RWC Training Squad

[FKAS]

Just seems odd to drop a player one week and reinstate them the next. If Murley had to have some downtime why not simply make a statement to that effect and to still leave him as a squad member. We had Rodd in a similar position. It makes Borthwick look like he's undecided when the real answer could be that players just need to spend time away from camp for a period.

Stress Blackhole has a deliberate policy of not giving information about player's personal situations to the media, as he resents the environment that makes the public/media feel *owed* personal information about health, injuries, situation, etc. I do get his point - players are real people too and should have some expectation of privacy, but it was hugely frustrating as a Leicester fan to not know if someone was injured or just out of favour and, if they were injured, whether it was a big one or just a scratch. Guess we have got used to know as fans and do feel entitled.

tl;dr - not making a statement to that effect is absolutely on brand for him.

Puja

Made the team announcements interesting when you were never quite sure who would appear or disappear from selection.

[Gloskarlos]

Mercer stating that he didn't fit with how Semi Boring wanted to play.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/zach ... eb4b8c699f

Good interview - apologies for the paywall.

[Danno]

Mercer stating that he didn't fit with how Semi Boring wanted to play.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/zach ... eb4b8c699f

Good interview - apologies for the paywall.

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fw ... eb4b8c699f

[Oakboy]

Why is it ridiculous? To me that sounds like 20 or so clear cut decisions and 3 50:50 calls.

We already know the back row is going to be a tough shout and that alone could account for two of those 50:50s. It’s going to be similar with the back three too.

The Murley piece is odd, but why is there always a default assumption of incompetence and a negative overreaction?

At this stage, to be undecided on 7 places (i.e. 21% of the squad) smacks of indecisiveness to me. I would prefer SB to make his choices now and use the warm-ups for tactical polishing and the odd final place in the starting 23. Remaining doubts regarding an injury-affected player or two might be about the only reason to dither on squad selection, IMO.

[Banquo]

Why is it ridiculous? To me that sounds like 20 or so clear cut decisions and 3 50:50 calls.

We already know the back row is going to be a tough shout and that alone could account for two of those 50:50s. It’s going to be similar with the back three too.

The Murley piece is odd, but why is there always a default assumption of incompetence and a negative overreaction?

At this stage, to be undecided on 7 places (i.e. 21% of the squad) smacks of indecisiveness to me. I would prefer SB to make his choices now and use the warm-ups for tactical polishing and the odd final place in the starting 23. Remaining doubts regarding an injury-affected player or two might be about the only reason to dither on squad selection, IMO.

The issue to me is the lack of outstanding players across a lot of position; lots of good prem players, even decent internationals. Plus I'm not sure he knows how to line up the backs to best effect.

[Puja]

Why is it ridiculous? To me that sounds like 20 or so clear cut decisions and 3 50:50 calls.

We already know the back row is going to be a tough shout and that alone could account for two of those 50:50s. It’s going to be similar with the back three too.

The Murley piece is odd, but why is there always a default assumption of incompetence and a negative overreaction?

At this stage, to be undecided on 7 places (i.e. 21% of the squad) smacks of indecisiveness to me. I would prefer SB to make his choices now and use the warm-ups for tactical polishing and the odd final place in the starting 23. Remaining doubts regarding an injury-affected player or two might be about the only reason to dither on squad selection, IMO.

Depends how you define "undecided". If he genuinely has no clue and there's a load of 50:50s (or 33:33:33s in the case of the back row and wings), then yes, I'd agree it's indecisiveness.

What I suspect is probably more likely is that he's 100% on 26 and 90% on the other 7 - he knows his 33, but the door isn't completely closed for 7 of the positions if someone kicks on or shits the bed last minute. The latter is especially true as there are a number of uncapped players and you can't really know if they are able to cut it in an international without trying them in an international. He might already have pretty much decided to take Dan and TWillis, but wants to see them play away in Cardiff to make sure that what's in training can happen on the pitch as well, before upgrading them from 90% to 100%.

Puja

[Oakboy]

Why is it ridiculous? To me that sounds like 20 or so clear cut decisions and 3 50:50 calls.

We already know the back row is going to be a tough shout and that alone could account for two of those 50:50s. It’s going to be similar with the back three too.

The Murley piece is odd, but why is there always a default assumption of incompetence and a negative overreaction?

At this stage, to be undecided on 7 places (i.e. 21% of the squad) smacks of indecisiveness to me. I would prefer SB to make his choices now and use the warm-ups for tactical polishing and the odd final place in the starting 23. Remaining doubts regarding an injury-affected player or two might be about the only reason to dither on squad selection, IMO.

Depends how you define "undecided". If he genuinely has no clue and there's a load of 50:50s (or 33:33:33s in the case of the back row and wings), then yes, I'd agree it's indecisiveness.

What I suspect is probably more likely is that he's 100% on 26 and 90% on the other 7 - he knows his 33, but the door isn't completely closed for 7 of the positions if someone kicks on or shits the bed last minute. The latter is especially true as there are a number of uncapped players and you can't really know if they are able to cut it in an international without trying them in an international. He might already have pretty much decided to take Dan and TWillis, but wants to see them play away in Cardiff to make sure that what's in training can happen on the pitch as well, before upgrading them from 90% to 100%.

Puja

Fair enough, if that's is method. Presumably, though, he decided long ago how he wants the team to play based on the overall standard of players available. Let's face it he made a fair statement, for example, with the three SHs in the camp. Basically that decision announces that we will see nothing new with a sort of declared intent. In a way, that simplifies everything, I suppose, and I have no argument in principle with sticking to the tried and trusted in the short-term nature of preparation for the RWC. I'm still surprised that he has seven decisions to make and am inclined to doubt that the DT has that right. I actually think SB is better than that.

[Puja]

Bothwings might be taciturn, but Wigglesworth is apparently the man to speak to for information: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/66377859

Interesting notes - the Wales game is not being used as "a selection shootout", players know where they stand in terms of selection, and the coaches have a pretty good handle on what the squad is likely to be.

Also, Chessum is apparently back in full training, which is excellent news and a massive surprise. Fair play to the lad; he must've worked hard on his rehab to get back so quickly.

ETA: Further details found here as well: https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://ww ... t-learned/

Disappointed to hear both Martin and Chessum were splitting scrum training time between playing flank and lock - I'd rather we not play 3 locks if at all possible, but I suppose we do want to have flexibility off the bench?

Puja

[Puja]

Telegraph are championing a Lawrence/Tuilagi midfield as being the way forward for England: https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://ww ... world-cup/

Seems like utter mince to me and the article gets absurd at one point. "Because Farrell needs help distributing, we'd need to pick Malins on the wing. And because Malins is slower, we'd need to pick Earl on the flank to add some pace." I hate selection chains where you need to pick X to cover Y's lack of ability to do a basic tenet of his job. I'm not a Slade fan but, if we're not going Ford/Farrell (which I still regard as the least bad way to use Farrell, given that we apparently are legally required to start him), I think he has to go into one of the centre roles.

Puja

[Mikey Brown]

Yep. I hate that idea. Going from 3 midfield “playmakers” to 0 is a funny idea at least. Particularly with a (not so far anymore?) May, Malins, Steward back three.

We can’t just settle on a combo with a bit of balance between pace, power and handling? I don’t even care anymore whether that’s built around one of Tuilagi/Lawrence at 12 or 13, but let’s not bother with both at once.

Watch the rugby pod clip where Goode talks about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith if you fancy winding yourself up even more, though I largely agree on his concerns about Borthwick’s England being uninteresting at the moment.

[Oakboy]

Based on watching Lawrence/Slade in the 6N, I'd need a lot of convincing that the pairing is not our best available centre combination, assuming both are fully fit. Neither will relish playing with Farrell at 10 or Youngs at 9 but there it is.

[Mikey Brown]

Based on watching Lawrence/Slade in the 6N, I'd need a lot of convincing that the pairing is not our best available centre combination, assuming both are fully fit. Neither will relish playing with Farrell at 10 or Youngs at 9 but there it is.

I think you underestimate the impact, both in terms of physicality and leadership, of having a 100 cap presence alongside as you stoop to catch that pass.

[FKAS]

Based on watching Lawrence/Slade in the 6N, I'd need a lot of convincing that the pairing is not our best available centre combination, assuming both are fully fit. Neither will relish playing with Farrell at 10 or Youngs at 9 but there it is.

I think you underestimate the impact, both in terms of physicality and leadership, of having a 100 cap presence alongside as you stoop to catch that pass.

At walking pace a good 10m behind the gain line.

[Puja]

Watch the rugby pod clip where Goode talks about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith if you fancy winding yourself up even more, though I largely agree on his concerns about Borthwick’s England being uninteresting at the moment.

I was about to look it up, thinking it would be nice to see a clip talking about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith, before I realised that you mean a chasm the other way, where Farrell's on the better side.

Puja

[Oakboy]

Based on watching Lawrence/Slade in the 6N, I'd need a lot of convincing that the pairing is not our best available centre combination, assuming both are fully fit. Neither will relish playing with Farrell at 10 or Youngs at 9 but there it is.

I think you underestimate the impact, both in terms of physicality and leadership, of having a 100 cap presence alongside as you stoop to catch that pass.

At walking pace a good 10m behind the gain line.

I don't like any of the 9/10 options in the squad. I prefer Quirke and Mitchell to any of the three SHs selected. Smith should have made the 10 shirt his own by now if he was ever going to. That must herald a difficult time for our centres, whoever is picked at halfback. Some noddy of a pundit is bound to blame whoever is at 12/13 for not winning matches despite getting only 2 or 3 chances to catch the ball in 80 minutes.

[Margin_Walker]

Watch the rugby pod clip where Goode talks about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith if you fancy winding yourself up even more, though I largely agree on his concerns about Borthwick’s England being uninteresting at the moment.

I was about to look it up, thinking it would be nice to see a clip talking about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith, before I realised that you mean a chasm the other way, where Farrell's on the better side.

Puja

If you can get over the Faz bit, he does makes some good points about the lack of engagement and personality coming from this England setup. And the stark comparison with the feel around England Cricket at the moment.

[Banquo]

Watch the rugby pod clip where Goode talks about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith if you fancy winding yourself up even more, though I largely agree on his concerns about Borthwick’s England being uninteresting at the moment.

I was about to look it up, thinking it would be nice to see a clip talking about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith, before I realised that you mean a chasm the other way, where Farrell's on the better side.

Puja

If you can get over the Faz bit, he does makes some good points about the lack of engagement and personality coming from this England setup. And the stark comparison with the feel around England Cricket at the moment.

Yes, it would be good to see an approach that looks to play around the strengths of the majority of players rather than works around perceived weaknesses....or at least have a clear strategy.

[Puja]

Watch the rugby pod clip where Goode talks about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith if you fancy winding yourself up even more, though I largely agree on his concerns about Borthwick’s England being uninteresting at the moment.

I was about to look it up, thinking it would be nice to see a clip talking about the chasm between Farrell and Ford/Smith, before I realised that you mean a chasm the other way, where Farrell's on the better side.

Puja

If you can get over the Faz bit, he does makes some good points about the lack of engagement and personality coming from this England setup. And the stark comparison with the feel around England Cricket at the moment.

Do we really need engagement and personality from England coaches? Externally, I mean, rather than being popular and good leaders within the camp. I don't much care if Stoic Bazlessball doesn't give exciting press conferences.

In fact, watching Australia dealing with the "engagement and personality" from their setup, I'm fairly certain that I prefer it.

Puja

[Margin_Walker]

I guess it's a personal thing. I enjoy watching England play cricket. It's refreshing, players are free to be proper characters and express themselves whilst trying to win games. It's genuinely entertaining. I wouldn't compare it to Rugby Australia's engagement, which just seems to be an extension of Eddie shithousery.

Bring boring is fine if you're getting results I guess. We'll see if Borthers can do that in the Autumn. I can't say I've looked forward to watching England play rugby for a while though.

[Banquo]

I guess it's a personal thing. I enjoy watching England play cricket. It's refreshing, players are free to be proper characters and express themselves whilst trying to win games. It's genuinely entertaining. I wouldn't compare it to Rugby Australia's engagement, which just seems to be an extension of Eddie shithousery.

Bring boring is fine if you're getting results I guess. We'll see if Borthers can do that in the Autumn. I can't say I've looked forward to watching England play rugby for a while though.

Like you, I interpret the external signals as a mirror of internal mood. Possibly wrong. That said, I took your comment originally to be about how you run a team rather than the external image.

[Puja]

I guess it's a personal thing. I enjoy watching England play cricket. It's refreshing, players are free to be proper characters and express themselves whilst trying to win games. It's genuinely entertaining. I wouldn't compare it to Rugby Australia's engagement, which just seems to be an extension of Eddie shithousery.

Bring boring is fine if you're getting results I guess. We'll see if Borthers can do that in the Autumn. I can't say I've looked forward to watching England play rugby for a while though.

Okay, that I can agree with. I would much rather see England looking to express themselves and take the attitude of making other teams worry about our strengths rather than worrying about how they will defend against others' strengths.

I'm choosing to remain optimistic, but I do worry that the plan is to go into our shell, box-kick everything, and try to avoid playing the game as much as we can. Quite apart from being dull as ditchwater, I don't see that being a success.

Guess we'll see on Saturday. Full training camp, lots of prep time, all the coaches now ensconced, and very nearly a completely clean bill of health for the players - no excuses for not seeing what Borthwickball can do from here.

Puja

[Margin_Walker]

I guess it's a personal thing. I enjoy watching England play cricket. It's refreshing, players are free to be proper characters and express themselves whilst trying to win games. It's genuinely entertaining. I wouldn't compare it to Rugby Australia's engagement, which just seems to be an extension of Eddie shithousery.

Bring boring is fine if you're getting results I guess. We'll see if Borthers can do that in the Autumn. I can't say I've looked forward to watching England play rugby for a while though.

Okay, that I can agree with. I would much rather see England looking to express themselves and take the attitude of making other teams worry about our strengths rather than worrying about how they will defend against others' strengths.

I'm choosing to remain optimistic, but I do worry that the plan is to go into our shell, box-kick everything, and try to avoid playing the game as much as we can. Quite apart from being dull as ditchwater, I don't see that being a success.

Guess we'll see on Saturday. Full training camp, lots of prep time, all the coaches now ensconced, and very nearly a completely clean bill of health for the players - no excuses for not seeing what Borthwickball can do from here.

Puja

I like Borthwick. He seems a decent guy and is clearly a very analytical (and successful) coach. But he has generally been quite a conservative coach and I'm not sure that's enough at this level. You need to take a few risks now and again to make the best teams in the world worry about what you are bringing to the table.

I agree though, there's no doubt they are in a better position now to show what they can do compared to the 6N where they'd had very little time in camp under the new regime. The warm up games will be very interesting though and I like the idea of using them to really develop their game with mostly 1st choice players, rather than use them as an extended set of trial games for fringe players. As much as I'd like to see a couple of those fringe players get a shot!

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah I wasn’t talking about having Borthwick do a big media song and dance. The OTT smile and cheery attitude when he took over was understandable on some level from a PR perspective but pretty transparent and seemed to quickly disappear.

Obviously it’s a lot easier to look like you’re having fun when you’re winning, and easier to express yourselves when you have a dominant platform, but they don’t often come across like the side we see in the all the carefully curated camp propaganda videos.

I can only really compare to Scotland, the Scottish club sides and Harlequins in terms of following a side closely enough to comment, but I don’t think the desire to entertain fans is a completely shallow one. I guess it’s weird for England because there is such a steady supply of mental poshos who will pay the insane Twickenham prices without question.

[Epaminondas Pules]

I know it’s not England, but Odogwu and Dino Lamb make their Italy debuts this weekend.

[Epaminondas Pules]

One thing I’d say from the Ashes series is that although England were hugely entertaining they were also hugely frustrating, showing real issues in their ability to co-adapt to the Aussies and what was happening on the pitch. It’s was plan A or plan A. A lot is lost in the entertainment factor but it does have a Newcastle under Keegan feel. IF they build that adapt / co-adapt intelligence then they’ll be world beaters.