[2013 EOYT] England

[Peat]

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.

It helps that he's started the season on fire. Think people were cautiously pencilling him in at the end of the summer tour, now they're inking it. But yeah, Yarde has all the skills for a Lancaster winger, and there's a gaping vacancy on the left, while Wade is short a few and fighting with Ashton. I know who I'd like to see win, but...

Going back to PD's comment - I quite liked the idea of playing Foden there, particularly when we were short of wingers making a real fist of things. But Mike Brown never looked like working (probably worked better than I thought it would!) and now we have wingers. I'd still rather play someone like Foden or Tait on the left wing ahead of Strettle though.

 

[McTallshort]

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.

Dont see what Trinders done to keep Manu out

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Ah, I didn't even notice that.
Definitely Manu over Trinder. Trinder has started well, and looks to have improved his defence, but Manu vs Falcons trumps everything Trinder has done this season.

 

[Patchey]

Ah, I didn't even notice that.
Definitely Manu over Trinder. Trinder has started well, and looks to have improved his defence, but Manu vs Falcons trumps everything Trinder has done this season.

Trinder > Manu was mainly because Manu has played only once, albeit very well, this season while Trinder has been one of the few shining lights across all three of Gloucester's opening three games. Only an injury will stop Manu from starting in the Autumn. If he was injured I'd like to see Trinder in his place.

I still can't find it in myself to pick Ashton, I haven't forgiven him for hogging a spot in the EPS for the last twelve months without deserving it. You're right though, Wade has been less than impressive so far this season. At times its like he's playing at half speed.

In slightly unrelated news has anyone noticed the fact that Richard Wigglesworth is the face of the new England alternative shirt launch? Conspiracy theorists might think this suggests he is crawling his way back towards the EPS...

 

[Peat]

I was wondering who the hell that was in that shirt. Jesus, Wigglesworth, can we get our heads out of Saracens' anal cavity already?

I think its fair to pick Trinder in a team based off the opening three games. We all know he has next to zero chance starting ahead of Tuilagi.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Trinder has looked superb against drift defences - I don't think it would take long for international teams to work that out though.

Although no-one is anywhere near to mounting a realistic challenge to Manu's starting berth our potential second choice guys are all playing pretty well.
JJ, Tomkins, Burrell and Trinder have all had positive starts to the season.

I still can't find it in myself to pick Ashton, I haven't forgiven him for hogging a spot in the EPS for the last twelve months without deserving it.

I'm in the same boat, although his selection would actually be justifiable at this point. I trust Wade to bring his attacking prowess onto the international stage - it's the other parts we're still in the dark on.

Wigglesworth was chosen because he's a Lancastrian, though to be fair he's one of many in the England set-up.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Wigglesworth is there because he's from Lancashire and it's a Lancashire themed shirt.
Expect Care to be the poster boy for the Yorkshire home kit.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I was just thinking about Billy Bunipona and him playing at 6.

Could it actually be better for his England chances than playing at 8?
If we assume that either he or Kvesic will be on the bench then him showing that he play at 6 could give him an edge...

 

[Patchey]

Burrell has been especially impressive going forwards, not so sure about his defense. JJ still confuses me a little. Tomkins looks much more settled in union this year. I'd expect one of them to replace Brat in the EPS and for Lancaster to overlook Trinder and go with someone who has been in the squad before.

Wigglesworth was chosen because he's a Lancastrian, though to be fair he's one of many in the England set-up.

Phew. Wigglesworth is behind about six others form wise before he'll be near the nine shirt again.

 

[Peat]

Yes and no. Yes, I agree that being able to play at 6 is a huge advantage for him getting onto the bench. No in that really he wants to be displaying what he can do from the back of a scum if he's to displace Morgan - although Morgan seems to be doing a rather fine job of this himself.

 

[ratsapprentice]

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/feat...phil-morrow-about-the-amazing-billy-vunipola/

Pretty good article. Two points to take from it.

1) Billy is apparently 130kg, not the 126kg he is listed at by Sarries and the RFU.

2) He used to be 152kg when he was 18. lol

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Who are the other Lancs?
If anyone says Foden they get neg rep.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Ashton, Tomkins, Eastmond, Farrell and Ford...

All from Oldam or Wigan.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Neither of which are in Lancashire...!

 

[ratsapprentice]

That's a matter of opinion.

The old county boundaries still exist, the new ones are only really there for administration purposes.

Saracens are a technically part of London, but in reality it's a Hertfordshire club.
Quins are a surrey club in the same way.

 

[Peat]

That's a matter of opinion.

The old county boundaries still exist, the new ones are only really there for administration purposes.

Saracens are a technically part of London, but in reality it's a Hertfordshire club.
Quins are a surrey club in the same way.

Greater London Uber Alles. Actually Herts is welcome to Sarries.

edit: Anyway, Greater Manchester/Merseyside both come under Lancashire Rugby.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Tell anyone from Lancashire that Mancs are Lancs! They'll tear you a new one

All semantics anyway, as long as you're not saying anyone from Yorkshire is a Lanc then there's no major problems here :lol:

 

[ratsapprentice]

Having lived in (not in the suburbs) London all my life and gone to school in Hertfordshire proper and subsequently Barnet, I have never considered towns like Barnet or Richmond part of London.
Most of the guys I went to school with played county rugby for Middlesex or Hertfordshire, not "Greater London County".

I know not everyone does, but I don't consider metropolitan areas as counties.

As an aside: I'd be interested to see what teams would look like if they were made up based on the 9 English regions...

 

[Patchey]

Having lived in (not in the suburbs) London all my life and gone to school in Hertfordshire proper and subsequently Barnet, I have never considered towns like Barnet or Richmond part of London.
Most of the guys I went to school with played county rugby for Middlesex or Hertfordshire, not "Greater London County".

I know not everyone does, but I don't consider metropolitan areas as counties.

Good point. Rugby in London is generally based on the nearest county to where you are. I play for a north London side but in a Herts&Middlesex league, which is a pain for away games.

 

[Peat]

edit: Manu's torn a pec, out until Christmas.

While I share your ambivalence to the outliers - I grew up in Lewisham and went to school in Orpington, and was never quite sure if Orpington should really be considered part of London - when it comes to their sporting institutions, they are London clubs. Nobody played rugby for Greater London county, but no one talks about Harlequins representing Surrey/Richmond - they talk about them representing London, and a couple of seasons back they had the London skyline on their shirt. I'll accept they're a Surrey club as well, nothing wrong with dual identity.