Willis, Simmonds or B Curry as starting openside in 6 Nations?

[Stom]

I guess an elephant (or rather rhino?) in the room is what happens when Underhill becomes available, his defence alone imo merits a backrow place and he could cover 6 as well as 7

I'm not sure it does, tbh...

I mea, on his day he's very good, but he doesn't really fit into the different systems you create to make the most of Lawes at 6, for example. I do think he and Curry work well together, but I also think Willis and Curry would work really well, and Willis provides more upside than Underhill for me, with the caveat that we've not really seen him much at international level.

Given free rein, I would go for Willis and BCurry on the flanks this time round. But I imagine it'll be Lawes and A.N.Other. I just hope it's Willis, not Earl...

I think the quality of Underhill’s defensive skillset often means he’s underrated in an attacking sense (IMO, his carrying and the lines he picks have improved considerably in the last few seasons). However, his injury proneness is a worry and his frequent absences allow other players to make more compelling cases to be picked ahead of him.

I imagine Borthwick is a fan of Underhill’s and it seems crazy to say it given how good he can be, but if the likes of Willis, Earl and Ben Curry take this opportunity, I honestly think he might struggle to make the squad.

Again, can someone explain how Earl is rated so highly?

[Mikey Brown]

He’s a “menace” and a bundle of energy” etc etc

He’s a very good all rounder, but hard to know if that makes for a distinctly average international or one who can do a bit of everything + his USP of impressive pace.

[Timbo]

I'm not sure it does, tbh...

I mea, on his day he's very good, but he doesn't really fit into the different systems you create to make the most of Lawes at 6, for example. I do think he and Curry work well together, but I also think Willis and Curry would work really well, and Willis provides more upside than Underhill for me, with the caveat that we've not really seen him much at international level.

Given free rein, I would go for Willis and BCurry on the flanks this time round. But I imagine it'll be Lawes and A.N.Other. I just hope it's Willis, not Earl...

I think the quality of Underhill’s defensive skillset often means he’s underrated in an attacking sense (IMO, his carrying and the lines he picks have improved considerably in the last few seasons). However, his injury proneness is a worry and his frequent absences allow other players to make more compelling cases to be picked ahead of him.

I imagine Borthwick is a fan of Underhill’s and it seems crazy to say it given how good he can be, but if the likes of Willis, Earl and Ben Curry take this opportunity, I honestly think he might struggle to make the squad.

Again, can someone explain how Earl is rated so highly?

Probably be easier if you first explained why you don’t rate him highly?

I totally get scepticism around his ability to step up to test level, until he’s given a proper chance we simply can’t know what he capable of. But you’d have to accept he’s been incredibly good for Saracens in the last season and a half?

[Scrumhead]

Yep. Similar thinking from me.

As much as I find his histrionics deeply irritating, there’s no denying he’s played a big role in a good side as well as being individually very good.

Perhaps the biggest case for his inclusion is that he is simply different to our other options at 7. He’s the closest thing we have to Hooper or Tipuric, whereas he rest of our flankers offer fairly similar strengths to each other.

The Currys, Willis and Ludlam aren’t necessarily similar players as such, but they perform similar roles.

IMO, Earl could bring something different as an impact player and doesn’t require some of the compromises and trade-offs Simmonds needs.

[Oakboy]

I have to say that I share Stom's scepticism about Earl. I agree that he is a good club player in a good club side. I also agree that he could possibly become a good international given an extended run. Overall, though, I'd certainly rank him behind Curry, Curry, Willis, Willis, Ludlam, Underhill and Lawes for a flank shirt. He'd also be well down a list of No 8s. As a utility bench option he'd perhaps get closer but still have several ahead of him.

I doubt he will get a real chance before the RWC unless there are lots of injuries.

[Scrumhead]

I really can’t see how Earl is behind Tom Willis as a flanker. I rate the latter extremely highly but solely as an 8. He barely plays on the flank at club level and definitely isn’t a test calibre flanker.

[Stom]

My feeling is that Earl is a decent jackal, but not as good as Curry, Curry, Mercer or Willis. He's a solid tackler, but not as effective as Underhill nor as efficient as Lawes or Mercer. He's an OK wide carrier, but not as good as Dombrandt, Mercer, Curry or Curry, and he's a passable tight carrier, but nowhere near as good as Dombrandt, Willis, Willis, even tCurry or, wait for it, Mercer.

He works well in a dominant Sarries team, but he's shown absolutely nothing in his brief international appearances. I'm all for giving players opportunities, but I feel like you pick Curry, Curry, Willis, Willis, Mercer, Dombrandt, Underhill, and Lawes ahead of him right now. And Ludlam has been effective at international level.

So yeah. He posts decent numbers across the board without being the best at anything. Does that make him worth a spot? Especially ahead of Mercer, who posts even better numbers across the board.

[Banquo]

My feeling is that Earl is a decent jackal, but not as good as Curry, Curry, Mercer or Willis. He's a solid tackler, but not as effective as Underhill nor as efficient as Lawes or Mercer. He's an OK wide carrier, but not as good as Dombrandt, Mercer, Curry or Curry, and he's a passable tight carrier, but nowhere near as good as Dombrandt, Willis, Willis, even tCurry or, wait for it, Mercer.

He works well in a dominant Sarries team, but he's shown absolutely nothing in his brief international appearances. I'm all for giving players opportunities, but I feel like you pick Curry, Curry, Willis, Willis, Mercer, Dombrandt, Underhill, and Lawes ahead of him right now. And Ludlam has been effective at international level.

So yeah. He posts decent numbers across the board without being the best at anything. Does that make him worth a spot? Especially ahead of Mercer, who posts even better numbers across the board.

Mercer is really an out and out 8, incidentally the most turned over player in France ; Earl is primarily an openside, and I'd say the quickest of the bunch. Mercer is also not yet available for us.
Not that sold on either tbf compared to others.

[Scrumhead]

Mercer played plenty of rugby on the flank at Bath and was generally very good. Not sure I’d ever consider picking him there for England, but he’s more versatile than you’re giving him credit for.

I don’t totally disagree on Stom’s synopsis on Earl, but it does feel a little harsh and also a bit irrelevant considering Mercer isn’t available yet anyway.

I’d also question how much opportunity Earl has really had? He’s probably had about 30mins in total in an England jersey and while it’s perfectly fair to say he hasn’t made a massive impact, he hasn’t had much to work with.

[Danno]

My feeling is that Earl is a decent jackal, but not as good as Curry, Curry, Mercer or Willis. He's a solid tackler, but not as effective as Underhill nor as efficient as Lawes or Mercer. He's an OK wide carrier, but not as good as Dombrandt, Mercer, Curry or Curry, and he's a passable tight carrier, but nowhere near as good as Dombrandt, Willis, Willis, even tCurry or, wait for it, Mercer.

He works well in a dominant Sarries team, but he's shown absolutely nothing in his brief international appearances. I'm all for giving players opportunities, but I feel like you pick Curry, Curry, Willis, Willis, Mercer, Dombrandt, Underhill, and Lawes ahead of him right now. And Ludlam has been effective at international level.

So yeah. He posts decent numbers across the board without being the best at anything. Does that make him worth a spot? Especially ahead of Mercer, who posts even better numbers across the board.

But he shouts a lot

[Banquo]

Mercer played plenty of rugby on the flank at Bath and was generally very good. Not sure I’d ever consider picking him there for England, but he’s more versatile than you’re giving him credit for.

I don’t totally disagree on Stom’s synopsis on Earl, but it does feel a little harsh and also a bit irrelevant considering Mercer isn’t available yet anyway.

I’d also question how much opportunity Earl has really had? He’s probably had about 30mins in total in an England jersey and while it’s perfectly fair to say he hasn’t made a massive impact, he hasn’t had much to work with.

....my point being I would only consider him as an 8 (which in england terms you seem to agree with)- he played 6 when Faletau was available and it didnt use his skills optimally imo...which are best suited to 8. Earl has also played elsewhere in the backrow but again is more 7 mould; Mercer was being compared to Earl, which didnt seem relevant even more so as he is not availabe yet.
Even if available, never been that sold on him despite talent. Had to laugh when they said on commentary he is the most turnd over player in the french top flight.

[p/d]

I haven’t been a supporter of Earl but, with a new dawn, I hope form will be relevant and the premiership player of the year gets looked at in a new back row …….. the shouty g*t

[Spiffy]

He’s a “menace” and a bundle of energy” etc etc

He’s a very good all rounder, but hard to know if that makes for a distinctly average international or one who can do a bit of everything + his USP of impressive pace.

I think you have it there. Earl is probably most noticeable for his speed, and looks impressive when he pops up out wide to score tries. But when it come to the nuts and bolts and grind of an all-round openside's game, he is nothing special. I would disagree with the post above which suggests he is in the Hooper/Tipuric class. These players are pretty special and I don't think he's even close.

[fivepointer]

Earl can be very impressive with the ball and in a bit of space. He's got a high work rate, makes few errors and has excellent hands. There's a lot to like. He's a fine player who hasnt been given a proper chance yet.
Ben Curry is playing really well for Sale right now. His all round game is first rate.

[Mikey Brown]

He’s a “menace” and a bundle of energy” etc etc

He’s a very good all rounder, but hard to know if that makes for a distinctly average international or one who can do a bit of everything + his USP of impressive pace.

I think you have it there. Earl is probably most noticeable for his speed, and looks impressive when he pops up out wide to score tries. But when it come to the nuts and bolts and grind of an all-round openside's game, he is nothing special. I would disagree with the post above which suggests he is in the Hooper/Tipuric class. These players are pretty special and I don't think he's even close.

I’m unsure if he’s now one of those players perceived to do no/little grunt work because of the fact he makes the breaks in the wide channels and does the flashy stuff. He seems to do a fair bit of work in all areas of the field, to me, but reading this thread you wouldn’t think so. It’s anyone’s guess whether all that will translate to internationals though.

[Oakboy]

Maybe, it's the thought of having Earl in an England shirt together with Itoje and Farrell. A 3rd mighty mouth could be a tongue too far.

[Mikey Brown]

Oh yeah I mean he’s intensely annoying as a character. I’m not convinced he’s better than Curry or Willis, but I get why he’s in the conversation ahead of Ludlow, Underhill etc.

I think Will Evans is harshly overlooked, but might never shake that worry of just being too small and injury prone for the top level.

I wonder how B Unit will view the OTT Sarries celebrations and wind ups. I can’t recall if they’d started doing that while he was still there or not. Can’t imagine it being his thing though.

[francoisfou]

I was at the Toulouse/Munster match yesterday and Jack Willis was impressive, even when Munster began to click. Borthers really should pick him at 7. Earl maybe on the bench?

[Banquo]

He’s a “menace” and a bundle of energy” etc etc

He’s a very good all rounder, but hard to know if that makes for a distinctly average international or one who can do a bit of everything + his USP of impressive pace.

I think you have it there. Earl is probably most noticeable for his speed, and looks impressive when he pops up out wide to score tries. But when it come to the nuts and bolts and grind of an all-round openside's game, he is nothing special. I would disagree with the post above which suggests he is in the Hooper/Tipuric class. These players are pretty special and I don't think he's even close.

I’m unsure if he’s now one of those players perceived to do no/little grunt work because of the fact he makes the breaks in the wide channels and does the flashy stuff. He seems to do a fair bit of work in all areas of the field, to me, but reading this thread you wouldn’t think so. It’s anyone’s guess whether all that will translate to internationals though.

Excellent points, and I thought the same was true of Sam Simmonds. In both their cases, their clubs choose to use their fast carrying skills in quite a specific way, so they don't get tasked with doing some of the ruck work (say) that you might expect back rows to do (bit like when Croft was stationed wide, and consequently was perceived as not being handy at the breakdown- when he actually was; in attack he was there to use that gas in mismatches, and that worked sometimes, and in defence he was there to cover counterattacks from turnovers. I wasn't a fan of either of those, but that was the rationale). I've also seen Sam Simmonds do excellent jackal work, less so Earl (but could have missed it).....and as you say, there's a perception issue; after my posts above, I hate to invoke Mercer, but the lack of grunt was often said about him, but I remember WT (? i think) produced some stats on his involvements, and it was very impressive.

Fortunately selectors/coaches have access to real data and don't go by our 'observations....nay prejudices '

[Banquo]

Oh yeah I mean he’s intensely annoying as a character. I’m not convinced he’s better than Curry or Willis, but I get why he’s in the conversation ahead of Ludlow, Underhill etc.

I think Will Evans is harshly overlooked, but might never shake that worry of just being too small and injury prone for the top level.

I wonder how B Unit will view the OTT Sarries celebrations and wind ups. I can’t recall if they’d started doing that while he was still there or not. Can’t imagine it being his thing though.

Ludlam or ludlow, or both

Kenningham being fit would be interesting, and where is Pearson in all this?

[Banquo]

I was at the Toulouse/Munster match yesterday and Jack Willis was impressive, even when Munster began to click. Borthers really should pick him at 7. Earl maybe on the bench?

yep he went well, started off playing left flanker in a left/right French stylee, then packed down at the openside for the last 15.

[Oakboy]

Fortunately selectors/coaches have access to real data and don't go by our 'observations....nay prejudices '

What! You might need to explain. Can't think what you mean.

[Scrumhead]

He’s a “menace” and a bundle of energy” etc etc

He’s a very good all rounder, but hard to know if that makes for a distinctly average international or one who can do a bit of everything + his USP of impressive pace.

I think you have it there. Earl is probably most noticeable for his speed, and looks impressive when he pops up out wide to score tries. But when it come to the nuts and bolts and grind of an all-round openside's game, he is nothing special. I would disagree with the post above which suggests he is in the Hooper/Tipuric class. These players are pretty special and I don't think he's even close.

Except I didn’t say he is in their class. I simply said his playing style is more reminiscent of theirs in comparison to our other options at 7 who mostly play a tighter game.

[SDHoneymonster]

Get the idea that Borthwick won't pick anyone who doesn't work their nuts off and Earl's stats for both attacking and defensive work suggests a player who is unfairly pigeonholed as a fancy dan seagulling out wide IMO (Charlie Morgan has done several pieces on Earl which highlight how effective he has been). He deserves a decent opportunity, although he's forever going to be cursed as he's just too tempting to drop in as the back row bench option given his versatility and skill set. For Scotland I'd personally go with Willis/Curry/Dombrandt as the starting back row with Earl on the bench, but would have no issue with Ludlam taking any of those slots.

[Stom]

Oh yeah I mean he’s intensely annoying as a character. I’m not convinced he’s better than Curry or Willis, but I get why he’s in the conversation ahead of Ludlow, Underhill etc.

I think Will Evans is harshly overlooked, but might never shake that worry of just being too small and injury prone for the top level.

I wonder how B Unit will view the OTT Sarries celebrations and wind ups. I can’t recall if they’d started doing that while he was still there or not. Can’t imagine it being his thing though.

Ludlam or ludlow, or both

Kenningham being fit would be interesting, and where is Pearson in all this?

I think Kenningham needs some more development first, tbh. He was caught out a few times before injury and needs to work on his positioning and reading a little, imo.

On Earl again, I think he does work very hard and does the basics well, but I think our balance needs more/specific skills. When you have Willis Willis Curry curry available, you’re kinda sorted, I think, so long as they step up as they look likely to.