What a curious time to be pulling on a white shirt. There are so many opinions being voiced on England’s team, Stuart Lancaster must feel like someone trying to crack a safe with a roomful of people shouting different numbers at him.
For this weekend’s contest versus Australia, England will start Farrell, Barritt and Joseph for the very first time. Which means, since the players trudged off the Telstra turf in 2003, the number of different combinations in the England midfield approaches a staggering half century.
It is an area of particular conjecture but it is not alone. Discussion on the back row has also filled clubhouses over the last few weeks and the decision over who is England’s best hooker is still up for debate.
Which makes me think the following could be true: bizarre though it is, in those much argued positions, representing your country does you less favours than being left out. Never has there been a seemingly better time to not play for England.
Let’s look at the players who have benefitted.
Dylan Hartley
After his semi-final headbutt, Hartley’s ban meant that his Rugby World Cup was in jeopardy. He is now free to play but for Lancaster to include him there would have to be an injury. But oh, how people are calling for his service. Apparently, he is the answer to all of England’s lineout woes and his natural leadership qualities would have steered the boat clear of that Wales wreckage. I can’t see Hartley agreeing to throw to two at such a moment.
Manu Tuilagi
Explosive, aggressive, difficult to contain; words easily attributed to Manu Tuilagi by both the rugby press and the police. But is there a man more important to Stuart Lancaster’s England? Things have not been the same since his groin strain, either on or off the pitch. He has England fans yearning like a young Verona teenager under a balcony. How different would things be had he been available?
Thomas Waldrom
With Billy Vunipola limping out of the competition, Nick Easter has been drafted in. I don’t have too much problem with this as I feel he brings a very good offloading game from which England could benefit. However, many people south west of the Stoop feel Thomas Waldrom should have been in with a shout. His heroic efforts for the Exeter Chiefs went unrewarded last year and not being considered for any international duty during the Six Nations only appeared to bring out the best in him.
Steffon Armitage
A back row containing Armitage would have a fair amount of plus points (and admirers). Steffon, exiled because of the made up rule of not picking your players from overseas clubs, is in the same breakdown bracket as Warburton, Tipuric, Hooper and Pocock; he makes more turnovers than Greggs. It seems he will never be picked by Stuart Lancaster, yet his stock remains sky high.
Luther Burrell
Dropped after one bad game against France (and no one playing that night covered themselves in glory), Burrell returned to Northampton and watched the centre debacle grow. He put in a storming performance for Northampton as Saints beat Saracens at the Allianz last Saturday (17-36) and then looked on as England lost to a side they’d beaten back in January when he was playing (in Cardiff btw). Should he have been in this England side instead of Burgess? A growing number of people (and Irish centres) feel he should.
Brad Barritt
The South African born centre is ‘exponent extraordinaire’ of improving your worth while not playing for your country. Seemingly undroppable for RWC2015, he didn’t play a minute of England’s Six Nations campaign (the one where they came within moments of winning the competition and where they put 50+ points on the team going so well in pool D). Yet Lancaster couldn’t put him back in the side fast enough. And when JJ went down, it was Brad who switched positions. By my reckoning, he’s never started 13 for his national side; never was good enough for England last week.
Jonathan Joseph
His absence in the game against Wales meant England had no attacking conduit in the midfield and as such, he has been jettisoned back in tout de suite. Considering initial recovery reports had him out til the quarters, two weeks from now, this seems a little quick. Not playing last weekend has made him top of Lancaster’s wish list.
Not only but also
The amount of people moaning at the TV last Saturday as Cipriani sat so close to an international playing surface was audible. And what of Henry Slade? Is he that important as a water boy that he can’t be released to actually play some rugby? What about Danny Care? Even George Ford’s mediocre showing against Fiji had greater attraction post Wales. Say what you will to counter, these players not playing for their country seem to be going up in people’s estimations.
Let’s hope Saturday’s performance against the Wallabies puts all this nonsense to bed. This is possibly one of the most ridiculous articles I’ve ever written. Sadly, I feel, it may also be true.
By Sam Roberts (@samrobertsrugby)
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
As the enormity of the weekend’s results sinks in, so to do the last vestiges of passion and interest in this world cup dissipate. Some may say this is an overreaction, but it is the culmination of three years of mediocrity spun as progress. England have won nothing under Lancaster and I see no prospect of change, with management who fail to recognise their mistakes and limitations.
What’s worse is that this frustrating era was preceded by 8 years of mediocrity and outright failure. In the 24 years I have been watching rugby and supporting England, I would never have dreamed that a team with the resources England has on offer would have one 6n championship in 11 years. And yet nobody seems to care? Very little outrage from most fans (on this site at least), the RFU seem content to let things drift, extending the contracts of coaches who have promised much but delivered nothing of consequence.
If England win on Saturday (a big “if” IMO), then the House of Lancaster will limp on. If we lose, we will be a laughing stock. How did we get to this. It’s our home World cup and my thoughts are already drifting to what team we might pick for the 6n, one full of promise and enterprise. It should not be like this. I should be looking forward to Saturday, but I’m not.
A new team, under new management (I hope) so that they can fulfil their potential:
1) Auterac
2) George
3) Brookes – This is a young and mobile front row, who also very strong in the set piece. Marler and Cole have disappointed.
4) Launchbury
5) Itoje
6) Burgess – great ball carrier, can still deploy him in the centre channels, big match player (Ewers to be his back up in the EPS)
7) Kvesic – or ano up and coming openside, if there is one from the recent u21 alumni, but we need to develop a more balanced back row.
8) Morgan or Billy
9) Youngs
10) Ford
11) May
12) Slade
13) Joseph or Manu
14) Watson
15) Brown
16) Youngs – a great impact player, but should not come off the bench in close games.
17) Mako
18) Cole
19) Attwood
20) Billy or Morgan
21) Simpson or D Robson – 2 lightening quick 9s who could tear apart tiring defences
22) Farrell or Cipriani (depending on the 23)
23) Daly or Wade – Pace, pace, pace. People will question Wade’s defence. That is not the problem, it’s his concentration. Therefore I have no qualms about deploying him for 15 – 20 minutes against tiring defences. Daly would be needed if Farrell is picked, as he covers so many positions, and is good cover for Joseph.
Players never to be selected again – Barritt, Parling, Haskell, Barritt, Wood, Robshaw, Care, Wigglesworth, Barritt, Burrell, 12t, Goode and did I mention Barritt? Though they may at times have produced some good performances, when you examine their contribution over the long term they have come up short, and we must therefore deduce that they always, ultimately will.
Agree with much of this to be fair, except the flankers. Kvesic is nowhere near good enough to play for England, I don’t care if he is a fetcher. Robshaw is the best 7 we have playing in England, whether we like it or not. There are good young flankers around, but the only one I’d consider a fetcher is Fraser and injuries are stopping him progressing unfortunately.
Nathan Hughes is one that will be involved from next summer tour onwards; he walks into the 8 shirt for me.
Don’t have much time for Attwood, and I’m still not sold on Ford either. Oh and why has Marler been dropped? Simply a big Auterac fan or is he in the shun category? Personally I’m a huge fan of his.
In terms is dismissing players; Parling, Wood, Robshaw or Burrell wouldn’t be on my list. None should necessarily be first choice, but not deserving of complete shunning either.
To put together a squad for 12 months from now, I’d see something like this:
1.Marler 2.George 3.Cole 4.Launchbury 5.Itoje 6.Wood 7.Robshaw 8.Hughes 9.Youngs 10. Farrell 12.Slade 13.Tuilagi 14.Watson 15.Brown
16.Cowan-Dickie 17.Vunipola 18.Brookes 19.Lawes 20.Vunipola 21.Robson 22.JJ 23.Nowell
Slade can cover 10 so no need for cover there. JJ and Nowell give us great bench options.
Flankers are the biggest worry for me. Who is there? Kvesic, just no. Burgess I have no idea where he’ll play so I can’t bring myself to include him. Wallace,Wray,Jones,Clifford all look ok without looking like they should be thrown in at test level.
Marler has never been the best scrummager, got better and has now gone backwards. Never say never, but Auturac just looks too good to ignore.
I don’t get the hate for Kvesic. I thought he had a good season in a stuggling side, and sometimes you need to identify talent. Maybe Kvesic isn’t the answer, so then maybe have a look at the successful u21 teams. Fraser is a good shout if he can stay fit. I just think we need to be more strategic. The breakdown has been an issue since Back retired. England have played a number of 6s in the position since; Worsley, Moody, Haskell etc. Whose to say with some top notch coaching Kvesic or ANO could perform better than they do at club level. I just want an end to square pegs in round holes.
Attwood has always looked good coming off the bench, and I just like the idea of having huge (and skillful) monsters comeing off the bench agianst tiring sides, but happy to consider others as he’s not a particular favourite or anything.
Re Parling, Wood, Robshaw or Burrell, ok never say never, but they are unlikely to be a) around or at their peak in 4 years and; b) top class internationals. They have their moments, and yes if there are injuries, as per the Easter recall, maybe they could do a job, but lets
‘s not waste another 4 years. We need to be a bit more fwd looking.
Fraser always looked great, I’m a huge fan of his. Can’t say I know enough about any U21 player but maybe there is a fetcher in there? Not sure though. If you look at the build of a Pocock or a Warburton, Kvesic is giving away serious amounts of kg to them; I just don’t think he’d be able to compete. I’d love to be proven wrong.
Wood I actually really like, I think he is a top 6. Put him with a fetcher and he could be extremely valuable.
I think in England, we have struggled to produce good quality 7s, and good creative centres. We produce loads of really good 6s, lots of decent ball carrying centers. This has happened for too long to be a short term one off. A decade of not producing them is a fundamental problem which is why I pull back on some of the hate you show SL.
In England, at youth level even, we value size over brains. The best 7s are brilliant because they pick their time, they know when they should go for a steal and when they should hold off, that is the way to get turnovers. But if a 7 at the age of 15 is told to eat and gym before he is told to study the breakdown and get his timing right – we end up in this situation. The exact same logic can be applied to a creative center. Don’t spend time passing, running and learning how to pull defences around and put people in holes – get in the gym, get bigger.
It’s a fundamental problem that has led to English failure in the the 7 and 12 positions for the past decade. Arguably, since the professionalism of the sport.
Wood looked a good prospect a few years ago, never managed to maintain those heights, and for me just doesn’t carry well enough. I would rather have Robshaw at 6 tbh or Slater, but feel with a season under his belt, Burgess will just get better.
You say that england historically don’t produce 7s – the irony being that when Hill, Back and Lol were first picked as a backrow comination they were all considered 7s!!
For me the RFU has to be more proactive. If the clubs want the RFU to stick to the no overseas rule, then they need to be mindful of making sure talent is being developed in all areas. Try Kvesic/ Fraser or ANO, and if they really are not up to scratch, then either finance a deal to bring Armitage to the AP, and/ or mandate/ enforce the clubs to give game time to up and coming talent from the acadamies or age grade England set ups. I refuse to believe that with our playing base we have no proper fetchers in the system. I think more likely the problem is that true fetchers take time to deveop, so easier to bring in a Loew or a Salvi, or just play a hybrid attritional player in the 7 role, like Robshaw, Wood or Clarke.
I’m not as convinced that they are there. As I mention above. age 15/16, these English talents are thrown into the gym, not spending time out on the pitch learning about the breakdown and the timing of when you should go for the ball. Age 17/18 they look at the first team players and see they are all massive, and this perpetuates the issue. Without top quality coaches around them at that point, it’s very hard for them to develop those fetcher qualities.
Wood or Robshaw at 6 sounds good to me. I just think Wood offers more line out presence and no less in other areas. Slater I forgot about! Maybe him with Launchbury at lock with Itoje at 6! Although not sure who out of these lot can run a line out.
Steffon Armitage would still be out in the cold then?
I tell you what, I’d feel a lot more confident for Saturday if we had him as one of the guys dealing with Pocock and Hooper…
Of course he would be. And of course he would be extremely useful against those two.
But if he isn’t worth jeopardising the future of English rugby in this country, there isn’t one player that is.
My guess is that Armitage will quietly go about excelling for another couple of years at Toulon, picking up team silverware and personal awards/plaudits. At the exact moment that he starts to deteriorate in form, fitness, general ability, suddenly the RFU will conjure up a deal to bring him into a Premiership club. He comes in to that time, continues to dip in form and then gets selected for England. Plays poorly in two games then gets dropped, with Stuart Lancaster (inexplicably still head coach even in 2018), giving meaningless platitudes but with a smug, “told-you-so” expression etched on his face.
Please don’t forget that Armitage had his chance to come back to England, demonstrate that he could still play his game behind a pack that wasn’t as monstrous as the Toulon 8 and get into the England side
Instead he chose to renew his contract in France when he fully knew it would rule him out of any kind of England contention.
I don’t give a toss how good he is (and I question how effective he’d be at international level playing with a pack under pressure and going backwards). He had his chance and he decided against taking it. He chose the money instead. As far as I’m concerned Toulon can keep him
PS – and even if SL had picked him, he’d have dropped him when he got arrested for assault
I’m not convinced by Auterac so would keep Marler. Also your backline is too lightweight
The U20s fetcher you are looking for is called Lewis Ludlam and he was fantastic in the recent U20WC and northampton need to start giving him some first team experience because he is a serious future contender for england. Kvesic should never play for England he’s not good enough
otherwise its a very good team
What concerns do you have over Auterac – he just seems to be immense every time I see him play?
Saints need to be given a push then. The no overseas rule benefits the AP clubs and they need to make sure they helpEngland in return
It will be good to see Barritt play in usual role at number 12,before you unleash your vitriol rather than be shunted out to play in a totally unfamiliar position
Seen him at 12 plenty of times, he is completely useless in attack then too…
Is this you presenting your CV for the job, if so you get my vote. Harsh on Burrell perhaps & no.1 I haven’t even heard of but full of attacking flair, isn’t that what we were supposed to be bringing to this RWC only to chicken out when it mattered.
Am at the England game too plus the Samoa v Scotland one, dreading the possible (probable)banter from the Jocks as much as saturday
The issue is that players picked are judged on their international form, while players not picked are judged on club form. It’s not a fair comparison by nature.
Lancaster hasn’t got every decision right, but beat Australia and we qualify, it’s in our hands and we can’t ask for too much more than that.
I’d have liked to see Daly get Slades shot against France, and then later Slade get to play 13 against Wales. But there’s nothing to say that we’d be any better off for those decisions. Or anyone else’s.
I agre with much of what Benjit says. I can’t believe that the RFU have tolerated Lanacaster’s continual failures and excuses for so long.
I can only think that they’re embarrassed
Until England remember that international rugby (well actually international SPORT) is always about picking the form and best players England will always underachieve (and based on amount of pro players and resources and the success of the U20s since 2008 it is underachieving). By omitting Armitage they have also tried, and failed, to re-write the logic of back row play.
And Lancaster’s biggest problem has always been his use of the bench. Already decided pre game (remember subbing Care in Paris in 2014) and too cautious. Imagine a bench last weekend involving Abendanon, Cipriani and Care instead of Goode, Ford (both either starts or not in 22) and Wigglesworth.
England Rugby cares more about image (hence why Hartley and Tuilagi were both omitted unnecessarily – New Zealand have similar problems but seem to deal with them and just get on with it), pleasing sponsors and protecting the Premiership than winning 6N and World Cup titles. Any intelligent fan would have realised that four years ago… England has a club like atmosphere, which breeds irrational beliefs from the players themselves such as Wood and Brown et al believing Armitage & co don’tt deserve to be involved, but they need to go back to basics. What has the agreement between the RFU and Premiership achieved since 2008? No European Cup titles and just one 6N title. Compare that to Ireland and Wales (regional issues aside) and it’s truly embarrassing but they only have themselves to blame..
Seeing most of their best players overseas has killed the club game in Wales so I fully support not including players outside of the prem.
You’re absolutely right about picking form, underachieving and use of the bench.
Would probably disagree about the tuilagi and Hartley incidents but that’s open to opinion
“This is possibly one of the most ridiculous articles I’ve ever written. Sadly, I feel, it may also be true.”
Well I thought it was hilarious. And yes, very true indeed.
Loved the “makes more turnovers than Greggs” line… :)
If memory serves correctly Barritt had a spell at 13 when Manu was injured in 2013. What the hell happened to that young promising 12 he played outside (36) who played an absolute blinder against Scotland and slowly slides into mediocrity.
But agree with the point, he’s suddenly perceived as a much better player when not playing for England!
Short term however there is always hope, the losing finalists in the last to RWCs have had player led phoenix from the ashes campaigns and been in a worse state than we are today.
But long term to become more than some difficult to beat side that occasionally pulls off a good win against a higher ranked team …. well, no evidence we are getting there.
My big gripe with Lancaster (and RFU) is he’s just not a good enough coach for England, not experienced enough, won nothing, not learnt fast enough. If you ranked all the coaches in world rugby, domestic or international where does he come? Top 10? Not a chance, Top 20? I doubt it. Top 50? Maybe but questionable. If you want to be the top team in the world start by seeking out the very best coach(es) in the world.
A top team needs a top coach, you can’t learn coaching in the international stage, you have to learn your trade at elite club level where you coach 52 weeks a year. His fundamental failing is to not recognise and appreciate the skills and experience he does not possess and recruit guys who do have then. Yes there was an attempt to get Smith (the right guy), and that should have been a very simple conversation “you do the on field, I’ll give you control over game plan and selection, I’ll take care of the off field and all the politics and media so you can do your job, what will it take to get you to say yes?”
I suspect Lancaster bored him with questions on exactly how much the all blacks like to play for the shirt and presented his pyramid for success ….. and Smith is sitting there thinking “WTF, I wan’t to make you better at passing the ball and have some creative backs moves”.
Change is needed …. but for tomorrow there is still hope, alcohol and some nice CAT A tickets!
On the Armitage point …. I know it’s been done to death
I agree with the rule for not picking overseas players. Given Armitage moved before this rule was set (when he didn’t think he had any international future) we should have found some middle ground.
We’ll pick you and give you a go …. on the condition that you promise to come back to play in England when your (first) contract is up, if you have made the grade and are still in the EPS
This would have been a fair compromise, sadly the boat has sailed
Agree with you. Except; he has since signed a contract after the rule was brought in. He made his choice.
However, the RFU could have worked harder to get him.
Yes agree, with signing of the contract extension closed the door. But he could have brought him in on the tour to SA prior to the contract being extended and given him a chance.
We never looked for a way to actually solve the problem, which was stupid.
Pick the best players. Bring on young players, if you are good enough you are old enough. Have a clear plan of how your team should play. Have leaders in key positions who are rock solid in the crucial points of the game. The result is a team as in 2003 knows it can win and deal with any situation within a match and react having analysed all the options. Sadly none of these apply to the current team. Here is hoping SL’s class of 2015 proves me to be completely wrong.
Even these comments highlight the problem with fans (not necessarily only England fans) which the article highlights. In sport (not only rugby) it’s easy to see a problem and to suggest an idea which we THINK would solve the problem. Midfield not creative enough? Bring Slade in! Midfield not got enough ballast going forward? Tuilagi! Linouts are misfunctioning? Hartley! Backrow not mobile enough? Just play a 7! (regardless of whether they are international quality or not); and the list goes on.
The fact is, we don’t know whether any of these “solutions” would have worked or whether they would have served to create a further problem. Who knows, if Robshaw and Barritt weren’t in the team we might end up having an abnormally high number of missed tackles and then there’d be an equally strong clamour to have them back in the team. I remember the vitriol which Mike Brown has having a couple of years ago, or the times that T. Youngs, Wood, Care, Ford, now Joseph, have been heralded as the player to make the difference for England.
Sports fans by default believe that our own personal methods are better than anyone else (including the coaches), and as a result prefer the one or two players who we would want to be in the team to those who actually are. This is why the players who aren’t in the team are given far better publicity as those in the team: it’s very easy to see those who aren’t playing as the “saviours” to England’s problems when we haven’t got a clue whether they actually would be or not. I mean, they could end up turning it around, but how likely is that? And is it worth basing our criticism on the chance that our favourite player might turn it around?
This doesn’t mean that we can’t criticise the coaching staff or players but I look at some of the comments here and it’s tiresome just how critical some of the “fans” here are. Rather than putting up reasoned arguments as to why certain players really aren’t playing well and should be dropped, it just feels like people have the idea that:
-since some players are out of form/not as good as the fans would like them to be, they need to be cast out into the international wilderness, never to be selected again
-We then select the next 21 year old who we hope will become an international superstar.
-When (If?) they proceed to fail: a) criticise management and b) select next 21 year old.
-Repeat process until international superstar is created.
-Despite having many years of not even competing for the 6N title whilst many players are tried and discarded, once one world class player is produced proceed to consider system a success after one 2nd place in the 6N…….. because that’s what will happen if we continually decide to keep trusting in potential for the sake of it rather than form.
There seems to be this expectation that all the players should consistently be world-class in every match and any failure means that they need to be dropped. Is that really the best system? I’m not saying to be satisfied with mediocrity but, rather, just to think logically and imagine what would happen if we decided to cast a player aside once they’ve failed once or twice – and then proceed never to select them again because they’ve “had their chance”…
Like it or not, I think we can all agree that the management are doing what they feel is the best way forwards for England. I don’t think that’s the best way forwards at all and do not understand why Slade, Care or George isn’t playing on Saturday or why Burgess isn’t a flanker or why Daly, Itoje, or Simpson weren’t given a proper chance. But, do I really think that, because of a couple of recent poor performances, the entire past four years have been a failure and most of the players who have been a foundation of that time need to be dropped? Does any fan genuinely think that the alternative will definitely be an improvement?
The worst thing: we’re not even out of this world cup, and we’re already having this discussion. Seems like some “fans” were just waiting for an opportunity to criticise England and a couple of tiny faults (it wasn’t a bad performance at all, the only real weaknesses against Wales were discipline and the centres…) have led to the knives being out. Is this really warranted? Are your criticisms genuinely because you are sure that a certain alternative will be an improvement or is it just criticism for the sake of criticism?
Barritt didn’t play in any 6N games and you very nearly won it! Burrell and JJ were excellent. Burrell didn’t even make the WC squad, in favour of a more defence oriented approach which now leaves you at risk of exiting your own WC. Is that not evidence enough?
I think the England “fans” have every reason to be critical.
Mike, Lots of common sense, pragmatism and level-headedness in your comments.
I don’t like it.
Matt, you’ve hit two nails on their respective heads.
First one is how some players seem to actually get worse when they play for England. 36 is one case in point. Also Tait and Ford are/were two exciting, creative players, who seem to have their natural instincts shut down by the England coaching experience. I would put Cipriani in that list, but I think he’s less willing to be tamed and consequently he’s dropped – says it all really.
Second is, Lancaster could be an excellent manager. The media love him, he does seem to strike a chord with players on the whole behaviour and team spirit stuff. But his best tactical rugby decisions have only ever come about through circumstance, for example his first choice being injured. There’s a role for him, but it’s basically what Rob Andrew might be doing already, (does he actually do anything??), rather than actually coaching the team.
Armitage moving to Bath was also linked to SL providing assurances of a place in the squad. Clearly SL does not rate the former European rugby player of the year. Many do mind.
lancaster has made continual mistakes and he continues in the same vein ,this team is perfect for the aussies
I was with Mike until the “couple of bad performances ” line,then we parted company. There have been many poor performances under Stuey Mike and the big bugbear is the inability to reproduce the good ones on a consistent basis.
Also,I don’t think that anyone hear is suggesting that they have the magic formula for success. What we all have are opinions,which will ultimately remain conjecture as non of us are in a position to influence things directly.
In my opinion England had a brief hiatus under Lancaster,plateaued and are now regressing. Matt has written a very clever article. Innocence by non association being the basic premise.
It’s sad and infuriating to read comments by passionate,intelligent,commited England supporters who know that the W Cup has been nothing more than a giant money making (£20 million in gate receipts for one game at HQ) and marketing campaign with a bit of sub standard rugby thrown in to try and mollify the peasants.The RFU and England coaching staff should hang their heads in shame.
Even a win tonight is double edged as it will enable Bungle to carry on Canute style,convinced that he is the right man for the job and that the media and fans are just out to get him.
Heart: the boys,Head: Aus by 10-15.
** for Matt read Sam. Sorry,late night ,beer involved! Managed to not punch a copper or toss a dwarf though (Toss a dwarf????? WTF)
perfect for england to get beat,i am 10 years old,i watched lancaster bring on baritt in the 6N against france in the last 5 mins and they duly ran straight round him to steal the match,and the 6N.can someone explain why he is bought back after being dropped ages ago,he brings nothing to the table and never has,also why start with the smallest hooker in english history and then bring on a big fat slow one just when the ozzies want a big fat one ,,,,,surely youd start with webber and bring on youngs when play breaks up,,,or better still just play HARTLEY its easy not rocket science, but if we cant get england beat with continual poor subs or poor gameplans and poor team selection lets just ban all our best players ,,,,lancaster is a fool hes a proven fool and he has selected a team that will embaress the whole country,,,i guarantee if we have 3 good players tonight lancaster will sub them all with 5 mins to play,,,,,,,idiot
When a 10 year old has better judgement than the manger in charge, you know you’re in trouble.
Very good post btw.
Hi Reuben. Wise words from such a young fellow. you obviously care about English rugby very deeply. Grown ups,as I am sure you know,don’t always do the obvious or the best thing.
One day ,hopefully not too long from now, we will be able to say that this was just a bad period in England’s journey to become the best team in the world ,just like 2003,which you won,t be able to remember . I’m sure you know all about it though as you are such a big England fan.
I hope you enjoy tonights game and that we can all celebrate a win for the Boys.
Keep posting your thoughts.
“Rugby is a noble game
played by fifteen hulking brutes
But spare a thought for the poor soul
Who has to clean their boots!”
Shocking result. I couldn’t agree more with a lot of the comments made. A disgrace. Where was the passion (no doubt one of the pathetic Twickenham buzz words)?
What to do?
Bring inSteffon Armitage which I have stated consistently on here. You don’t run scared of rules; you just pick a winning team (it’s that simple) as Clive Woodward wrote in a newspaper column 3-4 months ago (Yes it was The Mail or Times) Various nay-Sayers on this site said no you can’t do that; it affects the club game. Clive Woodward’s answer was rubbish! You OBVIOUSLY pick the best 15 including Armitage (his words not mine)!!!!!!!
Not playing Cipriani was literally rugby insanity!
Not playing Tuilagi probably was too! Even despite an arrest. You can’t deny your team/squad 4 of its best attacking players and not expect there to be problems! That’s 25% of your first choice 15! The players I list below should all have been in it rather than excluded for dubious quasi moralistic reasons.
The missing 25%
1. Tuilagi
2. Armitage (voted best player in French league 2015)
3. Cipriani
4. Previous hooker whose name I forget
Checks said up yours to the rules and chose his European based players! Look where that got him. A World Cup Quarter Final!
Furthermore having discovered Slade he should have been played more!
Players and management to drop:
Lancaster, Rowntree, Farrell Senior, Robshaw, Barrit, Cole and Marler
Finally England need a number 7 (their first since 2003 funnily enough) The experiment with Robshaw is a failure both as captain and Flanker. Woods would make a good captain (it almost happened once before) and for heaven’s sake bring in Wade which I’ve also been saying for six months.