EPS Watch / Player Form Thread

[Mellsblue]

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...

He could do. Going on his public thoughts on the player, I’m not sure Jones would trust him to play we’re there an injury crisis. I also think it’d be harsh to make someone as callow as Mercer play international rugby away from his preferred position.

[twitchy]

Armand is a perfect fit who is bang in form. Or we could get some more second rows in for the hell of it.

[Puja]

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.

What's wrong with Lawes's handling? I mean, he's never going to play fly-half, but he's got pretty solid hands, can handle an overlap and put a winger away, has a decent line in an offload - what's not to like?

Puja

[Oakboy]

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?

Robshaw.

[Puja]

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...

He could do. Going on his public thoughts on the player, I’m not sure Jones would trust him to play we’re there an injury crisis. I also think it’d be harsh to make someone as callow as Mercer play international rugby away from his preferred position.

Having watched him across the last couple of weeks, I'm with you (and Eddie). Mercer is very talented, but he's still trying to play like a superstar. Worked fine when outclassing the other U20s, but he needs to learn that he a) can't bust through a defence all by himself, b) shouldn't try to do bust through a defence all by himself and c) there are other, more supportive things which he could be doing rather than continually trying to win a game on his own.

He's young though and hopefully has a lot of (mental) growing up left to do. I'm just thrilled he's at the same club as Faletau. If he can learn off him, I will be very pleased indeed.

Puja

[Digby]

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.

What's wrong with Lawes's handling? I mean, he's never going to play fly-half, but he's got pretty solid hands, can handle an overlap and put a winger away, has a decent line in an offload - what's not to like?

Puja

He tends to die with the ball in contact. Maybe I should watch more Saints games, though that doesn't sound especially enticing, but in close/pressure games I don't see him being akin to Whitelock or Retallick, and that limits his advancing his case even allowing for improvements as a carrier.

[Banquo]

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?

Robshaw.

Gawd.

[Oakboy]

Who at 7?

Robshaw.

Gawd.

An almighty openside!

Otherwise, Armand or maybe Simmonds. So far, I'm lukewarm about Underhill. If we are going the youth route Willis looks the part more than any of the other youngsters, IMO.

[Raggs]

Willis has looked very handy this season, but I'd not put him ahead of the Curry's yet, as they've proven capable at AP level for over a season now. I don't think the Curry's are good enough for international at this point, but in purely AP terms, their body of work is greater than Willis.

[Puja]

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.

What's wrong with Lawes's handling? I mean, he's never going to play fly-half, but he's got pretty solid hands, can handle an overlap and put a winger away, has a decent line in an offload - what's not to like?

Puja

He tends to die with the ball in contact. Maybe I should watch more Saints games, though that doesn't sound especially enticing, but in close/pressure games I don't see him being akin to Whitelock or Retallick, and that limits his advancing his case even allowing for improvements as a carrier.

That's not unfair - I thought you were suggesting he had clog-hands or something.

Mind, it's taken us this many years to teach him not to run upright into contact - I don't think I'd want to risk that by making him prioritise an offload out of the tackle.

Puja

[Digby]

What's wrong with Lawes's handling? I mean, he's never going to play fly-half, but he's got pretty solid hands, can handle an overlap and put a winger away, has a decent line in an offload - what's not to like?

Puja

He tends to die with the ball in contact. Maybe I should watch more Saints games, though that doesn't sound especially enticing, but in close/pressure games I don't see him being akin to Whitelock or Retallick, and that limits his advancing his case even allowing for improvements as a carrier.

That's not unfair - I thought you were suggesting he had clog-hands or something.

Mind, it's taken us this many years to teach him not to run upright into contact - I don't think I'd want to risk that by making him prioritise an offload out of the tackle.

Puja

Merely that whilst the improvement in his carrying is great that it hasn't been matched with a development in his handling lessens the potential worth of his improvement. Not that I think he's that bad, and the game is just so brutal and fast now the oddity isn't people struggling like Lawes in this area, it's that the work of the NZ locks in this area is just so good.

[Timbo]

Whitelock is a workhorse and a world class lineout forward, but not imo anything to get too worked up over as a footballer or ball carrier. Retallick on the other hand is a freak.

[Beasties]

Willis has looked very handy this season, but I'd not put him ahead of the Curry's yet, as they've proven capable at AP level for over a season now. I don't think the Curry's are good enough for international at this point, but in purely AP terms, their body of work is greater than Willis.

What excites me most about Willis is the power that he has already, stronger than the Currys from what I can see. Not quite Simmonds' power yet or effectiveness, but he's looking tremendous over the ball and intelligent with it. That said, it's very early days as you rightly say.

[Raggs]

Willis has looked very handy this season, but I'd not put him ahead of the Curry's yet, as they've proven capable at AP level for over a season now. I don't think the Curry's are good enough for international at this point, but in purely AP terms, their body of work is greater than Willis.

What excites me most about Willis is the power that he has already, stronger than the Currys from what I can see. Not quite Simmonds' power yet or effectiveness, but he's looking tremendous over the ball and intelligent with it. That said, it's very early days as you rightly say.

I'd agree that he looks stronger than the Curry's, he takes a lot more to clear out, and is very powerful at clearing out himself. Definitely looks to be on the right path to be an exceptional player, but will he remain that way when other teams start targeting him, and making sure they're ready to clear him out, or giving certain players the role of marking him and clearing him out.

[Timbo]

Or will he remain that way when he starts games rather than coming off the bench.

[kk67]

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

Yup. When you build a team you need a starting point and then build around it. Those three must play, everyone else moves over to accommodate them. I'd stick Clifford at 8 and just go balls-out.

[dronesjr]

I would go for Launchbury, Kruis and Itoje at 4, 5, 6. Don’t think Lawes offers enough at the breakdown to start at 6. Most likely Simmonds at 7 to balance the lack of speed.

[Puja]

I would go for Launchbury, Kruis and Itoje at 4, 5, 6. Don’t think Lawes offers enough at the breakdown to start at 6. Most likely Simmonds at 7 to balance the lack of speed.

Hmm. I do get your logic, but I believe that Itoje has the capacity to be the best 4 in the world. I don't want to waste that on making him into a pretty solid 6. To my mind, he either locks or you put him on the bench and say, "These guys are better than you right now - go improve and prove me wrong."

I've got less qualms about putting Lawes at 6, because I don't see him as World XV quality in the same way and he's old enough not to have huge amounts of improvability left in him to waste.

Besides, I think I'd still have Robshaw over either of them. Square pegs for square holes and he is a more than useful flanker.

Puja

[Spiffy]

Robshaw.

Gawd.

An almighty openside!

Otherwise, Armand or maybe Simmonds. So far, I'm lukewarm about Underhill. If we are going the youth route Willis looks the part more than any of the other youngsters, IMO.

Simmonds seems to have something of the X factor. He has been playing very well. Is strong and fast with a nose for the try line. He may have the best power/weight ratio in the PL and takes some stopping for a forward who is relatively small by today's standards. Agree about Underhill, who looked full of promise, but perhaps has been a tad overhyped. But he has plenty of time to develop his game. At the moment Simmonds is the more impressive of the two.

[Scrumhead]

Gawd.

An almighty openside!

Otherwise, Armand or maybe Simmonds. So far, I'm lukewarm about Underhill. If we are going the youth route Willis looks the part more than any of the other youngsters, IMO.

Simmonds seems to have something of the X factor. He has been playing very well. Is strong and fast with a nose for the try line. He may have the best power/weight ratio in the PL and takes some stopping for a forward who is relatively small by today's standards. Agree about Underhill, who looked full of promise, but perhaps has been a tad overhyped. But he has plenty of time to develop his game. At the moment Simmonds is the more impressive of the two.

I’d agree with that assessment.

Simmonds isn’t big, but he’s about the same size and weight as Michael Hooper who hasn’t done too badly in test rugby.

Obviously that leans towards him playing at 7 rather than 8, but I’d rather see him there anyway given that Billy and Hughes will be the first and second choice 8s if fit. Underhill and Tom Curry have done fairly well in their opportunities so far, but if Simmonds were to play a blinder as a 7, that shirt is 100% up for grabs.

[Stom]

An almighty openside!

Otherwise, Armand or maybe Simmonds. So far, I'm lukewarm about Underhill. If we are going the youth route Willis looks the part more than any of the other youngsters, IMO.

Simmonds seems to have something of the X factor. He has been playing very well. Is strong and fast with a nose for the try line. He may have the best power/weight ratio in the PL and takes some stopping for a forward who is relatively small by today's standards. Agree about Underhill, who looked full of promise, but perhaps has been a tad overhyped. But he has plenty of time to develop his game. At the moment Simmonds is the more impressive of the two.

I’d agree with that assessment.

Simmonds isn’t big, but he’s about the same size and weight as Michael Hooper who hasn’t done too badly in test rugby.

Obviously that leans towards him playing at 7 rather than 8, but I’d rather see him there anyway given that Billy and Hughes will be the first and second choice 8s if fit. Underhill and Tom Curry have done fairly well in their opportunities so far, but if Simmonds were to play a blinder as a 7, that shirt is 100% up for grabs.

I've said it before, but if Billy decides he wants to leave rugby, I'd love to see Underhill, Simmonds and Mercer in the same backrow. I think it would have lovely balance.

I want Underhill spending as much time as possible with Robshaw. His D is top notch already, but Robshaw's alignment and organisation are fantastic. And those are things you can learn from someone else.

It's very interesting that we now have a load of backrows that will give us the flexibility to play different systems once they mature. Fantastic

[Oakboy]

Is Eddie being experimental for the AIs or what? I'd expect him to pick the best available team for Argentina and Australia, saving changes for the last match. With the Lions disruption and a virtual 2nd XV in Argentina, the team unit is bound to be rusty. Australia are too good to risk units of the team raw against them.

IMO, the best available 'back five' is Launchbury, Itoje, Lawes, Robshaw, Hughes.

[Banquo]

Is Eddie being experimental for the AIs or what? I'd expect him to pick the best available team for Argentina and Australia, saving changes for the last match. With the Lions disruption and a virtual 2nd XV in Argentina, the team unit is bound to be rusty. Australia are too good to risk units of the team raw against them.

IMO, the best available 'back five' is Launchbury, Itoje, Lawes, Robshaw, Hughes.

I'm assuming you don't want any width on the game, and Faz to start

[Which Tyler]

Simmonds isn’t big, but he’s about the same size and weight as Michael Hooper who hasn’t done too badly in test rugby.

Just because I've done this elsewhere in a thread where people were claiming that Mercer and Simmonds were too small for international rugby:

Zach Mercer: 190cm; 105 kg (BMI: 29.09)
Sam Simmonds: 184cm; 103kg (BMI: 30.42)

Sergio Parisse: 196cm; 112kg (BMI: 29.15)
Kieran Read: 193cm; 110kg (BMI: 29.53)
Jamie Heaslip: 192cm; 110kg (BMI: 29.84)
Taupe Faletau: 189cm; 110kg (BMI: 30.79)
David Pocock: 183cm; 103kg (BMI: 30.76)
Louis Picamoles: 192cm; 116kg (BMI: 31.47)

Ben Morgan: 191cm; 116kg (BMI: 31.8)
Nathan Hughes: 196cm; 125kg (BMI: 32.54)
Thomas Waldron: 185cm; 114kg (BMI: 33.31)
Billy Vunipola: 188cm; 130kg (BMI: 36.78)

IMO Simmonds is more-or-less as bulky as he can go, Mercer's probably got another 5-10 kg before stressing his frame (based on eye-balling their physiques).
Simmonds almost exactly the same stats as Pocock; Mercer(+5kg) almost exactly the same stats as Faletau (who he's also learning from, and plays very similarly to)

[Oakboy]

Is Eddie being experimental for the AIs or what? I'd expect him to pick the best available team for Argentina and Australia, saving changes for the last match. With the Lions disruption and a virtual 2nd XV in Argentina, the team unit is bound to be rusty. Australia are too good to risk units of the team raw against them.

IMO, the best available 'back five' is Launchbury, Itoje, Lawes, Robshaw, Hughes.

I'm assuming you don't want any width on the game, and Faz to start

What I want and what Eddie will do are somewhat different. What is our best available backs' line-up? Presumably, based on the past, it is Youngs, Ford, May, Farrell, Joseph, Watson and Brown. Why would Eddie not start with that line-up?

I'd pick Slade at 12 or 13 but I doubt if Eddie will.