The Official English Rugby Thread

[ASMO]

Squad confirmed, we're half an hour on and look how excited we all are!

England squad

Forwards:

Ollie Chessum (Leicester), Dan Cole (Leicester), Tom Curry (Sale), Theo Dan (Saracens), Ben Earl (Saracens), Ellis Genge (Bristol), Jamie George (Saracens), Maro Itoje (Saracens), Courtney Lawes (Northampton), Lewis Ludlam (Northampton), Joe Marler (Harlequins), George Martin (Leicester), David Ribbans (Toulon), Bevan Rodd (Sale), Kyle Sinckler (Bristol), Will Stuart (Bath), Billy Vunipola (Saracens), Jack Walker (Harlequins), Jack Willis (Toulouse)

Backs:

Henry Arundell (Racing 92), Danny Care (Harlequins), Elliot Daly (Saracens), Owen Farrell (Saracens), George Ford (Sale), Ollie Lawrence (Bath), Max Malins (Bristol), Joe Marchant (Stade Francais), Marcus Smith (Harlequins), Freddie Steward (Leicester), Manu Tuilagi (Sale), Jack van Poortvliet (Leicester), Anthony Watson (unattached), Ben Youngs (Leicester)

Looks pretty much as discussed/predicted - the Wales game was a last chance saloon for a number of players, so given poor performance there's not many revelations.

Still no idea what our midfield is going to look like. Merchant has been a bright spot in terms of running rugby so a well deserved spot in front of Slade, and Lawrence has put in some very tidy performances prior to injury, but I'm sure Tuilagi will be shovelled in there somewhere, as will Farrell if Smith is at 10.

Hypothesising about the England midfield. Plus ça change.

does it really matter? with Youngs and Farrell inside them all they will b doing is chasing kicks anyway.

[inactionman]

Squad confirmed, we're half an hour on and look how excited we all are!

England squad

Forwards:

Ollie Chessum (Leicester), Dan Cole (Leicester), Tom Curry (Sale), Theo Dan (Saracens), Ben Earl (Saracens), Ellis Genge (Bristol), Jamie George (Saracens), Maro Itoje (Saracens), Courtney Lawes (Northampton), Lewis Ludlam (Northampton), Joe Marler (Harlequins), George Martin (Leicester), David Ribbans (Toulon), Bevan Rodd (Sale), Kyle Sinckler (Bristol), Will Stuart (Bath), Billy Vunipola (Saracens), Jack Walker (Harlequins), Jack Willis (Toulouse)

Backs:

Henry Arundell (Racing 92), Danny Care (Harlequins), Elliot Daly (Saracens), Owen Farrell (Saracens), George Ford (Sale), Ollie Lawrence (Bath), Max Malins (Bristol), Joe Marchant (Stade Francais), Marcus Smith (Harlequins), Freddie Steward (Leicester), Manu Tuilagi (Sale), Jack van Poortvliet (Leicester), Anthony Watson (unattached), Ben Youngs (Leicester)

Looks pretty much as discussed/predicted - the Wales game was a last chance saloon for a number of players, so given poor performance there's not many revelations.

Still no idea what our midfield is going to look like. Merchant has been a bright spot in terms of running rugby so a well deserved spot in front of Slade, and Lawrence has put in some very tidy performances prior to injury, but I'm sure Tuilagi will be shovelled in there somewhere, as will Farrell if Smith is at 10.

Hypothesising about the England midfield. Plus ça change.

does it really matter? with Youngs and Farrell inside them all they will b doing is chasing kicks anyway.

I'll mark you down as 'unconvinced' then.

[Joost]

Ugh, could make a decent side out of that squad on paper if everyone was on-form and we had some sort of cohesive game plan - let’s see but not looking promising so far (as basic a skill as holding onto the ball would’ve been a start at the weekend!).

Is Dan really the third best hooker we have? Couldn’t hit a barn door at the weekend or hold onto the ball in contact. Scrum also went to sh!t when the replacement front row came on (probably not his fault tbf)

Not too surprised re Slade, he’s only ever looked good for England at 13 outside a big centre and only then intermittently, has had plenty of opportunities to establish himself as a key England player and hasn’t done it. Having Farrell at 10 or 12 next to him hasn’t helped.

Thought Care played pretty well at the weekend, JvP coming on killed all pace and rhythm we had - bad Ben Youngs’ mk2

Got a horrible feeling Borthers is going to be the new Robbo

[Hal Jordan]

We'll see how his backrow selections fare.

The outside back selection makes sense in the context of the game plan. Why pick try scorers if the winger's job is to chase high balls, you pick halfway house "back three" players.

[sockwithaticket]

The absence of Cokanasiga, Porter, M. Vunipola and Hill is good, but selection really is a secondary issue to style of play at the moment and I predict that this tournament is basically going to be a re-run of 2011 with dour, shite rugby just about squeaking us into the knock outs where we'll meekly submit to a side we could beat on paper.

[Torquemada 1420]

The absence of Cokanasiga, Porter, M. Vunipola and Hill is good, but selection really is a secondary issue to style of play at the moment and I predict that this tournament is basically going to be a re-run of 2011 with dour, shite rugby just about squeaking us into the knock outs where we'll meekly submit to a side we could beat on paper.

I almost posted on the game thread that basically English rugby had not moved on since 2003 and then thought that was probably unfair: at club level at least where the likes of Quins and Saints were trying to play rugby. Even Bath, albeit haplessly.

However, the Torygraph had this today
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... nry-slade/

Bulk and versatility key as Steve Borthwick looks to reprise England's 'white orcs' of 2003

to which my immediate thought was "reprise? "

[Torquemada 1420]

Still no idea what our midfield is going to look like. Merchant has been a bright spot in terms of running rugby so a well deserved spot in front of Slade, and Lawrence has put in some very tidy performances prior to injury, but I'm sure Tuilagi will be shovelled in there somewhere, as will Farrell if Smith is at 10.

I'd be very surprised if Smith is selected at FH over Farrell.

[sockwithaticket]

The absence of Cokanasiga, Porter, M. Vunipola and Hill is good, but selection really is a secondary issue to style of play at the moment and I predict that this tournament is basically going to be a re-run of 2011 with dour, shite rugby just about squeaking us into the knock outs where we'll meekly submit to a side we could beat on paper.

I almost posted on the game thread that basically English rugby had not moved on since 2003 and then thought that was probably unfair: at club level at least where the likes of Quins and Saints were trying to play rugby. Even Bath, albeit haplessly.

However, the Torygraph had this today
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... nry-slade/

Bulk and versatility key as Steve Borthwick looks to reprise England's 'white orcs' of 2003

to which my immediate thought was "reprise? "

Ashton tried to move us on and it just didn't work, whether it was lack of buy in from the players or him being incapable of articulating what he wanted out of them, rejecting him and simplifying things at the '07 world Cup worked.

Johnson definitely regressed the team, but he attempted to do so without access to forwards of the calibre that made the 'white orcs' approach successful.

Lancaster did actually try to get us playing some better rugby with some success, then Eddie came in talking about 'bodyline rugby'. We did actually produce some expansive stuff under him, but mostly he wanted us to go with the orc approach and over the last few years it's been less and less productive.

Part of why the clubs have changed is the type of players available to them. The academies are not churning out an endless string of behemoths and so they're having to work with what they've got. The national set up needs to cop on.

[Dinsdale Piranha]

Still no idea what our midfield is going to look like. Merchant has been a bright spot in terms of running rugby so a well deserved spot in front of Slade, and Lawrence has put in some very tidy performances prior to injury, but I'm sure Tuilagi will be shovelled in there somewhere, as will Farrell if Smith is at 10.

I'd be very surprised if Smith is selected at FH over Farrell.

I'd be surprised if Smith gets any gametime at all apart from in dead rubbers or matches that are either already won/lost.

Marchant is being picked because he's solid in defence. I doubt Borthwick gives a flying fuck about his attacking ability.

I can't help but think that Eddie was a plant to ensure zero development in the national team for 2 years before a world cup.

[JM2K6]

Still no idea what our midfield is going to look like. Merchant has been a bright spot in terms of running rugby so a well deserved spot in front of Slade, and Lawrence has put in some very tidy performances prior to injury, but I'm sure Tuilagi will be shovelled in there somewhere, as will Farrell if Smith is at 10.

I'd be very surprised if Smith is selected at FH over Farrell.

Genge and Steward aside, the people who played at the weekend are largely the squad's injury reserves. The first XV will be very close to this:

Genge
George
Cole
Itoje
Chessum
Lawes (possibly Ludlam depending on Lawes' fitness)
Billy
Curry
Youngs (ok MAYBE JVP)
Farrell
Arundell
Tuilagi
Lawrence
Watson
Steward

with the bench probably being Marler, Walker, Stuart, Ribbans, Willis, JVP (or Youngs), Ford, Daly but with some messing around depending on whether Lawes starts, whether he decides to go Ford/Farrell 10/12, etc etc.

Dan, Earl, Martin, Rodd, Care, Malins, Marchant are destined to kick their heels, I think.

[JM2K6]

The absence of Cokanasiga, Porter, M. Vunipola and Hill is good, but selection really is a secondary issue to style of play at the moment and I predict that this tournament is basically going to be a re-run of 2011 with dour, shite rugby just about squeaking us into the knock outs where we'll meekly submit to a side we could beat on paper.

Yup. England aren't Leicester. England might have George Ford and Freddie Steward, but a good kicking game requires a lot more than just your 10 and 15 being really good at dealing with it. Other teams have some superb flyhalves and fullbacks with very well rounded games, and a lot of top notch wings and loose forwards to assist. England might have dump truck Billy and Ellis Genge, and Tuilagi and Lawrence, but other teams have better carriers across the park with a much better recent record. We're going to play the percentages, kick as much as possible, and then act surprised when other teams beat us on the gain line or win the kicking battle and we have nothing to counter them with.

All I ask for is a team that's well coached, well organised, committed, willing to use their collective imagination & trust their skills, and - crucially - willing to ruthlessly exploit attacking opportunities when they arrive. It's hard to do that if you point blank refuse to play the game most of the time. Safety first only wins you matches if you are streets ahead of everyone else in certain key areas, and we're not. Sure, world cups have been won off of kicking games or great defence - SA, Australia - but those sides could also take a team apart if they had to and they were unquestionably the best in the world in certain areas. What are we best in the world at? Catching the ball if it goes to our 8 foot tall fullback? Kicking the ball high in a funny way so it gets dropped once every 9 attempts?

[Torquemada 1420]

All I ask for is a team that's well coached, well organised, committed, willing to use their collective imagination & trust their skills, and - crucially - willing to ruthlessly exploit attacking opportunities when they arrive.

I think that wish exists across the majority of the world's rugby fans and maybe 2 teams might qualify at present? If you threw in "and picked the best players in each position" that total might become zero!

[Chilli]

Absolute best case with that squad?


- lose by 20 in the final again

[Joost]

What’s striking is how almost all of the players from 2019 haven’t progressed (most have gone backwards) when you’d have backed a good number of that side to become the best in their positions (or thereabouts) in the world. Pretty much all of the team from the final are in the squad and should be at their peak

Daly
Watson
Tuilagi
Farrell
May
Ford
Youngs

Vunipola
George
Sinckler
Itoje
Lawes
Underhill
Curry
Vunipola

[JM2K6]

All I ask for is a team that's well coached, well organised, committed, willing to use their collective imagination & trust their skills, and - crucially - willing to ruthlessly exploit attacking opportunities when they arrive.

I think that wish exists across the majority of the world's rugby fans and maybe 2 teams might qualify at present? If you threw in "and picked the best players in each position" that total might become zero!

Nah. Most sides fit that bill. Even ones who are struggling, like Australia, can point to some performances that match. Argentina, NZ, SA, Ireland, Scotland, France.. all playing clear headed rugby where attacking rugby is the name of the game and there's a clear direction in how they want to play.

[Torquemada 1420]

All I ask for is a team that's well coached, well organised, committed, willing to use their collective imagination & trust their skills, and - crucially - willing to ruthlessly exploit attacking opportunities when they arrive.

I think that wish exists across the majority of the world's rugby fans and maybe 2 teams might qualify at present? If you threw in "and picked the best players in each position" that total might become zero!

Nah. Most sides fit that bill. Even ones who are struggling, like Australia, can point to some performances that match. Argentina, NZ, SA, Ireland, Scotland, France.. all playing clear headed rugby where attacking rugby is the name of the game and there's a clear direction in how they want to play.

IMHO, the point that fails is in red. Every team and pretty much every player (ironically Russell being an exception) these days is so over coached, none is able to play heads up rugby or is too afraid to do so.

[JM2K6]

I think that wish exists across the majority of the world's rugby fans and maybe 2 teams might qualify at present? If you threw in "and picked the best players in each position" that total might become zero!

Nah. Most sides fit that bill. Even ones who are struggling, like Australia, can point to some performances that match. Argentina, NZ, SA, Ireland, Scotland, France.. all playing clear headed rugby where attacking rugby is the name of the game and there's a clear direction in how they want to play.

IMHO, the point that fails is in red. Every team and pretty much every player (ironically Russell being an exception) these days is so over coached, none is able to play heads up rugby or is too afraid to do so.

I wouldn't say that SA, NZ, Ireland, Scotland, France, Australia are so structured as to prevent their livelier players from sparking something off the cuff and having their teammates be switched on to it. They're always alive to opportunities.

[Kawazaki]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

[Torquemada 1420]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

FM. TF is was early on in the podcast. Are they always this inane? 1 hour of this?!!

The other thing that struck me was it seemed Care (and others) had already been told they were guaranteed a place before the Wales game. How does that work? Players all talk to one another so everyone must have known what his status was. Is that the best way to get the most from "a team"? What's the point in fielding players who had nothing to gain and possibly everything to lose (injury): I know they are pros but are they really going to give 100% and how might that have impacted upon the guys who knew their places were on the line i.e. half your mates not trying whereas you need a good individual performance which is hard to happen in a bad team performance?

[SaintK]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

No thanks, I'm depressed enough already.
Most of the "serious" rugby journalists appear to feel much the same as we do about the selections and the way England are likely to play!!

[Hal Jordan]

May and Porter staying and training with the squad, Tuilagi is - gasp - doubtful through injury.

[Paddington Bear]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

Rugby and cricket are reasonably comparable sports in a number of ways. How is it I can get high quality analysis throughout the summer (and Michael Vaughan), but no one can offer anything but dross for rugby? At least Hamilton and Goode are mildly entertaining in a class clown sort of way, the rest are just dismal. Not new of course, no need to hark back to the Halcyon Barnes/Walrus days

[JM2K6]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

FM. TF is was early on in the podcast. Are they always this inane? 1 hour of this?!!

The other thing that struck me was it seemed Care (and others) had already been told they were guaranteed a place before the Wales game. How does that work? Players all talk to one another so everyone must have known what his status was. Is that the best way to get the most from "a team"? What's the point in fielding players who had nothing to gain and possibly everything to lose (injury): I know they are pros but are they really going to give 100% and how might that have impacted upon the guys who knew their places were on the line i.e. half your mates not trying whereas you need a good individual performance which is hard to happen in a bad team performance?

In some cases it was obvious - there were only 3 scrum halves in the squad and Borthwick had made it clear they would take 3. In others, it wasn't at all obvious, Marchant played his way into the final squad at the weekend for example. Some players were guaranteed places simply because that's how the squad was set up: Smith, Care, Steward, Genge, Stuart, Sinkler.

And there's "have made it into the squad" versus "have made it into the conversation for actually playing in big matches" to consider as well

[JM2K6]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

Rugby and cricket are reasonably comparable sports in a number of ways. How is it I can get high quality analysis throughout the summer (and Michael Vaughan), but no one can offer anything but dross for rugby? At least Hamilton and Goode are mildly entertaining in a class clown sort of way, the rest are just dismal. Not new of course, no need to hark back to the Halcyon Barnes/Walrus days

I reckon it's two things:

1) It's a sport that lends itself to a cerebral approach on and off the field, so you get ex-pros who are erudite and think hard about the game, and are able to explain the intriciacies in ways that are both interesting and informative; this engages people who then also become good commentators/pundits despite not playing at a high level because there's a lot to think about & understand (and thus explain)

2) It's a sport that is largely a series of 1-on-1 contests where technique and the mental approach trump athleticism in most cases. Pro rugby is a sport primarily for absolute fucking meatheads where being bigger and stronger is the biggest single advantage in the sport; it's also far more team based and that team is usually not a set of deep thinkers, so the coaches resort to drumming basic ideas and cult-like beliefs into the team and so we get this nonsense instead. The only people trying to do real analysis are a couple of Youtubers and some fringe journalists.

[sockwithaticket]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

Rugby and cricket are reasonably comparable sports in a number of ways. How is it I can get high quality analysis throughout the summer (and Michael Vaughan), but no one can offer anything but dross for rugby? At least Hamilton and Goode are mildly entertaining in a class clown sort of way, the rest are just dismal. Not new of course, no need to hark back to the Halcyon Barnes/Walrus days

At one point or another I've given all of Rugby Union Weekly, Blood and Mud, Eggchasers, The Rugby Pod, Flats & Shanks and The Good The Bad and The Rugby a try and dropped them all bar Eggchasers because they're so shallow in terms of content.

Eggchasers I dropped because the constant injection of covid scepticism and general right wingery into their work became unbearable. Which is a shame as they actually made a fist at engaging in some analysis or discussing the analysis done by the likes of Russ Petty and also made an effort to discuss most, if not quite all, the games of a given weekend. It's annoying that doing so made them stand out so much.

[Torquemada 1420]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

Rugby and cricket are reasonably comparable sports in a number of ways. How is it I can get high quality analysis throughout the summer (and Michael Vaughan), but no one can offer anything but dross for rugby? At least Hamilton and Goode are mildly entertaining in a class clown sort of way, the rest are just dismal. Not new of course, no need to hark back to the Halcyon Barnes/Walrus days

I'm not sure they are comparable. Cricket is peculiar in the amount of analytical detail involved that either actually matters or will hold an audience's interest. People care about how many leg byes there are whereas nobody really cares about how many dropped passes occurred. A longer reach would be to suggest cricket has a more cerebral audience and, because of its exclusive/excluding roots, a much higher % of articulate participants. {EDIT: a politer way of what JM said!).

Surely a better analogy would be football............ where the analysis is equally as inane? I watched the 1st round of EFL highlights on ITV on Sunday morning and it was at least as bad as the 10 mins or so I endured of that rugby podcast drivel above.

2 other observations
- football has enough participants such that even if only a fraction of a % were any good, it should easily be possible to match cricket's punditry.
- France is an exception when it comes to rugby. I often read the NZ sites (NZ Herald, Stuff etc) and they are generally pretty crap. Midi Olympique is the cricinfo equivalent in rugby. Even L'Equipe down to regional stuff is good relative to other nations and nothing in the world comes close to the hilarious insights of Boucherie Ovalie.

[Torquemada 1420]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

FM. TF is was early on in the podcast. Are they always this inane? 1 hour of this?!!

The other thing that struck me was it seemed Care (and others) had already been told they were guaranteed a place before the Wales game. How does that work? Players all talk to one another so everyone must have known what his status was. Is that the best way to get the most from "a team"? What's the point in fielding players who had nothing to gain and possibly everything to lose (injury): I know they are pros but are they really going to give 100% and how might that have impacted upon the guys who knew their places were on the line i.e. half your mates not trying whereas you need a good individual performance which is hard to happen in a bad team performance?

In some cases it was obvious - there were only 3 scrum halves in the squad and Borthwick had made it clear they would take 3. In others, it wasn't at all obvious, Marchant played his way into the final squad at the weekend for example. Some players were guaranteed places simply because that's how the squad was set up: Smith, Care, Steward, Genge, Stuart, Sinkler.

And there's "have made it into the squad" versus "have made it into the conversation for actually playing in big matches" to consider as well

Agree that some things would be obvious e.g. Dupont for France and Farrell for England (regardless of merit). I suppose if the 3SHs were already a done deal, there was no way of avoiding one position where someone might not be giving his all. Upon reflection, if you still did not know what your squad was and were going to make a number of decisions based upon 1 game, then it's bad management.

[petej]

May and Porter staying and training with the squad, Tuilagi is - gasp - doubtful through injury.

The Porter thing is nuts. He played at 12 for England despite Tigers preferring Kelly, Gopperth and Scott in that position and playing more frequently at 13. Porter is a club level utility back.

[petej]

If you want a laugh then listen to Danny Care on their latest BBC Rugby pod explaining that England played a "smart" game against Wales.

Jesus fucking wept.

Rugby and cricket are reasonably comparable sports in a number of ways. How is it I can get high quality analysis throughout the summer (and Michael Vaughan), but no one can offer anything but dross for rugby? At least Hamilton and Goode are mildly entertaining in a class clown sort of way, the rest are just dismal. Not new of course, no need to hark back to the Halcyon Barnes/Walrus days

I'm not sure they are comparable. Cricket is peculiar in the amount of analytical detail involved that either actually matters or will hold an audience's interest. People care about how many leg byes there are whereas nobody really cares about how many dropped passes occurred. A longer reach would be to suggest cricket has a more cerebral audience and, because of its exclusive/excluding roots, a much higher % of articulate participants. {EDIT: a politer way of what JM said!).

Surely a better analogy would be football............ where the analysis is equally as inane? I watched the 1st round of EFL highlights on ITV on Sunday morning and it was at least as bad as the 10 mins or so I endured of that rugby podcast drivel above.

2 other observations
- football has enough participants such that even if only a fraction of a % were any good, it should easily be possible to match cricket's punditry.
- France is an exception when it comes to rugby. I often read the NZ sites (NZ Herald, Stuff etc) and they are generally pretty crap. Midi Olympique is the cricinfo equivalent in rugby. Even L'Equipe down to regional stuff is good relative to other nations and nothing in the world comes close to the hilarious insights of Boucherie Ovalie.

Good detailed football analysis is available. The podcast format is ideal for such analysis and I wouldn’t expect a football highlights show to cater to that. The question is where are the equivalent rugby podcasts? There must be enough footage available these days to be able to do it.

[Hal Jordan]

May and Porter staying and training with the squad, Tuilagi is - gasp - doubtful through injury.

The Porter thing is nuts. He played at 12 for England despite Tigers preferring Kelly, Gopperth and Scott in that position and playing more frequently at 13. Porter is a club level utility back.

Perfect for filling a shirt whilst shuttle running between the 22s as the ball is kicked back and forth, then. A utility back means one less pick, leaving a squad place for another lock, or fly half. Or another utility back.

[JM2K6]

England team to face Wales: Steward; Arundell, Marchant, Lawrence, Daly; Farrell (capt), Van Poortvliet; Marler, George, Stuart, Itoje, Martin, Lawes, Earl, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Dan, Genge, Cole, Hill, Willis, Youngs, Ford, Malins

(That's Lawrence at 12, Marchant at 13, Daly on the wing, in case anyone's confused)

Some hope that Youngs is still not considered the best starting option, at least. Surprised Walker isn't getting a go given Dan's thunderingly shite display last weekend. Earl getting an early shot at 7. Martin getting another game to prove me wrong.

[dpedin]

England team to face Wales: Steward; Arundell, Marchant, Lawrence, Daly; Farrell (capt), Van Poortvliet; Marler, George, Stuart, Itoje, Martin, Lawes, Earl, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Dan, Genge, Cole, Hill, Willis, Youngs, Ford, Malins

(That's Lawrence at 12, Marchant at 13, Daly on the wing, in case anyone's confused)

Some hope that Youngs is still not considered the best starting option, at least. Surprised Walker isn't getting a go given Dan's thunderingly shite display last weekend. Earl getting an early shot at 7. Martin getting another game to prove me wrong.

Not a lot of pace in that team especially the pack but there again I cant see the ball getting wide through the hands anyway so I hope Arundel and Daly are ready to chase box kicks all game? Looks a bit like a wrecking ball strategy for game against Wales - more one out rugby and box kicks?

[JM2K6]

England team to face Wales: Steward; Arundell, Marchant, Lawrence, Daly; Farrell (capt), Van Poortvliet; Marler, George, Stuart, Itoje, Martin, Lawes, Earl, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Dan, Genge, Cole, Hill, Willis, Youngs, Ford, Malins

(That's Lawrence at 12, Marchant at 13, Daly on the wing, in case anyone's confused)

Some hope that Youngs is still not considered the best starting option, at least. Surprised Walker isn't getting a go given Dan's thunderingly shite display last weekend. Earl getting an early shot at 7. Martin getting another game to prove me wrong.

Not a lot of pace in that team especially the pack but there again I cant see the ball getting wide through the hands anyway so I hope Arundel and Daly are ready to chase box kicks all game? Looks a bit like a wrecking ball strategy for game against Wales - more one out rugby and box kicks?

Er... Lawrence is one of the quicker 12s, Marchant, Daly, Arundell are all very pacy, Earl is one of the quickest 7s around, and JVP is rapid. So there's some pace, just not the majority of the team.

I think we can call the game plan based on Borthwick's preferred tactics, but you wouldn't be able to call it from the team selection, hampered as it is by injury. You absolutely could pick that back row and that back line to play a fast, aggressive style.

[ASMO]

England team to face Wales: Steward; Arundell, Marchant, Lawrence, Daly; Farrell (capt), Van Poortvliet; Marler, George, Stuart, Itoje, Martin, Lawes, Earl, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Dan, Genge, Cole, Hill, Willis, Youngs, Ford, Malins

(That's Lawrence at 12, Marchant at 13, Daly on the wing, in case anyone's confused)

Some hope that Youngs is still not considered the best starting option, at least. Surprised Walker isn't getting a go given Dan's thunderingly shite display last weekend. Earl getting an early shot at 7. Martin getting another game to prove me wrong.

Not a lot of pace in that team especially the pack but there again I cant see the ball getting wide through the hands anyway so I hope Arundel and Daly are ready to chase box kicks all game? Looks a bit like a wrecking ball strategy for game against Wales - more one out rugby and box kicks?

Er... Lawrence is one of the quicker 12s, Marchant, Daly, Arundell are all very pacy, Earl is one of the quickest 7s around, and JVP is rapid. So there's some pace, just not the majority of the team.

I think we can call the game plan based on Borthwick's preferred tactics, but you wouldn't be able to call it from the team selection, hampered as it is by injury. You absolutely could pick that back row and that back line to play a fast, aggressive style.

it wont really matter, JVP has glacial service, then you got Farrell who's first and only instinct is to boot the leather off it...not going to exactly be hard for the leekists to guess the tactics and setup accordingly.

[sockwithaticket]

Very much struggling to care. The changes to the pack should probably be enough to grind out a win at Twickenham.

[Lobby]

England team to face Wales: Steward; Arundell, Marchant, Lawrence, Daly; Farrell (capt), Van Poortvliet; Marler, George, Stuart, Itoje, Martin, Lawes, Earl, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Dan, Genge, Cole, Hill, Willis, Youngs, Ford, Malins

(That's Lawrence at 12, Marchant at 13, Daly on the wing, in case anyone's confused)

Some hope that Youngs is still not considered the best starting option, at least. Surprised Walker isn't getting a go given Dan's thunderingly shite display last weekend. Earl getting an early shot at 7. Martin getting another game to prove me wrong.

Not a lot of pace in that team especially the pack but there again I cant see the ball getting wide through the hands anyway so I hope Arundel and Daly are ready to chase box kicks all game? Looks a bit like a wrecking ball strategy for game against Wales - more one out rugby and box kicks?

Er... Lawrence is one of the quicker 12s, Marchant, Daly, Arundell are all very pacy, Earl is one of the quickest 7s around, and JVP is rapid. So there's some pace, just not the majority of the team.

I think we can call the game plan based on Borthwick's preferred tactics, but you wouldn't be able to call it from the team selection, hampered as it is by injury. You absolutely could pick that back row and that back line to play a fast, aggressive style.

I was going to say that, ironically, that's a back line that would be much better suited to playing outside Smith than last week's. But of course, with JvP and Farrell England will just kick and then kick again.

I see that there are still plenty of tickets left for this game and loads available for next week's game against Fiji. Not a surprise really; I wouldn't pay to see this England team plodding through Borthwick's tedious game plan.

[Dinsdale Piranha]

Not a lot of pace in that team especially the pack but there again I cant see the ball getting wide through the hands anyway so I hope Arundel and Daly are ready to chase box kicks all game? Looks a bit like a wrecking ball strategy for game against Wales - more one out rugby and box kicks?

Er... Lawrence is one of the quicker 12s, Marchant, Daly, Arundell are all very pacy, Earl is one of the quickest 7s around, and JVP is rapid. So there's some pace, just not the majority of the team.

I think we can call the game plan based on Borthwick's preferred tactics, but you wouldn't be able to call it from the team selection, hampered as it is by injury. You absolutely could pick that back row and that back line to play a fast, aggressive style.

I was going to say that, ironically, that's a back line that would be much better suited to playing outside Smith than last week's. But of course, with JvP and Farrell England will just kick and then kick again.

I see that there are still plenty of tickets left for this game and loads available for next week's game against Fiji. Not a surprise really; I wouldn't pay to see this England team plodding through Borthwick's tedious game plan.

I've just bought tickets for NZ vs SA in a couple of weeks. The thought of paying money to see England is too depressing.

[Lobby]

Er... Lawrence is one of the quicker 12s, Marchant, Daly, Arundell are all very pacy, Earl is one of the quickest 7s around, and JVP is rapid. So there's some pace, just not the majority of the team.

I think we can call the game plan based on Borthwick's preferred tactics, but you wouldn't be able to call it from the team selection, hampered as it is by injury. You absolutely could pick that back row and that back line to play a fast, aggressive style.

I was going to say that, ironically, that's a back line that would be much better suited to playing outside Smith than last week's. But of course, with JvP and Farrell England will just kick and then kick again.

I see that there are still plenty of tickets left for this game and loads available for next week's game against Fiji. Not a surprise really; I wouldn't pay to see this England team plodding through Borthwick's tedious game plan.

I've just bought tickets for NZ vs SA in a couple of weeks. The thought of paying money to see England is too depressing.

Indeed, as the Guardian noted after last week's game

"Even allowing for the changing shape of the modern game, England were static, unambitious and dull in every sense of the word. Notwithstanding Wales’s feisty performance, it was not much of an advertisement for English imagination. While there is still a month left in which to restore some faith, the rest of the world is not exactly quaking. .... England have lost their last three games, scoring just two tries and conceding 13. Unless they show signs of reversing that trend in the next three weeks, their opening pool match against Argentina in Marseille will become ever more problematic."

[SaintK]

Not a lot of pace in that team especially the pack but there again I cant see the ball getting wide through the hands anyway so I hope Arundel and Daly are ready to chase box kicks all game? Looks a bit like a wrecking ball strategy for game against Wales - more one out rugby and box kicks?

Er... Lawrence is one of the quicker 12s, Marchant, Daly, Arundell are all very pacy, Earl is one of the quickest 7s around, and JVP is rapid. So there's some pace, just not the majority of the team.

I think we can call the game plan based on Borthwick's preferred tactics, but you wouldn't be able to call it from the team selection, hampered as it is by injury. You absolutely could pick that back row and that back line to play a fast, aggressive style.

I was going to say that, ironically, that's a back line that would be much better suited to playing outside Smith than last week's. But of course, with JvP and Farrell England will just kick and then kick again.

I see that there are still plenty of tickets left for this game and loads available for next week's game against Fiji. Not a surprise really; I wouldn't pay to see this England team plodding through Borthwick's tedious game plan.

The RFU are offering accredited clubs up to 10 free tickets if they register a new junior (U16 or below) player on their Game Management System.
They went in 10 minutes at my club

[sockwithaticket]

We're a dreadful excuse for a rugby team. Ireland will have their way with us next week.