England v France, 15 August

First topic message reminder :

  
ENGLAND v FRANCE
15 August 2015
KO: 20:00 local
Twickenham, London

Live on telly

Referee: John Lacey (Ireland)
Assistant Referees: George Clancy (Ireland) & Leighton Hodges (Wales)
Television match official: Simon McDowell (Ireland)

A. Head to Head

99 Played 99
54 Won 38
7 Drawn 7
38 Lost 54
1,553 Points 1,230

B. Recent Form

21 March 2015
Twickenham, London
55 – 35 to England

1 February 2014
Stade de France, Saint-Denis
26 – 24 to France

23 February 2013
Twickenham, London
23 – 13 to England

11 March 2012
Stade de France, Saint-Denis
22 – 24 to England

8 October 2011
Eden Park, Auckland, New Zealand
19 – 12 to France

C. Teams

ENGLAND

Alex Goode; Anthony Watson, Henry Slade, Sam Burgess, Jonny May; Owen Farrell, Richard Wigglesworth; Mako Vunipola, Rob Webber, Kieran Brookes, George Kruis, Geoff Parling, Tom Wood, Calum Clark, Ben Morgan

Replacements: Luke Cowan-Dickie, Alex Corbisiero, David Wilson, Dave Attwood, James Haskell, Danny Care, Danny Cipriani, Billy Twelvetrees

FRANCE

Scott Spedding; Sofiane Guitoune, Remi Lamerat, Alexandre Dumoulin, Brice Dulin; Francois Trinh-Duc, Morgan Parra; Louis Picamoles, Fulgence Ouedraogo, Yannick Nyanga; Yoann Maestri, Alexandre Flanquart; Nicolas Mas, Dimitri Szarzewski, Vincent Debaty

Replacements: Guilhem Guirado, Xavier Chiocci, Uini Atonio, Sebastien Vahaamahina, Loann Goujon, Rory Kockott, Remi Tales, Gael Fickou

I'm pretty happy with that. For a completely scratch side, with only Watson and possibly Wood as established first choice to beat that French team which was much nearer a first XV is a good achievement.

Burgess and Slade each had some nice touches and slotted in well. Burgess in particular put in some big tackles but also a couple of really deft short passes in attack. Barritt and Joseph are nailed on but I think Burrell might be feeling the pressure a bit now. I slightly wonder what the point of keeping all of Burrell, 36, Burgess and Slade up to now is though unless there's an injury we're not being told about.

Watson, as well as his tries, seemed very committed in a couple of tackles I saw, which was encouraging.

Fair dos to Goode - he had a strong game and it was a lovely kick for May's try. I'd like to see France's nearly-try in the first few minutes again though. From where I was at the game it was clear whether Burgess got done for pace on the kick through or whether Goode was a bit out of position - too deep - or both. Maybe unduly picky as he did a lot well.

Hooker is a problem. Cowan-Dickie must be feeling a bit sick with how the lineout went, for all his other strengths. As someone said, big opportunity for Jamie George now.

Well that's hooker sorted out, as LCD clearly can't be picked after that performance.

I thought both Slade and Burgess played well, and actually looked a decent pairing. Seeing as I haven't seen Burrell play well for England for a long-time (and then as an OC) I'd leave him out and have both of them in the squad. Twelvetrees and Cipriani are both reliant on injuries now.

Brookes was playing well, so it is a shame he got injured. That pretty much guarantees Corbisero a place in the squad I think.

Clark did ok, but Haskell did better, so I think flanker is sorted too.

England were good in the first half (Goode's best performance for England I'd say). I'm concerned about depth at tighthead, and hooker could become an issue, but England have some very good players to come into the pack and the backs look very dangerous.

All in the all that game got SL a lot closer to finalising his squad.

ford, farrell, burgess, barritt, joseph, slade will be in. imo. and so they should be.

Rugby Fan wrote:One telling point came in the post match interview. Asked why he didn't get Farrell to kick for goal when we won a scrum penalty near the end, Tom Wood said it wasn't a gimme; he wanted to keep the pressure on, and a penalty would only have increased the lead to seven points anyway.

Of course, it would have given England an eight point lead, and sealed the match.  

It's a small point, but I think that shows the folly of not giving Wood more captaincy opportunities at Test level. Like Robshaw, he runs himself into the ground, so isn't always thinking as clearly at the back end of a match. This one didn't cost us but I worry that similar muddled thinking at the tournament will hurt us.

More importantly he can be steam-rollered by a full-back, Haskell can't, which is why I will tell everyone until I'm blue in the face...Haskell may be a bit of an idiot and a show pony, but he is still a better bet than Wood. Wood is an excellent, committed player but he lacks both pace and power for a 6.

and basic maths.

One of the disappointing aspects about that pack performance is that it's often said England have few stars, but plenty of players of equal calibre.

We can't easily dismiss our troubles up front on third choice selections when the gap between our first and third picks is supposed to be narrow.

It would be ironic if we turn up at a World Cup with some magic in the backs and a poor set of forwards. I know Australia have made that formula work for them before but it's not really in our rugby DNA to do so.

One thing Wood did show is how much a genuine jumper at 6 adds to our line-out options. Haskell can jump but rarely looks comfortable in the role.

Clark I thought played well in parts and was a bit anonymous in others. The yellow card was unfortunate given he has become a victim of a long overdue clamp down on 'croc rolls' which I have heard many comment on being dangerous. Given his previous people will naturally jump to conclusions but I think it's simply a case of refs wanting to make a stance on the issue.

Haskell out played Clark when he came on anyway and should have solidified his place in the squad. The fact he showed up OK from 8 also adds some more versatility as well.

Parling looked off the pace to my eyes but given his experience and line-out nous he will be safe. Kruis may well have leap frogged Attwood with a dogged performance and very high work rate. He made a couple of errors but so did many players. Overall it was an impressive performance however.

After all the justifiable frustration at Webber being selected after a poor season I actually thought he played quite well. The line-out was more solid when he was operating with Parling, Wood and Kruis. Plus he showed up well around the park throwing his weight around.

LCD on the other hand was poor and George really needs game time in the next warm up match.

In the backs, Wigglesworth played well and solidified his spot ahead of Care. Slade also impressed a lot and given Cipriani only got a chance from full back I imagine Slade is now favourite as utility back. Especially with Goode also performing well.

Burgess I felt looked a bit lost but often made up for it with his exceptional athletic ability and physicality. He spent a lot of time following the ball in the defence, as did Slade at one point, which stronger sides would exploit out more ruthlessly. I still feel he is by far better suited to blind side but he fared better at 12 than I expected.

With Brookes going off injured. Haskell performing better than Clark. LCD struggling so much. Plus Goode playing very well. I imagine the 31 is now even more firmly looking like below.

1.Marler, Mako, Corbs
2.Youngs, Webber, George
3.Cole, Wilson
4.Launchbury + Kruis or Attwood
5.Lawes, Parling
6.Wood, Haskell
7.Robshaw
8.Billy V, Morgan

9.Youngs, Wigglesworth, Care
10.Ford, Farrell

11.May, Nowell
12.Barritt + Burrell or Burgess
13.Joseph, Slade
14.Watson
15.Brown, Goode

Having only five back-rowers isn't the norm, right?

Then again neither is having only three wingers. I'm less worried about that today than I was yesterday.

5 back rows with 4 second rows, one of whom can cover 6, is standard for a RWC squad Wi11 yeah.

Some sides go with 6 back rows and only 3 second rows with a back row who can cover lock. Personally I prefer the former however. If you have a player who can cover both to very high standard it is of course ideal, England do not however.

If you only have 3 second rows you don't realistically leave yourself scope to rest one if they are struggling. With 5 back rows in the 31 and 4 in match day squad you still have that tiny bit of wiggle room to give someone a game off if needed however.

4.Kruis or Attwood - Depending who is in the final squad
5.Parling
6.Wood
7.Haskell
8.Morgan/Billy - Start whoever is second choice

19.Launchbury
20.Billy/Morgan - Whoever is first choice can fill the bench

I would happily see that against Uraguay if we wanted to rest Lawes, Launchbury and Robshaw as three of our most vital players.

With 3 locks however in order to rest Lawes we would need a lock paring of 4.Clark/Easter 5.Parling which is far from ideal. I would still expect us to beat Uraguay with that pairing, but it gives a bad balance to a squad IMO.

I personally was very happy with the performance from the backs but the forwards worried me.

Front row didn't dominate like I hoped, however Vunipola had a good game in the open.

Second Rows just did not make themselves effective enough. Not convinced.
I suggest some need to watch the game again and look specifically for the back row instead of the match (seriously its well worth doing this as you see the game completely differently). Clarke and Wood were everywhere and very disruptive!

Haskell came on at 8 didn't he? its a big strength to play both positions and he did it well.

Our backs looked more threatening then I have seen in a long while.

Slade I rate hugely and would like to see him in. Burgess certainly looked fine for me. Both passed very well and were solid in defence. Burgess hits were well timed and certainly effective. He was also one of the first people to congratulate the pack on well won ball. This positive air is priceless and will bring a staggering amount to the squad even if he is not always on the pitch. He won't let people down.

Slade should have got a yellow for his hit in the air, Burgess probably deserved his for pulling back the quick penalty. Clarke was extremely unlucky to get binned, but I am sure that the players have been briefed on this. really pity. thats potentially 3 silly yellow cards for 3 new caps. That will hurt against some teams, those aside there really good debuts there.

wingers looked sharp for me - some great feet by Watson and May looked close to his usual elusive self.

Goode had a good game for me too. cracking visions and execution for the cross field kick. I just wish he had a little more "go-forward" when he breaks the line as he must be horrible to try and tackle with that footwork.

Baggy42 wrote:Goode had a good game for me too. cracking visions and execution for the cross field kick. I just wish he had a little more "go-forward" when he breaks the line as he must be horrible to try and tackle with that footwork.

Goode certainly nailed his squad place. He brought his Sarries form and I'd reckon had his best game for England. That said, I'll always worry about his pace. England's aggressive defense leaves him with a lot of ground to cover. I guess the pace of May and Watson means they can get back to cover if needed.

On the other hand, Clark and LCD must now be out of contention. Cipriani too, given how Slade and Goode played. I thought all of the second rows were pretty anonymous - probably Kruis showed up the most. Corbisiero was the worst prop on display, but I imagine he'll get the nod.

What's happened to corbisiero? Has he had to shed bulk to protect his knees and thus become underpowered, or something?

king_carlos wrote:With Brookes going off injured. Haskell performing better than Clark. LCD struggling so much. Plus Goode playing very well. I imagine the 31 is now even more firmly looking like below.

1.Marler, Mako, Corbs
2.Youngs, Webber, George
3.Cole, Wilson
4.Launchbury + Kruis or Attwood
5.Lawes, Parling
6.Wood, Haskell
7.Robshaw
8.Billy V, Morgan

9.Youngs, Wigglesworth, Care
10.Ford, Farrell

11.May, Nowell
12.Barritt + Burrell or Burgess
13.Joseph, Slade
14.Watson
15.Brown, Goode

I'd agree with that squad to a man and probably go with Attwood and Burgess.

I'm wondering if Corbisiero just hasn't adapted to the new scrum engagement laws, he doesn't look anywhere near as destructive as he did a couple of years ago.

Front row depth is looking a little worrying if that is a break to Brookes' arm.

Lancaster has apparently said that Brookes' injury wasn't too serious.

I think Corbs has been one of the losers under the new scrum engagement - but I also thought last night he wasn't helped by a ref who didn't really know what to look for. He improved in the later scrums, which suggests he can still solve problems. But if any prop cemented a place last night, it was probably Marler.

Cumbrian wrote:I'm wondering if Corbisiero just hasn't adapted to the new scrum engagement laws, he doesn't look anywhere near as destructive as he did a couple of years ago.  

Front row depth is looking a little worrying if that is a break to Brookes' arm.

I think it's a slight step down from Cole to Wilson/Brookes and from Marler to Mako (in terms of scrummaging ability) and Corbisiero (as he currently is), but a front row of Mako, Youngs/Webber and Wilson should be good enough against most international front rows, with the possible exception of France, who have some scary props.

One of the worst ref displays I have ever seen. Burgess yellow was marginal, Clarke's yellow was plain wrong. His arrogence came to the gore when refusing to listen to the linesman after the fly hack on care. Just pleased the beret team won. Very encouraging considering the number of fringe players.

robbo277 wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:I'm wondering if Corbisiero just hasn't adapted to the new scrum engagement laws, he doesn't look anywhere near as destructive as he did a couple of years ago.  

Front row depth is looking a little worrying if that is a break to Brookes' arm.

I think it's a slight step down from Cole to Wilson/Brookes and from Marler to Mako (in terms of scrummaging ability) and Corbisiero (as he currently is), but a front row of Mako, Youngs/Webber and Wilson should be good enough against most international front rows, with the possible exception of France, who have some scary props.

I'll wait to hear the extent of Brookes' injury before I get too worried, but I'm thinking at tight head prop, what if one of Cole or Wilson gets injured in the first game?  If Brookes is knackered we might be struggling a bit for depth.

If Brookes is crocked, then Henry Thomas would be on standby.

As a Chiefs fan I'm disappointed that LCD had a nightmare with his throwing as I regularly see him doing better on lineouts and have seen first hand how destructive he can be around the park!

Appreciate that on that showing the general rugby fan will have huge doubts over his ability though!!

Burgess is simply a 6 playing at 12.... But some will argue so is Barrit and with Slade at 13 bringing others into the game I think Lancaster may take both!

Watson and May played themselves into contention to start and Nowell needs a big game next week!

I like the look of our half back partnerships as well

Youngs/Ford
Wiggo/Farrell

Could do very well

wrfc1980 wrote:One of the worst ref displays I have ever seen. Burgess yellow was marginal, Clarke's yellow was plain wrong. His arrogence came to the gore when refusing to listen to the linesman after the fly hack on care. Just pleased the beret team won. Very encouraging considering the number of fringe players.

Clark dragged a player out of a ruck by his face. If one of those fingers had strayed into face or eye that would have been reckless play and a red. It was stupid and he can't complain. It was good to see a ref clamp down on that kind of dangerous rucking technique.

I only saw the highlights where England looked lightweight up front and seemed to be schooled at the breakdown. Haskell seemed to be the best of the backrowers and the plus points seemed to be all amongst the backs where Slade seems to be a god send in that he can make a back line with Farrell at 10 look like a creative attacking threat.

Where Clark was unlucky Sam is that all last season such a clear out would have been unpenalised, while there were similar ones in the Aviva game that went unpunished.

I have no problem with refs clamping down on something - but it has to be uniform and consistent.

Haskell did indeed have a good cameo, though clark had secured a couple of turnovers in the first half. We lost the ball too often in attack when the ball carrier presented the ball badly - or the SH was looking elsewhere.

Scrums were interesting. Both sides were awarded iffy penalties and both sides had periods when the shoved the other back. France did win the forward battle but created little.

And finally - having just come back from hols and seen the usual suspect banging on about the wingers selected I do wonder if he is currently choking on his humble pie?

As a poorly informed neutral, I cannot believe that anyone would contemplate leaving Haskell at home. You're going to be playing against massive SANZAR and Pacific Islander loose forwards. You cannot afford a player who is going to get worn down over the course of a match with all of the chaos and it cannot be in debate now that Wood can suffer in this regard.

ah, but Haskell has no brain power to get worn down.

More seriously, Haskell will go but due to the lineout is likely to be a sub for big games at best.

Securing our own ball on attack was poor last night which I think highlights the importance of some of England's first choice pack in this regard. I remember in the 6 nations someone on here (I think) highlighting the amount of work that Cole gets through securing our own ball. I imagine it's something that the likes of Robshaw, Launchbury and BV will also help improve. I'm also worried the pack is a bit lightweight in games against the likes of SA but sadly we don't have any experienced, enforcer type second rows or 6s.

LondonTiger wrote:ah, but Haskell has no brain power to get worn down.

Exactly. The big feller is perfect.

Does anyone think Lancaster would consider taking both Burgess and Slade along with Barritt and Joseph after yesterday? Burrell's form is obviously slightly in question but that could have changed with 2 months of England pre-season, and Lancaster wants experience in the squad.

I get the feeling that Lancaster is desperate to take Burgess.

ref was shocking - hope he doesn't get the chance to ruin a team's RWC

LondonTiger

Possibly, but if it's the three Bs and Joseph then we're slightly putting all our eggs in Joseph's basket with regards to some creativity in midfield, and potentially putting a target on Ford if we start with two bludgeons outside him. Slade would provide another alternative there, albeit more of a distributing threat rather than running.

Slade's position in the squad will probably be dependent on who they decide can best cover the FH position. Ford and Farrell will go, but a third option is needed. This will be covered by one of Goode, Cipriani and Slade. Goode is surely nailed on at deputy FB and could be pushing Brown for selection, but I would have rather we saw him or cipriani getting 30 minutes at FH rather than Farrell stay on for the full 80

I'd rather Goode wasn't 10 cover, mainly because we have already narrowed ourselves down enough in terms of back three players' without one having a dual role.

Incidentally the guardian reckon we're going full first choice next week.

Based on yesterday's selection I guess that means for now:

15. Brown
14. Watson
13. Joseph
12. Burrell (Lancaster said he'd probably be starting)
11. Nowell
10. Ford
9. Youngs

1. Marler
2. Youngs
3. Cole
4. Launchbury
5. Lawes
6. Haskell
7. Robshaw
8. Vunipola

The fact that we seem to have retained more than enough centres thus far, combined with Lancaster name dropping Burrell and Joseph as next week's combo, makes me think Barritt might be struggling with an injury. A lot of reports had speculated that both Twelvetrees and Eastmond would be released, but Twelvetrees was kept on while most of the other predictions were accurate.

I might cut against the grain here, I think last night was a good experience for Luke Cowan-Dickie. I doubt he'll be going to the World Cup, but he is a talent and now knows what is required of him. We'll see what he is made of. He should head back to Exeter and just throw, throw and throw!

I expect that the side for next week will tell us much of what we want to know about the final calls to be made.

I expect that Marler, Youngs, Cole, Launchbury and Lawes will all return to the pack. The second row spot on the bench may be used to give Kruis or Attwood another game to make a statement rather than to give Parling gametime.

In the back row it will be interesting to see who gets the nod between Haskell and Wood at 6. With Billy V not involved yesterday I expect both him and Morgan will the be in the 23 - Morgan needs all the game time he can get. Therefore I don't expect there to be a flanker on the bench. We might well use one of these warm-ups to have a look at how 6.Wood 7.Haskell goes however.

In the backs Youngs will return the 23 but after a strong showing from Wigglesworth might not be guaranteed a starting spot. Ford will return at 10 I imagine. Plus Nowell and Brown in the back three.

The centres will be interesting though given that all three of Barritt, Joseph and Burrell need game time but many will be interested in seeing more of Slade and Burgess. Could we see both Slade and Burgess on the bench?

king_carlos wrote:I expect that the side for next week will tell us much of what we want to know about the final calls to be made.

I expect that Marler, Youngs, Cole, Launchbury and Lawes will all return to the pack. The second row spot on the bench may be used to give Kruis or Attwood another game to make a statement rather than to give Parling gametime.

In the back row it will be interesting to see who gets the nod between Haskell and Wood at 6. With Billy V not involved yesterday I expect both him and Morgan will the be in the 23 - Morgan needs all the game time he can get. Therefore I don't expect there to be a flanker on the bench. We might well use one of these warm-ups to have a look at how 6.Wood 7.Haskell goes however.

In the backs Youngs will return the 23 but after a strong showing from Wigglesworth might not be guaranteed a starting spot. Ford will return at 10 I imagine. Plus Nowell and Brown in the back three.

The centres will be interesting though given that all three of Barritt, Joseph and Burrell need game time but many will be interested in seeing more of Slade and Burgess. Could we see both Slade and Burgess on the bench?

Huh? I agree with everything else you said, but wigglesworth was little more than fine yesterday and there's no way he's overtaking Youngs who was a star of the six nations.

I would imagine based on the way utility subs were used on Saturday that Easter will be played as the lock sub for at least one game.

Morgan did really well considering how long he's been out but his fitness was tailing off - not sure how they will know whether he can get to 60 minute fitness.

thomh wrote:

king_carlos wrote:I expect that the side for next week will tell us much of what we want to know about the final calls to be made.

I expect that Marler, Youngs, Cole, Launchbury and Lawes will all return to the pack. The second row spot on the bench may be used to give Kruis or Attwood another game to make a statement rather than to give Parling gametime.

In the back row it will be interesting to see who gets the nod between Haskell and Wood at 6. With Billy V not involved yesterday I expect both him and Morgan will the be in the 23 - Morgan needs all the game time he can get. Therefore I don't expect there to be a flanker on the bench. We might well use one of these warm-ups to have a look at how 6.Wood 7.Haskell goes however.

In the backs Youngs will return the 23 but after a strong showing from Wigglesworth might not be guaranteed a starting spot. Ford will return at 10 I imagine. Plus Nowell and Brown in the back three.

The centres will be interesting though given that all three of Barritt, Joseph and Burrell need game time but many will be interested in seeing more of Slade and Burgess. Could we see both Slade and Burgess on the bench?

Huh? I agree with everything else you said, but wigglesworth was little more than fine yesterday and there's no way he's overtaking Youngs who was a star of the six nations.

I felt Wigglesworth a fair bit better than fine. He isn't flashy but his kicking was very good and his distribution allowed the use of the three different first recievers to operate well. That was done with a pack which was struggling as well.

I was thinking more that he could be given another game starting alongside Ford to see how they operate together rather than him definitely replacing Youngs as starter for the world cup. Ben will get a game at 9 whether this coming weekend against France or in a few weeks against Ireland. I just feel that giving Wigglesworth another chance behind a full strength pack with Ford next to him could be interesting.

Ok that makes sense, but I personally just think Youngs brings a degree of class that Wigglesworth doesn't. I can't see anyone other than Youngs starting the World Cup, so I'd rather he had the time on the pitch with Ford and the forwards to get back up to speed. Wigglesworth v Care for the bench may be decided horses for courses.

I'd agree that Youngs at his best is a fair class above Wigglesworth - as is Care. However both have struggled for consistency for club and country at periods throughout their career. Both also have a tendency to kick too long when under pressure.

Yesterday I think Wigglesworth showed that he can be a very valuable alternative to help control a game given his decision making and box kicking. His distribution has been inconsistent at times but so has Youngs and Care's. Along with most scrum halves in world rugby in fact!

Re Scrum half's for England. Ben Youngs will be the starting scrum half in the first game.
It about the second choice. Wigglesworth yesterday showed he should be the second scrum half/on the bench. But lest be honest Youngs can blow hot and cold in most game's.
So i don't think he is garanteed to be first choice. But he is for now.

I do think that Danny Cippriani should be given a second chance along with Callum Clark. Unlucky to get the yellow card in my opinion.

Billy Twelvetrees should be dropped from the squad. He is not up to international rugby at all.

Lcd i do think he needs more game time to be honest( club games) that is. I think this world cup is a bit too early for him.

You'd imagine he'd give his first choice pack a run against France, especially after the mauling they took in the second half against France.

So that's: Marler, Youngs, Cole, Launchbury, Lawes, Haskell/Wood, Robshaw, Vunipola. Not sure who the 6 will be, Haskell looked more impressive when coming on, and even if Wood is first choice, Lancaster may hold him back.

For the bench, you imagine Jamie George would get a run, and then Corbisiero and Wilson may be fresher and take the bench spots again. I think Easter may come in as second row cover, and then Clark could be given another run as a back row sub, or whoever doesn't make it out of Haskell and Wood. I didn't think much of Clark yesterday, but his Premiership form and performances in training might get him another shot.

In the backline, I would expect Youngs, Ford, Joseph, Nowell and Brown to come in, with Barritt and Burrell fighting it out for the 12 spot and whoever misses out getting the 23 shirt. In terms of half-backs, I'd give Care another run from the bench to see if he can nail the sub position and Cipriani one last go to come on at 10.

I think Farrell and Wigglesworth were their usual uninspiring selves and showed no creativity whatsoever. Why wasn't Cipriani given 25+ minutes at F/H? Yet again we are back to Farrell never being taken off, that's the reason why Ford hasn't got as many caps/experience as he should have by now.

Pheonix

Realistically Cipriani will only go to the World Cup as cover for both 10 and 15, so it made sense to see how he got on at full back. Just a shame that any set-piece platform deserted us when he came on, so he didn't have a chance to do much.

robbo277 wrote:You'd imagine he'd give his first choice pack a run against France, especially after the mauling they took in the second half against France.

So that's: Marler, Youngs, Cole, Launchbury, Lawes, Haskell/Wood, Robshaw, Vunipola. Not sure who the 6 will be, Haskell looked more impressive when coming on, and even if Wood is first choice, Lancaster may hold him back.

For the bench, you imagine Jamie George would get a run, and then Corbisiero and Wilson may be fresher and take the bench spots again. I think Easter may come in as second row cover, and then Clark could be given another run as a back row sub, or whoever doesn't make it out of Haskell and Wood. I didn't think much of Clark yesterday, but his Premiership form and performances in training might get him another shot.

In the backline, I would expect Youngs, Ford, Joseph, Nowell and Brown to come in, with Barritt and Burrell fighting it out for the 12 spot and whoever misses out getting the 23 shirt. In terms of half-backs, I'd give Care another run from the bench to see if he can nail the sub position and Cipriani one last go to come on at 10.

I could see Wilson starting over Cole for the France game given he was injured for much of the second half of the season so needs game time. Either way I would expect him and Cole to each start one of the remaining two games in whatever order. Cole will be starter come the world cup though.

As for the bench I wouldn't be surprised if Slade is given the 22 shirt after his performance yesterday. I could also see Burgess getting another chance from the bench although Bomber may decide it's more important to give both Barritt and Burrell game time.

We saw England with three creative players, and whilst the first half pack was delivering ball we saw back play of the highest calibre from England.

I worry about moving to a side with Brown at FB, Joseph at OC and one of Barritt or Burrell at IC. Every side playing England will know that if you shut down Ford you shut down the English backline, even given the talent May, Watson, Nowell and Joseph have.

LCD will be back, but this WC is too soon for him. Going forward England need to develop another hooking option to make sure there is good competition for the place, as Hartley's international career is presumably over. Perhaps Haywood.

More depth at TH will eventually be supplied by Hill and Sinkler. The Brookes injury shows that England are currently a bit vulnerable in this position.