RugbyRebels

Is the Argie front row up to its usual standard? If so, all selection debate starts there. Are we going to lose Genge, George and Stuart to the red shirt shuffle?

I'd say we definitely lose all 3.

Baxter, LCD and Heyes you'd say are the established next in line, with Rodd/Obano, Dan/Langdon, AOF/Cole in the mix too. I'd say that gives us the option of picking some slightly younger, more dynamic guys in there without being too light on experience. I wouldn't think starting LCD and Cole together would be necessary, for instance.

Not sure where Arg are in the front 5 to be honest, but it always feels like a different prospect to play them away in Arg.

The 2 Arg test are bookended by an England XV v France XV (whatever that means) and a USA test, so there is a game beforehand for some youngsters to put their hands up for the tests, then I imagine all the rest will get a go vs the Yanks.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 10:27 am I'd say we definitely lose all 3.

Baxter, LCD and Heyes you'd say are the established next in line, with Rodd/Obano, Dan/Langdon, AOF/Cole. I'd say that gives us the option of picking some slightly younger, more dynamic guys in there without being too light on experience.

Not sure where Arg are in the front 5 to be honest, but it always feels like a different prospect to play them away in Arg.

The 2 Arg test are bookended by an England XV v France XV (whatever that means) and a USA test, so there is a game beforehand for some youngsters to put their hands up for the tests, then I imagine all the rest will get a go vs the Yanks.

Fasogbon ahead of Cole, you'd expect?

I was wondering the other day how the England players are handling the prospect of a flight to the USA right now. I wouldn't be surprised if a couple of names dropped out for personal reasons before that last game, simple because they didn't want to take any risks with arbitrary security detention.

Puja

You'd hope so, though it wouldn't totally shock me to see Cole in there. I was really just trying to remember SB's most recent pecking order.

I hadn't really considered the issues with going to the US. You imagine with such a big organisation that all this stuff is fairly routine, but that's porbably naive.

It's a pretty bleak prospect however you structure it. Underestimating the Pumas is foolish and I can see two losses with our pack unpacked like that

No idea how to fix it mind - we simply don't have the depth in the tight five right now, but it will be interesting

FKAS wrote: ↑Tue Apr 29, 2025 3:06 pm

Danno wrote: ↑Tue Apr 29, 2025 2:18 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue Apr 29, 2025 2:04 pm

He only touched the ball five time, the lazy fecker.

Should have been chasing kicks

Which was the one where Farrell screamed at him to chase the kicks?

He scored five tries against Chile in a rout but against Wales and Argentina in the third place playoff didn't impress. Now I'd be willing to excuse a lot given he had the misfortune to have Farrell at 10 but hugging the touchline and not chasing kicks didn't really impress me a great deal at the time.

He's not set the world alight at Racing, hopefully he kicks on at Bath but I don't see the need to rush him back into the squad.

Between the two games he received a grand total of one pass. In 128 minutes we gave one of the most exciting attacking talents the ball once.

Picking Arundell and just getting hi to chase kicks is the very definition of madness. That's not to say he couldn't have done it better. But then our entire game plan was utter gash. Rancid, STI ridden gash that smells like it hasn't been washed in a year.

That said I think he's injured anyway.

Danno wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 10:39 am It's a pretty bleak prospect however you structure it. Underestimating the Pumas is foolish and I can see two losses with our pack unpacked like that

No idea how to fix it mind - we simply don't have the depth in the tight five right now, but it will be interesting

It’s lock that I’m more concerned about than the front row I think.

I’d like to give Coles another go. The Leicester 3 will all be unavailable. Without resorting to Ewels or Isekwe who are we looking at?

Not sure about continuing the CCS/Hill experiments, but if we wanted to go for a super mobile game and fit more backrows in that could be fun.

jngf wrote: ↑Tue Apr 29, 2025 7:30 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Apr 28, 2025 7:14 pm

jngf wrote: ↑Mon Apr 28, 2025 6:47 pm

I have to say I really don’t think this was the case - yes he was good in the lineout and could use his pace to make some great cover tackles but I would have had Haskell or Robshaw or Moody or Wordsley in the 6 shirt every time over Croft, simply on grounds of pure physicality and power.Croft was used by us like Pierre Spies was used by the boks - a round peg in a square hole.

I will generally give you a lot of latitude on your opinions - I may not agree with you oftimes, but it's interesting to hear a different perspective. On this occasion however, you are just factually incorrect. The situation was not as you remember it.

Puja

Let’s frame it another way, if you’re an oppo test team who you going to fear more at 6 Wordsley, Haskell, Moody, Robshaw or Croft? My memory serves that Croft wasn’t used much in his second Lions call up and Robshaw was unlucky to lose out to him. I posit viewing Croft as any sort of physical,dominant enforcer type forward is your rose tinted specs playing tricks on you rather my limited memory

Croft. Those other four, whilst conforming to your narrow view of what a blindside flanker/6 has to be, were all decent internationals but without anything special in their armoury (unless madness in Moody's case is a usp); imo they wouldn't get anywhere near a good NZ or SA or France team on skill levels alone. Croft had good basics, but two usp's in his pace and his world class lineout.

Croft got three caps on his first Lions tour, and 2 on his second (iirc after a bad neck injury nearly ended his career?); he started the first test v Oz in 2013 and had an excellent game in a win, but was mysteriously dropped to the bench by Gatland (for the limited lydiate- who was selected ahead of Robshaw etc ) and we went on to lose that game (I was there, so disappointing!). Not sure why he didn't make the final test squad tbh; I met him and a few of the others in Melbourne and they were top lads.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 10:05 am Is the Argie front row up to its usual standard? If so, all selection debate starts there. Are we going to lose Genge, George and Stuart to the red shirt shuffle?

The Argentinian scrum isnt the potent weapon that it once was. However, it will still be a challenge for a 2nd string front 5.

Think we'll go with Baxter, Rodd, Obano, LCD, Langdon, Dan, Heyes, AOF and Fasogbon in the front row.

I'm sure Ewels will go along with Coles. Think SB will take Isiekwe and one out of Clark or Lockett. Pity Batley isnt playing as he would surely be in the mix.

Wouldnt surprise me if Hill and CCS are earmarked as 2nd row cover.

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 9:30 am Right, I'd say that's the Tom Croft debate completed for now. Delightful throwback to the 2010s though that was, I'm making a modding decision that we're stopping using this thread for it and that, should people wish to continue, they can open a new thread.

Mod

sorry, missed the memo. Regret getting dragged into such nonsense tbh

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:05 am

Danno wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 10:39 am It's a pretty bleak prospect however you structure it. Underestimating the Pumas is foolish and I can see two losses with our pack unpacked like that

No idea how to fix it mind - we simply don't have the depth in the tight five right now, but it will be interesting

It’s lock that I’m more concerned about than the front row I think.

I’d like to give Coles another go. The Leicester 3 will all be unavailable. Without resorting to Ewels or Isekwe who are we looking at?

Not sure about continuing the CCS/Hill experiments, but if we wanted to go for a super mobile game and fit more backrows in that could be fun.

I think we've got some good bean pole options in Coles, Arthur Clark and Joe Owen. Not sure they'll all go as we might want some more experience for the Pumas. We will need to find a bit more size, maybe Lockett can add that. Ewels might get pushed into that role for the short term. Bamber and Batley if he recovers in time maybe looked at, Tizard has been among A sides but he seems to have regressed.

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:21 am

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:05 am

Danno wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 10:39 am It's a pretty bleak prospect however you structure it. Underestimating the Pumas is foolish and I can see two losses with our pack unpacked like that

No idea how to fix it mind - we simply don't have the depth in the tight five right now, but it will be interesting

It’s lock that I’m more concerned about than the front row I think.

I’d like to give Coles another go. The Leicester 3 will all be unavailable. Without resorting to Ewels or Isekwe who are we looking at?

Not sure about continuing the CCS/Hill experiments, but if we wanted to go for a super mobile game and fit more backrows in that could be fun.

I think we've got some good bean pole options in Coles, Arthur Clark and Joe Owen. Not sure they'll all go as we might want some more experience for the Pumas. We will need to find a bit more size, maybe Lockett can add that. Ewels might get pushed into that role for the short term. Bamber and Batley if he recovers in time maybe looked at, Tizard has been among A sides but he seems to have regressed.

Yeah tight head lock needs a bit of a turbo charge. I'm a bit Clark confused, but Arthur is a bit less bean poley than Coles?

Maybe we're talking more about playing style/physicality, but it seems strnage to me Coles gets referred to as if he's such a lightweight? Looks like quite a big bloke to me. Is Locket considerably heftier?

Shame about Tizard yes. Weird really that he stalled so much going to Saracens. I thought playing alongside Itoje would be great for him and he'd be our new Launchbury by now.

Bamber seems to be getting a fair bit of gametime for Sale now, but it's hard to tell if he's just a big lump or more than that.

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:27 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:21 am

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:05 am

It’s lock that I’m more concerned about than the front row I think.

I’d like to give Coles another go. The Leicester 3 will all be unavailable. Without resorting to Ewels or Isekwe who are we looking at?

Not sure about continuing the CCS/Hill experiments, but if we wanted to go for a super mobile game and fit more backrows in that could be fun.

I think we've got some good bean pole options in Coles, Arthur Clark and Joe Owen. Not sure they'll all go as we might want some more experience for the Pumas. We will need to find a bit more size, maybe Lockett can add that. Ewels might get pushed into that role for the short term. Bamber and Batley if he recovers in time maybe looked at, Tizard has been among A sides but he seems to have regressed.

Yeah tight head lock needs a bit of a turbo charge. I'm a bit Clark confused, but Arthur is a bit less bean poley than Coles?

Potentially. Where's a Glaws fan when you need one.

If Arthur Clark could offer the tighthead lock role then he and Coles could work as a lock combination. They are both pretty big and mobile, decent at lineout time. Willis in at 8 behind them and Baxter/LCD/Heyes in front we should be alright.

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:40 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:27 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:21 am

I think we've got some good bean pole options in Coles, Arthur Clark and Joe Owen. Not sure they'll all go as we might want some more experience for the Pumas. We will need to find a bit more size, maybe Lockett can add that. Ewels might get pushed into that role for the short term. Bamber and Batley if he recovers in time maybe looked at, Tizard has been among A sides but he seems to have regressed.

Yeah tight head lock needs a bit of a turbo charge. I'm a bit Clark confused, but Arthur is a bit less bean poley than Coles?

Potentially. Where's a Glaws fan when you need one.

If Arthur Clark could offer the tighthead lock role then he and Coles could work as a lock combination. They are both pretty big and mobile, decent at lineout time. Willis in at 8 behind them and Baxter/LCD/Heyes in front we should be alright.

lol I’m not as good a glaws fan as I should be, despite being born there!! Arthur looks pretty good tho. Coles has a great engine, good hands good lineout but still needs a few more kg ideally

Looks like Furbank will be out for the summer- still experiencing problems with his arm since the break.

Leaves us with some interesting full back options.

Daly- picked to play there against Italy before moving to centre quite earlier. Probably has the most rounded game but might be be used on the left wing as he was vs Italy?

MSmith- argies likely to be very stronga aerially so possibly rules this out? Form is average at best and picked up an injury at the weekend.

Steward- have we moved on from him?

Carpenter- possibly the form pick. Not really a playmaking full back though.

Wouldn’t be adverse to seeing Daly on the wing with Carpenter at full back- particularly if we have Roebuck right wing for some familiarity.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:57 am Looks like Furbank will be out for the summer- still experiencing problems with his arm since the break.

Leaves us with some interesting full back options.

Daly- picked to play there against Italy before moving to centre quite earlier. Probably has the most rounded game but might be be used on the left wing as he was vs Italy?

MSmith- argies likely to be very stronga aerially so possibly rules this out? Form is average at best and picked up an injury at the weekend.

Steward- have we moved on from him?

Carpenter- possibly the form pick. Not really a playmaking full back though.

Wouldn’t be adverse to seeing Daly on the wing with Carpenter at full back- particularly if we have Roebuck right wing for some familiarity.

I'd say Steward's got to be close to the form pick as he has really kicked on since the 6N. The question is whether we can go to him when he's such a different style - he's changing the whole structure of the backline because his attacking game is entering the line as a third centre, rather than a second fly-half. The same would be true of Carpenter as well, tbh.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 1:12 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:57 am Looks like Furbank will be out for the summer- still experiencing problems with his arm since the break.

Leaves us with some interesting full back options.

Daly- picked to play there against Italy before moving to centre quite earlier. Probably has the most rounded game but might be be used on the left wing as he was vs Italy?

MSmith- argies likely to be very stronga aerially so possibly rules this out? Form is average at best and picked up an injury at the weekend.

Steward- have we moved on from him?

Carpenter- possibly the form pick. Not really a playmaking full back though.

Wouldn’t be adverse to seeing Daly on the wing with Carpenter at full back- particularly if we have Roebuck right wing for some familiarity.

I'd say Steward's got to be close to the form pick as he has really kicked on since the 6N. The question is whether we can go to him when he's such a different style - he's changing the whole structure of the backline because his attacking game is entering the line as a third centre, rather than a second fly-half. The same would be true of Carpenter as well, tbh.

Puja

Carpenter is a good fullback but he's the answer to none of the questions around what England could do with adding to the backline.

England are going to be lacking physical, direct carriers with Lawrence injured and Freeman likely with the Lions. Will Carpenter help with that? Nope.

England have lacked range with their kicking game, none of the three flyhalfs really offer that. France and Ireland use secondary kickers for range in their backline and Simply Ballkick went that way with Daly in the 6N. Does Carpenter help with that? Nope.

Is Carpenter going to offer a playmaking option from 15? Nope.

Now Steward as Puja says in form and could help with the first two but it would mean adjusting the backline. Now we're we to go Seb Atkinson and Dingwall as the centres we'd have a distributing midfield, Atkinson could carry a bit and then Steward attacking as that third centre with Roebuck piling in off his wing. Add some pace onto the other wing and that could work. That or we continue with Marcus at 15 and then look to add carriers at centre and wing.

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:27 amYeah tight head lock needs a bit of a turbo charge. I'm a bit Clark confused, but Arthur is a bit less bean poley than Coles?

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:37 am Maybe we're talking more about playing style/physicality, but it seems strnage to me Coles gets referred to as if he's such a lightweight? Looks like quite a big bloke to me. Is Locket considerably heftier?

Coles is definitely not small by anyone's concept, but by the stats (which are always to be taken with a pinch of salt or 5) he's 18st5 and 6ft 9. Chessum and Clark are two inches shorter and 4lb/6lb heavier respectively, which does give them a lower centre of gravity. Lockett's actually significantly lighter than all three, allegedly. And we've got no-one else in the Martin camp of being 6'6 and 19st7.

Weights and heights are clearly not the be-all-and-end-all, but you're not wrong that Coles isn't drastically undersized.

Puja

I’d be surprised if LCD did go on the Lions tour. He’s playing very well and has the experience as a previous tourist.

Yep, don’t mind the look of something like this.

9. JVP
10. Ford/Smith
11. Daly/Murley
12. Dingwall/Atkinson
13. Beard? Maybe Dingwall, but would still like some more punch
14. Roebuck
15. Steward

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:13 am

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 9:30 am Right, I'd say that's the Tom Croft debate completed for now. Delightful throwback to the 2010s though that was, I'm making a modding decision that we're stopping using this thread for it and that, should people wish to continue, they can open a new thread.

Mod

sorry, missed the memo. Regret getting dragged into such nonsense tbh

Sweet jeebus thank you

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:05 am

Danno wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 10:39 am It's a pretty bleak prospect however you structure it. Underestimating the Pumas is foolish and I can see two losses with our pack unpacked like that

No idea how to fix it mind - we simply don't have the depth in the tight five right now, but it will be interesting

It’s lock that I’m more concerned about than the front row I think.

I’d like to give Coles another go. The Leicester 3 will all be unavailable. Without resorting to Ewels or Isekwe who are we looking at?

Not sure about continuing the CCS/Hill experiments, but if we wanted to go for a super mobile game and fit more backrows in that could be fun.

It's a rotten position to be in (no pun intended) I'd much rather we rolled the dice by playing, say, Coles, Clark and a.n.other instead of Mr Early Red Card and Mr Maybe I'll Play Better This Time

Front row might be ok but is going to be quite raw as a unit

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 1:46 pm Yep, don’t mind the look of something like this.

9. JVP
10. Ford/Smith
11. Daly/Murley
12. Dingwall/Atkinson
13. Beard? Maybe Dingwall, but would still like some more punch
14. Roebuck
15. Steward

Last time England toured Argentina, Ford was outstanding. The main reason - Faz was not on tour to cramp his style. I actually hope we don't see him go this time since he really belongs on the Lions tour.

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 1:42 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:27 amYeah tight head lock needs a bit of a turbo charge. I'm a bit Clark confused, but Arthur is a bit less bean poley than Coles?

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 11:37 am Maybe we're talking more about playing style/physicality, but it seems strnage to me Coles gets referred to as if he's such a lightweight? Looks like quite a big bloke to me. Is Locket considerably heftier?

Coles is definitely not small by anyone's concept, but by the stats (which are always to be taken with a pinch of salt or 5) he's 18st5 and 6ft 9. Chessum and Clark are two inches shorter and 4lb/6lb heavier respectively, which does give them a lower centre of gravity. Lockett's actually significantly lighter than all three, allegedly. And we've got no-one else in the Martin camp of being 6'6 and 19st7.

Weights and heights are clearly not the be-all-and-end-all, but you're not wrong that Coles isn't drastically undersized.

Puja

He's not being called light, but bean poley and isn't a tight head lock, which was the key point.