RugbyRebels

Which Tyler wrote:

Puja wrote:

twitchy wrote:Get devoto in.

He'd be yet another 10/12 though.

He really wouldn't.

Well, okay, so he's not exactly a Slade/Francis-alike, but he's also not a 13 (no matter how much his clubs try and crowbar him in there).

Puja

Has Morgan played in the 2nd row?

I'd be surprised. I've literally never seen him jump in a line-out, doesn't really look the shape for it and is only 6'2" I think.

If he moved forward, prop always looked the more likely destination.....
I have seen him jump at lineout time but I've also seen a lunar eclipse.

Puja wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Puja wrote:
He'd be yet another 10/12 though.

He really wouldn't.

Well, okay, so he's not exactly a Slade/Francis-alike, but he's also not a 13 (no matter how much his clubs try and crowbar him in there).

No, but he's much more of a 13 than he is a 10; even if he himself won't admit it.

Which Tyler wrote:

Puja wrote:

Which Tyler wrote: He really wouldn't.

Well, okay, so he's not exactly a Slade/Francis-alike, but he's also not a 13 (no matter how much his clubs try and crowbar him in there).

No, but he's much more of a 13 than he is a 10; even if he himself won't admit it.

That's setting a bar so low that you could trip over it! I take your point that he's not a 10/12, but he is at least a 10-esque 12.

Puja

I'd say he's about 5/8ths 2nd 5/8th, 1/8ths 1st 5/8th and the remaining 2/8ths an out-and-out, thoroughbred 12.5.

Mikey Brown wrote:I'd say he's about 5/8ths 2nd 5/8th, 1/8ths 1st 5/8th and the remaining 2/8ths an out-and-out, thoroughbred 12.5.

Mikey Brown wrote:I'd be surprised. I've literally never seen him jump in a line-out, doesn't really look the shape for it and is only 6'2" I think.

Same applies with Billy V tbh

Hughes or Beaumont would be the picks if we wanted more of a line out jumper in the back row.

Wood isn't likely to be touring now i reckon...

jngf wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I'd be surprised. I've literally never seen him jump in a line-out, doesn't really look the shape for it and is only 6'2" I think.

Same applies with Billy V tbh

Hughes or Beaumont would be the picks if we wanted more of a line out jumper in the back row.

Not sure we really need one with Robshaw in there, he's a perfectly serviceable 3rd option.

Raggs wrote:Wood isn't likely to be touring now i reckon...

Nope. Presumably he'll be suspended but Eddie might drop him anyway.

Without Haskell and Wood, I would draft-in Beaumont and Wilson. Both can offer a bit of versatility and while Wilson doesn't offer experience in a test environment, he's an experienced pro and a leader at his club and think that could be useful in such a young, inexperienced group of back rowers.

From the initial 31 we're definitely losing Haskell, Hill and Marchant with Solomona, Cokanasiga and Maunder all injury doubts and Wood likely to be suspended.

The Barbarians game will be a big opportunity for some of those who missed out on the original squad. Beaumont, Wilson, Haley and Spencer in particular.

Townsend puts in a good shift today for Chiefs I think he'll go to Argentina, Maunders pretty doubtful apparently.

Hopefully. There's no way to tell what Eddie's thinking but it would be odd to select Maunder as a younger alternative to Youngs and Care and then replace him with Wigglesworth.

For all we know, Townsend or indeed, Robson may have been preferred to Wigglesworth had they not been in the play-offs.

Fingers crossed for either. Wigglesworth is a retrograde step.

Mellsblue wrote:As M Brown says, James is 13 who has had a few games at 10.

This, and it's a fairly damning condemnation of the Sale recruitment policy at 10 last summer, as he's not really even Premiership back up level at fly half.

Beaumont is in the training squad, not the touring squad but I think he's likely to replace Haskell.

He's starting tomorrow so has a good chance to impress. The fact that he also covers lock is a bonus.

Having said that, if he's anonymous or has a stinker, he could still be overlooked. It's up to him to seize the chance but either way, Hughes will be favourite to start at 8 in Argentina.

If Wood is suspended (which looks likely) there's another back row spot up for grabs too.

Wood being suspended looks a given, maybe Eddie asked him to take on some of the responsibility of Hartley with so many kids around

Which game carries more weight for late addictions to the touring squad, BaaBaas or Prem final?

Tough call TBH. I'd say the training camp will also be taken in to consideration.

Anyone who has impressed in training and plays well against the Barbarians has to be in with a good shout. Particularly if the players they're competing with from the Prem final are also uncapped/had less exposure to Eddie.

For example, Haskell and Wood's spots in the back row could conceivably be two from Beaumont, Wilson, Armand, Wray or Thompson.

Even if Armand, Wray or Thompson has a stand-out game, they've never been called-up by Eddie, even for a training camp. Armand was the closest with the Saxons but that still wouldn't have given Eddie a first-hand look at him. If Beaumont and Wilson have impressed Eddie, I think it would be hard for the others to compete.

The prem final looks like an actual competitive game

Mellsblue wrote:Which game carries more weight for late addictions to the touring squad, BaaBaas or Prem final?

I'd agree with scrumhead - the Barbarians game will carry more weight because Eddie will want continuity and players who have already been in camp, rather than trying to crowbar in new people.

I don't necessarily know that we'd need to replace Wood - we'd still have Robshaw, Underhill, Curry and Curry to cover the flanks, so we're well stocked there. Get Beaumont in to replace Haskell and we'll be sorted, I'd think.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:I don't necessarily know that we'd need to replace Wood - we'd still have Robshaw, Underhill, Curry and Curry to cover the flanks, so we're well stocked there. Get Beaumont in to replace Haskell and we'll be sorted, I'd think.

Suspect they'd still call a replacement up for political reasons though, don't want to give an opening to an argument about what size the squad needed to be in the first place should it be something they're negotiating about again in the future.

I'd be tempted with another lock or back row/lock on top of Beaumont though rather than a pure flanker.

Spencer is definitely in with a shout if they don't go for a back row replacement.

I'm surprised he's not starting alongside Ewels tomorrow. Sink or swim for Isiekwe and a lot of responsibility on Ewels come lineout time.

Puja wrote: I'd agree with scrumhead - the Barbarians game will carry more weight because Eddie will want continuity and players who have already been in camp, rather than trying to crowbar in new people.

Continuity at a lower standard seems more the standard of Burt than Eddie

After today, I'd have thought Ollie Devoto could well have played himself back into Eddie's plans, given Marchant's injury (and England's generalised lack of options at IC)