Courtney Lawes

Am I the only one who thinks he's just quite Poopie?

Commentators go on about him 'being an athlete' and extremely physical, but he only puts big hits in on scrum halves and backs alike, not great in the tight, not great in the loose (see missed tackle on Fofana) and his ball carrying is equal to a beanpole.

I'm not a rugby genius so probably have missed it but what exactly does he do that everyone seems so fond of?

EDIT: according to ESPN's stats in the first half he's missed 4 tackles. That's shocking for any player let alone a lock-come-flanker

No, you're not the only one actually - #overhyped

I think he's garbage. Surely there's a better option at 6 if The Brand wasn't fit to start?

im a fan of Lawes, but not at 6!

He's a decent athletic lock but on thr flank he is out of his depth.

His defence is good but in attack I struggle to remember any big carries from him.

I agree he should be in the 2nd row he is not a 6... Tom wood should play 6 and we should pick a proper #8.. We missed Ben Morgan today..

SL makes mistakes and this is one of them. A no 8 at no 8 and a b/s at b/s please - this is test rugby after all.

I always thought he was very overhyped when he first played for England - then he got sent into the wilderness, now he is back proving me right.

I've always said he's overhyped. Wood at 6 and Haskell at 8 would have been my choice for today.

Robshaw, Wood, Launchbury, Cole and possibly Youngs are Lions for me.

Morgannwg.

Regards to Lawes, he will not make the Lions tour or even be slected in the squad. Well that is what i think/believe.

I think he needs to lose a bit of the athletic aspect of his game and add some bulk. As many big hits he puts in he gets bounced off too much for a backrow five forward.

His weight ratio is too balanced... In rugby you need a lot of strength in your core if you're a big lad to not get turned over.

Etzebeth is similar... With the ball he gets turned over quite a lot when hes on his own....We actually put a man on his jersey for every carry to give him more balance in the initial balance... It works well and England would be good to follow suit on that... Same with launchbery.

He was utter Love sacks today, both from what I saw and the stats

I think he needs a good run of rugby and should be judged in due course.He looks like a person who hasn't rode a bike in 10 years and is learning all over again.I believe he will come good over time.

On a few of the others thread over last few days I have asked about lawes at 6, I think he is a great player (potentially) but I habe always seen him as a 2nd row.

Didn't see much of the England game today due to work but judging by the posts I guess the experiment at 6 didn't work?

Great impact player coming off the bench - was poopie as a starter today.

Too many people missing the point. He's a very average test b/s. He's a good test lock. SL got it wrong.

Next time I see Wood playing scrum half I'm going to have a right go at him.

Agree with the comments about him needing to bulk up, just looks a bit too lean for 2nd row, and despite a couple of big tackles, missed far too many to be a consistent option at blindside. Have never really seen him make much ground with ball in hand either.

For Italy, I would like to see Wood back at blindside, and Morgan/Vunipola at 8, whoever is the most match fit

He has an all or nothing tackling technique. I dont think its reliable enough at international level but you dont want to get caught by it

Hes a good player. He had a (very) bad day today playing out of position after not playing much rugby.
Easily the worst we've ever seen from him.

And yet we still won.
That means we can take a lot of positives from the experiments of Wood and Lawes.
Hopefully we've learnt that there are plenty of better options at 6.
And that while Wood can play 8, we're better with a more powerful player there.

Who is 2nd choice at 7 these days?
If Robshaw was to play 6, who would play 7?
Would it be Haskell? If so, we're no better off in terms of injury cover.

Agree with PSW, good player who had a poor game and should probably stick to the second row for the foreseeable future. Disappointed as felt this could be his strongest position.

Generally good points are good hands, good line speed and pace, decent work rate and engine. Negatives were there for all to see today.

Can't quote from my mobile but in answer to wasps I think Wood or Haskell would play seven for now if Robshaw got injured. Once fit again, as long as he returns to form then expect Croft to join the other 3 as one of England's top four flankers moving forward. Fraser and Kvesic keeping them on their toes so to speak.

B91212 wrote:Agree with PSW, good player who had a poor game and should probably stick to the second row for the foreseeable future. Disappointed as felt this could be his strongest position.

Generally good points are good hands, good line speed and pace, decent work rate and engine. Negatives were there for all to see today.

It's all well and good being a quick lock and having good hands but when you don't make ground or break tackles when you have hands on then those skills are worthless.

For me it just highlights the huge difference between lock and backrow and the even bigger difference between club and international rugby. As a lock his (almost) back row abilities are a bonus.....As a back row they ain't even near to the standard required. Soon as we got our 8 back it'll get back to normal

Time for Wood to return to 6, and play a 8 at 8. Morgan if fit, if not Billy V or Waldron, or even a call to Easter.

I'm happy for Lawes to be a sub for second row, and Haskell a sub for backrow, but don't start them (or Wood) out of position.

It was an experiment which did not work.No harm done.Move on.

I thought Wood was fantastic yesterday, but we could do with having Morgan's carrying back.

Alex_Germany wrote:Time for Wood to return to 6, and play a 8 at 8. Morgan if fit, if not Billy V or Waldron, or even a call to Easter.

I'm happy for Lawes to be a sub for second row, and Haskell a sub for backrow, but don't start them (or Wood) out of position.

I wouldn't want tubby Easter back but I agree, our balance between power and mobility looked wrong to me.

he needs to stop looking for the 'perfect tackle' and just do the dog work like Wood

damage_13 wrote:he needs to stop looking for the 'perfect tackle' and just do the dog work like Wood

Why would he. The big hit is what his reputation is based on and he only has to make one every other game and its enough to get him in the England squad.

Nice to read all the balanced articles.

Lawes is a very decent player, but of course the media went overboard as it always does with new players. When MJ went on about the sound made by CL tackles in training they all lapped it up. He has played extremely well in some matches and also poorly in others. Same as any player. Injuries have knocked him back a lot and he is still trying to get back up to previous levels. Playing him out of position was a mistake as everyone here has agreed. I don't think he will make the Lions, but I do think he will be part of this England team all the way into RWC 2015. At the moment coming off the bench is right for him.

I think Lawes should focus on becoming a lineout king...(does he have the knack of running a lineout? ) then he would be a great replacement for Parling...

He's a decent lock but not an International 6 by any standards. The good side of the France game in a way is that Lancaster has now learnt that he isn't a 6 without it costing us too dear. With Wood, Croft, Haskell and Johnson already in the pecking order and youngsters coming through we shouldn't be seeing him there again however.

4.Launchberry, Lawes
5.Parling, Deacon
6.Wood, Haskell, Croft, Johnson
7.Robshaw, Kvesic
8.Morgan, Vunipola, Waldrom, Crane

That's how I see the pecking order at the moment. If Croft comes back to full fitness he'll make a very interesting battle with Wood however, also if Robshaw were to get injured I'd probably rather move Wood to 7 than bring Kvesic in just yet. Good to see strength in depth however.

I think you might be right Geordie, at the moment he fits into neither of the 2 stereotypes for a second row (lets ignore the trial at 6 which shall not be named). He doesn't put in a decent enough shift as a workhorse/enforcer type, despite being 18 odd stone. His natural build is quite gangly (for a pro rugby player) so in theory focusing on the lineout would be a good long term bet for him. Does he have the brains though? (in the nicest possible way).

Wherever he ends up, he has to start working harder. Smashing a SH may look good for your youtube montage, but in fact getting him to the floor and then contesting for the ball or else wrapping him up is going to be far more useful to the team although not as glamourous.

Bathman_in_London wrote:I think you might be right Geordie, at the moment he fits into neither of the 2 stereotypes for a second row (lets ignore the trial at 6 which shall not be named). He doesn't put in a decent enough shift as a workhorse/enforcer type, despite being 18 odd stone. His natural build is quite gangly (for a pro rugby player) so in theory focusing on the lineout would be a good long term bet for him. Does he have the brains though? (in the nicest possible way).

Wherever he ends up, he has to start working harder. Smashing a SH may look good for your youtube montage, but in fact getting him to the floor and then contesting for the ball or else wrapping him up is going to be far more useful to the team although not as glamourous.

Great point

I thought it for a while Bathman...he would make a lineout guy with a physicality...alongside say launchbury...

Now as you say does he have the brains to run it..well he wouldnt really have to if you had Wood etc there as he can do that.
Lawes just needs to focus on excelling in the lineout...

King Carlos,

You listed
7.Robshaw, Kvesic

You simply have to include Will Fraser there now...he impresses me every game i watch..and maybe further back..Wallace at quins.

I also disagree, for if Robshaw was to get injured i would keep Wood at 6 and give one of the young lads a go...they are actual 7's after all and all having been standing out in the prem....it would be Kvesic v Fraser i would think....and i would be happy with that.

GeordieFalcon wrote:
King Carlos,

You listed
7.Robshaw, Kvesic

You simply have to include Will Fraser there now...he impresses me every game i watch..and maybe further back..Wallace at quins.

I also disagree, for if Robshaw was to get injured i would keep Wood at 6 and give one of the young lads a go...they are actual 7's after all and all having been standing out in the prem....it would be Kvesic v Fraser i would think....and i would be happy with that.

I'd agree Fraser and Wallace have both been excelling in the jeff, I simply feel with how good a job the England pack as whole is doing of sharing the load at the breakdown I'd be happier seeing someone like Haskell come in who can take up some of the carrying work Robshaw has been getting through. Robshaw may not be making big carries but he's making a lot of them every game. In that sense Lancaster is employing a Exeter esque gameplan of rock solid defence and keep the ball at all cost. Kvesic would fit into that gameplan as well to be fair!

On the point of a 'proper 7' people debate a lot now it frustrates me slightly that people only refer to 'scavenging' when talking about a proper 7. In my eyes a true 7 has three key role - huge workload, breakdown menace AND linkman between forwards/backs. To me that last part is what sets McCaw apart from Pocock, Warburton, Brussow, etc and it's also what Robshaw is doing a good job of at the moment.

In that case i think Fraser would be your ideal choice...for he's a big lad...seems to be everywhere at the breakdwon...and he also isnt afraid to get his hands on the ball.

In the recent Saxons game at the Falcons i was at, in a woeful performance Fraser was one who stood out with a decent game.

I think both he and Kvesic would fall nicely into the team plan at 7 should it be required through injury.

6 Wood
7 Kvesic / Fraser / Wallace
8 Morgan

Still has a nice physical ball winning look to it, with some good carrying capacity aswell...

Agreed Fraser is also a very strong ball carrier Geordie. All in all I think the best thing is that the back row is finally looking to have some depth to it. Plenty of competition in all three positions and if Morgan/Vunipola both continue to develop well we could have two great ball carriers to choose between at 8.

The obvious worry from there in the pack is TH with there being a fair distance between Cole and Wilson as back up, then a canyon to the next options after Wilson... Let's just hope some of the youngsters can kick on soon!

Henry Thomas?

Henry Thomas is a good prospect, but in terms of experience he is a long way behind Cole and Wilson. I feel a bit for Wilson, he is a decent player, but with Cole in front of him he rarely seems to get any longer than 5 minutes to show what he can do.

Fraser has looked very good, I bet that playing at Glaws with a team goig forward will propel Kvesic into more peoples thinking too. He already looks good for Wuss, it can't be too long before he gets capped.

GeordieFalcon wrote:In that case i think Fraser would be your ideal choice...for he's a big lad...seems to be everywhere at the breakdwon...and he also isnt afraid to get his hands on the ball.

In the recent Saxons game at the Falcons i was at, in a woeful performance Fraser was one who stood out with a decent game.

I think both he and Kvesic would fall nicely into the team plan at 7 should it be required through injury.

6 Wood
7 Kvesic / Fraser / Wallace
8 Morgan

Still has a nice physical ball winning look to it, with some good carrying capacity aswell...

Isn't Clarke next in line?

Alex_Germany wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:In that case i think Fraser would be your ideal choice...for he's a big lad...seems to be everywhere at the breakdwon...and he also isnt afraid to get his hands on the ball.

In the recent Saxons game at the Falcons i was at, in a woeful performance Fraser was one who stood out with a decent game.

I think both he and Kvesic would fall nicely into the team plan at 7 should it be required through injury.

6 Wood
7 Kvesic / Fraser / Wallace
8 Morgan

Still has a nice physical ball winning look to it, with some good carrying capacity aswell...

Isn't Clarke next in line?

I believe he's injured/a tw@t.

Yeah Lancs really seems to rate Clark...but he's out injured.

For me its Kvesic v Fraser for Robshaws understudy at the moment.

Lawes just looks abit to thin for my liking!

he was getting rattled up against the french. He needs to eat alot of meat before he comes back

mystiroakey wrote:Lawes just looks abit to thin for my liking!

he was getting rattled up against the french. He needs to eat alot of meat before he comes back

neigh

He's still 18st +

He'll be hitting the 20st mark if he does fill out...

wow he would be a beast!

Im repeating myself but if i was Lancs id be pestering the life out of Saints...telling to make him a lineout demon.

He's never in my opinon gonna be a Botha or a Johnson etc the enforcer type. He could be a very aggresive and physical lineout guy though...

HIm and Launchbury could be a very effective unit if lawes lineout was as effective as Parlings.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Im repeating myself but if i was Lancs id be pestering the life out of Saints...telling to make him a lineout demon.

He's never in my opinon gonna be a Botha or a Johnson etc the enforcer type. He could be a very aggresive and physical lineout guy though...

HIm and Launchbury could be a very effective unit if lawes lineout was as effective as Parlings.

'

I think you're dead right on him being a lineout lock. The thing about Lawes for me is he looks like he has a thin 'trunk'. It's good to see our players aren't the pasty eaters of old but he doesn't look like he has a lot of lower body strength as a result (wouldn't tell him that mind). As everyone says, he also carries too upright.

What about Garvey Geordie?!