The Official English Rugby Thread

[Ovals]

Ribbans called up to the England squad to cover for Lawes, who went off at the weekend with a calf injury. Pleased for Ribbans, shame it's at his teammate's expense. Presumably Isiekwe will now become the hybrid lock/6.

I think Chessum is earmarked for that role unless Borthwick is mad and thinks Itoje can play 6 at Test level.

Or maybe, just maybe, we'll see three backrow players who are actually full time backrow players.

Yes please!
Itoje needs to find his pre-injury form as well. Was a bit flat again yesterday

Earl and Willis on the flanks would be very tasty !

[sockwithaticket]

I think Chessum is earmarked for that role unless Borthwick is mad and thinks Itoje can play 6 at Test level.

Or maybe, just maybe, we'll see three backrow players who are actually full time backrow players.

Yes please!
Itoje needs to find his pre-injury form as well. Was a bit flat again yesterday

Earl and Willis on the flanks would be very tasty !

Dombrandt sandwiched between those two would be my back row for the tournament.

[sockwithaticket]

Saints grab Tom Cruse until the end of the season.

[Oxbow]

Saints grab Tom Cruse until the end of the season.

Is he any good, there were so many hookers at Wasps I lose track. I guess this means Matavesi is going to be out longish-term.

[sockwithaticket]

Saints grab Tom Cruse until the end of the season.

Is he any good, there were so many hookers at Wasps I lose track. I guess this means Matavesi is going to be out longish-term.

Yeah, he was our default starter for a fair period given all Tommy Taylor's injuries. Good at set piece and in the loose. Will probably suit you lot pretty well.

[Oxbow]

Saints grab Tom Cruse until the end of the season.

Is he any good, there were so many hookers at Wasps I lose track. I guess this means Matavesi is going to be out longish-term.

Yeah, he was our default starter for a fair period given all Tommy Taylor's injuries. Good at set piece and in the loose. Will probably suit you lot pretty well.

Cheers.

[Ovals]

Yes please!
Itoje needs to find his pre-injury form as well. Was a bit flat again yesterday

Earl and Willis on the flanks would be very tasty !

Dombrandt sandwiched between those two would be my back row for the tournament.

That'd be my choice as well - very mobile, all carry well, all tackle well, link well, and all good at turning the ball over at the breakdown. And they all have big engines.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Earl and Willis on the flanks would be very tasty !

Dombrandt sandwiched between those two would be my back row for the tournament.

That'd be my choice as well - very mobile, all carry well, all tackle well, link well, and all good at turning the ball over at the breakdown. And they all have big engines.

I don't mind the choice, but none have shown any of those things at test level, and Dombrandt is something of a pick his moment player more than a nose to the grindstone, which is fine if one gets the the outcome Quins do. If we're going with that then that really should be 3/4s of the backrow spots in the 23 we're looking to take to the WC, with Curry to come back, it certainly has plenty of potential, it's also something of an unknown.

[JM2K6]

Dombrandt sandwiched between those two would be my back row for the tournament.

That'd be my choice as well - very mobile, all carry well, all tackle well, link well, and all good at turning the ball over at the breakdown. And they all have big engines.

I don't mind the choice, but none have shown any of those things at test level, and Dombrandt is something of a pick his moment player more than a nose to the grindstone, which is fine if one gets the the outcome Quins do. If we're going with that then that really should be 3/4s of the backrow spots in the 23 we're looking to take to the WC, with Curry to come back, it certainly has plenty of potential, it's also something of an unknown.

Dombrandt does a lot of carrying and tackling, he's not a luxury player.

[sockwithaticket]

Dombrandt sandwiched between those two would be my back row for the tournament.

That'd be my choice as well - very mobile, all carry well, all tackle well, link well, and all good at turning the ball over at the breakdown. And they all have big engines.

I don't mind the choice, but none have shown any of those things at test level, and Dombrandt is something of a pick his moment player more than a nose to the grindstone, which is fine if one gets the the outcome Quins do. If we're going with that then that really should be 3/4s of the backrow spots in the 23 we're looking to take to the WC, with Curry to come back, it certainly has plenty of potential, it's also something of an unknown.

Our most 'known quantity' back row of recent seasons would be Lawes, T. Curry and B. Vunipola. The first two are injured and it would be generous to say that the latter has been inconsistent internationally over the last few years and thus hasn't been selected in the squad.

Any configuration in the back row from the assembled group of players in this squad will be something of an unknown with little to no history of playing alongside each other, so I'm fine with putting together a combo of players whose domestic form is shit hot.

[Kawazaki]

It's a weird thing to say but England look small. Similarly, I noticed in the Edinburgh v Saracens match that the Scottish team just looked bigger from 1 to 15.

[Tichtheid]

Saints grab Tom Cruse until the end of the season.

Is he any good, there were so many hookers at Wasps I lose track. I guess this means Matavesi is going to be out longish-term.

He has played about half a dozen times for Edinburgh since Wasps went for a Burton, he looked pretty good at the nuts and bolts stuff, good darts, handy around the park.

[fishfoodie]

It's a weird thing to say but England look small. Similarly, I noticed in the Edinburgh v Saracens match that the Scottish team just looked bigger from 1 to 15.

[Ovals]

That'd be my choice as well - very mobile, all carry well, all tackle well, link well, and all good at turning the ball over at the breakdown. And they all have big engines.

I don't mind the choice, but none have shown any of those things at test level, and Dombrandt is something of a pick his moment player more than a nose to the grindstone, which is fine if one gets the the outcome Quins do. If we're going with that then that really should be 3/4s of the backrow spots in the 23 we're looking to take to the WC, with Curry to come back, it certainly has plenty of potential, it's also something of an unknown.

Dombrandt does a lot of carrying and tackling, he's not a luxury player.

Absolutely - he is very busy in all aspects. He's been the standout 8 for a couple of seasons now. And I think those 3 will complement each other as a unit. Just hope Borthwick isn't going to put a 5.5 in at 6. I think we'll need a very dynamic Backrow because I can see the Scots trying to play with huge intensity much like Edinburgh did v Sarries. The Breakdown is going to be fiercely contested.

[SaintK]

It's a weird thing to say but England look small. Similarly, I noticed in the Edinburgh v Saracens match that the Scottish team just looked bigger from 1 to 15.

[sockwithaticket]

George and Daly also removed from the England squad due to injuries. Blamire and Lawrence come in.

[inactionman]

George and Daly also removed from the England squad due to injuries. Blamire and Lawrence come in.

Ollie Lawrence has been in good form for Bath. Not quite like-for like with Daly, but he's not just a bosh merchant (although that might have been just me marking him down as one in his Worcester days).

[sockwithaticket]

George and Daly also removed from the England squad due to injuries. Blamire and Lawrence come in.

Ollie Lawrence has been in good form for Bath. Not quite like-for like with Daly, but he's not just a bosh merchant (although that might have been just me marking him down as one in his Worcester days).

He's obviously a more powerful carrier than some of our winnowier centres like Slade, which I think led to some unfair expectations and misguided commentary in the media that he could be the next Tuilagi. On the rare occasion I'd catch a Worcester game and he was actually in the lineup rather than injured it was pretty clear that he preferred bursting through an outside shoulder than running into a man.

[SaintK]

George and Daly also removed from the England squad due to injuries. Blamire and Lawrence come in.

Down to 4th, 5th and 6th choice hookers in camp!!!

[sockwithaticket]

George and Daly also removed from the England squad due to injuries. Blamire and Lawrence come in.

Down to 4th, 5th and 6th choice hookers in camp!!!

The last Lions tour excepted, where it didn't really matter due to the quality of England's opposition, I'm struggling to remember a time when we didn't have at least one of George or Cowan-Dickie fit to rely on during an international window.

Do you reckon France will let us borrow one of their 50 or so international class hookers

[inactionman]

George and Daly also removed from the England squad due to injuries. Blamire and Lawrence come in.

Ollie Lawrence has been in good form for Bath. Not quite like-for like with Daly, but he's not just a bosh merchant (although that might have been just me marking him down as one in his Worcester days).

He's obviously a more powerful carrier than some of our winnowier centres like Slade, which I think led to some unfair expectations and misguided commentary in the media that he could be the next Tuilagi. On the rare occasion I'd catch a Worcester game and he was actually in the lineup rather than injured it was pretty clear that he preferred bursting through an outside shoulder than running into a man.

He's got a really good eye for a line, and he's able to put teammates through gaps with a decent set of hands. I only really caught him when he was capped by Eddie, and not sure that's how we set up to play - he seemed to get the 'run hard into traffic' role. Maybe Eddie got a bit seduced by his physical strength.

[sockwithaticket]

Ollie Lawrence has been in good form for Bath. Not quite like-for like with Daly, but he's not just a bosh merchant (although that might have been just me marking him down as one in his Worcester days).

He's obviously a more powerful carrier than some of our winnowier centres like Slade, which I think led to some unfair expectations and misguided commentary in the media that he could be the next Tuilagi. On the rare occasion I'd catch a Worcester game and he was actually in the lineup rather than injured it was pretty clear that he preferred bursting through an outside shoulder than running into a man.

He's got a really good eye for a line, and he's able to put teammates through gaps with a decent set of hands. I only really caught him when he was capped by Eddie, and not sure that's how we set up to play - he seemed to get the 'run hard into traffic' role. Maybe Eddie got a bit seduced by his physical strength.

I think it was his debut where it took 60 minutes for him to receive a pass and he was subbed pretty soon after that. Whether it was inherent in the game plan or players around him just not picking options that involved him. In subsequent appearances he was definitely being asked to just truck it up and in the 12 channel where defences tend to be more resolute. His strengths were certainly not being played to.

[SaintK]

George and Daly also removed from the England squad due to injuries. Blamire and Lawrence come in.

Down to 4th, 5th and 6th choice hookers in camp!!!

The last Lions tour excepted, where it didn't really matter due to the quality of England's opposition, I'm struggling to remember a time when we didn't have at least one of George or Cowan-Dickie fit to rely on during an international window.

Do you reckon France will let us borrow one of their 50 or so international class hookers

I bloody wish. Was only discussing that point with my son on Sunday. France are very well served at hooker!

[SaintK]

He's obviously a more powerful carrier than some of our winnowier centres like Slade, which I think led to some unfair expectations and misguided commentary in the media that he could be the next Tuilagi. On the rare occasion I'd catch a Worcester game and he was actually in the lineup rather than injured it was pretty clear that he preferred bursting through an outside shoulder than running into a man.

He's got a really good eye for a line, and he's able to put teammates through gaps with a decent set of hands. I only really caught him when he was capped by Eddie, and not sure that's how we set up to play - he seemed to get the 'run hard into traffic' role. Maybe Eddie got a bit seduced by his physical strength.

I think it was his debut where it took 60 minutes for him to receive a pass and he was subbed pretty soon after that. Whether it was inherent in the game plan or players around him just not picking options that involved him. In subsequent appearances he was definitely being asked to just truck it up and in the 12 channel where defences tend to be more resolute. His strengths were certainly not being played to.

Jones treated him appallingly on a personal level as well.

[SaintK]

He's obviously a more powerful carrier than some of our winnowier centres like Slade, which I think led to some unfair expectations and misguided commentary in the media that he could be the next Tuilagi. On the rare occasion I'd catch a Worcester game and he was actually in the lineup rather than injured it was pretty clear that he preferred bursting through an outside shoulder than running into a man.

He's got a really good eye for a line, and he's able to put teammates through gaps with a decent set of hands. I only really caught him when he was capped by Eddie, and not sure that's how we set up to play - he seemed to get the 'run hard into traffic' role. Maybe Eddie got a bit seduced by his physical strength.

I think it was his debut where it took 60 minutes for him to receive a pass and he was subbed pretty soon after that. Whether it was inherent in the game plan or players around him just not picking options that involved him. In subsequent appearances he was definitely being asked to just truck it up and in the 12 channel where defences tend to be more resolute. His strengths were certainly not being played to.

Double post......fat fingers!!¬

[JM2K6]

Certainly the lowest bar for Borthwick to cross - and one of the most important ones - is to come up with a game plan that, y'know, actually pays attention to the players we have and what they're good at, rather than some bitter little poison dwarf's 1980s view of English rugby as a whole. Bonus points for not shoehorning someone into a very restricted role on the basis that if you squint really hard they might look a bit like another player with a completely different skillset.

[Ovals]

Certainly the lowest bar for Borthwick to cross - and one of the most important ones - is to come up with a game plan that, y'know, actually pays attention to the players we have and what they're good at, rather than some bitter little poison dwarf's 1980s view of English rugby as a whole. Bonus points for not shoehorning someone into a very restricted role on the basis that if you squint really hard they might look a bit like another player with a completely different skillset.

What outcome, in the 6n, do you think will the minimum for a successful campaign from Borther's new team ? Will it be judged more on performances than results ?

[JM2K6]

Certainly the lowest bar for Borthwick to cross - and one of the most important ones - is to come up with a game plan that, y'know, actually pays attention to the players we have and what they're good at, rather than some bitter little poison dwarf's 1980s view of English rugby as a whole. Bonus points for not shoehorning someone into a very restricted role on the basis that if you squint really hard they might look a bit like another player with a completely different skillset.

What outcome, in the 6n, do you think will the minimum for a successful campaign from Borther's new team ? Will it be judged more on performances than results ?

Usually is in a world cup year and doubly so here. I think we'd want to see signs of a coherent attacking gameplan that suits more than one flyhalf, selection that suits the players available, and a bit more freedom for players to play to their strengths. Things like improving the set piece and discipline are a given, what I think everyone wants to see is signs that Borthwick isn't just the continuity candidate that is going to be able to get the most out of our most talented players - the Smiths AND the Farrells so to speak. A simpler gameplan is fine for now with the world cup in mind, as long as it's clear, it suits the players we have, and it's clearly not a losing one.

So yeah, results can look after themselves. It'd be a huge ask for us to beat Ireland on the final weekend, for example, because that's just the reality of the two teams right now. What I would want is to come away from the game confident that with some more time in the oven it would produce an even better showing, not clinging to minor moments of promise in a sea of shit.

[sockwithaticket]

We have Scotland, Italy and France at home. I'd say the first two should be wins, but Borthwick would need to be lightning in a bottle to get us on the right side of the result against France given where our respective teams are at right now.

Of the two away fixtures, Wales is winnable, but it's a giant question mark. I'd say that man for man we have the better players, but we've seen what Gatland can do with them. Ireland are similar to France in that they are very settled and very good, it would be something of a miracle for us to go there and beat them.

2 - 3 wins, with clear signs of sorting out a playing style and not getting gaped by the two clearly superior teams would be acceptable.

[SaintK]

We have Scotland, Italy and France at home. I'd say the first two should be wins, but Borthwick would need to be lightning in a bottle to get us on the right side of the result against France given where our respective teams are at right now.

Of the two away fixtures, Wales is winnable, but it's a giant question mark. I'd say that man for man we have the better players, but we've seen what Gatland can do with them. Ireland are similar to France in that they are very settled and very good, it would be something of a miracle for us to go there and beat them.

2 - 3 wins, with clear signs of sorting out a playing style and not getting gaped by the two clearly superior teams would be acceptable.

Agreed............but!
When was the last time we beat Wales in Cardiff?
When was the last time we beat Scotland at Twickenham for that matter?

[Paddington Bear]

There's a couple of elements for me:
1) We haven't been able to regularly put away sides of the strength of Scotland/Wales/Argentina/Australia as any side with pretensions to the top table has to be able to do
2) Excluding a miracle comeback against NZ we have been at least 14 points worse than those sitting at the top table recently

So for me the bare minimum is home wins over Scotland and Italy. Cardiff is a tough place to go, but Wales are crap atm and so 3 wins is very attainable.
Which leads to point 2. We have to at least make France and Ireland really work for a win. This is completely attainable, both have struggled to turn over comparable sides to us and particularly France have vulnerabilities that aren't quite getting ironed out. Ireland's reliance on Sexton is nothing new.

My best case scenario for this 6N looks something like:
- rejuvenated England edge out Scotland, Torq is still mocking Russell's performance the following Saturday
- Italy put up a better fight than they have recently, but England in the end comfortably win with a bonus point
- win in Cardiff, ageing Wales can't last the distance
(yes I am aware these next two are less likely)
- England turn over a sloppy France by 3-5 points
- Loss in a tight decider in Dublin

[sockwithaticket]

We have Scotland, Italy and France at home. I'd say the first two should be wins, but Borthwick would need to be lightning in a bottle to get us on the right side of the result against France given where our respective teams are at right now.

Of the two away fixtures, Wales is winnable, but it's a giant question mark. I'd say that man for man we have the better players, but we've seen what Gatland can do with them. Ireland are similar to France in that they are very settled and very good, it would be something of a miracle for us to go there and beat them.

2 - 3 wins, with clear signs of sorting out a playing style and not getting gaped by the two clearly superior teams would be acceptable.

Agreed............but!
When was the last time we beat Wales in Cardiff?
When was the last time we beat Scotland at Twickenham for that matter?

2018 and 2017 (2019 was that high scoring draw that felt like a loss) respectively.

Our recent record against Scotland is genuinely one of the blackest marks against Jones' name in my book.

I'm choosing to be optimistic that changing the coach will be enough to help us turn things around against those two!

[SaintK]

We have Scotland, Italy and France at home. I'd say the first two should be wins, but Borthwick would need to be lightning in a bottle to get us on the right side of the result against France given where our respective teams are at right now.

Of the two away fixtures, Wales is winnable, but it's a giant question mark. I'd say that man for man we have the better players, but we've seen what Gatland can do with them. Ireland are similar to France in that they are very settled and very good, it would be something of a miracle for us to go there and beat them.

2 - 3 wins, with clear signs of sorting out a playing style and not getting gaped by the two clearly superior teams would be acceptable.

Agreed............but!
When was the last time we beat Wales in Cardiff?
When was the last time we beat Scotland at Twickenham for that matter?

2018 and 2017 (2019 was that high scoring draw that felt like a loss) respectively.

Our recent record against Scotland is genuinely one of the blackest marks against Jones' name in my book.

I'm choosing to be optimistic that changing the coach will be enough to help us turn things around against those two!

Hope so!

[Ovals]

There's a couple of elements for me:
1) We haven't been able to regularly put away sides of the strength of Scotland/Wales/Argentina/Australia as any side with pretensions to the top table has to be able to do
2) Excluding a miracle comeback against NZ we have been at least 14 points worse than those sitting at the top table recently

So for me the bare minimum is home wins over Scotland and Italy. Cardiff is a tough place to go, but Wales are crap atm and so 3 wins is very attainable.
Which leads to point 2. We have to at least make France and Ireland really work for a win. This is completely attainable, both have struggled to turn over comparable sides to us and particularly France have vulnerabilities that aren't quite getting ironed out. Ireland's reliance on Sexton is nothing new.

My best case scenario for this 6N looks something like:
- rejuvenated England edge out Scotland, Torq is still mocking Russell's performance the following Saturday
- Italy put up a better fight than they have recently, but England in the end comfortably win with a bonus point
- win in Cardiff, ageing Wales can't last the distance
(yes I am aware these next two are less likely)
- England turn over a sloppy France by 3-5 points
- Loss in a tight decider in Dublin

England's performances in the Autumn were especially woeful - but looking back to last year's 6N, we wouldn't have needed to play much better to have had some decent results. We were heading for a win away to Scotland before LCD's brainfart, PT and YC. We held Ireland for 70 minutes at home despite playing the whole game with 14 men following Ewel's RC after just 2 mins.

Just getting some basics right (and good discipline) could see us being quite competitive - obviously it might take some time for the new team to gel - that 1st game will be the key - the Scots will throw everything at us and play a high intensity game - so there's no room for us to be tentative. Getting a win, against them, with a decent performance will do wonders for their confidence.

[SaintK]

Tackle height for all levels from Nat 1 and below (and all age grade) will be at waist level or lower starting next season. With a focus on both the tackler and the carriers height.

Hearing that there is likely to be an RFU row-back on this.
Below the waist is in fact a bit misleading and midriff/belly button height is a clearer definition. Watch this space
Appalling Comms and PR nonethless

[JM2K6]

Tackle height for all levels from Nat 1 and below (and all age grade) will be at waist level or lower starting next season. With a focus on both the tackler and the carriers height.

Hearing that there is likely to be an RFU row-back on this.
Below the waist is in fact a bit misleading and midriff/belly button height is a clearer definition. Watch this space
Appalling Comms and PR nonethless

"Below the waist" was never the claim, but for some reason it's what all the drama queens treated it as. It was pretty clear that the RFU weren't pushing for "exactly waist level and if you hit the belly instead it's a penalty" - they're going for "below the sternum".

[Paddington Bear]

There's a couple of elements for me:
1) We haven't been able to regularly put away sides of the strength of Scotland/Wales/Argentina/Australia as any side with pretensions to the top table has to be able to do
2) Excluding a miracle comeback against NZ we have been at least 14 points worse than those sitting at the top table recently

So for me the bare minimum is home wins over Scotland and Italy. Cardiff is a tough place to go, but Wales are crap atm and so 3 wins is very attainable.
Which leads to point 2. We have to at least make France and Ireland really work for a win. This is completely attainable, both have struggled to turn over comparable sides to us and particularly France have vulnerabilities that aren't quite getting ironed out. Ireland's reliance on Sexton is nothing new.

My best case scenario for this 6N looks something like:
- rejuvenated England edge out Scotland, Torq is still mocking Russell's performance the following Saturday
- Italy put up a better fight than they have recently, but England in the end comfortably win with a bonus point
- win in Cardiff, ageing Wales can't last the distance
(yes I am aware these next two are less likely)
- England turn over a sloppy France by 3-5 points
- Loss in a tight decider in Dublin

England's performances in the Autumn were especially woeful - but looking back to last year's 6N, we wouldn't have needed to play much better to have had some decent results. We were heading for a win away to Scotland before LCD's brainfart, PT and YC. We held Ireland for 70 minutes at home despite playing the whole game with 14 men following Ewel's RC after just 2 mins.

Just getting some basics right (and good discipline) could see us being quite competitive - obviously it might take some time for the new team to gel - that 1st game will be the key - the Scots will throw everything at us and play a high intensity game - so there's no room for us to be tentative. Getting a win, against them, with a decent performance will do wonders for their confidence.

Yep exactly, I wouldn't be shocked to see us have a pretty good year, that's not the same as thinking we're going to win the World Cup but the basis of a very competitive side that people don't want to play is all there.

[Raggs]

Tackle height for all levels from Nat 1 and below (and all age grade) will be at waist level or lower starting next season. With a focus on both the tackler and the carriers height.

Hearing that there is likely to be an RFU row-back on this.
Below the waist is in fact a bit misleading and midriff/belly button height is a clearer definition. Watch this space
Appalling Comms and PR nonethless

"Below the waist" was never the claim, but for some reason it's what all the drama queens treated it as. It was pretty clear that the RFU weren't pushing for "exactly waist level and if you hit the belly instead it's a penalty" - they're going for "below the sternum".

Annoyed me how many people somehow got below the waist. RFU used waist and navel. They should have been smarter and put up a small image showing clearly what this means though.

[SaintK]

Tackle height for all levels from Nat 1 and below (and all age grade) will be at waist level or lower starting next season. With a focus on both the tackler and the carriers height.

Hearing that there is likely to be an RFU row-back on this.
Below the waist is in fact a bit misleading and midriff/belly button height is a clearer definition. Watch this space
Appalling Comms and PR nonethless

"Below the waist" was never the claim, but for some reason it's what all the drama queens treated it as. It was pretty clear that the RFU weren't pushing for "exactly waist level and if you hit the belly instead it's a penalty" - they're going for "below the sternum".

No mention of below the sternum in their communication, just this

Reduced tackle height for all community rugby

Tackles must be made at the line of the waist and below.

Perhaps the RFU could have made it a tad more explicit and clearer in their comms and then maybe the thousands of "drama queens" would not have signed the Change.Org petition that's doing the rounds. Or if the RFU had done a proper fully briefed press call with a Q and A we would have had more clarity

[Raggs]

Line of the waist is not below the waist though is it. And the waist starts before the sternum.