England v France Saturday Feb 8th 16h45

[Puja]

Murley officially out of the France game and replaced in the squad by Lozowski, whom I'm sure will have a lovely time holding tackle bags.

Probably a stroke of luck - would've been awfully harsh and demoralising if he had been dropped and potentially ruined a very promising player, but I also don't want to be selecting him for France just on the basis of not being cruel. This way, he gets a chance to reset and come back later, hopefully having worked on his positioning under swirling garryowens.

Choice now between Sleightholme and Roebuck (please not Steward on the wing). I'm torn - Roebuck is great in the air and a weapon for retrieving opposition kicks, as well as being a top finisher and a steppy bastard, however Sleightholme is faster and stronger in the contact and gives off more IFW vibes in his general play, but is weaker in defence.

If we want to contest every kick off like we did at the weekend, kind of need Steward (don't think I've ever seen us win that many kicks offs, Marcus and Freddie were dialled in).

This is a key point, which I meant to reply to earlier but didn't. For all my castigating of Steward's counterattacking and long-standing belief in MSmith4FullBack, he was an absolute weapon from kick-offs. Can Freeman do the same if we drop Steward? If not, is it (gulp) even worthwhile having Steward on the wing if it means we can use him that way - we're willing to propose compromising our back row to bolster the lineout; is the same not potentially true about another setpiece?

Puja

Puja, is replacing Earl with a genuine no.8 actually compromising it? I’d say its been compromised well already

Ah - wasn't thinking of TWillis, but about putting Chessum in at 6 which a lot of pundits/fans want. I'd be in favour of TWillis over Earl just on general principles, let alone the additional 3 inches of lineout jumper.

Puja

[Banquo]

Murley officially out of the France game and replaced in the squad by Lozowski, whom I'm sure will have a lovely time holding tackle bags.

Probably a stroke of luck - would've been awfully harsh and demoralising if he had been dropped and potentially ruined a very promising player, but I also don't want to be selecting him for France just on the basis of not being cruel. This way, he gets a chance to reset and come back later, hopefully having worked on his positioning under swirling garryowens.

Choice now between Sleightholme and Roebuck (please not Steward on the wing). I'm torn - Roebuck is great in the air and a weapon for retrieving opposition kicks, as well as being a top finisher and a steppy bastard, however Sleightholme is faster and stronger in the contact and gives off more IFW vibes in his general play, but is weaker in defence.



This is a key point, which I meant to reply to earlier but didn't. For all my castigating of Steward's counterattacking and long-standing belief in MSmith4FullBack, he was an absolute weapon from kick-offs. Can Freeman do the same if we drop Steward? If not, is it (gulp) even worthwhile having Steward on the wing if it means we can use him that way - we're willing to propose compromising our back row to bolster the lineout; is the same not potentially true about another setpiece?

Puja

Puja, is replacing Earl with a genuine no.8 actually compromising it? I’d say its been compromised well already

Ah - wasn't thinking of TWillis, but about putting Chessum in at 6 which a lot of pundits/fans want. I'd be in favour of TWillis over Earl just on general principles, let alone the additional 3 inches of lineout jumper.

Puja

Yes, tbh I did also wonder why you thought the only option to balance the back row/lineout debate was to stick a lock at 6. Hill, CCS are in the squad, as well as Willis T.

The height reference is a tad disingenuous too

[FKAS]

Check the Bristol v Sarries thread. Maybe someone in there knows.

Nothing in there other than some idiot banging on ad nauseam about how good some chap called RICH LANE!!! is.

Need world rugby to lift his ban first and can't see the other nations agreeing to that.

[Oakboy]

The team announcement is late.

[Mikey Brown]

Are you referencing an (expected) announcement or just that is was done quite early last week?

[jngf]

The team announcement is late.

Why on earth do Borthwick and Co see any merit in anything other than delaying it as long as possible? ( Is RFU directing him to do this? ) BTW hope Maro’s had some CPD on honing his public speaking in advance of next post match press apolo…conference

[Puja]

The team announcement is late.

Why on earth do Borthwick and Co see any merit in anything other than delaying it as long as possible? ( Is RFU directing him to do this? ) BTW hope Maro’s had some CPD on honing his public speaking in advance of next post match press apolo…conference

I wonder if there's an element of scooping press leaks?

Puja

[Oakboy]

Are you referencing an (expected) announcement or just that is was done quite early last week?

The latter.

[Oakboy]

Murley out, due to injury and Lozowski in. I presume this means Sleightholme is fit (or Beard is covering wing).





{Mod} ETA - you have to deadname Twitter in the link and replace x. co m with twitter. co m , otherwise it won't show up on here. The tech behind RugbyRebels apparently joining me in refusing to ever call it "x" {/Mod}

I'd have thought Ibitoye made more sense. Is he injured?

[p/d]

Murley out they say. Due to an injury they say

[FKAS]

Murley out, due to injury and Lozowski in. I presume this means Sleightholme is fit (or Beard is covering wing).





{Mod} ETA - you have to deadname Twitter in the link and replace x. co m with twitter. co m , otherwise it won't show up on here. The tech behind RugbyRebels apparently joining me in refusing to ever call it "x" {/Mod}

I'd have thought Ibitoye made more sense. Is he injured?

I think so. OHC would be a fairly ideal call up seeing as he's back to his best and is now good at the kick chase thing as well as the scoring tries thing.

[Mikey Brown]

Does that include the kick catch?

[Captainhaircut]

Mail reckon Marcus full back, Fin 10.

Unclear who would play wing. Little bit of insider info I have is that Murley was going to play before his injury (apparently he’s out for 4 weeks).

[Puja]

Mail reckon Marcus full back, Fin 10.

Unclear who would play wing. Little bit of insider info I have is that Murley was going to play before his injury (apparently he’s out for 4 weeks).

It is very much a "horses-for-courses" style selection that's typical of Some Boldcalls - not necessarily a repudiation of MSmith at 10, but moving things around to the needs of a particular game. Hopefully this course doesn't require Steward to wear 14 though - Murley playing being the plan doesn't suggest that though.

Puja

[Captainhaircut]

Mail reckon Marcus full back, Fin 10.

Unclear who would play wing. Little bit of insider info I have is that Murley was going to play before his injury (apparently he’s out for 4 weeks).

It is very much a "horses-for-courses" style selection that's typical of Some Boldcalls - not necessarily a repudiation of MSmith at 10, but moving things around to the needs of a particular game. Hopefully this course doesn't require Steward to wear 14 though - Murley playing being the plan doesn't suggest that though.

Puja

I just said that to the person who told me about Murley. If the initial plan was for Murley to start, that would suggest Steward wasn’t playing (the Marcus to full back piece is too big a change for it be brought on by Murley injury).

Might still mean Steward starts but hoping we to Roebuck. Can’t see him starting Sleightholme when he hasn’t played for weeks. Steward or Roebuck would mean Freeman left wing though where he sees even less of the ball that on the right.

[Puja]

Mail reckon Marcus full back, Fin 10.

Unclear who would play wing. Little bit of insider info I have is that Murley was going to play before his injury (apparently he’s out for 4 weeks).

It is very much a "horses-for-courses" style selection that's typical of Some Boldcalls - not necessarily a repudiation of MSmith at 10, but moving things around to the needs of a particular game. Hopefully this course doesn't require Steward to wear 14 though - Murley playing being the plan doesn't suggest that though.

Puja

I just said that to the person who told me about Murley. If the initial plan was for Murley to start, that would suggest Steward wasn’t playing (the Marcus to full back piece is too big a change for it be brought on by Murley injury).

Might still mean Steward starts but hoping we to Roebuck. Can’t see him starting Sleightholme when he hasn’t played for weeks. Steward or Roebuck would mean Freeman left wing though where he sees even less of the ball that on the right.

I had it in my head that Roebuck has played 11, but a quick look on all.rugby tells me I'm spectacularly wrong. Hadn't considered that as a possible problem, although Freeman's done all right on the left wing for England while playing with IFW.

Puja

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah, can’t say I’d noticed that trend with Freeman.

Murley apparently got 10+ touches at the weekend, if that means anything. Not that I would have guessed he got close to that.

[Banquo]

Mail reckon Marcus full back, Fin 10.

Unclear who would play wing. Little bit of insider info I have is that Murley was going to play before his injury (apparently he’s out for 4 weeks).

It is very much a "horses-for-courses" style selection that's typical of Some Boldcalls - not necessarily a repudiation of MSmith at 10, but moving things around to the needs of a particular game. Hopefully this course doesn't require Steward to wear 14 though - Murley playing being the plan doesn't suggest that though.

Puja

I just said that to the person who told me about Murley. If the initial plan was for Murley to start, that would suggest Steward wasn’t playing (the Marcus to full back piece is too big a change for it be brought on by Murley injury).

Might still mean Steward starts but hoping we to Roebuck. Can’t see him starting Sleightholme when he hasn’t played for weeks. Steward or Roebuck would mean Freeman left wing though where he sees even less of the ball that on the right.

Bizarre that a left wing should see less ball really.

[FKAS]

It is very much a "horses-for-courses" style selection that's typical of Some Boldcalls - not necessarily a repudiation of MSmith at 10, but moving things around to the needs of a particular game. Hopefully this course doesn't require Steward to wear 14 though - Murley playing being the plan doesn't suggest that though.

Puja

I just said that to the person who told me about Murley. If the initial plan was for Murley to start, that would suggest Steward wasn’t playing (the Marcus to full back piece is too big a change for it be brought on by Murley injury).

Might still mean Steward starts but hoping we to Roebuck. Can’t see him starting Sleightholme when he hasn’t played for weeks. Steward or Roebuck would mean Freeman left wing though where he sees even less of the ball that on the right.

Bizarre that a left wing should see less ball really.

At amateur level you'd normally put your best winger on the left wing. Everyone's happier to pass off their right hand so they're more likely to get the ball.

[Mikey Brown]

Maybe that left-handed freak Slade is doing a Faz and unable to pass the other way.

[Banquo]

I just said that to the person who told me about Murley. If the initial plan was for Murley to start, that would suggest Steward wasn’t playing (the Marcus to full back piece is too big a change for it be brought on by Murley injury).

Might still mean Steward starts but hoping we to Roebuck. Can’t see him starting Sleightholme when he hasn’t played for weeks. Steward or Roebuck would mean Freeman left wing though where he sees even less of the ball that on the right.

Bizarre that a left wing should see less ball really.

At amateur level you'd normally put your best winger on the left wing. Everyone's happier to pass off their right hand so they're more likely to get the ball.

Indeed. Be interesting to see whether try scoring stats bear this out at the top level.
Not so long ago you’d have the quicker guy on the left, and a bigger unit on the right. But now wingers have to do fancy dan stuff like kicking

[Mellsblue]

Bizarre that a left wing should see less ball really.

At amateur level you'd normally put your best winger on the left wing. Everyone's happier to pass off their right hand so they're more likely to get the ball.

Indeed. Be interesting to see whether try scoring stats bear this out at the top level.
Not so long ago you’d have the quicker guy on the left, and a bigger unit on the right. But now wingers have to do fancy dan stuff like kicking

I miss Dan Luger as well.

[Spiffy]

I just said that to the person who told me about Murley. If the initial plan was for Murley to start, that would suggest Steward wasn’t playing (the Marcus to full back piece is too big a change for it be brought on by Murley injury).

Might still mean Steward starts but hoping we to Roebuck. Can’t see him starting Sleightholme when he hasn’t played for weeks. Steward or Roebuck would mean Freeman left wing though where he sees even less of the ball that on the right.

Bizarre that a left wing should see less ball really.

At amateur level you'd normally put your best winger on the left wing. Everyone's happier to pass off their right hand so they're more likely to get the ball.

There has been quite a bit of chat on the board over the past few years on international level players being unable to pass well off one of their hands. Since most are right handed, this usually means that those in question are less adept when passing from left to right. I am not sure I buy it. Passing a rugby ball to either side accurately is not rocket science, especially in the era of professional rugby, when players have all the time in then world to work at it, since that is their job. It's hard to believe that some (many?) are not equally competent on both sides after having delivered thousands of passes. It should be practically automatic, grooved and second nature. Yes - passers can be put under pressure by defences but that is a separate issue.
That said I still find it amazing to see the overall poor standard of passing on BOTH sides by professional players.
How often do you see this - a team in possession kicks the ball high and wide. A defender (usually a wing or FB, sometimes a covering FH) takes the ball near the touchline, decides to pass infield to a team mate for a better kicking angle and fires it straight at his head (sometimes above head height, requiring a jump from the receiver ; and sometimes at his knees). All of this with no opposition within 20 metres and under no pressure. You will see at least a couple of examples of this sloppy stuff in every game.

[fivepointer]

From The Guardian -

England are poised to select both Fin Smith and Marcus Smith in the same starting team to face France in the Six Nations this weekend.

The young Northampton fly-half is in line to make his first start in the No 10 jersey with his Harlequin namesake expected to be redeployed at full-back against France at Allianz Stadium on Saturday.

[Mellsblue]

Times reporting the same and a back row of T Curry, Earl and Willis with Chessum to replace Curry if he hasn’t recovered sufficiently.