Team v France

[Banquo]

He has been the correct short-term selection. How long he stays is up to the other candidates. To take the shirt somebody has to convince EJ that his presence improves the pack overall compared with Hartley. It is never going to be about eye-catching romps in the loose or the occasional dominant scrum. It is going to be about being an integral part of a consistently effective scrum (all the other bits such as solid lineout throwing obviously have to be a given).

Good stuff, but to these points....how do you take the shirt without being given the chance; and our scrum still doesn't look consistently effective still, to me?

[Oakboy]

He has been the correct short-term selection. How long he stays is up to the other candidates. To take the shirt somebody has to convince EJ that his presence improves the pack overall compared with Hartley. It is never going to be about eye-catching romps in the loose or the occasional dominant scrum. It is going to be about being an integral part of a consistently effective scrum (all the other bits such as solid lineout throwing obviously have to be a given).

Good stuff, but to these points....how do you take the shirt without being given the chance; and our scrum still doesn't look consistently effective still, to me?

Somebody else taking the shirt - with difficulty but does that matter if things are going well? I think EJ is a realist where the scrum is concerned - better but not good is still hell of an improvement. At some stage, I'd guess he would answer your point by admitting that further improvement is impossible without replacing Hartley, albeit that he then has 'one step back to take two forward'.

That scenario also applies to other players whose contribution is useful/adequate but whose limitations prevent the team moving forward. Let's face it, EJ has not set the world on fire with England's performances but he has achieved hard-bitten success with largely the same players as Burt. The one major change is Hartley. It's not a coincidence, IMO.

[Banquo]

He has been the correct short-term selection. How long he stays is up to the other candidates. To take the shirt somebody has to convince EJ that his presence improves the pack overall compared with Hartley. It is never going to be about eye-catching romps in the loose or the occasional dominant scrum. It is going to be about being an integral part of a consistently effective scrum (all the other bits such as solid lineout throwing obviously have to be a given).

Good stuff, but to these points....how do you take the shirt without being given the chance; and our scrum still doesn't look consistently effective still, to me?

Somebody else taking the shirt - with difficulty but does that matter if things are going well? I think EJ is a realist where the scrum is concerned - better but not good is still hell of an improvement. At some stage, I'd guess he would answer your point by admitting that further improvement is impossible without replacing Hartley, albeit that he then has 'one step back to take two forward'.

That scenario also applies to other players whose contribution is useful/adequate but whose limitations prevent the team moving forward. Let's face it, EJ has not set the world on fire with England's performances but he has achieved hard-bitten success with largely the same players as Burt. The one major change is Hartley. It's not a coincidence, IMO.

'the one major change is Hartley'....do you mean as skipper?

I totally agree, and I've always said, that we still have less than top performers to replace. Hartley is one.

[Mellsblue]

Hartley is there because Jones wanted to bring an edge to the team that was missing under Lancaster. This can also be seen by Farrell and Brown as vc's.

I can understand the logic but if you look at it purely from a playing perspective George, for me, would've been the best choice. For all of this talk of Hartley playing well I'd say he was worst performer in the pack. I dread to think of how many tackles he's missed.

As for the assertion that the one major change from the Lancaster era is Hartley. I'd suggest the major change is a competent coaching set-up.

We'll never know the answer but I wonder how much better the pack would've gone with George as first choice hooker.

[twitchy]

......anyone know what's up with Hartley? I've not seen anything that said he is crocked, merely sat out training. Torygraph says he'll play!



(the other factor that wasn't considered above was the likely absence of Marler; so we could be ending the match with a very green international front row should both he and Hartley not be available).

I think this is what happens when you have press at training sessions.

[Oakboy]

Good stuff, but to these points....how do you take the shirt without being given the chance; and our scrum still doesn't look consistently effective still, to me?

Somebody else taking the shirt - with difficulty but does that matter if things are going well? I think EJ is a realist where the scrum is concerned - better but not good is still hell of an improvement. At some stage, I'd guess he would answer your point by admitting that further improvement is impossible without replacing Hartley, albeit that he then has 'one step back to take two forward'.

That scenario also applies to other players whose contribution is useful/adequate but whose limitations prevent the team moving forward. Let's face it, EJ has not set the world on fire with England's performances but he has achieved hard-bitten success with largely the same players as Burt. The one major change is Hartley. It's not a coincidence, IMO.

'the one major change is Hartley'....do you mean as skipper?

I totally agree, and I've always said, that we still have less than top performers to replace. Hartley is one.

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

[Banquo]

Somebody else taking the shirt - with difficulty but does that matter if things are going well? I think EJ is a realist where the scrum is concerned - better but not good is still hell of an improvement. At some stage, I'd guess he would answer your point by admitting that further improvement is impossible without replacing Hartley, albeit that he then has 'one step back to take two forward'.

That scenario also applies to other players whose contribution is useful/adequate but whose limitations prevent the team moving forward. Let's face it, EJ has not set the world on fire with England's performances but he has achieved hard-bitten success with largely the same players as Burt. The one major change is Hartley. It's not a coincidence, IMO.

'the one major change is Hartley'....do you mean as skipper?

I totally agree, and I've always said, that we still have less than top performers to replace. Hartley is one.

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

? Hartley was Burt's choice a lot of the time, he just couldn't have him at the world cup. We have a different second row, a reconfigured back row, and some stability 10-15 (rightly or wrongly).

[Oakboy]

Hartley is there because Jones wanted to bring an edge to the team that was missing under Lancaster. This can also be seen by Farrell and Brown as vc's.

I can understand the logic but if you look at it purely from a playing perspective George, for me, would've been the best choice. For all of this talk of Hartley playing well I'd say he was worst performer in the pack. I dread to think of how many tackles he's missed.

As for the assertion that the one major change from the Lancaster era is Hartley. I'd suggest the major change is a competent coaching set-up.

We'll never know the answer but I wonder how much better the pack would've gone with George as first choice hooker.

Let's not get at cross purposes. I meant that Hartley was the one significant change of personnel. Thus, better coaching has achieved results with just the one change. It's not an either/or.

As for George, I expect EJ would agree with your assertion that he is a better player than Hartley. His opinion, though, seems to be that, in the short term, Hartley was more likely to be an effective part of an improved scrum. EJ, you, I, everybody probably, agree that George will ultimately be part of a better scrum still - in the longer term.

[Oakboy]

'the one major change is Hartley'....do you mean as skipper?

I totally agree, and I've always said, that we still have less than top performers to replace. Hartley is one.

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

? Hartley was Burt's choice a lot of the time, he just couldn't have him at the world cup. We have a different second row, a reconfigured back row, and some stability 10-15 (rightly or wrongly).

Except that Burt appeared to have Youngs as 1st choice. Again, I agree with you but Burt could have done all that EJ has done in other areas. Kruis and Itoje were available, for example, as were Haskell and Robshaw. He could have played Farrell at 12 etc.

[Banquo]

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

? Hartley was Burt's choice a lot of the time, he just couldn't have him at the world cup. We have a different second row, a reconfigured back row, and some stability 10-15 (rightly or wrongly).

Except that Burt appeared to have Youngs as 1st choice. Again, I agree with you but Burt could have done all that EJ has done in other areas. Kruis and Itoje were available, for example, as were Haskell and Robshaw. He could have played Farrell at 12 etc.

Hartley was the starting hooker all the last 6N and in the AI's before that, so no idea why you say Youngs was first choice..

I know he could, but he didn't, that was my point v major personnel change. The bench is also pretty different.

[Mellsblue]

Hartley is there because Jones wanted to bring an edge to the team that was missing under Lancaster. This can also be seen by Farrell and Brown as vc's.

I can understand the logic but if you look at it purely from a playing perspective George, for me, would've been the best choice. For all of this talk of Hartley playing well I'd say he was worst performer in the pack. I dread to think of how many tackles he's missed.

As for the assertion that the one major change from the Lancaster era is Hartley. I'd suggest the major change is a competent coaching set-up.

We'll never know the answer but I wonder how much better the pack would've gone with George as first choice hooker.

Let's not get at cross purposes. I meant that Hartley was the one significant change of personnel. Thus, better coaching has achieved results with just the one change. It's not an either/or.

As for George, I expect EJ would agree with your assertion that he is a better player than Hartley. His opinion, though, seems to be that, in the short term, Hartley was more likely to be an effective part of an improved scrum. EJ, you, I, everybody probably, agree that George will ultimately be part of a better scrum still - in the longer term.

Ah, ok. We were at cross purposes. As you were!!

[Banquo]

Hartley is there because Jones wanted to bring an edge to the team that was missing under Lancaster. This can also be seen by Farrell and Brown as vc's.

I can understand the logic but if you look at it purely from a playing perspective George, for me, would've been the best choice. For all of this talk of Hartley playing well I'd say he was worst performer in the pack. I dread to think of how many tackles he's missed.

As for the assertion that the one major change from the Lancaster era is Hartley. I'd suggest the major change is a competent coaching set-up.

We'll never know the answer but I wonder how much better the pack would've gone with George as first choice hooker.

Let's not get at cross purposes. I meant that Hartley was the one significant change of personnel. Thus, better coaching has achieved results with just the one change. It's not an either/or.

As for George, I expect EJ would agree with your assertion that he is a better player than Hartley. His opinion, though, seems to be that, in the short term, Hartley was more likely to be an effective part of an improved scrum. EJ, you, I, everybody probably, agree that George will ultimately be part of a better scrum still - in the longer term.

Ah, ok. We were at cross purposes. As you were!!

it's not just the one change though- and Hartley had been almost ever-present pre RWC.

[iLovett]

Somebody else taking the shirt - with difficulty but does that matter if things are going well? I think EJ is a realist where the scrum is concerned - better but not good is still hell of an improvement. At some stage, I'd guess he would answer your point by admitting that further improvement is impossible without replacing Hartley, albeit that he then has 'one step back to take two forward'.

That scenario also applies to other players whose contribution is useful/adequate but whose limitations prevent the team moving forward. Let's face it, EJ has not set the world on fire with England's performances but he has achieved hard-bitten success with largely the same players as Burt. The one major change is Hartley. It's not a coincidence, IMO.

'the one major change is Hartley'....do you mean as skipper?

I totally agree, and I've always said, that we still have less than top performers to replace. Hartley is one.

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

I'll be that one then!

IMHO he's the best tight 5 hooker we have by a fair whack (right now), and it's the tight 5 that needed most improvement from the WC / Ireland loss last year.

J George is obviously very promising, but still too green for nasty 6nations front rows at full tilt. His time will come... Hartley if fit enough MUST start vs an always beastly french front row away from home. Admittedly Youngs is the best in the loose, (centre? ) but that's irrelevant to the nuts & bolts of being a world class hooker which Hartley clearly is, and has been for some time.

Seeing young / mobile hookers sprinting about in the loose is definitely fun, but they should really be keeping the ruck secure & the maul going forwards (or down on oppo ball!)

People suggesting 'lineout aside'; lol... the lineout is one of the most important facets in the game, look what happened to Wales when they did / didn't get lineout ball on Saturday.

[Banquo]

'the one major change is Hartley'....do you mean as skipper?

I totally agree, and I've always said, that we still have less than top performers to replace. Hartley is one.

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

I'll be that one then!

IMHO he's the best tight 5 hooker we have by a fair whack (right now), and it's the tight 5 that needed most improvement from the WC / Ireland loss last year.

J George is obviously very promising, but still too green for nasty 6nations front rows at full tilt. His time will come... Hartley if fit enough MUST start vs an always beastly french front row away from home. Admittedly Youngs is the best in the loose, (centre? ) but that's irrelevant to the nuts & bolts of being a world class hooker which Hartley clearly is, and has been for some time.

Seeing young / mobile hookers sprinting about in the loose is definitely fun, but they should really be keeping the ruck secure & the maul going forwards (or down on oppo ball!)

People suggesting 'lineout aside'; lol... the lineout is one of the most important facets in the game, look what happened to Wales when they did / didn't get lineout ball on Saturday.

Hartley played against Ireland, lest we forget. I'll accept he is probably the most solid tight hooker we have, but his loose play is pretty substandard at international level- misses a lot of tackles, and carries weakly (world class, srsly?); if he is the best all round we have (and there is a case for that), then its clear we need to do better.

[Digby]

Hartley played against Ireland, lest we forget.

Played or happened to be there?

[Mellsblue]

'the one major change is Hartley'....do you mean as skipper?

I totally agree, and I've always said, that we still have less than top performers to replace. Hartley is one.

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

I'll be that one then!

IMHO he's the best tight 5 hooker we have by a fair whack (right now), and it's the tight 5 that needed most improvement from the WC / Ireland loss last year.

J George is obviously very promising, but still too green for nasty 6nations front rows at full tilt. His time will come... Hartley if fit enough MUST start vs an always beastly french front row away from home. Admittedly Youngs is the best in the loose, (centre? ) but that's irrelevant to the nuts & bolts of being a world class hooker which Hartley clearly is, and has been for some time.

Seeing young / mobile hookers sprinting about in the loose is definitely fun, but they should really be keeping the ruck secure & the maul going forwards (or down on oppo ball!)

People suggesting 'lineout aside'; lol... the lineout is one of the most important facets in the game, look what happened to Wales when they did / didn't get lineout ball on Saturday.

Hartley is world class.....come on.

I reckon George will have faced nastier frontrows and tight fives in Europe than anything he's faced in this 6N.

Good thing about George is his set piece is as good as Hartley's and he's far better in the loose. Imagine having a hooker who's good in both facets.

[Banquo]

Hartley played against Ireland, lest we forget.

Played or happened to be there?

harsh and maybe fair

[iLovett]

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

I'll be that one then!

IMHO he's the best tight 5 hooker we have by a fair whack (right now), and it's the tight 5 that needed most improvement from the WC / Ireland loss last year.

J George is obviously very promising, but still too green for nasty 6nations front rows at full tilt. His time will come... Hartley if fit enough MUST start vs an always beastly french front row away from home. Admittedly Youngs is the best in the loose, (centre? ) but that's irrelevant to the nuts & bolts of being a world class hooker which Hartley clearly is, and has been for some time.

Seeing young / mobile hookers sprinting about in the loose is definitely fun, but they should really be keeping the ruck secure & the maul going forwards (or down on oppo ball!)

People suggesting 'lineout aside'; lol... the lineout is one of the most important facets in the game, look what happened to Wales when they did / didn't get lineout ball on Saturday.

Hartley played against Ireland, lest we forget. I'll accept he is probably the most solid tight hooker we have, but his loose play is pretty substandard at international level- misses a lot of tackles, and carries weakly (world class, srsly?); if he is the best all round we have (and there is a case for that), then its clear we need to do better.

Quite right on Hartley v Ireland! Doh! Stick by my opinion of him though, having seen him a majority of the 300 odd times hes played for Saints & England, he's a boss, except for THAT final

[Banquo]

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

I'll be that one then!

IMHO he's the best tight 5 hooker we have by a fair whack (right now), and it's the tight 5 that needed most improvement from the WC / Ireland loss last year.

J George is obviously very promising, but still too green for nasty 6nations front rows at full tilt. His time will come... Hartley if fit enough MUST start vs an always beastly french front row away from home. Admittedly Youngs is the best in the loose, (centre? ) but that's irrelevant to the nuts & bolts of being a world class hooker which Hartley clearly is, and has been for some time.

Seeing young / mobile hookers sprinting about in the loose is definitely fun, but they should really be keeping the ruck secure & the maul going forwards (or down on oppo ball!)

People suggesting 'lineout aside'; lol... the lineout is one of the most important facets in the game, look what happened to Wales when they did / didn't get lineout ball on Saturday.

Hartley is world class.....come on.

I reckon George will have faced nastier frontrows and tight fives in Europe than anything he's faced in this 6N.

Good thing about George is his set piece is as good as Hartley's and he's far better in the loose. Imagine having a hooker who's good in both facets.

....devil's advocate- not sure his darts are as good as Dylan's tbh.

[iLovett]

I just really meant personnel change. EJ got it right with Hartley but not one in a hundred of us would have predicted it beforehand.

I'll be that one then!

IMHO he's the best tight 5 hooker we have by a fair whack (right now), and it's the tight 5 that needed most improvement from the WC / Ireland loss last year.

J George is obviously very promising, but still too green for nasty 6nations front rows at full tilt. His time will come... Hartley if fit enough MUST start vs an always beastly french front row away from home. Admittedly Youngs is the best in the loose, (centre? ) but that's irrelevant to the nuts & bolts of being a world class hooker which Hartley clearly is, and has been for some time.

Seeing young / mobile hookers sprinting about in the loose is definitely fun, but they should really be keeping the ruck secure & the maul going forwards (or down on oppo ball!)

People suggesting 'lineout aside'; lol... the lineout is one of the most important facets in the game, look what happened to Wales when they did / didn't get lineout ball on Saturday.

Hartley is world class.....come on.

I reckon George will have faced nastier frontrows and tight fives in Europe than anything he's faced in this 6N.

Good thing about George is his set piece is as good as Hartley's and he's far better in the loose. Imagine having a hooker who's good in both facets.

Yes on George, but in time, he's still green for France away, not that it matters as he's crocked

On Hartley; ask Gatland, Schmit Jones, Woodward, McGeeghan, Johnson, in fact anyone who's been a top class coach.. he's right up there with the best in the world. Doesn't do a ton in the loose so you won't see it on TV but he gets about I tells ya! Nobody recalls him ousting Steve Thompson who everyone admitted was class, with his WC medal & all. Really like the look of the French 2 though, he's got game! We need to be wary of this French team, they have a good performance in them if things go their way, like a lineout or 2 or a green front row getting minced

[Digby]

....devil's advocate- not sure his darts are as good as Dylan's tbh.

Depends on whether you think the ball going in straight is a virtue. Sarries are rarely pinged for it, but there does look an issue there which mayn't serve England well.

[Mikey Brown]

Just to pointlessly derail this thread a bit further; has the phrase darts come to mean all line-out throws now? The term seems to pop up all the time on here. I don't know that we actually vary our short, sharp throws and lobbed balls that much but it always used to be a useful distinction.

[Banquo]

I'll be that one then!

IMHO he's the best tight 5 hooker we have by a fair whack (right now), and it's the tight 5 that needed most improvement from the WC / Ireland loss last year.

J George is obviously very promising, but still too green for nasty 6nations front rows at full tilt. His time will come... Hartley if fit enough MUST start vs an always beastly french front row away from home. Admittedly Youngs is the best in the loose, (centre? ) but that's irrelevant to the nuts & bolts of being a world class hooker which Hartley clearly is, and has been for some time.

Seeing young / mobile hookers sprinting about in the loose is definitely fun, but they should really be keeping the ruck secure & the maul going forwards (or down on oppo ball!)

People suggesting 'lineout aside'; lol... the lineout is one of the most important facets in the game, look what happened to Wales when they did / didn't get lineout ball on Saturday.

Hartley played against Ireland, lest we forget. I'll accept he is probably the most solid tight hooker we have, but his loose play is pretty substandard at international level- misses a lot of tackles, and carries weakly (world class, srsly?); if he is the best all round we have (and there is a case for that), then its clear we need to do better.

Quite right on Hartley v Ireland! Doh! Stick by my opinion of him though, having seen him a majority of the 300 odd times hes played for Saints & England, he's a boss, except for THAT final

I reckon you should turn off 'when the saints go marching in' before you post. He's really not a world class hooker, for the reasons outlined before, plus his discipline issues have seen him give less than full service to club and country. He's a good club hooker for sure.

[Banquo]

Just to pointlessly derail this thread a bit further; has the phrase darts come to mean all line-out throws now? The term seems to pop up all the time on here. I don't know that we actually vary our short, sharp throws and lobbed balls that much but it always used to be a useful distinction.

sorry it was just short hand, like a sprinters starting position

[Mellsblue]

I'll be that one then!

IMHO he's the best tight 5 hooker we have by a fair whack (right now), and it's the tight 5 that needed most improvement from the WC / Ireland loss last year.

J George is obviously very promising, but still too green for nasty 6nations front rows at full tilt. His time will come... Hartley if fit enough MUST start vs an always beastly french front row away from home. Admittedly Youngs is the best in the loose, (centre? ) but that's irrelevant to the nuts & bolts of being a world class hooker which Hartley clearly is, and has been for some time.

Seeing young / mobile hookers sprinting about in the loose is definitely fun, but they should really be keeping the ruck secure & the maul going forwards (or down on oppo ball!)

People suggesting 'lineout aside'; lol... the lineout is one of the most important facets in the game, look what happened to Wales when they did / didn't get lineout ball on Saturday.

Hartley played against Ireland, lest we forget. I'll accept he is probably the most solid tight hooker we have, but his loose play is pretty substandard at international level- misses a lot of tackles, and carries weakly (world class, srsly?); if he is the best all round we have (and there is a case for that), then its clear we need to do better.

300 odd times hes played for Saints & England, he's a boss, except for THAT final

Suddenly it all makes sense.