England still winning the RWC at a canter - The quarter finals and beyond

First topic message reminder :

Carried on..............

Geordie wrote:Ill say it for the last time and im not saying again as its boring...SB clearly had a plan for the World Cup. Hes improved the scrum, the lineout working and the breakdown is at its best for years. The defence was wobbly but has hugely improved towards the end. Thats how you build a team....start from the basics up.

Thus.....The basics are now there to build on...and the key aspects...improving the quality of the kicking...and reducing the wasted kicks...and bringing in an attack. Felix Jones is now in place and things will come through.

England now...at the very worst...are a hard team to beat. That not a bad place to be in, baring in mind France / ireland etc are al 4/5 years down the road....

Being 4/5 years down the road is a double-edged sword, though. Most of the higher ranked teams (and Ireland in particular) have more of a squad rebuild to do than England - IIRC England had the youngest squad in the QFs. They are further through their tactical evolution, but the Law changes that I suspect will come through this cycle could be a great leveller.

It'll be an interesting 6 Nations. England have pretty much the most benign schedule they could get, starting with Italy and then with what are likely to be progressively harder matches (Scotland Away, Wales at Home, Ireland at Home, France Away), which gives Borthwick a chance to build through the tournament and bed in some tactical innovation alog the way.

Poorfour wrote:

Geordie wrote:Ill say it for the last time and im not saying again as its boring...SB clearly had a plan for the World Cup. Hes improved the scrum, the lineout working and the breakdown is at its best for years. The defence was wobbly but has hugely improved towards the end. Thats how you build a team....start from the basics up.

Thus.....The basics are now there to build on...and the key aspects...improving the quality of the kicking...and reducing the wasted kicks...and bringing in an attack. Felix Jones is now in place and things will come through.

England now...at the very worst...are a hard team to beat. That not a bad place to be in, baring in mind France / ireland etc are al 4/5 years down the road....

Being 4/5 years down the road is a double-edged sword, though. Most of the higher ranked teams (and Ireland in particular) have more of a squad rebuild to do than England - IIRC England had the youngest squad in the QFs. They are further through their tactical evolution, but the Law changes that I suspect will come through this cycle could be a great leveller.

It'll be an interesting 6 Nations. England have pretty much the most benign schedule they could get, starting with Italy and then with what are likely to be progressively harder matches (Scotland Away, Wales at Home, Ireland at Home, France Away), which gives Borthwick a chance to build through the tournament and bed in some tactical innovation alog the way.

Do they? They have a huge gap at 10...but are they really in a big rebuild?

Geordie wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

Geordie wrote:Ill say it for the last time and im not saying again as its boring...SB clearly had a plan for the World Cup. Hes improved the scrum, the lineout working and the breakdown is at its best for years. The defence was wobbly but has hugely improved towards the end. Thats how you build a team....start from the basics up.

Thus.....The basics are now there to build on...and the key aspects...improving the quality of the kicking...and reducing the wasted kicks...and bringing in an attack. Felix Jones is now in place and things will come through.

England now...at the very worst...are a hard team to beat. That not a bad place to be in, baring in mind France / ireland etc are al 4/5 years down the road....

Being 4/5 years down the road is a double-edged sword, though. Most of the higher ranked teams (and Ireland in particular) have more of a squad rebuild to do than England - IIRC England had the youngest squad in the QFs. They are further through their tactical evolution, but the Law changes that I suspect will come through this cycle could be a great leveller.

It'll be an interesting 6 Nations. England have pretty much the most benign schedule they could get, starting with Italy and then with what are likely to be progressively harder matches (Scotland Away, Wales at Home, Ireland at Home, France Away), which gives Borthwick a chance to build through the tournament and bed in some tactical innovation alog the way.

Do they? They have a huge gap at 10...but are they really in a big rebuild?

I missed the full list but they do have a hardcore of 30 somethings in the pack in particular, although guys like Furlong may have been gently moving towards the back of the queue already.

I suppose Ireland's system will improve the longevity of some players (they won't have had the work load of their English or French counterparts), but there is a lot of experience in their squad. Over half of them are over 30, but they still have a superb spine to work with and will no doubt add to it in the coming period

Connor Murray and O'Mahony are 34, Bundee Aki 33...the rest are all 31 or younger.

Furlong is 30...

It's a few tweaks to their squad...not massive rebuild...although they will miss Sexton...

Think England kick off with Italy away then Wales at home and then Scotland so probably what you'd want if you were the coaches, unless we lose to Italy then it looks an extremely bad run.

Have Marler and Cole actually retired from internationals? I've seen rumours of Marler but nothing concrete that I can see? So far then we only lose Lawes from the pack? We lose Youngs at SH but keep Care and Mitchell. vP to come in as a 3rd sh? We have Farrell and Ford at FH. Losing Marchant but keeping Tuilagi. Watson comes back in as we lose May (injury cover anyway) and Steward at full back. More tweaks than rebuilding?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Think England kick off with Italy away then Wales at home and then Scotland so probably what you'd want if you were the coaches, unless we lose to Italy then it looks an extremely bad run.

Have Marler and Cole actually retired from internationals? I've seen rumours of Marler but nothing concrete that I can see? So far then we only lose Lawes from the pack? We lose Youngs at SH but keep Care and Mitchell. vP to come in as a 3rd sh? We have Farrell and Ford at FH. Losing Marchant but keeping Tuilagi. Watson comes back in as we lose May (injury cover anyway) and Steward at full back. More tweaks than rebuilding?

We don't want to throw all the oldies out straightaway but we do need a rebuild, starting now.

Only heard rumours about Marler...but lots of them.

Nothing on Cole...i still think he might be persuaded to do the 6n whilst they identify the next batch of tight heads to work with.

JVP is miles away so possibly Warr.

Then replacements for:
Lawes
Marchant
Ribbans
Jack Willis
Ben Youngs
Johnny May

Watson...on his day is probably our best winger by a way...but how injury prone is he now. Do we sack it off and put the time in to Murley or one of the young talented wingers.

lostinwales wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Think England kick off with Italy away then Wales at home and then Scotland so probably what you'd want if you were the coaches, unless we lose to Italy then it looks an extremely bad run.

Have Marler and Cole actually retired from internationals? I've seen rumours of Marler but nothing concrete that I can see? So far then we only lose Lawes from the pack? We lose Youngs at SH but keep Care and Mitchell. vP to come in as a 3rd sh? We have Farrell and Ford at FH. Losing Marchant but keeping Tuilagi. Watson comes back in as we lose May (injury cover anyway) and Steward at full back. More tweaks than rebuilding?

We don't want to throw all the oldies out straightaway but we do need a rebuild, starting now.

Could have started in the 23 6Ns to be fair. Do you think there will be thoughts that a rebuild is needed? We did have the youngest average age in QF after all. The front row which is out oldest was the strongest in the eyes of the coaches etc

Geordie wrote:Only heard rumours about Marler...but lots of them.

Nothing on Cole...i still think he might be persuaded to do the 6n whilst they identify the next batch of tight heads to work with.

JVP is miles away so possibly Warr.

Then replacements for:
Lawes
Marchant
Ribbans
Jack Willis
Ben Youngs
Johnny May

Watson...on his day is probably our best winger by a way...but how injury prone is he now. Do we sack it off and put the time in to Murley or one of the young talented wingers.

When's vP out until like? Thought it was just the WC, didn't realise it was so serious.

I don't think Murley is the best winger for our tactics. It'll be Roebuck unless Scotland go for him.

i did say Murley OR one of our young talented wingers.

Yes JVP is out for a bit more. Not sure if it will hamper his 6n or not. But to be honest on form he shouldnt be there anyway...he was poor for a long time. Needs to get his game back at tigers.

If its roebuck..thats fine hes a strong talented young winger.

Yeah just throwing the name I see best fitting into it, and 1 we should be trying to get to commit to England. Is the A game going to mean players commit too? Lost track if it's only the u20s now.

Think England kick off with Italy away then Wales at home and then Scotland so probably what you'd want if you were the coaches, unless we lose to Italy then it looks an extremely bad run.

I cannot see England losing to Italy, just dont think it will happen. England though need to beat Scotland, the losing streak against them getting a bit long now.

mountain man wrote:

Think England kick off with Italy away then Wales at home and then Scotland so probably what you'd want if you were the coaches, unless we lose to Italy then it looks an extremely bad run.

I cannot see England losing to Italy, just dont think it will happen. England though need to beat Scotland, the losing streak against them getting a bit long now.

I agree, England arent pretty but have developed a steely edge and are hard to beat. And they have shown they can play to an intensity (v SA) Italy cant play at.

Scotland is a different matter...purely because England are still inconsistent...and being hard to beat and "steely" wont be enough. They need to start working on all the offensive aspects fo their game...quality and number of kicks...attack etc.

But we DO need to end this losing streak.

No reason why they can't these days. They weren't at their best in the WC granted (really weird treatment of the coach) but they are capable of scoring some great tries. Get ahead on the score board and maintain composure and England will be in big trouble. First 2 games for England are the big ones, win those and we can relax a little as the rest you would be expecting losses so not too much pressure.

No 7&1/2 wrote:No reason why they can't these days. They weren't at their best in the WC granted (really weird treatment of the coach) but they are capable of scoring some great tries. Get ahead on the score board and maintain composure and England will be in big trouble. First 2 games for England are the big ones, win those and we can relax a little as the rest you would be expecting losses so not too much pressure.

Not necessarily. If you can go toe to toe with SA in a World Cup Semi final despite not being near where you want to be..(poor kicking, too much kicking, no attack etc)...then we're not in so bad a shape. Felix Jones in is a big one. We have stopped the rot of the basics...improved them and can continue doing that...but now we MUST start working on the above...which is what Jones, Wigglesworth etc will be focused on.

Geordie wrote:
...
Nothing on Cole...i still think he might be persuaded to do the 6n whilst they identify the next batch of tight heads to work with.
...
Watson...on his day is probably our best winger by a way...but how injury prone is he now. Do we sack it off and put the time in to Murley or one of the young talented wingers.

I think Cole may well be asked very nicely to stay on for a season or even two depending on how he and others go, but it's a position that badly needs some younger players to step up.

Watson should be in because he is the best when available. If the injury problems do recur and he keeps missing games, then others will get a chance because they will be the best available when he's injured... no point in bumping him aside if he is fit on the basis we thought he might not be!

Geordie wrote:
...

Scotland is a different matter...purely because England are still inconsistent...and being hard to beat and "steely" wont be enough. They need to start working on all the offensive aspects fo their game...quality and number of kicks...attack etc.

But we DO need to end this losing streak.

Exactly this for me, if there's a must win game in the 6Ns it's against Scotland! The last 4 games have been within a score, and obviously the last 3 in Scotland's favour. I hope for the sake of an exciting high quality 6 nations Scotland will be an improved side, but if they are are the same level as recent years (and I think that's what we saw in the world cup) then an improved England team should be winning that game.

No 7&1/2 wrote:
I don't think Murley is the best winger for our tactics. It'll be Roebuck unless Scotland go for him.

That's assuming that our tactics are fixed, which I know is what you believe but I think is unlikely.

Murley picked up an injury in pre-season, but if he's back to fitness by the 6N I would hope he is given a chance. He's been the best finisher in English rugby two seasons in a row from both close range and further out, doesn't have the positional and defensive flaws that a lot of the other young contenders do, and based on the stats from the pre-RWC camp is the fastest player in the squad. It would be hugely disappointing if England can't find a use for that talent. The only real thing against him is his height - but he's two inches taller than Kolbe and one shorter than Arendse, who don't seem to have been held back by that.

As for Marler retiring - who knows, including the man himself? Rumour among Quins fans is that he'll retire fully at the end of this season, but it is likely to depend on how Fin Baxter is developing. I could see him being motivated to keep playing until Baxter is firmly established, ideally in both his shirts.

Big wrote:

Geordie wrote:
...
Nothing on Cole...i still think he might be persuaded to do the 6n whilst they identify the next batch of tight heads to work with.
...
Watson...on his day is probably our best winger by a way...but how injury prone is he now. Do we sack it off and put the time in to Murley or one of the young talented wingers.

I think Cole may well be asked very nicely to stay on for a season or even two depending on how he and others go, but it's a position that badly needs some younger players to step up.

Watson should be in because he is the best when available.  If the injury problems do recur and he keeps missing games, then others will get a chance because they will be the best available when he's injured...   no point in bumping him aside if he is fit on the basis we thought he might not be!

Thats a fair call...its a watch this space with regards to him...just seems to be hes more out than in these days

Poorfour wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
I don't think Murley is the best winger for our tactics. It'll be Roebuck unless Scotland go for him.

That's assuming that our tactics are fixed, which I know is what you believe but I think is unlikely.

Murley picked up an injury in pre-season, but if he's back to fitness by the 6N I would hope he is given a chance. He's been the best finisher in English rugby two seasons in a row from both close range and further out, doesn't have the positional and defensive flaws that a lot of the other young contenders do, and based on the stats from the pre-RWC camp is the fastest player in the squad. It would be hugely disappointing if England can't find a use for that talent. The only real thing against him is his height - but he's two inches taller than Kolbe and one shorter than Arendse, who don't seem to have been held back by that.

As for Marler retiring - who knows, including the man himself? Rumour among Quins fans is that he'll retire fully at the end of this season, but it is likely to depend on how Fin Baxter is developing. I could see him being motivated to keep playing until Baxter is firmly established, ideally in both his shirts.

After the tactics have been so successful why would they change?

Murley is clearly rated otherwise he wouldn't have been looked at in the Six Nations and then training camps. If they hadn't seen something he'd have been discarded.

Despite the kick first tactics we have seen players tried in the back three. Arundell has had 4 starts and 3 bench apps on the wing. Smith has been tried at fullback off the bench and starting. OHC was looked at in the Six Nations and struggled, sadly. Cokanasiga was looked at in the warmups as well and made OHC look like Penaud.

As said several times I think the tactics in the back three are really interesting and could potentially make altering selection depending on the opposition easier as the side develops. That method of one player they manipulate under high balls, one they manipulate into the best position to return kicks and one that covers a ton of grass to allow the first two into said positions. Then using both halfbacks and the back three to variously cover those roles during kick tennis as suits their respective strengths. It can theoretically mean what is a huge shift in personnel such as Smith for Steward doesn't require a big shift in tactics for how they control the kicking game.

The way Mitchell for instance improved at this over the RWC was impressive. He went from being a bit of a Care-esque passenger in defence to covering the Boks cross field bombs adeptly when defending as an openside winger. Which is the role that Ireland used to use Conor Murray in to allow one winger to play very deep with Kearney and cover a lot of ground. Whereas due to the 50-22 rules and vastly improved kicking games generally England did it to allow three players in the back field rather than two.

I know some seem to find this stuff boring as the only interesting thing in rugby is apparently tries with multiple offloads. I really enjoy watching tactical evolutions like that though. The role of SHs in defence is one of the most interesting examples over the last 10 years or so. Not too long ago many 9s were complete passengers. There were exceptions like Gregan and Joost but they really were exceptions. Most just stood around, waved their arms to look like they were "conducting the forwards" and maybe swept behind the defensive line to cover grubbers and chips if they were particularly hard working. Whereas now you have guys like Dupont who is Shaun Edwards defensive general for the short side. Faf being an active part of the Boks blitz. The Wales SHs gunning for intercepts around the fringes. Most 9s being used in the back three as kicking options who therefore have to challenge high balls.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
I don't think Murley is the best winger for our tactics. It'll be Roebuck unless Scotland go for him.

That's assuming that our tactics are fixed, which I know is what you believe but I think is unlikely.

Murley picked up an injury in pre-season, but if he's back to fitness by the 6N I would hope he is given a chance. He's been the best finisher in English rugby two seasons in a row from both close range and further out, doesn't have the positional and defensive flaws that a lot of the other young contenders do, and based on the stats from the pre-RWC camp is the fastest player in the squad. It would be hugely disappointing if England can't find a use for that talent. The only real thing against him is his height - but he's two inches taller than Kolbe and one shorter than Arendse, who don't seem to have been held back by that.

As for Marler retiring - who knows, including the man himself? Rumour among Quins fans is that he'll retire fully at the end of this season, but it is likely to depend on how Fin Baxter is developing. I could see him being motivated to keep playing until Baxter is firmly established, ideally in both his shirts.

After the tactics have been so successful why would they change?

7.5, are you really getting anything out of these posts at this stage? Because I think it's safe to say the rest of us aren't. We get it, you think nothing's going to change. Effectively responding to well thought out and reasoned posts with, "yeah but the coaches are s**t, tactics s**tter and nothing will change so any discussion is meaningless", does raise the question of why you're bothering to engage in the discussion.

Tries with multiple offloads. At the moment I'd take a winger getting more than 1 pass in a match!

I'm sorry that I don't have the faith that Borthwick is about to change his philosophy. I guess I'm keeping going as at least I can witness the slow realisation in the few defenders that this is really the pinnacle of BorthwickBall.

But there is a serious point to those that are clamouring for him to change, when all signs point towards them patting themselves on the back for these tactics. Have to say I do rate Borthwicks coaching under Jones. I think that it where it currently stops with this group though.

LCD is back this weekend too, which solves all the hooker questions if he remains fit.

So just posting basically the same thing under different posts most days for a few months until the Six Nations in the hope that your team fails so you can say, "I told you so". I stand corrected, it's adding a lot in that case.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Tries with multiple offloads. At the moment I'd take a winger getting more than 1 pass in a match!

We have wings?

No 7&1/2 wrote:...I guess I'm keeping going as at least I can witness the slow realisation in the few defenders that this is really the pinnacle of BorthwickBall...

I don't really have a clue about Borthwick. If pushed, it seems plausible he retreated to a simple plan for the World Cup, after a painful Six Nations, and now plans to develop. No idea what that will look like.

However, 7&1/2, you do seem sure, so I'm curious what turn of events might change your mind about his potential as a coach. Presumably, winning matches wouldn't be sufficient. Is it down to whether he selects certain players, or whether we start scoring tries through our backs? If Borthwick chooses a team you advocate, and they play in a fashion you prefer but lose matches, would that improve your opinion of Borthwick?

1.Willis 2.Willis 3.Willis 4.Willis 5.Willis 6.Willis 7.Willis 8.Barbeary
9.Smith 10.Smith 11.Smith 12.Ojomoh 13.Smith 14.Smith 15.Smith

19 tries a game. 75 minutes ball in play time. 3 kicks per match limited to successful cross field kicks. It's a simple criteria.

Rugby Fan wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:...I guess I'm keeping going as at least I can witness the slow realisation in the few defenders that this is really the pinnacle of BorthwickBall...

I don't really have a clue about Borthwick. If pushed, it seems plausible he retreated to a simple plan for the World Cup, after a painful Six Nations, and now plans to develop. No idea what that will look like.

However, 7&1/2, you do seem sure, so I'm curious what turn of events might change your mind about his potential as a coach. Presumably, winning matches wouldn't be sufficient. Is it down to whether he selects certain players, or whether we start scoring tries through our backs? If Borthwick chooses a team you advocate, and they play in a fashion you prefer but lose matches, would that improve your opinion of Borthwick?

Well I've always said a primary motivation of me watching any sport is to be entertained. And his teams are pretty dull aren't they? I always thought he'd struggle to get the best out of the players available but not to the extent his has. I do think his task is made harder as well as more teams in the prem move away from the very slug fest orientated plan he has, for petes sake even Exeter are looking decent this season. So in terms of losing and entertaining, yes I'd be happier, though with the resources we have I think it's very realistic to have both. For me to change my mind he would have to alter his approach as poorfour and Geordie seemingly think he will. It's good to have those strong basics, though to be honest there's a helluva lot of work still needed on our lineout, rolling maul, and frankly the scrum is iffy. I just don't see him moving past that basic mould though. In regards to winning matches being enough, if I have to sit through England kicking it every time they get it after a phase or 2 then no it's not good enough, I said the same in 2020 when we lost 1 (and could have won that). I would say when I'm looking at the fixtures this year and I was forced to make a bet, I think we'll pick up 3 wins, possibly/ probably 4 when that 4th AI is revealed. Italy, Wales and Australia. And the size of the bet wouldn't be my mortgage.

king_carlos wrote:1.Willis 2.Willis 3.Willis 4.Willis 5.Willis 6.Willis 7.Willis 8.Barbeary
9.Smith 10.Smith 11.Smith 12.Ojomoh 13.Smith 14.Smith 15.Smith

19 tries a game. 75 minutes ball in play time. 3 kicks per match limited to successful cross field kicks. It's a simple criteria.

For what it's worth I would love the 6Ns team to lineup as

Genge George Sinckler
Itoje Chessum
Kenningham Curry
Dombrandt
Mitchell Smith
H-C Kelly Lawrence Radwan Steward

Baxter LCD Stuart probably (Painter is getting some write ups but haven't seen enough of his improved scrummaging that Baxter is paying lip service to yet)
Tizard/Isiekwe/Martin (any of them) Earl Quirke Farrell Watson/Arundell

And again 19 tries, well I'd take more than 1 pass to the winger. Obvs never going to happen and that team would not be the best under the current tactics.

No concerns that Dombrandt at international level looked about as athletic as a middle aged dad trying to squeeze into a still damp wetsuit?

king_carlos wrote:No concerns that Dombrandt at international level looked about as athletic as a middle aged dad trying to squeeze into a still damp wetsuit?

I'd have concerns over Sinckler, Kenningham, Dombrandt, Mitchell, Smith, Lawrence, Radwan, H-C, Baxter, Earl, Quike and Arundell with the current tactics. My side to get the best from the current tactics would probably have a fair bit of difference to that.

Oh well. Add a question about one players athletic ability compared to international opposition to the list of posts that 7.5 has offered a variation of, ""yeah but the coaches are s**t, tactics s**tter and nothing will change so any discussion is meaningless", in response to then.

"Pass the ketchup please darling". "No condiment will taste good with the current tactics love".

king_carlos wrote:Oh well. Add a question about one players athletic ability compared to international opposition to the list of posts that 7.5 has offered a variation of, ""yeah but the coaches are s**t, tactics s**tter and nothing will change so any discussion is meaningless", in response to then.

"Pass the ketchup please darling". "No condiment will taste good with the current tactics love".

You don't think tactics and combos can negate or strengthen individuals strengths King?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Oh well. Add a question about one players athletic ability compared to international opposition to the list of posts that 7.5 has offered a variation of, ""yeah but the coaches are s**t, tactics s**tter and nothing will change so any discussion is meaningless", in response to then.

"Pass the ketchup please darling". "No condiment will taste good with the current tactics love".

You don't think tactics and combos can negate or strengthen individuals strengths King?

Yes they can. There are also basic things that players need to last at international level that you get away without at club level. The physicality and pace of the international game is as high as it's ever been in rugby. The physicality and pace in many Prem games is worse than it was about 5 years ago in the same league. Tactics aren't going make a back row who looked less fit than the opposition props suddenly thrive. Especially if the tactics you yearn for include a higher ball in play time.

king_carlos wrote:No concerns that Dombrandt at international level looked about as athletic as a middle aged dad trying to squeeze into a still damp wetsuit?

As a surfer I can verify that getting into a dry wetsuit when skin is damp is WAY harder.

king_carlos wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Oh well. Add a question about one players athletic ability compared to international opposition to the list of posts that 7.5 has offered a variation of, ""yeah but the coaches are s**t, tactics s**tter and nothing will change so any discussion is meaningless", in response to then.

"Pass the ketchup please darling". "No condiment will taste good with the current tactics love".

You don't think tactics and combos can negate or strengthen individuals strengths King?

Yes they can. There are also basic things that players need to last at international level that you get away without at club level. The physicality and pace of the international game is as high as it's ever been in rugby. The physicality and pace in many Prem games is worse than it was about 5 years ago in the same league. Tactics aren't going make a back row who looked less fit than the opposition props suddenly thrive. Especially if the tactics you yearn for include a higher ball in play time.

But all the players were unfit weren't they. It's an issue with the prem so they're all going to come into the 6 ns below their Italian counterparts. It took 4 months to get them into shape,they couldn't even practice their attacking.

The team as a whole were unfit, yes. Certain players were clearly less fit than others though. With the one who watched a cross field kick sail over his head whilst standing still, then basically crawled after the winger who caught it to make it look like he tried being a notable example.

Ah yeah when he was stand in winger. Can't believe he didn't do better. You ised to see Vunipola gobble up those chances and run it back.

Plenty of back rows do a lot better when covering wide channels. Some even experiment with concepts as revolutionary as putting one foot in front of the other in a sequential manner to create movement. I don't think a single poster here has suggested we want Billy used instead. Though Dombrandt was somehow worse remarkably.

1.Genge, Rodd, VRR
2.George, Dan, Langdon
3.Sinckler, Stuart, Painter
4.Itoje, Martin
5.Chessum
6.Underhill, Ludlam
7.Curry, Pearson
8.Earl, Barbeary

9.Mitchell, JvP, Quirke (Warr if Quirke not fit)
10.Farrell, Ford, Smith

11.Freeman, Roebuck
12.Lawrence, Tuilagi
13.Daly, Dingwall
14.Watson, Murley
15.Steward, Arundell

That's the sort of squad I'd be looking at. A 6 Nations training squad will be slightly bigger than that but it's the sort of core I think should be there. A 5th winger or 7th back row are often marginal calls between similar sorts of options. Beyond those players I'd probably be adding names for the sake of it at this stage. I'd rather see some European rounds first.

Prem form is hard to judge interantional potential from at the moment but players such as Painter and Langdon seem to have the physical attributes as well as decent performances.

Kelly has been part of a very poor Tigers midfield so far this season. He needs to get back to nearer last seasons form between his injuries to have any chance at the England squad. Fraser Dingwall has impressed me with Saints though. Will Joseph is a talent too.

If Marler and Cole are available I wouldn't be opposed to using either. Marler in particular. The value Ireland got from Cian Healy since 2019 being a great example of why I'm not a fan of moving on players as it's "the start of a new cycle". It may depend on whether either are up for it though.

7.5 just to make it clear...I don't think it'll be a huge tactical shift...it will be gradual and it will will stsrt by addressing the quality of the kicks, reduction in the number of sheer wasted kicks...and bringing in some attacking play..including offloads etc

You say he hasn't made rhe best of players?

Itoje looking like himself of old...Ben Earl one of the players of the tournament something the great Eddie Jones couldn't achieve....Marchant looking strong at 13 after years of misuse by Jones...etc efc

Nathan Catt the former bath prop is rhe RFU pathways scrum coach...

Anyway rather rhan going round in circles about SB...lets move away from rhat...

So Speaking of props and what Baxter was saying...where do you stand on it

Do you want an all action prop who can scrummage alright...or do you want a brick toilet who offers little in regards to playmaking or all action...but can scrummage a rhino and rock solid in defence.

king_carlos wrote:Plenty of back rows do a lot better when covering wide channels. Some even experiment with concepts as revolutionary as putting one foot in front of the other in a sequential manner to create movement. I don't think a single poster here has suggested we want Billy used instead. Though Dombrandt was somehow worse remarkably.

Very true. It was a really odd choice by the coaches to move him wide.

Geordie wrote:7.5 just to make it clear...I don't think it'll be a huge tactical shift...it will be gradual and it will will stsrt by addressing the quality of the kicks, reduction in the number of sheer wasted kicks...and bringing in some attacking play..including offloads etc

You say he hasn't made rhe best of players?

Itoje looking like himself of old...Ben Earl one of the players of the tournament something the great Eddie Jones couldn't achieve....Marchant looking strong at 13 after years of misuse by Jones...etc efc

No don't think he's made the best of players. Earl I think has been picked out for a few great individual breaks but I just don't think he's an 8. He's been rag dolled somewhat too. I know Woodward also thinks he's a 6...for me he's a 7 and a great bench option. And he's not threatening to take that spot from curry. Again Marchant has looked good very good defensively and has done nothing in attack the same as everyone else under this regime. Honestly can't believe anyone thinks this is a step up from Jones tbh.

Noone thinks its a step up per say..its a back to basics and build on it...when Jones had lost focus on what he was trying to

Anyway.....last I'll say on the matter.

Lost focus...or more putting the ling term goal of the wc above all else. Then we had Bortgwick do the same unsuccessfully. All on all a bit of a balls up. But yes onwards at least.