RugbyRebels

Youngs FFS. Lawes FFS.

I give up.

I do hope Furbank has a good game though. Deserves his chance.

Banquo wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Get the lad in. He's a quality player who has been mostly excellent this season.

That’s an approach. Just don’t hammer him or Eddie if it doesn’t come off. It’s a hotbed though, and I feel reservations are appropriate.

Is it just Furbank for whom we cut Jones some slack? Buggered if I can see what else we praise him for even if we win. And, if we lose . . .

Banquo wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:Yeah - I feel the same. Just when I thought we’d learned that locks at 6 doesn’t work, there goes Eddie Jones AGAIN ... just infuriating when I actually like all of the other selection calls.

You like Ewels at lock, Curry at 8, Youngs/Heinz, and Faz at 12, with two centres on the bench?

I have no problem with Ewels at lock, though he wouldn't be my first choice. I can see the point of Curry at 8. I have a huge problem with Youngs and Heinz. I've given up hoping for Fazlet to be dropped. And I would definitely have Thorley on the bench.

Not a single representative of the top team in the GP in the starting XV. At the very least, that must be unusual.

Oakboy wrote:Not a single representative of the top team in the GP in the starting XV. At the very least, that must be unusual.

Other than Simmonds at 8. Who would you have?

On that note, I had a little giggle that our reasoning for Jones not liking Simmonds (and Armand) is that Exe have 8s that play like 7s, only for him to then pick a 7 to play 8. Classic Eddie.

I wouldn't have picked that team, my main problems are:

Not getting a new 9 in the squad either to start or come off the bench.
Lawes at 6
No Sam Simmonds in the squad.

However:
Ewels I'm ok with, he's a good player. Good to see a new FB being given a shot. Love Stuart and Genge on the bench.

I am backing Eddie at this moment though and I expect us to win, which is the most important thing.

The pack is going to be high on work rate, Curry will play as a 3rd flanker and we have carriers in Sinckler, Genge, George, Itoje, Curry, Underhill, Manu... there have been times in the past when we didn't have a single ball carrier on the pitch...

The game before last was the best England performance in my lifetime I think. We fucked up in the final. I was worried about a hangover for that but somehow I don't think it'll happen, I think Eddie will have them fired up and if he does, we'll win.

I actually smell a grand slam coming along, and if he does that, I don't care who's in the back row or if Ben Youngs is playing, it'll be marvelous.

I’m actually quite liking this idea that we will covertly be fielding 4. Itoje 5. Lawes 6. Underhill 7. Curry 8. Ewels.

Scrumhalf I’m just going to have to ignore completely. I’ll have a meltdown if I start thinking too hard about the fact Youngs will have to retire before we ever see him dropped for an important game. Ditto Farrell.

Mellsblue wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Not a single representative of the top team in the GP in the starting XV. At the very least, that must be unusual.

Other than Simmonds at 8. Who would you have?

On that note, I had a little giggle that our reasoning for Jones not liking Simmonds (and Armand) is that Exe have 8s that play like 7s, only for him to then pick a 7 to play 8. Classic Eddie.

I'd have Hill ahead of Ewels AND Simmonds starting at 8. I was thinking more in general international terms, though, and wondering how many of the other top 5/6 countries had no representatives from their top teams. To be fair, injuries to Slade and Nowell were a factor for this match.

Boo

TheDasher wrote:The pack is going to be high on work rate, Curry will play as a 3rd 2nd flanker and we have carriers in Sinckler, Genge, George, Itoje, Curry, Underhill, Manu... there have been times in the past when we didn't have a single ball carrier on the pitch...

FTFY.

Liking the optimism though. Could do with a bit more of that around here!

Puja

You might have picked the wrong day to go looking for optimism

Puja wrote:

TheDasher wrote:The pack is going to be high on work rate, Curry will play as a 3rd 2nd flanker and we have carriers in Sinckler, Genge, George, Itoje, Curry, Underhill, Manu... there have been times in the past when we didn't have a single ball carrier on the pitch...

FTFY.

Liking the optimism though. Could do with a bit more of that around here!

Puja

I think every one of us has the best long-term interest of the team at heart. It's interesting to wonder what Is the best, though, from this point onwards. Four years ago, there was that wonderful unbeaten run to come. That led to some shelving of development perhaps. I want us to win but I also want a well-structured, four-year programme. I'd rather we won a GS in the 4th year than the 1st, for example.

The XV/23 selected gives me very little cause to think that Jones is building in the way that I want to see (apart from Furbank's selection). Based on the previous 4 year cycle, I have serious concern about the long-term planning and the effect of a few wins wrapped around the old guard (especially at SH).

There are grounds for optimism in terms of the overall standard of, say, our top 50 players compared with four years ago. Whether the on-field development puts that to good use remains to be seen.

Puja wrote:

TheDasher wrote:The pack is going to be high on work rate, Curry will play as a 3rd 2nd flanker and we have carriers in Sinckler, Genge, George, Itoje, Curry, Underhill, Manu... there have been times in the past when we didn't have a single ball carrier on the pitch...

FTFY.

Liking the optimism though. Could do with a bit more of that around here!

Puja

Thanks Puja, good fix.

We should be optimistic - we were unreal against the ABs and we got to the WC final, we were utterly shambolic in the world cup before that and we have a lot of talent in the squad and emerging beneath it.

Eddie could've picked loads of new names and some people might have been happy but we may as a result be humped by the French. EJ will make sure the side evolves - he can be ruthless. We have to win this game though, it's hugely important that we do.

Oakboy wrote:

Puja wrote:

TheDasher wrote:The pack is going to be high on work rate, Curry will play as a 3rd 2nd flanker and we have carriers in Sinckler, Genge, George, Itoje, Curry, Underhill, Manu... there have been times in the past when we didn't have a single ball carrier on the pitch...

FTFY.

Liking the optimism though. Could do with a bit more of that around here!

Puja

I think every one of us has the best long-term interest of the team at heart. It's interesting to wonder what Is the best, though, from this point onwards. Four years ago, there was that wonderful unbeaten run to come. That led to some shelving of development perhaps. I want us to win but I also want a well-structured, four-year programme. I'd rather we won a GS in the 4th year than the 1st, for example.

The XV/23 selected gives me very little cause to think that Jones is building in the way that I want to see (apart from Furbank's selection). Based on the previous 4 year cycle, I have serious concern about the long-term planning and the effect of a few wins wrapped around the old guard (especially at SH).

There are grounds for optimism in terms of the overall standard of, say, our top 50 players compared with four years ago. Whether the on-field development puts that to good use remains to be seen.

Absolutely fair enough not to like this selection of course, but of the old guard, who do you think shouldn't be in the squad? Youngs, I'm guessing Farrell, who else?

TheDasher wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Puja wrote:
FTFY.

Liking the optimism though. Could do with a bit more of that around here!

Puja

I think every one of us has the best long-term interest of the team at heart. It's interesting to wonder what Is the best, though, from this point onwards. Four years ago, there was that wonderful unbeaten run to come. That led to some shelving of development perhaps. I want us to win but I also want a well-structured, four-year programme. I'd rather we won a GS in the 4th year than the 1st, for example.

The XV/23 selected gives me very little cause to think that Jones is building in the way that I want to see (apart from Furbank's selection). Based on the previous 4 year cycle, I have serious concern about the long-term planning and the effect of a few wins wrapped around the old guard (especially at SH).

There are grounds for optimism in terms of the overall standard of, say, our top 50 players compared with four years ago. Whether the on-field development puts that to good use remains to be seen.

Absolutely fair enough not to like this selection of course, but of the old guard, who do you think shouldn't be in the squad? Youngs, I'm guessing Farrell, who else?

Heinz obviously too.

Banquo wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:Yeah - I feel the same. Just when I thought we’d learned that locks at 6 doesn’t work, there goes Eddie Jones AGAIN ... just infuriating when I actually like all of the other selection calls.

You like Ewels at lock, Curry at 8, Youngs/Heinz, and Faz at 12, with two centres on the bench?

I’m not happy with Youngs and Heinz, but as the only other 9 in the squad is Mitchell who was always very unlikely to play as an ‘apprentice’, they were always going to play so not really a ‘selection call’ at this stage.

I rate Ewels and he’s generally done well for England when called upon. Kruis hasn’t been in imperious form, so I’m fine with Ewels starting.

I’m also still of the opinion that the Ford/Farrell pairing is the best option we have at 10/12 so until a better alternative emerges, it’s what I’d have picked. Maybe Devoto on the bench is a nod to the future, so again I’m OK with that. Without Watson, Thorley was the only other realistic option in the squad and Joseph’s greater experience (and ability to adequately cover he wing if needed), makes him the better selection IMO.

I don’t know if exactly ‘like’ Curry at 8, but we knew it was going to be a flanker playing out of position so while I’d have preferred Earl at 8 or (with Curry on the flank) or Hill at blindside instead of Lawes, I was ready for it.

If one wanted to be ruthless, in World Cup terms, one can say Eddy has had the same level of success as Brian Ashton but with twice the time and a more talented group of players than the largely SWC 2nd XV that Ashton inherited (via the crazy Robbo period).

Oakboy wrote:I think every one of us has the best long-term interest of the team at heart. It's interesting to wonder what Is the best, though, from this point onwards. Four years ago, there was that wonderful unbeaten run to come. That led to some shelving of development perhaps. I want us to win but I also want a well-structured, four-year programme. I'd rather we won a GS in the 4th year than the 1st, for example.

The XV/23 selected gives me very little cause to think that Jones is building in the way that I want to see (apart from Furbank's selection). Based on the previous 4 year cycle, I have serious concern about the long-term planning and the effect of a few wins wrapped around the old guard (especially at SH).

There are grounds for optimism in terms of the overall standard of, say, our top 50 players compared with four years ago. Whether the on-field development puts that to good use remains to be seen.

Interesting that you don't see Stuart > Cole or Ewels > Kruis, or even Devoto/Dingwall > Francis, or Hill/Earls > Nobody, as moving in the right direction.
The only players I see who aren't valid options for 2023 are Youngs and Heinz, and even then, Youngs might yet make it

Tigs put up this analysis elsewhere, worth repeating here:
Interesting comparing Eddie's first 6 Nations squad to now.
Hooker
Hartley -> George
George -> LCD
LCD -> Dunn

Loosehead
Vunipola -> Vunipola
Marler -> Genge
Mullan -> Marler

Tighthead
Cole -> Sinckler
Hill -> Stuart
Thomas -> Williams

Locks
Same + Ewels and Moon

Back Row (-Vunipola)
Haskell -> Curry
Robshaw -> Underhill
Kvesic -> Ludlam
Clifford -> Hill
Beaumont -> Earl

Scrum Half
Youngs -> Youngs
Care -> Heinz

Fly half (+Umaga)
Farrell -> Farrell
Ford -> Ford

Centre
Devoto -> Devoto
Hill -> Dingwall
Joesph -> Joesph
Daly -> Manu

Wing
Ashton -> May
Nowell -> Watson
Yarde -> Thorley

Full back
Brown -> Daly
Goode -> Furbank

Oakboy wrote:

Puja wrote:

TheDasher wrote:The pack is going to be high on work rate, Curry will play as a 3rd 2nd flanker and we have carriers in Sinckler, Genge, George, Itoje, Curry, Underhill, Manu... there have been times in the past when we didn't have a single ball carrier on the pitch...

FTFY.

Liking the optimism though. Could do with a bit more of that around here!

Puja

I think every one of us has the best long-term interest of the team at heart. It's interesting to wonder what Is the best, though, from this point onwards. Four years ago, there was that wonderful unbeaten run to come. That led to some shelving of development perhaps. I want us to win but I also want a well-structured, four-year programme. I'd rather we won a GS in the 4th year than the 1st, for example.

The XV/23 selected gives me very little cause to think that Jones is building in the way that I want to see (apart from Furbank's selection). Based on the previous 4 year cycle, I have serious concern about the long-term planning and the effect of a few wins wrapped around the old guard (especially at SH).

There are grounds for optimism in terms of the overall standard of, say, our top 50 players compared with four years ago. Whether the on-field development puts that to good use remains to be seen.

I think there are already plenty of signs of Eddie ‘evolving to the squad.

I’m hugely disappointed we didn’t see changes at 9, but I think it’s pretty clear he intends to skip Robson and Spencer for the next generation. I think that’s a touch unfair without giving either enough of a run to prove themselves, but at the same time, neither are in such stellar form to demand selection and at least we have Mitchell as an apprentice. Perhaps if Mitchell had actually played a game this season we might have seen him get a full call-up? In short, I don’t like the Youngs/Heinz duopoly, but I do get it as long as it’s a short term scenario.

Furbank is a brave selection and I hope it’s one we can persevere with even if it doesn’t immediately work out this weekend. He’s been great for Saints so I’m excited by what he can offer.

Ewels inclusion in the starting XV and Stuart and Devoto making the bench are all positive signs of moving in the right direction.

The only thing I’m really frustrated by is the back row muddle. We arguably have the best crop of young back row players in the world but at this point in time we’re using them in odd, sub-optimal ways. I can take some heart from the fact that Hill and Earl are in the squad and hopefully they train well enough to force Eddie’s hand as it appears Ewels etc. have.

Scrumhead wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Puja wrote:
FTFY.

Liking the optimism though. Could do with a bit more of that around here!

Puja

I think every one of us has the best long-term interest of the team at heart. It's interesting to wonder what Is the best, though, from this point onwards. Four years ago, there was that wonderful unbeaten run to come. That led to some shelving of development perhaps. I want us to win but I also want a well-structured, four-year programme. I'd rather we won a GS in the 4th year than the 1st, for example.

The XV/23 selected gives me very little cause to think that Jones is building in the way that I want to see (apart from Furbank's selection). Based on the previous 4 year cycle, I have serious concern about the long-term planning and the effect of a few wins wrapped around the old guard (especially at SH).

There are grounds for optimism in terms of the overall standard of, say, our top 50 players compared with four years ago. Whether the on-field development puts that to good use remains to be seen.

I think there are already plenty of signs of Eddie ‘evolving to the squad.

Sure...but then Lawes at 6...

It's the definition of insanity!!!

A question I have - if Furbank replaces the injured Watson, was Watson going to be sued at fullback instead of Daly, or does Eddie see the entire back three as interchangeable, with the best "unit" being selected from the available players and then slotted into the best positions as required?

TheDasher wrote: Absolutely fair enough not to like this selection of course, but of the old guard, who do you think shouldn't be in the squad? Youngs, I'm guessing Farrell, who else?

As I've already said, I'd have given Robson and Spencer a year at 9/21. I'd choose either Ford or Farrell and never play the latter at 12. I have reservations about Kruis, Tuilagi and Joseph for 4 years time and the time to look to replace them is now not two years' time. I'd also suggest there has been a drop off in form of a few more: Billy, Mako and George, perhaps (hopefully temporarily).

jngf wrote:If one wanted to be ruthless, in World Cup terms, one can say Eddy has had the same level of success as Brian Ashton but with twice the time and a more talented group of players than the largely SWC 2nd XV that Ashton inherited (via the crazy Robbo period).

That would be ruthless, but it'd also be highly fatuous, given Eddie's team didn't get humped in the pool stages, nor receive gratuitous amounts of luck in the knock-outs.

Puja

Puja wrote:

jngf wrote:If one wanted to be ruthless, in World Cup terms, one can say Eddy has had the same level of success as Brian Ashton but with twice the time and a more talented group of players than the largely SWC 2nd XV that Ashton inherited (via the crazy Robbo period).

That would be ruthless, but it'd also be highly fatuous, given Eddie's team didn't get humped in the pool stages, nor receive gratuitous amounts of luck in the knock-outs.

Puja

Though Ashton’s team didn’t get to avoid playing the best team in their group

Peej wrote:A question I have - if Furbank replaces the injured Watson, was Watson going to be sued at fullback instead of Daly, or does Eddie see the entire back three as interchangeable, with the best "unit" being selected from the available players and then slotted into the best positions as required?

Curious one. I really didn't expect to ever see Daly named on the wing again, particularly as Jones must be aware of people slating him for persisting with him at fullback. I thought he'd double down.