EPS Watch / Player Form Thread

[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

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.

yet you'd pick a back 5 in the pack that doesn't give that back line the best chance of working, both in supply of good ball and support?

[Digby]

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.

yet you'd pick a back 5 in the pack that doesn't give that back line the best chance of working, both in supply of good ball and support?

Yep, that back five in the pack looks like you'd play in the 1-3 phases area and if you don't break the line in that period simply kick the ball away. And really you'd want Manu back to make that plan easier.

[belgarion]

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)

Can you please put all thos numbers into a form the slightly older users on this board can understand.
I was brought up/taught at school ft & inches, stones & pounds & acutally prefer them to all this metric crap

[Which Tyler]

Can you please put all thos numbers into a form the slightly older users on this board can understand.
I was brought up/taught at school ft & inches, stones & pounds & acutally prefer them to all this metric crap

No

[Digby]

Can you please put all thos numbers into a form the slightly older users on this board can understand.
I was brought up/taught at school ft & inches, stones & pounds & acutally prefer them to all this metric crap

No

Quite right too.

[Oakboy]

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.

yet you'd pick a back 5 in the pack that doesn't give that back line the best chance of working, both in supply of good ball and support?

You make it sound like there are realistic alternatives which would produce more ball for the backs and support them out wide. I just don't see who that might be and I don't see how the game style can open up with Eddie's insistence on playing Farrell and no adequate alternatives at 9.

Idealistically, If available, I'd still try Simpson, Cipriani and Slade.

So, who would you choose?

[Raggs]

May out for Argentina with a hamstring strain.

[Banquo]

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.

yet you'd pick a back 5 in the pack that doesn't give that back line the best chance of working, both in supply of good ball and support?

You make it sound like there are realistic alternatives which would produce more ball for the backs and support them out wide. I just don't see who that might be and I don't see how the game style can open up with Eddie's insistence on playing Farrell and no adequate alternatives at 9.

Idealistically, If available, I'd still try Simpson, Cipriani and Slade.

So, who would you choose?

all I am saying is that you put forward a back five which doesn't complement the style of play you propound ad infinitum, based on Eddie's squad. A more balanced selection in the back 5 to support more than a tight game might look like Itoje, Launchbury, Robshaw, Underhill, Hughes, which has mobility if not quite the attacking skills at 7 I might want. I'd like to see- from the squad now- Care, Ford, May, Slade, JJ, Roko/Watson, Watson/Brown. That said, I'd be pretty nervous about the midfield conceding the gainline too easily. I'm pi55ed that Teo and Daly are crocked.


(and now May)

[Puja]

May out for Argentina with a hamstring strain.

Oh FFS!

Puja

[Banquo]

May out for Argentina with a hamstring strain.

Oh FFS!

Puja

who you going for as back three now then

Horrid thought that JJ may get shunted, but doubt it.

[fivepointer]

Launchbury doubtful too.

[Banquo]

Launchbury doubtful too.

ironic its the non-lions dropping out now!

[Tom Moore]

Given that he was selected in the initial squad, I suspect it will be Solomona now with Watson and Brown.

Rokoduguni to potentially get a run against Samoa, maybe with Daly if his knee clears up.

[fivepointer]

Apparently Smith has had to come home as he's hurt his foot, plus Ewels, Simmonds and Underhill havent trained fully due to knocks picked up at the w/e.
We might be down to picking a side based on last one standing if we get any more injuries. Still next week should be plain sailing with only that little get together with the Welsh pack to worry about.

[Banquo]

Given that he was selected in the initial squad, I suspect it will be Solomona now with Watson and Brown.

Rokoduguni to potentially get a run against Samoa, maybe with Daly if his knee clears up.

...though suspect Solomona was more likely selected so Eddie could have a look in training rather than playing him, esp against Oz.

[Banquo]

Roko and Solomona are also semi crocked!

[TheNomad]

Really hoping some of them pull through.

Shame in particular about May and Daly. If we'd had enough wingers, it's possible that we could have tried Watson at 15.

[Oakboy]

yet you'd pick a back 5 in the pack that doesn't give that back line the best chance of working, both in supply of good ball and support?

You make it sound like there are realistic alternatives which would produce more ball for the backs and support them out wide. I just don't see who that might be and I don't see how the game style can open up with Eddie's insistence on playing Farrell and no adequate alternatives at 9.

Idealistically, If available, I'd still try Simpson, Cipriani and Slade.

So, who would you choose?

all I am saying is that you put forward a back five which doesn't complement the style of play you propound ad infinitum, based on Eddie's squad. A more balanced selection in the back 5 to support more than a tight game might look like Itoje, Launchbury, Robshaw, Underhill, Hughes, which has mobility if not quite the attacking skills at 7 I might want. I'd like to see- from the squad now- Care, Ford, May, Slade, JJ, Roko/Watson, Watson/Brown. That said, I'd be pretty nervous about the midfield conceding the gainline too easily. I'm pi55ed that Teo and Daly are crocked.


(and now May)

The snag with that is that Underhill has dropped off (IMO). I just can't see that he will affect a game like Lawes can, whatever their theoretical skill slants. Lawes is a hardened international. Underhill is a pretender (so far).

Why Care over Youngs? Both are equally crap.

I just don't think Eddie will leave Farrell out, much as I'd be delighted to see Slade and JJ. We both have to swallow hard and accept that if Eddie breaks his usual 10/12 selection, it will be Ford who dips out. I don't think we were ever likely to see Ford and T'eo, for example. We just might have seen (still might) Farrell and T'eo, I suppose.

[kk67]

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

Yup. With Clifford and Slater on the bench.

[Banquo]

You make it sound like there are realistic alternatives which would produce more ball for the backs and support them out wide. I just don't see who that might be and I don't see how the game style can open up with Eddie's insistence on playing Farrell and no adequate alternatives at 9.

Idealistically, If available, I'd still try Simpson, Cipriani and Slade.

So, who would you choose?

all I am saying is that you put forward a back five which doesn't complement the style of play you propound ad infinitum, based on Eddie's squad. A more balanced selection in the back 5 to support more than a tight game might look like Itoje, Launchbury, Robshaw, Underhill, Hughes, which has mobility if not quite the attacking skills at 7 I might want. I'd like to see- from the squad now- Care, Ford, May, Slade, JJ, Roko/Watson, Watson/Brown. That said, I'd be pretty nervous about the midfield conceding the gainline too easily. I'm pi55ed that Teo and Daly are crocked.


(and now May)

The snag with that is that Underhill has dropped off (IMO). I just can't see that he will affect a game like Lawes can, whatever their theoretical skill slants. Lawes is a hardened international. Underhill is a pretender (so far).

Why Care over Youngs? Both are equally crap.

I just don't think Eddie will leave Farrell out, much as I'd be delighted to see Slade and JJ. We both have to swallow hard and accept that if Eddie breaks his usual 10/12 selection, it will be Ford who dips out. I don't think we were ever likely to see Ford and T'eo, for example. We just might have seen (still might) Farrell and T'eo, I suppose.

You've completely ignored my mobility point, but hey ho. I'm not a fan of youngs or Care much, but personally think Care is a tad more likely to get the best from Ford, notwithstanding the club link.....and I was noting picking from Eddie's mob.

[Timbo]

I hope Eddie is bold with his backrow selections this Autumn. For all the column inches on this forum about the back 3 and various aspects of the back line, the backrow is the single biggest issue he has to address imo.

[Banquo]

I hope Eddie is bold with his backrow selections this Autumn. For all the column inches on this forum about the back 3 and various aspects of the back line, the backrow is the single biggest issue he has to address imo.

yep, not aided by Billy V's absence

[Puja]

I hope Eddie is bold with his backrow selections this Autumn. For all the column inches on this forum about the back 3 and various aspects of the back line, the backrow is the single biggest issue he has to address imo.

I'm cheered by the fact that there's no room for Haskell. That would've been the safe and uninspiring choice and I'm glad it's not even an option.

Now we've just got to hope that we don't see Lawes, Robshaw, Hughes, as that's the only other safe and stolid combination from which we will learn the square-root of sod all.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

I just hope he goes balls out and picks Robshaw, Underhill and Simmonds, with Curry on the bench. I was hoping for a balls out selection in the back three - something like May, Daly, Watson - but as that hope has been dashed by injury I hope he moves any selectorial madness to the backrow.
I think this AI series was always pencilled in for something a bit radical due to the proclamation that he’d rest the Lions, they are relatively easy fixtures, the 6N is deemed as must win and that we are now into Eddie’s phase two. With Teo, Billy and pretty much every EQ winger in the Prem injured and front row, second row and 9-10-12 settled, backrow seems the only place lending itself to some voluntary - rather than injury imposed, last man standing - radical selections.

[Oakboy]

Strange that Bassett never gets a mention for the wing vacancy! He's a real 'do the right thing at the right time' merchant who rarely comes off second best to his opposite number. Behind Daly, Watson and May just about everyone is in a relative second division, IMO. I'd have Bassett at or near the top of it.