RWC Training Squad

[p/d]

Can any of our locks play 7?

[FKAS]

Can any of our locks play 7?

A back five of locks? That could work.

4. Ribbans
5. Chessum
6. Lawes
7. Itoje
8. Martin

Why not.

[p/d]

Can any of our locks play 7?

A back five of locks? That could work.

4. Ribbans
5. Chessum
6. Lawes
7. Itoje
8. Martin

Why not.

With Luds and Willis at 12 and 13, and old clappy guns on the wing.

[Puja]

Can any of our locks play 7?

A back five of locks? That could work.

4. Ribbans
5. Chessum
6. Lawes
7. Itoje
8. Martin

Why not.

With Luds and Willis at 12 and 13, and old clappy guns on the wing.

The Curries at 9 and 10, Pearson on the other wing, and BillyV at full-back because he continually needs to be picked for his "presence".

Puja

[Mikey Brown]

We really have hit rock bottom if we’re back to this.

[Danno]

Well, yes.

[Scrumhead]

I wouldn't disagree with any of that for a second but the point I was trying to understand was Ford saying 'too many mistakes in training' after 8 weeks (or whatever). If the match performance showed no improvement in togetherness, mistake reduction and discipline what have they been doing?

We whinge correctly about a lack of top class players but the players we have are a lot better, IMO, than their collective performance indicates. That is the big disappointment.

Feels more like he's saying what we're doing in training just isn't working and we're playing like shit. I'm not sure there's a whole lot more to read in to it?

And yes when 95% of the team are playing badly it seems pointless to even talk about individual player 'form'. We don't know what we're doing and it feels like basically everyone has lost confidence in it.

Make Ford attack coach, bring in Jonathon Joseph as defence coach and demote Wigglesworth to box-kick supervisor.

So who's starting at 8 vs Argentina?

Four choices for the 8 shirt appear to be Ludlam, Earl, J Willis and Curry (if fit). SB could have brought T Willis into the squad before yesterday but chose not to. Assuming that SB's 1st choice back row is Lawes, Curry and BV, if fit, Curry will start at 7 and Lawes at 6. I still think Willis is the best of the other three and would start him at 8 but SB, so far, disagrees. That means Ludlam at 8, I'd guess, with Earl on the bench. If Curry is not fit, presumably SB will then have Earl at 7 with Willis on the bench.

I do too. However, he’s never really replicated his club form at test level. He’s had some decent games, but not the stand out performances he’s put in for Wasps or Toulouse and quite a few disappointingly anonymous ones IMO.

In comparison, Ludlam is never less than good.

I prefer Willis as a player but right now, Ludlam is more effective at test level.

[Which Tyler]

I just can't believe that nobody's suggested Itoje at 8.

[Danno]

I just can't believe that nobody's suggested Itoje at 8.

I'm sure if you comb through * someone's * post history you will find it.

[Banquo]

I just can't believe that nobody's suggested Itoje at 8.

I'm sure if you comb through * someone's * post history you will find it.

yup

[p/d]

[

I do too. However, he’s never really replicated his club form at test level. He’s had some decent games, but not the stand out performances he’s put in for Wasps or Toulouse and quite a few disappointingly anonymous ones IMO.

In comparison, Ludlam is never less than good.

I prefer Willis as a player but right now, Ludlam is more effective at test level.

I have been underwhelmed by Willis at int level, yet always taken aback by Ludlam who I never really rated.

That said, in the few minutes he was afforded, brother Tom looked the best back rower available. I reckon he would have been an absolute natural on the international stage. But hey-ho

[Danno]

[

I do too. However, he’s never really replicated his club form at test level. He’s had some decent games, but not the stand out performances he’s put in for Wasps or Toulouse and quite a few disappointingly anonymous ones IMO.

In comparison, Ludlam is never less than good.

I prefer Willis as a player but right now, Ludlam is more effective at test level.

I have been underwhelmed by Willis at int level, yet always taken aback by Ludlam who I never really rated.

That said, in the few minutes he was afforded, brother Tom looked the best back rower available. I reckon he would have been an absolute natural on the international stage. But hey-ho

Might get to see him and Mercer duke it out in 6 months' time once we're embarrassed by Arg and turned over by Samoa. That has to be new coach time. Ludlam can keep 6 at the moment for my money, he gets everywhere.

[Mikey Brown]

[

I do too. However, he’s never really replicated his club form at test level. He’s had some decent games, but not the stand out performances he’s put in for Wasps or Toulouse and quite a few disappointingly anonymous ones IMO.

In comparison, Ludlam is never less than good.

I prefer Willis as a player but right now, Ludlam is more effective at test level.

I have been underwhelmed by Willis at int level, yet always taken aback by Ludlam who I never really rated.

That said, in the few minutes he was afforded, brother Tom looked the best back rower available. I reckon he would have been an absolute natural on the international stage. But hey-ho

Yep. You have to wonder what else Borthwick expected him to do in a 17 minute cameo to prove himself, or it was just a completely pointless exercise.

[Puja]

I just can't believe that nobody's suggested Itoje at 8.

That's very 2019. Itoje is dead to us now.

Puja

[Danno]

I just can't believe that nobody's suggested Itoje at 8.

That's very 2019. Itoje is dead to us now.

Puja

Well but what has he done for us lately??

[Spiffy]

In which case start Ludlam there and use Earl on attacking scrums on occasion to use his explosiveness.

Or just drop Earl completely.

Because you don’t like him or because of how he’s been playing?

I don't dislike him (I don't know him) but I'm not that fond of his histrionics. It's just that I don't think that he is particularly good player and certainly not consistent. I'd say he is probably overrated, but is an effective club player who catches the eye at Sarries, who are mostly on the front foot so it's not hard to shine. At international level he can have impressive flashes against minor opposition but against the big boys??? In any case I think he should be considered only as a 7. He's just too small for an international 8, especially in the Silly Bogger game plan (if there is such a thing). Of course I don't know how he is performing in training, but Pearson, for example, might have been a better call for the squad.

[p/d]

Not sure how to judge ‘works class’ these days but I’m pretty sure we don’t have any in our back row options. Likewise behind the scrum.

And that ain’t good going into a WC

[Oakboy]

Feels more like he's saying what we're doing in training just isn't working and we're playing like shit. I'm not sure there's a whole lot more to read in to it?

And yes when 95% of the team are playing badly it seems pointless to even talk about individual player 'form'. We don't know what we're doing and it feels like basically everyone has lost confidence in it.

Make Ford attack coach, bring in Jonathon Joseph as defence coach and demote Wigglesworth to box-kick supervisor.

So who's starting at 8 vs Argentina?

Four choices for the 8 shirt appear to be Ludlam, Earl, J Willis and Curry (if fit). SB could have brought T Willis into the squad before yesterday but chose not to. Assuming that SB's 1st choice back row is Lawes, Curry and BV, if fit, Curry will start at 7 and Lawes at 6. I still think Willis is the best of the other three and would start him at 8 but SB, so far, disagrees. That means Ludlam at 8, I'd guess, with Earl on the bench. If Curry is not fit, presumably SB will then have Earl at 7 with Willis on the bench.

I do too. However, he’s never really replicated his club form at test level. He’s had some decent games, but not the stand out performances he’s put in for Wasps or Toulouse and quite a few disappointingly anonymous ones IMO.

In comparison, Ludlam is never less than good.

I prefer Willis as a player but right now, Ludlam is more effective at test level.

Fair enough but that simply reflects the poor structure of the game plan. Against Fiji in the first half, it looked to me like Willis burned himself out doing far more than his share of first-up tackles. I think Ludlam dashes about more noticeably. (In p/d mode, the relative haircuts may help that.)

I'm getting to the point of simply not caring. An article in the DT suggests scraping to a SF could be the worst scenario because nothing will be changed as would happen with a failure to get out of the group stage.

Another article advocates a DoR appointment to introduce a long-term structure and avoid having a full coaching crew with no international experience. The depressing factor is that the RFU allowed that to happen on the back of their experience with Jones who appears to have been answerable to nobody. Quite simply, there is too much wrong with English rugby to still believe that just changing the head coach will put things right.

[Banquo]

Not sure how to judge ‘works class’ these days but I’m pretty sure we don’t have any in our back row options. Likewise behind the scrum.

And that ain’t good going into a WC

the working class get it in the neck again.

On Jack Willis- he's not had that many starts in truth, and mostly in a shyte team....the same would be true of ludlam in fairness....but their USP's are very different; Ludlam is a bouncy puppy who has learned to direct his energy and sharpened his ball retention and presentation in contact and looks the part more now (though imo he's not very fit); Willis is obvs a breakdown jackalling specialist and unglamorous carrier...and imo we haven't seen much of the former because he's having to do the ruck work of others (ditto Itoje methinks).

Raggs, where are you!

(should have read Dors post first, similar points)

[p/d]

Not sure how to judge ‘works class’ these days but I’m pretty sure we don’t have any in our back row options. Likewise behind the scrum.

And that ain’t good going into a WC

the working class get it in the neck again.

On Jack Willis- he's not had that many starts in truth, and mostly in a shyte team....the same would be true of ludlam in fairness....but their USP's are very different; Ludlam is a bouncy puppy who has learned to direct his energy and sharpened his ball retention and presentation in contact and looks the part more now (though imo he's not very fit); Willis is obvs a breakdown jackalling specialist and unglamorous carrier...and imo we haven't seen much of the former because he's having to do the ruck work of others (ditto Itoje methinks).

Raggs, where are you!

(should have read Dors post first, similar points)

bloody ‘works’ aagghhh

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah I’d assume Wilson was the last. Was he working class or just northern? I forget which is which.

I’d agree we’re beyond just changing out the coach and hoping everything fixes is itself. I think provided we can upgrade the coaching team around him there isn’t an obviously superior long-term coach hitting the market after the World Cup, is there?

It might be a matter of calling everything until RWC 2027 a ‘transition period’ and actually start doing some long term thinking. I guess that would require acknowledgement from the RFU about how shortsighted everything has been so far though.

[fivepointer]

Here is the DT article Dors refers to above about installing a DoR.

https://12ft.io/proxy?&q=https%3A%2F%2F ... -borthwick

Seems to me to be a thoroughly good idea.

[Banquo]

Here is the DT article Dors refers to above about installing a DoR.

https://12ft.io/proxy?&q=https%3A%2F%2F ... -borthwick

Seems to me to be a thoroughly good idea.

nothing new. was done before and is now mainly covered by conor o'shea's role.

IMO its less about structure/title, more about strategy and people.

[FKAS]

Here is the DT article Dors refers to above about installing a DoR.

https://12ft.io/proxy?&q=https%3A%2F%2F ... -borthwick

Seems to me to be a thoroughly good idea.

"In retrospect, it seems a clear mistake that Borthwick was allowed to recruit his entire coaching staff from Leicester Tigers at considerable expense."

Only Sinfield and Borthwick were costly the others had contracts up for renewal in the summer or in the case of Harrison would not have been expensive.

"A pool-stage exit, once unthinkable now worryingly plausible, is clearly the nightmare scenario."

Not that unthinkable, it's not like 2015 was that long ago the memory has faded.

The article is pretty much dross. Sensationalist garbage and as Banquo says Connor O'Shea is in the equivalent of a DOR role. Appointing Borthwick also gives the RFU more say in the goings on as he doesn't have the Eddie Jones attitude and wait of experience to reinforce his decision making.

[Mikey Brown]

Here is the DT article Dors refers to above about installing a DoR.

https://12ft.io/proxy?&q=https%3A%2F%2F ... -borthwick

Seems to me to be a thoroughly good idea.

nothing new. was done before and is now mainly covered by conor o'shea's role.

IMO its less about structure/title, more about strategy and people.

Did Jones have to report to O’Shea?