The Official English Rugby Thread

[Monk]

Care is a much better fit playing with Smith at the moment

A Quins 8 - 9 - 10 combo makes sense imo

[JM2K6]

Countless

Lots of factors to consider - eg how many of them played the whole game with 14. Anyway, it stands to reason that losing a player for 80mins, against a team that were already favourites, is a huge disadvantage and, even if you then play well, you're almost certain to lose.

It's plenty of times, yeah - because it's always mentioned on here when it happens and it's been happening often enough to become a meme. Of course you also jumped into an argument that was partly about England's total lack of attacking ability, which cannot be blamed purely on the red card even though R&C seems convinced that all and every attack is stymied by the lack of Ewels.

But you missed my edit as well, 3-5 points for a yellow card is meaningless given how often a yellow is immediately followed by a 3 point penalty. You can't just multiply that out. They don't get a free penalty every 10 minutes.

Except that most times the attacking side doesn't take the 3 pints on offer, preferring to go for the try, knowing they have an extra man and the defending side is at a big disadvantage.

So, what other games have a side won after being down a man in the 1st couple of mins ?

England vs Argentina? Quins v Glaws? Saracens v Exeter (think this was a draw)? There's been plenty of others, though I don't commit them all to memory as they're not that rare now. This is a commonly occurring discussion on here: notplanetrugby.com/viewtopic.php?p=81208

Also sorry, I edited again You're referencing something else I added: those situations where a yellow card happens because a team is having to infringe to avoid conceding a try, i.e. they are likely to concede a try anyway. It's not a case of "there's been a yellow, now we can score" as often as it is "let's keep the pressure on". Yellows for multiple infringements, yellows for cheating to stop a probably try being scored - all of those are examples of how points scored after yellow cards can often be a reflection of the match situation.

So: quite a lot of 3-pointers scored after yellow cards. Quite a lot of tries scored after yellow cards that were dished out because a team was already struggling to prevent the opposition from scoring. You can't just extrapolate that across all matches. Stats don't work that way.

[Ovals]

England: Furbank; Steward, Marchant, Slade, Nowell; Smith, Youngs; Genge, George, Stuart, Itoje, Isiekwe, Lawes, Underhill, Simmonds.

Replacements:, Marler, Dolly, Sinckler, Chessum, Dombrandt, Randall, Ford, Daly

[JM2K6]

Care is a much better fit playing with Smith at the moment

A Quins 8 - 9 - 10 combo makes sense imo

Care isn't fit enough for international rugby and his form is pretty shaky this season, plus he's had several yellow cards in his past few games. It's a terrible idea.

[Monk]

Care is a much better fit playing with Smith at the moment

A Quins 8 - 9 - 10 combo makes sense imo

Care isn't fit enough for international rugby and his form is pretty shaky this season, plus he's had several yellow cards in his past few games. It's a terrible idea.

i follow english club rugby and disagree with you

[JM2K6]

Care is a much better fit playing with Smith at the moment

A Quins 8 - 9 - 10 combo makes sense imo

Care isn't fit enough for international rugby and his form is pretty shaky this season, plus he's had several yellow cards in his past few games. It's a terrible idea.

i follow english club rugby and disagree with you

I'm a Quins fan. Are you disagreeing with his awful discipline in the last month or two?

[Hal Jordan]

When the hell is our team named?

Forget I asked.

Thank god this is on last so I can get wrecked and fall into bed.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

When the hell is our team named?

Forget I asked.

Thank god this is on last so I can get wrecked and fall into bed.

Qu’un sang impur
Abreuve nos sillons

[Ovals]

It's plenty of times, yeah - because it's always mentioned on here when it happens and it's been happening often enough to become a meme. Of course you also jumped into an argument that was partly about England's total lack of attacking ability, which cannot be blamed purely on the red card even though R&C seems convinced that all and every attack is stymied by the lack of Ewels.

But you missed my edit as well, 3-5 points for a yellow card is meaningless given how often a yellow is immediately followed by a 3 point penalty. You can't just multiply that out. They don't get a free penalty every 10 minutes.

Except that most times the attacking side doesn't take the 3 pints on offer, preferring to go for the try, knowing they have an extra man and the defending side is at a big disadvantage.

So, what other games have a side won after being down a man in the 1st couple of mins ?

England vs Argentina? Quins v Glaws? Saracens v Exeter (think this was a draw)? There's been plenty of others, though I don't commit them all to memory as they're not that rare now. This is a commonly occurring discussion on here: notplanetrugby.com/viewtopic.php?p=81208

Also sorry, I edited again You're referencing something else I added: those situations where a yellow card happens because a team is having to infringe to avoid conceding a try, i.e. they are likely to concede a try anyway. It's not a case of "there's been a yellow, now we can score" as often as it is "let's keep the pressure on". Yellows for multiple infringements, yellows for cheating to stop a probably try being scored - all of those are examples of how points scored after yellow cards can often be a reflection of the match situation.

So: quite a lot of 3-pointers scored after yellow cards. Quite a lot of tries scored after yellow cards that were dished out because a team was already struggling to prevent the opposition from scoring. You can't just extrapolate that across all matches. Stats don't work that way.

On the other hand, you might be able to mitigate being a player down for 10 mins - doing that for 80 is another matter entirely - I only gave the extrapolation as an indicator as to how hard it is for a side to cope with a man down. As was shown in the England game, the longer you are down a man, the tougher it gets - 10 mins you can cope with, 80 and you're pretty much cooked.

I do, however, agree about our attack - it's been toothless with 15 and it was toothless with 14. But having one less player certainly wouldn't have helped.

[JM2K6]

Except that most times the attacking side doesn't take the 3 pints on offer, preferring to go for the try, knowing they have an extra man and the defending side is at a big disadvantage.

So, what other games have a side won after being down a man in the 1st couple of mins ?

England vs Argentina? Quins v Glaws? Saracens v Exeter (think this was a draw)? There's been plenty of others, though I don't commit them all to memory as they're not that rare now. This is a commonly occurring discussion on here: notplanetrugby.com/viewtopic.php?p=81208

Also sorry, I edited again You're referencing something else I added: those situations where a yellow card happens because a team is having to infringe to avoid conceding a try, i.e. they are likely to concede a try anyway. It's not a case of "there's been a yellow, now we can score" as often as it is "let's keep the pressure on". Yellows for multiple infringements, yellows for cheating to stop a probably try being scored - all of those are examples of how points scored after yellow cards can often be a reflection of the match situation.

So: quite a lot of 3-pointers scored after yellow cards. Quite a lot of tries scored after yellow cards that were dished out because a team was already struggling to prevent the opposition from scoring. You can't just extrapolate that across all matches. Stats don't work that way.

On the other hand, you might be able to mitigate being a player down for 10 mins - doing that for 80 is another matter entirely - I only gave the extrapolation as an indicator as to how hard it is for a side to cope with a man down. As was shown in the England game, the longer you are down a man, the tougher it gets - 10 mins you can cope with, 80 and you're pretty much cooked.

I do, however, agree about our attack - it's been toothless with 15 and it was toothless with 14. But having one less player certainly wouldn't have helped.

It's definitely harder, no question. I just don't agree with the extrapolating the "average points conceded" stat because of how misleading it can be.

Some other examples:

Toulouse beating Racing away from home in a European knockout game with an early red: https://www.rugbydump.com/news/toulouse ... -red-card/
Ireland with their only win on tour in South Africa despite losing CJ Stander to an early red: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... tch-report
Australia beating France to seal the series in 2021 despite losing Koroibete after 5 minutes: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/ ... ver-france
Ireland smash Samoa at the world cup despite Aki's red card in the first half: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50027152
All Blacks beat Australia comfortably despite an early red for Jordie Barrett: https://www.rugby.com.au/news/wallabies ... ship202195
Munster smash Glasgow despite Earls being red carded early on: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37730494

Obviously there are plenty of examples of red cards leading to losses. But it's not at all a death sentence. And no matter what the crazy man says, it does not excuse England's total lack of attack (I know you agree!). These matches are evidence of it. It's total nonsense to claim that losing a mediocrity like Ewels made our complete inability to create anything a foregone conclusion.

[Ovals]

England vs Argentina? Quins v Glaws? Saracens v Exeter (think this was a draw)? There's been plenty of others, though I don't commit them all to memory as they're not that rare now. This is a commonly occurring discussion on here: notplanetrugby.com/viewtopic.php?p=81208

Also sorry, I edited again You're referencing something else I added: those situations where a yellow card happens because a team is having to infringe to avoid conceding a try, i.e. they are likely to concede a try anyway. It's not a case of "there's been a yellow, now we can score" as often as it is "let's keep the pressure on". Yellows for multiple infringements, yellows for cheating to stop a probably try being scored - all of those are examples of how points scored after yellow cards can often be a reflection of the match situation.

So: quite a lot of 3-pointers scored after yellow cards. Quite a lot of tries scored after yellow cards that were dished out because a team was already struggling to prevent the opposition from scoring. You can't just extrapolate that across all matches. Stats don't work that way.

On the other hand, you might be able to mitigate being a player down for 10 mins - doing that for 80 is another matter entirely - I only gave the extrapolation as an indicator as to how hard it is for a side to cope with a man down. As was shown in the England game, the longer you are down a man, the tougher it gets - 10 mins you can cope with, 80 and you're pretty much cooked.

I do, however, agree about our attack - it's been toothless with 15 and it was toothless with 14. But having one less player certainly wouldn't have helped.

It's definitely harder, no question. I just don't agree with the extrapolating the "average points conceded" stat because of how misleading it can be.

Some other examples:

Toulouse beating Racing away from home in a European knockout game with an early red: https://www.rugbydump.com/news/toulouse ... -red-card/
Ireland with their only win on tour in South Africa despite losing CJ Stander to an early red: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... tch-report
Australia beating France to seal the series in 2021 despite losing Koroibete after 5 minutes: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/ ... ver-france
Ireland smash Samoa at the world cup despite Aki's red card in the first half: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50027152
All Blacks beat Australia comfortably despite an early red for Jordie Barrett: https://www.rugby.com.au/news/wallabies ... ship202195
Munster smash Glasgow despite Earls being red carded early on: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37730494

Obviously there are plenty of examples of red cards leading to losses. But it's not at all a death sentence. And no matter what the crazy man says, it does not excuse England's total lack of attack (I know you agree!). These matches are evidence of it. It's total nonsense to claim that losing a mediocrity like Ewels made our complete inability to create anything a foregone conclusion.

Good examples but still a minority by a huge distance - it may not be a death sentence but it ain't far off - especially when the side with 15 is the better side to start with. I'm confident that we'd have lost with 15, even with the dominance we had in the scrum - so playing with 14 just took out what slim chance we had.

[Ovals]

Must admit that I'm pretty dismayed at Eddie's selection for the France game. I can see no real chance that our attack will be any better and it all looks set up for kicking the leather off the ball - but with slow chasers - It's all a bit depressing. And yet again Barbeary's time has been utterly wasted. This side does absolutely nothing to take the team forward.

I really want to see Eddie given the elbow - even if it means we have to take a bit of a hammering in France. Not sure I can even be bothered to watch.

[JM2K6]

On the other hand, you might be able to mitigate being a player down for 10 mins - doing that for 80 is another matter entirely - I only gave the extrapolation as an indicator as to how hard it is for a side to cope with a man down. As was shown in the England game, the longer you are down a man, the tougher it gets - 10 mins you can cope with, 80 and you're pretty much cooked.

I do, however, agree about our attack - it's been toothless with 15 and it was toothless with 14. But having one less player certainly wouldn't have helped.

It's definitely harder, no question. I just don't agree with the extrapolating the "average points conceded" stat because of how misleading it can be.

Some other examples:

Toulouse beating Racing away from home in a European knockout game with an early red: https://www.rugbydump.com/news/toulouse ... -red-card/
Ireland with their only win on tour in South Africa despite losing CJ Stander to an early red: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... tch-report
Australia beating France to seal the series in 2021 despite losing Koroibete after 5 minutes: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/ ... ver-france
Ireland smash Samoa at the world cup despite Aki's red card in the first half: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50027152
All Blacks beat Australia comfortably despite an early red for Jordie Barrett: https://www.rugby.com.au/news/wallabies ... ship202195
Munster smash Glasgow despite Earls being red carded early on: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37730494

Obviously there are plenty of examples of red cards leading to losses. But it's not at all a death sentence. And no matter what the crazy man says, it does not excuse England's total lack of attack (I know you agree!). These matches are evidence of it. It's total nonsense to claim that losing a mediocrity like Ewels made our complete inability to create anything a foregone conclusion.

Good examples but still a minority by a huge distance - it may not be a death sentence but it ain't far off - especially when the side with 15 is the better side to start with. I'm confident that we'd have lost with 15, even with the dominance we had in the scrum - so playing with 14 just took out what slim chance we had.

It's not an exhaustive list, and it's not a huge minority - early red cards aren't all that common full stop. It also doesn't need to be exhaustive in order to disprove the idea that red cards ruin the contest.

We agree that we were likely to lose that match anyway. But then most people thought that about Australia and they still won with a red card.

[Ovals]

It's definitely harder, no question. I just don't agree with the extrapolating the "average points conceded" stat because of how misleading it can be.

Some other examples:

Toulouse beating Racing away from home in a European knockout game with an early red: https://www.rugbydump.com/news/toulouse ... -red-card/
Ireland with their only win on tour in South Africa despite losing CJ Stander to an early red: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... tch-report
Australia beating France to seal the series in 2021 despite losing Koroibete after 5 minutes: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/ ... ver-france
Ireland smash Samoa at the world cup despite Aki's red card in the first half: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50027152
All Blacks beat Australia comfortably despite an early red for Jordie Barrett: https://www.rugby.com.au/news/wallabies ... ship202195
Munster smash Glasgow despite Earls being red carded early on: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37730494

Obviously there are plenty of examples of red cards leading to losses. But it's not at all a death sentence. And no matter what the crazy man says, it does not excuse England's total lack of attack (I know you agree!). These matches are evidence of it. It's total nonsense to claim that losing a mediocrity like Ewels made our complete inability to create anything a foregone conclusion.

Good examples but still a minority by a huge distance - it may not be a death sentence but it ain't far off - especially when the side with 15 is the better side to start with. I'm confident that we'd have lost with 15, even with the dominance we had in the scrum - so playing with 14 just took out what slim chance we had.

It's not an exhaustive list, and it's not a huge minority - early red cards aren't all that common full stop. It also doesn't need to be exhaustive in order to disprove the idea that red cards ruin the contest.

We agree that we were likely to lose that match anyway. But then most people thought that about Australia and they still won with a red card.

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree - for me a red card, that early, radically alters the odds against you and, in that game, it was pretty well curtains in the 2nd minute and it ended up being a record defeat despite us playing above ourselves.

[JM2K6]

Playing above the level of this Eddie Jones 6N side, maybe. One would hope playing above ourselves in general would involve a line break or two...! Can't fault the commitment. Can fault a lot of other things - not least the balance of the side, as well as the impact of the injuries which exposed that even further.

[geordie_6]

There's a certain irony that Furbank, who was dropped after a horror show under the high ball against France has been brought back in to help counteract the threat of the high ball game...

...from France.

[Kawazaki]

The weather forecast for Paris tomorrow is perfect sunshine all day and a dry evening.

We could be in for the nadir of all nadirs in the career of Eddie Jones.

[JM2K6]

I expect us to fight like we did in the Ireland game, although we're away from home. I also expect us to kick the shit out of the ball again.

Two articles in the Graun worth reading today. This one, from Andy Bull, is very well stated and posted before the team was announced: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... ugby-union

It was crisp, clear and grounded in simple principles. You wonder what that Eddie Jones would make of this Eddie Jones and what would he say about England now if he still had that column in the Mail.

Would he ask why the captaincy is being passed around between Tom Curry, Courtney Lawes and Farrell when the man who sets the standards, Maro Itoje, is frozen out because he may or may not be too “inward-looking” to do it (it depends if you go on Jones’s last book or what he said about it afterwards)? Would he ask why if England’s forwards played so well against Ireland when Itoje and Lawes were packing down together at lock England don’t play them there every week?

(there's plenty more)

And then something less to agree with, more to make you angry: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/ ... ugby-union

perhaps more telling was his suggestion that England could struggle to field their absolute first-choice XV until next year’s Rugby World Cup.

The Premiership clubs would argue the attrition rate on international duty is an equally major factor but Jones, now lacking a clutch of Lions including Curry, Owen Farrell, Manu Tuilagi, Anthony Watson, Luke Cowan-Dickie and Jonny Hill, believes that English injury disruption is becoming harder to avoid than ever. “Now, more so than at any time, the length of the season in England is daunting,” Jones says. “We’ve got to be more accepting that this is going to be part of the normal going forward. Your ability to get your best team on the field is probably only going to be seen at the World Cup when you get three months to prepare the players properly. Otherwise you’ve just got to make do with what you have available.”

Given France, even with the occasional Covid issues, have used just 26 players in the entire championship and have an even longer domestic season, there is a certain irony to the timing of Jones’s complaint. Cohesion, too, is not entirely down to good luck with injuries. Those English supporters exasperated by England’s endless comings and goings will be wondering if England’s management are subtly – or not too subtly – trying to get their excuses in early.

[Kawazaki]

JM, you should listen to the latest BBC Rugby podcast entitled 'The one about France'. Don't worry, there no Ugo in it. It's an intelligent insight into the changes made in France particularly by the 30 - yes 30 - fully professional clubs in France toward working in the best interests of French rugby. Features the Brive chairman for the last 17 years who is English and John Beattie gives a players perspective of what is like our there. Basically, it's no fluke that France are now a very good team, Shaun Edwards of course had a lot to do with it but Fabian Galthie is the real catalyst apparently. He's not just a fancy pair of spectacles.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3OvcA0 ... =copy-link

[JM2K6]

JM, you should listen to the latest BBC Rugby podcast entitled 'The one about France'. Don't worry, there no Ugo in it. It's an intelligent insight into the changes made in France particularly by the 30 - yes 30 - fully professional clubs in France toward working in the best interests of French rugby. Features the Brive chairman for the last 17 years who is English and John Beattie gives a players perspective of what is like our there. Basically, it's no fluke that France are now a very good team, Shaun Edwards of course had a lot to do with it but Fabian Galthie is the real catalyst apparently. He's not just a fancy pair of spectacles.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3OvcA0 ... =copy-link

Cheers, will do. Need to listen to the one with Cipriani running the rule over England's attack too

[Paddington Bear]

Good articles. I've no issue with playing a kicking game, in fact I think in large part it suits English rugby to start from the position of a big pack and a good chasing game. Of course, as we've seen with France who have both of those and kick the leather off it, it doesn't preclude playing good attacking rugby when you choose to.

I think it's a fair point to compare the Eddie of 2016 to the one now. The side looks incoherent in a way it did not in his first four years. It's hard to discern exactly what our gameplan has been this 6N but my best guess is that it was along the lines of grinding out Scotland & Wales, tearing into Ireland and engineering a showdown in Paris with Manu back fit.
We should have beaten Scotland from where the game was with 10/15 minutes to go and we'll never know if with 15 we'd have turned Ireland over, no point debating it.

From where we are now I do think that a performance in Paris is important. I still think we can turn them over, the weight of expectation and belief can be as much of a curse as a blessing if things don't work out as France expect them to (imagine the change in the stadium if there's an early Hansen style try, a lineout set move try a la Eddie's first few years, or we run through their scrum). Winning would be great but as much as anything showing we can compete with the top teams is the key element to salvage something from this year.

Barring an absolute 40 point wipe out in Paris, Eddie's job is safe to the World Cup so may as well come to terms with it. I'm comfortable enough taking him at his word that it is his overriding plan to get it right there, and we'll be there or thereabouts if you just look at the schedule:
- If we lose to both Argentina and Japan, greatest of respect to them, things have gone disastrously wrong. Our pack as it's played this 6N would manshame the Japanese and grind out a 10-15 point win even if everything else goes to shit.
- QF will be vs Australia or Wales (plausibly Fiji). Will be interesting games, but both are teams we've beaten this season and I think we are objectively better than.
- Then you're at the semis and anything can happen.

The podcast on France was a good listen as well whilst walking down the canal - got me wondering where we'd be with a settled and top level assistant coach group. Cockerill seems to be doing a decent job with the forwards, the rest?

[sockwithaticket]

Aiming for a good World Cup to the detriment of the 6N just isn't acceptable.

If a team makes it all the way to the final they play 7 games at the World Cup. Assuming the lowest possible number of other tests in the 4 year cycle (37 - 5 each 6N, 2 each Summer and 3 each Autumn), the maximum proportion of games it can represent is 16%.

I'm also hugely distrustful of Eddie saying everything will be fine in the future when the present has shown little sign of firming up and we've had two very poor 6N on the trot.

[petej]

Cockerill will only work short term and not good with young players

[sockwithaticket]

The podcast on France was a good listen as well whilst walking down the canal - got me wondering where we'd be with a settled and top level assistant coach group. Cockerill seems to be doing a decent job with the forwards, the rest?

Attack coach has definitely had the most churn under Eddie and I don't think it's a coincidence that it's the most dysfunctional part of our game.

[Paddington Bear]

Cockerill will only work short term and not good with young players

My suspicion is that international environments suit him better than clubs - he knows his stuff but is clearly an insufferable prick. Probably fine to work with for a few weeks at a time.

[Paddington Bear]

From an interview with Sam Simmonds:

“I feel like, as a group, probably this campaign more than any other we’ve come together as a squad,” he added. “Although that maybe hasn’t been reflected in the results against Scotland and Ireland, I feel like people could see at Twickenham what it meant for us to play for England. Also we’re not just playing for England, we’re playing for the coaches. That’s big to see that, and how much confidence we have in what Eddie does and in how we play the game at the weekend.”

Always have to take these things with a pinch of salt, likewise the videos coming from RFU channels, but it's hard to look at this and the efforts being put in, and see this as a squad who hate their time with England and can't stand/are afraid of their coaches.

[Kawazaki]

For a £23k match fee, people will say just about anything.

[Ovals]

I expect us to fight like we did in the Ireland game, although we're away from home. I also expect us to kick the shit out of the ball again.

I think you're absolutely correct. Eddie has always liked seeing his side hoofing the ball. After our excellent rearguard action last weekend he probably thinks that's the template for how we should play this weekend - hence the rather 'hotchpot' team he's selected this week. It's a very limited gameplan and won't be pretty to watch. We're also very unlikely to achieve the same success we managed at the scrums.

[JM2K6]

From an interview with Sam Simmonds:

“I feel like, as a group, probably this campaign more than any other we’ve come together as a squad,” he added. “Although that maybe hasn’t been reflected in the results against Scotland and Ireland, I feel like people could see at Twickenham what it meant for us to play for England. Also we’re not just playing for England, we’re playing for the coaches. That’s big to see that, and how much confidence we have in what Eddie does and in how we play the game at the weekend.”

Always have to take these things with a pinch of salt, likewise the videos coming from RFU channels, but it's hard to look at this and the efforts being put in, and see this as a squad who hate their time with England and can't stand/are afraid of their coaches.

It's a case of if you have to tell people you're playing for the coaches...

Look what players say when selection is no longer anything they have to worry about. Like Dylan Hartley.

[JM2K6]

Cipriani mocking Eddie's cliches - "We don't play formation mate, we don't have that mate, we don't have handling forwards mate - what group of players have you been watching?"

[Paddington Bear]

From an interview with Sam Simmonds:

“I feel like, as a group, probably this campaign more than any other we’ve come together as a squad,” he added. “Although that maybe hasn’t been reflected in the results against Scotland and Ireland, I feel like people could see at Twickenham what it meant for us to play for England. Also we’re not just playing for England, we’re playing for the coaches. That’s big to see that, and how much confidence we have in what Eddie does and in how we play the game at the weekend.”

Always have to take these things with a pinch of salt, likewise the videos coming from RFU channels, but it's hard to look at this and the efforts being put in, and see this as a squad who hate their time with England and can't stand/are afraid of their coaches.

It's a case of if you have to tell people you're playing for the coaches...

Look what players say when selection is no longer anything they have to worry about. Like Dylan Hartley.

It was in answer to a specific question about Eddie

[Rhubarb & Custard]

I expect us to fight like we did in the Ireland game, although we're away from home. I also expect us to kick the shit out of the ball again.

I think you're absolutely correct. Eddie has always liked seeing his side hoofing the ball. After our excellent rearguard action last weekend he probably thinks that's the template for how we should play this weekend - hence the rather 'hotchpot' team he's selected this week. It's a very limited gameplan and won't be pretty to watch. We're also very unlikely to achieve the same success we managed at the scrums.

It's not exactly the attack that nobody else has line of thinking being espoused but a few weeks ago. Hard too to see what it does to develop the pairing of Randall and Smith

[Margin__Walker]

U20s for the France game on Sunday. Arundell back in. Stephens makes shows up on the bench (guessing he's been injured up to now?). Probably the strongest line up they've turned out so far, so hopefully managed to end on a positive note.

England U20 v France U20
15. Henry Arundell (London Irish, Caps 2)
14. Deago Bailey (Bristol Bears, Caps 7)
13. Will Joseph (London Irish, Caps 1)
12. Ethan Grayson (Northampton Saints, Caps 4)
11. Cassius Cleaves (Harlequins, Caps 2)
10. Louie Johnson (Newcastle Falcons, 3 Caps)
9. Nye Thomas (Sale Sharks, Caps 1)
1. Fin Baxter (Harlequins, Caps 6)
2. John Stewart (Bath Rugby, Caps 4)
3. Tim Hoyt (Leicester Tigers, Caps 1)
4. Lewis Chessum (Leicester Tigers, Caps 2)
5. Chandler Cunningham-South (London Irish, Caps 2)
6. Ewan Richards (Bath Rugby, Caps 6)
7. Toby Knight (Saracens, Caps 3)
8. Emeka Ilione (Leicester Tigers, Caps 5) - Captain

Replacements
16. Ollie Fletcher (Newcastle Falcons, Caps 0)
17. Archie McArthur (Wasps, Caps 1)
18. Mikey Summerfield (London Irish, Caps 4)
19. Tom Lockett (Northampton Saints, Caps 2)
20. Lucas Brooke (London Irish, Caps 3)
21. Matty Jones (Gloucester Rugby, Caps 3)
22. Iwan Stephens (Newcastle Falcons, Caps 0)
23. Tom Litchfield (Northampton Saints, Caps 4)

[JM2K6]

No Jamie Benson? Is he injured? He's done pretty well, plus Quins have picked Ross Chisholm at 10 for the cup game so you'd expect he'd have played instead...

[Margin__Walker]

Dunno. Missed that he wasn't on the bench as he's been rotating a bit with Johnson. Albeit Benson getting the nod lately, so guessing he will have a knock.

[Kawazaki]

U20s for the France game on Sunday. Arundell back in. Stephens makes shows up on the bench (guessing he's been injured up to now?). Probably the strongest line up they've turned out so far, so hopefully managed to end on a positive note.

England U20 v France U20
15. Henry Arundell (London Irish, Caps 2)
14. Deago Bailey (Bristol Bears, Caps 7)
13. Will Joseph (London Irish, Caps 1)
12. Ethan Grayson (Northampton Saints, Caps 4)
11. Cassius Cleaves (Harlequins, Caps 2)
10. Louie Johnson (Newcastle Falcons, 3 Caps)
9. Nye Thomas (Sale Sharks, Caps 1)
1. Fin Baxter (Harlequins, Caps 6)
2. John Stewart (Bath Rugby, Caps 4)
3. Tim Hoyt (Leicester Tigers, Caps 1)
4. Lewis Chessum (Leicester Tigers, Caps 2)
5. Chandler Cunningham-South (London Irish, Caps 2)
6. Ewan Richards (Bath Rugby, Caps 6)
7. Toby Knight (Saracens, Caps 3)
8. Emeka Ilione (Leicester Tigers, Caps 5) - Captain

Replacements
16. Ollie Fletcher (Newcastle Falcons, Caps 0)
17. Archie McArthur (Wasps, Caps 1)
18. Mikey Summerfield (London Irish, Caps 4)
19. Tom Lockett (Northampton Saints, Caps 2)
20. Lucas Brooke (London Irish, Caps 3)
21. Matty Jones (Gloucester Rugby, Caps 3)
22. Iwan Stephens (Newcastle Falcons, Caps 0)
23. Tom Litchfield (Northampton Saints, Caps 4)

How much quicker are the England U20 back-3 compared to the senior side?!

[Ovals]

I expect us to fight like we did in the Ireland game, although we're away from home. I also expect us to kick the shit out of the ball again.

I think you're absolutely correct. Eddie has always liked seeing his side hoofing the ball. After our excellent rearguard action last weekend he probably thinks that's the template for how we should play this weekend - hence the rather 'hotchpot' team he's selected this week. It's a very limited gameplan and won't be pretty to watch. We're also very unlikely to achieve the same success we managed at the scrums.

It's not exactly the attack that nobody else has line of thinking being espoused but a few weeks ago. Hard too to see what it does to develop the pairing of Randall and Smith

It's pretty much an admission that they've completely failed and just aren't going to bother with it any longer. TBH you don't need a highly paid head coach to implement the limited gameplan that appears to be latest Eddie's latest brain brainwave. Yet again we've made no real progress during the 6N.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

I think you're absolutely correct. Eddie has always liked seeing his side hoofing the ball. After our excellent rearguard action last weekend he probably thinks that's the template for how we should play this weekend - hence the rather 'hotchpot' team he's selected this week. It's a very limited gameplan and won't be pretty to watch. We're also very unlikely to achieve the same success we managed at the scrums.

It's not exactly the attack that nobody else has line of thinking being espoused but a few weeks ago. Hard too to see what it does to develop the pairing of Randall and Smith

It's pretty much an admission that they've completely failed and just aren't going to bother with it any longer. TBH you don't need a highly paid head coach to implement the limited gameplan that appears to be latest Eddie's latest brain brainwave. Yet again we've made no real progress during the 6N.

It's almost less we make little progress and instead we keep resetting and starting anew. The attack we had last 6N was interesting if difficult to see how it could be sustained, the autumn was not good, but since then we started this 6N in very similar style to France as regards the attack. But whereas France have developed their attack over several years we've again changed or perhaps again given up. For sure Eddie runs some very nice strike moves, and in a lot of games our pack, the kick chase and running strike moves off penalties will work, but if you don't get the penalties and the other side take your kicks then not only is it a rotten watch it's near doomed to failure.

Johnson did this too, try an attack, find some problems in it and change the plan. Eddie should have more patience, or needs to control more what his underlings are up to, but whatever we need to accept progress isn't always instant. And now additionally selection seems to be getting worse

[Margin__Walker]

How much quicker are the England U20 back-3 compared to the senior side?!

Ha. Yeah, just a little. It'll never catch on.

[Raggs]

How much quicker are the England U20 back-3 compared to the senior side?!

Ha. Yeah, just a little. It'll never catch on.

The u20s game in general is faster. U20s international referee fitness test is higher than any other level.