Autumn International Squad

[Margin_Walker]

The description of his injury in that Twitter update sounded pretty bad to me (in all my medical expertise) so it doesn’t seem too surprising, even though it said he might be fine. Doesn’t really seem worth the risk with such a promising youngster.

Yeah, I'm no doctor, but I didn't like the sound of an old break being aggravated to a point where he was in that much discomfort on the pitch. You'd probably rather it was a minor sprain.

Definitely not worth taking any chances this series for me. Will leave it to the experts though.

[Scrumhead]

Whose development has been ruined by Tuilagi's games for England? I think every England coach is aware Manu can't be counted on but no one has managed to step up it seems to me.

11 years is a long time.

It’s not that Tuilagi’s games for England ‘ruined’ anyone’s development. More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside. Perhaps no one absolutely demanded to keep it, but I’d also say that a lot of our 13s have been practically ignored when they have played because Farrell kicked away he majority of our possession. Tuilagi and maybe Slade are more or less the only ones that ever seem to get the ball. Sure Lawrence didn’t shine, but IIRC he barely got given the ball and then got criticised for not being involved enough.

More recently, Marchant should definitely have had more of a run in the side but got shunted out to the wing for Tuilagi. Despite the fact he’s upset Eddie, I don’t think he’s ever had a bad game for England and IMO has looked perfectly at home at test level.

[FKAS]

Whose development has been ruined by Tuilagi's games for England? I think every England coach is aware Manu can't be counted on but no one has managed to step up it seems to me.

11 years is a long time.

It’s not that Tuilagi’s games for England ‘ruined’ anyone’s development. More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside. Perhaps no one absolutely demanded to keep it, but I’d also say that a lot of our 13s have been practically ignored when they have played because Farrell kicked away he majority of our possession. Tuilagi and maybe Slade are more or less the only ones that ever seem to get the ball. Sure Lawrence didn’t shine, but IIRC he barely got given the ball and then got criticised for not being involved enough.

More recently, Marchant should definitely have had more of a run in the side but got shunted out to the wing for Tuilagi. Despite the fact he’s upset Eddie, I don’t think he’s ever had a bad game for England and IMO has looked perfectly at home at test level.

That's been one of the issues in recent times for most of the 13s. I don't think Marchant and Porter got more than a half dozen carries between them over the three games this summer. It's a tough ask for most centres to provide the big impact Manu can make off two carries in a game.

[Oakboy]

Whose development has been ruined by Tuilagi's games for England? I think every England coach is aware Manu can't be counted on but no one has managed to step up it seems to me.

11 years is a long time.

It’s not that Tuilagi’s games for England ‘ruined’ anyone’s development. More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside. Perhaps no one absolutely demanded to keep it, but I’d also say that a lot of our 13s have been practically ignored when they have played because Farrell kicked away he majority of our possession. Tuilagi and maybe Slade are more or less the only ones that ever seem to get the ball. Sure Lawrence didn’t shine, but IIRC he barely got given the ball and then got criticised for not being involved enough.

More recently, Marchant should definitely have had more of a run in the side but got shunted out to the wing for Tuilagi. Despite the fact he’s upset Eddie, I don’t think he’s ever had a bad game for England and IMO has looked perfectly at home at test level.

That's been one of the issues in recent times for most of the 13s. I don't think Marchant and Porter got more than a half dozen carries between them over the three games this summer. It's a tough ask for most centres to provide the big impact Manu can make off two carries in a game.

I think you have just summed it up. Does Tuilagi's two decent carries every 6th game, when he happens to be available, total a more telling overall contribution than Marchant's, say, had he played all six games?

As ever it is not what a player CAN do. It is what he DOES do.

The comment, 'nobody else has stepped up' is only part of the issue. How many professional players really make a telling statement in the odd game here and there, knowing that they are out on their ear whenever the boss's favourite deigns to be available? Worse still, IMO, is the overall effect on the squad as players tiptoe around the problem. The point is that nobody else can do what Tuilagi does so his presence/absence dictates the shape of the whole training camp. It must be disruptive.

[Banquo]

Whose development has been ruined by Tuilagi's games for England? I think every England coach is aware Manu can't be counted on but no one has managed to step up it seems to me.

11 years is a long time.

It’s not that Tuilagi’s games for England ‘ruined’ anyone’s development. More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside. Perhaps no one absolutely demanded to keep it, but I’d also say that a lot of our 13s have been practically ignored when they have played because Farrell kicked away he majority of our possession. Tuilagi and maybe Slade are more or less the only ones that ever seem to get the ball. Sure Lawrence didn’t shine, but IIRC he barely got given the ball and then got criticised for not being involved enough.

More recently, Marchant should definitely have had more of a run in the side but got shunted out to the wing for Tuilagi. Despite the fact he’s upset Eddie, I don’t think he’s ever had a bad game for England and IMO has looked perfectly at home at test level.

Slade and JJ have had a load of time at 13. The latter was mostly very good there, the former ok. As above, there hasn't been a host knocking the door down, though I agree Marchant's treatment is odd.

(I'd think our kicking from 9 has been as much a culprit; Faz doesn't kick that much from 12 either tbh)

[Banquo]

11 years is a long time.

It’s not that Tuilagi’s games for England ‘ruined’ anyone’s development. More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside. Perhaps no one absolutely demanded to keep it, but I’d also say that a lot of our 13s have been practically ignored when they have played because Farrell kicked away he majority of our possession. Tuilagi and maybe Slade are more or less the only ones that ever seem to get the ball. Sure Lawrence didn’t shine, but IIRC he barely got given the ball and then got criticised for not being involved enough.

More recently, Marchant should definitely have had more of a run in the side but got shunted out to the wing for Tuilagi. Despite the fact he’s upset Eddie, I don’t think he’s ever had a bad game for England and IMO has looked perfectly at home at test level.

That's been one of the issues in recent times for most of the 13s. I don't think Marchant and Porter got more than a half dozen carries between them over the three games this summer. It's a tough ask for most centres to provide the big impact Manu can make off two carries in a game.

As ever it is not what a player CAN do. It is what he DOES do.

The comment, 'nobody else has stepped up' is only part of the issue. How many professional players really make a telling statement in the odd game here and there, knowing that they are out on their ear whenever the boss's favourite deigns to be available?

what does this mean?

[fivepointer]

11 years is a long time.

It’s not that Tuilagi’s games for England ‘ruined’ anyone’s development. More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside. Perhaps no one absolutely demanded to keep it, but I’d also say that a lot of our 13s have been practically ignored when they have played because Farrell kicked away he majority of our possession. Tuilagi and maybe Slade are more or less the only ones that ever seem to get the ball. Sure Lawrence didn’t shine, but IIRC he barely got given the ball and then got criticised for not being involved enough.

More recently, Marchant should definitely have had more of a run in the side but got shunted out to the wing for Tuilagi. Despite the fact he’s upset Eddie, I don’t think he’s ever had a bad game for England and IMO has looked perfectly at home at test level.

That's been one of the issues in recent times for most of the 13s. I don't think Marchant and Porter got more than a half dozen carries between them over the three games this summer. It's a tough ask for most centres to provide the big impact Manu can make off two carries in a game.

I think you have just summed it up. Does Tuilagi's two decent carries every 6th game, when he happens to be available, total a more telling overall contribution than Marchant's, say, had he played all six games?

As ever it is not what a player CAN do. It is what he DOES do.

The comment, 'nobody else has stepped up' is only part of the issue. How many professional players really make a telling statement in the odd game here and there, knowing that they are out on their ear whenever the boss's favourite deigns to be available? Worse still, IMO, is the overall effect on the squad as players tiptoe around the problem. The point is that nobody else can do what Tuilagi does so his presence/absence dictates the shape of the whole training camp. It must be disruptive.

I guess the answer to the question is that the coaches do think Tuilagi's limited impacts over the course of his career are worth more than what others can bring. They are content to bring him in when he's fit and to discard others.
It makes sense if Tuilagi really does elevate our game and if we are appreciably better when he plays.
But are we? I'm not convinced he's given us much since the WC - 6 games and 1 try but i'm struggling to think of a game when i've thought that Tuilagi was the difference and played a key role.
You've got to cut a special player some slack, and its certainly true that when he's at his best, Tuilagi is a special player. But he is 31 now with more time off than on and its reasonable to ask whether he justifies a place in the side.

[Scrumhead]

Whose development has been ruined by Tuilagi's games for England? I think every England coach is aware Manu can't be counted on but no one has managed to step up it seems to me.

11 years is a long time.

It’s not that Tuilagi’s games for England ‘ruined’ anyone’s development. More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside. Perhaps no one absolutely demanded to keep it, but I’d also say that a lot of our 13s have been practically ignored when they have played because Farrell kicked away he majority of our possession. Tuilagi and maybe Slade are more or less the only ones that ever seem to get the ball. Sure Lawrence didn’t shine, but IIRC he barely got given the ball and then got criticised for not being involved enough.

More recently, Marchant should definitely have had more of a run in the side but got shunted out to the wing for Tuilagi. Despite the fact he’s upset Eddie, I don’t think he’s ever had a bad game for England and IMO has looked perfectly at home at test level.

Slade and JJ have had a load of time at 13. The latter was mostly very good there, the former ok. As above, there hasn't been a host knocking the door down, though I agree Marchant's treatment is odd.

(I'd think our kicking from 9 has been as much a culprit; Faz doesn't kick that much from 12 either tbh)

I agree re. JJ but IIRC, he only really got that extended run because Tuilagi wasn’t available. I don’t recall them playing in tandem and I strongly suspect that Tuilagi would have got the nod at 13 if it was a straight choice between them, regardless of whether JJ deserved to keep the shirt or not.

[Banquo]

11 years is a long time.

It’s not that Tuilagi’s games for England ‘ruined’ anyone’s development. More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside. Perhaps no one absolutely demanded to keep it, but I’d also say that a lot of our 13s have been practically ignored when they have played because Farrell kicked away he majority of our possession. Tuilagi and maybe Slade are more or less the only ones that ever seem to get the ball. Sure Lawrence didn’t shine, but IIRC he barely got given the ball and then got criticised for not being involved enough.

More recently, Marchant should definitely have had more of a run in the side but got shunted out to the wing for Tuilagi. Despite the fact he’s upset Eddie, I don’t think he’s ever had a bad game for England and IMO has looked perfectly at home at test level.

Slade and JJ have had a load of time at 13. The latter was mostly very good there, the former ok. As above, there hasn't been a host knocking the door down, though I agree Marchant's treatment is odd.

(I'd think our kicking from 9 has been as much a culprit; Faz doesn't kick that much from 12 either tbh)

I agree re. JJ but IIRC, he only really got that extended run because Tuilagi wasn’t available. I don’t recall them playing in tandem and I strongly suspect that Tuilagi would have got the nod at 13 if it was a straight choice between them, regardless of whether JJ deserved to keep the shirt or not.

Irrespective of why, two players have had extended runs at 13, and JJ made a very good fist of it- so there have been two players who have had a lot of time in the shirt, contrary to what you said. Who are the these 13's that have been ignored because Farrell kicked the ball away (do you mean at 10 or 12? cos he really doesn't kick much from 12)?

[Scrumhead]

I didn’t say no-one had any ‘time in the shirt’ though. I said that almost every 13 we’ve had over the past 11 years has been treated as a stop gap solution while Tuilagi was unavailable. I stand by that.

As for 13s being ignored, it may be more of a perception than a fact, but the recent stats suggest that whoever is wearing that shirt has little involvement in attack. Maybe Farrell is not solely to blame for that, but tactically, I feel like our 13s get a raw deal.

[Banquo]

I didn’t say no-one had any ‘time in the shirt’ though. I said that almost every 13 we’ve had over the past 11 years has been treated as a stop gap solution while Tuilagi was unavailable. I stand by that.

As for 13s being ignored, it may be more of a perception than a fact, but the recent stats suggest that whoever is wearing that shirt has little involvement in attack. Maybe Farrell is not solely to blame for that, but tactically, I feel like our 13s get a raw deal.

you said -More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside- the first part just isn't correct, albeit possibly because he had some long term injuries. Two players have had extended runs in the 13 shirt. Your second point is kinda moot, as he has been unavailable a lot.

I think it is perception; which 13's are you talking about? I think Porter wasn't necessarily trusted to do much, in a side which was a bit backed into a corner. I think in general, we haven't produced that much talent in midfield tbf- we've all banged on for years about 12's, but there aren't and haven't been many 13's that I've thought were the business, JJ stands out tbh, but lost his way after injury. Its why Manu continually gets recalled- tbf I agree with the general thrust that picking him seems increasingly forlorn, but I don't believe that's really hampered others.

[Stom]

I didn’t say no-one had any ‘time in the shirt’ though. I said that almost every 13 we’ve had over the past 11 years has been treated as a stop gap solution while Tuilagi was unavailable. I stand by that.

As for 13s being ignored, it may be more of a perception than a fact, but the recent stats suggest that whoever is wearing that shirt has little involvement in attack. Maybe Farrell is not solely to blame for that, but tactically, I feel like our 13s get a raw deal.

you said -More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside- the first part just isn't correct, albeit possibly because he had some long term injuries. Two players have had extended runs in the 13 shirt. Your second point is kinda moot, as he has been unavailable a lot.

I think it is perception; which 13's are you talking about? I think Porter wasn't necessarily trusted to do much, in a side which was a bit backed into a corner. I think in general, we haven't produced that much talent in midfield tbf- we've all banged on for years about 12's, but there aren't and haven't been many 13's that I've thought were the business, JJ stands out tbh, but lost his way after injury. Its why Manu continually gets recalled- tbf I agree with the general thrust that picking him seems increasingly forlorn, but I don't believe that's really hampered others.

The thing is, while I agree with you, I absolutely get where scrum is coming from.

Our centres haven't really been given a chance, whether through chopping and changing or through a system that does not make the most out of their talents.

Sure, you build a tactic around your best players and making the most out of them, but we've had outside centres who have line breaking ability for years, we've just not built a system that allowed them to show it off. All of JJ, Slade, and Marchant have the ability to not just execute a very nice outside break, but to slip through midfield gaps. But under Jones we've not been interested in that, it's all been about using centres to stretch play and create imbalances in the defensive line that our power runners can exploit.

While, sure, this makes the most out of some of our players, it doesn't show off the skills of our centres much.

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah, I get the idea of any other centre just being a placeholder until Manu comes back, but that was often years at a time where he wasn’t really even in the conversation.

Joseph and Slade were the incumbents for a good period I’d say. You could argue Lawrence was a bit unfairly brought in with the expectation of being Manu 2, not given the ball, and then ditched, but that’s not really based on much.

Actually developing a plan to use the other centre options well is another matter I guess. You could say picking Farrell at 12 demands a 13 like Manu, I don’t know, but our tactics/coaching have been so inconsistent it’s hard to say.

[Oakboy]

Yeah, I get the idea of any other centre just being a placeholder until Manu comes back, but that was often years at a time where he wasn’t really even in the conversation.

Joseph and Slade were the incumbents for a good period I’d say. You could argue Lawrence was a bit unfairly brought in with the expectation of being Manu 2, not given the ball, and then ditched, but that’s not really based on much.

Actually developing a plan to use the other centre options well is another matter I guess. You could say picking Farrell at 12 demands a 13 like Manu, I don’t know, but our tactics/coaching have been so inconsistent it’s hard to say.

IMO, had he been used properly, Slade was the real deal at 12 or 13. He was only ever a 3rd choice centre in Jones's eyes. JJ, for a time, was rated slightly higher but both, no matter what their contribution, knew that Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi was the first choice group. I have no stomach for detailed statistics but I wonder how many caps Slade and JJ got without either Farrell as a blockage or Tuilagi as a battering ram. Whatever the real merits of Farrell or Tuilagi may be (have been), there are reasonable doubts about Jones's genuine intention to build a new centre pairing.

One wonders where it leaves Smith. Until the next RWC has been and gone, he has to face playing with Farrell and Tuilagi at centre if both are available. Conversely, if either or both are unavailable, he has to prepare for a totally different playing style with a real chance that he will carry the can for any lack of creativity.

[Banquo]

I didn’t say no-one had any ‘time in the shirt’ though. I said that almost every 13 we’ve had over the past 11 years has been treated as a stop gap solution while Tuilagi was unavailable. I stand by that.

As for 13s being ignored, it may be more of a perception than a fact, but the recent stats suggest that whoever is wearing that shirt has little involvement in attack. Maybe Farrell is not solely to blame for that, but tactically, I feel like our 13s get a raw deal.

you said -More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside- the first part just isn't correct, albeit possibly because he had some long term injuries. Two players have had extended runs in the 13 shirt. Your second point is kinda moot, as he has been unavailable a lot.

I think it is perception; which 13's are you talking about? I think Porter wasn't necessarily trusted to do much, in a side which was a bit backed into a corner. I think in general, we haven't produced that much talent in midfield tbf- we've all banged on for years about 12's, but there aren't and haven't been many 13's that I've thought were the business, JJ stands out tbh, but lost his way after injury. Its why Manu continually gets recalled- tbf I agree with the general thrust that picking him seems increasingly forlorn, but I don't believe that's really hampered others.

The thing is, while I agree with you, I absolutely get where scrum is coming from.

Our centres haven't really been given a chance, whether through chopping and changing or through a system that does not make the most out of their talents.

Sure, you build a tactic around your best players and making the most out of them, but we've had outside centres who have line breaking ability for years, we've just not built a system that allowed them to show it off. All of JJ, Slade, and Marchant have the ability to not just execute a very nice outside break, but to slip through midfield gaps. But under Jones we've not been interested in that, it's all been about using centres to stretch play and create imbalances in the defensive line that our power runners can exploit.

While, sure, this makes the most out of some of our players, it doesn't show off the skills of our centres much.

Odd, because I've been told a number of times how slick our centre operation was when Farrell and JJ were in occupation , and also Scrumhead saying despite all his game time Slade has never really convinced at 13.....
Having asked the question re Tuilagi and the impact of his presence/non presence a number of times, we are now getting to the nub of it; its not Tuilagi per se, but how we want to play (this may get into chicken and egg territory now) under Eddie (and previously tbf).

Frankly, if you want a successful breaking 13, you really have to have a running threat at 12 and a 10 like Ford being able to play what's in front of them; it was true that we had a patch when JJ looked fantastic both sides of the ball, but we had a dominent pack at that point. To be really honest, I don't think Eddie really knows much about back play, and that's coupled with his belief (as you pointed out) that our strengths lie in power rather than guile and pace (I don't think he trusts the pack to make enough good decisions when playing fast and loose)- and that's where Manu plays in.
I'm still not convinced other than JJ we've produced other 13's you'd want to create the scenario you describe, though that's harsh on Marchant, who I agreed earlier had been treated strangely; I don't think Slade is an outside breaking centre at intl level tbh.

I've tried to avoid the F word, but he remains a road block for me at 12.

[Banquo]

Yeah, I get the idea of any other centre just being a placeholder until Manu comes back, but that was often years at a time where he wasn’t really even in the conversation.

Joseph and Slade were the incumbents for a good period I’d say. You could argue Lawrence was a bit unfairly brought in with the expectation of being Manu 2, not given the ball, and then ditched, but that’s not really based on much.

Actually developing a plan to use the other centre options well is another matter I guess. You could say picking Farrell at 12 demands a 13 like Manu, I don’t know, but our tactics/coaching have been so inconsistent it’s hard to say.

IMO, had he been used properly, Slade was the real deal at 12 or 13. He was only ever a 3rd choice centre in Jones's eyes. JJ, for a time, was rated slightly higher but both, no matter what their contribution, knew that Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi was the first choice group. I have no stomach for detailed statistics but I wonder how many caps Slade and JJ got without either Farrell as a blockage or Tuilagi as a battering ram. Whatever the real merits of Farrell or Tuilagi may be (have been), there are reasonable doubts about Jones's genuine intention to build a new centre pairing.

One wonders where it leaves Smith. Until the next RWC has been and gone, he has to face playing with Farrell and Tuilagi at centre if both are available. Conversely, if either or both are unavailable, he has to prepare for a totally different playing style with a real chance that he will carry the can for any lack of creativity.

See the nub of that is not Tuilagi, but Farrell .

[Oakboy]

Yeah, I get the idea of any other centre just being a placeholder until Manu comes back, but that was often years at a time where he wasn’t really even in the conversation.

Joseph and Slade were the incumbents for a good period I’d say. You could argue Lawrence was a bit unfairly brought in with the expectation of being Manu 2, not given the ball, and then ditched, but that’s not really based on much.

Actually developing a plan to use the other centre options well is another matter I guess. You could say picking Farrell at 12 demands a 13 like Manu, I don’t know, but our tactics/coaching have been so inconsistent it’s hard to say.

IMO, had he been used properly, Slade was the real deal at 12 or 13. He was only ever a 3rd choice centre in Jones's eyes. JJ, for a time, was rated slightly higher but both, no matter what their contribution, knew that Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi was the first choice group. I have no stomach for detailed statistics but I wonder how many caps Slade and JJ got without either Farrell as a blockage or Tuilagi as a battering ram. Whatever the real merits of Farrell or Tuilagi may be (have been), there are reasonable doubts about Jones's genuine intention to build a new centre pairing.

One wonders where it leaves Smith. Until the next RWC has been and gone, he has to face playing with Farrell and Tuilagi at centre if both are available. Conversely, if either or both are unavailable, he has to prepare for a totally different playing style with a real chance that he will carry the can for any lack of creativity.

See the nub of that is not Tuilagi, but Farrell .

Which really means it is Jones!!!!

[Banquo]

IMO, had he been used properly, Slade was the real deal at 12 or 13. He was only ever a 3rd choice centre in Jones's eyes. JJ, for a time, was rated slightly higher but both, no matter what their contribution, knew that Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi was the first choice group. I have no stomach for detailed statistics but I wonder how many caps Slade and JJ got without either Farrell as a blockage or Tuilagi as a battering ram. Whatever the real merits of Farrell or Tuilagi may be (have been), there are reasonable doubts about Jones's genuine intention to build a new centre pairing.

One wonders where it leaves Smith. Until the next RWC has been and gone, he has to face playing with Farrell and Tuilagi at centre if both are available. Conversely, if either or both are unavailable, he has to prepare for a totally different playing style with a real chance that he will carry the can for any lack of creativity.

See the nub of that is not Tuilagi, but Farrell .

Which really means it is Jones!!!!

I agree, but frankly he does have pretty limited midfield options when all is said and done. Not doing the Faz thing again tho

[Scrumhead]

Well in essence, we’re all agreed then …

The short summary of my thoughts is that our midfield options are quite limited (more so at 12 than at 13), but I also No it is fair to say that the options we do have aren’t/haven’t been used in the best way.

[Stom]

you said -More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside- the first part just isn't correct, albeit possibly because he had some long term injuries. Two players have had extended runs in the 13 shirt. Your second point is kinda moot, as he has been unavailable a lot.

I think it is perception; which 13's are you talking about? I think Porter wasn't necessarily trusted to do much, in a side which was a bit backed into a corner. I think in general, we haven't produced that much talent in midfield tbf- we've all banged on for years about 12's, but there aren't and haven't been many 13's that I've thought were the business, JJ stands out tbh, but lost his way after injury. Its why Manu continually gets recalled- tbf I agree with the general thrust that picking him seems increasingly forlorn, but I don't believe that's really hampered others.

The thing is, while I agree with you, I absolutely get where scrum is coming from.

Our centres haven't really been given a chance, whether through chopping and changing or through a system that does not make the most out of their talents.

Sure, you build a tactic around your best players and making the most out of them, but we've had outside centres who have line breaking ability for years, we've just not built a system that allowed them to show it off. All of JJ, Slade, and Marchant have the ability to not just execute a very nice outside break, but to slip through midfield gaps. But under Jones we've not been interested in that, it's all been about using centres to stretch play and create imbalances in the defensive line that our power runners can exploit.

While, sure, this makes the most out of some of our players, it doesn't show off the skills of our centres much.

Odd, because I've been told a number of times how slick our centre operation was when Farrell and JJ were in occupation , and also Scrumhead saying despite all his game time Slade has never really convinced at 13.....
Having asked the question re Tuilagi and the impact of his presence/non presence a number of times, we are now getting to the nub of it; its not Tuilagi per se, but how we want to play (this may get into chicken and egg territory now) under Eddie (and previously tbf).

Frankly, if you want a successful breaking 13, you really have to have a running threat at 12 and a 10 like Ford being able to play what's in front of them; it was true that we had a patch when JJ looked fantastic both sides of the ball, but we had a dominent pack at that point. To be really honest, I don't think Eddie really knows much about back play, and that's coupled with his belief (as you pointed out) that our strengths lie in power rather than guile and pace (I don't think he trusts the pack to make enough good decisions when playing fast and loose)- and that's where Manu plays in.
I'm still not convinced other than JJ we've produced other 13's you'd want to create the scenario you describe, though that's harsh on Marchant, who I agreed earlier had been treated strangely; I don't think Slade is an outside breaking centre at intl level tbh.

I've tried to avoid the F word, but he remains a road block for me at 12.

JJ did look very good for a while...before Jones. I pretty much agree with it all. But I do think Slade can make a nice outside break. Not in the class of JJ or Marchant - or, and I know this is my opinion... - George Lowe, who didn't get a look in for England, but he's still good at it, imo.

And yes, it's style, and yes, perhaps he's been backed into that because of the limitations of the players and himself.

[Spiffy]

you said -More that no one really got that much time in the 13 shirt because whenever Tuilagi was briefly fit, they were moved aside- the first part just isn't correct, albeit possibly because he had some long term injuries. Two players have had extended runs in the 13 shirt. Your second point is kinda moot, as he has been unavailable a lot.

I think it is perception; which 13's are you talking about? I think Porter wasn't necessarily trusted to do much, in a side which was a bit backed into a corner. I think in general, we haven't produced that much talent in midfield tbf- we've all banged on for years about 12's, but there aren't and haven't been many 13's that I've thought were the business, JJ stands out tbh, but lost his way after injury. Its why Manu continually gets recalled- tbf I agree with the general thrust that picking him seems increasingly forlorn, but I don't believe that's really hampered others.

The thing is, while I agree with you, I absolutely get where scrum is coming from.

Our centres haven't really been given a chance, whether through chopping and changing or through a system that does not make the most out of their talents.

Sure, you build a tactic around your best players and making the most out of them, but we've had outside centres who have line breaking ability for years, we've just not built a system that allowed them to show it off. All of JJ, Slade, and Marchant have the ability to not just execute a very nice outside break, but to slip through midfield gaps. But under Jones we've not been interested in that, it's all been about using centres to stretch play and create imbalances in the defensive line that our power runners can exploit.

While, sure, this makes the most out of some of our players, it doesn't show off the skills of our centres much.

Odd, because I've been told a number of times how slick our centre operation was when Farrell and JJ were in occupation , and also Scrumhead saying despite all his game time Slade has never really convinced at 13.....
Having asked the question re Tuilagi and the impact of his presence/non presence a number of times, we are now getting to the nub of it; its not Tuilagi per se, but how we want to play (this may get into chicken and egg territory now) under Eddie (and previously tbf).

Frankly, if you want a successful breaking 13, you really have to have a running threat at 12 and a 10 like Ford being able to play what's in front of them; it was true that we had a patch when JJ looked fantastic both sides of the ball, but we had a dominent pack at that point. To be really honest, I don't think Eddie really knows much about back play, and that's coupled with his belief (as you pointed out) that our strengths lie in power rather than guile and pace (I don't think he trusts the pack to make enough good decisions when playing fast and loose)- and that's where Manu plays in.
I'm still not convinced other than JJ we've produced other 13's you'd want to create the scenario you describe, though that's harsh on Marchant, who I agreed earlier had been treated strangely; [highlight=][glow=]I don't think Slade is an outside breaking centre at intl level tbh.

I've tried to avoid the F word, but he remains a road block for me at 12.

Classic outside breaks are as rare as hens teeth these days. Defences are so tight and organized. Plus, none of those mentioned above has the acceleration/top end pace for it.

[Banquo]

The thing is, while I agree with you, I absolutely get where scrum is coming from.

Our centres haven't really been given a chance, whether through chopping and changing or through a system that does not make the most out of their talents.

Sure, you build a tactic around your best players and making the most out of them, but we've had outside centres who have line breaking ability for years, we've just not built a system that allowed them to show it off. All of JJ, Slade, and Marchant have the ability to not just execute a very nice outside break, but to slip through midfield gaps. But under Jones we've not been interested in that, it's all been about using centres to stretch play and create imbalances in the defensive line that our power runners can exploit.

While, sure, this makes the most out of some of our players, it doesn't show off the skills of our centres much.

Odd, because I've been told a number of times how slick our centre operation was when Farrell and JJ were in occupation , and also Scrumhead saying despite all his game time Slade has never really convinced at 13.....
Having asked the question re Tuilagi and the impact of his presence/non presence a number of times, we are now getting to the nub of it; its not Tuilagi per se, but how we want to play (this may get into chicken and egg territory now) under Eddie (and previously tbf).

Frankly, if you want a successful breaking 13, you really have to have a running threat at 12 and a 10 like Ford being able to play what's in front of them; it was true that we had a patch when JJ looked fantastic both sides of the ball, but we had a dominent pack at that point. To be really honest, I don't think Eddie really knows much about back play, and that's coupled with his belief (as you pointed out) that our strengths lie in power rather than guile and pace (I don't think he trusts the pack to make enough good decisions when playing fast and loose)- and that's where Manu plays in.
I'm still not convinced other than JJ we've produced other 13's you'd want to create the scenario you describe, though that's harsh on Marchant, who I agreed earlier had been treated strangely; [highlight=][glow=]I don't think Slade is an outside breaking centre at intl level tbh.

I've tried to avoid the F word, but he remains a road block for me at 12.

Classic outside breaks are as rare as hens teeth these days. Defences are so tight and organized. Plus, none of those mentioned above has the acceleration/top end pace for it.

True, bar JJ at his best...

[Banquo]

Well in essence, we’re all agreed then …

The short summary of my thoughts is that our midfield options are quite limited (more so at 12 than at 13), but I also No it is fair to say that the options we do have aren’t/haven’t been used in the best way.

I think we do/have had limited midfield options. I don't know what the 'best way' would be, because it depends on what else is going on; and Farrell at 12 intrinsically dictates what you can or cannot do. Frankly, I think the first is the bigger issue.

[Banquo]

The thing is, while I agree with you, I absolutely get where scrum is coming from.

Our centres haven't really been given a chance, whether through chopping and changing or through a system that does not make the most out of their talents.

Sure, you build a tactic around your best players and making the most out of them, but we've had outside centres who have line breaking ability for years, we've just not built a system that allowed them to show it off. All of JJ, Slade, and Marchant have the ability to not just execute a very nice outside break, but to slip through midfield gaps. But under Jones we've not been interested in that, it's all been about using centres to stretch play and create imbalances in the defensive line that our power runners can exploit.

While, sure, this makes the most out of some of our players, it doesn't show off the skills of our centres much.

Odd, because I've been told a number of times how slick our centre operation was when Farrell and JJ were in occupation , and also Scrumhead saying despite all his game time Slade has never really convinced at 13.....
Having asked the question re Tuilagi and the impact of his presence/non presence a number of times, we are now getting to the nub of it; its not Tuilagi per se, but how we want to play (this may get into chicken and egg territory now) under Eddie (and previously tbf).

Frankly, if you want a successful breaking 13, you really have to have a running threat at 12 and a 10 like Ford being able to play what's in front of them; it was true that we had a patch when JJ looked fantastic both sides of the ball, but we had a dominent pack at that point. To be really honest, I don't think Eddie really knows much about back play, and that's coupled with his belief (as you pointed out) that our strengths lie in power rather than guile and pace (I don't think he trusts the pack to make enough good decisions when playing fast and loose)- and that's where Manu plays in.
I'm still not convinced other than JJ we've produced other 13's you'd want to create the scenario you describe, though that's harsh on Marchant, who I agreed earlier had been treated strangely; I don't think Slade is an outside breaking centre at intl level tbh.

I've tried to avoid the F word, but he remains a road block for me at 12.

JJ did look very good for a while...before Jones. I pretty much agree with it all. But I do think Slade can make a nice outside break. Not in the class of JJ or Marchant - or, and I know this is my opinion... - George Lowe, who didn't get a look in for England, but he's still good at it, imo.

And yes, it's style, and yes, perhaps he's been backed into that because of the limitations of the players and himself.

JJ has played the majority of his games under Jones, and has looked excellent in Jones's teams, esp 2016-18; Jones brought him in as a regular, whereas he was a bit in and out under Burt. Slade's outside breaking ability at intl level would have to be questioned, he's not that quick at that level.
And yes, chicken meet egg

[francoisfou]

I’ve copied my post to the Baabaas thread.