Post AI Review

[Banquo]

Tuilagi to me is a dream alternative to Teo, but I do not ever expect to see him for England again. Discussing him seems pointless right now, and I wouldn’t like the balance anyway when we have some good ball handlers available.

I didn’t see the game on Saturday, but I’m really fascinated how bad my fuckups must have been. I’m actually all for looking at Watson at 15, but nobody seemed to mind when on two occasions he threw wild passes to nobody.

I’m genuinely trying to figure what I could have done that was worse.

I think some on here will be angry at the likes of you, Hartley and Farrell no matter what they do. If Slade, Watson etc make mistakes, that's completely glossed over, but if we don't look as good with, for example, no Farrell, then it's not because Farrell is good...

Not sure about Farrell, I think a lot of people think he's quality, and a lot think he's quality but wearing the wrong shirt number. Hartley, well for myself I lost trust in him a few years back, stamping on the Saffer lad's knee was the last straw and since then he's not improved as a player and there are other better younger players available, but if he played well he would have played well

Faz doesn't get much praise on here. P/D raves about him, and EP has always had a more balanced view than others....with obviously Dors really rating him, as a fan of clap and kick. And Dasher likes the cut of his jib, as he is a stroppy git.

[Digby]

I think some on here will be angry at the likes of you, Hartley and Farrell no matter what they do. If Slade, Watson etc make mistakes, that's completely glossed over, but if we don't look as good with, for example, no Farrell, then it's not because Farrell is good...

Not sure about Farrell, I think a lot of people think he's quality, and a lot think he's quality but wearing the wrong shirt number. Hartley, well for myself I lost trust in him a few years back, stamping on the Saffer lad's knee was the last straw and since then he's not improved as a player and there are other better younger players available, but if he played well he would have played well

Faz doesn't get much praise on here. P/D raves about him, and EP has always had a more balanced view than others....with obviously Dors really rating him, as a fan of clap and kick. And Dasher likes the cut of his jib, as he is a stroppy git.

Most players don't get much praise on here when we're after improved standards. But fwiw I posted only recently that Farrell is now a class act, even if he's still causing balance issues in being selected as a 12. And it's not the only nice thing I've ever said about him, though granted there are probably more negative comments. Still, I've made negative comments about players like Mako, Billy V, JJ, Daly and Watson, so generally perhaps the board doesn't go in for fawning, as it should be imo

[Mellsblue]

I think some on here will be angry at the likes of you, Hartley and Farrell no matter what they do. If Slade, Watson etc make mistakes, that's completely glossed over, but if we don't look as good with, for example, no Farrell, then it's not because Farrell is good...

Not sure about Farrell, I think a lot of people think he's quality, and a lot think he's quality but wearing the wrong shirt number. Hartley, well for myself I lost trust in him a few years back, stamping on the Saffer lad's knee was the last straw and since then he's not improved as a player and there are other better younger players available, but if he played well he would have played well

Faz doesn't get much praise on here. P/D raves about him, and EP has always had a more balanced view than others....with obviously Dors really rating him, as a fan of clap and kick. And Dasher likes the cut of his jib, as he is a stroppy git.

Poor old Fazlet does get a hard time on here but I believe is it required. Out in the real world the praise is continuous, even missing a kick is a strength when he nails the next one, and those who doubt need somewhere to air their views away from the din of adulation.

[Oakboy]

Are any players universally loved on here? Even Itoje gets criticised.

[Puja]

Back-row? It's very much still open. Puja and others have written off the lock at 6 option but I'm not so sure. Both Underhill and Simmonds are candidates for the 7 shirt but I still think that Robshaw gives a better 80 minute stint which in its own way affects the game more. Billy, if fully fit, comes back in but his influence above Hughes's might not be the cure-all that some imagine. Play one of them at 6? Presumably, it would be Hughes. Robshaw would have to be at 7 then, surely, to get some on-the-hoof brain/experience. 'Robshaw is a good 3rd choice option at 7 now,' says Eddie. That could mean he'll never play him there again or make him 1st choice.

Out of interest, what further would you need to discount the lock at 6 option, given that Samoa openly took the piss out of us at the breakdown?

Puja

[Mellsblue]

Back-row? It's very much still open. Puja and others have written off the lock at 6 option but I'm not so sure. Both Underhill and Simmonds are candidates for the 7 shirt but I still think that Robshaw gives a better 80 minute stint which in its own way affects the game more. Billy, if fully fit, comes back in but his influence above Hughes's might not be the cure-all that some imagine. Play one of them at 6? Presumably, it would be Hughes. Robshaw would have to be at 7 then, surely, to get some on-the-hoof brain/experience. 'Robshaw is a good 3rd choice option at 7 now,' says Eddie. That could mean he'll never play him there again or make him 1st choice.

Out of interest, what further would you need to discount the lock at 6 option, given that Samoa openly took the piss out of us at the breakdown?

Puja

Playing devils advocate, Launch at 4 and a 7 at 7.

[Digby]

Are any players universally loved on here? Even Itoje gets criticised.

McCaw has had a period or two when he wasn't that dominant and even he got some criticism, okay those also related to times when the ball was being kicked back and forth so McCaw ran to and fro watching the ball go over his head a lot, and when NZ got set to go wide very early and left him outnumbered at the breakdown. And if McCaw can get criticism as perhaps the most consistent performer ever in the top echelon of players who could possibly avoid it?

[Banquo]

Not sure about Farrell, I think a lot of people think he's quality, and a lot think he's quality but wearing the wrong shirt number. Hartley, well for myself I lost trust in him a few years back, stamping on the Saffer lad's knee was the last straw and since then he's not improved as a player and there are other better younger players available, but if he played well he would have played well

Faz doesn't get much praise on here. P/D raves about him, and EP has always had a more balanced view than others....with obviously Dors really rating him, as a fan of clap and kick. And Dasher likes the cut of his jib, as he is a stroppy git.

Most players don't get much praise on here when we're after improved standards. But fwiw I posted only recently that Farrell is now a class act, even if he's still causing balance issues in being selected as a 12. And it's not the only nice thing I've ever said about him, though granted there are probably more negative comments. Still, I've made negative comments about players like Mako, Billy V, JJ, Daly and Watson, so generally perhaps the board doesn't go in for fawning, as it should be imo

do you really think Faz is a class act at 10? I think he's still merely workmanlike there, tho gradually (still) improving.

[Banquo]

Are any players universally loved on here? Even Itoje gets criticised.

Conrad Smith of course. Parisse seems to be, though I think he veers towards being selfish sometimes, but fair enough.

every player will get criticised- criticism is not necessarily negative anyway- as its impossible to have a perfect game/skillset, pretty much.

[Digby]

Faz doesn't get much praise on here. P/D raves about him, and EP has always had a more balanced view than others....with obviously Dors really rating him, as a fan of clap and kick. And Dasher likes the cut of his jib, as he is a stroppy git.

Most players don't get much praise on here when we're after improved standards. But fwiw I posted only recently that Farrell is now a class act, even if he's still causing balance issues in being selected as a 12. And it's not the only nice thing I've ever said about him, though granted there are probably more negative comments. Still, I've made negative comments about players like Mako, Billy V, JJ, Daly and Watson, so generally perhaps the board doesn't go in for fawning, as it should be imo

do you really think Faz is a class act at 10? I think he's still merely workmanlike there, tho gradually (still) improving.

I do. His decision making there is excellent, with the caveat Sarries are typically dominant and across the team superbly drilled. I also think (and this will be a common comment to those who've talked to about this away from here) he can look clunkier than he actually is, he can be so straight in attack he makes it harder to pass smoothly (clearing the inside hip as Greenwood observed isn't always easy) but in doing to he consistently puts an excellent shape on the team attack.

Whether he can replicate his Sarries form at 10 for England I don't know, but I'd be interested to see, difficulty there is I'm also a big Ford fan and don't want to dent his progress. But Eddie isn't getting paid a lot of money to avoid this choice is my take on the 10 shirt

[Mikey Brown]

Tuilagi to me is a dream alternative to Teo, but I do not ever expect to see him for England again. Discussing him seems pointless right now, and I wouldn’t like the balance anyway when we have some good ball handlers available.

I didn’t see the game on Saturday, but I’m really fascinated how bad my fuckups must have been. I’m actually all for looking at Watson at 15, but nobody seemed to mind when on two occasions he threw wild passes to nobody.

I’m genuinely trying to figure what I could have done that was worse.

I think some on here will be angry at the likes of you, Hartley and Farrell no matter what they do. If Slade, Watson etc make mistakes, that's completely glossed over, but if we don't look as good with, for example, no Farrell, then it's not because Farrell is good...

You obviously didn’t pop in to discuss Slade after the Argentina match.

Aye. That was an odd one. Slade’s performance went down as awful because he’s meant to be good at passing. Whereas if you’ve never been good at it, it’s not a big deal to fuck it up I guess.

I think Farrell is a different case. I think a lot of the slating on here is more in response to the ridiculous media hype he gets. A bit like Henson or Sheridan.

I mean the things Slade messed up would be pretty normal for Faz, but totally ignored by Healey, Barnes etc. if he did them.

[Puja]

Back-row? It's very much still open. Puja and others have written off the lock at 6 option but I'm not so sure. Both Underhill and Simmonds are candidates for the 7 shirt but I still think that Robshaw gives a better 80 minute stint which in its own way affects the game more. Billy, if fully fit, comes back in but his influence above Hughes's might not be the cure-all that some imagine. Play one of them at 6? Presumably, it would be Hughes. Robshaw would have to be at 7 then, surely, to get some on-the-hoof brain/experience. 'Robshaw is a good 3rd choice option at 7 now,' says Eddie. That could mean he'll never play him there again or make him 1st choice.

Out of interest, what further would you need to discount the lock at 6 option, given that Samoa openly took the piss out of us at the breakdown?

Puja

Playing devils advocate, Launch at 4 and a 7 at 7.

But we did have Launch at 4. And while Robshaw isn't everyone's cup of tea, would Underhill have really made a difference in securing our own ball? Simmonds certainly didn't.

The only combo I can see working with a lock at 6 would be to have BCurry or TCurry, as they're the only ones with the pace and the instincts to secure our own ball with limited help from the rest of the back row. And even with them I'd have concerns about them being blasted off the ball with them only being 19 years old and still growing.

Puja

[Raggs]

Out of interest, what further would you need to discount the lock at 6 option, given that Samoa openly took the piss out of us at the breakdown?

Puja

Playing devils advocate, Launch at 4 and a 7 at 7.

But we did have Launch at 4. And while Robshaw isn't everyone's cup of tea, would Underhill have really made a difference in securing our own ball? Simmonds certainly didn't.

The only combo I can see working with a lock at 6 would be to have BCurry or TCurry, as they're the only ones with the pace and the instincts to secure our own ball with limited help from the rest of the back row. And even with them I'd have concerns about them being blasted off the ball with them only being 19 years old and still growing.

Puja

Launch was at 4 for 30 minutes. Then we got Lawes, who doesn't do as much at the breakdown.

Though now there's a copy on youtube, I might go through for ruck marks. I'm more interested in Simmonds and George's scores, than others.

EDIT - Simmonds, like Hughes, was also our primary carrier, meaning less chances to be in the attacking breakdowns.

[Banquo]

Most players don't get much praise on here when we're after improved standards. But fwiw I posted only recently that Farrell is now a class act, even if he's still causing balance issues in being selected as a 12. And it's not the only nice thing I've ever said about him, though granted there are probably more negative comments. Still, I've made negative comments about players like Mako, Billy V, JJ, Daly and Watson, so generally perhaps the board doesn't go in for fawning, as it should be imo

do you really think Faz is a class act at 10? I think he's still merely workmanlike there, tho gradually (still) improving.

I do. His decision making there is excellent, with the caveat Sarries are typically dominant and across the team superbly drilled. I also think (and this will be a common comment to those who've talked to about this away from here) he can look clunkier than he actually is, he can be so straight in attack he makes it harder to pass smoothly (clearing the inside hip as Greenwood observed isn't always easy) but in doing to he consistently puts an excellent shape on the team attack.

Whether he can replicate his Sarries form at 10 for England I don't know, but I'd be interested to see, difficulty there is I'm also a big Ford fan and don't want to dent his progress. But Eddie isn't getting paid a lot of money to avoid this choice is my take on the 10 shirt

His passing is worse than clunky left to right, even accepting that he does run straight going that way; I still have issues with his defence, given his propensity to over commit, and taking into account its less dangerous at 10 than 12. His options are generally good in the armchair that is Sarries, and with the wise Barritt chatting to him- plus he'll see a bit less as wiggy runs most of the show for sarries. I will grant he has improved most aspects of his game ball in hand, and is definitely an option at 10 for us-- plus coaches like him for his work ethic and 'attitude'. But as a 10 he doesn't register very highly from a skills point of view for me.

[Banquo]

I think some on here will be angry at the likes of you, Hartley and Farrell no matter what they do. If Slade, Watson etc make mistakes, that's completely glossed over, but if we don't look as good with, for example, no Farrell, then it's not because Farrell is good...

You obviously didn’t pop in to discuss Slade after the Argentina match.

Aye. That was an odd one. Slade’s performance went down as awful because he’s meant to be good at passing. Whereas if you’ve never been good at it, it’s not a big deal to fuck it up I guess.

I think Farrell is a different case. I think a lot of the slating on here is more in response to the ridiculous media hype he gets. A bit like Henson or Sheridan.

I mean the things Slade messed up would be pretty normal for Faz, but totally ignored by Healey, Barnes etc. if he did them.

Agreed on Faz, plus for me I saw him play for one of the Sarries junior sides against my sons school team, and he behaved like an absolute c*nt.

[Mikey Brown]

So 10. Farrell 12. Barritt 13. Te’o is what you’re suggesting?

[Mikey Brown]

I can’t temember if the thing about him making George Ford do his homework at school is common knowledge or not, but I hear from someone that knew him then that yes, he is indeed a cunt.

[Digby]

Also need to consider it wasn't simply a backrow issue that Samoa got after our breakdown, simply they put in bigger numbers, and the England team didn't react to that but kept trying to setup as they'd practiced with the coaches during the week. Similar in some respects to the job that Italy did on us that the players on the field were unable or unwilling to make changes during the game.

Now that attack expects defence to merely fan out there will be chances as Samoa have just shown to flood the breakdown more than expected. Still, it's hardly just on the backrow that we ran into problems, but it was partly them

[Banquo]

Playing devils advocate, Launch at 4 and a 7 at 7.

But we did have Launch at 4. And while Robshaw isn't everyone's cup of tea, would Underhill have really made a difference in securing our own ball? Simmonds certainly didn't.

The only combo I can see working with a lock at 6 would be to have BCurry or TCurry, as they're the only ones with the pace and the instincts to secure our own ball with limited help from the rest of the back row. And even with them I'd have concerns about them being blasted off the ball with them only being 19 years old and still growing.

Puja

Launch was at 4 for 30 minutes. Then we got Lawes, who doesn't do as much at the breakdown.

Though now there's a copy on youtube, I might go through for ruck marks. I'm more interested in Simmonds and George's scores, than others.

EDIT - Simmonds, like Hughes, was also our primary carrier, meaning less chances to be in the attacking breakdowns.

Indeed, not sure what Puja was actually expecting there.

[Digby]

do you really think Faz is a class act at 10? I think he's still merely workmanlike there, tho gradually (still) improving.

I do. His decision making there is excellent, with the caveat Sarries are typically dominant and across the team superbly drilled. I also think (and this will be a common comment to those who've talked to about this away from here) he can look clunkier than he actually is, he can be so straight in attack he makes it harder to pass smoothly (clearing the inside hip as Greenwood observed isn't always easy) but in doing to he consistently puts an excellent shape on the team attack.

Whether he can replicate his Sarries form at 10 for England I don't know, but I'd be interested to see, difficulty there is I'm also a big Ford fan and don't want to dent his progress. But Eddie isn't getting paid a lot of money to avoid this choice is my take on the 10 shirt

His passing is worse than clunky left to right, even accepting that he does run straight going that way; I still have issues with his defence, given his propensity to over commit, and taking into account its less dangerous at 10 than 12. His options are generally good in the armchair that is Sarries, and with the wise Barritt chatting to him- plus he'll see a bit less as wiggy runs most of the show for sarries. I will grant he has improved most aspects of his game ball in hand, and is definitely an option at 10 for us-- plus coaches like him for his work ethic and 'attitude'. But as a 10 he doesn't register very highly from a skills point of view for me.

His passing is somewhat erratic, more so off his left 'tis true. It's a good point about Wiggy at Sarries running the game so much, and actually another problem for Faz with both England's current halfbacks now both at Tigers.

Faz should get Sarries to sign Youngs

[Banquo]

So 10. Farrell 12. Barritt 13. Te’o is what you’re suggesting?

Given I'm not suggesting Faz, no. Or Teo at 13.

Now Barritt at 12

[Banquo]

Also need to consider it wasn't simply a backrow issue that Samoa got after our breakdown, simply they put in bigger numbers, and the England team didn't react to that but kept trying to setup as they'd practiced with the coaches during the week. Similar in some respects to the job that Italy did on us that the players on the field were unable or unwilling to make changes during the game.

Now that attack expects defence to merely fan out there will be chances as Samoa have just shown to flood the breakdown more than expected. Still, it's hardly just on the backrow that we ran into problems, but it was partly them

It was. Technique and decision making about numbers have been a huge issue for us internationally since c 2004 . You'd think given the passivity that seems to have set in to some teams about defending breakdowns, and thus complacency from attacking teams about numbers, you'd soon see the appropriate reaction to that.

[Which Tyler]

Am I too late for a bit of bashing on Farrell, Hartley and... who was the third?
I think that that perspective is about 4 years out of date TBH.

I think that Farrell is widely regarded as having improved his game massively after his Lions tour to Aus; and has continued to improve. For the last couple of year I have been saying that he's a perfectly competent international level FH, with world class elements - his attitude could be considered world class (though he still tends towards the "petulant oik" moniker on occassion - it's largely been retired), and he certainly has a world class hype machine.
These days I think that most of his cricitisms here are around the different standards he's held to compared to his rivals, his rushing out of the line in defence (which works as designed from 10 at club level, but just leaves dog-legs in the line from IC at international level), and his lack of personal threat ball-in-hand, which just allows defenders to double on on either his FH or his OC - both of which are absolutely fair criticism, and not "bashing"; the relative standards thing is irritation at pundits, not the player.

For Hartley - IMO the issue has been more about his discipline, and the perception that he's a red card / long ban just waiting to happen. On playing, many of us feel that George is simply a better player, but you need more light between the two in order to overtake the captain - and Hartley has been captain of a fantastic run of results (if not form). I don't think Hartley gets much abuse these days TBH, we just wouldn't necessarily pick him based on playing performance.

[Puja]

But we did have Launch at 4. And while Robshaw isn't everyone's cup of tea, would Underhill have really made a difference in securing our own ball? Simmonds certainly didn't.

The only combo I can see working with a lock at 6 would be to have BCurry or TCurry, as they're the only ones with the pace and the instincts to secure our own ball with limited help from the rest of the back row. And even with them I'd have concerns about them being blasted off the ball with them only being 19 years old and still growing.

Puja

Launch was at 4 for 30 minutes. Then we got Lawes, who doesn't do as much at the breakdown.

Though now there's a copy on youtube, I might go through for ruck marks. I'm more interested in Simmonds and George's scores, than others.

EDIT - Simmonds, like Hughes, was also our primary carrier, meaning less chances to be in the attacking breakdowns.

Indeed, not sure what Puja was actually expecting there.

Fair and I had actually forgotten that Launch went off injured. Good points, well made.

Although what Simmonds has been excelling at for Exeter and what has brought him to the attention of England has been his carrying and his support work. So I stand by my opinion that lock + Simmonds isn't likely to produce better breakdown work than lock + Robshaw.

I would be very interested in seeing those ruck marks if you are so inclined Raggs.

Puja

[Digby]

Simmonds in attacking rucks has so far been the typical Exeter player, which is to say he couldn't give a flying tulip about a ruck and simply goes off his feet to end any contest, he'll need to be careful in this area. His variant to that was to get cleaned out too easily, he'll need to be careful there too.

But he's a kid making his debut, and for all he has issues he looks a very god prospect