Why did Lancaster pick Ashton instead of Wade?

Just putting it out there?

Reminds me of the copious selections of a shoite Rhys Priestland.
Wade is gonna be this years John Bentley.

John Bentley could tackle...!

maestegmafia wrote:John Bentley could tackle...!

If Wade can make 1/100 tackles then he's still better than Ashton.

I'm surprised nobody is mentioning Mike Brown's tackling skills or lack there of.

Im still amazed so many people slated Cuthbert's defence.

It is starting to look more daft with every game Wade plays. We have this deadly, mercurial try scoring threat who can create something out of nothing, yet he doesn't get a look in, even off the bench. Instead we play an incredibly out of form player on one side (who has stopped doing what made him good in the first place) and a out of position full back on the other... and we hardly score any tries. I understand his defensive weaknesses, but could his tackling be any worse than Ashton's? Or could his positioning be any worse than (the out of position) Brown?

It is the same situation with no.8. Billy Vunipola has been a stand out player all season... yet we play a guy who is patently too lightweight to play no.8 in a lightweight back-row. What is worse is that I have seen him start to play there for Northampton too, which I suspect is at the request of the England management. This suggest that he is being seen as a long term option at no.8.

Lancaster still has a lot of credit in the bank with me, but if this persists into the summer and afterwards I think I will start getting a bit fed up.

All I can say is wade is like Robinson and shane Williams impossible to mark so small and can do things in a game that no expects he's not going get his England cap for some time because he will have his lions one first

I don't think Brown's tackling itself was the problem, just his positioning on the wing and his lack of pace meant he could be exposed.

Ashton is desperately out of form and needs to be given time to rediscover it at club level.

If Wade doesn't go with the Lions (and he could be a bolter), he has to start on the wing for the England tests in Argentina, he's earned the opportunity.

Was having a discussion with a few friends last night on Twitter. We didn't debate the number 9 position, but we decided on a backline of:

10. Farrell
11. May
12. Twelvetrees
13. Tuilagi
14. Wade
15. Brown

With Farrell and Tuilagi likely to be on the Lions tour, I'd like to see Flood and Burns start a test each in Argentina and Trinder take the 13 spot. Play whoever's available at 9 and give that backline a chance to run at Argentina. If they find their feet then they can form the basis of our backline for the Autumn series.

Agree with Cumbrian, Vunipola should have come in earlier, perhaps he would have if he hadn't been injured earlier in the tournament. He should go to Argentina as well and deserves some good game time. Wood is a 6 or at a push a 7. He shouldn't be played at 8. With him there it puts too much pressure on the centres (and in particular Tuilagi) to make the hard yards and doesn't allow them the opportunity to play in space.

I like your back-line, but I'd still bring Foden back into the fullback position, people seem to have forgotten all about him. He was one of our best players for the last couple of years!

I haven't seen his form recently, but I think Brown earned the right to be first choice 15 over Foden, before being shunted out to the wing to cover a lack of options. I didn't get a chance to see Leicester/Northampton the other week, but I can't imagine any Northampton players shining in that.

For me Foden would tour and possibly take the 23 shirt as he can cover wing and full-back to a high standard and has vast International experience, but I'd give Brown the shot he deserves at 15 for the Argentina tour. If Foden starts next season back at his best then he can slot straight in for the Autumn series.

All coaches show a little bit of loaylty/faith, rightly or wrongly in players who have performed previously.

Howley did it with the likes of Jenkins and Roberts and he looked to have made a huge error after the Ireland but he stuck with them and they came good by the end of the 6Nations (though I would still have started James)

Lancaster showed Ashton some faith, stuck by him but unlucky for both it didn't come good.

Like with Priestland (though his was an injury) some players need to be dropped for their own good in the long term.

I think the worst thing for Wade is to be picked for the Lions. If he gets selected he's going to be picked in the dirt trackers team and won't get selected for the tests because he hasn't played test rugby.

The best thing for his game is that he gets picked for the Argentina series and gets game time. They are no mugs and the experience will get him more noticed than playing for the Lions. Then we are more likely to see him be included in the England test squad for the 2014 6N.

The best thing for Ashton is to feel the sting of not being wanted and for him to react in a positive way and come back hungrier next season. Sometimes a mental break is just as important as a physical one. It sure was needed for Priestland and I think the two cases are not dissimilar.

Cumbrian wrote:It is the same situation with no.8. Billy Vunipola has been a stand out player all season... yet we play a guy who is patently too lightweight to play no.8 in a lightweight back-row. What is worse is that I have seen him start to play there for Northampton too, which I suspect is at the request of the England management. This suggest that he is being seen as a long term option at no.8.

You do realise that BillyV was not fit for the Ireland, France and Italy games - and had not much game time to be considered for the Wales game.

LondonTiger wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:It is the same situation with no.8. Billy Vunipola has been a stand out player all season... yet we play a guy who is patently too lightweight to play no.8 in a lightweight back-row. What is worse is that I have seen him start to play there for Northampton too, which I suspect is at the request of the England management. This suggest that he is being seen as a long term option at no.8.

You do realise that BillyV was not fit for the Ireland, France and Italy games - and had not much game time to be considered for the Wales game.

No. No, I did not.

I still stand by my other comments regarding Wood not being the right person for the no.8 shirt though.

maestegmafia wrote:John Bentley could tackle...!

Wade is actually a very good tackler and rarely misses. He has been fairly criticised for his defensive positioning which I believe is improving.

Up until that point Lancaster always picked the form players. In the most recent tournament he didn't and England went backwards. If Wade does what he did last night on a weekly basis then it is an absolute travesty he was overlooked for Ashton! There is no doubt in my mind that this England coaching team is the best that England have had in a long time so the lessons will be learnt. IMO you should also look at Twelvetrees and Daly in the centre.

Doesn't matter who we pick in the centres or on the wings, if we can't get quick ball for them, then they're going to struggle just as much. We need Morgan back for some good carries. It's much easier to secure a ruck going forward with a few bigger players. Hopefully Manu won't have to be at the rucks trying to secure the ball and can run some more lines from deep - this is when he's at his best.

its to do with the limitations of the EPS after it was filled with a darth of forwards thats why WADE trained with England during the 6N when he could, but Wasps had priority.

We cannot ever again allow ourselves to be bullied. Lancaster and his cohorts must eat humble pie and learn lessons or at the next RWC we will be bundled out by a bigger wales side and outrun by a sharper aussie side.

That cannot be allowed to happen for the good of the game in this country it cannot happen.

Other sides are going to try to take liberties with us. We need a harder edge.

MJ recognised this in his seleciton of Attwood i think

I still cant believe all the criticism Brown has been getting. He was pretty damn good for a guy who aint a winger.
Give him his shot at FB. Then put Wade at 11.

MJ recognised this in his seleciton of Attwood i think.

We'd all pick Attwood on his old Gloucester form...but he hasnt hit that level for years...well until recently when he finally seems to be creeping back up there.
Another could be Fearns...a physical, heavy confrontational back rower.

I think that was the role they hoped Callum Clark would fill. Does anyone think he will travel? I havent seen anything of him...hows his form been?

Clarke's just come back Geordie. Had a terrible injury (shoulder?) the game before the Six Nations and has just come back last weekend. Not sure how he went though.

Played about 20 minutes and did alright, competed well at the breakdown and a couple of good runs. Still needs decent amount of gametime to get back to form.

Amazing that England cam so close to a slam with such a weak back three.

Goode is dreadful, Brown isnt a winger and Ashton was utterly dire.

Absolutely Guns, imagine if we had played our strongest lineup positionally...

I still maintain i like balance in the back 3. One winger with pace sidestep, magic...and the other more of a bruiser with pace...route one, but in the absence of that..id be happy to look at Marlon Yarde or a few others.

Hopefully Ashton can regain some confidence and form as he is quality when he is there...

Agree GG. Brown should be starting fullback, Goode needs to offer more attacking threat, and Ashton needs to bring his AP form to the International stage. It is staggering how close England got to the GS with that back 3, you're right. Very limited ball reached the wings, which makes Brown's overall tournament performance even more impressive, considering the quality of ball he had to work with.

Yes not much ball reached the back three at all as it didnt seem to fit in with the England gameplan. Goode got some ball from kicks but blew his load every time with silly side side steps and running into contact.

Ashton and Browns defense wasnt great.

He seemed to slip a lot before reaching the contact!

Ashton's defence doens't need talking about anymore- everyone knows.

Brown's defence wasn't up to winger standards, neither were his support lines. Conversely, I actually think his defence at fullback in the premiership is excellent.

bluestonevedder wrote:He seemed to slip a lot before reaching the contact!

Ashton's defence doens't need talking about anymore- everyone knows.

Brown's defence wasn't up to winger standards, neither were his support lines. Conversely, I actually think his defence at fullback in the premiership is excellent.

Yes he is a much better fullback.

I think Goode slipped a lot because he kept trying to side step invisible players. Cant understand why he doesnt just wait till he reaches the opposition defence before he sidesteps. Might even break the line.

Wade was given three areas to work on by England. Tackling, taking the high ball and kicking from hand.

Tackling - given the current preference for 'wrap' tackles to prevent offloads, Wade will always be at a disadvantage against bigger, more powerful players.

High ball - his courage is not in doubt, but again, he will lose out against taller players.

Kick returns - his first instinct is to run, but he can kick ok. Plus he is aware of players inside him with a better angle and a bigger boot. At Wasps that is usually Shug amd/or Daly.

But I have come to the conclusion that Lancaster seems to want utility players in a number of positions; namely the back row and back three.

We saw how ruthlessly those areas were exposed in Cardiff. Wales' back row specialists blasted our guys off the park, and exposed Brown's lack of pace for two tries.

I suspect there will need to be a raft of wing injuries for Wade to be picked atm.

GunsGerms wrote:Amazing that England came so close to a slam with such a weak back three.

Goode is dreadful, Brown isnt a winger and Ashton was utterly dire.

Goode wasn't dreadful but I was surprised how many people thought he was man of the match material. He wasn't. Armitage, Foden and Brown have all looked dangerous at full back. Goode was "safe under the high ball" but offered nothing in attack.

It's bizarre how Brown has not been able to play his best position for England because he is less crap at being a winger than Goode. Armitage and Tait? Players who can play wing, centre and full back. Goode, Foden and Brown? Full backs.

Just make a decision, Stuart Lancaster. Winterbottom over Rees, Dawson over Bracken, Andrew over Barnes, Teague over Richards. Sometimes you have to ignore a great player because you prefer someone else.

Because his tackling is better.

Rugby Fan

The bemusing part is that despite getting no service at all and playing out of position Brown made breaks, made yards, at times took two or three to put him down etc. Yet he was still criticised for poor performances???!!

Put him at FB with Wade on one flank and if we must go with two FB's then Foden on the other wing. That would be a bit more interesting.

Geordiefalcon Brown gets criticised because it was his poor positioning on a few occasions which allowed opposition to score tries - e.g. Scotland and Wales.

Brown fought hard but he was exposed.

Ashton has 3 tries in 3 games. Now he's back at Sarries his confidence is coming back.

Ashton is rated because he is still a good player just in poor form.

In the HC he has outshone Visser twice and outpaced Bowe.

I'm not even sure it's poor positioning with Brown, to me it's more that over the first 10 metres he's not very quick and he isn't quick on the turn, which allows sharper players to steal a march.

Wade is the opposite. His postioning is dreadful, and he thinks his pace will always be able to compensate. It often does, but every now and then the opposition winger will be quick enough to exploit the gap, or powerful enough to shrug off the half challenge, which is his biggest issue.

Ashton's issue is his personality as much as anything. His swallow diving and "footballer mentality" rub people up the wrong way. He's a decent international winger, no question. Not as good as many first thought, especially after his wonder try against Australia. Parts of his game are certainly lacking. He isn't the best defender, and he handling skills and kicking game are average. But in terms of pace and finishing instincts, he's very good indeed.

Is it any surprise that Brown got caught out of position? He is after all a full back being asked to learn the finer details of wing play on the highest stage. When out of position - and it does not need to be by much - he does not have the gas needed to correct matters.

As already stated, rather than trying to shoehorn players into the team (Lawes at 6, Wood at 8, Brown at 11) the coaches need to pick the best available at those individual positions.

I would have Ashton first choice on form...he is a winger i rate hgihly and have always defended him on here.
I would give him the summer off to have a nice break then come back firing.

It is also critical however that we start to play a game that benefits our wingers.
Ashton thrives of angles and following the big carriers...like Morgan etc..we need them back and firing too.

LondonTiger wrote:Is it any surprise that Brown got caught out of position? He is after all a full back being asked to learn the finer details of wing play on the highest stage. When out of position - and it does not need to be by much - he does not have the gas needed to correct matters.

As already stated, rather than trying to shoehorn players into the team (Lawes at 6, Wood at 8, Brown at 11) the coaches need to pick the best available at those individual positions.

Can't agree with that any more! So frustrating that people don't understand he is a FB.

bluestonevedder who doesn't understand he is a full back other than obviously Lancaster?

I would have tried out Wade personally or if not him then Strettle or even Varndell.

Brown is really a victim of his own success. He had such a good game on the wing against the ABs, that Lancaster felt the need to stick with him in that position.

It's certainly time for Wade though. Work on his defence by all means, but his attacking abilities are in a league of their own at the moment. He can score you 5 points from nothing. That is invaliable in this day and age, a lesson Scotland learned this season with Hogg. Whereas under Robinson we could have 65% possession and territory, building numerous lateral phases, we couldn't score. Yet now we have Hogg, and to a lesser extent Visser and Maitland, we now have those players who can finish from anywhere, and take those half chances. Wade does that in abundance, and this season he has scored some really special tries. England should harness him immediately, and I'd be very excited were Gatland to take a punt this summer.

beshocked wrote:bluestonevedder who doesn't understand he is a full back other than obviously Lancaster?

I would have tried out Wade personally or if not him then Strettle or even Varndell.

There just seems to be a lot of talk on 606v2 about how rubbish he his, and how poor his Six Nations was. It's a little frustrating that people don't understand he's a full back, and as LT said, his defense and support lines will be inherently poor for an international winger. Dropping him because he played poorly out of position is not a viable excuse. It would be like dropping Wood for playing poorly at 8. Wood is our best 6. Brown is our best 15. Play them there.

I particularly agree on Wood. Quite a silly decision by Lancaster in my view. Wood was nothing more than functional at 8, and yet Wood and Robshaw together on the flanks is an excellent combination, particularly with a good ball carrier at 8.

In the absence of Morgan, England should have used Billy Vunipola. They developed a good shape to the pack against NZ and Scotland, but then seemed to track backwards thereafter.

Yeh, Wood and Robshaw on the flanks were excellent together. Their work rates combined with Robshaw gritty work, and Wood's speed and aggression complimented each other really well.

bluestonevedder wrote:

beshocked wrote:bluestonevedder who doesn't understand he is a full back other than obviously Lancaster?

I would have tried out Wade personally or if not him then Strettle or even Varndell.

There just seems to be a lot of talk on 606v2 about how rubbish he his, and how poor his Six Nations was. It's a little frustrating that people don't understand he's a full back, and as LT said, his defense and support lines will be inherently poor for an international winger. Dropping him because he played poorly out of position is not a viable excuse. It would be like dropping Wood for playing poorly at 8. Wood is our best 6. Brown is our best 15. Play them there.

I agree but you have to admit Brown didn't do well.

Lancaster made selection errors by picking Brown and Wood out of position.

FES I agree. I want to see more of Billy Vunipola.

Oh I admit he didn't do well on the wing, in that he didn't score, or pose much of an attacking threat. But, his stats considering that were really, really good.

It's an odd situation.

bluestonevedder if you look at the stats Goode did well too but he is panned on these forums.

Stats only tell you part of the story. Brown was guilty for tries conceded vs Wales and Scotland.

I like Brown. I think he still has a lot to offer but he and the rest of the back three had a really tough 6 nations.

I remember two situations I think in the same match when both Goode and Brown could have passed Ashton the ball which would have likely been a try for him on both occasions. Instead the opportunities were lost. I think it was vs either Italy or France.

Goode's stats were good, but he's a full back, so most of his metres came most returning kicks, not clean breaks. Brown returned some kicks too, but also beat defenders, made clean breaks, and was just a nuisance for some oppositions. His defence at times though was suspect, but for Harlequins at 15 I think it's actually pretty damn good.

Brown was a little too selfish at times with the ball. You're right, there were occasions when he should have offloaded, but instead backed himself. Wrong call with Ashton in the waiting.

Play the players in their right positions is always a sensible move - does seem to have been over looked somewhat.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I would have Ashton first choice on form...he is a winger i rate hgihly and have always defended him on here.
I would give him the summer off to have a nice break then come back firing.

I hear he is going to Aus this summer with Dorothy to find some courage (someone told him it comes in handy when tackling) Or was that OZ?, I thought Gatland's first name wasn't Dorothy

dragonbreath wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:I would have Ashton first choice on form...he is a winger i rate hgihly and have always defended him on here.
I would give him the summer off to have a nice break then come back firing.

I hear he is going to Aus this summer with Dorothy to find some courage (someone told him it comes in handy when tackling) Or was that OZ?, I thought Gatland's first name wasn't Dorothy

As opposed to the courage displayed by someone having a go at him from behind a keyboard, eh?

Its funny how the Welsh deride England for being so poor...yet their victory over us in the 6n finale has seemingly made them world beaters...

Dragonbreath...Ashton is a very good player who is at rock bottom confidence. It is not helped that we have played a defensive game with few signs of attacking quality that wingers like him thrive off. He will come good again.