RugbyRebels

A few bits of commentary hoping Eddie Jones pulls a rabbit out the hat and puts and end to this coaching charade! Just get fucking shot of them for which a loss to Japan is acceptable!

Anyway….

Baxter
LCD
Stuart
Itoje (c)
Martin
CCS
Underhill
Earl
JVP
Smith (F)
Sleightholme
Dingwall
Freeman
Roebuck (IFW if fit)
Steward

AOF
Dan
Erm….Cole I guess
Hill
Pollock
Randall
Smith (M)
Roebuck / Ibitoye

Tom Moore wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2024 3:57 pm

Stom wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2024 9:25 am

Beasties wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2024 9:17 am Willis to do well today and be drafted into the squad and possibly straight into the team v Japan? Has a stormer v Japan leaving all of us scratching our heads at why tf he wasn’t in to start with. He’ll then be the new messiah but not had any sort of test to prove he actually is good at this level. Queue much debate for the next three months due to lack of evidence which we could’ve had by actually picking him for the AIs….

Christ, I’m annoyed.

No chance he's in the XV for Japan. He's not had 3 squads to learn the "defensive positioning and system".

Given the last three matches, I don't think anyone has.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2024 2:18 pm May as well try out this Earl at centre experiment properly.

You know what - that's the most interesting suggestion I've heard so far and pretty much the only thing that could drive my interest in this game. Slade/Lawrence is a categorical failure and it's not like we've got other options, so why not actually give it a proper "Bergamasco at 9" style go?

The game itself feels like a waste of time - like Uruguay in 2015. The games that would make a difference have already been and lost, and there's no benefit to be gained from this one. It's a lose-lose scenario - no size of victory will make up for the past three weeks, anything other than a resounding win is a "failure", and even if we rotate to try something new, and the players brought in do well, it won't mean a huge amount because it's "only Japan".

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:18 am

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2024 2:18 pm May as well try out this Earl at centre experiment properly.

You know what - that's the most interesting suggestion I've heard so far and pretty much the only thing that could drive my interest in this game. Slade/Lawrence is a categorical failure and it's not like we've got other options, so why not actually give it a proper "Bergamasco at 9" style go?

I’m not necessarily saying it’s what I’d do but if you are going go 6-2 and use him as centre cover, it would be good to see how it actually works in practice. If it doesn’t work, we can throw the idea of him covering from the bench in the bin.

Article in the DT suggests (in an 'England are mediocre' theme) that only Marcus and Mitchell would come near a SA 1st XV with Itoje, Underhill and IFW making the 2nd XV.

In the 'players or coaches' debate, I think a more important question is whether France, NZ, Australia, SA and Ireland would pick Pollock for Saturday. It's not just the 'if he's good enough, he's old enough' theme either. IMO, where top teams flourish is when head coaches have the brain and nerve to drop a GOOD player for a better one. T Curry and Underhill, at their best, are excellent international 7s but there is an argument that Pollock's best is already up to theirs. The danger, long-term, is NOT picking him now. Why? Because, 2 years from the RWC, he needs time in the shirt to realise his potential; to have good games and bad; to make mistakes and come back better; but, most important of all, to influence the team as an integral part of an upward spiral.

Conversely, we plough on trying to convince Dombrandt that he is up to it etc.

The point is that we ARE mediocre but we can only not be if we change approach. I'm not sure that Borthwick can, unfortunately.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 8:14 am

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:18 am

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2024 2:18 pm May as well try out this Earl at centre experiment properly.

You know what - that's the most interesting suggestion I've heard so far and pretty much the only thing that could drive my interest in this game. Slade/Lawrence is a categorical failure and it's not like we've got other options, so why not actually give it a proper "Bergamasco at 9" style go?

I’m not necessarily saying it’s what I’d do but if you are going go 6-2 and use him as centre cover, it would be good to see how it actually works in practice. If it doesn’t work, we can throw the idea of him covering from the bench in the bin.

Oh, I wasn't criticising - I was agreeing. This game is futile, but with enough challenge that we could see if it was actually viable. If it is, maybe start making noise about actually converting him, if it does go full-Bergamasco, then at the bare minimum we can get pundits to shut the hells up about it.

Puja

The shovel on shit by Slade to Lawrence when Smith was perfectly placed for the pull back will forever haunt.

Is there anyway we can go to Felix Jones and grovel to him with the promise he has complete control of our attack?

I'd like to see (though I accept there's not a cat in hell's chance)

Baxter
LCD
Stuart
Itoje (c)
Martin
CCS
Underhill
Willis

JVP
Smith (M)
Sleightholme
Dingwall
Freeman
Ibitoye (IFW if fit)
Steward

AOF
Dan
Heyes
Hill
Pollock
Randall
Smith (F)
Roebuck

DT reports T Curry and IFW expected to be fit for Saturday.

Isn't it time for the RFU to lift the ban on overseas-based players?

francoisfou wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:33 am Isn't it time for the RFU to lift the ban on overseas-based players?

I think so. SA have with some success!

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:38 am

francoisfou wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:33 am Isn't it time for the RFU to lift the ban on overseas-based players?

I think so. SA have with some success!

No. Screws over the Prem for the addition of Jack Willis and Joe Marchant. Not worth it.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 8:37 amIn the 'players or coaches' debate, I think a more important question is whether France, NZ, Australia, SA and Ireland would pick Pollock for Saturday. It's not just the 'if he's good enough, he's old enough' theme either. IMO, where top teams flourish is when head coaches have the brain and nerve to drop a GOOD player for a better one. T Curry and Underhill, at their best, are excellent international 7s but there is an argument that Pollock's best is already up to theirs.

Has he even nailed down a spot for Northampton? I appreciate the concern around Underhill and Curry’s fitness/longevity but they are two of our most effective, proven players. I don’t know how much that assessment of Pollock is hyperbole, he does look exciting, but I wouldn’t have thought it was the highest priority change.

I agree with the sentiment that now is the time to drop the dead wood and get some new blood in though. Trying it some of the areas of obvious weakness first would be nice.

I don’t know why the selection of top 14 players goes on. Jack Willis has chosen not to be available for England. That’s all there is to it.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:50 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 8:37 amIn the 'players or coaches' debate, I think a more important question is whether France, NZ, Australia, SA and Ireland would pick Pollock for Saturday. It's not just the 'if he's good enough, he's old enough' theme either. IMO, where top teams flourish is when head coaches have the brain and nerve to drop a GOOD player for a better one. T Curry and Underhill, at their best, are excellent international 7s but there is an argument that Pollock's best is already up to theirs.

Has he even nailed down a spot for Northampton? I appreciate the concern around Underhill and Curry’s fitness/longevity but they are two of our most effective, proven players. I don’t know how much that assessment of Pollock is hyperbole, he does look exciting, but I wouldn’t have thought it was the highest priority change.

I agree with the sentiment that now is the time to drop the dead wood and get some new blood in though. Trying it some of the areas of obvious weakness first would be nice.

I don’t know why the selection of top 14 players goes on. Jack Willis has chosen not to be available for England. That’s all there is to it.

Willis was screwed by his club's demise. Has he ever had a realistic offer to come back? I think there is a case for his being 'exceptional circumstances'. I'd scrap the policy anyway. We are not overflowing with props, for example. The French league is a half-decent school for them, I'd have thought.

Pause for thought https://www.world.rugby/rankings

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:01 am

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:50 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 8:37 amIn the 'players or coaches' debate, I think a more important question is whether France, NZ, Australia, SA and Ireland would pick Pollock for Saturday. It's not just the 'if he's good enough, he's old enough' theme either. IMO, where top teams flourish is when head coaches have the brain and nerve to drop a GOOD player for a better one. T Curry and Underhill, at their best, are excellent international 7s but there is an argument that Pollock's best is already up to theirs.

Has he even nailed down a spot for Northampton? I appreciate the concern around Underhill and Curry’s fitness/longevity but they are two of our most effective, proven players. I don’t know how much that assessment of Pollock is hyperbole, he does look exciting, but I wouldn’t have thought it was the highest priority change.

I agree with the sentiment that now is the time to drop the dead wood and get some new blood in though. Trying it some of the areas of obvious weakness first would be nice.

I don’t know why the selection of top 14 players goes on. Jack Willis has chosen not to be available for England. That’s all there is to it.

Willis was screwed by his club's demise. Has he ever had a realistic offer to come back? I think there is a case for his being 'exceptional circumstances'. I'd scrap the policy anyway. We are not overflowing with props, for example. The French league is a half-decent school for them, I'd have thought.

There's no point in thinking about him is there? He's not available for selection and that's it. Remember he wasn't a guaranteed England starter anyway and wouldn't necessarily be if he was here now. I'm a huge fan, I was a lifelong Wasps fan and watched most of his games for us, loved him, but our problems are much wider than just this one player, quite the opposite, I think we has some ok options at 7.

Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:38 am Pause for thought https://www.world.rugby/rankings

They have left out Wales?

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:01 am

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:50 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 8:37 amIn the 'players or coaches' debate, I think a more important question is whether France, NZ, Australia, SA and Ireland would pick Pollock for Saturday. It's not just the 'if he's good enough, he's old enough' theme either. IMO, where top teams flourish is when head coaches have the brain and nerve to drop a GOOD player for a better one. T Curry and Underhill, at their best, are excellent international 7s but there is an argument that Pollock's best is already up to theirs.

Has he even nailed down a spot for Northampton? I appreciate the concern around Underhill and Curry’s fitness/longevity but they are two of our most effective, proven players. I don’t know how much that assessment of Pollock is hyperbole, he does look exciting, but I wouldn’t have thought it was the highest priority change.

I agree with the sentiment that now is the time to drop the dead wood and get some new blood in though. Trying it some of the areas of obvious weakness first would be nice.

I don’t know why the selection of top 14 players goes on. Jack Willis has chosen not to be available for England. That’s all there is to it.

Willis was screwed by his club's demise. Has he ever had a realistic offer to come back? I think there is a case for his being 'exceptional circumstances'. I'd scrap the policy anyway. We are not overflowing with props, for example. The French league is a half-decent school for them, I'd have thought.

I’m not arguing Willis should want to take a pay cut (a culture cut too, if that’s a phrase) but he’s taken new contracts in France, ruling himself out, and that’s his choice.

He’s thriving. Good on him.

But what about Pollock and the young blood?

I’ve seen lots of calls for Ibitoye, but what about Murley, too? While I didn’t watch the whole of the A game, what I did see showed that Murley is good enough

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:16 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:01 am

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:50 am

Has he even nailed down a spot for Northampton? I appreciate the concern around Underhill and Curry’s fitness/longevity but they are two of our most effective, proven players. I don’t know how much that assessment of Pollock is hyperbole, he does look exciting, but I wouldn’t have thought it was the highest priority change.

I agree with the sentiment that now is the time to drop the dead wood and get some new blood in though. Trying it some of the areas of obvious weakness first would be nice.

I don’t know why the selection of top 14 players goes on. Jack Willis has chosen not to be available for England. That’s all there is to it.

Willis was screwed by his club's demise. Has he ever had a realistic offer to come back? I think there is a case for his being 'exceptional circumstances'. I'd scrap the policy anyway. We are not overflowing with props, for example. The French league is a half-decent school for them, I'd have thought.

I’m not arguing Willis should want to take a pay cut (a culture cut too, if that’s a phrase) but he’s taken new contracts in France, ruling himself out, and that’s his choice.

He’s thriving. Good on him.

But what about Pollock and the young blood?

But, did Willis have realistic offers to come back? Was it a practical (earn a living/family responsibility) decision to not sign a new contract with a French club?

Willis, Willis, Pollock and CCS would all be in the squad if I was picking it. I'd probably have Fisilau, Hill and Pearson ahead of others too.

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:06 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:38 am Pause for thought https://www.world.rugby/rankings

They have left out Wales?

definitely one bit of schadenfreude to be had there

Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:48 pm

p/d wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:06 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:38 am Pause for thought https://www.world.rugby/rankings

They have left out Wales?

definitely one bit of schadenfreude to be had there

Wales closer on points to Georgia in 12th than Italy in 10th and with the Boks coming at the weekend.

I can’t say I know what offers were made. I’d bet my right hand he’d get a prem contract if he wanted to play for England that badly.

We all want the Willises to be playing for England. I feel like that’s completely unanimous already.

How much of the team would you like to see Borthwick overhaul? Should we do what France and Italy have done just get the whole next generic early? Look to 2031? Or is Pollock just so good that he is a special case?

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:38 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 12:16 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:01 am

Willis was screwed by his club's demise. Has he ever had a realistic offer to come back? I think there is a case for his being 'exceptional circumstances'. I'd scrap the policy anyway. We are not overflowing with props, for example. The French league is a half-decent school for them, I'd have thought.

I’m not arguing Willis should want to take a pay cut (a culture cut too, if that’s a phrase) but he’s taken new contracts in France, ruling himself out, and that’s his choice.

He’s thriving. Good on him.

But what about Pollock and the young blood?

But, did Willis have realistic offers to come back? Was it a practical (earn a living/family responsibility) decision to not sign a new contract with a French club?

Willis, Willis, Pollock and CCS would all be in the squad if I was picking it. I'd probably have Fisilau, Hill and Pearson ahead of others too.

Of course he did, but he had better ones from France, and made his bed accordingly. The risk of the Prem being absolutely decimated of our best talent is real; course you can argue that that would create headroom for young players, but then we just become feeder clubs to the Top 14, until they run out of money. Reality is, most of the best have backed their own talent to get into the England set up for their income boost (and career satisfaction), and so the rules are working as it stands.

How many times have you seen Pollock play, and in what context; he is a huge talent for sure, to be clear.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 11:01 am

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:50 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 8:37 amIn the 'players or coaches' debate, I think a more important question is whether France, NZ, Australia, SA and Ireland would pick Pollock for Saturday. It's not just the 'if he's good enough, he's old enough' theme either. IMO, where top teams flourish is when head coaches have the brain and nerve to drop a GOOD player for a better one. T Curry and Underhill, at their best, are excellent international 7s but there is an argument that Pollock's best is already up to theirs.

Has he even nailed down a spot for Northampton? I appreciate the concern around Underhill and Curry’s fitness/longevity but they are two of our most effective, proven players. I don’t know how much that assessment of Pollock is hyperbole, he does look exciting, but I wouldn’t have thought it was the highest priority change.

I agree with the sentiment that now is the time to drop the dead wood and get some new blood in though. Trying it some of the areas of obvious weakness first would be nice.

I don’t know why the selection of top 14 players goes on. Jack Willis has chosen not to be available for England. That’s all there is to it.

Willis was screwed by his club's demise. Has he ever had a realistic offer to come back? I think there is a case for his being 'exceptional circumstances'. I'd scrap the policy anyway. We are not overflowing with props, for example. The French league is a half-decent school for them, I'd have thought.

We've got a nice pipeline of props established the first few products of which are starting to play Prem rugby. Your plan for the continued development of these players is to tell them to go to France and therefore miss training weeks with England and front row camps?

Not to mention the ah well the Prem is dead let's just let top level rugby in the country die. That mentality hasn't hurt Wales has it ...