Squad for Wales

[Mikey Brown]

I can't imagine for a second that Farrell or Jones have any concern about him keeping his spot. Anything good England do is down to him, so if we keep winning I don't even see it entering either of their minds.

[fivepointer]

He's a fixture. We all know that. But some objectivity amongst media and pundits wouldnt go amiss.

[p/d]

Perhaps Farrell is actually one of those who does thrive off the pressure of playing in front of a full house.

[Tom Moore]

I'm reminded of that Alright Nigel crying baby meme their fans were so fond of 5 years ago.

They'd be better off filing a complaint over the performance of their hooker.

[Banquo]

I think he looks nervous, I wonder if he's been told his place is not as secure as it seems.

That made me spit my coffee. Its not happening.

[Banquo]

Farrell has been our worst player this Autumn.

Even by his so-so standards, he has been awful.

I think that if Jones had the brain and nerve to make Itoje captain, after a game or two, with honest impartial assessment, Farrell would disappear. But it won't happen because, frankly, I think Jones as H/C and Farrell as captain/10/12 are all the same issue.

Eddie is not stupid, irrespective of your profound dislike. And much as you and I think roughly the same about Farrell, esp in current form/mindset, everyone who counts thinks he's a 'test animal'.

[Oakboy]

Farrell has been our worst player this Autumn.

Even by his so-so standards, he has been awful.

I think that if Jones had the brain and nerve to make Itoje captain, after a game or two, with honest impartial assessment, Farrell would disappear. But it won't happen because, frankly, I think Jones as H/C and Farrell as captain/10/12 are all the same issue.

Eddie is not stupid, irrespective of your profound dislike. And much as you and I think roughly the same about Farrell, esp in current form/mindset, everyone who counts thinks he's a 'test animal'.

The only way to really make objective asessment would be if Farrell picked up a serious injury forcing Jones to go, say, a season without him. I would not wish that on the person, albeit that I don't rate the player.

Today, in the DT, Brian Moore refers to Itoje, Farrell and Billy V as world class with reference to playing a power game. I suppose that is where the difference lies. Jones, post the SA final defeat, is obsessed with power and I accept Moore's parallel with that infamous GS defeat to Scotland. His point, that it affected tactics for two years is valid, as is his contention that, despite subsequent back-to-back GSs their limited playing style meant they underperformed but won.

I think Jones is currently leaving 20% or so in the dressing room with his tactics and selection but, as Moore points out, no criticism will affect anything when a team wins every game. He also contends, correctly, that armchair critics can spout off without the responsibility. I hope we all continue to do so unashamedly.

[p/d]

I think that if Jones had the brain and nerve to make Itoje captain, after a game or two, with honest impartial assessment, Farrell would disappear. But it won't happen because, frankly, I think Jones as H/C and Farrell as captain/10/12 are all the same issue.

Eddie is not stupid, irrespective of your profound dislike. And much as you and I think roughly the same about Farrell, esp in current form/mindset, everyone who counts thinks he's a 'test animal'.

The only way to really make objective asessment would be if Farrell picked up a serious injury forcing Jones to go, say, a season without him. I would not wish that on the person, albeit that I don't rate the player.

Today, in the DT, Brian Moore refers to Itoje, Farrell and Billy V as world class with reference to playing a power game. I suppose that is where the difference lies. Jones, post the SA final defeat, is obsessed with power and I accept Moore's parallel with that infamous GS defeat to Scotland. His point, that it affected tactics for two years is valid, as is his contention that, despite subsequent back-to-back GSs their limited playing style meant they underperformed but won.

I think Jones is currently leaving 20% or so in the dressing room with his tactics and selection but, as Moore points out, no criticism will affect anything when a team wins every game. He also contends, correctly, that armchair critics can spout off without the responsibility. I hope we all continue to do so unashamedly.

Big Bri reads this forum.

[Raggs]

Jones is obsessed with power? Have you seen the backline he just sent out, and who were clearly allowed to play a bit using skills and steps?

[fivepointer]

Lose and selection/tactics become a live issue. Win and you can simply rebut any criticism by referring to the scoreboard.

And England are winning. Even with Farrell in the side.

[Banquo]

Jones is obsessed with power? Have you seen the backline he just sent out, and who were clearly allowed to play a bit using skills and steps?

well that might have been the intent......play 'a bit' might be right (though I think a lot was about speed to contest the kicks call me cynical). My issue would be three fold- i- Kicking was overdone, notably in attacking positions (again), ii- Kicking was poor, bar a couple from Young....but also iii- if you send that backline out, with JJ as a blindside/third centre, and three/four playmakers (Ford, Faz (I'm being kind), Slade, and Daly (who has been initiating counter attack play)---- you have to have and deploy some good moves, and you have to think about what happens if the strike moves don't result in a score. Otherwise you end up with a hodge podge of players trying to exploit the good work done by overloading the open side; and that's what has happened in the last two games, resulting in a failure to convert quite a few good chances.

Funnily enough, some power is required in the back division- and I think Manu/Lawrence would be in if fit, or possibly Coka in form (though that's a guess as we don't really know what that looks like internationally recently).

[Banquo]

Lose and selection/tactics become a live issue. Win and you can simply rebut any criticism by referring to the scoreboard.

And England are winning. Even with Farrell in the side.

This. imo Jones is (not so) subtly trying stuff out, but wanting to win at the same time. Much easier to adjust tactics and personnel when you are winning- and he has said 'attack is for next year' or summat.

[Mellsblue]

As Banquo alludes to, Eddie selected that backline as that’s who were fit. If Tuilagi, Lawrence, Nowell and Coka we’re fit and in form then it would’ve been different.

[Digby]

Attack has been something we're going to get to since 2002, which is quite a few next years, more than anyone could work out probably. Although the oddity might be for a few seasons until Clive binned Ashton we had an attack for a few seasons, go back before Clive and again there really wasn't much in the way of attack.

it's one reason so many of our big names love Farrell, he came into test rugby aware you shouldn't attack, normally the wise old heads have to spend a few years beating that nonsense out of the children and suddenly here was this snot nosed kid who understood about the graft of test rugby from the off

[p/d]

As Banquo alludes to, Eddie selected that backline as that’s who were fit. If Tuilagi, Lawrence, Nowell and Coka we’re fit and in form then it would’ve been different.

5:3 split on bench?

[Raggs]

All those players are regular England players though. And how often have we actually sent out a power option in the backline with Eddie? Manu when he's fit, but who wouldn't. Coka got a few appearances, but I'd never have classed him as a regular (and again, he's a very classy winger when fit).

Ford, Farrell, Slade, Joseph, Daly, May, Watson Are all absolute mainstays of Eddie's backlines, and none of them are power options. The suggestion that he's obsessed with power just seems a daft one. There is absolutely a minimum physical requirement, especially in the forwards, that it's important to meet, but to suggest that Eddie is only focusing on giants is daft.

[p/d]

All those players are regular England players though. And how often have we actually sent out a power option in the backline with Eddie? Manu when he's fit, but who wouldn't. Coka got a few appearances, but I'd never have classed him as a regular (and again, he's a very classy winger when fit).

Ford, Farrell, Slade, Joseph, Daly, May, Watson Are all absolute mainstays of Eddie's backlines, and none of them are power options. The suggestion that he's obsessed with power just seems a daft one. There is absolutely a minimum physical requirement, especially in the forwards, that it's important to meet, but to suggest that Eddie is only focusing on giants is daft.

You don't think it feasible he is obsessed with the power 'game'?

[Mr Mwenda]

I think he looks nervous, I wonder if he's been told his place is not as secure as it seems.

That made me spit my coffee. Its not happening.

Haha, I aim to please!

Hearing what Hartley has said about how he was dropped, I think EJ will happily ditch Farrell if something that fits his plans/thinking about the game. I don't think anyone is actually indispensable. The problem is many of us on here (myself included) struggle to see what it is that Farrell brings over some other options other than the fact that he seems to be rarely injured. Not a bad attribute to have if so much of test rugby depends on cohesion and familiarity.

[Oakboy]

Surely, Jones is playing a forward-dominated style with no-risk back play? Whether the word 'power' describes it is irrelevant. It is not selective kicking, it is safety-first kicking. Maybe, we should just describe Jones's game-plan as 'low-risk'? The point is that it is not pretty. It is successful on the scoreboard.

In one of the recent club games (Friday night's, I think) a commentator asked the question, "If kids watched this as their first ever game, would they be interested in playing the sport?"

I think there is some danger for the game the way things are going.

[Oakboy]

. . . it's one reason so many of our big names love Farrell, he came into test rugby aware you shouldn't attack, normally the wise old heads have to spend a few years beating that nonsense out of the children and suddenly here was this snot nosed kid who understood about the graft of test rugby from the off

Ouch . . . But I like it.

[Mellsblue]

Well Coka was in the RWC squad despite not being fit, and, iirc, in this EPS despite zero club form. Nowell, our hybrid flanker, was also in the RWC squad despite injury and is first choice when fit due to his work in and around the breakdown. Lawrence was in as soon as Manu was injured. I’ve no issue with the Lawrence selection but very few others have been fast tracked into the 1st XV with such a small back catalogue.
Farrell is deemed a power option, sadly, hence the fact he is preferred to Ford when the oppo backline is full of heavy runners.
Joseph isn’t a mainstay - he’s third choice OC behind Slade and Manu. Ford, Farrell, Slade and Daly are used primarily as kickers to provide a platform for our pack. May and Watson are superb kick chasers, if they’re in the side for anything other than this or the hope they’ll produce a bit of magic then the gameplan to put them in the right situations is failing miserably.

[Banquo]

Attack has been something we're going to get to since 2002, which is quite a few next years, more than anyone could work out probably. Although the oddity might be for a few seasons until Clive binned Ashton we had an attack for a few seasons, go back before Clive and again there really wasn't much in the way of attack.

it's one reason so many of our big names love Farrell, he came into test rugby aware you shouldn't attack, normally the wise old heads have to spend a few years beating that nonsense out of the children and suddenly here was this snot nosed kid who understood about the graft of test rugby from the off

I had to delete a sarcastic post about Chris Ashton there. Ironically it was players rebelling against Brian Ashton's coaching philosophy that got a very mediocre team to the 2007 RWC final. Which says something or other. And if we were really honest, we have been putting out very average sides for a very long time now, albeit often less than the sum of our parts----until the last 3 or 4 years, when a good crop of players have come together. And Faz

[Banquo]

As Banquo alludes to, Eddie selected that backline as that’s who were fit. If Tuilagi, Lawrence, Nowell and Coka we’re fit and in form then it would’ve been different.

Don't bring Jack 'no gas I'm a 7' Nowell into it.

[Oakboy]

As Banquo alludes to, Eddie selected that backline as that’s who were fit. If Tuilagi, Lawrence, Nowell and Coka we’re fit and in form then it would’ve been different.

Don't bring Jack 'no gas I'm a 7' Nowell into it.

You might not but Jones will - you know, that wonderful guy who knows everything about the game.

[Oakboy]

Attack has been something we're going to get to since 2002, which is quite a few next years, more than anyone could work out probably. Although the oddity might be for a few seasons until Clive binned Ashton we had an attack for a few seasons, go back before Clive and again there really wasn't much in the way of attack.

it's one reason so many of our big names love Farrell, he came into test rugby aware you shouldn't attack, normally the wise old heads have to spend a few years beating that nonsense out of the children and suddenly here was this snot nosed kid who understood about the graft of test rugby from the off

I had to delete a sarcastic post about Chris Ashton there. Ironically it was players rebelling against Brian Ashton's coaching philosophy that got a very mediocre team to the 2007 RWC final. Which says something or other. And if we were really honest, we have been putting out very average sides for a very long time now, albeit often less than the sum of our parts----until the last 3 or 4 years, when a good crop of players have come together. And Faz

So far, Dawson is the only pundit (of which I am aware) to suggest that the creative players will soon run out of patience with Jones.