The Official English Rugby Thread

[JM2K6]

Watched on catchup last night.

Fuck me, worse than I thought. Anyway, let's start with the good:

- Earl back at 7 and producing a very Ben Earl display. Much easier to handwave away the dumb penalties and ball handling errors when the rest of what he does is so impactful. More of this, please! He's a real talent (and if he could cut out that other stuff, he'd be a world beater)
- Defence was decent again
- Marchant was busy off the ball then really came through when things opened up in the 2nd half
- Itoje looking busier than we've seen for a while
- Lawes was decent again (though smashed in contact a couple of times)
- Good impact off the bench from Smith and Lawrence, and a cameo from Dan again
- We almost looked like a team that wanted to attack in the last 20 mins

Now, the bad:

- Ford was much worse than against Argentina. Yes, the game plan requires us to kick it, but it's like they had a go at him for being too independent in the last game and he gets fined if he passes
- Mitchell is a more extreme version of this. He kicked it very poorly very often
- Tuilagi was anonymous
- Starting front row barely made a dent in Japan
- Lineout was garbage, George is lucky he's the only real option
- Back three were varying shades of shit. Daly kicking poorly & being run down easily by a lock, Steward looking like a clumsy oaf, May being May
- Billy was a black hole when he came on, ran into (but not through) brick walls and was easily rounded in defence
- Stuart is a problem; Sinckler wasn't good, but jesus
- At times it felt like Japan were picking us off at will at the breakdown
- As mentioned by others, Kay nailed it when he said there's no-one running lines for Ford. Sure, some players like Ashton or Dombrandt have that innate understanding of when and how to hit a line, but for crying out loud I'm sure Manu or George or Sinckler or anyone can do it. Only Marchant and occasionally May looked like it until the subs came on; then we saw some actually half decent interplay and decision making at the line.


We are being handed wins by teams who struggle to hold the ball and who are shooting themselves in the foot far beyond any pressure being applied by England. We're not 2007 South Africa. We're not even 2007 England. We're 2011 England at best. And if we don't improve massively we're going to get run over in a QF.

Agree with basically all of that.

Re. the running lines, without watching it back it seemed to be that many times the ball would be worked out the back behind an initial pod to Ford/whoever and the second wave of runners..... just wasn't there. Either physically weren't there, or had all trotted up in a line way too early. So you had your playmaker behind the gain line and isolated behind all his support, with the only faint hope being maybe his blind side winger might be coming on a huge loop eventually.

Pick the bones out of that. Agree players should be able to work something a bit more coherent out for themselves, a lot of them have played together for years after all, and maybe Ford could have adjusted better to some of this shit going on and gone into drop goal mode instead of finding himself in these situations and then dinking kicks everywhere desperately to try and get out of it.... but when it's so disjointed you have to ask what they are doing in training and being coached at. Whoever is to blame though, it was shite.

Yes, reading back I should be more clear: it's a dogshit gameplan that is being demanded of them to a ludicrous degree. That is problem number one.

[petej]

A lot of the time Ford received it there were 4-5 forwards milling about (not in the useful ready to receive at pace and carry the ball way) in the 10-12 channel. I guess it worked with the lawes try. We are essentially a bit shit. This is a marginal improvement from being really shit

[Oxbow]

Mitchell was poor last night, but he's obviously being asked to play to a gameplan because he'd never kick that much for Saints, and although it's not the strongest part of his game, I've never seen him kick that poorly for Saints either. There's no point playing Mitchell if they're just going to ask him to leather the shit off the ball, you might as well just play Youngs. Ditto Ford and Farrell really.

[Hal Jordan]

So, now that our captain is available, where does he start?

[JM2K6]

Mitchell was poor last night, but he's obviously being asked to play to a gameplan because he'd never kick that much for Saints, and although it's not the strongest part of his game, I've never seen him kick that poorly for Saints either. There's no point playing Mitchell if they're just going to ask him to leather the shit off the ball, you might as well just play Youngs. Ditto Ford and Farrell really.

Yup. It's what's being drilled into him. I'll criticise him for executing very poorly, but the decision to kick cannot be his fault alone.

[Lobby]

I enjoyed the Guardian's view of England's game last night:

"...from a safe distance, up high in the stadium, it all just looked – and apologies for using a layperson’s term here – absolutely godawful. And perhaps after the euphoria of Marseille this was a reminder that any team can have a good day at the office. These lapses do happen from time to time. Class is temporary. Soul-numbing drudgery – on the evidence of Borthwick’s England, at any rate – is permanent."

"Japan play the kind of rugby that is still basically recognisable as the game we all started playing as children. Run, crash, pass, pass, run and never stop running. England, for their part, met this assault of angles and artistry with percentages and perspiration, the rugby of brains and brawn to counter the rugby of soul. “Physical contest! Physical contest!” screamed Jamie George as England hunkered down for an early scrum. As a description of his surroundings, it was flawless. I like to imagine that at mealtimes George greets the arrival of his food with a cry of: “Dinner! Dinner!”"

"the only question England really answered here was: can they kick it? To which the answer is: oh God, yes."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... oh-god-yes

[Brazil]

So, now that our captain is available, where does he start?

I suspect they'll stick him at 12, with Manu moving to 13. I suppose they could potentially start him at 10 against Chile, but I'd be surprised if Borthwick would take the risk of disrupting The System too much. Plus the chance to double the kicking opportunities will be absolute catnip for him.

[Raggs]

I enjoyed the Guardian's view of England's game last night:

"...from a safe distance, up high in the stadium, it all just looked – and apologies for using a layperson’s term here – absolutely godawful. And perhaps after the euphoria of Marseille this was a reminder that any team can have a good day at the office. These lapses do happen from time to time. Class is temporary. Soul-numbing drudgery – on the evidence of Borthwick’s England, at any rate – is permanent."

"Japan play the kind of rugby that is still basically recognisable as the game we all started playing as children. Run, crash, pass, pass, run and never stop running. England, for their part, met this assault of angles and artistry with percentages and perspiration, the rugby of brains and brawn to counter the rugby of soul. “Physical contest! Physical contest!” screamed Jamie George as England hunkered down for an early scrum. As a description of his surroundings, it was flawless. I like to imagine that at mealtimes George greets the arrival of his food with a cry of: “Dinner! Dinner!”"

"the only question England really answered here was: can they kick it? To which the answer is: oh God, yes."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... oh-god-yes

See I agree England were awful, but the bollocks about Japan suggests I shouldn't be listening to this writer...

England kicked 42 times, Japan 37. Only England also passed 167 times vs Japans 96, and ran the ball 137 times vs Japans 74. Which means as a ratio, Japan almost kicked twice as often as England.

[sockwithaticket]

What should happen: chuck Farrell in at 10 against Chile to preserve Ford and occupy the press. In games that matter go with Ford - Lawrence - Marchant as the midfield.

What Brazil said is the most likely thing, unfortunately.

[Lobby]

I enjoyed the Guardian's view of England's game last night:

"...from a safe distance, up high in the stadium, it all just looked – and apologies for using a layperson’s term here – absolutely godawful. And perhaps after the euphoria of Marseille this was a reminder that any team can have a good day at the office. These lapses do happen from time to time. Class is temporary. Soul-numbing drudgery – on the evidence of Borthwick’s England, at any rate – is permanent."

"Japan play the kind of rugby that is still basically recognisable as the game we all started playing as children. Run, crash, pass, pass, run and never stop running. England, for their part, met this assault of angles and artistry with percentages and perspiration, the rugby of brains and brawn to counter the rugby of soul. “Physical contest! Physical contest!” screamed Jamie George as England hunkered down for an early scrum. As a description of his surroundings, it was flawless. I like to imagine that at mealtimes George greets the arrival of his food with a cry of: “Dinner! Dinner!”"

"the only question England really answered here was: can they kick it? To which the answer is: oh God, yes."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... oh-god-yes

See I agree England were awful, but the bollocks about Japan suggests I shouldn't be listening to this writer...

England kicked 42 times, Japan 37. Only England also passed 167 times vs Japans 96, and ran the ball 137 times vs Japans 74. Which means as a ratio, Japan almost kicked twice as often as England.

Everyone kicks, especially from their own 22. England are fairly unique in kicking so much ball away when they get into the opposition 22.

[Raggs]

I enjoyed the Guardian's view of England's game last night:

"...from a safe distance, up high in the stadium, it all just looked – and apologies for using a layperson’s term here – absolutely godawful. And perhaps after the euphoria of Marseille this was a reminder that any team can have a good day at the office. These lapses do happen from time to time. Class is temporary. Soul-numbing drudgery – on the evidence of Borthwick’s England, at any rate – is permanent."

"Japan play the kind of rugby that is still basically recognisable as the game we all started playing as children. Run, crash, pass, pass, run and never stop running. England, for their part, met this assault of angles and artistry with percentages and perspiration, the rugby of brains and brawn to counter the rugby of soul. “Physical contest! Physical contest!” screamed Jamie George as England hunkered down for an early scrum. As a description of his surroundings, it was flawless. I like to imagine that at mealtimes George greets the arrival of his food with a cry of: “Dinner! Dinner!”"

"the only question England really answered here was: can they kick it? To which the answer is: oh God, yes."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... oh-god-yes

See I agree England were awful, but the bollocks about Japan suggests I shouldn't be listening to this writer...

England kicked 42 times, Japan 37. Only England also passed 167 times vs Japans 96, and ran the ball 137 times vs Japans 74. Which means as a ratio, Japan almost kicked twice as often as England.

Everyone kicks, especially from their own 22. England are fairly unique in kicking so much ball away when they get into the opposition 22.

Sure, but 5 extra kicks, vs nearly double the number of carries and passes, doesn't have me thinking that Japan are some sort of "never stop running" side.

[Hal Jordan]

A short pass to a static forward in the 10/12 channel is still a pass.

Just caught a replay of the Steward try, Ford crosskicked with his left foot.

[ASMO]

I enjoyed the Guardian's view of England's game last night:

"...from a safe distance, up high in the stadium, it all just looked – and apologies for using a layperson’s term here – absolutely godawful. And perhaps after the euphoria of Marseille this was a reminder that any team can have a good day at the office. These lapses do happen from time to time. Class is temporary. Soul-numbing drudgery – on the evidence of Borthwick’s England, at any rate – is permanent."

"Japan play the kind of rugby that is still basically recognisable as the game we all started playing as children. Run, crash, pass, pass, run and never stop running. England, for their part, met this assault of angles and artistry with percentages and perspiration, the rugby of brains and brawn to counter the rugby of soul. “Physical contest! Physical contest!” screamed Jamie George as England hunkered down for an early scrum. As a description of his surroundings, it was flawless. I like to imagine that at mealtimes George greets the arrival of his food with a cry of: “Dinner! Dinner!”"

"the only question England really answered here was: can they kick it? To which the answer is: oh God, yes."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... oh-god-yes

See I agree England were awful, but the bollocks about Japan suggests I shouldn't be listening to this writer...

England kicked 42 times, Japan 37. Only England also passed 167 times vs Japans 96, and ran the ball 137 times vs Japans 74. Which means as a ratio, Japan almost kicked twice as often as England.

Raggs you are in danger of channeling Borthwick. Context is everything, raw stats are meaningless without it. Who kicked most when in an attacking position in the opposition 3rd of the field? Who kicked the most defensively? Who had most posession? Who had most territory?

[Raggs]

Raggs you are in danger of channeling Borthwick. Context is everything, raw stats are meaningless without it. Who kicked most when in an attacking position in the opposition 3rd of the field? Who kicked the most defensively? Who had most posession? Who had most territory?

England kicked a shitload of attacking ball away, England kicked a shitload in general and England were shit in general.

As I said in my opening post on this, that's not the issue. The idea that Japan were somehow just running and passing everything is quite simply bollocks, made up to try and suggest that they were trying their best to play rugby as it should be etc, but the big meanies just ground them down. Japan aren't a good team right now, it's not 2019, they are nowhere near what they were.

[ASMO]

Raggs you are in danger of channeling Borthwick. Context is everything, raw stats are meaningless without it. Who kicked most when in an attacking position in the opposition 3rd of the field? Who kicked the most defensively? Who had most posession? Who had most territory?

England kicked a shitload of attacking ball away, England kicked a shitload in general and England were shit in general.

As I said in my opening post on this, that's not the issue. The idea that Japan were somehow just running and passing everything is quite simply bollocks, made up to try and suggest that they were trying their best to play rugby as it should be etc, but the big meanies just ground them down. Japan aren't a good team right now, it's not 2019, they are nowhere near what they were.

I completely agree with that, but i would also add when Japan attacked ball in hand they looked lightyears ahead of England.

[JM2K6]

Raggs you are in danger of channeling Borthwick. Context is everything, raw stats are meaningless without it. Who kicked most when in an attacking position in the opposition 3rd of the field? Who kicked the most defensively? Who had most posession? Who had most territory?

England kicked a shitload of attacking ball away, England kicked a shitload in general and England were shit in general.

As I said in my opening post on this, that's not the issue. The idea that Japan were somehow just running and passing everything is quite simply bollocks, made up to try and suggest that they were trying their best to play rugby as it should be etc, but the big meanies just ground them down. Japan aren't a good team right now, it's not 2019, they are nowhere near what they were.

Eh, it's not like they're saying Japan never kicked. He's saying that Japan attacked by trying to play flowing rugby. Which they did, but they also dropped the ball a lot so ended up losing territory and having to do a lot of kick tennis. What Japan didn't do, which is very obvious to everyone who watched the game, was resort to the boot as the main attacking weapon regardless of situation.

[Margin__Walker]

Times going with Faz at 10, Smith at 15 for Chile. Arundell and Willis also starting.

[inactionman]

Times going with Faz at 10, Smith at 15 for Chile. Arundell and Willis also starting.

Do I dare ask where Ford fits? (Assuming Smith is backup 10)

[Margin__Walker]

Times going with Faz at 10, Smith at 15 for Chile. Arundell and Willis also starting.

Do I dare ask where Ford fits? (Assuming Smith is backup 10)

He fits snuggly on the bench for this one if the Times are to be believed.

Edit - With this as the 15

Probable England XV to face Chile M Smith; M Malins, E Daly, O Lawrence, H Arundell; O Farrell, D Care; B Rodd, T Dan, K Sinckler, D Ribbans, G Martin, L Ludlam, J Willis, B Vunipola.

[Sinkers]

Doesn’t Malins often play fullback? But he’s been shoved on the wing for a complete newbie in that position?

[Oxbow]

Both Malins and Arundell have payed there, so let's stick Smith at fullback where he's never played for his club, yay. And when England score a boatload of tries against a shattered Tier 3 nation everything will be rosy again.

[Raggs]

He's a wildcard option. Quite literally a game changer. Bring him on if you're chasing a try (or more than one) because it's needed. So in the smaller games, get him more experience there.

It's not as though 10s never drop into the backfield regularly anyway.

[sockwithaticket]

The question is does utilising Smith at fullback provide more net benefit than using an actual back three player? Maybe against the minnows. Doubtful against anyone of quality. In which case, is the experiment a waste of time?

[inactionman]

Doesn’t Malins often play fullback? But he’s been shoved on the wing for a complete newbie in that position?

I get a bit lost in this- I can't remember if Malins' move to Bristol was in part due to wanting to play 15 or not wanting to play 15. Given Piutau is on the move, I suspect it's because he wants to be fullback.

[Raggs]

The question is does utilising Smith at fullback provide more net benefit than using an actual back three player? Maybe against the minnows. Doubtful against anyone of quality. In which case, is the experiment a waste of time?

Against both Argentina and Fiji, we saw a step up in attack when Smith came on the pitch. Maybe Malins could replicate that, but I'm not so sure.

I'm not sure it's something I'd want to run for a full 80 minutes, since then Ford and Smith could be targeted in the backfield over a sustained assault. However in the last 15 minutes, if we need points, it's smart. I'd quite like to see Arundell just get a shot on the wing over May to be honest. Or have him on the bench, drop Manu, and have Lawrence start at 12.

[sockwithaticket]

The question is does utilising Smith at fullback provide more net benefit than using an actual back three player? Maybe against the minnows. Doubtful against anyone of quality. In which case, is the experiment a waste of time?

Against both Argentina and Fiji, we saw a step up in attack when Smith came on the pitch. Maybe Malins could replicate that, but I'm not so sure.

I'm not sure it's something I'd want to run for a full 80 minutes, since then Ford and Smith could be targeted in the backfield over a sustained assault. However in the last 15 minutes, if we need points, it's smart. I'd quite like to see Arundell just get a shot on the wing over May to be honest. Or have him on the bench, drop Manu, and have Lawrence start at 12.

With the game more broken up in the latter stages, it certainly has more potential to work and the back three selection in the squad is not great. None of them are in form that demands selection and we don't have many particularly complimentary configurations.

[Raggs]

The question is does utilising Smith at fullback provide more net benefit than using an actual back three player? Maybe against the minnows. Doubtful against anyone of quality. In which case, is the experiment a waste of time?

Against both Argentina and Fiji, we saw a step up in attack when Smith came on the pitch. Maybe Malins could replicate that, but I'm not so sure.

I'm not sure it's something I'd want to run for a full 80 minutes, since then Ford and Smith could be targeted in the backfield over a sustained assault. However in the last 15 minutes, if we need points, it's smart. I'd quite like to see Arundell just get a shot on the wing over May to be honest. Or have him on the bench, drop Manu, and have Lawrence start at 12.

With the game more broken up in the latter stages, it certainly has more potential to work and the back three selection in the squad is not great. None of them are in form that demands selection and we don't have many particularly complimentary configurations.

Right now we're clearly selecting for aerial ability, which fits with all the kicking. Combined with Chessum, Itoje and Lawes, we're a good threat in the lineout too.

Keep it close for 65 minutes, or grind out a win. Then bring on Smith and Lawrence to try and smash and grab a result.

[SaintK]

Doesn’t Malins often play fullback? But he’s been shoved on the wing for a complete newbie in that position?

I get a bit lost in this- I can't remember if Malins' move to Bristol was in part due to wanting to play 15 or not wanting to play 15. Given Piutau is on the move, I suspect it's because he wants to be fullback.

Correct

[Niegs]

I enjoyed the Guardian's view of England's game last night:

"...from a safe distance, up high in the stadium, it all just looked – and apologies for using a layperson’s term here – absolutely godawful. And perhaps after the euphoria of Marseille this was a reminder that any team can have a good day at the office. These lapses do happen from time to time. Class is temporary. Soul-numbing drudgery – on the evidence of Borthwick’s England, at any rate – is permanent."

"Japan play the kind of rugby that is still basically recognisable as the game we all started playing as children. Run, crash, pass, pass, run and never stop running. England, for their part, met this assault of angles and artistry with percentages and perspiration, the rugby of brains and brawn to counter the rugby of soul. “Physical contest! Physical contest!” screamed Jamie George as England hunkered down for an early scrum. As a description of his surroundings, it was flawless. I like to imagine that at mealtimes George greets the arrival of his food with a cry of: “Dinner! Dinner!”"

"the only question England really answered here was: can they kick it? To which the answer is: oh God, yes."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... oh-god-yes

See I agree England were awful, but the bollocks about Japan suggests I shouldn't be listening to this writer...

England kicked 42 times, Japan 37. Only England also passed 167 times vs Japans 96, and ran the ball 137 times vs Japans 74. Which means as a ratio, Japan almost kicked twice as often as England.

Are any of the stattos counting times the ball is passed in a phase. It'd be interesting to know how many of those passes are just one-out, or 2+. Combine that with metres gained from the last phase.

I did it for some games years ago and recall one-outs being something like 70+% and yielding something like 50m (subtracting from the net anytime the receiver was tackled behind the gainline)

[Raggs]

I enjoyed the Guardian's view of England's game last night:

"...from a safe distance, up high in the stadium, it all just looked – and apologies for using a layperson’s term here – absolutely godawful. And perhaps after the euphoria of Marseille this was a reminder that any team can have a good day at the office. These lapses do happen from time to time. Class is temporary. Soul-numbing drudgery – on the evidence of Borthwick’s England, at any rate – is permanent."

"Japan play the kind of rugby that is still basically recognisable as the game we all started playing as children. Run, crash, pass, pass, run and never stop running. England, for their part, met this assault of angles and artistry with percentages and perspiration, the rugby of brains and brawn to counter the rugby of soul. “Physical contest! Physical contest!” screamed Jamie George as England hunkered down for an early scrum. As a description of his surroundings, it was flawless. I like to imagine that at mealtimes George greets the arrival of his food with a cry of: “Dinner! Dinner!”"

"the only question England really answered here was: can they kick it? To which the answer is: oh God, yes."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... oh-god-yes

See I agree England were awful, but the bollocks about Japan suggests I shouldn't be listening to this writer...

England kicked 42 times, Japan 37. Only England also passed 167 times vs Japans 96, and ran the ball 137 times vs Japans 74. Which means as a ratio, Japan almost kicked twice as often as England.

Are any of the stattos counting times the ball is passed in a phase. It'd be interesting to know how many of those passes are just one-out, or 2+. Combine that with metres gained from the last phase.

I did it for some games years ago and recall one-outs being something like 70+% and yielding something like 50m (subtracting from the net anytime the receiver was tackled behind the gainline)

Not exactly that, but Ford passed a hell of a lot more than the Japanese 10. Not the be all and end all of course, but memory alone has us pulling the ball back from the front pod quite often?

[sockwithaticket]

Against both Argentina and Fiji, we saw a step up in attack when Smith came on the pitch. Maybe Malins could replicate that, but I'm not so sure.

I'm not sure it's something I'd want to run for a full 80 minutes, since then Ford and Smith could be targeted in the backfield over a sustained assault. However in the last 15 minutes, if we need points, it's smart. I'd quite like to see Arundell just get a shot on the wing over May to be honest. Or have him on the bench, drop Manu, and have Lawrence start at 12.

With the game more broken up in the latter stages, it certainly has more potential to work and the back three selection in the squad is not great. None of them are in form that demands selection and we don't have many particularly complimentary configurations.

Right now we're clearly selecting for aerial ability, which fits with all the kicking. Combined with Chessum, Itoje and Lawes, we're a good threat in the lineout too.

To an exent. Daly's never been particularly good under the high ball, while both he and May have lost pace which does weaken the chase a bit. Rapid players track the ball more quickly and are often afforded more time to make a decision about getting up to challenge or waiting on the ground to smash the catcher.

Keep it close for 65 minutes, or grind out a win. Then bring on Smith and Lawrence to try and smash and grab a result.

The ol' Welsh trick under Gatland. Not much to be enthused by.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

We do of course have the option to pick two of our primary chasers, Messrs Genge and Sinckler, and hope they add significant value as a pairing to the chase unit.

[tc27]

Faz at 10, Smith at 15 according to the Xwatter rumour mill

Arundel also starting.

[Hal Jordan]

Smith at 15 is giving me Monye at 15 vibes.

[Hal Jordan]

15. Marcus Smith
14. Henry Arundell
13. Elliot Daly
12. Ollie Lawrence
11. Max Malins

10. Owen Farrell (capt.)
9. Danny Care

1. Bevan Rodd
2. Theo Dan
3. Kyle Sinckler
4. David Ribbans
5. George Martin
6. Lewis Ludlam
7. Jack Willis
8. Billy Vunipola

Replacements: Jack Walker, Joe Marler, Will Stuart, Ollie Chessum, Ben Earl, Ben Youngs, George Ford, Joe Marchant

[inactionman]

15. Marcus Smith
14. Henry Arundell
13. Elliot Daly
12. Ollie Lawrence
11. Max Malins

10. Owen Farrell (capt.)
9. Danny Care

1. Bevan Rodd
2. Theo Dan
3. Kyle Sinckler
4. David Ribbans
5. George Martin
6. Lewis Ludlam
7. Jack Willis
8. Billy Vunipola

Replacements: Jack Walker, Joe Marler, Will Stuart, Ollie Chessum, Ben Earl, Ben Youngs, George Ford, Joe Marchant

5/3 bench, very un-South African.

[inactionman]

Smith at 15 is giving me Monye at 15 vibes.

for different reasons, I suspect Ugo could barely catch a cold at 15.

[sockwithaticket]

15. Marcus Smith
14. Henry Arundell
13. Elliot Daly
12. Ollie Lawrence
11. Max Malins

10. Owen Farrell (capt.)
9. Danny Care

1. Bevan Rodd
2. Theo Dan
3. Kyle Sinckler
4. David Ribbans
5. George Martin
6. Lewis Ludlam
7. Jack Willis
8. Billy Vunipola

Replacements: Jack Walker, Joe Marler, Will Stuart, Ollie Chessum, Ben Earl, Ben Youngs, George Ford, Joe Marchant

Sadly, I predict a final 20 of Ford - Farrell and the same again against Samoa to get some minutes into that partnership. It's actually been quite a number of tests since we've done it and I think it'd be better for England not to revert back to it.

[JM2K6]

Yeah. Manu's not justified the hype around his performances at this world cup - the media/English disease of praising a storied player for existing and doing basic shit - and Lawrence absolutely should be in his place for the big games. Even though he's probably better at 13, I think he's a better 12 than Manu.

But we'll get Ford - Farrell - Manu, with Lawrence as the backup 13 if Manu is injured during the week, and Marchant either benching or on the wing.

Daly's had a terrible time of things so here's hoping 13 goes well for him, because if he's going to continue being first choice on the wing he needs some form.

[Brazil]

Pleased to see Rodd and WIllis getting starts, and some pace on the wings at last.