England's Backs

If not quite the embarrassment of riches we see in the forwards, things are still shaping up pretty well.

SH

Ben Youngs looks to have made the place his own. Behind him there are three decent options: Wigglesworth (just a good all-round player), Care (until recently first choice, and still has plenty going for him) and Simpson (I had written him off, but he's bee excellent this season - potentially a fine bench option). So no problems here.

FH

Ford appears to be ahead for now. When Farrell is in form and fit he's a fine (and under-rated) player. The coaching team really rate him. I'm not sure he's the best bench option, but he can play 12. Cipriani is playing ok, and I reckon he might rise to the occasion if he gets on the pitch. I think he is a good bench option. Myler is fine; a better player than he was, but slightly uninspiring. Slade may be the player to rival Ford and Farrell through their careers, but I can't see SL using him at FH until after the WC. Overall I think England are well served at 10.

IC

The problem position. We could see how Ford was pressurised when there was no kicking option at 12. England have plenty of potential options, but who will make the position theirs? Burrell is the incumbent. He was ok against Wales. Twelvetrees did well when he came on, can kick, but can he learn not to throw a pass when it's not on? Barritt can play there but prefer a more multi-facetted player at 12. Eastmond has done so good things, but I think he may just be too small to be the long-term option (plus his kicking game is limited). Personally I'm yet to be convinced that Burgess can play 12 at international level. So far, lots of options, but no clear winner.

I wonder if Tuilagi might be tried there again? If JJ has made 13 his own, and if you subscribe to having your best players on the pitch then it's either there or back to the left-wing. There are some things he's limited at, but unlike Barritt he has a USP.

Long-term I think the answer will be one of Devoto (a skillset and physical presence quite like Twelvetrees, but without the tendency to overplay), Slade (such a fine player he has to feature soon somewhere, possibly by the wc) or Hill (if he can develop a kicking game). Or maybe Tom Stephenson in a couple of years' time.

I think England will ultimately solve the 12 issue. Whether we'll manage to do this by the wc is much less certain.

OC

For me it has to be JJ. And if it isn't then it's Tuilagi. There may be less strength in depth here, as then you have to go to Barritt, Burrell, Slade, or possibly Daly, the first 3 of whom are not proper ICs. Longer term Stephenson or Tompkins might provide competition. So, two good options, and then some adequate ones.

Wings

I'm happy with May and Watson. Watson in particular is a fantastic player, who will be first choice 14 for the next few years, and then will end up at 15 I suspect. Behind them both Yarde and Nowell are good players who will get better. I can't see Wade as a starter, but he's a superb finisher, and maybe he'd be a bench option in the wc for if we are chasing a game. Tuilagi might be considered an option if SL doesn't fancy him at 12. Then there is always Ashton. I'm pretty happy with the options here.

FB

Less choice here. Brown is first choice. Then it looks like it is Goode, Watson, and Pennell. I think there is enough strength in depth pre-wc.

Overall

I think England are capable of putting a world class backline on the pitch. The key is finally sorting the 12 conundrum. And finding a place for Tuilagi (who knows, the answer may be the same).

I cannot see Tuilagi at twelve. I would like to see Ford, Eastmond and Joseph tried.

At fullback I would stick with Brown. If he is injured I would give Homer a try. He looks good after coming back from injury. He gives the added advantage of being able to take long kicks.

#joke "I think England are capable of putting a world class backline on the pitch. The key is finally sorting the 12 conundrum. And finding a place for Tuilagi (who knows, the answer may be the same). "

England do not have world class backs - name me one world class player we have? We just need to be proficient and hope our forwards can beat other teams.

Joseph looked pretty good. tuilagi I have never been impressed by in an international

nlpnlp wrote:#joke "I think England are capable of putting a world class backline on the pitch. The key is finally sorting the 12 conundrum. And finding a place for Tuilagi (who knows, the answer may be the same). "

England do not have world class backs - name me one world class player we have?  We just need to be proficient and hope our forwards can beat other teams.  

They potentially have world class backs. Ford, JJ and Watson in particularly look like something special in the English team. I would say that Mike Brown is currently the best fullback in the NH as well.

TJ wrote:Joseph looked pretty good.  tuilagi I have never been impressed by in an international

Not erven against New Zealand?

TJ wrote:Joseph looked pretty good.  tuilagi I have never been impressed by in an international

Sorry, cant take that too seriously. For all his faults he still has a try strike rate that is the envy of most, and there is what Mallett said about him the other day

Tuilagi is a force of nature, and you only get one or two of that type of player in a generation,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/31023424

Care was also brilliant last year. I hope he can rediscover his mojo.

what a difference a day makes.

have been calling for jj to start at 13 for a long time, along with many many others. surprise surprise, he reproduces his outstanding AP and HC performance in an england shirt.

and all of a sudden we genuinely have a threatening backline. and we do. individually and collectively most of them have world class potential (whatever that means). ford, burrell/eastmond/burgess, jj/tuilagi, may, watson, brown. and it really helps having clubs players in key combinations for country, so i would have no problems with ford, eastmond, jj. with 36 on the bench after his stellar 15 minutes on friday.

however its all about the collective. a "world xv" is utterly meaningless. and subjective. RWC winner however, is not

To be honest, it was 1 game. Some fans need to get there feet back on the ground.

We could play crap against Italy and people will be calling for the same players to get the axe. We need a consistant run of games where the players have done well.

quinsforever wrote:what a difference a day makes.

have been calling for jj to start at 13 for a long time, along with many many others. surprise surprise, he reproduces his outstanding AP and HC performance in an england shirt.

and all of a sudden we genuinely have a threatening backline. and we do. individually and collectively most of them have world class potential (whatever that means). ford, burrell/eastmond/burgess, jj/tuilagi, may, watson, brown. and it really helps having clubs players in key combinations for country, so i would have no problems with ford, eastmond, jj. with 36 on the bench after his stellar 15 minutes on friday.

however its all about the collective. a "world xv" is utterly meaningless. and subjective. RWC winner however, is not

When I used the term "potentially world class" I meant that some of the more talented english backs could go on to be one of the best in their position internationally. Right now, I don't think England have any backs that fit that description. Mike Brown possibly, but he would be behind Smith, Folau and Le Roux.

nlpnlp wrote:#joke "I think England are capable of putting a world class backline on the pitch. The key is finally sorting the 12 conundrum. And finding a place for Tuilagi (who knows, the answer may be the same). "

England do not have world class backs - name me one world class player we have?  We just need to be proficient and hope our forwards can beat other teams.  

I think that "world class" is a ludicrously overused term when applied to individuals. Players look world class in one series, and then ordinary in the next and vice versa. There are very few players who can consistently perform at a level that would see them in a world XV regardless of the team around them.

I can remember that even on the eve of the 2003 RWC England were only felt to have one or two "world class" players. Usually it was Robinson and Wilkinson, a few people added Johnson and Back to the list. Remember the forwards were derided as Dad's Army when they flew out? Afterwards, of course, there were loads of World XVs compiled with 8 or more Englishmen in it. It's all bovine faecal matter.

The important question is whether England can put together a backline that will put pressure on the SH teams and create scoring chances. With the current lineup, it looks possible. Ford offers more creativity than Farrell, Joseph looks fit for the role. The back three aren't yet consistent but the talent is definitely there. Sort 12, and it could all click.

I think Tuilagi has to be given a chance to get in the side at either 11 or 12. If he can't make a case for starting in either of those positions then what a bench option he'd be (able to cover 11, 12, 13 and 14). The trouble is we are short on time before the wc. It's a shame we don't have another 6 months to work out what our best side is. I'd like to see the following given 2 or 3 games to gell:

Youngs
Ford
Tuilagi
Slade
Joseph
Watson
Brown

There's a huge amount of talent there, but I don't think we'll move to this side in the 6 Nations (I'm sure SL wants to win the GS), and then there won't be time.

Incidentally, I just watched Alex Goode's game changing performance at FH for Sarries. He's a fine fullback, but I think he's wasted there. I hope he'll get more opportunities at club level to play 10 again, because I think he's got the ability to play there at international level. I also think, like Slade, he'd make a good centre too. England, and Saracens, aren't making enough of his talent.

DaveM wrote:Incidentally, I just watched Alex Goode's game changing performance at FH for Sarries. He's a fine fullback, but I think he's wasted there. I hope he'll get more opportunities at club level to play 10 again, because I think he's got the ability to play there at international level. I also think, like Slade, he'd make a good centre too. England, and Saracens, aren't making enough of his talent.

We have been saying this for a while. All of the issues I have with him at fullback (lack of pace, so so defense) are not really the same problem playing at FH, where his brains, distribution and boot could be very useful. Wouldnt want him in the centers though.

Need a 10 at 10.

Goode's perf in LV cup, however impressive, doesn't indicate he is a 10 of international quality. Especially as he plays there once a season.

And we have plenty of superior options.

That was one reasonable game. We had a much better backline performance against NZ in 2012 but never matched that. Only Youngs and Brown started both and Brown was out on the wing.

We just don't know. Care looked head and shoulders above Youngs last year so who can say how form will change. Ford had a decent match but made enough mistakes to give us a hint of what might go wrong against better opposition.

Lancaster will look for continuity but he should also have the courage to select a first choice back line if players are fit, not just rely on fate to give the shirt to a man in possession if we win matches.

quinsforever wrote:Need a 10 at 10.

Goode's perf in LV cup, however impressive, doesn't indicate he is a 10 of international quality. Especially as he plays there once a season.

And we have plenty of superior options.

Not disagreeing at all. Its just when I see Goode and what he can and can't do I think that he might well have made a very good fly half. But he isn't, he's just a top class club level 15.

Oh and Ford. Yes he made mistakes, but there were fewer and fewer of them as the game went on. He is only going to get better for experiences such as last Friday.

Always perspected by the fact that when England try a more experimental approach they often look quite good, but when they have everyone fit and take a more considered approach they tend to look rubbish.  Against Wales, Burrell and Joseph were returning after a long absence, and Watson, May and Ford are still quite young in international terms.

Difficult to really know the best side or get them onto the field at the same time, but England do posses interesting players if not world-class

A bit sorry for Rokoduguni as he is not mentioned in the list above but did look very good for Bath early season.

Before the Wales match I tempted to think England might need a more defensive minded formation (e.g. Barritt), but perhaps now it seems attack is the best form of defence.

cb wrote:Always perspected by the fact that when England try a more experimental approach they often look quite good, but when they have everyone fit and take a more considered approach they tend to look rubbish.  Against Wales, Burrell and Joseph were returning after a long absence, and Watson, May and Ford are still quite young in international terms.

Difficult to really know the best side or get them onto the field at the same time, but England do posses interesting players if not world-class

A bit sorry for Rokoduguni as he is not mentioned in the list above but did look very good for Bath early season.

Before the Wales match I tempted to think England might need a more defensive minded formation (e.g. Barritt), but perhaps now it seems attack is the best form of defence.

100% agree. dont want to bank my own drum, but have been saying that about the need for ford, burrell (or eastmond), joseph at 10-13 and haskell at 6 precisely for attack reasons. it changes the way that opposition teams have to organise themselves and completely shifts the momentum with genuine ball carrying threats at 6, 8, 9, 10-15. rather than 8 only and knowing once it got to farrell and 36 we were dreadfully predictable in offense.

these are small changes, but they cause massive problems for opposition.

not sure that their approach was that experimental given that ford at 10, burrell at 12, joseph at 13 and haskell at 6 are the form players in the AP playing in their best positions. it just seems that way because bomber was so resistant to dropping farrell or 36.