Review/Discussion of the state of the England team

by cb Wed 07 Jan 2015, 4:01 pm

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.

by lostinwales Mon 12 Jan 2015, 2:01 pm

TJ wrote:My 2p worth? I think 10 is the real issue and Farrell has not moved on at all in a couple of years. England lack a playmaker. Farrell is a poor mans Wilkinson( and I never rated Wilkinson). The rest of the England team are good if in places uninspiring but someone somewhere ( and its usually the 10) has to provide some unpredictability and magic. I would play Cipriani because despite his weaknesses and flaws he as those qualities that are lacking.

I don't think tuliagi will provide all the answers when he is back as well. Too predictable. You have centres a plenty and all the candidates have been tried and none really shone. Got space for either Kyle Eastmond or Jonathan Joseph? They have impressed me in the AP.

Hartley is a weak point. He has now proven that he cannot change his lack of self control so that must be the end of his international career. All teams will know what he is like and he will be targeted to make him lose his temper and get sent off. At least a year in the AP without a single card before he is considered again.

Tell you what - as a scots fan while I believe many of our first teamplayers are better than their English counterparts but the strength in depth england have compared to us I would kill for. Come the WC that will be a huge advantage for england.

Opening game - England to win comfortably

Right.

1) I would be amazed if Farrell starts in the 6N. It will be Ford. Farrell can play very well for England but his form is poor and there still seem to be niggling injury issues. Ford is very much a playmaker (as is Care when given a chance). I also would like to see Cips involved but Ford is the man in possession. (And we all have our own opinions, but while accepting he had limitations 'never rating Wilkinson' will put you in something of a minority)

2) Tuliagi. Who can tell he hasnt played much for a while, but the combination of pace power and acceleration he has means that although you can largely predict what is going to happen, dealing with it is something else. Maybe its the old absence making the heart grow fonder etc, but he is also starting to develop the kind of presence that makes players around him play better. I really want to see Kyle involved, but with the make up of the team can see why Barritt is back in.

3) Hartley has been discussed endlessly.

4) As already stated we are entitled to opinions. Good luck at Twickenham but don't let the run of losses vs the AB's and SA, and the constant running down of England players/ standard wild optimisim about your own get in the way.

The strength in depth thing means that when we have guys out the replacements are rarely going to be poor. There is the big question about how many of our players are actually great. Who knows. Some will be, some wont, and some are (like Robshaw) but its very very hard to get people to admit it.

5) Wales. I'd like to think so but its always a big worry, especially without a bunch of our best players Smile

. I actually think Wales are in a funny place, either sticking largely with the same old (OK not all that old but...) or trying to bring in too many new players and being a bit underdone. I think if Gatland has a successful 6N while bringing in new players and modifying how Wales play to take advantage of them I might start to respect him a little more.

by Alex_Germany Mon 12 Jan 2015, 3:55 pm

Someone above said 3 yellow cards for England, which is probably average for a hooker.

by hugehandoff Mon 12 Jan 2015, 4:09 pm

Probable (not mine) team as it currently stands.

Marler
Hartley
Wilson
Attwood
Lawes
Wood
Vunipola
Robshaw
Youngs
Ford
May
Barritt
Burrell
Watson
Brown

Bench
Corbs
Webber
Cole
Parling
Haskell
Wigglesworth
Farrell
Foden?

There is room for injuries and late form to make the odd change, but that is what I will expect although not sure about Foden, but cover for the back 3 is required.

by lostinwales Mon 12 Jan 2015, 4:14 pm

Care and Parling on the bench are the only two I'd have real doubts about. Seems like Care is getting form back and I cant see that Parling has done enough.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Myler in over Farrell on the bench too.

by No 7&1/2 Mon 12 Jan 2015, 4:17 pm

What's that based on HHO? I'd be surprised not to see Care back at 9 let alone out of the match day squad.

by hugehandoff Mon 12 Jan 2015, 4:20 pm

I just think that is what SL will go with. I would prefer Care on the bench. Plus I would start Wade and have Watson on the bench over Foden. Plus I would have Cips on the bench over Farrell.

by lostinwales Mon 12 Jan 2015, 4:28 pm

I doubt Cole will be there at the start of the 6N

by **George Carlin** Mon 12 Jan 2015, 4:53 pm

What is a realistic timescale for Tualagi coming back to the international game?
Anyone know?

by BamBam Mon 12 Jan 2015, 5:09 pm

George Carlin wrote:What is a realistic timescale for Tualagi coming back to the international game?
Anyone know?

Apparently he'll be back playing mid to late January. How much time he needs to get match fit and into form again is anyone's guess.

Looking at the fixtures, I'd say leave him out for the Wales game as we can't afford him to be off form, then we should be able to win against Italy without him. That would give him until 1st March to be ready for the game away at Ireland, which would be a realistic target IMO

by thomh Mon 12 Jan 2015, 5:15 pm

Agree with that. Gives him plenty of time to get up to full speed and Burgess should be perfectly capable at 13 for at least the first two games. Whistle

by maestegmafia Mon 12 Jan 2015, 6:49 pm

thomh wrote:Agree with that. Gives him plenty of time to get up to full speed and Burgess should be perfectly capable at 13 for at least the first two games.

That is a bit ambitious... Burgess is effective enough but he does look vulnerable at the moment.

by thomh Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:05 pm

by maestegmafia Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:08 pm

Either way it's not good this close to the RWC to not have any idea who should be in your back line. Brown is the only consistent selection

by WELL-PAST-IT Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:13 pm

thomh wrote:Hasn't he been playing a bit of second row to make way for Manoa?

Yes, they have swapped positions for a while, not sure it is working though. Put him alongside Day and the scrum is OK, but not as good as Lawes and either Manoa or Day.

Manoa is an animal at 8 though, pity he got those Eagles caps early in his career, he would have been English qualified by now. He ha severy attribute you could wish for in an 8.

by HammerofThunor Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:16 pm

Then good for the Eagles.

by thomh Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:21 pm

maestegmafia wrote:Either way it's not good this close to the RWC to not have any idea who should be in your back line. Brown is the only consistent selection

True to an extent, though May played almost every game in 2014 and it's always Youngs or Care. Mainly worried about the centres as usual.

by maestegmafia Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:27 pm

The Telegraph has a poll quizzing fans on who they would pick if they were Stuart Lancaster.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11339961/Wales-v-England-Who-would-you-select-for-the-Six-Nations-opener-in-Cardiff-on-February-6.html

by WELL-PAST-IT Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:38 pm

maestegmafia wrote:The Telegraph has a poll quizzing fans on who they would pick if they were Stuart Lancaster.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11339961/Wales-v-England-Who-would-you-select-for-the-Six-Nations-opener-in-Cardiff-on-February-6.html

Strange that they do not have Barritt as an option at 12, only 13 when Burrell is an option in both 12 and 13

by Gwlad Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:46 pm

They won't let you vote for Burgess at 6 and 12 either .

by maestegmafia Mon 12 Jan 2015, 7:50 pm

I don't think that Lancaster will pay any attention to the result of the poll so I am sure it's seriousness is not too prevelent.

There is an interesting article in the Guardian on selection issues too. Here is an extract on the flyhalf debate.

"he can thrive behind a dominant pack
Selection for an international coach is a delicate balance between hard data and imagination. Steve Diamond, who admitted last week that he has a vested interest in Danny Cipriani’s selection for England (without it, his star fly-half will probably head off to France), was at pains to point out the unevenness of the playing field for Cipriani against his England rivals, who all play for better teams. It is worth pointing out that on this rare occasion when he played behind a dominant pack against one of those rivals Cipriani had a field day. Diamond’s message to Stuart Lancaster is to look beyond the number of match-winning performances or points scored and imagine how England’s candidates for No10 might play in different teams. His plausible argument is that, pound for pound, Cipriani is playing as well as any of them."

By Michael Aylwin

by maestegmafia Mon 12 Jan 2015, 9:43 pm

Brian Moore has added his thoughts too

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11339038/England-coach-Stuart-Lancaster-must-make-make-tough-calls-and-now-is-the-time-to-make-them.html

by TJ Mon 12 Jan 2015, 10:01 pm

Nick Easter? Is Moore seriously calling for him? Easter is a fine club player but IMO he is one of those unfortunates who doesn't quite make the grade at international level. He simply is too slow.

by **Rugby Fan** Tue 13 Jan 2015, 1:15 am

Gwlad wrote:...Lost form or been injured, but with a little bit of coaching indecision thrown in…..Rokodugni was the next best thing for what, 17 minutes? Will he figure again?

The huge pool of talent England draw from is as much of a reason for not finding cohesion as the injury/form issue is. Lancaster really has to find and back his first choices during the course of this competition and stick with them until the RWC. With no Launchbury, Cole, Morgan, Manu et al he is unable to do that again and time really is running out. As a result of that lack of cohesion England definitely haven't fulfilled the potential that their pool of players promise to deliver, and it has manifested in a tendency to play somewhat conservative 10 man rugby with the occasional moment of brilliance from the back 3.

But there is more to it than that. For example an ongoing midfield crisis at centre. Barritt was almost forgotten but now seems to be back in the mix and what are the stats on centre combos tested out? Now it's clear Farrell is under scrutiny because he just doesn't spark the back line, which is a shame when you have the likes of May and Brown who show how deadly they can be on the counter but while there is so much flux in the midfield you can't expect any fluency. There has been consistent selection in one position and for me it all starts at 10 but I think most agree Farrell is not the way forward, but to change him now may be just as costly as keeping him and coaching his game to where it needs to be. He does a job and kicks his goals but England need a playmaker. Consequently England meander on with conservative but effective rugby which maintains the status quo and keeps them up there competing, but entirely not where they could be and should be. This year they really have to be a different side - we all expect them to be - and it must start in a couple of weeks where they MUST beat Wales.

A win in Cardiff will be tough to get but is by no means beyond their reach; if they get it i expect to see much less variation in selection from then on. You'd think that if they could just have a period where their form players remain uninjured then consistent selection would lead to a stability that would allow them to express themselves and start settling in. Taking all that into account I am still not entirely sure what style of rugby Lancaster WANTS then to play; or will he just settle for the W at any cost? As a result he tends to pick the next best player available and if they don't do well then it is easy to replace them with new shoes; a cycle develops where the perception is he seems to be looking for success almost by trial and error, a tweak here and there The thought that Burgess is going to be fast tracked indicates that he is always looking for a touch of individual magic when perhaps he needs to look for a steady cohesive team from consistent selection. Less could be more.

Wales come in for a lot of criticism for their inflexible style and dependency on route 1 rugby. But whatever your feelings about Wales, it has been effective in the NH at least. I don't bring up Wales to suggest they are doing what England should do at all, but they are at the other end of the spectrum to England in that they have almost too much cohesion with far fewer players to select. So their style has evolved based on the skill set of the incumbents and is somewhat driven by necessity. No one can say it isn't working within the inherent limitations it imposes. As such team management is equally problematic; a predictable style that even has its own trademarked name in Gatlandball and this is a result of the exact opposite of England's problems…. Wales have a very well defined back line with clear first choices leading to a predictable style that has only varied once in years against SA in the Autumn.

So back to England; arguably Cole is no longer first choice but i think Launchbury and Morgan definitely are…the big problem is Manu as it seems to me England are a different side with him fit and on form, and are willing to build a back line around him as he is a talisman. His absence in Cardiff is another lost opportunity but he is the sort of player who is so strong that he will fit straight back in when fit and I hope he comes back into the squad quickly so that Lancaster can find a 12 to pair him and a 2nd choice 13 assuming Farrell covers 10 and 12, and just stick with them until they come good. I think they should be outside Ford or Cipriani but have a feeling that Farrell may well step up this tournament as he must now feel that pressure that he hasn't had before with only Flood pushing, whose England career was ended for him.

You make a lot of fair points.

I don't think Lancaster has been indecisive, though. He's made decisions that I didn't agree with, and some that he may now regret, but there's usually been a rationale. That's actually what makes our situation disconcerting: I can see a logic to each step we've taken over the last few years but we haven't really ended up where we want to be.

You often hear and read pundits bemoaning the fact Lancaster hasn't settled on his midfield or wingers, and then there will be complaints that Ford, Cipriani, Slade, Wade etc haven't had more game time, but there is very little consensus on when Lancaster should have handed out these caps, and who he should have dropped to accommodate them.

by **George Carlin** Tue 13 Jan 2015, 8:30 am

I agree that the past 12 months doesn't automatically make Lancaster a poor selector of players. I really think that he should regard the lack of 'nailed on' options as a gift - if nobody can agree whom the centres and wingers are, then he should just pick combinations now and settle on them. There simply won't be concensus, so why try and appease everyone? It's both impossible and counter-productive. There is no 'perfect' combination - just guys who can execute the team game plan well. Why lose continuity trying to find that extra 4-5%?

What I do think he needs to embrace (if he hasn't already, of course) is the idea that two lesser quality players who have had consistent game time together (in the centre or on the wing) may deliver a better product for their country than two bigger 'stars' who have just returned from injury and have had no real game time with the international squad.

by Geordie Tue 13 Jan 2015, 9:16 am

TJ wrote:
GeordieFalcon wrote:
TJ wrote:
............Hartley is a weak point. He has now proven that he cannot change his lack of self control so that must be the end of his international career. All teams will know what he is like and he will be targeted to make him lose his temper and get sent off. At least a year in the AP without a single card before he is considered again..................

Yes he has his moments....but Lancaster isn't going to drop Englands best hooker by a country mile (and one of the worlds best).
Id be curious to know what his actual disciplinary record is like for England. I bet its not actually that bad.

Is he really that good? He will cost England a game at some point with his indiscipline. Its not just the cards, its also the penalties and the fact when the red mist descends no one plays as well. Martin Johnson s temper was his main weakness . tems were able to wind him up until he lost the plot and did so regularly. However MJ recognised this weakness in his game and by the WC win had changed his behaviour so this weakness was no longer evident and it improved him as a player. Perhaps he could mentor Hartley?

He'll cost a game at some point?
Well hes been playing at international level for a long time now and I honestly don't think he has yet...and if its purely a one off...then the same can be labelled at any player?? Not much of an argument TJ??

When has the red mist come down in an England shirt? A silly stamp in the AI's which I accept was idiotic...but those incidents are few and far between and I can name a few others at the level who have had their moments or stupidity.

As for is he a good hooker. Yes. His lineout is top class. His scrimmaging is very good, his work rate and tackling rucking etc is right up there with the best.
The only thing that annoys me about him is his carrying...which isn't good enough.

The problem with Hartley is that he's just universally disliked with no basis on any actual facts....in an England shirt.

by lostinwales Tue 13 Jan 2015, 10:00 am

George Carlin wrote:I agree that the past 12 months doesn't automatically make Lancaster a poor selector of players. I really think that he should regard the lack of 'nailed on' options as a gift - if nobody can agree whom the centres and wingers are, then he should just pick combinations now and settle on them. There simply won't be concensus, so why try and appease everyone? It's both impossible and counter-productive. There is no 'perfect' combination - just guys who can execute the team game plan well. Why lose continuity trying to find that extra 4-5%?

What I do think he needs to embrace (if he hasn't already, of course) is the idea that two lesser quality players who have had consistent game time together (in the centre or on the wing) may deliver a better product for their country than two bigger 'stars' who have just returned from injury and have had no real game time with the international squad.

Very well put.

The centers are a great example, because what we really want is Tuilagi +1. And then when you look at the +1 all of the options are good, none are truly great, and none of them are at all easy to compare. (I am thinking 36/Barritt/Eastmond/Burrell)

by Geordie Tue 13 Jan 2015, 10:25 am

Is that what everyone wants ...Tuilagi + 1?

I just want two lads who can the basics exceptionally well aswell as offering a bit more at this level. Just enough to make use of a very interesting back three in May, Watson and Brown.

Oh and can we never again ever suggest Twelvetrees for a spot in the England camp. His decision making and execution is just not good enough simple as that.

by lostinwales Tue 13 Jan 2015, 10:56 am

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is that what everyone wants ...Tuilagi + 1?

I just want two lads who can the basics exceptionally well aswell as offering a bit more at this level. Just enough to make use of a very interesting back three in May, Watson and Brown.

Oh and can we never again ever suggest Twelvetrees for a spot in the England camp. His decision making and execution is just not good enough simple as that.

Maybe it is just me but of all the players we have available an on form fit Tuilagi is probably the one I'd least like to leave out. We have lots of good players and solid replacements for those players but I think (given form and fitness) Tuilagi is a bit more than that.

And never say never with 36. He was an important part of a very decent backline last 6N. Hopefully with the other options coming through we won't have to have that debate for much longer though.

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 13 Jan 2015, 12:27 pm

TJ wrote:Nick Easter? Is Moore seriously calling for him? Easter is a fine club player but IMO he is one of those unfortunates who doesn't quite make the grade at international level. He simply is too slow.

Easter has always been slow. I don't think he has slowed down at all.

It didn't stop him putting in a lot of good performances for England, you don't have to be MotM every week. I seem to remember a hat trick against our next opposition not that long ago, albeit a total distance travelled of 2m.

by Cyril Tue 13 Jan 2015, 12:28 pm

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:
TJ wrote:Nick Easter? Is Moore seriously calling for him? Easter is a fine club player but IMO he is one of those unfortunates who doesn't quite make the grade at international level. He simply is too slow.

Easter has always been slow. I don't think he has slowed down at all.

It didn't stop him putting in a lot of good performances for England, you don't have to be MotM every week. I seem to remember a hat trick against our next opposition not that long ago, albeit a total distance travelled of 2m.

It was four tries, wasn't it?

by lostinwales Tue 13 Jan 2015, 12:35 pm

Cyril wrote:
WELL-PAST-IT wrote:
TJ wrote:Nick Easter? Is Moore seriously calling for him? Easter is a fine club player but IMO he is one of those unfortunates who doesn't quite make the grade at international level. He simply is too slow.

Easter has always been slow. I don't think he has slowed down at all.

It didn't stop him putting in a lot of good performances for England, you don't have to be MotM every week. I seem to remember a hat trick against our next opposition not that long ago, albeit a total distance travelled of 2m.
It was four tries, wasn't it?

It was. I am very happy with our first choices for no.8 but..

Every time the Easter debate comes up I say look at the stats for the 6N's when he did play. He did a hell of a lot of work when it came to distance, carries, offloads, balls taken in the lineout. He also has everything you would want of a no.8 except pace. He is slow, but then there are very few players who dont have any weaknesses at all

by No 7&1/2 Tue 13 Jan 2015, 12:38 pm

Our backrow was a little underpowered when Easter was around albeit with different flankers. Given people are complaining about it now with Morgan or Vunipola I can see the same questions arising.

by Gwlad Tue 13 Jan 2015, 6:45 pm

Rugby Fan wrote:
Gwlad wrote:...Lost form or been injured, but with a little bit of coaching indecision thrown in…..Rokodugni was the next best thing for what, 17 minutes? Will he figure again?

The huge pool of talent England draw from is as much of a reason for not finding cohesion as the injury/form issue is. Lancaster really has to find and back his first choices during the course of this competition and stick with them until the RWC. With no Launchbury, Cole, Morgan, Manu et al he is unable to do that again and time really is running out. As a result of that lack of cohesion England definitely haven't fulfilled the potential that their pool of players promise to deliver, and it has manifested in a tendency to play somewhat conservative 10 man rugby with the occasional moment of brilliance from the back 3.

But there is more to it than that. For example an ongoing midfield crisis at centre. Barritt was almost forgotten but now seems to be back in the mix and what are the stats on centre combos tested out? Now it's clear Farrell is under scrutiny because he just doesn't spark the back line, which is a shame when you have the likes of May and Brown who show how deadly they can be on the counter but while there is so much flux in the midfield you can't expect any fluency. There has been consistent selection in one position and for me it all starts at 10 but I think most agree Farrell is not the way forward, but to change him now may be just as costly as keeping him and coaching his game to where it needs to be. He does a job and kicks his goals but England need a playmaker. Consequently England meander on with conservative but effective rugby which maintains the status quo and keeps them up there competing, but entirely not where they could be and should be. This year they really have to be a different side - we all expect them to be - and it must start in a couple of weeks where they MUST beat Wales.

A win in Cardiff will be tough to get but is by no means beyond their reach; if they get it i expect to see much less variation in selection from then on. You'd think that if they could just have a period where their form players remain uninjured then consistent selection would lead to a stability that would allow them to express themselves and start settling in. Taking all that into account I am still not entirely sure what style of rugby Lancaster WANTS then to play; or will he just settle for the W at any cost? As a result he tends to pick the next best player available and if they don't do well then it is easy to replace them with new shoes; a cycle develops where the perception is he seems to be looking for success almost by trial and error, a tweak here and there The thought that Burgess is going to be fast tracked indicates that he is always looking for a touch of individual magic when perhaps he needs to look for a steady cohesive team from consistent selection. Less could be more.

Wales come in for a lot of criticism for their inflexible style and dependency on route 1 rugby. But whatever your feelings about Wales, it has been effective in the NH at least. I don't bring up Wales to suggest they are doing what England should do at all, but they are at the other end of the spectrum to England in that they have almost too much cohesion with far fewer players to select. So their style has evolved based on the skill set of the incumbents and is somewhat driven by necessity. No one can say it isn't working within the inherent limitations it imposes. As such team management is equally problematic; a predictable style that even has its own trademarked name in Gatlandball and this is a result of the exact opposite of England's problems…. Wales have a very well defined back line with clear first choices leading to a predictable style that has only varied once in years against SA in the Autumn.

So back to England; arguably Cole is no longer first choice but i think Launchbury and Morgan definitely are…the big problem is Manu as it seems to me England are a different side with him fit and on form, and are willing to build a back line around him as he is a talisman. His absence in Cardiff is another lost opportunity but he is the sort of player who is so strong that he will fit straight back in when fit and I hope he comes back into the squad quickly so that Lancaster can find a 12 to pair him and a 2nd choice 13 assuming Farrell covers 10 and 12, and just stick with them until they come good. I think they should be outside Ford or Cipriani but have a feeling that Farrell may well step up this tournament as he must now feel that pressure that he hasn't had before with only Flood pushing, whose England career was ended for him.

You make a lot of fair points.

I don't think Lancaster has been indecisive, though. He's made decisions that I didn't agree with, and some that he may now regret, but there's usually been a rationale. That's actually what makes our situation disconcerting: I can see a logic to each step we've taken over the last few years but we haven't really ended up where we want to be.

You often hear and read pundits bemoaning the fact Lancaster hasn't settled on his midfield or wingers, and then there will be complaints that Ford, Cipriani, Slade, Wade etc haven't had more game time, but there is very little consensus on when Lancaster should have handed out these caps, and who he should have dropped to accommodate them.

Fair play Fan….i think as you mention the decisions haven't got him where he needs to be and then there is the inevitable tweaking…point is it has to stop now. He needs to stick with players and let them figure it out, and not necessarily players who are on form now either, but the ones who he believes will do the job for him in RWC. I do think Farrell should be benched and either Ford or Cirpiani given a shot at starting for at least 2 or 3 games. If Cips isn't picked now then why not? I am still confident we will see a very powerful RWC performance from England though. In the meantime really looking forward to Feb 6 which will be a cracker.

by nathan Tue 13 Jan 2015, 6:54 pm

maestegmafia wrote:Either way it's not good this close to the RWC to not have any idea who should be in your back line. Brown is the only consistent selection

Well theres two ways of looking at that, either he hasn't settled on a back line or he's bedding in different combinations in order to build up strength in depth.

by **LondonTiger** Tue 13 Jan 2015, 7:03 pm

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:
It didn't stop him putting in a lot of good performances for England, you don't have to be MotM every week. I seem to remember a hat trick against our next opposition not that long ago, albeit a total distance travelled of 2m.

He put in some very good performances for England - but not even I consider 8 years to be "not that long ago" and I am ancient. Also remember being a WC warmup game it was against a 3rd string Welsh team. Still 62-5 though Very Happy

I wish Easter had stayed in the team after the 2011 WC rather than Dowson playing there for Bomber's first test or later Waldrom. However this board would have been apoplectic if he had been retained - as due to an ill-considered joke many wanted him hung drawn and quartered.

by Gwlad Tue 13 Jan 2015, 7:07 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
WELL-PAST-IT wrote:
It didn't stop him putting in a lot of good performances for England, you don't have to be MotM every week. I seem to remember a hat trick against our next opposition not that long ago, albeit a total distance travelled of 2m.

He put in some very good performances for England - but not even I consider 8 years to be "not that long ago" and I am ancient. Also remember being a WC warmup game it was against a 3rd string Welsh team. Still 62-5 though

I wish Easter had stayed in the team after the 2011 WC rather than Dowson playing there for Bomber's first test or later Waldrom. However this board would have been apoplectic if he had been retained - as due to an ill-considered joke many wanted him hung drawn and quartered.

what was it?

by **LondonTiger** Tue 13 Jan 2015, 7:14 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2011/dec/04/nick-easter-england-world-cup

The furore over this was rather ridiculous - but as said most on here were outraged.

by HammerofThunor Tue 13 Jan 2015, 7:25 pm

That was ridiculous. Even I can hear Easter saying it and I don't know the guy. Right down to the tone. The exact type of gallows humour that I'd expect from him.

by **LondonTiger** Tue 13 Jan 2015, 7:28 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:That was ridiculous. Even I can hear Easter saying it and I don't know the guy. Right down to the tone. The exact type of gallows humour that I'd expect from him.

you know how self righteous an internet mob can get though HoT.

by HammerofThunor Tue 13 Jan 2015, 7:28 pm

nathan wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:Either way it's not good this close to the RWC to not have any idea who should be in your back line. Brown is the only consistent selection

Well theres two ways of looking at that, either he hasn't settled on a back line or he's bedding in different combinations in order to build up strength in depth.

I think the main issue has been injuries, then trying someone new because of it. Then they either do well and are kept (until they get injured) or are replaced when the injured player returns (who then might not be in the same form). Lancaster hasn't been Wee weeing about. Just really unlucky, especially in the centres. Tuilagi's been on and off. Burrell looked good then was injured. Twelvetrees is one of the best on paper but has been underwhelming. Barritt is very unfashionable but returns when needed. Eastmond is probably considered too small (not by me)

by Gwlad Tue 13 Jan 2015, 7:48 pm

One thing is for sure about centres, they come in pairs, individual brilliance is important but they are often remembered best as a partnership. Tindall/Greenwood, Guscott/Carling, Horan/Little, Roberts/Davies etc….
Lets face it, Manu is the 13 of choice and for me they need to find the 12 that works best with him. Someone with excellent distribution skills…Farrell?

by Poorfour Tue 13 Jan 2015, 8:10 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
WELL-PAST-IT wrote:
It didn't stop him putting in a lot of good performances for England, you don't have to be MotM every week. I seem to remember a hat trick against our next opposition not that long ago, albeit a total distance travelled of 2m.

He put in some very good performances for England - but not even I consider 8 years to be "not that long ago" and I am ancient. Also remember being a WC warmup game it was against a 3rd string Welsh team. Still 62-5 though

I wish Easter had stayed in the team after the 2011 WC rather than Dowson playing there for Bomber's first test or later Waldrom. However this board would have been apoplectic if he had been retained - as due to an ill-considered joke many wanted him hung drawn and quartered.

It was a depleted Wales team, certainly, but it's a bit much to call it 3rd string when it contained 10 of the 22 that faced Australia in the RWC.

Anyway, although 2007 is a long time ago, it was only a season or two into Easter's professional career. He's still got enough in the tank. And yes, he's not quick, but you don't often see him out of position. The other key thing that he has that none of the alternatives do is how well Robshaw, Brown, Care and Marler know his game. Given that there's a very good chance that all four of those will be in the matchday 23 and at least two will start, that could be invaluable.

Ah, who am I kidding. It's not going to happen.

by maestegmafia Tue 13 Jan 2015, 8:11 pm

Gwlad wrote:One thing is for sure about centres, they come in pairs, individual brilliance is important but they are often remembered best as a partnership. Tindall/Greenwood, Guscott/Carling, Horan/Little, Roberts/Davies etc….
Lets face it, Manu is the 13 of choice and for me they need to find the 12 that works best with him. Someone with excellent distribution skills…Farrell?

Slade?

by **LondonTiger** Tue 13 Jan 2015, 8:15 pm

Slade is a 10 playing at 13 for his club. Would be odd to select a player at 12 for country when they have not done it for club?

by HammerofThunor Tue 13 Jan 2015, 8:34 pm

Eastmond. Not sure who would lead the defence

by maestegmafia Tue 13 Jan 2015, 8:41 pm

LondonTiger wrote:Slade is a 10 playing at 13 for his club. Would be odd to select a player at 12 for country when they have not done it for club?

Hardly.

He shows all the right attributes to be a brilliant 12.

Example of the same was Gatland converting Jamie Roberts to inside centre from wing/fullback at international level on tour vs the Springboks in 2008.

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,3561_3684976,00.html

If Roberts had half the passing and footballing skills of Slade I think everyone in Wales would be overjoyed.

by maestegmafia Tue 13 Jan 2015, 10:40 pm

Stuart Lancaster held a meeting with Danny Cipriani last week and intends to go to Harlequins to see Nick Easter tomorrow as the England head coach considers whether the pair are ready for a return to his squad for the final Six Nations campaign ahead of the World Cup.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11343928/Stuart-Lancaster-opens-door-to-Danny-Cipriani-and-Nick-Easter-return-for-Six-Nations-Championship.html

by Dubbelyew L Overate Wed 14 Jan 2015, 12:28 am

LondonTiger wrote:Slade is a 10 playing at 13 for his club. Would be odd to select a player at 12 for country when they have not done it for club?

Slade's a tyro at 13, with just one pre-season game before this campaign, and he's played there because of early season injuries at Exe. He's still playing there because he made a success of it, and that the hard tackling Hill reinforces the 10 channel where Steeno is weak.. Last season, our 'Enry played 12 a fair bit, probably as much as he played 10 (and he's moved to inside centre after substitutions this season).

He's a fair player in most skills - a decent tackler, but not as destructive as Barritt, pretty quick but not as pacy as Joseph, elusive but not a stepper like Eastmond, pretty strong but nowhere near Tuilagi's power - Poopie all over 36 in all aspects though. It is possible that he may be the best distributor of the lot, - he can really fizz a pass - but he is inexperienced and his game management, whilst so far pretty good, is unproved at top level. RWC is perhaps a year or two early for him. His ability to find time for himself is impressive, and he seems to have a rugby intelligence, so I wouldn't be at all upset to find him in the RWC squad as a utility back, although that;s only likely through injuries to others.

by Wilkinson sword Wed 14 Jan 2015, 5:59 am

Brown Wade and May in the back three
Tuilagi and Burgess in the centres
Care and Cipriani as the half backs
A back row of Morgan (if fit, if not, Vunipola), Armitage at 7 and Robshaw at 6
A front five of Lawes, Launchbury, Corbisiero, Cole and Hartley.

That emphatically is the world class team that Lancaster should be brave enough to field at the World Cup to stand a chance of winning it. To that end, he needs to start picking these game changers this 6 Nations - Wade, Burgess, Cipriani and Armitage.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 14 Jan 2015, 10:01 am

Bombers "Most Selected" Team ie thos players who have been selected the most:

Marler
Hartley
Cole
Lawes
Launchbury
Wood
Robshaw
Morgan
Youngs
Farrell
Ashton
Barritt
Manu
May
Brown

Reps: Youngs, Vunipola, Wilson, Parling, Vunipola, Care, Flood, Goode

by Sponsored content