RugbyRebels

I'd still have Launchbury as the first lock on the teamsheet. What we see now is a player who has been seriously underrated by Jones and Borthwick. I find that strange because I'd say that the lock's ceilings are in the order Itoje, Launchbury, Lawes, Kruis. With either Itoje or Launchbury as captain, picking them as the starting pairing raises the team's ceiling, IMO. It gives the best game-to-game long-term combination of physicality, pure rugby skill, mental toughness, character, brain and leadership. And, Lawes is the guy to have coming off the bench.

I'd still pick and start Launch too, but Eddie and Borthwick don't see it the same way. That's why I think he'll be the lock to make way

Oakboy wrote:I'd still have Launchbury as the first lock on the teamsheet. What we see now is a player who has been seriously underrated by Jones and Borthwick. I find that strange because I'd say that the lock's ceilings are in the order Itoje, Launchbury, Lawes, Kruis. With either Itoje or Launchbury as captain, picking them as the starting pairing raises the team's ceiling, IMO. It gives the best game-to-game long-term combination of physicality, pure rugby skill, mental toughness, character, brain and leadership. And, Lawes is the guy to have coming off the bench.

I think Launchbury is our second best lock after Itoje, but it’s not just a simple case of picking the two best players.

Part of the problem is that neither of those two is a top lineout caller/manager. This is where Kruis and Lawes have an edge over Launchbury. When you add in the fact that Kruis and Itoje are an established club partnership and Lawes has frequently shown he is a brilliant impact option from the bench, it probably explains why Launchbury is 4th choice.

I don’t see any reason to cut him though. He’s plenty young enough for the next RWC cycle.

Mikey Brown wrote:This always tends to be a guessing game but I thought the acknowledged order was thought to be Kruis, Itoje, Lawes, Launchbury in terms of scrummaging power?

Launch has a fantastic work-rate and skills, but I thought at set piece he was only really considered strong in the maul, in comparison to the other contenders.

Weight is spread very differently among different players. I’d say Ewels puts his about pretty well. He’s not a Botha or Etzebeth but we don’t have any of those and it certainly isn’t Launchbury.

Anyway. Willis...

Obviously Willis should be at 7...

With Ewels at 6 and Itoje at 8.

Peej wrote:I'd still pick and start Launch too, but Eddie and Borthwick don't see it the same way. That's why I think he'll be the lock to make way

I have Launch as our second best lock but would pick Itoje and Kruis as best pairing with Lawes off the bench.
I think I was the first to suggest Launch May lose his spot but that’s based on Jones’s preferences not mine.

Mellsblue wrote:

Peej wrote:I'd still pick and start Launch too, but Eddie and Borthwick don't see it the same way. That's why I think he'll be the lock to make way

I have Launch as our second best lock but would pick Itoje and Kruis as best pairing with Lawes off the bench.
I think I was the first to suggest Launch May lose his spot but that’s based on Jones’s preferences not mine.

I’m already convinced Jones should retire as England coach. Were it to happen, removing Launchbury from the squad when there’s no competing candidate out there making a case for inclusion might convince a few others too. I’d have a lot less problem with the removal of Youngs, Billy or Farrell - all of whom are coasting imo.

Mellsblue wrote:

In an enlightened post Jones environment I could see:

Underhill, Wilson, Willis, Earl and Kvesic challenging for the jackal, hard carrying destroyer flank berth

Curry x 2, Ludlum, Sam Simmonds, Will Evans (and possibly Jack Clifford?) challenging for the flier/linkman flank berth.

(openside and blindside beginning to sound antiquated)

With a couple of powerful athletic forwards such as Macbeth(copyright) and Dombrandt starting at 8 - with Billy reserved for impact sub duties.

jngf wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

In an enlightened post Jones environment I could see:

Underhill, Wilson, Willis, Earl and Kvesic challenging for the jackal, hard carrying destroyer flank berth

Curry x 2, Ludlum, Sam Simmonds, Will Evans (and possibly Jack Clifford?) challenging for the flier/linkman flank berth.

(openside and blindside beginning to sound antiquated)

With a couple of powerful athletic forwards such as Macbeth(copyright) and Dombrandt starting at 8 - with Billy reserved for impact sub duties.

I think we can now say Itoje at 8 remains a terrible idea.

So is Macbeth Itoje now?!

Where's Brad Shields now?

Eh?

morepork wrote:Where's Brad Shields now?

Eh?

Sent to Coventry.

morepork wrote:Where's Brad Shields now?

Eh?

Injured.

Mikey Brown wrote:So is Macbeth Itoje now?!

who was Macbeth before?

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:So is Macbeth Itoje now?!

who was Macbeth before?

Looking over your shoulder, Banquo?

I never really enjoyed Shakespeare after my head was messed with at school - mainly by having to play Puck in a pretty feeble effort for O-level English Lit. I did once achieve simultaneous orgasm with a girlfriend in the rear stalls of the Salisbury Playhouse, though. Can't remember the play for the life of me. Apart from the sex, it was infamous for the cast stopping halfway through the first scene and refusing to continue until all the kids stopped talking. Happy days.

Close the board. We won’t top this.

Oakboy wrote:

morepork wrote:Where's Brad Shields now?

Eh?

Sent to Coventry.

Tbf That’s a tasty back row Shields and Nutley...

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:So is Macbeth Itoje now?!

who was Macbeth before?

Anybody nicknamed Macbeth?

I’m not sure what’s going on here but maybe that’s for the best.

Oakboy wrote: Looking over your shoulder, Banquo?

I've no idea why this conversation turned to McBeth, but I do feel that this comment deserves more appreciation

Which Tyler wrote:

Oakboy wrote: Looking over your shoulder, Banquo?

I've no idea why this conversation turned to McBeth, but I do feel that this comment deserves more appreciation

but If only he had chosen to finish his post at that point.....

p/d wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Oakboy wrote: Looking over your shoulder, Banquo?

I've no idea why this conversation turned to McBeth, but I do feel that this comment deserves more appreciation

but If only he had chosen to finish his post at that point.....

This

Absolutely fair and valid

Mikey Brown wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:So is Macbeth Itoje now?!

who was Macbeth before?

Anybody nicknamed Macbeth?

I’m not sure what’s going on here but maybe that’s for the best.

I think it's a reference to me banning him from mentioning Itoje at 8 during the RWC, like actors not naming Macbeth as bad luck.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Banquo wrote: who was Macbeth before?

Anybody nicknamed Macbeth?

I’m not sure what’s going on here but maybe that’s for the best.

I think it's a reference to me banning him from mentioning Itoje at 8 during the RWC, like actors not naming Macbeth as bad luck.

Puja

didn't think it needed explaining