Whither England?

This topic is for comments on where England go from here for the rest of the six Nations (and even beyond). I appreciate there are existing topics on an autopsy of the Dublin match, what should have to Lancaster, and also a player's rating for the match, but this is more looking at what happens next from an England team perspective. Please comment if you wish

Some of my views are: - Lancaster could stick with the current side which may be more his inclination, but if Brown is fit he would almost certainly come back in (removing any need to cast judgement on Goode).  If Lawes is match fit, then he again might feature either on the bench or even in starting fifteen.

For my part even though I do not think big changes should be made, it would be interesting to see what Slade would be like, as he seems to be growing in confidence in the league.  Also as mentioned on this board several times, why no give Wade a chance to play a few minutes.

England could come second if they win their remaining matches, but maybe those matches should be used to try a few things without becoming too radical.  In some ways the pressure is off, as long as England do not give another dreadful performance.

Also the opportunity could be used to address some of the structural problems which are not necessarily wholly selection related.

The break does england a lot of good. It allows the chance for Tuillagi Lawes and the others coming back to fairly stake a claim to regain their places. Lancaster is in a goods position where replacing some players wouldnt have to beseen as a knee jerk reaction, as this is bringing back in players who were pre injury central to Englands plans.
Brown will walk back in if/when hes recovered, I dont think thats even open to debate is it?

What I dont see is him going for wild cards like Slade, Burgess is a more likely roll of the dice....but if Tuilagi is faring again and he wants a big impact center he is the more likely to get the chance, the signs were there from Lancaster asking him to attend the game with the team.

England will still be short a clear strategy and well functioning center partnership, a reliable fly half (Fords kicking game goes AWOL, Farrell cant stay fit and has form farts every 6 months, Cipriani cant even be relied upon to tell the sex of the people he sleeps with till after hes done it), wings who genuinely demand places, and a forwards who can have a good game more than 50% of the time.

So yep Id agree that theres some problems that wont be overcome by shuffling the deckchairs yet again even if the defeat by Ireland wasnt quite as bad as crashing into and iceberg.

Its just all getting a bit tiresome now from England. Same old story year after year. Tease and flump. The graveyard at the back of the selection room is getting pretty full despite the zombie apocolypse bringing back a half paced Easter and Cipriani.
Has Phil Vickery retired yet ?

Yep they lost so there will be personnel tweaking which is Bomber's favorite way to deal with losing when what he needs to do - it is too late IMO- is STICK WITH A 23 and maybe change what are perceived first choice players back onto the bench.

I reckon we will see at least 5 changes v Scotland.

THe one major change I would definitely consider is giving Slade a shot at 12.
Burrell hasn't set the world alight, Twelvetrees never will and Barritt is injured

He wanted the grand slam...he hasn't got it...I think now fix the problem position...12.

The others positions will fix when the injured come back.

Also give the Irish their due...they did a job on us...so give most of the lads a proper bo$$ocking a kick up the backside and then a chance to redeem themselves.

For the next game:
1 Marler
2 Youngs (Hartley is a shadow of himself this tournament)
3 Cole
4 Attwood
5 Kruis (Needs a big game or he drops way down the list)
6 Haskell (Poor since Wales game..., one last chance before Wood is back)
7 Robshaw
8 Vunipola

9 Youngs (Stop the pointless aimless kicking)
10 Ford
11 May
12 Slade
13 Joseph
14 Nowell
15 Watson

I don't think Youngs kicking is aimless there's just no kick chase even Tigers can muster more of an attempt than the England no show at the weekend.

The second row were shocking at the weekend. Oh for a for Ed Slater. I'd bring in Lawes for either one of them. It doesn't matter both were ineffectual.

Youngs in for Hartley and Corbisiero in for Marler. When Manu finally gets a couple of Tigers games under his belt he can be considered it's ridiculous Lancaster is so keen to crowbar a player who's barely played a game all season back into the first team.

If Brown isn't fit then Pennell has to come in for Goode.

I agree about Slater Sam.

Had he been fit I think he would be in there. Such a shame about his injury.
Attwood made 19 tackles which was impressive but i thought him and Kruis were lacking in a few other areas.
Safe to say Launchbury and Lawes are the combo when fit.

I worry about the 12 option also.
What would you do with that spot for the rest of the tournament.

Bomber has some genuine decisions to make. Having stumbled through injury into some exciting attacking backs (ford, jj, watson), Bomber now has to decide whether to stick with them and believe that a stronger forward platform will allow them to be dangerous. Or go back to an entirely defensive oriented selection 1 thru 15.

my view is the defensive selections are enough to win you 6Ns, maybe. But never a RWC. Teams that win RWCs have threats in the forwards and in the backs, allied with a kicker who converts enough to prevent opposition from infringing with impunity.

priority 1 - the pack. lawes asap. launchbury too for RWC pls. Hartley stays, and Bomber gives him full support to be as nasty, mean and irritating as he is inclined to be. A muted Hartley is a waste of space. healthy competition with wood, hask, billy v and morgan is fine.

priority 2 (imo) - stick with the exciting young guns. defensively they have been just fine. And in attack they offer so much more. if brown isnt back, or gets injured again, we must have Nowell at FB. he is like a younger, angrier, heavier, harder Brown if thats possible. And May back on the wing. No more Goode pls. Ever. very safe hands, but absolutely no threat counter-attacking at this level. We need a FB that puts real fear into over-kicking 9s and 10s. Brown does. And i think Nowell or Watson would too.

Manu and 36 can fight for a bench spot. Both huge impact players. Burrell hasn't really had the same impact this year as last unfortunately.

Which leads me to my radical suggestion...give the 12 jersey to Eastmond or Burgess, whoever performs better over the rest of the matches, season, and EPS training. I genuinely think that a backline of Ford, Eastmond/Burgess, JJ, Watson, May, Brown/Nowell would be excellent. They place together at club and that communication and fluency, if they have it, is priceless.

Gwlad wrote:Yep they lost so there will be personnel tweaking which is Bomber's favorite way to deal with losing when what he needs to do - it is too late IMO- is STICK WITH A 23 and maybe change what are perceived first choice players back onto the bench.

Thats the problem with England- they have so many options of equivalent quality. It's too easy to get caught in the trap of changing players when it doesn't work because the team you'll end up with is as good on paper as the one you've reshuffled. But with no continuity, there's no development. Right now he should have a core group of around 30 players and little deviation from it.

Notch wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Yep they lost so there will be personnel tweaking which is Bomber's favorite way to deal with losing when what he needs to do - it is too late IMO- is STICK WITH A 23 and maybe change what are perceived first choice players back onto the bench.

Thats the problem with England- they have so many options of equivalent quality. It's too easy to get caught in the trap of changing players when it doesn't work because the team you'll end up with is as good on paper as the one you've reshuffled. But with no continuity, there's no development. Right now he should have a core group of around 30 players and little deviation from it.

and very few of exceptional standout quality.

last years standout performers in an England shirt were Care, Farrell, Lawes, Launchbury, Burrell, Brown

none of them are performing with the same quality this year for club or country. or they are injured. sometimes i wonder if our stars are really stars or if its just that their novelty allows them to score against teams that arent familiar with them. think Manu vs NZ in 2012. Burrell scoring several tries last year. JJ 3 already this 6N.

imo the two we really miss are Lawes and Launchbury. if they hadnt been injured there is no doubt they would have started every match.

Hartley does look a little bit lost at the lineout without Lawes and Launchbury, doesn't help having Parling injured too, that's the top three locks all out.

A few comments:

Not sure Hartley struggled in lineouts, more to do with credit to Toner's lifters.

Lancs isn't that much of a tinkerer, leastwise not much within a campaign. Last 6N he was pretty consistent in selection, and so far he has been in this. Injuries, and sometimes form, has led to changes in his squads between campaigns (and the inability of NZRU and WR to read a calendar).

Nowell v Brown. Jack played fullback in his formative years, at U20, Amlin and LV, but hasn't played there this season or last in AP or HC. He's younger than Mike, but not angrier and probably not harder. The two of them share many qualities, though.

In amongst the doom and gloom from last weekend, in the world of ifs and buts, the result could have gone either way. Fine margins - Ireland prevailed, but there's nothing to show anything different to what most of us expected - 2 teams with little to choose between them.

Slade - 36 is frontrunner for RWC squad, Slade afterwards. There's a wholly different discussion for England's utility back(s) in the RWC squad, though.

Most are unfit but this to me looks like a cadre to work with towards RWC
Marler/Corbs, Hartley, Cole, Lawes, Launchbury, Wood/Croft/Haskell, Robshaw, Morgan/Vunipola, Youngs, Ford, ?, ?, Manu/Joseph, ?, Brown/Foden.

Stuck on wings and centres…so many options and some might come good if given time to develop…May is a classic example…he was the dogs cohones until recently and now out of squad. Just doesn't work that way, or shouldn't.

Cutting nose off to spite face IMO

Whither England?

It's off a bit to the right there over that bit of water.

I personally think Nowell should be a starter. He is a great player IMO. Has he ever played centre? He looks like he has the right physique for it.

GunsGerms wrote:I personally think Nowell should be a starter. He is a great player IMO. Has he ever played centre? He looks like he has the right physique for it.

He has played at 13 for Exeter a lot this year. A lot of people think full back might be his best position (Brown mk II). He is a very busy player. I still think we would have been better with May on Sunday (and I am not alone) but you want to see Nowell involved somewhere

Busy is a good word for him but he also seems to be quite a smart player and decision maker. I think under the right coach he could become world class.

Oh he's definitely one for the future, maybe the right now. Long term post Brown full back (at the moment) is likely to be either Watson or Nowell.

Sadly with the latest injury the thinking is that Foden won't be seen in England colours again.

I wouldnt trust Nowell as anything other than cover full back in the 23 right now. He has consistently made mistakes especially under high balls in his England appearances to date. Still a rough diamnond at best.

Foden is a huge loss for England if he doesnt recover sufficiently. Brown though will walk back into his shirt and start the world cup (assuming fitness), I cant even believe thats being debated.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:A few comments:

Not sure Hartley struggled in lineouts, more to do with credit to Toner's lifters.

Lancs isn't that much of a tinkerer, leastwise not much within a campaign. Last 6N he was pretty consistent in selection, and so far he has been in this. Injuries, and sometimes form, has led to changes in his squads between campaigns (and the inability of NZRU and WR to read a calendar).

Nowell v Brown. Jack played fullback in his formative years, at U20, Amlin and LV, but hasn't played there this season or last in AP or HC. He's younger than Mike, but not angrier and probably not harder. The two of them share many qualities, though.

In amongst the doom and gloom from last weekend, in the world of ifs and buts, the result could have gone either way. Fine margins - Ireland prevailed, but there's nothing to show anything different to what most of us expected - 2 teams with little to choose between them.

Slade - 36 is frontrunner for RWC squad, Slade afterwards. There's a wholly different discussion for England's utility back(s) in the RWC squad, though.

That is one of the reasons I have no doubts we wont win the WC....id bring Slade in now...36 is just not good enough, the alarming factor being for someone with such good passing skills...is how bad he is at it during game time.

It did make me laugh when the Telegraph put this up today

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11448296/Six-Nations-2015-Mike-Brown-return-gives-Stuart-Lancaster-England-selection-dilemma.html

I've had a stronger dilemma deciding what colour trousers to wear to work

You not think he's showed some good stuff this 6Ns from the bench GF? Certainly think he's been a touch better than Burrell.

It would be a jump up the pecking order for Slade to make the 23. At the minute hes only made the training squad through injuries to Eastmond Barrit and Tuilagi, and given the hard on Lancaster has for Burgess has another massive lump to leapfrog there as well. The only thing is his favour is that hes more of a like for like replacement for Twelvetrees as a ball playing 12 rather than league style player. He certainly seems to be the current darling of the pundits and internet, presumably on the grounds he hasnt been given the opportunity to prove he isnt that good after all yet.  
Consider as well when looking at his longer term world cup squad Lancaster may see Ford/Farrell in the 23 as giving cover at 12 for a second playmaker, again reducing the need for a Slade/36. I suspect only 1 of those 2 will make the squad certainly. So maybe Slade getting a go in this tournament will bold down to whether or not Lancaster hates Twelvetrees as much as the internet does and blames him for everything  thats gone wrong now May isnt about to carry the can.
Dont be shocked and awed if Slade isnt picked.

Its also come to something if we are looking at who the bench 12 should be when loads of players are injured as being the deciding factor in England winning the world cup or not.

One way or the other England will have to sort out their tactical kicking game if they are going to improve. Running the ball for 500m+ is all well and good but doing it from deep in your own half and rarely crossing the opponents 22 isnt much use, especially without a top drawer goal kicker.

He's done ok mate im not ignorant enough say he hasn't. I just don't think its enough, and his passing really concerns me.

Burrell has been completely ineffective.

I know Barritt isn't the answer really....but in all honesty he is the most consistent and if fit he would be my choice for 12...especially as a midfield leader between Ford and Joseph.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You not think he's showed some good stuff this 6Ns from the bench GF? Certainly think he's been a touch better than Burrell.

Burrell seems lost to me. I've never really rated him to be honest, and I just don't think he's a naturally good rugby player. He's big, and hits the ball at pace, but everything else seems to be forced. An international centre should have been able to get that quick pass away against Ireland. Fofana, Davies, Scott, and I'm sure Henshaw could have made that pass. I don't think Burrell is our answer at 12. 36 hasn't shown enough in either the Gloucester or England jersey to warrant being England's starting inside centre. His defence has improved and he's had some nice cameos off the bench, but it would be unjust for him to start. 

May back onto the wing for me in place of Nowell or Watson. Yes, he missed a tackle and blew and overlap against Italy, but how England missed his kick chasing and speed. 

Haskell was anonymous again and his inability to consistently impose himself in games is so annoying. Most of the time it's a case of looking like Tarzan but playing like Jane.

i'm going to say it quietly...Burgess...

I think Twelvetrees and Barritt are both consistent to be honest. Neither are brilliant, neither poor (as they both get labelled at times). They offer different sort of games and as I've said previously just feel Twelvetrees brings more out of others and suits the plan a little more.

Slade could be very good in this England side judging by his season so far but it's a little early yet especially at 12 where he's not really played much. Will benefit him for having a few more cracks at 10 for Exeter. I wouldn't be against flinging him onto the bench or into a warm up match.

bluestonevedder wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:You not think he's showed some good stuff this 6Ns from the bench GF? Certainly think he's been a touch better than Burrell.

Burrell seems lost to me. I've never really rated him to be honest, and I just don't think he's a naturally good rugby player. He's big, and hits the ball at pace, but everything else seems to be forced. An international centre should have been able to get that quick pass away against Ireland. Fofana, Davies, Scott, and I'm sure Henshaw could have made that pass. I don't think Burrell is our answer at 12. 36 hasn't shown enough in either the Gloucester or England jersey to warrant being England's starting inside centre. His defence has improved and he's had some nice cameos off the bench, but it would be unjust for him to start. 

May back onto the wing for me in place of Nowell or Watson. Yes, he missed a tackle and blew and overlap against Italy, but how England missed his kick chasing and speed. 

Haskell was anonymous again and his inability to consistently impose himself in games is so annoying. Most of the time it's a case of looking like Tarzan but playing like Jane.

Burrells issue is he should be playing 13 or not at all. England constant issue, because JJ and Tuilagi should also be starting there. Year on year its been finding a 12 who can do something with whats outside them thats eluded England coaches. I dont think for a minute that Burrell is Lancasters first choice there and there is perhaps an element of him being picked on the basis of his previous performances when at 13, everything thatscurrently being said about JJ was previously said about him.
Again Id moot the idea of bumping JJ out to the wing where England are struggling to find genuine threats with the ball in hand and leaving the 13 spot open for Tuillagi or Burrell who both have the potential to be excellent there.
That does bring us back to finding a playmaker 12 which I guess boils down to trusting 36 to finally deliver on potential (why of why did we never get to see him and Tuillagi get a run together?), take a punt on Slade or forget that Hape/Henry Paul ever happened and trust that Sam Purges really can pass kick and has a Union brain to add to his Bastreaud impersonations. Lets face it though Lancaster will just pick Barritt wont he (he can tackles!).

Burrell is a 12 Gooseberry...that's his club position.

I think re the backs we need to know how we want to play. I don't mean rigidly sticking to one plan of attack, but knowing vaguely how we want to create space and exploit it.

If we want to smash it up at 12, ruck quickly and release our back 3 that way, pick Burrell and use him like Wales use Roberts. If we want to use footwork to open up space we're going for Eastmond, in my opinion.

Personally, i'd rather we went for the latter choice. For this reason - it is defensively frailer, undoubtedly, certainly Eastmond and JJ are not stopping some of the bigger backs on the gain-line. So we'd need to know how we arranged defensively with this in mind. We also wouldn't have the luxury of trucking it up with Burrell after we get slow ball. But here's my thing. Without a unit at 12, we have to secure quick ball. Our rucking game has to improve. It may go horribly wrong but I would LOVE us to HAVE to focus on this. The problem with quick ball at the moment is I don't believe any of the other 12s have good enough hands or decision making to attack effectively with it. We saw Burrell without the confidence to pass the ball on and he was turned over when we should have been able to attack. I don't think Eastmond would have that problem. We'd also still be able to ship the ball one or two out to a forward to go up the guts if we do get slow ball.

Anyway, that's a long-winded way of saying I think Eastmond should be our 12, alongside clubmates Ford and JJ. As for other contenders at 12 - 36 flatters to deceive and is too inconsistent, Burrell I think is a 13 personally. Slade I think will be an excellent 10 but could make a fantastic 12, would like to see him get more time there. Burgess I still think will settle at 6, but in time may go past Burrell as a bruiser who can distribute. Manu cannot pass, or won't pass, there's no point in him there. Devoto I would like to see get more time at 12, bit obviously plenty including Eastmond are ahead of him.

On other positions - Goode? No, Nowell even as a novice at FB is better. May back on the wing, we need the pace to chase kicks. We also need those kicks to be vaguely decent, so someone needs to talk to Ford about shortening the distance, and Care needs to come in for Youngs. Actually Youngs kicking isn't much worse than Care's, but he takes forever to get the ball away and against Italy every pass was about 2 feet above Ford's head.

I guess Lawes back in for Kruis, Attwood given a boll***ing with Launchbury on the bench.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Burrell is a 12 Gooseberry...that's his club position.

Hes wasted there at international  level. He cant bully his way through and doesnt get the space he needs. If hes playing tests its at 13  or not at all IMO.

Ditto Tuillagi, its awful seeing him at 12.

Slade needs to be looked at as Burrell looks half the player he has been.

Send Ben Young's back to Leicester too, dreadfully slow and ponderous at getting the ball away.

Agreed Gooseberry and TightHEAD. Youngs is back to the dithering and endless 'organising'. I think he's our sub option but nothing more.

He seems to do this time after time once he appears to make the No9 shirt his own.

Soooooooo frustrating.

Wasnt Tuilagi tried at 12 for the Lions with BOD? I think it was a pretty well thought of combo, although of course Tuilagi got broke. Kicking may be an issue.

I think we have looked better with 36 at 12 in his cameos because he does throw decent long passes, and Burrell does not. Burrell had very little time when he got done but yes you'd like to think a better player could of shifted the ball faster. I don't know. But he hasn't looked great so far.

Slade wont be picked this 6N unless there are massive injury problems. Lancaster only picks from players who have been training with the squad, and I don't think Slade has done enough to be considered there.

Ben Youngs- well everyone thought he was great in the first game. Care at his best is a shoe in but he isnt and he even sat out the last club game with a calf injury. Youngs is a fine player, occasionally an inspired one. One player wont make the difference anyway. And why is it always the Leicester players which are so questioned? (Youngs - see above. Tom Youngs too small, Croft show pony, Tuilagi just crash ball etc - You do wonder if there are other prejudices present)

I think I'd like to see 36 in for Burrell, May and Nowell on the wings and Watson to the bench, if we are just looking at the current bunch

Drop Cole too, lightweight

lostinwales I think many players from all clubs have been criticised.

Not just Leicester.

E.g. Saracens - Goode is not rated as international class, Kruis is considered 2nd rate compared to world class locks like Lawes and Launchbury, Billy is seen as a 2nd rate no 8 compared to Morgan. Wigglesworth - not rated as a 9.

Gloucester - May - been called road runner, Twelvetrees - plenty of criticism.

Quins - Robshaw has been criticised as not a 7.

Bath - Eastmond - seen as too small.

The club that gets the least criticism is probably Exeter.

My thoughts about the Leicester players is that they like most players are good in the right set up.

Manu is a very talented player for example but who is best to pair him up with?

People like to pan player X - not realising that perhaps the coaches aren't utilising player X properly.

Player X is also criticised for not doing the same thing as player Y.


England on the weekend didn't use Haskell properly -I thought his job in the XV was to be another ball carrier yet against Ireland he carried the ball only 5 times compared to Billy's 14.


I guess it's sometimes what we think a player should do and what they do.

Attwood is supposedly meant to be this powerhouse enforcer yet have we seen it?

Twelvetrees is meant to be one of the best passers of the rugby ball yet we've not seen that.


A good coach and management gets the best out of all the players at their disposal. Can we say that Lancaster and co have?

We all knew what Ireland would do against England yet the coaches and players had no answer.

You have to question the coaches preparation.

It's not the loss that's the problem - it's the manner of the loss. It was emphatic and means England have to ask themselves so many questions.

have been really pleased with Easter's contribution when he has come on in the Wales and Ireland matches. Gets himself involved and makes yards with every carry. Causes problems for defenders.

I hope bomber keeps him in the RWC squad as his experience and skills are really useful imo

quinsforever wrote:have been really pleased with Easter's contribution when he has come on in the Wales and Ireland matches. Gets himself involved and makes yards with every carry. Causes problems for defenders.

I hope bomber keeps him in the RWC squad as his experience and skills are really useful imo

Well Morgan is 50:50 and in his absence Easter has to go

Easters trump card is that he covers lock as well. That said I wouldnt be over inspired seeing England reduced to taking him to the world cup, even if he has earned his spot. The alternative though would be Waldrom or just relying on the likes of Haskell to shuffle over as 8 replacement (and then screw up pick ups from scrums etc). Or for Vuinpola to get fit enough to last 80 minutes.

So yeah if Morgan isnt fit i dont really see how he wont go. Its a heck of a story for him if he does.

Although coaches will always say this I think its a fair point by the Sale chap that Cipriani should have come on at some point in that game. Although perhaps England did recover and get into a rythym at just the pint Lancaster might have been poised to consider it does feel like his place in the 23 at all is only on sufferance and that "someones dad" doesnt want him nailing down the right to a place.
England needed a spark of creativity, and some better kicking. By 60 minutes the situation was critical and the game being chased. They had the option on the bench and chose not to use it.

What exactly is he being paid for?

TightHEAD wrote:Send Ben Young's back to Leicester too, dreadfully slow and ponderous at getting the ball away.

I woudl be happy to have him back. We get him into really good form, then a month with England and Farrell and Catt's coaching ruins him.

Gooseberry I hope that's not the reason Cipriani didn't come on.

Londontiger To be honest I wouldn't be against seeing a reshuffle in the coaches with Farrell Sr and Catt being given the boot.

lostinwales wrote:Wasnt Tuilagi tried at 12 for the Lions with BOD? I think it was a pretty well thought of combo, although of course Tuilagi got broke. Kicking may be an issue.

I think we have looked better with 36 at 12 in his cameos because he does throw decent long passes, and Burrell does not. Burrell had very little time when he got done but yes you'd like to think a better player could of shifted the ball faster. I don't know. But he hasn't looked great so far.

Slade wont be picked this 6N unless there are massive injury problems. Lancaster only picks from players who have been training with the squad, and I don't think Slade has done enough to be considered there.

Ben Youngs- well everyone thought he was great in the first game. Care at his best is a shoe in but he isnt and he even sat out the last club game with a calf injury. Youngs is a fine player, occasionally an inspired one. One player wont make the difference anyway. And why is it always the Leicester players which are so questioned? (Youngs - see above. Tom Youngs too small, Croft show pony, Tuilagi just crash ball etc - You do wonder if there are other prejudices present)

This is half the trouble though LIW. I keep saying he has the skills but his execution and decision making is poor.

He throws out these big longs passes at the wrong times...he also floats passes out that are neither for the next man nor reach the man after that...usually hitting the deck.

Marler
Meathead (c)
Cole
Attwood
Lawes
Robunshaw
Billy wheez
Brand X
Youngs
Ford
May
Eastmond
Joseph
Wade
Watson

Corbs
Webber
Fatty Brookes
Kitchener
Wood
Simpson
Cips
Nowell/Yarde

Some needed dropping because they wern't good enough in the first place, others need another chance to prove themselves one way or another, Meathead should be given his head as captain which is obviously an inspired decision, at once backing his selection whilist giving Robshaw the hurry up and everyone a different voice to listen to. Obviously those not selected either, arn't up to it, need to show the required form, or are injured.

Sunday was bad day at the office all round. Lets see who has learnt from the experience.

Gooseberry wrote:Easters trump card is that he covers lock as well. That said I wouldnt be over inspired seeing England reduced to taking him to the world cup, even if he has earned his spot. The alternative though would be Waldrom or just relying on the likes of Haskell to shuffle over as 8 replacement (and then screw up pick ups from scrums etc). Or for Vuinpola to get fit enough to last 80 minutes.

So yeah if Morgan isnt fit i dont really see how he wont go. Its a heck of a story for him if he does.

Hes done 80 minutes every game so far. He has upped his fitness a great deal. The 60 minute (if you are lucky) version was last year

Changes for Scotland:
Brown in Goode out
Care in Wiggs out
Wood in Croft out

I'd also potentially rotate 10 and 12 so start with Cipriani and 36 then bring on Ford and Burrell

Apparently Burrell is a doubt with a hamstring injury. That opens the door for a wildcard like Slade or Burgess to get on the bench or even a start.

Noooooo


Stop adding more players!

Let's just stick with what we know and back them. What the frak is Burgess going to do other then make a mistake and get hung out to dry by the media and us fans? Likewise Slade, why suddenly dump him in the team?