack of counter-arguments other than "But he's not in the team", I'm going to go with proven.

 

[mstar]

Don't be a armchair warrior peat, we can have this debate all 6N. JJ isn't going to jump ahead of Barrit this tournament, i just can't see it happening unless you have a crystal ball?

Please feel free to post your stats on why you think JJ is better then manu/barrit at international level, please we all like to see.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

From what I've seen of Joseph this season his form has dropped way off anyhow.
Obviously it's hard to shine when you're in a relegation battle/more often than not partnered with a non-passing centre (Tagicakibau), but I've not seen him doing anything particularly special this season.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

I would've started Vunipola and Care, but apart from that it's the side I wanted to see.

Roll on the weekend (despite me working throughout the game, and having to avoid this place/all forms of media until I can watch it on iPlayer that night!)

Ah man! Make sure you go straight to iplayer rather than through the bbc homepage, as the results will surely be there...

 

[Peat]

Of course Joseph isn't going to jump ahead of Barritt, what with Barritt being primarily a 12 and Joseph being a 13, unless Tuilagi mystically and magically overnight becomes the Nonu-esque 12 people believe he could be. I suspect Joseph will play no part this Six Nations to be honest, but that's not because Lancaster doesn't rate him or he doesn't have the attributes for Lancaster's game. Partially because as Olyy points out, Joseph ain't on a hot streak due to the Not-Nots being sheeeeeeeit, partially because Lancaster is taking a punt on Twelvetrees. But Joseph will get his chance again soon enough, would be no great surprise to see him given games on the summer tour - probably starting at 13, unless Daly finishes the season on fire.

Now, Twelvetrees getting ahead of Barritt, that's the interesting one...

 

[mstar]

Agree i hope TT plays really well as he might be the answer we looking for as a centre to partner manu.