England v France Saturday Feb 8th 16h45

[Mellsblue]

Lol. They've fallen in to Steve's trap by announcing first. Now we can simply select our team that will destroy this one.

Simply brilliant.

[p/d]

Lol. They've fallen in to Steve's trap by announcing first. Now we can simply select our team that will destroy this one.

Simply brilliant.

Edwards with be tearing into Galthié about such a rookie mistake

[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.

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.

Hill has to start for me. Never popular on RR but size and power at the moment matter and we're going to get fcked if he doesn't pick a strong enough pack. CCS is not a starter I don't think (should be a n8 for me anyway, or at least covering 6 and 8) and we can't pick two Currys against France in my view. Hill, Willis, T.Curry is a physically strong backrow with a good balance, lineout option, stamina, carrying etc.

As we'd then be picking a heftier 6 and 8 I think it'd make me more inclined to pick Chessum over Martin... Incidentally Chessum is still a fairly big dude, just not as heavy as Martin. He's just better though. Chessum looks to me to be a real talent, he very frequently catches the eye, Martin doesn't. One big hit against Mostert that he's been living off for some time. Chessum versus Ireland last year was magnificent and has played well on many an occasion. I think he's a better player all round. I'm not sure George Martin gets anywhere near the Ireland, SA, NZ or French teams, he's starting to look quite limited frankly.

[Stom]

I just don't feel like shuffling the deckchairs will get any results...

Obviously, I would love a backrow of Hill, Curry, Willis, but that's only useful if we have a gameplan that works... We're close enough to the best possible XXIII that every issue we have can pretty much be put down to coaching.

[Mikey Brown]

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.

Hill has to start for me. Never popular on RR but size and power at the moment matter and we're going to get fcked if he doesn't pick a strong enough pack. CCS is not a starter I don't think (should be a n8 for me anyway, or at least covering 6 and 8) and we can't pick two Currys against France in my view. Hill, Willis, T.Curry is a physically strong backrow with a good balance, lineout option, stamina, carrying etc.

As we'd then be picking a heftier 6 and 8 I think it'd make me more inclined to pick Chessum over Martin... Incidentally Chessum is still a fairly big dude, just not as heavy as Martin. He's just better though. Chessum looks to me to be a real talent, he very frequently catches the eye, Martin doesn't. One big hit against Mostert that he's been living off for some time. Chessum versus Ireland last year was magnificent and has played well on many an occasion. I think he's a better player all round. I'm not sure George Martin gets anywhere near the Ireland, SA, NZ or French teams, he's starting to look quite limited frankly.

I know we've done this conversation before, but come off it. The grunt work is what people are after. The big hits are part of that, but his work in the scrum (as much as we can really know) and maul is a big positive. I do think Itoje benefits from that ballast next to him too, as he's not a particularly massive lock.

I totally take your point about Chessum overall though. He's class. A better all round player, much more nimble on his feet (Martin has been caught out here a few times) but was playing 6 vs Ireland in fairness with a very handy second row platform.

Not sure what you mean RE Hill on RR. I thought we are all excited to see him get a go? I agree there's a balance to be had. If we can put out a heftier backrow I'd be more comfortable with swapping Chessum and Martin in the starting lock spots.

Interesting to see Ireland set some record for lineouts completed against England on Saturday, with us competing in something like 3/24. I know many feel we 'got away with it' having Martin & Curry as 2nd/3rd choice lineout options in attack, but surely we need to be attacking more opposition ball. Another Chessum/Hill strength.

[TheDasher]

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.

Hill has to start for me. Never popular on RR but size and power at the moment matter and we're going to get fcked if he doesn't pick a strong enough pack. CCS is not a starter I don't think (should be a n8 for me anyway, or at least covering 6 and 8) and we can't pick two Currys against France in my view. Hill, Willis, T.Curry is a physically strong backrow with a good balance, lineout option, stamina, carrying etc.

As we'd then be picking a heftier 6 and 8 I think it'd make me more inclined to pick Chessum over Martin... Incidentally Chessum is still a fairly big dude, just not as heavy as Martin. He's just better though. Chessum looks to me to be a real talent, he very frequently catches the eye, Martin doesn't. One big hit against Mostert that he's been living off for some time. Chessum versus Ireland last year was magnificent and has played well on many an occasion. I think he's a better player all round. I'm not sure George Martin gets anywhere near the Ireland, SA, NZ or French teams, he's starting to look quite limited frankly.

I know we've done this conversation before, but come off it. The grunt work is what people are after. The big hits are part of that, but his work in the scrum (as much as we can really know) and maul is a big positive. I do think Itoje benefits from that ballast next to him too, as he's not a particularly massive lock.

I totally take your point about Chessum overall though. He's class. A better all round player, much more nimble on his feet (Martin has been caught out here a few times) but was playing 6 vs Ireland in fairness with a very handy second row platform.

Not sure what you mean RE Hill on RR. I thought we are all excited to see him get a go? I agree there's a balance to be had. If we can put out a heftier backrow I'd be more comfortable with swapping Chessum and Martin in the starting lock spots.

Interesting to see Ireland set some record for lineouts completed against England on Saturday, with us competing in something like 3/24. I know many feel we 'got away with it' having Martin & Curry as 2nd/3rd choice lineout options in attack, but surely we need to be attacking more opposition ball. Another Chessum/Hill strength.

How can you quantify his work in the scrum? We don't know how much more force he necessarily provides in the scrum than Chessum anyway - I'd imagine the difference isn't vast, our problems in the scrum are often down to the front row, I wouldn't say Martin should be kept in for that. Is he better in the Maul than Chessum? Not sure, he doesn't seem as intelligent a player and if it's down to heft, that's why I'm picking Hill and Willis. Itoje is a small lock these days let's be honest, I think the 6'6 is inflated, he's 6'5, not that it matters because he's class... Martin isn't.

Re Hill on RR. It was two sentences... I said I would pick Hill (which I know is a popular notion here). Then I said harping on about size and power on RR never used to be popular, when saying our pack needs to be bigger.

Chessum was great at 6 versus Ireland last year but he's also often a prominent player in the row too, he has a positive impact on a game, with multiple noticeable moments, it's true for Leicester too.

Re the backs - god knows what SB will do... I have a feeling it won't be correct!

[Mikey Brown]

Hill has to start for me. Never popular on RR but size and power at the moment matter and we're going to get fcked if he doesn't pick a strong enough pack. CCS is not a starter I don't think (should be a n8 for me anyway, or at least covering 6 and 8) and we can't pick two Currys against France in my view. Hill, Willis, T.Curry is a physically strong backrow with a good balance, lineout option, stamina, carrying etc.

As we'd then be picking a heftier 6 and 8 I think it'd make me more inclined to pick Chessum over Martin... Incidentally Chessum is still a fairly big dude, just not as heavy as Martin. He's just better though. Chessum looks to me to be a real talent, he very frequently catches the eye, Martin doesn't. One big hit against Mostert that he's been living off for some time. Chessum versus Ireland last year was magnificent and has played well on many an occasion. I think he's a better player all round. I'm not sure George Martin gets anywhere near the Ireland, SA, NZ or French teams, he's starting to look quite limited frankly.

I know we've done this conversation before, but come off it. The grunt work is what people are after. The big hits are part of that, but his work in the scrum (as much as we can really know) and maul is a big positive. I do think Itoje benefits from that ballast next to him too, as he's not a particularly massive lock.

I totally take your point about Chessum overall though. He's class. A better all round player, much more nimble on his feet (Martin has been caught out here a few times) but was playing 6 vs Ireland in fairness with a very handy second row platform.

Not sure what you mean RE Hill on RR. I thought we are all excited to see him get a go? I agree there's a balance to be had. If we can put out a heftier backrow I'd be more comfortable with swapping Chessum and Martin in the starting lock spots.

Interesting to see Ireland set some record for lineouts completed against England on Saturday, with us competing in something like 3/24. I know many feel we 'got away with it' having Martin & Curry as 2nd/3rd choice lineout options in attack, but surely we need to be attacking more opposition ball. Another Chessum/Hill strength.

How can you quantify his work in the scrum? We don't know how much more force he necessarily provides in the scrum than Chessum anyway - I'd imagine the difference isn't vast, our problems in the scrum are often down to the front row, I wouldn't say Martin should be kept in for that. Is he better in the Maul than Chessum? Not sure, he doesn't seem as intelligent a player and if it's down to heft, that's why I'm picking Hill and Willis. Itoje is a small lock these days let's be honest, I think the 6'6 is inflated, he's 6'5, not that it matters because he's class... Martin isn't.

Re Hill on RR. It was two sentences... I said I would pick Hill (which I know is a popular notion here). Then I said harping on about size and power on RR never used to be popular, when saying our pack needs to be bigger.

Chessum was great at 6 versus Ireland last year but he's also often a prominent player in the row too, he has a positive impact on a game, with multiple noticeable moments, it's true for Leicester too.

Re the backs - god knows what SB will do... I have a feeling it won't be correct!

I hope that didn't come off as confrontational, I literally just didn't understand the RR reference. I thought we were the Hill fanboys. I think the objection is generally to a Mike Williams style big lump at 6, just to add mass, rather than Hill who is RAPID and pretty skillful too.

I feel I gave the only caveat I really can on Martin's scrum power. We have anecdotal evidence of him being super powerful there. I think Cole specifically has mentioned it but there's no chance of me tracking down a quote. Chessum is great at getting the levers in at the maul, but I've seen Martin's weight make a considerable difference to an opposition drive. Again, no real way of quanitifying it. They're both important elements.

None of this is knocking Chessum. I think he's great, but I'm glad we have Martin.

[TheDasher]

I know we've done this conversation before, but come off it. The grunt work is what people are after. The big hits are part of that, but his work in the scrum (as much as we can really know) and maul is a big positive. I do think Itoje benefits from that ballast next to him too, as he's not a particularly massive lock.

I totally take your point about Chessum overall though. He's class. A better all round player, much more nimble on his feet (Martin has been caught out here a few times) but was playing 6 vs Ireland in fairness with a very handy second row platform.

Not sure what you mean RE Hill on RR. I thought we are all excited to see him get a go? I agree there's a balance to be had. If we can put out a heftier backrow I'd be more comfortable with swapping Chessum and Martin in the starting lock spots.

Interesting to see Ireland set some record for lineouts completed against England on Saturday, with us competing in something like 3/24. I know many feel we 'got away with it' having Martin & Curry as 2nd/3rd choice lineout options in attack, but surely we need to be attacking more opposition ball. Another Chessum/Hill strength.

How can you quantify his work in the scrum? We don't know how much more force he necessarily provides in the scrum than Chessum anyway - I'd imagine the difference isn't vast, our problems in the scrum are often down to the front row, I wouldn't say Martin should be kept in for that. Is he better in the Maul than Chessum? Not sure, he doesn't seem as intelligent a player and if it's down to heft, that's why I'm picking Hill and Willis. Itoje is a small lock these days let's be honest, I think the 6'6 is inflated, he's 6'5, not that it matters because he's class... Martin isn't.

Re Hill on RR. It was two sentences... I said I would pick Hill (which I know is a popular notion here). Then I said harping on about size and power on RR never used to be popular, when saying our pack needs to be bigger.

Chessum was great at 6 versus Ireland last year but he's also often a prominent player in the row too, he has a positive impact on a game, with multiple noticeable moments, it's true for Leicester too.

Re the backs - god knows what SB will do... I have a feeling it won't be correct!

I hope that didn't come off as confrontational, I literally just didn't understand the RR reference. I thought we were the Hill fanboys. I think the objection is generally to a Mike Williams style big lump at 6, just to add mass, rather than Hill who is RAPID and pretty skillful too.

I feel I gave the only caveat I really can on Martin's scrum power. We have anecdotal evidence of him being super powerful there. I think Cole specifically has mentioned it but there's no chance of me tracking down a quote. Chessum is great at getting the levers in at the maul, but I've seen Martin's weight make a considerable difference to an opposition drive. Again, no real way of quanitifying it. They're both important elements.

None of this is knocking Chessum. I think he's great, but I'm glad we have Martin.

Not at all! Sorry if I sounded defensive, didn't mean to. Martin looks way off it to me, really does, flat-footed, not a strong carrier. If I could be guaranteed no brain-farts I'd rather Jonny Hill in there than Martin. SB needs to get to know Arthur Clarke, Ben Bamber and some of this new line of big locks and work out who's got it and who hasn't, quickly.

[Mikey Brown]

How can you quantify his work in the scrum? We don't know how much more force he necessarily provides in the scrum than Chessum anyway - I'd imagine the difference isn't vast, our problems in the scrum are often down to the front row, I wouldn't say Martin should be kept in for that. Is he better in the Maul than Chessum? Not sure, he doesn't seem as intelligent a player and if it's down to heft, that's why I'm picking Hill and Willis. Itoje is a small lock these days let's be honest, I think the 6'6 is inflated, he's 6'5, not that it matters because he's class... Martin isn't.

Re Hill on RR. It was two sentences... I said I would pick Hill (which I know is a popular notion here). Then I said harping on about size and power on RR never used to be popular, when saying our pack needs to be bigger.

Chessum was great at 6 versus Ireland last year but he's also often a prominent player in the row too, he has a positive impact on a game, with multiple noticeable moments, it's true for Leicester too.

Re the backs - god knows what SB will do... I have a feeling it won't be correct!

I hope that didn't come off as confrontational, I literally just didn't understand the RR reference. I thought we were the Hill fanboys. I think the objection is generally to a Mike Williams style big lump at 6, just to add mass, rather than Hill who is RAPID and pretty skillful too.

I feel I gave the only caveat I really can on Martin's scrum power. We have anecdotal evidence of him being super powerful there. I think Cole specifically has mentioned it but there's no chance of me tracking down a quote. Chessum is great at getting the levers in at the maul, but I've seen Martin's weight make a considerable difference to an opposition drive. Again, no real way of quanitifying it. They're both important elements.

None of this is knocking Chessum. I think he's great, but I'm glad we have Martin.

Not at all! Sorry if I sounded defensive, didn't mean to. Martin looks way off it to me, really does, flat-footed, not a strong carrier. If I could be guaranteed no brain-farts I'd rather Jonny Hill in there than Martin. SB needs to get to know Arthur Clarke, Ben Bamber and some of this new line of big locks and work out who's got it and who hasn't, quickly.

Fair enough. I'd imagine we can at least agree the rate he became a nailed on starter shows the void we've had for a big, nasty tight-head lock.

[Banquo]

I hope that didn't come off as confrontational, I literally just didn't understand the RR reference. I thought we were the Hill fanboys. I think the objection is generally to a Mike Williams style big lump at 6, just to add mass, rather than Hill who is RAPID and pretty skillful too.

I feel I gave the only caveat I really can on Martin's scrum power. We have anecdotal evidence of him being super powerful there. I think Cole specifically has mentioned it but there's no chance of me tracking down a quote. Chessum is great at getting the levers in at the maul, but I've seen Martin's weight make a considerable difference to an opposition drive. Again, no real way of quanitifying it. They're both important elements.

None of this is knocking Chessum. I think he's great, but I'm glad we have Martin.

Not at all! Sorry if I sounded defensive, didn't mean to. Martin looks way off it to me, really does, flat-footed, not a strong carrier. If I could be guaranteed no brain-farts I'd rather Jonny Hill in there than Martin. SB needs to get to know Arthur Clarke, Ben Bamber and some of this new line of big locks and work out who's got it and who hasn't, quickly.

Fair enough. I'd imagine we can at least agree the rate he became a nailed on starter shows the void we've had for a big, nasty tight-head lock.

Aye- exactly what he is-old skool tight head lock, but not as big or as nasty as we'd ideally want. Probably more mobile, notwithstanding TD view on flat footed (more like bad knees I'd think?).

[TheDasher]

Not at all! Sorry if I sounded defensive, didn't mean to. Martin looks way off it to me, really does, flat-footed, not a strong carrier. If I could be guaranteed no brain-farts I'd rather Jonny Hill in there than Martin. SB needs to get to know Arthur Clarke, Ben Bamber and some of this new line of big locks and work out who's got it and who hasn't, quickly.

Fair enough. I'd imagine we can at least agree the rate he became a nailed on starter shows the void we've had for a big, nasty tight-head lock.

Aye- exactly what he is-old skool tight head lock, but not as big or as nasty as we'd ideally want. Probably more mobile, notwithstanding TD view on flat footed (more like bad knees I'd think?).

Sorry yes, probably bad knees. Just looks slow and one-paced, I can't believe he ever played 6 watching him.

Re the backs - I can barely bring myself to write anything on here it's become that painful. Lawrence had a stormer at 13 so don't want to move him back to 12 to play Beard (who I think is excellent) but we're all at sea at 12 generally due to SB and his poor planning and past selections... Then Slade did ok vs Ireland so you think, perhaps stick with it for this game... Marcus is not a 15 (might be in attack but not in any other element), Roebuck must be in, god knows what he's doing with Steward etc etc. All too much for me.

[p/d]

Where’s our next Shaw or Grewcock coming from!!!

[Mellsblue]

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.

Hill has to start for me. Never popular on RR but size and power at the moment matter and we're going to get fcked if he doesn't pick a strong enough pack. CCS is not a starter I don't think (should be a n8 for me anyway, or at least covering 6 and 8) and we can't pick two Currys against France in my view. Hill, Willis, T.Curry is a physically strong backrow with a good balance, lineout option, stamina, carrying etc.

As we'd then be picking a heftier 6 and 8 I think it'd make me more inclined to pick Chessum over Martin... Incidentally Chessum is still a fairly big dude, just not as heavy as Martin. He's just better though. Chessum looks to me to be a real talent, he very frequently catches the eye, Martin doesn't. One big hit against Mostert that he's been living off for some time. Chessum versus Ireland last year was magnificent and has played well on many an occasion. I think he's a better player all round. I'm not sure George Martin gets anywhere near the Ireland, SA, NZ or French teams, he's starting to look quite limited frankly.

I know we've done this conversation before, but come off it. The grunt work is what people are after. The big hits are part of that, but his work in the scrum (as much as we can really know) and maul is a big positive. I do think Itoje benefits from that ballast next to him too, as he's not a particularly massive lock.

I totally take your point about Chessum overall though. He's class. A better all round player, much more nimble on his feet (Martin has been caught out here a few times) but was playing 6 vs Ireland in fairness with a very handy second row platform.

Not sure what you mean RE Hill on RR. I thought we are all excited to see him get a go? I agree there's a balance to be had. If we can put out a heftier backrow I'd be more comfortable with swapping Chessum and Martin in the starting lock spots.

Interesting to see Ireland set some record for lineouts completed against England on Saturday, with us competing in something like 3/24. I know many feel we 'got away with it' having Martin & Curry as 2nd/3rd choice lineout options in attack, but surely we need to be attacking more opposition ball. Another Chessum/Hill strength.

Yep, allowing Itoje, our only world class player, to play his own game is worth its weight in Nottingham locks.

[Mellsblue]

Where’s our next Shaw or Grewcock coming from!!!

South Africa?

[Mikey Brown]

Where’s our next Shaw or Grewcock coming from!!!

Oh come on. Are you intentionally trying to summon him?

Also worth noting on Martin he’s only 23. I don’t think many big bastard locks are close to their prime at that stage. Though who knows why state his knees will be in a few years down the line.

[TheDasher]

Where’s our next Shaw or Grewcock coming from!!!

Now you're talking.

Is Martin better than prime Dave Attwood even? I don't think so. Attwood was a carrier too.

[TheDasher]

Where’s our next Shaw or Grewcock coming from!!!

South Africa?

Ben Bamber at sale is a unit and I keep mentioning him as I've watched him twice and he looks quite good Early to say though...

Genuinely do think Arthur Clarke stands out a bit - he effects the game, as Chessum does. Martin goes missing.

And actually forgetting big and nasty, Alex Coles is a better rugby player than George Martin I think... I'd rather Itoje and Coles with a big back row than Martin and Itoje and three opensides in the backrow...

[p/d]

Steward, now Martin. FKAS will be in meltdown

[Banquo]

Steward, now Martin. FKAS will be in meltdown

Chessum is also a bit....freckly..

[TheDasher]

Steward, now Martin. FKAS will be in meltdown

Is FKAS a Martin fan?

Nothing wrong with being a Steward fan... Steward who was so, so good and then dropped, picked, dropped, picked etc etc, confidence shot. Now dropped again with little Marcus taking his place.

[Mellsblue]

We really, really need to win this weekend for the sake of the collective sanity of everyone on this board. Goodness knows what it’ll do to big Freddie’s mental state, though.

[p/d]

Steward, now Martin. FKAS will be in meltdown

Is FKAS a Martin fan?

I believe, though not 100% sure, he might follow Leicester

[Mikey Brown]

[Mikey Brown]

Willis starts at 8! Earl at 7. Dual Smiths. No Steward. Ben Curry, Jamie George and Elliot Daly on the bench the big changes.

England: M Smith; Freeman, Lawrence, Slade, Sleightholme; F Smith, Mitchell; Genge, Cowan-Dickie, Stuart, Itoje (c), Martin, T Curry, Earl, Willis

Replacements: George, Baxter, Heyes, Chessum, Cunningham-South, B Curry, Randall, Daly

[FKAS]

Steward, now Martin. FKAS will be in meltdown

Is FKAS a Martin fan?

I believe, though not 100% sure, he might follow Leicester

Outrageous.

George Martin is very good but there's no argument for the fact the knee injuries have effected his agility. He's a big unit and still mobile but could do with working on being lighter on his feet. Would help him in quite a few areas.