BBC Home

Explore the BBC

134 comments

user rating: 1 star

Why on earth pick Julian White

Six Nations England
by dammit_chris (U1689410) 21 January 2009
comment on the article

Just heard the 'great' news that Mr Julian White has been called into the elite player squad - I really cannot believe this, when he walked out on the World Cup Squad he showed how committed he was to the England cause, he is a red card waiting to happen and only offers a strong scrummaging technique - in modern rugby this just isn't enough. Why has he been given another chance?

What signal is this sending to the GP young props out there? Why not Mullan, Dicksen (Newcastle) or Corbesiero (if that's how you spell it) - I really dont want to see White lining up for England again, we're meant to be moving towards an open and expansive style of play, not going back to the good old days when we could keep it tight and get the big lads mauling it up the touchline. This is such a backwards step and I am really disappointed with this call.

I cannot help but feel that Matt Stevens has let us down to some degree - he is a professional sportsman and an England international - that brings with it a great deal of honour, respect and expectation to be a role model. Recreational drugs in sport there is no place for, there are not any excuses and it is just a complete shock that of all the players who have got banned it would be Stevens, he seemed a complete professional.

Hopefully the counseling or admitting it publicly will help him but this will more than likely signal the end of his England career - luckily we have Julian White to help us!

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own
comment by Sam (U6583071)

posted Jan 22, 2009

"white is too damn old what is johnson thinking of.....?????

-------------------

Don't you just love it when somebody ignores 7 pages of comments and puts a completely convincing argument in."

And several months of HEC and GP action. What is MJ thinking of?

Form.
Set piece dominance.
Experience.
The youthful backrow.
The unphyscial second row.
The lack of agression shown during the AIs.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 22, 2009

'i recall that game churchofpunk when white came on, got a massive shove on gethin jenkins, dallaglio picked up, ran over jones and scored the try!'
Go the whole way and bring Dalaglio back as well, thanks for the memories, but that's all they are.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 22, 2009

Despite all the hoo hah about the props, what is of greater concern is the continuing Beckhamisation of Mr Cipriani. His performance against Leinster was barely adequate and after half a season, the excuses about him "coming back from injury so lay off him" are increasingly lame. Ultimately he is probably
England's best choice, but right now, he should never be considered at club level in preference over Dave walder, whose omission from the Saxons squad is rather strange. So, Danny boy, the pipes may be calling, but leave off the appearances at the cat walks and the likes, because whilst you are playing so poorly, all it does in attract the sort of criticism that is very hard to ignore. The fans at Twickenham on Saturday were screaming the word 'playboy' in insult. What have you done to dispel that feeling?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 22, 2009

Strikes me that the weak link of the four props is Payne. Why not leave him out and blood a new young prop at loosehead, possibly someone who can cover both sides.

The main point of the front row is to secure good posession at the scrum and, to a lesser degree at the lineout as throwers-in and lifters. Anything else comes second and is largely the role of the backs.

It seems to me that teams like Wales and SA have been successful integrating youngsters into experienced, winning sides. Too much inexperience is decidedly a bad thing and as we already have an inexperienced 3/4 line, back row and half back pairing, plus real problems at inside centre. Lets give those guys some time to settle down before we introduce even more newbies hey?

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Segnes (U1710014)

posted Jan 23, 2009

Lots of good sense in this thread. At a time when the England squad doesn't have a surfeit of "best in the world" players, English supporters should be grateful that there is a seasoned journeyman like White who will do the basic job well. Of course, we hope that the strategists are looking for ways to find the most promising youngsters and blood them thoroughly, but it would be exceedingly cocky to use the premier team for that purpose after the early-season tests.

This is why I think there should be much more interest in the Saxons' coaching team, selection and fixture-list than is the custom.

Just a word to the folk who think that the selection of White interferes with an "expansive" game-plan (not that I think Johnson does wisely to marry himself to such a plan). There aren't that many people who would agree that games are expansive when the props and locks are doing a great deal of the running, and any team which actually relies on props and locks for penetration probably shouldn't be contemplating an expansive game-plan anyway.

Backs need space if they're going to play expansively, and this space is created, not by cluttering the pitch with forwards, but by using the "fat boys'" energies to tie the opposition down in a struggle for possession at source. People who advocate expansive play ought to regard tight forwards with a preoccupation on try-scoring gallops with a measure of suspicion.

This is not to say that forward support isn't always valuable, and that a run from a "fat boy" can't contribute vastly in winning a game, but that is true no matter what your game-plan is.

I'm tempted to conclude by asking whether England presently has enough backs formidable enough to justify their forwards' efforts to make space for them. Perhaps England should be looking for running props. No, that would be mischievous, wouldn't it?

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Sam (U6583071)

posted Jan 23, 2009

"Perhaps England should be looking for running props"

There is no such thing and you know it. A prop might get a jog going and allow his bulk to pull him forward gathering the momentum to break a challenge but a prop actually running pfft yeah right.

Fair point about the England backs though, the Care/Cipriani partnership was embarrassingly bad in the AIs and the midfield combo of Flutely and Noon didn't really impress either.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Juggler (U2995016)

posted Jan 23, 2009


>> A prop might get a jog going and allow his bulk to pull him forward gathering the momentum to break a challenge but a prop actually running pfft yeah right. <<


I saw Matt Mullan run once. Actually run.

I know he's converted hooker, but that's no excuse.

I assume the Front Row Union convened and had a word with him.

Got to stamp that sort of thing out before any other props start getting ideas.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Thunor (U10890672)

posted Jan 23, 2009

Was that when he ran down Hook? <laugh> That was one of the best things I'd seen in ages. Lewsey would have been proud.

I wonder how much stick Hook got for been chased down by that cheetah of a player (the loosehead prop)?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 23, 2009

"English supporters should be grateful that there is a seasoned journeyman like White who will do the basic job well. "

hes only played for 2 clubs to my mind

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Segnes (U1710014)

posted Jan 24, 2009

Oh dear. Looks as if I've stepped into it with my usage.

Tallshort, in calling Julian White a journeyman, I simply meant that he is analagous to a competent tradesman (in the best sense). My dictionary doesn't offer a definition of "journeyman" which seems to me to imply club-hopping, but be that as it may I certainly wouldn't want to accuse White of being a club-hopper. He's anything but.

And thanks for your funny ripostes, Sam and Juggler - I laughed aloud. Of course, by my reference to "running", I meant running in open play in possession of the ball, entailing receiving and delivering passes. I am quite aware that everybody is expected to run (in the proper sense of the word)a good deal in the course of a match. I am myself amused by the older expression which has now been superceded by the phrase "expansive rugby": it used to be called "running rugby", as if any other tactical approach entailed players proceeding by walking, or hopping, or a succession of cartwheels and handsprings.

Well, hoist by my own petard. Thanks for the laugh, blokes.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5
    0 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 100.00%
    5 votes

average rating:
1.00 from 5 votes