The Official English Rugby Thread
If we're playing Smith at 10, we probably want Youngs at 9, to prevent it being all change. Though I do still want the youngsters to get a good runout.
Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-
Margin__Walker
- Posts: 2744
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:47 am
Will be an interesting 6N for May on the wing front. He's the guy who's treading water at the moment and not putting big performances. Can only be an automatic selection for so long.JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:27 am Would've been nice to see Collier rewarded for being a beastly scrummager but it was a long shot. Heyes is pretty good.
Not THAT surprised by Chessum being ahead of Martin, going on my "does he actually do anything when on TV" index. Radwan missing out seems strange to me but I really like OHC so eh.
-
Iain(bobbity)
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2021 6:38 am
I feel like the Ford thing is personal. He's definitely a player who has ideas about how things should be done.
It can't be because he wants to change the style of play and Ford doesn't fit. Ford's a hugely flexible player and we've seen what he can do with the shackles off.
I'm also pissed off because I want Smith to be learning off Ford in training. The weaker parts of Smith's game are real strengths for Ford ffs.
I'm also pissed off because I want Smith to be learning off Ford in training. The weaker parts of Smith's game are real strengths for Ford ffs.
-
sockwithaticket
- Posts: 8663
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:48 am
This is the main reason his inclusion is so baffling. Ok, for whatever reason you don't want Ford involved in the matchday squad, but he's a 75 cap international who, among other things, pulled the strings during a dismantling of the All Blacks. Surely he has value as a squad member to mentor Smith (and Furbank to a lesser degree if he's still being seen as 10 cover).JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:13 pm It can't be because he wants to change the style of play and Ford doesn't fit. Ford's a hugely flexible player and we've seen what he can do with the shackles off.
I'm also pissed off because I want Smith to be learning off Ford in training. The weaker parts of Smith's game are real strengths for Ford ffs.
Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:46 am
Will be an interesting 6N for May on the wing front. He's the guy who's treading water at the moment and not putting big performances. Can only be an automatic selection for so long.
Yeah, I reckon once he reaches about 110 caps he'll be kicked out by Eddie.
I think the main problem for Ford is that there is not enough room for all 3 of him, Smith and Farrell in a match-day 23,. Jones evidently cannot live without Farrell, so it's Ford or Smith to miss out; Ford at the moment.
It's complete bollocks in my humble opinion: I'd have both the others ahead of Farrell at 10, and Lozowski and Slade ahead of him at 12 (even if it's not the latter's better position).
It's complete bollocks in my humble opinion: I'd have both the others ahead of Farrell at 10, and Lozowski and Slade ahead of him at 12 (even if it's not the latter's better position).
I hadn't noticed that Underhill's been dropped. Perhaps it's a sign he's moving away from Curry at 8 finally? I didn't think Underhill had a great autumn, particularly against SA when he was absolutely shocking. Big call to drop him though given he's been messed around with ever since the world cup and the success of the Curry/Underhill combo.
-
Rhubarb & Custard
- Posts: 2097
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:04 pm
I think the main thing for Ford is the same problem Cipriani had. In that if your a big presence on setting team shape in attack and you're not starting he doesn't want to distraction from the number 1 pick at 10. Pros and cons in that line of thinkingWoddy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:58 pm I think the main problem for Ford is that there is not enough room for all 3 of him, Smith and Farrell in a match-day 23,. Jones evidently cannot live without Farrell, so it's Ford or Smith to miss out; Ford at the moment.
It's complete bollocks in my humble opinion: I'd have both the others ahead of Farrell at 10, and Lozowski and Slade ahead of him at 12 (even if it's not the latter's better position).
Isnt Underhill broken at the moment?JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:49 pm I hadn't noticed that Underhill's been dropped. Perhaps it's a sign he's moving away from Curry at 8 finally? I didn't think Underhill had a great autumn, particularly against SA when he was absolutely shocking. Big call to drop him though given he's been messed around with ever since the world cup and the success of the Curry/Underhill combo.
Just reading some of the exchanges from the England press conference yesterday and I'm a bit stumped. Can somebody please explain this quote;
I've read it 5 or 6 times now and I'm not getting it.
“Marcus could be an absolutely brilliant ten so he needs a 12 next to him that can run the game for him and that’s where Owen is so good,”
- Eddie Jones
I've read it 5 or 6 times now and I'm not getting it.
You know whats going to happen, Farrell will go in as a 12 but will be first receiver on attacking ball which will fuck up anything Smith tries to do because he will just shovel slow shit ball onwards and expect Smith to work a miracle, it happened when they played together in the AI'sKawazaki wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:06 pm Just reading some of the exchanges from the England press conference yesterday and I'm a bit stumped. Can somebody please explain this quote;
“Marcus could be an absolutely brilliant ten so he needs a 12 next to him that can run the game for him and that’s where Owen is so good,”
- Eddie Jones
I've read it 5 or 6 times now and I'm not getting it.
-
Happyhooker
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:09 pm
A bit, but nearly backASMO wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:49 pmIsnt Underhill broken at the moment?JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:49 pm I hadn't noticed that Underhill's been dropped. Perhaps it's a sign he's moving away from Curry at 8 finally? I didn't think Underhill had a great autumn, particularly against SA when he was absolutely shocking. Big call to drop him though given he's been messed around with ever since the world cup and the success of the Curry/Underhill combo.
-
sockwithaticket
- Posts: 8663
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:48 am
A generous interpretation is he's trying to lower the media's expectations of Smith and the team with him at 10.Kawazaki wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:06 pm Just reading some of the exchanges from the England press conference yesterday and I'm a bit stumped. Can somebody please explain this quote;
“Marcus could be an absolutely brilliant ten so he needs a 12 next to him that can run the game for him and that’s where Owen is so good,”
- Eddie Jones
I've read it 5 or 6 times now and I'm not getting it.
A less generous one is that he's negging Smith to stop the kid from getting ideas above his station as to his position in the national pecking order. Then there's a side order of justifying including Farrell after no recent game time.
It should be on Farrell to prove he's good enough to play alongside Smith. He made England look ponderous as fuck in the AIs and as soon as he disappeared we got better. He was dire in the last 6N and had a piss-poor Lions tour; what gives, Eddie?
-
Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11144
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
It's simple enough. It's another twisting facts to support the inclusion of Farrell. What the interviewer should have asked was whether if Smith had been injured......Kawazaki wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:06 pm Just reading some of the exchanges from the England press conference yesterday and I'm a bit stumped. Can somebody please explain this quote;
“Marcus could be an absolutely brilliant ten so he needs a 12 next to him that can run the game for him and that’s where Owen is so good,”
- Eddie Jones
I've read it 5 or 6 times now and I'm not getting it.
Indeed. Really Farrell should have to prove he justifies inclusion at 10 or 12. We basically know he will move to 10 if Smith gets injured. We've repeatedly seen Farrell fluff his lines at 10 which is why he was playing 12.
Marcus could be an absolutely brilliant 10 so we are going to remove an attacking option to make him less dangerous.
-
eldanielfire
- Posts: 852
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:01 pm
Farrell has those pictures that would ruin Eddie's career?
-
Happyhooker
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:09 pm
You're going to have to be more specific I'm afraid
Flood and cips were decent but I'm not sure I would class either as one of the greatest passers of the ball they had ever seen.
Edit: Charlie hodgson?
Last edited by petej on Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Good news.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022 ... ve-finalEnglish club rugby is set to return to free-to-air television following the agreement of a new deal with ITV. At the start of this season there was widespread disappointment when the popular Channel 5 highlights show was axed but Premiership Rugby has now negotiated a fresh partnership with ITV until the end of the 2023-24 season.
-
sockwithaticket
- Posts: 8663
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:48 am
Good news if they're cracking games which showcase how exciting the sport can be, bad if they turn out to be dour, cagey affairs 'for the purists'. Exposure is good for the game, but it needs to hook people rather than put them off.SaintK wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:54 am Good news.https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022 ... ve-finalEnglish club rugby is set to return to free-to-air television following the agreement of a new deal with ITV. At the start of this season there was widespread disappointment when the popular Channel 5 highlights show was axed but Premiership Rugby has now negotiated a fresh partnership with ITV until the end of the 2023-24 season.
Shame Mark Durden-Smith has been bumped from the highlights. Being mates in real life who also do after dinner speaking together, he and Flatman had real chemistry.
Its Brazil - of course its Charlie Hodgson..petej wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:34 amFlood and cips were decent but I'm not sure I would class either as one of the greatest passers of the ball they had ever seen.
Edit: Charlie hodgson?
(TBF he's not wrong about the breezeblocks).
Quite good against SA (kick pass for Cueto's try)and then yanked about 20 minutes in VS Australia the next week.
I remember far too much about the Andy Robinson era England team
England Vs SA (hodgson and Jaco Van Der westhuizen I think were the 10s) was the only England game I attended during the Robinson era. i was very lucky.
That is spectacular good fortune. I have some very grim memories from those dayspetej wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 9:33 amEngland Vs SA (hodgson and Jaco Van Der westhuizen I think were the 10s) was the only England game I attended during the Robinson era. i was very lucky.
(Edit)
Argentina 2006 being the nadir
-
Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11144
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
Was that the purple kit game? We were busy trying to get card planes to land on the pitch
-
Happyhooker
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:09 pm
Is Nathan Hughes really turning out for London Scottish tomorrow or is it just a lad with the same name?
No Hughes in this team!Happyhooker wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:56 pm Is Nathan Hughes really turning out for London Scottish tomorrow or is it just a lad with the same name?
-
Margin__Walker
- Posts: 2744
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:47 am
Dunno about the LS player, but former Eng international Nathan Hughes is turning out for Hartpury tomorrow.Happyhooker wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:56 pm Is Nathan Hughes really turning out for London Scottish tomorrow or is it just a lad with the same name?
-
Happyhooker
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:09 pm
Sorry, meant hartbury against london Scottish but obviously blanked out!!
Bloody hell
Bloody hell
-
Happyhooker
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:09 pm
-
Hal Jordan
- Posts: 4154
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:48 pm
- Location: Sector 2814