• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2013 EOYT] England

So if Lancaster called him up, would he be a buffoon? :p

Yes, and he's a buffoon for having already done so, and that's not even the most of his buffoonery when it comes to his back three. I am cautiously pro-Lancaster at the moment, but that doesn't mean I'm not rather irritated by the misuse of his back three. If he, for example, left out McScotland for Strettle, I would load my pants in rage.

I'll take Ashton over Strettle everyday incidentally. One's been an international class winger and may be again, the other never was and never will be. Shame, he had the potential, but it didn't happen, and anyone picking him is a penishoarder.

yeah ? I dunno...you seem to know him, I just discovered him this afternoon. Well I knew him from before, but never noticed him.
I dunno, he does have a bunch of tries for Bath I see, and some of those highlights and that match I saw, he looked pretty brutal. But it's true he's only scored his 4 tries against "bad" teams for England (bad form Argentina and one on Samoa).

but, a "pussy" (for a guy hi size) ?..

So you English guys don't like him ??...not a good addition to the Rose XV ?

Basically, yeah, he's not a good addition. Had a chance, started ok, never really did it. A guy his size is always going to be physical and produce some good moments, but he isn't outstandingly so. There's a couple of moments stuck in my mind which were basically embarrassing for a guy his size (that Williams tackle one of them). He's not physical enough to play international rugby just on the back of that, and doesn't seem to have enough other wing skills. I kinda like the idea of him as a centre, he's got a great offloading game, but I think he's come to it too late and doesn't have the right thinking.
 
No surprise who is the only one on the forum spectacularly thick enough to think Banahan should be in international reckoning.

good point.
and finally, speaking of 'thick', here's a fun list of his big hits:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...d-v-Samoa-Matt-Banahans-top-five-tackles.html
(click on the ***les each time to get the link to the YT).

Is he super inconsistent ? he must be...why don't ppl rate him ?

EDIT:
Basically, yeah, he's not a good addition. Had a chance, started ok, never really did it. A guy his size is always going to be physical and produce some good moments, but he isn't outstandingly so. There's a couple of moments stuck in my mind which were basically embarrassing for a guy his size (that Williams tackle one of them). He's not physical enough to play international rugby just on the back of that, and doesn't seem to have enough other wing skills. I kinda like the idea of him as a centre, he's got a great offloading game, but I think he's come to it too late and doesn't have the right thinking.

oh ok. Thanks.
And I don't know about the "other wing skills" if you've got mobility and strength like that, I'll gladly sacrifice side steps. And on defense he's like a big flanker, all in one winger...but I'm sure he's inconsistent toothen...
 
Last edited:
He's just not very effective at international level... it's as simple as that.

He's a fan favorite at Bath, but I don't think you'll hear many of them say they want him to play for England.
 
I bet you'd recall Vainikolo on the other wing as well.

heeyyyyyy wait a minute here....I know what you're doing there...you're coming onto me, aren't you ? ;)
yeaaaah, I know, I know, you've been on my cuck for a while these days...well, I'm flattered, I must say !
 
And I don't know about the "other wing skills" if you've got mobility and strength like that, I'll gladly sacrifice side steps. And on defense he's like a big flanker, all in one winger...but I'm sure he's inconsistent toothen...
Which angle to attack on the wing.
Picking lines in midfield.
Knowing when a break will happen and when to support.
Positioning to receive kicks (working in tandem with the fullback).
Kick-chase. Both the kicking part, and the chasing part.
Defensive positioning.
Knowing when to come out of the line to stop an overlap.
Tracking across the field to cover for an absent fullback or scrum-half.
Supporting your 13 in a ruck if they decide to make a run rather than pass.
Timing your run to come off a backline move, or to receive a pass from the 13/15.
Tackling positioning.
Reading attacking plays, both on your team and theirs. (eg, knowing when your/their fly-half will chip the ball through, and respond accordingly)
Spatial awareness such as knowing how to avoid being dragged into touch, and how to use the touchline as a defender.
etc.

Just being a physical beast means very little in rugby. You have to have the brain to use your body to good effect.

For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5ksQExJRpU#t=1m54s

Pause when you go on the video (at 1m 54s). Burns has the ball in his hands and he passes to Simpson-Daniel. Simpson-Daniel spots two front rowers standing together in the defensive line. He instantly knows this is where he is going to attack, despite receiving the pass too far past the gap. He runs as if he is going to attack the outside shoulder of the prop and allows the defensive line to drift, allowing for the gap to open up in front of him and he changes pace to go through it. Looking at the starting position, he has absolutely no right to get through that gap, and he manages it with a classy, intelligent piece of play. Game-reading like this is what separates the best wingers from the mid-tier ones.

And then North's run on the piece of footage after the Stooke try. North is a big guy. 6'4, ~17st. And yet it's his footwork that gets him past the defence along with his bulk. I think Banahan would have tried going through all of those players. Not necessarily a bad option to take at times, but I doubt the try had been scored if Banahan as opposed to North had been running it back.

Quite simply, I don't think in the past that Banahan was intelligent enough at the higher level. He has more than enough success with his brawn at club level, but it's much less likely to work at the higher level unless you know how to use it. And Banahan seemingly never did. Unlike others, I wouldn't want to strike him off from playing for England ever again because I don't like to do that with any player - perhaps he'll come into a good patch of form. But I'm not holding my breath either.

I bet you'd recall Vainikolo on the other wing as well.
Not to be compared. Vainikolo was my reason to get into union in the first place, I thought so highly of him in league. He crossed codes way too late in his career and I don't think he could catch up with it as a result. But needless to say, he was such a talented rugby player...
 
Last edited:
If he, for example, left out McScotland for Strettle, I would load my pants in rage.

McScotland...?

I think our two wingers will be Yarde and Ashton.
No idea about 15 - ideally Foden but Lancaster was very quick to drop and ignore him. Hopefully not Goode, , though his try today probably made Lancaster spaff his pants and pencil him in for the foreseeable.
 
Yeah, I don't think so.
There's a load of better 15s (Foden, Brown, the Arscott brothers, the Tait brothers, Bendy, Armitage). Thinking about it I'd have most English 15s over him, can't really think of any starting fullbacks he's better than. Even Watson, with his 3 or so hours of senior rugby, would be a better option.
 
McScotland...?
"Son of" Scotland. Yarde. :p

I got ya, Peat.

Not sure why Goode is in the squad either. Brown and Foden have got 15 sorted. Three 15s is overkill. Sacrifice Goode, because we need back-up for Tuilagi. And Trinder is looking seriously, seriously good atm.
 
Last edited:
Which angle to attack on the wing.
Picking lines in midfield.
Knowing when a break will happen and when to support.
Positioning to receive kicks (working in tandem with the fullback).
Kick-chase. Both the kicking part, and the chasing part.
Defensive positioning.
Knowing when to come out of the line to stop an overlap.
Tracking across the field to cover for an absent fullback or scrum-half.
Supporting your 13 in a ruck if they decide to make a run rather than pass.
Timing your run to come off a backline move, or to receive a pass from the 13/15.
Tackling positioning.
Reading attacking plays, both on your team and theirs. (eg, knowing when your/their fly-half will chip the ball through, and respond accordingly)
Spatial awareness such as knowing how to avoid being dragged into touch, and how to use the touchline as a defender.
etc.

Just being a physical beast means very little in rugby. You have to have the brain to use your body to good effect.

For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5ksQExJRpU#t=1m54s

Pause when you go on the video (at 1m 54s). Burns has the ball in his hands and he passes to Simpson-Daniel. Simpson-Daniel spots two front rowers standing together in the defensive line. He instantly knows this is where he is going to attack, despite receiving the pass too far past the gap. He runs as if he is going to attack the outside shoulder of the prop and allows the defensive line to drift, allowing for the gap to open up in front of him and he changes pace to go through it. Looking at the starting position, he has absolutely no right to get through that gap, and he manages it with a classy, intelligent piece of play. Game-reading like this is what separates the best wingers from the mid-tier ones.

And then North's run on the piece of footage after the Stooke try. North is a big guy. 6'4, ~17st. And yet it's his footwork that gets him past the defence along with his bulk. I think Banahan would have tried going through all of those players. Not necessarily a bad option to take at times, but I doubt the try had been scored if Banahan as opposed to North had been running it back.

Quite simply, I don't think in the past that Banahan was intelligent enough at the higher level. He has more than enough success with his brawn at club level, but it's much less likely to work at the higher level unless you know how to use it. And Banahan seemingly never did. Unlike others, I wouldn't want to strike him off from playing for England ever again because I don't like to do that with any player - perhaps he'll come into a good patch of form. But I'm not holding my breath either

well yeh sure he's raw, and you say he doesn't know how to use his body so be it. It's just so hard to turn down a 115kg winger with brutal plays like he can do, fends, hits etc...and if you say he's bad to medium at all those things you've listed, then fine.
ANYWAYS:
man, that George North-initiated try on your vid is SICK !!! and you definitely have a point about Banahan's straight running, North is huge and still has good footwork (on that play at least). But I dunno, I feel ppl criticize the one-dimensionality of players a bit unfairly in Rugby. A bulldozer's a bulldozer. Give me some Bastareaud, Picamoles or Nonu any day of the week. It sounds stubborn and unintelligent, but seriously. Battering rams get you some ground, and chances are they can destroy on defense too. And there's no substitute for a big ball carrier. OF course you need variation as a team, but I want a bulldozer, at least one, on my team.

So Banahan's too "raw" let's say.

And I hope England get that Ben Morgan fellow back on the subject of strong ball carrying, they sure could use some of those dynamics to initiate some attack.
 
Last edited:
This. Yoe, accept that the highlights video lied to you about his usual standard of play already.

oh yeah, no doubt.
Too bad though...I like his style a lot, wish I could see more of him to see his general level of play.
 
So after three rounds if the Prem I'd go for this:


1 Corbs
2 Youngs
3 Cole
4 Atwood
5 ?
6 ?
7 ?
8 ?


9 ?
10 Burns
11 Wade
12 36
13 Trinder
14 Yarde
15 Brown


I think the back row and second lock position are too overcrowded to decide yet. Equally I haven't seen a stand out nine.


I tried to limit myself to EPS players. Based on form and personal preference I would have included Ford and Watson, best English 10 and 15 so far this season.


As for the front row I'm all for experimenting with Wilson and Webber but seeing as we haven't had Cole and Corbs fit together for some time I'd err on the side of caution and start them both first before playing around.
 
Not to be compared. Vainikolo was my reason to get into union in the first place, I thought so highly of him in league. He crossed codes way too late in his career and I don't think he could catch up with it as a result. But needless to say, he was such a talented rugby player...

They are to be compared in the context of people who would select their wingers on the basis of a few big hits. yoe91 genuinely knows **** all about the game, advocating Banahan for England just sums this up if you hadn't worked it out before.

Anyway back on topic, it seems Yarde has leapfrogged Wade who had seemed next in line for a chance for a while. Is this because Yarde is seen as the safer bet under the high ball and in the tackle? Or just because his form surpasses that of Wade? It seems nobody wants a full back Brown/Foden to remain out of position on the wing either, which was an odd Lancaster tactic in my opinion. Has Ashton regained a bit of form after a summer's rest this season at all as well?
 
PD: I think Yarde has taken the "dependable 11" spot that Lancaster seems to favor. Not that Yarde is just dependable, he is as good an attacking weapon as we've had in a while and is deceptively large - something that our other in-form(ish) wingers aren't.
I don't think Yarde has overtaken anyone per se, in that Mike Brown was playing there in lieu of any standout candidates.
Wade will get his chance to overtake Ashton.
 
Last edited:
So after three rounds if the Prem I'd go for this:


1 Corbs
2 Youngs
3 Cole
4 Atwood
5 ?
6 ?
7 ?
8 ?


9 ?
10 Burns
11 Wade
12 36
13 Trinder
14 Yarde
15 Brown

I'd have Foden over Brown, and arguably wouldn't have Wade there - don't think he's had the best start to the season, and if we're judging solely on the opening rounds, then it should be Ashton there (shock horror!).

Backrow is an odd one - with Wood playing 6 for Saints (shifting Clarke to 7) I think that he's been asked to play there by England, so I think we'll see the standard Wood, Robshaw, Morgan backrow, with one of Binny and Kvesic on the bench.
However I've not been blown away by Robshaw, he's been OK but has been overhyped to the max by media (social and otherwise). Morgan has been poor so far, whereas Binny has been excellent, though playing at 6 rather than 8 (can't remember his control at the scrum for Wasps? I want to say it wasn't great, but don't know why). Kvesic has been quality for Gloucester, though has been moved across to 6 to accommodate Qera.
Realistically the only viable option we have at 7 is Dave Seymour.
:D

My backrow would be:
6. Wood
7. Kvesic
8. Binny

20. Robshaw/Morgan

Kvesic may not be as dependable/whatever as Robshaw, but is better at the breakdown, better in link play and 10 times the carrier (Robshaw's carrying looks to have taken a backwards step over the summer and it wasn't particularly great to start with).
 

Latest posts

Top