RugbyRebels

Anyone know when the team's due to be named? Thought it was today, but no sign of it so far.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 1:16 pm Anyone know when the team's due to be named? Thought it was today, but no sign of it so far.

Puja

Argentina's what? 7 hours behind us?
So standard announcement at 1pm there would be 8pm here

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 1:26 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 1:16 pm Anyone know when the team's due to be named? Thought it was today, but no sign of it so far.

Puja

Argentina's what? 7 hours behind us?
So standard announcement at 1pm there would be 8pm here

Good point; well made. Very Greenwich-centric of me.

Puja

Ref: Angus Gardner
TJs: Luc Ramos, Gianluca Gnecchi
TMO: Olly Hodges

England

1. Baxter
2. George (c)
3. Heyes
4. Ewels
5. Coles
6. Curry
7. Underhill
8. Willis

09. Spencer
10. Ford (c)
11. Muir
12. Atkinson
13. Slade
14. Roebuck
15. Steward

16. Dan, 17, Rodd, 18. Opoku-Fordjour, 19. Cunningham-South, 20. Pepper, 21. Dombrandt
22. Van Poortvliet, 23. Murley

6:2 with a winger.

Like: Atkinson, Muir
Dislike: Ewels, Spencer, Slade

That back three makes me feel like Spencer and Ford are going to be kicking A LOT.

Can Ewels make it a hat trick of red cards? Might be interesting odds on that.

jeez. Hardly the scariest backline of all time. Does Ben Curry do blindside much? I guess its the kamikaze kids v 2. It doesn't read well, I guess unsurprisingly- going to be tough I'd think.

Hate 6:2. Esp that one

Literally never seen Ben at 6. I’m sure he won’t be bad, and I guess Underhill does some blindside-esque work, but feels unnecessary.

Locks options are poor.

What is it we’re achieving with an extra backrower on the bench exactly? CCS is useful as a bench lock option if you didn’t have any specialist 6/8 cover, but here it all seems redundant.

I like Muir and Roebuck, and understand picking the best two aerial options here, but they don’t tend to come infield that much do they? Given how little that midfield attacks the line it’s either going to be really slickly getting the ball wide or just hoofing it in the air? Hopefully we’ll be using Steward more effectively through the middle.

Slade covering 10 with Murley covering 13 is just asking for trouble.

Weird selection.

Muir and Steward ahead of murley and carpenter? That's vomit-inducing.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 4:31 pm Literally never seen Ben at 6. I’m sure he won’t be bad, and I guess Underhill does some blindside-esque work, but feels unnecessary.

Locks options are poor.

What is it we’re achieving with an extra backrower on the bench exactly? CCS is useful as a bench lock option if you didn’t have any specialist 6/8 cover, but here it all seems redundant.

I like Muir and Roebuck, and understand picking the best two aerial options here, but they don’t tend to come infield that much do they? Given how little that midfield attacks the line it’s either going to be really slickly getting the ball wide or just hoofing it in the air? Hopefully we’ll be using Steward more effectively through the middle.

Slade covering 10 with Murley covering 13 is just asking for trouble.

Weird selection.

I don’t think we’ll even bother going through the middle. It’ll be bomb after bomb to the wings. Probably why Spencer is in ahead of JvP.

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 4:39 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 4:31 pm Literally never seen Ben at 6. I’m sure he won’t be bad, and I guess Underhill does some blindside-esque work, but feels unnecessary.

Locks options are poor.

What is it we’re achieving with an extra backrower on the bench exactly? CCS is useful as a bench lock option if you didn’t have any specialist 6/8 cover, but here it all seems redundant.

I like Muir and Roebuck, and understand picking the best two aerial options here, but they don’t tend to come infield that much do they? Given how little that midfield attacks the line it’s either going to be really slickly getting the ball wide or just hoofing it in the air? Hopefully we’ll be using Steward more effectively through the middle.

Slade covering 10 with Murley covering 13 is just asking for trouble.

Weird selection.

I don’t think we’ll even bother going through the middle. It’ll be bomb after bomb to the wings. Probably why Spencer is in ahead of JvP.

Its a shame, cos I like the Ford/S Atkinson potential, and especially for creating space.

Not at all a fan of that back row, nor the 6:2 bench. Surprised Spencer starts and Muir is preferred to Murley. Get that Slade has to be in the 23 to cover FH.

I do like Atkinson at 12.

Front 5 is the best available. Ewels has his critics but he is a far better lock than Isiekwe and its a bit early for Clark.

I love a 6:2 bench me.

Muir over Murley I get, Muir could take to test rugby pretty solidly I suspect. Steward/Roebuck good. Slade bad, should be on the bench. Spencer over all is a better player than JVP in my view (JVP obviously has great potential) I'm glad he's getting another go. Atkinson at 12 fine but looks a boring, unthreatening midfield due to Slade's presence...

Agreed front five is probably the best available although I think I favour Rodd over Baxter. I'd have started Ted Hill at 6 personally (am I missing something? is he crocked?). Dombrandt pointless.

TheDasher wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 4:52 pm I love a 6:2 bench me.

Muir over Murley I get, Muir could take to test rugby pretty solidly I suspect. Steward/Roebuck good. Slade bad, should be on the bench. Spencer over all is a better player than JVP in my view (JVP obviously has great potential) I'm glad he's getting another go. Atkinson at 12 fine but looks a boring, unthreatening midfield due to Slade's presence...

Agreed front five is probably the best available although I think I favour Rodd over Baxter. I'd have started Ted Hill at 6 personally (am I missing something? is he crocked?). Dombrandt pointless.

bloody forwards . I'd have thought the disruption in the last game we played would have warned shorton backs off.

Ted Hill, yes indeed. I was wondering who was missing.

Banquo wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 4:59 pm

TheDasher wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 4:52 pm I love a 6:2 bench me.

Muir over Murley I get, Muir could take to test rugby pretty solidly I suspect. Steward/Roebuck good. Slade bad, should be on the bench. Spencer over all is a better player than JVP in my view (JVP obviously has great potential) I'm glad he's getting another go. Atkinson at 12 fine but looks a boring, unthreatening midfield due to Slade's presence...

Agreed front five is probably the best available although I think I favour Rodd over Baxter. I'd have started Ted Hill at 6 personally (am I missing something? is he crocked?). Dombrandt pointless.

bloody forwards . I'd have thought the disruption in the last game we played would have warned shorton backs off.

Ted Hill, yes indeed. I was wondering who was missing.

I can understand BCurry/Underhill on the flanks, as they are the most experienced and proven test-quality operators. However, surely Hill is the player that you want in the 21 shirt in a 6:2 - get a game-changing point of difference onto the bench without having to worry about him (realistically) only covering one position? Dombrandt is just meh.

Slade...? I guess I understand it in terms of his experience and shepherding a very new and inexperienced side, and he does have a good game in him. Spencer over JVP is baffling, but there is the hope that he might come good and show even a modicum of his Bath form at some point.

We could've done worse, I guess.

Puja

Dombrandt on the bench suggests a short duty for Willis again. Why? He looks fit for 80 but if he's not he should not be there. I suppose there's just a case for moving Willis to 6 but why Pepper on the bench as well in that case?

It is not looking like being an entertaining watch.

Ewels, Spencer, Dombrandt, 6:2 = eurgh

The rest is OK with some even quite pleasing.

Epaminondas Pules wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 5:38 pm Ewels, Spencer, Dombrandt, 6:2 = eurgh

The rest is OK with some even quite pleasing.

Back three turning circle is interesting .

Oakboy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 5:14 pm Dombrandt on the bench suggests a short duty for Willis again. Why? He looks fit for 80 but if he's not he should not be there. I suppose there's just a case for moving Willis to 6 but why Pepper on the bench as well in that case?

It is not looking like being an entertaining watch.

Yeah. I don’t think we’ve ever seen 80 from Willis yet for England, yet all his performances have been good. If his presence means throwing the whole bench out of whack by selecting another 8 (assuming you’re not busy playing a different 8 out of position) then why bother.

I actually like this team less and less, the more I look at it. Roebuck is the only back with even a slightly positive amount of agility/acceleration. I like those back 3 players individually, but all together it just looks off.

Maybe Blacket has a master plan, it certainly sounded like we were going to see his attacking influence on this side, but it doesn’t look promising.

If we’re insisting on a 6/2, use Slade or the other Atkinson to cover a few positions. I’d love to see Beard or Ojomoh given a chance running off of Ford and Atkinson, at least bringing a bit of pace or intent.

Slade and Muir are real meh selections, particularly in the context of the rest of the backline.

Spencer is just depressing though JvP did miss some training time as he was with the Lions and Borthwick might want some bench impact. Ewels and Dombrandt still being selected is also less than positive.

Rest of the team is ok. Ben Curry did finish last season playing 6 for Sale with I think Dugdale at 7.

Bench does have some good impact at least.

I'm actually okay with Ewels being there in the context of wanting to win the game - he's a good rugby player and on form, probably the best pick. Yes, we might learn more by putting CCS or Clark there, but if the thing we learn is that they're not test quality locks, then we don't learn anything about any other players cause the entire team's structurally compromised.

I wouldn't've given him another chance after the red cards debacle myself, but in terms of giving ourselves the best chance of winning the game, he's probably the best bet, as long as he can stay on the pitch.

Puja

Ewels isn't an international quality lock either. He's a good club level lock that's repeatedly choked when making the step up, on his good days at international level he was anonymous. In terms of leadership and experience I get it but it's far from ideal to have him there.

FKAS wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 7:10 pm Ewels isn't an international quality lock either. He's a good club level lock that's repeatedly choked when making the step up, on his good days at international level he was anonymous. In terms of leadership and experience I get it but it's far from ideal to have him there.

That's very much swinging too far in the opposite direction - he has looked at minimum competent most of the time at international level and IIRC was deservedly a first choice pick when he got the first red against Ireland (and I believe was PotM in the previous fame). He's not a superstar, but he's definitely a solid international.

I don't like having to defend Ewels; stop making me!

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 7:36 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 7:10 pm Ewels isn't an international quality lock either. He's a good club level lock that's repeatedly choked when making the step up, on his good days at international level he was anonymous. In terms of leadership and experience I get it but it's far from ideal to have him there.

That's very much swinging too far in the opposite direction - he has looked at minimum competent most of the time at international level and IIRC was deservedly a first choice pick when he got the first red against Ireland (and I believe was PotM in the previous fame). He's not a superstar, but he's definitely a solid international.

I don't like having to defend Ewels; stop making me!

Puja

He's got 30 caps and his highlights reel is two red cards. He's a solid pro who will likely do the sort of solid job that will allow others to hopefully create some highlight reels bits. We do need to develop more locks though. I hope Clark gets a go next time out, even if it's off the bench.