England Squad Named

First topic message reminder :

SQUAD IN FULL

Here it is: Eddie Jones first squad as England head coach.

Forwards

Josh Beaumont (Sale Sharks), Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers), Luke Cowan-Dickie (Exeter Chiefs), Jack Clifford (Harlequins), Jamie George (Saracens), Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints), James Haskell (Wasps), Paul Hill (Northampton Saints), Maro Itoje (Saracens), George Kruis (Saracens), Matt Kvesic (Gloucester Rugby) *injury replacement for Dave Ewers (Exeter Chiefs), Joe Launchbury (Wasps), Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints), Joe Marler (Harlequins), Matt Mullan (Wasps), Chris Robshaw (Harlequins), Henry Thomas (Bath Rugby) *injury replacement for Kieran Brookes (Northampton Saints), Billy Vunipola (Saracens), Mako Vunipola (Saracens)

Backs

Chris Ashton (Saracens), Mike Brown (Harlequins), Danny Care (Harlequins), Elliot Daly (Wasps), Ollie Devoto (Bath Rugby) *injury replacement for Manu Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers), Owen Farrell (Saracens), George Ford (Bath Rugby), Alex Goode (Saracens), Sam Hill (Exeter Chiefs) *injury replacement for Henry Slade (Exeter Chiefs), Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby), Jack Nowell (Exeter Chiefs), Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby), Marland Yarde (Harlequins), Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)

Per Sky

Lawes hasn't been at his best consistently for over a year. His trademark hits aren't even coming on backs.

I'd just go with the medical guys opinion of whats fully fit for a rugby player! I suspect most players aren't 100% in tip top condition at any point during the season so I suppose being able to perform at their peak would cover it? Form has it's place but a different team and a player can look very different to what we see on a club weekend e.g. Morgan who never seems to reach the same heights for his club. Said it before but a form England side will look very different from the likely one picked and wouldn't perform better than the likely one in a majority of cases.

Obviously a players strengths weaknesses and playing style come into it as well.

I think Lawes has been living off his reputation for some time. When England came to Cardiff with Kruise and Attwood in 2015 they just bullied Wales from the first minute and dominated the game. That is the type of style and performance they need to emulate. Go back to their traditional strengths whilst developing power and dynamism behind which means playing Nowell regularly. Still lacking a 7 but maybe that's something for the near future as it is an absolute imperative and they need to get that sorted as the current back row leaves a lot to be desired IMO:thumbsup:

RubyGuby wrote:I think Lawes has been living off his reputation for some time. When England came to Cardiff with Kruise and Attwood in 2015 they just bullied Wales from the first minute and dominated the game. That is the type of style and performance they need to emulate. Go back to their traditional strengths whilst developing power and dynamism behind which means playing Nowell regularly. Still lacking a 7 but maybe that's something for the near future as it is an absolute imperative and they need to get that sorted as the current back row leaves a lot to be desired IMO:thumbsup:

Bullied from the first minute and dominated the game ? England were 10 points down at half time ?

England haven't bullied anyone up front for a long time.

RubyGuby wrote:I think Lawes has been living off his reputation for some time. When England came to Cardiff with Kruise and Attwood in 2015 they just bullied Wales from the first minute and dominated the game. That is the type of style and performance they need to emulate. Go back to their traditional strengths whilst developing power and dynamism behind which means playing Nowell regularly. Still lacking a 7 but maybe that's something for the near future as it is an absolute imperative and they need to get that sorted as the current back row leaves a lot to be desired IMO:thumbsup:

I think that's exactly what Jones is planning Ruby...hence Haskell type players in there at 7 over specialised like Kvesic etc.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:I think Lawes has been living off his reputation for some time. When England came to Cardiff with Kruise and Attwood in 2015 they just bullied Wales from the first minute and dominated the game. That is the type of style and performance they need to emulate. Go back to their traditional strengths whilst developing power and dynamism behind which means playing Nowell regularly. Still lacking a 7 but maybe that's something for the near future as it is an absolute imperative and they need to get that sorted as the current back row leaves a lot to be desired IMO

I think that's exactly what Jones is planning Ruby...hence Haskell type players in there at 7 over specialised like Kvesic etc.

I do wonder if Kitchener is going to turn into the 'Simon Shaw' of this generation of players. The guy who would win caps in most other international teams but who doesn't quite make it in ours.

Hopefully its only short term until he can really get to work on them in the summer and use some specialists aswell as bullying teams.

I am a huge Kvesic fan.

lostinwales wrote:I do wonder if Kitchener is going to turn  into the 'Simon Shaw' of this generation of players. The guy who would win caps in most other international teams but who doesn't quite make it in ours.

The problem with Kitchener is that he seems to have taken so long to really nail a tigers shirt, and successive England managers don't seem to have rated him.

There must be some reason.

Shaw did get some caps though, so all is not lost. Not every player needs to be capped at 22.

RubyGuby wrote:I think Lawes has been living off his reputation for some time. When England came to Cardiff with Kruise and Attwood in 2015 they just bullied Wales from the first minute and dominated the game. That is the type of style and performance they need to emulate. Go back to their traditional strengths whilst developing power and dynamism behind which means playing Nowell regularly. Still lacking a 7 but maybe that's something for the near future as it is an absolute imperative and they need to get that sorted as the current back row leaves a lot to be desired IMO:thumbsup:

Agree with a lot of that Ruby. Get a big and very powerful tight 5 who can dominate up front then a quick back line to take advantage of quick ball and space created out wide.

I think in a way that is how Jones is viewing Haskell at 7. He wants his set-piece to give his side good enough ball to allow them to attack from first phase rather than turnovers. As such he is picking the 7 he thinks is best suited to securing phase ball and offering another carrier off 9. In time he seems to view Clifford as the best guy for that role given he can also link with the backs so well.

I still want Kvesic to get a go but if he can get a back row balance and game plan working that allows us to play some quick rugby then I'll be a happy man whoever is playing!

munkian wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:I think Lawes has been living off his reputation for some time. When England came to Cardiff with Kruise and Attwood in 2015 they just bullied Wales from the first minute and dominated the game. That is the type of style and performance they need to emulate. Go back to their traditional strengths whilst developing power and dynamism behind which means playing Nowell regularly. Still lacking a 7 but maybe that's something for the near future as it is an absolute imperative and they need to get that sorted as the current back row leaves a lot to be desired IMO:thumbsup:

Bullied from the first minute and dominated the game ? England were 10 points down at half time ?

England haven't bullied anyone up front for a long time.

I don't think it was an exaggeration to say Wales were bullied in this game. The welsh scrum was going backwards from the off & it was a dubious pick up by Faletau & English indiscipline that gave Wales the lead at half time. The second half was one way traffic that scoreline flattered Wales big time.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

munkian wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:I think Lawes has been living off his reputation for some time. When England came to Cardiff with Kruise and Attwood in 2015 they just bullied Wales from the first minute and dominated the game. That is the type of style and performance they need to emulate. Go back to their traditional strengths whilst developing power and dynamism behind which means playing Nowell regularly. Still lacking a 7 but maybe that's something for the near future as it is an absolute imperative and they need to get that sorted as the current back row leaves a lot to be desired IMO:thumbsup:

Bullied from the first minute and dominated the game ? England were 10 points down at half time ?

England haven't bullied anyone up front for a long time.

I don't think it was an exaggeration to say Wales were bullied in this game. The welsh scrum was going backwards from the off & it was a dubious pick up by Faletau & English indiscipline that gave Wales the lead at half time. The second half was one way traffic  that scoreline flattered Wales big time.

Its worth adding to the above by saying that yes Wales made and rode their luck in the first quarter but after that were pretty toothless (and scoreless in the 2nd half). Good defense as ever though, but not enough on its own.

I think it's true that England haven't really bullied their way round the park in a while but I do think they have controlled games well. There's only been a handful of performances where we've been blown off the park by the opposition pack.

I'll repeat England dominated that game from the 1st minute, an illegal Faletau try and a few penalty's gave the score line a flattering look for welsh fans and although ahead at half time we were never allowed to be at the races and were living off scraps. Very dominant performance by England up front which gave their backs a good platform to work from and perhaps they should have scored 1 or 2 more trys. The irony is that Lancaster only chose the team through injuries. He should have stuck with them and that style and taken it into the RWC. It was a very dominant performance against a good welsh team in Cardiff.

Do you guys think that that win in Cardiff made England all the more complacent going into the game they then lost against Wales at the RWC...???

Not really, played a completely different game plan to which we went for in the 6Ns trying to rely more on the pack and territory than using our backs and trusting Slade as a capable back up. Burgess Barritt was awfully one dimensional even so it was capitulation in the last 20 min.

1st half in the RWC was one way traffic again. Francis was having a horrible time in the scrum and when May scored it looked like it was going to be pretty straightforward. Its just that England never pulled far enough ahead (a lot to do with how tough Wales were to break down) and Wales never quit. Then there was the meltdown in the 2nd half....

maestegmafia wrote:Do you guys think that that win in Cardiff made England all the more complacent going into the game they then lost against Wales at the RWC...???

Not really.

I think we froze at the WC. We played some nice stuff building up to the competition but the selections and injuries forced SL to compromise the attacking game that had worked so well with this bizarre containment game. He just basically got it wrong. He tried to change the forwards from this almost dominant pack that could mix it up to a pack of 8 flankers. The set piece suffered and struggled in the contact.

The game against Aus was more of a showcase of this. We bossed Aus on previous occasions and the set piece seemed to be taken for granted. We lost the scrum and struggled with the physicality. In previous games we were able to physically outmuscle the Aus pack and prevent Pocock from getting into the game, we didn't get near that in the WC.

We basically froze against Wales and winning would have papered over the cracks.

I agree with a lot of the above. I think in particular I was disappointed with our 2 first choice props Marler & Cole they just did not turn up at the WC.
If they are chosen again for Saturday together with Hartley. They all owe a performance for England because none of them would be first choice on form.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:I agree with a lot of the above. I think in particular I was disappointed with our 2 first choice props Marler & Cole they just did not turn up at the WC.
If they are chosen again for Saturday together with Hartley. They all owe a performance for England because none of them would be first choice on form.

Yet people chose Cole above Brookes even when Brookes was fit and tearing teams a new one earlier this season.

I think Cole and Marler had a lot to do with conditioning aswell.

Lancaster wanted them more like flankers than Props. I think it affected their power.

Scottrf wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:I agree with a lot of the above. I think in particular I was disappointed with our 2 first choice props Marler & Cole they just did not turn up at the WC.
If they are chosen again for Saturday together with Hartley. They all owe a performance for England because none of them would be first choice on form.

Yet people chose Cole above Brookes even when Brookes was fit and tearing teams a new one earlier this season.

Brookes still has an issue with lasting more the 30-40 minutes without trailing off. The problem here is that Brookes scrummaging is the first thing to go when he starts struggling.

He has improved in this regard and if he keeps doing so could be an excellent starting TH for England fairly soon. Until he can last more than 40 minutes against top sides without tailing off at set-piece he will be a difficult player to start at international level.

Cole has been better this season but still far from his best form. His scrummaging has looked solid if unspectacular and he has cut down the number of silly penalties he was giving away at the break down. In an ideal world I'd want someone playing a bit better to start but with Brookes coming back from injury, Paul Hill very green, Davey Wilson a long long way off and Henry Thomas part of an inconsistent Bath set-piece it isn't an ideal situation.

It's always been Brookes issue. He'd start lasting a half then he'd pick up a knock and be back to a 20min prop.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I think Cole and Marler had a lot to do with conditioning aswell.

I think Cole and Marler had a lot to do with Youngs being between them instead of Hartley, personally.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I think Cole and Marler had a lot to do with conditioning aswell.

Lancaster wanted them more like flankers than Props. I think it affected their power.

Marler got caught out by a very well orchestrated Aussie comms campaign, too. Every time they had a put in, the entire pack took a co-ordinated step to the left, which inevitably twisted Marler round like he was boring in. But because they'd banged on about it in the media beforehand, the ref knew where to place the blame rather than look at what was actually happening. I'm not saying Marler was blameless - as a prop, you bore in if you can get away with it - but until this year he's had a justified reputation as a clean if not particularly destructive scrummager.

maestegmafia wrote:Do you guys think that that win in Cardiff made England all the more complacent going into the game they then lost against Wales at the RWC...???

No. The managements absolute fear of the Welsh centres then the turgid selection of Farrell,Burgess and Barritt to counter it ultimately lost us the game. It played straight into gatlandballs plans. Wales saw the gaps, played with more confidence and belief and deserved the win.

Got my eye on Mitch Lees. If he can get fit again he will be the next "Bakkies Botha" for England. A very promising talent but some way to go before he gets a Red Rose shirt.

Breadvan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Do you guys think that that win in Cardiff made England all the more complacent going into the game they then lost against Wales at the RWC...???

No. The managements absolute fear of the Welsh centres then the turgid selection of Farrell,Burgess and Barritt to counter it ultimately lost us the game. It played straight into gatlandballs plans. Wales saw the gaps, played with more confidence and belief and deserved the win.

I disagree

Sam kept Doc quiet

The mistake that cost you the game was taking him off.

Doc immediately started making yards in the 10/12 channel and gave us the front foot ball to get wide quick and hit your wing channels which, unbelievably, were defending deep.

Our whole pack was underbulked, because we decided to go for the "League, one size fits all" conditioning...

Gwlad wrote:

Breadvan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Do you guys think that that win in Cardiff made England all the more complacent going into the game they then lost against Wales at the RWC...???

No. The managements absolute fear of the Welsh centres then the turgid selection of Farrell,Burgess and Barritt to counter it ultimately lost us the game. It played straight into gatlandballs plans. Wales saw the gaps, played with more confidence and belief and deserved the win.

I disagree

Sam kept Doc quiet

The mistake that cost you the game was taking him off.

Doc immediately started making yards in the 10/12 channel and gave us the front foot ball to get wide quick and hit your wing channels which, unbelievably, were defending deep.

Agree about taking Burgess off.  Defensively he was quite good in that game.  But he was replaced by Ford (or Ford for Farrell and Farrell for Burgess).  Changed and weakened the entire defensive structure.  

But as we have discussed before, the team was already damaged.  Lancaster de-powered the entire pack in the pre-RWC training, which was the only long term period of time he ever had with the team to mold it to his liking.  Unfortunately for England, Wales, and especially Australia, liked it too.

Roberts is very overrated though. Gatland should drop him altogether and leave him at Quins

Please?

For me that single decision, more than picking him in the first place, epitomized just how lacking in rugby brains lancaster was. If you pick a man mountain like Burgess for his ability to make defense offensive, you dont then take him off in a very tight game with 20 to go because you want a playmaker to have a go. Wales were suffocating, unable to get through the midfield and forced to kick the ball away or try and get wide anyway they could which meant they just got shepherd to the 5 m and touch. off goes Slammin Sam and its like an invitation to take it up!

Even now i can't believe he did it because it gifted us the game.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Roberts is very overrated though. Gatland should drop him altogether and leave him at Quins

Don't entirely disagree

As a blunt instrument who occasionally finds a sweet inside shoulder he is pretty effective. But he passes almost as poorly as JD2 - Varsity is proof- and is not especially quick.

But as a system player he is outstanding.

He is exactly the player Quins needed

Basically imagine Roberts but everything 30% less good and you have JTH

Gwlad wrote:For me that single decision, more than picking him in the first place, epitomized just how lacking in rugby brains lancaster was. If you pick a man mountain like Burgess for his ability to make defense offensive, you dont then take him off in a very tight game with 20 to go because you want a playmaker to have a go. Wales were suffocating, unable to get through the midfield and forced to kick the ball away or try and get wide anyway they could which meant they just got shepherd to the 5 m and touch. off goes Slammin Sam and its like an invitation to take it up!

Even now i can't believe he did it because it gifted us the game.

Agree.  It was a truly bizarre, mind boggling decision:  
Defending a lead in the final quarter.  Let's bring on our worst defender and replace one of our best.  UFB.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Basically imagine Roberts but everything 30% less good and you have JTH

odd because I am sure 2/3 seasons ago he was the next best thing about to break into England.

How Jamie doesn't get more injured is beyond me.

Are quins playing a form of gatball then?

No but our attack relies on getting someone over the gain line. That's Doc's job. Without a carrier in the centre it doesn't work, we become too lateral

For the Six Nations, maybe we should clone Jamie George.  Could you imagine 15 of these on the pitch?  Would scare the daylights out of everyone.  I love this picture.  

ChequeredJersey wrote:No but our attack relies on getting someone over the gain line. That's Doc's job. Without a carrier in the centre it doesn't work, we become too lateral

which forces defenses to use 2 or sometimes 3 players to bring him down….unless you have a guy like Burgess who will take him out over the gainline one on one right!!!

Oh Stewie.

Gwlad wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:Basically imagine Roberts but everything 30% less good and you have JTH

odd because I am sure 2/3 seasons ago he was the next best thing about to break into England.

How Jamie doesn't get more injured is beyond me.

Are quins playing a form of gatball then?

Not really, in that we don't have back rowers playing 9, 11 & 14, and our 15 can't kick goals. But our offence works so much better with a couple of good ball carriers to straighten the line and make space for the offloading game out wide

Anyway…my other bone of contention with England is consistency and i reckon Eddie is too smart to fall foul of that

What is the starting XV looking like?

Poorfour wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:Basically imagine Roberts but everything 30% less good and you have JTH

odd because I am sure 2/3 seasons ago he was the next best thing about to break into England.

How Jamie doesn't get more injured is beyond me.

Are quins playing a form of gatball then?

Not really, in that we don't have back rowers playing 9, 11 & 14, and our 15 can't kick goals. But our offence works so much better with a couple of good ball carriers to straighten the line and make space for the offloading game out wide

Davies and Amos hardly back rowers, North more of a prop!

And Biggar kicks for us now and IMO will continue to do so even when Half returns

Rumoured to be

Brown
Watson
Joseph
Farrell
Nowell
Ford
Care
Vunipola
Haskell
Robshaw
Kruis
Launchbury
Cole
Hartley (c)
Vunipola

englandglory4ever wrote:Got my eye on Mitch Lees. If he can get fit again he will be the next "Bakkies Botha" for England. A very promising talent but some way to go before he gets a Red Rose shirt.

Isnt he an Aussie...and a poor version of Ed Slater?

doctor_grey wrote:For the Six Nations, maybe we should clone Jamie George.  Could you imagine 15 of these on the pitch?  Would scare the daylights out of everyone.  I love this picture.  

I think its safe to see you'll be seeing him on Saturday for at least 20 mins...and that's a good thing.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:For the Six Nations, maybe we should clone Jamie George.  Could you imagine 15 of these on the pitch?  Would scare the daylights out of everyone.  I love this picture.  

I think its safe to see you'll be seeing him on Saturday for at least 20 mins...and that's a good thing.

Will Eddie pull his captain off if the game is not already in the bag with 20 to go?

ChequeredJersey wrote:Rumoured to be

Brown
Watson
Joseph
Farrell
Nowell
Ford
Care
Vunipola
Haskell
Robshaw
Kruis
Launchbury
Cole
Hartley (c)
Vunipola

Big psychical pack, Tarzan swinging on his vine etc

Care i just like, always have, in front of a creative and talent laden set of backs. If Care fires it will decide game.

But huge responsibility on Care because i see a disjoint there. Alludes to Eddie's opening statements about what style England must adopt. The backs will be crying out for ball while the pack stuffs it up the jumper.

I expect them to come out and maul their way round Edinburgh! If Scots can hold them out for the first 30 minutes I think it might reveal a bit of Route 1 fever in England.

Will be a cracking game though.