Team for Italy

[Mikey Brown]

Come on then. What are we thinking? Mix it up a little bit or are still in too precarious a position?

I don’t know if there is any news on Martin, Curry or Willis, but that might be a great opportunity to give Hill, CCS or B Curry a go.

Surely another lock is being brought in to the squad to get up to speed, even if Martin is deemed fit.

I’d like to see Murley get a go, but maybe that’s just sentiment.

Will Randall get a chance to continue kicking the ball directly up in the air?

The dream of trying a different centre pairing is obviously long gone. I’m sure they’ll need this match to iron out those defensive lapses ahead of the final round.

[Oakboy]

I think that our backs need to be trusted to attack. Mitchell must be given the basis to play as he does for Northampton. I'd pick Dingwall and Freeman at 12/13 and challenge Mitchell/Fin Smith to use them with their natural game. I'd dump Sleightholme from the 23, have a 5:3 bench and start with a back three of Daly, Roebuck and Marcus.

Depending on fitness, I'd then pick a back row charged with delivering decent ball quickly. B Curry has to start for that, probably with TC and Willis, if fit. Earl on the bench. Same tight five.

[Scrumhead]

100% with Oakboy on giving the backs license to play. Not so much with the proposed changes.

I’d keep the changes fairly minimal in the backs and would simply swap out Slade for Dingwall or Beard. I just don’t see how he can keep his place when he’s consistently poor.

Lawrence’s handling is a frequent issue. However, he played pretty well against Ireland and France and he at least ran dangerous lines yesterday even if his hands let him down. There’s enough there to persevere IMO.

Pack wise, I’d hopeful that 2wks is enough time for Martin and Coles. If not, I’d probably call up Ewels even if I don’t enjoy the idea. I’m not too worried about Tom Curry given how well Ben has shown up from the bench. I wouldn’t mind resting him for Italy as I think we will need him vs. a more resurgent version Wales.

[Mellsblue]

Same forwards as yesterday but I think B Cuzza must start with Earl dropped to the bench. The latter is either a 9/10 player or a bit of a liability with rarely a performance in between the two extremes. I’d also go with the radical tweak of picking a lock on the bench amongst 6 forwards. Wouldn’t argue with Dan in for LCD.

Agreed on Dingers in for Slade. I don’t think Lawrence is the answer at 13 but he’s been better than Slade and let’s deal with one thing at a time. Rest of the backline the same albeit we really need Furbank and Malins to be fit or WR to end this ludicrous persecution of RICH LANE!!!

I think it would be harsh to drop Sleightholme when he’s being asked to chase kicks all game rather than play to his strengths - why not pick Roebuck for that - particularly when he’s proved devastating in attack when given the opportunity. You’d hope we’ll play a more expansive game in the next two matches. I’m happy to riot and sack Pennyhill Park if we don’t.

[Banquo]

Unfortunately Sleightholme was pretty poor kick chase aside, like others was all at sea in defence and gifted Scotland an easy bit of counter attack scoring ball. He is good going forward generally tho.

I don’t think personnel change will make a heap of difference tbh, though I would change the midfield and poss backrow.

[fivepointer]

Suspect personnel changes will be minimal but hopefully we'll see a different mindset with some desire to actually play a bit.

[Oakboy]

I just think we need to start from a Northampton base at 9, 10, 12, 13. It may not work but it needs to be tried. Freeman's try was a bit like some that he scored at 13 for his club. Basically, we need a selection that reduces the impact of our attack coach and concentrates on what the players do naturally in attack. With another gap week there would be time to work on their defence in conjunction with a different back three.

I agree that Slade's time is up but expecting everything to improve just by replacing him is over-optimistic, IMO. Lawrence needs to go too, though he may return later.

[Which Tyler]

Tom Curry needs a rest.
Agreed on Dingwall for Slade
Any SH in for Randall
A real lock on the bench

2 starting and 2 benches is enough really. We may have 2 wins, but we don't have confidence, so we need to built from here, rather than taking Italy lightly, casting the net wider, and slipping on the banana skin, breaking our coccyx.

I suspect SB will bring Martin back for Hill, and leave it there.

[p/d]

If Slade got a yellow card everything would improve

[Stom]

Honestly, LCD out, George to start, Dan to bench. Martin back if fit. See how TCuzza and TWillis are before making a judgement (BCuzza and CCS). Get shot of Slade. DIngwall or Beard, I don't care. Heck, pair them. If what that takes is Daly at 11 for his boot, so be it.

It's the tactics that need adjusting more.

[Mellsblue]

Honestly, LCD out, George to start, Dan to bench. Martin back if fit. See how TCuzza and TWillis are before making a judgement (BCuzza and CCS). Get shot of Slade. DIngwall or Beard, I don't care. Heck, pair them. If what that takes is Daly at 11 for his boot, so be it.

It's the tactics that need adjusting more.

And dishonestly?

[Stom]

Honestly, LCD out, George to start, Dan to bench. Martin back if fit. See how TCuzza and TWillis are before making a judgement (BCuzza and CCS). Get shot of Slade. DIngwall or Beard, I don't care. Heck, pair them. If what that takes is Daly at 11 for his boot, so be it.

It's the tactics that need adjusting more.

And dishonestly?

Keep Itoje, Stuart, Chessum, TWillis , the Smiths, and Freeman. Bin the rest.

[FKAS]

I think that our backs need to be trusted to attack. Mitchell must be given the basis to play as he does for Northampton. I'd pick Dingwall and Freeman at 12/13 and challenge Mitchell/Fin Smith to use them with their natural game. I'd dump Sleightholme from the 23, have a 5:3 bench and start with a back three of Daly, Roebuck and Marcus.

Depending on fitness, I'd then pick a back row charged with delivering decent ball quickly. B Curry has to start for that, probably with TC and Willis, if fit. Earl on the bench. Same tight five.

You think they just wander on to the pitch and play off the cuff at Saints? Lawes gave an interview before he left Saints where he talked about how the patterns and attacking structure is hammered into them and deviation makes a mess so the coaches clamp down on it. The difference is that Sam Vesty is an exceptional attack coach and that Wigglesworth is a mediocre one.

That and the other key difference is that Prem defences aren't close to international standard so sloppy handling and ruck clearouts are things you can get away with at that level.

[Mellsblue]

Honestly, LCD out, George to start, Dan to bench. Martin back if fit. See how TCuzza and TWillis are before making a judgement (BCuzza and CCS). Get shot of Slade. DIngwall or Beard, I don't care. Heck, pair them. If what that takes is Daly at 11 for his boot, so be it.

It's the tactics that need adjusting more.

And dishonestly?

Keep Itoje, Stuart, Chessum, TWillis , the Smiths, and Freeman. Bin the rest.

Liar.

[Banquo]

I think that our backs need to be trusted to attack. Mitchell must be given the basis to play as he does for Northampton. I'd pick Dingwall and Freeman at 12/13 and challenge Mitchell/Fin Smith to use them with their natural game. I'd dump Sleightholme from the 23, have a 5:3 bench and start with a back three of Daly, Roebuck and Marcus.

Depending on fitness, I'd then pick a back row charged with delivering decent ball quickly. B Curry has to start for that, probably with TC and Willis, if fit. Earl on the bench. Same tight five.

You think they just wander on to the pitch and play off the cuff at Saints? Lawes gave an interview before he left Saints where he talked about how the patterns and attacking structure is hammered into them and deviation makes a mess so the coaches clamp down on it. The difference is that Sam Vesty is an exceptional attack coach and that Wigglesworth is a mediocre one.

That and the other key difference is that Prem defences aren't close to international standard so sloppy handling and ruck clearouts are things you can get away with at that level.

yes....but the patterns are developed to suit what they've got and skill levels (and obviously working hard to improve these and evolve the attack), rather than impose something they aren't able to do. Quite right tho that Prem rugby is a huge distance away from intl standard.

[Scrumhead]

Agree with others on LCD. At best he’s been underwhelming. I really hope Langdon has an absolute stormer in the A game as he has by far the most rounded skillset of the hooking options we have.

[Mellsblue]

I think that our backs need to be trusted to attack. Mitchell must be given the basis to play as he does for Northampton. I'd pick Dingwall and Freeman at 12/13 and challenge Mitchell/Fin Smith to use them with their natural game. I'd dump Sleightholme from the 23, have a 5:3 bench and start with a back three of Daly, Roebuck and Marcus.

Depending on fitness, I'd then pick a back row charged with delivering decent ball quickly. B Curry has to start for that, probably with TC and Willis, if fit. Earl on the bench. Same tight five.

You think they just wander on to the pitch and play off the cuff at Saints? Lawes gave an interview before he left Saints where he talked about how the patterns and attacking structure is hammered into them and deviation makes a mess so the coaches clamp down on it. The difference is that Sam Vesty is an exceptional attack coach and that Wigglesworth is a mediocre one.

That and the other key difference is that Prem defences aren't close to international standard so sloppy handling and ruck clearouts are things you can get away with at that level.

You’re conflating ‘their natural game’ with play exactly as they do at Saints.

[FKAS]

Doubt we'll see much change in personnel suspect the tactics will change. I mean they'll have to because Sleightholme's kick chase was laughably bad and Smith looked exposed when it was kicked to contest so I'd imagine we'll row back slightly on the kicking. Italy have less breakdown threat as well which will help.

Hopefully we go back to a 5:3 bench split and see if we can add some more impact there. Possibly giving Murley a chance to come back in, maybe Steward. If Furbank is fit then Marcus to the bench.

[Oakboy]

Is Quirke still injured?

[FKAS]

I think that our backs need to be trusted to attack. Mitchell must be given the basis to play as he does for Northampton. I'd pick Dingwall and Freeman at 12/13 and challenge Mitchell/Fin Smith to use them with their natural game. I'd dump Sleightholme from the 23, have a 5:3 bench and start with a back three of Daly, Roebuck and Marcus.

Depending on fitness, I'd then pick a back row charged with delivering decent ball quickly. B Curry has to start for that, probably with TC and Willis, if fit. Earl on the bench. Same tight five.

You think they just wander on to the pitch and play off the cuff at Saints? Lawes gave an interview before he left Saints where he talked about how the patterns and attacking structure is hammered into them and deviation makes a mess so the coaches clamp down on it. The difference is that Sam Vesty is an exceptional attack coach and that Wigglesworth is a mediocre one.

That and the other key difference is that Prem defences aren't close to international standard so sloppy handling and ruck clearouts are things you can get away with at that level.

You’re conflating ‘their natural game’ with play exactly as they do at Saints.

Possibly because I think the term and general concept of "natural game" he complete shite. Quality players adapt to whatever the game throws at them and can play a range of tactics. The "natural game" argument comes out when average to maybe good players struggle to adapt or show the ability to play a variation of tactics at a higher level.

[Mellsblue]

You think they just wander on to the pitch and play off the cuff at Saints? Lawes gave an interview before he left Saints where he talked about how the patterns and attacking structure is hammered into them and deviation makes a mess so the coaches clamp down on it. The difference is that Sam Vesty is an exceptional attack coach and that Wigglesworth is a mediocre one.

That and the other key difference is that Prem defences aren't close to international standard so sloppy handling and ruck clearouts are things you can get away with at that level.

You’re conflating ‘their natural game’ with play exactly as they do at Saints.

Possibly because I think the term and general concept of "natural game" he complete shite. Quality players adapt to whatever the game throws at them and can play a range of tactics. The "natural game" argument comes out when average to maybe good players struggle to adapt or show the ability to play a variation of tactics at a higher level.

If you’re right, and I don’t think you are, then we’re fecked because we have players who have proved the can’t play whatever style Borthwick asks for and a coach who changes personnel on a horses for courses basis. I’d also add that you’ve spent many a post arguing in favour of that horses for courses selection, eg Steward. In which case you’re either disagreeing with yourself or admitting Steward etc are average. I actually think it’s both.

[Banquo]

You’re conflating ‘their natural game’ with play exactly as they do at Saints.

Possibly because I think the term and general concept of "natural game" he complete shite. Quality players adapt to whatever the game throws at them and can play a range of tactics. The "natural game" argument comes out when average to maybe good players struggle to adapt or show the ability to play a variation of tactics at a higher level.

I’d also add that you’ve spent many a post arguing in favour of that horses for courses selection, eg Steward. In which case you’re either disagreeing with yourself or admitting Steward etc are average. I actually think it’s both.

quite.

[loudnconfident]

Whoever we pick, they've had better improve on yesterday (judging by Italy's performance so far today...)

[Mr Mwenda]

Gotta try a new centre I think, that's the only non injury change for me. If nothing else it might make us reappraise the Slade-Lawrence combo.

[FKAS]

You’re conflating ‘their natural game’ with play exactly as they do at Saints.

Possibly because I think the term and general concept of "natural game" he complete shite. Quality players adapt to whatever the game throws at them and can play a range of tactics. The "natural game" argument comes out when average to maybe good players struggle to adapt or show the ability to play a variation of tactics at a higher level.

If you’re right, and I don’t think you are, then we’re fecked because we have players who have proved the can’t play whatever style Borthwick asks for and a coach who changes personnel on a horses for courses basis. I’d also add that you’ve spent many a post arguing in favour of that horses for courses selection, eg Steward. In which case you’re either disagreeing with yourself or admitting Steward etc are average. I actually think it’s both.

I'm disagreeing with the concept of the term "natural game" not about selecting players for their strengths and weaknesses. Most players have strengths and weaknesses, you gain X by selecting play a bit lose some of y. Difference between logic and a lazy largely meaningless term.

Fin Smith has looked good playing for Worcester, Northampton and England. None of those styles or tactics have been similar. Which then is his "natural game"?