England v Wales - Team Announcement

[Oakboy]

I think Smith is the correct selection at 10, all criticism aside. I'm not sure Randall is the correct selection at 9 despite the absence of criticism. Slade at 12 is an OK selection, all factors considered. Daly at 13 is daft. He's a winger.

[Which Tyler]

I think Smith is the correct selection at 10, all criticism aside. I'm not sure Randall is the correct selection at 9 despite the absence of criticism. Slade at 12 is an OK selection, all factors considered. Daly at 13 is daft. He's a winger.

Here here

[Banquo]

Should focus on caps not age. This strange criticism of Smith raises the question as to what they are instructing him to do at training. Not like they haven’t had in camp over the last 6 weeks

He has 7 caps then. Why is the criticism’strange’? Acknowledging that he has a great skill set but is in a misfiring team is surely valid?

‘Strange’ was more reference to the implication in Puja’s post not yours. Mind you I still feel the issue is Slade trying to do the Farrell role when we should be fielding a direct runner at 12.

well, he did try with the only option. And have been saying the same in respect to Ford and before for well over a decade

[Banquo]

I think Smith is the correct selection at 10, all criticism aside. I'm not sure Randall is the correct selection at 9 despite the absence of criticism. Slade at 12 is an OK selection, all factors considered. Daly at 13 is daft. He's a winger.

I did call out his mediocrity and passing.

The Daly thing is just odd, as twas Eddie who made a star of him on the wing in the first place

[Puja]

You are right if course. But it is still quite early in his international career. I agree he has to broaden his vision to a wider, more team-orientated approach, but that will come. For that he will need some help both inside and outside the FH position at 9 and 12. I just don't like to see an obviously talented player get some flack (even if deserved) while his ponderous mates in the three quarters keep turning in sub par performances with little negative comment. Only last week I read some article talking about the "electric" Slade. (I think he's recently blown a fuse.)

Yes, because Young's, Farrell, Slade etc are all totally immune to criticism on RR...

I am not having a pop at you, but some other posters here seem to be laying many of England's woes on Smith's shoulders when the faults lie elsewhere.

Wait, what? Posters here?

I believe that's me.

While I'm not particularly sold on Slade/Daly (either as international centres or as a combination), is Smith really creating anything for either of them? I can't really think of an opportunity where Smith opened a hole for someone else this 6N (nb, have memory problems, so willing to be corrected), whereas I can think of a couple where the men outside him were forced to stutter step as he thought he saw a gap, then changed his mind.

I will note I'm not saying he's terrible, just that he's young and learning and that's one of our problems. When the backline doesn't create anything all game under Ford or Farrell, we blame the fly-half for having a bad game, not say that the faults lie with the three-quarters

Puja

[fivepointer]

We're in danger of focusing on the input of one player in why the team isnt firing on all cylinders.

Smith has a role to play and he will develop as he gains greater experience and those around him understand what he can do. He's got a ton of promise but is green in international terms.

But he doesnt pick the team, nor decide on tactics and he cannot influence what is happening in the set pieces or at the breakdown. He cant feed runners when none exist and its difficult for any FH to fashion a dynamic attack when the ball is slow or poorly presented.

[twitchy]

I just copied the first bit of the article.


England had 47 different instances of possession during their unconvincing win over Wales on Saturday at Twickenham. Fourteen of those ended with spills, turnovers or opposition penalties. There were 34 kicks from hand, some of which were regathered by England. Starkly, just three of the hosts’ points were earned by pressure exerted through phase-play.

Four of the penalties converted by Marcus Smith were won in defence by disruptive jackalling. Another came when Nick Isiekwe was taken out at a late lineout. Alex Dombrandt’s try, of course, came from a Wales set piece that malfunctioned due to Maro Itoje’s nudge on Adam Beard. None of this is a glowing endorsement of England’s attack, which sometimes looked over-complicated as well as under-powered and imbalanced.

Statistician Russ Petty has noted that Opta recorded just two clean breaks for England. Only three times previously under Eddie Jones have they done as badly or worse by that measure. In the World Cup final against South Africa and amid a Murrayfield monsoon a few months later they also managed two. During last year’s loss to Scotland, they failed to create a single one. It could have been worse, at least.
The theory

Eddie Jones was given a chance to outline England’s attacking principles afterwards. He has often spoken about how England do not want to conform to a certain structure. Here is his rationale:

“We don’t play any sort of formation. Most teams around the world play a 1-3-3-1 or a 2-4-2 where the forwards are in certain positions on the field. We play a completely free formation. On a set phase we have the first two phases organised, to get us on the front foot, and then we want the nine, 10 and 12 to be organising the attack and taking the opportunities quickly. There’s much more free decision-making for the players in our attack than there is maybe in a formation attack.”

A “formation attack” is founded upon certain forwards holding width while others hold the middle. Think of how Kieran Read, the great New Zealand number eight, would often hug touchlines. The idea of a zonal system is that big-hitters – often props and locks – occupy the three- and four-man pods, staying central to conserve energy and generate quick ball so that more dynamic carriers can operate in space further out.

In recent years, a 1-3-2-2 shape has emerged. Japan showcased it at their home World Cup in spectacular style and England toyed with it themselves a year ago. But, as Connacht senior coach Pete Wilkins told Telegraph Sport last month, the most sophisticated attacks are shunning structure in favour of spontaneity because defences thrive if they can easily identify what their opponents are up to.

This chimes with Jones’ thinking. He believes that fluidity is the way forward for England, because it gives them greater potential. That said, he acknowledges that it will take longer to click:

“[The system] has got no ceiling, as your attack is completely unpredictable. But obviously it takes more time to get right and takes more cohesion and combinations. There’s a smart guy in Australia called Ben Darwin. He talks about cohesion all the time. When I coached him, he couldn’t even spell the word cohesion. Now he’s the world expert on cohesion. It’s true. When the players play to the ball more than they play away from the ball, it takes a lot more cohesion to get that right. We’re going to be peaking at the World Cup, we’re quite clear about that.”

Club and provincial teams, like Connacht, have more scope to develop cohesion. England have limited opportunities in this regard and their sprawling club scene does not have the inherent advantages of a professional system with fewer sides, such as that of Ireland.

Whether or not Jones is right to frame everything so rigidly by World Cup cycles is a separate debate. His paymasters at the RFU have clearly granted him licence to do so. With that freedom, he is playing the long game with regard to England’s attacking development.

[Mikey Brown]

Well let’s hope he’s left himself enough time.

It’s strange having found him to be overly prescriptive for such a long time, and wanting the team to play a bit more heads-up, but it feels like a very dramatic shift (along with many other personnel changes) to be making at this stage.

As always with Eddie there’s a *assuming he actually means/believes anything he’s saying.

[Which Tyler]

While I'm not particularly sold on Slade/Daly (either as international centres or as a combination), is Smith really creating anything for either of them? I can't really think of an opportunity where Smith opened a hole for someone else this 6N (nb, have memory problems, so willing to be corrected), whereas I can think of a couple where the men outside him were forced to stutter step as he thought he saw a gap, then changed his mind.

Surely, that all counts as "valid criticisms of an individual player" not "laying many of England's woes on Smith's shoulders when the faults lie elsewhere"?

[jngf]

Is Lawes at 6 still working for those in favour of it or are there any takers for my T Curry S Simmonds England flanker combo (and I’m genuinely openminded as to which 6 and which is 7 )?
(Nb Dombrandt would be my first choice 8)

[Banquo]

Well done everyone

[Mellsblue]

Well done everyone

[Which Tyler]

So...
As there's nothing else to talk about...
What's your backline against Ireland?

[Banquo]

So...
As there's nothing else to talk about...
What's your backline against Ireland?

very difficult without knowing the backrow

[Mellsblue]

So...
As there's nothing else to talk about...
What's your backline against Ireland?

very difficult without knowing the backrow

You’re on form today.

[Banquo]

So...
As there's nothing else to talk about...
What's your backline against Ireland?

very difficult without knowing the backrow

You’re on form today.

stuck clock and all that

[Mikey Brown]

Anyone know what the Tuilagi situation is? My head says we should just forget about him entirely at this point, but it would be hard to resist playing him if he is available.

I'd guess there's not much use planning for him to be fit either way. I just don't want to see Daly at 13 again.

There are quite a few changes I'm tempted by, something like Marler, George, Sink, Launch, Itoje, Randall, Smith, Daly, Slade, Marchant, Nowell, Steward but that feels like quite a lot of shuffling. I wish we could be bedding these halfbacks in alongside a more experienced partner, but it seems a bit pointless to switch to Youngs/Smith or Randall/Ford at this stage.

[Banquo]

Anyone know what the Tuilagi situation is? My head says we should just forget about him entirely at this point, but it would be hard to resist playing him if he is available.

I'd guess there's not much use planning for him to be fit either way. I just don't want to see Daly at 13 again.

There are quite a few changes I'm tempted by, something like Marler, George, Sink, Launch, Itoje, Randall, Smith, Daly, Slade, Marchant, Nowell, Steward but that feels like quite a lot of shuffling. I wish we could be bedding these halfbacks in alongside a more experienced partner, but it seems a bit pointless to switch to Youngs/Smith or Randall/Ford at this stage.

Full marks for avoiding a back row debate

Think I'd go with that backline in the absence of any convincing alternatives tbh- it looks very samey bar Steward (unsurprising as all the 3/4's have been touted at 13 at one time or another!), but we aren't awash with backs demanding to be picked.

[Mikey Brown]

Yep, could really do with a point of difference in there but it doesn't feel like we're suddenly going to be unleashing an international quality Mark Atkinson on the world any time soon.

[Mellsblue]

Anyone know what the Tuilagi situation is?

Jones is quoted yesterday as saying they’re looking at a 10 day recovery time and it was touch-and-go as to whether he’d make it for Ireland.

[Oakboy]

I said before the Wales game that I did not like both Malins and Nowell on the wings. I felt it should be either/or and nothing on Saturday altered my opinion. Daly should be on the wing or not in the 23.

I have reservations about Marchant but it seems pointless to me to NOT reach the stage of making a permanent in/out decision on him. He's definitely better than he has shown so far and buggering about with Tuilagi and Daly instead of giving him starts through to the end of the 6N is plain wrong, IMO.

I'd go with MB's backline for both remaining matches. Malins or Tuilagi on the bench makes sense.

I'm still not convinced by Randall but I'd give him both starts.

As for the forwards, is there any news on Jonny Hill? Despite lots of reservation expressed on here in past months he has been sorely missed. He and Itoje are a far more effective 2nd row than Itoje with Isiekwe or Ewels. If we could have Launchbury on the bench as well it would be something to make the opposition think.

Is Blamire going to get the 16 shirt if LCD is out?

Back row? Mmm . .

[jngf]

I said before the Wales game that I did not like both Malins and Nowell on the wings. I felt it should be either/or and nothing on Saturday altered my opinion. Daly should be on the wing or not in the 23.

I have reservations about Marchant but it seems pointless to me to NOT reach the stage of making a permanent in/out decision on him. He's definitely better than he has shown so far and buggering about with Tuilagi and Daly instead of giving him starts through to the end of the 6N is plain wrong, IMO.

I'd go with MB's backline for both remaining matches. Malins or Tuilagi on the bench makes sense.

I'm still not convinced by Randall but I'd give him both starts.

As for the forwards, is there any news on Jonny Hill? Despite lots of reservation expressed on here in past months he has been sorely missed. He and Itoje are a far more effective 2nd row than Itoje with Isiekwe or Ewels. If we could have Launchbury on the bench as well it would be something to make the opposition think.

Is Blamire going to get the 16 shirt if LCD is out?

Back row? Mmm . .

Willemse and Woki seems to work well for France, Itoje has a similar style to Woki ( though not quite as mobile about the park imo) - Launchbury or Hill could play the Willemse role?

[Mikey Brown]

So... play Itoje and a tight-head lock? Good call. Solid stuff.

[Danno]

Anyone know what the Tuilagi situation is? My head says we should just forget about him entirely at this point, but it would be hard to resist playing him if he is available.

Even then I'd suggest only ever benching him. He pulled out at the 11hour, so we presumably trained around him starting, which would have wasted far more of that training than planning on getting him on at 60mins. No chance of him breaking 7mins in and if he breaks at 67mins then we'd only have to ride out the last 15.

[Oakboy]

Anyone know what the Tuilagi situation is? My head says we should just forget about him entirely at this point, but it would be hard to resist playing him if he is available.

Even then I'd suggest only ever benching him. He pulled out at the 11hour, so we presumably trained around him starting, which would have wasted far more of that training than planning on getting him on at 60mins. No chance of him breaking 7mins in and if he breaks at 67mins then we'd only have to ride out the last 15.

Quite. Building an approach around him smacks a bit of desperation anyway, after only one club game back from yet another injury. It would be simple enough to have him as a bench option and give him a start in the future if ever he goes, say, three months injury-free (if that ever happens).