Japan vs England team speculation

[Puja]

Thought I'd start a controversial thread.

What selection do people think we ought to go with for Japan? It's two weeks before the first NZ test, so it's a really useful warm-up and could give us an advantage in cohesion against a newly built NZ side that have had no gametime together. On the other hand, it's another game in a very long season, against a weaker opposition (although we do need to take it seriously - no-one needs to hear Eddie Jones crow over an upset), and do we want to just roll out the 1st XV for yet antoher match instead of giving the fringe a chance to show what they can do?

To my mind, I'd have a mixture:

Baxter
Dan
Stuart
Coles
Martin
CCS
Underhill
Earl (c)

Mitchell
FSmith
Freeman
Lawrence
Slade
Feyi-Waboso
MSmith

Genge, George, Cole, Ewels, Fisilau, Van Poortvliet, Dingwall, Sleightholme/Furbank

Front row is easiest to bring in the inexperienced lot and where our old heads need the least gametime. I'd like to see Baxter capped asap and given a chance to show what he can do at the top level and I feel that more minutes into Dan can only be a good thing. Itoje needs as much rest as can be given him and he's experienced enough not to need a warmup match. The back row is one where I think they'd all benefit from more time together to form a unit - the only change I'd make is if we decide to take TCurry along for some ridiculous reason, as he will need game-time.

In the backs, they need time together as a unit to build - the only change I'd want from the end of the 6N is to see if the Smith/Smith combo works in a game situation. Hard lines on Ford to be moving him out of the XXIII, but those two are the future and it's only a question of whether they play 10 and 15 or 10 and 22.

Puja

[FKAS]

I'd have the third choice tighthead on the bench instead of Cole. Whomever we pick needs game time more than Old Father Time.

I think it might depend on who makes the Prem final and whether we expect those players to then go against Vs NZ. If they play in the Prem final and are likely to start the first test Vs NZ I'd be tempted to rest them. Not a hard rule but very much a possibility, particularly the forwards and Mitchell (as he puts himself in harms way and awful lot).

[Oakboy]

I think we'd be mad not to try Earl and T Willis at 7/8. If they become regular picks in that combination for Saracens the long-term potential for England is huge. Beyond that, I'd want to see if CCS can cut it as a starting 6.

[Mikey Brown]

Baxter capped ASAP because it’s the best thing for him or is there some concern he’d get poached? Obviously he’s class, I just don’t know when is the right time to introduce a new prop.

I guess 22 is old enough?

[fivepointer]

Not a game to take lightly. Japan are no mugs and will be motivated to do well at home.

I'd expect most of our first choice or 6N squad players to be involved with a few adjustments. Baxter being capped seems an obvious move and some game time for our 3rd choice TH (possibly Heyes) would make sense. Yes to T Willis somewhere in the 23 and jvP being brought back in.

The PREM final is on June 8, the Japan game June 22 and then we have a fortnight before the first NZ test on July 6 so there is chance for recovery.

[Mikey Brown]

I think we'd be mad not to try Earl and T Willis at 7/8. If they become regular picks in that combination for Saracens the long-term potential for England is huge. Beyond that, I'd want to see if CCS can cut it as a starting 6.

That's a whole lot of abrasive ball carrying isn't it. I guess we just don't know if Borthwick views Earl as being suited to what he wants from a 7, even though he plays there almost exclusively at club level.

[Which Tyler]

Thought I'd start a controversial thread.

Anyone in danger of being capped by another nation (even if they more rightly belong to that other nation).

So let's get Dan Kelly capped, for example, and put out feelers towards Regan Grace, who Wales look like capping without him playing a single minute of (competitive) rugby union...
For the avoidance of doubt - tongue is 100% in cheek here.

[Puja]

Baxter capped ASAP because it’s the best thing for him or is there some concern he’d get poached? Obviously he’s class, I just don’t know when is the right time to introduce a new prop.

I guess 22 is old enough?

Baxter played for England A, so poaching's not a concern right now. I'd say 22 is an excellent age to be involved with internationals and get a feel for what the step-up looks like - I wouldn't be starting him against South Africa or NZ, but I'd definitely have him as third choice loosehead on the tour and give him a start against the lesser scrummaging Japan side.

I think we'd be mad not to try Earl and T Willis at 7/8. If they become regular picks in that combination for Saracens the long-term potential for England is huge. Beyond that, I'd want to see if CCS can cut it as a starting 6.

That's a whole lot of abrasive ball carrying isn't it. I guess we just don't know if Borthwick views Earl as being suited to what he wants from a 7, even though he plays there almost exclusively at club level.

Has Earl looked anything like as good at 7 for Saracens as he did playing 8 for England though?

Thought I'd start a controversial thread.

Anyone in danger of being capped by another nation (even if they more rightly belong to that other nation).

So let's get Dan Kelly capped, for example, and put out feelers towards Regan Grace, who Wales look like capping without him playing a single minute of (competitive) rugby union...
For the avoidance of doubt - tongue is 100% in cheek here.

You suckered me - I was ready to write a strident response until I quoted and saw the hidden message.

Puja

[Which Tyler]

Mua ha ha ha haaaaa

[Oakboy]

Has Earl looked anything like as good at 7 for Saracens as he did playing 8 for England though?



Puja

I'd say, yes. However, that is not the major consideration. Earl/Willis at 7/8 looks better now than Underhill/Earl. Beyond that, IF the pairing becomes a fixture for Saracens it will improve. Club combos are not necessarily the perfect answer, of course, but the right ones do transfer effectiveness to international teams. All I am saying is give it a decent trial.

[Scrumhead]

Sure, but at present it’s not really the club combination. If they’re looking good as a unit at the start of next season it could well be the way to go for the AIs, but for now, it’s not an established enough double-act to justify dropping Underhill for.

I really rate Tom Willis, but TBH, I’m not even sure he’s been obviously good enough to make the squad ahead of his competition.

[Stom]

Baxter capped ASAP because it’s the best thing for him or is there some concern he’d get poached? Obviously he’s class, I just don’t know when is the right time to introduce a new prop.

I guess 22 is old enough?

Baxter played for England A, so poaching's not a concern right now. I'd say 22 is an excellent age to be involved with internationals and get a feel for what the step-up looks like - I wouldn't be starting him against South Africa or NZ, but I'd definitely have him as third choice loosehead on the tour and give him a start against the lesser scrummaging Japan side.

I think we'd be mad not to try Earl and T Willis at 7/8. If they become regular picks in that combination for Saracens the long-term potential for England is huge. Beyond that, I'd want to see if CCS can cut it as a starting 6.

That's a whole lot of abrasive ball carrying isn't it. I guess we just don't know if Borthwick views Earl as being suited to what he wants from a 7, even though he plays there almost exclusively at club level.

Has Earl looked anything like as good at 7 for Saracens as he did playing 8 for England though?

Thought I'd start a controversial thread.

Anyone in danger of being capped by another nation (even if they more rightly belong to that other nation).

So let's get Dan Kelly capped, for example, and put out feelers towards Regan Grace, who Wales look like capping without him playing a single minute of (competitive) rugby union...
For the avoidance of doubt - tongue is 100% in cheek here.

You suckered me - I was ready to write a strident response until I quoted and saw the hidden message.

Puja

Considering his performance against two really good scrummaging Toulouse props, I'd say he's easily on his way to being our best scrummaging LHP NOW.

[FKAS]

Sure, but at present it’s not really the club combination. If they’re looking good as a unit at the start of next season it could well be the way to go for the AIs, but for now, it’s not an established enough double-act to justify dropping Underhill for.

I really rate Tom Willis, but TBH, I’m not even sure he’s been obviously good enough to make the squad ahead of his competition.

The options at 8 are queuing up with Barbeary looking physical both sides of the ball and good at nabbing a turnover. Fisilau is putting in some all action performances. No doubt th Zach Mercer hype train will re-engage shortly. Dombrant is still doing Dombrant things.

How many backrows are we realistically taking on tour, 6? Your assume that Earl, Underhill, CCS and Roots are going. The other two spots won't necessarily be 8s, probably one specialist 8 and one flanker.

[Stom]

Honestly, I was all aboard the Mercer hype train. But after seeing him get bettered by Dombrandt in both games...and Dombrandt not getting in for England...yeah, no thanks.

Dombrandt surely is there or there abouts, Barbeary is close. I think we're starting to look good in the backrow, especially for depth considering how crap we've been for a while. Hope Ted Hill can actually find form and fitness.

[Puja]

Baxter capped ASAP because it’s the best thing for him or is there some concern he’d get poached? Obviously he’s class, I just don’t know when is the right time to introduce a new prop.

I guess 22 is old enough?

Baxter played for England A, so poaching's not a concern right now. I'd say 22 is an excellent age to be involved with internationals and get a feel for what the step-up looks like - I wouldn't be starting him against South Africa or NZ, but I'd definitely have him as third choice loosehead on the tour and give him a start against the lesser scrummaging Japan side.

Considering his performance against two really good scrummaging Toulouse props, I'd say he's easily on his way to being our best scrummaging LHP NOW.

And against Tameifuna vs Bordeaux as well. I want to be cautious about throwing him in at the deep end though - while 22 is old enough for an introduction to test rugby, it's still very young in prop years. This is his first season where he's been starting regularly for Quins and I would rather take it slow and build up his development rather than give him a potential brutal "learning experience".

A moment to note just how fantastic a job Quins have done about bringing him through though. Was looking on All.Rugby and it's pretty much textbook - 8 sub appearances across two seasons while he's 18-20, last season was 16 bench/5 starts, and this season letting him push through with 11 bench/14 starts. Made him force his way past Marler to make him improve, without holding him back or denying him opportunities in the big games. Sadly the data doesn't go back far enough to show the stats of Dan Cole making his way past Castrogiovanni, but I suspect the numbers would look pretty close - hopefully it's giving Baxter the chance to enjoy the longevity of career that Cole's had, instead of going down the Corbisiero route.

Puja

[Scrumhead]

Agreed. Generally we do a good job of bringing our academy products through sensibly. Marcus Smith is really the one who was parachuted in early, but a lot of that was to do with Catrakilis’ unfortunate injury.

Speaking of Marcus Smith, playing him at 15 is the only thing I don’t really like in your starting XV. Knowing he can do it is a nice option to have but it’s definitely not his best position.

Personally I’d start Fin Smith against Japan and Marcus vs. NZ. I’d stick with Furbank at 15. It’s shown some promise but it’s still early days so I’d keep him there for all three tests.

[Puja]

Speaking of Marcus Smith, playing him at 15 is the only thing I don’t really like in your starting XV. Knowing he can do it is a nice option to have but it’s definitely not his best position.

Personally I’d start Fin Smith against Japan and Marcus vs. NZ. I’d stick with Furbank at 15. It’s shown some promise but it’s still early days so I’d keep him there for all three tests.

I don't know I can argue too hard against that - I do tend to be more in favour of a round peg in a round hole and there's no doubting that Furbank is the man in form and in possession (and that's not taking into account that MSmith is probably the front-runner for 10 (given their contrasting semi-final performances), so it's a bit outre to have him move away from the pivotal position of fly-half).

I guess the idea of fitting two out of our three world class 10 onto the pitch at the same time is very tantalising. It's greedy, I know. If we were opening up against NZ, then I'd not suggest it, but the fact that we do have Japan first does tempt me. But then that leaves Furbank one step behind the rest of the backline, which isn't fair or sensible... I don't know. Glad I'm not paid to make the final decision on that.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

The Smiths* are world class?



*no band/music jokes or puns allowed.

[FKAS]

Speaking of Marcus Smith, playing him at 15 is the only thing I don’t really like in your starting XV. Knowing he can do it is a nice option to have but it’s definitely not his best position.

Personally I’d start Fin Smith against Japan and Marcus vs. NZ. I’d stick with Furbank at 15. It’s shown some promise but it’s still early days so I’d keep him there for all three tests.

I don't know I can argue too hard against that - I do tend to be more in favour of a round peg in a round hole and there's no doubting that Furbank is the man in form and in possession (and that's not taking into account that MSmith is probably the front-runner for 10 (given their contrasting semi-final performances), so it's a bit outre to have him move away from the pivotal position of fly-half).

I guess the idea of fitting two out of our three world class 10 onto the pitch at the same time is very tantalising. It's greedy, I know. If we were opening up against NZ, then I'd not suggest it, but the fact that we do have Japan first does tempt me. But then that leaves Furbank one step behind the rest of the backline, which isn't fair or sensible... I don't know. Glad I'm not paid to make the final decision on that.

Puja

Marcus at 15 does open up the option of a 6-2 bench split. Particularly with Freeman also in the squad. Not something we need for this tour but going forwards could be very useful against the likes of France and South Africa.

Furbank brings a lot to the 15 shirt and having both a creative and strong kicking option there appears to be the way to go but he's hardly been error free. He's the man in possession of the shirt and given the choice I and everyone else would have him at 15 come the first NZ test. I'm not sold he'll still be holding the shirt by the next world cup though.

I still think selection depends on the Prem Final. By the time those guys have finished beating each other to a pulp and then flown to the other side of the world a few might well need an extra week's rest. Could open up the XV for some experimentation.

[Oakboy]

It's funny how selection quirks affect players over the years. For example, SB planned to start the 6N with M Smith and F Smith at 10/22. Injury gave Ford a chance and now he is arguably SB's first choice rather than third.

Watching Bristol, last weekend, I thought Malins looked superb at 15, his preferred position, but he has been written off having never started there for England (I think). I'd not pick him ahead of Furbank but he looks more useful there than Smith and on a par with Steward.

Earl is another. Might he still be on the edge of back row selection had injury/suspension not fluked him a chance at 8? Indeed, had Curry been fit would he have got that chance?

Mitchell/JVP is another instance.

[Puja]

The Smiths* are world class?



*no band/music jokes or puns allowed.

Fair point - potentially world-class is a better turn of phrase.

Puja

[Mikey Brown]

I always forget how much the prem final affects things, which inevitably has a knock-on effect to the team that plays the rest of the series.

It’s funny how Steward now seems as relevant in the 15 conversation as Mike Brown. Yeah I speak in third person, and what?

I don’t view Smith as a 15 really but there’s a lot more overlap with his and Furbank’s strengths and weaknesses, which does make things a bit easier.

I can’t see how Saints won’t be in the final. I wonder which other team being there would be the most disruptive?

[FKAS]

It’s funny how Steward now seems as relevant in the 15 conversation as Mike Brown. Yeah I speak in third person, and what?

Steward has been running the ball, looking to link ball in hand and kicking with more variety since the 6N. Not sure it's brought on his game enough to challenge for the shirt this summer but being dropped has definitely been good for his game.

I suspect he'll tour this summer but might find game time hard to come by. He's still a notable point of difference with his work under the high ball and his cover tackles (leaving the Italian 8 unable to continue in the 6N and levelling Quirke to force a knock on when it looked a certain try last weekend) as well as carrying physicality. Having him in camp where they can push his development would be a benefit. He might lack acceleration but when up to speed he moves quick enough.

[Scrumhead]

I rate Steward very highly.

My main reason for suggesting that we persevere with Furbank is partly because of the variety it gives to our attack and partly because it doesn’t make sense to discard it when it’s still in it’s early stages of development.

Conversely, I think we know what Steward’s strengths are. Ideally, we reach a point where it’s a horses for courses selection.

[Mellsblue]

Ideally we’ll reach a point where we can pick our first choice XV and the oppo can select their horse for our course.