-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
English summer rugby
- Thread starter Maverick1987
- Start date
Aristodemus
Bench Player
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2011
- Messages
- 973
- Reaction score
- 46
Goode and Barritt are the two I don't want to see. Obviously Ashton too but that is just a bonus to the two guys who I think hurt our backline. Oh.... and Burns > Farrell 
According to this article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...and-rugby-future-looking-bright-in-white.html
It's a very brief mention at the end of the Saxons paragraph. I can't seem to find anywhere else to support it though. The Telegraph seems to get fairly reliable leaks, so I reckon it's accurate.
I don't agree on Barritt. There's nothing wrong with having a rock in defence, he just needs a more creative fly-half inside him. It should be a rule that Farrell and Barritt can't play together; Farrell played much better with Twelvetrees and Barritt looks a lot better in attack when Hodgson plays fly-half at Saracens. They're just too similar. In brief defence of Ashton, he hasn't had a back line playing to his strengths.
I wouldn't be so definitive about Burns over Farrell as well. Burns is obviously a much greater talent in attack, but I'm not entirely convinced he can control the game at international level. An under strength Argentina isn't an arduous enough test for me to feel comfortable. Add to that Farrell's improvement in attack with the Lions and I think it'll be fairly close in Lancaster's eyes. I hope they end up with a fierce rivalry; it'd be great for England, with Flood as the Journeyman back-up.
Burns can control a game as well as Farrell can imo. The first-half of last season, when Glos lost JSD, May and Trinder, Glos basically temporarily transformed into a second Sarries since there were a lack of try scorers available, grinding and scoring penalties. Unlike Sarries, Glos doesn't have the same quality in the front 5. But Burns was on fire. His attacking instinct really helps in his ability to control a game. For example, if a forward comes out the line too fast to try and close the space down when a kick is coming, I've seen Freddie sidestep, run 5m and get the kick away anyway, and in a much better position. That's what sets him apart for me: Farrell tries to find space to kick the ball into, Freddie does the same, but also creates good space for himself. He keeps defenders guessing, and my god, his control over his backline is superlative amongst the England crowd.
I would be wary of taking some good moments from armchair rides and say Farrell can definitely attack in your average international too. The circs mean neither man proved too much if you ask me.
As for Lancaster's plans, he always talks a good fight, but by now that means little to me, although I've yet to read the full bloody article.
As for Lancaster's plans, he always talks a good fight, but by now that means little to me, although I've yet to read the full bloody article.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
I agree on the FH situation, I don't think you'll see Fred as first choice until the 6N at the earliest.
That's not to say he won't start in any of the three AI's, but certainly not as the set-in-stone first choice.
That's not to say he won't start in any of the three AI's, but certainly not as the set-in-stone first choice.
I think Flood has been forgotten rather unfairly. Still very good player, but most of his England appearances have come at poor times either playing behind a pretty poor pack and/or midfield.
I don't mind Farrell some times, but I'd have Flood and Burns as my two 10s.
Sent from my GT-I9305 using Rugby Forum mobile app
I don't mind Farrell some times, but I'd have Flood and Burns as my two 10s.
Sent from my GT-I9305 using Rugby Forum mobile app
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
I don't care if Flood starts the season in the best form of his life, I wouldn't want him to play.
He's had 7 years to stake his claim. SEVEN YEARS!
I've really grown to resent him... more than just as a player, as a person too.
Last edited:
This. He now has 57 caps and has never owned the shirt. He, to me, will never be more than a journeyman. A seven-out-of-ten player. Both Farrell and Burns have the potential to be better than him by 2015; he isn't going to get better than he is now. Worst case, if Farrell and Burns don't improve, he can step in.
What would be better for England come 2015? Flood with 80 [23 games left] caps? Or Farrell and Burns with 39 and 26 caps a piece?
How is he a journeyman?
He's been at two clubs, one for four and the other for five years.
Might as well call burns a no good journey man too, he started out at the Bath academy.
Sent from my GT-I9305 using Rugby Forum mobile app
He's been at two clubs, one for four and the other for five years.
Might as well call burns a no good journey man too, he started out at the Bath academy.
Sent from my GT-I9305 using Rugby Forum mobile app
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
I've only ever heard it used, with relation to sports, for players who go from club to club a lot.
I don't care if Flood starts the season in the best form of his life, I wouldn't want him to play.
He's had 7 years to stake his claim. SEVEN YEARS!
I've really grown to resent him... more than just as a player, as a person too.
As far as I'm concerned, he's more than staked it. He's the best of them. England's best rugby since 2003 came with Flood pulling the strings. He's the most complete player too. Its annoying he's never been as consistent as you'd like, blame injury and Alred for changing his kicking right when he looked like he was hitting his peak, but he's still a better player than both Fazlet and Burns and the second best international fly-half in the NH behind Sexton for my money.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
It's not his fault, but I genuinely dislike the guy at this point.
His selection (with a mind to actually playing him, not just as injury cover) would probably be one of the biggest errors Lancaster could make imo.
His selection (with a mind to actually playing him, not just as injury cover) would probably be one of the biggest errors Lancaster could make imo.
Why?
(that's both to disliking him as a person and playing him).
Farrell would be a worse choice considering the other quality backs available (though none of them are Saracens so there's a good chance they won't get a look in).
(that's both to disliking him as a person and playing him).
Farrell would be a worse choice considering the other quality backs available (though none of them are Saracens so there's a good chance they won't get a look in).
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
What is the point in playing him?
In terms of development it would be a terrible decision.
He's a decent-to-good player at international level, and I think England should aim higher than being "decent-to-good".
The reason I have grown to dislike him so much, is nothing to do with him as a person or player, he simply represents England as an underachieving team to me.
In terms of development it would be a terrible decision.
He's a decent-to-good player at international level, and I think England should aim higher than being "decent-to-good".
The reason I have grown to dislike him so much, is nothing to do with him as a person or player, he simply represents England as an underachieving team to me.
Last edited:
Because he's better than Farrell and more developed than Burns?
It's not as if he's ancient and blocking younger players development, he's 27 and is a viable option.
It's not as if he's ancient and blocking younger players development, he's 27 and is a viable option.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
He's not, after 7 years, going to suddenly turn into a great FH.
If Flood is the quality of player people want to see playing for England then colour me depressed.
If Flood is the quality of player people want to see playing for England then colour me depressed.
Similar threads
