Team for Scotland

[Captainhaircut]

Sounds like a bit of a random thought, but I could actually see Dombrandt captaining the A squad. I could also see him putting in a MOM performance and then getting a recall to the senior 23 only to fall a bit flat again with a bench appearance.

Barbeary’s the only 8 in the 25 called up for the A squad and is possibly a little lucky to be there having not been in particularly stellar from so I’m definitely not against Dombrandt doing it. I’m just not sure it would serve any particularly useful purpose beyond winning the A game.

Fisilau in the A squad also.

[Puja]

Dombrandt back in the squad cause he played well against Sarries 2 1/2s.

I had assumed this was a wind-up when first I saw it! Seems relatively pointless to me, as I've given up hope of him being good enough at the very top level, but I guess Berryeater hasn't completely yet.

Sounds like a bit of a random thought, but I could actually see Dombrandt captaining the A squad. I could also see him putting in a MOM performance and then getting a recall to the senior 23 only to fall a bit flat again with a bench appearance.

Barbeary’s the only 8 in the 25 called up for the A squad and is possibly a little lucky to be there having not been in particularly stellar from so I’m definitely not against Dombrandt doing it. I’m just not sure it would serve any particularly useful purpose beyond winning the A game.

I mean, if he's in the England squad as a genuine contender for a place, then I think he has to play the A game, doesn't he? Same with Coles - if we have a flurry of injuries, they're into the XXIII and it's gotta be worthwhile to get minutes into them after their injuries.

I think Pollock could be on the bench vs Scotland. One thing about Stoic Backrowwatcher's reign is that he's not been afraid to promote a promising youngster on the basis of what they've shown in training and I can absolutely see Pollock having smashed it with his fearless attitude.

Puja

[Danno]

Pollock would be over B Curry, which would, frankly, be insane when we really, really need to put Scotland away for the first time in 4 years. I still think he'll be dropping down to the A squad

[Puja]

Pollock would be over B Curry, which would, frankly, be insane when we really, really need to put Scotland away for the first time in 4 years. I still think he'll be dropping down to the A squad

More likely to be over CCS. They're not the same type of player, but Pollock does also offer hard carrying and some game-changing USPs that would provide a point of difference off the bench, and CCS has got to be under pressure having made silly errors and little impact against Ireland and not being trusted to come off the bench against France.

It's not something I'm certain about or anything, but it would be on brand for what we've seen from Behindscenes.

Puja

[Oakboy]

The other factor in the mix is SB's attitude towards Willis. He was reluctant to pick him in the first place evidently. Then, he replaced him after 52(ish) minutes v France. He may see a need to cover him from the bench rather than switch Earl. So far, CCS, if he comes on, does so at 6.

I'd play Willis for 80 v Scotland to check his lasting influence and I'd have a 5:3 bench. I'd guess that SB will do neither.

[Mikey Brown]

The other factor in the mix is SB's attitude towards Willis. He was reluctant to pick him in the first place evidently. Then, he replaced him after 52(ish) minutes v France. He may see a need to cover him from the bench rather than switch Earl. So far, CCS, if he comes on, does so at 6.

I'd play Willis for 80 v Scotland to check his lasting influence and I'd have a 5:3 bench. I'd guess that SB will do neither.

It would be nice to think we'd make these decisions based on how the game is going, though I'd agree it would be good to see how Willis does over 80.

Tom Curry mentions on one of the recent England videos "I was meant to come off at 55 but ended up staying on" which I thought was curious. Maybe that was just a casual note at half time, or maybe that was Borthwick's plan from the outset when naming the team, but at least he was flexible enough to change it. It would be interesting to know what Borthwick was seeing that prompted the decision to replace a tight carrier with another openside and not use CCS at all.

[Oakboy]

The other factor in the mix is SB's attitude towards Willis. He was reluctant to pick him in the first place evidently. Then, he replaced him after 52(ish) minutes v France. He may see a need to cover him from the bench rather than switch Earl. So far, CCS, if he comes on, does so at 6.

I'd play Willis for 80 v Scotland to check his lasting influence and I'd have a 5:3 bench. I'd guess that SB will do neither.

It would be nice to think we'd make these decisions based on how the game is going, though I'd agree it would be good to see how Willis does over 80.

Tom Curry mentions on one of the recent England videos "I was meant to come off at 55 but ended up staying on" which I thought was curious. Maybe that was just a casual note at half time, or maybe that was Borthwick's plan from the outset when naming the team, but at least he was flexible enough to change it. It would be interesting to know what Borthwick was seeing that prompted the decision to replace a tight carrier with another openside and not use CCS at all.

Yes, it would be good to hear his assessment. I agree that he must be a better manager with flexibility in his thinking. I hope his coaching crew are all now fully supportive because it appears that things are coming together. A win this coming Saturday would be another big step forward.

[Puja]

The other factor in the mix is SB's attitude towards Willis. He was reluctant to pick him in the first place evidently. Then, he replaced him after 52(ish) minutes v France. He may see a need to cover him from the bench rather than switch Earl. So far, CCS, if he comes on, does so at 6.

I'd play Willis for 80 v Scotland to check his lasting influence and I'd have a 5:3 bench. I'd guess that SB will do neither.

It would be nice to think we'd make these decisions based on how the game is going, though I'd agree it would be good to see how Willis does over 80.

Tom Curry mentions on one of the recent England videos "I was meant to come off at 55 but ended up staying on" which I thought was curious. Maybe that was just a casual note at half time, or maybe that was Borthwick's plan from the outset when naming the team, but at least he was flexible enough to change it. It would be interesting to know what Borthwick was seeing that prompted the decision to replace a tight carrier with another openside and not use CCS at all.

I'd imagine that the management saw him having a god-tier performance and decided better to change the plan rather than interrupt that. Probably what did for CCS's appearance - I'd imagine the plan was to keep him in reserve to come on as soon as TCurry started blowing or felt his hip, but he never did.

I remain pleasantly surprised by the 80 minute influence of Earl - I was convinced that his fading and dumb mistakes at the tail end of our tight losses was due to tiredness, and celebrated when he was finally the man subbed off against Ireland instead of doing another 80, but he was effective all the way to the end against France. I'd like to see that regularly before I start relying on it though.

Puja

[FKAS]

The other factor in the mix is SB's attitude towards Willis. He was reluctant to pick him in the first place evidently. Then, he replaced him after 52(ish) minutes v France. He may see a need to cover him from the bench rather than switch Earl. So far, CCS, if he comes on, does so at 6.

I'd play Willis for 80 v Scotland to check his lasting influence and I'd have a 5:3 bench. I'd guess that SB will do neither.

It would be nice to think we'd make these decisions based on how the game is going, though I'd agree it would be good to see how Willis does over 80.

Tom Curry mentions on one of the recent England videos "I was meant to come off at 55 but ended up staying on" which I thought was curious. Maybe that was just a casual note at half time, or maybe that was Borthwick's plan from the outset when naming the team, but at least he was flexible enough to change it. It would be interesting to know what Borthwick was seeing that prompted the decision to replace a tight carrier with another openside and not use CCS at all.

I'd imagine that the management saw him having a god-tier performance and decided better to change the plan rather than interrupt that. Probably what did for CCS's appearance - I'd imagine the plan was to keep him in reserve to come on as soon as TCurry started blowing or felt his hip, but he never did.

I remain pleasantly surprised by the 80 minute influence of Earl - I was convinced that his fading and dumb mistakes at the tail end of our tight losses was due to tiredness, and celebrated when he was finally the man subbed off against Ireland instead of doing another 80, but he was effective all the way to the end against France. I'd like to see that regularly before I start relying on it though.

Puja

Having Willis take on a lot of the hard carrying maybe kept Earl a bit fresher so he wasn't making those errors late in the game.

[Puja]

It would be nice to think we'd make these decisions based on how the game is going, though I'd agree it would be good to see how Willis does over 80.

Tom Curry mentions on one of the recent England videos "I was meant to come off at 55 but ended up staying on" which I thought was curious. Maybe that was just a casual note at half time, or maybe that was Borthwick's plan from the outset when naming the team, but at least he was flexible enough to change it. It would be interesting to know what Borthwick was seeing that prompted the decision to replace a tight carrier with another openside and not use CCS at all.

I'd imagine that the management saw him having a god-tier performance and decided better to change the plan rather than interrupt that. Probably what did for CCS's appearance - I'd imagine the plan was to keep him in reserve to come on as soon as TCurry started blowing or felt his hip, but he never did.

I remain pleasantly surprised by the 80 minute influence of Earl - I was convinced that his fading and dumb mistakes at the tail end of our tight losses was due to tiredness, and celebrated when he was finally the man subbed off against Ireland instead of doing another 80, but he was effective all the way to the end against France. I'd like to see that regularly before I start relying on it though.

Puja

Having Willis take on a lot of the hard carrying maybe kept Earl a bit fresher so he wasn't making those errors late in the game.

You're probably spot on with that one. He did look a much better player when not trying to be all things to all men.

Puja

[Puja]

Telegraph reckon that Double-Smith will be retained for Scotland, which I'm very glad about. Needs to be given time to prove or disprove its efficaciousness.

Puja

[Galfon]

Needs to be given time to prove or disprove its efficaciousness.
Puja

with that Medicinal Compound they're all using, it should be fine..

[Danno]

That's going to be in my head for a week

[FKAS]

Telegraph reckon that Double-Smith will be retained for Scotland, which I'm very glad about. Needs to be given time to prove or disprove its efficaciousness.

Puja

Express agrees but thinks Chessum will start in the backrow as the only change.

[Mikey Brown]

Suggestions at who is being displaced?

[p/d]

Telegraph reckon that Double-Smith will be retained for Scotland, which I'm very glad about. Needs to be given time to prove or disprove its efficaciousness.

Puja

Express agrees but thinks Chessum will start in the backrow as the only change.

Hopefully the Express doesn’t know its arse from its elbow

[Mikey Brown]

Chessum swaps in for Martin and that's it. Fair enough really.

[Banquo]

Not a fan of announcing so early tbh, nor 6:2. But whatevs.

[Mikey Brown]

I sort of get it, but are we really expecting Teams to be waiting until Tuesday afternoon of a match week to make major tactical changes based on the opposition?

[FKAS]

Telegraph reckon that Double-Smith will be retained for Scotland, which I'm very glad about. Needs to be given time to prove or disprove its efficaciousness.

Puja

Express agrees but thinks Chessum will start in the backrow as the only change.

Hopefully the Express doesn’t know its arse from its elbow

Thankfully they don't.

Makes plenty of sense for Chessum to start with Martin having been managing a niggle.

[p/d]

Isn’t it the SA way. This is it do your best attitude.

[FKAS]

I sort of get it, but are we really expecting Teams to be waiting until Tuesday afternoon of a match week to make major tactical changes based on the opposition?

Minor tweaks. Toonie no doubt has his 9s and wingers practicing their kick to compete. I'm half expecting them to field someone like Kinghorn on the wing to chase the kicks for at least the first half and test how comfortable Marcus is at the back.

[p/d]

Express agrees but thinks Chessum will start in the backrow as the only change.

Hopefully the Express doesn’t know its arse from its elbow

Thankfully they don't.

Makes plenty of sense for Chessum to start with Martin having been managing a niggle.

Aye. Only an injury would have seen changes in the back row

[Mikey Brown]

I sort of get it, but are we really expecting Teams to be waiting until Tuesday afternoon of a match week to make major tactical changes based on the opposition?

Minor tweaks. Toonie no doubt has his 9s and wingers practicing their kick to compete. I'm half expecting them to field someone like Kinghorn on the wing to chase the kicks for at least the first half and test how comfortable Marcus is at the back.

And what would England have done if Townsend had named 14. Kinghorn 15. Rowe first instead of the other way round? Bring Steward back in?

I broadly agree with the Rassie and P/D approach, but I doubt there's much in it.

[fivepointer]

Very happy to see Chessum start. Not a fan of only 2 replacement backs but this does seem to be a regular feature now in matchday 23's.