[2020 Six Nations] England vs Ireland (23/02/20)

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I do wish that the RFU would have more influence in the players from U18 - Senior rugby.
I feel that a lot of players get moved about too much at club level that it actually hinders them when it comes to international selections.

But Club need players to be versatile so they can use them for cover.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I do wish that the RFU would have more influence in the players from U18 - Senior rugby.
I feel that a lot of players get moved about too much at club level that it actually hinders them when it comes to international selections.

But Club need players to be versatile so they can use them for cover.

Can agree with that
Addison played all of 10/11/12/13/14/15 for us before leaving
Sam James 10/12/13/15
Luke James 12/13/15

How are they supposed to grow into their position when they're getting bounced around so much

 

[Scotty]

So can we just stop being surprised at EJs selections and just come up with a # that explains it.

Its not going to stop over the next rounds

 

[TRF_Olyy]

The only thing that can save us is Ben curry at 9

 

[Jashay]

I'm always interested to see the unusual selections play out, no matter how baffling they seem. I remember Big Joe packing down at 8 in one game so Billy could roam; it gave England the option to go down the blindside with Big Joe or give the ball to Billy to run down the 10 channel. I thought that was a fantastic option to have.

So take his comments on Ben Earl training on the wing. Sure, it's probably just another Eddieism, but if you have a forward who can also function as back cover, then that's incredible. It's something I've often thought of Sam Simmonds: he's a back row, but he's rapid, has a great step, decent hands and runs good lines. That's pretty much my checklist for a non-crash ball centre, so if I could be reassured that he knew how to defend the 13 channel I wouldn't be at all put out by seeing him there.

I've not seen as much of Ben Earl so I can't really comment on him, though. But the potential for me to accept him as a back exists!

Curry at 8 only bothers me because he's been unreliable in the only point on my No.8 checklist; dealing with the ball at the back of the scrum. If he can sort that out, great.

Lawes at 6 would bother me more if we lost Curry or Underhill in the deal, as it would weaken our breakdown. But we haven't, so that's all fine by me. Curry can hit breakdowns just as well with an 8 on his shirt as a 6/7. Potentially a problem with lack of ball carriers, maybe? We've got quite a lot of decent options on field there, though.

For all that, though, I am a little worried about the backs. Having an injury prone player come back in with the only cover being a long-injured player looks like a dangerous area to me.

 

[NickBD]

For all that, though, I am a little worried about the backs. Having an injury prone player come back in with the only cover being a long-injured player looks like a dangerous area to me.

Its a good point and even worse when you consider bench is a 6/2 split. I usually prefer 6/2 splits but with the only back outside if a 9 being Slade just back from injury it's a bad call. Unless he actually does consider Earl as a back too.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I'm always interested to see the unusual selections play out, no matter how baffling they seem. I remember Big Joe packing down at 8 in one game so Billy could roam; it gave England the option to go down the blindside with Big Joe or give the ball to Billy to run down the 10 channel. I thought that was a fantastic option to have.

Agreed, that was great innovation - totally up for seeing more of that kind of fresh thinking.

But big difference between that and taking the unnecessary risks that come from playing players out of position for a whole match.

 

[spartan32]

I've been trying to make sense of the selection for this match. Injury certainly has played a part, and although I find the conspiracy theories about Jones trying to end his contract early amusing, I think it's pretty unlikely.

the only conclusion I can draw is that, after we lost the first game and a Slam was off the table, Jones has decided to let this tournament be one big experiment. Do some crazy things and see what happens. Test people in impossible positions and see what they do and potentially build in some "worst case scenario" experience. I know Curry isn't an 8, but isn't handy for him to have some international experience doing it so if the crap hits the fan, you've got some sort of cover?

I mean just imagine if we do pull this off today, or even manage to keep it close. With that sort of line up. That's a serious mental resilience boost. And if we lose badly, well it doesn't mean anything. We gambled on something crazy and lost, which is the expected result. In some ways it's an odd sort of win win.

 

[Leinster Fan]

Everyone is convinced their team is going to lose.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

We've got 15 very good players in our starting line up. But I can't help thinking that Jones is inspired by Eric Morecambe:

"I'm playing all the right notes - but not necessarily in the right order".

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

Let's flip it around and look at the positives of Eddie's selections (just for s**ts and giggles):

The starting XV:
The front five is excellent, and will need to be against a good Irish scrum.
Curry, Underhill and Itoje give us plenty of jackalling presence at the breakdown.
The three locks plus Curry give us plenty of options at the lineout and plenty with which to battle Irleand's lineout options.
Lawes and Underhill especially are renowned for their big hits; dominant tackles could well be a big factor in this game as they were last year.
Youngs might react to getting benched by having that annual MOTM performance that we know he's capable of.
Ford, Farrell and Daly give us plenty of kicking options.
Tuilagi can give us good front-foot ball.
The back three has plenty of pace; May is one of the best wingers in the world, Daly is a playmaker at fullback and Joseph is the intercept king and good at defending in space.

The Replacements:
The bench has three quarters of a replacement pack, and given the weather in London at the moment, that's not a bad thing at all. The wind's so strong it's howling round the house, and there's plenty of rain in it. This will likely be a forwards' slog, and goodness knows what the wind will do to the high ball game.
Genge and Cowan-Dickie are proven strong carriers and Earl has plenty of potential.
Launchbury should be chomping at the bit to prove to Eddie he belongs after missing so many WC games.
We cannot possibly run out of locks in this match!
Heinz can provide a change of pace if Youngs is glacial.
Slade has the skillset to unlock a tiring defence late in the game.

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

All in favour of innovating, but you can be innovative without putting players in positions that they're clearly going to be uncomfortable in. I'm fully in favour of coaches empowering players to play what's in front of them - all the noises that have come out of the Eng camp in the past is that Jones likes players who stick to his script and don't go off piste hence the tactical inflexibility we've seen time and again.

I don't want to keep quoting Eddie's book, that would be silly, but he explicitly states that one of the biggest problems he encountered when he became England coach is that English players don't go off piste, that they want to be told what to do. This is the opposite of Ozzie rugby players apparently. So in order to get the England players to take the initiative, improvise, play off-the-cuff and problem-solve, he repeatedly puts them in situations that make them uncomfortable so that they have to work things out for themselves. So playing players out of position is part of that drive to make them better at going off-piste. He wants to make them uncomfortable because he thinks it will make them better players.

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

There seem to be a lot of assumptions going on with Dombrandt, Devoto, Thorley et al that they are ready for interntional rugby, but we all know club form doesn't necessarily translate to international form. Alex Goode has been one of the best players in Europe for the past decade, but he was consistently poor in an England shirt. When Eddie first picked an out-and-out 7 rather than a 6 and a half - Teimana Harrison - he proved to be in over his head. Furbank is a proper fullback and Eddie clearly thought he was ready, but so far he's been mediocre. Slade is a fine player now, but for his first ten caps or so, he looked lost.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see Dombrandt in there, but I don't think we can just assume we can plug him straight in and everything's gonna be fine.

 

[ALJ]

Is the Australian team a good poster-child for quality rugby?

Can we really believe that BV is the only international class no 8 in England? If he is then that's a damning indictment but we're never going to find out if we never play another number 8.

Jones is clearly an excellent coach but he seems a little too bloody minded sometimes. A good example is his unwillingness to ever pick more than two S/Hs in the squad - one goes down in the lead up to a match and were screwed. Yet 5 locks in the starting 23 is apparently fine - sure we have a lot of good quality locks but that doesn't mean they all have to play.

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

Is the Australian team a good poster-child for quality rugby?

Can we really believe that BV is the only international class no 8 in England? If he is then that's a damning indictment but we're never going to find out if we never play another number 8.

Jones is clearly an excellent coach but he seems a little too bloody minded sometimes. A good example is his unwillingness to ever pick more than two S/Hs in the squad - one goes down in the lead up to a match and were screwed. Yet 5 locks in the starting 23 is apparently fine - sure we have a lot of good quality locks but that doesn't mean they all have to play.

Well Oz have been to four World Cup finals (tied for the most ever) and won two (second most ever). I think we can assume they've played some quality rugby down the years.

There'll be two or three young number 8s who get a chance against the Barbarians and Japan (twice) over the summer when Eddie rests his WC players. We'll see what they can do then. Until then, he's forcing Curry to adapt so that Curry becomes a better player.

Apparently Eddie only picks two scrum halves because of the way the team train. A third scrum half wouldn't fit. Not sure how they train exactly, but that was the reason he gave. And if one goes down before the match, Ford fills in. Flexibility, adaptability, the ability to cope with any and all situations, circumstances and happenings, that's what Eddie's going for. He'll break a lot of eggs to make his omelette, but he's not bloody-minded, he's just a chef.

Oh and yes, he does seem to have a lock fetish.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Well Oz have been to four World Cup finals (tied for the most ever) and won two (second most ever). I think we can assume they've played some quality rugby down the years.

There'll be two or three young number 8s who get a chance against the Barbarians and Japan (twice) over the summer when Eddie rests his WC players. We'll see what they can do then. Until then, he's forcing Curry to adapt so that Curry becomes a better player.

Apparently Eddie only picks two scrum halves because of the way the team train. A third scrum half wouldn't fit. Not sure how they train exactly, but that was the reason he gave. And if one goes down before the match, Ford fills in. Flexibility, adaptability, the ability to cope with any and all situations, circumstances and happenings, that's what Eddie's going for. He'll break a lot of eggs to make his omelette, but he's not bloody-minded, he's just a chef.

Oh and yes, he does seem to have a lock fetish.

I'm convinced you are Eddie Jones.

There is nothing adaptable about having no injury cover for scrumhalf, especially in the world cup. There is no excuse for only training with 2. Had youngs taken a knock in the world cup warm ups, we would have gone in with 2 scrumhalves who had only been with the squad a few weeks, which is sheer lunacy. I can understand sticking with a favourite if they are clearly the best but Youngs is so far from that it makes no sense. He's playing a large part in why Tigers have been stuck at the bottom of the prem table for the last 2 years.

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

I'm convinced you are Eddie Jones.

You've rumbled me.

 

[Gavin]

Sir Clive being a complete arse as usual as a pundit

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

Bayfield asking Farrell what Irishness is.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I'm sure the South Africans in the squad will wonder what that tax dodging hypocrite can teach them about being Irish that they haven't learned in their 4 years living there.