England summer tour of Argentina

First topic message reminder :

Updated prior to Consur XV game:

Forwards (18)
Dave Attwood (Bath Rugby, 2 caps)
Rob Buchanan (Harlequins, uncapped)
Calum Clark (Northampton Saints, uncapped)
Alex Corbisiero (London Irish, 18 caps)
Paul Doran Jones (Northampton Saints, 4 caps)
Tom Johnson (Exeter Chiefs, 5 caps)
Matt Kvesic (Worcester Warriors, uncapped)
Joe Launchbury (London Wasps, 9 caps)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 20 caps)
Joe Marler (Harlequins, 10 caps)
Ben Morgan (Gloucester Rugby, 10 caps)
David Paice (London Irish, 6 caps)
Ed Slater (Leicester Tigers, uncapped)
Henry Thomas (Sale Sharks, uncapped)
Billy Vunipola (London Wasps, uncapped)
Rob Webber (Bath Rugby, 3 caps)
David Wilson (Bath Rugby, 26 caps)
Tom Wood (Northampton Saints, captain, 18 caps)

Backs (14)
Mike Brown (Harlequins, 16 caps)
Freddie Burns (Gloucester Rugby, 1 cap)
Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints, 7 caps)
Kyle Eastmond (Bath Rugby, uncapped)
Ben Foden (Northampton Saints, 30 caps)
Alex Goode (Saracens, 11 caps)
Jonathan Joseph (London Irish, 4 caps)
Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby, uncapped)
David Strettle (Saracens, 13 caps)
Joel Tomkins (Saracens, uncapped)
Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester Rugby, 4 caps)
Christian Wade (London Wasps, uncapped)
Richard Wigglesworth (Saracens, 12 caps)
Marland Yarde (London Irish, uncapped)

With Kearnan Myall and Haydn Thomas added to the squad for the Barbarians game.

Sides for the Consur XV game - KO 19.30

England: Ben Foden (Northampton Saints); Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby), Luther Burrell (Northampton Saints), Kyle Eastmond (Bath Rugby), David Strettle (Saracens); Stephen Myler (Northampton Saints), Richard Wigglesworth (Saracens); Joe Marler (Harlequins); David Paice (London Irish); Henry Thomas (Sale Sharks); Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints); Kearnan Myall (Unattached); Tom Wood (Northampton Saints, captain); Tom Johnson (Exeter Chiefs), Billy Vunipola (London Wasps)

Replacements: Rob Buchanan (Harlequins), Alex Corbisiero (London Irish), Paul Doran Jones (Northampton Saints), Dave Attwood (Bath Rugby), Matt Kvesic (Worcester Warriors) 21 Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints), Freddie Burns (Gloucester Rugby), Jonathan Joseph (London Irish)

CONSUR XV: Tomás Carrió (Argentina); Belisario Agulla (Argentina), Francisco Sansot (Argentina), Juan Socino (Argentina), Leandro Leivas (Uruguay); Benjamín Madero (Argentina), Tomás Cubelli -C- (Argentina), Bruno Postiglioni (Argentina), Arturo Ávalo (Uruguay), Mario Sagario (Uruguay), Cesar Fruttero (Argentina), Pablo Huete (Chile), Tomás de la Vega (Argentina), Javier Ortega Desio (Argentina), Antonio Ahualli (Argentina)

Replacements: Alejo Corral (Uruguay), Óscar Durán (Uruguay), Nicolás Klapenbach (Uruguay), Diego Magno (Uruguay), Juan Gaminara (Uruguay), Agustín Ormaechea(Uruguay), Mosiés Duque (Brasil), Santiago Gbernau (Uruguay)

http://www.espn.co.uk/england/rugby/story/184014.html

The game contains plenty of developing players on both sides who won't have played together much so should be interesting. From an England perspective I can't to see how Foden does back in the 15 shirt and also really looking forward to Jonny May getting a chance on the wing as I've been pushing for him to be selected all season (and before that even!).

To be completely honest I know little about most of the Consur XV players but as a Tigers fan I'm looking forward to seeing Horacio Agulla's younger brother Belisario on the right wing. I always rated Horacio very highly and enjoyed his style of play so I'm hoping for much the same from Belisario!

The boy is deadly

Alex_Germany wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:
Here's the team I would pick from that squad:

1. A Corbisiero
2. R Buchanan
3. D Wilson
4. D Attwood
5. C Lawes
6. T Wood
7. M Kvesic
8. B Morgan
9. R Wigglesworth (D Care)
10. F Burns
11. J May
12. B Twelvetrees
13. K Eastmond (J Tomkins)
14. C Wade
15. M Brown

16. R Webber 17. N Wood 18. H Thomas 19. E Slater 20. J Launchbury 21. J Simpson 22. T Flood 23. B Foden

Add in Launchbury and Care, and perhaps Robshaw, and that team would have a good chance against the Lions. (Probably a class Tighthead and Hooker short of a win).

With England and the Lions both playing Barbarians sides, I reckon it would be better to just see England v Lions.

It could though lead to serious embarassement for the Lions. Plus perhaps too many injuries.

You might be right there Alex. I think if they were facing the Lions you'd want to make the alterations above. Launchbury i've kept to the bench as he's an awesome player but not quite a 4 or 5 at present and against a heavy-weight Lions side I think you need the power in there. On the TH front Davy Wilson with some international exposure I think is a better scrummaging prop than Dan Cole.

I think we need to continue with Launchbury...hes class...and he will naturally bulk up aswell.

That then gives you the option of playing Parling alongside for lineout duties which then gives you Wood at 6 for the extra grunt in the breakdwon etc...

OR

We go with Slater or Attwood etc alongside for serious power and go for Croft at 6 for the lineout.

At least we have some options developing...

EDIT: Sorry missed that...playing the lions doh...

greytiger wrote:I'd have Tom Croft in there probably at the expense of Robshaw on current form. But it's all speculation.

It'll all look different in November.

Is Croft and Wood a functional flank combo though? There has been a lot of discussion about it

GeordieFalcon wrote:I think we need to continue with Launchbury...hes class...and he will naturally bulk up aswell.

That then gives you the option of playing Parling alongside for lineout duties which then gives you Wood at 6 for the extra grunt in the breakdwon etc...

OR

We go with Slater or Attwood etc alongside for serious power and go for Croft at 6 for the lineout.

At least we have some options developing...

Out of interest, according to Wikipedia:

Joe Launchberry: 115kg, 1.98m
Courtney Lawes: 118kg, 2.01m
Ed Slater: 116kg, 1.98m
Dave Attwood: 115kg, 2.01m
Geoff Parling: 114kg, 1.98m

Weight wise, all within a T-bone steak and fries of each other.

Lawes is the heaviest then but doesn't seem able to use it as well as he should in my view. Maybe I'm still holding the fact he got the ball ripped from him by a back last year against him!

Alex_Germany wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:I think we need to continue with Launchbury...hes class...and he will naturally bulk up aswell.

That then gives you the option of playing Parling alongside for lineout duties which then gives you Wood at 6 for the extra grunt in the breakdwon etc...

OR

We go with Slater or Attwood etc alongside for serious power and go for Croft at 6 for the lineout.

At least we have some options developing...

Out of interest, according to Wikipedia:

Joe Launchberry: 115kg, 1.98m
Courtney Lawes: 118kg, 2.01m
Ed Slater: 116kg, 1.98m
Dave Attwood: 115kg, 2.01m
Geoff Parling: 114kg, 1.98m

Weight wise, all within a T-bone steak and fries of each other.

I really don't trust those stats mate!

Attwood is easily the largest of all of them, you can tell by just looking at the guy. I reckon he is at least 120kg at 6'7. Provides that real bulk that the others are missing. Slater is a stocky lad too, but is slightly smaller than the others in terms of height. He plays like an 'enforcer' though, and rarely takes a backwards step.

No way is Lawes the heaviest of all of them! He is actually very lean.

According to the RFU site:

JL: As per wiki, also Wasps website.
CL: 111kg and 2m. seems more reasonable than Wikipedia
GP: As per wiki

According to Tigers website, ES is as per Wiki.
According to Bath website, DA is as per Wiki.

So Lawes by some way the lightest. Slater, Attwood and Launchbury very close.

Edit: Lawes was always there for his athleticism. I think Launchbury provides that. Launchbury plus Attwood or Slater?

Yeh, Lawes is very much there for his athleticism, you're right. Problem is, he sometimes plays and acts like an 'enforcer' which I don't think he has the physique for. He's an incredible athlete, but I wouldn't like to see him fill out a lot more so we could see a Launchbury/Lawes pairing at some point At the moment, they are both a little too lightweight.

I really like the look of a Attwood-Launchbury partnership for this summer though!

Lawes is another of those players like Haskell who I think flatters to deceive.

I don't really understand the hype that surrounds Lawes. When he first came on the scene I thought he looked good but I think he's faltered badly.

Personally I think Lawes is very fortunate to keep his place in the squad.

He's not a lineout man and neither is he an enforcer in my opinion.


Like you no 7&1/2 perhaps I don't like Lawes because he cost us that try vs Wales last season.

Can Slater run a lineout?

In the England team chosen for the Argentina tour I don't see any particular lineout options I would feel at all confident in.

I think England's lineout has still been a weakness since Borthwick is no longer there.

Our lineout could struggle in Arg I agree Beshocked. From what I read Attwood could be leading the line and Bath have the worst lineout in the prem.

I'm with you on Lawes, he's too lightweight in all the jobs you need a lock to do. Bar the odd big hit on a back he doesn't really do to much. His lineout work is pretty good mind.

Borthwick is a good line out lock but will gladly never pull on an England jersey again.

beshocked wrote:Lawes is another of those players like Haskell who I think flatters to deceive.

I don't really understand the hype that surrounds Lawes. When he first came on the scene I thought he looked good but I think he's faltered badly.

Personally I think Lawes is very fortunate to keep his place in the squad.

He's not a lineout man and neither is he an enforcer in my opinion.


Like you no 7&1/2 perhaps I don't like Lawes because he cost us that try vs Wales last season.

Can Slater run a lineout?

In the England team chosen for the Argentina tour I don't see any particular lineout options I would feel at all confident in.

I think England's lineout has still been a weakness since Borthwick is no longer there.

Is Haskell as bad as you say he is? Personally don't think he's amazing but still, in the last season or two he's done a pretty solid job when asked and think your being a bit unfair on him.

Haskell has played his best rugby at 7.

Talking of 7's,I thought Fraser was out for the season and needed a shoulder op but is playing at the weekend.

Alex_Germany wrote:According to the RFU site:

JL: As per wiki, also Wasps website.
CL: 111kg and 2m. seems more reasonable than Wikipedia
GP: As per wiki

According to Tigers website, ES is as per Wiki.
According to Bath website, DA is as per Wiki.

So Lawes by some way the lightest. Slater, Attwood and Launchbury very close.

Edit: Lawes was always there for his athleticism. I think Launchbury provides that. Launchbury plus Attwood or Slater?

According to the RFU website:

D Attwood - 118kg (18st 8lb)

E Slater - 116kg (18st 3lb)

As we all know we can't trust published stats on weight and height. Further, it's about how you use that weight and power. In the tight Attwood is at present a more powerful presence than either Launchbury or Lawes. I think Launchbury is superb but he needs to be handled well and allowed to bulk out.

Apparently it's not how big you are but how you use it.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Our lineout could struggle in Arg I agree Beshocked. From what I read Attwood could be leading the line and Bath have the worst lineout in the prem.

I'm with you on Lawes, he's too lightweight in all the jobs you need a lock to do. Bar the odd big hit on a back he doesn't really do to much. His lineout work is pretty good mind.

Borthwick is a good line out lock but will gladly never pull on an England jersey again.

I think those who are doubting Lawes' ability are being a bit short-sighted. Yes he got stripped by Williams for that try and he had a very poor showing at 6 against France by his own admission. If you look at his England tenure as a whole though and particularly when he hasn't been beset by injury he's had some moments of real quality. During MJ's tenure he was excellent and as a replacement this year in the Ireland and Scotland game he came on and caused some havoc.

This season his game for Saints against Castres(?) at Franklins Gardens was one of the best lock performances i've seen this season. He was everywhere in the air, put in some super tackles and began to get his carrying game going a bit more. Which again by his own admission had dropped off. He's had some nasty injuries and now he's strung some game time together he's looking a key part of a very physical Saints pack.

Don't get me wrong he's not the finished article and neither is he a classic 4 at the moment. I'd have Samu Manoa over him from Saints at 4 but Lawes at 5 with Croft at 6 makes for a very interesting combination. A SR of 4. E Slater 5. C Lawes 19. D Attwood 20. J Launchbury makes for a powerful locking combination and adds to the scrum. Underestimating Lawes is a poor call in my view.

sickofwendy wrote:Apparently it's not how big you are but how you use it.

That's what I tell myself!

Your not alone

ChequeredJersey wrote:

greytiger wrote:I'd have Tom Croft in there probably at the expense of Robshaw on current form. But it's all speculation.

It'll all look different in November.

Is Croft and Wood a functional flank combo though? There has been a lot of discussion about it

I think it is. And these are the two best flankers so they should be given the chance to play together. Both do more work on the floor than they are given credit for, Wood being particularly strong over the ball. Croft links very effectively with the backs and is a real threat out wide. Our number 8 should be doing plenty of tight carrying, with help from the tight 5. Both are extremely proficient in the line out, removing the need for a lightweight second row, so we can afford more ballast in their. I'd go Launchbury and Attwood with Lawes on the bench personally, but any combo of these 3 and Slater should work well.

I hate this constant pigeon holing of flankers as 'proper 7s', '6 1/2s' etc. Every flanker is different, every one has strengths and weaknesses and it is about getting the greatest aggregate skillset on the park at once. Wood may not be Richie McCaw. But Richie McCaw isn't David Pocock who isn't Sam Warburton who isn't Thierry Dussetoir. They are all effective players and Wood can be similarly effective in his own way. We also have Dan Cole who is the best foraging front row forward in the world, and Billy Twelvetrees who wins an awful lot of ball on the floor from 12. Hopefully someone like Kvesic or Wallace will develop into a world class player but until then we may as well make use of the 2 world class flankers we have at the moment. This obsession with needing a guy who has only ever worn the number 7 is incorrect and is getting boring.

This isn't to say Robshaw is out of the equation, as he has done quite well since coming in (although not as good as the 6N hype might suggest). Any combo if the 3 should be effective. I just think Croft and Wood are the best two at the moment.

Chjw131 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Our lineout could struggle in Arg I agree Beshocked. From what I read Attwood could be leading the line and Bath have the worst lineout in the prem.

I'm with you on Lawes, he's too lightweight in all the jobs you need a lock to do. Bar the odd big hit on a back he doesn't really do to much. His lineout work is pretty good mind.

Borthwick is a good line out lock but will gladly never pull on an England jersey again.

I think those who are doubting Lawes' ability are being a bit short-sighted. Yes he got stripped by Williams for that try and he had a very poor showing at 6 against France by his own admission. If you look at his England tenure as a whole though and particularly when he hasn't been beset by injury he's had some moments of real quality. During MJ's tenure he was excellent and as a replacement this year in the Ireland and Scotland game he came on and caused some havoc.

This season his game for Saints against Castres(?) at Franklins Gardens was one of the best lock performances i've seen this season. He was everywhere in the air, put in some super tackles and began to get his carrying game going a bit more. Which again by his own admission had dropped off. He's had some nasty injuries and now he's strung some game time together he's looking a key part of a very physical Saints pack.

Don't get me wrong he's not the finished article and neither is he a classic 4 at the moment. I'd have Samu Manoa over him from Saints at 4 but Lawes at 5 with Croft at 6 makes for a very interesting combination. A SR of 4. E Slater 5. C Lawes 19. D Attwood 20. J Launchbury makes for a powerful locking combination and adds to the scrum. Underestimating Lawes is a poor call in my view.

Just think Lawes does need a standout game for England soon or he's going to find it very hard to get any time on the pitch. Lancaster is obviously looking at bulk there with Slater and Attwood coming in. Lawes is competing directly with Launchbury at the moment to me with Parling nailed on after this 6 nations (and hopefully a brilliant tour of Aus).

Lawes doesn't really have a carrying game to drop off to be fair.

It's not a case of being short sighted it's seeing his performances on the pitch that helps make an opinion.

I personally think he's massivley overated and we have better options moving forward.

jeffwinger wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

greytiger wrote:I'd have Tom Croft in there probably at the expense of Robshaw on current form. But it's all speculation.

It'll all look different in November.

Is Croft and Wood a functional flank combo though? There has been a lot of discussion about it

I think it is. And these are the two best flankers so they should be given the chance to play together. Both do more work on the floor than they are given credit for, Wood being particularly strong over the ball. Croft links very effectively with the backs and is a real threat out wide. Our number 8 should be doing plenty of tight carrying, with help from the tight 5. Both are extremely proficient in the line out, removing the need for a lightweight second row, so we can afford more ballast in their. I'd go Launchbury and Attwood with Lawes on the bench personally, but any combo of these 3 and Slater should work well.

I hate this constant pigeon holing of flankers as 'proper 7s', '6 1/2s' etc. Every flanker is different, every one has strengths and weaknesses and it is about getting the greatest aggregate skillset on the park at once. Wood may not be Richie McCaw. But Richie McCaw isn't David Pocock who isn't Sam Warburton who isn't Thierry Dussetoir. They are all effective players and Wood can be similarly effective in his own way. We also have Dan Cole who is the best foraging front row forward in the world, and Billy Twelvetrees who wins an awful lot of ball on the floor from 12. Hopefully someone like Kvesic or Wallace will develop into a world class player but until then we may as well make use of the 2 world class flankers we have at the moment. This obsession with needing a guy who has only ever worn the number 7 is incorrect and is getting boring.

This isn't to say Robshaw is out of the equation, as he has done quite well since coming in (although not as good as the 6N hype might suggest). Any combo if the 3 should be effective. I just think Croft and Wood are the best two at the moment.

Largely speaking I don't disagree with that view Jeffwinger. As I have said in my post above Wood would make an excellent international '7' with the work he does at the breakdown and his open play. Pairing him with Croft would produce an awesome line-out.

My problem so far is that Lancaster's balance has been all to pot. Playing 6. T Croft 7. T Wood is great and would put in some super work around the park. But as you allude to JW the front five and No. 8 needs to look something like:

1. A Corbisiero
2. T Youngs
3. D Cole
4. E Slater
5. J Launchbury
6. T Croft
7. T Wood
8. B Morgan

16. R Buchanan 17. M Vunipola 18. D Wilson 19. C Lawes 20. B Vunipola

A Wood/Croft combo would struggle for me, I just don't think they compliment each other.

Are you Saints fan Chjw131?

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Lawes doesn't really have a carrying game to drop off to be fair.

It's not a case of being short sighted it's seeing his performances on the pitch that helps make an opinion.

I personally think he's massivley overated and we have better options moving forward.

As I have clearly stated in my post a) His carrying game has been poor this season - by his own admission. b) I have sighted three games which have been truly stand out performances. Just saying the player is overrated is not a reasoned opinion.

During MJs tenure he carried a lot more and the latter part of this season he has looked to carry more often particularly looking at taking different lines. Those the the observations that are informing my opinion. I think it is short-sighted to write off a player who has been extremely highly rated by probably the best SR ever to have played the game (MJ) and a current Lions toursit and former Captain in Paul O'Connell.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:A Wood/Croft combo would struggle for me, I just don't think they compliment each other.

Are you Saints fan Chjw131?

No Glaws for my sins!

As much as I love them both as players, I don't think a backrow consisting of both Wood and Croft can work.

Against Wales we really got shown up, and the backrow looked lightweight in the rucks and mauls. I know Wood was at 8 that game, but that wouldn't have made too much difference.

For the time being, I'd keep Croft as an impact sub I think.

bluestonevedder wrote:As much as I love them both as players, I don't think a backrow consisting of both Wood and Croft can work.

Against Wales we really got shown up, and the backrow looked lightweight in the rucks and mauls. I know Wood was at 8 that game, but that wouldn't have made too much difference.

For the time being, I'd keep Croft as an impact sub I think.

I disagree bluestone. Wood and Robshaw together put in a huge work-rate and combined with Morgan I think that that isn't a bad backrow. The problem is we've not had a whole pile of attacking ability across the park and adding in the sort of dynamic player that Croft is whilst retaining Wood in place of Robshaw doesn't lose you a huge amount when you're able to play a SR of Launchbury and Slater for example. Adding someone like Attwood from the bench.

It's just my opinion but I think it could work. I'd actually like to see:

6. T Wood
7. M Kvesic
8. B Morgan

That to me, with the exception of Fraser looks a very complete BR.

I did mention in a previous post why I don't think Lawes is as good as some seem to think he is.

I don't think he does a SR's job well. He doesn't carry well at all, never really has and is actually getting worse if anything. I don't think he's a physical presence in the tight, he often gets knocked off close in.

He's very mobile and does make good covering tackles, more than not on backs but thats a bonus from a lock for me, I want to see grunt/power and physicaliity.

I'm just not really a fan of his, I think we have numerous better options.

Chjw131 wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:As much as I love them both as players, I don't think a backrow consisting of both Wood and Croft can work.

Against Wales we really got shown up, and the backrow looked lightweight in the rucks and mauls. I know Wood was at 8 that game, but that wouldn't have made too much difference.

For the time being, I'd keep Croft as an impact sub I think.

I disagree bluestone. Wood and Robshaw together put in a huge work-rate and combined with Morgan I think that that isn't a bad backrow. The problem is we've not had a whole pile of attacking ability across the park and adding in the sort of dynamic player that Croft is whilst retaining Wood in place of Robshaw doesn't lose you a huge amount when you're able to play a SR of Launchbury and Slater for example. Adding someone like Attwood from the bench.

It's just my opinion but I think it could work. I'd actually like to see:

6. T Wood
7. M Kvesic
8. B Morgan

That to me, with the exception of Fraser looks a very complete BR.

I think England were very very limited that day in terms of go-forward ball, so maybe it's unfair to judge them on that performance. I'd just rather see a more tenacious, compact openside who smashes the breakdown and is great over the ball. I love the backrow combination you mention, and that's one I would really like to see at some point. I think the balance there is great, and with someone like Vunipola coming off the bench, it could be destructive.

Chjw131 wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:As much as I love them both as players, I don't think a backrow consisting of both Wood and Croft can work.

Against Wales we really got shown up, and the backrow looked lightweight in the rucks and mauls. I know Wood was at 8 that game, but that wouldn't have made too much difference.

For the time being, I'd keep Croft as an impact sub I think.

I disagree bluestone. Wood and Robshaw together put in a huge work-rate and combined with Morgan I think that that isn't a bad backrow. The problem is we've not had a whole pile of attacking ability across the park and adding in the sort of dynamic player that Croft is whilst retaining Wood in place of Robshaw doesn't lose you a huge amount when you're able to play a SR of Launchbury and Slater for example. Adding someone like Attwood from the bench.

It's just my opinion but I think it could work. I'd actually like to see:

6. T Wood
7. M Kvesic
8. B Morgan

That to me, with the exception of Fraser looks a very complete BR.

I completely agree with this, and think your back row looks great. But at this moment in time I'd still pick Croft over Kvesic. Right now he is the better player. Perhaps in a year or so time Kvesic will have proven himself the outstanding 7 in England (I'm sure you and I hope this happens asap) and this will be the right choice.

Lawes was not good against Quins at the weekend. Got bounced in defence by players he really should have been tackling.

It does happen a lot with Lawes, he makes some big hits on small guys but misses a lot of tackles.

His performance against France at 6 has just come SCREAMING back to me

http://www.premiershiprugby.tv/FullMatchReplays

15:17 in the Quins game. Awful.

I agree he's had some off performances and his France game was very poor at 6. He is nonetheless a good player and he is to the SR what Croft is to the BR. A player who doesn't fit the mould but given allowance could just be that 'point of difference'.

thomh wrote:http://www.premiershiprugby.tv/FullMatchReplays

15:17 in the Quins game. Awful.

Yeh, that is truly awful for a second row forward.

I do however, agree with what you are saying Chjw131.

Courtney lawes has just turned 24 he has had to deal with a few injuries and being shunted from 4 to 6 to 4.
He Is still young for a lock and whilst he isn't the finished article by a distance I think he will continue to develop and hopefully along with the others on tour this summer be an asset for England for the years ahead.

The competition in the back row is really hotting up which is great to see. If Lancaster learns his lesson from the 6N in picking a flanker at 8 and sticks with Vunipola/Morgan then we've got a core of players developing who can complement each other well IMO.

6.Wood or Croft
7.Robshaw or Kvesic - though Fraser will definitely challenge there
8.Morgan or Vunipola

I'd say the natural skill set of those guys if picked in their best positions should complement one another well. We just need to get the right second rows beside them, as everyone is saying. Personally I'd like to see 4.Slater 5.Launchberry in Argentina with Atwood on the bench and then when Parling returns add him to the squad with those three so they can fight it out. Harsh on Lawes I know but I just haven't been impressed this season -if he improves his all round skill set (he seems to be trying in fairness) and regains consistency I'd happily see him in the mix again.

Got to say I do really like the look of the below side and how they could play going forward to next season. Let's just hope we can see something like it on the park after inevitable post Lions injuries etc!

1.Corbs 2.Youngs 3.Cole 4.Slater 5.Launchberry 6.Wood 7.Robshaw 8.Morgan
9.Youngs 10.Burns 11.May 12.Twelvetrees 13.Tuilagi 14.Wade 15.Brown
16.Webber/Hartley 17.Vunipola 18.Wilson 19.Parling 20.Croft 21.Care 22.Farrell 23.Foden

king_carlos wrote:The competition in the back row is really hotting up which is great to see. If Lancaster learns his lesson from the 6N in picking a flanker at 8 and sticks with Vunipola/Morgan then we've got a core of players developing who can complement each other well IMO.

6.Wood or Croft
7.Robshaw or Kvesic - though Fraser will definitely challenge there
8.Morgan or Vunipola

I'd say the natural skill set of those guys if picked in their best positions should complement one another well. We just need to get the right second rows beside them, as everyone is saying. Personally I'd like to see 4.Slater 5.Launchberry in Argentina with Atwood on the bench and then when Parling returns add him to the squad with those three so they can fight it out. Harsh on Lawes I know but I just haven't been impressed this season -if he improves his all round skill set (he seems to be trying in fairness) and regains consistency I'd happily see him in the mix again.

Got to say I do really like the look of the below side and how they could play going forward to next season. Let's just hope we can see something like it on the park after inevitable post Lions injuries etc!

1.Corbs 2.Youngs 3.Cole 4.Slater 5.Launchberry 6.Wood 7.Robshaw 8.Morgan
9.Youngs 10.Burns 11.May 12.Twelvetrees 13.Tuilagi 14.Wade 15.Brown
16.Webber/Hartley 17.Vunipola 18.Wilson 19.Parling 20.Croft 21.Care 22.Farrell 23.Foden

Yes agreed that looks a lot like the side for next year though I suspect Parling would start in front of Slater.

thomh wrote:http://www.premiershiprugby.tv/FullMatchReplays

15:17 in the Quins game. Awful.

he is just too tall, bends at the waist to tackle so his centre of gravity is far too high, just needs some coaching

100%beefy wrote:

thomh wrote:http://www.premiershiprugby.tv/FullMatchReplays

15:17 in the Quins game. Awful.

he is just too tall, bends at the waist to tackle so his centre of gravity is far too high, just needs some coaching

And at about 17 minutes Care juggles the ball and gives a hospital pass to Monye.

I think any professional player could have a film of "low-lights" made and look absolutely crap.

Regarding Brown on the wing - I think it was clear mid way through the 6N this wasn't working. I'm sure the England management realised that, but felt the Wales game was too late to change it.

The Wales game made it clear. Two tries scored on Brown's wing. I would be both surprised and disappointed to see Brown starting on the wing again.

Brown will have to fight it out with Foden and Goode for the full back spot. All three bring something different, so it's a tough choice. As said on other threads, if Twelvetrees plays 12, then Goode is not needed at 15.

Foden can probably play wing better than Brown, but probably not as well as Wade, Yarde or May.

Hound of Harrow wrote:

100%beefy wrote:you don't drop a captain when you are going on a crucial tour with a weakened squad...i guarantee you Robshaw is not rationalising it the way you are and the lions standby spin is unfortunate, either they are being rested or they are on standby but not both...i expect he is champing at the bit to get out there...and frankly with such a depleted squad i think the argies will feel england are there fr the taking

Sorry, but it was widely expected that Robshaw was not going on the England tour this summer. He played more minutes of rugby than any other England EPS player this season.

Also the 'are they being rested, or on standby' comment (in termsof Robshaw) is to ignore the fact that several players from other countries are being 'rested' this summer.

England will not select based purely on the last international you played. Club form comes into it.

It's not the Lions.

Chjw131 wrote:Some strong arguments about the make-up of the BR going forward that's for certain.

I actually tend to agree with the idea that Robshaw's place is vulnerable. It is right to say that but for injury, Wood would have been Captain from the start of Lancs term. Robshaw has done very well in his role and his work-rate has been outstanding but he isn't a stand-out sort of player in any specific role. I think had he kept to 6 he might well have been.

The problem really comes down to balance as GF highlighted. This I think is Lancaster's dream team BR:

6. T Croft
7. C Clark
8. T Wood (c)

It's only speculation I grant you but he sees Clark as a 7, Croft as his line-out king and Wood as an invaluable captain. To me it's a terrifyingly poor BR and in reality I think even Lancs is coming round to the idea that it doesn't work.

Getting Croft involved is the problem. I think you need to look at the back 5 as a whole to get Croft in. Here's a possible solution:

4. D Attwood
5. C Lawes
6. T Croft
7. T Wood
8. B Morgan

With Croft leading the line-out that could be very effective around the park and in the line-out, a crucial set-piece.

Someone said above that Haskell was moved to 7 to accommodate Wood at 6. That's not strictly true, it was a toss-up between who wore 6 and 7 and if you look at the work Wood does at the breakdown, his turn-over rate and his speed to breakdowns around the park he could play as an extremely effective 7 at international level.

Can't agree with this conclusion. It's been stated in interviews that Johnson is the man set to play out of his usual position as the other 7, with Clark going as a 6. Lancaster also clearly considers Morgan and Vunipola as 8s over Wood, Lancaster has stated he'd given the 8 spot to Vunipola when Morgan got injured and only played Wood there when Vunipola got injured in training. When it comes to blindside he also seems to prefer Wood to Croft, having selected Wood over Croft when they've both been available (in terms of the lineout issue you raise regarding these two, yes Croft is the better jumper, but Wood is a pretty good jumper and also often runs the Saints lineout, which Croft doesn't do for Tigers, meaning Lancatser is able to go for his preference of a more impact type lock on the bench who isn't a lineout specialist).

Brown will have to fight it out with Foden and Goode for the full back spot

Considering Tait's excellent Murphy impression and MOTM performance today I'd say his name will soon be added to the list of contenders for the 15 shirt.

I think going forward Lawes will drop out. Parling and Slater both offer mobility, bigger work rates and better lineout skills. This summer a second row of Slater (if fit) and Attwood should be the go to partnership.

I think Tait is well down the FB pecking order Sam, he needs a good half a season firing before he's back in England contention I'd imagine.

I'd agree on Lawes but possibly maybe Parling also who past the lineout doesn't really add too much.

Slater/Launchbury/Attwood could be a cracking trio of locks (big if)

timhen wrote:When it comes to blindside he also seems to prefer Wood to Croft, having selected Wood over Croft when they've both been available

Not sure you can reach that conclusion. After all they have not really both been available at the same time. Wood was injured durng 2012 6NS. Then Croft was injured. As soon as Croft had managed a couple of games for Leicester he was right back in the squad (against Italy) and the team against Wales. We will only know which Lancaster prefers come the AIs - assuming they are both fit and based on past history the chances of that are low.

He's shown up very well in the big games since xmas, he shone against Toulon and ripped through Quins today. He's also considerably more versatile than the other options. We've seen him play 13 in a rwc final, he can play wing as well and he did a fair stand in at 12 for the second half against LI. Got to be a great bench option that.

Parling doesn't get the credit he deserves for his work rate, he doesn't make the big hits/carries/turnovers and so seems to be overlooked.