England v France Saturday Feb 8th 16h45

[Mikey Brown]

Times reporting the same and a back row of T Curry, Earl and Willis with Chessum to replace Curry if he hasn’t recovered sufficiently.

A shame the Curry pair doesn’t get another go at the expense of Earl, but unsurprising. I thought B Curry went pretty well.

I’m tempted to say we stick with Marcus at fullback for the 6 nations, assuming that’s what is happening for France, so we can at least shine a light on whether this is a tactic worth pursuing.

Freeman’s days at 15 appear to be over (and Daly’s at this level) and while I do think Steward has grown as a player, we know his strengths and weaknesses.

I don’t like the chopping and changing there, particularly while 8 and centre still seem more immediate issues, but I could live with that selection.

Any mention of George?

[Oakboy]

DT agrees on that back row, removing any doubts about Earl at 7 in SB's mind (if not some of ours). Why that trio is now judged correct for France but was not for Ireland, I do not understand. Nothing about B Curry's and Willis's minutes on the pitch last week justify the change so is it just a mistake admitted?

[Banquo]

Bizarre that a left wing should see less ball really.

At amateur level you'd normally put your best winger on the left wing. Everyone's happier to pass off their right hand so they're more likely to get the ball.

There has been quite a bit of chat on the board over the past few years on international level players being unable to pass well off one of their hands. Since most are right handed, this usually means that those in question are less adept when passing from left to right. I am not sure I buy it. Passing a rugby ball to either side accurately is not rocket science, especially in the era of professional rugby, when players have all the time in then world to work at it, since that is their job. It's hard to believe that some (many?) are not equally competent on both sides after having delivered thousands of passes. It should be practically automatic, grooved and second nature. Yes - passers can be put under pressure by defences but that is a separate issue.
That said I still find it amazing to see the overall poor standard of passing on BOTH sides by professional players.
How often do you see this - a team in possession kicks the ball high and wide. A defender (usually a wing or FB, sometimes a covering FH) takes the ball near the touchline, decides to pass infield to a team mate for a better kicking angle and fires it straight at his head (sometimes above head height, requiring a jump from the receiver ; and sometimes at his knees). All of this with no opposition within 20 metres and under no pressure. You will see at least a couple of examples of this sloppy stuff in every game.

Of course every pro player should be able to pass well both sides. Sadly not so. However they generally can do it better on the side that favours their dominant hand

[Mellsblue]

Times reporting the same and a back row of T Curry, Earl and Willis with Chessum to replace Curry if he hasn’t recovered sufficiently.

A shame the Curry pair doesn’t get another go at the expense of Earl, but unsurprising. I thought B Curry went pretty well.

I’m tempted to say we stick with Marcus at fullback for the 6 nations, assuming that’s what is happening for France, so we can at least shine a light on whether this is a tactic worth pursuing.

Freeman’s days at 15 appear to be over (and Daly’s at this level) and while I do think Steward has grown as a player, we know his strengths and weaknesses.

I don’t like the chopping and changing there, particularly while 8 and centre still seem more immediate issues, but I could live with that selection.

Any mention of George?

I’d have stuck with twindaloo as well.

Nothing about George.

[fivepointer]

BCurry will be unlucky to miss out. Willis at 8 is what we all want to see. Marcus at FB is worth a go. It does allow Fin to start and thats a very good thing.

[Mikey Brown]

BCurry will be unlucky to miss out. Willis at 8 is what we all want to see.

Yeah I find this cycle frustrating. Feels like we've seen it with a few players. Get a start, get dropped, reappear on the bench, disappear for a season, get another start. I know form fluctuates, and I get 'horses for courses' and all that, but sometimes I wish he'd just back what he's doing for a few games in a row and see how a player settles in to the team, particularly when so many other elements are changing around them.

For instance it feels like it took a couple of caps/seasons longer than it should have for Borthwick to really make a call on Dombrandt. Which then has a knock-on effect for players like Willis who are banging at the door.

Maybe in a year or so we'll be very glad that Willis got a gradual introduction to test rugby, but I still think about how immediately he looked the part in that Wales cameo, which was over a year ago now.

Similar with Marcus Smith I guess. I'd have liked to change the centres first and continue with him as first choice 10, but that's not happening, so if we're doing this fullback thing let's just have a proper look while Furbank is out injured.

[Scrumhead]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

[FKAS]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

When did Marcus provide England with an 80 minute performance? He often looks brilliant for 10-20 minutes but tends to drift out games and I can't recall one where he took it by scruff of the neck and controlled things. Last weekend was indicative of his England experience to date for me. Sensational for the first 20 mins, yellow card knocks his confidence and then is largely absent from the game until moved to fullback.

[Banquo]

I know one of Borthwick's usps is/was horses for courses selection and game plan (though with a core game plan that repeated- ball in the air). But preparing an intl side on this basis is pretty challenging, and whilst injuries get in the way, changing an entire back row (and replacing one that did its job pretty much perfectly for 40 mins) is ....'ambitious'. Ditto the huge change in style and method of attack tween Smith and Smith, with a very different backfield, personnel and style. Big ask to change so much in a week. Ah well, only France. Good luck Steve and the fellas!

[Mikey Brown]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

What does Borthwick do? Who knows, but probably switch him back to the bench (and Marcus and Freddie along with him) and we continue as if nothing happened. Except everyone now has slightly less confidence in what they're doing.

I agree that M Smith's performances have been patchy, but so has virtually everything about this team. We've consistently scored 20+ points against a lot of good teams, for a while now, but the defence is equally inconsistent.

[FKAS]

I know one of Borthwick's usps is/was horses for courses selection and game plan (though with a core game plan that repeated- ball in the air). But preparing an intl side on this basis is pretty challenging, and whilst injuries get in the way, changing an entire back row (and replacing one that did its job pretty much perfectly for 40 mins) is ....'ambitious'. Ditto the huge change in style and method of attack tween Smith and Smith, with a very different backfield, personnel and style. Big ask to change so much in a week. Ah well, only France. Good luck Steve and the fellas!

Thought the rumours were BCurry out and TWillis in. That shouldn't be a massive upheaval.

The change to the back three though that'll be a bigger factor as you say. Two thirds will change, only Freeman stays in. Be interesting to see what Statistical Battlefront does with the bench, if he brings in Ford then Marcus is staying at 15 throughout pr does he have Steward there and the ability to switch tactics if France pivot to kicking to contest on Marcus.

[TheDasher]

So frustrating as we're not far from being good... in the pack surely:

Drop Earl, 8 Willis, 6 Hill, 7 Tom Curry (Ben Curry on bench), Chessum in for Martin.

[Oakboy]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

I'm not in favour of the 10/15 shuffle but it will be interesting to see if Fin gets more out of the centres. I hope his default instructions are not to involve Marcus. That needs to be the exception rather than the rule.

I also want to see more of Freeman on the roam. Let the French defence worry about him rather than tie him down to touchline-hugging and kick-chasing. Our game plan for a run of games has wasted his talent.

[Mellsblue]

I know one of Borthwick's usps is/was horses for courses selection and game plan (though with a core game plan that repeated- ball in the air). But preparing an intl side on this basis is pretty challenging, and whilst injuries get in the way, changing an entire back row (and replacing one that did its job pretty much perfectly for 40 mins) is ....'ambitious'. Ditto the huge change in style and method of attack tween Smith and Smith, with a very different backfield, personnel and style. Big ask to change so much in a week. Ah well, only France. Good luck Steve and the fellas!

Thought the rumours were BCurry out and TWillis in. That shouldn't be a massive upheaval.

One personnel change plus one positional change. T Cuzza is the only person in the same jersey as last week and that’s only if he’s fit to play. If no T Cuzza it’s a completely new backrow, assuming reports are true.

[Banquo]

I know one of Borthwick's usps is/was horses for courses selection and game plan (though with a core game plan that repeated- ball in the air). But preparing an intl side on this basis is pretty challenging, and whilst injuries get in the way, changing an entire back row (and replacing one that did its job pretty much perfectly for 40 mins) is ....'ambitious'. Ditto the huge change in style and method of attack tween Smith and Smith, with a very different backfield, personnel and style. Big ask to change so much in a week. Ah well, only France. Good luck Steve and the fellas!

Thought the rumours were BCurry out and TWillis in. That shouldn't be a massive upheaval.

The change to the back three though that'll be a bigger factor as you say. Two thirds will change, only Freeman stays in. Be interesting to see what Statistical Battlefront does with the bench, if he brings in Ford then Marcus is staying at 15 throughout pr does he have Steward there and the ability to switch tactics if France pivot to kicking to contest on Marcus.

well you are changing your number 8 and your open side (and that's assuming Tom Curry be fit). Playing Earl at 7 where he hasn't featured much for England recently, and a quite different player to Ben Curry; Willis at 8 similarly a very different player to Earl. So....

Its not just the change in personnel either, Smith and Steward is chalk v cheese, obviously.

Its hardly a pivot for France to kick either, iirc they are one of the kickingest of teams.

[Mellsblue]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

What does Borthwick do? Who knows, but probably switch him back to the bench (and Marcus and Freddie along with him) and we continue as if nothing happened. Except everyone now has slightly less confidence in what they're doing.

I agree that M Smith's performances have been patchy, but so has virtually everything about this team. We've consistently scored 20+ points against a lot of good teams, for a while now, but the defence is equally inconsistent.

Yeah. If you’re moving/demoting M. Smith for not putting 80mins together then you’ll need a whole raft of changes throughout the team.
My guess is that Steward isn’t offering enough/what they want in attack and with no Furbank the coaches see M. Smith as the only option. If that is the case, and this is the major evidence against my theory, what is the point of Daly being in the squad.

[Oakboy]

So frustrating as we're not far from being good... in the pack surely:

Drop Earl, 8 Willis, 6 Hill, 7 Tom Curry (Ben Curry on bench), Chessum in for Martin.

Hill needs a start at some point this 6N but it's likely to be a 'hiding to nothing' situation - play badly and it's goodbye, play well and it's only Italy/Wales.

Why Chessum for Martin? You are not the only one advocating that and I don't see the logic.

[Mikey Brown]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

I'm not in favour of the 10/15 shuffle but it will be interesting to see if Fin gets more out of the centres. I hope his default instructions are not to involve Marcus. That needs to be the exception rather than the rule.

I also want to see more of Freeman on the roam. Let the French defence worry about him rather than tie him down to touchline-hugging and kick-chasing. Our game plan for a run of games has wasted his talent.

What does this mean?

Agreed on Freeman. He can play that role well, but you feel we could get a lot more out of him.

[Oakboy]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

I'm not in favour of the 10/15 shuffle but it will be interesting to see if Fin gets more out of the centres. I hope his default instructions are not to involve Marcus. That needs to be the exception rather than the rule.

I also want to see more of Freeman on the roam. Let the French defence worry about him rather than tie him down to touchline-hugging and kick-chasing. Our game plan for a run of games has wasted his talent.

What does this mean?

Agreed on Freeman. He can play that role well, but you feel we could get a lot more out of him.

I probably phrased it badly. What I mean is Fin is the game manager. He should play his natural game not be required to look for Marcus at every play (shades of Ford/Farrell).

[Scrumhead]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

What does Borthwick do? Who knows, but probably switch him back to the bench (and Marcus and Freddie along with him) and we continue as if nothing happened. Except everyone now has slightly less confidence in what they're doing.

I agree that M Smith's performances have been patchy, but so has virtually everything about this team. We've consistently scored 20+ points against a lot of good teams, for a while now, but the defence is equally inconsistent.

Patchy is still harsh. I’d argue he’s been at the heart of most of the good things we’ve done post RWC.

This piece about the yellow card knocking his confidence is absolute invention. He isn’t the flaky maverick some like to make out. As I recall, he made the break that ended with Mitchell’s marginal forward pass at the start of the second half and barely saw the ball after that.

Yes, a 10 should ‘control the game’ but a lot of their ability to do so kind of depends on having the ball … Ford, Fin, Faz, even Wilkinson would have struggled in that second half.

I would love the M-B-M’s back to show who did what when rather than relying on our recollections.

I rate Fin Smith but shifting Marcus to 15 is a shabby way to treat him. Not really sure he can win here? He plays badly and gets criticised when people forget he’s not a 15. He plays well and there’s a higher change he gets stuck there until someone exposes him for not being a 15 and then gets dropped. If Fin has a bad game, I guarantee we’ll hear ‘France is a tough debut start. He needs another go to be sure’, ‘the pack let him down’ etc. The kind of excuses Marcus doesn’t get.

[p/d]

Fin will bring more players into play, think that is a given. The question will be what those players do with it. Defence and kicking are fine.

As I say, do not see any problem with him at 10.

My problem - as with Willis - this should have been a known factor form the AI not something we are doing 6n v France (playing at home is irrelevant)

Now Smith at fb will be good and bad. I’m just fearful the scales will be tipped in the favour of bad

[Oakboy]

I rate Fin Smith but shifting Marcus to 15 is a shabby way to treat him. Not really sure he can win here? He plays badly and gets criticised when people forget he’s not a 15. He plays well and there’s a higher change he gets stuck there until someone exposes him for not being a 15 and then gets dropped. If Fin has a bad game, I guarantee we’ll hear ‘France is a tough debut start. He needs another go to be sure’, ‘the pack let him down’ etc. The kind of excuses Marcus doesn’t get.

I agree with that. Is the reason for the 10/15 selection to get more out of the FH, to get more out of the FB or to lever both Smiths into the XV? I'd have persevered with Marcus at 10 but if I thought that Fin could do a better job in the shirt I'd have wanted him there without Marcus at FB. Now, if SB IS right we could theoretically get the best out of both. Arguably, though, we could get the best from neither - because both are on the pitch.

[Banquo]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

What does Borthwick do? Who knows, but probably switch him back to the bench (and Marcus and Freddie along with him) and we continue as if nothing happened. Except everyone now has slightly less confidence in what they're doing.

I agree that M Smith's performances have been patchy, but so has virtually everything about this team. We've consistently scored 20+ points against a lot of good teams, for a while now, but the defence is equally inconsistent.

Patchy is still harsh. I’d argue he’s been at the heart of most of the good things we’ve done post RWC.

This piece about the yellow card knocking his confidence is absolute invention. He isn’t the flaky maverick some like to make out. As I recall, he made the break that ended with Mitchell’s marginal forward pass at the start of the second half and barely saw the ball after that.

Yes, a 10 should ‘control the game’ but a lot of their ability to do so kind of depends on having the ball … Ford, Fin, Faz, even Wilkinson would have struggled in that second half.

I would love the M-B-M’s back to show who did what when rather than relying on our recollections.

I rate Fin Smith but shifting Marcus to 15 is a shabby way to treat him. Not really sure he can win here? He plays badly and gets criticised when people forget he’s not a 15. He plays well and there’s a higher change he gets stuck there until someone exposes him for not being a 15 and then gets dropped. If Fin has a bad game, I guarantee we’ll hear ‘France is a tough debut start. He needs another go to be sure’, ‘the pack let him down’ etc. The kind of excuses Marcus doesn’t get.

Patchy is still harsh. I’d argue he’s been at the heart of most of the good things we’ve done post RWC. Both can be true, we've only been good in patches. Personally I think Marcus gets plenty of leeway, because of the good things he does every game- his issue remains that his game is based on him in the starring role (sounds pejorative, not meant that way- its the way he plays), and as stated and reconfirmed by BOD for example, that's quite difficult for those around to adjust to at this level and with a relative lack of familiarity. Perseverance and a consistent voice and presence at 12 would help, as it does for many 10's.

BUT...as you say 10's can't do much without the ball.

[Mikey Brown]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

What does Borthwick do? Who knows, but probably switch him back to the bench (and Marcus and Freddie along with him) and we continue as if nothing happened. Except everyone now has slightly less confidence in what they're doing.

I agree that M Smith's performances have been patchy, but so has virtually everything about this team. We've consistently scored 20+ points against a lot of good teams, for a while now, but the defence is equally inconsistent.

Patchy is still harsh. I’d argue he’s been at the heart of most of the good things we’ve done post RWC.

This piece about the yellow card knocking his confidence is absolute invention. He isn’t the flaky maverick some like to make out. As I recall, he made the break that ended with Mitchell’s marginal forward pass at the start of the second half and barely saw the ball after that.

Yes, a 10 should ‘control the game’ but a lot of their ability to do so kind of depends on having the ball … Ford, Fin, Faz, even Wilkinson would have struggled in that second half.

I would love the M-B-M’s back to show who did what when rather than relying on our recollections.

I rate Fin Smith but shifting Marcus to 15 is a shabby way to treat him. Not really sure he can win here? He plays badly and gets criticised when people forget he’s not a 15. He plays well and there’s a higher change he gets stuck there until someone exposes him for not being a 15 and then gets dropped. If Fin has a bad game, I guarantee we’ll hear ‘France is a tough debut start. He needs another go to be sure’, ‘the pack let him down’ etc. The kind of excuses Marcus doesn’t get.

Fair enough. 'Patchy' wasn't meant to be a huge put-down, and I agree most of our positive back play has come through him, but there have been ups and downs - with the occasional moment of desperation or running up blind alleys. That desperation is often because of failures in other areas though. The whole "grabbing the game by the scruff of the neck" thing often feels like a bit of a tired cliche centred largely on a players' mannerisms or body language.

I do wish sometimes he'd be able to sit back and let us run through the phases, but that does require us having the setup and the punch to continually make dents in midfield. The line between "disappearing" from a game and sitting back and letting your big carriers do their thing often seems to be in the eye of the beholder. Without accuracy and good decision making around the breakdown you can't just decide to run a whole load of phases.

[FKAS]

So what happens if Fin comes in an underwhelms? I rate him highly, but I find it unfair to shift Marcus to 15 when he’s almost always done well at 10.

Last weekend wasn’t his best performance, but he was still the architect of most of our good play in attack and I’m not sure it’s reasonable to judge him on a second half where we barely had the ball and the whole team dropped off.

What does Borthwick do? Who knows, but probably switch him back to the bench (and Marcus and Freddie along with him) and we continue as if nothing happened. Except everyone now has slightly less confidence in what they're doing.

I agree that M Smith's performances have been patchy, but so has virtually everything about this team. We've consistently scored 20+ points against a lot of good teams, for a while now, but the defence is equally inconsistent.

Yeah. If you’re moving/demoting M. Smith for not putting 80mins together then you’ll need a whole raft of changes throughout the team.
My guess is that Steward isn’t offering enough/what they want in attack and with no Furbank the coaches see M. Smith as the only option. If that is the case, and this is the major evidence against my theory, what is the point of Daly being in the squad.

I don't think it's about Steward not offering enough more about how France choose to kick. As Banquo says above they areire than happy to kick but unlike France who back their aerial capabilities and kick to compete France tend to kick long chase using their quick wingers and then back their defensive line. Return kicks are fine as they'll have playmakers at the back waiting to counter, kicking out for a lineout is a great result for them as they've got a good set piece.

Given the fullback is likely to get time on the ball Marcus makes sense, all his strengths come from having time on the ball and the opportunity to play what's in front of him. Steward's strengths are winning contests in the air and using his physicality to break tackles. Steward was a good (if under used) fit for the Ireland game. Marcus being free to launch counters from deep feels like a good option Vs France.