RugbyRebels

Stom wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:It’s interesting that Marler, Robshaw, Care and Brown were the Quins mainstays in the England squad over the last few years, while all are now both playing the best rugby they have in a good while and looking as far from the England side as they have in years.

Well, indeed.

I'd have them all in the squad and considering the way England have been playing off 9, I'd start Care.

I don't think you can argue that Reinach and Faf have been the best 2 SHs this year, but Care is easily the 3rd best. He's been excellent for Quins and has really held Smith's hand along.

No coincidence that our terrible run came when he was out injured...

I’m struggling to think of a good game from Care when starting. I think he’s easily our best ‘finisher’ but I would have both Sarries players ahead of him to start.

When was Spencer's good starting England game?

He hasn’t had one but he’s currently the form SH. We can’t rule people out for not having a good game starting at 9 as we’d then have to go down the maverick route of not picking a 9 at all. However, I believe Care has proven he’s not great as a starter but our best replacement. If fit, for me, he’d always be in the 21 shirt. I didn’t understand the calls for Spencer to play for England but his form now should see him start there. Ideally, we shouldn’t be in a position where we are taking an educated guess on our starting 9 but sticking with Youngs through thick and thin has left us there.

I did forget the important part there of being a mainstay regardless of how knackered or out of form they look. They’ve all had big patches of that, and it was comment as much on the effect not being with England may have had on them?

All have looked rejuvenated but I couldn’t guess whether that is only possible because they’re out of the squad, or is a reason they should be straight back in.

I agree that Care should have the 21 shirt, regardless of anything else. His impact off the bench was a big part of early EJ success I think.

Robshaw is behind Wilson now. I’m biased but I’d take him ahead of Shields every day of the week though. I’d imagine his experience of the last World Cup might be pretty useful too.

Daly still isn’t a fullback, not that that matters to EJ. Watson just needs to show a lot.

Marler I’m hoping can be swayed by a few weeks work for some pretty good money.

Still don’t

Mikey Brown wrote:I did forget the important part there of being a mainstay regardless of how knackered or out of form they look. They’ve all had big patches of that, and it was comment as much on the effect not being with England may have had on them?

All have looked rejuvenated but I couldn’t guess whether that is only possible because they’re out of the squad, or is a reason they should be straight back in.

I agree that Care should have the 21 shirt, regardless of anything else. His impact off the bench was a big part of early EJ success I think.

Robshaw is behind Wilson now. I’m biased but I’d take him ahead of Shields every day of the week though. I’d imagine his experience of the last World Cup might be pretty useful too.

Daly still isn’t a fullback, not that that matters to EJ. Watson just needs to show a lot.

Marler I’m hoping can be swayed by a few weeks work for some pretty good money.

Still don’t

The Marler's not for turning.

I’m not so sure about that ... the last time he was asked in an interview, he said something along the lines of ‘never say never’.

I think he could be persuaded, given he’s in a much better place from a mental point of view and the opportunity to have one last international hurrah might tempt him.

Care, Robshaw and Brown should all be in IMO. All three have been in excellent form and while arguably none of them would be first choice, they would be very valuable squad players given their experience in World Cup environment.

Arguably Brown is the least likely. Watson has come back in good nick and I’d imagine that effectively closes the curtains on Brown’s test career.

Just looking at this, http://en.espn.co.uk/statsguru/rugby/pl ... view=match, I hadn't realised how little the Watson at fullback experiment had actually been tried at international level.

I wonder if EJ would actually view him as a 15 ahead of Daly (even though he plays all his club rugby there?) who now actually has more international game-time at 15 than Watson. I'm also curious if Watson fits the expanded attacking remit of the fullback, he certainly hasn't got Daly's kicking or passing game.

I think Marler took the venue for the RWC into account when retiring. If it was Europe instead of Japan, he might not have made the decision in the first place.

Mikey Brown wrote:Just looking at this, http://en.espn.co.uk/statsguru/rugby/pl ... view=match, I hadn't realised how little the Watson at fullback experiment had actually been tried at international level.

I wonder if EJ would actually view him as a 15 ahead of Daly (even though he plays all his club rugby there?) who now actually has more international game-time at 15 than Watson. I'm also curious if Watson fits the expanded attacking remit of the fullback, he certainly hasn't got Daly's kicking or passing game.

Agreed. Although even if Eddie prefers Daly as his first choice 15, I think Watson would certainly be viewed as capable of covering - hence my curtains for Mike Brown comment.

It’s been picked up on a few times already, but Eddie does like versatility which probably bodes well for players like Shields and Nowell and less so for out and out specialists.

I get that picking a 31 will always mean some compromises, but I’d always take a specialist over a makeshift option. Even the most versatile players have a position they are strongest in.

Watson doesn’t have Daly’s rounded game but he is actually a 15, with huge counter attack potential and that will scare defences. That’s not something Brown can do. His running will create holes and opportunities elsewhere and stop the oppo raining bombs on our 15.
The dream remains:
Daly
May
Watson

Scrumhead wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Just looking at this, http://en.espn.co.uk/statsguru/rugby/pl ... view=match, I hadn't realised how little the Watson at fullback experiment had actually been tried at international level.

I wonder if EJ would actually view him as a 15 ahead of Daly (even though he plays all his club rugby there?) who now actually has more international game-time at 15 than Watson. I'm also curious if Watson fits the expanded attacking remit of the fullback, he certainly hasn't got Daly's kicking or passing game.

Agreed. Although even if Eddie prefers Daly as his first choice 15, I think Watson would certainly be viewed as capable of covering - hence my curtains for Mike Brown comment.

It’s been picked up on a few times already, but Eddie does like versatility which probably bodes well for players like Shields and Nowell and less so for out and out specialists.

I get that picking a 31 will always mean some compromises, but I’d always take a specialist over a makeshift option. Even the most versatile players have a position they are strongest in.

We've already got Farrell covering 10 and 12, Slade covering 10, 12, 13 and 15, Daly covering 11, 13 and 15, Watson covering 14 and 15...

Stom wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Just looking at this, http://en.espn.co.uk/statsguru/rugby/pl ... view=match, I hadn't realised how little the Watson at fullback experiment had actually been tried at international level.

I wonder if EJ would actually view him as a 15 ahead of Daly (even though he plays all his club rugby there?) who now actually has more international game-time at 15 than Watson. I'm also curious if Watson fits the expanded attacking remit of the fullback, he certainly hasn't got Daly's kicking or passing game.

Agreed. Although even if Eddie prefers Daly as his first choice 15, I think Watson would certainly be viewed as capable of covering - hence my curtains for Mike Brown comment.

It’s been picked up on a few times already, but Eddie does like versatility which probably bodes well for players like Shields and Nowell and less so for out and out specialists.

I get that picking a 31 will always mean some compromises, but I’d always take a specialist over a makeshift option. Even the most versatile players have a position they are strongest in.

We've already got Farrell covering 10 and 12, Slade covering 10, 12, 13 and 15, Daly covering 11, 13 and 15, Watson covering 14 and 15...

Jack Nowell covering 11 13 14 15 and 7

Doorzetbornandbred wrote:

Stom wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:
Agreed. Although even if Eddie prefers Daly as his first choice 15, I think Watson would certainly be viewed as capable of covering - hence my curtains for Mike Brown comment.

It’s been picked up on a few times already, but Eddie does like versatility which probably bodes well for players like Shields and Nowell and less so for out and out specialists.

I get that picking a 31 will always mean some compromises, but I’d always take a specialist over a makeshift option. Even the most versatile players have a position they are strongest in.

We've already got Farrell covering 10 and 12, Slade covering 10, 12, 13 and 15, Daly covering 11, 13 and 15, Watson covering 14 and 15...

Jack Nowell covering 11 13 14 15 and 7

We should just call up Harry Thacker to cover 2 and 7, Dombrandt to cover 4, 5, 6 and 8, Clifford for across the backrow, bring Burgess back to cover 6 and 12, Sam James for 10, 12, 13 and 15, anyone else?

Stom wrote:

Doorzetbornandbred wrote:

Stom wrote:
We've already got Farrell covering 10 and 12, Slade covering 10, 12, 13 and 15, Daly covering 11, 13 and 15, Watson covering 14 and 15...

Jack Nowell covering 11 13 14 15 and 7

We should just call up Harry Thacker to cover 2 and 7, Dombrandt to cover 4, 5, 6 and 8, Clifford for across the backrow, bring Burgess back to cover 6 and 12, Sam James for 10, 12, 13 and 15, anyone else?

Shields 5 & 7. Hughes 5 & 8. Ah, wait. I’ve got this game wrong, haven’t I.

Mellsblue wrote:

Stom wrote:

Doorzetbornandbred wrote:
Jack Nowell covering 11 13 14 15 and 7

We should just call up Harry Thacker to cover 2 and 7, Dombrandt to cover 4, 5, 6 and 8, Clifford for across the backrow, bring Burgess back to cover 6 and 12, Sam James for 10, 12, 13 and 15, anyone else?

Shields 5 & 7. Hughes 5 & 8. Ah, wait. I’ve got this game wrong, haven’t I.

Itoje 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 15.

Puja

I'd back Mako at 10 or 12.

Scrumhead wrote:I’m not so sure about that ... the last time he was asked in an interview, he said something along the lines of ‘never say never’.

I think he could be persuaded, given he’s in a much better place from a mental point of view and the opportunity to have one last international hurrah might tempt him.

Care, Robshaw and Brown should all be in IMO. All three have been in excellent form and while arguably none of them would be first choice, they would be very valuable squad players given their experience in World Cup environment.

Arguably Brown is the least likely. Watson has come back in good nick and I’d imagine that effectively closes the curtains on Brown’s test career.

Given their World Cup experience is pretty much entirely negative, Robshaw especially so, I'm not sure that's much of a recommendation. Imo we have rightly moved past them, though Brown remains a much more reliable 15 than Daly.

Joe Marler to play - for the Barbarians.

Pretty handy side developing. Worry for us if we just throw in a bunch of untested youngsters.

fivepointer wrote:Joe Marler to play - for the Barbarians.

Pretty handy side developing. Worry for us if we just throw in a bunch of untested youngsters.

Could be a chris ashton situation where EJ sees what he is missing.

twitchy wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Joe Marler to play - for the Barbarians.

Pretty handy side developing. Worry for us if we just throw in a bunch of untested youngsters.

Could be a chris ashton situation where EJ sees what he is missing.

Less surprising when Marler gets outpaced by Ford though...

twitchy wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Joe Marler to play - for the Barbarians.

Pretty handy side developing. Worry for us if we just throw in a bunch of untested youngsters.

Could be a chris ashton situation where EJ sees what he is missing.

I rarely defend Eddie, but I think he knows what he’s missing with Marler.

Marler primarily retired for mental health reasons which I’m not sure we can lay at Eddie’s door.

You could make an argument to say he wasn’t enjoying playing for England under Eddie, but most of what he actually cited was the amount of time he was spending away from his young family which would have been the same under any coaching regime.

TRP saying that Cipriani has been invited to play for the Barbarians. I imagine he’s looking at it as an opportunity to make a point, as Ashton did last year.

I'd be in favour of going very young and exciting for this lineup, roping in the U20s if they can be spared from their pre-JWC camp. There's no way that an England C team containing a load of never-was and never-will-bes like Symons and Sam James are going to get anything but spanked against this Barbarians side, so go young and fearless and invite them to throw caution to the wind.

You could have:

Obano
Thacker
Brookes
Kpoku
Moon
Hill
BCurry
Dombrandt/Mercer

Mitchell
Smith
Thorley
Redpath
Marchant
Collins/McConnochie
Olowofela/LJames


Puja

Scrumhead wrote:TRP saying that Cipriani has been invited to play for the Barbarians. I imagine he’s looking at it as an opportunity to make a point, as Ashton did last year.

Surely it'd be bridge-burning though. If he's in the RWC trainig squad, then he won't be able to play. If he's not in the RWC squad, then he'd surely be turning down the England team for this fixture.

Puja

I’m not sure? It depends when Eddie announces his training squad I guess?

Presumably Eddie has given Mallinder a list of players he can/can’t select because they’ll be in the main training squad, but there’s talk that he’s trying to convince Marler to come out of retirement and his Barbarians selection hasn’t been described as a problem for that scenario.

I’d be more worried about Cipriani ‘socialising’ with the Barbarians given his previous track record.