[2013 EOYT] England

[Patchey]

Yoe why has your name changed?

 

[j'nuh]

Stats don't tell the whole story (eg context of the team and match) but those looks pretty favourable for Attwood. However I thought Parling did quite a good job in the Lions.

I agree. For me, the most important stat for a lock is how many time he clears the ruck zone out. Wish stats were available for that.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I agree. For me, the most important stat for a lock is how many time he clears the ruck zone out. Wish stats were available for that.

I have seen them before but cna't remember where, it showed rucks hit per game type stat. I agree with both peoples positives of parling and Attwood and i actually think they would work well together. It's nice to be in a place where have a decent amount of locks kicking about for once.

So my starting 15 would be
1 Corbiserio - stand out player

2 Youngs -enough said

3 Willson - playing better than cole and starting him will make cole up his game

4 Lauchberry - Nice combo and if we are getting beat up can brin attwood on (i'd love to start him but where?)

5 Parling - A general for england at the moment

6 Wood / 7 Robshaw- i know people will want kvesic but let him earn his place, wood and robshaw make a good combo at the moment as long as there is a ball carrier at 8. We can work a true openside into the team if form dictates

8 Morgan - don't think Billy is ready yet and hope Morgan finds form, if after the first game he doesn't then bring in Billy the kid.

9 Youngs i guess, havent thought too much of care so far and theres no one else really pushing

10 Farrell - Burns form for Gloucester has to be enough to push Farrell but with the Lions experience Farrell will have improved

11 Wade - is he ready? This could mean we see Ahston although i hope not

12 12trees/ eastmond - depending on how things go with 12trees form we could see eastmond step in here. It will be interesting to actually have 2 12's in the squad who are both decent. Can't think of the last time that happened

13 Manu - we need depth here, maybe Lancaster would play 12trees or eastmond at 13 if Manu was injured?

14 Yarde has to start, when did we end up with no in form wingers with international experience?

15 hmm I'd go Foden as i rate him very highly and am a saints fan, i hope lancaster thinks the same as me! If is playing better than Brown and Goode is still injured.

Other interesting selections for the bench would be

Attwood or Lawes - i'd go attwood
Billy V or Kvesic ? i have no idea really, i want both players to gain experience
Care or Dickson - i might take dickson as he offers something different to youngs

I'm already excited!

 

[Crapspray]

A lot is to be said for continuity. Unless Parling is markedly worse than Attwood, I think he should start the Australia game. He's done nothing wrong for England.

I think it'd be far too easy to tear up the pack at the moment, with only Corbisiero guaranteed a starting jersey, but it'd be far more prudent to limit the changes -and disruption- early on in the series. On current form, I'd only drop Youngs and Cole. Let the others demand selection, as Wood did last year.

 

[ratsapprentice]

The "new" forwards should (and will) be brought on from the bench I think - the 6N pack wasn't "bad" as such it just needs re-balancing.
I think that's pretty close to what it will look like, although Yarde at 11 and Wade/Ashton at 14.
I think Eastmond has an added bonus in that he is capable of playing on the wing, so allows for some flexibility on the bench.

 

[Big Ewis]

Yoe why has your name changed?

I'm not sure what you're saying, but ppl seem to be referring to me these days about a "name change"...
all I can tell you my friend, is that I...............


am Big Ewis. :huh:

 

[Peat]

In the Parling/Launchbury/Attwood scenario, I'd probably tell one of Launchbury/Parling to run themselves into the ground for 55 minutes. The fantastic thing is it doesn't really matter which. I'd probably pick Parling, as he's the guy who's played the most rugby recently.

 

[j'nuh]

4. Attwood
5. Parling
6. Launchbury
7. Wood
8. Morgan/Vunipola

19. Robshaw
20. Kvesic/Morgan/Vunipola

Possibly? I think it would be quite nicely balanced. Personally, I'd have Vunipola to start and Kvesic on the bench, but there's some wiggle room here...

 

[Patchey]

I can't remember which Wasps game it was that Launchbury played 6 in last year (Henry?) but i
dont remember him impressing much. Doesn't mean that he couldn't work there of course, that back five is an enticing thought.

 

[Peat]

I've seen Launchbury have some cracking games at 6 right after the JWC. I'd be interested in seeing it, but as I don't think it even remotely in Lancaster's mind, not really considering it.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I'm sure he has it in his mind as a position Joe can cover, but certainly not as a starter there.

 

[j'nuh]

I remember reading on the Wasps message board that some fans prefer him as a 6 and think it's his long term position. Though with Johnson, I don't see it happening soon.

It's often the case with these 4/6s. Glos fans mostly say Savage is probably a 6. Irish fans used to say Garvey is a 6. Mixed views on where Launchbury and Slater should play. Whereas Alun Wyn is definitely a 4...

Who knows really? I don't think it matters where Launchbury plays personally. But for anyone interested in adding more physicality to the pack, this might be our best move short of adding Garvey or Fearns.

 

[ratsapprentice]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2013/sep/19/england-2015-world-cup-dean-ryan

Good article from Dean Ryan - as always, I can't think of a pundit I respect more even if I don't always agree with him.

His team to start:

Brown; Yarde, Tuilagi, Twelvetrees, Ashton, Farrell, B Youngs; Corbisiero, Hartley, Cole, Attwood, Parling, Wood, Kvesic, B Vunipola.

 

[Patchey]

I think I prefer Greenwood, but only slightly, they're both great pundits.

Aside from Ashton and Hartley I think that would be most peoples team.

 

[Crapspray]

Does the pack really lack grunt? The one that started against South Africa (Autumn Internationals), New Zealand, and Scotland was the victor in all three contests. It's only when the first choice loosehead and number eight were missing that it struggled. Even then, it managed to see off Ireland, France, and Italy - albeit not decisively. It seems Cardiff looms far too large over many minds.

It's mentioned that Corbisiero was rested this week because of the EPS agreement, can anyone else see Lancaster stepping in and requesting something similar with a few of the Tigers' lions? Is that even possible? Cole in particular looks tired and, seeing as we only have two international-class tightheads, really needs to be managed properly.

 

[Big Ewis]

Does the pack really lack grunt? The one that started against South Africa (Autumn Internationals), New Zealand, and Scotland was the victor in all three contests. It's only when the first choice loosehead and number eight were missing that it struggled. Even then, it managed to see off Ireland, France, and Italy - albeit not decisively. It seems Cardiff looms far too large over many minds.

It's mentioned that Corbisiero was rested this week because of the EPS agreement, can anyone else see Lancaster stepping in and requesting something similar with a few of the Tigers' lions? Is that even possible? Cole in particular looks tired and, seeing as we only have two international-class tightheads, really needs to be managed properly.

it's true England had the edge against NZ in Nov. 2012.
But against France, England struggled against the first unit. In fact they got pushed back a few times. Italy looked good except for that first scrum if I remember correctly. And in Cardiff England struggled big time in the scrum, they even lost one (or more ?) on their own introduction.
I think with time the scrum will solidify for sure, as players will add more of that "grunt" and girth, but right now a few teams are ahead of them in that department. Most of the tight 3 are still pretty young.

And you've just got the shyttiest username ever man, I mean that as a compliment ! :lol:

 

[ratsapprentice]

The pack is very mobile and great at playing with tempo, but it doesn't have the sort of physicality that will allow them to gain traction in a game against a really physical team like SA or the Wales team that turned up in Cardiff.
We need to find players that can do that (or can cope with it being done to them) so that we can go into games knowing we have the correct tools to deal with that sort of team when we come up against them.
We don't need two separate packs to choose from, just one or two players who will allow us to adjust the balance of our pack when it's needed.
Getting Attwood and Billy Vainipolo (as the commentators insist on calling him ) involved will go a long to achieving that IMO.

 

[Peat]

Does the pack really lack grunt? The one that started against South Africa (Autumn Internationals), New Zealand, and Scotland was the victor in all three contests. It's only when the first choice loosehead and number eight were missing that it struggled. Even then, it managed to see off Ireland, France, and Italy - albeit not decisively. It seems Cardiff looms far too large over many minds.

It's mentioned that Corbisiero was rested this week because of the EPS agreement, can anyone else see Lancaster stepping in and requesting something similar with a few of the Tigers' lions? Is that even possible? Cole in particular looks tired and, seeing as we only have two international-class tightheads, really needs to be managed properly.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with this except I also believe our first choice pack lacks a bit of grunt in the second row, and starts to lack grunt if injuries come in, and if the right players can be found to add some grunt while keeping the strengths we already have, we'd be daft not to look at it.

edit: Rats, remember the pack smashing into South Africa to get us back into the game during the Autumn? The pack with Corbs and Morgan DOES have the physicality to take those moments.

Also, I do want two complete packs to choose from in terms of depth. Minimum.

 

[ratsapprentice]

edit: Rats, remember the pack smashing into South Africa to get us back into the game during the Autumn? The pack with Corbs and Morgan DOES have the physicality to take those moments.

Also, I do want two complete packs to choose from in terms of depth. Minimum.

But without those two we lost far too much - not placing all your eggs in one basket and all that... as you say we need more depth to our physicality than two players.

I didn't mean to say we don't need two players in each position, I worded that bit badly.
I meant that we don't need to have a "mobile" pack and a "physical" pack made up of completely different players.

 

[Crapspray]

Completely agree with the desire for extra grunt and depth, and who/where it'll come from. What annoys me is that it's portrayed as a desperate need in the press. The real need, in my eyes, is for a set of attacking backs to match a mobile pack.

On the bright side, I think we're close to having two complete packs worth of players. Unless you means subs and starters. Ignoring Croft's injury, the EPS could put out:

Corbisiero
Youngs
Cole
Launchbury
Parling
Wood
Robshaw
Morgan

M. Vunipola
Hartley
Wilson
Lawes
Attwood
Croft
Kvesic
B. Vunipola

Both of which would be competitive and experienced enough. Add a lock like Slater and I think, physicality-wise, the EPS pack is sorted out to 2015. Conveniently ignore the Saxons, if you would...

And you've just got the shyttiest username ever man, I mean that as a compliment !

All credit goes to Bill Bryson in 'Notes From A Small Island'. It was either Colin Crapspray or Bertram Pantyshield.