• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

England 2024/25

Take a look at the Ireland squad going to Georgia.

Of the inexperienced players picked for today's game, the players with the least experience - Hill, Pepper, Atkinson and Carpenter are easily good enough to be third choice (as they are today) and all have the potential to be first choice in their positions.

I mean let's see how they handle the tour first

I swear every year we talk about our depth but reality is next to none of the depth will make it
 
We talk about depth because it's great.
Our 6th XV would only be challenged by France or South Africa's 6th XV.
Most of depth won't make it... because they're depth.
It does not mean that our 6th XV is as good as anyone else's 1st XV
 
Last edited:
Exactly. Sometimes a player might be good enough to be first choice but has an outstanding player or two ahead of them. They're 'not making it' through misfortune not being through lack of ability.
 
Exactly. Sometimes a player might be good enough to be first choice but has an outstanding player or two ahead of them. They're 'not making it' through misfortune not being through lack of ability.
Including misfortune of timing.
Ben Curry is intrinsicly nomworse a player than TCurry.
But Tom got 60-odd caps before Ben got started.
But that means that Tom has 60 caps worth of experience and comfort at international level, however many training camps to adjust, higher level (or just greater variety) of coaching and personal development.
Tom is currently the better player as a result of that. Tom is the starter, and Ben the depth player.

Because Ben got an injury when first on the fringes, and lost his place to Tom.
There's absolutely no reason to believe that it wouldn't have been exactly the same the other way around if not for that injury.

Maybe... I dunno, maybe Miles Reid (or any "insert name here") has an equally high ceiling as Underhill and TCurry, but coaches have never given them the chance, and the development, so he hasn't realised that potential, as is a depth player only. If ever given the chance, won't show the same, but due to that lack of development (and time to trust himself and the systems) to even do justice to his less-developed self.
Is "Insert Name Here" a depth player because the incumbent is exceptional? Or because the incumbent got there first, and avoided untimely injuries?
Were Ben Cohen & Mark Cueto really better wingers than Simpson-Daniel? Or did luck play a part?
 
Last edited:
Including misfortune of timing.
Ben Curry is intrinsicly nomworse a player than TCurry.
But Tom got 60-odd caps before Ben got started.
But that means that Tom has 60 caps worth of experience and comfort at international level
, however many training camps to adjust, and is currently the better player as a result of that.
Tom is the starter, and Ben the depth player.

Because Ben got an injury when first on the fringes, and lost his place to Tom.
There's absolutely no reason to believe that it wouldn't have been exactly the same the other way around if not for that injury.
Your are correct, but the other side to that is Toms body might be broken very soon whilst Ben could take up the mantle go on for years.

I think it'll be two defeats but this is where you see which young upcoming players have that physical and more importantly mental steel to go to a tough place and thrive.
 
Your are correct, but the other side to that is Toms body might be broken very soon whilst Ben could take up the mantle go on for years.
Absolutely - except that I'd argue that Tom's body is already broken.
But that's a player welfare issue (and a "let's try you at 8" issue), rather than a "how deep is your love depth" issue - which in turn, I've proselytised on plenty on these (and other) boards
 
Including misfortune of timing.
Ben Curry is intrinsicly nomworse a player than TCurry.
But Tom got 60-odd caps before Ben got started.
But that means that Tom has 60 caps worth of experience and comfort at international level, however many training camps to adjust, higher level (or just greater variety) of coaching and personal development.
Tom is currently the better player as a result of that. Tom is the starter, and Ben the depth player.

Because Ben got an injury when first on the fringes, and lost his place to Tom.
There's absolutely no reason to believe that it wouldn't have been exactly the same the other way around if not for that injury.

Maybe... I dunno, maybe Miles Reid (or any "insert name here") has an equally high ceiling as Underhill and TCurry, but coaches have never given them the chance, and the development, so he hasn't realised that potential, as is a depth player only. If ever given the chance, won't show the same, but due to that lack of development (and time to trust himself and the systems) to even do justice to his less-developed self.
Is "Insert Name Here" a depth player because the incumbent is exceptional? Or because the incumbent got there first, and avoided untimely injuries?
Were Ben Cohen & Mark Cueto really better wingers than Simpson-Daniel? Or did luck play a part?
Yep. Nailed it with that last paragraph.

I'd also ask what the definition of 'making it' is/at what point it's decided that a player has/hasn't made it?

We produce a lot of young players which often means there's a clamour for the new shiny thing (see Pollock, AOF, Fasogbon etc.) and often forgets that players develop at different rates. I've often seen very good players written off because they don't have 20+ caps by the time they're 25 and there's always comments like 'NZ' would be picking this guy by now' etc.

Luck and timing definitely play a part. As an example, Mark Wilson probably should have had a lot more caps, but in some respects he got his chance at the perfect time to demonstrate his value. Does having fewer caps make him a lesser player? Not IMO.
 
Sure but unless we give players a chance we'll never know. In any case, how often do we need to call upon 3rd/4th choice players?
 
I mean I'm not disagreeing with that

My point being that until they are given that chance it's hard to argue we have crazy depth

It is poor currently we don't really have many 3rd choices who are tried at that level

Honestly I feel it's been our downfall for a bit is not giving these 3rd choice guys chances to see if they can make it
 
For me the biggest difference between a club player and an international player is consistency. Most players can look good at club level at times or in matches. However, the transition to international means you have to be consistent at that higher level and that's where many players fall down. They can have good moments or a good game, but to be a regular means you need to hit that level consistently.
 
Were Ben Cohen & Mark Cueto really better wingers than Simpson-Daniel? Or did luck play a part?
JSD .. honestly one of my favourite players of all time. He "should" have been an England great..I believe he was that good. Alas the stars weren't aligned...
 
I mean I'm not disagreeing with that

My point being that until they are given that chance it's hard to argue we have crazy depth

It is poor currently we don't really have many 3rd choices who are tried at that level

Honestly I feel it's been our downfall for a bit is not giving these 3rd choice guys chances to see if they can make it
I feel like you're continually changing your point though.

The Premiership and European rugby are the best indicators we have. The only competition I think is demonstrably higher quality is the Top 14.

When it comes to the next best indicator, our A side beat the equivalent sides of Ireland and Australia pretty comfortably.

If there were a B competition, we'd probably be one of a handful of nations that could field a team with any top level domestic competition.

Apart from Ben Curry, which 3rd choice has been overlooked for any period of time? Ojomoh possibly, but he's also had a bad habit of being injured at the wrong times. Beard probably should have had a cap or two by now but it's not an egregious waste of opportunities.

The likes of Roebuck, Rodd and Coles have about the number of caps I'd expect from a 3rd/4th choice players. AOF is a 20 year old prop. I think a couple of caps so far is perfectly reasonable.
 
I feel like you're continually changing your point though.

The Premiership and European rugby are the best indicators we have. The only competition I think is demonstrably higher quality is the Top 14.

When it comes to the next best indicator, our A side beat the equivalent sides of Ireland and Australia pretty comfortably.

If there were a B competition, we'd probably be one of a handful of nations that could field a team with any top level domestic competition.

Apart from Ben Curry, which 3rd choice has been overlooked for any period of time? Ojomoh possibly, but he's also had a bad habit of being injured at the wrong times.

I don't think I'm changing my point maybe I prob wasn't clear

Borthwick still has positions where he doesn't know who is our first choice let alone 3rd choice

Players like Murley need a big tour because his debut was pretty shocking for example

Whilst I agree the premiership is prob the most fun competition to watch I disagree that it's the highest by that logic why are we so down the world ranking list? I think SA, France, NZ, could prob field superior B teams imo

I miss the Churchill cup tbh
 
This is why we need more A games to get a better look at players to see who's coming through. However, whether it's because his hands were tied or because he's not that good a coach, Borthwick has selected 2 experienced players in positions that need addressing for the WC.

Hooker is too reliant at the moment on LCD and George and neither are guaranteed to be fit and starting in 2 years time. Dan for me does not look good enough yet. I don't mind George because he will bring some needed experience, but Bothwick needs to give Langdon an opportunity and not double down on Dan.

Slade is the other bad pick. Again, maybe he was forced by the players availabke, but the midfield really needs sorting out and playing Slade isn't going to help resolve the situation.

My other issue tbh is at lock. We definitely don't seem to have as much depth as previously, but again Borthwick selects 3 back rows on the bench. If we get some unlucky injuries then it could lead to a very inexperienced pairing at the WC.
 
I think Borthwick just has certain criteria that players must meet. He clearly values caps (experience) and the work rate stats .Ie Tackle rates, rucks etc

I think that's fair. Langdon is an odd one though as I would suggest he meets the criteria of his spreadsheets..maybe just not the caps. Dan isn't doing anything to suggest he's the next big thing.

I don't think Lockett or Coles were available for this XV game were they? Or am I wrong?

Long-term I think SB is banking on his three major locks, whilst maybe hoping Coles make the jump up, but is impatiently hoping one of the young monsters of the U20 makes the step up as Pollock has. Maybe that's Kpoku if he moves to Sale....
 
I think the thing I'm finding most frustrating with england coaches is they don't do gradual change

Like Carpenter he could've prob started v Japan in a full england back line for his debut
 
This is a weird argument. But then again it crops up every four years.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Top