6 Nations Squad Announcement - 11:30am

[Banquo]

1. Genge
2. LCD
3. Stuart
4. Itoje
5. Chessum
6. Hill
7. Curry
8. Willis

9. Mitchell
10. Smith (unclear which)
11. Sleighthome
12. Dingwall
13. Lawrence
14. Freeman
15. Steward

That was sort of off the top of my head. Outside of the centers, I think it looks quite good

I'd be up for trying that centre combo (and overall backline with either Smith), but sticking Lawrence at i/c in defence, and mixing and matching them in attack.

Like the pack, tho haven't seen LCD this season and maybe Martin above Chessum. CCS on bench I assume with Chessum.....

[Banquo]

I think any team from that squad is going to have some yuk element to it. In Dublin, I'd pick:

1. Genge
2. LCD
3. Stuart
4. Itoje
5. Martin
6. CCS
7. Earl **
8. Willis

9. Mitchell
10. M Smith
11. Roebuck
12. Slade
13. Beard
14. Freeman
15. Steward

16. Dan
17. Baxter
18. Heyes
19. Chessum
20. Hill
21. JVP **
22. F Smith
23. Sleightholme

** Players I'd prefer to replace with Pollock and Quirke.

I'd be open to a 6:2 bench (omitting F Smith) but not with the other back row options in the squad. Possibly, one of the Currys but it's not opposition-scaring impact.

That backline outside 10 looks pretty turgid to me.

[Banquo]

I don’t see a world where a CCS, Earl, Willis back row works. Who is doing the grunt work? You can’t have three players who all want their hands on the ball all the time.

As special as CCS could be, he’s currently not in the right place quite a lot of the time. Impact of the bench is where we need him currently,

Willis strikes me as a good grunt v carrying balance, and he does work alongside Earl at Sarries, but its a fair point.

[Danno]

I don’t see a world where a CCS, Earl, Willis back row works. Who is doing the grunt work? You can’t have three players who all want their hands on the ball all the time.

As special as CCS could be, he’s currently not in the right place quite a lot of the time. Impact of the bench is where we need him currently,

Yep, it needs a glue player like Back, Robshaw, Wilson, Curry or Underhill.

[p/d]

CCS, Curry and Willis.

Hill defo on bench alongside old shouty (sadly)

[Oakboy]

I think any team from that squad is going to have some yuk element to it. In Dublin, I'd pick:

1. Genge
2. LCD
3. Stuart
4. Itoje
5. Martin
6. CCS
7. Earl **
8. Willis

9. Mitchell
10. M Smith
11. Roebuck
12. Slade
13. Beard
14. Freeman
15. Steward

16. Dan
17. Baxter
18. Heyes
19. Chessum
20. Hill
21. JVP **
22. F Smith
23. Sleightholme

** Players I'd prefer to replace with Pollock and Quirke.

I'd be open to a 6:2 bench (omitting F Smith) but not with the other back row options in the squad. Possibly, one of the Currys but it's not opposition-scaring impact.

That backline outside 10 looks pretty turgid to me.

Agreed. Taking out IFW and Furbank will leave some sort of compromise. Any combination from the selected squad has a degree of turgidity. I prefer Slade to Dingwall, Beard to Lawrence and Roebuck to Sleightholme. You and others may take the opposite view but will the end result really bother Ireland or France? I don't rate Steward but I'd rather have him at FB than Marcus or Daly. I was tempted to pick Slade at FB.

[Puja]

I think any team from that squad is going to have some yuk element to it. In Dublin, I'd pick:

1. Genge
2. LCD
3. Stuart
4. Itoje
5. Martin
6. CCS
7. Earl **
8. Willis

9. Mitchell
10. M Smith
11. Roebuck
12. Slade
13. Beard
14. Freeman
15. Steward

16. Dan
17. Baxter
18. Heyes
19. Chessum
20. Hill
21. JVP **
22. F Smith
23. Sleightholme

** Players I'd prefer to replace with Pollock and Quirke.

I'd be open to a 6:2 bench (omitting F Smith) but not with the other back row options in the squad. Possibly, one of the Currys but it's not opposition-scaring impact.

That backline outside 10 looks pretty turgid to me.

Agreed. Taking out IFW and Furbank will leave some sort of compromise. Any combination from the selected squad has a degree of turgidity. I prefer Slade to Dingwall, Beard to Lawrence and Roebuck to Sleightholme. You and others may take the opposite view but will the end result really bother Ireland or France? I don't rate Steward but I'd rather have him at FB than Marcus or Daly. I was tempted to pick Slade at FB.

After the past few weeks of insisting that FB is a specialist position and it's unconscionable to put anyone but a regular dedicated 15 there, I think you might've been mildly mocked if you'd given into temptation.

Puja

[FKAS]

For Ireland;

Genge, George, Stuart
Itoje, Martin
Chessum, TWillis, TCurry
Mitchell, F Smith
Slade, Lawrence
Roebuck, Steward, Freeman

LCD, Baxter, Heyes, CCS, Earl, JvP, M Smith, Sleightholme

Keep it tight early on look to impose ourselves on the game and then offload the bench for impact. Ireland will either go with a below par Crawley or a youthful Prendergast. Try and use that, play the territory and physical try to rattle him. Ireland will change it up in the second half with their bench at which point so can we. Dunno whether it'll be enough but hopefully make it close.

I was tempted to start Baxter and have Genge as impact off the bench but Baxter's form has been pretty poor in recent weeks. Didn't see the game at the weekend to see if there was any improvement.

[Oakboy]

That backline outside 10 looks pretty turgid to me.

Agreed. Taking out IFW and Furbank will leave some sort of compromise. Any combination from the selected squad has a degree of turgidity. I prefer Slade to Dingwall, Beard to Lawrence and Roebuck to Sleightholme. You and others may take the opposite view but will the end result really bother Ireland or France? I don't rate Steward but I'd rather have him at FB than Marcus or Daly. I was tempted to pick Slade at FB.

After the past few weeks of insisting that FB is a specialist position and it's unconscionable to put anyone but a regular dedicated 15 there, I think you might've been mildly mocked if you'd given into temptation.

Puja

Not a first!!!

[jngf]

That's fair that Martin isn't the lightest on his feet. He's been caught out a few times being a lone forward drifting out from the ruck. Not sure if that's just our defensive setup leaving holes though. I guess I wanted to see a partner closer to Skelton/Kruis for Itoje and Martin offers a lot more grunt than Chessum. Chessum is a fantastic all round player though, who can really slot in either role.

I think the best lock pairings always have an intimidating edge to them and that for me is Martin’s USP - Chessum and Itoje combined aren’t going to scare anyone to nearly the same extent though obviously they are superior atheletes to the former. I certainly never got the point of playing Martin at 6 and he’s not the most mobile for that role.

True although Martin may be physical, he's not the biggest of locks by modern standards is he? Everywhere you look it seems to say he's 6'6. The Boks and French are fielding all these 6'8, 6'9 monsters. I'm not sure the likes of RG Snyman etc would look at Martin and worry that much, even if he did destroy Mostert in one tackle some time ago.

His vital stats list him as 19 and a half stone which is pretty big by English lock standards

[Mikey Brown]

Weight is carried such different ways too. Snyman (did you know his name is Rudolph? I didn't) is obviously massive, but he plays much more like Itoje, if not even someone like Nakarawa.

Etzebeth is shorter and lighter (comparatively, obviously) than Snyman but is considerably more of a physical force I'd say. Martin has that 'dog' in him and the ability to really hammer his weight through a scrum or an attacker*. Nowhere near Etzebeth's athletic capabilities but he's the closest we've got to that physical presence in the pack. Chessum and Mostert is maybe a good comparison.

*Agreed I'd like to see him throw himself into carries more, but that's not the biggest priority to me frankly if he's picking up a bit more slack hitting rucks to allow guys like Willis, Earl, CCS, Hill more carries.

[FKAS]

Can't remember where it was but I heard someone describe George Martin as not that tall for a lock but he is deep. There's a lot of him and he he does make quite a lot of tackles. Quite a few big tackles but his technique isn't very showy and people don't tend to run directly at him anymore.

[Mr Mwenda]

I'm really glad for everyone's mental health that Willis has been called up. Now let's see him fail to make the match day 23

There's a decent team there if it plays to potential. Let's see if Ireland are continuing to age too fast for even their squad depth.

[Stom]

I don't know if it's bias, or that I rarely watch Prem matches not involving Quins, but I really don't understand why Murley would not get that 11 shirt...

He's quick, he's strong, he's got an incredible engine, he works hard, he jackals, he tackles well, he looks for work, he can chase kicks, he can wriggle out of tight spots, and he sports a dashing 'tache.

[Mellsblue]

I don't know if it's bias, or that I rarely watch Prem matches not involving Quins, but I really don't understand why Murley would not get that 11 shirt...

He's quick, he's strong, he's got an incredible engine, he works hard, he jackals, he tackles well, he looks for work, he can chase kicks, he can wriggle out of tight spots, and he sports a dashing 'tache.

I was unconvinced until the very end.

[p/d]

I was unconvinced until the very end.

[Mikey Brown]

I don't know if it's bias, or that I rarely watch Prem matches not involving Quins, but I really don't understand why Murley would not get that 11 shirt...

He's quick, he's strong, he's got an incredible engine, he works hard, he jackals, he tackles well, he looks for work, he can chase kicks, he can wriggle out of tight spots, and he sports a dashing 'tache.

I pretty much feel the same, but both Sleightholme and Roebuck have come in and shown a lot of quality too. Question marks over some defensive positioning, at a time when other established defensive leaders are also ballsing things up, seems slightly too harsh a reason to be dropped.

I’ve seen more of Murley than those two in recent weeks and he absolutely looks like he could make an impact for England if given the chance. Maybe I’d even let it come down to familiarity with whichever Smith is at 10.

I would say he’s probably the closest to IFW in terms of offering those extra metres out of nowhere. He’s so powerful for his size.

For now I don’t think I’d question Freeman’s spot at all. I quite like that NZ style pairing with a pure strike runner (IFW, Murley, OS, OHC) and a more rounded fullback-esque aerial threat (Freeman, Roebuck).

[Oakboy]

There's a decent team there if it plays to potential.

Brave statement, that. Our tight five are competitive but, even at their best, will they trouble Ireland (or France). I suppose they might just hold their own. We have a potential top quality back row IF Borthwick picks it - certainly one that can trouble Ireland.

As for the backs, we have in Mitchell and Marcus, a half back pairing that can match any other. Then what, though? I suppose a real top quality coaching set-up could develop an efficient back line that was more than the sum of its parts. Do we have that coaching standard in defence or attack?

Even if we do, where are the foundations after the performances in the AIs? Any togetherness presumably has to come from continuity which could mean Slade, Lawrence, Sleightholme, Freeman and Steward. Ford must not be involved based on his awful pre-conceived AI appearances.

Yes, this individual might be swapped for that one but is there anything outstanding on the sidelines? The one classy operator who could add something is Fin Smith. I don't like him only getting game time by moving Marcus to FB. In that debate, I find it odd that Fin at 12 has never been mentioned. I am not advocating it but it should have similar mileage of argument to Marcus at FB. Fin is the best defender of the three FHs so why not him at 12 - or 15, come to that?

I suppose the old 'game management' criticisms advocate moving Marcus. However, not keeping him at 10 for 80 IS disruptive. I'd suggest that improving Marcus's game management is a more realistic coaching goal than developing try-scoring flair in Fin or Ford.

It remains the case that our best try-scoring chances involve Marcus. They should improve with Mitchell back at 9.

I wonder if our coaches dare approach our first three 6N matches with real attacking ambition. The first priority must, presumably, be stopping the opposition back lines. That edges towards safety-first selections at 11-15 with attacking threats coming from Marcus's moments of magic or kick-chasing. I hope I'm wrong but that's the way I see it.

[Captainhaircut]

I know we’ve had a big run of results but some very pessimistic takes. Our tight 5 might hold their own against France and Ireland? Last time we played them we beat Ireland and lost to a last minute penalty in France. The tight 5 was plenty competitive in all 3 games against NZ and went well against SA too.

The 6N is a tough competition nowadays unfortunately. 3 wins out of 5 and competitive performances in the 2 losses would be a good return. Beat France and we can think about winning 4 out of 5.

Mitchell and Chessum (if fit) coming back in will make a big difference. Two of the first names in the team sheet for me, Mitchell possibly being the first.

[Mikey Brown]

I mean surely that opinion is an outlier. I'm not sure Oakboy will be happy unless every scrum and maul is going 20 metres forwards. You'd think we're getting absolutely smashed by all the big boys and losing to Wales, Italy, Japan etc. Oddly enough, our opponents are actually trying to win these games as well.

[FKAS]

I don't know if it's bias, or that I rarely watch Prem matches not involving Quins, but I really don't understand why Murley would not get that 11 shirt...

He's quick, he's strong, he's got an incredible engine, he works hard, he jackals, he tackles well, he looks for work, he can chase kicks, he can wriggle out of tight spots, and he sports a dashing 'tache.

I was unconvinced until the very end.

The tache is a key strength.

For me he's weak aerially and that might hamper his transition to international rugby. Harsh for a good player but his kick chase isn't going to allow us to contest and he might be targeted with crossfield kicks.

Iirc Tigers targeted him in the big game and successfully contested a lot of box kicks winning the ball back. Other international sides will have seen that and against say Ireland who's back three are all good enough to play fullback could be a tough afternoon for him or cause is to rely heavily on Steward switching to the wing to come and take the box kicks.

[TheDasher]

Weight is carried such different ways too. Snyman (did you know his name is Rudolph? I didn't) is obviously massive, but he plays much more like Itoje, if not even someone like Nakarawa.

Etzebeth is shorter and lighter (comparatively, obviously) than Snyman but is considerably more of a physical force I'd say. Martin has that 'dog' in him and the ability to really hammer his weight through a scrum or an attacker*. Nowhere near Etzebeth's athletic capabilities but he's the closest we've got to that physical presence in the pack. Chessum and Mostert is maybe a good comparison.

*Agreed I'd like to see him throw himself into carries more, but that's not the biggest priority to me frankly if he's picking up a bit more slack hitting rucks to allow guys like Willis, Earl, CCS, Hill more carries.

Can't disagree with anything you've said, but I still believe we don't generally punch as hard as SA, France or in fact NZ. To win the world cup, I think you need to be able to 'punch as hard', probably, unless you're fcking good everywhere else, which we're not. I am not going all Beefeater here, I am a massive Itoje fan, I rate Alex Coles, rate Chessum and as I said, do like Martin.

We beat Ireland in the 6ns and then went to France and narrowly lost. If you remember, France's midfield defence that day was atrocious, not sure what happened, our backs were on fire and they were all at sea in defence. Up front though, they literally threw us around like rag dolls. We are capable of putting up stronger physical resistance against the Boks too I think. Our scrummage is an issue. Rugby has followed NFL a little, the size of the athletes is/has increased and to win the world cup you need to be able to achieve parity with the strongest, probably...

So look, we're ok, Alex Coles is 6'7 and rapid, Itoje is class, Chessum and Martin are great but when thinking about the next cab off the rank, I'd really be looking for a really big, heavy scrummaging forward. It's also while I like Seb Blake and Blamire, they look strong but also mobile, and it's why Fasogbon could be worth his weight in gold literally. I'm not saying we pick a pack just on size (hence I'm not championing Painter at Exeter for instance) but I think we must have that muscle as an option in the tight five.

Back row, we are more than fine in this regard.

[TheDasher]

Inside centre is a shit show. Dingwall can't be the man, nowhere near I'd say and Slade absolutely not... he's a utility squad, safety pick if anything, nowhere near a starter. I hate to say it but from the players SCW has picked I'd have to go all SCW and just throw Freeman in at 13 and play Lawrence at 12 again. If he picks Freeman on the wing then Beard at 13.

[Mikey Brown]

Weight is carried such different ways too. Snyman (did you know his name is Rudolph? I didn't) is obviously massive, but he plays much more like Itoje, if not even someone like Nakarawa.

Etzebeth is shorter and lighter (comparatively, obviously) than Snyman but is considerably more of a physical force I'd say. Martin has that 'dog' in him and the ability to really hammer his weight through a scrum or an attacker*. Nowhere near Etzebeth's athletic capabilities but he's the closest we've got to that physical presence in the pack. Chessum and Mostert is maybe a good comparison.

*Agreed I'd like to see him throw himself into carries more, but that's not the biggest priority to me frankly if he's picking up a bit more slack hitting rucks to allow guys like Willis, Earl, CCS, Hill more carries.

Can't disagree with anything you've said, but I still believe we don't generally punch as hard as SA, France or in fact NZ. To win the world cup, I think you need to be able to 'punch as hard', probably, unless you're fcking good everywhere else, which we're not. I am not going all Beefeater here, I am a massive Itoje fan, I rate Alex Coles, rate Chessum and as I said, do like Martin.

We beat Ireland in the 6ns and then went to France and narrowly lost. If you remember, France's midfield defence that day was atrocious, not sure what happened, our backs were on fire and they were all at sea in defence. Up front though, they literally threw us around like rag dolls. We are capable of putting up stronger physical resistance against the Boks too I think. Our scrummage is an issue. Rugby has followed NFL a little, the size of the athletes is/has increased and to win the world cup you need to be able to achieve parity with the strongest, probably...

So look, we're ok, Alex Coles is 6'7 and rapid, Itoje is class, Chessum and Martin are great but when thinking about the next cab off the rank, I'd really be looking for a really big, heavy scrummaging forward. It's also while I like Seb Blake and Blamire, they look strong but also mobile, and it's why Fasogbon could be worth his weight in gold literally. I'm not saying we pick a pack just on size (hence I'm not championing Painter at Exeter for instance) but I think we must have that muscle as an option in the tight five.

Back row, we are more than fine in this regard.

Who is that though? Jonny Hill? Dom Barrow? Danny Grewcock? Maybe I've lost track of what it is you're actually suggesting here. I'm not against Jonny Hill forcing his way back in. He's huge and annoying but I don't know if he is as physical as Martin though.

To me, seeing Martin stand up to the SA pack in the world cup was a pretty defining moment. Sure we need others in the pack with that edge, but I feel like he's got it. Guys like Genge and Dombrandt don't seem to have been able to transfer their strengths to test level.

I like Blamire too. I'm not really sure why he got ditched. He had a lot to work on but definitely no more than Dan.

Fasogban definitely has that edge to him. I can't remember if it was Dan Cole or Max Lahiff, but I'd take the word of either as opposition tight-heads, saying they just can't beleive Benno Obanno isn't in the squad and is the best scrummaging loosehead in the league. He also looks to have that heft and aggression that we might be missing.

[Mikey Brown]

I don't know if it's bias, or that I rarely watch Prem matches not involving Quins, but I really don't understand why Murley would not get that 11 shirt...

He's quick, he's strong, he's got an incredible engine, he works hard, he jackals, he tackles well, he looks for work, he can chase kicks, he can wriggle out of tight spots, and he sports a dashing 'tache.

I was unconvinced until the very end.

The tache is a key strength.

For me he's weak aerially and that might hamper his transition to international rugby. Harsh for a good player but his kick chase isn't going to allow us to contest and he might be targeted with crossfield kicks.

Iirc Tigers targeted him in the big game and successfully contested a lot of box kicks winning the ball back. Other international sides will have seen that and against say Ireland who's back three are all good enough to play fullback could be a tough afternoon for him or cause is to rely heavily on Steward switching to the wing to come and take the box kicks.

I'd draw a distinction between being a good chaser and being good in the air, he's good at timing his chase and applying pressure. I do agree getting up in the air is probably the weakest part of his game that may be a deal-breaker for Borthwick.