RugbyRebels

Suddenly Paris is looking less daunting, whilst Murrayfield looks like more of a worry.

16th man wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 2:50 pm Suddenly Paris is looking less daunting, whilst Murrayfield looks like more of a worry.

We will prob lose both if we are being honest.

twitchy wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 2:57 pm

16th man wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 2:50 pm Suddenly Paris is looking less daunting, whilst Murrayfield looks like more of a worry.

We will prob lose both if we are being honest.

Funny cos it’s true.

Looks like Manu and Sid straight back in, as well as Martin and LCD.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 5:20 pm Looks like Manu and Sid straight back in, as well as Martin and LCD.

Would’ve thought that Dingwall and Slade deserve another match together instead of shoehorning the probably-far from-match-fit Tuilagi.

francoisfou wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 7:14 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 5:20 pm Looks like Manu and Sid straight back in, as well as Martin and LCD.

Would’ve thought that Dingwall and Slade deserve another match together instead of shoehorning the probably-far from-match-fit Tuilagi.

Agreed but I'd not be surprised if it's Tuilagi and Lawrence v Scotland. The temptation to select bludgeon instead of skill will probably rule.

I would have thought it would be Lawrence and Slade.

Marvellous if Martin is fit.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 9:08 pm

francoisfou wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 7:14 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 5:20 pm Looks like Manu and Sid straight back in, as well as Martin and LCD.

Would’ve thought that Dingwall and Slade deserve another match together instead of shoehorning the probably-far from-match-fit Tuilagi.

Agreed but I'd not be surprised if it's Tuilagi and Lawrence v Scotland. The temptation to select bludgeon instead of skill will probably rule.

Slade will play. He is the fulcrum of our attack and defence and, while he might not be our best player, he's certainly our most important right now.

Dingwall's difficult to judge. He's not been perfect, but he's shown definite sparks, and there is a lot to be said for going full Bazball and backing a talent to see if he can shine when shown faith. He could be our Zak Crawley. I think the key to whether there'll be a change will depend on just how fit Lawrence and Manu are. If they can start training from today, then they've got two weeks to learn the defensive system and integrate themselves into the new routines. If they're not really fully fit and only come into contention next week, then I think continuity will be more important.

Puja

p/d wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 9:31 pm I would have thought it would be Lawrence and Slade.

If fully fit, that's the pairing I'd pick.

I will take a moment to note that a (fully fit) Manu could be an awful lot of fun in the FJones defensive system. Imagining him doing the same kind of charging up in midfield that Dingwall and Slade did well against Wales.

Puja

francoisfou wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 7:14 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 5:20 pm Looks like Manu and Sid straight back in, as well as Martin and LCD.

Would’ve thought that Dingwall and Slade deserve another match together instead of shoehorning the probably-far from-match-fit Tuilagi.

Sorry into squad.

Dingwall and Lawrence would be my pick. Slade has wasted a lot of ball. Both M Smith and Ford would benefit from Dingwall and Lawrence mixing it up in the midfield, big lad and dextrous unselfish lad could ask some different questions of defences, and take advantage of play close to the tackle line.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 10:41 pm Dingwall and Lawrence would be my pick. Slade has wasted a lot of ball. Both M Smith and Ford would benefit from Dingwall and Lawrence mixing it up in the midfield, big lad and dextrous unselfish lad could ask some different questions of defences, and take advantage of play close to the tackle line.

I'm very much not against that pairing in theory, but we're lining up so many of our set plays and attacking moves with Slade standing 10 and Ford drifting behind, so if we dump him, then we've got to find someone else who can do that. Dingwall could maybe, but it's not his forte. Possibly Daly, but I'm loathe to take one of the wingers out being available as an attacking option on a strike play. If we had Furbank, then we could put him there, but Steward's been very good so far at 15 (and no-one wants him to go on the wing).

Puja

Tbh, I’m just enjoying not having a certain person permanently selected and bunging everything up. We actually look like we want to try some back moves now.

Beasties wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 7:17 am Tbh, I’m just enjoying not having a certain person permanently selected and bunging everything up. We actually look like we want to try some back moves now.

Good point but Tuilagi is a secondary blockage, IMO. He no longer runs through brick walls - just into them.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 8:15 am

Beasties wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 7:17 am Tbh, I’m just enjoying not having a certain person permanently selected and bunging everything up. We actually look like we want to try some back moves now.

Good point but Tuilagi is a secondary blockage, IMO. He no longer runs through brick walls - just into them.

Indeed, but I find myself far more relaxed about which centres we pick now as it makes creative back play possible, if elusive.

Beasties wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 7:17 am Tbh, I’m just enjoying not having a certain person permanently selected and bunging everything up. We actually look like we want to try some back moves now.

Plus Tuilagi wouldn’t add any credibility to SB’s already flawed ‘this is a young side’ excuse

Has Tuilagi played since the WC? Seems ridiculous to talk of him coming into the side on the basis of his lack of match sharpness alone, let alone his very ordinary recent form for England. The days when he could make dents and create havoc with his running are long gone, and his distributing skills are very limited.
I'd have Lawrence back in a heartbeat at the expense of Slade who has been very underwhelming.
Dingwall has shown enough to warrant further selection and In think he could work well with Lawrence.

As others have said the issue with that is how much we’ve built both attack and defence around Slade so far. You couldn’t simply swap Lawrence in and expect him to thrive.

Maybe they’ll switch up the approach in both areas to accommodate Lawrence at 13 but it seems much more like he is on the bench or replacing Dingwall.

Lawrence / Slade
Tuilagi / Slade
Tuilagi / Lawrence
Steward / Lawrence

…. See where I’m going here

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 11:46 am Lawrence / Slade
Tuilagi / Slade
Tuilagi / Lawrence
Steward / Lawrence

…. See where I’m going here

Frankly, I'd be more interested in Furbank/Lawrence if we're planning on converting a full-back to centre (which I don't think we should do, just to be clear).

Puja

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 11:29 am or replacing Dingwall.

sadly I agree, despite it meaning playing Sid out of position (he has started at 12 for England, but rarely at club level, and to me it looks like he needs time and space to thrive).

Its not like Slade at 13 and 10 has magically unlocked something; and extending the logic, what happens when Smith is fit? (a different problem, I accept).

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 12:01 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 11:29 am or replacing Dingwall.

sadly I agree, despite it meaning playing Sid out of position (he has started at 12 for England, but rarely at club level, and to me it looks like he needs time and space to thrive).

Its not like Slade at 13 and 10 has magically unlocked something; and extending the logic, what happens when Smith is fit? (a different problem, I accept).

Yeah it has drawbacks, but I can see England compromising to get a bit more firepower (or whatever you want to call it) in there somewhere. Plus Lawrence getting that random game at 12 for Bath (with a 12 at 13) right before the 6 nations had the feel of England meddling to me.

I don't see England moving away from wanting a functional stand-in first receiver regardless of who is at fly-half.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 12:16 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 12:01 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 11:29 am or replacing Dingwall.

sadly I agree, despite it meaning playing Sid out of position (he has started at 12 for England, but rarely at club level, and to me it looks like he needs time and space to thrive).

Its not like Slade at 13 and 10 has magically unlocked something; and extending the logic, what happens when Smith is fit? (a different problem, I accept).

Yeah it has drawbacks, but I can see England compromising to get a bit more firepower (or whatever you want to call it) in there somewhere. Plus Lawrence getting that random game at 12 for Bath (with a 12 at 13) right before the 6 nations had the feel of England meddling to me.

I don't see England moving away from wanting a functional stand-in first receiver regardless of who is at fly-half.

yup

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 12:16 pm
I don't see England moving away from wanting a functional stand-in first receiver regardless of who is at fly-half.

Maybe, we simply haven't had a FH good enough to change the pre-conceived ideas - on the back of OF's period of skewed dominance, anyway.