Eddie Jones: 'We need to reset the team. It's a transition period'

[Slick]

Are we really still saying May is world class? He’s not even the best winger at his club

[Sandstorm]

Are we really still saying May is world class? He’s not even the best winger at his club

He’s very fast

[assfly]

Are we really still saying May is world class? He’s not even the best winger at his club

I rate him very highly. Who do you think should replace him?

[Slick]

Are we really still saying May is world class? He’s not even the best winger at his club

I rate him very highly. Who do you think should replace him?

For England? No idea. But Watson is a far better player.

He was probably 5th/6th best winger in this years 6N, maybe even lower. No commentator I saw over the weekend had him in the Lions team, some not even in the squad. But people are still saying he is world class...

He is fast though

[Margin__Walker]

Meh, England have plenty of issues, but wing is nowhere near the top of the list.

Possible to go round in circles for ever on the definition of world class, but May is still a decent international wing for me. May not make the cut for the Lions but he's got more to his game than speed. No shame on being the 2nd best winger at his club either when the 1st is LRZ

[Slick]

Meh, England have plenty of issues, but wing is nowhere near the top of the list.

Possible to go round in circles for ever on the definition of world class, but May is still a decent international wing for me. May not make the cut for the Lions but he's got more to his game than speed. No shame on being the 2nd best winger at his club either when the 1st is LRZ

Agree with all of that and I like May as a player and a person.

But if we are going to use "world class" as even a loose descriptor of the very best players in the world... come on.

[Margin__Walker]

Like I said, comes down to the 'world class' definition. If you're a 'top three in his position in the world' kind of guy, then probably not at the moment. If you swing the 'one of the first names on the teamsheet for a tier one nation, with an impressive test record' then he would be.

[Torquemada 1420]

Meh, England have plenty of issues, but wing is nowhere near the top of the list.

Player issues are a long way behind the tactics IMHO. We all argue the hell about coach's selections. Picking someone like Ford and then telling him to keep hoofing the ball away is like taking a TV on a diving holiday.

[SaintK]

Meh, England have plenty of issues, but wing is nowhere near the top of the list.

Possible to go round in circles for ever on the definition of world class, but May is still a decent international wing for me. May not make the cut for the Lions but he's got more to his game than speed. No shame on being the 2nd best winger at his club either when the 1st is LRZ

Agree with all of that and I like May as a player and a person.

But if we are going to use "world class" as even a loose descriptor of the very best players in the world... come on.

"World Class" is a very over used description. I don't think England have any world class players in their squad currently although Itoje and Curry could be if they both keep on their current trajectory

[Torquemada 1420]

One would have to define world class.
1) Top 5 in that position in the world?
2) Top 10 in that position in the world? That would seem reasonable enough to me given that there are effectively 9 Tier 1 and Tier 2 sides (I'm ignoring Japan).

If we go by 2 then Itoje, Curry and Sinckler have to be already in that category and probably Underhill too? I suspect NZers could trot out 10 wingers to fill the top 10 positions.......... which would bring May into the grey zone.

[tc27]

I think May is pretty bloody good - not getting into the 'is he world class' nonsense but he's easily good enough to play at this level.

[Paddington Bear]

If we take a definition of world class to be something like positively remembered a decade plus after retirement, I think Maro definitely fits the bill. Underhill and Curry have potential. The rest probably not

[sockwithaticket]

World class definitely gets bandied around far too much by pundits.

May's definitely had spells where he's been in that bracket, I don't think he is at the moment. He'll be 31 at the start of April, it's an age for wingers where inexorable decline can set in.

[Slick]

I’d probably set it as would they get into a world XV or at least the wider squad.

Curry probably up there, Itoje just outside, Sinkler just outside

[Ovals]

If we take a definition of world class to be something like positively remembered a decade plus after retirement, I think Maro definitely fits the bill. Underhill and Curry have potential. The rest probably not

Marler is.

May probably not, based on this 6N - but I'd have had him there last year.

[Torquemada 1420]

May's definitely had spells where he's been in that bracket, I don't think he is at the moment. He'll be 31 at the start of April, it's an age for wingers where inexorable decline can set in.

That raised a point of discussion at the weekend. Key players who could be too old for RWC. Sexton, AWJ, Ken Owens, Stander already gone, Maitland, May.....

[Torquemada 1420]

I’d probably set it as would they get into a world XV or at least the wider squad.

Curry probably up there, Itoje just outside, Sinkler just outside

That's a much tighter definition and on current form, would suggest no Eng players would make the cut.

[Slick]

If we take a definition of world class to be something like positively remembered a decade plus after retirement, I think Maro definitely fits the bill. Underhill and Curry have potential. The rest probably not

Marler is.

May probably not, based on this 6N - but I'd have had him there last year.

That’s my problem with describing someone as world class. It should be the very best players in the game not players who have a couple of top class seasons then go back to being OK.

McCaw, Johnson, O’Driscoll, Carter - consistently brilliant over their whole careers, that’s world class to me. You probably get the odd players, like Dupont, who is just so obviously the best player in the world that he can go straight in.

[sockwithaticket]

May's definitely had spells where he's been in that bracket, I don't think he is at the moment. He'll be 31 at the start of April, it's an age for wingers where inexorable decline can set in.

That raised a point of discussion at the weekend. Key players who could be too old for RWC. Sexton, AWJ, Ken Owens, Stander already gone, Maitland, May.....

Focusing on England there are a few who you'd imagine might be on the cusp of retiring or being retired by RWC '23. Kruis will be 33, Lawes 34, Youngs 33, Wilson 33 and May 33,

A lot of the rest of the squad will be 30 - 32: Marler, Mako, Billy, Launchbury, George, Ford, Farrell, Daly, Robson, Joseph

Obviously players can keep going and performing over 30, but you do have to start keeping an eye on their efficacy and they can fall off both quickly and sharply.

[Paddington Bear]

If we take a definition of world class to be something like positively remembered a decade plus after retirement, I think Maro definitely fits the bill. Underhill and Curry have potential. The rest probably not

Marler is.

May probably not, based on this 6N - but I'd have had him there last year.

Marler is a good player and a nice bloke, but I wouldn't put him in the category of Sheridan, Vickery, probably even Corbs tbh

[I like neeps]

If England don't have many "world class" players despite the massive player base, private schools and cash money advantages they have the problems lie much deeper than Eddie Jones.

[JM2K6]

If we take a definition of world class to be something like positively remembered a decade plus after retirement, I think Maro definitely fits the bill. Underhill and Curry have potential. The rest probably not

Marler is.

May probably not, based on this 6N - but I'd have had him there last year.

Marler is a good player and a nice bloke, but I wouldn't put him in the category of Sheridan, Vickery, probably even Corbs tbh

Sheridan? How often did he get gubbed? He was wildly inconsistent and had real trouble against good technical scrummagers.

Vickery was brilliant right up until he wasn't, then he was dogshit for far too long.

Agree on Corbs though, he could well have been one of our best ever were it not for injury. Phenomenal player. Same could be said for Woodman, though perhaps to a lesser extent.

[notfatcat]

Meh, England have plenty of issues, but wing is nowhere near the top of the list.

Player issues are a long way behind the tactics IMHO. We all argue the hell about coach's selections. Picking someone like Ford and then telling him to keep hoofing the ball away is like taking a TV on a diving holiday.

[Ovals]

Our 6n performances were very depressing - but worry not lads - The RFU are going to hold a Review

We'll now all sleep soundly in that knowledge.

[laurent]

Our 6n performances were very depressing - but worry not lads - The RFU are going to hold a Review

We'll now all sleep soundly in that knowledge.

Laporte does these Really well and is looking for cash.

[Torquemada 1420]

Sheridan? How often did he get gubbed? He was wildly inconsistent and had real trouble against good technical scrummagers.

Vickery was brilliant right up until he wasn't, then he was dogshit for far too long.

Agree on Corbs though, he could well have been one of our best ever were it not for injury. Phenomenal player. Same could be said for Woodman, though perhaps to a lesser extent.

Sheridan dined out forever on that humiliation of an Aussie scrum in 2007: back then, when they weren't being allowed to cheat (hello Bill Young), Aus scrums were routinely beat up and Dunning, Baxter and co were no different. Like you say, Sheridan couldn't scrum for sh*t against good technicians and that was simply because he was too tall for a prop.

Agree on both Corbisiero and Woodman (who I personally liked a lot.... partly due to his animal charity work!).

[sorCrer]

I’d probably set it as would they get into a world XV or at least the wider squad.

Curry probably up there, Itoje just outside, Sinkler just outside

Sinckler? He really isn't anywhere near world class. Wouldn't make a B team.

[Grandpa]

Sheridan? How often did he get gubbed? He was wildly inconsistent and had real trouble against good technical scrummagers.

Vickery was brilliant right up until he wasn't, then he was dogshit for far too long.

Agree on Corbs though, he could well have been one of our best ever were it not for injury. Phenomenal player. Same could be said for Woodman, though perhaps to a lesser extent.

Sheridan dined out forever on that humiliation of an Aussie scrum in 2007: back then, when they weren't being allowed to cheat (hello Bill Young), Aus scrums were routinely beat up and Dunning, Baxter and co were no different. Like you say, Sheridan couldn't scrum for sh*t against good technicians and that was simply because he was too tall for a prop.

Agree on both Corbisiero and Woodman (who I personally liked a lot.... partly due to his animal charity work!).

Carl Hayman was pretty tall but seemed to do ok technically?

[JM2K6]

Sheridan? How often did he get gubbed? He was wildly inconsistent and had real trouble against good technical scrummagers.

Vickery was brilliant right up until he wasn't, then he was dogshit for far too long.

Agree on Corbs though, he could well have been one of our best ever were it not for injury. Phenomenal player. Same could be said for Woodman, though perhaps to a lesser extent.

Sheridan dined out forever on that humiliation of an Aussie scrum in 2007: back then, when they weren't being allowed to cheat (hello Bill Young), Aus scrums were routinely beat up and Dunning, Baxter and co were no different. Like you say, Sheridan couldn't scrum for sh*t against good technicians and that was simply because he was too tall for a prop.

Agree on both Corbisiero and Woodman (who I personally liked a lot.... partly due to his animal charity work!).

Carl Hayman was pretty tall but seemed to do ok technically?

He was technically superb, and at the time a bigger tighthead was less of a problem (tightheads tended to be larger than looseheads anyway). Sheridan was even taller, and was a relative newcomer to the front row (a converted backrower) who also played alongside a midget hooker half the time.

[Hal Jordan]

May's definitely had spells where he's been in that bracket, I don't think he is at the moment. He'll be 31 at the start of April, it's an age for wingers where inexorable decline can set in.

That raised a point of discussion at the weekend. Key players who could be too old for RWC. Sexton, AWJ, Ken Owens, Stander already gone, Maitland, May.....

Focusing on England there are a few who you'd imagine might be on the cusp of retiring or being retired by RWC '23. Kruis will be 33, Lawes 34, Youngs 33, Wilson 33 and May 33,

A lot of the rest of the squad will be 30 - 32: Marler, Mako, Billy, Launchbury, George, Ford, Farrell, Daly, Robson, Joseph

Obviously players can keep going and performing over 30, but you do have to start keeping an eye on their efficacy and they can fall off both quickly and sharply.

Of those, I think Kruis is gone long term, Lawes would make it as 34 isn't ancient for a lock, Wilson needs to go now, Youngs should be gone but will be winning his 1000th cap as we renew Jones contract for some reason, if May is not Usain May by then he could be a good option but age is likely to do for him.

The cohort below will have enough in the tank.

[Grandpa]

Sheridan dined out forever on that humiliation of an Aussie scrum in 2007: back then, when they weren't being allowed to cheat (hello Bill Young), Aus scrums were routinely beat up and Dunning, Baxter and co were no different. Like you say, Sheridan couldn't scrum for sh*t against good technicians and that was simply because he was too tall for a prop.

Agree on both Corbisiero and Woodman (who I personally liked a lot.... partly due to his animal charity work!).

Carl Hayman was pretty tall but seemed to do ok technically?

He was technically superb, and at the time a bigger tighthead was less of a problem (tightheads tended to be larger than looseheads anyway). Sheridan was even taller, and was a relative newcomer to the front row (a converted backrower) who also played alongside a midget hooker half the time.

Just checked. Hayman was 6ft4 and Sheridan 6ft5.... almost as tall as locks! Actually Ofa Tu'ungafasi, a current All Black prop is 6ft 5 too.. maybe props are getting taller...

[JM2K6]

Carl Hayman was pretty tall but seemed to do ok technically?

He was technically superb, and at the time a bigger tighthead was less of a problem (tightheads tended to be larger than looseheads anyway). Sheridan was even taller, and was a relative newcomer to the front row (a converted backrower) who also played alongside a midget hooker half the time.

Just checked. Hayman was 6ft4 and Sheridan 6ft5.... almost as tall as locks! Actually Ofa Tu'ungafasi, a current All Black prop is 6ft 5 too.. maybe props are getting taller...

They are, yeah. The laws have changed a lot, and bigger looseheads and hookers have become more common as a result. Smaller front rowers are much rarer now. For several years it was "just" about size and pushing power. It's improved a bit, but technique is still somewhat secondary to real bulk at pro level.

[Kawazaki]

I was always led to believe that the loosehead was usually the bigger prop and preferably taller. Short technical tightheads were the bane of the big loosehead as it meant they had to go lower to bind on and the better tightheads could split the loosehead from his hooker.

I don't know why shorter tightheads have fallen out of favour, they'd likely be even more effective against the monsters at loosehead nowadays.

[Kawazaki]

Our 6n performances were very depressing - but worry not lads - The RFU are going to hold a Review

We'll now all sleep soundly in that knowledge.

Eddie Jones is conducting the review into the pitiful performance. I kid you not.

[Grandpa]

I was always led to believe that the loosehead was usually the bigger prop and preferably taller. Short technical tightheads were the bane of the big loosehead as it meant they had to go lower to bind on and the better tightheads could split the loosehead from his hooker.

I don't know why shorter tightheads have fallen out of favour, they'd likely be even more effective against the monsters at loosehead nowadays.

Maybe they like tall props so they can be taller lifters in the lineout?

[JM2K6]

It's probably something to do with the height of the scrums, the way the engage works now, and relative sizes of packs. Certainly the scrum is essentially one big confused mess these days, but the period immediately after Sheridan & Hayman's era was when we started seeing an explosion in the size of front rows in all 3 positions.

[Kawazaki]

I was always led to believe that the loosehead was usually the bigger prop and preferably taller. Short technical tightheads were the bane of the big loosehead as it meant they had to go lower to bind on and the better tightheads could split the loosehead from his hooker.

I don't know why shorter tightheads have fallen out of favour, they'd likely be even more effective against the monsters at loosehead nowadays.

Maybe they like tall props so they can be taller lifters in the lineout?

Yes, it's possible. I've never been convinced that the lock is the best person to be lifted anyway. Simon Shaw was a great lifter but he was so heavy to try and lift.

I had the idea many years ago that the tallest forward should ideally throw the ball into the lineout. They'd have a much better view of the line, and from a much higher arm they could throw a much flatter trajectory. Much like most quarterbacks are tall to see over the line of scrimmage.

[SaintK]

Our 6n performances were very depressing - but worry not lads - The RFU are going to hold a Review

We'll now all sleep soundly in that knowledge.

Eddie Jones is conducting the review into the pitiful performance. I kid you not.

Yep, a good old self assessment conducted by the coaching team

[Kawazaki]

Jeff Probyn had almost mythical status as a small tighthead. Would be good to see a fit professional version of him nowadays.

[dpedin]

I was always led to believe that the loosehead was usually the bigger prop and preferably taller. Short technical tightheads were the bane of the big loosehead as it meant they had to go lower to bind on and the better tightheads could split the loosehead from his hooker.

I don't know why shorter tightheads have fallen out of favour, they'd likely be even more effective against the monsters at loosehead nowadays.

Maybe they like tall props so they can be taller lifters in the lineout?

Yes, it's possible. I've never been convinced that the lock is the best person to be lifted anyway. Simon Shaw was a great lifter but he was so heavy to try and lift.

I had the idea many years ago that the tallest forward should ideally throw the ball into the lineout. They'd have a much better view of the line, and from a much higher arm they could throw a much flatter trajectory. Much like most quarterbacks are tall to see over the line of scrimmage.

Richard Metcalfe played 2nd row for Scotland - I think he was originally from Leeds - was 7 foot tall and 140kg. You would have thought he would have been wonderful in the line out but most guys struggled to lift him. When he lifted another forward you could see the fear in their eyes as they were launched into the stratosphere! I saw him get badly injured when playing in Edinburgh, I think it was the last game he played, and he needed carried off the pitch on a stretcher, unfortunately he was too big for the stretcher and his head and feet fell off the ends. It wasn't pretty as they struggled to get him safely off the pitch!