p/d wrote:
Out of interest who did Burt leave out who should have be nailed on starter? Plus which players has Eddie taken a gamble on and come up trumps.
I was more meaning that the players Burt had available weren't of the required standard, not really his fault I grant you, but then we had the whole cough Burgess fiasco too.
Fair do’s. and I agree. Would also suggest the current side isn’t far off what most had wanted during the days Hartley was keeping George on the bench - and LCD out of the squad - Shields drafted in ahead of the likes of Curry and then the lock playing 6 ‘experiment’. Care and Youngs dominating the 9 shirt only to go to the WC with an average Kiwi club player.
Don’t see Underhill and Curry as a gamble, more bleed’in obvious. His gambles are Daly at fb, taking only two 9’s and a unproven/injured back 3 players. These still could be the areas that see us fall at the final hurdle
We got a WC final in 2007, by playing one more game than we have in this tournament, and that squad hardly lacked in experience.
Yup. The thing that irks is that some of these young players he eventually took could've had a few more caps without anything being lost. I absolutely agree that he's got most of the squad selection right ultimately, just a shame he hadn't arrived at this point earlier. The only one I'd quibble with is him throwing his hat in with McConnachie over having Brown in an emergency backup role. That one is baffling. I'd counter that with Ludlam though who has been an excellent addition to the squad.
Hey ho, it's all academic now, there's no doubt he's doing something right given how the team is playing at this stage of the tournament.
Beasties wrote:
Hey ho, it's all academic now, there's no doubt he's doing something right given how the team is playing at this stage of the tournament.
Beasties wrote:
I was more meaning that the players Burt had available weren't of the required standard, not really his fault I grant you, but then we had the whole cough Burgess fiasco too.
Fair do’s. and I agree. Would also suggest the current side isn’t far off what most had wanted during the days Hartley was keeping George on the bench - and LCD out of the squad - Shields drafted in ahead of the likes of Curry and then the lock playing 6 ‘experiment’. Care and Youngs dominating the 9 shirt only to go to the WC with an average Kiwi club player.
Don’t see Underhill and Curry as a gamble, more bleed’in obvious. His gambles are Daly at fb, taking only two 9’s and a unproven/injured back 3 players. These still could be the areas that see us fall at the final hurdle
We got a WC final in 2007, by playing one more game than we have in this tournament, and that squad hardly lacked in experience.
Yup. The thing that irks is that some of these young players he eventually took could've had a few more caps without anything being lost. I absolutely agree that he's got most of the squad selection right ultimately, just a shame he hadn't arrived at this point earlier. The only one I'd quibble with is him throwing his hat in with McConnachie over having Brown in an emergency backup role. That one is baffling. I'd counter that with Ludlam though who has been an excellent addition to the squad.
Hey ho, it's all academic now, there's no doubt he's doing something right given how the team is playing at this stage of the tournament.
For the last year or so has Jones not picked Underhill whenever he was fit?
Beasties wrote:
Hey ho, it's all academic now, there's no doubt he's doing something right given how the team is playing at this stage of the tournament.
couldn't agree more.
Quite. All arguments are off now he looks like winning the thing.
Beasties wrote:
I was more meaning that the players Burt had available weren't of the required standard, not really his fault I grant you, but then we had the whole cough Burgess fiasco too.
Fair do’s. and I agree. Would also suggest the current side isn’t far off what most had wanted during the days Hartley was keeping George on the bench - and LCD out of the squad - Shields drafted in ahead of the likes of Curry and then the lock playing 6 ‘experiment’. Care and Youngs dominating the 9 shirt only to go to the WC with an average Kiwi club player.
Don’t see Underhill and Curry as a gamble, more bleed’in obvious. His gambles are Daly at fb, taking only two 9’s and a unproven/injured back 3 players. These still could be the areas that see us fall at the final hurdle
We got a WC final in 2007, by playing one more game than we have in this tournament, and that squad hardly lacked in experience.
Yup. The thing that irks is that some of these young players he eventually took could've had a few more caps without anything being lost. I absolutely agree that he's got most of the squad selection right ultimately, just a shame he hadn't arrived at this point earlier. The only one I'd quibble with is him throwing his hat in with McConnachie over having Brown in an emergency backup role. That one is baffling. I'd counter that with Ludlam though who has been an excellent addition to the squad.
Hey ho, it's all academic now, there's no doubt he's doing something right given how the team is playing at this stage of the tournament.
Not sure that's fair. He capped Curry as a 19 year old. Underhill as soon as he was geographically available. Ludlum as a left field selection as a 23 year old in his breakthrough season, who probably very few others would even have considered. He also capped Isiekwe and Maunder as 19 year olds.
And the last sentence totally. As much as I have disagreed with EJ over the last four years it is damned hard to disagree now.
That's fair enough, I was more thinking re the Hartley, George, LCD situation. Also Robshaw and Care being jettisoned relatively late in the day, and Hughes, Brown etc. But I've kinda forgotten a lot of the details more the genral unwillingness to give 10/15 mins here and there to players who were sat on the bench in unimportant games.
Anyhoo it's all gravy and arguably irrelevant when we're arrived at this amazing stage. Saturday seems a long way off on a tedious Tuesday.
jngf wrote:Lineout will be interesting - can/will England be able to repeat their performance against NZ with SA by sticking to Itoje, Lawes/Kruis and Curry ?
Anticipating boks using Etzebeth, de Jager, Du Toit and Vermillion as starting jumpers
jngf wrote:Lineout will be interesting - can/will England be able to repeat their performance against NZ with SA by sticking to Itoje, Lawes/Kruis and Curry ?
Anticipating boks using Etzebeth, de Jager, Du Toit and Vermillion as starting jumpers
If they can replicate the movement and drills from last week, then they'll be fine. Doesn't matter how many jumpers the opposition have if you run clever shortened lineouts and have a hooker capable of nailing double-top every time.
A 5 man line means you can only put up one pod, so no double-marking and England's movement is so good and so practiced that it's hard to read where to go. Even with an extra week to study it, I'm not sure how much the Boks can do to combat it. If I were them, I'd camp in the middle of the lineout and force George to either throw over them or accept the worse attacking ball at the front. And even then, Ben Youngs's wide passing allied with a big runner in midfield gets the ball away from the touchline very adroitly.
Can Vermeulen even get off the ground? I can’t recall him being much of a jumper but may not have been paying attention. As others have alluded to there’s quite a lot more to a successful lineout than the number of players > 6’5” that you have.
jngf wrote:Lineout will be interesting - can/will England be able to repeat their performance against NZ with SA by sticking to Itoje, Lawes/Kruis and Curry ?
Anticipating boks using Etzebeth, de Jager, Du Toit and Vermillion as starting jumpers
They are in a purple patch....
I realise I'm going to have to go and rearrange some cushions on a sofa, but is that right?
jngf wrote:Lineout will be interesting - can/will England be able to repeat their performance against NZ with SA by sticking to Itoje, Lawes/Kruis and Curry ?
Anticipating boks using Etzebeth, de Jager, Du Toit and Vermillion as starting jumpers
They are in a purple patch....
England are in certainly the pink for this game. But they will hope the Green and Orange do not get seriously browned off, see red, and whitewash them. That would be a black day for English rugby, without a silver lining, and leave the fans feeling blue.
Storm in a teacup - they'd've asked Harry Williams to fly over to be on hand if they thought there was any risk of him not being fit. I'd imagine he's only taking a restricted part to make sure that he is okay.
Storm in a teacup - they'd've asked Harry Williams to fly over to be on hand if they thought there was any risk of him not being fit. I'd imagine he's only taking a restricted part to make sure that he is okay.
Puja
Aren't we positive. You're right, EJ has ruined this board!
Storm in a teacup - they'd've asked Harry Williams to fly over to be on hand if they thought there was any risk of him not being fit. I'd imagine he's only taking a restricted part to make sure that he is okay.
Puja
Aren't we positive. You're right, EJ has ruined this board!
Ha! Good point.
Bloody Eddie Jones. Was probably a judo-related injury. He's ruined our chances!
Puja wrote:
Storm in a teacup - they'd've asked Harry Williams to fly over to be on hand if they thought there was any risk of him not being fit. I'd imagine he's only taking a restricted part to make sure that he is okay.
Puja
Aren't we positive. You're right, EJ has ruined this board!
Ha! Good point.
Bloody Eddie Jones. Was probably a judo-related injury. He's ruined our chances!
Raggs wrote:Do we reckon that we could see a 6/2 split this time?
I wouldn't necessarily be entirely averse, as Slade covers the entire backline on his own, but I'm never a huge fan of it simply because two backs injuries leave us screwed. Plus I'm not sure of the value - our pack are young and full of energy and I'm not sure what benefit we'd get out of an extra flanker replacement or and extra lock replacement.
Raggs wrote:Do we reckon that we could see a 6/2 split this time?
I wouldn't necessarily be entirely averse, as Slade covers the entire backline on his own, but I'm never a huge fan of it simply because two backs injuries leave us screwed. Plus I'm not sure of the value - our pack are young and full of energy and I'm not sure what benefit we'd get out of an extra flanker replacement or and extra lock replacement.
Puja
Was thinking Ludlam and Wilson. Wilson can cover lock, flank and 8. Means you can have another player empty the tank, and a fresh head to face south africas fresh forwards.
Raggs wrote:Do we reckon that we could see a 6/2 split this time?
I wouldn't necessarily be entirely averse, as Slade covers the entire backline on his own, but I'm never a huge fan of it simply because two backs injuries leave us screwed. Plus I'm not sure of the value - our pack are young and full of energy and I'm not sure what benefit we'd get out of an extra flanker replacement or and extra lock replacement.
Puja
very high risk if say May is still feeling the hammy.....
I like the idea of Wilson coming on again. He has that incredible mix of a cool head and insane workrate, but coupled with rare focused aggression.
I do think we need to take the same approach once again. Get a lead and never let it up. Let them run time and again into our D. Only Kolbe is a more slippery customer than Reece or Bridge.
And de Allende is better than ALB or Goodhue.
Also, if Louw plays, that's a different thing. I'm not sure I understand why PSDT is so highly rated. If he runs into Underhill, he'll soon have PTSD instead!
I like the idea of Wilson coming on again. He has that incredible mix of a cool head and insane workrate, but coupled with rare focused aggression.
I do think we need to take the same approach once again. Get a lead and never let it up. Let them run time and again into our D. Only Kolbe is a more slippery customer than Reece or Bridge.
And de Allende is better than ALB or Goodhue.
Also, if Louw plays, that's a different thing. I'm not sure I understand why PSDT is so highly rated. If he runs into Underhill, he'll soon have PTSD instead!
PSDT and Louw aren't competing for the same position, if that's what you were saying. Though they are unlikely to drop Kolisi; PSDT's tackle count is huge, plus his lineout and physicality are impressive.
De Allende is different to ALB, I rate both of them.
