RugbyRebels

Peat wrote:

TheNomad wrote:

Puja wrote:
Mercer's likely to grow into his shoulders though and could be seen as an investment in the future. I don't want to be saying that Simmonds is too small to play international rugby at no 8... but it does feel like he's too small to be playing international rugby at no 8.

Puja

I don't want to say that either...but we all know he is

Has potential at flanker though. More likely 7 than 6.

Robashaw would have been my first name on the sheet not so long ago but Lawes and Armand have been the best 6s in the league this year - after that, maybe Mercer! I know some just flat out won't accept Lawes as an international 6, but I reckon he'd do well if given a shot

He's had shots at 6 at international level and never looked like doing better than well, to be generous.

Spiffy wrote:

Peat wrote:
He's had shots at 6 at international level and never looked like doing better than well, to be generous.

Players can, and often do, improve. There is no doubt that Lawes is loking better at 6 that at any time in the past and he is playing there regularly now. Jones might give him another shot. At the moment he looks as good as any 6 in the PL. He's a great lineout option, a destructive tackler and a powerful carrier. And he's big.

TheNomad wrote:

Peat wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:He's also better at playing rugby than he was then.
There's been this wiff of unfulfilled potential about him for a few years - not any more though.

Lawes was de facto blindside last 6N and didn't look like a top class guy then. I love what he's doing in Jones' England team, but unless his breakdown game has increased dramatically since February, I feel comfortable betting that you'll wish there was an actual flanker at 6.

I think that's harsh. I'd firstly say that his play (in particular his carrying) has developed since then and secondly, he's been playing a lot more time at 6.

I'd be for it personally. I think he's add more than Robshaw, and with a second row of Itoje and one other, you'd have a good balance anyway

Which Tyler wrote:Or to make that list of names make a bit more sense:

Mako Vunipola (Saracens),Ellis Genge (Leicester Tigers), Matt Mullan (Wasps)
Jamie George (Saracens), Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints),Tom Dunn (Bath Rugby)
Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers), Harry Williams (Exeter Chiefs)
Maro Itoje (Saracens), George Kruis (Saracens), Joe Launchbury (Wasps), Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints), Charlie Ewels (Bath Rugby), Nick Isiekwe (Saracens)
Chris Robshaw (Harlequins), Sam Simmonds (Exeter Chiefs)
Tom Curry (Sale Sharks), Sam Underhill (Bath Rugby)
Nathan Hughes (Wasps), Zach Mercer (Bath Rugby)



Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers), Danny Care (Harlequins)
George Ford (Leicester Tigers), Alex Lozowski (Saracens), Marcus Smith (Harlequins)
Owen Farrell (Saracens), Piers Francis (Northampton Saints)
Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby), Henry Slade (Exeter Chiefs)
Elliot Daly (Wasps), Jonny May (Leicester Tigers), Denny Solomona (Sale Sharks)
Mike Brown (Harlequins), Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby)

Stom wrote:Both Mercer and Smith are only in the training squad, though, not the match squads.

Plus, despite where they played age group, Mercer's appearances this season have been at 6, and Simmonds at 8...

Puja wrote:I suspect he's saying 10 from the first choice EPS. So Billy, Marler, Maunder, Te'o, Nowell would all count under that. Still struggling to get to 10 though!

Puja

Raggs wrote:He may be including people he plans to rest.

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:I suspect he's saying 10 from the first choice EPS. So Billy, Marler, Maunder, Te'o, Nowell would all count under that. Still struggling to get to 10 though!

Puja

I'd obliterated Nowell, apols.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:I suspect he's saying 10 from the first choice EPS. So Billy, Marler, Maunder, Te'o, Nowell would all count under that. Still struggling to get to 10 though!

Puja

I'd obliterated Nowell, apols.

You are Rieko Ioane and I claim my ten pounds.

Digby wrote:Who will the locks be now we're perhaps losing the mighty Ewels?

If Lawes had added much improved handling to his much improved carrying I think he'd have a much better shout for selection (and still might at 6 given we're a bit limp there), but as is it looks a 3 way pick between Launch, Itoje and Kruis. I think Launch and Itoje the best individuals, but Kruis likely offers the setpiece work, and then there's the question of what the best balance is rather than who are the best players.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:Who will the locks be now we're perhaps losing the mighty Ewels?

If Lawes had added much improved handling to his much improved carrying I think he'd have a much better shout for selection (and still might at 6 given we're a bit limp there), but as is it looks a 3 way pick between Launch, Itoje and Kruis. I think Launch and Itoje the best individuals, but Kruis likely offers the setpiece work, and then there's the question of what the best balance is rather than who are the best players.

Usually, the best pairing is the way to go - arguably Itoje and Kruis. Launchbury would be my first name on the teamsheet for skill and character. That highlights the past dilemma.

Maybe now, though, a simple 'pairing' argument may not cut it totally with increased athleticism, pitch coverage and breakdown tactics. It may be that the best combination of the back five as a whole has to be considered. That could require the quickest two locks or the two who best combine with the back row at the breakdown. Also, if line-out ball has to come exclusively from the locks, Itoje and Kruis get the shout. However, with Hughes and/or Lawes and/or Itoje in the back row there is less case against selecting the best individual, Launchbury.

I'd pick Launchbury and Itoje with Lawes at 6.

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:Who will the locks be now we're perhaps losing the mighty Ewels?

If Lawes had added much improved handling to his much improved carrying I think he'd have a much better shout for selection (and still might at 6 given we're a bit limp there), but as is it looks a 3 way pick between Launch, Itoje and Kruis. I think Launch and Itoje the best individuals, but Kruis likely offers the setpiece work, and then there's the question of what the best balance is rather than who are the best players.

Usually, the best pairing is the way to go - arguably Itoje and Kruis. Launchbury would be my first name on the teamsheet for skill and character. That highlights the past dilemma.

Maybe now, though, a simple 'pairing' argument may not cut it totally with increased athleticism, pitch coverage and breakdown tactics. It may be that the best combination of the back five as a whole has to be considered. That could require the quickest two locks or the two who best combine with the back row at the breakdown. Also, if line-out ball has to come exclusively from the locks, Itoje and Kruis get the shout. However, with Hughes and/or Lawes and/or Itoje in the back row there is less case against selecting the best individual, Launchbury.

I'd pick Launchbury and Itoje with Lawes at 6.

Who at 7?

Mellsblue wrote:Will he need/want to call anyone up. He already has Isiekwe in the squad. As we can see at SH he’s rather make do than bring in a player he doesn’t rate. I can’t think of another lock he has name checked. Who was the fourth lock in Arg? Was there one?
If I were him I’d bring in another 6, if he feels he needs another body. Wilson or Armand are the obvious choices.

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Will he need/want to call anyone up. He already has Isiekwe in the squad. As we can see at SH he’s rather make do than bring in a player he doesn’t rate. I can’t think of another lock he has name checked. Who was the fourth lock in Arg? Was there one?
If I were him I’d bring in another 6, if he feels he needs another body. Wilson or Armand are the obvious choices.

He could just promote Mercer from the training squad...