Joe Launchbury called up to the England squad

http://www.espnscrum.com/six-nations-2012/rugby/story/160678.html


Really pleased for him and I think it is the start of a long international career, but I wonder why it wasn't Matt Garvey? Probably more or less confirms that the English locks will be Parling, Botha or Palmer for the rest of the tournament.

Apparently it's just so that he can pick up some experience of the elite set up. I would also have liked to see Garvey get that experience instead though; at least he's been playing for the past two months!

It may be to do with their relative club commitments?

Neither club has a game for the next fortnight so I doubt club commitments has anything to do with it.

A synical part of me says that the more young players Lancaster feels he gets in to the squad the happier the press/fans will be so the more likely he'll be to retain the job...

Still pleased for Joe, he looked like a talent in the age grades.

yappysnap wrote:A synical part of me says that the more young players Lancaster feels he gets in to the squad the happier the press/fans will be so the more likely he'll be to retain the job...

Still pleased for Joe, he looked like a talent in the age grades.

There may be an element of this in the decision, but it sends a message out to the promising U20's I suppose. Last year Owen Farrell and Joe Launchbury were lining up for the age grade, this year they are in and around the senior team. Who's to say players like Matt Kvesic, Ben Spencer or Marland Yarde won't be in a similar position next year.

Very true, i'm not against this at all, it does send out the right message and the moe training and time these youngsters get around the EPS the better (I hope).

Does this mean Atwood is well clear on England then, maybe due to his old bans?

yappysnap wrote:Very true, i'm not against this at all, it does send out the right message and the moe training and time these youngsters get around the EPS the better (I hope).

Does this mean Atwood is well clear on England then, maybe due to his old bans?

That would be a shame yappy, Attwood's discipline has been excellent this season, he's still got plenty of dog in him but he's shown a really level headed approach to his rugby. He has been involved in almost every game this season and Bath have the Little Value semi on Friday night, so maybe he's been running on empty a bit for the EPS sessions, and SL is doing Bath a favour as Geech will be on the selection committee for the new coach appointment.

I still think there is a place for Attwood, he a good player and he's not even 25 yet! Saying that, he's going to face increased competition and might not be seen as the 'saviour' he was a year ago. Reasons to be cheerful though, we'll have depth in the future:

Geoff Parling
Courtney Lawes
Matt Garvey
Dave Attwood
George Robson
Joe Launchbury
Graham Kitchener
Ed Slater

Plus a few of the youngsters like Tom Savage (Gloucester), Dom Barrow (Leeds), George Kruis (Saracens) and the Quins U20 locks both current and recent.

We've got to be able to make at least one effective combination out of that lot, or so you'd think.

Isn't this a bit ridiculous? He's been injured and when he's been playing its been in the backrow. What about Kitchener, Attwood, Garvey, Slater? All young. All playing well.

I really hope Launchbury does well, he certainly looked good at U20 level and for Wasps. I'd love it for him to make the bench if good enough (although unlikely)

HammerofThunor wrote:Isn't this a bit ridiculous? He's been injured and when he's been playing its been in the backrow. What about Kitchener, Attwood, Garvey, Slater? All young. All playing well.

I really hope Launchbury does well, he certainly looked good at U20 level and for Wasps. I'd love it for him to make the bench if good enough (although unlikely)

If you're good enough, your old enough. Launchberry was terrific at the end of last season, and shone against Irish on Saturday.

The SH teams will blood young talent if they are good enough. In England the RFU don't seem trust in bringing that talent through to senior level early enough to see if they can cope.

Mallett may well get the head coach role, but Lancaster has a much better view of where the future lies.

Maybe it's what we need to do. Bypass those guys in their mid-20s who are decent and get the 20 year olds who've done well in very early. Our locks in the EPS are Botha (30), Deacon (31), Palmer (32) and Lawes (23). Injury replacements are Parling (28) and Attwood (24). We need to replace the first 3 (with Parling and Attwood + Other).

Launchbury has a big future, but this is a real shock.

I'm not sure Lancaster rates Garvey. He was taken off early in the first Saxons game and since then has been back with his club.

London Wasps young forward Joe Launchbury has been handed his first senior England call-up following a string of excellent performances since his return from injury in recent weeks.

Launchbury has been called into the full England squad for training this week in place of the injured Courtney Lawes and will join up with the squad tonight.

He will train alongside London Wasps hooker Rob Webber but not unfortunately with Joe Simpson, who dislocated his shoulder at the weekend ruling himself out of possible selection for the rest of the tournament.

Launchbury says he was delighted to get the call.
“I am totally shocked to be honest but thrilled to get the chance to train with the squad. It was a totally unexpected call especially as I have missed so much of this season but it’s a great opportunity for me to pick up some really valuable experience at the highest level. I’m really looking forward to it.”

It’s a meteoric rise for the 20-year-old who joined London Wasps for the 2009/10 season having been spotted by former Wasps stalwart Will Green playing for Worthing RFC.

In his first season with Wasps' Launchbury made the England U20s squad, helping last year’s side win the Six Nations and winning MOTM in the game against Ireland.

He was also a key part of the England side who reached last year’s IRB Junior World Cup Final and was awarded the England players player of the tournament. Earlier this year he was named in the England Saxons squad but has yet to feature having missed a large part of this season through injury.

He has however been a key figure since his return three weeks ago and was a stand-out performer in the London Wasps win over London Irish at the weekend.

Hes called up Karl Dickson to replace Joe Simpson (injured) as well.
7th choice at best only a few months ago....

England have always had a big pool of decent players, you could draw up similar lists for any position. The problems always been finding ones who are more than just place fillers and can keep at the top of their game for more than a year or two once capped.

Well you could argue that Other Dickson, Youngs, Simpson, Care and Wigglesworth are still ahead of him.

Cumbrian wrote:I still think there is a place for Attwood, he a good player and he's not even 25 yet! Saying that, he's going to face increased competition and might not be seen as the 'saviour' he was a year ago. Reasons to be cheerful though, we'll have depth in the future:

Geoff Parling
Courtney Lawes
Matt Garvey
Dave Attwood
George Robson
Joe Launchbury
Graham Kitchener
Ed Slater

Plus a few of the youngsters like Tom Savage (Gloucester), Dom Barrow (Leeds), George Kruis (Saracens) and the Quins U20 locks both current and recent.

We've got to be able to make at least one effective combination out of that lot, or so you'd think.

Im just not sure on this guy...its him or Parling as the lineout operator...and i just feel Parling has more of a presence.

Wigglesworths injured ratehr than passed over right? Actaully Paul Hodgson wouldve been ahead of him for Johnson too wouldnt he...that makes him about 8th choice, or possibly 9th behind Micky Young (suspended)

England have mediocrity in depth.

Yeh Wigglesworth is out for the season. It doesn't make sense though to put him behind Hodgson AND Young. He wouldn't be behind Hodgson now, but you then put him 9th because Young is currently suspended.

Dickson has been really excellent this year. If you go on the Quins' message board you'll find plenty of people thinking he should be ahead of Care (which I'd somewhat agree with). I'd have him ahead of Hodgson, Wigglesworth and Young right now, and possibly Care as well (for Quins at least)

I was saying where he was in the pecking order 6 months ago, not so much where he is now.
I dont think you could claim he was top of Lancasters list either, but all sorts of players get their opportunities this way.

OK - I was put off by you putting (suspended) after Young's name. It implied you were talking about the present.

I wasn't claiming he was near the top of Lancaster's list - but I do think his form this year has been largely excellent, and that he does deserve the call up.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:I still think there is a place for Attwood, he a good player and he's not even 25 yet! Saying that, he's going to face increased competition and might not be seen as the 'saviour' he was a year ago. Reasons to be cheerful though, we'll have depth in the future:

Geoff Parling
Courtney Lawes
Matt Garvey
Dave Attwood
George Robson
Joe Launchbury
Graham Kitchener
Ed Slater

Plus a few of the youngsters like Tom Savage (Gloucester), Dom Barrow (Leeds), George Kruis (Saracens) and the Quins U20 locks both current and recent.

We've got to be able to make at least one effective combination out of that lot, or so you'd think.

Im just not sure on this guy...its him or Parling as the lineout operator...and i just feel Parling has more of a presence.

True I'm not convinced by his all round game either. However, we don't have a huge number of lineout operators and Parling seems very injury prone. I'm always waiting for him to be broken unfortunately.

It strikes me as a waste of a spot. Same as with Marler. (although i concede that with him the point may have been to put him in Rowntree's care - doesnt say much for their faith in Quins coaches)

Why pick a guy for experience when you have NO intention of actually playing him???? Ever??? At this level???

Puts the whole operation at risk, denies someone like Garvey or (certainly) Attwood the genuine chance of a cap for what? Intangibles of "training experience" and clearly good PR...

Tri,

What would Launchberry be doing if he wasnt tarining with England the next couple of weeks? Watching the LV cup on TV?

What do you expect them to do, pick all 32 players for the matchday squad and hope noone notices?
Lancaster released everyone except his starting 15 for the rest weekend, and dowes the same for those not in the matchdaty 22

If theres a sudden raft of injuries in the next week then Marler and Launchberry will play. As it is they are in teh squad to make up the numbers and get experience. If they impress they may get moved up, and in theory they should be improved by the experience and get used to the england syetm and the other players likely to be in the side if and when they do get a cap.


Same for Dickson.

Lancaster was never going to pick Attwood or Garvey for the next game any more than he was Launchberry. It would be just as much of a waste of a spot for them too.
All three are in the EPS system. Attwood will be PLAYING in the LV semi final though. The choice was between Launchberry and Garvey who were both having two weeks off otherwise, Lancaster obviosuly rates Launcheberry a higher prospect of sees that theres more to gain form haing him up with the big kids.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Tri,

What would Launchberry be doing if he wasnt tarining with England the next couple of weeks? Watching the LV cup on TV?

What do you expect them to do, pick all 32 players for the matchday squad and hope noone notices?
Lancaster released everyone except his starting 15 for the rest weekend, and dowes the same for those not in the matchdaty 22

If theres a sudden raft of injuries in the next week then Marler and Launchberry will play. As it is they are in teh squad to make up the numbers and get experience. If they impress they may get moved up, and in theory they should be improved by the experience and get used to the england syetm and the other players likely to be in the side if and when they do get a cap.


Same for Dickson.

Lancaster was never going to pick Attwood or Garvey for the next game any more than he was Launchberry. It would be just as much of a waste of a spot for them too.
All three are in the EPS system. Attwood will be PLAYING in the LV semi final though. The choice was between Launchberry and Garvey who were both having two weeks off otherwise, Lancaster obviosuly rates Launcheberry a higher prospect of sees that theres more to gain form haing him up with the big kids.

All very logical except that he WON'T play Launchbury or Marler even if there are a bunch of injuries. He'll call up someone else to play. Launchbury was called up "for experience".

Pah!

There has been a lot of clamour on here for Garvey to be called up and many were suggesting he start before the 6 nations began. It all started after he made that line break (before christmas) and beat 3 players, dont get me wrong he does look to be a good, powerful ball carrier but any time I've seen him, he doesnt look remotely ready for test rugby.

Lauchberry however, has in my opinion, looked like an international quality player in the making. He has that presence and impact, you cant fail to notice him. I am suprised he has been called up and he is unlikely to play but im very glad to see him get the experience.

Both players will likely be involved with england in the future, although I think both are still behind attwood.

Triangulation wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Tri,

What would Launchberry be doing if he wasnt tarining with England the next couple of weeks? Watching the LV cup on TV?

What do you expect them to do, pick all 32 players for the matchday squad and hope noone notices?
Lancaster released everyone except his starting 15 for the rest weekend, and dowes the same for those not in the matchdaty 22

If theres a sudden raft of injuries in the next week then Marler and Launchberry will play. As it is they are in teh squad to make up the numbers and get experience. If they impress they may get moved up, and in theory they should be improved by the experience and get used to the england syetm and the other players likely to be in the side if and when they do get a cap.


Same for Dickson.

Lancaster was never going to pick Attwood or Garvey for the next game any more than he was Launchberry. It would be just as much of a waste of a spot for them too.
All three are in the EPS system. Attwood will be PLAYING in the LV semi final though. The choice was between Launchberry and Garvey who were both having two weeks off otherwise, Lancaster obviosuly rates Launcheberry a higher prospect of sees that theres more to gain form haing him up with the big kids.

All very logical except that he WON'T play Launchbury or Marler even if there are a bunch of injuries. He'll call up someone else to play. Launchbury was called up "for experience".

Pah!

Until it happens you're assuming. Why get upset by your own assumptions?

hammerof thunor

because it is NOT my assumption.

If Lancaster were going to play Marler he wouldve done it by now.

Maybe there is a small hope he'll blood him against the weak scrummaging ireland front row??

As for Launchbury it has been explicitly stated by Lancaster or one of his minions that he has been called up "FOR EXPERIENCE"

There is no other meaning. He is there to be a sponge. Not to play.

I am correct.

That will be all.

Triangulation wrote:It strikes me as a waste of a spot. Same as with Marler. (although i concede that with him the point may have been to put him in Rowntree's care - doesnt say much for their faith in Quins coaches)

Worth saying that Marler has dominated his opposite number for quite a few games now since the turn of the year. He was man of the match against Worcester (with Mullan struggling all afternoon on the other side), and won the equalising penalty against Newcastle on Friday. Whether or not Lancaster intends to play him he deserves his spot right now.

If only international benches had that extra prop I think we'd see Marler in every 6N's game. Unfortunately they don't so we have to take the frankly dire Stevens to cover both sides.

Launchberry is a good choice, I remember some of the monster tackles he put in on that SA tour last season.

thomh wrote:

Triangulation wrote:It strikes me as a waste of a spot. Same as with Marler. (although i concede that with him the point may have been to put him in Rowntree's care - doesnt say much for their faith in Quins coaches)

Worth saying that Marler has dominated his opposite number for quite a few games now since the turn of the year. He was man of the match against Worcester (with Mullan struggling all afternoon on the other side), and won the equalising penalty against Newcastle on Friday. Whether or not Lancaster intends to play him he deserves his spot right now.

Completely agree with that, alot of it comes from Johnston finally hitting with all his weight. I imagine Cole alongside Marler would be just as impressive.

Triangulation wrote:hammerof thunor

because it is NOT my assumption.

If Lancaster were going to play Marler he wouldve done it by now.

Maybe there is a small hope he'll blood him against the weak scrummaging ireland front row??

As for Launchbury it has been explicitly stated by Lancaster or one of his minions that he has been called up "FOR EXPERIENCE"

There is no other meaning. He is there to be a sponge. Not to play.

I am correct.

That will be all.

Er..maybe he hasn't been played because he's the 4th choice prop? Not exactly rocket science. You could equally say "What's the point in having a training squad bigger than 22?" You're not going to play them.

So yes it most definately is your assumption. No amount of spinning will change that. Nothing wrong with making assumptions about things just try not to cry over them as though they are true.

Johnson's problem is his bind (most tighthead bind on the arm it seems but only some of them get penalised). If he get's that right then they generally do well. Vallejos really doesn't seem to push as hard as Robson (which I find surprising for some reason. I think of him as a strong Argentinos enforcer type and he's really not), which doesn't help.

Is that the Rowntree effect?

I'm sure it is to an extent, but the Quins scrum was on the up before the England squad met up for the tournament. Nick Wood got sin-binned for scrummaging against them in the HC group game in January, and they destroyed Connacht there the following week, nearly rescuing the game with a turnover at the scrum after 80.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is that the Rowntree effect?

Don't think so. The Quins scrum runs on whether Johnson gets penalised or not. The game against Wasps came down to the fact it was Matthews and Vallejos gave very little umph from the second row. I don't think I've seen many games when Marler's been truly hammered in the scrum. I've definately seen more when Cole's been penaltised left right and centre (generally due to dodging reffing of course).

Guys who watch their team week in week out will have a much better idea of course, but their generally biased to their side/players (if you think you're not biased you're either an idiot or lying)

Oh im biased...i know we're utter sh**e

A lot of that is having Ollie Kohn back in there, he is a monster.

hammer!!

Forget about Marler.

I'm talking about Launchbury here.

Lancaster said " he's been called up FOR EXPERIENCE" STATED CLEARLY NOT ASSUMED!!

"for experience" meaning......

for him to benefit from the experience of being in an England training squad. NOT so that England can benefit from his playing experience. NOT for him to gain playing experience.

His call up is almost apologetic.

If Parling and Botha get injured you still wont see Launchbury in the match day squad.

So playing in the game wouldnt be experience?

Would he get any more benefit from sitting home watching the LV finals?

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:So playing in the game wouldnt be experience?

Would he get any more benefit from sitting home watching the LV finals?

Of course it would be "experience" for him to play. That goes WITHOUT SAYING. But that is not what was meant and it is not what is going to happen either.

Normally when someone is called up they're simply called up. Job done. However when the coach feels the need to add the words "for experience" what do you think that means?? It means - were going to have a look at him in training and get him to benefit from the experience he gets from hanging around with us.

I'm saying England might be better served by calling up someone who has half a chance of playing if required.

How do you think Attwood (MOM on the weekend) feels about all this?

Probably quite happy that he will be allowed to train with his club for the glorious LV run in but knowing that he may usurp Launchberry if there is a sudden locks crises.

I think the validity of Lancaster's selection of Launchbury essentially comes down to what your view of the utility of the EPS and Saxons squads. My view would be that the EPS is for the 32 players who are to varying degrees interchangeable in a starting XV ie: you need players who can come in, know the routine and can perform without a theoretical dip in performance.

The Saxons by contrast, is a squad to introduce players into the England elite ethos and training. It should very much be a stepping stone from the age grade sides into the elite set up via the Jeff. What Lancaster has done here is blur the distinction between the two and to some extent circumvent the Saxons purpose.

I frankly don't have any strong feelings about it either way. I think it's great that one of THE outstanding players in the U20 tournament is going to get some invaluable experience of the England system and hopefully that will bring him on faster as a player.

What that should be weighed against though is a) The purpose of the EPS itself and b) The message that sends to other contenders such as Attwood. Let's bear in mind that Joe hasn't played much rugby recently and would you elect to start him at 4 against a heavy French pack. The answer would almost certainly be no. As such there is real credibility in the argument for having another take his place in the EPS call up.

Chjw131 wrote:I think the validity of Lancaster's selection of Launchbury essentially comes down to what your view of the utility of the EPS and Saxons squads. My view would be that the EPS is for the 32 players who are to varying degrees interchangeable in a starting XV ie: you need players who can come in, know the routine and can perform without a theoretical dip in performance.

The Saxons by contrast, is a squad to introduce players into the England elite ethos and training. It should very much be a stepping stone from the age grade sides into the elite set up via the Jeff. What Lancaster has done here is blur the distinction between the two and to some extent circumvent the Saxons purpose.

I frankly don't have any strong feelings about it either way. I think it's great that one of THE outstanding players in the U20 tournament is going to get some invaluable experience of the England system and hopefully that will bring him on faster as a player.

What that should be weighed against though is a) The purpose of the EPS itself and b) The message that sends to other contenders such as Attwood. Let's bear in mind that Joe hasn't played much rugby recently and would you elect to start him at 4 against a heavy French pack. The answer would almost certainly be no. As such there is real credibility in the argument for having another take his place in the EPS call up.

Well done sir. You have summed this situation up beautifully. I doff my metaphorical cap to you sir!