England training squad

[Mikey Brown]

Why is it a burning question? Unless Eddie resigns or gets assassinated Farrell is 100% starting.

Ah. Beat me to it.

[Scrumhead]

As much as I hate to say it, Faz would deserve to start at 10 on current form.

[Oakboy]

As much as I hate to say it, Faz would deserve to start at 10 on current form.

Yes, unfortunately. The first AI 23 is going to be fascinating. For example, Farrell at 10? Lawes at 6 and still captain?

[Mellsblue]

Lawes is surely nailed on at 6 until the end of the World Cup.

[Scrumhead]

I thought he was very good in Australia. If he’s playing well and is doing well as captain, why drop him?

[Banquo]

I thought he was very good in Australia. If he’s playing well and is doing well as captain, why drop him?

He has become a proper job 6; tho I'd think Faz will likely want the captaincy back, so that's interesting. Faz should probs be at 10, which is depressing.

[Scrumhead]

Depends if he can transfer his club form to test rugby or not. As I’m sure you all know by now, I’m not a big Farrell fan, but I have been impressed by him so far this season.

While his pack do give him an easier ride than some, they haven’t been as dominant as has been suggested and the bigger thing for me is that he’s playing more instinctively rather than the usual ‘kick first’ mindset.

[Banquo]

Depends if he can transfer his club form to test rugby or not. As I’m sure you all know by now, I’m not a big Farrell fan, but I have been impressed by him so far this season.

While his pack do give him an easier ride than some, they haven’t been as dominant as has been suggested and the bigger thing for me is that he’s playing more instinctively rather than the usual ‘kick first’ mindset.

not convinced at all, but no fit convincing alternative.

[Scrumhead]

What ‘alternative’ are we talking about here? A 10 or a 12?

If it’s at 10, Smith is fit and playing reasonably well this season for Quins without particularly standing out. On the plus side, his kicking seems much improved - 100% so far IIRC?

Tuilagi is fit and playing at 12 but really the most noteworthy thing he’s done so far is managing to make it through a couple of games.

So we do have fit and available alternatives … in terms of form though, Farrell has had a considerably better start to the season.

The other option is potentially playing all three with Tuilagi at 13.

[Banquo]

What ‘alternative’ are we talking about here? A 10 or a 12?

If it’s at 10, Smith is fit and playing reasonably well this season for Quins without particularly standing out. On the plus side, his kicking seems much improved - 100% so far IIRC?

Tuilagi is fit and playing at 12 but really the most noteworthy thing he’s done so far is managing to make it through a couple of games.

So we do have fit and available alternatives … in terms of form though, Farrell has had a considerably better start to the season.

The other option is potentially playing all three with Tuilagi at 13.

I don't find either of those 'convincing' for differing reasons, but I was talking 10. But then I'm also not convinced its a different or better Farrell.

[Oakboy]

What ‘alternative’ are we talking about here? A 10 or a 12?

If it’s at 10, Smith is fit and playing reasonably well this season for Quins without particularly standing out. On the plus side, his kicking seems much improved - 100% so far IIRC?

Tuilagi is fit and playing at 12 but really the most noteworthy thing he’s done so far is managing to make it through a couple of games.

So we do have fit and available alternatives … in terms of form though, Farrell has had a considerably better start to the season.

The other option is potentially playing all three with Tuilagi at 13.

I don't find either of those 'convincing' for differing reasons, but I was talking 10. But then I'm also not convinced its a different or better Farrell.

Maybe, Farrell has shown some degree of aptitude in being an integral part of a changed approach by Saracens? I agree that his basic skills are unchanged but maybe a revised mind-set could be to England's benefit? I'd go as far as to say that he does not look uncomfortable with it.

As ever, we don't know what is said in the dressing room. To what extent does Farrell perform how he does by coaching instruction? Does that lead to a difference between what he does do and what he can do? He's never going to look like a slick, natural player, IMO, but he can be an effective team cog (at 10 anyway).

[Banquo]

What ‘alternative’ are we talking about here? A 10 or a 12?

If it’s at 10, Smith is fit and playing reasonably well this season for Quins without particularly standing out. On the plus side, his kicking seems much improved - 100% so far IIRC?

Tuilagi is fit and playing at 12 but really the most noteworthy thing he’s done so far is managing to make it through a couple of games.

So we do have fit and available alternatives … in terms of form though, Farrell has had a considerably better start to the season.

The other option is potentially playing all three with Tuilagi at 13.

I don't find either of those 'convincing' for differing reasons, but I was talking 10. But then I'm also not convinced its a different or better Farrell.

Maybe, Farrell has shown some degree of aptitude in being an integral part of a changed approach by Saracens? I agree that his basic skills are unchanged but maybe a revised mind-set could be to England's benefit? I'd go as far as to say that he does not look uncomfortable with it.

As ever, we don't know what is said in the dressing room. To what extent does Farrell perform how he does by coaching instruction? Does that lead to a difference between what he does do and what he can do? He's never going to look like a slick, natural player, IMO, but he can be an effective team cog (at 10 anyway).

Yep, sarries are playing very differently- not only demonstrated by the grounds their forwards especially are making, but also by the points they've shipped . They are kicking less from 9 and 10, and keeping it more in the hands, and/but Faz is acting as a pivot most of the time. He's always been pretty comfortable doing this at club level. Cog is right.

[Scrumhead]

What ‘alternative’ are we talking about here? A 10 or a 12?

If it’s at 10, Smith is fit and playing reasonably well this season for Quins without particularly standing out. On the plus side, his kicking seems much improved - 100% so far IIRC?

Tuilagi is fit and playing at 12 but really the most noteworthy thing he’s done so far is managing to make it through a couple of games.

So we do have fit and available alternatives … in terms of form though, Farrell has had a considerably better start to the season.

The other option is potentially playing all three with Tuilagi at 13.

I don't find either of those 'convincing' for differing reasons, but I was talking 10. But then I'm also not convinced its a different or better Farrell.

Maybe, Farrell has shown some degree of aptitude in being an integral part of a changed approach by Saracens? I agree that his basic skills are unchanged but maybe a revised mind-set could be to England's benefit? I'd go as far as to say that he does not look uncomfortable with it.

As ever, we don't know what is said in the dressing room. To what extent does Farrell perform how he does by coaching instruction? Does that lead to a difference between what he does do and what he can do? He's never going to look like a slick, natural player, IMO, but he can be an effective team cog (at 10 anyway).

I agree completely.

I don’t think it’s a ‘different or better Farrell’ as such. However, my main criticism of him in the past was his tendency to play robotic, pre-planned rugby regardless of what was in front of him. That mostly manifested itself in failing to see overlaps and exploit space.

It can’t have helped that Saracens’ main tactic was kick, chase, rinse, repeat. Now they’re playing more heads-up rugby, he’s actually being encouraged to play a bit more instinctively and looking better for it. I’m not saying he’s magically become a creative wizard, but if he’s showing more to his game, I’m happy to give credit where credit is due.

[Banquo]

I don't find either of those 'convincing' for differing reasons, but I was talking 10. But then I'm also not convinced its a different or better Farrell.

Maybe, Farrell has shown some degree of aptitude in being an integral part of a changed approach by Saracens? I agree that his basic skills are unchanged but maybe a revised mind-set could be to England's benefit? I'd go as far as to say that he does not look uncomfortable with it.

As ever, we don't know what is said in the dressing room. To what extent does Farrell perform how he does by coaching instruction? Does that lead to a difference between what he does do and what he can do? He's never going to look like a slick, natural player, IMO, but he can be an effective team cog (at 10 anyway).

I agree completely.

I don’t think it’s a ‘different or better Farrell’ as such. However, my main criticism of him in the past was his tendency to play robotic, pre-planned rugby regardless of what was in front of him. That mostly manifested itself in failing to see overlaps and exploit space.

It can’t have helped that Saracens’ main tactic was kick, chase, rinse, repeat. Now they’re playing more heads-up rugby, he’s actually being encouraged to play a bit more instinctively and looking better for it. I’m not saying he’s magically become a creative wizard, but if he’s showing more to his game, I’m happy to give credit where credit is due.

....I'm not convinced . I think he's just doing more passing and less kicking- the step change for sarries I think is how the forwards are carrying. He's always looked relatively comfy in a Sarries shirt, the difference is when he has little to no time...which is intl rugby. BUT can only judge on club form, and I'd likely pick him at 10 for the AI's.

[Mellsblue]

Will be interesting to see how he, and Sarries, go once the oppo have plenty of tape on their new structures.

[Banquo]

Will be interesting to see how he, and Sarries, go once the oppo have plenty of tape on their new structures.

Given how canny McCall is, I suspect they are experimenting with this new style to develop their overall game, and will have some triggers to reverting to more standard fare. I think their weakness is at 9 at the moment- workmanlike, but nothing special imo; also, their pack back 5 is mobile (in fact the whole pack), but without Itoje lacking a bit of physicality, so spreading the game suits.

[Mellsblue]

‘When I arrived in England in 2018, the rule was that you are eligible to play after three years of residency. I moved to Exeter and went straight on loan to Cornish Pirates. Two months later, the rule went up to five years. I was living in the UK for three years straight and I couldn’t go home because of Covid. That’s why!’

Well done FKAS for finding an answer from the horse's mouth (even if delivered via a shitrag). Although "I only didn't go home because of a pandemic" doesn't exactly scream a deep and abiding love for this country.

However, I'm not convinced that Schickerling's right that he is eligible. I was under the impression that you had to be capped by a certain date to fall under the 3 years ruling, otherwise you then dropped onto the 5 years one.

ETA. This article certainly seems to agree with me: https://www.rugbypass.com/news/new-elig ... om-injury/

ETETA. I've just read the WR regulations and I'm almost certain that I'm right: https://www.world.rugby/organisation/go ... appendix-3. The footnote specifically states, "The sixty-month residency requirement comes into effect after the cut-off date of December 31, 2021. The residency requirement up to and including December 31, 2021 is “thirty-six consecutive months of Residence immediately preceding the time of playing”." So anyone not already captured for a nation by December 31, 2021, then falls under the new regulation of 60 months residency.

Can anyone refute that? Am I reading something wrong? I can't believe the RFU *haven't* checked this, as it seems an incredibly basic thing to do, but I've learned in my life never to underestimate people's capacity for unexpected idiocy.

Puja

No idea of this guy is but a few people you can trust follow him on Twatter:

[Puja]

‘When I arrived in England in 2018, the rule was that you are eligible to play after three years of residency. I moved to Exeter and went straight on loan to Cornish Pirates. Two months later, the rule went up to five years. I was living in the UK for three years straight and I couldn’t go home because of Covid. That’s why!’

Well done FKAS for finding an answer from the horse's mouth (even if delivered via a shitrag). Although "I only didn't go home because of a pandemic" doesn't exactly scream a deep and abiding love for this country.

However, I'm not convinced that Schickerling's right that he is eligible. I was under the impression that you had to be capped by a certain date to fall under the 3 years ruling, otherwise you then dropped onto the 5 years one.

ETA. This article certainly seems to agree with me: https://www.rugbypass.com/news/new-elig ... om-injury/

ETETA. I've just read the WR regulations and I'm almost certain that I'm right: https://www.world.rugby/organisation/go ... appendix-3. The footnote specifically states, "The sixty-month residency requirement comes into effect after the cut-off date of December 31, 2021. The residency requirement up to and including December 31, 2021 is “thirty-six consecutive months of Residence immediately preceding the time of playing”." So anyone not already captured for a nation by December 31, 2021, then falls under the new regulation of 60 months residency.

Can anyone refute that? Am I reading something wrong? I can't believe the RFU *haven't* checked this, as it seems an incredibly basic thing to do, but I've learned in my life never to underestimate people's capacity for unexpected idiocy.

Puja

No idea of this guy is but a few people you can trust follow him on Twatter:

He runs Americas Rugby News, IIRC, whcih is a fairly solid T2 and T3 focussed website. He's pretty well informed.

Puja

[Scrumhead]

It’s always looked a little shonky … I hope the RFU have done their due diligence or this would be very embarrassing indeed.