Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

England fans split over who should replace Vunipola

By Josh Raisey
England and Saracens prop Mako Vunipola. (Photo by Warren Little/Getty Images)

The recent injury to Mako Vunipola has caused quite a storm on Twitter, as England fans have discussed who should start in the prop’s absence.

ADVERTISEMENT

The two frontrunners are Ellis Genge and Ben Moon, who both have featured from the bench so far this Six Nations. Both players bring a huge amount of the England team, but are equally very different players, which is probably why there is such a divide amongst the fans.

Of course, it seems almost certain that both will be part of the matchday squad for the rest of the tournament, but the debate rages as to who will start.

Many fans believe that the Leicester prop has the same amount, if not more power than Vunipola, which makes him a great replacement in the loose.

Continue reading below…

Video Spacer

This is undeniable, and although he lacks the hands that Vunipola has, the 23-year-old has not got the nickname ‘The Baby Rhino’ for nothing. The combination of Genge and Kyle Sinckler as England props is something that excites the fans a lot, and would definitely be a very imposing pack.

On the other hand, it is the solidity of Moon that is appealing to the other fans. Many argue that the Exeter prop performed expertly in the Autumn in the absence of Vunipola and Genge, and therefore deserves a start at the Principality Stadium. Moon is a better scrummager, and could well come in handy against a Welsh scrum that got the better of the French for the majority of their match at the Stade de France. Furthermore, some have said that Genge offers more as an impact sub.

The fans have also highlighted the depth in this position, which is something that Eddie Jones will be delighted with. Both players have been retained in the squad over the weekend, and will know that they have just over a week to prove that they can start in Cardiff.

ADVERTISEMENT

This is what the fans had to say:
https://twitter.com/AndrewBartletta/status/1095637797766156289
https://twitter.com/DannyBoy79/status/1095619994610749440
https://twitter.com/foxesfan75/status/1095577912789610496
https://twitter.com/zonalfire/status/1095436797818138625
https://twitter.com/Benjywoolley/status/1095431577834790912
https://twitter.com/RobDebenham/status/1095395429724884993
https://twitter.com/jackwedderkop/status/1095354539794939904
https://twitter.com/LittleChief69/status/1095360228101623809
https://twitter.com/JamesDa87194302/status/1095650337233354753
https://twitter.com/ryanjandrew2/status/1095596610795589632
https://twitter.com/Davyshark1/status/1095390904406417411
https://twitter.com/tychoanomaly/status/1095378800903364609
https://twitter.com/woodwardnl/status/1095350408980115456
https://twitter.com/dannyjt10/status/1095349590616887298

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 11

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

Abbie Ward: A Bump in the Road

Pacific Four Series 2024 | Canada vs USA

Japan Rugby League One | Verblitz v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Fresh Starts | Episode 2 | Sam Whitelock

Royal Navy Men v Royal Air Force Men | Full Match Replay

Royal Navy Women v Royal Air Force Women | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 7 hours ago
The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific

I have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.

21 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING The All Blacks outplayed the Springboks in the World Cup final The All Blacks outplayed the Springboks
Search