England- Players That Can be a Little Peeved

As the title suggests I thought perhaps the best way to analyse the new EPS and Saxons squads, (which is here btw https://www.606v2.com/t39214-englands-eps-and-saxons-announced) would be to look at the players NOT selected who perhaps should have been.

Off the top of my head players who I feel have shown good enough form this season to be selected in either the EPS or Saxons are:
George Kruis (S)
Luke Wallace (S)
Nick Easter (EPS)
Karl Fearns (S/EPS) - Injured
David Attwood (S)
Tom Savage (EPS)
Charlie Matthews (S)
Steffon Armitage (EPS)
Dan Robson (S)
Mat Hopper (S)
Mat Tait (S)
Tom Varndell (EPS)

So should any of these players have been selected in front of the current choices? I feel that in the Saxons there is a bit too much of a lean towards past-it EPS players especially in the pack, rather then giving as many future players a chance to train in the International set up as possible.

Think Fearns is injured, quite long term?

Ah hadn't heard that, would explain why he's not in either squad though. Do you know what happened?

Not sure what happened, but think he had surgery on his ankle and is in a medical boot! To be honest, I wonder where he would have been placed since backrow is such a crowded position at the moment. He's similar to Haskell in that he can cover all backrow positions, so would he have been competing for Dowson's place?

Jordan Crane could potentially feel a little peeved at not being included? He's had a quietly decent season so far, pounding away from the base of the scrums and rucks.

Am I allowed to add Steffon Armitage, or is that a different discussion?

Oh no, Pandora's box Mawhis!

I think it's obvious that Lancaster wants no part of Nick Easter regardless of form. He's 34 now, and to include him in the EPS on the build-up to his World Cup Squad would be relying on someone who *MIGHT* still have some good form in 2015.

I also believe that his "Down the toilet" comment in 2011 has gone a long way towards ruling him out of any further selection.

Tait unfortunately is an injury waiting to happen, and never quite lived up to his potential. And Varndell showed us defensively how he has not improved by watching surprisedly as Nick Abendanon ran past him in the opening minute of Wasps v Bath (this from a Wasps fan!).

Mawhis

I thought France-based players can't be included in the official EPS or Saxons squads because it is based on an agreement between the RFU and the Aviva teams. Doesn't necessarily mean Lancaster won't pick him for the 6Ns, although I can't see it happening.

As for those listed:
George Kruis (S) - Agree, especially with Botha being there
Luke Wallace (S) - Agree
Nick Easter (EPS) - Not for me. His time has passed, so regardless of how well he is playing for Quins I don't see merit in him playing for England again other than as emergency injury cover
David Attwood (S) - The current 606 poster-boy who gets consistently ignored by England. Do they know something we don't?
Tom Savage (EPS) - too much too soon. Saxons is his place at the moment.
Charlie Matthews (S)
Dan Robson (S)
Mat Hopper (S)
Mat Tait (S) - After so many injuries, I'd like him to just come through a year without damage and rebuild some confidence.
Tom Varndell (EPS) - Hmm... Surprised that Strettle got the nod, as he's got similar weaknesses to TV and his strengths are less outstanding. However, should Varndell be ahead of Wade, Sharples etc?

I'll let you have Steffon Armitage

Crane for me though has done little to show his brilliant form of a couple of seasons back, just seems a bit average at the moment.

dummy_half wrote:Mawhis

I thought France-based players can't be included in the official EPS or Saxons squads because it is based on an agreement between the RFU and the Aviva teams. Doesn't necessarily mean Lancaster won't pick him for the 6Ns, although I can't see it happening.

As for those listed:
George Kruis (S) - Agree, especially with Botha being there
Luke Wallace (S) - Agree
Nick Easter (EPS) - Not for me. His time has passed, so regardless of how well he is playing for Quins I don't see merit in him playing for England again other than as emergency injury cover
David Attwood (S) - The current 606 poster-boy who gets consistently ignored by England. Do they know something we don't?
Tom Savage (EPS) - too much too soon. Saxons is his place at the moment.
Charlie Matthews (S)
Dan Robson (S)
Mat Hopper (S)
Mat Tait (S) - After so many injuries, I'd like him to just come through a year without damage and rebuild some confidence.
Tom Varndell (EPS) - Hmm... Surprised that Strettle got the nod, as he's got similar weaknesses to TV and his strengths are less outstanding. However, should Varndell be ahead of Wade, Sharples etc?

Easter should at least be in the Saxons, Vunipola could learn a fair bit from him. Attwood is a massive lump of a player with a lot of skill which I think he'd show a lot more of in the Saxons then he necessarily does for Bath.

Why should Luke Wallace feel aggrieved? He's barely played.

Only 3+1 in the AP
Only 1+1 in the HC - both vs Zebre.

Compare this to his two 7 rivals

Fraser and Ksevic has played all 13 AP games. Starting 10.

Fraser started all 4 HC games too.

Just realised that no one has meantioned a certain lock...


... Mat Garvey

Fearns may be back by the end of the season at best so I can see why he isn't there.

Its good that there are a lot of players going well enough to be in with a chance of making the 2 squads I think. I think Botha is lucky he hasnt been replaced by any of the second rows on that list.

What about Matt Garvey??

Read your mind Geordie!

Not sure Charlie Matthews has played enough, though he was as impressive as Launchbury at the 2011 u20 world cup so is a great prospect.

Garvey is an absolute mystery, and annoyingly doesn't get the plaudits he deserves. Maybe it's because he's played a lot of 6 this season??!

Ai, Matthews is a good prospect too. He's a lump as well isn't he?

Garvey! Sorry but thought i'd join the outrage! Rumour has it Bath are looking to take him from London Irish which could help him. Frankly i'd like to see him at Gloucester.

Lancaster just doesn't seem to like Garvey for some reason. I've heard that its due to his lack of threat at the Lineout, but can't say for sure.

Its lucky for us at LI though - we'll need him to help us stay in the premiership.

I think Joe Simpson would be disappointed not to replace Lee Dickson.

He's surely a classic no.4 lock though so line-out jumping other than at the front shouldn't be an issue.

It is a 606 rumour but I do think there's some merit in the idea that something happened in the changing room of the Saxons v Wolfhounds last year. He was playing very well for England by any standards.

Alex_Germany wrote:I think Joe Simpson would disappointed not to replace Lee Dickson.

Not seen him this season but can any Wasps fans comment on his defensive ability? Always thought he was ropy in that department and you can't get away with that at international level (I didn't overly rate his passing either but someone told me he had improved in this area). I'm biased but do feel that Dickson is the 3rd best English 9 for now.

Don't think Crane should be in the EPS (or Saxons). Solid but not dynamic enough and no different than Dowson when he plays at 8.

Varndell can't defend. Just like Cipriani he shouldn't be anyway near an international squad until he can.

Matt Garvey continues to be a strange omission. Like has been mentioned on here many times, something must have happened during that Saxons game.

Players like Matthews & Wallace ideally need more gamer time before they make the Saxons and would be better off playing for Quins during the international window and gaining experience.

I would say, as a Wasps fan that Joe Simpson should have got the third berth SH. There is no quicker SH available for England & behind Youngs & Care the next SH would always be used as impact from the bench.
His defence is as good as Lee Dicksons.
He had dropped behind in the pecking order because of injury last season & a retreating scrum. This season is different & he is showing some real class.

We are lucky to have such strength in depth but that isn't much consolation to Joe.

I'll join the Garvey shouts for the second row! We've got a fair few of them coming through at the moment so can't get them all in though - also makes it even more odd we only have 3 in the EPS and Botha is in the Saxons but....

Joe Simpson is a very strong runner and good in covering defence but his core SH skills aren't that great. His passing and kicking need to improve markedly before he's ready for Int rugby IMO.

I'd also agree with dummy_half that after so many injuries it may be better to see Tait continue his re-introduction at Welford Road for now. I may be biased there but the staff at Tigers have done a great job getting him back on the pitch this season, they seem to have judged his rehab and rest periods just right so far. Touch wood it continues as I'd love to see him back in England colours soon!

Players like Matthews and Wallace might have been subtly asked to be kept out of the Saxons for the sake of their club!

Mr Bounce wrote:I think it's obvious that Lancaster wants no part of Nick Easter regardless of form. He's 34 now, and to include him in the EPS on the build-up to his World Cup Squad would be relying on someone who *MIGHT* still have some good form in 2015.

I also believe that his "Down the toilet" comment in 2011 has gone a long way towards ruling him out of any further selection.

Tait unfortunately is an injury waiting to happen, and never quite lived up to his potential. And Varndell showed us defensively how he has not improved by watching surprisedly as Nick Abendanon ran past him in the opening minute of Wasps v Bath (this from a Wasps fan!).

So apparently making a flippant comment (taken out of context that he later explained, followed by being the best player in his position around for 12 months and probably the key player at his club alongside Nev and Robshaw) is an indicator of worse character than what Clark did more recently? If that's SL's reasoning, he has lost all, and I mean all, respect I had for him

bluestonevedder wrote:Jordan Crane could potentially feel a little peeved at not being included? He's had a quietly decent season so far, pounding away from the base of the scrums and rucks.

I dont think he can be that peeved to be honest. He still looks a little slow on the pace for my liking.

I'd personally have picked a few wingers ahead of David Strettle.

Sharples and Wade certainly.

Armitages problem is was and always will be France (not methadone).

As long as hes there hes not making himself available. He knew this and still knows it, doesnt really have the right to feel peeved although yes if he was in the country he probably wouldve been picked.

Easter is peeved, quite publicly, over Waldrom...but the reason to leave him out is his age, see also Borthwick who has been solid all round for Saracens and a great organiser...Kruis is learning a lot of his trade from Borthwick and may become a more dynamic player with his attributes so yeah perhaps couldve been included, but hardly in a position to burn himself alive in protest. I dont think Crane has much to whinge about though, not really forcing his way back in.

Tait ...I dont think so.

All round I cant see anyone who hasnt made the 65 at all who shouldve been in the 33 and who can somehow feel mortally offended by not being there. Theres about a dozen names of second rows that have been touted, which really says a number had to miss out.

Its a pretty uncontroversial EPS really, albeit with a few inclusions like Strettle that are on the eyebrow raising side.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Armitages problem is was and always will be France (not methadone).

As long as hes there hes not making himself available. He knew this and still knows it, doesnt really have the right to feel peeved although yes if he was in the country he probably wouldve been picked.

Easter is peeved, quite publicly, over Waldrom...but the reason to leave him out is his age, see also Borthwick who has been solid all round for Saracens and a great organiser...Kruis is learning a lot of his trade from Borthwick and may become a more dynamic player with his attributes so yeah perhaps couldve been included, but hardly in a position to burn himself alive in protest. I dont think Crane has much to whinge about though, not really forcing his way back in.

Tait ...I dont think so.

All round I cant see anyone who hasnt made the 65 at all who shouldve been in the 33 and who can somehow feel mortally offended by not being there. Theres about a dozen names of second rows that have been touted, which really says a number had to miss out.

Its a pretty uncontroversial EPS really, albeit with a few inclusions like Strettle that are on the eyebrow raising side.

Agreed. I think I would have given Tom Varndell a chance ahead of Strettle his strike rate & form this season has been great. Ironically though his last game against Bath was probably his worst for a while & could possibly have tipped the balance after Abendanon rounded him too easily for his try. Still Tom is 2 years younger than Strettle & I hope he is still in the frame for the future.

All in all a very good looking couple of squads. Saxons look as strong as I have seen.

Purely speculation, but I wonder if Nick Easter omission has anything to do with his £35k down the toilet remark? Maybe it's deemed he's not got the right character for the team? Not suggesting this is the case, just questioning whether this hs played any part in SL's decision?

I think Sharples can feel pretty peeved to be dropped ahead of Strettle. I feel Sharples has been treated pretty poorly by SL and seen as somewhat as a scapegoat.

HKC I doubt think it helped his case to get included in last years 6 nations squads, since then hes just gotten older and the side better. Its more the policy of not selecting players that have almost no chance of making the world cup thats kept him out, same as when Johnson didnt pick his chum Lewsey.
He was "tainted" by the world cup fall out, but theres others (like Care) who have had worse issues that have been overlooked or overcome.

Sharples seems to have suffered from the classic England coach lunacy of throwing a new exciting winger in to the Test environment and expecting them to instantly capture their very best club form and if they don't then sack them off quick and get in a steady club player who'll say all the right things in training.

Pretty pathetic.

He's not playing very well (hasn't been for a long time in my opinion) and so he's been replaced by someone in better form who is comfortable on the left wing. Seems a reasonable decision to me.

As a Wasps fan, I am pleased to see Simpson cut out the faffing around at rucks. He's just been getting on with a 9's primary role - swift distribution. Albeit aided by a very good back row and a canny fly half in Stephen Jones, who is still an excellent organiser of a back line

His kicking for territory has been impressive as well. At the moment I think Simpson is worthy of an EPS slot above Dickson.

I also disagree with dropping Sharples for Strettle.

DaveM wrote:He's not playing very well (hasn't been for a long time in my opinion) and so he's been replaced by someone in better form who is comfortable on the left wing. Seems a reasonable decision to me.

That's not the case. In the last 4-5 games he's been excellent for Glaws. The backline has been misfiring, but Sharples is the only one to come away with crredit for all the games (Burns & 36 haven't been on top form). He may not be scoring tries, but he has helped set up tries. In particular his defence has been excellent and his work under the high ball has been top notch.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'd personally have picked a few wingers ahead of David Strettle.

Sharples and Wade certainly.

Two right wingers you mean?


HKC Sharples is criticised because he was poor against Australia and allowed them to score their try. The Aussies had a field day down his wing.

If you can't defend at international level....

SL obviously rates defence.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Armitages problem is was and always will be France (not methadone).

As long as hes there hes not making himself available. He knew this and still knows it, doesnt really have the right to feel peeved although yes if he was in the country he probably wouldve been picked.

I think there's alot more to it than that. I've just finished reading Moneyball by Michael Lewis, which is about the way the Oakland A's Major League Baseball team go about selecting players. The basic premise of the book is that the way managers and coaches go about selecting players is subjective and flawed, and players who get results, but don't measure up to a coaches idealised vision of what a player should look like/behave, get overlooked. That, to me, is the core reason that Armitage doesn't get selected. France is just an excuse for not selecting a player that Lancaster doesn't want to have to select anyway.

If you had never heard of Steffon, on looking at him you'd probably guess that he's a prop, rather than a 7, due to his body shape. Its easy to see why Lancaster, having never actually coached him, might think that he's unfit or that he just looks good because of the dominance of Toulon's pack (despite the fact that he played fantastically for Irish, who never had a dominant pack, ever). Then you look at Robshaw, who more closely resembles what people would think of as a back-row forward, and give him the nod instead, despite the fact that he's not actually playing as well at 7. You then get arguments like Robshaw's Leadership, Intangibles etc, or that he's doing a good job at 7, or that the game has moved on and you don't really need a classic 7 anymore used to justify the decision.

Just my opinion anyway.

beshocked wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'd personally have picked a few wingers ahead of David Strettle.

Sharples and Wade certainly.

Two right wingers you mean?


HKC Sharples is criticised because he was poor against Australia and allowed them to score their try. The Aussies had a field day down his wing.

If you can't defend at international level....

SL obviously rates defence.

He wouldn't have gone for Strettle if that was the case! ; ) You can't fault Strettle's desire, but he is one of the easier players to run through.

I fully appreciate Sharples had a bad game against Australia, my concern about his treatment is more about the statement it makes. He was good enough to start against Fiji, played well; started the next game out of position, played poorly and was never seen again, then dropped from the EPS. It is very reminiscent of the way Anthony Allen was treated. Sharples would be Glaws' 3rd or even 4th choice LW behind Sinbad, May and possibly Monahan, so if he has been dropped as he was being seen solely as a LW then I have no issue as there are better players, my concern is just the way he has been treated. Glaws have a long standing frustration with England for ruining/injuring our players and maybe this its those thoughts I'm airing now!

mawhis wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Armitages problem is was and always will be France (not methadone).

As long as hes there hes not making himself available. He knew this and still knows it, doesnt really have the right to feel peeved although yes if he was in the country he probably wouldve been picked.

I think there's alot more to it than that. I've just finished reading Moneyball by Michael Lewis, which is about the way the Oakland A's Major League Baseball team go about selecting players. The basic premise of the book is that the way managers and coaches go about selecting players is subjective and flawed, and players who get results, but don't measure up to a coaches idealised vision of what a player should look like/behave, get overlooked. That, to me, is the core reason that Armitage doesn't get selected. France is just an excuse for not selecting a player that Lancaster doesn't want to have to select anyway.

If you had never heard of Steffon, on looking at him you'd probably guess that he's a prop, rather than a 7, due to his body shape. Its easy to see why Lancaster, having never actually coached him, might think that he's unfit or that he just looks good because of the dominance of Toulon's pack (despite the fact that he played fantastically for Irish, who never had a dominant pack, ever). Then you look at Robshaw, who more closely resembles what people would think of as a back-row forward, and give him the nod instead, despite the fact that he's not actually playing as well at 7. You then get arguments like Robshaw's Leadership, Intangibles etc, or that he's doing a good job at 7, or that the game has moved on and you don't really need a classic 7 anymore used to justify the decision.

Just my opinion anyway.

All true. Which is why Lancaster only picks fit looking players like Waldrum.

Yeah thats a load of bull. They have all kinds of data on the fitness levels of players, and their workrates. Apparently Waldrom is right up there even if he is a bit slow to get moving...remarkably fit guy although he cant bend over his stomach to reach the ball if its on the ground. Morgan though was selected even though his appearance and fitness levels were poor...but he was told he would have to move to England for that to happen.
The attitude thing though there may be some truth in ...again relating to being in France. He has decided to put his club career ahead of chasing and England spot. That is not the kind of player Lancaster is looking for, I think thats fair to say.

If he were playing in England then he would be in the squad. Going up against Wales I couldnt think of a better player to be chasing the dragon.

HongKongCherry wrote:

beshocked wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I'd personally have picked a few wingers ahead of David Strettle.

Sharples and Wade certainly.

Two right wingers you mean?


HKC Sharples is criticised because he was poor against Australia and allowed them to score their try. The Aussies had a field day down his wing.

If you can't defend at international level....

SL obviously rates defence.

He wouldn't have gone for Strettle if that was the case! ; ) You can't fault Strettle's desire, but he is one of the easier players to run through.

I fully appreciate Sharples had a bad game against Australia, my concern about his treatment is more about the statement it makes. He was good enough to start against Fiji, played well; started the next game out of position, played poorly and was never seen again, then dropped from the EPS. It is very reminiscent of the way Anthony Allen was treated. Sharples would be Glaws' 3rd or even 4th choice LW behind Sinbad, May and possibly Monahan, so if he has been dropped as he was being seen solely as a LW then I have no issue as there are better players, my concern is just the way he has been treated. Glaws have a long standing frustration with England for ruining/injuring our players and maybe this its those thoughts I'm airing now!

If SL is going for a Saracens-esque backline (quite a few would say this is not the correct approach) then having Strettle who has played week in week out with the likes of Ashton,Goode,Barritt and Farrell would help the defensive shape and understanding.

In all likelihood Brown will play on the left wing anyhow as a stop gap.

I agree Sharples hasn't been treated well but unfortunately I don't see what type of form he has shown to be retained. No I don't think Strettle is necessarily the answer but evidently SL wants a left winger in the EPS.

Beshocked - I'm not sure how you can think that SL gives a stuff about the left wing vs right wing distinction when he's played both Mike Brown and Ben Foden on the left wing in recent times.

As a Scot, I'd far rather see Strettle in the England team at Twickenham than Wade, Varndell, Biggs or Sharples.

England will undoubtedly have more of the ball and more opportunities at Twickenham, and I'd therefore go with the wingers that actually score tries.

Wasn't Strettle's try at the weekend his 1st this season?

He isn't a bad player, I'm not saying that. I just think that on form he's a little lucky to be there. Good squad overall though.

2nd try of the season. He scored one vs Munster too.

beshocked wrote:2nd try of the season. He scored one vs Munster too.

I stand corrected. A veritable try scoring machine!

Think it took Christian Wade about 50 minutes to score two tries this season.....

Strettles tries per minute for Saracens and England are slightly worse than the equivalent figures for Andy Goode.

Just saying.

Theres no question that Lancaster is fairly conservative and focussed on defence first with the backs, having seen the way Saracens have been going about their business the last couple of years I cant say that entirely a bad thing. im sure its an approach based heavily on analysis of what actually wins games ( or rather loses them)
Yes its exactly the same kind of thing that Johnson got hammered for, but maybe with some better personell and a hell of a lot less injuries than we've had for years it might start working.

I do agree with FES though ( and this is something that used to madden me with Johnsons teams too ) that theres not much point in picking a side against Scotland thats based on trying to nullify their attacking game. They dont have one.

However you could colour me amazed if Strettle starts that game, Im sure 2 of Foden Brown and Goode will be in the first XV. Alongside Ashton that gives a real mix of skills in the back 3 and some pace. Listening to Scotland Johnsons comments it sounds like they will going for a fairly conservative gameplan and no doubt relying on kicking a fair bit, having guys who can handle the high ball and win those duels is important.
A strike winger like Varndell would surely be competing for Ashtons place, not that of the "second fullback".

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:I do agree with FES though ( and this is something that used to madden me with Johnsons teams too ) that theres not much point in picking a side against Scotland thats based on trying to nullify their attacking game. They dont have one.

Whoa there - not sure I said that last bit!!

HammerofThunor wrote:


All true. Which is why Lancaster only picks fit looking players like Waldrum.

yes, Waldrum, who was only second behind an uninjured McCraw in fitness tests when playing for the Crusaders. (and no... not fitness for Pies consumed per minute)

maybe, just maybe, the coaches and staff at the RFU know just a little bit about players fitness and how they fit into the squads than you!