BURGESS ?

First topic message reminder :

Is the inclusion of Burgess after one international and half a season with Bath (in a different position to where England are apparently playing him):

1 - A testment to the open mindedness of Stuart Lancaster, the England set up and the RFU that someone with a lot of raw talent can come into the squad no matter what their background and experience?

2 - A damning inditement of the RFU/PRL coaching system in that rugby union cannot produce test quality players from within it's own ranks and an admission that the clubs are not producing players good enough to keep a rugby league convert with less than a season's experience out?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Its the guy next to him in that France game who could be a star in this midfield. Burgess was decent vs France how do you think he was outstanding?

Burgess virtually stopped France on the gain line or behind it single handedly. He was also a constant threat in attack. Didn't you actually watch the game? Even Mike Ford said he was world class the very next day.

If burgess is going to be in the team for the next game against Ireland, i would prefare it if he was on the bench. and not in the starting line up.

Burgess has his own thread.

Some think he's lucky to make the squad, some (wrongly) think he's already an outstanding world class centre!

I predict the WC will come and go and Burgess will hardly feature. We'll be talking about someone else. Perhaps Conrad will cement his position as one of the greatest centres of all time, or maybe one of the new SA centres will put down a marker.

Slamming Sam will become a very good 6, or be back partying will Russell Crowe.

englandglory4ever wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Its the guy next to him in that France game who could be a star in this midfield. Burgess was decent vs France how do you think he was outstanding?

Burgess virtually stopped France on the gain line or behind it single handedly. He was also a constant threat in attack. Didn't you actually watch the game?  Even Mike Ford said he was world class the very next day.

No 1 person can stop an entire attack on the gain line and yhats the point when ill never take you seriously again.

No worries. I have never taken you seriously.

englandglory4ever wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Its the guy next to him in that France game who could be a star in this midfield. Burgess was decent vs France how do you think he was outstanding?

Burgess virtually stopped France on the gain line or behind it single handedly. He was also a constant threat in attack. Didn't you actually watch the game?  Even Mike Ford said he was world class the very next day.

Ok firstly, what do you mean "even" Mike Ford? Mike Ford is Burgess' club coach. Hes obviously going to be positive about him, even if he personally sees him as a flanker. If Mallinder or Baxter - coaches of Burgess' rivals for selection - had said it then that would be more significant.

Secondly, you've criticised Dawson and Ryan for expressing their concerns about Burgess elsewhere on the grounds that they should "get behind the team", but you're then happy to use Ford's comments as evidence of something. Personally I think it's that's inconsistent. You're basically saying that any criticism shouldn't be allowed, but any positive comments are evidence in your favour. It'd be like a pharmaceutical company suppressing studies that show their drugs don't work and then pointing at ones that show they do.

Thirdly, you haven't responded on the point about your treatment of Burrell v Burgess. Why are you so happy to waive the penalties Burgess gave away but then slam Burrell for doing the same against a better team?

I really really like Burgess and am excited about seeing more of him for England, but you're talking like he's got a blemish-free record of innumerable top class performances at 12 over a number of years. He's played something like 5 games there in his entire life. He could be amazing, but there nowhere near enough evidence to say that without doubt yet.

Burgess v Burrell is a no brainer. Burgess is :
More physical.
Better ball handler.
Better tackler.
Better motivator of others.
Better carrier of the ball.
A more positive influence on the team.
Someone who could play 6 or 12.

That's for you to be getting on with.

're "even" Ford. He is one of the people who think Burgess is only a forward. So for him to comment publicly that Burgess is world class at 12 is a huge admission of error.

In case some people haven't noticed yet. Burgess has been selected by the England coaches to play 12. They should now get behind them and stop carping about it.

You missed some benefit:

Burgess v Burrell. Burgess is:

More likely to be sin-binned.
More likely to concede penalties.
More likely to be caught out of position.
More likely to decapitate someone.


He has now been selected and indeed I am behind the team, I just hope the coaches are not as blind as you.

englandglory4ever

It's not even remotely an admission of error from Ford. He said it was a world class performance, but that doesnt mean he think Burgess is generally a world class 12 or that he's suddenly better there than at 6. He wants Burgess to be happy in Union and was just advocating for his own player.

In any case you still haven't answered on:

1. Why you treat the views of different experts so differently. You're attaching significance to Ford's comments because they vaguely back up your point, and getting angry about the mere existence of Dawson and Ryan's because they don't.

2. Why you're treating Burgess and Burrell differently. You're entitled to see Burgess as better at the attributes you listed, but you've savaged Burrell for giving away two penalties and completely disregarded the fact that Burgess did the same and got binned.

I'm completely behind the team but that's not at odds with having your own view on selection matters. Would you commit to not criticising a single element of the play or selection on the groundS that it would mean you weren't behind the team? If Burrell had been selected would you be having the same debate but supporting him instead?

And to keep reiterating - I'm glad Burgess was picked and am looking forward to seeing him play. Could be fantastic, but the idea that he's got nothing to prove in Union is a bit fanciful.

Tiresome but here goes.
Surely if Ford says it was a world class performance at 12 then what could be better? A universe class?.

Dawson and Ryan won't accept that Burgess has been selected as a 12. Why keep banging on? It does no good.

I've listed why Burgess is better above.

I'm not saying he's got nothing to prove. My fingers are crossed for him to do well and I think he will. Let's not forget that the coaches have put their faith in him. So it's you and other anti people that are at odds.

One world class performance does not equal a generally world class player was my point. Has Ford changed his mind about Burgess' best long term position based on that one game? I'd be completely stunned if he had.

You're not actually engaging with the arguments of people who disagrees with you, or you'd have explained by now why you think Burgess' tendency to give away penalties is less important than Burrell's, or clarified whether you'd still be taking the "everyone should just get behind the team and stop complaining" line if Burrell had been chosen instead, so I'm going to stop here.

LondonTiger wrote:You missed some benefit:

Burgess v Burrell. Burgess is:

More likely to be sin-binned.
More likely to concede penalties.
More likely to be caught out of position.
More likely to decapitate someone.

More likely to turn like a tanker.
More likely to run at a surprisingly slow pace for a back.


He has now been selected and indeed I am behind the team, I just hope the coaches are not as blind as you.

completed for you

Tiger and Barney. Should look up the word "benefit" some time. I don't think you have got it quite right.

So this is what obsession looks like..

Barney McGrew did it wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:You missed some benefit:

Burgess v Burrell. Burgess is:

More likely to be sin-binned.
More likely to concede penalties.
More likely to be caught out of position.
More likely to decapitate someone.

More likely to turn like a tanker.
More likely to run at a surprisingly slow pace for a back.


He has now been selected and indeed I am behind the team, I just hope the coaches are not as blind as you.

completed for you

Interestingly Lancaster has said that Burgess is as fast as the other centers (apart from Joseph). Can't help thinking this implies the alternatives aren't that fast at all but lets just look on the positive side

(I'm with the 'excited we have him playing for us but reservations about position/ experience' camp)

Burgess is obviously a bit of a punt, but as it came down to him v Burrell in the end, I really don't have a problem with the selection. Looking forward to see Burgess develop, he has huge potential imo and I guess we'll all soon see whether this world cup has come too soon.

Four centre places. Two back ups chosen with 1 cap each, one with less than a year's experience of the game. First choice Barrett and Joseph have never played a test match together.

Perhaps mid-field is not that important any more?

This thread seems to show one of the challenges with the Burgess selection - he is now the virtual sole point of discussion. A guy who has played Rugby for less than a year. Not sure if this is good for the team. All depends on how he goes with his teammates, in practice, and in games. Hopefully this selection is a stroke of genius.

It won't be an issue if he is 4th choice and doesn't feature much - attention will quickly move on. In fact attention will probably move on anyway once the tournament starts. There was always going to be a talking point - if it was Burgess it would have been the omission of Cipriani.

Ive got a good feeling about Burgess but then again I'm just about always optimistic. I can fully understand the well founded concerns of the worries though but I sincerely hope you're proved wrong.

I've also go a good feeling, it's just that I think it's silly to say he's already a world class 12. He could add a bit of excitement and leadership to the squad which is probably more than an equivalent fringe player would. If he goes well on the field it will be nice.

It sounds like he's popular and that he's got a personality that lifts the team which will be helpful too. Absolutely not proven as a world class 12 yet though but if he gets game time he's got the perfect opportunity to announce himself in style. I hope that he is able to do that this this world cup.

offload wrote:Four centre places.  Two back ups chosen with 1 cap each, one with less than a year's experience of the game.  First choice Barrett and Joseph have never played a test match together.

Perhaps mid-field is not that important any more?

No, but we can hope it marks the end of over a decade in which England's centre options have been inconsistent at best and mediocre at worst. The lack of experience is a function of injury and of how quickly Burgess and Slade have come through.

Lancaster's had something like 16 centre pairings in just over 40 games in charge, and unfamiliar centres have rarely been the reason for England losing. The coaching team have repeatedly shown that players can pick up the defensive system quickly; the challenge is in getting fluency into the attack. However, the first choice players in every position except 12 have had time playing together, and most of their backups have too.

The issues will be whether the attack can maintain its fluency with Barritt (you'd hope they've seen enough in training to know that) and if Barritt and Joseph both get injured, meaning that England would have to start with Burgess and Slade (or call up Burrell).