George Ford

First topic message reminder :

Having watched the Exeter v Bath game today I think it is clear that England need to pick Ford if we want to beat the top three teams on a regular basis.

I'm not into hyping players or claiming they are world class but this guy is very special and is in great form for Bath, he seems to grow in confidence every game I see him play and offers a lot more than Farrell IMO.

Yes he might not be international class for some but unless he is given some game time then we will know!

I will die convinced it was a try :'(

ChequeredJersey wrote:I will die convinced it was a try :'(

I remember being in a pub in central london at the time and even the TV fell off the wall in incredulity.

From what I have seen of Tait in the last two matches - an England call up for him would be laughable.

I notice a trend - many people on here like players who are quick. Tait is quick so he fits the criteria.

He used to be quick.

Rugby Fan wrote:

dummy_half wrote:GF / Brad

Shows how valuable having someone like Matt Tait around a squad is....

I would have liked Tait in our World Cup squad. Sadly, I think he's just too injury prone to maintain top form. Judging by his performance at the weekend, he is still well short of match fitness. I suspect his career will now play out like Sinbad's - scintillating highs for his club, punctuated by injury, and no real sniff at an England spot again.

RF

Players with the versatility of Tait (or James Hook) are absolute God sends when it comes to RWC squads - excellent bench cover in the bigger matches and more than capable of starting in any of about 4 or 5 positions agaisnt lesser opposition, letting your main guys have a rest. Haskell as back row cover is similarly good - heck, I wouldn't even object to him covering 2nd row in an emergency.

You're probably right with Tait though - just a bit too fragile to get back in the England reckoning.

beshocked

I'm not advocating for Tait to be back in the England squad now, just highlighting why having a few versatile players is beneficial for a squad and using Tait as an example.

I don't mind Goode as a starting full back, but on the proviso that we are playing two genuine wingers who can provide a counter-attacking threat. I actually think he has one element to his game that is better than Mike Brown, and that is his ability to join the line in attack - Brown's better at running kicks back, but doesn't often really link up with attacking moves when he's playing at 15.

Goode as bench cover is a different argument though...

beshocked wrote:From what I have seen of Tait in the last two matches - an England call up for him would be laughable.

I notice a trend - many people on here like players who are quick. Tait is quick so he fits the criteria.

I dont think quick is the sole criteria, but the problem in the last 2 games is that we have 2 speedsters (or 1.5 depending on how you view Nowell) and none on the bench. So you lose May for instance, and then Nowell goes down with cramp and you are much more vulnerable to speed.

If, say, Croft was on the pitch then its not so much of an issue.

As a club player a guy like Goode is a great asset for anyone, but he isn't good enough to cover all the positions he is being asked to cover for England from the bench.

That is why he gets shown up from time to time and why he never really hits the ground running for England.

Bendy would be a better sub for England.

Goode's footwork is pretty poor, he dances around then just runs straight into the defender. He doesn't have the gas to burn people on the outside either.

And Goode's tackling is a bit hmmmm

Can I ride another hobby horse ?

In the absence of Tait, I was always encouraged that we had Delon Armitage. He also covers FB, wing and centre and can kick goals (not that he's been called on to do that for a while).

Since 90% of professional rugby players in England are full backs these days, no-one particularly misses him, but he would do a lot to balance a matchday squad.

Rugby Fan wrote:Can I ride another hobby horse ?

In the absence of Tait, I was always encouraged that we had Delon Armitage. He also covers FB, wing and centre and can kick goals (not that he's been called on to do that for a while).

Since 90% of professional rugby players in England are full backs these days, no-one particularly misses him, but he would do a lot to balance a matchday squad.

Yep. One of the few who did OK last RWC too. You could probably say the same about Daly, although obviously he has a lot less experience

dummy half the biggest problem with Tait at the moment is that of what I have seen of him he is in woeful form.

In terms of full backs I would take numerous over him like Pennell,Abendanon,Goode,Brown,Arscott,Cook etc.

Goode gets repeatedly panned but he's still probably the 3rd best full back in England after Brown and Foden. I agree that his pace at international level is a bit of a problem but it's not just his fault if his weakness is being glaringly exposed by opposition. It's blatantly obvious if players have weaknesses you either minimise them in some way or don't play them. That's up to the coaches.


At club level Goode has proven himself to be a decent attacking threat and his tactical kicking is generally pretty good, he also adds the option of another place kicker.

I would actually say Goode is a better place kicker than 36 and Ford.



Oh and remember Goode was originally a 10 - he's never been known for his pace. It's his decision making which he is good at.

Rugby fan Delon burnt his bridges by going to France.

Think it was a terrible mis-judgement of SL to be so casual over Flood, who I think is grossly underrated.

Does anyone else think it's a shame Goode wasn't given more of a run at FH. Completely understandable for Sarries to move him to 15, and he didn't look great in the little time he was at 10, but I think he could have been a success. A decent (for a 10) running game, pretty good passing, not bad in defence etc.

Hood83 on the contrary I would say Flood is overrated. Certainly based on performances this season in the AP plus when Lancaster did give Flood opportunities at 10, he did not take them.

He's not a bad player when in form - but he's woefully out of form and has been for some time.

Goode at 10 suffered like the likes of Geraghty and Burns have - just doesn't have that steady consistency of Farrell Jr.

Goode did have a run of games at 10 but never truly nailed that 10 shirt to the mast. He can do a job there but compared to Farrell Jr he's just not got that authority.

Farrell Jr is a bit maligned but he's mostly reliable - with him it's what you see is what you get.

He's had his dip in performances like other players but he's not been as erratic as the likes of Geraghty,Burns,Lamb etc.

Farrell Jr has shown that he's a test match animal. Someone suited to play international rugby even if he's never going to win any awards. He's got the physicality and size which means he commands a bit of authority. He's also a 10 that other players can be confident in. He's got a long way to be seen in the same way as Jonny Wilkinson but 21 England caps and a Lions tour under his belt at the age of 22 is good going so far.

Ford should have what it takes to challenge Farrell Jr as long as his body holds up to the international game.

Wilkinson's hard hitting style obviously took it's toll on his body. Ford needs to be careful he doesn't take too much responsibility on himself.

beshocked,

I know where Delon stands and the extreme unlikelihood of him returning.
Incidentally, no-one is arguing for today's Tait to be shoved into the squad.

I agree with you that Goode has a lot of value but, if playing him at full back means switching Brown to wing, then England suffer at the back. While Brown is first-choice full back, Goode is not a good bench option. Similarly, if Goode was first choice, Brown should probably not be on the bench. Foden complements both better because he has pace on the wing.

Goode is unfortunate in some ways. He had an extended run in the team including that win over New Zealand but never made the position his own, despite, I think, claiming a man of the match award. He mainly won plaudits for his positional play when fielding kicks. That's an important skill, but he never translated that into an attacking threat.

At the time, the average supporter still remembered what a fit Foden could do, and Goode fell short by comparison. If Brown had been the next cab off the rank after Foden, I think he wouldn't have looked as threatening either. It's Brown's good fortune to be compared with the Saracen rather than the Saint.

For Goode to have won the affections of the England supporters more broadly, he needed to demonstrate the aspects of his game you say he shows for his club. In an England shirt, I haven't seen him as an attacking threat, or an alternative playmaker, or an effective tactical kicker.

Scrumpy wrote:As a club player a guy like Goode is a great asset for anyone, but he isn't good enough to cover all the positions he is being asked to cover for England from the bench.

That is why he gets shown up from time to time and why he never really hits the ground running for England.

Bendy would be a better sub for England.

Abendanon has been sadly overlooked by England. Since he rectified his tackling technique he's had some real positives to offer.

Chjw131 wrote:Abendanon has been sadly overlooked by England. Since he rectified his tackling technique he's had some real positives to offer.

You can't play every classy full back for England. Who do you think should have made way for him?

Rugby fan can't argue with that.

I just feel that more criticism should be focussed on the coaches than Goode. Goode should be dropped but it's not his fault if he is retained.

Equally in regards to T.Youngs. If the bloke can't hit his lineout jumpers he should be dropped.

I would say a good example of Goode's tactical kicking was vs Ireland last year when we won in Ireland.

Most of England's failings have been down to the poor decisions of the coaches - not the players. It frustates me that they don't seem to learn.

Ford does warrant his bench spot though if the game is on a knife edge and Farrell is performing well enough I would not bring Ford on.

Lancaster needs to learn not to throw on his bench for the sake of it. If starters are performing well you keep them on.

Ford has got to start against Italy whether we are on for the championship win or not. He is our 2nd choice 10 now, and Farrell is very likely to miss T1 in NZ. That is a really unfair environment to ask anyone to get their first cap at 10 and could affect both his future and our chances in that, and if he does start to mess up against Italy, I'd rather have the option of saving the game by bringing Farrell on than vice versa

ChequeredJersey wrote:Ford has got to start against Italy whether we are on for the championship win or not. He is our 2nd choice 10 now, and Farrell is very likely to miss T1 in NZ. That is a really unfair environment to ask anyone to get their first cap at 10 and could affect both his future and our chances in that, and if he does start to mess up against Italy, I'd rather have the option of saving the game by bringing Farrell on than vice versa

Agreed, no sleight on the incumbent, just a very bold and sensible decision. Plus with Farrell on the bench everyone will feel secure that we'd have a plan b which in itself removes some of the pressure on Ford.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Chjw131 wrote:Abendanon has been sadly overlooked by England. Since he rectified his tackling technique he's had some real positives to offer.

You can't play every classy full back for England. Who do you think should have made way for him?

Not necessarily as a starter but certainly 23 displacing Goode. I advocated he start in the '12 AIs on the wing with Brown at FB.

kingelderfield wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:Ford has got to start against Italy whether we are on for the championship win or not. He is our 2nd choice 10 now, and Farrell is very likely to miss T1 in NZ. That is a really unfair environment to ask anyone to get their first cap at 10 and could affect both his future and our chances in that, and if he does start to mess up against Italy, I'd rather have the option of saving the game by bringing Farrell on than vice versa

Agreed, no sleight on the incumbent, just a very bold and sensible decision. Plus with Farrell on the bench everyone will feel secure that we'd have a plan b which in itself removes some of the pressure on Ford.

If we lose to Ireland there's a good argument he should start v Wales.

I am pleased for him, he as been knocking on the door for a while now and if we are to have a Back up 10 for RWC, then i say good on Lancaster for giving him a chance now.

I would must he make any mistakes now( this 6ns) rather than be an emergency call up in the RWC and make them then.

I don't think Lancaster has been especially tardy in giving Ford a run. We are really only talking about how he might have been on the bench for the last two matches.

Last year, Leicester weren't getting the best out of him, and his performances for the Saxons didn't make a compelling case to leapfrog Burns.

It's only this year, as Burns has self-destructed and he has developed confidence with a run of games at Bath, that he's finally looked like delivering on his JWC promise.

Lancasters policy is to generally (im not saying always as there have been exceptions) see how players perform over 6 months to a year, and if they show consistancy they will be in the frame for selection.

Ford is probably in that frame now.

However lets be hoenst as rugby fan says...had Burns kept playing a reasonable standard of rugby he would have had more gametime and he would have been on the bench...possibly even starting the odd game...

beshocked wrote:Hood83 on the contrary I would say Flood is overrated. Certainly based on performances this season in the AP plus when Lancaster did give Flood opportunities at 10, he did not take them.

He's not a bad player when in form - but he's woefully out of form and has been for some time.

Goode at 10 suffered like the likes of Geraghty and Burns have - just doesn't have that steady consistency of Farrell Jr.

Goode did have a run of games at 10 but never truly nailed that 10 shirt to the mast. He can do a job there but compared to Farrell Jr he's just not got that authority.

Farrell Jr is a bit maligned but he's mostly reliable - with him it's what you see is what you get.

He's had his dip in performances like other players but he's not been as erratic as the likes of Geraghty,Burns,Lamb etc.

Farrell Jr has shown that he's a test match animal. Someone suited to play international rugby even if he's never going to win any awards. He's got the physicality and size which means he commands a bit of authority. He's also a 10 that other players can be confident in. He's got a long way to be seen in the same way as Jonny Wilkinson but 21 England caps and a Lions tour under his belt at the age of 22 is good going so far.

Ford should have what it takes to challenge Farrell Jr as long as his body holds up to the international game.

Wilkinson's hard hitting style obviously took it's toll on his body. Ford needs to be careful he doesn't take too much responsibility on himself.

My personal feeling is Flood had a whole string of very decent, but not flashy, performances for England when our pack was relatively average. His kicking was pretty decent, and his running game was hugely underrated. But maybe it's an agree to disagree thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkE4MAd-FTQ

Did Kahui tackle Tait head high ?

Floods problem is and has been for some time that hes become highly injury prone and hampered by them. I wouldnt be surprised if thats part of whats pushed him to quit england for the lower workload in France.
Funny this discussion should come up alongside one about Tait.

Hood83 sorry I would say Flood's form in the last two years has been overrated. He had not done enough to take the 10 shirt off Farrell Jr. Overall he's been a pretty good servant for England - 60 caps at the age of 28 shows he has been in the mix for England but he will never been seen in the same light as JW.

Flood has had some good games for England. No one can deny that but he never truly nailed down that 10 shirt for a sustained period before the emergence of Farrell Jr.

Jonny Wilkinson took the 10 shirt back off Flood for the RWC2011 because at the time Flood was not playing well. Flood responded to being dropped by looking brighter in cameos off the bench in the RWC but Martin Johnson had lost faith in Flood at 10.

Saracens beating Leicester in the 2010-11 AP final was the changing of the guard - Farrell Jr vs Flood with Farrell Jr being victorious.

Ford is just 20. I would say his call up is coming at the right time albeit should have perhaps been vs Scotland instead.

beshocked wrote:Hood83 sorry I would say Flood's form in the last two years has been overrated. He had not done enough to take the 10 shirt off Farrell Jr. Overall he's been a pretty good servant for England - 60 caps at the age of 28 shows he has been in the mix for England but he will never been seen in the same light as JW.

Flood has had some good games for England. No one can deny that but he never truly nailed down that 10 shirt for a sustained period before the emergence of Farrell Jr.

Jonny Wilkinson took the 10 shirt back off Flood for the RWC2011 because at the time Flood was not playing well. Flood responded to being dropped by looking brighter in cameos off the bench in the RWC but Martin Johnson had lost faith in Flood at 10.

Saracens beating Leicester in the 2010-11 AP final was the changing of the guard - Farrell Jr vs Flood with Farrell Jr being victorious.

Ford is just 20. I would say his call up is coming at the right time albeit should have perhaps been vs Scotland instead.

Ok fair point, I think Peter's right as well though, maybe the injury proneness is the real issue. I don't think that JW really earned the shirt back off Flood, I think Flood was in the same boat as Haskell, he just got shunted a bit unfairly. But last 2 years? Yeah, not been as good. I think Lancaster should have done more to encourage him to stay, personally. Lots of experience and still a good player, but we are where we are.

JW and Flood both had injury related disruptions to their careers.
No 10 at international level + AP weekly duty may be a bit too much in this targeted position ?
The French club life is certainly suiting Jonny's wellbeing.

I wish Bath would rest Ford every time they play the Chiefs.