England squad

[mol2]

Perhaps all Premiership sides should loose the same number of players during the international periods.

So if Tigers or Sarries lose 6 to England the all other sides should have 6 of their senior squad “suspended” by a league panel (less the number they have with England). That way all sides suffer the same impact and there is no disincentive to have England qualified players.

The league panel should select the best players with a forward/back balance and obviously not those already out with other nations, injury or suspension.

[GB72]

Perhaps all Premiership sides should loose the same number of players during the international periods.

So if Tigers or Sarries lose 6 to England the all other sides should have 6 of their senior squad “suspended” by a league panel (less the number they have with England). That way all sides suffer the same impact and there is no disincentive to have England qualified players.

The league panel should select the best players with a forward/back balance and obviously not those already out with other nations, injury or suspension.

I know that all of the clubs agreed as it gives more certainty as to budget but a change in the way the payments for England are split would at least help. Currently it is divided evenly but if, for example, each club got the equivalent of 2 players going on England duty and then the rest goes to the clubs based on players provided it would at least assist in keeping the quality of the resrves up. England could pay a bit more as well so, for example, pre season they pick an elite squad of 40 players and pay the clubs accordingly. They can then make an agreed number of changes and injury changes but they then pay each club on top of what they have already paid for these players. That may be a bit fairer but that has the downside of putting even more financial pressure on clubs such as Newcastle.

[teds]

That was in the early days when there was no salary cap in place. Squads with more international call ups are now handicapped by the Salary cap and cannot afford those additional players, smaller squads now.

May be wrong but I am not sure that the Autumn Internationals were a thing then and you were also dealing with the 5 Nations for a long time and no rest periods for players and so losing players for 4 weeks in a season did not seem too bad compared to now where they are unavailable for nearly half the season (not sure how far back you are talking but I assumed pre professional as during the professional era I seem to mainly recall the top teams pushing for as many points as possible early on as the others would always close the gap in the international periods).

Yes,there were end of season internationals as far back as 2009 iirc ,maybe even earlier.

If memory serves, I watched Australia v England back in 84 around bonfire night.

What changed I think was back then, a touring side would tour one country with more club and regional matches.

Actually just looked it up on Wikipedia looks like the Australians also played tests against Wales Scotland and Ireland, that year.

[markharbtiger]

Perhaps all Premiership sides should loose the same number of players during the international periods.

So if Tigers or Sarries lose 6 to England the all other sides should have 6 of their senior squad “suspended” by a league panel (less the number they have with England). That way all sides suffer the same impact and there is no disincentive to have England qualified players.

The league panel should select the best players with a forward/back balance and obviously not those already out with other nations, injury or suspension.

I know that all of the clubs agreed as it gives more certainty as to budget but a change in the way the payments for England are split would at least help. Currently it is divided evenly but if, for example, each club got the equivalent of 2 players going on England duty and then the rest goes to the clubs based on players provided it would at least assist in keeping the quality of the resrves up. England could pay a bit more as well so, for example, pre season they pick an elite squad of 40 players and pay the clubs accordingly. They can then make an agreed number of changes and injury changes but they then pay each club on top of what they have already paid for these players. That may be a bit fairer but that has the downside of putting even more financial pressure on clubs such as Newcastle.

Well, if payments in respect of players on England duty are split evenly - as has been mentioned on this forum before - they shouldn't be! Clubs ought to be paid in proportion to the number of players they lose. If I was an Exeter/Gloucester/Newcastle supporter, this 6N period looks great: bit of international rugby whilst my team isn't impacted, and can field full strength against weakened opposition for league games. How is this fair?

[sam16111986]

Perhaps all Premiership sides should loose the same number of players during the international periods.

So if Tigers or Sarries lose 6 to England the all other sides should have 6 of their senior squad “suspended” by a league panel (less the number they have with England). That way all sides suffer the same impact and there is no disincentive to have England qualified players.

The league panel should select the best players with a forward/back balance and obviously not those already out with other nations, injury or suspension.

I know that all of the clubs agreed as it gives more certainty as to budget but a change in the way the payments for England are split would at least help. Currently it is divided evenly but if, for example, each club got the equivalent of 2 players going on England duty and then the rest goes to the clubs based on players provided it would at least assist in keeping the quality of the resrves up. England could pay a bit more as well so, for example, pre season they pick an elite squad of 40 players and pay the clubs accordingly. They can then make an agreed number of changes and injury changes but they then pay each club on top of what they have already paid for these players. That may be a bit fairer but that has the downside of putting even more financial pressure on clubs such as Newcastle.

Well, if payments in respect of players on England duty are split evenly - as has been mentioned on this forum before - they shouldn't be! Clubs ought to be paid in proportion to the number of players they lose. If I was an Exeter/Gloucester/Newcastle supporter, this 6N period looks great: bit of international rugby whilst my team isn't impacted, and can field full strength against weakened opposition for league games. How is this fair?

I think they are weighted so everyone gets something but those who provide the most still get the most.

[Scott1]

What would be deemed a good return from this 6N for SB? 3 wins with 5 performances?

[Scott1]

Best time of the rugby year! Bacon sandwich ,orange juice and coffee time,exciting day ahead! COYE!

[Nofrontteeth]

C you Jimmy!
Sporran combed, bottle opener tucked into sock and full highland breakfast to give energy and soak up the alcohol

Life long Tigers fan with Highland roots. Hope Tigers lads show well but not well enough

Oh flower of Scotland ------
Enjoy the day

[markharbtiger]

Best time of the rugby year! Bacon sandwich ,orange juice and coffee time,exciting day ahead! COYE!

I think for me the best time of the Rugby year relates to Tigers winning, especially finals and cups..

[sam16111986]

What would be deemed a good return from this 6N for SB? 3 wins with 5 performances?

Progression is the most important thing for me. I want to see an improvement from the Autumn and then England improve over the course of the championship. I'm not overly focused on the wins, though 3 wins is certainly achievable.

I'm really interested in how we're going to play, the line up suggests we could see something really quite starkly different from the Eddie tenure so I can't wait to see what Steve has up his sleeve.

[Leicestertinytiger]

3 wins is fair given we’ve got Ireland and Wales away and the squad has suffered injuries to key players. If SB can get the team performing then I think people will be happy after the rubbish under Eddie.

[ay2oh]

3 wins is fair given we’ve got Ireland and Wales away and the squad has suffered injuries to key players. If SB can get the team performing then I think people will be happy after the rubbish under Eddie.

As long as all the Tigers players come out of it unscathed I will be happy.

[No6_Flanker]

Dan Cole hasn’t lost his dry humour:
https://youtu.be/3UyNMqJ7rAc

[Scott1]

Nice starter,now for the main course!

[Leicestertinytiger]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/2ff6 ... 3d871a666d

Excuses started already. Eddie took an England team that didn’t get past the group stage at a home WC and won the grandslam.

SB gets a team who won an away tour to Australia and drew to NZ - at a minimum should be beating Scotland at home, no offence to Scotland.