England vs Australia - Sat 3.10pm

[TheDasher]

Some good things in the side because we have a large number of good players... but I don't love it. Ford is not the man at 10 for me - he played well vs Argentina but I suspect Finn Smith would've done too. I think at international level Ford is a liability in defence personally, Finn Smith is overall a better bet and deserved to keep his shirt.

Dingwall is not the answer at 12 for me in the long term at this level. Despite all the chat about Lawrence being a 13, I think he was starting to play well for England at 12 and I'd say he's more of a presence there than Dingwall.

I think starting Baxter over Genge is an error. I think we need that carrying, dog and aggression in the first 40 mins vs Aus in the 1st autumn international - I'd have thought starting Genge, a leader in the group and one of only real carriers was a necessity... Stuart or Heyes not so crucial.

In the back-row his hands are tied a bit so sympathy for him there - no CCS, no Willis, no Ted Hill - three big powerful units that he couldn't pick... Not ideal. I have to say though that with that in mind, I'd have been tempted with Chessum 6, 7 Underhill, 8 Earl... but no big deal, probably.

I don't look at that side and think, christ, what a formidable side... I have been so enjoying having a big, powerful number 8 it's such a shame T Willis has gone... scraping the barrel here but starting to wonder if we should've called up Cracknell before Wales did. Probably not.

Ford is in better form than F Smith currently. There's very little in it but kicking off the tee has gone a bit wrong this season. Nothing wrong with forcing the young player to force his way past Ford. Given the flyhalfs very rarely actually defend in the line from phase play and are mainly in the backfield the chances to target Ford are minimal.

I quite like the Bok style bomb squad bench selection. I'd really like to see Borthwick deploy Genge on 30 mins to attack the fading legs just before halftime and then launch into the second forty still pretty fresh. Baxter is a solid selection and I quite like the fact we've geared up to bring a second half onslaught.

I think Borthwick would have liked to have named a bruising backrow option but TWillis opted for France, Ilione is injured, Ted Hill is injured and CCS is injured. Chessum to 6 just weakens the second row as there's a gulf in quality between Itoje, Chessum and Martin then the other locks available to England right now. We've gone super mobile in the pack to if Blackett is going for a high tempo attack looking to quickly narrow defences before going wide fast (kick passing very much an option) to target the isolated Wallaby back three, then the selections look good.

Love Cracknell but he's a good clubman. He's not an international player and at 31 he's unlikely to develop to become one. For a weak Welsh pack he'll add some physicality and work rate but England aren't really lacking that to the extent he'll make a difference and in a setup as mobile as we've gone with I'm not sure he'd keep up.

I honestly just think Finn Smith slotted in like he was born to play for England at 10 - Ford is more likely to disappoint in my view, that's how I'd put it. F Smith is such a confident young player, I'm not sure I've seen him play badly yet...

Re the Bok style thing - I get what you mean but I'm not sure we're playing with the same pool of props as them in quality terms...

Agree with you and as I said, his hands are a bit tied in the back row, I can't really blame him for much there. I too think Chessum is a lock but he's also an absolutely top class 6 - that game against Ireland springs to mind. I get your point on a step down to other locks but I'm in the minority I think in feeling that Coles is probably better than Martin who flatters to deceive. But I absolutely take your points.

Let's see!

[TheDasher]

I think I’d honestly rather Lawrence covering 8.

Why, because he "loses the ball in contact at 12" so the saying goes. He stopped doing that in his last few caps.

I'd personally prefer Lawrence, Ojomoh or Atkinson to Dingwall but hey ho.

[Puja]

Dingwall is not the answer at 12 for me in the long term at this level. Despite all the chat about Lawrence being a 13, I think he was starting to play well for England at 12 and I'd say he's more of a presence there than Dingwall.

Lawrence might be more of a presence, but he's not any kind of first receiver or creator like Dingwall is. At 12, he's at best a blunt instrument.

I quite like the Bok style bomb squad bench selection. I'd really like to see Borthwick deploy Genge on 30 mins to attack the fading legs just before halftime and then launch into the second forty still pretty fresh. Baxter is a solid selection and I quite like the fact we've geared up to bring a second half onslaught.

That'd be a fun idea, if that's what he has in mind. More of an Italy move than a Bok one that, but would be interesting to try.

A few immediate thoughts:

- Are we going with consistency with the Argentina tour for those comfortable with Blackett / Mcguigans methods? Would be sensible given Oz have a lot of cohesiveness
- Generally in favour of the 6/2 split but think it requires at least 2 multi positional backs in the 23 (MSmith, Daly, Freeman, etc)
- In line with the above, are Earl / Pollock covering 13 / wing?

1) I think it's more likely because of Lions rest periods/injuries leaving people short of gametime. The RFU's cockup in not including this fixture in the EPS agreement, as well as scheduling it first in the order, looks worse by the second.
2) Agreed, although I understand why Broadback's gone with Ford/FSmith, given current form.
3) I think Earl to centre is an established trope if needs must, although the talk of FSmith running at 12 in training means we could shift Dingwall out one to to cover an injury to 13 or wing.

Puja

[FKAS]

Interesting point to consider that Squidge raised on the For The Love Of Rugby podcast. Australia are finishing well under Schmidt. Beat England at Twickers in the last minute last season, were better in each second half than first on Lions games and came from behind to beat the Boks.

Is Borthwick stacking the bench with the options he wants to see off the stronger Australian part of the game. Ford will put England in all the right areas and build a score. Off he comes on 50 mins for the more physical F Smith who's nice and fresh to inject something slightly different. The Lions capped front row come on to try and deny Australia a platform to play off. Two Lions backrows come on to spoil, aggreviate and slow any momentum.

[FKAS]

Some good things in the side because we have a large number of good players... but I don't love it. Ford is not the man at 10 for me - he played well vs Argentina but I suspect Finn Smith would've done too. I think at international level Ford is a liability in defence personally, Finn Smith is overall a better bet and deserved to keep his shirt.

Dingwall is not the answer at 12 for me in the long term at this level. Despite all the chat about Lawrence being a 13, I think he was starting to play well for England at 12 and I'd say he's more of a presence there than Dingwall.

I think starting Baxter over Genge is an error. I think we need that carrying, dog and aggression in the first 40 mins vs Aus in the 1st autumn international - I'd have thought starting Genge, a leader in the group and one of only real carriers was a necessity... Stuart or Heyes not so crucial.

In the back-row his hands are tied a bit so sympathy for him there - no CCS, no Willis, no Ted Hill - three big powerful units that he couldn't pick... Not ideal. I have to say though that with that in mind, I'd have been tempted with Chessum 6, 7 Underhill, 8 Earl... but no big deal, probably.

I don't look at that side and think, christ, what a formidable side... I have been so enjoying having a big, powerful number 8 it's such a shame T Willis has gone... scraping the barrel here but starting to wonder if we should've called up Cracknell before Wales did. Probably not.

Ford is in better form than F Smith currently. There's very little in it but kicking off the tee has gone a bit wrong this season. Nothing wrong with forcing the young player to force his way past Ford. Given the flyhalfs very rarely actually defend in the line from phase play and are mainly in the backfield the chances to target Ford are minimal.

I quite like the Bok style bomb squad bench selection. I'd really like to see Borthwick deploy Genge on 30 mins to attack the fading legs just before halftime and then launch into the second forty still pretty fresh. Baxter is a solid selection and I quite like the fact we've geared up to bring a second half onslaught.

I think Borthwick would have liked to have named a bruising backrow option but TWillis opted for France, Ilione is injured, Ted Hill is injured and CCS is injured. Chessum to 6 just weakens the second row as there's a gulf in quality between Itoje, Chessum and Martin then the other locks available to England right now. We've gone super mobile in the pack to if Blackett is going for a high tempo attack looking to quickly narrow defences before going wide fast (kick passing very much an option) to target the isolated Wallaby back three, then the selections look good.

Love Cracknell but he's a good clubman. He's not an international player and at 31 he's unlikely to develop to become one. For a weak Welsh pack he'll add some physicality and work rate but England aren't really lacking that to the extent he'll make a difference and in a setup as mobile as we've gone with I'm not sure he'd keep up.

I honestly just think Finn Smith slotted in like he was born to play for England at 10 - Ford is more likely to disappoint in my view, that's how I'd put it. F Smith is such a confident young player, I'm not sure I've seen him play badly yet...

Re the Bok style thing - I get what you mean but I'm not sure we're playing with the same pool of props as them in quality terms...

Agree with you and as I said, his hands are a bit tied in the back row, I can't really blame him for much there. I too think Chessum is a lock but he's also an absolutely top class 6 - that game against Ireland springs to mind. I get your point on a step down to other locks but I'm in the minority I think in feeling that Coles is probably better than Martin who flatters to deceive. But I absolutely take your points.

Let's see!

We don't have Bok level props but neither do Australia and ours are better than theirs (mostly). Baxter and Heyes showed up very well in the summer so I'm pretty confident they'll start the game well and we can unload those that toured with the Lions for impetus.

I'm a big F Smith fan and a big Ford fan so I'm happy whichever gets the nod personally.

I'd take Martin over Coles every day of the week and twice on game day. Coles is a clever lock, runs good lines and has nice hands but he just lacks a bit of physicality and aggression for international rugby. If he could add that bit more dog to his game he'd win plenty of caps. Martin has all that, he's a unit that knows how to put it about and isn't short of aggression. His issue is getting fit, staying fit, staying fit long enough to actually find some form and develop.

[Mikey Brown]

I think I’d honestly rather Lawrence covering 8.

Why, because he "loses the ball in contact at 12" so the saying goes. He stopped doing that in his last few caps.

I'd personally prefer Lawrence, Ojomoh or Atkinson to Dingwall but hey ho.

I wasn’t being entirely serious, but what I meant was I’d rather have him in the 23 and (for whatever reason) have to stick him at 8 than pick two backrows on the bench and force one of them to cover centre/wing.

We could easily end up with a Ford, Smith, Dingwall midfield with any injury to 11/13/14/15 or a backrower out there. I just don’t see why we invite this risk for so little upside.

You need cover for the position your utility player (if that is Freeman) is starting in, which seems so obvious.

[Oakboy]

Interesting point to consider that Squidge raised on the For The Love Of Rugby podcast. Australia are finishing well under Schmidt. Beat England at Twickers in the last minute last season, were better in each second half than first on Lions games and came from behind to beat the Boks.

Is Borthwick stacking the bench with the options he wants to see off the stronger Australian part of the game. Ford will put England in all the right areas and build a score. Off he comes on 50 mins for the more physical F Smith who's nice and fresh to inject something slightly different. The Lions capped front row come on to try and deny Australia a platform to play off. Two Lions backrows come on to spoil, aggreviate and slow any momentum.

Tactical masterstroke or pandering to the opposition? Maybe we should let them worry about us - if we are good enough.

[FKAS]

Interesting point to consider that Squidge raised on the For The Love Of Rugby podcast. Australia are finishing well under Schmidt. Beat England at Twickers in the last minute last season, were better in each second half than first on Lions games and came from behind to beat the Boks.

Is Borthwick stacking the bench with the options he wants to see off the stronger Australian part of the game. Ford will put England in all the right areas and build a score. Off he comes on 50 mins for the more physical F Smith who's nice and fresh to inject something slightly different. The Lions capped front row come on to try and deny Australia a platform to play off. Two Lions backrows come on to spoil, aggreviate and slow any momentum.

Tactical masterstroke or pandering to the opposition? Maybe we should let them worry about us - if we are good enough.

Most international sides adjust selection based on the opposition. Generally it tends to be the result which signifies whether it was a tactical masterstroke or not. I think it would be a touch arrogant from the England coaching staff to ignore how well the Wallabies have been finishing games. Whether that necessitates the bench selection we have gone for we'll find out. I quite like it.

[FKAS]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/cricket ... 5be4&ei=66

Also saw this posted elsewhere. Likely to get some feathers ruffled.

[TheDasher]

Ford is in better form than F Smith currently. There's very little in it but kicking off the tee has gone a bit wrong this season. Nothing wrong with forcing the young player to force his way past Ford. Given the flyhalfs very rarely actually defend in the line from phase play and are mainly in the backfield the chances to target Ford are minimal.

I quite like the Bok style bomb squad bench selection. I'd really like to see Borthwick deploy Genge on 30 mins to attack the fading legs just before halftime and then launch into the second forty still pretty fresh. Baxter is a solid selection and I quite like the fact we've geared up to bring a second half onslaught.

I think Borthwick would have liked to have named a bruising backrow option but TWillis opted for France, Ilione is injured, Ted Hill is injured and CCS is injured. Chessum to 6 just weakens the second row as there's a gulf in quality between Itoje, Chessum and Martin then the other locks available to England right now. We've gone super mobile in the pack to if Blackett is going for a high tempo attack looking to quickly narrow defences before going wide fast (kick passing very much an option) to target the isolated Wallaby back three, then the selections look good.

Love Cracknell but he's a good clubman. He's not an international player and at 31 he's unlikely to develop to become one. For a weak Welsh pack he'll add some physicality and work rate but England aren't really lacking that to the extent he'll make a difference and in a setup as mobile as we've gone with I'm not sure he'd keep up.

I honestly just think Finn Smith slotted in like he was born to play for England at 10 - Ford is more likely to disappoint in my view, that's how I'd put it. F Smith is such a confident young player, I'm not sure I've seen him play badly yet...

Re the Bok style thing - I get what you mean but I'm not sure we're playing with the same pool of props as them in quality terms...

Agree with you and as I said, his hands are a bit tied in the back row, I can't really blame him for much there. I too think Chessum is a lock but he's also an absolutely top class 6 - that game against Ireland springs to mind. I get your point on a step down to other locks but I'm in the minority I think in feeling that Coles is probably better than Martin who flatters to deceive. But I absolutely take your points.

Let's see!

We don't have Bok level props but neither do Australia and ours are better than theirs (mostly). Baxter and Heyes showed up very well in the summer so I'm pretty confident they'll start the game well and we can unload those that toured with the Lions for impetus.

I'm a big F Smith fan and a big Ford fan so I'm happy whichever gets the nod personally.

I'd take Martin over Coles every day of the week and twice on game day. Coles is a clever lock, runs good lines and has nice hands but he just lacks a bit of physicality and aggression for international rugby. If he could add that bit more dog to his game he'd win plenty of caps. Martin has all that, he's a unit that knows how to put it about and isn't short of aggression. His issue is getting fit, staying fit, staying fit long enough to actually find some form and develop.

I agree on Baxter and Heyes in the Summer but we had Willis with us then, Genge is a carrier and I think we're light on those to start with - but no big deal, he's playing and will get 40 minutes surely.

Gut feeling is Finn Smith will get the shirt back in the coming few games, let's see.

Re Martin - I want to love him but other than melting Mostert and looking muscular (albeit not THAT big compared to many of his international foe) he's not cut it yet. Doesn't carry well and is slow and flat footed. Coles let's not forget is 6'7 and runs like a centre, has a hell of an engine, good hands, good tackler etc. I think he's got more physical too... Also not saying I want him to start, just going with who is in SB's squad.

A win would be a big statement after the argie victories.

[Danno]

I think I’d honestly rather Lawrence covering 8.

Why, because he "loses the ball in contact at 12" so the saying goes. He stopped doing that in his last few caps.

I'd personally prefer Lawrence, Ojomoh or Atkinson to Dingwall but hey ho.

I wasn’t being entirely serious, but what I meant was I’d rather have him in the 23 and (for whatever reason) have to stick him at 8 than pick two backrows on the bench and force one of them to cover centre/wing.

We could easily end up with a Ford, Smith, Dingwall midfield with any injury to 11/13/14/15 or a backrower out there. I just don’t see why we invite this risk for so little upside.

You need cover for the position your utility player (if that is Freeman) is starting in, which seems so obvious.

THIS.

[Danno]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/cricket ... 5be4&ei=66

Also saw this posted elsewhere. Likely to get some feathers ruffled.

Wish he'd lose the Boris Johnson look.

[FKAS]

I honestly just think Finn Smith slotted in like he was born to play for England at 10 - Ford is more likely to disappoint in my view, that's how I'd put it. F Smith is such a confident young player, I'm not sure I've seen him play badly yet...

Re the Bok style thing - I get what you mean but I'm not sure we're playing with the same pool of props as them in quality terms...

Agree with you and as I said, his hands are a bit tied in the back row, I can't really blame him for much there. I too think Chessum is a lock but he's also an absolutely top class 6 - that game against Ireland springs to mind. I get your point on a step down to other locks but I'm in the minority I think in feeling that Coles is probably better than Martin who flatters to deceive. But I absolutely take your points.

Let's see!

We don't have Bok level props but neither do Australia and ours are better than theirs (mostly). Baxter and Heyes showed up very well in the summer so I'm pretty confident they'll start the game well and we can unload those that toured with the Lions for impetus.

I'm a big F Smith fan and a big Ford fan so I'm happy whichever gets the nod personally.

I'd take Martin over Coles every day of the week and twice on game day. Coles is a clever lock, runs good lines and has nice hands but he just lacks a bit of physicality and aggression for international rugby. If he could add that bit more dog to his game he'd win plenty of caps. Martin has all that, he's a unit that knows how to put it about and isn't short of aggression. His issue is getting fit, staying fit, staying fit long enough to actually find some form and develop.

I agree on Baxter and Heyes in the Summer but we had Willis with us then, Genge is a carrier and I think we're light on those to start with - but no big deal, he's playing and will get 40 minutes surely.

Gut feeling is Finn Smith will get the shirt back in the coming few games, let's see.

Re Martin - I want to love him but other than melting Mostert and looking muscular (albeit not THAT big compared to many of his international foe) he's not cut it yet. Doesn't carry well and is slow and flat footed. Coles let's not forget is 6'7 and runs like a centre, has a hell of an engine, good hands, good tackler etc. I think he's got more physical too... Also not saying I want him to start, just going with who is in SB's squad.

A win would be a big statement after the argie victories.

Coles last season had a good tackle completion stat but dominant tackles were only 7.5% and 81% of his tackles were above hip height. Poor technique and not dominant. For Coles carrying his stats generally look good partly because of the Saints attack but it you look at the percentage of his carries requiring more than one tackler it's at 47%, he's great at hitting a line and running more of a flanker style position not so much at the big carries in the tight.

Martin on the other hand 19% dominant tackles and 71% of carries requiring 2 or more tackles. Big man hitting hard in the tight exchanges.

Coles might be better suited to playing at 6 for England in all honesty. If Martin doesn't look big compared to international contemporaries then Coles is a thin bean pole.

[Oakboy]

It's always interesting that we see things so differently. If he had stayed at Sale, I'd still pick Jonny Hill as our 3rd best lock - more effective than Martin in the tight and far more physical than Coles. SB ignored him and he's now in France with the two Willises meaning that three of our best 23 are missing.

Punditry is starting to speculate that Marcus could follow after being omitted completely. It's hard not to reflect that he could still be our starting FH had he resisted the switch to FB. SB is reported as having challenged him to work as hard as Ford did when left out of the 23. Fair enough, I suppose.

[TheDasher]

I was a huge Jonny Hill fan, I'd be happy with him as a 3rd choice lock for sure - he did deteriorate a bit though, I liked him towards the end of his time at Exeter. People mention the silly penalties for England, but they came at the end when frankly I thought he always looked frustrated, perhaps again some of the in the squad, dropped from the squad, in the squad again selection merry go round took it's toll. I think on his day he could certainly be 3rd choice.

Martin to me hasn't delivered - slow and ponderous, injured a lot, occasional massive hit but other than that, not great, not even remotely on the same level as Chessum and when they both started playing for England there was a suggestion that it would be one of them with Itoje with the other (Chessum it turned out) playing at 6. Always rated Chessum more.

Coles is not such a bean pole anymore, you can see it, he's got to be nearly 19 stone, 6'7, rapid, great hands, seriously fit - I'd say he offers a lot. As we've said before, Itoje isn't a massive specimen either, so playing Coles and Itoje does feel a bit lightweight whereas I suspect Coles and Chessum will keep putting the weight on a bit with age.

All this aside, there are now a lot of big English locks available to Steve when not long ago there weren't... it's a position he knows about... interesting to see who comes through. Arthur Clarke, Bamber etc.

[FKAS]

Martin to me hasn't delivered - slow and ponderous, injured a lot, occasional massive hit

2.5 to 3 times more likely to make an "occasional" dominant hit than Coles last season despite an injury interrupted season.

Chessum has developed past him. Mainly because he's generally played more and developed with it. That and doesn't have to manage a knee issue that slows him down.

Chessum's dominant percentage are also nowhere near Martin's, neither were Johnny Hill's or Itoje's last season. It's why Borthwick likes him. Good for the set piece and smashes the opposition back with a big work rate. Needs to use this time out of the game to fix his shoulder and his knee though, get some of his post mobility back, he can't keep playing like this.

[SixAndAHalf]

I think I’d honestly rather Lawrence covering 8.

Why, because he "loses the ball in contact at 12" so the saying goes. He stopped doing that in his last few caps.

I'd personally prefer Lawrence, Ojomoh or Atkinson to Dingwall but hey ho.

I wasn’t being entirely serious, but what I meant was I’d rather have him in the 23 and (for whatever reason) have to stick him at 8 than pick two backrows on the bench and force one of them to cover centre/wing.

We could easily end up with a Ford, Smith, Dingwall midfield with any injury to 11/13/14/15 or a backrower out there. I just don’t see why we invite this risk for so little upside.

You need cover for the position your utility player (if that is Freeman) is starting in, which seems so obvious.

I’d definitely rather have Earl / Pollock in the backs than Lawrence in the pack. The set piece is complex and critical to our game plan.

Ideally I’d rather both were only an emergency though - if you are doing a 6/2, you have to sacrifice a 10 to have at least two multi positional players in the 23. Seems Borthers wants to have his cake and eat it.

[SixAndAHalf]

I was a huge Jonny Hill fan, I'd be happy with him as a 3rd choice lock for sure - he did deteriorate a bit though, I liked him towards the end of his time at Exeter. People mention the silly penalties for England, but they came at the end when frankly I thought he always looked frustrated, perhaps again some of the in the squad, dropped from the squad, in the squad again selection merry go round took it's toll. I think on his day he could certainly be 3rd choice.

Martin to me hasn't delivered - slow and ponderous, injured a lot, occasional massive hit but other than that, not great, not even remotely on the same level as Chessum and when they both started playing for England there was a suggestion that it would be one of them with Itoje with the other (Chessum it turned out) playing at 6. Always rated Chessum more.

Coles is not such a bean pole anymore, you can see it, he's got to be nearly 19 stone, 6'7, rapid, great hands, seriously fit - I'd say he offers a lot. As we've said before, Itoje isn't a massive specimen either, so playing Coles and Itoje does feel a bit lightweight whereas I suspect Coles and Chessum will keep putting the weight on a bit with age.

All this aside, there are now a lot of big English locks available to Steve when not long ago there weren't... it's a position he knows about... interesting to see who comes through. Arthur Clarke, Bamber etc.

I also always rated Chessum above Martin. Martin for me goes into the Furbank bucket of being out for so long he needs to show some form at club level before coming back in especially with Coles and CCS coming through in his absence.

I was never sure on Coles but he stepped up last season and was very good in Argentina. I think him, CCS, Martin and Hill are competing for a similar role as the lock / 6 option on the bench.

Ideally before the World Cup one of the big bodied locks comes through - Bamber and Clark playing in the prem or one of Kpoku, Sodeke or Burrow.

[jngf]

Leaving aside personal selection preferences, I have concerns about that starting XV. Picking both Underhill and Earl seems unbalanced. Ford and Steward starting might lead to defensive vulnerability and too much kicking.

As Puja pointed out, six Lions on the bench. I suppose it will confuse the Aussies.

Agree, I’m totally unconvinced Earl has the power needed as a number 8 to get over the gainline in the way T Willis and CCS can in tight traffic.

[jngf]

Some good things in the side because we have a large number of good players... but I don't love it. Ford is not the man at 10 for me - he played well vs Argentina but I suspect Finn Smith would've done too. I think at international level Ford is a liability in defence personally, Finn Smith is overall a better bet and deserved to keep his shirt.

Dingwall is not the answer at 12 for me in the long term at this level. Despite all the chat about Lawrence being a 13, I think he was starting to play well for England at 12 and I'd say he's more of a presence there than Dingwall.

I think starting Baxter over Genge is an error. I think we need that carrying, dog and aggression in the first 40 mins vs Aus in the 1st autumn international - I'd have thought starting Genge, a leader in the group and one of only real carriers was a necessity... Stuart or Heyes not so crucial.

In the back-row his hands are tied a bit so sympathy for him there - no CCS, no Willis, no Ted Hill - three big powerful units that he couldn't pick... Not ideal. I have to say though that with that in mind, I'd have been tempted with Chessum 6, 7 Underhill, 8 Earl... but no big deal, probably.

I don't look at that side and think, christ, what a formidable side... I have been so enjoying having a big, powerful number 8 it's such a shame T Willis has gone... scraping the barrel here but starting to wonder if we should've called up Cracknell before Wales did. Probably not.

Ford is in better form than F Smith currently. There's very little in it but kicking off the tee has gone a bit wrong this season. Nothing wrong with forcing the young player to force his way past Ford. Given the flyhalfs very rarely actually defend in the line from phase play and are mainly in the backfield the chances to target Ford are minimal.

I quite like the Bok style bomb squad bench selection. I'd really like to see Borthwick deploy Genge on 30 mins to attack the fading legs just before halftime and then launch into the second forty still pretty fresh. Baxter is a solid selection and I quite like the fact we've geared up to bring a second half onslaught.

I think Borthwick would have liked to have named a bruising backrow option but TWillis opted for France, Ilione is injured, Ted Hill is injured and CCS is injured. Chessum to 6 just weakens the second row as there's a gulf in quality between Itoje, Chessum and Martin then the other locks available to England right now. We've gone super mobile in the pack to if Blackett is going for a high tempo attack looking to quickly narrow defences before going wide fast (kick passing very much an option) to target the isolated Wallaby back three, then the selections look good.

Love Cracknell but he's a good clubman. He's not an international player and at 31 he's unlikely to develop to become one. For a weak Welsh pack he'll add some physicality and work rate but England aren't really lacking that to the extent he'll make a difference and in a setup as mobile as we've gone with I'm not sure he'd keep up.

I honestly just think Finn Smith slotted in like he was born to play for England at 10 - Ford is more likely to disappoint in my view, that's how I'd put it. F Smith is such a confident young player, I'm not sure I've seen him play badly yet...

Re the Bok style thing - I get what you mean but I'm not sure we're playing with the same pool of props as them in quality terms...

Agree with you and as I said, his hands are a bit tied in the back row, I can't really blame him for much there. I too think Chessum is a lock but he's also an absolutely top class 6 - that game against Ireland springs to mind. I get your point on a step down to other locks but I'm in the minority I think in feeling that Coles is probably better than Martin who flatters to deceive. But I absolutely take your points.

Let's see!

Glad somebody else feels similarly re Martin - for me he’s a bit overrated - big ballast but doesn’t offer the carrying option that a supposed lock cum 6 should - and pairing him with Itoje compounds the issue - England do need to unearth a tighthead 5 lock who can maul and carry ( in other words the qualities players like Shaw and Launchbury brought to the party).

[Epaminondas Pules]

Starting XV: Steward; Roebuck, Freeman, Dingwall, Feyi-Waboso; Ford, Mitchell; Baxter, George, Heyes, Itoje (capt), Chessum, Pepper, Underhill, Earl.
Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Genge, Stuart, Coles, T Curry, Pollock, Spencer, F Smith.

That's a loaded bench. Going to be using the locks to carry first half it seems, maybe play wider off 10 to tire the Wallabies pack and then second half deploy the forwards carrying game. Bold strategy if so.

Hmmmm.....just feels less than it could have been. If we don't target their breakdown with three 7s playing then it will be a criminal waste.

Feels like we're going to kick a lot. I'm amazed Lawrence is not at 13. I'd have pout Freeman at fullback and Lawrence at 13.

We've stacked the bench with forwards and then gone really odd with the backs. Let's hope Dingwall doesn't take a knock! I don't see why we're pairing Mitchell with Ford and Smith with Spencer. It makes no sense to me.

[pjm1]

I like that we're debating the relative merits of very good players against other, very good players. I makes a nice change from fearing that Faz will get a run to neck tackle someone, or Slade can shoot out of the line and let someone canter through the hole.

I am surprisingly comfortable with what looks on the face of it to be a rash and risky selection. My internal justification is as follows:

Front row - rewarding strong performance in Arg, although the Arg scrum was pretty appalling - how far they have fallen... Bomb squad tactics as already stated. Also think George to throw into our lineout with fewer natural jumpers makes sense
Second row - don't think there's any debate
Back row - we have an absolute plethora of riches here. When other nations (and lots of them, all tier 1) are saying our back row stocks are to die for, I worry less about the personnel chosen. We do lack at least one heavy, tight carrier - so I hope (and expect) our tactics not to rely on having them
Halves - Mitchell plus either of Ford/Fin is as good a combo as most teams could muster - again, we have real riches at 10 between our 3, so count ourselves lucky
Centres - I love Dingwall as a player, so delighted he is in. Freeman is an experiment (ignoring the Wales game since that was an unopposed training run) so looking forward to see how it goes - and we get another aerial master in the team
Wings - nice balance and good in the air vs other options (I see FW as competing for a speedster spot with Arundell)
FB - only real option, and he is playing well

For me, it all comes down to the tactics and how we balance our attacking options - pod carries vs back line moves vs tactical kicking (including kick pass). With our faster forwards, I can see us looking for gaps close into the ruck and offloads - our faster forwards are very good ball handlers, so even a half break can tip on to another back rower coming through alongside. Really hoping for a tactical kicking masterclass from Ford - he is usually so good at that, it's an art form rather than a frustration of grubbers when we have men over.

[Oakboy]

I don't see why we're pairing Mitchell with Ford and Smith with Spencer. It makes no sense to me.

Good point, that!

Weeks back, Austin Healey said it should be Mitchell/Fin or Spencer/Marcus. I suppose we should add Ford/Quirke?

[Captainhaircut]

I don't see why we're pairing Mitchell with Ford and Smith with Spencer. It makes no sense to me.

Good point, that!

Weeks back, Austin Healey said it should be Mitchell/Fin or Spencer/Marcus. I suppose we should add Ford/Quirke?

He was talking about combination of styles- 1 dasher, 1 controller was the jist.

This still works with Mitchell and Ford.

I do agree it’s weird to have Ford at 10 with saints at 9, 12 and 13 though.

[jngf]

I like that we're debating the relative merits of very good players against other, very good players. I makes a nice change from fearing that Faz will get a run to neck tackle someone, or Slade can shoot out of the line and let someone canter through the hole.

I am surprisingly comfortable with what looks on the face of it to be a rash and risky selection. My internal justification is as follows:

Front row - rewarding strong performance in Arg, although the Arg scrum was pretty appalling - how far they have fallen... Bomb squad tactics as already stated. Also think George to throw into our lineout with fewer natural jumpers makes sense
Second row - don't think there's any debate
Back row - we have an absolute plethora of riches here. When other nations (and lots of them, all tier 1) are saying our back row stocks are to die for, I worry less about the personnel chosen. We do lack at least one heavy, tight carrier - so I hope (and expect) our tactics not to rely on having them
Halves - Mitchell plus either of Ford/Fin is as good a combo as most teams could muster - again, we have real riches at 10 between our 3, so count ourselves lucky
Centres - I love Dingwall as a player, so delighted he is in. Freeman is an experiment (ignoring the Wales game since that was an unopposed training run) so looking forward to see how it goes - and we get another aerial master in the team
Wings - nice balance and good in the air vs other options (I see FW as competing for a speedster spot with Arundell)
FB - only real option, and he is playing well

For me, it all comes down to the tactics and how we balance our attacking options - pod carries vs back line moves vs tactical kicking (including kick pass). With our faster forwards, I can see us looking for gaps close into the ruck and offloads - our faster forwards are very good ball handlers, so even a half break can tip on to another back rower coming through alongside. Really hoping for a tactical kicking masterclass from Ford - he is usually so good at that, it's an art form rather than a frustration of grubbers when we have men over.

My concern is we don’t have any tight carriers in that pack Genge aside ( could Underhill take on some of this? He has the power ) ditto in the backs and our tactics from the Jones era to date have largely relied on having one or more players with this ability.