England 38 man squad

First topic message reminder :

With the squad set to be selected on Wednesday, I'd be interested to see what players people would like to see included.
This would be my squad in no particular order...

01: J.Marler (Quins) A.Waller (Saints) M.Mullan (Wasps)*
02: R.Webber (Bath) D.Hartley (Saints) J.Gray (Quins)
03: D.Wilson (Bath) H.Thomas (Bath) K.Brookes (Newcastle)
04: J.Launchberry (Wasps) G.Kitchener (Leicester)
05: D.Attwood (Bath) C.Lawes (Saints)
06. T.Wood (Saints) J.Haskell (Wasps)
07. C.Robshaw (Quins) W.Fraser (Saracens) M.Kvesic (Gloucester)*
08: B.Vunipola (Saracens) B.Morgan (Gloucester)

Injured: Corbisiero, Vunipola, Youngs, Cole, Slater, Parling, Croft, Garvey, Fearns, Johnson, Dickinson.

09: D.Care (Quins) B.Youngs (Leicester) L.Dickson (Saints)
10: D.Cipriani (Sale) G.Ford (Bath) O.Farrell (Saracens)
11. M.Yarde (Irish) A.Watson (Bath)
12. B.Barritt (Saracens) K.Eastmond (Bath) B.Twelvetrees (Gloucester)*
13. L.Burrell (Saints) J.Joseph (Bath)
14. S.Rokodeguni (Bath) C.Ashton (Saracens)*
15. M.Brown (Quins) B.Foden (Saints) A.Goode (Saracens)

Injured: Allen, Tuilagi, Trinder.

*Marler isn't having the most consistent seasons, whilst Waller is thriving for Saints in Corbisiero's absence. I could see him pressing Marler for a spot in the test XV

*The back row is our most competitive area. With all 5 of our flanker options the official 7's for their clubs; Quins, Saints, Saracens, Wasps and Gloucester respectively. I expect to see Fraser or Kvesic given a starting birth against Samoa.

*I reluctantly picked Twelvetrees, due to his ineffectiveness against better sides. However, Lancaster has faith in him so i'll give him the spot. If Eastmond is fully fit, his form merits a starting position.

*The wings are very open. There are a number of players who must be close to selection including May (LW) Strettle (LW) Sharples (RW) Nowell (RW) and Wade (RW) Chris Ashton really is in the last chance saloon.

This would be my XV to play New Zealand in the first test. Subs in brackets.

01. J.Marler (A.Waller)
02. D.Hartley (R.Webber)
03. D.Wilson (H.Thomas)
04. J.Launchberry (C.Lawes)
05. D.Attwood
06. T.Wood (J.Haskell)
07. C.Robshaw
08. B.Vunipola
09. D.Care (B.Youngs)
10. O.Farrell (D.Cipriani)
11. A.Watson
12. L.Burrell (K.Eastmond)
13. J.Joseph
14. C.Ashton
15. M.Brown

This would be my XV to play Samoa. Mostly squad players to be given a chance. Subs in brackets.

01. A.Waller (M.Mullan)
02. R.Webber (J.Gray)
03. H.Thomas (K.Brookes)
04. C.Lawes (G.Kitchener)
05. D.Attwood
06. J.Haskell
07. W.Fraser (M.Kvesic)
08. B.Morgan
09. B.Youngs (L.Dickson)
10. G.Ford (D.Cipriani)
11. M.Yarde
12. K.Eastmond
13. J.Joseph
14. S.Rokodeguni
15. B.Foden (A.Goode)

And I question having both Vuni &Morgan in the matchday squad as they provide very similar types

Barney, they would be my choice...they're both excellent...but i would also consider someone like Ewers or someone else who can cover 6 and 8.

The absence of Manu should drive Lancaster to see IF its better to have a good combo that helops the team rather than Manu who is the best individual weapon we have.

Eastmond and Burrell could be interesting...even barritt and Eastmond swapping on attack and defence.

Or the more likely Twelvetrees and Burrell.

And if thats the case it surely is Twelvetrees final chance. He MUST perform to required level......and ....Consistently.

What's the required level? He's been dependable without any major highs or lows. Just quietly helping the backline tick for me.

The squad suggests what we all know: Lancaster knows his first-choice pack, his half-backs and FB. Questions remain about the centres (he's got 5 of them in the squad), and the wings.

Centres I suspect he really wants to pick Tuilagi and 12T but Tuilagi's injuries continue to stop that from happening, it's becoming an issue TBH with the WC fast approaching.

Wings is Lancaster's real weak point: he seems to have no real idea what his first-choice wingers are, or how best to use the ones he has. He's gone back to Nowell and May here, with yarde who did pretty well in NZ and IMO deserves to keep his place, and the in-form Roko. Does he go the "auxiliary FB" route he used for the 6N with Nowell and May? Or does he go for genuine strike options. As fans we like wingers to score tries and would obviously prefer the latter, but...

Twelvetrees is a lucky boy! I don't see that he's found much form this season at all.

Changes I'd have made personally:

Waller for Mullan
Kitchener for Kruis - Though Kruis is still an excellent player, I just feel Kitchener is playing better right now
Fraser, Kvesic, Ewers or Gibson for Clark
Wade for May
Foden for Goode

The big two there for me are Clark - I think he's a good player but not one who has put in the performances required to demand selection in such a highly contested position. Particularly with Fraser fit again.

Also Wade being overlooked is very frustrating too me. We keep saying that we need to improve our finishing and be more clinical plus add some spark to the backline. Well there Wade is. He's one of the best one on one attackers out there, with a nose for the try line and the ability to create something from nothing.

From what I have seen here and elsewhere Wade is still very much finding his way back into form. Outside of the amazing try he scored at the weekend the writeups suggest he was poor.

Foden vs Goode no contest
Myler seems a very safe option, in that he is a good all rounder, but the question is does he have the skills to make a real difference at international level and not just be a place holder? It just seems Cipriani has been on fire - its so rare to see a 10 get a decent write up while playing for the loosing team.
Nice to see Kruis get a place, but as has been said, Kitchener is in such good form.

No 7&1/2 wrote:What's the required level?  He's been dependable without any major highs or lows. Just quietly helping the backline tick for me.

And thats what you want from your 12? Ticking along?

Personally i question if i have even seen that from him. Im not a complete hater of Twelvetrees. I see in him huge potential...my problem is...im just not seeing enough of that on the pitch - controlling the game..using his skills.

If he can click...then great he could be a very good international 12...he has all the skill set. But he simply must show me more than just ticking along this AI.

Lancaster apparently sees no place for that hardy perennial Phil Vickery.

All of the centres bar Joseph play 12 for their clubs, which maybe highlights the problem position!

Personally I don't have too many complaints about the squad, personally I think both Clark and Kruis are lucky, but baring a disastrous run of injuries, neither will be starting against NZ anyway.

An injury to Marler or Wilson will cause us big problems though.

Wings is Lancaster's real weak point: he seems to have no real idea what his first-choice wingers are, or how best to use the ones he has. He's gone back to Nowell and May here, with yarde who did pretty well in NZ and IMO deserves to keep his place, and the in-form Roko. Does he go the "auxiliary FB" route he used for the 6N with Nowell and May? Or does he go for genuine strike options. As fans we like wingers to score tries and would obviously prefer the latter, but....

May is similar to Twelvetrees in my eyes. He has all the skill set to be a top class international player. He needs to show this on the pitch now.

He has pace galore, he looks fairly powerful despite his slight frame, he can step, cover the high kicks well etc.

He needs to learn when to run straight and when to go on his wild adventures...and he needs to learn to back himself in a straight line when one on one with the opposition.
If he can do that he could make one of the wing spots his own.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:What's the required level?  He's been dependable without any major highs or lows. Just quietly helping the backline tick for me.

And thats what you want from your 12? Ticking along?

Personally i question if i have even seen that from him. Im not a complete hater of Twelvetrees. I see in him huge potential...my problem is...im just not seeing enough of that on the pitch.
If he can click...then great he could be a very good international 12...he has all the skill set. But he simply must show me more than just ticking along this AI.

But what does that look like? For me he's allowed England to relieve pressure on farrell stepping in as first receiver well. His passing barring 1or 2 shockers has been good. His kicking, especially grubbers has been good. He's made a few breaks which haven't resulted in anything but that was more down to lack of support. Tackling decent bar Aus for 1 tackle and I'd point to Youngs (T I think it was not tracking his own man). He's not had the man of the match display yet but what will you be looking for him to do?

I want him doing what you say...but im not sure we have seen that as much as you are alluding to.

Dont get me wrong, im not looking for Jason Robinson esque runs or Johnny style tackles...i want him to control the game and use the skills he has to hurt the teams.

We rarely see him putting players through gaps with his passes, we dont often see him putting his thnuderous boot in to intelligent use..ie putting the ball out for a lineout at the oppositions 5m line etc.

I would also disagree that his passing has been consistantly good. He has a great range of passing but too often he is careless and passes to peoples feet.

I don't buy the argument that Twelvetrees acted as Farrell's safety blanket. Care has been more instrumental in Farrell's performances.

Like geordiefalcon I haven't seen all the things Twelvetrees is supposedly meant to have done - bar one noticeable grubber he's not really created anything of note.

He's supposedly this playmaking genius who creates chance after chance with his world class passing, line breaks and kicks as well as an experienced mentor for Farrell. Really?

I would say Twelvetrees has been okay but he's not lived up to the hype surrounding him.

I probably concur with a lot of the sentiment but I would like to have seen Wade and Watson, and I think Ewers would be a much better blindside than Clark.  Agree with Kitchener over Kruis (but both good), though Kitchener brings more of a line-out option.

Unlucky also Foden.  Myler over Cipriani?  No place for Slade?  I guess within the numbers available not everyone could be picked.  I did see that only four props and two hookers were selected, so no error for any injuries otherwise the games would have to be cancelled.  Surely it woudl be better to rest some of the front-row completely (say against Samoa) and use more than six FRF's.

There's been a couple of awful passes which stick in the mind. He's put players through gaps but I haven't seen too many converted to tries which is the problem as you generally then don't see them repeated. He did it for a try vs Italy (although Italy as generally discounted as being any good). Honestly give him the benefit of the doubt and really focus on him in the next game he plays. Now watch him have a shocker!

beshocked, not sure anyones saying he's a mentor. What hype is this you talk of?

Disagree with the selections of Kruis (Kitchener), Clark (Fraser or Armitage), Myler (Cipriani) and Nowell (Wade).

Lancaster has gone with consistency of selection, but there are some form players ignored around the fringes. Still, other than Wade, the matchday 23 I would have picked has been included.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S_yZ_K4CAs

Okay fair enough - Twelvetrees assisted once but that was when the game was already won.

Hype - basically that Twelvetrees is the messiah.

It's funny that Farrell was more creative and more of an attacking threat than Twelvetrees. Of course you'll spout the hyperbole that it was all because of Twelvetrees taking the pressure off Farrell.

I will watch him closely 7.5.

Like i said...i recognise his skill set...i just havent seen him use them to hurt opposition in the manner we would expect to see a SH 12 perform...or a Greenwood etc.

We may say...well he's no Greenwood, or Nonu or Giteau etc...but thats the level that these players need to be performing at depending on their ability.

Twelvetrees is in there as a 2nd 10 so to speak. Thus when not coming from the 10...i want to see him, putting Manu or a winger (running off his shoulder) through the gaps.
I want to see him using the top 5 inches...putting in England in the right areas to play rugby with his boot. I want to see him running and looking to offload.
Him and the 10 are picked to do just that...control the game.

NB, This totally different to my expectations of Eastmond at 12 as i see them as completely different types of players.

Who's saying Twelvetrees is the messiah beshocked? I think Twelvetrees role in the team is to help split the play and make it harder for the opposition to react which is good for the team but I would in no way say Farrell is anything other than a great player. I've been praising him for a fair while and personally reckon he was one of the outstanding FHs until his recent injury issues.

Fair enough Geordie, I don't think he's ever going to go down as a great, just think he best suits England at present.

Eastmond is completely different - he's a strike runner and although his passing is decent he creates by making individual line breaks and using his side stepping and accelaration.

I generally defend Stuart Lancaster as a guy doing a pretty decent job (all coaches make mistakes), but if he picks Twelvetrees at 12 then I'd certainly chip in with criticism. You cannot ignore club rugby and pick players based on an idea, rather than what is actually being delivered week in week out.

Fair enough Geordie, I don't think he's ever going to go down as a great, just think he best suits England at present..

He doesnt have to be a great, he just needs to pull the strings more than he currently is.

Eastmond is completely different - he's a strike runner and although his passing is decent he creates by making individual line breaks and using his side stepping and accelaration.

FES, thats why i said my expectations of him and Twelvetrees are totally different...not higher or lower. If Eastmond comes in...i expect him to perform his specfic skills set to the required level...and that means making those breaks and doing his jinking runs...ala Nonu for NZ.

No 7&1/2 wrote:There's been a couple of awful passes which stick in the mind. He's put players through gaps but I haven't seen too many converted to tries which is the problem as you generally then don't see them repeated. He did it for a try vs Italy (although Italy as generally discounted as being any good). Honestly give him the benefit of the doubt and really focus on him in the next game he plays. Now watch him have a shocker!

beshocked, not sure anyones saying he's a mentor. What hype is this you talk of?

Wade need to learn to defend. At the moment he scores brilliant tries but gives away more. It is not that he cannot tackle. He just has awful positioning and makes bad decisions.

The best wings at the moment are Rokoduguni and Strettle but Lancaster will never pick Strettle for some reason.

well no 7 & 1/2 from your postings you evidently think he is.

I wouldn't go as far as to say Farrell is great. Good player who still needs work. He had a decent 6 nations but has been poor since. Plus he's still a bit petulant and immature individual. Not that surprising for someone of his age and profile.

Like any player he's got his pros and cons.

Every player needs to work on their game.

It's just with Twelvetrees he's supposed to have numerous skills and abilities which he hasn't really shown.

I don't think he's the messiah beshocked, just think he's the best option at the moment. hope that clears it up. I think Farrell was probably the best FH in the NH for a chunk of 2013/14, up there with Sexton.

Exiledinborders wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:There's been a couple of awful passes which stick in the mind. He's put players through gaps but I haven't seen too many converted to tries which is the problem as you generally then don't see them repeated. He did it for a try vs Italy (although Italy as generally discounted as being any good). Honestly give him the benefit of the doubt and really focus on him in the next game he plays. Now watch him have a shocker!

beshocked, not sure anyones saying he's a mentor. What hype is this you talk of?

Wade need to learn to defend. At the moment he scores brilliant tries but gives away more. It is not that he cannot tackle. He just has awful positioning and makes bad decisions.

The best wings at the moment are Rokoduguni and Strettle but Lancaster will never pick Strettle for some reason.

Strettle went to Argentina. The opposition wasnt up to much but a number of players (like Wade and Eastmond) did exceptionally well. Strettle didnt.

Similar situation with Sharples. He had a bad game vs Oz and hes been out of the picture ever since

The question you have to ask is..."Have any wingers excelled under Lancaster?"

I would suggest not...and that makes you wonder.

How many wingers have excelled over the last 10 years? Ashton for a period before his fall from form and then who?

No 7&1/2 wrote:I don't think he's the messiah beshocked, just think he's the best option at the moment. hope that clears it up. I think Farrell was probably the best FH in the NH for a chunk of 2013/14, up there with Sexton.

Fair enough I guess.

I don't know who the best options are at 10, 12 or 13 currently.

I agree Farrell was very good most of the 2013/14 season but his form tailed off in the latter stages of the season because of not being fully fit. He's not been fully fit for over 6 months. He has a lack of match practice.

I am not convinced that if England do risk Farrell he'll show the same form of the 6 nations.

Personally I think England and Saracens need to allow him a bit of time to fully recover - another 10 option must be found for England.

As for the centres I really don't know.

No 7&1/2 wrote:How many wingers have excelled over the last 10 years? Ashton for a period before his fall from form and then who?

I thought Cueto was pretty good.

Welly wrote: in 30 tests matches the only player other than robshaw to play 7 is Haskell for 1 test. The fact was before England started calling for him to play 7 Robshaw was a 6 so why couldn't he have been played 6 for a few tests to give others a look at 7?

That's a top internet fact there, Welly. As in, simply not true. Robshaw played 6 for Quins up until 2010 season, when the club captains were Paul Volley and Will Skinner - both out-and-out 7s who could not be played at 6. When O'Shea made Robshaw club captain, he became the 7 and as far as I can recall the only time he's started a Quins game without a 7 on his shirt was in 2011 when Easter was with England, Guest and York were injured and so they started him at 8.

Ok, so at the point of call up he'd probably played more at 6 than 7 but that reflects more on the value that Quins place on having him in the squad when the club captain also played 7 than on any innate gap in ability. That said, I don't think Lancaster would have had a problem starting him at 6 if there were a fit and in form 7 who was knocking on the door. But Armitage is in France, Kvesic's form has wandered and Fraser hasn't been able to stay fit at the right points. In addition, Wood and Haskell are also both in form and, like Robshaw, can play 6 or 7, and Haskell at least has performed very well in that role internationally (much to my surprise). Given that Vunipola can play 6, that gives plenty of experienced options who know how to play with one another.

Still, he has a 60% win ratio against MJ who had 55%. He has made England a tough opponent, and we have only really had one really bad game (or two if you include the last test vs NZ).

Its not the best ratio but its pretty good. Gatland win ratio is 50%

Poorfour do you want Wood or Haskell to play 7 for England? I know I wouldn't.

You say Fraser hasn't been able to stay fit at the right points. He is fit now. He is knocking on the door and he outplayed Robshaw in their encounter this season.

Lancaster gets it wrong again.

beshocked wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:How many wingers have excelled over the last 10 years? Ashton for a period before his fall from form and then who?

I thought Cueto was pretty good.

Cueto had a fantastic indian summer but he never seemed to have the pace to actually score that often. Was great seeing him torment Australia with his jinking runs, Very hard to put down or even catch, just slow moving

Other than that a very safe pair of hands.

Actually the other winger who looked good in the last 5 years was Delon Armitage.

I dont think people are questioning Lancaster per say LIW...he's been brilliant for England. I think we're wondering if he has that extra %, to take England on to that next level as a team.

Ie can he fix the niggling problems that everyone on here is mentioning and fix the position issues.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I dont think people are questioning Lancaster per say LIW...he's been brilliant for England. I think we're wondering if he has that extra %, to take England on to that next level as a team.

Ie can he fix the niggling problems that everyone on here is mentioning and fix the position issues.

You are right and we have every right to change how we feel about him, his regime and his achievements. It just gets all too easy to get into a very negative (KE?) type mindset if we focus on the questionable stuff. Its like a relationship where after a while it gets all too easy to take the good side for granted and the (small) bad side just seems to grow out of all proportion in importance

I think that we berate SL a bit too much about the wing situation, like the centres he can never get a settled combo as two out of three are always injured, i.e. Wade and Yarde when they were odds on to get picked last season, May has had time out as has Ashton and I think Strettle. He has had no choice but to keep picking different combos. With an unsettled centre partnership and different wings for every game, is it a wonder that none of them have seemed to click together.

For France last 6N, May and Nowell were last minute picks from outside the EPS and then May gets his nose broken after 10 minutes. Now there I do criticise SL, he should have had a utility wing/FB or an out and out winger on the bench, not Goode. Both May or Nowell could cover 15.

This year Yarde is not in good form but SL has shown consistency in picking him, Wade is still coming back from injury and has yet to settle down again, especially in his positioning, Strettle had his chance in the summer, he blew it. Ashton may have a right to be disappointed to be overlooked but SL has picked the two form wings at the moment and two others Nowell from last years 6N and Yarde he performed well in the summer.

Both May and Nowell can cover 15 which means he has more freedom on the bench if he wants to use it i.e. not Goode which would mean a 15 on the wing again or Goode in the centre.

beshocked wrote:Poorfour do you want Wood or Haskell to play 7 for England? I know I wouldn't.

You say Fraser hasn't been able to stay fit at the right points. He is fit now. He is knocking on the door and he outplayed Robshaw in their encounter this season.

Lancaster gets it wrong again.

No, Fraser hasn't been able to stay fit. Being fit and staying fit are two different things. You said yourself that Sarries really suffered when he was injured at the end of last season. I think (and I suspect that the England coaches think) that he needs to show that he can sustain his fitness for long enough to last an RWC campaign. Woodward was famously prepared to wait for Hill to recover in the RWC, but Hill had already proven his value at international level time and again. Fraser is not a known quantity at international level and not at this stage worth the gamble. If he stays fit until the 6N he may get a look in then; more likely it will be after the RWC that he gets his chance. If he stays fit.

I really don't go for these "x outplayed y therefore x should be in the squad" arguments, especially in one-off games. Robshaw outplayed McCaw in 2012. Is Robshaw therefore better than McCaw? No. A sample of one game is not a basis for comparison.

By the way, the match stats (haven't seen player stats) from that game made interesting reading. It was close, but Quins were ahead on most of the stats for territory, possession, breaks etc. Sarries scored one well-worked try and most of their other points came from forcing turnovers in midfield. Fraser was instrumental in the defensive effort that forced those turnovers, but it was the overall strategy (mainly not committing to the ruck so that there was always a strong defensive line) that created the result.

Poorfour if you don't pick Fraser you don't know if he's ready.

6 nations is too late to try him. Not worth a gamble? Picking an actual no 7 is seen as a gamble?

Might be ahead in territory,possession etc but the most important stat was the 39-0. Pretty sure Fraser was man of the match.

As for Fraser he's been getting the better of almost every single backrow with his team mates. It's not as big a gamble if you pair him with his team mate Billy.

Fraser was an instrumental part of the tactics as he is in most games he plays.

To be honest I think you're just afraid he might put pressure on Robshaw's place.

If Robshaw is injured then we have to resort to players who aren't opensides.

No, I'm not. I'm worried that we might start relying on a player who has a long history of injuries and might break down in the middle of the RWC. That way lies madness and Gatlandball.

Picking a player who hasn't shown he can string a series together *is* a gamble, especially this late in the day, however you want to spin it.

Only my opinion - but I feel that Fraser should be behind Kvesic who can feel really hard done by.

Poorfour are you saying that's the reason why Wade wasn't picked either?

So you're a supporter of Clark's selection.

I am only suggesting Fraser because he's been one of the best performing 7s in England when fit. It that unreasonable?

Londontiger based on what exactly?

Ksevic hasn't done anything to warrant being ahead of Fraser in my opinion.

has Kvesic been as influential in his games as Fraser would seem to be in his?

I know Kvesic has been playing well this season.

Would seem crazy that both have been overlooked for Clark.

I don't know the reason why any player was or wasn't picked. I'm saying I think it would be a big gamble to pick a player whose fitness has a question mark over it.

If I had to guess why Wade hasn't been picked, I'd say it's probably because his defensive positioning is still not good enough for International level and it's too late to fix before the RWC. Having said that, someone will probably get injured and he'll be straight into the team...

I have said very little on Clark. I haven't watched him enough to have an opinion. We get that you are a fan of Fraser. I also think that there are few on here who would disagree that he's a very good player. But fitness matters and I don't think it's unreasonable to hold the view that he's not done enough to show that he's permanently over his injury problems.

Permanently over injury problems? Anyone can injured any time. Sure it happens to some players more often but he's no more injury prone than someone like Wade or Manu.

Of course a bit of bias does come into it but generally when Fraser does play he has had a positive impact.

England are crying out for a specialist openside.

If Robshaw is injured our 7s options don't look great if we don't try Fraser or Ksevic for example.

Rokoduguni.. going to love hearing that name a lot on TV commentary this autumn.

gregortree wrote:Rokoduguni.. going to love hearing that name a lot on TV commentary this autumn.

Bet you decide his nickname is Rocky

beshocked wrote:Permanently over injury problems?  Anyone can injured any time. Sure it happens to some players more often but he's no more injury prone than someone like Wade or Manu.

Of course a bit of bias does come into it but generally when Fraser does play he has had a positive impact.

England are crying out for a specialist openside.

If Robshaw is injured our 7s options don't look great if we don't try Fraser or Ksevic for example.

I would imagine Lancaster would move Wood to 7 and include Haskell at 6 (or simply include Haskell at 7). Not ideal, but I doubt he would see either Fraser or Kvesic as the obvious successor to Robshaw, rightly or wrongly.

Of course if we're talking about form, and sustained form at that, then the other question mark at 7 is Steffon Armitage. Yes, I went there.

Calum Clark