RugbyRebels

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:34 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:27 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:24 pm

So, if he kept to the starting line up v Italy, just Beard or Slade in for Lawrence, you would have been happier?

and it would have shown a bit of consistency. Still...its never a dull moment with Stultingly Boring

I they win in Cardiff will that justify all his fiddling or does the performance need to be convincing? I'm just wondering what we will conclude if it's another scraped (lucky?) victory like the ones against France and Scotland. How do we measure progress?

Given the heat he has got for narrowly losing matches, I'm glad that he's been pragmatically executing plans to win.....I've said trillions of times, you can better develop from a winning base and a core of stuff that works. The problem then is, will fiddling develop us into a side that can be confident in itself of taking on all contenders. And its been the case, even in a run of defeats, that we have been close to winning all the games.

also, the harder you work, the luckier you get

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:34 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:27 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:24 pm

So, if he kept to the starting line up v Italy, just Beard or Slade in for Lawrence, you would have been happier?

and it would have shown a bit of consistency. Still...its never a dull moment with Stultingly Boring

I they win in Cardiff will that justify all his fiddling or does the performance need to be convincing? I'm just wondering what we will conclude if it's another scraped (lucky?) victory like the ones against France and Scotland. How do we measure progress?

I think it depends on how Wales are. If they come out all guns blazing and it's a hard fought match that we win by 1 point, then I'm not going to be angry that "we didn't put X points on Wales." Conversely, if they collapse and we beat them by 14, but we're error-strewn and incoherent, then I'm not going to be thrilled.

My main desire from the match is that I want us to act like we're big-time. I don't want us terrified of launching an attack because we're 2cm inside our half and so therefore everything must be slowed down and box-kicked to reduce the risk of the scary Welsh scoring against us. I want us to play an aggressive and ambitious game and, if Wales match us or beat us because they stepped up their game and pulled a brilliant performance out, then fair play to them.

I just don't want us to retreat into our shells and avoid playing to reduce risk, cause ironically that's going to increase the chances of them staying with us and sneaking it at the end. If we do that and scrape a victory, then that'll be a huge disappointment.

Puja

A curate's egg of a selection for me.
I'm pleased to see Freeman at 13 partnering Dingers, but am at a loss to know why Willis has been relegated to the bench, because It seemed to me that the England team had at last found a natural 8 (not a maunufactured one in Earl).
And what's Ted Hill done wrong in his 69 seconds against Scotland and his interrupted second half appearance on Sunday?

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:53 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:34 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:27 pm

and it would have shown a bit of consistency. Still...its never a dull moment with Stultingly Boring

I they win in Cardiff will that justify all his fiddling or does the performance need to be convincing? I'm just wondering what we will conclude if it's another scraped (lucky?) victory like the ones against France and Scotland. How do we measure progress?

I think it depends on how Wales are. If they come out all guns blazing and it's a hard fought match that we win by 1 point, then I'm not going to be angry that "we didn't put X points on Wales." Conversely, if they collapse and we beat them by 14, but we're error-strewn and incoherent, then I'm not going to be thrilled.

My main desire from the match is that I want us to act like we're big-time. I don't want us terrified of launching an attack because we're 2cm inside our half and so therefore everything must be slowed down and box-kicked to reduce the risk of the scary Welsh scoring against us. I want us to play an aggressive and ambitious game and, if Wales match us or beat us because they stepped up their game and pulled a brilliant performance out, then fair play to them.

I just don't want us to retreat into our shells and avoid playing to reduce risk, cause ironically that's going to increase the chances of them staying with us and sneaking it at the end. If we do that and scrape a victory, then that'll be a huge disappointment.

Puja

Wow, I'll bloody well vote for that!

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:24 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 4:51 pm So close to a great selection for me. Swap Willis with one of the back rows and then have Sleightholme in for MSMith (with Daly at full back, smith 23 and Ford out) and I’d be pretty happy.

So, if he kept to the starting line up v Italy, just Beard or Slade in for Lawrence, you would have been happier?

To an extent- wanted to see Freeman at 13 though, I like Pollock on bench and intrigued by CCS as a lock for long term.

You take the rough with the smooth…

No idea what to make of Borthwick’s selection bingo

My only ask is that we don’t lose.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 6:11 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:24 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 4:51 pm So close to a great selection for me. Swap Willis with one of the back rows and then have Sleightholme in for MSMith (with Daly at full back, smith 23 and Ford out) and I’d be pretty happy.

So, if he kept to the starting line up v Italy, just Beard or Slade in for Lawrence, you would have been happier?

To an extent- wanted to see Freeman at 13 though, I like Pollock on bench and intrigued by CCS as a lock for long term.

You take the rough with the smooth…

do you really think-again- that at 6ft 4 and with no club time, as far as i know, CCS has a future at lock?

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 6:41 pm No idea what to make of Borthwick’s selection bingo

My only ask is that we don’t lose.

aye. not least cos its....wales. Not becos they are in the doldrums to be clear.

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 6:58 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 6:11 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:24 pm

So, if he kept to the starting line up v Italy, just Beard or Slade in for Lawrence, you would have been happier?

To an extent- wanted to see Freeman at 13 though, I like Pollock on bench and intrigued by CCS as a lock for long term.

You take the rough with the smooth…

do you really think-again- that at 6ft 4 and with no club time, as far as i know, CCS has a future at lock?

I’m not sure his height is an issue. He’s incredibly athletic and much better in the lineout than say Martin who is 2 inches taller. Maro is only 1 inch taller. CCS comfortably big enough in terms of weight too.

I think CCS is a hugely promising player but he’s a bit jammed at test level and even at club I’m not sure he’s in their first choice backrow.

Club position is an issue but if we see him at lock, how do we force that issue? Alternative bench lock option was Hill who isn’t a lock either and Coles who I’m not really convinced by. Clark, Batley and Martin are injured..

I kind of like the mindset although appreciate I’m probably in the minority.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 5:22 pmlol. IBWT.

Indeed.

It gets worse the more I look at it.

Coles becoming a passable international lock seems a hell of a lot more likely to me than CCS. It just doesn’t make the best use of his strengths.

Sure he’s the best sort of backrow to be able to put there in an emergency, tall and reasonable in the lineout, but forcing that on ourselves and saying to Coles or whoever else they just aren’t worth a shot seems like a poor move on a man management front.

It would be different if we were 5:3 and it was a trade-off to get CCS and a 7 on the bench or something, but we don’t even seem to have much of a strategy for using the bench.

And I get Itoje/Chessum are capable of playing well for 80, but Chessum offers some reasonable 6 cover in his own right if you have a spare lock on the bench.

If you’re going to make weird selection decisions they need to pay off significantly more.

I’m concerned.

Aside from the absolute weirdness of this selection, he's pretty much written their team talk for them: "These guys think they can pick anyone anywhere and win."

I'm kind of hoping they over compensate and abandon whatever gameplan they had in mind all week.

Itoje and Dingers injured in the first 20mins would be hilarious.

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 8:31 pm I’m concerned.

Aside from the absolute weirdness of this selection, he's pretty much written their team talk for them: "These guys think they can pick anyone anywhere and win."

I'm kind of hoping they over compensate and abandon whatever gameplan they had in mind all week.

like

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 8:34 pm Itoje and Dingers injured in the first 20mins would be hilarious.

Stop iiiiiiiit

The only thing giving me a bit more positivity on this side is the simple fact that we know we need a BP to have any chance of winning the championship.

I know it’s a slim chance, but we have to go for it.

Scrumhead wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 8:49 pm The only thing giving me a bit more positivity on this side is the simple fact that we know we need a BP to have any chance of winning the championship.

I know it’s a slim chance, but we have to go for it.

It's such a weird setup though. I know some changes have been forced, but there's SO much disruption in the starting line up that I can't help but feel concerned

Always going to be a tough game.

Struggling to find a set of circumstances where the 6:2 split featuring Ford becomes deemed a stroke of genius.

If Chessum is injured they’re going to put Ford on JVP’s shoulders and play them at lock. Genie arse.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 9:56 pm If Chessum is injured they’re going to put Ford on JVP’s shoulders and play them at lock. Genie arse.

Now I feel a fool.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 7:10 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 6:58 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 6:11 pm

To an extent- wanted to see Freeman at 13 though, I like Pollock on bench and intrigued by CCS as a lock for long term.

You take the rough with the smooth…

do you really think-again- that at 6ft 4 and with no club time, as far as i know, CCS has a future at lock?

I’m not sure his height is an issue. He’s incredibly athletic and much better in the lineout than say Martin who is 2 inches taller. Maro is only 1 inch taller. CCS comfortably big enough in terms of weight too.

I think CCS is a hugely promising player but he’s a bit jammed at test level and even at club I’m not sure he’s in their first choice backrow.

Club position is an issue but if we see him at lock, how do we force that issue? Alternative bench lock option was Hill who isn’t a lock either and Coles who I’m not really convinced by. Clark, Batley and Martin are injured..

I kind of like the mindset although appreciate I’m probably in the minority.

mikey beat me to it, but I'd also add that he is still pretty young, and tbh we need an explosive carrying 6 who is good in the lineout, and scrummaging would denude that carrying imo, let alone all the other arguments against.

I'm assuming Coles isnt fit tbh

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 10:10 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 9:56 pm If Chessum is injured they’re going to put Ford on JVP’s shoulders and play them at lock. Genie arse.

Now I feel a fool.

We’re playing draughts and Borthwick is playing pin the tail on the donkey.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 10:29 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 10:10 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 9:56 pm If Chessum is injured they’re going to put Ford on JVP’s shoulders and play them at lock. Genie arse.

Now I feel a fool.

We’re playing draughts and Borthwick is playing pin the tail on the donkey.

Bit harsh on George

Words from the man with the plan(?):

Surely Ballkicking wrote:"The most important thing is the attitude in which we play. The way we approach the game. And that’s the challenge.

“I’m very clear – I want the team to play this week with bravery and speed on the ball. We want them to play big. That’s what I want the team to do. This back-row brings speed and athleticism, the bench gives us speed and athleticism and this back line we’ve got is an exciting one.

“Our aspiration is to win the tournament. That’s always been the way we want to go and that’s not changed. The team’s really clear on what we need to do to put ourselves in that position. Every England supporter would be expecting to be saying that’s what we aim to do. That’s exactly what we aim to do. We want to do it by playing the way that we want to play, by playing fast, by getting the ball to our players with strength and pace and athleticism.”

I mean, it does **sound** good, but this is a coach who learned at the feet of Eddie Jones, the master of mendacity, so we'll see how Saturday actually goes.

Also, FSmith can play 12 apparently. Hopefully that's not news to FSmith as well as to us.

Puja