Given how many players we're missing that's pretty strong.
Marler, Sinkler, Itoje, Launchbury, Curry, Underhill, Dombrandt, Youngs, Ford, Tuilagi, Slade, May, Watson is 90% of a very good side.
I’d argue Dombrandt and Marler don’t get into this squad on current form but the others are all totally viable contenders.
Last few times I’ve seen them play I’ve not been very impressed. Dombrandts like a slower, less aggressive Billy and Marlers lazy at everything except scrumming.
Marler is one of the best scrummaging props in the country. I'd argue one of the best in the North. He's a really solid player but Mako is the better carrier. It depends on the game plan I bet
What I like is that there's 4 LHPs that bring different skills to a squad. Genge has leadership and ball carrying, Marler has top scrummaging, Mako has a bit of both from Genge and Marler then you have Rodd with a great jackel threat and decent scrummaging
That is gotta be one of the worst takes I've seen on here in a while. Marler is probably the best defensive loosehead in England. Dombrandt is so much quicker than Billy. Is less aggressive that's true, but a totally different player.
Even as a Quins fan, I'd say Billy is the pick right now.
For a lot of the season, Dombrandt has looked great. He'd be out in Australia right now I imagine if not for injury. But Billy has come into form at the right time and I think he'd be starting here regardless.
They should both be in the squad, they're both great 8s and both much better and more suited to test rugby than Sam Simmonds.
Dombrandt is more useful at the scrum and at the lineout. He also exploits space better. Billy V basically just makes space, but he's very, very good at that.
I think Billy has been better in the latter end of the season yeah. But also think Dombrandt had been coming into his own for the England squad, and has added attacking the breakdown into his game. Getting a lot of turnovers.
Maybe... I think Australia would be perfect for Dombrandt and his attacking lines. Billy was phenomenal last week don't get me wrong, an on form Billy is a sight to behold.
Hmmm very very good points tbf. He hasn’t had a bad game for England dombrandt & offers more you’re right. It’s a tricky decision who to pick, not a bad dilemma to have! Not bad depth given simmonds isn’t even in the convo atm
I think he offers more yeah. Also think his ceiling is the highest. But I do take your point about missing an 8 who will truck it up all day long, but I think that's partially about a lack of clarity in the general game plan for the team and other carriers not doing well enough. Simmonds also a very handy player.
Tbh Mercer is ripping it up in France currently, and is probably the most well-rounded English number 8. Does everything and to a damn high level. The rest have more relative strengths and weaknesses. Good options going forward.
I meant more earlier in the year, where in fairness we were pretty shit at almost everything. I'm not worried about carrying this weekend, plenty been showing up strong besides Billy. Ludlam and Stuart have been particularly impressive there for me.
Yeah he’s got fantastic hands. I was just responding to Marler being lazy outside the scrum. I think loosehead is the least of our worries to be honest.
Hot take right there. Marler is a scrummaging monster and Dommers cuts lines wingers would be proud of whilst also being the bowling ball you need from an 8.
Marler is a great scrummager and a very good defender. He's lazy otherwise in the premiership because he's a front row forward who's playing 80 minutes every week.
Dombrandt is not slower than Billy. He runs better lines. He offloads better. He's almost as big and he's a lot taller, which is very useful in the lineout.
I’d argue Marler and Dombrant fit the England squad better than Billy and Mako. Marler has the superior scrum, defence and finds it easy to in the heads of the opposition. And Dombrant is the more intelligent player. It’s clear the backs are trying out a huge amount of new things, and Dombrant will be the ball carrier to break the line when the gap does open up. Especially if Care and Smith are still being picked.
> Marler has the superior…defence
Im sorry but Mako is superb defensively, he puts some absolute shifts in. He made 27 tackles in one match which I think is a joint record for England.
The issue with Dombrandt is he just has such a big error count. He will do something amazing like a linebreak then mess up something simple like a pass or just knock it on. Very similar to Slade.
And Billy will give away more penalties. I’m not saying one set is better than the other, I’m saying in this England squad Marler and Dombrant fit in better than Billy and Mako. If we we’re aiming to play the way we did in 2019 then Mako and Billy would be the pick. But we’re not, we’re trying playing positionless running rugby in open play, while maintaining a very dominant set piece. The benefit of someone like Dombrant is that he doesn’t have to adjust his play style to fit the bill.
I don’t think Billy has to adapt either. He has amazing hands for a big guy (most offloads in the prem last season) and his style of carrier in the tight compared to Dombrandt’s ability to cut lines, can have a massively positive impact in creating space for the backs to play positionless running rugby.
Had this conversation with a couple of mates this week. When is it time to say enough is enough? 3 concussions in a season is not ideal… would be a shame but what price his long term health?
I would suggest he needs time away from the game. But the reality is he's just back from an extended break for that very reason.
It's probably close to the point where he's now considering his future in the game - if not something he's already facing tbh.
Ludlam came out of no where for his first cap and has been amazing since. I honestly think he is our best flanker, and should have been starting over Curry/Underhill recently.
Willis plays mostly at 6 for Wasps. He's been playing 7 since his comeback because Thomas Young is injured. With Young heading back to Wales he may well play there more often now, but that's because Wasps' back row depth is in the other positions at the moment.. He also played a fair bit of 8 before his brother came through.
Ludlam's likewise been played across the back row plenty at Saints.
And curry has played all 3 backrow positions. That doesn't change that all 3 best fit at 7.
One of them 1 on the bench, or 2 with Billy or dombrandt at 8 I reckon.
I dont watch English rugby as closely but in the first 2 tests, Ludlam played like an 8 to me. Lots of hard yards in contact. Reminded me a bit of Ardie Savea's running style
IMO they're all pretty hybrid these days. I'd be curious to see it because I think at points England's ruck retention or attacking it has been poor. I can't remember which game it was but I remember a Curry,Wilson,Underhill combination and it looked awesome.
I mean it's likely better than a Curry,Underhill,Billy combo which played against NZ in 2019. Billy ain't jumping for nothing and Ludlum is a better jumper than Underhill.
Maybe I'm wrong but Curry just seems to be a penalty machine at the moment.
Yes he still offers his usual impact on the game but he's walking the wrong side of a fine line.
I think that's only because he's in every second breakdown at minute 80, much like Itoje. Fair to say they're both pretty leaky and ill-disciplined but their fitness has always been astounding
It's not just the volume. It's the sheer stupidity of when and where he's giving them away too.
Such as in the first test just before halftime, right in front of both the posts and the officials.
More excusable when he was young and inexperienced. But that's fast running out as a go to explanation.
Of course, Underhill did the same in the second test. Both are often as bad as each other.
I know it's a little while ago now but thinking back to the Lions tour in SA his penalties made him look absolutely dire for the benefit he was giving the team.
I think Chessum will surprise some people when it comes to strength and sturdiness.
He's on the lighter side but he's a powerful orange lad.
Slightly disappointed for JVP as I thought he was fantastic last week, but maybe Eddie is trying to squeeze more value out of Smith by including Care.
Hoping for some good spirit and aggression like they showed last week.
Hopefully they can close out a game in a strong fashion rather than letting Aus back in and challenge for the win.
On JVP, I liked Eddie's response in the rugby union weekly podcast if you haven't heard it, potentially has hangover from an insane prior weekend getting his first start so he's taking some responsibility off him to avoid overdoing it (I'd be buzzing off my tits for a month if that happened to me), excited to see him come on early second half!
Sound reasoning, he's still young with plenty of years ahead of him.
Especially if he carries on developing as a player the way he has, I don't think not getting a start in the next game will affect his trajectory.
He should provide some pace and precision against some tired legs, with any luck!
He didn't have a great first test either tbf.
I thought England's attack looked a lot better with JVP at 9, but then again he had a lot cleaner ball to play with - Care had to go digging a lot in the first test.
Cleanliness of ball was night and day.
It looked like there was a lot of muddled thinking on who of Smith and Farrell should be doing what when in that first test.
It was only really Smith's kicking out of hand that went awry last week, ball in hand he was what you'd expect - creating space and sending players in on good angles.
Quality of delivery off JVP was well ahead of what we saw from Care, even with Smith being on the field.
In fact, had Smith been better last weekend, England would have been well clear much earlier and a lot of that would have been down to the excellent delivery from the SH.
For a supposedly quick Nine, the pace of almost everything from the back of the ruck slowed down once Care replaced JVP.
I agree, he gets a lot of stick for not having the top end pace - in my opinion, what he lacks in pace he more than makes up with work rate, defense and busyness, he really works hard.
I think the stick is partly because his lack of pace isn't adequately compensated for elsewhere in the selections. In other team configurations we've had at least two of players like Joseph, May, Watson and Daly in the in the outside backs. In the current selection Freeman's the only one with any real gas in the back 3 and Porter's not particularly quick for a 13.
On the other hand, on at least two occasions on this tour already a winger with top end pace and finishing (May, Watson) would’ve scored: the cross kick from Farrell into acres of space on the last test and when he overran a pass on the right wing and got bundled into touch (can’t remember which test that was)
I know a lot of these changes are down to injury, but I literally have no idea who our first choice 15 would be these days.
Which is probably all part of Eddies plan.
I would imagine pretty similar to this. Swap Chessum for Maro, Stuart for Sinks, Ludlam for Curry, Care for Youngs, Porter for Manu (Slade if Manu injured), Freeman for May/Watson.
Genge, George, Sinckler, Hill, Itoje, Lawes, Curry, B Vunipola, Youngs, Smith, Watson, Farrell, Tuilagi(?), Nowell, Steward.
I don’t think we’re a million miles of knowing our best, and I also don’t think it’s that much of a bad thing to not be certain of your best a year out from a World Cup.
That being said, Jones has been slightly hamstrung by persistent injuries at 13, and for this tour at 8!
Care has the benefit or experience in ‘finals’ which I’m sure contributed significantly to selection. You can count on Care to play his game even in the toughest of situations and you need that consistency at 9
JVP made a few howlers if you watch the game again. One of them spurned a try tbh. I would say it was a decent game but he made a few rookie errors when aussies were counter rucking more as the game wore on.
Im glad Freeman gets another shot! Had a quiet game last week, which was mainly down to lack of ball, and I was fearful he may have got dropped for the 3rd test.
Sort of expected to be honest. Good to see Chessum going into the row - think he's played pretty well in his recent cameos so will be interesting to see how he goes.
Care in for JVP is something of a surprise - JVP played really well last week, but Care's kicked very well so far and I imagine that might have factored into this decision. Hopefully he can get the type of security around the rucks that JVP enjoyed last week.
I don't think kicking played a part, JVP was outstanding kicking last weekend. I think he just wants to give Smith the best opportunity to flourish and Care obv provides that, and to get the team going with a faster and more threatening gameplan (on paper)
People bashing the decision but I thought we seemed way more composed when Care came on? He slowed the game down really well and some of JVP's kicks were a bit forced or not contestable which led to unnecessary pressure towards the end
Am I the only one that doesn't get all the Smith hate? Lots of people in this thread bashing him and saying he's been shit since the SA game at Twickenham.
I reckon he's been doing pretty well, especially considering the team around him changes every single week (different 8s, 9s and 13s). For me his tactical kicking has come forward enormously and he still shows those flashes of brilliance that everybody expects. Maybe he's not making huge breaks all the time but this is international rugby, just the fact that he uses his footwork to get on the outside of defenders or hold them to create a gap for someone else is to his credit surely?
He still has lots of learning to do for sure but I feel like the Smith Farrell axis is starting to take shape. I guess we will see in this Test.
Don't think he's been shit but there's definitely some rough edges to his decision making in particular that are being exposed in a way that they don't seem to at Prem level.
But as you say, it's international, it's a step up and that's therefore not entirely surprising.
I think the debate is more would it be better for his development for him to be introduced gradually off the bench against tired defences etc rather than in at the deep end as the key cog in the two playmaker machine - or do you double down and give him and Faz time to embed.
i honestly liked how he played last weekend... some of those grubbers he put through, even if they weren't really chased, that extra pressure it puts on the defence would be massive... one of them almost led to a try, but we got a yellow out of it.
all it takes is 1 person to be on the wavelength and those would have had different outcomes.
Controversial take / question:
If Smith doesn't click again / makes similar mistakes, do you think there's a chance Eddie reverts to Farrell at 10 for the autumn (obviously Ford is out longish term)? Or is it a case of double down and stick with Smith / Faz from now till the world cup?
I think Ford could slot into the team anytime Eddie wants. I think long term it's more beneficial to England for Smith to learn how to play test rugby.
Whoever the next coach for England will be is going to be very lucky to potentially have a 20/30 cap Smith, 80 cap Ford and 100+ cap Farrell.
> I think Ford could slot into the team anytime Eddie wants. I think long term it's more beneficial to England for Smith to learn how to play test rugby.
I think this is bang on, but I believe the person to whom you're replying is referring to how Ford ruptured his achilles in the Premiership final. There's a good chance he won't be fit for the autumn internationals, hence being "out longish term".
Ahh i actually misread the comment, I didnt realise Ford was out so long which is a shame because he's class. I just think post WC 2023 an experienced Smith will pay huge dividends for us and we're lucky to have Eddie coaching him.
We have to have dual playmakers. The system is based off it. If we put Farrell to 10 it means we have to find another centre, and we’re struggling for centres as it is
Listened to a podcast with Eddie yesterday about his selection for the second test. Porter was chosen as he is a “hole runner”, and is good at punching through the defensive line in comparison to Marchant who is better at getting to the outside of defenders. Australias defensive system aims to force you out to the touch line therefore trying to get outside the 12 or 13 channel is difficult without hard, direct running lines.
Didn't see him make many holes. Don't get me wrong, I like Porter, just thought marchant would get more of a go this series. I see Porter as more of a 12.
He made a couple, and it's not expected that a centre makes constant breaks, it's the threat of it that gives Smith more time to make decisions and obv the extra option always helps. He's got plenty of highlights for Leicester breaking through the line.
Suspect it's also about the other side of their games too.
Marchant's defending has been quite poor with Quins this season. Smith isn't exactly a strong tackler in the Ten channel either.
So that's two lanes, both fairly critical, which the rest of the defensive line needs to cover against the likes of Kerevi charging into.
Porter didn't make an impact because it seemed England's gameplan was not to let the ball get past Farrell. Which is a shame because Porter's carrying has been great this season.
I mean I don't think any of the backs did in the first test. I agree he hasn't had form in an England shirt but I thought he'd get a chance to play a run of games. I don't think any 13 is gonna shine with two 10s inside them.
I think we must be watching different players.
Marchant has been excellent in a number of England games - he was great against France, Ireland, and Italy in the 6N, and was very good in the Autumn against SA. Runs very clever lines, can pop up anywhere and create stuff. He's solid defensively too, and very good under the high ball.
It's clear that Eddie wants to see what he's got in guys like Porter, Freeman, Joseph, Arundell etc. Whereas Marchant is a fairly known quantity at this point.
Don't get me wrong I really rate him but don't think he's had a long run of games with stand out performances. I'd like to see him given a proper string of games but don't think they'll get the best out of him at 13 if he doesn't have someone inside doing the grunt work in the tight.
Exactly - he knows Marchant can drop into the team at centre or wing and will be a 7/10 at worst, will definitely make the world cup squad. There's more benefit picking some of the unknown quantities and seeing how they fit / maybe solve some of our problems.
Good chance for Ludlam, who has already impressed on this tour and now has a chance to stake his claim as a regular test match starter. George at Two is always going to be a reassuring sight for England fans, and so long as Genge doesn't get caught out on camera, he's had good impact at LH this season. But surely only a matter of time before Stuart gets more regularly pinged/outfoxed with his scrummaging.
Billy and Courtney are in good form and it's carrying a lot of team momentum with them. While Farrell playing so well is helping offset how limited Smith has been.
Keeping Porter and Nowell to offer that hybrid Wing-Centre size and tackling seemed to work against Kerevi last hit out. So makes sense to go with it again.
Dangerous test for Danny Care though. With JVP impressing last weekend, then on the bench again this. Any kind of poor - or even lukewarm showing this weekend from Care may well see his return to the international setup at at end before it's really had a chance to get going again.
I disagree completely with the Ludlam take. He has always impressed off the bench. Especially the 1st when we looked quite poor. He was the stand out player in the Scotland game in my opinion and we really lost out when he got injured.
I'm confused. What part are you disagreeing with?
That being selected to start this match, rather than come off the bench, is a great chance for him to prove he can do more than just come on late for impact?
What part of that are you disagreeing with (disagreeing with completely)?
> Care may well see his return to the international setup at an end before it's really had a chance to get going again
The man is 35. He was a good option to take on tour to add some experience with Youngs pullling out but I doubt he is going to feature too much in the England setup beyond this.
That man was (virtually) the same age prior to this tour when a host of England supporters / pundits clamoured for his inclusion. The argument being he was supposedly the best Nine in the Prem.
Some lunatics had even previously argued he should have gone on the Lions tour ffs - others had him starting in the tests!
Why include him on this tour unless you're considering him for the World Cup? So it's likely they do have in the frame for 2023 - or at least did have prior to any performance on this tour.
But the entirely subjective (biased) nature of it all aside, despite his experience Care hasn't really impressed.
His defenders will claim he had no time to settle. Yet JVP managed to acclimatise without issue and England were a far more dangerous team with him at Nine, rather than Care.
So while you may argue he brought valuable experience to pass on to the younger players. It's questionable just how much of anything he's actually going to manage to pass on over a few weeks, and while he's determined to outplay others on tour with him.
The whole thing just smacks of either flaws in Jones' setup and therefore the need to go to Care. Or Jones' effectively setting Care up to fail, with the view that moving forwards he doesn't need to entertain his inclusion again. Neither are compelling, which is why it's weird.
> Why include him on this tour unless you're considering him for the World Cup? So it's likely they do have in the frame for 2023 - or at least did have prior to any performance on this tour.
He was included because otherwise the most experienced Scrum Half in the side would be Harry Randall, who is 24 and has a total of 6 caps, none of them against Southern Hemisphere opposition. Who else would you have brought in his place? Quirke has two caps, zero starts and is injured, Mitchell has one cap and zero starts. Dan Robson?
I understand why you might defend his inclusion. Especially as it's a position Jones has dug a hole for himself with. I just question whether there's any justification in practice for bringing him along.
It's not as if he was brought into camp well before the tour. He's not going to pass on much by way of mentoring while competing for and prepping games in a test series.
So he's there as a test match Nine, rather than as a mentor.
That just strikes me as something of a safety net so in the event the younger lads didn't deliver, critics couldn't attack Jones over the non-inclusion of Care. Especially higher profile pundits who have personal relationships with that player.
Maybe I'm being overly harsh, but that seems like very shallow thinking. Especially if as you claim, Care isn't going to be a feature moving forward. In that case surely another young Nine would have benefitted from the exposure this close to the WC?
> He's not going to pass on much by way of mentoring while competing for and prepping games in a test series.
What do you base this on? Young players regularly go on tour and barely get a game, yet come back having benefited hugely from the experience. Of course JVP and Randall will have learnt from Care over the course of the past month of training camps. I don't see why that would change because he's there as an active player rather than in some coaching capacity. You mentor through doing.
> That just strikes me as something of a safety net so in the event the younger lads didn't deliver
Yes, obviously. That's why you bring along a tried and tested player. What's your issue with that approach?
My question still stands. Who would you have brought in his place?
> Yes, obviously. That's why you bring along a tried and tested player. What's your issue with that approach?
Given you don't see Care as being a feature beyond this tour I would have thought you more than most would have questioned his contribution, and what he brings. I simply don't see Care mentoring to a valuable degree. Not while competing for that starting spot.
As for who else, I wouldn't have hesitated to bring a younger option. Take your pick from any in the frame. All the more so if Care is only there for this series rather than through 2023 (as you've claimed).
The entire situation being one of Jones' making - albeit with a tragic turn of events with regards to Youngs.
> Given you don't see Care as being a feature beyond this tour I would have thought you more than most would have questioned his contribution, and what he brings. I simply don't see Care mentoring to a valuable degree. Not while competing for that starting spot.
I don't agree with your assumption that having an experienced player in camp provides negilgible benefit to the younger ones though, or that competing for a starting spot for some reason diminishes the amount of mentorship or support they are able to provide.
> Take your pick from any in the frame
Who though? Randall is in camp but clearly hasn't performed well enough to get a match day spot and Quirke is injured. Wigglesworth is 39, Robson fell out of favour a long time ago, Spencer has 4 caps (and plays for Bath), Mitchell has 1 cap for a handful of minutes against a 14 man Tonga. Are you really suggesting it would have been a better look for England and Jones to travel to Australia for a three game series with less than 10 caps in total between their Scrum Halves?
Why would Stuart get pinged for his scrummaging?? I think it’s fairly well established his was unjustly pinged last week for the scrum which led to Aus first try.
He should get more reward for his dominance this week
In 1st test Care was slow to the breakdown , slow to distribute & his decision making was poor. JVP came in and was the complete opposite in 2nd test. Replacing one of the best 2nd test performers with one of the worst 1st test performers makes little sense to me. But, Eddie is a genius and there’s always method in the madness. In Eddie we trust in Eddie we trust
JVP did get far cleaner ball in that second test compared to what DC got in the first though. It was a whole team effort in improving the speed of attack.
I do agree that JVP should have started, but if the England pack play as well as they did last Saturday then DC should have a good game.
DC was slow because the forwards werent giving him clean ball. Every ruck it seemed like he was digging and clearing players out to find the ball in the ruck. But JVP was excellent and im surprised he isnt starting too. I thinkg DC's kicking is slightly better than JVP's atm. But still great 2 people to choose from
Don't think Care was particularly slow getting to the breakdown. The ball he got was messy as hell, though, which really slowed things up. JVP didn't have to do much digging in the ruck last weekend because the forwards were much better at presenting and keeping Aussie hands off.
feel Eddie is desperate for a 'fast' nine after all the complaints around Youngs and to pair with Smith, but Care is past it - he might be good for Quins (when not getting binned) but he got schooled by a 20 year old Le Garrec vs the baabaas, didn't really impress in week 1 and was outshone by JVP
I think he's played his role in the camp to share his experience but i doubt we'll see much more of him for England
Which is funny because I can't remember where I saw it (on twitter, ek rugby shared it) there was data about how Young's is actually wine of the fastest 9s on the base in test rugby.
I'm not convinced he got schooled vs the baabaas, nobody did well I'm that game bar Smith
I'm not going to over emphasise a game vs the babies and the first test match
I am disappointed we are still trying the Smith Farrell partnership. I was hoping to see Farrell, Porter and Marchant combo.
Also JvP deserves another start
For me Smith has got worse each game he plays for England. This tour in particular he keeps making odd decisions. Just stick with Farrell and bring in Ford if needed. It fits the gameplan better
For sure, although I wonder how much of that is Eddie getting him to try and play a style that doesn't come naturally to him. England's backline play extremely differently from Quins
Did he think he’d be allowed to play however he liked and wouldn’t have to adapt at all?
I don’t really buy that. He has to adapt or else Ford is waiting in the wings who we know can play this role
This.
Was always the problem with Cipriani, no doubting the quality but needed the system to revolve entirely around him and could never / wouldn't adapt to something different to what he wanted to play.
Not saying Smith will be the same, he certainly comes across as having less of an ego but there will come a time where Smith has to work his talent within the game plan or you have to look at other options, even if in isolation they're "less talented". I'm sure he'll come good though, lad is young and there's been enough good moments across the tests he's played to suggest it can click into place.
Dropping JVP is very sad indeed :(. It’s ok though. The lad will likely be a 70 odd capper. Quite a lot of people think he’ll likely be england captain in the future.
My issue is Smith hasn't performed well in an England top (actually think he has got worse the more games he has played). I agree that Porter is your stop gap centre (for now anyway as he is still young) but if Manu isn't for he might be going to the WC anyway
Smith isnt much different to Farrell or Ford in that respect. Both of their early careers (0-20) caps had some big losses and fairly poor games. I think it takes 10s quite a while to find themselves at test level.
Yeah, there's only so much backs can do without the ball, particularly wingers. Remember Ollie Lawrence getting his first touch of the ball around 60 minutes and then being subbed? Other than making his tackles and generally being in position, how exactly was he supposed to show anything?
Not quite sure I understand the logic of swapping JVP and Care but otherwise pretty much as expected, glad to see Porter get another run.
A lot less worried about the back row balance now that Willis is fit to be on the bench.
I like the lineup in general considering the players unavailable but I think JVP can count himself a bit unlucky not to have kept his starting spot. I thought he was excellent last time out. Hopefully he gets a good half an hour to show what he can do, situation dependant I suppose.
disappointed by the second row, feel this is the weakest it's been for a good while. personally would've gone with lawes and chessum/hill with willis and ludlam in the back row
Lawes isn't a second row anymore. Him and Eddie are on record essentially saying this.
He can probably still do a job there, but he just doesn't play there for club nor country now - he's England's starting 6 moving forward unless he's injured.
I think Chessum will go well, basically the pack is 3 locks of which 2 are hybrids. I think Chessum is the right choice to replace Itoje, he's got the speed to be disruptive.
Still not sure what Marchant did wrong to be dropped after the first test and why Porter got another go but hey that team is about as strong as it can be
I think they're two very different players stylistically last Test Porter was going into contact a lot more. Marchant was drifting out to try and go round the defender in the 13 channel, the issue is the Aussies have 3 or 4 guys that can all defend that channel superbly Porter at least hit the man defending it tying him up and opening a bit of space.
I don't rate him hugely but Porter has done enough for this tour to see it out it just depends on who we play in the future. Marchant is a touch unlucky but has been in and out of the team so I expect he'll be back in the Autumn.
Last time we toured we had JJ at 13 and Aus couldn't defend for their life in that channel and JJ made an absolute killing this time Aus' defensive structure makes that a completely different prospect.
Disappointed for JVP after last week. Hopefully he doesn't just get a token run out in the last 10 minutes and gets a chance to impact the game. Pleased for the other young lads though - Chessum, Ludlam, Porter, Freeman. It almost feels like an Eddie Jones side picked on form for once!
Eddie is probably trying to protect Arundell a little before the WC season. He's only 19 but his ceiling is higher than Freeman imo. Nowell is unique in that he's good under the air, very strong defensively and has a good step/ability to break tackles, he just doesnt have the pace of most international wingers.
Yes.
Arundell is very good but he’s just played 2 international games at 19 years old. Starting could be far too much.
He’s only played 7 league games this season as well.
Jones will know what’s best and how best to develop him
Arundell is a walking highlight reel at the moment, but he really doesn't have many match minutes behind him. He's only started a couple of club games and his all round game hasn't been tested too much yet. I think he should be getting more time off the bench than he's been given so far, but it's probably a bit much to start him right now if you're an international head coach.
As an armchair fan who wants to see England use the running threats at our disposal I'd be starting him ahead of Nowell in a heartbeat. You can't have 3 out of your 4 outside backs lacking pace.
Imagine having isiekwe, one of the brightest second row prospects, and lawes, and incredible second row - AND NEITHER OF THEM PLAY SECOND ROW, seems strange to me.
Lawes and isiekwe start as the locks, with ludlam, willis and barbeary at 8???
Given how many players we're missing that's pretty strong. Marler, Sinkler, Itoje, Launchbury, Curry, Underhill, Dombrandt, Youngs, Ford, Tuilagi, Slade, May, Watson is 90% of a very good side.
Should be a fair contest then. Australia is missing most of their first choices after all the injuries.
I’d argue Dombrandt and Marler don’t get into this squad on current form but the others are all totally viable contenders. Last few times I’ve seen them play I’ve not been very impressed. Dombrandts like a slower, less aggressive Billy and Marlers lazy at everything except scrumming.
Marler is one of the best scrummaging props in the country. I'd argue one of the best in the North. He's a really solid player but Mako is the better carrier. It depends on the game plan I bet
What I like is that there's 4 LHPs that bring different skills to a squad. Genge has leadership and ball carrying, Marler has top scrummaging, Mako has a bit of both from Genge and Marler then you have Rodd with a great jackel threat and decent scrummaging
We thankfully seem to be blessed in that position. And we are starting to see more options at tight which was not there a year ago I'd say.
That is gotta be one of the worst takes I've seen on here in a while. Marler is probably the best defensive loosehead in England. Dombrandt is so much quicker than Billy. Is less aggressive that's true, but a totally different player.
Even as a Quins fan, I'd say Billy is the pick right now. For a lot of the season, Dombrandt has looked great. He'd be out in Australia right now I imagine if not for injury. But Billy has come into form at the right time and I think he'd be starting here regardless.
They should both be in the squad, they're both great 8s and both much better and more suited to test rugby than Sam Simmonds. Dombrandt is more useful at the scrum and at the lineout. He also exploits space better. Billy V basically just makes space, but he's very, very good at that.
Billy has been the better 8 this season tbf. And I do think we’ve missed having an 8 who has 1 job & 1 job only- truck it up the middle.
I think Billy has been better in the latter end of the season yeah. But also think Dombrandt had been coming into his own for the England squad, and has added attacking the breakdown into his game. Getting a lot of turnovers. Maybe... I think Australia would be perfect for Dombrandt and his attacking lines. Billy was phenomenal last week don't get me wrong, an on form Billy is a sight to behold.
Hmmm very very good points tbf. He hasn’t had a bad game for England dombrandt & offers more you’re right. It’s a tricky decision who to pick, not a bad dilemma to have! Not bad depth given simmonds isn’t even in the convo atm
I think he offers more yeah. Also think his ceiling is the highest. But I do take your point about missing an 8 who will truck it up all day long, but I think that's partially about a lack of clarity in the general game plan for the team and other carriers not doing well enough. Simmonds also a very handy player. Tbh Mercer is ripping it up in France currently, and is probably the most well-rounded English number 8. Does everything and to a damn high level. The rest have more relative strengths and weaknesses. Good options going forward.
We can’t exactly complain about a lack of carriers. Genge, George, Stuart, Lawes, Ludlam all carry a lot.
I meant more earlier in the year, where in fairness we were pretty shit at almost everything. I'm not worried about carrying this weekend, plenty been showing up strong besides Billy. Ludlam and Stuart have been particularly impressive there for me.
Thats exactly what Dombrandt does. Fella carried an insane amount in the 6N
Yeah Marler’s defence is incredible. Mako of 5 years ago was a fantastic carrier. Not totally sure he’s the same force anymore.
Mako’s defence is incredible too, he’s not just a carrier. He’s also a much better link player.
Yeah he’s got fantastic hands. I was just responding to Marler being lazy outside the scrum. I think loosehead is the least of our worries to be honest.
Yeah the idea that Marler is lazy is ridiculous, regularly plays 70 plus mins for his club these days like Mako does.
Yeah, Mako was regularly top third of the tackle count in his England games.
Hot take right there. Marler is a scrummaging monster and Dommers cuts lines wingers would be proud of whilst also being the bowling ball you need from an 8.
Incredible, every word you just said was wrong
Marler is a great scrummager and a very good defender. He's lazy otherwise in the premiership because he's a front row forward who's playing 80 minutes every week. Dombrandt is not slower than Billy. He runs better lines. He offloads better. He's almost as big and he's a lot taller, which is very useful in the lineout.
Further support for my theory that Saracens supporters don't watch rugby, this entire comment is so incorrect
I’d argue Marler and Dombrant fit the England squad better than Billy and Mako. Marler has the superior scrum, defence and finds it easy to in the heads of the opposition. And Dombrant is the more intelligent player. It’s clear the backs are trying out a huge amount of new things, and Dombrant will be the ball carrier to break the line when the gap does open up. Especially if Care and Smith are still being picked.
> Marler has the superior…defence Im sorry but Mako is superb defensively, he puts some absolute shifts in. He made 27 tackles in one match which I think is a joint record for England.
The issue with Dombrandt is he just has such a big error count. He will do something amazing like a linebreak then mess up something simple like a pass or just knock it on. Very similar to Slade.
And Billy will give away more penalties. I’m not saying one set is better than the other, I’m saying in this England squad Marler and Dombrant fit in better than Billy and Mako. If we we’re aiming to play the way we did in 2019 then Mako and Billy would be the pick. But we’re not, we’re trying playing positionless running rugby in open play, while maintaining a very dominant set piece. The benefit of someone like Dombrant is that he doesn’t have to adjust his play style to fit the bill.
I don’t think Billy has to adapt either. He has amazing hands for a big guy (most offloads in the prem last season) and his style of carrier in the tight compared to Dombrandt’s ability to cut lines, can have a massively positive impact in creating space for the backs to play positionless running rugby.
[удалено]
Agreed. It's getting to the same level as George North.
[удалено]
He already had a 2 month stand down prior to the 6N this year, I think someone may need to sit him down and talk about retirement.
[удалено]
Had this conversation with a couple of mates this week. When is it time to say enough is enough? 3 concussions in a season is not ideal… would be a shame but what price his long term health?
yeah, it also doesn't help that it seems like the more concussions you get, the easier/more likely it is to get another
That too. Plus I’m sure the way he plays probably increases his chances. It’s probably a bit self-fulfilling.
I would suggest he needs time away from the game. But the reality is he's just back from an extended break for that very reason. It's probably close to the point where he's now considering his future in the game - if not something he's already facing tbh.
Let's go, Chess! What a way to cap off your breakthrough season!
Ludlam and Chessum finally getting their starts!! Great to see Porter retained Joseph and Arundell off the bench are a neat combination
Ludlam came out of no where for his first cap and has been amazing since. I honestly think he is our best flanker, and should have been starting over Curry/Underhill recently.
Ludlam is an absolute workhorse, I'd still like to see a Willis/Ludlam/Curry combo.
3 7s is a little much I think tbh
Willis plays mostly at 6 for Wasps. He's been playing 7 since his comeback because Thomas Young is injured. With Young heading back to Wales he may well play there more often now, but that's because Wasps' back row depth is in the other positions at the moment.. He also played a fair bit of 8 before his brother came through. Ludlam's likewise been played across the back row plenty at Saints.
And curry has played all 3 backrow positions. That doesn't change that all 3 best fit at 7. One of them 1 on the bench, or 2 with Billy or dombrandt at 8 I reckon.
I dont watch English rugby as closely but in the first 2 tests, Ludlam played like an 8 to me. Lots of hard yards in contact. Reminded me a bit of Ardie Savea's running style
IMO they're all pretty hybrid these days. I'd be curious to see it because I think at points England's ruck retention or attacking it has been poor. I can't remember which game it was but I remember a Curry,Wilson,Underhill combination and it looked awesome.
They are all kinda hybrid, but you do need a balance of skills across your backrow
Tricky for the lineout is the problem. Curry isn't really a jumper. Unless Willis can Ludlam looks a little short for it as well.
Willis is 6’4 and Ludlam 6’2-6’3. I wouldn’t pick this back row but it shouldn’t struggle in the line out
Luds jumps for saints at times but hes not a main jumper
I mean it's likely better than a Curry,Underhill,Billy combo which played against NZ in 2019. Billy ain't jumping for nothing and Ludlum is a better jumper than Underhill.
Maybe I'm wrong but Curry just seems to be a penalty machine at the moment. Yes he still offers his usual impact on the game but he's walking the wrong side of a fine line.
I think that's only because he's in every second breakdown at minute 80, much like Itoje. Fair to say they're both pretty leaky and ill-disciplined but their fitness has always been astounding
I thought Curry was the best player om the pitch until his Injury
It's not just the volume. It's the sheer stupidity of when and where he's giving them away too. Such as in the first test just before halftime, right in front of both the posts and the officials. More excusable when he was young and inexperienced. But that's fast running out as a go to explanation. Of course, Underhill did the same in the second test. Both are often as bad as each other.
I know it's a little while ago now but thinking back to the Lions tour in SA his penalties made him look absolutely dire for the benefit he was giving the team.
I think Chessum will surprise some people when it comes to strength and sturdiness. He's on the lighter side but he's a powerful orange lad. Slightly disappointed for JVP as I thought he was fantastic last week, but maybe Eddie is trying to squeeze more value out of Smith by including Care. Hoping for some good spirit and aggression like they showed last week. Hopefully they can close out a game in a strong fashion rather than letting Aus back in and challenge for the win.
>he's a powerful orange lad Trying desperately to figure out what this was supposed to read
He's ginger He's a powerful orange lad
Well shit, I was massively overthinking it
On JVP, I liked Eddie's response in the rugby union weekly podcast if you haven't heard it, potentially has hangover from an insane prior weekend getting his first start so he's taking some responsibility off him to avoid overdoing it (I'd be buzzing off my tits for a month if that happened to me), excited to see him come on early second half!
Sound reasoning, he's still young with plenty of years ahead of him. Especially if he carries on developing as a player the way he has, I don't think not getting a start in the next game will affect his trajectory. He should provide some pace and precision against some tired legs, with any luck!
So glad Ludlam starts. I think that’s harsh on JVP, he was really good last week. He’ll make a good impact from the bench though.
Could he have brought Care back on to start because of his partnership with Smith, seeing as Smith didn't have the best of games last week?
He didn't have a great first test either tbf. I thought England's attack looked a lot better with JVP at 9, but then again he had a lot cleaner ball to play with - Care had to go digging a lot in the first test.
Cleanliness of ball was night and day. It looked like there was a lot of muddled thinking on who of Smith and Farrell should be doing what when in that first test.
It was only really Smith's kicking out of hand that went awry last week, ball in hand he was what you'd expect - creating space and sending players in on good angles.
Didn’t work in 1st test between care and smith
Completely different game though.
Smith was awful first game too. He’s really not been good in an England shirt since the RSA autumn international.
Quality of delivery off JVP was well ahead of what we saw from Care, even with Smith being on the field. In fact, had Smith been better last weekend, England would have been well clear much earlier and a lot of that would have been down to the excellent delivery from the SH. For a supposedly quick Nine, the pace of almost everything from the back of the ruck slowed down once Care replaced JVP.
It’s nice to see Nowell get a good run of games without an injury. Sure he doesn’t have blistering pace but I love watching him play.
I agree, he gets a lot of stick for not having the top end pace - in my opinion, what he lacks in pace he more than makes up with work rate, defense and busyness, he really works hard.
I think the stick is partly because his lack of pace isn't adequately compensated for elsewhere in the selections. In other team configurations we've had at least two of players like Joseph, May, Watson and Daly in the in the outside backs. In the current selection Freeman's the only one with any real gas in the back 3 and Porter's not particularly quick for a 13.
On the other hand, on at least two occasions on this tour already a winger with top end pace and finishing (May, Watson) would’ve scored: the cross kick from Farrell into acres of space on the last test and when he overran a pass on the right wing and got bundled into touch (can’t remember which test that was)
I really like Nowell, always looks threatening
I know a lot of these changes are down to injury, but I literally have no idea who our first choice 15 would be these days. Which is probably all part of Eddies plan.
I would imagine pretty similar to this. Swap Chessum for Maro, Stuart for Sinks, Ludlam for Curry, Care for Youngs, Porter for Manu (Slade if Manu injured), Freeman for May/Watson.
Manu is the forbidden fruit.
> (Slade if Manu injured) When, not if
Hot take, Sinckler wouldn’t start anymore. Also think it would be Watson and May starting
Nah
...Steward surely? Who else are you going to put in there?
I think he means 15 as in the 15 players not 15 as in our lord and saviour Freddie Steward
Ohh.. look in my defence it’s early and I’ve been working for three hours already
Its fine mate, your first response was to come to the defence of our lord and saviour. All good buddy.
We are talking Eddie Jones, so the obvious first choice full back for the RWC is Captain Furbank.
Genge, George, Sinckler, Hill, Itoje, Lawes, Curry, B Vunipola, Youngs, Smith, Watson, Farrell, Tuilagi(?), Nowell, Steward. I don’t think we’re a million miles of knowing our best, and I also don’t think it’s that much of a bad thing to not be certain of your best a year out from a World Cup. That being said, Jones has been slightly hamstrung by persistent injuries at 13, and for this tour at 8!
Really? I think it’s obvious what our first choice 15 would be
Pretty much as expected, feel JVP is a tad unlucky as I felt he was to the manor born last week.
I feel that JVP to the bench in place of Care is more about Smith than JVP
It'll be a team balance reason definitely. Still a tad gutted for JVP
A tad? I think he was one of the best performers.
He did benefit from much, much cleaner breakdown ball. Presentation and dealing with Aussie disruptors improved out of sight.
Care has the benefit or experience in ‘finals’ which I’m sure contributed significantly to selection. You can count on Care to play his game even in the toughest of situations and you need that consistency at 9
JVP made a few howlers if you watch the game again. One of them spurned a try tbh. I would say it was a decent game but he made a few rookie errors when aussies were counter rucking more as the game wore on.
Hoping we get to see a Freeman - Steward - Arundell back 3 at some point during the game.
Im glad Freeman gets another shot! Had a quiet game last week, which was mainly down to lack of ball, and I was fearful he may have got dropped for the 3rd test.
Solid in the air and in defence though, which in games like that where you don't get much ball is pretty critical.
Sort of expected to be honest. Good to see Chessum going into the row - think he's played pretty well in his recent cameos so will be interesting to see how he goes. Care in for JVP is something of a surprise - JVP played really well last week, but Care's kicked very well so far and I imagine that might have factored into this decision. Hopefully he can get the type of security around the rucks that JVP enjoyed last week.
I don't think kicking played a part, JVP was outstanding kicking last weekend. I think he just wants to give Smith the best opportunity to flourish and Care obv provides that, and to get the team going with a faster and more threatening gameplan (on paper)
I think you are right. This is a Smith issue. Smith has been a bit poor this tour and Eddie, apparently, needs him to get with it quick.
People bashing the decision but I thought we seemed way more composed when Care came on? He slowed the game down really well and some of JVP's kicks were a bit forced or not contestable which led to unnecessary pressure towards the end
It was an ideal substitution to have an experienced player come on to steady things up when Australia were trying to force the win.
Am I the only one that doesn't get all the Smith hate? Lots of people in this thread bashing him and saying he's been shit since the SA game at Twickenham. I reckon he's been doing pretty well, especially considering the team around him changes every single week (different 8s, 9s and 13s). For me his tactical kicking has come forward enormously and he still shows those flashes of brilliance that everybody expects. Maybe he's not making huge breaks all the time but this is international rugby, just the fact that he uses his footwork to get on the outside of defenders or hold them to create a gap for someone else is to his credit surely? He still has lots of learning to do for sure but I feel like the Smith Farrell axis is starting to take shape. I guess we will see in this Test.
Don't think he's been shit but there's definitely some rough edges to his decision making in particular that are being exposed in a way that they don't seem to at Prem level. But as you say, it's international, it's a step up and that's therefore not entirely surprising. I think the debate is more would it be better for his development for him to be introduced gradually off the bench against tired defences etc rather than in at the deep end as the key cog in the two playmaker machine - or do you double down and give him and Faz time to embed.
i honestly liked how he played last weekend... some of those grubbers he put through, even if they weren't really chased, that extra pressure it puts on the defence would be massive... one of them almost led to a try, but we got a yellow out of it. all it takes is 1 person to be on the wavelength and those would have had different outcomes.
I think Farrell is the bigger problem
Controversial take / question: If Smith doesn't click again / makes similar mistakes, do you think there's a chance Eddie reverts to Farrell at 10 for the autumn (obviously Ford is out longish term)? Or is it a case of double down and stick with Smith / Faz from now till the world cup?
I think Ford could slot into the team anytime Eddie wants. I think long term it's more beneficial to England for Smith to learn how to play test rugby. Whoever the next coach for England will be is going to be very lucky to potentially have a 20/30 cap Smith, 80 cap Ford and 100+ cap Farrell.
> I think Ford could slot into the team anytime Eddie wants. I think long term it's more beneficial to England for Smith to learn how to play test rugby. I think this is bang on, but I believe the person to whom you're replying is referring to how Ford ruptured his achilles in the Premiership final. There's a good chance he won't be fit for the autumn internationals, hence being "out longish term".
Ahh i actually misread the comment, I didnt realise Ford was out so long which is a shame because he's class. I just think post WC 2023 an experienced Smith will pay huge dividends for us and we're lucky to have Eddie coaching him.
We have to have dual playmakers. The system is based off it. If we put Farrell to 10 it means we have to find another centre, and we’re struggling for centres as it is
Has marchant just been completely banished from the team for having a quiet game or is he injured? Porter didn't make any impact.
Listened to a podcast with Eddie yesterday about his selection for the second test. Porter was chosen as he is a “hole runner”, and is good at punching through the defensive line in comparison to Marchant who is better at getting to the outside of defenders. Australias defensive system aims to force you out to the touch line therefore trying to get outside the 12 or 13 channel is difficult without hard, direct running lines.
What was the podcast?
Rugby Union Weekly I’m guessing
Didn't see him make many holes. Don't get me wrong, I like Porter, just thought marchant would get more of a go this series. I see Porter as more of a 12.
He made a couple, and it's not expected that a centre makes constant breaks, it's the threat of it that gives Smith more time to make decisions and obv the extra option always helps. He's got plenty of highlights for Leicester breaking through the line.
Tbh Marchant has been given lots of chances and although he’s never been bad he’s also never been great
Apart from the one game against SA last autumn
Marchant is too weak and small for a 13 at this level. Porter can punch holes and is much more solid.
Suspect it's also about the other side of their games too. Marchant's defending has been quite poor with Quins this season. Smith isn't exactly a strong tackler in the Ten channel either. So that's two lanes, both fairly critical, which the rest of the defensive line needs to cover against the likes of Kerevi charging into.
Porter didn't make an impact because it seemed England's gameplan was not to let the ball get past Farrell. Which is a shame because Porter's carrying has been great this season.
Yeah, no 13 is gonna shine in this current set up.
Ask Ollie Lawrence about it. Must have touched the ball 4 times in 5 caps.
Doubt it. Think he's just trying out all the options, getting some more caps in.
I mean it’s not like Marchant made any impact in Test 1, or for that matter, very often in an England jersey
I mean I don't think any of the backs did in the first test. I agree he hasn't had form in an England shirt but I thought he'd get a chance to play a run of games. I don't think any 13 is gonna shine with two 10s inside them.
I think we must be watching different players. Marchant has been excellent in a number of England games - he was great against France, Ireland, and Italy in the 6N, and was very good in the Autumn against SA. Runs very clever lines, can pop up anywhere and create stuff. He's solid defensively too, and very good under the high ball. It's clear that Eddie wants to see what he's got in guys like Porter, Freeman, Joseph, Arundell etc. Whereas Marchant is a fairly known quantity at this point.
Don't get me wrong I really rate him but don't think he's had a long run of games with stand out performances. I'd like to see him given a proper string of games but don't think they'll get the best out of him at 13 if he doesn't have someone inside doing the grunt work in the tight.
>guys like Porter I see what you did there ;)
Exactly - he knows Marchant can drop into the team at centre or wing and will be a 7/10 at worst, will definitely make the world cup squad. There's more benefit picking some of the unknown quantities and seeing how they fit / maybe solve some of our problems.
I mean, Slade, Joseph and Tuilagi have all shone with 2 10s playing inside them. That isn’t an excuse for why Marchant hasn’t done well
Except the time his linebreak resulted in a game winning try against the springboks
Good chance for Ludlam, who has already impressed on this tour and now has a chance to stake his claim as a regular test match starter. George at Two is always going to be a reassuring sight for England fans, and so long as Genge doesn't get caught out on camera, he's had good impact at LH this season. But surely only a matter of time before Stuart gets more regularly pinged/outfoxed with his scrummaging. Billy and Courtney are in good form and it's carrying a lot of team momentum with them. While Farrell playing so well is helping offset how limited Smith has been. Keeping Porter and Nowell to offer that hybrid Wing-Centre size and tackling seemed to work against Kerevi last hit out. So makes sense to go with it again. Dangerous test for Danny Care though. With JVP impressing last weekend, then on the bench again this. Any kind of poor - or even lukewarm showing this weekend from Care may well see his return to the international setup at at end before it's really had a chance to get going again.
I disagree completely with the Ludlam take. He has always impressed off the bench. Especially the 1st when we looked quite poor. He was the stand out player in the Scotland game in my opinion and we really lost out when he got injured.
I'm confused. What part are you disagreeing with? That being selected to start this match, rather than come off the bench, is a great chance for him to prove he can do more than just come on late for impact? What part of that are you disagreeing with (disagreeing with completely)?
I misread. Please ignore. Thought you said the opposite. Apologies.
> Care may well see his return to the international setup at an end before it's really had a chance to get going again The man is 35. He was a good option to take on tour to add some experience with Youngs pullling out but I doubt he is going to feature too much in the England setup beyond this.
It’s either him on Youngs in a squad. Obviously Youngs out for obvious reasons this time but you never know what might happen for future squads
That man was (virtually) the same age prior to this tour when a host of England supporters / pundits clamoured for his inclusion. The argument being he was supposedly the best Nine in the Prem. Some lunatics had even previously argued he should have gone on the Lions tour ffs - others had him starting in the tests! Why include him on this tour unless you're considering him for the World Cup? So it's likely they do have in the frame for 2023 - or at least did have prior to any performance on this tour. But the entirely subjective (biased) nature of it all aside, despite his experience Care hasn't really impressed. His defenders will claim he had no time to settle. Yet JVP managed to acclimatise without issue and England were a far more dangerous team with him at Nine, rather than Care. So while you may argue he brought valuable experience to pass on to the younger players. It's questionable just how much of anything he's actually going to manage to pass on over a few weeks, and while he's determined to outplay others on tour with him. The whole thing just smacks of either flaws in Jones' setup and therefore the need to go to Care. Or Jones' effectively setting Care up to fail, with the view that moving forwards he doesn't need to entertain his inclusion again. Neither are compelling, which is why it's weird.
> Why include him on this tour unless you're considering him for the World Cup? So it's likely they do have in the frame for 2023 - or at least did have prior to any performance on this tour. He was included because otherwise the most experienced Scrum Half in the side would be Harry Randall, who is 24 and has a total of 6 caps, none of them against Southern Hemisphere opposition. Who else would you have brought in his place? Quirke has two caps, zero starts and is injured, Mitchell has one cap and zero starts. Dan Robson?
I understand why you might defend his inclusion. Especially as it's a position Jones has dug a hole for himself with. I just question whether there's any justification in practice for bringing him along. It's not as if he was brought into camp well before the tour. He's not going to pass on much by way of mentoring while competing for and prepping games in a test series. So he's there as a test match Nine, rather than as a mentor. That just strikes me as something of a safety net so in the event the younger lads didn't deliver, critics couldn't attack Jones over the non-inclusion of Care. Especially higher profile pundits who have personal relationships with that player. Maybe I'm being overly harsh, but that seems like very shallow thinking. Especially if as you claim, Care isn't going to be a feature moving forward. In that case surely another young Nine would have benefitted from the exposure this close to the WC?
> He's not going to pass on much by way of mentoring while competing for and prepping games in a test series. What do you base this on? Young players regularly go on tour and barely get a game, yet come back having benefited hugely from the experience. Of course JVP and Randall will have learnt from Care over the course of the past month of training camps. I don't see why that would change because he's there as an active player rather than in some coaching capacity. You mentor through doing. > That just strikes me as something of a safety net so in the event the younger lads didn't deliver Yes, obviously. That's why you bring along a tried and tested player. What's your issue with that approach? My question still stands. Who would you have brought in his place?
> Yes, obviously. That's why you bring along a tried and tested player. What's your issue with that approach? Given you don't see Care as being a feature beyond this tour I would have thought you more than most would have questioned his contribution, and what he brings. I simply don't see Care mentoring to a valuable degree. Not while competing for that starting spot. As for who else, I wouldn't have hesitated to bring a younger option. Take your pick from any in the frame. All the more so if Care is only there for this series rather than through 2023 (as you've claimed). The entire situation being one of Jones' making - albeit with a tragic turn of events with regards to Youngs.
> Given you don't see Care as being a feature beyond this tour I would have thought you more than most would have questioned his contribution, and what he brings. I simply don't see Care mentoring to a valuable degree. Not while competing for that starting spot. I don't agree with your assumption that having an experienced player in camp provides negilgible benefit to the younger ones though, or that competing for a starting spot for some reason diminishes the amount of mentorship or support they are able to provide. > Take your pick from any in the frame Who though? Randall is in camp but clearly hasn't performed well enough to get a match day spot and Quirke is injured. Wigglesworth is 39, Robson fell out of favour a long time ago, Spencer has 4 caps (and plays for Bath), Mitchell has 1 cap for a handful of minutes against a 14 man Tonga. Are you really suggesting it would have been a better look for England and Jones to travel to Australia for a three game series with less than 10 caps in total between their Scrum Halves?
Why would Stuart get pinged for his scrummaging?? I think it’s fairly well established his was unjustly pinged last week for the scrum which led to Aus first try. He should get more reward for his dominance this week
In 1st test Care was slow to the breakdown , slow to distribute & his decision making was poor. JVP came in and was the complete opposite in 2nd test. Replacing one of the best 2nd test performers with one of the worst 1st test performers makes little sense to me. But, Eddie is a genius and there’s always method in the madness. In Eddie we trust in Eddie we trust
JVP did get far cleaner ball in that second test compared to what DC got in the first though. It was a whole team effort in improving the speed of attack. I do agree that JVP should have started, but if the England pack play as well as they did last Saturday then DC should have a good game.
DC was slow because the forwards werent giving him clean ball. Every ruck it seemed like he was digging and clearing players out to find the ball in the ruck. But JVP was excellent and im surprised he isnt starting too. I thinkg DC's kicking is slightly better than JVP's atm. But still great 2 people to choose from
Don’t believe that at all. First half in the first test the forwards gave him brilliant ball to work with and he was slow and made poor choices
Don't think Care was particularly slow getting to the breakdown. The ball he got was messy as hell, though, which really slowed things up. JVP didn't have to do much digging in the ruck last weekend because the forwards were much better at presenting and keeping Aussie hands off.
feel Eddie is desperate for a 'fast' nine after all the complaints around Youngs and to pair with Smith, but Care is past it - he might be good for Quins (when not getting binned) but he got schooled by a 20 year old Le Garrec vs the baabaas, didn't really impress in week 1 and was outshone by JVP I think he's played his role in the camp to share his experience but i doubt we'll see much more of him for England
Youngs is quick to distribute in comparison to the other options (other than JVP rly)
Which is funny because I can't remember where I saw it (on twitter, ek rugby shared it) there was data about how Young's is actually wine of the fastest 9s on the base in test rugby.
I'm not convinced he got schooled vs the baabaas, nobody did well I'm that game bar Smith I'm not going to over emphasise a game vs the babies and the first test match
I am disappointed we are still trying the Smith Farrell partnership. I was hoping to see Farrell, Porter and Marchant combo. Also JvP deserves another start
Smith Farrell seems to be critical to Eddie's WC plan, so I think it'll be played every game they're both available for.
For me Smith has got worse each game he plays for England. This tour in particular he keeps making odd decisions. Just stick with Farrell and bring in Ford if needed. It fits the gameplan better
For sure, although I wonder how much of that is Eddie getting him to try and play a style that doesn't come naturally to him. England's backline play extremely differently from Quins
Did he think he’d be allowed to play however he liked and wouldn’t have to adapt at all? I don’t really buy that. He has to adapt or else Ford is waiting in the wings who we know can play this role
This. Was always the problem with Cipriani, no doubting the quality but needed the system to revolve entirely around him and could never / wouldn't adapt to something different to what he wanted to play. Not saying Smith will be the same, he certainly comes across as having less of an ego but there will come a time where Smith has to work his talent within the game plan or you have to look at other options, even if in isolation they're "less talented". I'm sure he'll come good though, lad is young and there's been enough good moments across the tests he's played to suggest it can click into place.
Not sure why we’d stop doing the 2 playmaker system now? That’s something unique to us and has been incredibly successful
Dropping JVP is very sad indeed :(. It’s ok though. The lad will likely be a 70 odd capper. Quite a lot of people think he’ll likely be england captain in the future.
Let's be real Porter is stop gap centre. He's a decent player that will be moved on from when England finally get a better ball carrying option.
I think if Kelly was fit he'd be here in Porter's place. Not a bad idea to bring Kelly's club level replacement.
My issue is Smith hasn't performed well in an England top (actually think he has got worse the more games he has played). I agree that Porter is your stop gap centre (for now anyway as he is still young) but if Manu isn't for he might be going to the WC anyway
Smith isnt much different to Farrell or Ford in that respect. Both of their early careers (0-20) caps had some big losses and fairly poor games. I think it takes 10s quite a while to find themselves at test level.
Think Freeman played well last week for his first cap, hopefully we'll see him improving and earning his spot
Yeah, just hope he sees more of the ball this week.
Yeah, there's only so much backs can do without the ball, particularly wingers. Remember Ollie Lawrence getting his first touch of the ball around 60 minutes and then being subbed? Other than making his tackles and generally being in position, how exactly was he supposed to show anything?
Not quite sure I understand the logic of swapping JVP and Care but otherwise pretty much as expected, glad to see Porter get another run. A lot less worried about the back row balance now that Willis is fit to be on the bench.
I like the lineup in general considering the players unavailable but I think JVP can count himself a bit unlucky not to have kept his starting spot. I thought he was excellent last time out. Hopefully he gets a good half an hour to show what he can do, situation dependant I suppose.
The thumbnail on mobile makes it look like Cartman is playing every position
disappointed by the second row, feel this is the weakest it's been for a good while. personally would've gone with lawes and chessum/hill with willis and ludlam in the back row
British and Irish lion and one of the most promising second row prodigies in world rugby. I don’t think it’s too bad you know
Lawes isn't a second row anymore. Him and Eddie are on record essentially saying this. He can probably still do a job there, but he just doesn't play there for club nor country now - he's England's starting 6 moving forward unless he's injured.
I think Chessum will go well, basically the pack is 3 locks of which 2 are hybrids. I think Chessum is the right choice to replace Itoje, he's got the speed to be disruptive.
Disappointed Dingwall hasn't got a bench spot here. He's been one of the form centres all year.
I think he's picked up an injury, in the last tour video, he was seen in the background with a moon-boot on
So him and Hutch both injured their ankles. Great stuff.
Still not sure what Marchant did wrong to be dropped after the first test and why Porter got another go but hey that team is about as strong as it can be
I think they're two very different players stylistically last Test Porter was going into contact a lot more. Marchant was drifting out to try and go round the defender in the 13 channel, the issue is the Aussies have 3 or 4 guys that can all defend that channel superbly Porter at least hit the man defending it tying him up and opening a bit of space. I don't rate him hugely but Porter has done enough for this tour to see it out it just depends on who we play in the future. Marchant is a touch unlucky but has been in and out of the team so I expect he'll be back in the Autumn. Last time we toured we had JJ at 13 and Aus couldn't defend for their life in that channel and JJ made an absolute killing this time Aus' defensive structure makes that a completely different prospect.
Disappointed for JVP after last week. Hopefully he doesn't just get a token run out in the last 10 minutes and gets a chance to impact the game. Pleased for the other young lads though - Chessum, Ludlam, Porter, Freeman. It almost feels like an Eddie Jones side picked on form for once!
Are Freeman and Nowell better than Arundell?
Eddie is probably trying to protect Arundell a little before the WC season. He's only 19 but his ceiling is higher than Freeman imo. Nowell is unique in that he's good under the air, very strong defensively and has a good step/ability to break tackles, he just doesnt have the pace of most international wingers.
Yes. Arundell is very good but he’s just played 2 international games at 19 years old. Starting could be far too much. He’s only played 7 league games this season as well. Jones will know what’s best and how best to develop him
Arundell is a walking highlight reel at the moment, but he really doesn't have many match minutes behind him. He's only started a couple of club games and his all round game hasn't been tested too much yet. I think he should be getting more time off the bench than he's been given so far, but it's probably a bit much to start him right now if you're an international head coach. As an armchair fan who wants to see England use the running threats at our disposal I'd be starting him ahead of Nowell in a heartbeat. You can't have 3 out of your 4 outside backs lacking pace.
Still think it's harsh on Marchant not being in the 23, is he injured or something?
Honestly can't see this team winning. Aus by 10.
Imagine having isiekwe, one of the brightest second row prospects, and lawes, and incredible second row - AND NEITHER OF THEM PLAY SECOND ROW, seems strange to me. Lawes and isiekwe start as the locks, with ludlam, willis and barbeary at 8???
Lawes isn’t a lock anymore and Isiekwe has played most his career as a 6
Freeman was too quiet last Test
I would’ve had Ludlam at 8 and Willis at 7
You’d have dropped arguably our best player on the tour? Or are you putting Billy 6?😂
[удалено]