England Still Don't Know What Their Best Team is Yet

I was at HQ yesterday watching England stutter to a win against Australia, and for the life of me (and others I was chatting with in the Cabbage Patch before the match), I can't figure out what is England's best XV.

Stuart Lancaster has been in the job for a couple of years now and we're still seeing changes and new faces and let's-try-him-and-let's -give-this-bloke-a-run-out-and-see-if-that-works. England have nothing like a settled team, and yet, various journos and rugby commentators seem to think England will be serious contenders for the World Cup in two years time.

Firstly, let me say this: I like Stuart Lancaster. In my opinion he's doing a good job, and none of the problems England encountered yesterday were, what I would call, "system problems". The organisation, tactics and strategies all look ok to me. The problem seems to me to be a lack of cohesion caused by not having a settled team that has gotten to know each other. Yes, the players are young and inexperienced and if given time together could become a formidable unit but time is something that is ticking away.

Yesterday, England were playing against a weak Australian team, and yet, somehow contrived to be behind at the interval and needed a lucky break in the second half courtesy of a short sighted touch judge followed by an outrageous stroke of good fortune when a charge-down fell invitingly for Chris Robshaw to bundle over from three yards. Just his sort of range..!! <wink>. If I'm totally frank, I have to say I reckon England got out of jail yesterday.

But I digress. The point is that England are not going to seriously challenge at the World Cup unless Lancaster can finally decide on his definitive starting XV..... the team that picks itself and only ever varies when forced by injury or other mishap. And soon.

I'd agree completely we don't know our best side yet but hopefully the selection for Saturday will show a willingness to try and find it. In order to do so it will inevitably take some tough decision especially in the tight 5 where we have several good players in each position. At full strength I think the below 23 is the best we've got to offer though.

1.Corbs
2.Youngs
3.Cole
4.Launchberry
5.Attwood - Parling very close behind
6.Croft - Offers some pace and attacking threat to the pack in the loose
7.Robshaw
8.Vunipola

9.Youngs
10.Farrell

11.Yarde
12.Twelvetrees
13.Tuilagi
14.Wade
15.Brown

16.Hartley 17.Mako 18.Wilson 19.Parling 20.Morgan 21.Care 22.Flood 23.Daly - He offers genuine cover across the backline unlike Eastmond or Foden

It's a good looking side in my opinion but unless we have the miracle of seeing them fully fit and on the pitch together it's hard to know what our best will be.

It is tricky to work out England's best side, simply because of the depth.

Corbisiero or Vunipola or Marler? Cole or Wilson? Hartley or Youngs? Robshaw or Wood?

Ben Morgan, I thought, would be England's starting 8 for a while yet, but in comes Vunipola with a good display yesterday.

It seemed Launchbury and Parling were the lock combination - now there's pressure from Lawes and Attwood.

Youngs and Care are very close for no.9.

Farrell is under pressure from the experience of Flood, and the potential of Burns.

Tuilagi, Barritt, Twelvetrees, Tomkins, Burrell, and Joseph are fighting for two shirts in the centre.

Whilst the 15 shirt appears to be settled (hurrah!), there's still a battle for 11 and 14.

Good luck Lancaster! And I feel he is doing a good job, thus far.

Its also about where you start from. There were always a few good players but the general standard when Lancaster wasnt great. To get things moving he went for a certain kind of player and it worked, but these were never going to be the long term solution.

At the same time we have had a great crop of youngsters start to come through, but they dont all become ready for test level at the same time.

I dont think that the lack of a settled team right now is surprising, but I do think a core is forming. I do think that its possible that we wont see the best of England until after the RWC

Agreed we do not know our best XV. Yet. But the reason for this is largely that we have too many good players to chose between.

Of course we need to settle it down a bit and give guys a chance to gel.

I expect that the All Blacks game might help us do that. Certainly the upcoming tour to New Zealand will sort out the men from the boys.

p.s I was overly pessimistic in my views pre the Cook Cup game on Saturday. I was wrong. I apologise to anyone i annoyed.

To me it seems Lancaster is close to knowing the forwards he wants to go forwards with.  We have a group of a few players in contention, some are pretty similar, but may do some things better than others.

We know we have a reasonable group of props, though Cole and Corbs probably have the inside track.  Hookers are Youngs and Hartley.  Locks are from Lawes, Launchbury, Parling, and possibly Attwood.  Flankers Wood and Robshaw, and 8 from Morgan or Vunipola.  

After that, I am not sure how he sees the backs.  I thought Youngs had nailed the 9 jumper, but apparently not yet.  Farrell is Lancaster's 10 unless the world ends first.  After that, who knows?  Is he still in love with Barritt and Tuilagi?  Yarde over Wade was a weird choice for me (can Wade play left wing?). Really hard to tell where we will end up.

Doc - I'd say the forwards are looking very good with some depth in each position (see below). It's the backs that a really worrying me though with some very undecided picking orders and suitably odd selections as a consequence.

1.Corbs, Vunipola, Marler
2.Youngs, Hartley, Webber
3.Cole, Wilson
4.Launchberry, Lawes
5.Parling, Attwood
6.Croft, Wood
7.Robshaw
8.Vunipola, Morgan

With maybe the exception of Marler and some second row combinations I'd be confident with any of the above players starting that we'd have a strong enough pack to challenge most sides.

9.Youngs, Care
10.Farrell, Flood, Burns
11.Yarde or May
12.Twelvetrees would be my choice still but many aren't convinced
13.Tuilagi
14.Wade
15.Brown, Foden - I'd love to see Tait return to the form off last season and really challenge Brown

When thinking about backs I'd want to start against any side, that's the best I can come up with.

We really need some players to throw their hands up in the centre especially. As a big advocate of 36 I'm really hoping he's given another chance against Argentina. I also hope we look to use his full skill set including his long passing and kicking game rather than asking whoever is picked at centre to simply run crash balls at a set defensive line.

Agree with Doc and Carlos - we are now in a position to know pretty much the entire forward pack and squad. A couple of spots where there is still competition between starter and replacement (Youngs / Hartley and the 2nd row options), but the basic personnel is consistent. I think if we were picking a RWC squad tomorrow it would have the names Carlos lists plus Kvesic and Haskell (and obviously not Croft because of his long-term injury)

The back division is rather less clear cut. At present I think there are 3 cemented starters when fit: Farrell, Tuilagi and Brown. I'd be surprised now if Youngs isn't the starter for the next two AIs and at the start of the 6Ns, but he isn't exactly concreted in place ahead of Care and Dickson.

Leaves 12 and the two wingers. 12trees has had a couple of chances now, and for all the hype and potential he seems to have, he's yet to prove consistently capable at this level - the question though is who else can play that position: Barritt is an excellent defender but is neither creative nor particularly powerful in attack, while Burrell has the power but by most accounts is a poor distributor and obviously is another new face who might not make the step up

Yarde looks promising and I think merits another look on Saturday. Which just really leaves the question of whether Ashton is doing enough in attack to make up for his defensive weaknesses - clearly he hasn't in his last few England games, but has been in good club form and has in the past shown himself to be an outstanding finisher at Test level. The options are Foden (if Lancaster reverts to his two fullbacks tactic - I thiink Foden is better suited to playing wing / auxilliary fullback than Brown is, because he has the pace) or Wade, who is unproven at this level but may be someone to have that little spark of magic.

Considering where England were when Lancaster took over, he's done a pretty good job moving us forward in terms of grinding out results with what is still really quite an inexperienced side. What we now want is to see some greater fluency in how we play with the ball.

I don't think you can win a world cup with your best XV - you need to know your best squad. England look to have several very strong options in most positions. To win a WC or even a 6N's you need options across the squad than can slot in.

Id say the following are definate 1st choice in Lancs eyes. There are also a few positios which there are two people fighting for the spot...

1 Corbs
2 (Youngs v Hartley)
3 Cole
4 Launchbury
5 (Parling, Attwood, Lawes)
6 Wood
7 Robshaw
8 (Morgan v Vunipola)

9 Youngs
10 Farrell
11 Yarde
12 Barritt
13 Tuilagi
14 Ashton
15 (Brown v Foden)

As others have said, the pack looks good. I also think the outside backs should be pretty handy - between e.g. Tuilagi, Yarde, Wade, Brown - certainly more dangerous than we have been in those positions for a long time. The problem I think is the attack between 6 and 12 - we aren't getting momentum around the fringes and don't have creative inside backs. I suggest getting Baxter in to work on our attack around the fringes - Exeter seem to be outstanding at it. The second point is more likely to be solved by a change of personnel - the trouble is, whilst we do have exciting players like Care, Burns, Eastmond, it is hard to see who is going to improve our attack without significantly weakening our defence.

Have to say it is all down to having a good squad. Granted there will always be a few core players who you really cannot do without (see the 2003 squad; I would single out Johnson, Wilkinson, Dallaglio & Robinson). We are genuinely in the lucky position of having at least 2 players in each position who can make the grade for one reason or another, sometimes 3 or 4. Of course there will be those who aren't quite as good but there are few that I have seen who don't quite make the grade. It's a nice place to be.

1. Corbisiero; Vunipola; Marler
2. Youngs; Hartley; Webber
3. Cole; Wilson (Thomas in ascendance?)
4. Launchbury; Lawes (Palmer as emergency back-up)
5. Parling; Attwood
6. Wood; Haskell; Johnson
7. Robshaw; Kvesic
8. Morgan; Vunipola
9. Youngs; Care; Dickson (At a pinch Wigglesworth & Simpson)
10. Farrell; Flood; Burns (Back up Ford & as a VERY long shot Cipriani)
11: Yarde; Strettle (Sharples?)
12: Barritt; Twelvetrees; Eastmond; Burrell
13: Tuilagi; Tomkins; Trinder; Joseph
14: Ashton; Wade
15: Brown; Foden; Goode

We have strength in depth - of that there is no doubt. Some will make, others won't. I for one am happy with what we have as long as there is no more playing people out of position (Brown at 11, Wood at 8 for example).

Quite right about the squad point. In the 2003 warm up games, an England 2nd XV lost to a French 1st XV who would go on to the semis by a missed drop goal. We don't have that kind of strength in depth yet.

The challenge is finding time for some of those combinations to gel.

Oh, and I'd say that Greenwood and Hill were more important to the 03 team than JR and Dayglo. It's taken 10 years to find decent replacements and we're still not there at 12. Got two Hill-a-likes now, though.