38 thoughts on “Lancaster trims England squad for Australia match”

1. Poor selection. Poor mgmt.

2. Barritt FFS.

   Lose this SL and you deserve everything that comes your way. Even if we scrape a win this series has been an abject failure of management and selection.

3. I think lancaster maybe out of his depth now although I also don’t think England have the wow factor in some key positions and have some serious thinking to do in next 12months.when u have a team with some good players but not great then you need an experienced coach with a bit of imagination to get best out of them.maybe a nick màllet or the likes.I do however wish him good luck as a nice guy.

4. I failed to understand why Barritt is still 13. Eastmond has been sent back, Twevletree is not crap at defence, nor is Farrell, just that he needs to stop going high.

   I wished Kitchener had been included, & Jack Nowell in place for Yarde. Because Nowell can cover wing and Fullback while Yarde just wing.

5. Well it’s pretty underwhelming , fingers crossed we at least start with 36.

   I just can’t see the logic behind not giving Burrell another cap (who was excellent in the 6N) and handing Barritt another chance …. who we know doesn’t cut it in attack at this level.

   For all the talk of Eastmond’s size we’ve seem him keep SBW quiet and he hardly got run over by the Boks either, so why we aren’t giving a proven club combination a go I have no idea.

   If we can’t put away Aus, playing their 15th (I think) international at the end of a long season along with all the trials and tribulations then we really are in trouble …..

   …. let’s have a scrum for 80 mins, that (and the lineout) have been the only team positives of the autumn.

6. to be quite honest I’m getting a little tired of some of the criticism levelled at lancaster here. of course barrits in; england need to beat australia, i don’t care about the performance, we need to beat them, full stop. where aus have an advantage is their backline, barrit can negate that. why throw burrell in when we know who the best defensive 12/13 is? if we put burrell in and we lost and their centres ran wild then lancaster would deserve far more stick, in my opinion, than if we lost with barrit.

   1. Did you miss the fact that we shipped 6 tries against NZ & SA? Barritt’s defensive prowess is grossly overstated. Our defence looked ok in the 6n, bar the last 10 minutes of the France match when Barritt’s superhuman defence did nothing to prevent defeat.

      Even if Barritt offered a modicum of attacking ability then I might buy the defence argument. Frankly he is more moribund than Tindell, Noon or Hipkiss. As I stated before we’d be better off with Robshaw in the 13 shirts; makes more tackles, yards and passes than Boreitt ever will.

      1. The strike rates of Noon and Tindall are roughly 2.5 and 2 times better than that of Barritt, that tells us everything we need to know about his attacking capabilities!!!

   2. Totally agree with you here. We need to defend that centre position and Barritt is the best man available to do it. Burrell’s defence is not great, Joseph is not physical enough at this level, and Tuilagi is injured. Australia have two big centres, and they will try and use them. I would be really worried if we had 12T and Joseph (for instance) in the centre berths. There would be carnage, and we would be shipping tries all over the park. At least with Barritt in there we should be able to limit it somewhat.
      At the moment without Tuilagi in the line, we don’t have an attacking centre that fits in with the way SL wants England to play. Some of us may not like that, but that’s the way it s. Burrell could possibly do the job, but he’s been injured and hasn’t played in any of the AI’s so SL is sticking wiht what he’s got, and it makes sense. We all know he doesn’t change things too much once a series or tournament has started.
      Barritt has done everything SL has asked him to do, and he’s keeping his place on merit.

      1. Kuridrani is injured though and any replacement is not going to be in the same league size-wise

         As for Burrell, I don’t remember his defence being bad at all – seemed to cope perfectly well with the Irish and Welsh centres in the 6 nations.

         If he can cope with D’Arcy, O’Driscoll, Roberts and Davies then he can cope with Toomua (6ft and 14 stone) and Beale (6ft and 14 stone) / Ashley-Cooper (6ft 1 and 15 stone 6) / whoever else they choose

         Barritt is certainly not keeping the place on merit – he’s keeping it on being the only centre who vaguely fits SL’s mindset

         This does not make sense. This is the same thinking that saw Borthwick and Tindall retained for far too long. The same thinking that saw Banahan being given England caps

         As people have pointed out if we play Barritt, we may as well play a flanker. I’ll bet Tom Wood is quicker than Barritt and his defence is better. Will pass the ball as much as Barritt as well

7. Ok – here’s one for all of you critics of SL. How many of our squad would make an AI first 15. Not one in my opinion. How about a second 15. One possibly. 3rd 15? The point I make is that I think that SL is doing alright with what he has to work with. He isn’t perfect, but he’s not bad, as has been suggested above. Just saying!

   1. Isn’t that kind of an indictment of Lancaster, Staggy? Just about everyone in this squad got their first cap under Lancaster. If not one of them could make a 1st or 2nd XV for the AIs, either from lack of talent/form, poor selection or poor game planning, doesn’t Lancaster have to shoulder some of that blame?

      1. Mcshane. Who do you think of English qualified players should be in then?

         Taking the backline as an example, we have Brown at 15 who is playing better for England than quins. SL has brought May in and he looks like a strike runner that we haven’t had for years. Other wing – who has put their hands up. Watson could be good. Tuilagi is injured. Who at inside centre? He has brought in Ford at FH and probably managed him better than Barkley was who was our last young tyro. Care was looking world class but had gone off the boil at club level. Just not sure that we have the top players but we are still playing as a top team and we are disappointed when we don’t beat the top two. That says a great deal. Alternatively we could be Wales with all the talent but unable to beat the SH teams.

         Am not saying SL is perfect but I think he is doing a pretty good job.

         1. “Alternatively we could be Wales with all the talent but unable to beat the SH teams” or, after Saturday, you could have both accolades – no talent and unable to beat SH teams… :-)

            1. To be serious though Staggy – why don’t England have the talent? The biggest playing base. The best league (snigger). The best resources for developing youngsters. Yet, as you say, no world beaters. Their best players are largely those who avoided the English system in their formative years – Hartley, Tuilagi, Vunipola, Corbs – even the awful Ashton was ok for a while and he too avoided English development .. and Farrel. Now Burgess.

               I would say I don’t buy that they don’t have the talent, it’s impossible to have so many playing it and not unearth gems – the system is primarily to blame but SL has to take some of the blame. Wade – he’s in my team and he’d be in the Welsh squad. We’d have had our Wade-like Jordan Williams in the squad if he hadn’t been injured. Cipriani – don’t like him but he’d be the 2nd choice Wales 10 for sure. Eastmond – he’d be in our squad. The players that SL are picking are not the ones who’d have the best chance of making other international teams squads. So I do feel he has to shoulder some of the blame.

               His focus and style is all about management with a capital M, not coaching. He’s like Woodward but without the world class players – all about systems, off field culture, discipline, culture, etc. but very little about how to actually play rugby. Gats gets a lot of stick but one thing he definitely is first and foremost is a rugby coach.

               SL is picking players by spreadsheet and analysis. Barrit is in because of his numbers in defence, tackling, yards, lack of mistakes, etc. What the analysis and spreadsheets don’t count well is, to use some management speak that SL would approve of, “opportunity cost”. You can show stats on the tackles Barrit made, the rucks he hit, the yards he made with ball in hand. It’s harder to show what the lack of a step, the lack of the right missed pass, the right attacking line or crazy flick would have achieved. So it doesn’t get counted. It’s why on stats Farrel probably outshines Ford, Yarde > May, etc.

               SL was wrong when he basically said you have to discount “flash”. You just have to understand what flash can bring and how to apply it. Coaching by spreadsheet doesn’t enable that.

               1. Why don’t we have the players? This is a whole new topic on its own! Partly the system, partly the cycle we are going through as we do have a good number of youngsters coming through. Is SL to blame for the dearth of world class players at present – I don’t think so. Has he overachieved with the team he has – probably. Is he the best coach out there – I don’t think so, but he’s decent.

                  You cite several examples of players who would be in the Welsh squad. Would any of them be starting? Didn’t think so. Gatland showed what he thought of Eastmond and Wade on the Lions tour, so I think that is rose tinted specs. To be fair to SL he has looked at both. I think that one of our problems, is too much strength in depth and therefore not enough time for players to grow at international level, which means he should be picking on talent not form! Let the debate continue!

                  1. Agree with the depth problem making it complicated. Gats (I keep giving Welsh examples I know, but that is what I know best) doesn’t have ~7 similar class centres. He has a couple of great ones (3 at best, some would argue for as little as 1.5) and then the drop to the rest. I agree this makes it easier for him than SL to pick his centres. A lot of Wales XV picks itself – but he does get players who don’t have very good club form to play above themselves. He also has managed to crack the nut of getting good players to gel into a good team in the spring, just not the autumn.

                     It’s an interesting position to be in and just reinforces that it is a results game. A few weeks ago I had a debate on this site about whether expecting 3 out of 4 wins didn’t align with where England are in ability. I think (and hindsight is amazing, granted) I have been proven right. They were not good enough to beat NZ or SA – it wasn’t luck, bad day, etc. However, at the time many good arguments were put forward about why it was a valid expectation – SL is moving them on, they’re developing, was the common theme. That now seems a premature announcement on SL. They seem to have at the least become stale, possibly even regressed.

                     I expect up-the-jumper stuff on Sat because, for this game, “a win is a win” is 100% right. Lose this and it’s going to be carnage for SL and the players he has stuck by.

                     If Wales lose … well, expectations are low. There will be rumblings but there will also be a genuine belief that few, if any, coaches could take them higher.

                  2. Staggy I really don’t understand your point. You talk as if world class players are born that way. They are not. They are developed. Ford is a case in point. One of the outstanding players of his generation at age grade, but left out of 6n squads in favour of Goode? The coaches should be there to identify the talented players and then judge which ones have the right mental make up to make the top grade. Ford and a few of the recent junior world cup winners are no brainers as far as I’m concerned. And yet Lancaster time and again picks safety first solid club players like Botha, Waldrum, Tomkins, Goode over more talented players. It’s about risk and reward. SL takes fewer risks and gets more limited reward. Look at Launchbury, only for into the side though injury despite stellar performances at Wasps.

                     1. I’m really not sure about much of this.

                        In the England vs Wales debate – we talk as if Wales have a far superior team to England, do they? We look pretty comfortable beating them in the 6 nations (without Corbs,Tuilagi,Cole – which are our only good players right!?). We also beat a clearly very impressive Ireland team.

                        Yes this Autumn has been extremely disappointing and proved we are some way off being the best in the world, but the reaction off the back of it has been madness as far as I’m concerned.

                        And Benjit – Launchbury was brought into train with England before he was a guaranteed starter for Wasps so I’m not sure your facts are right there.

                        I agree with your point though – SL has always waned towards safe picks. For the most part though, I’ve agreed with most of his selections. People talk about Ford as if he is some obvious world beater – is he? He still looks pretty shaky in my book. Don’t get me wrong, with Farrell off form I’d start him, but he misses easy kicks too often.

                        Out of interest, what under 20s would you want in? Cowan-Dickie I like – but he still doesn’t start regularly at Prem level. Sam Hill is an interesting one, as is Slade, but Hill is still very raw and Slade is really a 10 as much as he is getting game time at 13.

                        I could rumble on all day really but you get my point.

                        I have a massive issue with the continued selection of Barritt over Burrell. BUT, with both Burrell and Tuilagi out he did make sense at the start of the Autumn.

                        Cipriani – I’m a massive fan of and will always want him in. But really, that’s quite small grievances.

                        Our pack (whether SL or Rowntree) has grown into one with incredible strength in depth and one that can compete with anyone. We still have issues in our back line but we are England, we always have – let’s not sit that at SL’s door.

            2. This is what I’m worried about!

               1. This last reply was to Brightys first one by the way!

         2. To be honest, I don’t know who should be in right now aside from maybe Burrell for Barritt. This is probably one of the reasons I’m not the England coach. But seriously, you bring up a good point that the size of England’s player pool complicates selection. After every so-so performance the media and the general public (myself included, and I’m not even an England supporter) want a new backrow, a new centre partnership, Cipriani at 10, etc. Barring 1 or 2 questionable selections, I think Lancaster has picked about as strong a XV as he could have this Autumn. I was simply saying you can’t completely absolve him of blame if they end up going 0 for 4.

         3. I think we do have the players to play a more creative, attacking exciting game, but at the moment we have a coach whose style of play does not promote those players. I could give you a whole list of players who should probably be involved regularly with the England squad. Get them in that environment now, and we will reap the rewards later.

            Take Andre Pollard for example. He captains the baby Boks in the U20’s World Cup, and the next SA test series he’s straight in the squad. We won that World Cup, and yet we’ve not seen any of our young players anywhere near the senior or Saxons squad. Is this down to SL? Is it a trust issue on the coaches part? England played a much more exciting style in the U20’s than the senior squad do at the moment, but that is as much to do with the coaching, and the selection of the players.

8. Benjit, you compare barrit’s record against SA and NZ to burrell against six nations teams, an unfair comparison, how did burrell do in the summer against NZ? I see your point, and its a fair one, but i think with one game to go throwing an uncooked player against aus has more potential to backfire than keeping with barrit, i think their hope is with ford and 12trees (no great defender he, but a good attacker on his day) we will offer a more all round attacking threat than previously.

   On a side note was it only me who thought our best players last week were out back three and fly half? ironic as that has arguably been our biggest critisicism of recent times. they even managed to score three times between them. When was the last time that happened?

   Staggy; fair comment about the first 15, but i think a number would make the second, who did you have in mind?

   1. Banastre, who do you think of our team would make a 2nd 15. I thought possibly Wilson. 3rd 15 maybe May and Marler. 4th 15 maybe a couple more. You tell me who you think?

   2. Yes but if you compare Burrell ‘ s 6n record with Barritt my point still stands. 2012 & 2013 6n and to an extent the 2012 & 2014 AI thus far show that defence will only take you so far. Respectable losses, runners up. We should be aiming higher than that and that will involve taking risks. A safety first option just doesn’t cut it at this level IMO.

      Also I would pretty much discount that dogs dinner of a tour to NZ. England were set up to fail thanks to the scheduling but I still feel SL should have stuck by the team in the first match, perhaps using the later arriving to strengthen the bench only. The selection was so disjointed I don’t really hold any players individually responsible for that car crash.

9. Burrell is a 12, he grew defensively through the 6 nations, but he’s not had anywhere near the same exposure to being in a foreign position for the AIs. He’s hardly the most reliable defender positionally at 12. Beale and Toomua would have a field day.

   I dislike Barritt, but I’m not going to argue that call too much. Burrell will be in a far better place for the RWC as he’ll have the entire pre-RWC camp to get familiar with the 13 shirt again.

   As for putting Nowell on the bench, yes he’s just managed to score some tries, finally, but Yarde has regularly scored against NZ and at international level. And why do we need more fullback cover when we have Watson and May, both who are capable at fullback and played more there in the past 12 months than Nowell.

   Roko can feel hard done by, his injury robbed him of the chance to prove himself fully.

10. I have been a fan of Stuart Lancaster but this fasination with Owen Farrell is really perplexing me!

    So lets be clear Lancaster obviously thinks, injuries permitting that Brad Barritt and Billy Twelvetrees/Owen Farrell is the countries finest centre partnership? You really have to feel for Kyle Eastmond and Luther Burrell.

    Lets face it when Tui is fit it will be who partners him and for me thats neither Barritt, 36 or Farrell.

    Lancaster, in my opinion needs to stay true to his word and pick on form, send Farrell back to Sarries and he’ll hopefully buck his ideas up because Charlie Hdgson is playing better than him for his club.

11. I’ve always tried to understand SL’s views, even if I don’t agree with them. But, I am really struggling with the selection on Barritt.

    Yes he is very good defensively – but that is not enough.

    Burrell didn’t look poor defensively in the 6 nations. England didn’t leak tries Autumn 2013 either without Barritt. I’m not buying into this myth that he holds out back line together defensively.

    Burrell played in the second test in NZ and didn’t look poor to me. Barritt didn’t actually start any of the NZ tests, and yes we were run ragged in the 3rd test but that’s an anomaly and certainly would not have been saved by Barritt.

    Outside of that – happy with the squad. The pack can compete against anyone now and with Tuilagi fit and Farrell finding form I don’t think our back line is too far off.

    A year ago the back three was a massive issue, but we now have a pretty clear first choice with plenty of very capable back ups.

12. I really hope Twelvetrees gets a starting berth. I can’t lay all the blame at Farrell’s door but with a genuinely creative ball player at 10 in Ford, I think Twelvetrees will be under far less pressure to perform. He’s shown in sporadic moments that he has a very capable skill set, he can pass, kick, truck, offload and even beat Rob Kearney to a restart, but with Farrell at 10, he seemed to be pushing to do all of the above at once which led to bad decisions.
    Utterly perplexed as to why Burrell is out, he played very well against Sarries and his partnership with Twelvetrees has already shown it’s worth this 6N.

13. Another take on this is as follows (apologies for any regurgitation):

    SL has decided on an attacking strategy based on a second playmaker at 12 (complete with kicking game) and a solid, preferably bulldozer-ry, 13. The idea bring to fix defences at 13 and unleash the flyers from 10 or 12. The team trains to this model with backs and forwards able support and react quickly as a result (in theory). Tuilangi is clearly the shoe-in for the 13 role. Barritt is the only available replacement to enforce at 13 (JJ, Slade et al don’t fit). Burrell could slot there but he is too short on demonstrable international form to oust the (temporary) incumbent.
    As for 12, I don’t think Eastmond has shown enough of the playmaker skills to convince SL.
    The problem with all this is that Tuilangi is not around – the plan is faltering with Barritt unable to make up for some poor distribution at 10 and 12. But SL clearly values sticking to a long-term strategy (and the communicative benefits that come from doing so) over changing the strategy to fit in better or more in-form players.

    I gotta say, I am with SL. But I’ll only give him two games with 12T/Farrell and Tuilangi in the centres before I join the doubters.

    Thoughts?

    1. H, so you would back SL on choosing a strategy based on one player in England needing to be fit and available and not having any options when that player isn’t? That seems like pretty poor management to me? It ignores a basic fact about rugby – players are out injured regularly. It’s also a bit early to be basing an entire country’s rugby efforts around a 23 year old with 24 caps?

       1. Yes the charge over a lack of plan B is something both England and Wales are susceptible to.

          1. Eastmond may not have shown enough of the ‘playmaker’ skills at 12 to satisfy SL but how much of that is down to the severely out of form scrum half and fly half he had to play alongside?

             Would have been nice to see him line up alongside someone who is not just a club mate but who doesn’t play his rugby 30 metres behind the gainline

             1. I can’t say I agree with having Ford and Eastmond together just yet – not for Australia. Gotta win this one and there is too much risk having so little brawn in the 12/10 channel.
                12T is not the best defender but he is a steadying presence that may allow Ford to shine.
                Ford/12T/Barritt is not thrilling in itself but it seems solid enough and 12T and Ford should be able to get something moving with what is a pretty exciting back three.
                I am staying positive.

          2. No, it’s a charge regularly levelled at Wales. Only now, 2 short weeks after England being tipped to go 3 from 4 and have a shot at 4 from 4, is it being levelled at England. 2 weeks ago SL was a man who’d revolutionised England’s culture, had a team he was developing for a real tilt at the world cup and had developed a new squad with bags of potential. Now he’s a man with 1 plan, bias for the incumbents and at risk of a storm of grief if he doesn’t beat Aus on Saturday. Rapid turnaround.

             I should have added to my 1st post that I didn’t agree with H’s assessment of what SL is doing with the centres, I was just taking his argument to it’s logical conclusion.

             I think SL is genuinely picking the players he think are the best for those positions right now with the gameplan not being something that is worried about too much. He’s not developing a style of play as described, he’s concentrating on culture, getting Olympians in to deliver motivational speeches and working out the optimum distance to park the team bus from Twickers. He’s swallowed the “incremental gains” book whole.

             He genuinely believes, and has said as much in interviews, that Barrit is more than just a bosh merchant. “It’s not all about the flash”.

14. Fair comment and I think SL would like to have other options at 13 within this strategy. And perhaps there are in the likes of Burrell and Burgess (though the latter at 13 rather than 12 might not work).

    I don’t like the look of a centre partnership without one of Tuilangi, Barritt or Burrell – other combinations seem to lack the physical intensity to front up to the best teams. We can’t run around everyone. Top teams will just turn us over in the 13/wing channel every time.

15. I am concerned that because Ford had one decent game it is assumed the 10 position is resolved.Until he has gone through the 6N we won’t know whether he is the answer.He is only 21 and occupies the most important position on the field.I hope he makes it but it’s far too early to judge

Comments are closed.