RugbyRebels

Good squad Eddies picked IMO.

England squad to face Ireland:
Forwards: Jack Clifford, Dan Cole, Luke Cowan-Dickie, Tom Curry, Ben Earl, Ellis Genge, Jamie George, Nathan Hughes, Maro Itoje, George Kruis, Joe Launchbury, Courtney Lawes, Ben Moon, Brad Shields, Kyle Sinckler, Jack Singleton, Billy Vunipola, Mako Vunipola, Harry Williams, Mark Wilson.
Backs: Chris Ashton, Mike Brown, Joe Cokanasiga, Elliot Daly, Ollie Devoto, Owen Farrell, George Ford, Jonny May, Jack Nowell, Dan Robson, Henry Slade, Ben Te'o, Ollie Thorley, Manu Tuilagi, Ben Youngs.

Puja, can you please mash this all into the other thread? I wouldn't want anyone to miss out on such thrilling incites as Ben Youngs is a bit crap and Owen Farrell can't control himself.

Mikey Brown wrote:Puja, can you please mash this all into the other thread? I wouldn't want anyone to miss out on such thrilling incites as Ben Youngs is a bit crap and Owen Farrell can't control himself.

Your wish, etc, etc.

Puja

Just returning to the "England players have shone in Europe thing". The argument that the Irish condense their players into only 4 teams and so are bound to do better than English teams is a bit silly. We also only allow 5 foreigners per squad. As patriotic as I am, I can't help but notice there are other good rugby players in Ireland which we deny ourselves, thus hobbling our efforts.

This tournament there's a decent chance of English teams filling all the bottom positions in their groups, apart from Saracens. I appreciate it's a sample of 1 but that doesn't smack of you being awash with good players. If say your median performance in Europe is less than stellar. The long and short of it is that I think you seriously overestimate quite a lot of your players.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:. The long and short of it is that I think you seriously overestimate quite a lot of your players.

Only some of us but I agree with you. Normally I would say we are a pretty realistic.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Just returning to the "England players have shone in Europe thing". The argument that the Irish condense their players into only 4 teams and so are bound to do better than English teams is a bit silly. We also only allow 5 foreigners per squad. As patriotic as I am, I can't help but notice there are other good rugby players in Ireland which we deny ourselves, thus hobbling our efforts.

This tournament there's a decent chance of English teams filling all the bottom positions in their groups, apart from Saracens. I appreciate it's a sample of 1 but that doesn't smack of you being awash with good players. If say your median performance in Europe is less than stellar. The long and short of it is that I think you seriously overestimate quite a lot of your players.

Sarries are the only English team that have a large number of current or recent England internationals.

England (the national team) have had results that have been at least on a par with Ireland and Wales (the 2 other most successful NH teams) for a long time. I’m not sure of the exact figures, but I’d wager that since the ‘11 World Cup Eng have lost less 6N’s games than anyone else and more wins against the SH big 3, and possibly a better overall win %.

The issues with the clubs and their performances in Europe are largely separate.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Just returning to the "England players have shone in Europe thing". The argument that the Irish condense their players into only 4 teams and so are bound to do better than English teams is a bit silly. We also only allow 5 foreigners per squad. As patriotic as I am, I can't help but notice there are other good rugby players in Ireland which we deny ourselves, thus hobbling our efforts.

This tournament there's a decent chance of English teams filling all the bottom positions in their groups, apart from Saracens. I appreciate it's a sample of 1 but that doesn't smack of you being awash with good players. If say your median performance in Europe is less than stellar. The long and short of it is that I think you seriously overestimate quite a lot of your players.

EW, is it the case in Ireland that Europe is by some margin the top priority after internationals? Some Munster fans that I met insisted that it was but I don't know whether theirs was the general opinion.

I don't think that is the case in England (or France?, or Wales?, or Scotland?).

You may well be right about our estimation of the quality of players. However, whatever the actual individual playing standards, human flesh/brain cells can only be motivated to top level performance a limited number of times per season. At present, whether the players are individually the best or not, Ireland prioritises better than England.

Farrell our of today’s match for a minor op. 7 - 10 day recover period according to McCall.

Mellsblue wrote:Farrell our of today’s match for a minor op. 7 - 10 day recover period according to McCall.

Excessive thumb sucking - so they say!

Lions test players in NZ:
Mako
George
Sinckler
Itoje
Kruis
Lawes
Youngs
Farrell
Te’o (goodness knows how)
Daly
Watson

Add in Billy who would’ve probably been first choice 8 (don’t forget who the head coach was) and def in the match day squad. You’ve then got squad members such as Joseph, the laughable exclusion of Launch, May who I now think is verging on world class and Tuilagi who, let’s face it, would’ve gone if he were fit.

That sounds like a lot of good players to me.

Mellsblue wrote:Farrell our of today’s match for a minor op. 7 - 10 day recover period according to McCall.

Glasgow playing really well.
Goode playing like a 15 playing 10, Williams like a wing playing FB and Spencer just done 30 mins playing for Glasgow.

On the upside Tompkins playing well without you know who on the pitch

p/d wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Farrell our of today’s match for a minor op. 7 - 10 day recover period according to McCall.

Glasgow playing really well.
Goode playing like a 15 playing 10, Williams like a wing playing FB and Spencer just done 30 mins playing for Glasgow.

On the upside Tompkins playing well without you know who on the pitch

No doubt Farrell gave him such a rousing pre-match speech the Nat Div 1 standard Tompkins is playing like a Prem quality player.

Mellsblue wrote:Lions test players in NZ:
Mako
George
Sinckler
Itoje
Kruis
Lawes
Youngs
Farrell
Te’o (goodness knows how)
Daly
Watson

Add in Billy who would’ve probably been first choice 8 (don’t forget who the head coach was) and def in the match day squad. You’ve then got squad members such as Joseph, the laughable exclusion of Launch, May who I now think is verging on world class and Tuilagi who, let’s face it, would’ve gone if he were fit.

That sounds like a lot of good players to me.

Nowell got 2 test caps too.

English and Irish club games are apples and oranges. Different priorities, rules, structure...can’t be compared.

Although one does bleed into the other bit in England, the international game is largely separate.

Timbo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Lions test players in NZ:
Mako
George
Sinckler
Itoje
Kruis
Lawes
Youngs
Farrell
Te’o (goodness knows how)
Daly
Watson

Add in Billy who would’ve probably been first choice 8 (don’t forget who the head coach was) and def in the match day squad. You’ve then got squad members such as Joseph, the laughable exclusion of Launch, May who I now think is verging on world class and Tuilagi who, let’s face it, would’ve gone if he were fit.

That sounds like a lot of good players to me.

Nowell got 2 test caps too.

English and Irish club games are apples and oranges. Different priorities, rules, structure...can’t be compared.

Although one does bleed into the other bit in England, the international game is largely separate.

Forgot about Nowell, and there I was thinking we were lacking Lions quality flankers.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Just returning to the "England players have shone in Europe thing". The argument that the Irish condense their players into only 4 teams and so are bound to do better than English teams is a bit silly. We also only allow 5 foreigners per squad. As patriotic as I am, I can't help but notice there are other good rugby players in Ireland which we deny ourselves, thus hobbling our efforts.

This tournament there's a decent chance of English teams filling all the bottom positions in their groups, apart from Saracens. I appreciate it's a sample of 1 but that doesn't smack of you being awash with good players. If say your median performance in Europe is less than stellar. The long and short of it is that I think you seriously overestimate quite a lot of your players.

I'd say you're completely right. Seems to me european success helps for the six nations. Didn't england's most recent grand slam come the year sarries won europe? Back when england dominated so did the clubs. Hardly surprising that irish players benefit from playing at a higher level regularly in better sides and are better players. I assume that because so much is invested in the premiership by clubs and fans admitting the quality is low is harder at times.

Still, the lions representation does suggest that england's squad is not terrible and rugby is a game of such small margins that it wouldn't need that much of a swing for england to take it and even win handsomely. Ireland favourites but i hope they're turning into england 1999-2002 and not 2003.

The Heineken cup is certainly the next priority after Test rugby, but that's misleading. The Irish provinces still tend to be at the top of the table in Pro rugby including taking all 4 top spots in the not so distant past. If the Scots and Welsh are prioritising the Pro14 they have surprisingly little to show for it. Frankly I think your coaches in the premiership (bar Sarries) are largely idiots who don't understand the importance of rotation and how it strengthens a team over the course of a season rather than weakens it. Mind you neither do half the Ireland supporters so they aren't alone.

And yes I know that your English club teams largely aren't English and so drawing direct from Euro performance is a blunt tool (no YOU'RE a blunt tool), but it really was only a response to someone (Stom, I think) saying that since the players shone in Europe, they are better than my assessment.

Look I know the players are better than I think they are - rather like Gatland there comes a point when you realise that results must mean that you're missing something. I do get that they were selected heavily by Gatland for the Lions (but, you know, Gatland). I do however think the idea that they are playing massively and regularly behind their potential which is fostered by some supporters is bunkum. Seems to me that their results are roughly where they are, same as most teams, which means that they are certainly capable of beating Ireland, even away, but they are underdogs.

Casting them as underdogs lets them off the hook taking a longer term view, casting them as underdogs with days to go perhaps accepts England are getting a lot wrong

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:The Heineken cup is certainly the next priority after Test rugby, but that's misleading. The Irish provinces still tend to be at the top of the table in Pro rugby including taking all 4 top spots in the not so distant past. If the Scots and Welsh are prioritising the Pro14 they have surprisingly little to show for it. Frankly I think your coaches in the premiership (bar Sarries) are largely idiots who don't understand the importance of rotation and how it strengthens a team over the course of a season rather than weakens it. Mind you neither do half the Ireland supporters so they aren't alone.

And yes I know that your English club teams largely aren't English and so drawing direct from Euro performance is a blunt tool (no YOU'RE a blunt tool), but it really was only a response to someone (Stom, I think) saying that since the players shone in Europe, they are better than my assessment.

Look I know the players are better than I think they are - rather like Gatland there comes a point when you realise that results must mean that you're missing something. I do get that they were selected heavily by Gatland for the Lions (but, you know, Gatland). I do however think the idea that they are playing massively and regularly behind their potential which is fostered by some supporters is bunkum. Seems to me that their results are roughly where they are, same as most teams, which means that they are certainly capable of beating Ireland, even away, but they are underdogs.

Ah, so basically you're going in double on a misunderstanding?

I don't think you can look at the performance of the England team in recent times and think that the fault can lie with the skill of the players involved...they have looked like they're playing the wrong tactics, they are overtired and overtrained, and that has nothing to do with their individual skill.

I then suggested Ford was one of the best FHs around, behind Sexton and at a similar level to Russell (although I honestly think he's better than Russell, because he does the same without the mistakes). You then suggested he wasn't in the top 5 European FHs, which is bunkum, tbh, however low an opinion you have of English rugby players.

There is one other factor to look at when you consider the club sides. Injury crisis.

By god. Multiple sides have been struck down with insane injury problems during the past 2 seasons. It's hard to think that the England players at Bath, Quins, Leicester...have been playing at full throttle considering the numbers that have been missing.

Why has this been such a huge problem? God knows. I have no clue why some clubs have been hit so hard with injury problems while others have been scott free.

The other thing to look at is the mismanagement at the top level, above coaching. Leicester, Quins, Glos, Bath, Wasps...inept. And that surely have an impact on the players.

I'm not for a minute suggesting that the English players are hamstrung so badly that they are in fact the best in the world...I'm just saying that their performances are...slightly hamstrung. While the abilities of the Irish players are amplified by a truly magnificent system.

WHICH IS NOT A CRITICISM!!!

I wish England had the structure, but the RFU do not have the patience to stick to a long term plan since Woodentop. Which is a shame. As the right man in place could do wonders with our group of players.

In order.

Yes I do think it is due to the skill. Your performance at the breakdown has only recently moved from frankly joke levels to acceptabl to good. Now that doesn't matter much if you can just relentlessly keep going forward but if a team starts to be able to stop that - as they have when you've been missing Billy - then you've been eaten alive there which makes it hard to win rugby matches.

I maintain that Ford isn't regularly in the top 5 fly halves playing European in rugby (which is what I actually said).

The injury issue is almost entirely of your own making, and in any event you've got loads more rugby players than everyone but the French and the Bokke so forgive me if I'm not exactly sympathetic. It is what it is and everyone has to cope with the players that they have which may be because of injuries or because they have a tiny (playing) population. Everyone is hamstrung in their own way.

Our structure works for us and our limited playing pool. People used to say that your structure worked for you given that you have a lot more players - battle hardened or whatever. No doubt when the wheel turns they will do again.

Structure is an entirely relevant point of focus for discussion. England lacks skilled pivots in their strategy, and this hamstrings the team. Individuals at 9, 7, 2, 12 are in a constant state of flux or revert to type through either dogged persistence (9 and 10) or parachuting journeymen (12, loosies) . England have a dearth of quality in theses pivotal positions. I am prepared to be shown my arse in this assessment, but the choke is always on in the English engine room. IMHO of course.

morepork wrote:Structure is an entirely relevant point of focus for discussion. England lacks skilled pivots in their strategy, and this hamstrings the team. Individuals at 9, 7, 2, 12 are in a constant state of flux or revert to type through either dogged persistence (9 and 10) or parachuting journeymen (12, loosies) . England have a dearth of quality in theses pivotal positions. I am prepared to be shown my arse in this assessment, but the choke is always on in the English engine room. IMHO of course.

I still think this is down to selection.

Except 9, god knows what happened to SH skills for a good few years. Thank god they're coming through again, but jesus.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/46939765

In the tragic event that Shields and Farrell are not available, who do you pick for Ireland?

Easy...

Mako, George, Sinckler
Launch, Itoje
Wilson, Billy, Curry
Robson, Ford
Daly, Slade, Tuilagi, May
Brown

LCD, Genge, Cole, Lawes, Hughes, Youngs, Cipriani, Nowell

Depends who runs better in training between Ford-Slade-Manu and Ford-Devoto-Manu.

I try to ignore Shields's existence where I can anyway, so he doesn't really affect my selection.

Puja