Your pre World Cup squad: England

First topic message reminder :

I think there are normally 50 people in one of these squads but the numbers are quite flexible. But with no international games between now and the squad being named, who makes your wider squad? And what questions will you be looking to answer in the three warm up games?

Front Row
Marler, Vunipola, Corbisiero, Hartley, Youngs, Webber, Cole, Wilson, Brookes.

All 9 men have recent international experience both in terms of hard caps and squad time. There's no one else really in contention and front row isn't an area you traditionally get bolters.

Questions I'd be looking to answer is can Corbisiero force his way back into the starting line up and Hartley or Young's at 2.

Second row
Lawes, Launchbury, Parling, Attwood, Slater, Kruis.

Slater is the only controversial pick in there but his first cap is long overdue. Lancaster will pick the other 5 and no one will argue.

Our starting pair are a lock and I think everyone is fairly happy with Parling currently being third in the pecking order. So we need to establish our fourth choice early on. A lot will come down to training, but Lancaster will need to work out who that fourth choice is, and whether the fourth choice will make the plane.

Back Row
Robshaw, Wood, Armitage, Haskell, Kvesic, Vunipola, Morgan, Easter.

Robshaw, Wood, Vunipola and Morgan (if fit) pick themselves in the final squad. Easter covers Morgan (and second row) making him a must in the training squad and an attractive option if Morgan doesn't make the final squad. You don't just throw away 50 caps of experience so Haskell makes the wider squad for me, while Armitage and Kvesic get there on the strength of their club form.

The question for me relvolves around the starting back row. I don't think the balance is right and would look to experiment with Vunipola at 6 and Morgan at 8 and Armitage on the bench for the first match. With our locks both able to play 6, we should be able to facilitate more carriers in the back row. Once we lock in our starting back row we can fill the rest of the squad.

Half backs
Youngs, Care, Dickson, Wigglesworth, Ford, Farrell, Slade, Cipriani.

Only real left field selection here is Slade as a potential utility back. Cipriani is purely in as injury cover as I don't think he's versatile enough to be a third choice fly half and he won't go as one of the two.

I think the question to be answered is who is the second choice 9, can Care or Dickson usurp Wigglesworth? Youngs, Ford and Farrell are probably already booked in.

Centres
Barritt, Burrell, Twelvetrees, Burgess, Eastmond, Tuilagi, Joseph, Daly.

Barritt, Tuilagi and Joseph are already in the final squad, and for me I'd take those 3 only, with Slade, Farrell and Nowell also in the squad covering centre. After those 3, I think there are so many players who are much of a muchness and I think Lancaster would be wise to include them all in his squad to keep his options open. Should there be an injury Lancaster can then try to judge the form of the other players.

The question for me is what two to start with therefore. With 3 games you can try out each of the 3 combos from your 3 first choice centres or you can try two and give Slade a start at 13. But we need to nail our starting centre partnership as a matter of priority.

Back three
Nowell, Watson, May, Ashton, Wade, Brown, Foden, Goode.

Nowell, Watson, May and Brown all go to the World Cup with space for one more. With Nowell and Watson able to cover 15, that could be a winger or a full back. Ashton or Wade could get a hatful against Uruguay and secure a bonus point in that game.

First game I'd try Watson at full back to see whether that is a viable option, and I'd try one of my other wingers in his spot. After that, I think the starting 3 are pretty secure in their spots.

Jimpy I guess that's true.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Will be interesting to see how many of the injured come back and find some form or whether they've already done enough/shown something that the coaches are after. Would suspect that Slater may come through if fit and provide a real challenge to the incumbants.

Talking of the injured coming back and finding some kind of form. I have never liked the idea that a player who has been injured for a length of time coming straight back in too the England starting team or the bench for that matter. I find it give's the wrong impression that their shirt is theirs and their alone. No player should be able to walk back in after a long lay off in my opinion.

Every player should have to prove they are the best player for their position.

I agree to an extent in that they cant be awful but the best players dont make the best team and sometimes a player will add more than others even if not firing all cylinders. Generally an exception to your rule though.

Armitage is certainly worth looking at due to nobody really cementing a place at 6, similar with Bendy but in a back up position.

Hopefully SL will bring them both into the training squad.

Hasnt Wood cemented his place? Been an ever present when fully fit.

I do think Wood will play a major part in the team. But as he cemented his place? not sure to be honest.

How much more could it be cemented? If hes not a definite starter who is?

Yeah I think Wood is nailed on in that spot when he's fit...and its even more cemented with Haskell failing miserably to make any impression during the 6n.

PS
I do think however the whole back row should be re-assessed post WC.

Agree totally gf. Personally id be looking at Ewers and Kvesic initially. Fraser, Itoje and possibly Burgess who looks more a 6 to me than anything. The last 2 are if they make the move there. For me it looks their best position.

Yeah they need to look at Ewers...a big abrasive 6.

Also I agree with Kveisc. He is really back to excellent form since his move. He is consistently playing very well these days and should be looked at closely.

I rate Wood and Robshaw very highly...and they do the essential nitty gritty stuff brilliantly. But theres just no...spark or fireworks from them that i'd really like to see now and again.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah I think Wood is nailed on in that spot when he's fit...and its even more cemented with Haskell failing miserably to make any impression during the 6n.

PS
I do think however the whole back row should be re-assessed post WC.

Haskell was a lot of people's MOM against Wales first up. Sure he didn't hit the same heights thereafter but the whole back row failed to cover themselves in glory against Ireland.
What you lose in carrying with Wood you gain at the line out.

I do think we need 2 real hard ball carriers in the BR & as good as Robshaw is I wouldn't count him as a stand out carrier. So I agree regarding the reassessment Geordie.

I agree with the need to have another think about balance. Lancaster has got plenty right, as has Rowntree with the forwards, but you have to say that more often than not it's solid rather than spectacular.

Still, I do feel the English are pretty harsh on the team. Expectations are justifiably high, but even the great Sir Clive TCUP Winning Woodward had to endure the complete humiliation of finishing second on more than one occasion!

This for me is after the wc. One criticism of Woodward is he didn t leave the legacy. We need to identify the next set and expose them to internationals. Doesnt mean Robshaw et al are dropped just others given time.

You hit the nail 7.5 - Balance.

And I just wonder at times about the balance of the pack.
But that's for debate after the world cup.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah I think Wood is nailed on in that spot when he's fit...and its even more cemented with Haskell failing miserably to make any impression during the 6n.

PS
I do think however the whole back row should be re-assessed post WC.

Haskell was a lot of people's MOM against Wales first up. Sure he didn't hit the same heights thereafter but the whole back row failed to cover themselves in glory against Ireland.
What you lose in carrying with Wood you gain at the line out.

I do think we need 2 real hard ball carriers in the BR & as good as Robshaw is I wouldn't count him as a stand out carrier. So I agree regarding the reassessment Geordie.

bigtrevsbigmac disagree I thought that Billy was the best English player in Ireland. He fought heroically to bring England into the game with the most carries,metres made and defenders beaten of any other forward, also made a clean break. Made his fair share of tackles

I felt in contrast that both Haskell and Robshaw did not pull their weight that day.

The problem was that Billy was one of the only decent carrier of the ball in the backrow.

Haskell looked good vs Wales because he carried the ball and well. This was something he did little of in the other matches.

I thought that he was one of the worst English forwards in the other matches. Particularly vs Ireland he was a penalty machine.


FES expectations are high because England's resources are significant - with our resources we should be above the likes of Ireland and Wales - not on par. We also have had one of the most successful U20s teams in the last few years.

We have 12 AP teams to pick from compared to 4,4,2 and 2 in the Pro12.

I am sure you could make an England team out of one English club alone and it wouldn't do too badly.....

E.g.

Saracens

1.Mako
2.George
3.Alo
4.Kruis
5.Itoje
6.Wray
7.Fraser
8.Billy

9.Wigglesworth
10.Farrell
11.Strettle
12.Barritt
13.Tompkins
14.Ashton
15.Goode

Bit of inexperience there but 9 with international caps, the rest ex U20s (though 3 of them have been in the Saxons).

I know you support them, but that team would have their arses handed to them against a good international side.

Define a good side?

I think they would beat Scotland and Italy, also all sides ranked below them.

I don't think it would in the majority of times out of 10. Maybe you stand a better chance with italy refusing to pick anybody who can kick but I'd still favour them. Backline isn't bad, not great but that pack would get taken apart.

Italy maybe, Scotland would win relatively comfortably.

Its a bit disrespectful to assume that a club side made up of just its English players could beat international sides. Any international loosehead would take the young tighthead Alo apart

No 7&1/2 wrote:I don't think it would in the majority of times out of 10. Maybe you stand a better chance with italy refusing to pick anybody who can kick but I'd still favour them. Backline isn't bad, not great but that pack would get taken apart.

The backline wouldn't get any ball at all.

What is the status of the injuries....

Is Morgan pretty much ruled out of the WC.

Then we have Corbs who is a sicknote.
Manu doesn't seem to be recovering from his problem.

Slater ? Whats his status. He is one that could really benefit if he could get himself fit. He is the powerhouse style that everyone hoped Attwood would be...could Slater bring it to this level? He seems to use his power better than Attwood.

Bambam

Okay I will put it this way:

My opinion

1.Mako - better than any Italian or Scottish LH
2.George - not any international experience yet but I think he's got the potential
3.Alo - okay he's the real weak spot.
4.Kruis - better than any Scottish or Italian SR bar Gray Jr.
5.Itoje - perhaps not there just yet but will surpass any Scottish or Italian SR soon
6.Wray - probably better than Scotland's current picks
7.Fraser - probably better than anything Scotland's current picks.
8.Billy - only Parisse can match him though Billy is in better form. No 8 of Scotland not in the same league as Billy.

I guess this tells you how little I think of the Scottish backrow without Brown.

9.Wigglesworth - better than any Italian or Scottish in this position.
10.Farrell - ditto
11.Strettle - ditto
12.Barritt - ditto
13.Tompkins - the weak spot in this backline, raw talent
14.Ashton - better than any Italian or Scottish in this position
15.Goode - only Hogg surpasses him.

Perhaps the inexperience in key positions might let this team down but there is enough clear superiority in quite a few places to give them a chance.

Interesting views there beshocked.

Some I agree with one or two I might question...but your loyal to Sarries ill give you that

On the "Saracens" team over the week-end I was quietly impressed with George.  Seemed to scrum and throw quite well.  What do others think?

George has been pretty good all season having got the chance to play due to Brits injury, but I don't think he offers anything substantially different/better to the existing hookers in the squad.  If Brits was English I am pretty sure he would walk into the England team.

I think we could probably get to a list of 40/50 players that would cover most peoples choice of England world cup squad, which means that we have now more or less identified our best players.  It is more a question of getting the correct combinations.  However, there is no point trying to get it down to 31 or whatever because I would imagine 25%-33% of the players will not be fit come the world cup - likely players are Morgan, Croft, Foden, etc.  So that brings our 'top 50' down to around 35 fit players. You just have to hope that the injuries are spread out so we do not for instance loose all our tight heads, etc.

My 3 concerns with England are:

1.  We are still 100-200 caps light in experience.  I think this world cup is coming 1 or 2 years too early for us.
2.  There are no stand out world class players currently in this squad - some have the potential, but I don't think anyone on current form is in that category.
3.  Lancaster is still suspect in picking the best players, in their best position and playing the correct tactics.  There have been a few 'mind blowing' selections of players who were evidently not international class, or in positions where they should never have been picked.  Also the display against Ireland was poor, as everyone knew exactly what their game plan would be.  Also the display against Wales was more about team guts, than a team with a plan.

The plus points are that other than Easter, very few players will be definitely too old for the next world cup and most will be nearer there playing peak than they are now.  I know it is a bit of an England mantra that the next world cup is the one we will succeed at, but I think the age of the players that Lancaster has selected has deliberately or accidentally put us in that position, plus the recent success of our u20/u21s is providing a bit of a conveyor belt of good players, with a winning attitude.

Pre World Cup Get together / Trialist Squad

Front Row
LH: Marler, Vunipola, Corbisiero - Mullan if Corbs is injured
Hooker: Hartley, Youngs, Webber
TH: Cole, Wilson, Brookes.

Second row
Lawes, Launchbury, Parling, Attwood, Kruis - Have all been in the 6n squad
Slater - If fully fit

Back Row
Flankers: Robshaw, Wood, Haskell, Kvesic, C.Clark
No.8: Vunipola, Easter, Ewers
Morgan is looking unlikely to make it

Halfbacks
SH: Youngs, Care, Dickson, Wigglesworth - Where are the youngster coming through for Dickson and Wiggers...
FH: Ford, Farrell, Cipriani

Centres
Barritt, Burrell, Eastmond, Tuilagi, Joseph, Twelvetrees

Back three
Nowell, Watson, May, Ashton, Wade, Brown, Foden, Goode.

Guest Invites more for the experience but maybe selected if they make an unbelievable impression :
Slade
Garvey
Mark Wilson (Falcons back rower)
Hill (Exeter 12)
Stephenson (Saints 12)
Devoto
Burgess
Jamie George
Sinkler
Daly
Itoje

I know you don't like him but there's no way on earth Twelvetrees won't be in the WC squad.

Reluctantly added...

Ha. Cowan-Dickie may/prob will go for the experience of the training squad.

Beshocked - I'm going to have to pick you up on your assertion that Sarries English players alone would defeat Scotland:

English Saracens vs Scotland

1.Mako vs Dickinson - Sarries
2.George vs Ford - Scotland
3.Alo vs Murray - Scotland
4.Kruis vs Jonny Gray - Scotland
5.Itoje vs Richie Gray - Scotland
6.Wray vs Harley - Scotland
7.Fraser vs Cowan - Draw
8.Billy vs Denton - Sarries

9.Wigglesworth vs Laidlaw - Draw
10.Farrell vs Russell - Sarries
11.Strettle vs Seymour - Draw
12.Barritt vs Dunbar - Draw
13.Tompkins vs Bennett - Scotland
14.Ashton vs Maitland - Draw
15.Goode vs Hogg - Scotland

That's my best attempt at being balanced, and I make only 3 Saracen players a certainty to make the combined team (Mako and Billy Vunipola plus Owen Farrell), whereas I reckon 7 Scots would make it. I've noted 5 players where I think the contest is too close to call.

In sum, I think it's a very bold statement to suggest that English Sarries team would beat Scotland.

GeordieFalcon wrote:
SH: Youngs, Care, Dickson, Wigglesworth - Where are the youngster coming through for Dickson and Wiggers...

Simpson is still fairly young isn't he? more or less knocking on the door. The guy I really rate and want to see more of is Dan Robson of Gloucester, who's moving to Wasps next year IIRC. Be interesting to see if he can impose himself as first choice ahead of Simpson... Another I quite like the look of is Spencer at Sarries (though more in the mould of a Wigglesworth than a Care or Youngs), but he's stuck at third choice at the mo, so not really enough game time.

Youngs and Care aren't getting too old though, should still be around for a good few years?

Auterac, Webber, Wilson, Attwood, Garvey, Burgess, Fearns, Sisi, Young, Ford, Banahan, Eastmond, Ford, Rokoduguni, Watson may struggle slightly at the breakdown vs Sarries England back row, but otherwise would have a clear beating of them.

Corbs, Hartley, Denman, Lawes, Day, Wood, Clark, Dickinson, Dickson, Myler, Elliot, Stephenson, Burrell, Packman, Foden would also do very well.

However I would still expect both to get the wooden spoon if playing in the 6Ns.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ha. Cowan-Dickie may/prob will go for the experience of the training squad.

Yeah he probably would. Whats your thoughts on Yeandle. He never seems to get much attention but is 1st choice for Exeter.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:
SH: Youngs, Care, Dickson, Wigglesworth - Where are the youngster coming through for Dickson and Wiggers...

Simpson is still fairly young isn't he? more or less knocking on the door. The guy I really rate and want to see more of is Dan Robson of Gloucester, who's moving to Wasps next year IIRC. Be interesting to see if he can impose himself as first choice ahead of Simpson... Another I quite like the look of is Spencer at Sarries (though more in the mould of a Wigglesworth than a Care or Youngs), but he's stuck at third choice at the mo, so not really enough game time.

Youngs and Care aren't getting too old though, should still be around for a good few years?

Absolutely, they are both still young, but I just wonder who else is coming through. I forgot about Robson...see how he fairs at Wasps.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Beshocked - I'm going to have to pick you up on your assertion that Sarries English players alone would defeat Scotland:

English Saracens vs Scotland

1.Mako vs Dickinson - Sarries
2.George vs Ford - Scotland
3.Alo vs Murray - Scotland
4.Kruis vs Jonny Gray - Scotland
5.Itoje vs Richie Gray - Scotland
6.Wray vs Harley - Scotland
7.Fraser vs Cowan - Draw
8.Billy vs Denton - Sarries

9.Wigglesworth vs Laidlaw - Draw
10.Farrell vs Russell - Sarries
11.Strettle vs Seymour - Draw
12.Barritt vs Dunbar - DrawSarries
13.Tompkins vs Bennett - Scotland
14.Ashton vs Maitland - Draw
15.Goode vs Hogg - Scotland

That's my best attempt at being balanced, and I make only 3 Saracen players a certainty to make the combined team (Mako and Billy Vunipola plus Owen Farrell), whereas I reckon 7 Scots would make it. I've noted 5 players where I think the contest is too close to call.

In sum, I think it's a very bold statement to suggest that English Sarries team would beat Scotland.

Id only make one change.

Danny Care 28 and 3 months
Ben Youngs 25 and 7 months

Joe Simpson 26 and 9 months
Dan Robson 23 and 1 month.




(By comparison Rhys Webb turns 27 in December, Connor Murray 26 later this month)

That's a really handy crop of options at 9 for England and you're pretty well covered for at least 4 years (until RWC 2019) with that lot, even assuming no-one else steps up (which they will).

Simpson for my money has been overlooked. A great attacking option to have off the bench.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:Beshocked - I'm going to have to pick you up on your assertion that Sarries English players alone would defeat Scotland:

English Saracens vs Scotland

1.Mako vs Dickinson - Sarries
2.George vs Ford - Scotland
3.Alo vs Murray - Scotland
4.Kruis vs Jonny Gray - Scotland
5.Itoje vs Richie Gray - Scotland
6.Wray vs Harley - Scotland
7.Fraser vs Cowan - Draw
8.Billy vs Denton - Sarries

9.Wigglesworth vs Laidlaw - Draw
10.Farrell vs Russell - Sarries
11.Strettle vs Seymour - Draw
12.Barritt vs Dunbar - DrawSarries
13.Tompkins vs Bennett - Scotland
14.Ashton vs Maitland - Draw
15.Goode vs Hogg - Scotland

That's my best attempt at being balanced, and I make only 3 Saracen players a certainty to make the combined team (Mako and Billy Vunipola plus Owen Farrell), whereas I reckon 7 Scots would make it. I've noted 5 players where I think the contest is too close to call.

In sum, I think it's a very bold statement to suggest that English Sarries team would beat Scotland.

Id only make one change.

Fair enough. Dunbar has been superb this season for Glasgow and Scotland and very much a form player, whereas Barritt is currently being overlooked, but I am a fan of Barritt and what he brings to Sarries (and England previously). I struggled a bit between them thus calling it a draw.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ha. Cowan-Dickie may/prob will go for the experience of the training squad.

Yeah he probably would. Whats your thoughts on Yeandle. He never seems to get much attention but is 1st choice for Exeter.

He s alright . Never one who I ve thought as being international class.

Depends whether you're looking at it based on form or "class". On the basis of form, Russell over Farrell by a mile, Cowan > Fraser, Dunbar > Barritt, SHC> Laidlaw or Wigglesworth etc

I still think Scotland would win relatively comfortably against that Sarries team

BamBam wrote:Depends whether you're looking at it based on form or "class". On the basis of form, Russell over Farrell by a mile, Cowan > Fraser, Dunbar > Barritt, SHC> Laidlaw or Wigglesworth etc

I still think Scotland would win relatively comfortably against that Sarries team

I agree that Scotland would win fairly comfortably - more down to the pack than anything else. The first choice Scotland 8 is actually quite good, and I think English Sarries would struggle for ball.

Still, I'm not particularly thrilled that there's even a debate to be had here!!

Would Clermont beat England??

Haha, I did mention earlier that I think its a bit disrespectful !

Clermont and Toulon are international sides in all but name, not actually a bad debate, Sarries without their star foreign players is a different kettle of fish!

FES sorry to be blunt but your players aren't as good as you think. Perhaps it's lack of direction or lack of mental strength I don't know.

Saracens do have a good team - it's why Saracens have been the best performing English side in the European top tier in the last few years. The backs have done their fair share too. Our backs aren't rated highly by either sides despite the amount of times I have seen the Sarries backline destroy their opposition.....

Your players haven't achieved anywhere near as much.


really? Laidlaw - a draw with Wigglesworth? Laidlaw has been garbage for Scotland this season. Wigglesworth is much hated but has been one of the top 9s in the ERCC, hasn't done badly for England either.

Maitland a draw with Ashton? Seriously? Form and class - Ashton is comfortably better. Ashton scores more tries and has helped win matches that would only happen in Maitland's dreams. He's also in great form this season -huge matches against the likes of Quins,Clermont and Munster.

I would be highly interested to hear your argument for Maitland being equal......

Barritt > Dunbar because Barritt has the class that Dunbar lacks. Barritt is a big game player.

5 Sarries backs, 2 Scottish

I'd take George Kruis over Richie Gray.




Londontiger I know you wish you could clone Ford but alas.......

Only Ford or Joseph would get into a Sarries backline IMO.

As for the forwards, only Wilson and Garvey, perhaps Attwood instead of Itoje but I think Itoje will be one of the best forwards in England soon.



Bambam could put in Hodgson if we are talking about form - Hodgson would destroy Russell.

To be equally blunt I don't particularly rate Laidlaw or Wigglesworth but Laidlaw has performed strongly on the international stage, if not this season, and like your description of Barritt tends to be a big game player. I think Hidalgo-Clyne will prove to be better than both of them personally.

Maitland is a British Lion with 4 years and 54 Super Rugby caps for the Crusaders. I rate Ashton, you know I do, but Maitland is a very good player indeed.

Barritt vs Dunbar is tough and I can see both sides. I called it a draw. We also have Matt Scott as an option at 12 who is a very classy player, but Dunbar and certainly Barritt are far better defenders.

George Kruis over Richie Gray is ridiculous.

I admire your enthusiasm for Saracens, and your staunch promotion/defence of all Saracens players as required, but to suggest that English Saracens team would beat Scotland, particularly comparing the two packs of forwards, is ridiculous.

I have just read the Burgess wil start at blind side flanker for bath this week end.

He as played 11 games at centre for Bath since changing from rugby league. Surely this is a bit late now if he is going to play in the RWC?

Would rather have Watson and Rokoduguni than any of the Sarries back 3

beshocked wrote:FES sorry to be blunt but your players aren't as good as you think.

Pot, Kettle, Black.


You have so much prior history of over-rating your own players, and underestimating opposition. You get angry with any who dare to disagree, and even angrier at your teams when they deign to lose to obviously inferior teams.

Is Bath's decision to select Burgess at 6 an attempt to make him viable for RWC 2015 in a back row with only 1 carrier, or is it a case of a season late for him….will he bother to stick around if not selected for the RWC and will Lancaster pick him for his extended squad?

Burgess might be the biggest lame duck decoy Lancaster has. Seemingly finding it oh so hard to acclimatise to Union. If Lancaster has him in the WC squad then you can be certain he's going to explode into 'surprise' action. No other reason to have him. If he's not making waves then he's not needed. If he's there, he'll make waves.

No its because bath are playing a bottom side in poor or shall we say inconsistent form with a poor scrum.

Our back row: Mark Wilson is genuine class, Mayhew is decent and York is poor.
What better chance to see if he can cope at 6.