RugbyRebels

fivepointer wrote:Farrell out of the 6N's.

Can never wish injury on anyone. It does mean Eddie has to 'cope' tho....

Puja wrote:

SDHoneymonster wrote:Jonny Hill also a doubt for the Scotland game apparently. Would be an interesting dilemma if he missed out - he's taken some time to settle in but started to look the part in the autumn IMO and we lose a lot of bulk in the second row if he doesn't recover.

That would be a big loss - I'd go with Lawes if fit or Chessum if he's not, but you know Eddie will go with Ewels. I don't necessarily know that Chessum is international quality yet (or even if he ever will be; still far too early to tell), but Ewels is a very known quantity of "just below international standard" and so I'd rather take the gamble and hope Chessum rises to it.

Puja

I do find it amusing that the Jonny Hill called out as a liability in the last 6N has now become a big loss....which I do agree with.

If Ewels is the answer, I feel the wrong question has been asked.

Mellsblue wrote:

p/d wrote:Do you have to be fully jabbed for going into Scotland

Yes, for hepatitis.

and Buckfast

fivepointer wrote:Ewels will play at lock if Hill isnt fit.

If Lawes doesnt come through his HIA protocol I have a feeling Ludlam will play at 6.

Odds on Isiekwe at least making the matchday 23 have shortened considerably.

Ludlam doesn't even play six for Saints iirc.

Banquo wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Ewels will play at lock if Hill isnt fit.

If Lawes doesnt come through his HIA protocol I have a feeling Ludlam will play at 6.

Odds on Isiekwe at least making the matchday 23 have shortened considerably.

Ludlam doesn't even play six for Saints iirc.

He's played there for England. And remember, Eddie Jones is selecting the team....

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:

SDHoneymonster wrote:Jonny Hill also a doubt for the Scotland game apparently. Would be an interesting dilemma if he missed out - he's taken some time to settle in but started to look the part in the autumn IMO and we lose a lot of bulk in the second row if he doesn't recover.

That would be a big loss - I'd go with Lawes if fit or Chessum if he's not, but you know Eddie will go with Ewels. I don't necessarily know that Chessum is international quality yet (or even if he ever will be; still far too early to tell), but Ewels is a very known quantity of "just below international standard" and so I'd rather take the gamble and hope Chessum rises to it.

Puja

I do find it amusing that the Jonny Hill called out as a liability in the last 6N has now become a big loss....which I do agree with.

If Ewels is the answer, I feel the wrong question has been asked.

Indeed. Fair play to him, he has absolutely improved his game enough that I'm now okay with him being our starting lock, but he's still a distance off that comment being more praise than it is indictment of our lock supplies.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
That would be a big loss - I'd go with Lawes if fit or Chessum if he's not, but you know Eddie will go with Ewels. I don't necessarily know that Chessum is international quality yet (or even if he ever will be; still far too early to tell), but Ewels is a very known quantity of "just below international standard" and so I'd rather take the gamble and hope Chessum rises to it.

Puja

I do find it amusing that the Jonny Hill called out as a liability in the last 6N has now become a big loss....which I do agree with.

If Ewels is the answer, I feel the wrong question has been asked.

Indeed. Fair play to him, he has absolutely improved his game enough that I'm now okay with him being our starting lock, but he's still a distance off that comment being more praise than it is indictment of our lock supplies.

Puja

Lock stocks. With or without smoking barrels.

I think Johnny Hill benefited greatly from going on the Lions Tour. He clearly picked up a lot from spending time with the likes of AWJ etc.

I suspect Eddie will want the lock hybrid type in at 6 against Scotland. Three good jumpers in the lineout to try and disrupt Scotland and stop Russell getting good first phase ball to play with. In bad conditions he'll want the rolling maul to be a go to attacking play as well and in Cockers England have someone who is more than handy at coaching that.

Isiekwe is a very good lineout operator with a good work rate. Slotting him alongside Itoje would present an established lock combination and though a bit lighter we would have more mobility. If Lawes is out I think Chessum might end up making his debut.

Jonny Hill seems to take a while to adapt to every new higher level of rugby he’s exposed to, but once he does finds ways to really excel (so far at least). I remember when he first came through at Chiefs and thinking he’ll be successful if he can become an adequate Premiership lock. Fast forward a few years and he’s dominating against Racing and Toulouse in Heineken Cup knockouts. Hopefully we see the same rate of progress at international level.

FKAS wrote:I think Johnny Hill benefited greatly from going on the Lions Tour. He clearly picked up a lot from spending time with the likes of AWJ etc.

I suspect Eddie will want the lock hybrid type in at 6 against Scotland. Three good jumpers in the lineout to try and disrupt Scotland and stop Russell getting good first phase ball to play with. In bad conditions he'll want the rolling maul to be a go to attacking play as well and in Cockers England have someone who is more than handy at coaching that.

Isiekwe is a very good lineout operator with a good work rate. Slotting him alongside Itoje would present an established lock combination and though a bit lighter we would have more mobility. If Lawes is out I think Chessum might end up making his debut.

Isiekwe has hardly played at lock for ages iirc?

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
That would be a big loss - I'd go with Lawes if fit or Chessum if he's not, but you know Eddie will go with Ewels. I don't necessarily know that Chessum is international quality yet (or even if he ever will be; still far too early to tell), but Ewels is a very known quantity of "just below international standard" and so I'd rather take the gamble and hope Chessum rises to it.

Puja

I do find it amusing that the Jonny Hill called out as a liability in the last 6N has now become a big loss....which I do agree with.

If Ewels is the answer, I feel the wrong question has been asked.

Indeed. Fair play to him, he has absolutely improved his game enough that I'm now okay with him being our starting lock, but he's still a distance off that comment being more praise than it is indictment of our lock supplies.

Puja

I`m on the praise train. He`d been excellent almost since the last 6N. Was commenting on how fickle the game can be.

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:I think Johnny Hill benefited greatly from going on the Lions Tour. He clearly picked up a lot from spending time with the likes of AWJ etc.

I suspect Eddie will want the lock hybrid type in at 6 against Scotland. Three good jumpers in the lineout to try and disrupt Scotland and stop Russell getting good first phase ball to play with. In bad conditions he'll want the rolling maul to be a go to attacking play as well and in Cockers England have someone who is more than handy at coaching that.

Isiekwe is a very good lineout operator with a good work rate. Slotting him alongside Itoje would present an established lock combination and though a bit lighter we would have more mobility. If Lawes is out I think Chessum might end up making his debut.

Isiekwe has hardly played at lock for ages iirc?

He's switched between lock and 6 this season for Sarries having played pretty much solely at 6 whilst at Saints. He played in the row with Itoje Vs Saints at the start of this month.

Slade also a doubt for the opener, came into camp struggling.

FKAS wrote:

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:I think Johnny Hill benefited greatly from going on the Lions Tour. He clearly picked up a lot from spending time with the likes of AWJ etc.

I suspect Eddie will want the lock hybrid type in at 6 against Scotland. Three good jumpers in the lineout to try and disrupt Scotland and stop Russell getting good first phase ball to play with. In bad conditions he'll want the rolling maul to be a go to attacking play as well and in Cockers England have someone who is more than handy at coaching that.

Isiekwe is a very good lineout operator with a good work rate. Slotting him alongside Itoje would present an established lock combination and though a bit lighter we would have more mobility. If Lawes is out I think Chessum might end up making his debut.

Isiekwe has hardly played at lock for ages iirc?

He's switched between lock and 6 this season for Sarries having played pretty much solely at 6 whilst at Saints. He played in the row with Itoje Vs Saints at the start of this month.

Yep. I looked and he’s started 8 games at lock and 4 on the flank so far this season.

SDHoneymonster wrote:Slade also a doubt for the opener, came into camp struggling.

That is a worry … Slade might be annoyingly inconsistent for England but he’s a guaranteed starter with a good bit of experience that’s currently missing from our backs. If he’s out we’re probably looking at a midfield of Atkinson and Marchant. In theory, that could work quite well (Marchant is used to playing with a big 12 for Quins), but from experience POV, they’re sharing less than 10 caps between them.

Does that strengthen Daly and/or Nowell’s case to start? I guess Daly could play at 13?

Thats unhelpful.
If Slade doesnt make it an Atkinson-Marchant centre pairing seems likely, though i wonder if a Quins 10-12-13 might offer a club combination that would have the benefit of the players being familiar with one another.
It would mean Northmore out of position and thats a tall order for your first test but Atkinson is hardly a tried and tested 12.
Problems mounting for England.

Atkinson is ‘a tried and tested 12’ though? Maybe not at test level, but he knows how to defend in that channel is used to running moves as first or second receiver.

Northmore can play 12, but is primarily a 13 and looks much better when he plays in his natural position. Asking him to step up to test rugby and play out of position isn’t a good idea IMO.

According to a Jones quote in the DT, Slade came to camp with bruising that will only hamper him in training till tomorrow. (That probably means he will miss the whole 6N.)

SDHoneymonster wrote:Slade also a doubt for the opener, came into camp struggling.

Oh FFS.

Found the Jones quote from the telegraph, which does sound promising:

On the field, Henry Slade is set to fill Farrell’s role at inside centre outside either Marcus Smith or George Ford, although like others he has been unable to train this week. “We might move Sladey into 12 where he played against South Africa almost to handle that role,” Jones said. “He's got a few bumps and bruises from Montpellier so he won't be on the track until probably Friday.”

Puja

I would guess 11. Malins 12. Atkinson 13. Marchant 14. Nowell with Daly covering all from 23? I doubt we’d see Northmore used to cover 12 given his last outing there and lack of international experience. That’s already a very inexperienced backline but at least it’s exciting.

Youngs must have more caps than the entire rest of the backline.

Scrumhead wrote:

FKAS wrote:

Banquo wrote: Isiekwe has hardly played at lock for ages iirc?

He's switched between lock and 6 this season for Sarries having played pretty much solely at 6 whilst at Saints. He played in the row with Itoje Vs Saints at the start of this month.

Yep. I looked and he’s started 8 games at lock and 4 on the flank so far this season.

Fair enough . Think he's a bit caught between positions tbh- looks more like a 6 than a lock to me.

Bailey to play the Farrell role?
(agreed with Atkinson Marchant midfield, but it's Eddie, so you never know)

Mikey Brown wrote:I would guess 11. Malins 12. Atkinson 13. Marchant 14. Nowell with Daly covering all from 23? I doubt we’d see Northmore used to cover 12 given his last outing there and lack of international experience. That’s already a very inexperienced backline but at least it’s exciting.

Youngs must have more caps than the entire rest of the backline.

Could see Daly or Hassell-Collins starting on the left to inject a bit of pace - that backline has a bunch of creative ability and in Atkinson and Nowell the ability to break tackles but no real gas.

Which Tyler wrote:Bailey to play the Farrell role?
(agreed with Atkinson Marchant midfield, but it's Eddie, so you never know)

That would be bold AF considering he’s never played there in his fledgling senior career.

It’s Eddie, but that’s a bit out there for me.

From various Eddie quotes it really doesn’t sound like Slade is too much of a doubt.

Given that Eddie himself volunteered the idea that Slade could play at 12 with Marchant at 13 I’d guess that’s what he’s thinking.