Re: England vs Australia - Sat 3.10pm
Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2025 11:36 am
Yep. We’re creating a gameplan that suits the players we have not hankering for mythical players of a certain size.
Can't argue with SB doing that. Do you see him chopping and changing? I suppose he could build towards NZ with few changes next week. Conversely, will he swap some of the bench in with some of the Lions now tuned in?
I 100% agree with this. I was in favour of picking Ford for yesterday's game, but I think his remaining time is as a "controller" sub, or starting if F Smith is injured. Although Ford's distribution is excellent, he and Dingwall clearly weren't quite on the same telepathic wavelength, and that should change if we start F Smith. I didn't think Dingers has a particularly good game - and not just because of the intercept (although that was a shocker), but I'd like to try him again with F Smith inside. I feel their combo would really unlock what our backs attack is trying to do.Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 8:55 amI saw no cohesion between the two. Ford is just a traffic cone in defence (whereas Fin is a decent defender). That puts pressure on the IC. In attack, did they do anything together? Ford is the form FH but yesterday he did not get the best out of situations as they arose, arguably his strong point over competitors usually. Dingwall looked ordinary but would have looked better with Fin at 10. That's all I am saying. I would like to see the one change for the next game - Fin for Ford. After that, if it does not work, maybe Dingwall should go.SixAndAHalf wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 8:00 amWhat would be the reasoning for Ford hindering Dingwall? I can’t see how you can blame Ford for his intercept for exampleOakboy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 01, 2025 7:20 pm
Was Dingwall bad or did Ford make him look so? Argue for and against Dingwall and Freeman but why not start Fin to complete the Saints connection? I thought Mitchell and Ford were on different wavelengths. Either pick the Saints back line or build a different one around Ford.
I have advocated Freeman at 13 and saw enough good to want him retained there. I think he needs Dingwall inside him for now. Let's face it, there are three games to get it right or bloody Farrell will be back for the 6N.
I was in favour of picking FSmith to start with, as he has a pre-existing connection with Dingwall, but it seems odd to call for a change now after they've had 70-odd minutes together. If the opinion is that Ford is the better player right now, then we need to actually give that combination time to gel, rather than chuck it in tbe bin because it wasn't perfect after three training sessions and one match!pjm1 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 11:53 amI 100% agree with this. I was in favour of picking Ford for yesterday's game, but I think his remaining time is as a "controller" sub, or starting if F Smith is injured. Although Ford's distribution is excellent, he and Dingwall clearly weren't quite on the same telepathic wavelength, and that should change if we start F Smith. I didn't think Dingers has a particularly good game - and not just because of the intercept (although that was a shocker), but I'd like to try him again with F Smith inside. I feel their combo would really unlock what our backs attack is trying to do.Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 8:55 amI saw no cohesion between the two. Ford is just a traffic cone in defence (whereas Fin is a decent defender). That puts pressure on the IC. In attack, did they do anything together? Ford is the form FH but yesterday he did not get the best out of situations as they arose, arguably his strong point over competitors usually. Dingwall looked ordinary but would have looked better with Fin at 10. That's all I am saying. I would like to see the one change for the next game - Fin for Ford. After that, if it does not work, maybe Dingwall should go.SixAndAHalf wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 8:00 am
What would be the reasoning for Ford hindering Dingwall? I can’t see how you can blame Ford for his intercept for example
I have advocated Freeman at 13 and saw enough good to want him retained there. I think he needs Dingwall inside him for now. Let's face it, there are three games to get it right or bloody Farrell will be back for the 6N.
Freeman at 13 is also worth persisting with, for me. He was decent enough in traffic (although clearly no Manu) and his edge defensive duties were largely done well enough. But most of all, I don't see how we can't pick Roebuck after that performance, and I wouldn't want Freeman out of the XV. Maybe eventually a 15, but let's give him another shot at 13, with his Saints colleagues inside.
Although hopefully Pollock has learned a minor lesson about being overly cocky at the international stage after his try - had he run straight and headed for the corner, then he scores untouched, but he thinks he has Kellaway beaten and starts rounding in to head under the posts, already looking up at the screen and planning his celebration, which gives Kellaway the chance to make the tap-tackle. The panicked scrabbling to pick himself up and rescue the nearly butchered try took some of the cool factor off of it!Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 3:52 pmIt’s sort of funny with all the talk around Tom Willis that we’d only scored those two tries by having absolutely rapid number 8s on the field.
Yeah, getting tap tackled mid-smirk and then falling over again before finally managing to do that fifa/tiktok celebration was pretty cringe.Puja wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 4:46 pmAlthough hopefully Pollock has learned a minor lesson about being overly cocky at the international stage after his try - had he run straight and headed for the corner, then he scores untouched, but he thinks he has Kellaway beaten and starts rounding in to head under the posts, already looking up at the screen and planning his celebration, which gives Kellaway the chance to make the tap-tackle. The panicked scrabbling to pick himself up and rescue the nearly butchered try took some of the cool factor off of it!Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 3:52 pmIt’s sort of funny with all the talk around Tom Willis that we’d only scored those two tries by having absolutely rapid number 8s on the field.![]()
Puja
I am a fan of both FSmith and Ford and see the benefit of either - I don't think Ford tore up trees yesterday (though his kicking from hand was excellent and he looked good when on the ball, e.g. the pass to Earl for his nearly try). The issues with the attack weren't due to playmaking - more due to the execution once making the line break - and thus I don't think having FSmith there would have made the game dramatically different.Puja wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 4:39 pmI was in favour of picking FSmith to start with, as he has a pre-existing connection with Dingwall, but it seems odd to call for a change now after they've had 70-odd minutes together. If the opinion is that Ford is the better player right now, then we need to actually give that combination time to gel, rather than chuck it in tbe bin because it wasn't perfect after three training sessions and one match!pjm1 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 11:53 amI 100% agree with this. I was in favour of picking Ford for yesterday's game, but I think his remaining time is as a "controller" sub, or starting if F Smith is injured. Although Ford's distribution is excellent, he and Dingwall clearly weren't quite on the same telepathic wavelength, and that should change if we start F Smith. I didn't think Dingers has a particularly good game - and not just because of the intercept (although that was a shocker), but I'd like to try him again with F Smith inside. I feel their combo would really unlock what our backs attack is trying to do.Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 8:55 am
I saw no cohesion between the two. Ford is just a traffic cone in defence (whereas Fin is a decent defender). That puts pressure on the IC. In attack, did they do anything together? Ford is the form FH but yesterday he did not get the best out of situations as they arose, arguably his strong point over competitors usually. Dingwall looked ordinary but would have looked better with Fin at 10. That's all I am saying. I would like to see the one change for the next game - Fin for Ford. After that, if it does not work, maybe Dingwall should go.
I have advocated Freeman at 13 and saw enough good to want him retained there. I think he needs Dingwall inside him for now. Let's face it, there are three games to get it right or bloody Farrell will be back for the 6N.
Freeman at 13 is also worth persisting with, for me. He was decent enough in traffic (although clearly no Manu) and his edge defensive duties were largely done well enough. But most of all, I don't see how we can't pick Roebuck after that performance, and I wouldn't want Freeman out of the XV. Maybe eventually a 15, but let's give him another shot at 13, with his Saints colleagues inside.
Puja
Cover option to help facilitate a 6:2 or maybe even a 7:1 split on the bench. Doubt he'll start there unless it's to give him experience.Cameo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:21 am Is there anything to this Earl at centre chat? It's fine as a cover option and there would be some logic to getting hin familiar there by starting him in an easier game, but I keep reading journalists talking about it as an option to start or add spark to the midfield. Is that just journalists getting overexcited? I struggle to see a world where he is England's best option at 12.
I mean, we could do fsr worse. I'd prefer him to play there full-time if he's going to do it, but he's fast, powerful, and can run a good line off a 10. His hands and decision-making are decent enough - he's not going to be unpicking a defence on his own, but if we want to use 12 just to make dents in a defensive line and offload from the tackle/create quick ball, he's better at that role than Lawrence!Cameo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:21 am Is there anything to this Earl at centre chat? It's fine as a cover option and there would be some logic to getting hin familiar there by starting him in an easier game, but I keep reading journalists talking about it as an option to start or add spark to the midfield. Is that just journalists getting overexcited? I struggle to see a world where he is England's best option at 12.
Due to personal commitments this week, there definitely won't be a full one for Australia (I might see whether a highlights package of the m-b-m is doable - only commenting on notable minutes. We'll see).
I would be willing to have a look at Earl and for that matter Pollock as starting centres over Dingwall who hasn’t exactly set the world alight? Ditto would like to see Max Ojomoh given another start at 12Puja wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:58 amI mean, we could do fsr worse. I'd prefer him to play there full-time if he's going to do it, but he's fast, powerful, and can run a good line off a 10. His hands and decision-making are decent enough - he's not going to be unpicking a defence on his own, but if we want to use 12 just to make dents in a defensive line and offload from the tackle/create quick ball, he's better at that role than Lawrence!Cameo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:21 am Is there anything to this Earl at centre chat? It's fine as a cover option and there would be some logic to getting hin familiar there by starting him in an easier game, but I keep reading journalists talking about it as an option to start or add spark to the midfield. Is that just journalists getting overexcited? I struggle to see a world where he is England's best option at 12.
Puja
I would be willing to have a look at Earl and for that matter Pollock as starting centres over Dingwall who hasn’t exactly set the world alight? Ditto would like to see Max Ojomoh given another start at 12Puja wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:58 amI mean, we could do fsr worse. I'd prefer him to play there full-time if he's going to do it, but he's fast, powerful, and can run a good line off a 10. His hands and decision-making are decent enough - he's not going to be unpicking a defence on his own, but if we want to use 12 just to make dents in a defensive line and offload from the tackle/create quick ball, he's better at that role than Lawrence!Cameo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:21 am Is there anything to this Earl at centre chat? It's fine as a cover option and there would be some logic to getting hin familiar there by starting him in an easier game, but I keep reading journalists talking about it as an option to start or add spark to the midfield. Is that just journalists getting overexcited? I struggle to see a world where he is England's best option at 12.
Puja
Pollock is a super talented player, but still just a kid and naturally exuberant. Still, his antics have a bad look, and establishing a reputation as a big ego show-off does himself or the team no good. Not a great role model for countless kids who want to emulate their idol. On-field celebrations are OK but don't have to be over the top. SB should have have a quiet (or loud) word in his ear.Puja wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 4:46 pmAlthough hopefully Pollock has learned a minor lesson about being overly cocky at the international stage after his try - had he run straight and headed for the corner, then he scores untouched, but he thinks he has Kellaway beaten and starts rounding in to head under the posts, already looking up at the screen and planning his celebration, which gives Kellaway the chance to make the tap-tackle. The panicked scrabbling to pick himself up and rescue the nearly butchered try took some of the cool factor off of it!Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 3:52 pmIt’s sort of funny with all the talk around Tom Willis that we’d only scored those two tries by having absolutely rapid number 8s on the field.![]()
Puja
...... it is in NorthamptonCaptainhaircut wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 5:39 pm I don’t think many young kids are role modelling themselves on perfectly behaved rugby players like Chris Robshaw.
He’s a kid and absolutely loving playing for England, not quite sure what he does wrong? Celebrates a bit. Heaven forbid…
He’s never injured anyone punched anyone, racially abused anyone. Let’s not make up like Rugby is a game played by saints…
Naw...... Henry was checking out his dye job and charting his swan dive line.Mellsblue wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:29 pm Yeah. I reckon Pollock is good for English rugby on and off the pitch.
Stuart Barnes reckons Pollock was likely looking at the big screen to see if he was clear of the cover d. Anyone who watches the NFL will tell you that Daniel Jones thinks that is a good idea.
In which case, he did a terrible job, cause he started trying to go under the posts before he was clear of the cover d!Mellsblue wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:29 pm Yeah. I reckon Pollock is good for English rugby on and off the pitch.
Stuart Barnes reckons Pollock was likely looking at the big screen to see if he was clear of the cover d. Anyone who watches the NFL will tell you that Daniel Jones thinks that is a good idea.
I always presumed the name was ironic.Spiffy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:28 pm...... it is in NorthamptonCaptainhaircut wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 5:39 pm I don’t think many young kids are role modelling themselves on perfectly behaved rugby players like Chris Robshaw.
He’s a kid and absolutely loving playing for England, not quite sure what he does wrong? Celebrates a bit. Heaven forbid…
He’s never injured anyone punched anyone, racially abused anyone. Let’s not make up like Rugby is a game played by saints…![]()