England Training Squad

Rugby Fan wrote:If Jones ever picked a team with Hartley, Farrell, Brown and Ashton, then that would be a full complement of England players opposition supporters love to hate.

LondonTiger wrote:I would prefer John Mitchell as forwards coach.

BamBam wrote:Is Mercer injured? He's a different kind of 8, but definitely think he's one that should be in and around a squad like this

Cumbrian wrote:...I worry that Billy might suffer the same problems as Manu (too big for his frame, increasingly injury prone)...

Welly wrote: Cole is in the other category which is basically rested.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Welly wrote: Cole is in the other category which is basically rested.

Rested from being rested.....interesting. Will we see Cole in an England jersey again?

Rugby Fan wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:...I worry that Billy might suffer the same problems as Manu (too big for his frame, increasingly injury prone)...

England's history with Pacific Islander heritage players is short, because they are primarily the offspring of players who came to Britain to play professional rugby. Consequently, the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions but it's noticeble Faletau isn't injured as much as Billy and Manu, and Pacific Islanders with NZ, Australia and France don't seem to be out for as long either.

LondonTiger wrote:If we assume that those listed among the not considered are in contention that is a total of 57 names.

People not included who have featured in squads in the last 12 months (please let me know who I have missed):

Care
Smith
Boyce
Obano (long term injured)
Mercer
Graham
Mallinder
Yarde
Hill, Jonny
Earl
Woodward

Taylorman wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:...I worry that Billy might suffer the same problems as Manu (too big for his frame, increasingly injury prone)...

England's history with Pacific Islander heritage players is short, because they are primarily the offspring of players who came to Britain to play professional rugby. Consequently, the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions but it's noticeble Faletau isn't injured as much as Billy and Manu, and Pacific Islanders with NZ, Australia and France don't seem to be out for as long either.

Yes can be very divisive, and interestingly it puts rugbys two biggest nomad coaches together, maybe theres something in that. One thing about Mitchells sides is they tending to be very open, attacking sides though I see most of that being down to Carlos Spencers abilities as attack coach, and hes at the Canes next tear.

hugehandoff wrote:I saw that the Telegraph had an article on plans to limit the England players to 20 matches per season. The article was hidden behind their paywall so I was unable to read it. Anyone else care to share what it said? This potentially would be a very important breakthrough for England. Overplaying is clearly a problem.

England's top players may play fewer than 20 games a season as rugby chiefs look to halt injury rise


Gavin Mairs, rugby news correspondent
4 AUGUST 2018 • 10:33PM

England’s leading players could play fewer than 20 matches each season for club and country in a bid to address mounting concerns about the rate of injuries.

Player welfare have been central to the ongoing discussions between the Premiership clubs and RFU in an attempt to find agreement over the number of domestic games that overlap with England’s Test matches.

RFU announced last month that is introducing a trial to lower the legal height of the tackle to the Championship Cup in the new season as part of a bid to address the injury rate.

Steve Brown, the RFU chief executive, has revealed the governing body is also making the case of reducing the workload on England’s top players, insisting it could be done despite the financial pressures facing the clubs and the union.

The governing body’s latest injury audit in March revealed that injuries in English rugby were increasing, both in terms of their frequency and severity.

The data - provided by the Professional Rugby Injury Surveillance Project (PRISP) – revealed that concussion is the most common injury, with 47 per cent of match injuries are linked to tackling.

“One of the theories that we are building at the moment that actually less is more,” said Brown.

“If you just take the international game in isolation. Commercially playing that few times a year actually generates more value that playing lots of time a year because scarcity does drive value, and drives the premium prices we are able to charge. Even now, we are still able to do that.

“We have two-and-a-half million people trying to buy a ticket for the autumn internationals. You have got that demand there. If that was 30 times a year you would probably lose value if you overdid it.

“There is something in that model that says less is more. If you talk about a player welfare issue, our commercial and player welfare ambitions can be aligned.”

Brown said the RFU was the injury data currently being collected could lead to a re-evaluation of the maximum number of games that an international is allowed to play each year, which currently stands at 32.

“When we look at stats, we currently have 32-game equivalents maximum for an international standard player,” Brown added. “Our guys are averaging about 20 at the moment, but even that might be too many. (It is) Particularly challenging in a Lions year.

“There is situation where we need to look collectively at how much rugby is played. But I actually think it is probably a group of about 50 players that do the most playing and we can probably name them all now and I think that is where we could get much more sophisticated with all the data that we now have.


“So it is less games or less games for that core of players. I have seen some stats that players are underplaying as well so if they are underplaying they are exposed to injury too and there are quite a number of players in that cohort.”

Brown also defended the RFU cost-cutting process, insisting it was necessary given the tough economic climate caused by uncertainty over Brexit and a changing landscape in broadcasting deals.

Brown confirmed this week that the RFU would be making at least 62 people redundant this month as part of a cost-cutting measure to save up to £3million per year.

“You talk about redundancies in the RFU, you see that everywhere at the moment,” Brown added. “But what we worry about is individual partners that we deal with are experiencing that pressure, whether it is Brexit or other things that are out there at the moment.

“There is quite a big change going on in the broadcast world in terms of how that is going to look going forward so we are just taking a view that is a sensible one so that we stay strong and well-off and comfortable and able to invest in the game continuously.

“We are taking a wider view of the economy which is partly Brexit-impacted but lots of other things as well. We are just looking about how much cash availability have people got to spend which what could be discretionary. Sometimes that is promotional stuff they do as a sponsor or a partner but also the people who come here and buy a box or entertain people, on match day or non-match day.

“We are just taking a cautious view of what that looks like. That is effected in the numbers that we are predicting at the moment which is why we are cutting back."

LondonTiger wrote:

Brown seems slightly confused - as there is no way that the top players are currently averaging 20 match equivalents per season (ie 1600 minutes of rugby). 20 matches (or equivalents) does seem rather low - especially with 12 internationals this year, but something does need to be done.

While workload does need to be managed, the fact that more injuries occur in training than matches also needs to be looked at. The clubs have already reduced full contact training during the season to virtually nothing to keep players fit, and then see Eddie break them by disregarding this.

The Times said Jones' decision to go for Mitchell to bolster his defensive system is "casting his vote in the most unlikely direction".

"John Mitchell? Yes, that would be the same John Mitchell who has never had 'defence coach' as a job title. In fact, in his role as head coach of the Bulls during the recent Super Rugby season, he did run the defence and only one team in the competition, the Sunwolves, conceded more tries," noted rugby correspondent Owen Slot in a strong column.

"There is so much to question about this decision that you cannot but ask: is this really the best England could get? Mitchell has vast experience: he has been the head coach of the All Blacks and the United States. Yet one of the reasons he has this depth of experience is that he has job-hopped so fast, rarely staying for long.

If, or when, he takes this England job, it will be his 15th professional coaching job in six countries in 22 years. This is a CV that has long lost its shine."

The Times also dug up an interesting twist on Mitchell's previous England experience when he was forwards coach early in the tenure of Sir Clive Woodward's successful run as head coach.

"There is evidence to suggest that that team only really came together at the point that Mitchell left and was replaced by Andy Robinson. That was the suggestion that Woodward made in his book, Winning: 'Once he [Robinson] was on board, I believed winning the World Cup was a very real possibility'.

"Did the RFU ask Woodward about this? Or is it, actually, the case that Jones's opinion overrides the kind of due diligence that, for instance, turned the Stormers away from his man."

The Times pondered the dynamics of the two men: "The pair have never worked together before, and they are both alpha males. How quickly can they form a team? Furthermore, Mitchell has been a head coach since 2000, so how will he adapt to taking orders from someone else? Mitchell is a coach with a very firm view of how he wants things done, but what if Jones wants something different?"

Rugby Fan wrote:The RFU recently backed Jones, but also put him on notice. Who knows what they are actually thinking, but the impression you get is that another run of poor form, perhaps including the Autumn Internationals, will not be acceptable.

So, I question the wisdom of spending a large amount of money on such a controversial candidate. If the RFU ends up sacking Jones, then it's unlikely that they will want to hand the reins over to Mitchell, and even less that a new coach will want him on his team.

In the best case, Jones chooses all the right people to help him, but I don't think that can include anyone he asks for, when you are no longer sure if he has ability to do what you once thought.

doctor_grey wrote:So, what are the RFU going to do if the results in the Autumn are not so good?  Get rid of their coach less than one year before the World Cup?

kingelderfield wrote:You never know as mentioned above Mitchell and Jones might spark some magic, however My reaction is that everything about such an appointment is fundamentally wrong. Why are we not able to create a premier/union coaching feeder programme like the Kiwis do?
Honestly Mitchell is a awful, desperate decision by Jones.
There are coaches in the premiership, could they not be used in a part-time capacity if they're not permanently available?
We need better longer term strategies.

Rugby Fan wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:So, what are the RFU going to do if the results in the Autumn are not so good?  Get rid of their coach less than one year before the World Cup?

That's what happened when Robinson was sacked, and Brian Ashton appointed. No idea if the RFU wants to repeat the trick. Ashton was already part of the England management team, so it was a question of asking him to step up, rather than starting a search.

yappysnap wrote:Been reported that it'll cost the RFU approx £500k to buy Mitchell out of his contract at the Bulls. Wtf.