England EPS 2016/17 season.

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Well you already know I'm Team Ford...

I disagree that Ford is only a slightly better playmaker, and that Farrell is a superb kicker TBH

Edit - Unless you're just referring to goalkicking?

I was referring to goal kicking.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I don't think it's a case of if it isn't broke don't fix it. More a case of we don't have anyone better at 12, so Faz has to stay, until someone is putting their hands up he stays.

Same at backrow unless someone will out perform haskshaw then they have to stay. Harrison might be faster and better at the breakdown, Ewers might be a better ball carrier but until those players are performing better than the incumbents then they stay on the bench.

Personally I'd have Haskell at 6 Harrison at 7 and binny at 8 with either Clifford or Robshaw off the bench.

Robshaw might not make a massive impact but he can come on and not give away penalties when we are beating New Zealand 30-28!

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I don't think it's a case of if it isn't broke don't fix it. More a case of we don't have anyone better at 12, so Faz has to stay, until someone is putting their hands up he stays.

Same at backrow unless someone will out perform haskshaw then they have to stay. Harrison might be faster and better at the breakdown, Ewers might be a better ball carrier but until those players are performing better than the incumbents then they stay on the bench.

Personally I'd have Haskell at 6 Harrison at 7 and binny at 8 with either Clifford or Robshaw off the bench.

Robshaw might not make a massive impact but he can come on and not give away penalties when we are beating New Zealand 30-28!

I think you're slightly underselling Harrison and Ewers there. Yes Harrison is faster and better at the breakdown, but he's also a lot more physical both in defence and with ball in hand than Haskell is. I'd say Haskell only beats him at work rate (Which I'll admit, is pretty superb). And yes, Ewers is a better ball carrier, but he too is better at the breakdown and also has a Hell of a work rate for a man that is 120+kg (It's unclear how heavy he is. Chiefs list him as 128, but I don't believe that. Nonetheless, the man's a monster). He's also a better lineout option than Hask and again, I'd say is more physical. I'd also argue that he's more intelligent and has a better tactical and offloading/passing game.

 

[Every Time Ref]

I don't think it's a case of if it isn't broke don't fix it. More a case of we don't have anyone better at 12, so Faz has to stay, until someone is putting their hands up he stays.

Same at backrow unless someone will out perform haskshaw then they have to stay. Harrison might be faster and better at the breakdown, Ewers might be a better ball carrier but until those players are performing better than the incumbents then they stay on the bench.

Personally I'd have Haskell at 6 Harrison at 7 and binny at 8 with either Clifford or Robshaw off the bench.

Robshaw might not make a massive impact but he can come on and not give away penalties when we are beating New Zealand 30-28!

But an international coach also needs to more proactive than that. No one can outperform anyone by not playing, so at some point EJ has to make a choice to replace Farrell / Haskell / whoever with someone he judges to be a better option, even if it is a short term risk - unless he feels they are the long term solution, which I think we're generally in agreement here that they aren't.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Wasn't Ford's kicking on par with Farrells last year?

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Wasn't Ford's kicking on par with Farrells last year?

Last year being the key part of that sentence.

 

[msf]

I think you're slightly underselling Harrison and Ewers there. Yes Harrison is faster and better at the breakdown, but he's also a lot more physical both in defence and with ball in hand than Haskell is. I'd say Haskell only beats him at work rate (Which I'll admit, is pretty superb). And yes, Ewers is a better ball carrier, but he too is better at the breakdown and also has a Hell of a work rate for a man that is 120+kg (It's unclear how heavy he is. Chiefs list him as 128, but I don't believe that. Nonetheless, the man's a monster). He's also a better lineout option than Hask and again, I'd say is more physical. I'd also argue that he's more intelligent and has a better tactical and offloading/passing game.

Umm, did you watch any of the recent England games? Haskell is in the team purely because of his massively physical defence - Jones has talked about how hard he hits. If he just wanted someone with a high workrate he could put Robshaw there, which he did in the 3rd test against Australia because Harrison wasn´t providing the physicality he was looking for from his no. 7. I have never seen Harrison put in the hits like Haskell does (that was Haskell smashing Pocock in the first few seconds of the first test, btw). Harrison however is much better over the ball, and more dangerous ball-in-hand than Haskell.

Ewers is not a better lineout option than anyone, except perhaps Billy Vunipola or Steffon Armitage. Ewers hardly ever jumps for Chiefs. Haskell however is a perfectly adequate line out option, although he is so crucial at the tail of the lineout that Robshaw is normally the backrow option. Ewers is decent at the breakdown, but he isn´t fast enough to get there as a no.7. Again, almost anyone could claim to be more intelligent and a better handler than Haskell, but I don´t know what tactical means in terms of a backrow forward.

 

[Which Tyler]

Last year being the key part of that sentence.

You're right - the year before Ford's was better (there's an argument to be made that Fazlet takes tougher kicks, but I've yet to see anything backing up that opinion).
Mind you, IMO Ford is a better playmaker, better runner, better defender, better kicker from hand, better kicker from the tee, and in better form than you seem to allow for (balance of posts over the 9 months I've been on this board)

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Umm, did you watch any of the recent England games? Haskell is in the team purely because of his massively physical defence - Jones has talked about how hard he hits. If he just wanted someone with a high workrate he could put Robshaw there, which he did in the 3rd test against Australia because Harrison wasn´t providing the physicality he was looking for from his no. 7. I have never seen Harrison put in the hits like Haskell does (that was Haskell smashing Pocock in the first few seconds of the first test, btw). Harrison however is much better over the ball, and more dangerous ball-in-hand than Haskell.

Ewers is not a better lineout option than anyone, except perhaps Billy Vunipola or Steffon Armitage. Ewers hardly ever jumps for Chiefs. Haskell however is a perfectly adequate line out option, although he is so crucial at the tail of the lineout that Robshaw is normally the backrow option. Ewers is decent at the breakdown, but he isn´t fast enough to get there as a no.7. Again, almost anyone could claim to be more intelligent and a better handler than Haskell, but I don´t know what tactical means in terms of a backrow forward.

Yes, I did watch Haskell in the England games but I've decided not to completely base my opinion on him off of those 2 games. He was pretty poor all season, so I'm not now going to call him the King of Physicality because of what could've been some flukey form (Which, let's be honest, it probably was). Also, I wish people would stop making a point of Haskell's physicality because of his tackle on Pocock. Pocock was in the air to receive a catch, it was well-timed by Haskell, but required no physicality from him. I'm sure Ewers would also be fully capable of making a tackle on someone without his feet on the ground look like a monster hit.

I don't think you've seen enough of Ewers jumping. Sure he's not Kruis or Alun Wyn, but he is fully capable, I'd say more so than Haskell. Of course he doesn't jump much in games for Chiefs, they have the 2nd row who captained England's RWC lineout (Parling) and Don Armand, who won most lineouts in the Prem this season (Correct me if I'm wrong on that. I'm fairly sure he was at the top, but he may just have been in the top 3. Either way, you get my point). As someone who's watched the Chiefs training, I can comfortably say that he's a far better lineout forward than is shown in games. How could he not be, he's 6'4 (The same as Itoje).

 

[msf]

You're right - the year before Ford's was better (there's an argument to be made that Fazlet takes tougher kicks, but I've yet to see anything backing up that opinion).
Mind you, IMO Ford is a better playmaker, better runner, better defender, better kicker from hand, better kicker from the tee, and in better form than you seem to allow for (balance of posts over the 9 months I've been on this board)

I think Farrell is ultimately more dispensable than Ford. Exeter have shown that, with a long-range kicker such as Slade, a decent short-range kicker like Stevenson (or Ford) can get close to Farrell´s level of accuracy. The trick is getting a good long-range kicker, so you don´t suffer there, but England have both Slade and Daly available. Farrell however would need considerable help from the 12, at the same level Mike Catt used to offer, to be able to adequately replace Ford in terms of dictating play and stretching a defence.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

You're right - the year before Ford's was better (there's an argument to be made that Fazlet takes tougher kicks, but I've yet to see anything backing up that opinion).
Mind you, IMO Ford is a better playmaker, better runner, better defender, better kicker from hand, better kicker from the tee, and in better form than you seem to allow for (balance of posts over the 9 months I've been on this board)

I have a similar opinion on Ford to the 1 I have on Haskell, I'm not going to ignore a whole season of (let's be honest) poor play, just because he had a good couple of tests for England. The fact that he also performed badly vs Wales suggests that this season he's only been able to perform with Faz outside him to take off the pressure. So what's to say that if Faz was dropped from 12, Ford wouldn't go back to his Prem/Wales form. If he can continue his form vs Oz into the Prem next season then I'll change my mind, until then, the Ford that has been poor through the majority of this season is the 1 that I'm going to remember.

 

[msf]

So you didn´t watch the Six Nations either? From Jones´ comments it´s clear he disagrees with you, and I know whose judgement I would back on this...

How could Ewers not be? Because he is at least 120kg? Why isn´t Vunipola as good at jumping as Robshaw? They are the same height...Also, Itoje is 6´5, and it is much easier to be a good line out forward in training (was it even opposed?) than in an international game. Oh, and Wyn-Jones and Kruis are good at organising a lineout, but aren´t amazing jumpers.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and as Jones tried to explain to people, Ford did not play badly in the Wales´ match, the fly half very rarely plays badly in a side that scores 5 tries, he just kicked at goal badly.

Instead of his average form for Bath last season, why don´t you remember his excellent play (particularly his tactical kicking) in the Six Nations, or his fantastic play for Bath the season before?

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

So you didn´t watch the Six Nations either? From Jones´ comments it´s clear he disagrees with you, and I know whose judgement I would back on this...

How could Ewers not be? Because he is at least 120kg? Why isn´t Vunipola as good at jumping as Robshaw? They are the same height...Also, Itoje is 6´5, and it is much easier to be a good line out forward in training (was it even opposed?) than in an international game.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and as Jones tried to explain to people, Ford did not play badly in the Wales´ match, the fly half very rarely plays badly in a side that scores 5 tries, he just kicked at goal badly.

Instead of his average form for Bath last season, why don´t you remember his excellent play (particularly his tactical kicking) in the Six Nations, or his fantastic play for Bath the season before?

Launchbury - 118kg.
Lawes - 118kg.
Kruis (Who's best feature is his lineout play) - 117kg
Haskell - 118kg

Devin Toner - 124kg!

Ewers being 120kg isn't going to stunt his lineout jumping. International lifters are fully capable of getting 120kg+ men in the air.
And yes, the lineouts were opposed. In that case, by Parling and Armand at times (I've listed their accolades, I won't again). I'm not claiming that Ewers is a top quality lineout operator, but he is fully capable at jumping and I would say better than Hask.

Why don't I remember Ford's excellent tactical kicking in the 6 Nations? I do, because that's all he did in the 6 Nations!
His fantastic play for Bath last season? Because that was last season. It's been a year, that's a lot of time to lose form in. Last year people were calling Savea the best wing in the world, now they're saying eh shouldn't wear an ABs shirt. Form can fall. Ford's has. Last season is almost irrelevenat.

 

[msf]

It´s not just about weight, but height too. All those players are considerably taller than Ewers (apart from Haskell, who is lighter than Ewers and only a decent jumper), and the only one that is as heavy as him is about 6 inches taller! If you want to understand what it takes to be a good jumper, look at Itoje or Croft, two of the best in recent memory, both of whom are just 6´ 5 but who are significantly lighter than opposing jumpers. It´s really not controversial to say that line out locks (Matfield and Kay were probably the best from the 2000s) are more lightly built than the enforcers (Johnson, Botha). The requirements for both roles have changed somewhat, but the physics haven´t.

- - - Updated - - -

So the last few games are irrelevant, and the season before last is irrelevant, but last season is relevant? I don´t quite get your logic. North was having a pretty average season until about halfway through the Six Nations, where he suddenly looked like one of the best wings in the world again. Would you not have picked him for the NZ series because of his indifferent form earlier in the season?

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

It´s not just about weight, but height too. All those players are considerably taller than Ewers, and the only one that is as heavy as him is about 6 inches taller! If you want to understand what it takes to be a good jumper, look at Itoje or Croft, two of the best in recent memory, both of whom are just 6, 5 but are significantly lighter than opposing jumpers. It´s really not controversial to say that line out locks (Matfield, Kay were probably the best from the 2000s) are more lightly built than the enforcers (Johnson, Botha). The requirements for both roles have changed somewhat, but the physics haven´t.

Again, I'm not suggesting he's an excellent lineout jumper, I'm saying he's better than Hask, who is also really not an especially good lineout jumper. Ewers can be lifted and at a reasonable speed. That's not debatable, I've seen it happen. Neither Hask nor Ewers are often used as lineout jumpers, but both are capable of doing so and I would say that Ewers is more so. And over the last couple of seasons Ewers has been far better in the loose than Hask. Hask has a higher work rate and that's it. Hask is also 30, so his time with England will soon be rounding up. I'd like to see Ewers replace him when he is phased out.

- - - Updated - - -

- - - Updated - - -

So the last few games are irrelevant, and the season before last is irrelevant, but last season is relevant? I don´t quite get your logic. North was having a pretty average season until about halfway through the Six Nations, where he suddenly looked like one of the best wings in the world again. Would you not have picked him for the NZ series because of his indifferent form earlier in the season?

The last few games aren't irrelevant, but I'm not going to ignore what has been poor form throughout this season just because they had a good couple of games. I think that's fair enough and I know that many share the same opinion. The season before last was a year ago. Just because a player was good then doesn't mean that their form then should get them into a team now. If we based our selections on form from a year ago then Tom Wood would be getting picked over Teimana Harrison and Kyle Eastmond over Elliot Daly.

For your argument on North, if Wales had any other decent wingers then maybe North wouldn't be considered, but they don't. In Faz we have a decent 10 to replace Ford and in Ewers, Itoje, Harrison etc. flankers to replace Hask. I don't know why I'm suggesting that as I don't want either dropped, I think Ford-Faz should remain and Haskell to remain until post-Lions. But that's the difference between them and North.

This season just passed is the best 1 to base a players form off of that they consistently achieve as it's the only competition where we se players perform every week for half a year. Not over 2-3 weeks.

 

[msf]

Well, I wouldn´t say that, and I think Haskell will only be replaced when Underhill is ready. Ewers has zero chance of becoming Exeter´s 7, never mind England´s.

You didn´t answer the question. I thought it was a good analogy: both had shown they were excellent players in the seasons before last, both had an average season last year, and both had a few good games in the Six Nations. I think both Jones and Gatland were right to persevere with them on that basis.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Well, I wouldn´t say that, and I think Haskell will only be replaced when Underhill is ready. Ewers has zero chance of becoming Exeter´s 7, never mind England´s.

You didn´t answer the question. I thought it was a good analogy: both had shown they were excellent players in the seasons before last, both had an average season last year, and both had a few good games in the Six Nations. I think both Jones and Gatland were right to persevere with them on that basis.

Sorry, I should've made my idea clearer. I see Underhill replacing Robshaw, moving Haskell to 6, and then Ewers replacing Hask there. Not Ewers at 7. That would be ridiculous.

I think you're missing my point by bringing in this North analogy, I don't want Ford or Hask to be replaced yet. It was right for Jones to persevere with them and for Gatland with North. I'm saying that I think we should stay with Ford-Faz as they compliment each other, but if we were to get a real 12, I'd rather see Faz at 10 than Ford. And I'd like to see Ewers replace Hask post 2017.

But, say I was suggesting we should drop Ford and Hask in terms of your North analogy (Which isn't my opinion,but I'll just entertain the notion because I've got nothing better to do), then I would say that whereas North had been mediocre for Saints, Ford had been poor for Bath. That's a significant difference. Even though North wasn't in his form of old, he was still Wales' best winger, so he had to be persisted with. There were options to replace Ford and Hask so them being dropped was a more considerable option. I would also argue that all 3 pick up their form when in an international shirt, so there's nothing to suggest that if Ewers was given his chance internationally then he wouldn't raise his form too, potentially higher than Hask's. Again, that isn't my opinion, but I think it would be a valid argument.

 

[msf]

I think Itoje will be the long term 6, with Launchbury and Lawes at lock, if Lawes can learn to call the line out as well as Kruis. The fact that Jones took Kruis off for Lawes early on in both of the 2nd and 3rd tests suggests that he isn´t that far away.

Oh, and I don´t agree that Ford was poor for Bath, I think his father should take most of the blame for playing Matawalu instead of Cook - when Ford played with the latter he looked good.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I think Itoje will be the long term 6, with Launchbury and Lawes at lock, if Lawes can learn to call the line out as well as Kruis. The fact that Jones took Kruis off for Lawes early on in both of the 2nd and 3rd tests suggests that he isn´t that far away.

Oh, and I don´t agree that Ford was poor for Bath, I think his father should take most of the blame for playing Matawalu instead of Cook - when Ford played with the latter he looked good.

Launch and Lawes were both in the best form they've been in for a while on the Oz tour. If Jones saw Itoje as a 6 then he'd have played him there with Lawes or Launch at 2nd row.

For the Ford not poor at Bath because of Matawalu. Nope. I'll admit that was a factor, but that can't be where all the blame is pinned. Ford made some poor decisions and didn't look anywhere near as good as he did last season. Outside Cook he didn't look that much better anyway. We're clearly not getting anywhere on Ford vs Faz. We've been going at it for over an hour, let's put that argument to bed and agree to disagree.

 

[msf]

He did play him there, in the second half of the 3rd test, and there was talk about him playing there from the off in the 1st. If we go on Jones´current selections, Ewers would do well to get in the squad, never mind team!

Sure, I think we just notice different things when we watch rugby matches! At least we can rest assured that there is someone who is a better selector than us coaching England now!