New and Improved EPS Watch/Player Form Thread

[pjm1]

I think yesterday's selection and tactics were largely spot on, with just a bit of failure in the execution. Some of that failure in execution can be laid at the door of "first time together" and putting the new Wiggy-Blackett-Borthwick attack plans into action. Some of the failure is also because Freeman hasn't played 13 much.

If we want to dissect the selections based on the actual game, then I think there are two key positions where we can (and should) do better:
Ford - I totally understand and agreed with why he was picked, based on Prem form and Arg games. But he didn't quite deliver for me - he didn't have a bad game, except at the tee - and I felt his connection with Dingwall wasn't quite there (milliseconds off, perhaps). I'd much rather see F Smith here, and hopefully improve that telepathic connection with Dingwall.
Steward - was picked for aerial perfection and he didn't quite deliver. Again, he wasn't bad, but he fluffed a couple that we'd expect him to get, normally. His tip downs to other England players largely worked well, even if not clean takes by him - and I suspect that was tactical. The issue we have at 15 is the lack of experienced alternatives, so it feels like we're sticking with Steward and just have to hope he gets back to his best. I actually thought some of his attacking runs were ok though, so definitely not in the "bad" category all-round.

The bomb squad worked exceptionally well, especially when combined with how much we must have tired the Aussies out in that first 20, where we didn't score - we were pretty relentless. Very surprised Schmidt didn't use his bench earlier and more fully - it was a mistake, as there were too many tired legs in their pack when we refreshed ours.

I'd swap Underhill out for Tom Curry if Curry can go 60 next time. Underhill was good, but Curry is just too world class to leave on the bench, for me. Maybe Underhill goes to the bench?

[Oakboy]

6:2 yesterday gave us two 7s to replace two 7s. It denied us, say, Arundell for Steward. Whichever three (out of Pollock, Curry, Earl and Underhill) are selected at 7, 8, 20, surely one can do an effective 80.

Strange to watch that game and think that what we needed was to leave out one of Curry or Pollock for Arundell.

Why strange? To be clear, I'd have started Curry and Pollock and had Earl on the bench. Curry and Pollock would both have been good for 80. Let's face it, Steward was there to catch the high ball and was unexceptional at his primary skill. Arundell would probably have done just as well and would have been somewhat more threatening with ball in hand. Any of the other wingers with gas would have been equally useful on the bench. I also think that Earl could do a variety of jobs off the bench in the last 20. Of the 5 backrowers in the 23, Underhill is the most job-specific, IMO, and has lost pace. He did not play badly but could be the most vulnerable if SB continues a quest for versatility. Curry just looked a better player.

[Captainhaircut]

6:2 yesterday gave us two 7s to replace two 7s. It denied us, say, Arundell for Steward. Whichever three (out of Pollock, Curry, Earl and Underhill) are selected at 7, 8, 20, surely one can do an effective 80.

Strange to watch that game and think that what we needed was to leave out one of Curry or Pollock for Arundell.

Why strange? To be clear, I'd have started Curry and Pollock and had Earl on the bench. Curry and Pollock would both have been good for 80. Let's face it, Steward was there to catch the high ball and was unexceptional at his primary skill. Arundell would probably have done just as well and would have been somewhat more threatening with ball in hand. Any of the other wingers with gas would have been equally useful on the bench. I also think that Earl could do a variety of jobs off the bench in the last 20. Of the 5 backrowers in the 23, Underhill is the most job-specific, IMO, and has lost pace. He did not play badly but could be the most vulnerable if SB continues a quest for versatility. Curry just looked a better player.

Because at no point whilst our replacements forwards smashed them in the last 20 minutes was I thinking “god, I wish we’d picked another outside back on the bench”.

Firmly of the believe that 6-2 is the way to go nowadays given the physical requirements of being a forward.

[Oakboy]

Strange to watch that game and think that what we needed was to leave out one of Curry or Pollock for Arundell.

Why strange? To be clear, I'd have started Curry and Pollock and had Earl on the bench. Curry and Pollock would both have been good for 80. Let's face it, Steward was there to catch the high ball and was unexceptional at his primary skill. Arundell would probably have done just as well and would have been somewhat more threatening with ball in hand. Any of the other wingers with gas would have been equally useful on the bench. I also think that Earl could do a variety of jobs off the bench in the last 20. Of the 5 backrowers in the 23, Underhill is the most job-specific, IMO, and has lost pace. He did not play badly but could be the most vulnerable if SB continues a quest for versatility. Curry just looked a better player.

Because at no point whilst our replacements forwards smashed them in the last 20 minutes was I thinking “god, I wish we’d picked another outside back on the bench”.

Firmly of the believe that 6-2 is the way to go nowadays given the physical requirements of being a forward.

There is no doubt that there was significant impact but how much of it was that the players that came on were simply better than the ones they replaced? You may be right about 6:2 in the long term but I think it is easy to overlook having only 30 minutes of the better players compared with 50 had they started. I think three impactful front rowers may be justified off the bench but I just don't see it with back rowers like Curry and Pollock who could do their stuff for 80.

[Which Tyler]

Obano and Lockett in
Ojomoh and Callouri out

[Puja]

Why strange? To be clear, I'd have started Curry and Pollock and had Earl on the bench. Curry and Pollock would both have been good for 80. Let's face it, Steward was there to catch the high ball and was unexceptional at his primary skill. Arundell would probably have done just as well and would have been somewhat more threatening with ball in hand. Any of the other wingers with gas would have been equally useful on the bench. I also think that Earl could do a variety of jobs off the bench in the last 20. Of the 5 backrowers in the 23, Underhill is the most job-specific, IMO, and has lost pace. He did not play badly but could be the most vulnerable if SB continues a quest for versatility. Curry just looked a better player.

Because at no point whilst our replacements forwards smashed them in the last 20 minutes was I thinking “god, I wish we’d picked another outside back on the bench”.

Firmly of the believe that 6-2 is the way to go nowadays given the physical requirements of being a forward.

There is no doubt that there was significant impact but how much of it was that the players that came on were simply better than the ones they replaced? You may be right about 6:2 in the long term but I think it is easy to overlook having only 30 minutes of the better players compared with 50 had they started. I think three impactful front rowers may be justified off the bench but I just don't see it with back rowers like Curry and Pollock who could do their stuff for 80.

Do you remember the days where we had BillyV and Ben Morgan and whichever of them came off the bench looked like an absolute superstar and we'd be clamouring that that one had to start, only for the same to happen again when the positions were reversed? You can make a lot more impact when you know you've only got 30 minutes to spread your energy across and you can just go full bore without any need to ration, plus it goes further when you're running against tired legs in the opposition.

Puja

[Danno]

Obano and Lockett in
Ojomoh and Callouri out

Who the fuck is Lockett?

[FKAS]

Obano and Lockett in
Ojomoh and Callouri out

Who the fuck is Lockett?

Saints lock 23yo, got motm in an England A game Vs Ireland last year if I recall correctly.