England summer tour of Argentina

First topic message reminder :

I believe Wood and Kvesic are both in the ~16st region (off the top of my head). Not massive by modern back row standards, but not really lightweight either.

For those saying 'you can't have it all' re: Strettle and Paice, I ask why not?

These are horrendous selections for which there really is no justification. Yes overall it is a very encouraging team but lets be honest the team pretty much picks itself and these conservative (does it actually count as conservatism when we all know they're not 'solid' they're just poor) selections are another indication that Lancaster really needs to develop as a tactician and a selector. There are signs of progression but it's moving at a snail's pace and I have a horrible feeling we will revert to type as soon as the more important games come around.

Oh, and the deadwood in the EPS for me is:

Thomas Waldrom - Bring in BV

Tom Johnson - Add Kvesic

D Strettle - Yarde (he looks a natural fit for international rugby)

Courtney Lawes - Attwood. I'll get some stick but I think his form has been rubbish and his athleticism isn't enough, we already have Launchbury for the big engine role. He looks very light in his core as well and carries bolt-upright. Not totally convinced by Attwood but his work around the rucks is much better.

Alex Goode - Eastmond - Not a FB I know, but do we need 3? Offers great cover and I think needs to be developed as an alternative option at 12.

Callum Clark - Fraser - I actually rate him, but not earned his spot

Ashton - Would be sorely tempted to drop him for May or Wade, both whose defence I think is as good, but may be too harsh on the guy. I do still rate Ashton. Alternatively drop Dickson for one of them perhaps.

If I'm honest, I'd probably drop Barritt for JJ as well, but that's a hard call on the guy and probably unfair.

Its a shame Eastmond wasnt just put straight in as a scrum half...would be like Genia. A playmaking powerful scrum half with good running ability.

Hood, i agree with you about Lawes. It'll be interesting if players like Kruis, Savage etc start the season on fire...

GeordieFalcon wrote:Its a shame Eastmond wasnt just put straight in as a scrum half...would be like Genia. A playmaking powerful scrum half with good running ability.

Hood, i agree with you about Lawes. It'll be interesting if players like Kruis, Savage etc start the season on fire...

I thought eastmond had similar physical attributes to genia as well. I do like what I've seen of Kruis and really hope he kicks on this year!

Hood83 wrote:Chjw - I'd be pretty happy with most of those changes. The problem we have is htat we have about 5 or 6 backrowers who could be world class. Some have shown glimpses in the right team (Croft, Robshaw, Wood, Haskell) but looked average in the wrong team, others look class but haven't yet shown it against the very best for 80 mins (Morgan), and others still have shown potential but would need a good run of games for us to know (Kvesic, Fraser) - I'm slightly worried we'll have the same problem as usual - very good players picked but who never quite reach world-beater level but who stop young players coming in.

It's better to have too few players to choose from but the danger is there is a whole generation of players with world class potential who'll never get to realise it. You could probably make the same case for players like Slater, Daly, Joseph, Eastmond, JJ, May

I'm encouraged by the depth but how can we make sure we get the right selection, right balance, right gameplan and the right development of younger players with so many jigsaw pieces. Very glad I don't have to make these calls!  

Agree with you there Hood, the blend and balance of the team is the ultimate call. The problem becomes more complex when you add in varying form. Thus a BR of 6. T Wood 7. M Kvesic 8. B Morgan looks great and has proven to play well but if either one goes slightly off form their replacements coming in can cause another balance issue. Thus do you have to change two or even all three to get back to balance?! Tough stuff.

Slater I think will get his chance he was really unlucky to miss the tour and it's him who I potentially see taking Lawes' space if he starts the season very well. With so much fresh blood coming through the past two seasons it was always going to be the case that the new talent will find it increasingly difficult to get into the side. That is a positive as much as a negative.

I think Lancs will see this EPS as a critical one. He will only want to make very minor changes from this EPS going forward. Now is the time this team needs to start climbing the ranks with their performances and style of play. Hopefully we'll see those bright attacking players being well represented.

Thus a BR of 6. T Wood 7. M Kvesic 8. B Morgan looks great and has proven to play well but if either one goes slightly off form their replacements coming in can cause another balance issue. Thus do you have to change two or even all three to get back to balance?! Tough stuff.

I think 7 and 8 are ok...if morgan goes out we bring in Billy, if Robshaw is out we have Kvesic or Will Fraser, eithe rof whom i would be happy to start for England even in a 6n game or the upcoming AI's.

Ironically its 6 where we may be lacking. Wood is my first choice...Croft divides opinion but he is quality at what he does...but having him in would need a pack shuffle in my opinion.
Haskell, Fearns etc are all not at the level of Croft or Wood. Where are the 6's coming through. Will Garvey be a 6 for Bath? Will Savage be for Glos?

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Thus a BR of 6. T Wood 7. M Kvesic 8. B Morgan looks great and has proven to play well but if either one goes slightly off form their replacements coming in can cause another balance issue. Thus do you have to change two or even all three to get back to balance?! Tough stuff.

I think 7 and 8 are ok...if morgan goes out we bring in Billy, if Robshaw is out we have Kvesic or Will Fraser, eithe rof whom i would be happy to start for England even in a 6n game or the upcoming AI's.

Ironically its 6 where we may be lacking. Wood is my first choice...Croft divides opinion but he is quality at what he does...but having him in would need a pack shuffle in my opinion.
Haskell, Fearns etc are all not at the level of Croft or Wood. Where are the 6's coming through. Will Garvey be a 6 for Bath? Will Savage be for Glos?

Interesting you say that about Haskell and Fearns Geordie - I tend to agree that neither has shown as good form or England, or suggested they have more natural talent/attributes BUT - I think they are closer to the sort of 6 I'd like - very abrasive, good close quarters defence, decent ball-carriers in the tight. In the 6Ns before the 2011 WC I thought Haskell was superb, his work-rate seemed up by about 50% after his stint in France. Then he was dropped and seemed to lose confidence. I still believe he is a better player to play against a pack like SA's or even Wales, where runners will come close to the ruck and the game will be very direct.

Someone mentioned Slater above for Lawes instread of Attwood, I'd have no problem with that. He's the sort of abrasive guy who can stop people on the gain-line. Against some teams like Oz and NZ we may not need that, but against the biggest I think we may.

Ah i agree about the type of player Hood. I much prefer my 6 to be a tough physical player, who just gets on with the dirty work.
I thought Fearns was going to really put his hand up for that position, but hasnt really pushed on.

Haskell did indeed look very good - maybe i was a little harsh saying he wasnt quite at the standard. Lets see how he goes this season.

But in reality...WHERE are the other 6's coming from?

I rate our (Falcons) 6 Mark Wilson very highly indeed...and i think he could make the saxons in January, but even he isnt maybe the physical presence i like at 6.

Chjw131 wrote:

Hood83 wrote:Chjw - I'd be pretty happy with most of those changes. The problem we have is htat we have about 5 or 6 backrowers who could be world class. Some have shown glimpses in the right team (Croft, Robshaw, Wood, Haskell) but looked average in the wrong team, others look class but haven't yet shown it against the very best for 80 mins (Morgan), and others still have shown potential but would need a good run of games for us to know (Kvesic, Fraser) - I'm slightly worried we'll have the same problem as usual - very good players picked but who never quite reach world-beater level but who stop young players coming in.

It's better to have too few players to choose from but the danger is there is a whole generation of players with world class potential who'll never get to realise it. You could probably make the same case for players like Slater, Daly, Joseph, Eastmond, JJ, May

I'm encouraged by the depth but how can we make sure we get the right selection, right balance, right gameplan and the right development of younger players with so many jigsaw pieces. Very glad I don't have to make these calls!  

Agree with you there Hood, the blend and balance of the team is the ultimate call. The problem becomes more complex when you add in varying form. Thus a BR of 6. T Wood 7. M Kvesic 8. B Morgan looks great and has proven to play well but if either one goes slightly off form their replacements coming in can cause another balance issue. Thus do you have to change two or even all three to get back to balance?! Tough stuff.

Slater I think will get his chance he was really unlucky to miss the tour and it's him who I potentially see taking Lawes' space if he starts the season very well. With so much fresh blood coming through the past two seasons it was always going to be the case that the new talent will find it increasingly difficult to get into the side. That is a positive as much as a negative.

I think Lancs will see this EPS as a critical one. He will only want to make very minor changes from this EPS going forward. Now is the time this team needs to start climbing the ranks with their performances and style of play. Hopefully we'll see those bright attacking players being well represented.

Yeah, definitely agree re form. In a way the problem has been not identifying when a young player is just learning to play at international level, when they're not up to it and when they're just in poor form. It's then very easy to try out someone else. I'd be interested to see if England has started a lot more players than other teams - it feels like we have over the past decade, but do the numbers show that?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Ah i agree about the type of player Hood. I much prefer my 6 to be a tough physical player, who just gets on with the dirty work.
I thought Fearns was going to really put his hand up for that position, but hasnt really pushed on.

Haskell did indeed look very good - maybe i was a little harsh saying he wasnt quite at the standard. Lets see how he goes this season.

But in reality...WHERE are the other 6's coming from?

I rate our (Falcons) 6 Mark Wilson very highly indeed...and i think he could make the saxons in January, but even he isnt maybe the physical presence i like at 6.

No I think you're right Geordie re Haskell, maybe just a little below the others in terms of nous, but also it's the nature of the way he and Croft plays. A powerful hit around the ruck and good clearing out work doesn't look as good as skinning a winger, and it doesn't get remembered. Not saying Croft is just all flash but he is a player who stands out by the nature of his game, it's why he divides opinion I think.

But it's why I think Haskell has to stay in the mix, form permitting at Wasps. Bit gutted BV has left them as I felt that could have been a very good, powerful 6/8 combo. Wilson is a top player, and punches above his weight - but he's not there you're right. Fearns has some time, still pretty young. I felt he'd be an 8 but he won't get a look in behind Morgan and BV.

I guess for the moment wood and croft and Haskell give us some decent options.

Also, don't forget that while Robshaw's preferred position is 7, he's played half his senior career at 6. Tom Guest has also been in excellent form at 6 recently, though he may be too old and too similar to Croft to warrant selection.

Yea I don't think we're completely shot at 6 we've got some class options. Fearns was going very well when he was fit for Bath be it at 7 or 6. He seems injury prone at the moment. That's the sort of player i'd like to see come through to give us some differing options at BS.

He's a long way off but the style of Dave Sisi when he came on in the JWC Final is the sort of thing. A powerful player but not as rangy as the likes of Savage.

What gets me about Haskell is that he just doesn't seem to have the power at 6. He does some good defensive work and over the ball he also carries well in open spaces but not in tight particularly well and that's something I like to see from a 6 complimenting the SR.

Hasnt Sisi gone to Bath?

So they potentially have Fearns, Garvey (probably getting some time at SR) and him for the 6 spot?

The other one i was thinking about was Eastmond.

Both for Bath and potentially for England what position is he going to nail. I wouldnt want to see him continue to float between spots..."jack of all". So..

1) Many suggest the wing. Personally i think his skills would be wasted out there...especially when we have a host of classy wingers coming through aswell.

2) Centre has been mentioned...and 12 could be a great position where his ability could be used well. But some have questioned his size for that position. I dont see a problem with his size he looks a pocket batttleship.

My suggestion is how about 9? He has great vision, passing and running ability. We need someone like that to get plenty of ball. He could offer so much threat from the base and also a playmaker.
Where do you want to see him play?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Hasnt Sisi gone to Bath?

So they potentially have Fearns, Garvey (probably getting some time at SR) and him for the 6 spot?

Thats right Geordie. I wonder if he will find it easier to get time at 8, where the 2 options are Koster and Houston, both unknown quantities really.

Fearns seems very injury prone at the moment, just when he is coming back into form something else seems to go. I hope for his sake he can get a full season under his belt as he does offer something very different to Croft and Wood.

I wonder if harlequins try switching Clifford to one if the flanks as well - possibly get some time at 6?

GeordieFalcon wrote:The other one i was thinking about was Eastmond.

Both for Bath and potentially for England what position is he going to nail. I wouldnt want to see him continue to float between spots..."jack of all". So..

1) Many suggest the wing. Personally i think his skills would be wasted out there...especially when we have a host of classy wingers coming through aswell.

2) Centre has been mentioned...and 12 could be a great position where his ability could be used well. But some have questioned his size for that position. I dont see a problem with his size he looks a pocket batttleship.

My suggestion is how about 9? He has great vision, passing and running ability. We need someone like that to get plenty of ball. He could offer so much threat from the base and also a playmaker.
Where do you want to see him play?

He did play half-back in League as far as i'm aware. I'd rather see him at 12 to be frank. Just because conventional wisdom is that one has a big bosher at 12 doesn't mean we need to hold our back play to that view.

People who think he should be used on the wing clearly haven't seen him play. Yes it is a handy place to start, coming from League but his distribution skills are excellent and the way he utilises space is superb. FH is another option but for the present I think he should nail down the inside centre position. He can work with Banahan or Williams outside him at Bath. He could even combine with JJ but that would need looking at closely.

Long term I see him at 12 covering 10 potentially. He's a pretty unique talent and the tries he's scored have been epic.

valtrepkos wrote:I wonder if harlequins try switching Clifford to one if the flanks as well - possibly get some time at 6?

Clifford I like a lot at 8 he reminds me of a slightly more powerful Guest. He needs some more time to develop but he could be a super option at 8 for Quins and potentially England.

Do Quins have a conveyor belt of 8's?

Easter (Took him from Championship to England)
Guest
Yorke
Now Clifford

Chjw131 wrote:

valtrepkos wrote:I wonder if harlequins try switching Clifford to one if the flanks as well - possibly get some time at 6?

Clifford I like a lot at 8 he reminds me of a slightly more powerful Guest. He needs some more time to develop but he could be a super option at 8 for Quins and potentially England.

He won't get game time there, but I honestly think he has the skill-set of a really good 7. He links very well with the backs, has good pace and acceleration, good rucking and he's pretty damn good over the ball. He looks too small to be a top level 6 or 8 to me but I genuinely think he could be an excellent all-action 7, he seems to have the engine for it too.

Chjw131 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:The other one i was thinking about was Eastmond.

Both for Bath and potentially for England what position is he going to nail. I wouldnt want to see him continue to float between spots..."jack of all". So..

1) Many suggest the wing. Personally i think his skills would be wasted out there...especially when we have a host of classy wingers coming through aswell.

2) Centre has been mentioned...and 12 could be a great position where his ability could be used well. But some have questioned his size for that position. I dont see a problem with his size he looks a pocket batttleship.

My suggestion is how about 9? He has great vision, passing and running ability. We need someone like that to get plenty of ball. He could offer so much threat from the base and also a playmaker.
Where do you want to see him play?

He did play half-back in League as far as i'm aware. I'd rather see him at 12 to be frank. Just because conventional wisdom is that one has a big bosher at 12 doesn't mean we need to hold our back play to that view.

People who think he should be used on the wing clearly haven't seen him play. Yes it is a handy place to start, coming from League but his distribution skills are excellent and the way he utilises space is superb. FH is another option but for the present I think he should nail down the inside centre position. He can work with Banahan or Williams outside him at Bath. He could even combine with JJ but that would need looking at closely.

Long term I see him at 12 covering 10 potentially. He's a pretty unique talent and the tries he's scored have been epic.

Have to admit I'd prefer him at 12 as well. His all-round game from there could be brilliant I think. Less good at trucking it up than 36 but his skill-set is fantastic. We need to get players like that on the ball a lot, so I can see your thinking Geordie, I just feel it would take an age to get him ready - plus we're really short of distributors at 12.

It helps having Dippy Diprose on the coaching staff as an experienced ex-no8.

Clifford is the same height and weighs nearly the same amount as Parisse and Harinordiquy, if we use his lighter Quins profile weight, he is heavier according to the RFU (who are wrong), he also still has developing to do at only age 20, he'll be fine at 8 or 6

Hood83 wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:The other one i was thinking about was Eastmond.

Both for Bath and potentially for England what position is he going to nail. I wouldnt want to see him continue to float between spots..."jack of all". So..

1) Many suggest the wing. Personally i think his skills would be wasted out there...especially when we have a host of classy wingers coming through aswell.

2) Centre has been mentioned...and 12 could be a great position where his ability could be used well. But some have questioned his size for that position. I dont see a problem with his size he looks a pocket batttleship.

My suggestion is how about 9? He has great vision, passing and running ability. We need someone like that to get plenty of ball. He could offer so much threat from the base and also a playmaker.
Where do you want to see him play?

He did play half-back in League as far as i'm aware. I'd rather see him at 12 to be frank. Just because conventional wisdom is that one has a big bosher at 12 doesn't mean we need to hold our back play to that view.

People who think he should be used on the wing clearly haven't seen him play. Yes it is a handy place to start, coming from League but his distribution skills are excellent and the way he utilises space is superb. FH is another option but for the present I think he should nail down the inside centre position. He can work with Banahan or Williams outside him at Bath. He could even combine with JJ but that would need looking at closely.

Long term I see him at 12 covering 10 potentially. He's a pretty unique talent and the tries he's scored have been epic.

Have to admit I'd prefer him at 12 as well. His all-round game from there could be brilliant I think. Less good at trucking it up than 36 but his skill-set is fantastic. We need to get players like that on the ball a lot, so I can see your thinking Geordie, I just feel it would take an age to get him ready - plus we're really short of distributors at 12.

The Eastmond at 9 debate has certainly been had amongst Bath fans. While in terms of size, he would seem a natural fit, I think there is far more for a league player to learn playing at 9 than out in the backline, where the basics are the same ie pass, run and tackle. So I think its unlikely we would have seen him in an England shirt for example.

I like him at 12, but with the current preoccupation with monster centres, this does mean at the highest level some degree of building a team around him has to take place. What I mean by that is, while Eastmond and Banahan would work nicely, Eastmond and JJ could be a little vulnerable on a sodden pitch and would need the backrow to be covering/ working hard off their shoulders in attack at lot more.

But looking a little too far ahead, a midfield of Farrell, Eastmond and Tuilagli would be interesting for me, kicking, tackling, flair and power all in there, although admittedly it would be a change from SL's current tactics. But combined with the likes of Yarde on the wing who is a big bloke, I don't think we would lose much through Eastmonds size, and we would gain in attack.

Agree with Hood. Get Eastmond comfortable in that 12 shirt. With those feet, hands and that brain he could be a top IC. He just seems to have time on the ball and be that touch quicker than those around him in his actions. Partner him with Manu and between them that is a fearsome combination of skills.

Could be a touch harsh on Billy who is a cracking 12 but lacks that time on the ball the top level playmakers have.

Can eastmond tackle anyone over five foot tall?

I've not noticed him struggle in contact Doc. That will be th big test though, especially if he's to stay at 12.

That's my concern Sam. He obviously has the ball skills and is developing into a real threat. Hopefully that part of his game develops. Just not against Saints this upcoming season.

Given the love of huge centres in rugby at the moment Eastmond will have his work cut out in defence as a 12 given that he's the same size as little Shane. He's got the play making skills for it though and his pace of the mark makes him dangerous with ball in hand wherever he gets it. One thing I find unavoidable to notice is that there are a fair few Prem backlines with serious attacking potential for next season:

9.Youngs 10.Flood 11.Goneva/Benjamin/Thompstone 12.Allen 13.Tuilagi 14.Morris 15.Tait

9.Young/Stringer 10.Ford/Heathecote 11.Biggs 12.Eastmond 13.Joseph 14.Banahan 15.Abendanon/Watson

9.Cowan/Robson 10.Burns 11.May 12.Twelvetrees 13.Trinder 14.JSD/Sharples 15.Morgan - Hopefully Olly and JSD can get fit!

9.Simpson 10.Goode 11.Varndell 12.Tommy Bell 13.Daly 14.Wade 15.Southwell - Throw in Masi, Chris Bell, Lee Thomas etc and it's a backline with plenty of options and potential.

9.Care 10.Evans 11.Monye 12.Botica/JTH 13.Lowe 14.Smith/Williams 15.Brown

9.Dickson/Fotuali'i 10.Myler 11.North 12.Burrell 13.Waldouck/Pisi 14.Elliot 15.Foden - It'll be interesting to see the Dickson and Fotuali'i battle pan out there, Dickson is key to many of the Saints big performances but Fotuali'i is just electric. No doubt another backline with talent and options though.

Botica plays 10 more than 12 - JTH's main rival these days is Casson, who I think has real potential if he can stay fit, but is currently too fragile. If he can string a decent run of games together, he could be in contention.

By the way, what happened with Banahan at 12?on the couple of times I've seen him there, it looked like much his best position (and I never rated him as a wing)

Kyle Eastmond may only be 5 foot 6 but the guy is seriously ripped and used to front up tackling from his league days. If Manu is lining up alongside of him that'll help. As Farrell senior is still backs coach you can bet your mortgage on Owen Farrell staying as 10 as well and he's a tough tackler. Two big hitters either side of a decent tackler shouldn't present too many defensive issues.

king_carlos wrote:Given the love of huge centres in rugby at the moment Eastmond will have his work cut out in defence as a 12 given that he's the same size as little Shane. He's got the play making skills for it though and his pace of the mark makes him dangerous with ball in hand wherever he gets it. One thing I find unavoidable to notice is that there are a fair few Prem backlines with serious attacking potential for next season:

9.Youngs 10.Flood 11.Goneva/Benjamin/Thompstone 12.Allen 13.Tuilagi 14.Morris 15.Tait

9.Young/Stringer 10.Ford/Heathecote 11.Biggs 12.Eastmond 13.Joseph 14.Banahan 15.Abendanon/Watson

9.Cowan/Robson 10.Burns 11.May 12.Twelvetrees 13.Trinder 14.JSD/Sharples 15.Morgan - Hopefully Olly and JSD can get fit!

9.Simpson 10.Goode 11.Varndell 12.Tommy Bell 13.Daly 14.Wade 15.Southwell - Throw in Masi, Chris Bell, Lee Thomas etc and it's a backline with plenty of options and potential.

9.Care 10.Evans 11.Monye 12.Botica/JTH 13.Lowe 14.Smith/Williams 15.Brown

9.Dickson/Fotuali'i 10.Myler 11.North 12.Burrell 13.Waldouck/Pisi 14.Elliot 15.Foden - It'll be interesting to see the Dickson and Fotuali'i battle pan out there, Dickson is key to many of the Saints big performances but Fotuali'i is just electric. No doubt another backline with talent and options though.

Give me 9. Thomas 10. Steenson 11. Jess 12. Shoemark 13. Naqelevuki 14. Nowell 15. Arscott every time thanks

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
Give me 9. Thomas 10. Steenson  11. Jess  12. Shoemark  13. Naqelevuki  14. Nowell  15. Arscott every time thanks

Bet you Nack Nacq Nacker the big fijian wears 23 more than 13

We'll judging by.this it's...corbs first choice, then Marler, with Mako got work to do...

I'd have Mako as a designated bench man. Corbs clear first choice - great scrummager and just as good as Mako in the loose. If he's unavailable/rotated start Marler and keep Mako in the 17 shirt. My opinion on this hasn't changed over the summer.

What did people think of Parlings performance? Im just not sure at all. He's a grafter but im not sure how effective he is at this level.

I'd be much more tempted to try Launchbury and Attwood with Croft at 6 for our primary lineout guy.

I've always thought Parling was an average to weak player at international level and today reinforced that. Really struggles to make any impact against good opposition. Solid skills but distinctly lacking in power. An adequate stopgap offering a bit of experience over the past couple of years but he's never going to be a game changer or a world beater.

He's clearly a player that coaches like as he is always selected/retained despite never standing out the field, so I assume he must be good around the team.

Lancaster will show his usual loyalty and start Parling as long as he stays fit for at least the coming season, however I would go for the same combo as you Geordie. Launchbury and Attwood are definitly the best bet for now, while Lawes still has time to deliver on his promise and players like Slater, Savage and Garvey have looked good at premiership level. Further down the line we have Charlie Matthews, Elliott Stooke and plenty more coming through over the next few years. Don't see where Parling fits in over the medium to long term, and I don't want players picked for the short term.

I can understand why he's liked Jeff, hes a grafter...he has a huge work rate etc, and is good in the lineout.

But for me he is not a brilliant lineout jumper ala Croft and whilst he may hit every ruck...he just doesnt look that effective. Yes a nuisance, which i hope every player is at the breakdown...but never going to be strong enough to push over the ball against a couple of opposition players or good enough to effect some turnovers.

I would be interested in seeing his prem stats if i am wrong about this...Tigers fans will tell me ...

I think coaches like to go for work horses who they know they can trust to play at about 70% all the time rather then the potentially brilliant players who can go to 100% but also fall far shorter.

Or at least England coaches.

We'll probably see that with safe choices like Parling, Farrel, Strettle etc...

Yappy i dont dispute you need grafters...you need your workhorses...but the likes of Robshaw has proved you can be that..AND be a crackin player.

Thats the level we need to be looking at for all our players.

Parling certainly lacks a physical impact ball in hand. Worth noting he has the best tackle stats of any Lions forward from todays game with 14 tackles made and none missed (per ESPN). That level of ork rate maybe makes it easier for the likes of Launchbury to shine for England.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I can understand why he's liked Jeff, hes a grafter...he has a huge work rate etc, and is good in the lineout.

But for me he is not a brilliant lineout jumper ala Croft and whilst he may hit every ruck...he just doesnt look that effective. Yes a nuisance, which i hope every player is at the breakdown...but never going to be strong enough to push over the ball against a couple of opposition players or good enough to effect some turnovers.

I would be interested in seeing his prem stats if i am wrong about this...Tigers fans will tell me ...

Parling during the Prem. Not sure how accurate these stats are but they are from the telegraph website:

14 Matches -
1 Tries -
5 Points -
1 Try assist -
0 Kicks From Hand -
24 Passes -
0 Yellow cards -
0 Red cards -
69 Carries -
100 Metres carried -
1 Clean breaks -
3 Offloads -
2 Defenders beaten -
105 Tackles -
11 Missed tackles -
6 Penalties conceded -
12 Turnovers conceded -
68 Line outs won own throw -
11 Lineout steals

Sam, tbf Launchbury grafts quite hard too

Oh I wasn't sticking up for it, just trying to see it from the coaches mindset (although I don't agree with SL).

I think he'd prefer a safe player he knows to a potentially better player he doesn't know until that player has jumped through every single hoop needed.

Unless that player is a Saracen of Leicester Tiger.

Sam its not about the flamboyant carrying or flashy moments. As ive said you need those players, that do the horrible nitty gritty work, the rucking the tackling etc.

Im not saying Launchbury is the better option...he;s still young. Maybe it would be interesting to see Parling along side a more robust guy like an Attwood or a Garvey etc.

Like i felt today the Lions second row was too similar with Wyn Jones and Parling.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Parling certainly lacks a physical impact ball in hand. Worth noting he has the best tackle stats of any Lions forward from todays game with 14 tackles made and none missed (per ESPN). That level of ork rate maybe makes it easier for the likes of Launchbury to shine for England.

This is what i hate about stats. I had this argument with a mate during the 6 Nations about Parling and his high tackle count. We rewatched the game and picked out every tackle that he made, and on all bar 1 occasion, the ball carrier knocked him backwards and crossed the gainline before Parling dragged him to ground.

In the modern game, the gainline is everything, and Parling very rarely wins the collision in either defence or attack at international level. Great club player and a real grafter for England, but just not physical enough for me as a tight 5 forward.

Agree 100% with Ozzy and have been saying similar for a long time. Stats are entirely useless without context and Parling's stats massively overemphasise his contribution, particularly in defence. I also saw him slip off Hooper early on in the game today, so what they do and don't count under missed tackles is a bit sketchy.

Parling didn't have a strong game today but lacking a second row on the bench and the refusal to bring a sub on for Mako meant that all of Mako, AWJ and Parling were spent by the end of the game.

Keeping MV on for the full 80 was especially odd given he struggles to make the distance in the Jeff let alone a Lions test.

The four second rows we should see the EPS of Parling, Launchberry, Attwood and Lawes give us good strength but also differing options to pick from. All four offer different skill sets and options so for me it comes back down to balance in the pack.

1.Corbs
2.Youngs
3.Cole
4.Attwood
5.Launchberry
6.Croft
7.Robshaw
8.Morgan

I'm a fan of Parling but find myself increasingly leaning towards wanting that pack for the Autumn Internationals.

When is the EPS named? Is it next week or the week after? Usually the beginning of July IIRC

KC, the only change I would make to what you've got there is Wood in for Croft.