England's next EPS due soon.

First topic message reminder :

Well it has been a good Summer for the development of the England team as 2015 comes ever quicker into sight. Twelve players with RWC aspirations (ie not Matt Stevens) featured for the Lions. Most of those will have seen their game improve - possibly none more than Owen Farrell. Training day in, day out with such good players for so long has to help.

The remaining players delivered everything we could have asked for in Argentina, whilst the juniors managed to win the JWC. We are truly starting to look as if there is competition for every place.

On July 5th 2012, Stuart Lancaster named last season's squad. He will shortly name this seasons. Most of the 33 players are probably fairly predictable, yet even so it should have a rather exciting look to it.

I suspect the squad will look something like:

Props (5): Cole, Corbisiero, Marler, Vunipola, Wilson
Hookers (3): Hartley, Webber, Youngs
Second Row (4): Attwood, Launchbury, Lawes, Parling
Back Row (6): Croft, Morgan, Robshaw, Wood, Vunipola (+ 1 from Clark, Haskell & Kvesic)

Half-Backs (5): Care, Farrell, Youngs (and two from Burns, Dickson & flood)
Centres (4): Barritt, Tuilagi, Twelvetrees (and one other from Eastmond, Joseph or Tomkins)
Wingers (3): Ashton, Wade, Yarde
Full Backs (3) Brown, Foden, Goode


It is possible to pick two decent teams from that, and so long as Lancaster picks specialists rather than trying to shoehorn players in, we could have a pretty decent season.

And I didnt think Yarde was too small or underpowered either.

Might have to think about how the back row could help deal with the tackling. Neither Wade nor Eastmond avoid contact - its going to be more about having someone else available to back up quickly

I think we all know its going to be:

12 - Barritt or Twelvetree
13 - Tuilagi

So no fears there whatsover...this then means come the second half we can bring Eastmond on in the second half and either keep Manu on or Move Twelevtrees out to 13 and we can see how Eastmond goes.

Still think Eastmond should have been a 9. Running ability, creativity...and he will learn game management quickly in that spot...

And I didnt think Yarde was too small or underpowered either.

Lost in Wales...absolutely mate...hes powerful and explosive...i wouldnt class him as a weak link physically

I am interested to see that people are including Marland Yarde as a physically small or weak player/defender,  he has always seemed physically strong to me.  I always thought that he could prove a nice counter balance to Wade's rapier.  Physically these would go toe to toe with anybody in the world:

09. Ben Youngs (5ft 10in & 13st 9lb)
10. Owen Farrell (6ft 2in & 15st 2lb)
11. Marland Yarde (6ft 1in & 14st 0lb)
12. Billy Twelvetrees (6ft 3in & 15st 10lb)
13. Manu Tuilagi (6ft 0in & 17st 4lb)
14. Christian Wade (5ft 10in & 13st 8lb)
15. Ben Foden (6ft 0in & 14st 11lb)

ON the inclusion of too many small players,  don't we talk about picking the right player for the right match when we debate about Wood vs. Croft? I just think the right balance needs to be struck.  Unfortunately for Eastmond,  I think he is going to be seen as more of an impact player than a starter.

I don't think anyone is really suggesting Yarde is too small?  He is young and needs experience.  

In the picture leading the ESPN article, he looks like a monster compared to Eastmond.  
http://www.espnscrum.com/england/rugby/story/192667.html

I like Geordie's thought that Eastmond could/should have been developed as a scrum-half.  Failing that, he certainly fits the mold of an impact player when England are losing.  Sadly for him, that won't happen again until some time around 2018..........

I'm not sure of Marland Yarde's weight/height stats, but actually he is incredibly powerful.  I would go so far as to say that I would be surprised to find many EQ wingers more powerful than he is.  Certainly not Ashton, Strettle or Monye who have all been deemed powerful enough to don the jersey in the past.

doctor_grey wrote:I don't think anyone is really suggesting Yarde is too small?  He is young and needs experience.  

In the picture leading the ESPN article, he looks like a monster compared to Eastmond.  
http://www.espnscrum.com/england/rugby/story/192667.html

I like Geordie's thought that Eastmond could/should have been developed as a scrum-half.  Failing that, he certainly fits the mold of an impact player when England are losing.  Sadly for him, that won't happen again until some time around 2018..........

Wasn't he the Predator out the original Predator movie?

I know at the moment England have taken a few beatings by the welsh specifically upfront but I think it would be wrong to simply think they should only consider those that can match up like for like with them.

Conrad Smith ain't the biggest centre nor is BOD.

The boks have massive players throughout their whole team but you still see chaps like Aplon, De Jongh and Hougaard in the team and you may see a little chap called Deon Fourie gracing the backrow shortly.

Yes size is important but if a little guy can hold his own and then give an extra dimension to the team then they should play and the blend of players is so important.

I remember in the early 00s when people and pundits thought Jason Robinson wouldn't be able to play union due to his size. Probably the closest in terms of his attacking danger to Lomu that the game has seen since the great man retired... and he ws never a liability in defence either.

Could Wade come close to Robinsons level IF he reaches his potential?? He's some prospect.

Robinson did hit union in his peak... so that gave him an advantage whereas Wade is still growing and won't peak for a while.

I would say however that Robinson in League in his early years was still as dynamite as he was in union.

Difficult to say... he doesn't have the step that Robinson had... probably more pace though.

The other little guy, Eastmond??? He has that Robinson style of play more than Wade IMO. His try vs. Argentina was very impressive.

Of the three (eastmond, yarde and wade) I think in terms of competition for selection in their individual positions, wade probably has shown the most in the AP and assuming that his form continues (and i fully imagine it to) expect him to be the first to be selected. I've tried to discount the Argentinean tests given they were 2nd/3rd choice selections.
Yarde's form in the AP was generally good last year and I thought he showed touches of class and importantly the hunger necessary for him to get noticed. I still think he is raw and will need to continue to develop, because if we are open minded to the facts you will soon realise there is plenty of competition to pick from.
As for eastmond, of the three i think his selection is the most problematic. In terms of positional competition (IC) as things stand i would select twelvetrees and barrett in front of him and would also mention burrell as well, however each of these four are very different players so perhaps could offer a horses for courses solution (something i'm not really keen on) or would need to fight it out in strait forward selection terms. Eastmond in terms of abilities / style of play is most similar to twelvetrees but then again is very different. Yes they are both spatially creative ball players but from there on their abilities are divergent. Eastmond as it has been mentioned above is a brave tackler and for his size is very strong, however and i'm happy to be corrected here, has been protected in the defensive line when playing IC for Bath, which is something which unless performed to very high standard will always be disruptive for a side. Furthermore eastmond is still very much learning the Union positions and though he is definitely an excitement machine, he will need a settled period of IC selection at Bath (i believe he has played wing, OC and IC) before he will truly challenge for national selection. He is undoubtedly a very talented player and i fully expect him to continue on an upward curve, the question is how high that curve will project?
In terms of playing all three together in a WC final, well i would have no qualms assuming each genuinely merited their selection. Behind an abrasive pack i would be happy to field young’s burns yarde eastmond tuilagi wade foden, however right now i'd prefer young’s varndell flood twelvetrees tuilagi wade foden.

Cumbrian wrote:I am interested to see that people are including Marland Yarde as a physically small or weak player/defender,  he has always seemed physically strong to me.  I always thought that he could prove a nice counter balance to Wade's rapier.  Physically these would go toe to toe with anybody in the world:

09. Ben Youngs (5ft 10in & 13st 9lb)
10. Owen Farrell (6ft 2in & 15st 2lb)
11. Marland Yarde (6ft 1in & 14st 0lb)
12. Billy Twelvetrees (6ft 3in & 15st 10lb)
13. Manu Tuilagi (6ft 0in & 17st 4lb)
14. Christian Wade (5ft 10in & 13st 8lb)
15. Ben Foden (6ft 0in & 14st 11lb)

ON the inclusion of too many small players,  don't we talk about picking the right player for the right match when we debate about Wood vs. Croft? I just think the right balance needs to be struck.  Unfortunately for Eastmond,  I think he is going to be seen as more of an impact player than a starter.

On the size thing, think we just need the right balance. We also have to accept what we have and work round that. We can pick the two biggest wingers to match Cuthbert and North, but that will probably mean players like Banahan, who are in my opinion some level below those two.

The alternative is we a) pick guys who can exploit their weaknesses - not many but neither turn that quickly and Cuthbert's positioning is still not great - AND b) work out how we can best mitigate against our players relative weakness (likely to be size, but could also be total lack of creativity :-) ) without hugely disrupting the team. If players like Savea and North run directly at Wade, they're going to make yards. If they need to run over him from 5 yards, they're going to do that. But they're going to do that to all our wingers, unless you put Tuilagi there (and frankly I think he would end up a better winger than centre, but anyway).

I don't think you want too many physical mismatches, but one of the big advantages to players like Wade and Eastmond is they are happy to distribute as well, they're creators. Without players like that we really have little spark, in my opinion. I honestly think if Eastmond gets a lot of game-time at 12 he could be very, very good.

OK, i'm probably in a minority of one...but I think dropping Haskell was a mistake. I still think he's a better bench option across 6,7 and 8 than most others. He's also the only 6 we have defensively who can stop players on the gain-line and (when he bothers to get his body position right) gain some yards carrying.

I think the stop is harsh on Haskell and I wouldn't have dropped him but he's easy enough to call up and reintegrate if needed

Agree regarding Haskell.  I'd have kept him in the EPS as I believe he is a better option for the match day 23 than Vunipola, who is still a long way behind Morgan and offers no flexibility as a bench option.  I'll admit to a little hypocrisy here as I have previously bemoaned the inclusion of a cover option rather than an impact option on the bench, but I think balance is needed and Haskell does provide impact in his own way.

I think its worth highlighting his workload over the last few years:

2010-11 season with Stade Francais
2011 Six Nations, in which he was a stand out player
2011 World Cup summer camp
2011 World Cup
2011-12 season at Ricoh Black Rams
2012 Super Rugby season with Highlanders
2012 summer tour to South Africa
2012-13 season with Wasps
2013 Six Nations

So that makes it 3 years non stop competitive rugby, encompassing 4 domestic seasons in 4 countries, 2 Six Nations championships, a brutal summer tour and a World Cup.  Wouldn't surprise me if he really impressed for Wasps this year after a proper summer break then pre season for the first time in so long.  I hope he is still in Lancaster's plans.

As a side note while on the topic of Haskell, we all give him a bit of a hard time for the whole 'Brand' thing that comes with him, but I saw him being interviewed recently where he was asked about it.  His response was along the lines of "Yeah I get a bit of stick for it all, but its a short career so I'm making an effort to lay foundations for post-rugby opportunities, I've got little by way of qualifications so trying to get fingers in a few pies.  We get a lot of spare time and I'd rather not fill my days playing xbox."

An admirable stance in my book, an approach that more players should consider.  Although admittedly it doesn't have to come with some of the cringe worthy posing.

Alex_Germany wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:I don't think anyone is really suggesting Yarde is too small?  He is young and needs experience.  

In the picture leading the ESPN article, he looks like a monster compared to Eastmond.  
http://www.espnscrum.com/england/rugby/story/192667.html

I like Geordie's thought that Eastmond could/should have been developed as a scrum-half.  Failing that, he certainly fits the mold of an impact player when England are losing.  Sadly for him, that won't happen again until some time around 2018..........

Wasn't he the Predator out the original Predator movie?

Blimey (an expression I never use), but that's it. Let's hope he can stop people like the Predator too.

jeffwinger wrote:Agree regarding Haskell.  I'd have kept him in the EPS as I believe he is a better option for the match day 23 than Vunipola, who is still a long way behind Morgan and offers no flexibility as a bench option.  I'll admit to a little hypocrisy here as I have previously bemoaned the inclusion of a cover option rather than an impact option on the bench, but I think balance is needed and Haskell does provide impact in his own way.

I think its worth highlighting his workload over the last few years:

2010-11 season with Stade Francais
2011 Six Nations, in which he was a stand out player
2011 World Cup summer camp
2011 World Cup
2011-12 season at Ricoh Black Rams
2012 Super Rugby season with Highlanders
2012 summer tour to South Africa
2012-13 season with Wasps
2013 Six Nations

So that makes it 3 years non stop competitive rugby, encompassing 4 domestic seasons in 4 countries, 2 Six Nations championships, a brutal summer tour and a World Cup.  Wouldn't surprise me if he really impressed for Wasps this year after a proper summer break then pre season for the first time in so long.  I hope he is still in Lancaster's plans.

As a side note while on the topic of Haskell, we all give him a bit of a hard time for the whole 'Brand' thing that comes with him, but I saw him being interviewed recently where he was asked about it.  His response was along the lines of "Yeah I get a bit of stick for it all, but its a short career so I'm making an effort to lay foundations for post-rugby opportunities, I've got little by way of qualifications so trying to get fingers in a few pies.  We get a lot of spare time and I'd rather not fill my days playing xbox."

An admirable stance in my book, an approach that more players should consider.  Although admittedly it doesn't have to come with some of the cringe worthy posing.

Agree with all of that. It's easy to overlook how good he is due to his percieved persona. Also the comparisons to Dallaglio don't help, Hask has become a very different type of player now with all his work at 7. He's probably the best bench option we have but I imagine that will go straight to Croft if he isn't starting.

yappysnap wrote:

jeffwinger wrote:Agree regarding Haskell.  I'd have kept him in the EPS as I believe he is a better option for the match day 23 than Vunipola, who is still a long way behind Morgan and offers no flexibility as a bench option.  I'll admit to a little hypocrisy here as I have previously bemoaned the inclusion of a cover option rather than an impact option on the bench, but I think balance is needed and Haskell does provide impact in his own way.

I think its worth highlighting his workload over the last few years:

2010-11 season with Stade Francais
2011 Six Nations, in which he was a stand out player
2011 World Cup summer camp
2011 World Cup
2011-12 season at Ricoh Black Rams
2012 Super Rugby season with Highlanders
2012 summer tour to South Africa
2012-13 season with Wasps
2013 Six Nations

So that makes it 3 years non stop competitive rugby, encompassing 4 domestic seasons in 4 countries, 2 Six Nations championships, a brutal summer tour and a World Cup.  Wouldn't surprise me if he really impressed for Wasps this year after a proper summer break then pre season for the first time in so long.  I hope he is still in Lancaster's plans.

As a side note while on the topic of Haskell, we all give him a bit of a hard time for the whole 'Brand' thing that comes with him, but I saw him being interviewed recently where he was asked about it.  His response was along the lines of "Yeah I get a bit of stick for it all, but its a short career so I'm making an effort to lay foundations for post-rugby opportunities, I've got little by way of qualifications so trying to get fingers in a few pies.  We get a lot of spare time and I'd rather not fill my days playing xbox."

An admirable stance in my book, an approach that more players should consider.  Although admittedly it doesn't have to come with some of the cringe worthy posing.

Agree with all of that. It's easy to overlook how good he is due to his percieved persona. Also the comparisons to Dallaglio don't help, Hask has become a very different type of player now with all his work at 7. He's probably the best bench option we have but I imagine that will go straight to Croft if he isn't starting.

I couldn't agree more, yap/jeff. And at 28, there's still a good bit of meat left on the bone.

yappysnap wrote:

Agree with all of that. It's easy to overlook how good he is due to his percieved persona. Also the comparisons to Dallaglio don't help, Hask has become a very different type of player now with all his work at 7. He's probably the best bench option we have but I imagine that will go straight to Croft if he isn't starting.

There's an issue there. Robshaw and Wood are duracell forwards. It's Morgan who needs to come off after 60 minutes.

If Croft is sub, does Wood go to 8? Tried and failed. Vanipola could sub, but what if Wood or (unlikely) Robshaw get injured? I recall England playing wales once where a few 7s got injured - it cost England the game. Lawes can cover 6, but that didn't really work either.

That's why Haskell has to be on the bench, and one of Wood, Robshaw and Croft need to miss out. Tough call!

Kvesic has played as much club rugby at 8 as at 7. He is perfectly suited to cover the whole backrow

At this point in the RFC cycle, I feel that its time for consolidation rather than development of the back row. Kvesic has 2019 painted all over him. I reckon that some gnarled and more experienced operators should be in the Lancaster's target cross-wires.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Kvesic has played as much club rugby at 8 as at 7. He is perfectly suited to cover the whole backrow

I don't see why you'd bring Kvesic in though when Haskell is ready to go and has a whole heap of caps and experience (more then all three starters combined).

Alex_Germany wrote:

yappysnap wrote:

Agree with all of that. It's easy to overlook how good he is due to his percieved persona. Also the comparisons to Dallaglio don't help, Hask has become a very different type of player now with all his work at 7. He's probably the best bench option we have but I imagine that will go straight to Croft if he isn't starting.

There's an issue there. Robshaw and Wood are duracell forwards. It's Morgan who needs to come off after 60 minutes.

If Croft is sub, does Wood go to 8? Tried and failed. Vanipola could sub, but what if Wood or (unlikely) Robshaw get injured? I recall England playing wales once where a few 7s got injured - it cost England the game. Lawes can cover 6, but that didn't really work either.

That's why Haskell has to be on the bench, and one of Wood, Robshaw and Croft need to miss out. Tough call!

SL benched Croft before though and he was a very good sub, I guess it depends if you look at the bench as injury cover, tactical or impact.

Just saying that he's the best bench option in this EPS IMO. I would have kept Haskell

Just saying that he's the best bench option in this EPS IMO. I would have kept Haskell

For me it has to be all three of those things yappy.  Unfortunately finding players who can fulfill all of those roles is very difficult.

Yea true I guess. Croft cover some of that and we can always shuffle players around. I guess Lawes and Kvesic is the best option to cover and make an impact or a 6/2 split and have 1 lock, 1 flanker and 1 no8 so Lawes/Attwood, Kvesic/Croft and Vunipola. Then have Care and burns on the bench. Hhmmmmm...

If we had another decent goal kicker in the backs (Twelvetrees?) then a 6:2 split would favour Eastmond to cover 11-15 ..

But would still rather see 3 back replacements, so for me it would have to be Haskell on the bench. Interesting call though

Yappy, wasn't Croft benched because he was coming back from his neck injury. When fit Lancaster moved the backrow around to make room for him.

Alex_Germany wrote:

yappysnap wrote:

Agree with all of that. It's easy to overlook how good he is due to his percieved persona. Also the comparisons to Dallaglio don't help, Hask has become a very different type of player now with all his work at 7. He's probably the best bench option we have but I imagine that will go straight to Croft if he isn't starting.

There's an issue there. Robshaw and Wood are duracell forwards. It's Morgan who needs to come off after 60 minutes.

If Croft is sub, does Wood go to 8? Tried and failed. Vanipola could sub, but what if Wood or (unlikely) Robshaw get injured? I recall England playing wales once where a few 7s got injured - it cost England the game. Lawes can cover 6, but that didn't really work either.

That's why Haskell has to be on the bench, and one of Wood, Robshaw and Croft need to miss out. Tough call!

That's my take on it. Fully expected everyone to shoot me down on Haskell. I want to integrate Kvesic and Vunipola but I think we need to use the best players available. I think Haskell not only offers a good mix of experience across the back-row, but also something different when he comes on. If he comes on at 6, he's a more physical defensive player and better ball-carrier than Wood or Croft. At 8 his work-rate is probably better than Morgan. And at 7 he's more physical than Robshaw. So I think he offers the best mixture of cover and impact.

Surprised that Haskell was dropped, but one issue is that I don't think he's Lancaster's type of player. For all his work rate, physique and versatility, he's not as good a decision-maker (in terms of where to be, and when, and what to do) as the players in the EPS ahead of him.

This season is the last chance to experiment, so I expect the EPS has been skewed towards players who might break in. If Kvesic and co don't work out, Haskell can be reintroduced in time for 2015.

Let us assume Haskell has dropped down the pecking order and is unlikely to get the bench spot if all the EPS back rowers are fit. Now let us assume a scenario whereby one of our back row goes down injured early in the match. Would people rather see Vunipola/Morgan covering 6, or Wood/Robshaw/Croft/Kvesic covering 8?

jeffwinger

From what we have in the squad I would be starting 6. Wood 7. Robshaw 8. Morgan with Kvesic on the bench covering all 3.

Kvesic has played plenty at 8 jeffwinger, I think more games at AP level than at 7 even

Big ask for a young lad like Kvesic to step up out of position and control at the base of a very technical but not particularly big scrum. Might be a big ask for him in terms of carrying as well. Given Morgan's inability to last a full game it is a concern.

I'd go:

6. Croft
7. Wood/Robshaw
8. Morgan

20. Vunipola

I suppose we could do what the Lions did and use Croft as second row cover and have two backrows on the bench but that is risky.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Big ask for a young lad like Kvesic to step up out of position and control at the base of a very technical but not particularly big scrum. Might be a big ask for him in terms of carrying as well. Given Morgan's inability to last a full game it is a concern.

I'd go:

6. Croft
7. Wood/Robshaw
8. Morgan

20. Vunipola

I suppose we could do what the Lions did and use Croft as second row cover and have two backrows on the bench but that is risky.

It's not out of position though:

Warriors: 01 Matt Mullan (Ce Jones 66), 02 Aleki Lutui (Hayes 71), 03 John Andress (Currie 66), 04 James Percival, 05 Dean Schofield (Gillies 59), 06 Chris Jones, 07 Sam Betty, 08 Matt Kvesic (Taulava 54)

Warriors: 01 Matt Mullan, 02 Aleki Lutui, 03 John Andress, 04 James Percival, 05 Dean Schofield (Gillies 68), 06 Chris Jones, 07 Sam Betty, 08 Matt Kvesic (Taulava 55)

Warriors: 01 Matt Mullan (Ce Jones 74), 02 Aleki Lutui (Hayes 74), 03 John Andress (Currie 74), 04 James Percival, 05 Dean Schofield (Gillies 60), 06 Chris Jones, 07 Sam Betty, 08 Matt Kvesic (Cowan 60), 09 Jonny Arr (Hodgson 65), 10 Andy Goode, 11 David Lemi, 12 Josh Matavesi (Fatiaki 51), 13 Alex Grove, 14 Jon Clarke, 15 Chris Pennell (Carlisle 65)

The first 3 matches for Wuss last season that he started

Kvesic seems to me to have a good head on his young shoulders and I don't see him being phased if asked to pack down at 8.  Alternatively if control at the base of a scrum is an issue then I don't see a problem with him performing the 8 role with the exception of on attacking scrums when either of the senior players, Wood or Robshaw can pack down at the back.
 
I wouldn't use Croft as 2nd row cover, as he's not one, nor would I have two back rows on the bench.  Croft for me starts at 6 if Wood is out or out of form.

I have a real problem with leaving Croft out of the 23 altogether.  He's just too good a player not to be involved.  So is Wood.  I'm less convinced about Robshaw long term but for now he's earned his place.  In the absence of Haskell who would appear the ideal bench candidate, I don't think you could justify leaving any of the above 3 out of the squad.

Play Croft against Scotland and Italy and Wood against France, Ireland and Wales? Likewise rotate Kvesic and Robshaw.

jeffwinger wrote:I have a real problem with leaving Croft out of the 23 altogether.  He's just too good a player not to be involved.  So is Wood.  I'm less convinced about Robshaw long term but for now he's earned his place.  In the absence of Haskell who would appear the ideal bench candidate, I don't think you could justify leaving any of the above 3 out of the squad.

Of course you can.  Wood and Croft are 6's, albeit Wood can play 7 and allegedly 8 as well.  You pick your best one to start at 6, whoever you believe that to be, then decide if the other is your best bench option.  If he's not, then he's out of the matchday 23.  Simples.

If only it was that simple Ozzy, if only. Ever thought about being the Eng coach?

yappysnap wrote:Play Croft against Scotland and Italy and Wood against France, Ireland and Wales? Likewise rotate Kvesic and Robshaw.

Blimey. That puts Crofty in his place, yappy. Scotland and Italy are both rubbish.

Any chance of him getting a call for the AIs if we arrange a match against Belgium?

I feel sorry for Haskell; he is the one player who was rested for the Argentina tour to miss out on the senior squad.

Fair play to Kvesic for taking his opportunity though.

Whoever was selected, I hope Lancaster addresses the mental and physical frailties that have seen England teams' grand slam chances scuppered by fired up Celts.

Feed them raw sheep flesh

CJ, it really irks me that various England coaches down the years have not realised that if England are on for a Slam in the final game, then Ireland, Scotland and Wales with summon up everything they've got to stop us - if they can't win a Slam themselves, then denying England is the next best thing.

And from the first play in those games we look surprised at what's happening.

Next year is the easy (easier) way round for a GS.

PC - I don't believe there is an 'easier way round' GS opportunity. The wins have to be earned wherever you play. No such thing as a devalued GS in my book.


History also shows us that France win the 6N after a Lions year. Although they look to be in disarray atm.

As I said, I hope Lancaster gets his players to the right level to close out the deal if we get to that point.

England have had key players or at least not too far to first choice replacements rested by not being on the Lions tour this year (Marler, Hartley/Webber etc, Wilson, Launchbury, Lawes, wood, Robshaw, Morgan, Care, Burns/Flood, Basically all our outside backs) so we should be ok Lions fallout wise

I hope the coaches get a a 'winning' mentally into our players.

We've come up short too many times.

I don't think that's a winning mentality. It's more passion that we lacked. We had won 5 games on the bounce by the Wales match and any good team should be in their groove by then. Instead we looked terrified of failure while the Welsh (and Irish before them) played like men possessed.

We can get the wins, and grind them out when we need to. It's dealing with the expectation and pressure that gets us.