RWC Training Squad

[Mellsblue]

Just showed what a poor decision it was to stick with Eddie after 2019. Hopefully after this WC we might get a freshen up.

Who are the shining test talents he didn’t call up? One thing you can’t accuse him of is not bringing new faces in to camp.

To counter a question with a question...which potential test talents has he given more than a game or two? We have Billy, Marler, Tuilagi, to name three, who have been picked a lot - or parachuted in last minute in front of players who are playing better at the time - above potential test players like Tom Willis, Mercer, Rodd, VRR, Murley, who have either hardly had a look in, or have had 1 game, or maybe 2.

Eddie's big thing was to bring players into squad for what seemed like 2 years before they either got into the actual squad or were cast off.

And I've not mentioned Farrell once!

Farrell isn’t worth mentioning as even the likes of ROG would select him.
Mercer has been discarded by two different regimes now. Not sure why given club form but there must be a reason. Rodd has been played by both and has been ok.
VRR is perma-crocked.
Murley might be ok and I would’ve had him before OHC.. but OHC has looked great for LI and shat the bed for Eng, albeit on a very small sample size in a dysfunctional team.
I think T Willy could be the business but he went with Dombo who also looks great for club but shat the bed for England. Who’s to say T Willy wouldn’t do the same - not that I think he would.
You can name names but there’s no one who just screams that they’re a top test player. Ben Earl was Prem player of the year in ‘22 and has looked nothing but average at test level. Pearson has ripped up trees this season but looked average, even if you don’t include that tackle, against Wales. He has to one for the next RWC cycle but he’d only displace T Cuzza or J Willy who are already one of our best players.
Just look at the recent u20 World Cup results and it’ll give you a clue of the quality off the academy conveyor belt recently.
The obviously top EQ Prem test quality players are all in that 33, sadly and imo.

[Mellsblue]

Let's just say that SB's starting XV is:

Genge, George, Stuart, Itoje, Chessum, Lawes, Curry, Billy V, Youngs, Farrell, Watson, Tuilagi, Lawrence, Daly, Steward

Is that team unbeatable or can we pick one that just might give them a run. Say:

Marler, McGuigan, Sinckler, Hill, Martin, Ludlam, Willis, Willis, Mitchell, Smith, Arundell, Slade, Marchant, May, Malins.

All I am getting at is that we do have strength in depth (a 3rd XV of similar standard would not be difficult) and that shifting the emphasis of playing style might work too.

SB is setting himself up as 'win-or-bust' in a physical short-term fling. I don't altogether blame him but a couple of ugly defeats could do his reputation real harm.

Hasn’t it almost always been thus. Great depth but little world class talent.
Slightly Boringwatch is on safe ground for at least two years, surely. The RFU must know he’s inherited a complete mess.

[jngf]

I wish somebody could explain how Lawes is supposedly first choice blindside? - I know he’s improved but it seems he’s in there for the line out primarily and as a belated attempt to provide an English PsTD - Scrumhead’s very helpful stats diagram seemed to reinforce this to me at least

[Oakboy]

I wish somebody could explain how Lawes is supposedly first choice blindside? - I know he’s improved but it seems he’s in there for the line out primarily and as a belated attempt to provide an English PsTD - Scrumhead’s very helpful stats diagram seemed to reinforce this to me at least

Greenwood describes Lawes as England's most improved player. Lawes justifies his '1st choice 6' label offensivelyand defensively. I think if you were to ask a representative group of opposition players who they would least like in the shirt against them Lawes would win the vote easily. Another hint is that the team always plays better with him in it. His line-out work is a handy bonus.

[jngf]

I wish somebody could explain how Lawes is supposedly first choice blindside? - I know he’s improved but it seems he’s in there for the line out primarily and as a belated attempt to provide an English PsTD - Scrumhead’s very helpful stats diagram seemed to reinforce this to me at least

Greenwood describes Lawes as England's most improved player. Lawes justifies his '1st choice 6' label offensivelyand defensively. I think if you were to ask a representative group of opposition players who they would least like in the shirt against them Lawes would win the vote easily. Another hint is that the team always plays better with him in it. His line-out work is a handy bonus.

I’m sure he’s an intimidating presence but that does not mean he’s the best 6 in the squad or even a better 6 than lock imo

[Mellsblue]

I wish somebody could explain how Lawes is supposedly first choice blindside? - I know he’s improved but it seems he’s in there for the line out primarily and as a belated attempt to provide an English PsTD - Scrumhead’s very helpful stats diagram seemed to reinforce this to me at least

Greenwood describes Farrell as England's best player. Farrell justifies his '1st choice 10' label offensively and defensively. I think if you were to ask a representative group of opposition players who they would least like in the shirt against them Farrell would win the vote easily. Another hint is that everyone other than RR think the team always plays better with him in it.

Changed your post for context. Not that I don’t think Lawes is a quality player. I would go 6. Curry 7. Willis, though.

[Banquo]

Let's just say that SB's starting XV is:

Genge, George, Stuart, Itoje, Chessum, Lawes, Curry, Billy V, Youngs, Farrell, Watson, Tuilagi, Lawrence, Daly, Steward

Is that team unbeatable or can we pick one that just might give them a run. Say:

Marler, McGuigan, Sinckler, Hill, Martin, Ludlam, Willis, Willis, Mitchell, Smith, Arundell, Slade, Marchant, May, Malins.

All I am getting at is that we do have strength in depth (a 3rd XV of similar standard would not be difficult) and that shifting the emphasis of playing style might work too.

SB is setting himself up as 'win-or-bust' in a physical short-term fling. I don't altogether blame him but a couple of ugly defeats could do his reputation real harm.

we have depth, but as you are effectively pointing out, its all much of a muchness.

[Which Tyler]

Slightly Boringwatch is on safe ground for at least two years, surely. The RFU must know he’s inherited a complete mess.

Taking the RFU out of the equation, what (do we think) our red lines for him are?
So ahead of the RWC, what would we consider catastrophe, unacceptable, acceptable, or better than expected?

For me, he's now got the coaches he wanted, and the players he wants; and he's had them in camp for 6-8 weeks and counting, will be 15 weeks by the time the RWC starts.
The warm-ups are just that, they're pre-season matches with international teams, not club; so I'm trying not to read too much into them.
Par at the RWC, given the draw, is a losing semi-final.

If we drop out in the pool stages, then I'll probably be calling for his head.
If we lose the QF, having failed to perform well, I may well be calling for his head.
If we lose the QF, having performed well, and just got beaten by a better team on the day - fair enough, I'll probably be disgruntled, but give him the 6N and June window.
If we lose the SF, he'll have reached par, and earned to reach the 2-year mark to see if he can refresh the squad and start getting some improvements.
If we win the SF, he's probably earned the full 4 year period (barring future bad performances).

[FKAS]

In terms of coaches he hasn't got Felix Jones in yet. He's joining after the world cup.

It's somewhat irrelevant as I can't see the RFU sanctioning the cost of his sacking so soon after pushing for him to be hired earlier than planned at expense.

[Oakboy]

Let's just say that SB's starting XV is:

Genge, George, Stuart, Itoje, Chessum, Lawes, Curry, Billy V, Youngs, Farrell, Watson, Tuilagi, Lawrence, Daly, Steward

Is that team unbeatable or can we pick one that just might give them a run. Say:

Marler, McGuigan, Sinckler, Hill, Martin, Ludlam, Willis, Willis, Mitchell, Smith, Arundell, Slade, Marchant, May, Malins.

All I am getting at is that we do have strength in depth (a 3rd XV of similar standard would not be difficult) and that shifting the emphasis of playing style might work too.

SB is setting himself up as 'win-or-bust' in a physical short-term fling. I don't altogether blame him but a couple of ugly defeats could do his reputation real harm.

we have depth, but as you are effectively pointing out, its all much of a muchness.

Yep. I wish I could argue. Straw-clutching, I suppose part of me wonders if SB is going the right way about getting the absolute best out of the group. I insist that Jones never did. Even it was only a few per cent, something was always left in the dressing room. One significant indicator was the number of times that we started badly. I cannot forgive not creating 'unchained lions'. Sub-standard players ought always to have to find out their limitations as the opposition show superiority as the game develops. Looking lost from the kick-off must mean bad preparation and a failure to inspire.

SB was never my ideal appointment but I thought he'd immediately sort that out by introducing improved togetherness with attention to detail and 'understandable' organisation. So far he has not done so and I'm starting to wonder if he has more to offer.

[Banquo]

Let's just say that SB's starting XV is:

Genge, George, Stuart, Itoje, Chessum, Lawes, Curry, Billy V, Youngs, Farrell, Watson, Tuilagi, Lawrence, Daly, Steward

Is that team unbeatable or can we pick one that just might give them a run. Say:

Marler, McGuigan, Sinckler, Hill, Martin, Ludlam, Willis, Willis, Mitchell, Smith, Arundell, Slade, Marchant, May, Malins.

All I am getting at is that we do have strength in depth (a 3rd XV of similar standard would not be difficult) and that shifting the emphasis of playing style might work too.

SB is setting himself up as 'win-or-bust' in a physical short-term fling. I don't altogether blame him but a couple of ugly defeats could do his reputation real harm.

we have depth, but as you are effectively pointing out, its all much of a muchness.

Yep. I wish I could argue. Straw-clutching, I suppose part of me wonders if SB is going the right way about getting the absolute best out of the group. I insist that Jones never did. Even it was only a few per cent, something was always left in the dressing room. One significant indicator was the number of times that we started badly. I cannot forgive not creating 'unchained lions'. Sub-standard players ought always to have to find out their limitations as the opposition show superiority as the game develops. Looking lost from the kick-off must mean bad preparation and a failure to inspire.

SB was never my ideal appointment but I thought he'd immediately sort that out by introducing improved togetherness with attention to detail and 'understandable' organisation. So far he has not done so and I'm starting to wonder if he has more to offer.

I think Jones got the best out of them for quite a long time, but certainly dropped off. I do agree that that is the minimum I'd expect from any coach, and I'm not convinced Slarti Bartfarst has made much of a dent in that, even our basics remain sub-par imo.

[Spiffy]

we have depth, but as you are effectively pointing out, its all much of a muchness.

Yep. I wish I could argue. Straw-clutching, I suppose part of me wonders if SB is going the right way about getting the absolute best out of the group. I insist that Jones never did. Even it was only a few per cent, something was always left in the dressing room. One significant indicator was the number of times that we started badly. I cannot forgive not creating 'unchained lions'. Sub-standard players ought always to have to find out their limitations as the opposition show superiority as the game develops. Looking lost from the kick-off must mean bad preparation and a failure to inspire.

SB was never my ideal appointment but I thought he'd immediately sort that out by introducing improved togetherness with attention to detail and 'understandable' organisation. So far he has not done so and I'm starting to wonder if he has more to offer.

I think Jones got the best out of them for quite a long time, but certainly dropped off. I do agree that that is the minimum I'd expect from any coach, and I'm not convinced Slarti Bartfarst has made much of a dent in that, even our basics remain sub-par imo.

Stultifyingly Boring has been a massive disappointment with his selection, tactics, lack of charisma, leadership, personality and everything else you can think of. Has he got even one positive vibe going for him?

[Mellsblue]

Yep. I wish I could argue. Straw-clutching, I suppose part of me wonders if SB is going the right way about getting the absolute best out of the group. I insist that Jones never did. Even it was only a few per cent, something was always left in the dressing room. One significant indicator was the number of times that we started badly. I cannot forgive not creating 'unchained lions'. Sub-standard players ought always to have to find out their limitations as the opposition show superiority as the game develops. Looking lost from the kick-off must mean bad preparation and a failure to inspire.

SB was never my ideal appointment but I thought he'd immediately sort that out by introducing improved togetherness with attention to detail and 'understandable' organisation. So far he has not done so and I'm starting to wonder if he has more to offer.

I think Jones got the best out of them for quite a long time, but certainly dropped off. I do agree that that is the minimum I'd expect from any coach, and I'm not convinced Slarti Bartfarst has made much of a dent in that, even our basics remain sub-par imo.

Stultifyingly Boring has been a massive disappointment with his selection, tactics, lack of charisma, leadership, personality and everything else you can think of. Has he got even one positive vibe going for him?

Wait till you see his impression of Michael Macintyre.

[Mellsblue]

FWIW:

[Banquo]

South Africa leaving Pollard and Am(!) out owing to injury concerns.....there's confident.

[Banquo]

FWIW:

Interesting spread we have.

Yoda am I

[Banquo]

Dawson agrees with Mells

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/66433466

[switchskier]

Yep. I wish I could argue. Straw-clutching, I suppose part of me wonders if SB is going the right way about getting the absolute best out of the group. I insist that Jones never did. Even it was only a few per cent, something was always left in the dressing room. One significant indicator was the number of times that we started badly. I cannot forgive not creating 'unchained lions'. Sub-standard players ought always to have to find out their limitations as the opposition show superiority as the game develops. Looking lost from the kick-off must mean bad preparation and a failure to inspire.

SB was never my ideal appointment but I thought he'd immediately sort that out by introducing improved togetherness with attention to detail and 'understandable' organisation. So far he has not done so and I'm starting to wonder if he has more to offer.

I think Jones got the best out of them for quite a long time, but certainly dropped off. I do agree that that is the minimum I'd expect from any coach, and I'm not convinced Slarti Bartfarst has made much of a dent in that, even our basics remain sub-par imo.

Stultifyingly Boring has been a massive disappointment with his selection, tactics, lack of charisma, leadership, personality and everything else you can think of. Has he got even one positive vibe going for him?

I keep thinking back to Stultifyingly Boring being wheeled out as captain in the dog days of the Johnson era, with that weird cut across his nose and all of the bland platitudes, and I don't know why anyone is particularly surprised. That was a team of honest tryers that struggled with their absolute top echelon players aging out and he didn't seem to inspire then.

[fivepointer]

I'm cutting SB some slack. He got the job sooner than many thought he would. Is a novice international head coach. Had to make do during the 6N's. Inherited a pretty average group of players with very few you could legitimately call at the top level.
Unfortunately he's not done a whole heap to generate much of a buzz. He is a safety first, pragmatic coach who was never going to make us play with the freedom and ambition that many would like. Thats just not his style.
In the short term he has to make us do what we do better. That may be enough to get through to a WC SF such is the kindest of all draws we've been given.
If we fail disastrously to get out of the group, or go out lamely in the QF, then his suitability might come into question. But i doubt the RFU are going to go head hunting even if we do fail badly.
The WC will tell us whether SB has at least moved the team forward.

[Mellsblue]

Dawson agrees with Mells

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/66433466

Mells no longer agrees with Mells.

[Mellsblue]

Slightly Boringwatch is on safe ground for at least two years, surely. The RFU must know he’s inherited a complete mess.

Taking the RFU out of the equation, what (do we think) our red lines for him are?
So ahead of the RWC, what would we consider catastrophe, unacceptable, acceptable, or better than expected?

For me, he's now got the coaches he wanted, and the players he wants; and he's had them in camp for 6-8 weeks and counting, will be 15 weeks by the time the RWC starts.
The warm-ups are just that, they're pre-season matches with international teams, not club; so I'm trying not to read too much into them.
Par at the RWC, given the draw, is a losing semi-final.

If we drop out in the pool stages, then I'll probably be calling for his head.
If we lose the QF, having failed to perform well, I may well be calling for his head.
If we lose the QF, having performed well, and just got beaten by a better team on the day - fair enough, I'll probably be disgruntled, but give him the 6N and June window.
If we lose the SF, he'll have reached par, and earned to reach the 2-year mark to see if he can refresh the squad and start getting some improvements.
If we win the SF, he's probably earned the full 4 year period (barring future bad performances).

For me, he’s safe until this time next year. By that point if there’s not serious improvement I’d be tempted to get rid. As always, the question is whether there’s anyone better and available.

[LongForgotten]

Who are the shining test talents he didn’t call up? One thing you can’t accuse him of is not bringing new faces in to camp.

To counter a question with a question...which potential test talents has he given more than a game or two? We have Billy, Marler, Tuilagi, to name three, who have been picked a lot - or parachuted in last minute in front of players who are playing better at the time - above potential test players like Tom Willis, Mercer, Rodd, VRR, Murley, who have either hardly had a look in, or have had 1 game, or maybe 2.

Eddie's big thing was to bring players into squad for what seemed like 2 years before they either got into the actual squad or were cast off.

And I've not mentioned Farrell once!

Farrell isn’t worth mentioning as even the likes of ROG would select him.
Mercer has been discarded by two different regimes now. Not sure why given club form but there must be a reason. Rodd has been played by both and has been ok.
VRR is perma-crocked.
Murley might be ok and I would’ve had him before OHC.. but OHC has looked great for LI and shat the bed for Eng, albeit on a very small sample size in a dysfunctional team.
I think T Willy could be the business but he went with Dombo who also looks great for club but shat the bed for England. Who’s to say T Willy wouldn’t do the same - not that I think he would.
You can name names but there’s no one who just screams that they’re a top test player. Ben Earl was Prem player of the year in ‘22 and has looked nothing but average at test level. Pearson has ripped up trees this season but looked average, even if you don’t include that tackle, against Wales. He has to one for the next RWC cycle but he’d only displace T Cuzza or J Willy who are already one of our best players.
Just look at the recent u20 World Cup results and it’ll give you a clue of the quality off the academy conveyor belt recently.
The obviously top EQ Prem test quality players are all in that 33, sadly and imo.

I broadly agree that there aren't (m)any obviously international class players overlooked, but that does reflect on the coaches too. Several Scottish and Welsh starters weren't overwhelmingly obvious selections but after 2/3 years of consistent selection have learned to perform well at international level. The larger player pool means England always have the next big thing and an incumbent who's performing ok gets booted. I think you want someone to get at least 10-15 caps before you judge them.

Reminds me of England test captains where people said Strauss must go for FEC Cook, then Cook for FEC Root, then Root for Stokes... So perhaps our next new wing/8/10 will be the one!

[morepork]

It'd be nice if he coached a team that actually fired a few shots as opposed to playing not to lose.

[jngf]

Who I would pick based on squad available;

https://ranked-list-images.files.bbci.c ... 127f4.html

1 Genge
2 George
3 Stuart
4 Lawes
5 Ribbans
6 Ludlam
7 J Willis
8 Billy
9 Care
10 Smith
11 Daly
12 Lawrence
13 Marchant
14 Watson
15 Steward

Some very close calls eg Ribbans and Chessum, Ludlam and T Curry - but there’s others especially Itoje & Sinkler who need some bench time as a motivator to get their best form back

[Mellsblue]

To counter a question with a question...which potential test talents has he given more than a game or two? We have Billy, Marler, Tuilagi, to name three, who have been picked a lot - or parachuted in last minute in front of players who are playing better at the time - above potential test players like Tom Willis, Mercer, Rodd, VRR, Murley, who have either hardly had a look in, or have had 1 game, or maybe 2.

Eddie's big thing was to bring players into squad for what seemed like 2 years before they either got into the actual squad or were cast off.

And I've not mentioned Farrell once!

Farrell isn’t worth mentioning as even the likes of ROG would select him.
Mercer has been discarded by two different regimes now. Not sure why given club form but there must be a reason. Rodd has been played by both and has been ok.
VRR is perma-crocked.
Murley might be ok and I would’ve had him before OHC.. but OHC has looked great for LI and shat the bed for Eng, albeit on a very small sample size in a dysfunctional team.
I think T Willy could be the business but he went with Dombo who also looks great for club but shat the bed for England. Who’s to say T Willy wouldn’t do the same - not that I think he would.
You can name names but there’s no one who just screams that they’re a top test player. Ben Earl was Prem player of the year in ‘22 and has looked nothing but average at test level. Pearson has ripped up trees this season but looked average, even if you don’t include that tackle, against Wales. He has to one for the next RWC cycle but he’d only displace T Cuzza or J Willy who are already one of our best players.
Just look at the recent u20 World Cup results and it’ll give you a clue of the quality off the academy conveyor belt recently.
The obviously top EQ Prem test quality players are all in that 33, sadly and imo.

I broadly agree that there aren't (m)any obviously international class players overlooked, but that does reflect on the coaches too. Several Scottish and Welsh starters weren't overwhelmingly obvious selections but after 2/3 years of consistent selection have learned to perform well at international level. The larger player pool means England always have the next big thing and an incumbent who's performing ok gets booted. I think you want someone to get at least 10-15 caps before you judge them.

Reminds me of England test captains where people said Strauss must go for FEC Cook, then Cook for FEC Root, then Root for Stokes... So perhaps our next new wing/8/10 will be the one!

I absolutely agree that players need to get in to double figures before being judged but given that’s an entire international season and more games than Slovenly Bedraggled has had in his entire regime…
Who, since 2019, do you think hasn’t been given long enough in the team to prove their quality?
My point was more asking who is the glaring test quality player(s) that is missing from the squad? I can’t think of anybody.
Welcome to the board.