RugbyRebels

Danno wrote:MB summed it up neatly earlier, saying "Dombrandt wouldn't get off the couch for a cap". Not a chance Eddie will pick him until he actually plays for more than 20mins per match.

Is this the new Watson isn't a FB?

Stom wrote:

JellyHead wrote:The team for Scotland was announced on thursday so I assume we'll find out tomorrow.

I'm expecting minimal changes...

We might see Lawrence sacrificed at the altar of Eddie, while we might see Earl or Willis get a start. And the two props will either be starting or on the bench.

There's also a chance Hill misses out for Lawes.

Don't expect anything else.

Why do I get the oddest feeling we might see Lawes in the no.8 shirt thIs weekend?

jngf wrote:

Stom wrote:

JellyHead wrote:The team for Scotland was announced on thursday so I assume we'll find out tomorrow.

I'm expecting minimal changes...

We might see Lawrence sacrificed at the altar of Eddie, while we might see Earl or Willis get a start. And the two props will either be starting or on the bench.

There's also a chance Hill misses out for Lawes.

Don't expect anything else.

Why do I get the oddest feeling we might see Lawes in the no.8 shirt thIs weekend?

Because you’re weird?

Too much cheese before bed?

Stom wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
Quite, why on earth would you be looking to move Dombrandt to lock, if you wanted a young back row to play there surely you'd look at Hill, and not just because Dombrandt doesn't play lock and looks short and looks something of an ask to get up in the air.

Dombrandt to lock is the sort of thing I'd expect from an excited 10 year old who wants to pick as many carriers as possible because that's what looks good to them on TV. And in part that's fine, I think there's a reasonable case we lacked carriers against Scotland especially with George and Billy having spent lockdown locked in a KFC, but as a whole that's bad even for Clive

While Dombrandt playing lock for England is traditional Woodward bonkers, I do feel the need to point out that Dombrandt does and has played lock (certainly more recently and regularly than Hill) and was signed for Quins as a lock/back row.

Puja

TBF, he wasn't a pro player when he was playing lock...

He's not played lock for Quins and we're his first pro contract. It's akin to saying Andrew Sheridan could have locked for England.

Sheridan did lock for England didn't he? On a tour to Argentina during the Lions or some such?

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:

Puja wrote:
While Dombrandt playing lock for England is traditional Woodward bonkers, I do feel the need to point out that Dombrandt does and has played lock (certainly more recently and regularly than Hill) and was signed for Quins as a lock/back row.

Puja

TBF, he wasn't a pro player when he was playing lock...

He's not played lock for Quins and we're his first pro contract. It's akin to saying Andrew Sheridan could have locked for England.

Sheridan did lock for England didn't he? On a tour to Argentina during the Lions or some such?

Sheridan did actually start as a lock/8, Bristol (Pete Thorburn I think) moved him into the front row.

Stom wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
Quite, why on earth would you be looking to move Dombrandt to lock, if you wanted a young back row to play there surely you'd look at Hill, and not just because Dombrandt doesn't play lock and looks short and looks something of an ask to get up in the air.

Dombrandt to lock is the sort of thing I'd expect from an excited 10 year old who wants to pick as many carriers as possible because that's what looks good to them on TV. And in part that's fine, I think there's a reasonable case we lacked carriers against Scotland especially with George and Billy having spent lockdown locked in a KFC, but as a whole that's bad even for Clive

While Dombrandt playing lock for England is traditional Woodward bonkers, I do feel the need to point out that Dombrandt does and has played lock (certainly more recently and regularly than Hill) and was signed for Quins as a lock/back row.

Puja

TBF, he wasn't a pro player when he was playing lock...

He's not played lock for Quins and we're his first pro contract. It's akin to saying Andrew Sheridan could have locked for England.

I could've sworn that he played lock a couple of times for Quins in his first season? I reserve the right to be wrong at all times.

Puja

Oakboy wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Is Jones mega-mercenary? What I am getting at is will he cling on to screw the RFU for every last contract penny or will he resign with good grace once he realises it's not going to happen for him? I'm inclined to think he is honourable enough to prefer to go before he is pushed.

Let's face it, by any standards he cannot claim to he succeeding in his job if he loses any more games this 6N. If he was to lose a 2nd match he'd have only a 60% success rate. With the standard of our squad that can only mean 'goodbye' for a coach judged purely on results surely?

Meg-mercenary?

Would you?

If you were in your 60s, and had a job worth £400-450k per year, and 2 years left on your contract - would you walk away from that, probably into retirement, for "the greater good" of a country you have no allegiance to, and who wouldn't actually be in a better position without you (in your opinion)

I think Jones believes he is doing a good job but is starting to have doubts - did you see his facial expression and body language at pitchside midway through the 2nd half? I really don't care if he demands all his contract money. I was reacting to MB's question of whether the RFU can afford to buy him out.

So far in his career he has usually run out of steam and been replaced. He still might talk a good job but he is 'results or nothing'. In the press today he is quoted as saying, 'I always pick the best 23.' That was in defence of questions about dropping Farrell. You might believe in his chances of success with long-term planning. I don't. To me, that is just spin to try to cover his failings since being so demonstrably out-coached by the SA HC.

Honestly, I think that one of the worst things about losing to Scotland was adding fuel to your bonfire.

Let’s look at the actual facts.

Eddie’s win rate is 78%. Better than any other England coach and only bettered by NZ in the same period. How can you honestly say there are any reasonable grounds to sack him if there’s not another coach in test rugby with that win %?

Are we getting the most out of our player pool? Absolutely not. Do I like the way we’re playing at the moment? No. In fact, I can’t stand it and I have spent the majority of the time I’ve spent watching England recently shouting at the TV in frustration. BUT, I do back Eddie to get us back to playing well again and I don’t honestly believe there is a better alternative out there right now.

I also don’t believe we were ‘out-coached’ in the RWC final. We were certainly out-performed. We simply did not show up and while Eddie is ultimately accountable, I think the bottle job was on the pitch. Rassie Erasmus had one gameplan SA used in every game. He’s not a tactical genius. They were simply a lot better than we were on the day.

As for Farrell, I’m not (and never have been a fan), but Eddie Jones clearly isn’t the only one to think he is ‘World Class’. Over the past 5 or 6 years, the conventional wisdom was that Farrell was England’s talisman and the one of the best 10s in World Rugby. That came from a plethora of coaches and players around the world - not just journalists.

Eddie’s also right about a ‘bandwagon’. Yesterday Farrell was routinely lauded by the media. Now, it’s become fashionable to call for him to be dropped. Most of us here never felt the praise was justified, it’s just that the media have now caught on to the fact that he’s not the messiah.

Stom wrote:

Danno wrote:MB summed it up neatly earlier, saying "Dombrandt wouldn't get off the couch for a cap". Not a chance Eddie will pick him until he actually plays for more than 20mins per match.

Is this the new Watson isn't a FB?

No, he's just fucking lazy. Outstanding player, but goes missing for half of every game he plays.

jngf wrote:

Stom wrote:

JellyHead wrote:The team for Scotland was announced on thursday so I assume we'll find out tomorrow.

I'm expecting minimal changes...

We might see Lawrence sacrificed at the altar of Eddie, while we might see Earl or Willis get a start. And the two props will either be starting or on the bench.

There's also a chance Hill misses out for Lawes.

Don't expect anything else.

Why do I get the oddest feeling we might see Lawes in the no.8 shirt thIs weekend?

That sounds like a really odd feeling. Should I call someone for you? Be specific because I don't know whether I should call a medical professional or a sexual professional. I'll try to ensure they're bulky and wearing an 8 on their back either way, but no promises. X

Scrumhead wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Which Tyler wrote: Meg-mercenary?

Would you?

If you were in your 60s, and had a job worth £400-450k per year, and 2 years left on your contract - would you walk away from that, probably into retirement, for "the greater good" of a country you have no allegiance to, and who wouldn't actually be in a better position without you (in your opinion)

I think Jones believes he is doing a good job but is starting to have doubts - did you see his facial expression and body language at pitchside midway through the 2nd half? I really don't care if he demands all his contract money. I was reacting to MB's question of whether the RFU can afford to buy him out.

So far in his career he has usually run out of steam and been replaced. He still might talk a good job but he is 'results or nothing'. In the press today he is quoted as saying, 'I always pick the best 23.' That was in defence of questions about dropping Farrell. You might believe in his chances of success with long-term planning. I don't. To me, that is just spin to try to cover his failings since being so demonstrably out-coached by the SA HC.

Honestly, I think that one of the worst things about losing to Scotland was adding fuel to your bonfire.

Let’s look at the actual facts.

Eddie’s win rate is 78%. Better than any other England coach and only bettered by NZ in the same period. How can you honestly say there are any reasonable grounds to sack him if there’s not another coach in test rugby with that win %?

Are we getting the most out of our player pool? Absolutely not. Do I like the way we’re playing at the moment? No. In fact, I can’t stand it and I have spent the majority of the time I’ve spent watching England recently shouting at the TV in frustration. BUT, I do back Eddie to get us back to playing well again and I don’t honestly believe there is a better alternative out there right now.

I also don’t believe we were ‘out-coached’ in the RWC final. We were certainly out-performed. We simply did not show up and while Eddie is ultimately accountable, I think the bottle job was on the pitch. Rassie Erasmus had one gameplan SA used in every game. He’s not a tactical genius. They were simply a lot better than we were on the day.

As for Farrell, I’m not (and never have been a fan), but Eddie Jones clearly isn’t the only one to think he is ‘World Class’. Over the past 5 or 6 years, the conventional wisdom was that Farrell was England’s talisman and the one of the best 10s in World Rugby. That came from a plethora of coaches and players around the world - not just journalists.

Eddie’s also right about a ‘bandwagon’. Yesterday Farrell was routinely lauded by the media. Now, it’s become fashionable to call for him to be dropped. Most of us here never felt the praise was justified, it’s just that the media have now caught on to the fact that he’s not the messiah.

Good post.

Puja wrote:

Stom wrote:

Puja wrote:
While Dombrandt playing lock for England is traditional Woodward bonkers, I do feel the need to point out that Dombrandt does and has played lock (certainly more recently and regularly than Hill) and was signed for Quins as a lock/back row.

Puja

TBF, he wasn't a pro player when he was playing lock...

He's not played lock for Quins and we're his first pro contract. It's akin to saying Andrew Sheridan could have locked for England.

I could've sworn that he played lock a couple of times for Quins in his first season? I reserve the right to be wrong at all times.

Puja

I first saw Sheridan play in and England shirt at lock in a midweek game in South Africa in 2000 I think. His power was on a different level to anyone else on the pitch. Pity international level wasn't so uneven.

Scrumhead wrote:
Honestly, I think that one of the worst things about losing to Scotland was adding fuel to your bonfire.

Let’s look at the actual facts.

Eddie’s win rate is 78%. Better than any other England coach and only bettered by NZ in the same period. How can you honestly say there are any reasonable grounds to sack him if there’s not another coach in test rugby with that win %?

I thought I'd get that reaction from you, young man. I certainly respect your view, your consistency and your reasoned arguments.

However (I bet you are not surprised), I will stick to my opinion. I stand by what I said the other day that, in 50 years of watching, the England team's current performances RELATIVE TO THE STANDARD OF THE PLAYING BASE, are the worst I have seen.

Jones's win rate is one argument. However, let's assume that you were an outside observer of another country's team with Jones in charge with the same standard of player pool and those performances/results. Would you appoint him to the England job? I very much doubt it.

Cut him slack? I don't think so. The team is horrible to watch and underperforms every time it is on the pitch. That leaves results - win %ages, if you like. Only in Jones's time has winning the 6N been that much of a claim. Before his time, winning without a GS was seen as a poor consolation. How many times has he got a GS? When was the last one? When was the last meaningful tournament when we won every match? Sometimes, when a defeat happens is the most crucial measure.

The RFU will no doubt take your viewpoint. Even now, I really hope that Jones can turn things round but I thoroughly doubt his ability to do so. I have doubted it since the RWC final defeat to SA (and I still think Jones's overall win statistics are flattered by the initial winning run).

So, Mallinder in as coach? Is Mallet still about?

England team to face Italy
England: Daly; Watson, Slade, Farrell (capt), May; Ford, Youngs; M Vunipola, Cowan-Dickie, Sinckler, Itoje, Hill, Lawes, Curry, B Vunipola.
Replacements: George, Genge, Stuart, Ewels, Earl, Willis, Robson, Malins.

That will upset a few - Lawes at 6 AND a 6:2 bench split!

Lol. Do one Ollie Lawrence. You're useless. That's proper man management right there.

Why do I doubt it will take Farrell an hour to get a touch on Saturday?

15. Elliot Daly (Saracens, 48 caps)
14. Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 47 caps)
13. Henry Slade (Exeter Chiefs, 35 caps)
12. Owen Farrell (C) (Saracens, 89 caps)
11. Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby, 62 caps)
10. George Ford (Leicester Tigers, 73 caps)
9. Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 105 caps)

1. Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 63 caps)
2. Luke Cowan-Dickie (Exeter Chiefs, 27 caps)
3. Kyle Sinckler (Bristol Bears, 40 caps)
4. Maro Itoje (Saracens, 44 caps)
5. Jonny Hill (Exeter Chiefs, 5 caps)
6. Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 86 caps)
7. Tom Curry (Sale Sharks, 29 caps)
8. Billy Vunipola (Saracens, 57 caps)

FINISHERS
16. Jamie George (Saracens, 55 caps)
17. Ellis Genge (Leicester Tigers, 24 caps)
18. Will Stuart (Bath Rugby, 9 caps)
19. Charlie Ewels (Bath Rugby, 17 caps)
20. Ben Earl (Bristol Bears, 9 caps)
21. Jack Willis (Wasps, 2 caps)
22. Dan Robson (Wasps, 8 caps)
23. Max Malins (Bristol Bears, 4 caps)

Redpath's one-game stand-in?

lol

Oakboy wrote:Redpath's one-game stand-in?

When you look at the make up of the team its gonna be more of the same it seems...

Typical. We have more outstanding flankers than we know what to do with, yet Courtney f*cking Lawes at 6 is the answer to a defeat.

Puja

Puja wrote:Typical. We have more outstanding flankers than we know what to do with, yet Courtney f*cking Lawes at 6 is the answer to a defeat.

Puja

This.

Ever bloody decreasing circles.

Gets dropped because Baby Faz wouldn't pass to him.

It's a bit like the mob - once you're a made man, you're untouchable. Must be so depressing to be a talented, young English player right now.