6 Nations Squad Announcement - 11:30am

[p/d]

Shocked he was overlooked as George’s successor

[Skalyba]

Chessum's stock has really risen lately!

unless I'm misremembering he started at 6 v Ireland last year and had a stormer of a game, that's my only thinking. I dont think CCS is is a starter yet and harsh to throw T Hill straight into that and the french game

[p/d]

I’m not saying he should start but I don’t get this ‘fear’ of starting players in big matches. If Hill is the right fit for whatever SB wants from the back row then it shouldn’t matter who the opponents are.

[Mikey Brown]

I’m not saying he should start but I don’t get this ‘fear’ of starting players in big matches. If Hill is the right fit for whatever SB wants from the back row then it shouldn’t matter who the opponents are.

Yeah, there needs to be a balance but it does feel like it’s a bit of a pattern with England.

Hill has to wait his chance while Willis settles in, then who knows in the summer if Pollock or whoever then has to sit back because Hill isn’t experienced enough.

We can’t change the centres because we’re also messing around at 9/10/15 etc.

I do get the hesitation when Ireland are the opposition, but we’ve done this in previous years with relatively ‘easy’ starts to tournaments. Knowing there likely won’t be any better opportunities to blood players.

[Oakboy]

Of course, if you brought all the new players in at once and it worked the time then available for the team to develop, as a unit, is increased.

Management involves risk. Retaining players who have reached their ceiling, become injury-prone or never quite cut it is a risk too.

[jngf]

Chessum's stock has really risen lately!

unless I'm misremembering he started at 6 v Ireland last year and had a stormer of a game, that's my only thinking. I dont think CCS is is a starter yet and harsh to throw T Hill straight into that and the french game

Imo if they’re fit and good enough for test rugby you start them whatever the fixture and level of prior test exposure ( else they’re really not good enough)

[FKAS]

I’m not saying he should start but I don’t get this ‘fear’ of starting players in big matches. If Hill is the right fit for whatever SB wants from the back row then it shouldn’t matter who the opponents are.

Yeah, there needs to be a balance but it does feel like it’s a bit of a pattern with England.

Hill has to wait his chance while Willis settles in, then who knows in the summer if Pollock or whoever then has to sit back because Hill isn’t experienced enough.

We can’t change the centres because we’re also messing around at 9/10/15 etc.

I do get the hesitation when Ireland are the opposition, but we’ve done this in previous years with relatively ‘easy’ starts to tournaments. Knowing there likely won’t be any better opportunities to blood players.

Multiple players who are unknown at this level starting in the same combination against high level opposition can go badly wrong. At which point they get savaged by the media who will have been singing their praises before the game. Can be a miserable place to be for young players. Don't want to have the Mat Tait effect in some of the guys we have coming through who have the potential to be long term options.

We've got the last two games in the 6N and a summer tour where we are primed for greater experimentation. Hopefully accelerate some of the squad refresh then.

[Mellsblue]

never quite cut it is a risk too.

Yet you still advocate for Slade.

[Captainhaircut]

We've got the last two games in the 6N and a summer tour where we are primed for greater experimentation. Hopefully accelerate some of the squad refresh then.

I’m not sure we do have the summer tour for experimentation. Some dickhead thought it was a good idea to tour Argentina whilst we miss a load of the squad to the Lions. Probably the same person who thought the best way to start the autumn internationals was with a game against NZ.

Granted we’ll have to replace the players who go to the lions but not sure we’ll be dishing out a load of debuts.

[Oakboy]

never quite cut it is a risk too.

Yet you still advocate for Slade.

Fair point. IF SB announced a root and branch clear-out and going for broke on the young pretenders, you'd not get a peep out of me about Slade's departure.

Where I still take some convincing is that, IF we are just picking a team to win tomorrow, Lawrence and/or Dingwall have more to offer. Longer-term, even though they are younger than Slade, I don't think either is up to it either. That may well define SB's dilemma with the centre-pairing.

[jngf]

never quite cut it is a risk too.

Yet you still advocate for Slade.

Fair point. IF SB announced a root and branch clear-out and going for broke on the young pretenders, you'd not get a peep out of me about Slade's departure.

Where I still take some convincing is that, IF we are just picking a team to win tomorrow, Lawrence and/or Dingwall have more to offer. Longer-term, even though they are younger than Slade, I don't think either is up to it either. That may well define SB's dilemma with the centre-pairing.

I’ll say it again if push comes to shove I’d rather move Earl to 12 than have Slade there ( or anywhere near the 23 )

[FKAS]

We've got the last two games in the 6N and a summer tour where we are primed for greater experimentation. Hopefully accelerate some of the squad refresh then.

I’m not sure we do have the summer tour for experimentation. Some dickhead thought it was a good idea to tour Argentina whilst we miss a load of the squad to the Lions. Probably the same person who thought the best way to start the autumn internationals was with a game against NZ.

Granted we’ll have to replace the players who go to the lions but not sure we’ll be dishing out a load of debuts.

We did alright four years ago didn't we?

With the Lions Tour on the level of expectation and press attention will be much reduced. The squad is also evolving well under Borthwick. Don't think we need that many more to come in.

[TheDasher]

Yet you still advocate for Slade.

Fair point. IF SB announced a root and branch clear-out and going for broke on the young pretenders, you'd not get a peep out of me about Slade's departure.

Where I still take some convincing is that, IF we are just picking a team to win tomorrow, Lawrence and/or Dingwall have more to offer. Longer-term, even though they are younger than Slade, I don't think either is up to it either. That may well define SB's dilemma with the centre-pairing.

I’ll say it again if push comes to shove I’d rather move Earl to 12 than have Slade there ( or anywhere near the 23 )

If he could pass like a back I'd agree with you, but he can't. In athletic terms fine but there's a little more to it than that. Frankly if you would pick Earl at 12 for the reasons I think you're keen on it, you may as well pick Ted Hill who is apparently even quicker and would be even more of a handful arguably!

On a serious note, SB needed to be brave at 12 and he hasn't been, simple as that. He should have called up Butt, Atkinson, Hartley etc and looked at them all in training and just picked one of them.

[jngf]

Fair point. IF SB announced a root and branch clear-out and going for broke on the young pretenders, you'd not get a peep out of me about Slade's departure.

Where I still take some convincing is that, IF we are just picking a team to win tomorrow, Lawrence and/or Dingwall have more to offer. Longer-term, even though they are younger than Slade, I don't think either is up to it either. That may well define SB's dilemma with the centre-pairing.

I’ll say it again if push comes to shove I’d rather move Earl to 12 than have Slade there ( or anywhere near the 23 )

If he could pass like a back I'd agree with you, but he can't. In athletic terms fine but there's a little more to it than that. Frankly if you would pick Earl at 12 for the reasons I think you're keen on it, you may as well pick Ted Hill who is apparently even quicker and would be even more of a handful arguably!

On a serious note, SB needed to be brave at 12 and he hasn't been, simple as that. He should have called up Butt, Atkinson, Hartley etc and looked at them all in training and just picked one of them.

Totally agree on handling point you’ve rightly made if we’re using 12 as a second playmaker but I thought the idea was we needed a bit more of the carrying grunt that a fit Manu used to provide - in which case a player like Earl or even T Hill ( or even CCS ) might do a job there and it might give Aki a bumpy surprise!

[TheDasher]

I’ll say it again if push comes to shove I’d rather move Earl to 12 than have Slade there ( or anywhere near the 23 )

If he could pass like a back I'd agree with you, but he can't. In athletic terms fine but there's a little more to it than that. Frankly if you would pick Earl at 12 for the reasons I think you're keen on it, you may as well pick Ted Hill who is apparently even quicker and would be even more of a handful arguably!

On a serious note, SB needed to be brave at 12 and he hasn't been, simple as that. He should have called up Butt, Atkinson, Hartley etc and looked at them all in training and just picked one of them.

Totally agree on handling point you’ve rightly made if we’re using 12 as a second playmaker but I thought the idea was we needed a bit more of the carrying grunt that a fit Manu used to provide - in which case a player like Earl or even T Hill ( or even CCS ) might do a job there and it might give Aki a bumpy surprise!

I know you're saying these things tongue in cheek jngf

Aki is not someone to run at no matter how big you are to be honest, but if you wanted big men to run at him the CCS/Hill type player/flankers stand in the line on attacking ball anyway. I'd have thought if we were to go all SCW/maverick and start trying people in completely different positions it'd make sense to look at Freeman or Steward at 12... I am not advocating that by the way, just saying if we're going for crazy selection choices either of those could work, certainly better than Earl there IMO

[jngf]

I’m beginning to think there must be some sort England Hex when it comes to certain ( highly skillful ) players making the leap to test rugby. Sam Simmonds, Dombrandt, Slade, and earlier the ICEMAN,Nathan Hughes,DWS, Simpson-Daniel, S Barnes could all have been rightly counted club heroes - but something goes really wrong when donning that white shirt. Is it the mental stress, physicality and pace increase at test level or is it some form structural rigidity in playing style that England test sides ( and same for football) seem schackled by? Do we simply expect too much?

[Oakboy]

I’m beginning to think there must be some sort England Hex when it comes to certain ( highly skillful ) players making the leap to test rugby. Sam Simmonds, Dombrandt, Slade, and earlier the ICEMAN,Nathan Hughes,DWS, Simpson-Daniel, S Barnes could all have been rightly counted club heroes - but something goes really wrong when donning that white shirt. Is it the mental stress, physicality and pace increase at test level or is it some form structural rigidity in playing style that England test sides ( and same for football) seem schackled by? Do we simply expect too much?

Maybe we have always lacked quality at SH making No8s, FHs and centres look worse than they might have been.

[p/d]

it'd make sense to look at Freeman or Steward at 12...

…… finally

[TheDasher]

I’m beginning to think there must be some sort England Hex when it comes to certain ( highly skillful ) players making the leap to test rugby. Sam Simmonds, Dombrandt, Slade, and earlier the ICEMAN,Nathan Hughes,DWS, Simpson-Daniel, S Barnes could all have been rightly counted club heroes - but something goes really wrong when donning that white shirt. Is it the mental stress, physicality and pace increase at test level or is it some form structural rigidity in playing style that England test sides ( and same for football) seem schackled by? Do we simply expect too much?

Not sure about that to be honest. Sam Simmonds had a few goes, but ultimately bar one game against Italy didn't grab his chance, didn't look great for the Lions either. Bit of a one-trick pony. Can you imagine him getting near the Bok squad honestly?

Dombrandt isn't physical enough at intl level, he doesn't seem to fancy it... and you have to. If it was touch rugby, he'd be the best really big no8 in the world...

Slade is another 10 who's been pushed wide/out in his career and that's worked at club level but not at intl level. Talented enough to have some really good moments but doesn't have the pace or strength to be a top, top class intl centre.

Iceman - not liked on here or by fans anywhere really but you can't say he hasn't in the main had a successful England career? He went further than his talent suggested he would...

Nathan Hughes was frustrating. Good player - looked nervous for me, lacked confidence, carried too high. I suspect poorly managed and picked, dropped, picked etc, given a few mins here, there etc. He should've been told to go and play and fck people up, but he looked nervous.

DWS didn't get picked until he was on the slide if I remember rightly. Also had major injury didn't he? Should've been involved two years before he was...

Barnes - unreliable compared to Rob A no?

Simpson Daniel was great but was he always a much better option than the people picked in front of him? And in what position etc. Not that clear cut for me.

[TheDasher]

it'd make sense to look at Freeman or Steward at 12...

…… finally

You can probably tell that I'm the type to want to try these two at 12... just don't say it too often as I can't be arsed with the argument!

[Banquo]

I’m beginning to think there must be some sort England Hex when it comes to certain ( highly skillful ) players making the leap to test rugby. Sam Simmonds, Dombrandt, Slade, and earlier the ICEMAN,Nathan Hughes,DWS, Simpson-Daniel, S Barnes could all have been rightly counted club heroes - but something goes really wrong when donning that white shirt. Is it the mental stress, physicality and pace increase at test level or is it some form structural rigidity in playing style that England test sides ( and same for football) seem schackled by? Do we simply expect too much?

JSD was excellent at intl level when fit. Nathan Hughes was fragile, ditto Barnesy, DWS wasn't ever that good tbh. Simmonds and Dombrandt not good enough to begin with imo. Slade....wrong position most of his career for me/England. ICEMAN?

Club system still doesn't have the intensity to translate outstanding players there into intl players with regularity imo...ie from the number of very good prem players there are, you'd expect more top intl players than we have. Plus our improved dev pathways haven't been in place that long.

[Banquo]

I’m beginning to think there must be some sort England Hex when it comes to certain ( highly skillful ) players making the leap to test rugby. Sam Simmonds, Dombrandt, Slade, and earlier the ICEMAN,Nathan Hughes,DWS, Simpson-Daniel, S Barnes could all have been rightly counted club heroes - but something goes really wrong when donning that white shirt. Is it the mental stress, physicality and pace increase at test level or is it some form structural rigidity in playing style that England test sides ( and same for football) seem schackled by? Do we simply expect too much?

Simpson Daniel was great but was he always a much better option than the people picked in front of him? And in what position etc. Not that clear cut for me.

Yes. But injured too often.

[Oakboy]

I’m beginning to think there must be some sort England Hex when it comes to certain ( highly skillful ) players making the leap to test rugby. Sam Simmonds, Dombrandt, Slade, and earlier the ICEMAN,Nathan Hughes,DWS, Simpson-Daniel, S Barnes could all have been rightly counted club heroes - but something goes really wrong when donning that white shirt. Is it the mental stress, physicality and pace increase at test level or is it some form structural rigidity in playing style that England test sides ( and same for football) seem schackled by? Do we simply expect too much?

JSD was excellent at intl level when fit. Nathan Hughes was fragile, ditto Barnesy, DWS wasn't ever that good tbh. Simmonds and Dombrandt not good enough to begin with imo. Slade....wrong position most of his career for me/England. ICEMAN?

Club system still doesn't have the intensity to translate outstanding players there into intl players with regularity imo...ie from the number of very good prem players there are, you'd expect more top intl players than we have. Plus our improved dev pathways haven't been in place that long.

It's sort of an aside but one question I've always thought needing answering is, "Would we have picked Dupont for the regular 9 shirt and stuck with him as France did?" He's now one of the all-time greats etc. etc. but would he have been if he was English and would he have been that so early? (I know that is just one example.) It's not just a 'do we pick them early enough' question, though. It's a 'do we recognise them as potentially good early enough'?

Basically, too, do the French clubs have journeymen shirt-blockers or is THAT our problem?

Of course, I am trying to decide whether we have/miss true adult talent. Recent results/performances (by our international teams) indicate that we DO have junior talent.

[TheDasher]

I’m beginning to think there must be some sort England Hex when it comes to certain ( highly skillful ) players making the leap to test rugby. Sam Simmonds, Dombrandt, Slade, and earlier the ICEMAN,Nathan Hughes,DWS, Simpson-Daniel, S Barnes could all have been rightly counted club heroes - but something goes really wrong when donning that white shirt. Is it the mental stress, physicality and pace increase at test level or is it some form structural rigidity in playing style that England test sides ( and same for football) seem schackled by? Do we simply expect too much?

Simpson Daniel was great but was he always a much better option than the people picked in front of him? And in what position etc. Not that clear cut for me.

Yes. But injured too often.

What position and in which years instead of who?... if you can be bothered

[Banquo]

Simpson Daniel was great but was he always a much better option than the people picked in front of him? And in what position etc. Not that clear cut for me.

Yes. But injured too often.

What position and in which years instead of who?... if you can be bothered

Ben Cohen, Dan Luger, Austin Healey, Josh Lewsey (as wing), Cueto, Strettle, Sackeyetc 2002-2010.