Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Featured
2024 Guinness Six Nations
RBS 6 Nations - Scotland Vs England (04/02/2012 - 17:00)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gingergenius" data-source="post: 479340" data-attributes="member: 33219"><p>I'll repeat, I think everyone is being far too harsh on England's midfield/ backline for not looking dangerous on Saturday. To look dangerous you need to have quick ball, and England barely even had any slow ball. For which we have the back row/ pack to thank. A miserable day at Murrayfield with a bunch of rookies is not the day to judge a midfield on their attacking abilities.</p><p></p><p>If Flood is fit, who's to say he'll be at any level of form? Yes of course he would be first pick normally, but too often in the past England have thrown in players based on reputation when they've been carrying an injury or simply horribly lacking in gametime - look at Cipriani a few years back. We'll have to trust Lancaster's judgement on this one, but I hope he would only think of starting Flood if he was sure he could play 60 minutes of top class rugby.</p><p></p><p>If so, then a midfield of 10. Flood, 12. Farrell, 13. Barritt would be the best option. I can't see how people think they're making any sense moaning about a lack of attacking threat and then suggesting a midfield of Barritt and Turner-Hall - Farrell may be no Quade Cooper, but he's more of a footballer than either of those two. If Flood isn't deemed fit enough, then Lancaster will name an unchanged midfield, which I wouldn't disagree with too much, although on principle I don't want Hodgson there - so I'd have 10. Farrell, 12. Barritt, 13. Turner-Hall.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gingergenius, post: 479340, member: 33219"] I'll repeat, I think everyone is being far too harsh on England's midfield/ backline for not looking dangerous on Saturday. To look dangerous you need to have quick ball, and England barely even had any slow ball. For which we have the back row/ pack to thank. A miserable day at Murrayfield with a bunch of rookies is not the day to judge a midfield on their attacking abilities. If Flood is fit, who's to say he'll be at any level of form? Yes of course he would be first pick normally, but too often in the past England have thrown in players based on reputation when they've been carrying an injury or simply horribly lacking in gametime - look at Cipriani a few years back. We'll have to trust Lancaster's judgement on this one, but I hope he would only think of starting Flood if he was sure he could play 60 minutes of top class rugby. If so, then a midfield of 10. Flood, 12. Farrell, 13. Barritt would be the best option. I can't see how people think they're making any sense moaning about a lack of attacking threat and then suggesting a midfield of Barritt and Turner-Hall - Farrell may be no Quade Cooper, but he's more of a footballer than either of those two. If Flood isn't deemed fit enough, then Lancaster will name an unchanged midfield, which I wouldn't disagree with too much, although on principle I don't want Hodgson there - so I'd have 10. Farrell, 12. Barritt, 13. Turner-Hall. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Featured
2024 Guinness Six Nations
RBS 6 Nations - Scotland Vs England (04/02/2012 - 17:00)
Top