**OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

All things Rugby
User avatar
toweliechaos
Posts: 1642
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:20 pm
Location: God's own county

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by toweliechaos »

I don't understand the value of that lineup in a dead rubber.

Surely Vunipola - George - Webber - Kruis - Launch - Haskell - Wood - Easter - Care - Ford/Slade - JJ/Slade - JJ/Slade - Nowell - Watson - Goode

to get all the players in the squad some exposure (otherwise, why bother taking?) and to try out some variables e.g. Wood at 7 to see if he's less shit there.

What do we gain with Launch and Praline? Farrell? Robshaw? I mean who is looking at Robshaw and thinking what this man needs is a few more pointless games?
Leicester Mafia
Posts: 1251
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:29 pm

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Leicester Mafia »

I'm actually looking forward to the review in a way, there's been so many rumours it will be good to finally get the truth about what's happened in camp. And we should hopefully get rid of those holding the team back and make some positive steps forward
User avatar
armchairfan
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by armchairfan »

Leicester Mafia wrote:Oh and Jamie George must be feeling pretty aggrieved right now, surely he was worth a start?
:frown: Did he run over Bombers ( apt nickname really when you think about it ) dog or something? What does the guy have to do to get a start!

Re: Ford, Farrell iirc didn't they play together in that combination at U20's? .. hell they've tried every other bloody flavour.

Perhaps they should have just thrown everyones name in a hat and drawn them out 1-23 at least it might have been fun to watch.
Last edited by armchairfan on Tue Oct 06, 2015 12:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
armchairfan
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by armchairfan »

toweliechaos wrote:I don't understand the value of that lineup in a dead rubber.

Surely Vunipola - George - Webber - Kruis - Launch - Haskell - Wood - Easter - Care - Ford/Slade - JJ/Slade - JJ/Slade - Nowell - Watson - Goode

to get all the players in the squad some exposure (otherwise, why bother taking?) and to try out some variables e.g. Wood at 7 to see if he's less shit there.

What do we gain with Launch and Praline? Farrell? Robshaw? I mean who is looking at Robshaw and thinking what this man needs is a few more pointless games?
Perhaps its his retirement game? :twisted:
bonji
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:22 pm

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by bonji »

armchairfan wrote:Re: Ford, Farrell iirc didn't they play together in that combination at U20's? .. hell they've tried every other bloody flavour.
They played together in that combination against Samoa last Autumn. Mind you that was with Barritt at 13.
User avatar
Margin_Walker
Posts: 12935
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Margin_Walker »

Will be an odd atmosphere in the ground for this one, glad I didn't get hold of tickets for it. Thought there would be a little more turnover in the pack for this one. Got a feeling Nowell is going to work out some frustration on the Uruguayans.

On a side note, as a fan of the the team playing Leicester the following week, I'm pleasently surprised that Cole and Youngs are having to plough through another game, thus making an early return for the first game of the season even less likely.
User avatar
toweliechaos
Posts: 1642
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:20 pm
Location: God's own county

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by toweliechaos »

On another positive hope, just listened to Andy Fuckwit pretending that Stuart gets to do all the picking (obviously without any coercion) and he does end the segment with: "...it's been an absolute privilege to work with him..." (referring to Bomber).

Could it be Daddy Faz is shortly to be the past and no longer the stinking present or depressing future?
User avatar
Raggs
Posts: 18569
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Raggs »

Quite irritating to have foriegners stating we need to go back to the forwards only game, when they seemingly have no clue about English rugby or the players available. We do not have the players to build a pack that could dominate most the other top nations to the point that it's winning most the games.
User avatar
covrich
Posts: 2133
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Middle England

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by covrich »

fudge me I am glad Slade gets a run out even though its a dead rubber against what will probably be a spent Uraguay..

But I would have started George and Brookes..
User avatar
Woddy
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Woddy »

Leicester Mafia wrote:I'm actually looking forward to the review in a way, there's been so many rumours it will be good to finally get the truth about what's happened in camp. And we should hopefully get rid of those holding the team back and make some positive steps forward
Don't expect that any time soon.
User avatar
geordie_6
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by geordie_6 »

Shame that we couldn't give Brookes and George a runout, given that Cole has been poor at Tighthead and George has more than earned a go at hooker.
User avatar
Glaston
Posts: 3150
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Glaston »

For comedic affect what are the odds on Uruguay scoring the first try?
User avatar
Keith
Posts: 5646
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:55 pm
Location: God's own country

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Keith »

toweliechaos wrote:On another positive hope, just listened to Andy Fuckwit pretending that Stuart gets to do all the picking (obviously without any coercion) and he does end the segment with: "...it's been an absolute privilege to work with him..." (referring to Bomber).

Could it be Daddy Faz is shortly to be the past and no longer the stinking present or depressing future?
Lancaster is off, Faz is staying? x(
User avatar
Keith
Posts: 5646
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:55 pm
Location: God's own country

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Keith »

Glaston wrote:For comedic affect what are the odds on Uruguay scoring the first try?
After 13 seconds... it's San Marino all over again!
piquant
Posts: 9122
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by piquant »

Woddy wrote:
Leicester Mafia wrote:I'm actually looking forward to the review in a way, there's been so many rumours it will be good to finally get the truth about what's happened in camp. And we should hopefully get rid of those holding the team back and make some positive steps forward
Don't expect that any time soon.
We were the best team in training?
User avatar
theo
Posts: 13023
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by theo »

geordie_6 wrote:Shame that we couldn't give Brookes and George a runout, given that Cole has been poor at Tighthead and George has more than earned a go at hooker.
Seems odd to me to not put the next generation out there for this game.

Why not try Burgess at 6. Or would that be too much of an admission that they f**ked up.
User avatar
geordie_6
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by geordie_6 »

theo wrote:
geordie_6 wrote:Shame that we couldn't give Brookes and George a runout, given that Cole has been poor at Tighthead and George has more than earned a go at hooker.
Seems odd to me to not put the next generation out there for this game.

Why not try Burgess at 6. Or would that be too much of an admission that they f**k up.
Has Burgess been suspended following his citing?
User avatar
Keith
Posts: 5646
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:55 pm
Location: God's own country

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Keith »

No. He got a warning.
User avatar
geordie_6
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by geordie_6 »

Keith wrote:No. He got a warning.
Ah. In that case then possibly, they didn't want to stick him there after being adamant he was a centre.
User avatar
Wendigo7
Posts: 12358
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Wendigo7 »

Lancaster and co GOOOOONNNEEEE.
fisgard792
Posts: 4515
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by fisgard792 »

theo wrote:
geordie_6 wrote:Shame that we couldn't give Brookes and George a runout, given that Cole has been poor at Tighthead and George has more than earned a go at hooker.
Seems odd to me to not put the next generation out there for this game.

Why not try Burgess at 6. Or would that be too much of an admission that they f**k up.
it would appear so, i was quite surprised that they didnt have the courage of their convictions, unless the rumour coming out of oz has some legs.
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 39277
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Anonymous 1 »

nicebutdim wrote:
Leicester Mafia wrote:I don't like Goode but he deserves a run out at least. However even The Fazmeister Jr himself has said he considers himself a 10 not a 12, so that's a weird one. I mean it seems pretty obvious he has no international future at 12 but Slade might, so why not pick Slade with JJ and see how it goes.

I suppose it doesn't really matter though, this is the dictionary definition of a pointless game
Its probably because JJ is carrying an injury and they don't want to risk long term damage for the sake of playing Uruguay in an utterly meaningless game. That leaves the other options being Barritt and Burgess who will probably be jettisoned after the World Cup.
Another way of looking at it is England v Uruguay could be a blowout. Wouldn't look good to have Ford Slade and JJ ripping them to shreads.
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 39277
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Anonymous 1 »

Wendigo7 wrote:Lancaster and co GOOOOONNNEEEE.
I don't belieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeve it
Sloper
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 8:01 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Sloper »

Wendigo7 wrote:Lancaster and co GOOOOONNNEEEE.
this selection is more than a mea culpa, it's almost self harm.
bonji
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:22 pm

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by bonji »

Image

Nice graphic from the Telegraph. Source:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyu ... enure.html
Hawk97
Posts: 14171
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:47 pm
Location: Westerlands

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Hawk97 »

Faz and Baz x(
User avatar
Keith
Posts: 5646
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:55 pm
Location: God's own country

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Keith »

Hawk97 wrote:Faz and Baz x(
The dynamic Sarries midfield axis? More like the axis of evil.
crapbackrow
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 4:32 pm

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by crapbackrow »

rewatching the first half... margin of defeat seems incredible given how threatening we were in wide channels, but we clearly overcooked it by going through hands almost every time.

youngs also played like complete shit in attack and defence - needed a bit more patience before delivering the ball a number of times. twice he gave a panicked pop to an isolated runner for pocock to pounce on. though i suspect that was the game plan, with our tactical gurus attempting to blow aus away with the widest, fastest game we could muster...
User avatar
Madness
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Somewhere in poachland

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Madness »

Using that Telgraph graphic this is the least inspiring team possible under Lancaster (token player out of position as per nearly every game under Lancaster)

PDJ
Webber
Stevens
Botha
Palmer
Dowson
Clarke
Easter
Wiggles
Farrell
Ashton
Barrett
Tomkins
Burrell (OOP, although sure he did end on the wing in a game we lost)
Goode
User avatar
toweliechaos
Posts: 1642
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:20 pm
Location: God's own county

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by toweliechaos »

I'm amazed that Fuckallsworth has only played a third of the time that Care has. It feels like he's played about as much, which just goes to show how fucking painful having him around the squad is as I clearly go mental whenever his pointy-nosed fizzog looms from the bench.
Selim The Sot
Posts: 639
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 7:53 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Selim The Sot »

geordie_6 wrote:
Keith wrote:No. He got a warning.
Ah. In that case then possibly, they didn't want to stick him there after being adamant he was a centre.
Back in the summer, a coach told me (cue more red cyber spittle from Towlie) that they would be interested in taking a look at Burgess as a possible 6 after the WC and it seemed pretty clear that he was destined for a significant England role wherever he played. As this was before any of the training camps it appeared that Burgess had already attained a seemingly assured status despite there being very limited evidence to justify it. Clearly, this was originally a blind faith project based entirely on his RL status (and draw your own conclusions about that) but in the event there was even more enthusiasm for Sam after they has been exposed to his ever present aura during the training camps. Problem is, much of this enthusiasm seemed to revolve around Sam the man, rather than Sam the Rugby Union player.
User avatar
pjm1
Posts: 3578
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by pjm1 »

I'm assuming that Bomber is answering a dare someone gave him: how many fly halves can you start in a match day XV?

Four is pretty good going, to be fair.
crapbackrow
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 4:32 pm

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by crapbackrow »

burgess did a good job when he was on the pitch in both games, no matter what rugby brain gordon d'arcy says for clicks. gave a great miss pass at 78 mins, something i've never seen barritt do.
User avatar
toweliechaos
Posts: 1642
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:20 pm
Location: God's own county

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by toweliechaos »

Selim The Sot wrote:
geordie_6 wrote:
Keith wrote:No. He got a warning.
Ah. In that case then possibly, they didn't want to stick him there after being adamant he was a centre.
Back in the summer, a coach told me (cue more red cyber spittle from Towlie) that they would be interested in taking a look at Burgess as a possible 6 after the WC and it seemed pretty clear that he was destined for a significant England role wherever he played. As this was before any of the training camps it appeared that Burgess had already attained a seemingly assured status despite there being very limited evidence to justify it. Clearly, this was originally a blind faith project based entirely on his RL status (and draw your own conclusions about that) but in the event there was even more enthusiasm for Sam after they has been exposed to his ever present aura during the training camps. Problem is, much of this enthusiasm seemed to revolve around Sam the man, rather than Sam the Rugby Union player.
National Express, Johnsons or Shearings?
User avatar
4071
Posts: 5088
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by 4071 »

crapbackrow wrote:rewatching the first half... margin of defeat seems incredible given how threatening we were in wide channels, but we clearly overcooked it by going through hands almost every time.

youngs also played like complete shit in attack and defence - needed a bit more patience before delivering the ball a number of times. twice he gave a panicked pop to an isolated runner for pocock to pounce on. though i suspect that was the game plan, with our tactical gurus attempting to blow aus away with the widest, fastest game we could muster...
First time I've ever seen Youngs criticized for delivering the ball too quickly.
User avatar
Keith
Posts: 5646
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:55 pm
Location: God's own country

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Keith »

toweliechaos wrote:
Selim The Sot wrote:
geordie_6 wrote:
Keith wrote:No. He got a warning.
Ah. In that case then possibly, they didn't want to stick him there after being adamant he was a centre.
Back in the summer, a coach told me (cue more red cyber spittle from Towlie) that they would be interested in taking a look at Burgess as a possible 6 after the WC and it seemed pretty clear that he was destined for a significant England role wherever he played. As this was before any of the training camps it appeared that Burgess had already attained a seemingly assured status despite there being very limited evidence to justify it. Clearly, this was originally a blind faith project based entirely on his RL status (and draw your own conclusions about that) but in the event there was even more enthusiasm for Sam after they has been exposed to his ever present aura during the training camps. Problem is, much of this enthusiasm seemed to revolve around Sam the man, rather than Sam the Rugby Union player.
National Express, Johnsons or Shearings?
I shouldn't, but
Spoiler: show
:lol:
crapbackrow
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 4:32 pm

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by crapbackrow »

4071 wrote:
crapbackrow wrote:rewatching the first half... margin of defeat seems incredible given how threatening we were in wide channels, but we clearly overcooked it by going through hands almost every time.

youngs also played like complete shit in attack and defence - needed a bit more patience before delivering the ball a number of times. twice he gave a panicked pop to an isolated runner for pocock to pounce on. though i suspect that was the game plan, with our tactical gurus attempting to blow aus away with the widest, fastest game we could muster...
First time I've ever seen Youngs criticized for delivering the ball too quickly.
he's always been quick to take it from the ruck, though usually followed by his trademark shuffle
Backwoodsman1
Posts: 1879
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 5:17 pm

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Backwoodsman1 »

4071 wrote:
crapbackrow wrote:rewatching the first half... margin of defeat seems incredible given how threatening we were in wide channels, but we clearly overcooked it by going through hands almost every time.

youngs also played like complete shit in attack and defence - needed a bit more patience before delivering the ball a number of times. twice he gave a panicked pop to an isolated runner for pocock to pounce on. though i suspect that was the game plan, with our tactical gurus attempting to blow aus away with the widest, fastest game we could muster...
First time I've ever seen Youngs criticized for delivering the ball too quickly.
Only ever played at openside myself and I can watch a play developing off a ruck and think, no don't give that pass. You see a ball passed to a player with no immediate support and two opponents closer , even by a copule of feet , and you can predict the turnover situations before they develop ! Having said that, a number of our forwards like a cuddle and a trundle, even without thinking who is close enough to support them, its definitely an area to work on.
User avatar
Xin
Posts: 346
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 5:02 pm

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by Xin »

It's painful, really painful. I'm going for positive amdist the doom and gloom. The sides we lost to are currently ranked 2 and 3 in the world, and one of those was in our grasp to win (or a least draw).

It was bad - we froze in the headlights, felt the pressure but I not sure the team is a disaster even if the situation is.

Ok - now I'm going to back and sulk
piquant
Posts: 9122
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am

Re: **OFFICIAL** English Rugby Thread

Post by piquant »

crapbackrow wrote:
4071 wrote:
crapbackrow wrote:rewatching the first half... margin of defeat seems incredible given how threatening we were in wide channels, but we clearly overcooked it by going through hands almost every time.

youngs also played like complete shit in attack and defence - needed a bit more patience before delivering the ball a number of times. twice he gave a panicked pop to an isolated runner for pocock to pounce on. though i suspect that was the game plan, with our tactical gurus attempting to blow aus away with the widest, fastest game we could muster...
First time I've ever seen Youngs criticized for delivering the ball too quickly.
he's always been quick to take it from the ruck, though usually followed by his trademark shuffle
(a) no he isn't quick to take it from the ruck, part of his issue is his footwork arriving which slows the play, and (b) what he does once he has hands on the ball varies, some of it's very good, some of it far less so, and some of it isn't ideal but that's what happens when 15 people try to stop you doing what you want. Certainly there's no one trademark thing he actually does once he has the ball, there does seem to be an ill-judged perception he just dithers with the ball but such thinking is too simplistic and as it happens wrong anyway.
Post Reply