Puja wrote:
I think your criticism's a year or so out of date there padprop; he hasn't done the stop and dance routine on counters at all this season and instead has looked very dangerous and direct.
I'm still wary of picking him, as he has shown form at Sarries only to fail with England before, but he is showing better with Sarries than he ever has done and with Brown in a rut, I don't think it'd be right not to give him another chance.
Perhaps then comes down to whether one thinks form at club level can lead to a player deserving a chance, or where one balances that Vs an expectation of whether a player can bring their sills to bear in effective fashion at test level. I'm not that fussed just by form and think Goode has reached his level so I'm not too worried about whether it'd be right to give him another cap or not, I just wouldn't do it, which might be harsh but selection at that level is harsh. Maybe the only thing which would incline me towards Goode is if the rest of the backline were starting to fill with strike runners, so replace Farrell with Tuilagi, and replace Nowell with May, Wade, Yarde or Rokoduguni and I'd be willing to consider Goode mayn't be the best player but he might be the best player for the team.
But then you're basically saying to the players, "You can play as well as you want, you can work as hard as you like to improve, but if I don't like you, you'll never get picked." Aren't we generally against that sort of behaviour from international coaches?
Players can change and improve with time, growing up and hard work. Brown's a prime example of that.
Puja
Brown is a player I've never wanted in an England side, he has improved, not enough. I would allow if a different selection Brown might have done much better, but I'm not sure we had the right sort of player to balance his selection with.
And I have no issue with players working hard to improve but never getting a chance, most players never get picked at test level. To the player that can only ever mean they're not good enough and they should work still harder, or they can mentally fold and then who wants them anyway.
Banquo wrote:
Tricky one on Goode- he's got a ton of skill, generally makes good decisions, a very talented player. His positional play is as good as anyone's.
I'd be inclined to give him a go at 15 to see whether his pace and defence has somehow improved enough for international level; Brown's distribution really is an issue for me. Personally I think we need to find someone else.
Feels a bit like swapping back and forth between Youngs and Care at 9, though perhaps Goode would be playing the role of Dickson as the less used alternative.
Not really- Youngs and Care swap over is pretty regular, and they are similar-ish sorts of players. Goode and Brown are chalk and cheese as full backs, and Goode hasn't been rotating with Brown at all. If you mean all 4 lack something as international players, I agree though!
If someone can put a compelling case for being ahead of either of them, I'd be much happier! In the meantime, Goode (like Brown before him) seems to have improved a fair amount as a player- Brown did 'change his spots' by getting much fitter and working on his pace, after looking dead and buried as in intl in 2008....and then became a decent if limited intl player- and by dint of playing well in the AP and Europe, and because Brown is well off form imo, Goode should be being considered for another shot at the shirt. I do think in this case club form is relevent, because imo the incumbent isn't such a great player we can let him off an average patch.
As I've always said, I think Goode isn't good enough in attack at intl level.....but let's maybe have another look; maybe the concerns over his last man turnstile prevent even that. But who are the other options, outside Watson?
Goode and Brown are different sorts of players, but like Care and Youngs it still seems to me to be picking between players who are not and will not be good enough. There are some risks in looking to see if other players are good enough, and that mayn't pay off either, but my preference would be to keep looking.
Digby wrote:
Feels a bit like swapping back and forth between Youngs and Care at 9, though perhaps Goode would be playing the role of Dickson as the less used alternative.
Not really- Youngs and Care swap over is pretty regular, and they are similar-ish sorts of players. Goode and Brown are chalk and cheese as full backs, and Goode hasn't been rotating with Brown at all. If you mean all 4 lack something as international players, I agree though!
If someone can put a compelling case for being ahead of either of them, I'd be much happier! In the meantime, Goode (like Brown before him) seems to have improved a fair amount as a player- Brown did 'change his spots' by getting much fitter and working on his pace, after looking dead and buried as in intl in 2008....and then became a decent if limited intl player- and by dint of playing well in the AP and Europe, and because Brown is well off form imo, Goode should be being considered for another shot at the shirt. I do think in this case club form is relevent, because imo the incumbent isn't such a great player we can let him off an average patch.
As I've always said, I think Goode isn't good enough in attack at intl level.....but let's maybe have another look; maybe the concerns over his last man turnstile prevent even that. But who are the other options, outside Watson?
Goode and Brown are different sorts of players, but like Care and Youngs it still seems to me to be picking between players who are not and will not be good enough. There are some risks in looking to see if other players are good enough, and that mayn't pay off either, but my preference would be to keep looking.
ah ok, that was my point about all 4 not being very good intl players, so agreed. I would keep looking too, as I've said before (and not just these positions...at least a new player per unit, if not more)- I'm just saying part of that search might now include Goode as he really does seem to have improved. Mind so has Farrell, and I'm still not convinced he should be in the EPS. What we don't know with either actually is what this improved club form will translate to internationally....and Goode is making the case for another look, whilst we are searching for our version of cullen
Very recently, but it was likely a one off for Exeter. That said if Nowell were to play wing for his club and fullback for England I think he could manage that, he'd just need more patience adjusting to lift at 15, and so if it turned our he wasn't up to 15 at test level we'd be running out of games going into the next WC.
Banquo wrote:
Tricky one on Goode- he's got a ton of skill, generally makes good decisions, a very talented player. His positional play is as good as anyone's.
I'd be inclined to give him a go at 15 to see whether his pace and defence has somehow improved enough for international level; Brown's distribution really is an issue for me. Personally I think we need to find someone else.
Feels a bit like swapping back and forth between Youngs and Care at 9, though perhaps Goode would be playing the role of Dickson as the less used alternative.
Not really- Youngs and Care swap over is pretty regular, and they are similar-ish sorts of players. Goode and Brown are chalk and cheese as full backs, and Goode hasn't been rotating with Brown at all. If you mean all 4 lack something as international players, I agree though!
If someone can put a compelling case for being ahead of either of them, I'd be much happier! In the meantime, Goode (like Brown before him) seems to have improved a fair amount as a player- Brown did 'change his spots' by getting much fitter and working on his pace, after looking dead and buried as in intl in 2008....and then became a decent if limited intl player- and by dint of playing well in the AP and Europe, and because Brown is well off form imo, Goode should be being considered for another shot at the shirt. I do think in this case club form is relevent, because imo the incumbent isn't such a great player we can let him off an average patch.
As I've always said, I think Goode isn't good enough in attack at intl level.....but let's maybe have another look; maybe the concerns over his last man turnstile prevent even that. But who are the other options, outside Watson?
Haley? Still very early for him but he's got a lot going for him. If he can keep developing I'd rather take an early punt on him than be stuck with the Brown/Goode purgatory. For all that Goode is currently in the form of his life, bless him, he will never be strong enoigh defensively once you get into the final stages of a WC.
Ask any Wasps fan who they'd prefer at FB, an out of sorts Piutau or an in form Miller?
Digby wrote:
Feels a bit like swapping back and forth between Youngs and Care at 9, though perhaps Goode would be playing the role of Dickson as the less used alternative.
Not really- Youngs and Care swap over is pretty regular, and they are similar-ish sorts of players. Goode and Brown are chalk and cheese as full backs, and Goode hasn't been rotating with Brown at all. If you mean all 4 lack something as international players, I agree though!
If someone can put a compelling case for being ahead of either of them, I'd be much happier! In the meantime, Goode (like Brown before him) seems to have improved a fair amount as a player- Brown did 'change his spots' by getting much fitter and working on his pace, after looking dead and buried as in intl in 2008....and then became a decent if limited intl player- and by dint of playing well in the AP and Europe, and because Brown is well off form imo, Goode should be being considered for another shot at the shirt. I do think in this case club form is relevent, because imo the incumbent isn't such a great player we can let him off an average patch.
As I've always said, I think Goode isn't good enough in attack at intl level.....but let's maybe have another look; maybe the concerns over his last man turnstile prevent even that. But who are the other options, outside Watson?
Haley? Still very early for him but he's got a lot going for him. If he can keep developing I'd rather take an early punt on him than be stuck with the Brown/Goode purgatory. For all that Goode is currently in the form of his life, bless him, he will never be strong enoigh defensively once you get into the final stages of a WC.
Ask any Wasps fan who they'd prefer at FB, an out of sorts Piutau or an in form Miller?
....my point being its not the longest list really. Not a brilliant situation.
Banquo wrote:
....my point being its not the longest list really. Not a brilliant situation.
I think the list is plenty long enough, if we must it could detail Goode and Brown, and then Watson, Foden, Tait, Haley, Pennell, Daly, Hammersley, Nowell, Mallinder maybe - whether as a nation, or rather between selectors, coaches and players, we can make anything of that remains to be seen, but I think the options are there if not so far the delivery. If not the longest list of proven test standard performers then no it's not a long list, for me that would have just Foden's name on it and that quite a dated entry.
If you have to pick Brown or Goode, right now it pretty much has to be Goode as Brown's refusal to pass is becoming comical.
I'd be tempted to go with Watson to be honest. Short term we'd be losing a World Class wing for an untested fullback, but I think he's worth the risk as he could be a big leap forward. I also would like to see Nowell get regular game time at 15 as I reckon he would be better suited there than at wing.
As I've said far too often , I'd like Hammersly to be looked at over the summer.
Timbo wrote:Foden's nowhere near good enough anymore imo.
Ironically he's become a better all round 15- his kicking in particular is very long and good now- but has lost his running mojo...partly through injury (he's been carrying a groin strain) and partly through playing in a team that has no clue in the backs unless the forwards are completely on top. Think he is still a decent player, but time is against him now; I also think his last man tackling has become a real weakness, often flat footed.
Banquo wrote:
....my point being its not the longest list really. Not a brilliant situation.
I think the list is plenty long enough, if we must it could detail Goode and Brown, and then Watson, Foden, Tait, Haley, Pennell, Daly, Hammersley, Nowell, Mallinder maybe - whether as a nation, or rather between selectors, coaches and players, we can make anything of that remains to be seen, but I think the options are there if not so far the delivery. If not the longest list of proven test standard performers then no it's not a long list, for me that would have just Foden's name on it and that quite a dated entry.
well I could write a long list comprising of the known, the semi-known and the downright optimistic, but that isn't quite what I was driving at, in the sense that if you were picking a side tomorrow, the list would be somewhat shorter imo.
I think either Watson or Nowell should be given a go. But if it's Nowell I'd like to see him get more of a run for Exeter there first.
If you play Goode you get a good attacking 15 with great positional awareness for covering the backfield. But his 1-on-1 defence is pretty mundane.
If you play Brown you get a strong runner and great tackler (although his pathetic attempt on Ashton yesterday was noticeable), a fiery competitor that won't take a step backwards. But you have to accept that you'll bomb a few try scoring opportunities because he won't make the try scoring pass when it's on.
For me, Daly would be a step backwards. He was never that good at 15 really, is not going to ho back there any time soon, and he's in electric form at 13.
Banquo wrote:
....my point being its not the longest list really. Not a brilliant situation.
I think the list is plenty long enough, if we must it could detail Goode and Brown, and then Watson, Foden, Tait, Haley, Pennell, Daly, Hammersley, Nowell, Mallinder maybe - whether as a nation, or rather between selectors, coaches and players, we can make anything of that remains to be seen, but I think the options are there if not so far the delivery. If not the longest list of proven test standard performers then no it's not a long list, for me that would have just Foden's name on it and that quite a dated entry.
well I could write a long list comprising of the known, the semi-known and the downright optimistic, but that isn't quite what I was driving at, in the sense that if you were picking a side tomorrow, the list would be somewhat shorter imo.
The list is 11 names long, 8 of them being capped, and we've had years to build to this point. We've also got years ahead of us, but if we continue to waste those years as we have we'll continue to be rather rubbish, if on the other hand we get the selection and coaching/development right we're in a pretty good place.
Digby wrote:
I think the list is plenty long enough, if we must it could detail Goode and Brown, and then Watson, Foden, Tait, Haley, Pennell, Daly, Hammersley, Nowell, Mallinder maybe - whether as a nation, or rather between selectors, coaches and players, we can make anything of that remains to be seen, but I think the options are there if not so far the delivery. If not the longest list of proven test standard performers then no it's not a long list, for me that would have just Foden's name on it and that quite a dated entry.
well I could write a long list comprising of the known, the semi-known and the downright optimistic, but that isn't quite what I was driving at, in the sense that if you were picking a side tomorrow, the list would be somewhat shorter imo.
The list is 11 names long, 8 of them being capped, and we've had years to build to this point. We've also got years ahead of us, but if we continue to waste those years as we have we'll continue to be rather rubbish, if on the other hand we get the selection and coaching/development right we're in a pretty good place.
I said it was a long list, but not helpful in the context I was describing. Though once more I have no idea what the point you are making is, or who you want from that list who isn't Goode or Brown. If you are saying we are strong at 15 today, I don't agree; if you are saying we could be, then maybe, but you could say the same on a lot of positions, and I wouldn't say we have the deepest well to draw on in this position.
Who for you is the player we should be playing instead of the gruesome twosome?
Banquo wrote:
well I could write a long list comprising of the known, the semi-known and the downright optimistic, but that isn't quite what I was driving at, in the sense that if you were picking a side tomorrow, the list would be somewhat shorter imo.
The list is 11 names long, 8 of them being capped, and we've had years to build to this point. We've also got years ahead of us, but if we continue to waste those years as we have we'll continue to be rather rubbish, if on the other hand we get the selection and coaching/development right we're in a pretty good place.
I said it was a long list, but not helpful in the context I was describing. Though once more I have no idea what the point you are making is, or who you want from that list who isn't Goode or Brown. If you are saying we are strong at 15 today, I don't agree; if you are saying we could be, then maybe, but you could say the same on a lot of positions, and I wouldn't say we have the deepest well to draw on in this position.
Who for you is the player we should be playing instead of the gruesome twosome?
Well you say it's not a long list, I think it is a long list but whoever is plucked from the list, and it's a bit murky who given the length of the list, will need some work. I think I'd pick Watson, Pennell or Daly, depends a bit on how EJ wants us to play and who the other selections in the backline are.
Digby wrote:
The list is 11 names long, 8 of them being capped, and we've had years to build to this point. We've also got years ahead of us, but if we continue to waste those years as we have we'll continue to be rather rubbish, if on the other hand we get the selection and coaching/development right we're in a pretty good place.
I said it was a long list, but not helpful in the context I was describing. Though once more I have no idea what the point you are making is, or who you want from that list who isn't Goode or Brown. If you are saying we are strong at 15 today, I don't agree; if you are saying we could be, then maybe, but you could say the same on a lot of positions, and I wouldn't say we have the deepest well to draw on in this position.
Who for you is the player we should be playing instead of the gruesome twosome?
Well you say it's not a long list, I think it is a long list but whoever is plucked from the list, and it's a bit murky who given the length of the list, will need some work. I think I'd pick Watson, Pennell or Daly, depends a bit on how EJ wants us to play and who the other selections in the backline are.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Banquo wrote:
I said it was a long list, but not helpful in the context I was describing. Though once more I have no idea what the point you are making is, or who you want from that list who isn't Goode or Brown. If you are saying we are strong at 15 today, I don't agree; if you are saying we could be, then maybe, but you could say the same on a lot of positions, and I wouldn't say we have the deepest well to draw on in this position.
Who for you is the player we should be playing instead of the gruesome twosome?
Well you say it's not a long list, I think it is a long list but whoever is plucked from the list, and it's a bit murky who given the length of the list, will need some work. I think I'd pick Watson, Pennell or Daly, depends a bit on how EJ wants us to play and who the other selections in the backline are.
Digby wrote:
The list is 11 names long, 8 of them being capped, and we've had years to build to this point. We've also got years ahead of us, but if we continue to waste those years as we have we'll continue to be rather rubbish, if on the other hand we get the selection and coaching/development right we're in a pretty good place.
I said it was a long list, but not helpful in the context I was describing. Though once more I have no idea what the point you are making is, or who you want from that list who isn't Goode or Brown. If you are saying we are strong at 15 today, I don't agree; if you are saying we could be, then maybe, but you could say the same on a lot of positions, and I wouldn't say we have the deepest well to draw on in this position.
Who for you is the player we should be playing instead of the gruesome twosome?
Well you say it's not a long list, I think it is a long list but whoever is plucked from the list, and it's a bit murky who given the length of the list, will need some work. I think I'd pick Watson, Pennell or Daly, depends a bit on how EJ wants us to play and who the other selections in the backline are.
I said it wasn't the longest list of (obvious) immediate successors to the gruesome twosome - as opposed to a long list of people who might be able to play 15 (at a big stretch in the case of Nowell, Daly, Mallinder) for England. I don't think any of the three you've finally landed on look like folks who'd make a step change there frankly. So mine is an immediate quality argument, which is different to writing down a bunch of names who are between vaguely suited and already tried.
Last edited by Banquo on Sun Apr 17, 2016 8:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Just for clarity, are these all the semi-realistic options?
Daly - has all the skills I think but isn't playing there,
Nowell - apparently used to play there quite a lot, I'm not sure he has the skills but I'm intrigued and it may suit him better than wing
Brown - out of form but solid, some seem oddly keen to suggest this is the way I've always played
Goode - great kicker, great passer, generally good under high balls, does he have any vague clue how to tackle yet? It's odd (impressive) how rarely you see anyone get him (or Ashton) one on one
Watson - now playing at 15 in a wank Bath side, I can't really tell
Tait - not convinced
Foden - been off his game for so, so long but gret on his day. Will we ever see that again?
Pennel - has the moment gone? I've not seen much of him
Miller - seems to me to be incredibly fast and incredibly flakey, is that unfair?
Haley - does look a talent but way too early
Armitage/Abendanon - presumably N/A? How old are they?
Mikey Brown wrote:Just for clarity, are these all the semi-realistic options?
Daly - has all the skills I think but isn't playing there,
Nowell - apparently used to play there quite a lot, I'm not sure he has the skills but I'm intrigued and it may suit him better than wing
Brown - out of form but solid, some seem oddly keen to suggest this is the way I've always played
Goode - great kicker, great passer, generally good under high balls, does he have any vague clue how to tackle yet? It's odd (impressive) how rarely you see anyone get him (or Ashton) one on one
Watson - now playing at 15 in a wank Bath side, I can't really tell
Tait - not convinced
Pennel - has the moment gone? I've not seen much of him
Miller - seems to me to be incredibly fast and incredibly flakey, is that unfair?
Haley - does look a talent but way too early
Armitage/Abendanon - presumably N/A? How old are they?
Missed out Mallinder- a bit early to say, but on Digby's radar.
Banquo wrote:
I said it was a long list, but not helpful in the context I was describing. Though once more I have no idea what the point you are making is, or who you want from that list who isn't Goode or Brown. If you are saying we are strong at 15 today, I don't agree; if you are saying we could be, then maybe, but you could say the same on a lot of positions, and I wouldn't say we have the deepest well to draw on in this position.
Who for you is the player we should be playing instead of the gruesome twosome?
Well you say it's not a long list, I think it is a long list but whoever is plucked from the list, and it's a bit murky who given the length of the list, will need some work. I think I'd pick Watson, Pennell or Daly, depends a bit on how EJ wants us to play and who the other selections in the backline are.
I said it wasn't the longest list of (obvious) immediate successors to the gruesome twosome - as opposed to a long list of people who might be able to play 15 (at a big stretch in the case of Nowell, Daly, Mallinder) for England. I don't think any of the three you've finally landed on look like folks who'd make a step change there frankly. So mine is an immediate quality argument, which is different to writing down a bunch of names who are between vaguely suited and already tried.
We're not always going to get immediate returns, which is why I'm grumpy about a wasted 6N.
Mikey Brown wrote:Just for clarity, are these all the semi-realistic options?
Daly - has all the skills I think but isn't playing there,
Nowell - apparently used to play there quite a lot, I'm not sure he has the skills but I'm intrigued and it may suit him better than wing
Brown - out of form but solid, some seem oddly keen to suggest this is the way I've always played
Goode - great kicker, great passer, generally good under high balls, does he have any vague clue how to tackle yet? It's odd (impressive) how rarely you see anyone get him (or Ashton) one on one
Watson - now playing at 15 in a wank Bath side, I can't really tell
Tait - not convinced
Pennel - has the moment gone? I've not seen much of him
Miller - seems to me to be incredibly fast and incredibly flakey, is that unfair?
Haley - does look a talent but way too early
Armitage/Abendanon - presumably N/A? How old are they?
Missed out Mallinder- a bit early to say, but on Digby's radar.
But yes. It's quite the armoury of weapons
Yep, not overly impressive but if a few of them (and I think Mallinder might [at15?]) get it together we might be alright.
It perplexes me that some rate Goode under the high ball. He is terrific under it but only when not under pressure. Whenever someone else is challenging he just melts away. That is not a plus point in an international FB in my book. How is Pennell playing this year? I've hardly seen any of him.
