Farrell must go

[murphy15]

If we drop Ford then we are getting too close to French policy. I think he's got a lot of potential and we need to stick with him. He is a potential long-term choice for 10, whereas Farrell is one-dimensional and a disciplinary nightmare. Perhaps Slade will wind up a 10, but he is so good at centre it would be a shame to miss out on the chance to see a midfeld axis of Tuilagi / Slade. Personally, I think Cipriani warrants a shot in the squad - perhaps his last shot - but he's earned it.

[Roly]

If we drop Ford then we are getting too close to French policy. I think he's got a lot of potential and we need to stick with him. He is a potential long-term choice for 10, whereas Farrell is one-dimensional and a disciplinary nightmare. Perhaps Slade will wind up a 10, but he is so good at centre it would be a shame to miss out on the chance to see a midfeld axis of Tuilagi / Slade. Personally, I think Cipriani warrants a shot in the squad - perhaps his last shot - but he's earned it.

His kicking is woeful of late (less than 54% if I remember rightly).

If he wants to be part of an England squad, he's going to have to drastically improve that average I'd suggest.

[4071]

Ford had a dreadful game. He fell off tackles, was indecisive and got caught in possession when inside the Irish 22 and didn't kick well. No clean breaks, no metres made and he isn't allowed to take conversion attempts.

Why wasn't he taken off instead of Farrell, with the back line moving up one, Brown going onto the wing and Goode taking over at 15?

On current form, I hope he is "rested".

ESPN stats have Ford making 8 tackles and missing none. So, those tackles he 'fell off'.... which ones were they?

[4071]

A better goal kicker than Owen? Charlie cost England so many 6Ns games with his goal kicking, remember than one vs France at Twickers

Yes.


And which others?


SO MANY games that a few more ought to leap out at you, aside from the France game (where Barkley took over kicking duties and missed 3 himself).


Actually, I've had this argument more times over the years than I can recall. There was one short period in Hodgson's career where Aldred completely changed his kicking style (as he did with Flood, with similar results). That season, Hodgson kicked at 55-65%, which is utterly unacceptable.

But it really was just one season in a career that lasted somewhat longer. Trouble is that England fans have inexplicable memory issues and will judge a player's entire career on a handful of memorable moments, and refuse to change their opinion in the face of repeated contrary evidence.

Hodgson was consistently a good kicker. He had a bad season, but that was an outlier.

Actually, I would not be surprised if Farrell has a worse conversion rate at international level than Hodgson (or at least, so similar as to make no odds). Difference is that Hodgson missed kicks in a losing cause (because his England team was truly awful) and Farrell has missed kicks in a winning cause, which means that the Hodgson misses are more memorable and that the unchallenged TRUTH that Hodgson was a flaky kicker and Farrell a dead-eye shooter persists. In spite of reality.

[fleabane]

I don't know which game the ESPN statistician was watching, but the three of us watching from my sofa saw wee George fall off at least three tackles!

His indecision alone should be enough to step him down. It could be very costly against the Welsh, and his decision making against a retreating pack has never been sharp.

[L Smith]

Ford had a dreadful game. He fell off tackles, was indecisive and got caught in possession when inside the Irish 22 and didn't kick well. No clean breaks, no metres made and he isn't allowed to take conversion attempts.

Why wasn't he taken off instead of Farrell, with the back line moving up one, Brown going onto the wing and Goode taking over at 15?

On current form, I hope he is "rested".

ESPN stats have Ford making 8 tackles and missing none. So, those tackles he 'fell off'.... which ones were they?

Lies, damn lies and statistics!

[Soggypitch]

Ford does look rusty but Jones sees him as his long term 10 and wants to stick with him and give him chance to play himself back into form.

Farrell is the current form 10 in England, he's been playing brilliantly all season for Sarries in the prem and Europe. Some on here however have deep seated prejudices that any kind of form will not dislodge.

Personally my dream England 10, 12 and 13 in form and fit would be Ford, Slade and Manu. Let's hope we get to see that combo in Australia this summer. Farrell of course would be a fantastic bencher to cover 10 and 12.

Oh and I agree that Charlie Hodgson retired from international rugby far too early, a class fly half if ever there was one.

Finally back on topic with Farrell, I completely disagree that he has a discipline problem. Yes he plays with an edge, yes he sometimes looks surly, but he has the sort of temperament you need in a rugby team - we've had a few at Tigers I reckon, one Martin Johnson for a start, and in the current team Barrow, who has been banned twice already this year but Cockers picked him again on Sunday the moment he was available. Why? Because Cockers knows that all successful teams need players with an edge and Barrow gives us that, as does Mike Williams, Slater and OTY. That's why we miss them so much when they're not available.
That's also why I reckon Barrow can go on to be a great lock forward, he's already overtaken Kitch in my view, but he does need to learn that to play on the edge doesn't mean fighting all the time, OTY and Slates learned that as younger players and so will Barrow IMO anyway!

[wellstiger]

Sorry
Ford jnr is not international class.
Farrel is better than Ford but can be on the edge of legality at times.
Cips kicking game is not good enough at present.
Steenson was Irish u21, does he qualify????
Goode is having the time of his life, but pensionable
Your mate from Sarries - ditto -
Don't get me started re Burns - sorry not a fan.
WHO'S LEFT !!!!!

Slade...

Definatley one for the near future. Probably a season away

[Isambard]

Farrell is an enforcer. Ford is a liability. I think that the Ford family are far too inclined to talk with the press, rent a quote.

[TigerCam]

I always thought Farrell was only in for his undoubted nervelesness when kicking goals, and his tackling

Turns out his tackling stats are the worst in the backs-which begs the question
Why on earth is he in the team ??

Surely Centres ---- 12 Tuilagi or Slade or Burrell 13 Daly or Joseph and 10 Ford or Cipriani

Or will EJ ditch Ford to keep Farrell ????

I think once EJ has Manu in form at 12, he will use Farrell/Ford as a start/bench combination. EJ has said that he like the way Ford plays 'flat'. Farrell can suffer from the 'red mist' and give some stupid penalties away as do others like Cole. I think until he has a settled back-row with a bit more pace in it he will continue to jiggle the backline around? It must be tough given the guys to come back form injury? IMO Farrell stays, having another 10 on the park does allow for more second receiver combinations

[mol2]

The problems are:

1) Ford is hopelessly out of form both for club and country.
2) Ford lacks the kicking range for international rugby so if he plays there has to be another player to kick the penalties. Presumably this is why Farrell is playing centre. OK the fly half doesn't have to be the goal kicker, but why compromise one of the other selections to fit in a player who, on current form, doesn't merit selection?
3) Is he really big enough? Is the defensive set up compromised to limit the amount of tacking required of him?

For me Farrell should be the fly half until Slade returns from injury.

[ellis9]

I'd pick anyone other than Farrell!

[darganj]

A better goal kicker than Owen? Charlie cost England so many 6Ns games with his goal kicking, remember than one vs France at Twickers

Yes.


And which others?


SO MANY games that a few more ought to leap out at you, aside from the France game (where Barkley took over kicking duties and missed 3 himself).


Actually, I've had this argument more times over the years than I can recall. There was one short period in Hodgson's career where Aldred completely changed his kicking style (as he did with Flood, with similar results). That season, Hodgson kicked at 55-65%, which is utterly unacceptable.

But it really was just one season in a career that lasted somewhat longer. Trouble is that England fans have inexplicable memory issues and will judge a player's entire career on a handful of memorable moments, and refuse to change their opinion in the face of repeated contrary evidence.

Hodgson was consistently a good kicker. He had a bad season, but that was an outlier.

Actually, I would not be surprised if Farrell has a worse conversion rate at international level than Hodgson (or at least, so similar as to make no odds). Difference is that Hodgson missed kicks in a losing cause (because his England team was truly awful) and Farrell has missed kicks in a winning cause, which means that the Hodgson misses are more memorable and that the unchallenged TRUTH that Hodgson was a flaky kicker and Farrell a dead-eye shooter persists. In spite of reality.

I have never seen Farrell cost england or sarries a game with his kicking.

Hodgson's range is poor - never see him kick more than 35-40m max so his stats should be better than Farrell's as he attempts easier kicks.

Hodgson has never ever looked comfortable under high pressure. Some of the best rugby he played was on Lions tour in 2005 when he was in midweek team and could just fling it about.

Hodgson was a mercurial passer but he isn't in the same league as Farrell.

Farrell is England's future at 10, been unbelievable this year for Sarries.

Hodgson is a worse tackler than Ford, average at best goal kicker.

[ellis9]

Disagree completely. Hodgson is a much better fly half than Farrell. Having said that, most are better than Farrell.

[4071]

A better goal kicker than Owen? Charlie cost England so many 6Ns games with his goal kicking, remember than one vs France at Twickers

Yes.


And which others?


SO MANY games that a few more ought to leap out at you, aside from the France game (where Barkley took over kicking duties and missed 3 himself).


Actually, I've had this argument more times over the years than I can recall. There was one short period in Hodgson's career where Aldred completely changed his kicking style (as he did with Flood, with similar results). That season, Hodgson kicked at 55-65%, which is utterly unacceptable.

But it really was just one season in a career that lasted somewhat longer. Trouble is that England fans have inexplicable memory issues and will judge a player's entire career on a handful of memorable moments, and refuse to change their opinion in the face of repeated contrary evidence.

Hodgson was consistently a good kicker. He had a bad season, but that was an outlier.

Actually, I would not be surprised if Farrell has a worse conversion rate at international level than Hodgson (or at least, so similar as to make no odds). Difference is that Hodgson missed kicks in a losing cause (because his England team was truly awful) and Farrell has missed kicks in a winning cause, which means that the Hodgson misses are more memorable and that the unchallenged TRUTH that Hodgson was a flaky kicker and Farrell a dead-eye shooter persists. In spite of reality.

I have never seen Farrell cost england or sarries a game with his kicking.

However, you recall almost a decade on that game which Hodgson cost us when he only kicked 3 from 6 attempts, which is still a 50% success rate.

I've seen Farrell kicking at 50% and missing easy shots as well.

Perhaps those don't stick in the memory, for some reason....

Difference is that Hodgson missed kicks in a losing cause (because his England team was truly awful) and Farrell has missed kicks in a winning cause, which means that the Hodgson misses are more memorable and that the unchallenged TRUTH that Hodgson was a flaky kicker and Farrell a dead-eye shooter persists. In spite of reality