RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote:Whilst I think Slade's future at intl level is 12, esp as he is now a threatening runner , seems a bit odd that he has had no game time there this season to my knowledge...and that you haven't got Watson at 15.

That said, decent side and bench; it would have been much more interesting if May were fit. Glad Roko is on the bench. I wonder what it is about Launch that Eddie doesnt fancy, or whether he wants Kruis to run the l/o and thinks a Kruis/Launch lock pairing as a bit wimpy.

Glad Itoje is getting a rest.

Banquo wrote:Whilst I think Slade's future at intl level is 12, esp as he is now a threatening runner , seems a bit odd that he has had no game time there this season to my knowledge...and that you haven't got Watson at 15.

That said, decent side and bench; it would have been much more interesting if May were fit. Glad Roko is on the bench. I wonder what it is about Launch that Eddie doesnt fancy, or whether he wants Kruis to run the l/o and thinks a Kruis/Launch lock pairing as a bit wimpy.

Glad Itoje is getting a rest.

fivepointer wrote:The midfield selection is one that pleases me. Would have liked to see Watson at FB and the bench props start, but overall thats looks a good selection. Tough that May misses out, can only assume hes not quite fit enough.
Faz and Itoje rested is very sound.

Stom wrote:

Banquo wrote:Whilst I think Slade's future at intl level is 12, esp as he is now a threatening runner , seems a bit odd that he has had no game time there this season to my knowledge...and that you haven't got Watson at 15.

That said, decent side and bench; it would have been much more interesting if May were fit. Glad Roko is on the bench. I wonder what it is about Launch that Eddie doesnt fancy, or whether he wants Kruis to run the l/o and thinks a Kruis/Launch lock pairing as a bit wimpy.

Glad Itoje is getting a rest.

It's interesting that while we all see Launch as an incredible lock, and perhaps even the best of ours, he's 4th for England and missed out on the Lions...

There must be something we don't know.

Mikey Brown wrote:Looks brilliant. Really excited by that bench. I’d argue a couple of things, Launch, where you play Watson maybe, but I’m very pleased with that.

Curry on the bench is bold.

That bench is mad.

It May is 1% off being able to run properly he is basically pointless, so a good call to rest him further.

Maybe will see Lozowski come on at 15 if all goes well?

Mikey Brown wrote:Looks brilliant. Really excited by that bench. I’d argue a couple of things, Launch, where you play Watson maybe, but I’m very pleased with that.

Curry on the bench is bold.

That bench is mad.

It May is 1% off being able to run properly he is basically pointless, so a good call to rest him further.

Maybe will see Lozowski come on at 15 if all goes well?

Puja wrote:You're always going to have to compromise in some position on the bench. I'd rather have Curry than have someone whobcan cover 8, but isn't as good/exciting.

Puja

fivepointer wrote:Lock selection was always going to be a very close run thing, even with Itoje taking a break. Without a recognised back row jumper, the l/o would have been a concern, hence Kruis come in. Hard on Launchbury but i think his l/o work is generally a little below where the others are.
The bench does have an impactful look about it for sure.

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:You're always going to have to compromise in some position on the bench. I'd rather have Curry than have someone whobcan cover 8, but isn't as good/exciting.

Puja

Aye, calculated risk, as I have in my mind Hughes does retire hurt quite often. Though likely an ill founded perception!

Puja wrote:You're always going to have to compromise in some position on the bench. I'd rather have Curry than have someone whobcan cover 8, but isn't as good/exciting.

Puja

Raggs wrote:Eddie states that they plan on Hughes to be playing the 80.

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

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Eddie states that they plan on Hughes to be playing the 80.

You've commented before on Eddie's statements

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:You're always going to have to compromise in some position on the bench. I'd rather have Curry than have someone whobcan cover 8, but isn't as good/exciting.

Puja

Aye, calculated risk, as I have in my mind Hughes does retire hurt quite often. Though likely an ill founded perception!

He used to retire lazy, if that's what you're thinking of?

Played 160 minutes on the summer tour IIRC, so I wouldn't've thought it'd be a huge issue. Having said that, I do expect Eddie to bring him off for Curry about 65 minutes - I think he'll want to see how Robshaw at 8 holds up in a real game, just in case he needs to pick a bench like this again in a more competitive fixture.

Puja

Raggs wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Eddie states that they plan on Hughes to be playing the 80.

You've commented before on Eddie's statements

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.

jngf wrote:

Puja wrote:You're always going to have to compromise in some position on the bench. I'd rather have Curry than have someone whobcan cover 8, but isn't as good/exciting.

Puja

Will be interesting to see which of Robshaw and Underhill Eddie brings on T Curry for ( and very interesting were the substitution for Hughes )
Quite keen to see how Underhill goes if switched to BSF with Curry at OSF