Review/Discussion of the state of the England team

First topic message reminder :

Just a quick review/discussion on the status of the England team.  Not necessarily a complete analysis but I sure others will fill in the missing gaps and provide their own views.

England were very disappointing and stalled during the Autumn Internationals. Without a dominance scrum they could very easy have lost to Australia.

FORWARDS:

Generally went well, but England should not complacent as next up is Wales away at the MS, where they were bullied last time.

If Corbisiero and Cole can regain form and fitness, England will be strong at prop.  Brookes quietly improving with some younger guys waiting in the wings.

Hooker seems to be a weak area though, Webber did not look wonderful over the week-end.  Hartley a bit undisciplined.

Quite a good groups of locks, but I would still prefer an Attwood or Slater type.  Occasionally Lawes and Launchbury look a little light-weight.  Also though competition is very tight, I would like to have seen how Kitchener would fare.

Backrow is a point of discussion and debate.  The number eights look good with Vunipola coming back to form and future options in Ewers and others (Hughes?).  I think Robshaw almost always plays well but I would not mind seeing Garvey at blindside, to do the tight stuff and allow the other back five forwards to excel in the loose.


BACKS:

Not totally bleak but how to get them playing?

Fullback seems set with Brown and I wonder if Watson should be seen as his successor.

Scrum-half is fairly well served by Youngs and Care if he can recover his form.  Also Simpson can look a good player?

Fly-half is well stocked with Ford, Farrell, Myler and Cips.  Indeed at the week-end I thought Myler had a great game.

At wing there are lots of options in May, Watson, Rokoduguni, Nowell, Wade, Yarde and Benjamin has come on a bit as well. I would love to see Wade get a go sometime.

Centre has been a problem which is annoying has there seems to be talent available.  Tuilagi, Burrell, Eastmond, Joseph, Barritt, Slade, Twelvestrees, etc. all seem good players

So if everyone was fit and on Form, I would go with: -

Corbisiero
Hartley
Cole
Attwood
Launchbury
Garvey
Robshaw
Morgan

Youngs
Ford
Watson
Burrell
Tuilagi
May
Brown

Would definitely have Lawes on the bench in case the line went belly-up. Have not yet found room for Wade but would have Eastmond on the bench.  However in most positions there is a lot of competition, so sometimes the choice could go either way.
Perhaps England’s real weakness is having several good players (with the sum being better than the parts), but with very few world class options.

Honestly and truly, what do people suppose is the concensus about Cipriani?

Will he only ever be on the bench if Ford is playing? What can Farrell do that Cipriani cannot?

I am as neutral as a Toblerone bar and have no truck with any of these three players but I really am confused as to what is going on in terms of selection.

I think Farrell offers tackling and slightly better kicking accuracy. Is this enough? Depends on what you think wins a WC.

With no disrespect to SA or the great JW, I think a strong tackling, high percentage kicking fly-half CAN get win you a WC, and can certainly get you to a final. I don't think the game has changed so drastically that that no longer holds true...

...except if you're drawn against the ABs. Then, i think forget it, you need someone who with more variety or you're buried.

Its all combinations. With Farrell you have great niggly attitude, great defense and a great boot, but maybe you have to tweak the rest of the back line if you want it to look dangerous (like last year with playing he who must be cast into the outer darkness at 12). He was playing at 10 when we did beat the AB's.

Cipriani is more experienced and offers lots of great things, except being the best kicker or the strongest defender (although reports seem to suggest his defense is much improved from what it was).

There are issues but I am all for Cipriani to be on the bench behind Ford until such time as Farrell is able to prove he is on best form.

Cipriani will always divide people. I am unable to decide whether I am with Steve Diamond and if he was at a strong team he woudl be a shoo in - or it is the Parisse thing and he is shining in an average side?

Certainly the few times I have seen him in full this season he has not been great - but on highlights packages has looked awesome.

LondonTiger wrote:Cipriani will always divide people. I am unable to decide whether I am with Steve Diamond and if he was at a strong team he woudl be a shoo in - or it is the Parisse thing and he is shining in an average side?

Certainly the few times I have seen him in full this season he has not been great - but on highlights packages has looked awesome.

Parisse shines in in any team he plays...! That's a poor comparision.

Cipriani has flaws in defence, so does Ford when you compare the two to Farrell.

That said a backbone with on form skillfull players like Care, Cipriani, Eastmond, Joseph, Wade looks a lot more frightening to us opposition fans than the predictability of Farrell, Barritt and Tuilagi/Burrell

Tuilagi/Burrell might be predictable, but stopping them is another thing altogether .. I'll give you Farrell and Barritt

Can't line up with a centre combo of Eastmond and Joseph with Cips at 10, there's just not enough defensive stability there, its all well and good saying we'll just have to outscore the opposition, but that isn't always going to be possible

BamBam wrote:Tuilagi/Burrell might be predictable, but stopping them is another thing altogether .. I'll give you Farrell and Barritt

Can't line up with a centre combo of Eastmond and Joseph with Cips at 10, there's just not enough defensive stability there, its all well and good saying we'll just have to outscore the opposition, but that isn't always going to be possible

I can't imagine the england coaches dropping Farrell for Cips no matter how well he is playing for Sharks... One thing that is dependable is Lancasters pragmatic view of rugby.

maestegmafia wrote:

BamBam wrote:Tuilagi/Burrell might be predictable, but stopping them is another thing altogether .. I'll give you Farrell and Barritt

Can't line up with a centre combo of Eastmond and Joseph with Cips at 10, there's just not enough defensive stability there, its all well and good saying we'll just have to outscore the opposition, but that isn't always going to be possible

I can't imagine the england coaches dropping Farrell for Cips no matter how well he is playing for Sharks... One thing that is dependable is Lancasters pragmatic view of rugby.

That reads as if you're trying to insult him.

He probably is - though bomber would take it as a compliment.

I wonder who the non-pragmatic international coaches are?

I can't name one.

lostinwales wrote:Its all combinations. With Farrell you have great niggly attitude, great defense and a great boot, but maybe you have to tweak the rest of the back line if you want it to look dangerous (like last year with playing he who must be cast into the outer darkness at 12). He was playing at 10 when we did beat the AB's.

Cipriani is more experienced and offers lots of great things, except being the best kicker or the strongest defender (although reports seem to suggest his defense is much improved from what it was).

There are issues but I am all for Cipriani to be on the bench behind Ford until such time as Farrell is able to prove he is on best form.

Fair point! Though i think that was a major anomaly.

At the beginning of the season I thought Cipriani was a very strong challenger for England, but then came the Champions Cup game against Munster. He started off well, but as soon as the pressure came on in the 2nd half he began making bad decisions, with some absolute disasters in the last quarter. I think he would be fine against a lot of international sides, but in the tight, high pressure games against tough opposition I would just be waiting for that serious misjudgement or mental crumble that have featured too often throughout his career. Third choice feels right to me, capable of some very good things (not as good as Ford), but not a go-to player for must-win matches.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

BamBam wrote:Tuilagi/Burrell might be predictable, but stopping them is another thing altogether .. I'll give you Farrell and Barritt

Can't line up with a centre combo of Eastmond and Joseph with Cips at 10, there's just not enough defensive stability there, its all well and good saying we'll just have to outscore the opposition, but that isn't always going to be possible

I can't imagine the england coaches dropping Farrell for Cips no matter how well he is playing for Sharks... One thing that is dependable is Lancasters pragmatic view of rugby.

That reads as if you're trying to insult him.

No I am remarking on his character, loads of people say the same about Lancaster, loads say the same about Gatland.

Can you honestly see him drop Owen Farrell for Cipriani, could you see him select Cipriani for the first game ahead of Ford?

Not a chance.

alcoombe wrote:At the beginning of the season I thought Cipriani was a very strong challenger for England, but then came the Champions Cup game against Munster.  He started off well, but as soon as the pressure came on in the 2nd half he began making bad decisions, with some absolute disasters in the last quarter.  I think he would be fine against a lot of international sides, but in the tight, high pressure games against tough opposition I would just be waiting for that serious misjudgement or mental crumble that have featured too often throughout his career.  Third choice feels right to me, capable of some very good things (not as good as Ford), but not a go-to player for must-win matches.

As opposed to Farrell who's won us so much? Or who's missed a fair few kicks himself and stunted our game at times?

Or compared to Ford who's bottled a hell of a lot of games for Bath (behind a much better pack), just look at that game v Tigers two weeks ago, if that was Cips he'd be being flagglated for that performance!

Massive double standards with Cipriani on here.

maestegmafia wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

BamBam wrote:Tuilagi/Burrell might be predictable, but stopping them is another thing altogether .. I'll give you Farrell and Barritt

Can't line up with a centre combo of Eastmond and Joseph with Cips at 10, there's just not enough defensive stability there, its all well and good saying we'll just have to outscore the opposition, but that isn't always going to be possible

I can't imagine the england coaches dropping Farrell for Cips no matter how well he is playing for Sharks... One thing that is dependable is Lancasters pragmatic view of rugby.

That reads as if you're trying to insult him.

No I am remarking on his character, loads of people say the same about Lancaster,  loads say the same about Gatland.

Can you honestly see him drop Owen Farrell for Cipriani, could you see him select Cipriani for the first game ahead of Ford?

Not a chance.

I could see Cips ahead of Farrell but not Ford. He's been the best 10 in the league for me this season. Just a comment that all coaches are pragmatists that's all.

LondonTiger wrote:He probably is - though bomber would take it as a compliment.

I wonder who the non-pragmatic international coaches are?

Ashton?

It wasn't that long ago many pundits were saying this World Cup would come to early for England, and it would be 2019 where our young talent would have enough experience under the belt to mount the best challenge.

Along the way, expectations started to rise, and it now looks like there'll be disappointment if we don't at least make it to the final.

I'm intrigued by how this is affecting Lancaster's thinking. He has a contract which takes him past the 2019 World Cup, so he could believe it's more important to build for the long term. With that kind of perspective, he might decide there is no point - except in dire emergency, or "exceptional circumstances" - introducing a player to the squad this late in the day if they won't be part of the picture towards 2019.

On the other hand, he'll be very aware of these raised expectations and will know that a poor showing at the Cup might jeopardize his position as coach. The RFU would rather buy out that extended contract than stick with a busted flush.

Even Martin Johnson's team got out of their group, so that's a bare minimum, and by no means a given this year. To be absolutely sure of being retained, Lancaster probably needs to get to the semis, and not suffer a humiliating exit. When you consider two World Cup winners, Woodward and Henry, both went out at in the quarters on their first efforts, the size of the task becomes apparent.

You do wonder, if things don't go smoothly for England in the Six Nations, whether Lancaster ditches part of his long term strategy in favour of selecting players who can get get England far enough in the tournament to make sure he gets a chance at another cycle.

If he really was the arch pragmatist, then that's what he ought to do. Maybe these conversations we hear about with Armitage, Easter and Cipriani are keeping his options open. It's hard, though to reconcile that with the man who has spoken so much about getting the team culture right, and a coach who has preferred to cap young players at every turn.

RWCs are for winning only and not for developing players. If you have a large percentage of your squad with previous RWC experience then happy days, but you should never select anyone for a RWC just to improve some distance chances at a future RWC. RWCs are about the here and now and all selections should be based on the simple criteria of which players will give you the best chance of winning the tournament.

As for England's expectations they are based purely on the draw. Win our group and we can make the final without playing SA or NZ. Runner up in the group and we will likely play SA in the 1/4 final and that will be game over. I don't think anyone's expectations of England doing well are based on anything else....certainly not form as we saw in the AIs. A decent side, but certainly not world beaters. With certain players returning from injury and hopefully finding form (Cole, Launchbury, Corbs, Croft, Manu) and maybe a RL convert helping out we should have a decent chance of winning our group, but it will be a close run thing. Home advantage really helps so fingers crossed we don't blow this opportunity to have a great tournament

yappysnap wrote:

alcoombe wrote:At the beginning of the season I thought Cipriani was a very strong challenger for England, but then came the Champions Cup game against Munster.  He started off well, but as soon as the pressure came on in the 2nd half he began making bad decisions, with some absolute disasters in the last quarter.  I think he would be fine against a lot of international sides, but in the tight, high pressure games against tough opposition I would just be waiting for that serious misjudgement or mental crumble that have featured too often throughout his career.  Third choice feels right to me, capable of some very good things (not as good as Ford), but not a go-to player for must-win matches.

As opposed to Farrell who's won us so much? Or who's missed a fair few kicks himself and stunted our game at times?

Or compared to Ford who's bottled a hell of a lot of games for Bath (behind a much better pack), just look at that game v Tigers two weeks ago, if that was Cips he'd be being flagglated for that performance!

Massive double standards with Cipriani on here.

All players (especially young ones) make mistakes or have underperforming matches, Cipriani's issue is that when he makes mistakes he too often compiles them thick & fast, and frequently not the more understandable misjudgements or errors that decision-makers are prone to, but real what were you thinking moments.  The rash of and type of incidents in that 2nd half performance against Munster are the sort we've unfortunately seen too often in his old England and Melbourne days that we hoped he had moved on from.  Ford & Farrell have certainly had their failures in their short careers, but they've also won a number of very big games for club and different level national sides.  The really big games or tough examinations (particularly away in hostile environments) where Cipriani has truly shown his mettle to the same degree in recent years aren't numerous.  I hope that if given an opportunity he proves me wrong, but until he can hold his nerve through games like that Champions Cup one I will doubt his suitability for the even tougher fixtures that international rugby against the best sides bring.

I`m not qualified to pick a test squad.
Because I don`t follow club rugby,but it seems it just as well.
England have such a large pool to choose from because the current injury rate is very bad,3 first choice in a week.

Not to make 6 Ns let alone the RWC,look doubtful, so the question of form over reputation is occurring example
Cipriani.Is being mentioned a lot but his defence/goalkicking have been questioned.

What does annoy me is when a player for example Farrell,and Pollard are rotated to
bench.Press goes with the dramatic he is "dropped"NOT he is "rotated" during the AI`s.

As would be expected a certain amount of experimentation took place in 2014 by ALL sides,.

I think that Lancaster likes to have a flair 10 and a steady 10, with Ford and Farrell being them respectively. I'd like to think that if Ford gets injured then Cips would come in and if Farrell were injured then someone like Myler would replace him. Its a fair enough system and gives the team the option of tightening up the game or cutting loose. For all his faults I'd much rather have Farrell kicking a pressure penalty than any of the other options.

Dean Ryan in The Guardian

"A prediction. Next Wednesday, when Stuart Lancaster announces his squad for the Six Nations, he will signal the end of England’s search for a ball-playing second receiver. The hunt for a creative inside-centre is over."

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/jan/15/six-nations-england-squad-prediction-rugby-union



Ryan's thought on who Lancaster will pick for the England Squad and match day 23 this Six Nations.

15 Brown, 14 May, 13 Burrell, 12 Barritt, 11 Watson; 10 Ford, 9 B Youngs; 1 Corbisiero, 2 T Youngs, 3 Wilson, 4 Attwood, 5 Lawes, 6 Wood, 7 Robshaw, 8 B Vunipola.

Replacements
16 Hartley, 17 Marler, 18 Cole, 19 Kruis, 20 Clark, 21 Care, 22 Farrell, 23 Yarde.

In the squad

Webber, M Vunipola, Brooks, Parling, Croft, Ewers, Wigglesworth, Myler, Tuilagi, Eastmond, Goode, Nowell.

He also said T Youngs is a destructive scrummager - worth a snigger.

And I'm fairly sure it's time for Corbs' usual injury down-time

Yeah that made me laugh too, on the whole I reckon he's about right on the squad though.

If we ever get to a point where Marler, Corbs, Cole and Wilson are all fit at the same time and in form, I'll be very happy

Farrell is a fine 10 when he's in form but he's not in form - he's been poor since last year's 6 nations and had an autumn to forget. I thought he had a good 6 nations and got more confident as it went on, overall for England he's been more good than bad.

Farrell should have never been involved in the AIs - that was the England's poor management. He should have been allowed to recover his form at club level instead there are still huge question marks over his form.

Farrell has more international experience than any of his rivals - that's one of his advantages. I think it's only SA of the big sides he has not beaten.

I would prefer an in form Cipriani to an out of form Farrell as of now.

To be honest I think the best performing 10 this season has been Myler not Ford or Cipriani.

Would prefer Myler to Cipriani personally.

"For the Six Nations opener in Cardiff in three weeks time, I would expect Lancaster to start with the destructive scrummaging of Corbisiero, Tom Youngs and Davey Wilson with Joe Marler, Dylan Hartley and Dan Cole to add impact from the bench – the hooker and tighthead starting among the replacements only because of a lack of game time. Behind them and in the squad, I see Mako Vunipola, Rob Webber, who has lost a little ground, and Kieran Brookes, who has made the best of his game time to supplant Henry Thomas."

Hartley's lack of game time? His ban is served he has missed three matches whilst keeping up full training.

You can sort of see why Ryan failed as a coach with muddled thinking like this. Youns a destructive scrummager, obviously doean't know the set piece from open play where Youngs is destructive.

I would be surprised if Youngs makes the 23, Webber is way ahead if it comes to the set piece of the breakdown.

The only part I agree with is the keeping of the back three from the AIs and the centre combos.

I think Care will start, if youy are going to play Ford you need to give him the time to create his magic, Care, delivers quicker and when required flatter ball than youngs and with his elecric pace, keeps the backrow and 9 interested around the base of the breakdown far longer than Youngs

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:"For the Six Nations opener in Cardiff in three weeks time, I would expect Lancaster to start with the destructive scrummaging of Corbisiero, Tom Youngs and Davey Wilson with Joe Marler, Dylan Hartley and Dan Cole to add impact from the bench – the hooker and tighthead starting among the replacements only because of a lack of game time. Behind them and in the squad, I see Mako Vunipola, Rob Webber, who has lost a little ground, and Kieran Brookes, who has made the best of his game time to supplant Henry Thomas."

Hartley's lack of game time? His ban is served he has missed three matches whilst keeping up full training.

You can sort of see why Ryan failed as a coach with muddled thinking like this. Youns a destructive scrummager, obviously doean't know the set piece from open play where Youngs is destructive.

I would be surprised if Youngs makes the 23, Webber is way ahead if it comes to the set piece of the breakdown.

The only part I agree with is the keeping of the back three from the AIs and the centre combos.

I think Care will start, if youy are going to play Ford you need to give him the time to create his magic, Care, delivers quicker and when required flatter ball than youngs and with his elecric pace, keeps the backrow and 9 interested around the base of the breakdown far longer than Youngs

There is a certain irony with his reasoning for not starting Hartley and Cole and then picking Corbs.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:"For the Six Nations opener in Cardiff in three weeks time, I would expect Lancaster to start with the destructive scrummaging of Corbisiero, Tom Youngs and Davey Wilson with Joe Marler, Dylan Hartley and Dan Cole to add impact from the bench – the hooker and tighthead starting among the replacements only because of a lack of game time. Behind them and in the squad, I see Mako Vunipola, Rob Webber, who has lost a little ground, and Kieran Brookes, who has made the best of his game time to supplant Henry Thomas."

Hartley's lack of game time? His ban is served he has missed three matches whilst keeping up full training.

You can sort of see why Ryan failed as a coach with muddled thinking like this. Youns a destructive scrummager, obviously doean't know the set piece from open play where Youngs is destructive.

I would be surprised if Youngs makes the 23, Webber is way ahead if it comes to the set piece of the breakdown.

The only part I agree with is the keeping of the back three from the AIs and the centre combos.

I think Care will start, if youy are going to play Ford you need to give him the time to create his magic, Care, delivers quicker and when required flatter ball than youngs and with his elecric pace, keeps the backrow and 9 interested around the base of the breakdown far longer than Youngs

i think Youngs should play alongside Ford, or Care with Farrell. I think those pairs are more suited to each other.

Also didn't Webber recently go head to head against T. Youngs and completely lost the battle?

The Bath front three lost the battle, that is not to say Webber did.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:"For the Six Nations opener in Cardiff in three weeks time, I would expect Lancaster to start with the destructive scrummaging of Corbisiero, Tom Youngs and Davey Wilson with Joe Marler, Dylan Hartley and Dan Cole to add impact from the bench – the hooker and tighthead starting among the replacements only because of a lack of game time. Behind them and in the squad, I see Mako Vunipola, Rob Webber, who has lost a little ground, and Kieran Brookes, who has made the best of his game time to supplant Henry Thomas."

Hartley's lack of game time? His ban is served he has missed three matches whilst keeping up full training.

You can sort of see why Ryan failed as a coach with muddled thinking like this. Youns a destructive scrummager, obviously doean't know the set piece from open play where Youngs is destructive.

I would be surprised if Youngs makes the 23, Webber is way ahead if it comes to the set piece of the breakdown.

The only part I agree with is the keeping of the back three from the AIs and the centre combos.

I think Care will start, if youy are going to play Ford you need to give him the time to create his magic, Care, delivers quicker and when required flatter ball than youngs and with his elecric pace, keeps the backrow and 9 interested around the base of the breakdown far longer than Youngs

I think that the article is slightly confusing and that we could be reading it wrong. "Destructive scrummaging" relates to Corbs only and not to Youngs or Wilson? Only Ryan can clarify, but surely he does not include Youngs in this phrase? And a lack of game for Coles clearly, but not Hartley!

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:The Bath front three lost the battle, that is not to say Webber did.

Well it was the Tigers front three that won the battle, Youngs was one of those front three

Surely you'd want the best 9 with the best 10 no matter? So Care and Ford should both be picked. Why pick a running 10 if the 9 is off form and likely to hamper him as is the case if Youngs was to start.

I don't think it is the case of just picking the best players and hoping they work together. Guys excel at different game styles. Not sure if pairing Care with Farell (out of form) is getting best out of him. Not really sure.

yappysnap wrote:Surely you'd want the best 9 with the best 10 no matter? So Care and Ford should both be picked. Why pick a running 10 if the 9 is off form and likely to hamper him as is the case if Youngs was to start.

Is Ben Youngs really that off form? Before the game against Leicester, Cares form wasn't the best.

Think Care and Ford are the front runners for their positions. Can't see Marler or Hartley getting dropped either.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Think Care and Ford are the front runners for their positions. Can't see Marler or Hartley getting dropped either.

Yep. Corbs might have the potential to be one of the best props around, but after all the time he has had off he has to prove it all over again.

I think we'll see broadly the same team take the field that left it from Australia. Clearly Morgan will be replaced by BV. I think Haskell or Clark are the front runners for the bench spot.

More than likely that Corbs will be on the bench if fit and I don't see Hartley being anywhere other than out on the field from the start. Lancs will want all his experience on the pitch from the off in Cardiff to avoid a repeat of last time. Lawes is the only other question mark. He has been injured and I haven't seen him back as yet. That means Parling will go straight in.

1. J Marler
2. D Hartley
3. D Wilson
4. D Attwood
5. G Parling
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw (c)
8. B Vunipola
9. B Youngs
10. G Ford
11. J May
12. B Barritt
13. L Burrell
14. A Watson
15. M Brown

16. T Youngs 17. A Corbisiero 18. K Brookes 19. G Kruis 20. J Haskell 21. D Care 22. O Farrell 23. M Yarde

That is the side that I expect Lancs to select for Wales. IF Lawes and Cole are both out.

Chjw131 wrote:I think we'll see broadly the same team take the field that left it from Australia. Clearly Morgan will be replaced by BV. I think Haskell or Clark are the front runners for the bench spot.

More than likely that Corbs will be on the bench if fit and I don't see Hartley being anywhere other than out on the field from the start. Lancs will want all his experience on the pitch from the off in Cardiff to avoid a repeat of last time. Lawes is the only other question mark. He has been injured and I haven't seen him back as yet. That means Parling will go straight in.

1. J Marler
2. D Hartley
3. D Wilson
4. D Attwood
5. G Parling
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw (c)
8. B Vunipola
9. B Youngs
10. G Ford
11. J May
12. B Barritt
13. L Burrell
14. A Watson
15. M Brown

16. T Youngs 17. A Corbisiero 18. K Brookes 19. G Kruis 20. J Haskell 21. D Care 22. O Farrell 23. M Yarde

That is the side that I expect Lancs to select for Wales. IF Lawes and Cole are both out.

Is that a better team than the last team England sent to Cardiff?



England vs Wales 2013 Review from The Telegraph

Alex Goode (full-back)
The most underrated player in the England team. He sees the potential for attack very early. He is also a good option for first receiver on the short side. 8

Chris Ashton (right wing)
Flattering to deceive at the moment. There is no doubt he can finish moves but he is getting a bit flat on the outside which is taking momentum away. 6

Manu Tuilagi (outside centre)
He is a handful. He needs a fly-half who can play him in. He has the ability to off-load but we have not seen much of it. A physical threat, he will have a big impact in Cardiff. 8

Brad Barritt (inside centre)
Very solid and consistent, he is a really intelligent defender. Has good hands even though some may not notice. I think he will work Jonathan Davies really hard. 8

Mike Brown (left wing)
I have been impressed with him on the wing. It is not an easy switch for a full-back. If there are any poor kicks he can beat the first man and return with interest. 8

Owen Farrell (fly-half)
This is a Test match animal and there are not many of those. He is the heartbeat of the team, despite his youth, and he puts England in the right places at key times. 9

Ben Youngs (scrum-half)
He has better game management than Danny Care and his kicking has been key. Wales’s back-row will have to watch him and that could create space on the outside. 8

Joe Marler (loosehead prop)
Wales will target loosehead which is probably why England have opted for Marler. They are going to have to be technically spot-on. He has a good attitude and is a battler. 7

Tom Youngs (hooker)
Very dynamic round the field and has a huge work-rate. A downside might be his tight physicality. But he is in more places, making more tackles. His throwing has been OK. 7

Dan Cole (tighthead prop)
He is absolutely crucial to England at the set-piece and a very important figure in making tackles, acting as an extra flanker at breakdown winning turnovers. 9

Joe Launchbury (lock)
I have been very impressed with him. For such a young lad, he is very skilful, very mobile and carries well. What he does in conjunction with the back-row has a big impact. 8

Geoff Parling (lock)
The organiser. He keeps the forwards’ heads in the right places, focused on the detail of the job. He has a key role at the lineout where his calling will make a difference. 8

Tom Croft (blindside flanker)
He is back fit and that is great news for England. He is a huge threat in the lineout so he will be a real problem to Wales in one of their weaker areas. 8

Chris Robshaw (openside flanker)
A huge competitor. Everyone would say that he has been very important to the way England have developed. He is always close to the action. Leads by example

Tom Wood (No 8)
He reminds me of Richard Hill. He works the tight channels really well and it is often Wood who makes a critical tackle. His control at the base is not always spot-on. 8

Better balance in the pack certainly. Settled partnerships are still awaited in the backs for 1 reason or another. They certainly cant play as bad. Still questions on the actual team though so it may be quite different.

Parling. I don't know. Has he done enough to get back in or is it just a case of last (experienced) man standing. I guess we dont have that long to find out.

lostinwales wrote:Parling. I don't know. Has he done enough to get back in or is it just a case of last (experienced) man standing. I guess we dont have that long to find out.

With Luanchbury out i think his line out expertise and leadership is crucial.

maes, you could equally ask whether the Wales team that will take the pitch in 2015 is as good as the one in 2013.

England will certainly be missing Manu, but that is (sadly) not an uncommon occurrence these days. In most other respects, Chjw's team is at least better balanced than the 2013 one.

The key differences are likely to be:
- The front row are unlikely to have as torrid a time with Garces behind the whistle as they did with Walsh. It was the scrum wot won it for Wales in 2013 (though my opinions on the quality of officiating have been voiced many times already). The same could probably be said for England in 2014. M Garces et M Poite sont tous les deux Francais, et ca c'est meilleur pour les garcons gras Anglais.
- Back row balance will be far better with a proper No 8
- Barritt and Burrell offers less outright power than Barritt and Manu, but Burrell has better distribution and picks smarter lines.

Poorfour wrote:maes, you could equally ask whether the Wales team that will take the pitch in 2015 is as good as the one in 2013.

England will certainly be missing Manu, but that is (sadly) not an uncommon occurrence these days. In most other respects, Chjw's team is at least better balanced than the 2013 one.

The key differences are likely to be:
- The front row are unlikely to have as torrid a time with Garces behind the whistle as they did with Walsh. It was the scrum wot won it for Wales in 2013 (though my opinions on the quality of officiating have been voiced many times already). The same could probably be said for England in 2014. M Garces et M Poite sont tous les deux Francais, et ca c'est meilleur pour les garcons gras Anglais.
- Back row balance will be far better with a proper No 8
- Barritt and Burrell offers less outright power than Barritt and Manu, but Burrell has better distribution and picks smarter lines.

I leave discussing Wales to the other thread but, objectively, we probably haven't altered as much as England in personnel.

Regarding Manu, he was not really in the game last time in Cardiff, butchered a possible try by dropping the ball and little else.

I am Of the concensus that Lancaster really needs to experiment this championship to get the team right. Injury causes too little consistency in selection, the only regulars are Hartley, Wood, Robshaw and Brown. A good spine that you can build a side around but you need to settle on halfbacks and an inside centre.

This championship is a great opportunity to give players a chance to perfom in pressure games.

No need for experimenting.

Even though we are still what 8 months away from the WC I think majority of coaches will have the big % of their squad already settled in their minds.

Of course there are always injuries or those currently injured may not recover etc which will give someone a chance but like said biggest % of squads will be known.

I think I'd prefer kitchener to Parling to be honest.

But Parling wouldn't be a horrific choice.

Maybe even Day of Saints if we're really struggling. He's not young or long term but playing very well and is a good alrounder.

No 7&1/2 wrote:No need for experimenting.

Really?


You will have to explain your thoughts on that one...!

England need to continue as they re doing no need to go off on any tangents. Build partnerships further and be consistent. No real need to roll the dice.

nathan wrote:

yappysnap wrote:Surely you'd want the best 9 with the best 10 no matter? So Care and Ford should both be picked. Why pick a running 10 if the 9 is off form and likely to hamper him as is the case if Youngs was to start.

Is Ben Youngs really that off form? Before the game against Leicester, Cares form wasn't the best.

Eh, it's been ok. I'd still start Youngs right now, but isn't form something you have or don't have? Form prior to the match in which you showed good form isn't form any more?

No 7&1/2 wrote:England need to continue as they re doing no need to go off on any tangents. Build partnerships further and be consistent. No real need to roll the dice.

Most of the players england want partnerships from are either injured or out of form.

Farrell and Youngs

Tuilagi and Barritt

Corbs Hartley Cole

Launchbury and Lawes

Wood Robshaw Morgan

There are a lot of missing lads from those, you need to look at other options as these lads have not been able to win a six nations let alone a RWC....

England are being forced to experiment by injuries. Why be scared to look at form players that the fans and pundits praise week in week out, over ones the fans so often criticise...???