RugbyRebels

I honestly think England could make a bit more use of Underhill as a carrier - we don’t see him do it very often, but when it happens it looks pretty powerful and explosive.

Tigersman wrote:Wasn't Williams just as injury prone? If not more

2017/18
- Francis played 21 games (1,364 minutes)
- Williams played 16 (1,150)

2018/19
- Francis 23 games (1,402)
- Williams 17 games (1,109)

Not doing the 2019/20 stats as he was diagnosed with cancer after the 2019 season.

I think the situation with Williams was complicated. Reading his recent interviews, his dad was a big influence on his decision and I imagine the cancer made him reflect on his opportunities.

I don’t really think England missed a trick TBH. There was definitely interest shown, but I think Williams’ injuries often coincided with England camps and he was never likely to be selected when first London Irish and then Newcastle were in the Championship.

jngf wrote:I honestly think England could make a bit more use of Underhill as a carrier - we don’t see him do it very often, but when it happens it looks pretty powerful and explosive.

Underhill is decent enough carrier and maybe he is under-used, but I wouldn’t have used the word ‘explosive’. If it becomes a shoot out between Underhill and Willis, the latter is a much more effective carrier in traffic and probably faster/more elusive in wider channels. Underhill’s defence is his best chance of staying in the team, not more of his OK, but not notably brilliant carrying.

Scrumhead wrote:

jngf wrote:I honestly think England could make a bit more use of Underhill as a carrier - we don’t see him do it very often, but when it happens it looks pretty powerful and explosive.

Underhill is decent enough carrier and maybe he is under-used, but I wouldn’t have used the word ‘explosive’. If it becomes a shoot out between Underhill and Willis, the latter is a much more effective carrier in traffic and probably faster/more elusive in wider channels. Underhill’s defence is his best chance of staying in the team, not more of his OK, but not notably brilliant carrying.

Not sure who would be the quicker of the two tbh.

Banquo wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

jngf wrote:I honestly think England could make a bit more use of Underhill as a carrier - we don’t see him do it very often, but when it happens it looks pretty powerful and explosive.

Underhill is decent enough carrier and maybe he is under-used, but I wouldn’t have used the word ‘explosive’. If it becomes a shoot out between Underhill and Willis, the latter is a much more effective carrier in traffic and probably faster/more elusive in wider channels. Underhill’s defence is his best chance of staying in the team, not more of his OK, but not notably brilliant carrying.

Not sure who would be the quicker of the two tbh.

The quickest effective carrier is probably Simmonds - so speed counts for FA with Jones, perhaps.

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:
Underhill is decent enough carrier and maybe he is under-used, but I wouldn’t have used the word ‘explosive’. If it becomes a shoot out between Underhill and Willis, the latter is a much more effective carrier in traffic and probably faster/more elusive in wider channels. Underhill’s defence is his best chance of staying in the team, not more of his OK, but not notably brilliant carrying.

Not sure who would be the quicker of the two tbh.

The quickest effective carrier is probably Simmonds - so speed counts for FA with Jones, perhaps.

footrace with him and Earl would be fun

Scrumhead wrote:

jngf wrote:I honestly think England could make a bit more use of Underhill as a carrier - we don’t see him do it very often, but when it happens it looks pretty powerful and explosive.

Underhill is decent enough carrier and maybe he is under-used, but I wouldn’t have used the word ‘explosive’. If it becomes a shoot out between Underhill and Willis, the latter is a much more effective carrier in traffic and probably faster/more elusive in wider channels. Underhill’s defence is his best chance of staying in the team, not more of his OK, but not notably brilliant carrying.

The only notable carry I can remember from Underhill was the sadly ruled out try Vs All Blacks. Turned Barrett inside out which was very funny.

England: Daly; Joseph, Slade, Farrell, May; Ford, Youngs; M Vunipola, George, Sinckler, Itoje, Launchbury, Curry, Underhill, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Genge, Stuart, Hill, Earl, Willis, Robson, Watson.

Exciting forward selection, complete shite in the backs.

How is it complete shite?

The least penetrative midfield possible

Adam_P wrote:The least penetrative midfield possible

Depends on whether you plan on penetrating through handling, speed and a step, or smash.

I’m not a lover of the ‘FFS’ combination, but we haven’t really been relying on ‘penetrative’ midfield in any case. Almost a bit irrelevant who plays 13 in attack TBH.

Otherwise I quite like the pack and bench. I’m not generally a lover or 6:2 but I think we could murder Wales up front.

I hate 6:2, but interesting he's continuing with May as openside wing and JJ as third centre. I hope its better organised this time!

Raggs wrote:

Adam_P wrote:The least penetrative midfield possible

Depends on whether you plan on penetrating through handling, speed and a step, or smash.

sort of, but you need someone to hold the midfield defence to enable the handling/speed/step to work, which is obviously the approach for this midfield.

I'll take the 6.2 split since it probably allowed Willis another potential cap. I'll be pretty irritated if he gets Dunn over by Eddie.

Danno wrote:I'll take the 6.2 split since it probably allowed Willis another potential cap. I'll be pretty irritated if he gets Dunn over by Eddie.

I'd imagine wasps less than impressed

FKAS wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

jngf wrote:I honestly think England could make a bit more use of Underhill as a carrier - we don’t see him do it very often, but when it happens it looks pretty powerful and explosive.

Underhill is decent enough carrier and maybe he is under-used, but I wouldn’t have used the word ‘explosive’. If it becomes a shoot out between Underhill and Willis, the latter is a much more effective carrier in traffic and probably faster/more elusive in wider channels. Underhill’s defence is his best chance of staying in the team, not more of his OK, but not notably brilliant carrying.

The only notable carry I can remember from Underhill was the sadly ruled out try Vs All Blacks. Turned Barrett inside out which was very funny.

He carried to good effect once last Saturday- I do think he has decent speed. He's generally occupied doing other things ...he's just not a go to carrier.

FKAS wrote:England: Daly; Joseph, Slade, Farrell, May; Ford, Youngs; M Vunipola, George, Sinckler, Itoje, Launchbury, Curry, Underhill, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Genge, Stuart, Hill, Earl, Willis, Robson, Watson.

Exciting forward selection, complete shite in the backs.

I quite like it. Major upside - Ford at 10. I'm not thrilled about FFS as it hasn't looked balanced when tried in the past, but I'm intrigued to see if this roving-centre/wing tactic has any legs. It's innovative, which is something that people have accused Eddie of not being and, with Ford at 10, there's a decent chance that we'll actually *use* it this week, rather than just having Joseph chase kicks.

Plus, quite importantly, if it does prove to be something that works at international level, it's a tactic that's replicable even when there's an injury, as Marchant is ideally placed to play the Joseph role.

Puja

Precisely one change to the starting XV, Ford for Lawrence.

Ford at 10 is an obvious upgrade on Farrell.

Dont like a 6/2 bench but at least it gives hope to see something of Willis and Earl together. Maybe a touch more than 5 minutes too.

Tired of 6:2 and FFS, like most others, as much as either can work on their day if everything else is clicking. Ford in at flyhalf improves the team in general though.

Gutted for Dunn. What a slap in face to put in all the hours and not even be given a chance to show what he can do before getting replaced.

On Underhill I think he actually runs some really clever lines in attack but I’d assume his role is focussed on securing possession rather than taking the ball forward. I think maybe he lacks that extra bit of pace, footwork, or a handoff that would make him a better primary carrier.

Adam_P wrote:The least penetrative midfield possible

Agreed it's flacid it's that penetrative.

Why give Ford the 10 shirt and then give him nothing to work with? Farrell is half a centre at best so is of little attacking use to Ford unless they want a second distributor in which case Farrell will probably come in for the short pass so Ford can make the longer tougher one. Slade is actually a centre but plays best with a direct runner at 12, could develop to play 12 with a direct 13 but he'll have no room to work because Farrell will do nothing to hold the midfield defence and Ford can't hold an entire midfield by himself. Slade wants to go in the outside and bring in the back three but you need some space for that.

Joseph is about the only running option, having him come off the blindside and hit the outside arc will work once or twice but that's an option that will become easy to read. May works best in space which he won't have unless it's from a kick. Daly is similar but will probably be targeted with Joseph by the Welsh kicking game.

Thankfully Wales are struggling at the minute so the selection and omission of Cockansiga shouldn't hurt our chances too much.

Puja wrote:

FKAS wrote:England: Daly; Joseph, Slade, Farrell, May; Ford, Youngs; M Vunipola, George, Sinckler, Itoje, Launchbury, Curry, Underhill, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Genge, Stuart, Hill, Earl, Willis, Robson, Watson.

Exciting forward selection, complete shite in the backs.

I quite like it. Major upside - Ford at 10. I'm not thrilled about FFS as it hasn't looked balanced when tried in the past, but I'm intrigued to see if this roving-centre/wing tactic has any legs. It's innovative, which is something that people have accused Eddie of not being and, with Ford at 10, there's a decent chance that we'll actually *use* it this week, rather than just having Joseph chase kicks.

Plus, quite importantly, if it does prove to be something that works at international level, it's a tactic that's replicable even when there's an injury, as Marchant is ideally placed to play the Joseph role.

Puja

I suppose that is a polite way of saying it.

Lewis-Hughes at 6 and Botham at 7 for Wales. That’s a very callow pair of flankers.

English boys in at centre too.

Scrumhead wrote:Lewis-Hughes at 6 and Botham at 7 for Wales. That’s a very callow pair of flankers.

English boys in at centre too.

Christ on a bike!!! they obviously think May & Joseph are potential weak links in defence.

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:
Underhill is decent enough carrier and maybe he is under-used, but I wouldn’t have used the word ‘explosive’. If it becomes a shoot out between Underhill and Willis, the latter is a much more effective carrier in traffic and probably faster/more elusive in wider channels. Underhill’s defence is his best chance of staying in the team, not more of his OK, but not notably brilliant carrying.

The only notable carry I can remember from Underhill was the sadly ruled out try Vs All Blacks. Turned Barrett inside out which was very funny.

He carried to good effect once last Saturday- I do think he has decent speed. He's generally occupied doing other things ...he's just not a go to carrier.

He’s quick enough - the famous cover tackle on Scott Williams is good evidence on that front. He’s shown he’s pretty good at popping up on the shoulder and hitting some decent lines. I don’t know where jngf has the idea that he has ‘explosive’ carrying ability that England (and Bath) are ignoring though.