Englands Midfield

First topic message reminder :

I think we're coming to a point soon that we are going to have a lot of genuine and proven options in the midfield area, and it will also be the area that could be the difference between winning a series or matches in NZ (or winning a WC) and not.

But these all offer different styles....

What do you see as the best balanced and most effective midfield?

10:
Farrell
Cipriani
Ford
Burns

12:
Twelvetrees
Eastmond
Burrell
Barritt

13
Tuilagi
Eastmond?
Burrell

One season is a big ask for anyone and almost impossible unless your a freak athlete and put on the wing/fullback. It took sbw a few years as did eastmond etc. Let's not forget that arguably the most succesfull convert ever brad thorne is a forward.

Had a thought whether Bath could play Burgess at 13 in a similar role as Manu then realised that could leave a Ford/Eastmond 10/12, a little on the small size & while size isn't everything it does help.

Forgot about Thorne...he was one of the best locks of his generation.

One of my favourite players of all time. I like the way that he always kept an eye out for cheap shots on McCaw. He was like his big brother!

6 Burgess
7 Robshaw
8 Vunipola

Now that would be a monstrous back row.

Yes, think 6 would be Burgess' sensible placement especially early on in his induction.

Of course Wood will have a lot to say about him taking the England 6 spot....and Garvey about the Bath 6 spot...

Well, wherever he's put is going to cause somebody grief so it's up to him to make the challenge and win. Must admit I think he's got the kind of rugby brain that will allow him to adapt.

GeordieFalcon wrote:6 Burgess
7 Robshaw
8 Vunipola

Now that would be a monstrous back row.

Yes, but you would need a third Robshaw in there to cover for Burgess in the dirty work, and I think someone might notice. We only just get away with having two as it is. (Sorry, Quins fans' in joke)

More seriously, I disagree with the idea that Lancaster has tinkered. I think he has been pretty consistent with his backline selections when he's been able and most of the change that has happened has been forced by circumstance. 36/Burrell only came about because Manu was out, for instance. He's experimented in two ways: playing a second FB on the wing (in part as cover for Farrell/Barritt, but it's not an uncommon tactic at international level - look at NZ) and last week's 36 / Burrell / Tuilagi experiment - where the one player we now know to be fully fit did fine, but 36, who we now know not to be fully fit, struggled to feed him.

The management must have known twelvetrees wasn't Match fit,he hadn't played for 5 weeks,so why was he risked when we had 3 other options to pick from.
Same with care and Farrell

sickofwendy wrote:The management must have known twelvetrees wasn't Match fit,he hadn't played for 5 weeks,so why was he risked when we had 3 other options to pick from.
Same with care and Farrell

Two possibilities (among others):
i) They picked the players who had gone best in full contact training. Sometimes you just don't know how an injury will hold up
ii) They may have had doubts but picked them anyway to see how they would go playing injured. Answer: well, but not quite well enough.

Remember, these guys are desperate to play (see Hansen's description of Read's reaction to being picked). They'll put themselves through as much as they can take to get on that pitch - but then the intensity gets to another level and it breaks down a bit.

Never as clear cut as you think.

J

That makes sense   

i agree with that. i also think players dont want to let anyone else get a shot at the shirt so they will minimize the extent of their injuries even in their own minds rather than give up the jersey to a challenger.

therein lies the skill of a truly great manager. and i would say SL didnt make the right decisions here.

Agreed
Lancs was hoping they would bring their 6 nations form rather than realise they couldn't because they wasn't match fit

SL can't bring himself to believe his own eyes. The first test backs went well but still got dropped. Players can look good in training but don't live up to expectations in a match. Glad to see them getting another go.

A backline with "X-Factor" ability (not saying we should play it!) would be something like this:

9:  Care
10: Cipriani
11: Yarde
12: Eastmond
13: Tuilagi
14: Wade
15: Brown/Watson

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Don’t buy the excuses tbh – England still have a problem with the midfield.

 12T is great on paper but after slowly improving over the 6N has looked ordinary again – and if that’s because he’s a bit tired, perhaps an early night or two.

Eastmond was a breath of fresh air in the 1^st test, but if he can’t nail the club position he can’t nail the test one – so the jury’s out.

Barritt is solid and I think under-valued but limits our attacking prowess somewhat.

Burrell was great in the 6N but I was surprised to see how over-awed he looked in NZ – is this a mental thing, how will he deal with SA, or is he a touch fatigued also?

Trinder…meh.

And now we’ve lost Tomkins   .

For me the only shoo-in so far is Manu (and that’s when he’s not mooching about on the wing). A lot to do before the RWC.

Agree with all these points Barney. Burrell especially, I thought was close to useless last week. NZ would have had a harder time navigating a revolving door than getting through his tackles. None of his 'big-man' elements were obvious either, and his support play wasn't there. Don't get me wrong, I like Burrell, but by far that was his worst game.

I still like 36, but it's clear that he's been given a gameplan by the England management team. His first caps in the 6N and early tour in Argentina I think he looked so good because he ran wonderful support lines and took the ball at speed (he absolutely tore up Argentina). Now he's playing the second playmaker role, and forces way too many offloads- as evident last week. I don't think he's playing his natural game at all. Still, I think some of the good things he did last week are being overlooked because of the try he indirectly gave away.

36 hasn't nailed it yet, I find myself just waiting for him to mess up, unfair I know. Burrell has been disappointing but I'm confident he'll make it back to form. What we haven't seen is him play at 12 and wouldn't want him to be tried there if he's out of sorts. Barritt is solid defensively but we need an attacking spark and I don't think he's got it. I really want Eastmond to shine and show he can challenge for the shirt.

36 hasn't nailed it yet, I find myself just waiting for him to mess up

Thats my problem...im on edge with him. Both offensively and defensively.

After today England's midfield has some very bright talent coming through.