England Squad for Italy

SL has named the same starting squad for Italy this Saturday.

What are your thoughts?

Article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/16962216

I would give Morgan the number 8 jersey and that's it

I for one think Dowson against Parisse is going to end pretty badly. Would have much preferred to see Morgan start as the out and out 8, rather than having Dowson filling in. Like our chances across the rest of the backrow.

Should be interesting...

+1 RubyGuby!

Would have like to see
Morgan for Dowson,
Parling for Palmer
Mullan on the bench as replacement prop.
Also Jonny May on to the bench.

We also need a proper outside centre..Manu must play against Wales..

Agree about Dowson and Parling, but I think Marler would have been a mistake. His scrummaging isn't great, and blooding him against a very strong Italian front row wouldn't be the greatest start for him.
Jonny May should be in the training squad a least I feel.

bluestonevedder wrote:Agree about Dowson and Parling, but I think Marler would have been a mistake. His scrummaging isn't great, and blooding him against a very strong Italian front row wouldn't be the greatest start for him.
Jonny May should be in the training squad a least I feel.

Matt Mullan not Marler...
Marler should not be in the squad until he learns how to scrumage..

sorry pal, completely misread that! Early start and all that. Yeh, Mullan I agree with. He offers the same as Marler in terms of carrying and work around the park, but is ten times the better scrummager!

bluestonevedder wrote:sorry pal, completely misread that! Early start and all that. Yeh, Mullan I agree with. He offers the same as Marler in terms of carrying and work around the park, but is ten times the better scrummager!

no worries... hopefully in the next couple of years Marler can become a good scrummager as he is great in the loose..

I think the time he has had in the England camp working with Rowntree will have done him the world of good. Rowntree's a bit of a magician I think.

Disappointed that Morgan isn't at no 8.

I personally would have picked this backrow:
6.Dowson
7.Robshaw
8.Morgan

With Croft on the bench as impact sub.

Shame to see Youngs picked as his poor form since the Argentina cameo continues. Would have liked to see Dickson get a starting berth.

Youngs in my opinion is a lot more effective partnered with Flood (he can't work without him). Also he would be better suited as an impact sub against tired Italians.


Dowson and Youngs definitely need to up their games this weekend. If they continue to give England poor ball then England will be unable to attack and keep the ball in hand.

Other than that I would keep the rest of the team the same.

Still find the bench strange. JTH is a good player but he doesn't offer anything extra.

Good Shout about Lee Dickson starting...... he will provide much quicker ball..

Morgan and Dickson deserved to start.

What is it that people see in Ben Youngs?

The guy is out of form and is down on confidence, he needs time on the bench to realise he has to work harder if he wants the starting No9 shirt.

Youngs can only regain his confidence by playing - he's a proven class scrum half.

Thats fine but he should be playing for the Tigers, not gaining another underserved England cap.

Well i think i agree i would have brought in Morgan and another second row...Parling seems to be the personal favorite of people.

However we did well under hostile conditions at Murrayfield...so lets give the guys another chance to show what they can do...in what could be another hostile environment at the Stadio Olimpico...

I would bring on the subs a little earlier though especially Morgan if we are not getting much forward momentum....

Hersh I agree with you.

Ben Youngs is a good player but is currently going through a rough patch. The problem is that this rough patch has been over 6 months!

RubyGuby I disagree. I don't think the constant poor performances for England are helping his confidence at all. His performance damages the side too. It's a shame Danny Care foolishly ruled himself out because he could have sparked Youngs to fight for his place.

Youngs' hunger needs to be renewed in my opinion. He looked very hungry and fired up when coming off the bench against Argentina but since then....

Also another worrying thing is that Youngs doesn't look able to work with any fly half other than Flood.

Where exatly was that quicker ball from Dickson on Saturday? There was rarely any popportunity for quick ball, unless you have Phillips as your scrum half and he can do the back rows job for them...but then youll need someone else to do the actual 9 job.

What do epopel see in Youngs? 12 months ago he was the best scrum half in the world yadyada

He can pass, run, kick, and put balls into scrums. But yes he, like the rest of the team, hasnt been on fire for a while now. Thats not down to individuals, its a collective thing.

I do find it surprising though that after that p1ss poor a performance ( and it reeally was much worse than England at the world cup) he hasnt made any changes at all.
However this was based on what happened in training, including a 15 vs 15 game.

Im not sure if Dickson took part in that, since he has a broken hand. Id be surprised if hed been able to train fully all week even if it were only bruising, a scrum half with a dodgy hand isnt much use.
In that case its hard to see how Lancaster could easily replace Youngs. This side does need time to gel and get used to playing together under the new England systems. The lack of organsation was as evident as the lack of drive and poor execution against Scotland, that wont be fixed by chucking the whole side out and starting again...again.

To make no changes at all though? I think most of us expected to see Morgan given a go over Dowson. Getting so more energy in the pack to take the ball forward when we have it ( and creat the opportunities for Youngs to get the backline into he game) and getting someone to drive over at rucks to present the ball is probably the number one improvement needed.
Then we can see if the Saracens midfield is capable of putting an attacking move together.

I think this is the 1st sign that Lancaster hasn't a clue.

Youngs should have dropped to the bench at least.

But!

I'll happily eat my own words if he plays a blinder on Saturday.

Then we can see if the Saracens midfield is capable of putting an attacking move together.

Peter...i think we all know the answer to that already

I think its very unfair to say that Lancaster hasn't got a clue.

He took a very inexperienced squad to the cauldron of Murrayfield and got a result, despite the fact that the team had only met in the carpark before the match figuratively speaking.

WE can all say this player should be dropped, or this player should start but I doubt we know more than the coach, if we did, we'd probably be doing his job, and judging by some of the so-called knowledge on here, that would be a frightening prospect.

Agree with squad selection there is a lot to be said for stability now after bringing in lots of new combos against Scotland.
Youngs, Dowson & Croft will know full well there places are under threat.
I expect the bench to be used earlier on Saturday.

I'm dissapointed.
I would have liked Morgan, Dickson, Sharples and Brown to start and their counterparts on the bench.
So a bench of Dowson (to cover all back row), Youngs, Sharples and Foden to offer a real impact and game changer if needed come 60mins.

Lancaster has been adventurous with his squad selection but, not so much with his matchday 22. But, still at least this gives the players another game to gel.

IMO this shows a level of maturity and confidence from the coach. A new look side wins the first match and he sticks with them for the second. I'm sure he'll still use the bench - but giving players a couple of games to bed in is good to see from an England coach.

Why does Lancaster have to keep picking Barritt at 13 and Farrell at 12? Barritt has been playing all his club rugby as a 12. Whereas Farrell has been playing this season as a 13.

beshocked wrote:Why does Lancaster have to keep picking Barritt at 13 and Farrell at 12? Barritt has been playing all his club rugby as a 12. Whereas Farrell has been playing this season as a 13.

+1

bluestonevedder wrote:

beshocked wrote:Why does Lancaster have to keep picking Barritt at 13 and Farrell at 12? Barritt has been playing all his club rugby as a 12. Whereas Farrell has been playing this season as a 13.

+1

The only reasoning I can think of is that Farrell is there for his kicking game, taking the pressure off of Hodgson and allowing him to concentrate on his attacking game. That being said, hasn't Barritt operated at fly half, so his kicking game must be pretty good....

beshocked wrote:Why does Lancaster have to keep picking Barritt at 13 and Farrell at 12? Barritt has been playing all his club rugby as a 12. Whereas Farrell has been playing this season as a 13.

Maybe this is the 2nd sign that Lancaster hasn't a clue?

Good point beshocked - although are they interchanging on a fairly regular basis anyway!
Is Barritt seen as a more solid defender and is there to assist out wide with Strettle.
I still feel that a Barritt-Tuilagi partnership would potentially cause teams a lot of problems. (if only for Tuilagi to make the space out wide when 2 people mark him - and the back 3 to zip through).
Barritt and Farrell just dont scare the opo much!

Farrell does all his kicking from 13 at club level.

My point is why tamper with the 10,12,13 club combo?

If it's to keep Farrell in the team as 12 when Tuilagi back it's stupid.

Barritt is a much better 12.

beshocked wrote:Farrell does all his kicking from 13 at club level.

My point is why tamper with the 10,12,13 club combo?

If it's to keep Farrell in the team as 12 when Tuilagi back it's stupid.

Barritt is a much better 12.

I'm all out of possible answers.

Maybe Lancaster just thinks its 2006 and everyone needs two flyhalves playing next to each other. At least he likes proper fullbacks rather than 3 wingers.

Not what i'd have done but he clearly wants the starting 15 to have another chance after getting their first match out of the way and hoping they have gelled more. Good luck to them

Maybe Lancaster doesnt trust Farrell at 13

ChequeredJersey wrote:Maybe Lancaster doesnt trust Farrell at 13

but he would trust Farrell at 12 instead?

I just can't understand playing the best EQ inside centre at 13.

propdavid_london wrote:I'm dissapointed.
I would have liked Morgan, Dickson, Sharples and Brown to start and their counterparts on the bench.
So a bench of Dowson (to cover all back row), Youngs, Sharples and Foden to offer a real impact and game changer if needed come 60mins.

Lancaster has been adventurous with his squad selection but, not so much with his matchday 22. But, still at least this gives the players another game to gel.

Ideally, + 1. But I can see where he's coming from. Brown and JTH are not good bench options though

propdavid_london wrote:I'm dissapointed.
I would have liked Morgan, Dickson, Sharples and Brown to start and their counterparts on the bench.
So a bench of Dowson (to cover all back row), Youngs, Sharples and Foden to offer a real impact and game changer if needed come 60mins.

Lancaster has been adventurous with his squad selection but, not so much with his matchday 22. But, still at least this gives the players another game to gel.

Ideally, + 1. But I can see where he's coming from. Brown and JTH are not good bench options though

beshocked wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:Maybe Lancaster doesnt trust Farrell at 13

but he would trust Farrell at 12 instead?

I just can't understand playing the best EQ inside centre at 13.

True but Twelvetrees at 13 would be better than not picking him at all

Shame to see Youngs picked as his poor form since the Argentina cameo continues. Would have liked to see Dickson get a starting berth.

I wouldn't he was even slower at the breakdown than Youngs, he either kicked or gave a delayed pass for a kick against Scotland. If anythin I'd have liked to see a different 9 like Simpson or Spencer brought in to try and inject some more tempo as Dickson offered nothing. With a bit of luck Youngs might actually recover some form should England get him any ball.

I just can't understand playing the best EQ inside centre at 13.

Cause Farrell's daddy wants him to be the England 12? I'd imagine that Lancaster is concerned that at 13 Farrell's lack of pace may be exposed by quicker 13s (see game at Gloucester for Trinder breezing past him) and so has moved him in one and given the more experienced defender Barritt (who isn't much quicker) the job of shutting down the opposition attack in the 13 channel until Manu is back. Hence Barritt coming up quickly and taking down any Scottish player trying to get the ball wide. The Denton outside break showed the frailties that lay in the lack of covering tackles from 10 and 12 (13 as well but Barritt had already made a tackle in this case) and that Strettle isn't the greatest of tacklers which meant once the ball was out there it should have been a fairly straight forward run in. Well fairly straight forward if Foden hadn't had a good body position and Denton could pass or kick.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

beshocked wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:Maybe Lancaster doesnt trust Farrell at 13

but he would trust Farrell at 12 instead?

I just can't understand playing the best EQ inside centre at 13.

True but Twelvetrees at 13 would be better than not picking him at all

Funny guy. By the way what's happened to Trinder and Allen?

Allen seems to have been left firmly in the cold.

How long is Trinder out for?

Allen for England appears to be getting
the Matty Tait/Hodgson post Nonu treatment, after he was embarrassed by Dan Carter. Which seems silly as he is a talented 12, has matured since his international match and anyone can throw an interception

Pretty disappointed with this myself.

England can't start building for the future until a permanent Head Coach is appointed, so this 6 nations should really be about testing out combinations and seeing which players can make it at this level.

I'm not really interested in what Lancaster thinks is the future for England, as he's unlikely to be given the job full time (IMHO ). He should be looking to give as many players a run as possible, so that the next guy knows what he's working with.

beshocked wrote:Hersh I agree with you.

Ben Youngs is a good player but is currently going through a rough patch. The problem is that this rough patch has been over 6 months!

RubyGuby I disagree. I don't think the constant poor performances for England are helping his confidence at all. His performance damages the side too. It's a shame Danny Care foolishly ruled himself out because he could have sparked Youngs to fight for his place.

Youngs' hunger needs to be renewed in my opinion. He looked very hungry and fired up when coming off the bench against Argentina but since then....

Also another worrying thing is that Youngs doesn't look able to work with any fly half other than Flood.

No scrum half works well when playing with a new fly half for the first time!

To be fair if Lancaster did pick Twelvetrees at 13 hed quit the first tiem Gloucester have a game he was told he'd get the 12 shirt for

beshocked wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:Maybe Lancaster doesnt trust Farrell at 13

but he would trust Farrell at 12 instead?

I just can't understand playing the best EQ inside centre at 13.

You obviously havent seen James Fitzpatrick play...

On a serious note though, arent they just switching...in defensive moments on our ball when kicks may be needed Farrell goes 12...but in big tackling or a big carrying situation Barritt goes to 12.

mawhis wrote:Pretty disappointed with this myself.

England can't start building for the future until a permanent Head Coach is appointed, so this 6 nations should really be about testing out combinations and seeing which players can make it at this level.

I'm not really interested in what Lancaster thinks is the future for England, as he's unlikely to be given the job full time (IMHO ). He should be looking to give as many players a run as possible, so that the next guy knows what he's working with.

So you expect combinations to work instantly? Sorry but that doesnt happen. Players need time to gell with each other.

mawhis wrote:Pretty disappointed with this myself.

England can't start building for the future until a permanent Head Coach is appointed, so this 6 nations should really be about testing out combinations and seeing which players can make it at this level.

I'm not really interested in what Lancaster thinks is the future for England, as he's unlikely to be given the job full time (IMHO ). He should be looking to give as many players a run as possible, so that the next guy knows what he's working with.

Im sorry but thats just rubbish.

He has already blooded many new players...Morgan, Dowson, Barritt, Farrell, Botha (to a degree), Robshaw....

What is any coach going to find out about a player playing 1 game in the highly passionate 6n then being dropped for ANOTHER new cap!!!???

PS...i also believe we should never use the 6n as a "trial competition" you should be trying to win everything you can.

Geordie - you remain the voice of reason in the England camp here on 606 - Maybe you should throw your hat into the arena for the top job (well the one just under Rob Andrew)

beshocked wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:Maybe Lancaster doesnt trust Farrell at 13

but he would trust Farrell at 12 instead?

I just can't understand playing the best EQ inside centre at 13.

Wilko started at 12 for England maybe there is a plan to switch him to FH in the future?

GeordieFalcon wrote:

He has already blooded many new players...Morgan, Dowson, Barritt, Farrell, Botha (to a degree), Robshaw....

What is any coach going to find out about a player playing 1 game in the highly passionate 6n then being dropped for ANOTHER new cap!!!???

PS...i also believe we should never use the 6n as a "trial competition" you should be trying to win everything you can.

I agree (though I would have started Brown and maybe Morgan). Did we not criticise Robinson for ditching players after one match?