RugbyRebels

I think McInally generally has his throwing pretty sorted. It, alongside discipline, is why I would have him ahead of Brown if they are both on form.

The lineout as a whole can be a bit cumbersome. My main issue though is that we don't seem to compete much on opposition ball generally. I just don't like to give big powerful teams like England and France easy ball.

Having said that. If England keep kicking like they did in the autumn. It doesn't matter if you give them ball as long as it is not in or about your 22 and your defence can hold for three phases. They'll kick it back soon enough. I'm all for Russell trying all the crazy chips he wants.

whatisthejava wrote:England squad

Backs: Elliot Daly, Owen Farrell, George Ford, Ollie Lawrence, Max Malins, Jonny May, Paolo Odogwu, Harry Randall, Dan Robson, Henry Slade, Anthony Watson, Ben Youngs.

Forwards: Luke Cowan-Dickie, Tom Curry, Ben Earl, Ellis Genge, Jamie George, Jonny Hill, Maro Itoje, Charlie Ewels, Courtney Lawes, Tom West, Beno Obano, Will Stuart, Sam Underhill, Billy Vunipola, Harry Williams, Mark Wilson.

Probable team

Youngs
Ford
May
Farrell
Slade
Watson
Daly

Genge
George
Williams
Itoje
Lawes
Underhill
Curry
Vanipolo

It'll be Stuart over Williams at 3, but other than that, I think you've nailed it. Our patented lateral FFS midfield will offer little to no penetration, so don't worry about picking tacklers there.

Puja

Puja wrote: It'll be Stuart over Williams at 3, but other than that, I think you've nailed it. Our patented lateral FFS midfield will offer little to no penetration, so don't worry about picking tacklers there.

Puja

You don't play exciting rugby but under Eddie you play almost the perfect game for the current interpretations.

Compete quickly in the rucks or not at all
Tackle hard trying to force the box kick
Compete for the box kick and then look to attack the gaps
In attack use bigger forwards to mash over the gain line.
Repeat


Its world rugby wet dream and where they have wanted rugby to go for the last 20 years.


Although I don't think it will last (the style) , I'm actually surprised with what's happening around concussion and lawsuits that WR has not completely shat the bed and not done anything knee jerk just to help the defence


I reckon come the end of the 6N its

France
England
Ireland
Scotland
Wales
Italy

Possibly top 2 swap
middle 3 swop

whatisthejava wrote:

Puja wrote: It'll be Stuart over Williams at 3, but other than that, I think you've nailed it. Our patented lateral FFS midfield will offer little to no penetration, so don't worry about picking tacklers there.

Puja

You don't play exciting rugby but under Eddie you play almost the perfect game for the current interpretations.

Compete quickly in the rucks or not at all
Tackle hard trying to force the box kick
Compete for the box kick and then look to attack the gaps
In attack use bigger forwards to mash over the gain line.
Repeat


Its world rugby wet dream and where they have wanted rugby to go for the last 20 years.


Although I don't think it will last (the style) , I'm actually surprised with what's happening around concussion and lawsuits that WR has not completely shat the bed and not done anything knee jerk just to help the defence


I reckon come the end of the 6N its

France
England
Ireland
Scotland
Wales
Italy

Possibly top 2 swap
middle 3 swop

I don't buy that: either that it's the perfect game for the current interpretations, or that it is what WR have wanted.

England have a great set of players. The way they play at the moment has been reasonably effective but allows teams that are significantly worse than them to stay in the game. If you can match their physicality (e.g. like France 3rds did), you can rely on them just kicking the ball back to you. I think it is their physicality that makes them hard to beat, not their kicking tactics.

Don't think they've always gone about it the right way, but think it's pretty clear WR are wanting an open fast flowing game. After all, it's what these interpretations were aiming for when introduced in NZ, and largely achieved.

Thistle Rugby Pod suggesting they've been told Graham will start at 8 on Saturday. May be true, may be pish.

Cameo wrote: but think it's pretty clear WR are wanting an open fast flowing game.

I don't want to sound like a prick but id like to see any evidence you have

If you look back since the dawn of professionalism everything has pushed rugby towards bigger heavier players and more contact.

WR is desperate for some poor fucker to die through a legal hit to demonstrate how manly rugby is

They can go fuck themselves and should be held criminally responsible for the hundreds of players who have developed and will develop demensia on their watch

Big D wrote:Thistle Rugby Pod suggesting they've been told Graham will start at 8 on Saturday. May be true, may be pish.

Be good if true - he had another good game for Falcons at the weekend (albeit he did lose the ball in contact right at the end, leading to the Irish try)

I keep reading about Graham's incredible carrying (or maybe just incredible volume of carries) but I haven't really seen it. I'd still have Fagerson start, but happy to get more of a look at Graham and like the physical edge he offers.

Mikey Brown wrote:I keep reading about Graham's incredible carrying (or maybe just incredible volume of carries) but I haven't really seen it. I'd still have Fagerson start, but happy to get more of a look at Graham and like the physical edge he offers.

Certainly a good point whether Graham brings destructive carrying, or more volume and efficiency. From what I've seen, probably more the latter. - but I've only seen him in a couple of games this season. Fagerson looked quite handy in the autumn, so there's probably not much in it

whatisthejava wrote:

Cameo wrote: but think it's pretty clear WR are wanting an open fast flowing game.

I don't want to sound like a prick but id like to see any evidence you have

If you look back since the dawn of professionalism everything has pushed rugby towards bigger heavier players and more contact.

WR is desperate for some poor fucker to die through a legal hit to demonstrate how manly rugby is

They can go fuck themselves and should be held criminally responsible for the hundreds of players who have developed and will develop demensia on their watch

Can you not put most of that down to professionalism though?

Each change I can remember has been justified in the basis that it either improves safety or makes for a more open game.

They certainly haven't all worked and some of them have been stupid, but I don't think there has been any sign that they want the game to be bigger and slower. More collisions is an inevitable result of their drive for more ball in play time but I don't think that aim is that controversial.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with their rule changes etc., but I do think most of them have been attempts to mitigate the effects of professionalism.

Ally wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I keep reading about Graham's incredible carrying (or maybe just incredible volume of carries) but I haven't really seen it. I'd still have Fagerson start, but happy to get more of a look at Graham and like the physical edge he offers.

Certainly a good point whether Graham brings destructive carrying, or more volume and efficiency. From what I've seen, probably more the latter. - but I've only seen him in a couple of games this season. Fagerson looked quite handy in the autumn, so there's probably not much in it

Probably repeating myself here but I think Fagerson is understated because he is not massive and he looks like he is probably quite a nice guy.

Equally, I've not seen much of Graham for a while so maybe he has been playing out of his skin.

Cameo wrote: Can you not put most of that down to professionalism though?

Each change I can remember has been justified in the basis that it either improves safety or makes for a more open game.

They certainly haven't all worked and some of them have been stupid, but I don't think there has been any sign that they want the game to be bigger and slower. More collisions is an inevitable result of their drive for more ball in play time but I don't think that aim is that controversial.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with their rule changes etc., but I do think most of them have been attempts to mitigate the effects of professionalism.

But, if what you say is true we wouldn't be in the middle of a ticking timebox with concussion and the most turgid rugby we have seen in 20 years.

Sure professionalism led to more guys having more time and everyone started bulking up, but in response to that WR did nothing to try and find a space for the wee guy or the skillful guy. They sat back and watched an entire culture come about where a scrum half had to be 6ft tall to compete, a winger 17 stone and props can now get away at 20 stone.

I would also argue that the changing of subs from 3 - 8 has prob been the most damaging part of rugby because it has allowed bigger players to have entire careers where they never need to play more than 50 mins

If you look back in the last 20 years how many shane Williams, Grahams, (SA Toulouse winger) has their been compared to guys like Niki Walker, George North, Cuthbert, Lesley Vanikolo

WR are 100% to fault for the state of rugby, they set the culture and everything that has happened flows from them. I really hope their is a smoking gun in this and some of them go to jail for drastically reducing the life quality of guys that wanted to play sport, at least then their would be some form of justice for these guys.

I'm sorry but the clubs and unions bare much more of the burden than WR do. They are the employers of these guys and have a duty of care for them. Rugby cannot exist without concussion, there are always going to be occasions where head knocks result in them. The team is responsible for assessing and acting appropriately when dealing with the fallout of one.

Listening to Jamie Cudmore, he clearly believes the blame is with individuals rather than with the game as a whole.

I agree with you on the substitutions side of things though, it does allow for specialists to exist that otherwise wouldn't be near the level of fitness required otherwise

WR desperately want a fast attractive game. Actually not so much a game, a spectacle. That really isn't in doubt. What also isn't in doubt is what a complete erse of it they have made and keep making.
WR change, tweak or reinterpret laws to achieve their dream of a spectacle, and every time untintended consequences occur. Often because the changes etc are not thought through and too often made as if rugby was played and run by amateurs instead of people whose jobs depend on winning, not just having fun.
So we have had more and more of this instead of just applying the laws as per the law book. Refs encouraged and promoted for "interpretation". And we had the ludicrous advent a few years of the "hit" in the scrum being promoted as part of the "spectacle". Yet it was always contrary to the laws and was a potential (and actual) cause of serious injury

A better game comes from changing behaviours of coaches and players, and that happens via disincentives, like penalising all offences and showing more cards and ignoring the squeals of SH teams like last season

If the officials applied the current laws, particularly by managing the offside line correctly including being in front of kickers then it would make a huge difference.

Big D wrote:If the officials applied the current laws, particularly by managing the offside line correctly including being in front of kickers then it would make a huge difference.

I get frustrated by the 8 or 9 players in front of every kick off but it never gets pulled up.

I do feel that the live TV pictures give us a much better angle for judging offside, the TMO should be calling these to the ref, particularly when it's wing defence away from the ruck etc. where the ref has other things to rightly be looking at. I did see in the 1872 cup recently, an Edinburgh player lying at the back of the ruck and the whole defensive line was lined up at around his waist level. I'm sure Glasgow and all others are guilty of it too but this was a particularly obvious one that sticks out.

Anyway, back on to the squad - everyone else starting to get excited about the game yet? Any gossip on the likely centre pairing??

stevedog1980 wrote: Anyway, back on to the squad - everyone else starting to get excited about the game yet? Any gossip on the likely centre pairing??

No gossip but given GTs selection history I'd guess his preference is for a Taylor/Harris combo. The problem with that is that Taylor has zero competitive minutes under his belt. He played a friendly the other week.

I really hope we give Redpath a go. He has been playing well and is match sharp.

I suspect you are right in anticipating a Taylor/Harris midfield combo. And to my mind, thats no bad thing: Taylor was excellent against Ireland and is a class act, so if he has proved in training that he is in good shape, then good luck to him.

Would be great to see Redpath on bench if he does go with Taylor though.

I know Harris gets some stick for being one dimensional - and clearly he is not Huw Jones in attack - but I do think he has been very good for us for some time and is obviously a crucial leader in the new defensive system. My worry would actually be if he gets injured: I don't think Jones is anything like the defensive liability that he is sometimes alleged to be, but he hasn't played centre for a while now. Would Redpath/Taylor be our combo if Harris picked up an injury?

I hope to see Redpath on the field at some point but, making your international debut against England in the 6N when you've newly declared for Scotland is a big ask. I would love to see Redpath / Jones in midfield at some point as well.

I suspect the Taylor / Harris combo will be the first choice, in many ways it's hard to argue with but if Redpath starts at 12 it would be a pretty clear indication that we want to see more from our midfield than just continuity and containment.

It's the number 8 and midfield combo I'm keen to see named, the rest of the team kind of picks itself to be honest

stevedog1980 wrote:I hope to see Redpath on the field at some point but, making your international debut against England in the 6N when you've newly declared for Scotland is a big ask. I would love to see Redpath / Jones in midfield at some point as well.

Twickenham without fans v players he knows well is probably as fair a 6N start as he could ask for IMO.

My main concern with Taylor is he is a sicknote without any rugby under his belt.

England: Daly; Watson, Slade, Lawrence, May; Farrell (capt), Youngs; Genge, George, Stuart, Itoje, Hill, Wilson, Curry, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Obano, Williams, Lawes, Earl, Robson, Ford, Malins.

Scotland team announced at lunch time, whatever that means.

Mikey Brown wrote:England: Daly; Watson, Slade, Lawrence, May; Farrell (capt), Youngs; Genge, George, Stuart, Itoje, Hill, Wilson, Curry, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Obano, Williams, Lawes, Earl, Robson, Ford, Malins.

Scotland team announced at lunch time, whatever that means.

Even with some notable absentees, that looks like some side, and probably a bit more dangerous in the backs with Slade at 13. Tentatively good news that Ford isn't starting perhaps, as I've thought that they've tended to have better attacking shape with him at 10

Big D wrote: Twickenham without fans v players he knows well is probably as fair a 6N start as he could ask for IMO.

My main concern with Taylor is he is a sicknote without any rugby under his belt.

True, there are definite positives for him in this as well. Even with those in place, playing your first international against the team you were originally meant to represent is going to be tough.

The other players have a few games head start on Taylor but not much. I wouldn't worry about him being undercooked

Team is out.

Tight 5 as expected. Three of then have under 20 caps.
Watson, Ritchie and Fagerson.
Redpath at 12.
Maitalnd wing.

All others as expected.

Bench is Cherry, Kebble, Nel, Gray Snr, Graham, Steele, VdW, Jones

Redpath to start! Fagerson ahead of Graham