ENGLAND SQUAD for QBE Internationals

First topic message reminder :

Uncapped centres Luther Burrell, Joel Tomkins and Henry Trinder have all been added to Stuart Lancaster’s England squad ahead of next month’s QBE Internationals against Australia, Argentina and New Zealand.
 
England Elite Player Squad for QBE Internationals
 
 
Forwards
David Attwood (Bath Rugby)
Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers)
Alex Corbisiero (Northampton Saints)
Tom Johnson (Exeter Chiefs)
Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints)
Matt Kvesic (Gloucester Rugby)
Joe Launchbury (London Wasps)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints)
Joe Marler (Harlequins)
Ben Morgan (Gloucester Rugby)
Geoff Parling (Leicester Tigers)
Chris Robshaw (Harlequins)
Billy Vunipola (Saracens)
Mako Vunipola (Saracens)
David Wilson (Bath Rugby)
Tom Wood (Northampton Saints)
Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers)
 
Backs
 
Chris Ashton (Saracens)
Mike Brown (Harlequins)
Freddie Burns (Gloucester Rugby)
Luther Burrell (Northampton Saints)
Danny Care (Harlequins)
Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints)
Owen Farrell (Saracens)
Toby Flood (Leicester Tigers)
Ben Foden (Northampton Saints)
Alex Goode (Saracens)
Kyle Eastmond (Bath Rugby)
Joel Tomkins (Saracens)
Henry Trinder (Gloucester Rugby)
Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester Rugby)
Christian Wade (London Wasps)
Marland Yarde (London Irish)
Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)

Do you mean 'Poor Doran Jones'  

Scrumpy wrote:Do you mean 'Poor Doran Jones'  

I left that open to interpretation. Poor old Quins.

His ability is irrelevant as he's been injured

Pretty happy with the the squad as a whole, but can't see how Alex Goode is in that squad. I would of much prefered to have Watson in there to gain experience, but could be a little soon for him still.

I think we need to be a bit sensible here. Corbs fit and firing is in my eyes one (possibly only one) of our true World Class players...i think he's in the top two in the world.

BUT Marler and Vunipola are not poor. They are works in progress and are working with some of the best scrum coaching around...both at their clubs AND with Rowntree at England, and im sure Rowntree goes around the clubs aswell doesnt he.

Just because they arent razamatazz all singing all dancing best in the world lets not throw them on the scrap heap. We're sometimes too quick to drop players becuase they are just progressing and arent instantly the best...

I do not think at loose head we are too badly off, even after Marler and Vunipola we have Mullan and Wood (when the ban ends), but at tight head after Cole and Wilson, the cupboard is very bare (though there are a few very young candidates).

The other slight anomally is at blindside where all the flankers seem to be open-side or pseudo open-side players and none a real heavy duty blindside. I would have liked to have seen Ewers in there as a possibility.

Otherwise the squad is generally not bad.

regards

CB

I too thought Ewers might make a blindside, but after watching him vs Cardiff he seems a very Picamoles esque no 8 ..

Happy with that squad. Is there a saxons EPS any more?

yappysnap wrote:Happy with that squad. Is there a saxons EPS any more?

There is a Saxons group but I am guessing they are not playing any games until the 6N so wont change from the summer squad. I have no idea if they will be training with the EPS in the run up to the AI.

As with the original EPS announcement, I think Lancaster has this pretty much right. If the main message board quibbles are about 2nd / 3rd choice hookers, 3rd choice 10s and an injury replacement flanker, we are as close to consensus as this place will ever get.

dummy_half wrote:As with the original EPS announcement, I think Lancaster has this pretty much right. If the main message board quibbles are about 2nd / 3rd choice hookers, 3rd choice 10s and an injury replacement flanker, we are as close to consensus as this place will ever get.

 

AS you say just quiblling over the reserve reserve choices. Moving to 2015 I can only envisage a handful of players squeezing through: Jonny May (Saxons), Dave Ewers (if he wants to play for England), Anthony Watson, George Ford (Saxons), Will Fraser (Saxons), Matt Tait (Saxons). Outside of that I can't think of many other candidates with a strong potential case.

Would be nice to have a heavy-duty BS in the mould of Carl Fearns.

If Fearns finds some solid form he could get in there as a very different backrow option. Likewise I don't think we've seen the last of Haskell (who played outstandingly for England two seasons ago before injury and fatigue).

I really can't see Tait getting back in. We have Brown and Foden as the top two contenders with Goode as third choice. Behind those three and looking good is May. Tait is realistically 5th choice and if we're looking that far afield then there are a few others as well.

Just off the top of my head I'd like to see a 6.Fearns 7. Fraser 8. Ewers backrow for next seasons 6N's A comp. Looks pretty impressive!

Chjw131 wrote:

hawalsh wrote:Ewers can't be called up for the training squad because he wasn't selected in the EPS or Saxons in the summer.

That's not the case, he could've selected anyone as injury cover. Not that I think he should've in this instance. Ewers has looked really good but needs a full season and Saxons appearance first. Although Morgan turned down the Saxons when invited!

I still don't understand people going on about Webber. Why would we want to replace a BR with another hooker?

JJ hasn't shown the sort of form that would've got him his place back but picking three centres ahead of him is a bit of a blow to the lad I would've thought. If Corbs is out i'd expect Lancs to select Vunipola, his scrummaging is a work in progress but he could go well against OZ.

Any news on Attwood? Launchbury has put in some more storming performances for Wasps but not really in the same game areas as Attwood.

Are you sure about that?  My understanding was that although that is true during the international window, for training sessions outside that any EPS replacement has to come from the Saxons first.  There was an article last week where Lancaster expressed his frustration at not being able to bring Dickinson or Ewers in, which was well after Croft's injury opened up a cover spot.  Also, not sure how well covering a staright-out 6 with an 8 who hasn't played 6 in some time would have gone down in terms of the ethos of the cover agreement.

dummy_half wrote:As with the original EPS announcement, I think Lancaster has this pretty much right. If the main message board quibbles are about 2nd / 3rd choice hookers, 3rd choice 10s and an injury replacement flanker, we are as close to consensus as this place will ever get.

Spot on. 

It's great that we have got to this point.

hawalsh wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

hawalsh wrote:Ewers can't be called up for the training squad because he wasn't selected in the EPS or Saxons in the summer.

That's not the case, he could've selected anyone as injury cover. Not that I think he should've in this instance. Ewers has looked really good but needs a full season and Saxons appearance first. Although Morgan turned down the Saxons when invited!

I still don't understand people going on about Webber. Why would we want to replace a BR with another hooker?

JJ hasn't shown the sort of form that would've got him his place back but picking three centres ahead of him is a bit of a blow to the lad I would've thought. If Corbs is out i'd expect Lancs to select Vunipola, his scrummaging is a work in progress but he could go well against OZ.

Any news on Attwood? Launchbury has put in some more storming performances for Wasps but not really in the same game areas as Attwood.

Are you sure about that?  My understanding was that although that is true during the international window, for training sessions outside that any EPS replacement has to come from the Saxons first.  There was an article last week where Lancaster expressed his frustration at not being able to bring Dickinson or Ewers in, which was well after Croft's injury opened up a cover spot.  Also, not sure how well covering a staright-out 6 with an 8 who hasn't played 6 in some time would have gone down in terms of the ethos of the cover agreement.

Yes. If you want an example of that policy in action look at Henry Trinder.

6.Fearns 7. Fraser 8. Ewers

Yappy its over a year till, and a good year for those 3 could see them as starting senior back row!

I'd never have Fearns over Wood and surely Vunipola is a better bet than Ewers?

You seen much of Ewers Bathite? 2 motm performances in last 2 games, he's a beast if bloke. Probably doesn't carry as hard as Billy but doesn't make the same mistakes and has a great offload.

I'd prefer Ewers over Billy personally.

Chjw131 wrote:

hawalsh wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

hawalsh wrote:Ewers can't be called up for the training squad because he wasn't selected in the EPS or Saxons in the summer.

That's not the case, he could've selected anyone as injury cover. Not that I think he should've in this instance. Ewers has looked really good but needs a full season and Saxons appearance first. Although Morgan turned down the Saxons when invited!

I still don't understand people going on about Webber. Why would we want to replace a BR with another hooker?

JJ hasn't shown the sort of form that would've got him his place back but picking three centres ahead of him is a bit of a blow to the lad I would've thought. If Corbs is out i'd expect Lancs to select Vunipola, his scrummaging is a work in progress but he could go well against OZ.

Any news on Attwood? Launchbury has put in some more storming performances for Wasps but not really in the same game areas as Attwood.

Are you sure about that?  My understanding was that although that is true during the international window, for training sessions outside that any EPS replacement has to come from the Saxons first.  There was an article last week where Lancaster expressed his frustration at not being able to bring Dickinson or Ewers in, which was well after Croft's injury opened up a cover spot.  Also, not sure how well covering a staright-out 6 with an 8 who hasn't played 6 in some time would have gone down in terms of the ethos of the cover agreement.

Yes. If you want an example of that policy in action look at Henry Trinder.

The following is what was reported in the papers:

Lancaster spoke last week of the constraints of working within the agreement over player release between the Rugby Football Union and Premiership clubs and it is those rules that are likely to prevent him from replacing Croft with his preferred choice.

Number eights Sam Dickinson of Northampton and Dave Ewers of Exeter have excelled since Premiership action began in September but, like Trinder, are not in either senior squad named in August so are set to be rendered unavailable to Lancaster.

"Picking a player from outside the squads is a challenge. It can be achieved, but it's not been achieved yet," Lancaster said.

If Lancaster is unable to promote either Dickinson or Ewers, Tom Johnson of Exeter or Saracens' Will Fraser are in contention to fill the back row vacancy created by Croft's season-ending injury.

So like I suggested, if it is occasionally allowed it must have to be a like-for-like positional player.  Lancaster wanted to bring an extra 8 in but clearly wasn't allowed.

Bathite wrote:I'd never have Fearns over Wood and surely Vunipola is a better bet than Ewers?

Mate its over a year away, i merely suggested who knows what could happen...if they are on fire there is potential for it to happen...not that it would.

It is nothing short of a crime for SL to overlook Ewers and Dickinson. Both have been outstanding in the AP. Tom Johnson tries hard but is nowhere near as effective as he sould be. He misses tackles and drops the ball too often at the highest level.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Bathite wrote:I'd never have Fearns over Wood and surely Vunipola is a better bet than Ewers?

Mate its over a year away, i merely suggested who knows what could happen...if they are on fire there is potential for it to happen...not that it would.

Exactly and my shout was originally for the Saxons game next season.

englandglory4ever wrote:It is nothing short of a crime for SL to overlook Ewers and Dickinson. Both have been outstanding in the AP. Tom Johnson tries hard but is nowhere near as effective as he sould be. He misses tackles and drops the ball too often at the highest level.

Agree with this, Johnsons inclusion is baffling. He's been outshone by Ewers virtually every game and we know he's not good enough for Int rugby from previous outings.

Is Ewers the coming messiah?

Look I know it's great to have a new player to rave about but surely the hype needs to put to the side till Ewers has a few more games?

England needs a 6 to replace Croft - Johnson is a 6. Ewers is an 8.

beshocked wrote:Is Ewers the coming messiah?

Look I know it's great to have a new player to rave about but surely the hype needs to put to the side till Ewers has a few more games?

England needs a 6 to replace Croft - Johnson is a 6. Ewers is an 8.

+1

Let's see how he gets on in Europe first and then i'm sure he'll be in the Saxons. After that it's the NZ tour and a chance for him to stake a claim to a 1st XV position.

I'm sure if he played for Sarries we'd have heard about him

He has played in Europe against the Blues, he was motm.

It's refreshed to see a player who bosses players physically(top players too) and seems to have a brain (unlike Billy V)

Beshocked, its good that potential future players are being identified and that players putting in good performances are being recognised...

In all honesty, i just hope Ben Morgan gets his head sorted when he joins up with the England camp...i firmly believe that a backrow of Wood, Robshaw and Morgan could be very impressive if they are allowed to get a good run of games together...

We'll see how Ewers does vs Glasgow.

Sgt Pooly how often do you see any player stroll into the England side? Every player has to earn their place. Ewers is no different.

Will Fraser has done far more than Ewers has but I wouldn't have Fraser in the England backrow just yet. Nothing to do with club allegiance.

I'm talking squad not side, TJ doesn't deserve his spot imo, he offers little now and going forward.

beshocked wrote:We'll see how Ewers does vs Glasgow.

Sgt Pooly how often do you see any player stroll into the England side? Every player has to earn their place. Ewers is no different.

Will Fraser has done far more than Ewers has but I wouldn't have Fraser in the England backrow just yet. Nothing to do with club allegiance.

Thats correct Beshocked, Lancaster has actually said a player must be playing consitantly for at least 6 months + and the top of their game at top level before they would be considered...and even then i imagine it would be for the Saxons.

"Lancaster has actually said a player must be playing consitantly for at least 6 months + and the top of their game at top level before they would be considered..."


So how does that work?

Ashton has been rubbish since 2011 rwc.

Has he though?

He's played well generally bar a minor slump for Sarries (beshocked can confirm)

Its the style Englands played that has been a problem for Ashton...in my useless opinion anyway...

I can't agree with that, whenever I've seen him play he doesn't look like the same player that burst onto the union scene.

Geordiefalcon I wouldn't say Ashton has shaken the foundation as Ewers seems to have done. Ashton has been solid though - scoring tries at a strike rate of about 50% which is pretty good. 3 tries in 6 games this season.

Ashton has been good when England have given him a good enough platform - vs Scotland and NZ he scored a try in both.

You need another winger to complement - Mike Brown is no winger.

Still a better strike rate than the Welsh legend, North.

beshocked wrote:Geordiefalcon I wouldn't say Ashton has shaken the foundation as Ewers seems to have done. Ashton has been solid though - scoring tries at a strike rate of about 50% which is pretty good. 3 tries in 6 games this season.

Ashton has been good when England have given him a good enough platform - vs Scotland and NZ he scored a try in both.

You need another winger to complement - Mike Brown is no winger.

Still a better strike rate than the Welsh legend, North.

My only issue isnt that he is not a very good try scoring winger, but that maybe we have unearthed two players in Wade and Yarde who do can do that and more

I disagree, i think he is a good try scoring winger...i just think he thrives off a certain game type and certainly with regards to England, we havent been playing a gametype that really suits him.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I disagree, i think he is a good try scoring winger...i just think he thrives off a certain game type and certainly with regards to England, we havent been playing a gametype that really suits him.

 
Then why continue to use him?
 
I would have thought a quality/world class winger can adapt their game.

Has any of our backs excelled during the Lancaster era?

Harsh to single out Ashton

Scrumpy wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:I disagree, i think he is a good try scoring winger...i just think he thrives off a certain game type and certainly with regards to England, we havent been playing a gametype that really suits him.

 
Then why continue to use him?
 
I would have thought a quality/world class winger can adapt their game.

Depends - some can some are just very good at certain skill sets and you want to make the most of those skills.

If you follow that reasoning the next thing you will want to do is something completely crazy like move a full back to wing

Maybe Geordie, but he draws attention to himself by doing silly dives and giving away silly penalties.

Plus his just got one of those faces that makes you want to do a Manu on him!

GeordieFalcon wrote:Has any of our backs excelled during the Lancaster era?

Harsh to single out Ashton

Closest for me would be Mike Brown on the wing. Great feet, excellent kicking option.. just shame he's slower then Jason Leonard.

Why is he so slow?

Surely thats something he could work on.

only thing you can't teach.

You can work on your speed but surely 9/10ths or however much is ability.. the rest is just refining your assets (however good or bad it is).

He's probably not that slow.. just compared to his 3/4 peers.

hawalsh wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

hawalsh wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:

hawalsh wrote:Ewers can't be called up for the training squad because he wasn't selected in the EPS or Saxons in the summer.

That's not the case, he could've selected anyone as injury cover. Not that I think he should've in this instance. Ewers has looked really good but needs a full season and Saxons appearance first. Although Morgan turned down the Saxons when invited!

I still don't understand people going on about Webber. Why would we want to replace a BR with another hooker?

JJ hasn't shown the sort of form that would've got him his place back but picking three centres ahead of him is a bit of a blow to the lad I would've thought. If Corbs is out i'd expect Lancs to select Vunipola, his scrummaging is a work in progress but he could go well against OZ.

Any news on Attwood? Launchbury has put in some more storming performances for Wasps but not really in the same game areas as Attwood.

Are you sure about that?  My understanding was that although that is true during the international window, for training sessions outside that any EPS replacement has to come from the Saxons first.  There was an article last week where Lancaster expressed his frustration at not being able to bring Dickinson or Ewers in, which was well after Croft's injury opened up a cover spot.  Also, not sure how well covering a staright-out 6 with an 8 who hasn't played 6 in some time would have gone down in terms of the ethos of the cover agreement.

Yes. If you want an example of that policy in action look at Henry Trinder.

The following is what was reported in the papers:

Lancaster spoke last week of the constraints of working within the agreement over player release between the Rugby Football Union and Premiership clubs and it is those rules that are likely to prevent him from replacing Croft with his preferred choice.

Number eights Sam Dickinson of Northampton and Dave Ewers of Exeter have excelled since Premiership action began in September but, like Trinder, are not in either senior squad named in August so are set to be rendered unavailable to Lancaster.

"Picking a player from outside the squads is a challenge. It can be achieved, but it's not been achieved yet," Lancaster said.

If Lancaster is unable to promote either Dickinson or Ewers, Tom Johnson of Exeter or Saracens' Will Fraser are in contention to fill the back row vacancy created by Croft's season-ending injury.

So like I suggested, if it is occasionally allowed it must have to be a like-for-like positional player.  Lancaster wanted to bring an extra 8 in but clearly wasn't allowed.

What you suggested originally was that any replacement for a senior player had to come from within the two Elite squads. That is wrong on the evidence. The quote you have used from the press is also inaccurate (see in bold). Trinder has come in from outside the squads.

Therefore without knowing the terms of this 'cover agreement' any speculation as to the replacements for players is purely speculative. Further, who is to say who plays in what position. With the back-row it is even more impossible to clearly discern a set position with players often rotating. As a quick example Tom Wood played No.8 at the start of the year. Tom Corft has been known to play in the second row etc..

Whilst either Dickinson or Ewers may essentially be considered as an '8' to say they would be excluded because they would have to replace Tom Croft, a '6' is not logical. Who is to say who plays where? Do we take the most recent game as evidence of where a player plays? If so you'll see that Dave Ewers played at No.6 for Exeter v Cardiff on the weekend (as he has done many times before). Kai Horstman playing at No.8.

Thus to say either Ewers or Dickinson would be excluded from replacing Tom Croft is a nonsense on the facts. Even the terms of agreement would be called into serious question, if we were in possession of those.

Im a huge fan of Brown and he should be FB in the AI's without question but i dont think he has really excelled either stuck out on the wing....though he was certainly the best of our backs if we're looking at offensive aspects.
Also I dont think Mike brown is actually that slow. But thats not his game...he's just so hard to tackle, he's aggressive, he gets past players.

The only back who really has excelled in my eyes is Barritt...and sadly that isnt remotley in an offensive manner its as the defence general that he's been asked to do. I think this sums up Englands backs during Lancasters era, and why so many of us are now calling for much more offensively.

get players like Morgan, Vunipola brother, Youngs crashing through taking England forward and you'll see the likes of Ashton come to life...

GeordieFalcon wrote:Im a huge fan of Brown and he should be FB in the AI's without question but i dont think he has really excelled either stuck out on the wing....though he was certainly the best of our backs if we're looking at offensive aspects.
Also I dont think Mike brown is actually that slow. But thats not his game...he's just so hard to tackle, he's aggressive, he gets past players.

The only back who really has excelled in my eyes is Barritt...and sadly that isnt remotley in an offensive manner its as the defence general that he's been asked to do. I think this sums up Englands backs during Lancasters era, and why so many of us are now calling for much more offensively.

get players like Morgan, Vunipola brother, Youngs crashing through taking England forward and you'll see the likes of Ashton come to life...

Brown should get the 15 shirt on merit no question in my mind. I'd like to see Foden on the bench. What I would say is that however much Mike Brown has worked on his acceleration over 10/20m he is still limited in terms of flat out pace by comparison of those other backs around him in the squad.

What i'd like to see is Brown's ability to beat defenders, stay strong in the tackle and offload with some real pace outside him. I know we can't go with total inexperience in the backline, and neither would I expect it but i'd like to see something like this:

9. B Youngs
10. F Burns (O Farrell)
12. B Twelvetrees
11. M Yarde
13. K Eastmond (J Tomkins)
14. C Wade (C Ashton)
15. M Brown

In brackets are what I think Lancs will select for OZ on current form. The back-line i've picked though could compliment each other very well and offers some outstanding threats from 9 to 15, something we haven't seen from an England back line...ever? All of those players can break and exploit weaknesses themselves. The 9-13 axis has some super distribution skills and there are four full on kicking threats in Brown, Youngs, 36 and Burns. Defensively it's sound with Wade the only real question mark. Also very safe under the high ball, again with the exception of Wade. What he brings to the party though, I feel make up for any of these negatives.

That is an exciting proposition Chjw !

Having multiple threats across a backline does not increase the overall threat level by increments of 1. It is more exponential i think.

Where a succession of England coaches have failed is that they're conservative and on occasion they will pick a good attacking player but they will maroon them in an otherwise non threatening backline.

They fail to construct a proper backline.

You could put Jonah Lomu on the end of some of our backlines over the years and he wouldn't be able to do much.

Similarly if you play Burns for god's sake give him attacking runners to use.

Triangulation wrote:

That is an exciting proposition Chjw !

Having multiple threats across a backline does not increase the overall threat level by increments of 1.  It is more exponential i think.

Where a succession of England coaches have failed is that they're conservative and on occasion they will pick a good attacking player but they will maroon them in an otherwise non threatening backline.

They fail to construct a proper backline.

You could put Jonah Lomu on the end of some of our backlines over the years and he wouldn't be able to do much.

Similarly if you play Burns for god's sake give him attacking runners to use.

Spot on Tri, that's often been the problem with England. Take a good attacking threat and make them look ordinary by a) putting all the responsibility on their shoulders and b) surrounding them with players who don't compliment them.

The back-line, much like the back row and pack should be looked at holistically. I agree that threats across the park, if combined with a good pack increase their effectiveness by more than a notional denomination of one.

Yes - single or even double threats in a backline not only have a near impossible task in trying to create and finish off everything themselves but they are also relatively easily marked out of the game by the defenders.

You cannot easily mark a backline with the threat that yours would pose. It is essentially man on man marking with a little help from the forwards in cover defence.

One mistake by one defender in this scenario and the line is breached.

This puts stress on individual defenders and on defensive systems.

In turn this makes it more likely that defensive errors will occur. Especially later on in the game when defenders are fatigued physically and just as importantly mentally.

Isolate defenders, stress them by forcing them to think constantly under pressure, tire them and keep it going. Line breaks and tries just have to follow.

fa0019 wrote:only thing you can't teach.

You can work on your speed but surely 9/10ths or however much is ability.. the rest is just refining your assets (however good or bad it is).

He's probably not that slow.. just compared to his 3/4 peers.

He's not even that slow then, he raced literally around 3 defenders for his 2nd try vs Scarlets. He lacks outright pace but that is rarely useful in any ball sport at all, and his acceleration is good. He was just unlucky to get himself out of position vs Tipuric which has propagated a myth that has been false for quite some time