Hopes and Predictions for your national Team this year...?

First topic message reminder :

Who is your national team and what are your thoughts on their prospects for the new season...?

Could they fulfil your optimistic ambitions or is your persimistic realism more accurate....?

Happy with the new players coming through or are the retirements going to end a golden spell of form?

Which matches/championships might you stand a chance of winning this season...?

question for the home nation supporters.


Usually after every Lions tour there is the "fallout" player fatigue, injury etc. and in the past the reasoning was the teams most highly represented in the Lions tour suffers the next six Nations.

How do you believe it will affect Wales this time round?

Scotland played in SA with a host of youngsters, effectively expanding their depth, Ireland had an easy time in USA, Wales tested some youngsters in Japan, and it didn't go to well for them, England showed oodles of depth in Argentina, albeit against a second string team.

Thoughts?

AIs My hopes :

Win all our Autumn internationals. We gave South Africa a fright in the summer tournament and have beaten Australia in our last 2 games. No disrespect to Japan but I think we'll be in dire trouble if we can't beat them at home.

AIs My prediction :

We beat Australia and Japan.


6N My hopes :

Top Table finish, winning our home games and running our Italy in a close game at the Olympic stadium.

My Prediction :

Not brave enough to comment yet....

Wales:

1. Beat Australia.
2. Win 4 games at least in the 6nations
3. Beat Australia.
4. Do not lose to teams ranked 6th or below in the rankings (not currenlty knowing what they are exactly)
5. Did I mention beat Australia?
6. Develop depth in positions 3/8/9
7. See variations in our gameplay, specifically the backline attacks.

England :

Autumn internationals : Win against Argentina and Aus or NZ. TBH I see us beating Aus and Argentina, and losing to NZ.

Six nations : Grand slam. Last year we slowly got worse throughout the competition after a strong start, we need to maintain the intensity for the campaign. Even though this is a year where we have only two home games its against our worst six nations foes in Ireland and Wales(recent years). Whereas we seem to win far more often than lose to Scotland, Italy and France.

Summer tour to NZ : Crikey, its a tall order to win there. But if we have ambitions to win the world cup in 2015, we need to win at least one match. I think only England and Wales have the potential talent to win there at the moment from the NH. TBH if England win a match there I would imagine we got lucky(NZ missing kicks, bounce of the ball etc)

miaow wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

miaow wrote:Wales; beat at least one of SA and Aus, retain the 6N, and give a few caps to the replacements at 1, 3, 9, and 14.

The Southern Hemisphere scalp is, especially on the back of a successful Lions Tour, arguably more important the winning the 6N, otherwise it's in danger of becoming a proverbial monkey so close to the WC. If Wales don't win the 6N, then they really need to be challenging, and not capitulate and/or come 4th. No losses with weakened teams in the Autumn, don't give call ups/caps to average players who are too afraid to be there, don't cap 18 year old Premiership players, and maybe add a bit more flair to the backline.

miaow,

Why at 14, I can understand 1, 3 and 9 but North and Cuthbert are there for long time IMO

Since Shane's retirement, it's been Cuthbert and North on the wings. They've been fortunate in that they've been fit for internationals (I cba to check, but since the 2012 6N, has either missed a 'full' game*- Japan excluded), but eventually one will get injured, and possibly during the WC. We have no obvious replacement, Liam Williams could do a job but he's a far better full back than winger, Czekaj/Tom James etc. have had their chances, and Harry Robinson and the other youngsters need to bide their time and develop (Halfpenny is clearly not being moved from 15 any time soon). Eli Walker ought to have been capped by now but for injuries, so the sooner we see what he can do at the top level, the better.

There's also a case to be made that Cuthbert's defence makes him an absolute liability if the Welsh pack doesn't dominate or gain parity of possession (as we've seen when only a few injuries occur- Samoa & Argentina- or against the very best sides). I'm still astounded by his finishing with ball in hand, it's honestly scary to think how average he makes Test opposition 3/4s look sometimes. However, I'd also argue the Welsh team needs variety; trophies and relative success has masked the failings in the backline, namely that it lacks invention when on the back foot, or at the very least ought to be able to counter attack better than it does currently, and can at times look woefully aimless when running straight lines into waiting tacklers. None of which would be solved by Walker, it's much more the failing of the gameplan. Howley introduced some effective strike moves, namely the wrap around/pass behind the dummmy runner, to Cuthbert, which resulted in his tries against Ireland and Italy in '13, and his Lions Test try, too. But it's not enough. Walker looks like a runner in a different vein to anything yet in the side, and it would be good to see him become a viable Test option and dependable replacement should injury dictate he is needed.


Edit: *Liam Williams filled in on the wing against NZ in 2012, didn't he...can't remember is he played any more during the series/if there were any other occasions of absence from the pair.

Yup, made a nuisance of himself too, clattered Daag (I think) at one point, he certainly wasn't happy about it either

For Scotland I think we need to beat Japan playing good rugby as a bare minimum in the AIs, and then hope to beat one of Australia or South Africa. We have defeated both in relatively recent memory and hopefully, as always, our SH friends will view Scotland as one of the easier fixtures and underestimate us. With our front five, I'd say Australia in particular look vulnerable, particularly now that we have outside backs good enough to trouble them. Whether our defence can withstand Australia is a different question.

As for the 6 Nations, very difficult to call so far ahead, but our only two home games come against France and England, making it a tricky run of games. As a minimum we need to beat Italy away from home, always easier said than done, but I'd like us to be winning one of the home games as well. France under Saint Andre have been pretty awful, and again I think we now have outside backs who will cause them some problems. As for the other away fixtures, I don't fancy our chances in the Millenium, but having narrowly (and fortunately) defeated Ireland last year, I like to think we have an outside chance against them again. I'm not convinced they've figured out what to do about replacing D'Arcy and BOD.

To recap: as a minimum we need to win 1 AI (Japan) and 1 6 Nations (Italy) fixture. I think we also have a shot at Australia (home), France (home) and Ireland (away), although I certainly won't be putting my hard earned cash on any of those....

Biltong wrote:question for the home nation supporters.


Usually after every Lions tour there is the "fallout" player fatigue, injury etc. and in the past the reasoning was the teams most highly represented in the Lions tour suffers the next six Nations.

How do you believe it will affect Wales this time round?

Scotland played in SA with a host of youngsters, effectively expanding their depth, Ireland had an easy time in USA, Wales tested some youngsters in Japan, and it didn't go to well for them, England showed oodles of depth in Argentina, albeit against a second string team.

Thoughts?

Yeah, a good point to make. England's depth is starting to look a little worrying, especially looking ahead to two years' time. When you consider a position like 15, where the 2013 incumbent Alex Goode may not even be in with a look in ahead of Ben Foden, Matthew Tait, and Mike Brown, it's depth which ought to stand them in good stead.

Scotland will be a danger, they've got a host of backs, and forwards in fact, who have the opportunity to nail down a shirt. There's been so little consistency of selection for them over the past few seasons, you get the feeling that with a few settled leaders in the side, they could maybe even better last season's position. Ireland will have the fresh impetus of a new coach and system, and will probably be incredible in patches. I'd imagine this is where the rebuilding begins, with a few boys playing their last tournaments, and maybe so have already done so.

I think the 6N as a whole will be quite exciting; more tries, more flair.

Looking back to Wales horrendous 2012 AI whitewash I wonder where are we now. Last year on the back of the tantalisingly close but unsuccessful Oz tour. This year triumphant Lions with many from the Wales squad involved in a totally different ambience. Last years opponents: Argentina on the rise after their first RC and best performance ever against the Boks; Samoa or ABs-lite as I like to call them with their NZ education and club rugby not to mention Fotu'ali their Ospreys SH and capt. ; NZ -never going to happen and dear old Australia who after all else managed to beat us by only two points with a fine try from Beck. Personnel: Adam missing throughout, Phillips from the bench v Arg, end of the road for sad Priest. The hangover continued into the first half of 6Ns Ireland. This year : SA who didn't look that great against Arg in Mendoza shipping two tries to one who were saved by Arg desperation there were allegations of Arg gouging and biting ffs. Arg well there you have it poor discipline Contemponi subbed early. Can they play well without him. MQuite his hilarious ending. SA two pints in front, 5 mins to go. Penalty in front of posts. Steyn kicks for the comer. Why? Because with Arg kick off after 3pointer they feared defending their line. Tonga banana skin?
Australia -again! I really think this is our time and expecting at least 3 from 4'

There's a lot of fuss being made over England's strength in depth again. Same old story each year. When you put things into perspective then the win in Argentina isn't that great. They faced a team of semi-pro players. The England team consisted of players that have played rugby at the highest level for some time. A lot of them have had experience in the Saxons team, others were already capped by England. There's obviously only going to be one result. As per there isn't much between England and their Saxons team, and I don't believe this depth will do them much good during the coming 6 Nations.

That's right Saint. It would have been better if England had gone to Japan and lost.

You say there isn't a great deal of difference between the England first squad and the Saxons/back-up. That's a pretty good thing isn't it? There are plenty coming through who can more then do a job,

There's an enormous drop-off from the Welsh first choice and the back-ups as proven in Japan and anytime there is an injury or two.

The Saxons flatter to decieve. Scotland A have beaten them in the last 2 years including a shambolic rout when they last played in Scotland.

England's depth looks much stronger on paper than what it is in reality.

Cyril wrote:That's right Saint. It would have been better if England had gone to Japan and lost.

You say there isn't a great deal of difference between the England first squad and the Saxons/back-up. That's a pretty good thing isn't it? There are plenty coming through who can more then do a job,

There's an enormous drop-off from the Welsh first choice and the back-ups as proven in Japan and anytime there is an injury or two.

I expected a bitter response from a childish poster. I knew someone would see it as an attack on England and then feel the need to bring my national team into it.
 

Allow me to put it into perspective for you Cyril. That Wales team was the back-ups to Wales back-ups, the team itself contained semi-pro players (like Argentina did ). A large number of the team were bench players for their Regional squads. This team was selected and coached by a mob of numpties. Japan on the other hand have a host of pro players to pick and poach from their very rich league, and have continued to exceed expectations under a very good coaching staff. I hope this continues for Japan in the future.

It depends how you see it. The difference between England and the Saxons could just highlight the weakness of England. This has been the case for the last 5 years. I would also agree with Radge that England's 'strength in depth' looks a lot better on paper. If England can get back to the days when Woodward would make wholesale changes and still be able to beat full strength teams then you lot might actually have a point with all of your strength in depth talk.

Hoping for a clean sweep of the AIs, grand slam and then 2 wins away to NZ. I expect and thinks it's realistic that we pick up 2 out of 3 in the Ai with the All Blacks winning but us putting up a decent performance. I think a GS is attainable in the 6Ns but wouldn't be too disappointed in 2nd place. Fully expect NZ to beat us 3 0 but want some good performances to come out of it.

In realtion to performance rather than results I want and expect a little more flair in the team along with some forward grunt. Wade, Attwood, Slater, Vunipola, Yarde,12trees should help us here. And no full backs on the wing please.

Rugby today is attritional. It's not realistic to put out your best team and forge combinations with your best players. You need to think in wider terms and integrate a wider squad and know which players can fit inside that test team.

The June tests gave no NH team an idea of their best team but it may have helped give an idea about the wider squad for the November tests. Every team this year faces at least two difficult prospects and the schedule means you can't expect to face those challenges with your first team.

Having depth is all very well but at times having a big pool of players makes it more difficult to whittle down the numbers into your idea of an A team. Equally injuries or form may throw up problems of specific resources that stretch even your wider resources. You have to be able to adapt and plug any holes and spread as much strength as you can throughout the team.

The Saint wrote:

Cyril wrote:That's right Saint. It would have been better if England had gone to Japan and lost.

You say there isn't a great deal of difference between the England first squad and the Saxons/back-up. That's a pretty good thing isn't it? There are plenty coming through who can more then do a job,

There's an enormous drop-off from the Welsh first choice and the back-ups as proven in Japan and anytime there is an injury or two.

I expected a bitter response from a childish poster. I knew someone would see it as an attack on England and then feel the need to bring my national team into it.
 

Allow me to put it into perspective for you Cyril. That Wales team was the back-ups to Wales back-ups, the team itself contained semi-pro players (like Argentina did ). A large number of the team were bench players for their Regional squads. This team was selected and coached by a mob of numpties. Japan on the other hand have a host of pro players to pick and poach from their very rich league, and have continued to exceed expectations under a very good coaching staff. I hope this continues for Japan in the future.

It depends how you see it. The difference between England and the Saxons could just highlight the weakness of England. This has been the case for the last 5 years. I would also agree with Radge that England's 'strength in depth' looks a lot better on paper. If England can get back to the days when Woodward would make wholesale changes and still be able to beat full strength teams then you lot might actually have a point with all of your strength in depth talk.

Sounds like you need strength in depth in your coaching as well as your players.

Top tier sides should be able to go to Japan and win. I can't imagine other sides in the top 6 losing out there regardless of who they sent.

No need to resort to insults either.

How many top teams tour there though Cyril? We're going there with a composite side in November and I for one am nervous that this game could be an ambush.

Cyril - we were not the first side to lose to Japan and we won't be the last (but yes were were the first to lose in a capped match).

Wales need to build strength in depth in a few positions, and we also need to stop our fasination with youth players. There are a number of good players who get overlooked when it comes to Wales on the basis that they are too old. The likes of Andy Fenby, Gareth Maule, Richard Fussel and the likes, should probably have been capped by now. However they have seen youngsters step straight out of the U20s squad and into the welsh squad instead without even proving themselves at regional level first. That is a serious issue that needs to be addressed, but I can't see it happening as in Wales we are constantly hoping for hte next wonder kid.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:How many top teams tour there though Cyril? We're going there with a composite side in November and I for one am nervous that this game could be an ambush.

You'll be absolutely fine.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Cyril - we were not the first side to lose to Japan and we won't be the last (but yes were were the first to lose in a capped match).

Of course, but you would surely have expected to win even with a below-strength side?

Cyril wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:How many top teams tour there though Cyril? We're going there with a composite side in November and I for one am nervous that this game could be an ambush.

You'll be absolutely fine.

No doubt that's what Wales thought too. They did us the favour of showing what they can do if you don't get selections or preparation right.

Cyril wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Cyril - we were not the first side to lose to Japan and we won't be the last (but yes were were the first to lose in a capped match).

Of course, but you would surely have expected to win even with a below-strength side?

Interesting question - makes me wonder what everyone's assumptions are based on.
 
If you look at the IRB rankings at the moment:
 
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 91.64
2(2) SOUTH AFRICA 87.29
3(3) ENGLAND 85.76
4(4) AUSTRALIA 85.32
5(5) FRANCE 81.59
6(6) WALES 81.36
7(7) SAMOA 80.42
8(8) IRELAND 79.58
9(9) SCOTLAND 76.95
10(10) ARGENTINA 76.41
11(11) TONGA 74.77
12(12) ITALY 74.17
13(13) FIJI 73.56
14(14) CANADA 72.68
15(15) JAPAN 71.98
 
Japan sit just behind Canada, who would run a lot of Top 10 sides very close.
 
Japan have massive player numbers and their first XXIII all play professionally.
 
Now look at the Wales side that endured the Asian wedgie:
 
Wales: Liam Williams (Scarlets); Harry Robinson (Blues), Owen Williams (Blues), Jonathan Spratt (Ospreys), Tom Prydie (Dragons); Dan Biggar (Ospreys), Lloyd Williams (Blues); Rhys Gill (Saracens), Emyr Phillips (Scarlets), Scott Andrews (Blues), Bradley Davies (Blues, capt), Lou Reed (Blues), James King (Ospreys), Andries Pretorius (Blues), Josh Navidi (Blues).
 
Replacements: Scott Baldwin (Ospreys), Rhodri Jones (Scarlets), Craig Mitchell (Exeter Chiefs), Andrew Coombs (Dragons), Dan Baker (Ospreys), Tavis Knoyle (Scarlets), Rhys Patchell (Blues), Dafydd Howells (Ospreys).
 
That's 4th choice of player for some positions.
 
Fair enough, the coaching staff misjudged their opposition, it would seem but is it really bonkers Narnia territory that Wales lost? This is not a wum. I'm genuinely asking the question.

Cyril wrote:
Sounds like you need strength in depth in your coaching as well as your players.

Top tier sides should be able to go to Japan and win. I can't imagine other sides in the top 6 losing out there regardless of who they sent.

No need to resort to insults either.

Why don't you let the WRU worry about that.

And why should we assume we can take any sort of team to Japan and win? That's just disrespectful to them. Also I post hard fact not insults, and you didn't like the facts I posted about England so resorted to trying to drag Wales into being the poor WUM that you are. Why don't you relax and accept that other people may be of the opinion that England's apparent strength in depth isn't the bees knees.

The Saint wrote:

Cyril wrote:
Sounds like you need strength in depth in your coaching as well as your players.

Top tier sides should be able to go to Japan and win. I can't imagine other sides in the top 6 losing out there regardless of who they sent.

No need to resort to insults either.

Why don't you let the WRU worry about that.

And why should we assume we can take any sort of team to Japan and win? That's just disrespectful to them. Also I post hard fact not insults, and you didn't like the facts I posted about England so resorted to trying to drag Wales into being the poor WUM that you are. Why don't you relax and accept that other people may be of the opinion that England's apparent strength in depth isn't the bees knees.

Do you think you could actually discuss without being offensive? We might not agree but there's no need for that.

George Carlin wrote:

Cyril wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Cyril - we were not the first side to lose to Japan and we won't be the last (but yes were were the first to lose in a capped match).

Of course, but you would surely have expected to win even with a below-strength side?

Interesting question - makes me wonder what everyone's assumptions are based on.
 
If you look at the IRB rankings at the moment:
 
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 91.64
2(2) SOUTH AFRICA 87.29
3(3) ENGLAND 85.76
4(4) AUSTRALIA 85.32
5(5) FRANCE 81.59
6(6) WALES 81.36
7(7) SAMOA 80.42
8(8) IRELAND 79.58
9(9) SCOTLAND 76.95
10(10) ARGENTINA 76.41
11(11) TONGA 74.77
12(12) ITALY 74.17
13(13) FIJI 73.56
14(14) CANADA 72.68
15(15) JAPAN 71.98
 
Japan sit just behind Canada, who would run a lot of Top 10 sides very close.
 
Japan have massive player numbers and their first XXIII all play professionally.
 
Now look at the Wales side that endured the Asian wedgie:
 
Wales: Liam Williams (Scarlets); Harry Robinson (Blues), Owen Williams (Blues), Jonathan Spratt (Ospreys), Tom Prydie (Dragons); Dan Biggar (Ospreys), Lloyd Williams (Blues); Rhys Gill (Saracens), Emyr Phillips (Scarlets), Scott Andrews (Blues), Bradley Davies (Blues, capt), Lou Reed (Blues), James King (Ospreys), Andries Pretorius (Blues), Josh Navidi (Blues).
 
Replacements: Scott Baldwin (Ospreys), Rhodri Jones (Scarlets), Craig Mitchell (Exeter Chiefs), Andrew Coombs (Dragons), Dan Baker (Ospreys), Tavis Knoyle (Scarlets), Rhys Patchell (Blues), Dafydd Howells (Ospreys).
 
That's 4th choice of player for some positions.
 
Fair enough, the coaching staff misjudged their opposition, it would seem but is it really bonkers Narnia territory that Wales lost? This is not a wum. I'm genuinely asking the question.

It's not bonkers but it must be very disappointing:

a) to lose
b) to know your back-up players aren't to the level you thought they were

I don't think anybody would suggest they wouldn't take a side out there that they hoped would win.

It's not disrespectful to Japan. It's just realistic of their place in the rugby pecking order.

Saint and Cyril lets not get into a who is a bigger pain in the ring competition here.

Cyril wrote:

The Saint wrote:

Cyril wrote:
Sounds like you need strength in depth in your coaching as well as your players.

Top tier sides should be able to go to Japan and win. I can't imagine other sides in the top 6 losing out there regardless of who they sent.

No need to resort to insults either.

Why don't you let the WRU worry about that.

And why should we assume we can take any sort of team to Japan and win? That's just disrespectful to them. Also I post hard fact not insults, and you didn't like the facts I posted about England so resorted to trying to drag Wales into being the poor WUM that you are. Why don't you relax and accept that other people may be of the opinion that England's apparent strength in depth isn't the bees knees.

Do you think you could actually discuss without being offensive? We might not agree but there's no need for that.

Cyril, you appear to be complaining about cold, hard fact again. That's your issue not my mine. Therefore, you need to resolve it. The two options are the one I've mentioned in my last comment or to ignore my posts.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Saint and Cyril lets not get into a who is a bigger pain in the ring competition here.

Please don't put me and Gareth in the same category  

Now that we've established that England's strength in depth might to be as great as some believe, perhaps we can get back to the topic. So, England fans confident of winning the 6 Nations using their strength in depth?

more confident with the further options at 2nd row, 7, 8, 12, 11 and 14 yes. Shouldn't lead to the need of playing people outside of their comfort zone so everyone can concentrate on their primary job.

1. Wales definitely need to develop their coaches, in every aspect, at every level.
- As a blues fan I yearn for the days of Dai Young......

2. Wales lost in Japan due to bad selection, probably underestimating Japan and Japan playing better than the welsh team put out.
- simple, and this emphasises point 1.

3. England have better strength in depth than Wales, I dont think this can be argued, what can be argued is probably a coherent selection that maximises the potential of each player to succeed with so little familiarity.

4. Wales and England are about even stevens, Wales hving the upper hand in head to head games recently. A result either way wouldnt ususally surprise anyone, thats why the blowout at the end of the 6ns was such a talked about game and performance from the welsh boys.


Not really.....

Wales lost to Japan because of the iminent threat of Godzilla should we emerge victorious, we gave them a series draw.

Wales is better than England, who is poo.

 

That's more like it Comfort

The beginning sounded like pure fiction but it got more believable by the end.

I assume poo is Japanese for 'betterer'.

With regards to England i dont think we have proven yet that we have a huge depth in squad...HOWEVER where the suggestions that we do have that, are coming from,are the hugely encouraging performances in the leagues and HC cups of many of the youngsters, such as Wade, Daly, Yarde, Burns, Twelvetrees & Youngs, Corbs, Parling for the Lions.  etc.

Yes that woeful Argentina summer squad is hardly a benchmark to judge against...BUT equally you go out and beat whats in front of you. And by doing so several players put their hand up to suggest their worth looking at on the bigger stage against the bigger teams.

Personally the big hope is that we stay injury free. The loss of Ben Morgan - 1 bloomin player seemed to derail our game horrifically. We missed his ball carrying. This cant be allowed to happen again. We have Billy coming through...but maybe we need another to share the duties in the pack. At least 2 real deal carriers on the pitch at the same time.

Expectations - 1st or 2nd in the 6n...but i really hope we see much more from our attacking game.

I'd agree with that Geordie. Not conclusive evidence of real depth yet, but certainly signs that England are heading in the right direction.

The key, obviously, is for Lancaster to manage the right combinations and fulfil the potential of all the talent that is on offer.

It tends to be easier to focus talent where you have less talent to choose from. I'd be a happy man were Scotland to have options like Joseph, May, Eastwood and Burns (players that can't even get into the England matchday squad)!

Instead of running down each other's team, why don't you just stick to your own teams?

FES, Ive been saying that for some time now...we have a wide selection of choice but name 5 first team starters penned in? Its difficult.

Personally whilst i like competition, i still want a core of say 10-12 players that you can name as yes they would start. Wales are pretty much there now.
And This is what Lancaster must start focusing on now.

This means you can bring individual youngsters in to a settled team, the team are familiar with the tactics and also means that you still have competition for each place which should keep places keen.

Ie Robshaw is nailed on 7...however now we have Will Fraser, Kvesic, Saull, Wallace etc coming through. None totally proven, BUT have shown great recent performances. This will start to put pressure on Robshaw to suggest if he drops his performances we have players who can come in and play as good as or better if possible. If they play better...Robshaw is then the challenger and has to wait for his chance.

I think England do have great strength in depth in that we have two and in some cases 3 players who you could make a good case for starting.  In fact I’d say on any day you could drop 7 or 8 first choice players for the next in line and I don’t think we’d perform that much worse.  The problem we have is that I would rate pretty much every one of these players (currently) as about a 7/10 with perhaps a couple of 8’s.  A wall 3 bricks deep might be pretty strong but if it’s only 3 bricks high someone’s just going to walk over it.

The thing that gives me and a lot of other England fans hope I believe is that there are a large number of players who are young and have in no way peaked.  Looking back only a few years when we had the likes of Borthwick, Moody, Worsley, Cueto etc you couldn’t really fault their effort but they had just peaked and weren’t quite good enough.  I’m not saying every one of the current squad will get a lot better but in my opinion they have the potential too if they work hard enough.  There is no guarantee this will happen  but if we ever have designs on winning another world cup or climbing to the top of the rankings then 7 or 8 of the core need to get up to that 8/10 or 9/10 level.

To be fair to Lancaster I think he's slowly getting there. The front row is nailed on. Launchbury + 1 looks like the second row, and he has Morgan as his preferred option at 8, with Robshaw at 7 and one of Wood or Croft at 6. That's a fairly settled pack, with the only real variables at lock at 6 (and frankly handy options to choose from in that regard).

He has Youngs nailed on first choice 9, and Tuilagi certain to start at 13 with Ashton at 14. I suppose you can never say a backline is settled without a settled 10, but he'd been pretty consistent in looking to Owen Farrell, although there's now a three way race for the 12 jersey (Barritt, 36 and Eastmond).

Whichever of the three options he picks at 15 (Foden, Brown or Goode), all three are experienced in Lancaster's thinking, so it's really 12 and 11 which are the positions up for grabs.

I think the core of Lancaster's WC side is pretty much there. He just needs to use this season to figure out the 3-4 remaining positions. I can't imagine we'll see wholesale changes.

with Ashton at 14

Ive backed him for some time during his slump (on form he is a quality player)...but unless he starts performing to his highest ability again i would be dissapointed if he started over Wade or Yarde.

Toadfish

I think your spot on there...

Surely Ashton's out of the picture until he plays his way back in?

He was lethal when he came on the scene, he's been poor to average for a while at test level.

Full back...

I think it's a bit unfair on Brown (who is a very good full-back) but Foden for me should be the 15. He's just a very classy player and a brilliant broken field runner.

Goode has fallen back a bit, I think.

It'll be interesting how Tait does this season.

If Tait continues his form of the end of last season I'd like to see him on the bench. Not only is he good cover for OC, Wing and FB he's a player who can come on and make an impact. I'd like to see Lancaster get away from just picking the unluckiest back on the bench and pick the best player for the job.

Toadfish wrote:If Tait continues his form of the end of last season I'd like to see him on the bench.  Not only is he good cover for OC, Wing and FB he's a player who can come on and make an impact.  I'd like to see Lancaster get away from just picking the unluckiest back on the bench and pick the best player for the job.

+1

Tait and Hook. Not so much utility players as futility players. At least that's what they became.

Good to see Tait at least is being considered more as a utility player again. Ben Smith has shown that utility is not a dirty word and form is a powerful, exciting word.

I know it's early, but it's an international rugby forum guys  


Italy are improving all the time no question, more likely to be a case of 1 step back two steps forward however. 2 wins would be a success. Prediction:5th/6th

France look short on leadership and regardless of PSA's input, the current generation is being spoiled. They'll still manage 2-3 wins. In fairness they have historically reacted well to crises so they can't be written off.Prediction: 4th

Scotland could have a slighty strange season as they await the arrival of Cotter. I think this will mean that performances are more important than results. They honestly could do well but there isn't one game where they look favourites. Reluctantly, 6th.

Wales are clearly riding a high but performances against SH opposition in November will surely have a big impact on their confidence. It is the strongest or at least equal-strongest first XV in Europe, but is the depth coming through? Understandable for a small population, but fewer crucial injuries (Spala anyone?) and a very clear cut, if not flamboyant game plan has seen them prosper far more than the similarly sized rugby nation Ireland since RWC 2011.
Wales should get at least 4 victories. 3 at home, and one away in either the Aviva or Twickenham.
Halfpenny could be an absolute nightmare aided by the scrummage. Through gritted teeth, I can't bet against another slam.

England seem to have their strongest side since Woodward. All nations envy their strength in depth. This young team looks to be sailing in the right direction for RWC 2015. And Corbisiero, blimey.
However... they were hugely dependent on Tuilagi. This must change. Also, Farrell will now be regarded as weakness, harsh but his reputation has crashed. One thing's for sure, England have more selection dilemmas than any other nation..
With a tough fixture list I don't think 3 wins, whilst unfulfilling, would be disastrous...

...ignore my previous post   

....and finally Ireland, who along with Scotland seem the hardest to predict. There are quite a few variables...
can Schmidt actually get us playing rugby football?
can POC, Ryan, and Ross keep fit? Can Stephen Ferris get fit...?  
will BOD and Rory Best prove a point or two?
will we finally see the best of SOB, Sexton and O'Mahony in a green shirt? ... and Keith Earls and Andrew Trimble, sin and rodders
The potential is surely there but I do fear how we could cope with a muddy scrumfest in Twickenham. Performances will take priority over results, for 6 months. Having said that, the fixtures look enticing and there is no reason the France hoodoo cannot be shed this year. So...

Ireland to get the wooden spoon. #Don'tJinxIt

England seem to have their strongest side since Woodward. All nations envy their strength in depth. This young team looks to be sailing in the right direction for RWC 2015. And Corbisiero, blimey.
However... they were hugely dependent on Tuilagi. This must change. Also, Farrell will now be regarded as weakness, harsh but his reputation has crashed. One thing's for sure, England have more selection dilemmas than any other nation..
With a tough fixture list I don't think 3 wins, whilst unfulfilling, would be disastrous...

Dead right on Tuilagi - but please go on thinking that about Farrell (not that I'd mind Burns coming in instead) More than one loss would be poor.

lostinwales wrote:

England seem to have their strongest side since Woodward. All nations envy their strength in depth. This young team looks to be sailing in the right direction for RWC 2015. And Corbisiero, blimey.
However... they were hugely dependent on Tuilagi. This must change. Also, Farrell will now be regarded as weakness, harsh but his reputation has crashed. One thing's for sure, England have more selection dilemmas than any other nation..
With a tough fixture list I don't think 3 wins, whilst unfulfilling, would be disastrous...

Dead right on Tuilagi - but please go on thinking that about Farrell (not that I'd mind Burns coming in instead) More than one loss would be poor.

I guess two losses do look bad isolated but I mean you might have a 70% chance in each game and by the law of averages lose one or two. And against Wales and maybe Ireland 70% is generous. Wales, England and I hope a Schmidt-inspired Ireland all have the capacity to win the slam next year, marginal unfulfilment is not at this stage disastrous. (Bar another heavy defeat to Wales, you need a result there.)
Four wins is your minimum target, but three isn't a failure full stop.

Farrell is no longer the ice-man. He was widely touted as the Lions 10 not long ago, in fact Irish maverick pundit Keith Wood had him pencilled in by February (ok Sexton was injured for a decent while).
He did recover in the Lions tour and had a good cameo in the final test but I for one do not have that sense that Farrell can really hurt us. Even his goal kicking is a tad overrated (statistics aren't great, although he does get them when he really needs it).
Look, I'm not writing him off but I just think he'll be up against it more this year. The lions experience could be useful I guess. I haven't watched Burns but it sounds like he can be used as an impact sub like Madigan should be for Ireland. Fire and ice. Sexton/Farrell and Madser/Burns.

Haven't really heard on outsiders thoughts on Ireland this year? Will Schmidt need time do you reckon?

France look short on leadership and regardless of PSA's input, the current generation is being spoiled. They'll still manage 2-3 wins. In fairness they have historically reacted well to crises so they can't be written off.Prediction: 4th

Im sick of managers trying to make France something their not - too structured.

They have brutally powerful forwards, and mercurial adventurous backs. I want to see them going back to the old ways of crazy adventurous rugby.

They are the best team in the World on their day playing that old style of rugby...and most inconsistant i agree.

School boy teams can beat them one week....then the next they walk NZ off the park.

I've supported Wales for too long to make predictions. My hope however, is come the AI's we actually turn up. We didn't last year and played very poor rugby. The debacle in Japan confirmed that without our top talent we are ordinary so I also hope that enough of them stay fit over the next few months. I'm also hoping to see some consistency in performance from Wales - something that has been badly lacking even when we have had some success.

I'll be happy if Wales take an SH scalp this autumn, I'm a bit worried about the 6N tho, England and Scotland will surely be more challenging and Ireland will be a bit of an unknown quantity, and that's when teams can be most dangerous. Winning back to back 6N makes us the team to beat, can we handle that? I dunno, so with that in mind, I'll be happy with a top 3 finish.

Then there's the French, who usually take the 6N after a Lions tour, lots of factors to consider, and Italy are no mugs on their day.

Looking forwards to the games, tho a bit worried.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

France look short on leadership and regardless of PSA's input, the current generation is being spoiled. They'll still manage 2-3 wins. In fairness they have historically reacted well to crises so they can't be written off.Prediction: 4th

Im sick of managers trying to make France something their not - too structured.

They have brutally powerful forwards, and mercurial adventurous backs. I want to see them going back to the old ways of crazy adventurous rugby.

They do have history for just kicking the coach out. Solves things fairly quickly.