Team for Argentina

Moderator: Puja

Post Reply
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Digby »

Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:So we need to move the ball away from contact then, or we need Mako, Lawes and Hughes to be making big dents on the carry. It's a decent enough squad given what's gone before and players missing
Yep, George starting would give better balance in the loose, and I think Launchbury a better carrier than Kruis. Wish BV was fit.
Broadly I'd have wanted George and a carrier at 3, or another carrier at either 6 or 7. If we had extra carrying options in the 2 and 3 shirt it's make more sense to me to them have 2 flankers whose game is better suited to supporting a team than carrying a team. And we've still no carrying options at 12 or 13 to bail the team out of trouble, Slade might be doing more than he did but it's not the stuff of legend at test level
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17668
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Puja »

Banquo wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Banquo wrote: You've commented before on Eddie's statements :D
True, but seeing as Eddie stuck with Hughes for 80 in Arg, I don't see why I'd assume he's lying now. Of course, if we're winning well, it might be more important to take Hughes off that someone else, in terms of keeping an 8 fit.
yep, and most of the other games he's started, I now know!
That does make sense, I guess. If Hughes is starting, then that means Billy wasn't available and, given the gulf to our next 8 options, means that Hughes was unlikely to be subbed unless absolutely necessary.

Puja
Backist Monk
Banquo
Posts: 19123
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Banquo »

Digby wrote:
Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:So we need to move the ball away from contact then, or we need Mako, Lawes and Hughes to be making big dents on the carry. It's a decent enough squad given what's gone before and players missing
Yep, George starting would give better balance in the loose, and I think Launchbury a better carrier than Kruis. Wish BV was fit.
Broadly I'd have wanted George and a carrier at 3, or another carrier at either 6 or 7. If we had extra carrying options in the 2 and 3 shirt it's make more sense to me to them have 2 flankers whose game is better suited to supporting a team than carrying a team. And we've still no carrying options at 12 or 13 to bail the team out of trouble, Slade might be doing more than he did but it's not the stuff of legend at test level
yes, I said earlier, a more direct option in the backs would be ideal- who is a valid question, to which Roko might be an answer. Sinckler might have been the 3 we are looking for, and you could look for more from the locks.
Mikey Brown
Posts: 12134
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Mikey Brown »

Stop being such a bastard Digby.
Mikey Brown
Posts: 12134
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Mikey Brown »

I did write a slightly more eloquent response but lost it and can’t be bothered to re-type it. I think I captured the mood of it though.
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Digby »

Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:
Banquo wrote: Yep, George starting would give better balance in the loose, and I think Launchbury a better carrier than Kruis. Wish BV was fit.
Broadly I'd have wanted George and a carrier at 3, or another carrier at either 6 or 7. If we had extra carrying options in the 2 and 3 shirt it's make more sense to me to them have 2 flankers whose game is better suited to supporting a team than carrying a team. And we've still no carrying options at 12 or 13 to bail the team out of trouble, Slade might be doing more than he did but it's not the stuff of legend at test level
yes, I said earlier, a more direct option in the backs would be ideal- who is a valid question, to which Roko might be an answer. Sinckler might have been the 3 we are looking for, and you could look for more from the locks.
This side could work, but the handling in the pack outside of Mako doesn't make it obvious the ball can or will be moved with pace phase upon phase. So we're back to trying to keep pace in pick and go plays to then work of a lazy or fatigued defence, but it shouldn't worry a decent defence

Mako, George, Sinckler, Launchbury, Itoje is maybe our most attacking tight five, though LCD should take real issue with that and maybe Genge too, and even then handling isn't stellar, but there are more carrying options
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Digby »

Mikey Brown wrote:Stop being such a bastard Digby.
And I thought I'd only written nice things today
TheNomad
Posts: 630
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:19 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by TheNomad »

Digby wrote:
This side could work, but the handling in the pack outside of Mako doesn't make it obvious the ball can or will be moved with pace phase upon phase. So we're back to trying to keep pace in pick and go plays to then work of a lazy or fatigued defence, but it shouldn't worry a decent defence

Mako, George, Sinckler, Launchbury, Itoje is maybe our most attacking tight five, though LCD should take real issue with that and maybe Genge too, and even then handling isn't stellar, but there are more carrying options
Will LCD ever stay fit for long enough? Not looking promising really, which is such a shame
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Digby »

Just one of those things with LCD. At this point I'd still cite his throwing as more of an issue than his injury record, and possibly his discipline too
User avatar
Oakboy
Posts: 6366
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:42 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Oakboy »

Might Mako need a rest every bit as much as Itoje and Farrell? Or, is Marler going to start against Australia?
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17668
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Puja »

Oakboy wrote:Might Mako need a rest every bit as much as Itoje and Farrell? Or, is Marler going to start against Australia?
Maybe the plan is to rest the rest of the Lions players for Samoa? Would make sense and then we could have a team of Genge, Hartley, Williams, Itoje, Launchbury, Robshaw, Underhill, Hughes, Youngs, Ford, May, Fazlet, Slade, Roko, Brown, which should be fine.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Oakboy
Posts: 6366
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:42 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Oakboy »

Puja wrote:
Oakboy wrote:Might Mako need a rest every bit as much as Itoje and Farrell? Or, is Marler going to start against Australia?
Maybe the plan is to rest the rest of the Lions players for Samoa? Would make sense and then we could have a team of Genge, Hartley, Williams, Itoje, Launchbury, Robshaw, Underhill, Hughes, Youngs, Ford, May, Fazlet, Slade, Roko, Brown, which should be fine.

Puja
So one game's rest each, you think, with the strongest possible 23 for Aus?
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17668
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Puja »

Oakboy wrote:
Puja wrote:
Oakboy wrote:Might Mako need a rest every bit as much as Itoje and Farrell? Or, is Marler going to start against Australia?
Maybe the plan is to rest the rest of the Lions players for Samoa? Would make sense and then we could have a team of Genge, Hartley, Williams, Itoje, Launchbury, Robshaw, Underhill, Hughes, Youngs, Ford, May, Fazlet, Slade, Roko, Brown, which should be fine.

Puja
So one game's rest each, you think, with the strongest possible 23 for Aus?
Would seem to make sense. Which means, of course, that it won't happen.

ETA. Makes sense in terms of the order of things as well. The two most chronically overworked get two weeks off by taking it easy in Portugal as well.

Puja
Backist Monk
Raggs
Posts: 3304
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:17 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Raggs »

Curry has injured his wrist, Simmonds now on the bench. Hughes now more likely to get a rest?
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17668
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Puja »

Bugger!

Puja
Backist Monk
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Digby »

Raggs wrote:Curry has injured his wrist
Wanker
User avatar
Which Tyler
Posts: 9145
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:43 pm
Location: Tewkesbury
Contact:

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Which Tyler »

Digby wrote:
Raggs wrote:Curry has injured his wrist
Wanker
Be fair - he IS a teenager!
Mikey Brown
Posts: 12134
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Mikey Brown »

So Simmonds was fit? Surely this was the perfect opportunity to sneak Ben Curry in to the squad?
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Digby »

Which Tyler wrote:
Digby wrote:
Raggs wrote:Curry has injured his wrist
Wanker
Be fair - he IS a teenager!
I know for a fact Raggs isn't a teenager
User avatar
Which Tyler
Posts: 9145
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:43 pm
Location: Tewkesbury
Contact:

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Which Tyler »

Digby wrote:
Which Tyler wrote:
Digby wrote:
Wanker
Be fair - he IS a teenager!
I know for a fact Raggs isn't a teenager
True enough - but if you want to know who the wankers on this board are; you need this link: http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/memberlist.php
User avatar
jngf
Posts: 1569
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 5:57 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by jngf »

Raggs wrote:Curry has injured his wrist, Simmonds now on the bench. Hughes now more likely to get a rest?
If Simmonds does make an appearance at 8 he may well be the smallest player fielded by England in that role since the post war era? Still as Neil Back demonstrated if you’re good enough, you’re big enough (tbh Simmonds looks like my ideal of an attacking and linking openside and has the perfect vital statistics for that role ).
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Digby »

He'd be a little shorter than Hill and Sanderson, but probably not all that different in weight, indeed Simmonds might be the heaviest if compared to the weights Hill and Sanderson were playing at 8
fivepointer
Posts: 5892
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by fivepointer »

Argentina -
1. S. Garcia Botta
2. A. Creevy
3. N. Tetaz Chaparro
4. M. Alemanno
5. T. Lavanini
6. P. Matera
7. M. Kremer
8. T. Lezana

9. T. Landajo
10. JM. Hernandez
11. E. Boffelli
12. S. Gonzalez Iglesias
13. M. Moroni
14. R. Moyano
15. J. Tuculet

16. J. Motoya, 17. L. Noguera, 18. E Pieretto, 19. B. Macome, 20. L. Senatore, 21. G. Bertranou, 22. N. Sanchez, 23. S. Cancellere.
Banquo
Posts: 19123
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Banquo »

fivepointer wrote:Argentina -
1. S. Garcia Botta
2. A. Creevy
3. N. Tetaz Chaparro
4. M. Alemanno
5. T. Lavanini
6. P. Matera
7. M. Kremer
8. T. Lezana

9. T. Landajo
10. JM. Hernandez
11. E. Boffelli
12. S. Gonzalez Iglesias
13. M. Moroni
14. R. Moyano
15. J. Tuculet

16. J. Motoya, 17. L. Noguera, 18. E Pieretto, 19. B. Macome, 20. L. Senatore, 21. G. Bertranou, 22. N. Sanchez, 23. S. Cancellere.
They are capable of some top rugby- the backs can be dangerous, and Matera and Creevy are excellent.
Banquo
Posts: 19123
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Team for Argentina

Post by Banquo »

jngf wrote:
Raggs wrote:Curry has injured his wrist, Simmonds now on the bench. Hughes now more likely to get a rest?
If Simmonds does make an appearance at 8 he may well be the smallest player fielded by England in that role since the post war era? Still as Neil Back demonstrated if you’re good enough, you’re big enough (tbh Simmonds looks like my ideal of an attacking and linking openside and has the perfect vital statistics for that role ).
post war? which one? Falklands?
Post Reply