June International Test: Australia vs. England [1st Test] (11/06/2016)

[TRF_heineken]

Location: Suncorp Stadium, Brisbane
Time: 12:00 CAT (SA, GMT+2)​

TEAMS

Australia: 15 Israel Folau, 14 Dane Haylett-Petty, 13 Tevita Kuridrani, 12 Samu Kerevi, 11 Rob Horne, 10 Bernard Foley, 9 Nick Phipps, 8 David Pocock, 7 Michael Hooper, 6 Scott Fardy, 5 Rob Simmons, 4 Rory Arnold, 3 Greg Holmes, 2 Stephen Moore (captain), 1 Scott Sio

Substitutes:16 Tatafu Polota-Nau, 17 James Slipper, 18 Sekope Kepu, 19 James Horwill, 20 Dean Mumm, 21 Sean McMahon, 22 Nick Frisby, 23 Christian Leali'ifano.

England: 15 Mike Brown, 14 Anthony Watson, 13 Jonathan Joseph, 12 Luther Burrell, 11 Marland Yarde, 10 Owen Farrell, 9 Ben Youngs, 8 Billy Vunipola, 7 James Haskell, 6 Chris Robshaw, 5 George Kruis, 4 Maro Itoje, 3 Dan Cole, 2 Dylan Hartley (captain), 1 Mako Vunipola

Substitutes: 16 Luke Cowan-Dickie, 17 Matt Mullan, 18 Paul Hill, 19 Joe Launchbury, 20 Courtney Lawes, 21 Danny Care, 22 George Ford, 23 Jack Nowell

 

[ncurd]

If Eddie's regime so far has taught me anything it's not to speculate too much into teams suggested by the press until its officially announced. I've yet to see a pundit get it right beforehand yet.

- - - Updated - - -

Well the press got it right for a change surprised Itoje didn't move but obviously Jones thinks it better to keep him in the second row. Feel Nowell is a little hard done by. Ford is the wrong decision in my book but equally I don't think its fair to say its a shocker of a decision.

 

[Which Tyler]

Slipping back a row against a fast Aussie team after 50-60 minutes of scrummaging and mauling isn't exactly the easiest ask.

Say one thing for the old regime, say I could at least disregard all paper talk until I saw it in the Mail.

The Daily Heil's too busy perving them in the pool

 

[Stumpy]

Could Yarde have been selected as Eddie viewed the game against Wales as more important than the Premiership final? Both had good games that weekend, I thought Nowell was brilliant and arguable the best player on the pitch. Probably not the case but just a thought.

 

[NickBD]

The talking points will be Yarde, the back row and Youngs but Cowen-Dickie over Jamie George is a odd one for me. George would be a better impact sub of the bench.

 

[Maverick1987]

Lawes and Launchbury on the bench too ...... Some seriously strange calls from Eddie .....

 

[WaterboySA]

Agree on Launchbury...I don't know much about England rugby but to leave this guy out of your starting team is madness. Would be the same as leaving Etsebeth out of the Bok starting team. If you need space for Itoje, leave someone else out.

 

[ncurd]

Kruis was arguably better than Itoje during the six nations....moving Itoje to 6 was the only option and Jones has clearly dismissed that idea for now.

Our strength at Lock is insane and Launchers needs to provide something very special to replace one of Ktoje as neither should be anywhere close to being dropped.

 

[WaterboySA]

I never realized that Itoje was seen more as a lock than a loose forward. I honestly thought he played lock out of necessity. Amazing player anyways.

 

[stus768]

Kruis was arguably better than Itoje during the six nations....moving Itoje to 6 was the only option and Jones has clearly dismissed that idea for now.

Our strength at Lock is insane and Launchers needs to provide something very special to replace one of Ktoje as neither should be anywhere close to being dropped.

Considering there are 2 locks on the bench itoje must be covering back row so he can't have dismissed it.

 

[ncurd]

Considering there are 2 locks on the bench itoje must be covering back row so he can't have dismissed it.

It's an odd one I think he more has it as an option in various scenarios or something to try if the game isn't tight. I think the likely plan will be to play Itoje and Robshaw until the end of the match.

He's certainly dismissed it as a starting option but probably thinks it better than our current backrow backup options. Honestly the reality is I'm surprised Lawes is on the bench and not Clifford.

 

[stus768]

It's an odd one I think he more has it as an option in various scenarios or something to try if the game isn't tight. I think the likely plan will be to play Itoje and Robshaw until the end of the match.

He's certainly dismissed it as a starting option but probably thinks it better than our current backrow backup options. Honestly the reality is I'm surprised Lawes is on the bench and not Clifford.

I was very surprised at lawes on the bench.

 

[Peat]

Kruis was arguably better than Itoje during the six nations....moving Itoje to 6 was the only option and Jones has clearly dismissed that idea for now.

Our strength at Lock is insane and Launchers needs to provide something very special to replace one of Ktoje as neither should be anywhere close to being dropped.

Still think Kruis is quite a bit overtalked.

Guess we'll see. I'm not particularly sold on this being the way to paradise but probably wiser at this point to see if it works.

 

[ncurd]

Still think Kruis is quite a bit overtalked.

Guess we'll see. I'm not particularly sold on this being the way to paradise but probably wiser at this point to see if it works.

Honestly I think Launchbury has a higher ceiling than Kruis but Kruis has literally done nothing even remotely close to warrant being dropped. It's a case of incumbent playing rubbish, getting injured or putting in some outstanding shifts yourself. Its one of the problems with strength in depth at what point do you make a switch for a player with more potential when they are playing very well.

 

[Peat]

Honestly I think Launchbury has a higher ceiling than Kruis but Kruis has literally done nothing even remotely close to warrant being dropped. It's a case of incumbent playing rubbish, getting injured or putting in some outstanding shifts yourself. Its one of the problems with strength in depth at what point do you make a switch for a player with more potential when they are playing very well.

Not playing as well as one of the other players can is, imo, enough to warrant dropping.

And you make the switch when you think it wins you the next match..

Not that I'm sure I'd have made the switch given what Kruis means to our line out. I make those points philosophically.

But I still think he's overrated in general and also being rated on one window, which means the rating is possibly premature.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Not playing as well as one of the other players can is, imo, enough to warrant dropping.

And you make the switch when you think it wins you the next match..

Not that I'm sure I'd have made the switch given what Kruis means to our line out. I make those points philosophically.

But I still think he's overrated in general and also being rated on one window, which means the rating is possibly premature.

I also think when a unit within a team is clicking you stick with it unless the argument against is overwhelming. Personally I thought the argument for moving Itoje to the back row was overwhelming given our flankers and Australia's flankers, so disappointed not to see that, however not at all surprised or particularly disappointed that EJ didn't want to break up Krutoje for a different lock (even though I agree that Launchbury is exceptional)

Nowell a genuine shock, I never really thought that would happen. He's got weaknesses but many strengths, has been playing very well as part of a unit which is basically performing (if there is a weak link to it it's Brown, not him). For me Nowell fitted into a similar category to the Daly-Joseph debate; I don't see the value in replacing a proven international who is playing well with someone who might turn out to be a better option in an area that's largely functioning, when there are other areas which need attention more urgently. I would have preferred continuity on this one, definitely.

You know what, some odd ones, some I'm not convinced about, some which will be argued both before and after the game I've no doubt ... but let's all take a moment to be grateful that at least Brad Barritt isn't even in the discussion!

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I don't know if it's just me but i don't get the whole 'play player X as he has a higher ceiling' thing.

Players go in and out of form. Some players might never be the best in the world but might not have massive weaknesses in their game. To me your team can never be world class without those types of players in a team.

Maybe that's just me but for every star you need a balance of players of make little mistakes and don't have any weaknesses.

Just imagine if we had the depth we at lock for inside centre. Just imagine.......

 

[Every Time Ref]

I don't know if it's just me but i don't get the whole 'play player X as he has a higher ceiling' thing.

Players go in and out of form. Some players might never be the best in the world but might not have massive weaknesses in their game. To me your team can never be world class without those types of players in a team.

Maybe that's just me but for every star you need a balance of players of make little mistakes and don't have any weaknesses.

Just imagine if we had the depth we at lock for inside centre. Just imagine.......

The reasoning is that any promising player needs international experience to become world class, and there are a limited number of test caps available as there are few international games compared to domestic. It's a tricky balancing act, but you definitely need to choose wisely who to give the precious commodity of international experience to.

However, I do agree with what you say about players who don't make mistakes being invaluable. It's easy to get carried away with looking for a star in every position, but they don't always exist.

 

[Peat]

I also think when a unit within a team is clicking you stick with it unless the argument against is overwhelming. Personally I thought the argument for moving Itoje to the back row was overwhelming given our flankers and Australia's flankers, so disappointed not to see that, however not at all surprised or particularly disappointed that EJ didn't want to break up Krutoje for a different lock (even though I agree that Launchbury is exceptional)

I mostly agree with that but I don't think the second row should be considered as a unit. I think they should be considered in light of the pack as a whole.

Does that mean I change them? Probably not today, but given that our pack has a significant weakness in terms of support play and the breakdown, I still remain very much pro-Launchbury as he's the single biggest boost to that available outside of the starting 8.

Probably an argument to be re-examined after the series rather than now though.

Nowell a genuine shock, I never really thought that would happen. He's got weaknesses but many strengths, has been playing very well as part of a unit which is basically performing (if there is a weak link to it it's Brown, not him). For me Nowell fitted into a similar category to the Daly-Joseph debate; I don't see the value in replacing a proven international who is playing well with someone who might turn out to be a better option in an area that's largely functioning, when there are other areas which need attention more urgently. I would have preferred continuity on this one, definitely.

You know what, some odd ones, some I'm not convinced about, some which will be argued both before and after the game I've no doubt ... but let's all take a moment to be grateful that at least Brad Barritt isn't even in the discussion!

I'm surprised and not in favour, but I can see the logic. The back line wasn't providing enough physicality; Yarde in changes that. Again, I don't think the back three can be considered a unit in isolation. Arguably it creates a defensive weakness but Nowell had some dodgy moments in the Six Nations anyway.

I don't know if it's just me but i don't get the whole 'play player X as he has a higher ceiling' thing.

Players go in and out of form. Some players might never be the best in the world but might not have massive weaknesses in their game. To me your team can never be world class without those types of players in a team.

Maybe that's just me but for every star you need a balance of players of make little mistakes and don't have any weaknesses.

Just imagine if we had the depth we at lock for inside centre. Just imagine.......

You're arguing against something no one's said in this instance and where the player left out is one of the most error free and consistent we have.

In general though, I'd argue that unless a player makes few mistakes and has very few weaknesses, they're not a star. There's a few monster athletes who are an exception to that rule but for me, stars are players who never drop below a certain threshold and are capable of doing multiple things incredibly well.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I mostly agree with that but I don't think the second row should be considered as a unit. I think they should be considered in light of the pack as a whole.

Does that mean I change them? Probably not today, but given that our pack has a significant weakness in terms of support play and the breakdown, I still remain very much pro-Launchbury as he's the single biggest boost to that available outside of the starting 8.

Probably an argument to be re-examined after the series rather than now though.



I'm surprised and not in favour, but I can see the logic. The back line wasn't providing enough physicality; Yarde in changes that. Again, I don't think the back three can be considered a unit in isolation. Arguably it creates a defensive weakness but Nowell had some dodgy moments in the Six Nations anyway.



You're arguing against something no one's said in this instance and where the player left out is one of the most error free and consistent we have.

In general though, I'd argue that unless a player makes few mistakes and has very few weaknesses, they're not a star. There's a few monster athletes who are an exception to that rule but for me, stars are players who never drop below a certain threshold and are capable of doing multiple things incredibly well.

I was more mulling it over than arguing a case. It's a lovely problem to have with kruis, launchbury and Itoje, would be made a lot easier if EJ dropped Haskell and or Robshaw.