Flood, Along With Others Released Back To His Club

First topic message reminder :

According to the Beeb.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/17277936

Guess that means Hodgson is classed by SL as the better bench option.

Well the stats about Ashton getting the ball 16 times I struggle to beleive, but if he did it wasn't quality ball that's for sure.

The Strettle attempt at the end was Butchered by Brown, not Tuilagi or Baritt!

Infact I'd go as far to say that Tuilagi didn't make a pass on the move, he made one to Ashton but had to stand still to make it.

With Baritt and Tuilagi at centre there is no guile or nous and all attacking threat is lost, the big bosh in the 13 channell kills ball out wide, I personally would like to see Baritt at 12 and Farrell at 13, he offers much more vision, and scope for a pass, plus he plays others in better.

I hesitate to bring a Welsh comparison into it but Davies is working so well for Wales right now because of Roberts threat at 12, and the other threats he brings into the game, North, Cuthbert and halfp.

For me a 13 is a linkman, who provides a threat, but most importantly uses much more potent threats around him, for me Tuilagi just doesn't have that about him, but in reality who does in England right now, it's a real area for concern!

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:Why are you all so happy with a Barritt Tuilagi partnership?

For me that is seriously lacking, and the back 3 are going to be largely isolated as they have been so far.

Because if Youngs/Flood were playing.....

yappysnap wrote:

Eustace H Plimsoll wrote:

Why are you all so happy with a Barritt Tuilagi partnership?

For me that is seriously lacking, and the back 3 are going to be largely isolated as they have been so far.

I agree it's lacking a distributor. Still better than anything we've had for a while though.

Both have been known to distribute quite well, ao maybe it's just a case of giving them a chance.

If we didn't have them who would we have...

Gettying back to the fly half debate, Leicester coach Matt O'Connor has his views on it here... http://www.espnscrum.com/six-nations-2012/rugby/story/160747.html?CMP=RSS2

Suffice to say he isn't impressed with Lancasters coaching so far and hits the nail on the head with the following; "The Australian believes that the halfbacks have been mistreated by England's interim coach Stuart Lancaster and also that the national side are not interested in creative players, just in "trying not to lose".

Stop me if i'm wrong but isn't that exactly the accusation we levelled at Martin Johnson??

Well thats typical of O'Connor, just copies everything I say

Yup you and O'Connor are just as one eyed. No one in their right mind would say Youngs has been mistreated.It's not Stuart Lancaster and his England management's fault that Youngs is playing so badly.

On the issue of Flood, it's a tough choice for Lancaster.

I can't talk about the quality of ball but ESPN says Ashton got the ball 15 (sorry) times, Strettle 11.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:I think the other thing that needs pointing out is that England werent quite as bad at the WC as people like to make out.

You evidently didn't watch any of the England games then!

Martin Johnson made numerous howlers. Continually picking Hape as his first choice 12 in the 6 nations but during the world cup ditching his loyal pet. For the crunch games he picked an over the hill 13 with the pace of a snail at 12 as well as at the time England's best no 10 at 12. He also wasted a place in the team by picking Moody at openside as captain despite him being a liability because of propensity to getting injured. Persisting with the woefully inept halfback combo of Youngs and Wilkinson which completely crippled both players' confidence.

Playing Stevens out of position instead of the more in form Corbisiero.

Letting his players get out of control with controversy after controversy.

A lot is about quality of ball but that is little to do with the centres. The issue is that England are playing very deep against rush defences. The ball is slow and whether by accident or design there is no creativity from the English 9s, Dickson has adapted far better to only dispensing from the base of the ruck Youngs has looked thoroughly lost (interesting interview with Flood post Glaws game about that). Farrell standing 15m behind the gainline is asking a lot of the centres who are having to get slow ball and then attack a defence which is moving faster than they are.

In Manu and Barritt there is the most naturally talented OC outside of BOD and a former fly half (he played 10 for the Sharks I think). There's plenty of pace, power and enough guile but what they are getting is poor and slow ball against a set defence. Same as the Welsh backs vs England (who were anonymous). If you can't get good ball then you are always going to struggle.

beshocked wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:Why are you all so happy with a Barritt Tuilagi partnership?

For me that is seriously lacking, and the back 3 are going to be largely isolated as they have been so far.

Because if Youngs/Flood were playing.....

yappysnap wrote:

Eustace H Plimsoll wrote:

Why are you all so happy with a Barritt Tuilagi partnership?

For me that is seriously lacking, and the back 3 are going to be largely isolated as they have been so far.

I agree it's lacking a distributor. Still better than anything we've had for a while though.

Both have been known to distribute quite well, ao maybe it's just a case of giving them a chance.

If we didn't have them who would we have...

Gettying back to the fly half debate, Leicester coach Matt O'Connor has his views on it here... http://www.espnscrum.com/six-nations-2012/rugby/story/160747.html?CMP=RSS2

Suffice to say he isn't impressed with Lancasters coaching so far and hits the nail on the head with the following; "The Australian believes that the halfbacks have been mistreated by England's interim coach Stuart Lancaster and also that the national side are not interested in creative players, just in "trying not to lose".

Stop me if i'm wrong but isn't that exactly the accusation we levelled at Martin Johnson??

Well thats typical of O'Connor, just copies everything I say

Yup you and O'Connor are just as one eyed. No one in their right mind would say Youngs has been mistreated.It's not England's fault that Youngs is playing so badly.

On the issue of Flood, it's a tough choice for Lancaster.

Except hes not just talking about specific personel, hes talking about the general style of play and what they are being asked to do.

Hes also pointiong out the lack of ball thats given out wide, although you can partly blame that on Tuilagis plack of distribution ( again though he ends up looking for contact most of the time because no space has been made because the half backs make it all to easy to cover across)

England are dull predictable and unimaginative. They have some quality players but arent getting the best from them. It was undertsnadable for the first two games, and excusable in the third where they at least looked like they were trying. For this one they need to show some more adventure, they simply will not win trying to bore France out of the game.
Going forward sthey will never be better than a 3-2 6 nations side unless they have a dominant pack ( not even close) unless they can learn to score tries or at least a pick a side that intends to do it.
Pissing off several of the best players they do have isnt a great start IMO.

The same held true under Johnson.


Chequered,

A good percentage of the ball Englands back 3 got was from fielding kicks by the opposition. Thats not quite the same as creating space and opportunity.

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Re: Flood, Along With Others Released Back To His Club

by thebluesmancometh Today at 14:35


Well
the stats about Ashton getting the ball 16 times I struggle to beleive,
but if he did it wasn't quality ball that's for sure.

The Strettle attempt at the end was Butchered by Brown, not Tuilagi or Baritt!

Infact
I'd go as far to say that Tuilagi didn't make a pass on the move, he
made one to Ashton but had to stand still to make it.

With Baritt
and Tuilagi at centre there is no guile or nous and all attacking
threat is lost, the big bosh in the 13 channell kills ball out wide, I
personally would like to see Baritt at 12 and Farrell at 13, he offers
much more vision, and scope for a pass, plus he plays others in better.

I
hesitate to bring a Welsh comparison into it but Davies is working so
well for Wales right now because of Roberts threat at 12, and the other
threats he brings into the game, North, Cuthbert and halfp.

For
me a 13 is a linkman, who provides a threat, but most importantly uses
much more potent threats around him, for me Tuilagi just doesn't have
that about him, but in reality who does in England right now, it's a
real area for concern!

You massively underrate Tuilagi Bluesman. Not sure why. You will have to eat your words in a few years when he's recognised as the NH's best OC.

The Wales midfield is a good example – you have one big lump, Roberts (who is incidentally far, far more of a bosher than Tuilagi) paired with a more fleet-footed and passing 13. If england had a 12 who passed then Tuilagi's relative lack of distribution skills would be fine. He's not a terrible passer anyway, but it's admittedly not a strength of his.

Letting his players get out of control with controversy after controversy

The Irish players did similar to the English players (minus the ferry hopping). They went out for beers and they went bungee jumping. The only difference being the media weren't interested in them, they were interested in Lord Tindall, he was the news story so everything that he and England did was magnified and exagerated.

beshocked wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:I think the other thing that needs pointing out is that England werent quite as bad at the WC as people like to make out.

You evidently didn't watch any of the England games then!

Martin Johnson made numerous howlers. Continually picking Hape as his first choice 12 in the 6 nations but during the world cup ditching his loyal pet. For the crunch games he picked an over the hill 13 with the pace of a snail at 12 as well as at the time England's best no 10 at 12. He also wasted a place in the team by picking Moody at openside as captain despite him being a liability because of propensity to getting injured. Persisting with the woefully inept halfback combo of Youngs and Wilkinson which completely crippled both players' confidence.

Playing Stevens out of position instead of the more in form Corbisiero.

Letting his players get out of control with controversy after controversy.

Yet they still played far better against Scotland than Lancasters side did, and won all but one of their games, that one perhaps mirroring the England Wales game.

Im not denying it wasty glorious and that theres mistakes to be learnt from, but in comparisson the side didnt actually perform anywway nearly as badly as some people like yourslef try and make out. This England side was complete tosh in its first two games and very lucky to come away with wins. In the third it had signs of improvement but were lucky to be in the game after 20 minutes.

Chequered,

A good percentage of the ball Englands back 3 got was from fielding kicks by the opposition. Thats not quite the same as creating space and opportunity.

True but it also shows that blaming our centre-partnership for our wingers not doing anything (especially you, Ashton) is false- they are getting the ball, and with the kicks, in a lot of space, but not doing anything constructive with it. As he's also not doing anything off the ball either, I'm feeling that some pressure on his place and some time getting form back at Saints would be better

thebluesmancometh wrote:Well the stats about Ashton getting the ball 16 times I struggle to beleive, but if he did it wasn't quality ball that's for sure.

The Strettle attempt at the end was Butchered by Brown, not Tuilagi or Baritt!

Infact I'd go as far to say that Tuilagi didn't make a pass on the move, he made one to Ashton but had to stand still to make it.

With Baritt and Tuilagi at centre there is no guile or nous and all attacking threat is lost, the big bosh in the 13 channell kills ball out wide, I personally would like to see Baritt at 12 and Farrell at 13, he offers much more vision, and scope for a pass, plus he plays others in better.

I hesitate to bring a Welsh comparison into it but Davies is working so well for Wales right now because of Roberts threat at 12, and the other threats he brings into the game, North, Cuthbert and halfp.

For me a 13 is a linkman, who provides a threat, but most importantly uses much more potent threats around him, for me Tuilagi just doesn't have that about him, but in reality who does in England right now, it's a real area for concern!

If we accept that Tuilagi is as poor a distributor as you say (I don't but I admit I can be wrong)-then we have JJ, Trinder, Hopper (weak in defence though), Lowe to name those that spring to mind

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:Why are you all so happy with a Barritt Tuilagi partnership?

For me that is seriously lacking, and the back 3 are going to be largely isolated as they have been so far.

Because if Youngs/Flood were playing.....

yappysnap wrote:

Eustace H Plimsoll wrote:

Why are you all so happy with a Barritt Tuilagi partnership?

For me that is seriously lacking, and the back 3 are going to be largely isolated as they have been so far.

I agree it's lacking a distributor. Still better than anything we've had for a while though.

Both have been known to distribute quite well, ao maybe it's just a case of giving them a chance.

If we didn't have them who would we have...

Gettying back to the fly half debate, Leicester coach Matt O'Connor has his views on it here... http://www.espnscrum.com/six-nations-2012/rugby/story/160747.html?CMP=RSS2

Suffice to say he isn't impressed with Lancasters coaching so far and hits the nail on the head with the following; "The Australian believes that the halfbacks have been mistreated by England's interim coach Stuart Lancaster and also that the national side are not interested in creative players, just in "trying not to lose".

Stop me if i'm wrong but isn't that exactly the accusation we levelled at Martin Johnson??

Well thats typical of O'Connor, just copies everything I say

Yup you and O'Connor are just as one eyed. No one in their right mind would say Youngs has been mistreated.It's not England's fault that Youngs is playing so badly.

On the issue of Flood, it's a tough choice for Lancaster.

Except hes not just talking about specific personel, hes talking about the general style of play and what they are being asked to do.

Hes also pointiong out the lack of ball thats given out wide, although you can partly blame that on Tuilagis plack of distribution ( again though he ends up looking for contact most of the time because no space has been made because the half backs make it all to easy to cover across)

England are dull predictable and unimaginative. They have some quality players but arent getting the best from them. It was undertsnadable for the first two games, and excusable in the third where they at least looked like they were trying. For this one they need to show some more adventure, they simply will not win trying to bore France out of the game.
Going forward sthey will never be better than a 3-2 6 nations side unless they have a dominant pack ( not even close) unless they can learn to score tries or at least a pick a side that intends to do it.
Pissing off several of the best players they do have isnt a great start IMO.

The same held true under Johnson.


Chequered,

A good percentage of the ball Englands back 3 got was from fielding kicks by the opposition. Thats not quite the same as creating space and opportunity.

I understand yours and Sam points but let's get a little perspective. Stuart Lancaster has had just 3 games with his squad. Some of you seem to forget that.

No I don't blame Tuilagi. I think he is a very good player.

I just personally feel this England side gets way too much criticism. Every coach/manager needs time.

It's hardly surprising that Matt O'Connor is spouting rubbish like this though.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Letting his players get out of control with controversy after controversy

The Irish players did similar to the English players (minus the ferry hopping). They went out for beers and they went bungee jumping. The only difference being the media weren't interested in them, they were interested in Lord Tindall, he was the news story so everything that he and England did was magnified and exagerated.

Did the Irish players allegedly toss dwarves? Did they jump off ferries? Did they pull off pranks in hotels?

Naive to think that the media wouldn't relish the opportunity to tear them to shreds.

Agree with Chequered Jersey. I don't think the back three have been performing well enough.


PSW you honestly think we played far better against Scotland with MJ in charge? Frankly I thought we were pretty rubbish in both - got the result each time though. The difference was it was SL's first game away from home with an almost new look England side.

England's performance in the world cup was shocking. Yes we beat Argentina and Scotland but were awful in both. Appalling vs France too. Such a gutless display.

Eustace

I don't under rate him, I acknowledge he is good at what he does, he can run good crash lines, and takes the ball up strong, he is big, quick and strong but for me that is not the pre requisite for a top 13!

He dies with the ball 9 times out of 10, and when he does pass he has to slow to a crawl to do so. Anyone who tells me Ashtons hissy fit on the touchline wasn't that Tuilagi had killed the move with a slow pass then not bothered supporting is kidding themselves. I don't think Ashton and Tuilagi like, or want to play with each other, same can be said about Foden though.

For me, you don't go wide to get over the gameline, you go wide to go a long way and score, if the ball dies out wide the pack has to go a long way in support.

Also by going wide you concede a lot of ground, defences are so quick today by the time Tuilagi gets it and makes his strong few metres England havn't actually gained anything.

Chequered

All good players mate, but are any ready yet?

I'd be looking at Farrell or 36 at 13 personally.

thebluesmancometh wrote:Chequered

All good players mate, but are any ready yet?

I'd be looking at Farrell or 36 at 13 personally.

I think if we let Joseph play he might be there. Only one way to find though, so we are not going to get to see

We were pretty poor against Scotland...but won
We were not much better against Italy..in dire conditions...but won
We were a significant improvement against Wales...and nearly beat their much vaunted side....and despite whats said there was a little bit more open rugby (not a lot but some)

We play France...and i expect a good defensive performance...with Farrell opening the ball a little more again...

Small improvements...built on a powerful defensive base with hard grafters.

Unlike Johno's which was like a yo yo...good - bad - horrific - excellent...

thebluesmancometh wrote:Eustace

I don't under rate him, I acknowledge he is good at what he does, he can run good crash lines, and takes the ball up strong, he is big, quick and strong but for me that is not the pre requisite for a top 13!

He dies with the ball 9 times out of 10, and when he does pass he has to slow to a crawl to do so. Anyone who tells me Ashtons hissy fit on the touchline wasn't that Tuilagi had killed the move with a slow pass then not bothered supporting is kidding themselves. I don't think Ashton and Tuilagi like, or want to play with each other, same can be said about Foden though.

For me, you don't go wide to get over the gameline, you go wide to go a long way and score, if the ball dies out wide the pack has to go a long way in support.

Also by going wide you concede a lot of ground, defences are so quick today by the time Tuilagi gets it and makes his strong few metres England havn't actually gained anything.

If that's the case of a little bit of rifts in the English backline I want to see them fixed as soon as possible.

You are right though. There must be friction with Foden and Ashton, M.Tuilagi and Ashton. Maybe even Strettle with his fellow Sarries (I have noticed he doesn't stand with them when the national anthem is sung).Also there is a pretty strong rumour Strettle is leaving. Maybe to Saints?

Geordie

Is a 7 point loss at home to Wales good enough for you though?

Have your expectations come down to reality? or are you in a state of denial that all problems can be fixed within 6 weeks?

I'm not sure that a very young and inexperienced Wales side winning by 7 at twickers is good enough.

beshocked wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:Eustace

I don't under rate him, I acknowledge he is good at what he does, he can run good crash lines, and takes the ball up strong, he is big, quick and strong but for me that is not the pre requisite for a top 13!

He dies with the ball 9 times out of 10, and when he does pass he has to slow to a crawl to do so. Anyone who tells me Ashtons hissy fit on the touchline wasn't that Tuilagi had killed the move with a slow pass then not bothered supporting is kidding themselves. I don't think Ashton and Tuilagi like, or want to play with each other, same can be said about Foden though.

For me, you don't go wide to get over the gameline, you go wide to go a long way and score, if the ball dies out wide the pack has to go a long way in support.

Also by going wide you concede a lot of ground, defences are so quick today by the time Tuilagi gets it and makes his strong few metres England havn't actually gained anything.

If that's the case of a little bit of rifts in the English backline I want to see them fixed as soon as possible.

You are right though. There must be friction with Foden and Ashton, M.Tuilagi and Ashton. Maybe even Strettle with his fellow Sarries (I have noticed he doesn't stand with them when the national anthem is sung).Also there is a pretty strong rumour Strettle is leaving. Maybe to Saints?

Maybe he would like to see the error of his ways and come back to Quins?

I'm feeling midly optimistic about England under Lancaster... That said I was feeling the same about England under Johnson. He made some really baffling selection decisions but our trajectory under his management was upward and he brought on a lot of young players.

I'd be looking at Farrell or 36 at 13 personally.

Farrell at 13 poses all the running threat of an arthritic woodlouse. If Lancaster dropped our best back in order to move our promising FH to 13 he would deserve tarring and feathering.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

beshocked wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:Eustace

I don't under rate him, I acknowledge he is good at what he does, he can run good crash lines, and takes the ball up strong, he is big, quick and strong but for me that is not the pre requisite for a top 13!

He dies with the ball 9 times out of 10, and when he does pass he has to slow to a crawl to do so. Anyone who tells me Ashtons hissy fit on the touchline wasn't that Tuilagi had killed the move with a slow pass then not bothered supporting is kidding themselves. I don't think Ashton and Tuilagi like, or want to play with each other, same can be said about Foden though.

For me, you don't go wide to get over the gameline, you go wide to go a long way and score, if the ball dies out wide the pack has to go a long way in support.

Also by going wide you concede a lot of ground, defences are so quick today by the time Tuilagi gets it and makes his strong few metres England havn't actually gained anything.

If that's the case of a little bit of rifts in the English backline I want to see them fixed as soon as possible.

You are right though. There must be friction with Foden and Ashton, M.Tuilagi and Ashton. Maybe even Strettle with his fellow Sarries (I have noticed he doesn't stand with them when the national anthem is sung).Also there is a pretty strong rumour Strettle is leaving. Maybe to Saints?

Maybe he would like to see the error of his ways and come back to Quins?

I wouldn't say that winning an AP and getting back into the England squad is an error but maybe he might want to go back to Quins. Simply because Quins play a more open style.

I have heard that you (Quins) and Saints are the favourites.

I'd be looking at Farrell or 36 at 13 personally

Twelvetrees is a specialist 12 that covers 10 and 13. He is not comfortable there in defence though is good in attack. Farrell would pass it out more, admittedly that's all he can do. He's not quick and certainly not strong ball in hand. The two games England had him at 12 the midfield barely moved forwards, he is solid but completely lacking in attacking intent. The fact you accuse England's most explosive player of lacking guile and then suggest playing a young player who only plays 13 for his club because they lack a better option (but are trying to recruit one) is just plain silly. Why not play Flood at 13? He is quicker, stronger ball in hand and has a better passing game than Farrell.

Unless there's something on the outside worth passing for why would Manu bother passing. What's the point of shoving the ball on for the winger to take contact? You might make an extra metre before initial contact but Manu will gain 2m in contact most of the time and require 3 players to drag him down. If England recycle that quickly that's 3 defenders not in the line. The problem is they don't or can't recycle quickly so there is no room on the outside and so Manu doesn't bother shipping on a pass to a marker winger.

I wouldn't say that winning an AP and getting back into the England squad is an error but maybe he might want to go back to Quins.

Whilst getting a hefty pay rise as well. Strettle really should be trying to stay at Sarries as currently there aren't really any big AP teams looking to pay top dollar for a winger. He has it good at Sarries and although the attacking play is limited there appears to be some signs of improvement this season. Don't see why Quins would be desperate to have him back (they have lots of wingers) and Saints have other priorities first (backrow and centres) as well as 4 decent options in the squad already (Artymiev, Cato, Diggin, Elliot).

Eustace

Thats exactly my point, it's not about the individual, it's about the team!!!

Tuilagi is Englands most effective back at present, but do you want that to continue? Do you want England shipping ball out to the 13 channell just to get over the gameline?

Are you happy with an ineffective back 3?

Are you happy with 2 tries in 3 games?

Are you happy with 2 chargedowns to show your attacking intent?

Jon Davies isn't that quick, as is Roberts, or Hook, but they can all play an effective 13 game. Its a hinge system where strike runners don't just run on the 10's shoulders, where you can get the ball to the 10 or 13 and have multiple strike runners on each shoulder, it presents multiple threats to defences. Look at Scott Williams rounding Tuilagi, Norths dummy run came from the 13 and Tuilagi watched too hard!

36 would make a great hinge at 13 for me, with the likes of Ashton, Foden and Tuilagi running strike lines for him to use!

formerly known as Sam wrote:

I'd be looking at Farrell or 36 at 13 personally

Twelvetrees is a specialist 12 that covers 10 and 13. He is not comfortable there in defence though is good in attack. Farrell would pass it out more, admittedly that's all he can do. He's not quick and certainly not strong ball in hand. The two games England had him at 12 the midfield barely moved forwards, he is solid but completely lacking in attacking intent. The fact you accuse England's most explosive player of lacking guile and then suggest playing a young player who only plays 13 for his club because they lack a better option (but are trying to recruit one) is just plain silly. Why not play Flood at 13? He is quicker, stronger ball in hand and has a better passing game than Farrell.

Unless there's something on the outside worth passing for why would Manu bother passing. What's the point of shoving the ball on for the winger to take contact? You might make an extra metre before initial contact but Manu will gain 2m in contact most of the time and require 3 players to drag him down. If England recycle that quickly that's 3 defenders not in the line. The problem is they don't or can't recycle quickly so there is no room on the outside and so Manu doesn't bother shipping on a pass to a marker winger.

I wouldn't say that winning an AP and getting back into the England squad is an error but maybe he might want to go back to Quins.

Whilst getting a hefty pay rise as well. Strettle really should be trying to stay at Sarries as currently there aren't really any big AP teams looking to pay top dollar for a winger. He has it good at Sarries and although the attacking play is limited there appears to be some signs of improvement this season. Don't see why Quins would be desperate to have him back (they have lots of wingers) and Saints have other priorities first (backrow and centres) as well as 4 decent options in the squad already (Artymiev, Cato, Diggin, Elliot).

Who do Quins have on the wings? Obviously Monye and Williams but who else? Surely there is room for him to go back to Quins?

Agree though Saracens might be the best bet if Sarries can sort out of the 13 conundrum.

Are you happy with 2 tries in 3 games?

No, but that's not all that relevant, since Tuilagi has only been at 13 for one of our last 3 games – the one where we showed the most threat in attack.

He has 8 caps for England and has scored 4 tries. In his first two games he scored in wins over Wales and Ireland.

I don't think it's reasonable to blame our most potent attacking weapon for our admitted current stodginess in attack.

Formerly known as sam

Mate you've just proved my point, by taking contact out wide how can England get quick ball if the pack is 30m+ away, also if those 3 floored defenders are to be counted, the 2 backs who have to secure ball for England and the line of forwards are hardly going to spread the ball the other direction to score arer they???

Tuilagi makes metres alright, I give you, but are they always in the right places? Definately not, and your talking about shovling ball on, if he had Foden wouldv'e been in for a try for England with only the drifting 1/2p as cover.

PS if your too slow to play at centre and don't have the ability to do the basics and struggle at centre... WTF are you doing playing international rugby???

Farrell isn't that slow, and can play the ball well, but if he is as bad as you say WOW what a player you have there, the next Jonny definately!

Tuiliagis inclusion shouldn't be up for discussion, he is one shining beast in that backline, it's that SL perhaps rightly so has tried to sort the defence out first and hence Farrell and Barritt. If you can get quick ball then that would help but there has to be more guile and subtlety in the back line. More dynamism and better angles and England could have scored a couple of trys against Wales, it's just seems a bit predictable, powerful but predictable.

Eustace

And how many tries did England score V Wales?

So he brought a poor scoring record down!

I don't dislike him, but he is not the player you all think, most of his 'good play' comes from worked plays that give him space, or his power in contact, which is all well and good, but where do the rest of the team fit into those qualities??? They don't that is Englands problem at the minute, the reliance of Tuilagi to do everything!

Look at Fofana, scoring some tries, and thats partly because he is big quick strong, but the ball is being kept alive when out wide, that is the key factor whan going wide!!

He's a good strike runner, but who is there to put him into space, and unlock defences?!

All islanders have struggled with this ability for years, and Manu may progress and turn into a very clever player, but his brothers weren't able to, and not many islanders can. Tuilagis whole development has been based on his big strong straight line running, when will he learn a little 'game sense'?

Blues,

I think the part people have trouble is is when you blame Tuilagi for the rest of the team being cr@p
Hes a good player, but like every other player need space and players around him creating that to be truely effective.

Tuilagis game isnt bult solely on satraight running. Its simply not true. Howver when presented with a set defence he is goign to take the contact option, at least hes able to drive his man back most times.

Your opinion of him is based on blinkered prejudice, your last post borders on racism frankly. Even if we accpet taht all islanders are bought up to run straight, he was bought up through the England youth system. he isnst a product of the Samoan 7s team ( famed for their direct unthinking rugby?) unlike the lajority of his countrymen.

And how many tries did England score V Wales?

Right so because we didn't score a try in one game that must be Tuilagi's fault. Wales didn't create a try on their own ball either. Whose fault is that? JD2's?

They don't that is Englands problem at the minute, the reliance of Tuilagi to do everything!

Hang on, Tuilagi's only been back one game. Our best performance by all acounts. We could easily have beaten the almighty Wales team. You thnk we were better against Scotland and Italy? More creative?

All islanders have struggled with this ability for years, and Manu may
progress and turn into a very clever player, but his brothers weren't
able to, and not many islanders can. Tuilagis whole development has been
based on his big strong straight line running, when will he learn a
little 'game sense'?

That's just lazy stereotyping. Tuilagi is not a straight-line bosher. Even if he were, why couldn't England make room for him in their team if Wales can not only make room for, but base their game around the arch-bosher Jamie Roberts?

Go back and watch Manu's first game in a Tigers shirt. South Africa come to Welford Rd and an 18 year old Manu runs a switch on the outside with Amorosino. The two defenders follow Manu and Amorosino goes under the posts. If it's on he does give it but what's the point in him giving it when it isn't? Your now predictable sweeping generalisations about Pacific Islanders are wholly inaccurate (look at the Samoan and Fuiji 7s or go back and look at Samoa beating Aus pre RWC plenty of skill and passing).

Mate you've just proved my point, by taking contact out wide how can England get quick ball if the pack is 30m+ away, also if those 3 floored defenders are to be counted, the 2 backs who have to secure ball for England and the line of forwards are hardly going to spread the ball the other direction to score arer they???

No but if the ball has gone wide on the now predictable hands call (about the only call in Farrell Snrs book on backs play) then the defence is in line Manu has the choice. Fling it to the winger and they make a couple of metres or Manu takes it in for more metres. Yes the England attack is becomming overly relient on Manu and yes he is more weapon than creator but that isn't his fault. England are playing with a creative 10/12.

I knew somebody would come up and try to play the 'racism' card!!!
I have no prejudice against Tuilagi, I have repeated over and over I like him, but Englands reliance on him getting over the gameline of which 15m are lost by the time he gets the ball is dull, and he HAS NOT PRODUCED ANYTHING AT INT LEVEL!!!
His tries (and nice ones) were crash lines!!!

The rest of the team is not cr*p, Ashton and Foden are devestating runners in space, as is Strettle, yet all 3 players are running supporting lines for nothing when the ball goes wide. As I stated, I did use stat analysis software and all 3 are running their lines, Foden especially!!!

He is an effective ball carrier, but an effective 13 he has not been. An example of an effective 13 this season has been Jon Davies, linking in differing attacking options at differing times, or simply using them as decoys. Arguably Tuilagi had more ball in better attacking situations and produced...?

My comments regarding his heritage are correct, islanders produce natural big strong and powerfull athletes year in year out, but natural progression is a natural thing combined with infrastructure. If Tuilagi hasn't developed 'game sense' throught the English structure, how is he going to develop it now he is relied upon to bosh up the middle?!

I have no prejudice against Tuilagi, I have repeated over and over I
like him, but Englands reliance on him getting over the gameline of
which 15m are lost by the time he gets the ball is dull, and he HAS NOT
PRODUCED ANYTHING AT INT LEVEL!!!
His tries (and nice ones) were crash lines!!!

You mean apart from his 4 "nice" tries in 8 caps?

Arguably Tuilagi had more ball in better attacking situations and produced...?

You are aware Tuilagi has only played one game for England at 13 this season?

Oh and here's Leicester SA for you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovH1U-JblIs&feature=related

Watch from 1.55 and tell me he's the reason England's back 3 aren't scoring this season (ignoring for a second the fact that he didn't play versus Scotland or Italy).

And 3.50 as well if you like.

He's a very good player. Don't know why you can't see that. He should be one of the first names on our team sheet.

Eustace

Lets keep this sensible.

England didn't score a try?! Did Tuilagi and Strettle have guilt edged opportunities to either score or either put someone in to score?
Brown has to take the blame for Strettles that was awfull, but just as awfull was Tuilagi not recognising Foden screaming on his shoulder and dying 2 metres short!

Wales did score a try, but lacked creativity because of a number of issues, losing Roberts at half time, Englands strong defence, Preistland playing poorly etc... (see that I will put blame on anyone who deserves it, unlike most on here)

The first 2 games were both away from home and in poor conditions, neither teams in those games were particularly attck minded, see Scotlands better attack V Wales!

I am hardly lazy stereotyping because I feel Tuilagi shows the attributes widely regarded as strengths in his native heritage! He is big, he is strong and he is agile, but ball player he is not.

Some of you are arguing that Parisse isn't as good as he looks because he is in an average team, it's a similar principle, noone in the English backline is firing at the minute, and your all looking at replacements and combos except one. All I am doing is giving you a counter argument as to why England don't look dangerous.

Wales did score a try, but lacked creativity because of a number of issues, losing Roberts at half time, Englands strong defence, Preistland playing poorly etc... (see that I will put blame on anyone who deserves it, unlike most on here)

Two of those issues you could lay at England. Wales have the best defence in the northern hemisphere and England were playing a 20 year old 10 known for his conservative playing style and added to that they are being coached by a backs coach known for utilising a pragmatic approach which is more about accumilating metres than making line breaks.

I'm also failing to see where Strettle and Manu missed these 'guilt edged' opportunities. Manu got chopped down brilliantly by Warburton because at no point did another English player threaten the line allowing Warburton and the Welsh defence ample time to come across. Strettle did indeed ground the ball but was unfortunate to see it not given and England had gone for the over the top all or nothing move safe in the knowledge they had a penalty advantage (incompetent ref for you).

Eustace

Lets put this into perspective...

The switch was ok, he gets the ball in space, goes 15 yards and makes a switch to the winger who beats 3 to score. Not bad at all.

2ndly, Again put into space, avoids a tap tackle, and looks for contact at the next, does bounce him off but then rounds a prop, gives a decent if not telegraphed pass to the wing.

They are good examples of what he can do, for his club 3 years ago.

I could be pedantic and say watch the whole thing and watch him get rounded 3 times in defence without laying a hand on the ball carrier!

As I said lets keep sensible, in a Baa baa's style game he made a good few yards, and passed twice, fair play to him, and as I keep repeating to everybody he is a decent weapon, but the 6N is a different kettle of fish, no room, tight nervy occasions, in his one game to date he has made more high profile mistakes than he has produced anything of note.

I've told you a hundred times why is nobody listening to me????

Sam

Mate your ignorant, how can you argue the ref was wrong to declare advantage over when the law clearly states it should be called over. I bet your one of these people saying the ref was wrong for you, but when EXACTLY THE SAME THING HAPPENED AND SCOTLAND WERE DENIED THE WINNING SCORE, NOT JUST DRAWING SCORE YOU CONVENIENTLY FORGET!!

Strettle did ground the ball, I agree with you, but there is a case that says he never, thats why it wasn't given, that small amount of doubt. SAME AS SCOTLAND GROUNDED IT IN MY VIEW!!! And the blame there went to Brown, ask your countrymen, he butchered that try!

Tuilagi was chopped down beautifully by Warburton, but had plenty of time while upright and when he hits the deck to offload for the try, and Foden is there screaming for him to do it yet he cannot. The fact that Warburton gets to him says a lot too, many other players wouldve taken a wider line but thats a different argument!

Two of those issues you could lay at England. Wales have the best defence in the northern hemisphere and England were playing a 20 year old 10 known for his conservative playing style and added to that they are being coached by a backs coach known for utilising a pragmatic approach which is more about accumilating metres than making line breaks.

This paragraph ^^^ I agree with, whats that to do with anything?

EXACTLY THE SAME THING HAPPENED AND SCOTLAND WERE DENIED THE WINNING SCORE, NOT JUST DRAWING SCORE YOU CONVENIENTLY FORGET!!

No I said the same thing then. Though I didn't think the needed the video official as Laidlaw clearly pulls back Youngs before the line. Scotland should have then had a kick at the posts.

Tuilagi was chopped down beautifully by Warburton, but had plenty of time while upright and when he hits the deck to offload for the try, and Foden is there screaming for him to do it yet he cannot. The fact that Warburton gets to him says a lot too, many other players wouldve taken a wider line but thats a different argument!

There's no where wider to go, much wider and Warburton would have pushed him into touch. He also lands the wrong side for the offload not that he'd have got it away as there was little room and Halfpenny was as close if not closer than Foden.

This paragraph ^^^ I agree with, whats that to do with anything?.

It's why England aren't scoring.

There is wider to go, Foden is 2 or 3 metres to his left, play it to him and he has the significantly smaller 1/2p in front if him, there is about 4/5 metres of room... plenty!

It's partly why England aren't scoring.

There is wider to go, Foden is 2 or 3 metres to his left, play it to him and he has the significantly smaller 1/2p in front if him, there is about 4/5 metres of room... plenty!

I wouldn't back Foden to score from there if I'm honest. Halfpenny is no mug in defence (ask Farrell) and Warburton was in full flight and would have had a say in the outcome. Manu need an inside option to make a pass to if England were to pass and score.

beshocked wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

beshocked wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:Eustace

I don't under rate him, I acknowledge he is good at what he does, he can run good crash lines, and takes the ball up strong, he is big, quick and strong but for me that is not the pre requisite for a top 13!

He dies with the ball 9 times out of 10, and when he does pass he has to slow to a crawl to do so. Anyone who tells me Ashtons hissy fit on the touchline wasn't that Tuilagi had killed the move with a slow pass then not bothered supporting is kidding themselves. I don't think Ashton and Tuilagi like, or want to play with each other, same can be said about Foden though.

For me, you don't go wide to get over the gameline, you go wide to go a long way and score, if the ball dies out wide the pack has to go a long way in support.

Also by going wide you concede a lot of ground, defences are so quick today by the time Tuilagi gets it and makes his strong few metres England havn't actually gained anything.

If that's the case of a little bit of rifts in the English backline I want to see them fixed as soon as possible.

You are right though. There must be friction with Foden and Ashton, M.Tuilagi and Ashton. Maybe even Strettle with his fellow Sarries (I have noticed he doesn't stand with them when the national anthem is sung).Also there is a pretty strong rumour Strettle is leaving. Maybe to Saints?

Maybe he would like to see the error of his ways and come back to Quins?

I wouldn't say that winning an AP and getting back into the England squad is an error but maybe he might want to go back to Quins. Simply because Quins play a more open style.

I have heard that you (Quins) and Saints are the favourites.

I was talking more in a religious sense it was a good career move but I'd have liked to keep him here. Now that he's injury free, I think our gameplan and backs will allow him to play his natural game and get back to his defender-beating best more quickly and better than Sarries or England.

Sam, I'm pretty sure we'd make space for Strettle- he fits in well with our players (he's played with most of our 1st choice backline) his form at Quins was his best ever and got him to the England squad in the first place before he got injured and he fits in well with our attack strategy. Our currents wingers are Smith, Stegmann, Williams and Monye but we can fit in another and I think Strettle, even now, is the best of the lot. It also adds some more strength in depth to a squad that doesn't have many players but still has competition all across the park. If we couldn't afford him, I think we would loan or sell another winger to make room, within reason.

Tbh I'd much rather we stuck with Smith and Stegmann and just played Williams and Monye to provide experience.

Remember we have Lindsey-Hague too who looks a talent. And Hopper who currently covers all the backs, plus Chisholm who i'd like to see play on a wing alongside Brown and Smith/Stegmann.

Strettle has gone down hill in my estimations, he can sign for Wuss as cover for Benjamin.

yappysnap wrote:Tbh I'd much rather we stuck with Smith and Stegmann and just played Williams and Monye to provide experience.

Remember we have Lindsey-Hague too who looks a talent. And Hopper who currently covers all the backs, plus Chisholm who i'd like to see play on a wing alongside Brown and Smith/Stegmann.

Strettle has gone down hill in my estimations, he can sign for Wuss as cover for Benjamin.

I personally think Strettle has gone downhill because Sarries use him in a completely different way to us.

Even before that though he didn't actually score much, he spends alot of time jinking and running dog legs looking for gaps.

Any of the youngsters have the potential to do as well as him if we give them time.

I liked Strettle but when he left we actually never missed him, this for me shows how significant he was.

If we're going to throw money at players lets buy more locks and props and another hooker now Brookers knee is busted.

I am in two minds over this issue. 1. I agree with Hersh and believe that Flood has not displayed decent enough form yet to warrant a slot. The superiority of the Leicester pack gave Youngs/Flood an armchair ride, which France will not allow. 2. However many years ago it was when CH crumbled in pathetic manner away against France. I swore at the time that he should never ever be allowed back into an England shirt again.

But Farrell warrants the starting slot after his performance against Wales and I think both of our reserve 10s offer something different. To be honest I don't have much confidence in either, but if really pushed I would go for Flood.

Flood set to be rested totally this weekend, as Cockers will start Ford against Bath.

Glad to hear that Ford is getting another start. I have heard a lot about him but not had the opportunity to watch him. Hopefully he will come good?

Eustace H Plimsoll wrote:Oh and here's Leicester SA for you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovH1U-JblIs&feature=related

Watch from 1.55 and tell me he's the reason England's back 3 aren't scoring this season (ignoring for a second the fact that he didn't play versus Scotland or Italy).

And 3.50 as well if you like.

He's a very good player. Don't know why you can't see that. He should be one of the first names on our team sheet.

The most amazing thing about that video is Youngs' excellent place kicking.