England v Fiji

[Stom]

So...I thought Coles, Mitchell, and CCS were good. I thought the props and Chessum were fine. Earl and Lawrence were hit and miss, and Pepper and Dingwall were MIA. The wings were both meh. Fin Smith was poor, and Marcus was hit and miss.

George made a huge difference, as did Curry, imo. He was just there when Pepper wasn't: just half a second quicker at reading what was happening.

Takeaways for me would be that CCS can be a good 8, and we should keep that in mind.
Coles is a very good lock, and can step up when needed.
Ford is still the better 10.
We need to hope Mitchell doesn't break.
Will Atkinson come back in at 12? Not impressed by Dingwall.
Arundell is a very interesting option.

I'd put Freeman back to 13, Roebuck comes in if fit, but then...do we keep IFW at 11, or bring in Arundell? I think we play IFW, but then rest him against Argentina.

[Mikey Brown]

Excuse me. Did you not see Ben Earl’s STATS?

[Mellsblue]

All I want is IFW and Arundell on the wings. I’d even accept Steward at 15, but would prefer Carpenter, to make it happen…
Thought F. Smith was poor… to judge anyone outside him is pointless.

[Oakboy]

So much was off because Itoje was missing. How much was his absence a factor at the breakdown? Was it pure lack of leadership or just his physical presence? Criticising our forward effectiveness needs to factor in that Itoje was not there,

In terms of basic contribution, with CCS taking lineout ball, Pepper appeared to do less but that's down to coaching preference. I'm no Underhill fan but he's a better 7 than Earl. Neither are as good as Curry but SB seems not to accept that.

To compete with NZ we are looking for 20 - 30% improvement. Do we have it?

[Charlatan]

S Atkinson is out till December

[Mikey Brown]

All I want is IFW and Arundell on the wings. I’d even accept Steward at 15, but would prefer Carpenter, to make it happen…
Thought F. Smith was poor… to judge anyone outside him is pointless.

You don’t rate Roebuck?

I’m conscious of my bias in being a Quins/Marcus fan, but I don’t feel like I’ve seen Fin Smith looking that composed for a little while now. That seemed to be his USP.

As ever though, chopping and changing of players, coaches and strategy so… who knows.

I know it’s unfashionable but I think you could say Underhill’s breakdown work was missed just as much as Curry or Itoje. Earl wins MOTM again for carrying a lot but is that really what we need our 7 to be doing?

[Stom]

So much was off because Itoje was missing. How much was his absence a factor at the breakdown? Was it pure lack of leadership or just his physical presence? Criticising our forward effectiveness needs to factor in that Itoje was not there,

In terms of basic contribution, with CCS taking lineout ball, Pepper appeared to do less but that's down to coaching preference. I'm no Underhill fan but he's a better 7 than Earl. Neither are as good as Curry but SB seems not to accept that.

To compete with NZ we are looking for 20 - 30% improvement. Do we have it?

I’d say FSmith’s poor day at the office was the bigger problem than Itoje missing. And having CCS and Earl together is also not a recipe for breakdown dominance.

We’ll probably select Curry, Underhill, Earl for NZ, which will be balanced. Add Ford back in at 10, Freeman to 13, and we have a much better balance.

Still unsure what Dingwall brings, tbh. It’s not as if he does any playmaking, he doesn’t make great defensive interventions, he makes regular mistakes… maybe well put Lawrence at 12 again.

[Oakboy]

So much was off because Itoje was missing. How much was his absence a factor at the breakdown? Was it pure lack of leadership or just his physical presence? Criticising our forward effectiveness needs to factor in that Itoje was not there,

In terms of basic contribution, with CCS taking lineout ball, Pepper appeared to do less but that's down to coaching preference. I'm no Underhill fan but he's a better 7 than Earl. Neither are as good as Curry but SB seems not to accept that.

To compete with NZ we are looking for 20 - 30% improvement. Do we have it?

I’d say FSmith’s poor day at the office was the bigger problem than Itoje missing. And having CCS and Earl together is also not a recipe for breakdown dominance.

We’ll probably select Curry, Underhill, Earl for NZ, which will be balanced. Add Ford back in at 10, Freeman to 13, and we have a much better balance.

Still unsure what Dingwall brings, tbh. It’s not as if he does any playmaking, he doesn’t make great defensive interventions, he makes regular mistakes… maybe well put Lawrence at 12 again.

Your opinion (not that I am disagreeing) makes Farrell at 12 for the 6N all too likely. I'm starting to think that Marcus at 10 is the best way to go.

[Stom]

So much was off because Itoje was missing. How much was his absence a factor at the breakdown? Was it pure lack of leadership or just his physical presence? Criticising our forward effectiveness needs to factor in that Itoje was not there,

In terms of basic contribution, with CCS taking lineout ball, Pepper appeared to do less but that's down to coaching preference. I'm no Underhill fan but he's a better 7 than Earl. Neither are as good as Curry but SB seems not to accept that.

To compete with NZ we are looking for 20 - 30% improvement. Do we have it?

I’d say FSmith’s poor day at the office was the bigger problem than Itoje missing. And having CCS and Earl together is also not a recipe for breakdown dominance.

We’ll probably select Curry, Underhill, Earl for NZ, which will be balanced. Add Ford back in at 10, Freeman to 13, and we have a much better balance.

Still unsure what Dingwall brings, tbh. It’s not as if he does any playmaking, he doesn’t make great defensive interventions, he makes regular mistakes… maybe well put Lawrence at 12 again.

Your opinion (not that I am disagreeing) makes Farrell at 12 for the 6N all too likely. I'm starting to think that Marcus at 10 is the best way to go.

Atkinson was good, I'd have him back when fit.

Farrell has been utter trash for Sarries since returning.

[FKAS]

So much was off because Itoje was missing. How much was his absence a factor at the breakdown? Was it pure lack of leadership or just his physical presence? Criticising our forward effectiveness needs to factor in that Itoje was not there,

In terms of basic contribution, with CCS taking lineout ball, Pepper appeared to do less but that's down to coaching preference. I'm no Underhill fan but he's a better 7 than Earl. Neither are as good as Curry but SB seems not to accept that.

To compete with NZ we are looking for 20 - 30% improvement. Do we have it?

I’d say FSmith’s poor day at the office was the bigger problem than Itoje missing. And having CCS and Earl together is also not a recipe for breakdown dominance.

We’ll probably select Curry, Underhill, Earl for NZ, which will be balanced. Add Ford back in at 10, Freeman to 13, and we have a much better balance.

Still unsure what Dingwall brings, tbh. It’s not as if he does any playmaking, he doesn’t make great defensive interventions, he makes regular mistakes… maybe well put Lawrence at 12 again.

Your opinion (not that I am disagreeing) makes Farrell at 12 for the 6N all too likely. I'm starting to think that Marcus at 10 is the best way to go.

You fancy a Marcus 10 and Ice Man 12 combi for the 6N? Bold call that one.

[Puja]

I know it’s unfashionable but I think you could say Underhill’s breakdown work was missed just as much as Curry or Itoje. Earl wins MOTM again for carrying a lot but is that really what we need our 7 to be doing?

Just reinforcing my opinion that Earl is not an international quality 7. He's a great player to have at 8, but put him at 7 and the poor other flanker gets overwhelmed with the amount of work they have to pick up. I don't think Pepper had a bad game (against the opinion of most of the board, apparently) as I think he got through a lot of unseen work, but it was noticeable how much more insecure our rucks looked than they did when he was paired with Underhill/TCurry as he was last week.

Other things learned from that game: Coles is a very decent international lock, Slick Backpicking was right to prefer Ford last week, Arundell continues to be ridiculous at international level, Dingwall probably isn't good enough.

Puja

[SixAndAHalf]

With Pepper was that the type of game he thrives in? Was completely unstructured. I feel like he needs to play as a back row lineout option. Back row is a tricky one as who comes out of the 23 from Oz (for CCS)? Coles seems the obvious one but he went well today.

[Mr Mwenda]

I know it’s unfashionable but I think you could say Underhill’s breakdown work was missed just as much as Curry or Itoje. Earl wins MOTM again for carrying a lot but is that really what we need our 7 to be doing?

Just reinforcing my opinion that Earl is not an international quality 7. He's a great player to have at 8, but put him at 7 and the poor other flanker gets overwhelmed with the amount of work they have to pick up. I don't think Pepper had a bad game (against the opinion of most of the board, apparently) as I think he got through a lot of unseen work, but it was noticeable how much more insecure our rucks looked than they did when he was paired with Underhill/TCurry as he was last week.

Other things learned from that game: Coles is a very decent international lock, Slick Backpicking was right to prefer Ford last week, Arundell continues to be ridiculous at international level, Dingwall probably isn't good enough.

Puja

Matches my view largely I say. Pepper certainly was unseen, perhaps he was working. I think I am most disappointed that England looked more disjointed despite another week in camp. I hope it's because they were already practicing for NZ. But Fiji have shown one can't ever take them lightly. The final scoreline flattered England I.

[Puja]

With Pepper was that the type of game he thrives in? Was completely unstructured. I feel like he needs to play as a back row lineout option. Back row is a tricky one as who comes out of the 23 from Oz (for CCS)? Coles seems the obvious one but he went well today.

I don't think I'd pick CCS in the XXIII myself. He did make a few good powerful runs and one ferocious tackle, but he was absent for protecting our rucks, and his impacts were too few and too far between. I'd rather have Underhill's ridiculous defence and overall workrate.

Puja

[Beasties]

I know it’s unfashionable but I think you could say Underhill’s breakdown work was missed just as much as Curry or Itoje. Earl wins MOTM again for carrying a lot but is that really what we need our 7 to be doing?

Just reinforcing my opinion that Earl is not an international quality 7. He's a great player to have at 8, but put him at 7 and the poor other flanker gets overwhelmed with the amount of work they have to pick up. I don't think Pepper had a bad game (against the opinion of most of the board, apparently) as I think he got through a lot of unseen work, but it was noticeable how much more insecure our rucks looked than they did when he was paired with Underhill/TCurry as he was last week.

Other things learned from that game: Coles is a very decent international lock, Slick Backpicking was right to prefer Ford last week, Arundell continues to be ridiculous at international level, Dingwall probably isn't good enough.

Puja

Matches my view largely I say. Pepper certainly was unseen, perhaps he was working. I think I am most disappointed that England looked more disjointed despite another week in camp. I hope it's because they were already practicing for NZ. But Fiji have shown one can't ever take them lightly. The final scoreline flattered England I.

Just watched it and I’d agree with seemingly only you that Fiji were a proper test. Right up until the last quarter when we pulled away.
I like CCS but he’s in and out, and pairing him with highlight reel hunter Earl puts a lot on 6. Both good players but need judicious use.
TWillis needs no mitigation (soz). I’m so angry about that.

Leaving IFW on and taking Tommy off was a bit weird. IFW was clearly injured.
Thought the Fiji 7 was useful for them.

[Mellsblue]

All I want is IFW and Arundell on the wings. I’d even accept Steward at 15, but would prefer Carpenter, to make it happen…
Thought F. Smith was poor… to judge anyone outside him is pointless.

You don’t rate Roebuck?

I’m conscious of my bias in being a Quins/Marcus fan, but I don’t feel like I’ve seen Fin Smith looking that composed for a little while now. That seemed to be his USP.

As ever though, chopping and changing of players, coaches and strategy so… who knows.

I know it’s unfashionable but I think you could say Underhill’s breakdown work was missed just as much as Curry or Itoje. Earl wins MOTM again for carrying a lot but is that really what we need our 7 to be doing?

I do rate Roebuck but those two are such serious athletes. Its the national team picking from one of the biggest pools of pro players. You should be leaving out lots of players you rate.

[twitchy]

Watching the fra vs sa game is pretty sobering.

[Beasties]

Is archive.ph down?
I’ve not managed to get it working for a few days now.

[twitchy]

Try this instead.
https://archive.org/

[Oakboy]

I’d say FSmith’s poor day at the office was the bigger problem than Itoje missing. And having CCS and Earl together is also not a recipe for breakdown dominance.

We’ll probably select Curry, Underhill, Earl for NZ, which will be balanced. Add Ford back in at 10, Freeman to 13, and we have a much better balance.

Still unsure what Dingwall brings, tbh. It’s not as if he does any playmaking, he doesn’t make great defensive interventions, he makes regular mistakes… maybe well put Lawrence at 12 again.

Your opinion (not that I am disagreeing) makes Farrell at 12 for the 6N all too likely. I'm starting to think that Marcus at 10 is the best way to go.

You fancy a Marcus 10 and Ice Man 12 combi for the 6N? Bold call that one.

No, you misinterpret my thoughts. I want Marcus at 10 to avoid having Farrell at 12. Dingwall is not adding anything constructive or surprising. As a steady link between Marcus and Freeman he might be adequate. I would have kept the Saints group together for this match but SB stuck Lawrence in. Now, with Fin having underwhelmed and Mitchell having a mediocre game, we need a real spark and it could come from Marcus at 10.

Lawrence is a bit of an enigma. Many applaud his selection as a 'real 13' but I don't see it. He has played well for England but at 12. Alongside Slade's great hands it was an OK partnership. I'd pick neither at centre now though I would still consider Slade at FB while Furbank is unavailable.

Atkinson was lauded but he always looked to have daft mistakes in his make-up. Woodward's omission from the A squad was a glaring mistake. Ojomoh was disappointing v NZ A.

So, at 12: Dingwall, Atkinson, Lawrence, Slade, Ojomoh, Earl? Or bloody Farrell? I think it could be him if SB picks Ford or Fin at 10. Just don't suggest I want it.

[Scrumhead]

Overall, I thought that was a very useful game that was exactly the right sort of test before NZ come to town.

Some played themselves out of contention and others had their weaknesses exposed.

Dingwall was outright poor. Two sub par performances in a row might necessitate bringing Slade into midfield next week. It’s not my favourite suggestion and he might flatter to deceive for England, but he’s simply better than Dingwall.

Moreover, Atkinson has become more valuable without playing.

The back row balance was off. Earl is a very good player who is obviously good enough to be a test player but he’s not a test 7. For a guy who is notably rapid, he was absent in getting to the ruck and didn’t help secure our ball. In his defence, that’s probably because he was being lined-up to carry (which is a system failure), but it also suggests he doesn’t have the instincts of a top level flanker. Arguably he’s one of our most consistent performers but if he starts, he needs 2 workhorses alongside him in the back row. CCS was very good, but given his USP is carrying/big hits, he probably shouldn’t be in the same back row as Earl. Yesterday, Pepper was trying to do the work of 1.5 players. Not his fault he couldn’t quite manage it. It also underlines the superhuman qualities of Tom Curry.

I’d go with Curry, Underhill and Earl with CCS on the bench.

Arundell is a very nice impact player to have.

[fivepointer]

I've championed Dingwall and rate him but he hasnt really nailed it so far. I'd keep him in the side but he needs to deliver a more convincing performance.

A word of appreciation for our front rowers. They all showed up well yesterday. Heyes is maturing very nicely, AOF put in a good cameo and our loose heads and hookers put in solid shifts.

[Stom]

Just on Lawrence...I don't think he was actively bad. I think he did some very good things. But the quantity of chances we gave up through or close to his channel was incredible.

It's just that the problem is 12...again. We really struggle with that, and the only player who I have watched in recent times and thought "yeah, that works" has been Atkinson.

On the wings...I think you put Freeman back to 13 as he looked promising there, and it'd be good to get 2 of IFW, Roebuck, and Arundell into the team. I'd then have Lawrence on the bench.

Oh, and on the backrow, I said it clearly when the team was announced: you cannot have CCS and Earl together, it's going to be a mess. Pepper was not great, though. Yes, he was given an insane amount of work to do, but we bought on Pollock for CCS, not exactly a big change, and Curry just showed his value.

As much as we're building depth, outside 12 (where we have no good choices) and wing (where we have many good choices), it does feel like the 15, and even the 23, pick itself...

[Scrumhead]

I thought Lawrence was OK. He’s usually a mix of good and not so good so pretty much par for the course. There’s a very good player in there but it still doesn’t seem to have completely clicked for him at test level.

I still hope Marchant becomes an option next year. He’s hugely underrated and would be my first choice for the 13 shirt.

[Oakboy]

The starting second row has hardly been mentioned. How far off competitive is it if, say, Itoje was not available v NZ? Quite a concern, IMO.