• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

England XV

Wasps For Life

Academy Player
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
68
Country Flag
England
Club or Nation
London Wasps
England Rugby XV

1. Alex Corbisiero (24) 18 Caps
2. Tom Youngs (26) 9 Caps
3. Dan Cole^ (26) 41 Caps
4. Courtney Lawes (24) 20 Caps*
5. Joe Launchbury~ (22) 9 Caps*
6. Tom Croft* (27) 38 Caps*
7. Matt Kvesic (21) 0 Caps
8. Ben Morgen (24) 10 Caps*
9. Ben Youngs (23) 33 Caps
10.*Freddie Burns** (22) 1 Cap
11. Marland Yarde (21) 0 Caps*
12. Billy Twelvetrees (24) 4 caps*
13. Manu Tuilagi (21) 21 Caps
14. Christian Wade (22) 0 Caps
15. Ben Foden (27) 30 Caps

Subs:

16. Dylan Hartley (26) 47 Caps (2)
17. Mako Vunipola (22) 9 Caps (1)
18. David Wilson (28) 19 Caps (3)
19. Dave Attwood (26) 2 Caps (4,5)
20. Chris Robshaw (26) 17 Caps (6,7)*
21. Danny Care (26) 41 Caps (9)
22. Owen Farrell (21) 16 Caps (10,12)
23. Mike Brown (27) 16 Caps (15)
 
hE5D72A8A.gif
 
Think this is worth asking. Most of the squad is pretty obvious now:

1. Corbisiero
2. Youngs
3. Cole
4. Launchbury
5. Parling
6. ...
7. ...
8. Morgan
9. Youngs/Care
10. Burns
11. May
12. Twelvetrees/Barritt
13. Tuilagi
14. Wade
15. Brown/Foden

16. Webber/Hartley
17. Vunipola
18. Wilson
19. Lawes/Attwood/(Croft!?)
20. ...
21. Care/Youngs
22. ...
23. ...

Backrow:

You have four contenders for 6 and 7: Robshaw, Wood, Croft, Kvesic. And each of them have claims. Kvesic is the most inexperienced and it may count against him, but has the greatest breakdown presence. Robshaw takes on more tight work than any of them and is the captain and I think he's our best 6 if he plays like one. Wood appears to be a jack-of-all-trades character. Croft offers something unusual for a backrow and may help us play an expansive game with his presence in wider channels.

There is a way to accommodate all four:
6. Robshaw 7. Kvesic 19. Croft 20. Wood

The idea is to keep Launchbury and Parling on the field for full 80s (they are athletic enough) and to vary the backrow as needed with the replacements. If Launchbury/Parling gets injured, Croft replaces them and Wood replaces Morgan. The idea is that Croft scrums in the second row, but is allowed to play normally, while Wood takes on the work of the injured lock. If Lawes gets to his best again, then he can replace Launchbury/Parling.

However, I think I just prefer leaving Wood out:
6. Robshaw 7. Kvesic 19. Lawes/Attwood 20. Croft

Wood is a great player, and is the clear injury replacement for any of the other backrowers, but I don't think see his specialist role in the side. He seems to do most things second-best. He's appears to be second best of the four at the breakdown (Kvesic), lineout and "backline attack" (Croft), tackling and work rate (Robshaw). I think he's a little further down than second at carrying, both in loose and tight, and being a linkman (Robshaw and Kvesic). I'm not sure who is the best at hitting rucks.

22/23:

You could feasibly leave out fly-half cover and use Twelvetrees as back-up, but it's probably too risky unless Twelvetrees puts in some good performances there for club. I'd probably have fly-half cover in Flood, not only because I think he's better than Farrell, but also because when winning, you don't want to force changes except to freshen the team with like-for-likes, and when losing, Farrell isn't the right player to bring on to chase a game. As for 23, there are so many options, I don't know where to start. I wouldn't have Barritt: same argument as the one I gave for not having Farrell on the bench. Joseph and Tait seem the most obvious. If May were to gain more experience at 13, then Yarde or Benjamin would be my other options.

22. Flood 23. Joseph(/Tait/Benjamin/Yarde)
 
Think this is worth asking. Most of the squad is pretty obvious now:

1. Corbisiero
2. Youngs
3. Cole
4. Launchbury
5. Parling
6. ...
7. ...
8. Morgan
9. Youngs/Care
10. Burns
11. May
12. Twelvetrees/Barritt
13. Tuilagi
14. Wade
15. Brown/Foden

16. Webber/Hartley
17. Vunipola
18. Wilson
19. Lawes/Attwood/(Croft!?)
20. ...
21. Care/Youngs
22. ...
23. ...

Backrow:

You have four contenders for 6 and 7: Robshaw, Wood, Croft, Kvesic. And each of them have claims. Kvesic is the most inexperienced and it may count against him, but has the greatest breakdown presence. Robshaw takes on more tight work than any of them and is the captain and I think he's our best 6 if he plays like one. Wood appears to be a jack-of-all-trades character. Croft offers something unusual for a backrow and may help us play an expansive game with his presence in wider channels.

There is a way to accommodate all four:
6. Robshaw 7. Kvesic 19. Croft 20. Wood

The idea is to keep Launchbury and Parling on the field for full 80s (they are athletic enough) and to vary the backrow as needed with the replacements. If Launchbury/Parling gets injured, Croft replaces them and Wood replaces Morgan. The idea is that Croft scrums in the second row, but is allowed to play normally, while Wood takes on the work of the injured lock. If Lawes gets to his best again, then he can replace Launchbury/Parling.

However, I think I just prefer leaving Wood out:
6. Robshaw 7. Kvesic 19. Lawes/Attwood 20. Croft

Wood is a great player, and is the clear injury replacement for any of the other backrowers, but I don't think see his specialist role in the side. He seems to do most things second-best. He's appears to be second best of the four at the breakdown (Kvesic), lineout and "backline attack" (Croft), tackling and work rate (Robshaw). I think he's a little further down than second at carrying, both in loose and tight, and being a linkman (Robshaw and Kvesic). I'm not sure who is the best at hitting rucks.

22/23:

You could feasibly leave out fly-half cover and use Twelvetrees as back-up, but it's probably too risky unless Twelvetrees puts in some good performances there for club. I'd probably have fly-half cover in Flood, not only because I think he's better than Farrell, but also because when winning, you don't want to force changes except to freshen the team with like-for-likes, and when losing, Farrell isn't the right player to bring on to chase a game. As for 23, there are so many options, I don't know where to start. I wouldn't have Barritt: same argument as the one I gave for not having Farrell on the bench. Joseph and Tait seem the most obvious. If May were to gain more experience at 13, then Yarde or Benjamin would be my other options.

22. Flood 23. Joseph(/Tait/Benjamin/Yarde)


I like your thinking but differ on Wood, i think Wood is the natural 6 out of that group. He does laods of work at the breakdown rucking (like your 6 should) puts in some great tackles and carries as well. I see lancaster wanting to keep a 7 at 7 after this tour and Croft/ Wood/ Robshaw will fight it out for the 6 shirt.

so

6 Wood/ Robshaw/ Croft (in no particular order)
7 Kvesic
8 Morgan/ Vuniploa

Then whoever is injured is covered by the other 6 (which lancaster likes doing i wouldn't do that personally).

The thing is Croft Wood & Robshaw all offer something different but to be honest none would be my perfect 6. I would want a menace, a destructive type player who puts in thunderous tackles and runs which neither of those 6's are. If we are going to continue with an athletic lock pairing we need more than just Morgan being the ball busting type player.

No the 23 shirt it has to be eastmond, he covers 12, 13, wing & FB. What more do you need oh and is a game changer!
 
I would like to see Burns play a lot more as a subsitiute to get his International feet before he was thurst in as 10 even if it means the odious Farrell starting (as he certainly seems to be the golden one as opposed to the more creative Flood). Once Burns has shown his better side in an English shirt and a lot more consistency, maybe then he could become the starter but, with so many important games coming and time getting shorter to RWC 2015, I cannot see Farrell losing the jersey to an "untried and untested" players such as Burns who has been just too inconsistent! You could say that Farrell went in as starter as an untried and tested international very quickly but he was a far more consistent club player first!

Also, I will go along with Will Greenwood, the best comment maker/commentator in world rugby, who says Barritt is his number one for the positon as he brings so much to the organisation of the backs on the field and neither, in my opinion, Manu or 12trees do that. Also there comes into the equation the same queston of consistency and there is no doubting Barritt wins on that score.

As for 10, I think that Launchbury and Lawes are the obvious stand out 2nd row......unfortunately neither is a line out organiser/caller such as Parling is. Parling may not be as explosive but would I love to know where he stands...jumps!!.....in the International line out stats? I would stick with Parling......to have a succcessful line out you need a good thrower, good organisation, good jumper and level headed leader who knows when to call which line out depending under the circumstances at the time!

As in going out to a restaurant, I do not want to go to a restaurant that serves me THE most spectacular meal one night and absolute sh*** the next, I want consistency of a good to very good standard - rather than spectacular or sh*** standard some of the time!
 
Last edited:
http://www.foxsports.com.au/league/...cup/story-fn2mcuj6-1226656683282#.Ua2rxevlVGE

Pencil him in!


As for 10, I think that Launchbury and Lawes are the obvious stand out 2nd row......unfortunately neither is a line out organiser/caller such as Parling is. Parling may not be as explosive but would I love to know where he stands...jumps!!.....in the International line out stats? I would stick with Parling......to have a succcessful line out you need a good thrower, good organisation, good jumper and level headed leader who knows when to call which line out depending under the circumstances at the time!

I don't think Lawes has played anywhere near well enough to warrant that. Lancaster seems to agree that a lock who adds ballast to the pack is needed, and Attwood/Slater look set to fill it.
I think we are going to see Launchbury and Parling as starters, with Attwood on the bench come the Autumn.

Again, Farrell isn't consistent. He's had absolute nightmares in big games several times now...

I think Barritt should be in the squad to a) Pass on his skills to 36/Kyle, b) offer flexibility in the selection of a 23.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone else think that if Webber performs well in Argentina this summer Hartley might lose his place in the 23? He's already been overtaken by Youngs and this combined with Webbers leadership role on the tour and Hartley's little tantrum in the Premiership final might result in Lancaster saying bye bye to Dylan. Just a thought.
 
Google image searched "Sandor Earl".

mfw



Does anyone else think that if Webber performs well in Argentina this summer Hartley might lose his place in the 23? He's already been overtaken by Youngs and this combined with Webbers leadership role on the tour and Hartley's little tantrum in the Premiership final might result in Lancaster saying bye bye to Dylan. Just a thought.
Absolutely. Lancaster was pretty clear early on about ill-discipline. I don't think it was bad enough to lose it outright, but Lancaster's definitely going to have an eye on Hartley.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think Lawes has played anywhere near well enough to warrant that. Lancaster seems to agree that a lock who adds ballast to the pack is needed, and Attwood/Slater look set to fill it.
I think we are going to see Launchbury and Parling as starters, with Attwood on the bench come the Autumn.

I was taking a view on all things being equal and all players up to form and would agree that Lawes is not and that is why he should not be and is not with the Lions...

Again, Farrell isn't consistent. He's had absolute nightmares in big games several times now...

I woud agee that he is no longer consistent.....my point was that he was consistent for his club when he was initally selected and Burns is not showing that level of consistency

I think Barritt should be in the squad to a) Pass on his skills to 36/Kyle, b) offer flexibility in the selection of a 23.

I agree with your first point but, on the second, I go with Will's assessment rather than, with humongeous respect, yours!!
 
Don't forget Burns was injured during the 6N, after starting to be blooded during the AIs.
He'd arguably be England's 10 by now, if not he'd be the bench 10.
 
Don't forget Burns was injured during the 6N, after starting to be blooded during the AIs.
He'd arguably be England's 10 by now, if not he'd be the bench 10.
Kinda goes with territory.......still need him to show more before I would see him start as 10.....
 
BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMP. Nice one Wasps For Life, very sneaky.

9. Ben Youngs (23) 33 Caps
10.*Freddie Burns** (22) 1 Cap
11. Marland Yarde (21) 0 Caps*
12. Billy Twelvetrees (24) 4 caps*
13. Manu Tuilagi (21) 21 Caps
14. Christian Wade (22) 0 Caps
15. Ben Foden (27) 30 Caps

That looks like one tasty backline !!
Forwards ain't too shabby either, and the bench looks fine as well.
England are really coming into their own, there was a time right after the RWC where they looked approximate in certain areas, too young, but willing as well. Right now they look really substantial. And honestly, the addition of two fast black guys on the wings can't really hurt them too much ! Although I heard defense was the issue..

Anyways man, they're going to direct you to the 'EOYT England thread':
http://www.therugbyforum.com/showthread.php?31670-2013-EOYT-England/page17
 
Has he? Not seeing it myself but then I do watch Flood more than him. In terms of leadership and game management its hard to see Burns ever being as good as Flood. Yes hes OK going forward but he has yet to show a performance yet that would convince me he is or would be a better choice than Flood.
 

Latest posts

Top