England v Japan

[FKAS]

I've got to disagree on that one Puja. From the end of the season before on the back of which he earned selection for the summer friendlies he was playing well. From the start of last season he was always good and the lynchpin in the backline. There was certainly a step up in form around December (the long pass for Saumaki to score in the corner Vs Connacht?) with improvements towards the end of the season. Maybe it's easier to see in hindsight with the way the Tigers backline attack fell off a cliff in terms of performance after his injury or that with him a virtual ever present at 12 two different Tigers flyhalfs picked up three player of the month awards between them and none after his injury.

I don't think he should have been picked if the tactic was to develop a young 10 as a viable third choice because that is a really good idea before a world cup. Two options is one injury away from squeaky bum time every time your remaining flyhalf is in contact. As I said a rookie 10 and 12 isn't ideal at the same time but there was no better EQ 12 in the league last season, first or second half. Mark Atkinson probably the only one who could have staked a claim based on form.

[Banquo]

Not really the case for Kelly. He was the form EQ 12 for last season didn't injure his hamstring until April. Eddie wanted to get Smith settled into the side though and so opted for Slade so that there wasn't a rookie 10/12 combination at the same time. Developing Smith and a legitimate third flyhalf has been the focus for Eddie over the last year and it makes sense in terms of squad depth.

If he wanted to bring on Kelly he could have easily parachuted the Tigers 9/10/12 combination straight into the side for the AIs or 6M last season and had form and continuity in selection. He was confident that between Farrell/Slade/Manu he had his 12 options covered though. Now most of us don't agree with that but I doubt Eddie cares.

Must confess it surprised me to hear that Kelly was the top EQ 12 and Eddie didn't pick him- I'd assumed he must have been hurt for than not to happen.

I will note that Kelly's form only really kicked on from late January/early February time, so I had no issues with him not being picked for the 6N - it would've been on a very short bank of evidence.

I also think that people are hoping very hard with Kelly because they don't like the alternatives. He's had only one spell of four months where he looked international quality - granted, it was his last rugby, so it could be the start of a permanent maturation into a top-level player, but it could also have been just a burst of form. We won't know until he's fit and playing again, and either does or doesn't replicate it.

Puja

Yeah, he sort of sneaked past me, I didn't really notice him overly.

[Mellsblue]

Eddie wanted to get Smith settled into the side though and so opted for Slade so that there wasn't a rookie 10/12 combination at the same time. Developing Smith and a legitimate third flyhalf has been the focus for Eddie over the last year and it makes sense in terms of squad depth.
He was confident that between Farrell/Slade/Manu he had his 12 options covered though. Now most of us don't agree with that but I doubt Eddie cares.

Interesting stuff. Where have you heard and/or read this? I’ve read Eddie saying he likes Slade at 15, and actually tried to persuade the player that it’s his best position, but not heard him mention Slade as a bona fide 12 or that his selection there was to hold Smith’s hand at Kelly’s expense.
It could just be he doesn’t rate Kelly, he doesn’t have a huge back catalogue, and/or he’s welded to a 2nd5/8th. We know he’s a stubborn fecker.

[Puja]

I've got to disagree on that one Puja. From the end of the season before on the back of which he earned selection for the summer friendlies he was playing well. From the start of last season he was always good and the lynchpin in the backline. There was certainly a step up in form around December (the long pass for Saumaki to score in the corner Vs Connacht?) with improvements towards the end of the season. Maybe it's easier to see in hindsight with the way the Tigers backline attack fell off a cliff in terms of performance after his injury or that with him a virtual ever present at 12 two different Tigers flyhalfs picked up three player of the month awards between them and none after his injury.

I don't think he should have been picked if the tactic was to develop a young 10 as a viable third choice because that is a really good idea before a world cup. Two options is one injury away from squeaky bum time every time your remaining flyhalf is in contact. As I said a rookie 10 and 12 isn't ideal at the same time but there was no better EQ 12 in the league last season, first or second half. Mark Atkinson probably the only one who could have staked a claim based on form.

Heartily disagree. He wasn't consistently in the Leicester 1st XV and was showing nothing more than promise before he earned his first cap. It was the games when the Lions were away and he didn't even play the first game, but the second easier one against Canada. It wasn't *earned* selection, so much as, "Let's have a look at this promising player" and he certainly was nowhere near actual international contention.

I will agree that January onwards, he really kicked on and we dearly missed him when he got injured - we limped over the line without him and he was dearly missed. However, it would've been a huge gamble to name him in the 6N squad back in January.

I hope he does come back from injury and show the same form he showed in Jan-Apr on a long-term basis, but right now, he's got too short of a book to be anything other than promising.

Puja

[FKAS]

I've got to disagree on that one Puja. From the end of the season before on the back of which he earned selection for the summer friendlies he was playing well. From the start of last season he was always good and the lynchpin in the backline. There was certainly a step up in form around December (the long pass for Saumaki to score in the corner Vs Connacht?) with improvements towards the end of the season. Maybe it's easier to see in hindsight with the way the Tigers backline attack fell off a cliff in terms of performance after his injury or that with him a virtual ever present at 12 two different Tigers flyhalfs picked up three player of the month awards between them and none after his injury.

I don't think he should have been picked if the tactic was to develop a young 10 as a viable third choice because that is a really good idea before a world cup. Two options is one injury away from squeaky bum time every time your remaining flyhalf is in contact. As I said a rookie 10 and 12 isn't ideal at the same time but there was no better EQ 12 in the league last season, first or second half. Mark Atkinson probably the only one who could have staked a claim based on form.

Heartily disagree. He wasn't consistently in the Leicester 1st XV and was showing nothing more than promise before he earned his first cap. It was the games when the Lions were away and he didn't even play the first game, but the second easier one against Canada. It wasn't *earned* selection, so much as, "Let's have a look at this promising player" and he certainly was nowhere near actual international contention.

I will agree that January onwards, he really kicked on and we dearly missed him when he got injured - we limped over the line without him and he was dearly missed. However, it would've been a huge gamble to name him in the 6N squad back in January.

I hope he does come back from injury and show the same form he showed in Jan-Apr on a long-term basis, but right now, he's got too short of a book to be anything other than promising.

Puja

Yes, fair the summer he got his cap was very much a development series but his name was well up there. Yes, selection against after that would have raised eyebrows but generally selecting any 20 year old for the national team would raise eyebrows.

Last season he missed two months of the season but still made 23 appearances with 22 being starts. He was key to Tigers winning the league and progressing in Europe. No idea whether that would translate to the international stage or whether he'll be another Ant Allen but if England are looking for an actual 12 to play 12 post world cup he could be top of the list depending on when and how he comes back from injury.

I'd definitely have him in the promising category and I said why England didn't select him but he was fit and in form which the initial assertion was he was injured and so couldn't be called up.

[Scrumhead]

I thought he was injured for the 6N but I stand corrected. He was definitely injured for the Australia tour so couldn’t have been included when his form actually meant he deserved to be. We’ll never know if he’d have gone or not.