Stuart Lancaster has named the England team to take on France at Twickenham this weekend, showing just one change from the side that beat Scotland as Geoff Parling comes into the second row in place of Dave Attwood.
Attwood drops out of the squad altogether, with Nick Easter regaining his place on the bench. Dan Cole wins his 50th England cap on the tighthead, an achievement which head coach Lancaster has hailed as ‘immense’.
“It’s a great achievement for Dan to win his 50th cap, especially coming back from his injury last year. He is one of the cornerstones of our squad and we all wish him all the best.
“Geoff did well off the bench against Scotland and now that he has got some games under his belt we feel it is the right time to start him and use his experience and quality in the starting line-up.
“The same goes for Nick Easter, who has really impressed in camp and with his appearances off the bench in the second row. He is a quality ball carrier and great defender – something we feel we will need in the latter stages of the game.”
ENGLAND TEAM TO PLAY FRANCE:
15. Mike Brown (Harlequins, 36 caps)
14. Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 8 caps)
13. Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 10 caps)
12. Luther Burrell (Northampton Saints, 11 caps)
11. Jack Nowell (Exeter Chiefs, 7 caps)
10. George Ford (Bath Rugby, 10 caps)
9. Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 46 caps)
1. Joe Marler (Harlequins, 30 caps)
2. Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints, 65 caps)
3. Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers, 49 caps)
4. Geoff Parling (Leicester Tigers, 22 caps)
5. Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 37 caps)
6. James Haskell (Wasps, 57 caps)
7. Chris Robshaw (captain, Harlequins, 36 caps)
8. Billy Vunipola (Saracens, 16 caps)
Replacements
16. Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 21 caps)
17. Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 19 caps)
18. Kieran Brookes (Newcastle Falcons, 9 caps)
19. Nick Easter (Harlequins, 50 caps)
20. Tom Wood (Northampton Saints, 35 caps)
21. Richard Wigglesworth (Saracens, 20 caps)
22. Danny Cipriani (Sale Sharks, 11 caps)
23. Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester Rugby, 19 caps)
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
94 replies on “Six Nations 2015: England names team to play France”
Oh dear God. Lancaster is so pedestrian (conservative doesn’t do him justice). Points difference could be an issue, and yet he persists with Wigglesworth and 12t on the bench. Easter on the bench? Is he our game changer? No back three game changer? Care or Simpson? And why does Attwood get singled out when Burrell, Hartley and Haskell have been equally underwhelming since Cardiff.
Can wait to see how the Lancaster apologists like Jacob defend this.
Why am I getting singled out? I’m not an apologist for SL in the slightest, when I disagree with his decision I’m more than happy to say so.
However, as I’ve stated, I’d much prefer SL picks the squad he believes is the best to win the match. I couldn’t care less about winning the 6 nations if I’m completely honest. 4 wins out of 5 is a good Championship – losing away to Ireland is no disaster. I’ve said plenty of times that points difference 6 nations wins aren’t that interesting to me. You only have to go back to 2011 to see how irrelevant that became – SL is picking a squad as close as possible to what he’d pick later this year.
However, Wrigglesworth and Twelvetrees continue to scream average Prem player. I’d bring Simpson and Slade in for those two and I can’t work out why he hasn’t. Care has looked out of form all year so I’d have Wrigglesworth before him. Really baffling decision not to get Daly involved in the squad as well. The Wade exclusion I completely understand, but Daly/Simpson I don’t.
Happy with the rest of the selection.
And to answer your question about why Attwood has been singled out – it’s about competition. Parling was really good when he came on last week, and Easter is a more dynamic options off the bench – it makes sense.
Haskell has been quiet since Cardiff but Wood didn’t make the same impact that Parling did last week so was a less obvious change.
Youngs/Hartley – was probably 50:50. I can only assume they want Youngs on for the last half hour as opposed to the first 50 – another decision that makes a lot of sense to me.
Sorry Jacob, but you are often the chief prosecutor to my posts!!
Agree with all that you say above re 12t and Wigglesworth. Funnily enough I think Wade would be less of a liability as a sub (?)but Daly is a good shout, heck even May would have been welcome.
Looking at the pack I do wonder whether keeping Attwood on the bench as insurance might not have been wise as the French pack looks very strong.
Whilst I am with you on the rather arbitrary outcome of this year’s championship (as there is very little between the 3 teams to claim one an outright championship) I look at situations such as this and the 19-3 in Dublin as good dress rehearsal for the knock out stages of the World cup. Does SL have it in him to roll the dice when it is needed? Remember 2003. Would SL have moved Tindell to wing at half time to bring Catt on or would he have waited until the 60th minute?
Haha you’re right there!
See your point on Attwood, but it is only the case if there is an early injury to a lock, later in the game Easter is a better choice. You could even argue SL has been fairly ambitious there!
I don’t think SL (or this England side) is at the same stage of development as the 2003 side. I wish they were, but they aren’t. That side was 6-7 years in the making, this side isn’t far past 3 years. It’s frustrating but it is the way it is.
To answer your above – SL did move Joseph to the wing to bring Twelvetrees on against Italy… p.s. I’m sure you’re fully aware that I know the situations weren’t at all the same
Objection your Honour! That is being very economical with the facts. One was tactical the other injury enforced. You could even argue that bringing on Cips at 15 would’ve been the more ballsy play.
I know we can’t compare to 2003, but SL’S situation is not entirely different to what Jake White had in 2006/07. Look at what Cheika has done in less than a year. The majority of this pack played in the last world cup and or have lions experience. Where SL really has screwed up is in the backs. Wasted caps on the likes of Ashton, Goode, Strettle, Barritt and now 12t long after their limitations were exposed and placed far too much reliance on Manu, hence we’re now playing catch up.
Thought you might call me out on that one! When I saw the injury straight away I said that Cips at full back will be good…. only to see 12T warming up, so I’m with you there!
I definitely agree that the backs is where he has had issues, what I don’t agree on is that it is his fault. If you look at who is selecting now, they simply were not available then. Watson, Nowell, Ford, Burrell were not options in 2012, or even 2013. All four then played in 2014 as the players you mention were moved on.
That being said, Barritt he still picks which baffles me every time.
Jacob,
2013, 12t made a great debut in 6n only to be dropped for the preferred battering ram approach of Barritt and Manu. He ignored Foden and stuck with Goode, persisted with Brown on the wing. In short we had no attacking game plan in the first 2 seasons and relied solely on Manu getting us over the gain line and scoring tries. 2013 summer tour (without the influence of Farrell) is the first time SL seemed to address the backs, picking exciting players for what they could do, rather than what could not, he then about faces in the 2013 AIs, when England were again disappointing (Tomkins FFS) before flipping again back to picking exciting players for the 2014 6n (albeit with an ultra conservative bench). I think 2014 6n was overall his best tournament to date, but then following the NZ summer tour, he completely throws the baby out with the bath water and goes back to his Barritt blanket. Again another disappointing campaign and here we are again. Lets face it Burrell is only being picked as SL prays Manu will recover for the World cup and if he and Barritt had been fit – they would’ve been the centres and Joseph would not have got a look in. This is not good management.
Don’t know how many times you have to tell me Barritt shouldn’t be picked and I agree with you before we can get to a point where we stop debating it… But if that is pretty much my only gripe with SL, so it could be worse!
Foden was injured in 2013 though, and Brown on the wing was an extension of lacking faith in any wingers around. Hence Ashton and Strettle also racking up caps. As soon as young talent like Watson and Nowell came though – all that stopped. How can you blame SL for that?
Tomkins was awful, but then the options at the time were limited. JJ was injured at that point. Burrell only started playing for Saints at the start of that 2013 season and was being touted as an option – but realistically he’d started about 5 Premiership matches.
I also really don’t like the argument regarding players only getting selection because of injury – that tends to be how top level sport works! How did Cruden/Barrett get so many NZ caps? Carter has been injured. How did Williams get his chance on the Welsh wing? North was injured. I could go on but you get my point. Someone has to be pretty special to barge there way past a regular starter at international level with no historic evidence that they can cut it at that level.
Keep preaching the gospel benjitt,I’m right beside You!
One day all this will be behind us.Post the world cup most probably.
How little they remember…
Lancaster is comfortably the least conservative England coach we’ve had for a long time.
It is ludicrous to suggest that there should be more changes because there is a chance that England may need to chase points in this game.
France are not the best side at the moment, but they do deserve England’s respect. They are strong (if little else) so stocking the England bench with pacy but unproven (or in Care’s case, inconsistent) players smacks of desperation. It may be that come 6pm on Saturday, England are desperate, but you can’t pick an international team based on that possibility.
The only change I would have made would be Slade in place of Twelvetrees.
Don’t understand the antipathy toward Wigglesworth. It appears that he is often judged on what he doesn’t provide ( extreme pace) rather than what he does (game management, quick service, good decision making, great kicking).
Completely agree with you Blub – I like the prospect of Easter coming on in the final 20 and adding something different. Slight problem if we have an early second row injury but I’d still back Easter. Been disappointed with Atwood this 6N, thought Kruis deserved to keep his place over him.
I don’t get the anti-Wigglesworth feeling either. Been impressed with him in the Premiership and thought his snappy service complemented the team well in the final stages. Because we have more running threats in the centre in Ford and Joseph (as opposed to Barritt/Farrell) sometimes a 9 moving the ball quickly and precisely to those guys is just as affective as a more unpredictable 9 who’s a threat himself (i.e. Care or Simpson).
But yes Slade over 12T was crying out to happen.
Well said that man
We can all judge SL selections on Sunday, but I think it is clear that he is going for consistency of selection to allow partnerships to bed in rather than the chopping and changing the way we normally see from PSA
It’s ludicrous to give yourself options from the bench? Like most on here you seem content with runners up places and being the nearly men of international rugby.
SL is paid to make the bug calls and he hasn’t. Cipriani and Wigglesworth have done well with their limited game time, but in picking Slade and Care/ Simpson SL would have covered the 12 option and increased his attacking options in the expected scenario that points are needed. This would also free up a place for a game breaker in the 23 shirt.
How is any of that ludicrous?
Benjit, just because he’s not making populist changes, it doesn’t mean that they are not Big calls.
Easter/Parling for Attwood is a big call.
Wigglesworth ahead of Care is a big call.
Corbisiero not in any of the 23’s is a big call.
May out/Nowell in was a big call.
Ford ahead of Farrell (when the latter was fit) was a big call.
Hartley starting ahead of Youngs is a big call.
Keeping Twelvetrees in the 23 is a big call (whether we agree with it or not).
Cipriani ahead of Myler is a big call (lets not forget that Myler was initially ahead of Cipriani).
Keeping Wood on the bench is a big call.
Simpson and/or Wade on the bench would be a risk. Because they are unproven. I wouldn’t mind seeing what they can offer at International level, but Saturday is not the time to have a look.
None of these are bug calls, some are not even 50/50.
When has Ford been picked ahead of a “fit” Farrell?
Corbs has been a shadow of his former self since injury. Not a big call.
Parling is a Lion. Again not a big call. Probably the right one though.
12t on the bench is baffling, it’s not evidence of SL’S bravery.
May got dropped for 2 poor performances and because Nowell is better under the high ball. Not a big call.
A big call would’ve been to recall Lawes for Ireland rather than send him back to Saint to get motm.
A big call would have been to start Watson at fb and not revert to the useless Goode, or at the very least bring on Cipriani at 15 when we went 19-3 down.
A big call would’ve been to start Ford in the autumn rather than play an unfit Farrell.
SL is just too reactive. It’s all after the event. Look at Joseph. SL would have played Barrit and Burrell until Barritt got injured. It was well briefed to the press that was what he was thinking.
They’re all big calls at International level Benjit. Unless you consider “big” to be a euphemism for wpicking whoever is flavour of the month.
If bringing in a player from the bench who is a Lion, defines what is not a “big call”, then presumably leaving out or benching the Lions Corbisiero, Vunipola, Youngs, Farrell is a big call?
Ford was picked ahead of Farrell against Samoa.
Actually, you quite right, playing watson and/or Cipriani at 15 as you describe would indeed have been big calls.
No necessarily the right calls, but certainly big.
Quite frankly not sure either of them would’ve done worse than Goode.
Benjit
I’m with you. The ‘big calls’ below look Lilliputian to me.
I’m in the middle here somewhere. I completely agree with your sentiment about desperation.
However, irrelevant of points different 6 nations wins, I would like our bench to offer more options.
Slade onto the bench allows for having a back 3 option which I like the idea of in general as he covers 10-13.
Wrigglesworth I’m not a huge fan of – but I don’t think many other options are particularly great either. Care lacks the game management for me. I’d like Simpson to come in, but again I wouldn’t trust his game management to start an international game.
Benjit,
Also, it is unfair to Atwood to talk of him being dropped. He was in the team because the the three locks ahead of him were injured. He performed well, and has put himself in as a real contender for a starting place. That said, Lawes was awesome last week and showed why he is ahead of Atwood, and Parling had real impact when he cam pn and is looking back to his lions best.
Personally I would have preferred if he had started Youngs not Hartley, but that is a lot closer. Burrell? well I guess you could replace him with 12T, but neither is lighting up the world at the moment. The only reason you would pick one is because you recently watched the other play.
I personally have not been underwhelmed by Haskell. So he has not hit the heights of Cardiff! Few of the england players have. He has done a lot of work at the breakdown, has carried pretty well (compared to Tom Woods record) and second highest tackles for England against Scotland and Ireland.
I would also prefer Slade on the bench, but I am not convinced by Simpson. Especially givne his lack of experience.
I’m really not concerned by this selection. On the run up to the World Cup consistency is king. This is the squad that Lancaster wants to play. Burrel will make way for Tuilagi and all will be right with the world. I would have played Slade for 36 but all and all we can’t be too surprised.
Lancaster will return to the Ford/Farrell axis at 10/12 come the weaker World Cup games and Farrell will take Cips shirt on the bench for the rest. Sad for Cips but it’s how I see it going. Slade will hopefully replace 36 who has had a lot of leeway given to him.
There’s not much more we could have expected. Watson and Nowell are scary and are growing into their positions. With Foden out and Watson as cover there are no other fullbacks who are good enough to replace Brown.
Don’t chance the pack – just don’t.
Ben returns to form rotation with Billy as the flower pot men at 8.
Care comes into the bench at 9 and that’s about it.
Agree with pretty much everything here, except for Care. He’s been in some poor form lately, and although Wiggy is not a sniping, pacey 9 like a lot the other guys, he is probably the best kicking and passing 9 we have. He is a good counter to Youngs’ style of play.
There is a lot of good sense in this comment! Feels like Lancaster has decided that bosh at 12 can work with JJ at 13 and Ford at 10, so Burrell holds the shirt until Tuilagi returns to fitness.
When Farrell returns to fitness I think we’ll see Cipriani and Twelvetrees both disappearing from the bench, with he and May/A.N. Other back three replacement, or possible Slade, coming in.
And Care needs to find himself some form with Quins. Once he’s done that he’ll get the reserve scrum half shirt back. He’s in the World Cup squad for sure, though.
Also, a large hat tip for the flower pot men reference.
And if Manu doesn’t recover or breaks down? Then what. SL bet the farm on Farrell junior and when he got injured realised he needed to blood a back up pronto. Burrell hasn’t really looked the part sadly. He’s tried Barritt as the bosher, but he’s not that type of player. That leaves them praying that Burgess steps up in a big way over the next few months. Big ask.
I think Farrell could be the answer at 12 long term (wrote something on it a while ago: http://www.therugbyblog.com/farrell-could-be-the-answer-at-centre-but-he-isnt-right-now) and I reckon you’ll see him there in a few of the warm up games if Tuilagi isn’t available. Between the 2 of them and Burrell, I’m not worried.
Burgess won’t be in the World Cup squad – if he is that’s a major flaw in judgement. I do think you’re going slightly over the top with your doomsday scenarios! England aren’t New Zealand yet, but then no-one is. They’re firmly in the next tier down along with SA, Ireland, Wales and Aus.
Jamie it’s not that I think it’s a doomsday scenario, I just think England’s coaching set up are limited and flawed and this translates to the team and holds it back.
Farrell and Catt are effectively learning on the job such is their inexperience. SL is hardly a veteran. Schmidt was number 2 to Cotter at Clerment. I can’t help but feel that SL should ve have plucked someone of a similar calibre at the start if his reign.
So you’re not thinking Farrell for the WC (will he be fit by then?)? Regardless, he’s unproven @ 12 @ Int’al, so it’s yet to be seen whether he can perform.
He’s typically stolid (more a Tindall, than say a Guscott type), reliable, a dependable defender, but England need a bit more from both centres, surely?
Would he have supported those breaks v Scotland? Maybe, maybe not.
And England dropped him for not being good enough @ 1st 5, unless he’s been played out of posi all along? Either way it would worry me a bit about having in the England team again. Too ‘D’, not enough offence for me.
Personally, I’d have Kyle Eastmond in there somewhere. He can beat people.
Actually, Farrell was a JWC finalist at 12 – with current England 10 Ford fly-half, no less. I know it’s not the same level, but the partnership worked pretty well.
You’re right. JWC ain’t the Full Monty. Besides the former boy wonder, Farrell, was drop kicked, by SL no less. 1 of them, therefore, must not have been up to it.
Geat
OK, I can’t count…, so how’s SL’s record stand v JS’s then?
If you want to pitch them against each other in the same terms, they’re both on the same number of Six Nations wins (e.g. 7 from 9)
You can’t really look at their overall records until Ireland tour somewhere other than Argentina under Schmidt (where England were also 2/2 under Lancaster). The one thing of note JS has done which Bomber hasn’t is a win over South Africa, whereas our man managed a draw away. Schmidt’s Ireland are yet to win an away game over a top 6 side.
Play the minutiae game all you like. The bottom line is that Schmidt’s won things, with a TRACK RECORD leading up to & incl Int’al level. Lanc’s won nuthin’ – yet!
I’ll have you know, Bomber has won a Hillary Shield, Triple Crown, two Cook Cups and four Calcutta Cups. 😉
Kindergarten stuff then! That’ll frighten the WC oppo, no doubt about it.
Seeing as Australia are in our RWC group, winning 2 out of 3 games against them probably will have a bearing, yes.
HaHa. An almost synchronised torrent of disagreement with Benjit.
Well Mike I remember being in a similarly minority position last 6 nations when SL chose Barritt and Goode on the bench against France and Scotland, ignoring the chance to blood Ford and/ any other competent back 3 player on the bench.
Result we lose to France (in part due to Goode) and failed to put enough points on a well beaten Scottish side. Sound familiar?
I take no pleasure in criticising England, but the propensity for people to blindly back SL after 3 disappointing years is incredible. Robinson/ Ashton and Johno really did a great job at lowering people’s expectations. Yes we brat NZ. Once. But no championships. No series wins, aside from a 3rd tier Argentina (which was with a different coaching team anyway).
Benjit to be honest my amusement was directed at the apparent synchronysation, not at you.
I seem to recall (not too clearly) being in agreement on Barritt/Good choice being crazy. If I recall I think I may have been wanting Foden back in (can’t remember if he was injured or just not on top form).
I would love to see Slade ont he bench. I think he has the talent and needs the experience. Added to which, he can’t be worse than 12T. was been recently.
Simpson v Wiggo? There is much talk about Simpsons pace and attacking, but I worry about the rest of his game and lack of experience at this level. With Ford/Cip outside him I would prefer a SH that can control the game more, and let the FH play. Fairly recently it was Dickson, but I prefer Wiggo as he gets the ball away quicker and kicks better. Would like another attacking SH, but with Care out of form they seem to be in short supply. Also with a sub for SH do you not want a player that brings a different style in case the starter is not working (do you not have to assume that the starter is on form and will have a “good game”, unless the oppo work out how to defend his style?).
Daly? Much like JJ he was not ready last year due to forma nd temperament. he is looking great this year, but JJ is better. As a sub? he covers 13, 15 and maybe wing. Slade covers 10, 12, 13,15?. Maybe a more specialist wing FB cover would complement Slade though Cips can cover 15 and JJ wing. Who covers for 12 with Cipriani and Daly?
With more time I would like to see these two brought into the squad and developed as cover. But I don’t think now is the time, and a year ago neither was ready.
I think one of the really key things about wigglesworth is his forward control, the way he organises his pack is the best bit of his game, I am yet to see him standing there watching a maul he is always redistributing the forwards and letting the guys know what is going on.
Third time lucky for trying to reply.
Not really laughing at you, more at the apparent synchronisaiton in our responses.
I seem to recall being of the same mind a year ago, but can’t remember clearly. Have not been a fan of Goode for some time, and thoguht Foden should have been back up to Brown.
I don’t agree with you re Smpson and Daly. there is a whole arguement behind this, but I am bored of typing it.
I just fear a repeat of Dublin. If we are chasing the game and Ford is playing well, who do we bring on the turn the game?
Care may not be in the best of form but his quickness if thought and deed turned the matches last year against Ireland and Wales. Could Wigglesworth do that? Or 12t. One of May, Simpson, Wade, Yarde or Care could.
It puzzles me that SL states that Slade will very much be part of the build up to the world cup and yet he has never seen him play at this level. He therefore has missed a huge opportunity to see a player who will probably lead England on to far greater things but sadly post world cup.
Three warm-up games in the lead in to RWC make for 240 potential minutes of experimenting with Slade and without the possibility that he will make a catastrophic error that loses us the championship. This is really not the time to be chancing our arm with an unknown
Whilst I feel sorry for Attwood, I also agree with Parling and Easter’s inclusion. Attwood has not been as good as hoped, and Easter has the experience, and a better ability to carry the ball and keep it alive.
Personally I would have risked Slade for 12T, but I can understand why SL hasn’t. If he did risk and he plays badly, SL will be under pressure no to pick him again (I’m thinking Tait here). Stick with 12T and we know what we’re going to get, even if it’s not really what we want.
On the whole as I expected but I am suprised with the choice Easter (in a pleasant way). I had high hopes for Attwood but it seems to have lost some of his aggression over the past 6 months and hasn’t really seized his chance
Easter has been good in his cameo appearances – he should have scored against Ireland (if 12T hadn’t been in his way) and provided much more impetus when he came on.
Plus he gives us cover for 8 if something happens to BV. I like having Easter and Wood on the bench. Haskell though has to be on his last chance. He needs a very big game indeed. Otherwise, it should be Wood to come back (although I’d personally give Ewers a chance)
Parling deserves his place, some of the lines he ran against Scotland would have looked good from a centre let alone a lock.
Others who should be in the last chance saloon for starting spots-
Burrell. I’ve been a strong supporter but he seems to have gone backwards since last year. He does run some excellent lines but for everything good, he’s been doing 2 things badly. Another in need of a big game
Hartley. He’s toned it down and in the process has lost some of the bristling aggression that helped to make him an excellent hooker. Hardly ever carries now and mistakes are creeping into his previously excellent throwing. Youngs definitely breathing down his neck
However, am disappointed that 12T and Wigglesworth are still cluttering up the bench. 12T has had his (numerous) chances and not cut it. Bring Slade in. Wigglesworth is a decent club pro and a safe pair of hands but offers no point of difference at international level – Simpson could, but we won’t no till he’s tried out.
I think people comparing SL to Clive Woodward have rose-tinted spectacles to an extent. It took Woodward 6 years to build a team that won a Grand Slam and three years to win the tournament – in a period when I would argue that Wales and Ireland were both weaker than they are now and when England had more world-class players than they do now. Winning a Grand Slam is a very difficult thing to do indeed.
Sure SL has made mistakes and is perhaps too conservative, but I wonder how those posting indignantly about his record would have responded to the 76-0 loss to Aus on Woodward’s ‘Tour from hell’? Or his continued failure to land a Grand Slam?
Pablito, just to clarify, I’m not saying that SL should be where SCW was in 2003 that would be ridiculous, but I am concerned about his lack of forward planning. He reacts only when it’s too late IMO. SCW did not get everything right, but he did get the big picture, set his side up to score tries and compete with the SH big 3.
Although I would have preferred more attacking options off the bench throughout the campaign I don’t think the last game is the right time to throw in some changes.
The group that have been together for the last 2 months stand the best chance.
Sorry folks, but I agree with Benjit on this!
I can understand what some of you are saying but a lot of it is contradictory, no Simpson as no experience but wouldn’t mind Slade…who has no experience! Players can only get experience if they play and the last competitive game before RWC is the last chance to look at these players properly.
I feel SL should be criticized, like Peter said, for not taking chances that can improve the side. If he is going to big Slade up as a real WC option why not see what he can do in a competitive game first? 12T/ Burrell haven’t set world alight so we are not going backwards by bringing inexperienced players in.
SL seems to need to be forced to make changes to his squad and, whilst that can be a good thing, it also means players like Ford and Joseph are too slow gaining experience whilst players like 12T/Barritt/Goode are too slow to make way.
Lastly, I don’t see the point, when he does bring in new players, of not playing them at all I.e. Cips or playing them out of position I.e. Easter. He is a top player but if he has to play more than 20 mins do England lose an advantage over 2 specialists? Maybe not but would rather see players ‘experienced’ in a position at international level.
I can’t fathom these comments from “fans” who don’t care if their team wins the Six Nations. Doesn’t make them much of a supporter in my book. A grand slam is the icing on the cake, but there’s no extra trophy for a GS or even winning outright. Plus, trying telling the Wales team of 2013 that points-difference wins don’t matter…
For me, an England win would be so sweet, as many (including this blog) predicted a third-place finish in this tournament. Which could still happen, of course!
I agree it definitely matters whether you win or lose the 6n, but i think it takes the edge of slightly; 4 out of 5 is a nice accomplishment but winning by +/- 10 pts doesn’t mean your so much better than the others that could be the difference in how the ball bounced etc So yes winning is no small feat and should not be marginalized but at the same time i think it shows how close the top 3 are.
Or the Ireland team last year for that matter
I’m not a fan now it seems?
My point isn’t that I don’t care – if we win the 6 nations on Saturday that’ll be great.
My point is this – if we do win on Saturday it won’t trick me into thinking we are much better than last year. Equally, I didn’t sit there last year thinking Ireland were much better than us because they had Italy at home to pumped them by more than we did.
Points difference just doesn’t separate teams clearly enough for me to put much weight behind it.
The history books don’t remember the nature of the win, just the champions. It’s not about where the winner stands in world rugby, in that context it’s irrelevant as New Zealand and South Africa are consistently the teams to beat anyway.
Then how come I keep hearing about the Baa Baas win in Cardiff v NZ in something BC?
Really? Tell that to the 2011 England side – everyone remembers the poor performance in Dublin. Followed by the nightmare at the WC.
You’re missing my point – I hope England win. I just don’t place much/any value in it.
I’m talking more in 20 or 30 years, 2011 will just be seen as an England Six Nations win – nothing more.
I fully agree it didn’t feel like that at the time, all I could do was be down about the Ireland result rather than the fact we’d won. However, had the fixtures landed differently but come out the same, e.g. thrashing Italy in the final game won us the title, it would have been a great weekend.
In 20 or 30 years? Why are you worried about that now?
I’m talking about in context of this current England side, and where things are at right now. That is far too far ahead to be worrying about!
Right now, it is not that relevant if we take the title or not.
Surely in the right-here and right-now we shouldn’t think about the world cup, and rather the fact that England’s very next game could end up with some silverware? As an England fan, I’d much rather we got our hands on a trophy than didn’t, and I’ll be gutted if we don’t.
I agree to some extent, I totally agree that if England need to win by 3 points to win the championship then ill be crying with joy whenever the forward are falling over and checking their faces in the reflection in the grass (scrums I think they used to be known as). But I also think that the win of the championship will benefit England for the future, the team has developed a steel and an ability to bounce back in matches, but take the 6 nations away from them again and it could really damage their confidence.
I don’t think anyone has said they wouldn’t be happy with England winning the 6 nations, I know I haven’t.
It’s the relevance and importance placed on it which is being questioned in a WC year.
4 from 5 is a really good outcome. England still haven’t lost at home against a 6 nations side since 2012. All great news.
I want England to win the 6 nations; but as I’ve said, if we don’t because of circumstances out of our control (i.e. Scotland getting 50 points pumped on them by Ireland), then I won’t be getting all down beat about it.
wont let me respond to jacob for some reason.
I think 4 out of 5 for the top 3 is a good outcome, regardless of point difference. It may highlight issues ie for wales – we need to score more tries take a bit of pressure of 1/2penny etc
But would we feel the same if we failed to get out of the wc group stages due to points? definitely not. The 6nations is a great tournament especially in a world cup year it gives the lads some silverware and confidence, this year I think all the top 3 will have confidence now it’s just who get’s the silverware.
I think Jacob recently described me as the most negative England fan ever, or words to that effect, so take my comments in that context…
But for me this championship is so close it just makes the idea of one of the 3 being crowned a “champion” a bit arbitrary especially considering how far wide of the mark England were in Dublin. Last year Ireland were a tap tackle away from beating England at Twickenham.
I almost wish that Wales and Ireland do post good wins so that if England do win it they will have done it the hard way and it would be fully earned.
I think it was most consistently negative… hey you earned it!
Completely agree with you that the “Champion” is arbitrary. England were a Fickou bit of brilliance away from a Grand Slam last year… that I’ll get excited about! Why? Because we controlled it.
England can’t control if Scotland roll over and get walloped by Ireland so I couldn’t judge them based on it.
Ah, but were we though? Had we beaten France, would we have had a customary “choke” – e.g. against Ireland? You can’t say the rest of the tournament would have unfolded in the same way.
I agree with Geat. A title is a title. Winners win things. Losers come second and go on about how pts difference means they’re not much worse than the team that won it. There are 2 international titles up for grabs for NH teams this year. Winning half of them is a fantastic achievement.
Winning the 6 nations would be a massively important statement for any of the 3 teams in WC year (for me, personally, especially so for Wales given the way us and “Warrenball” were written off after the first match). Yes, it doesn’t mean they’ll go on anx win the WC but the momentum, the feelgood factor, the confidence, the chance to experiment and even lose a warmup match because you have a trophy in the bag so the fans are not too jittery – priceless.
Also, I’m seeing the argument that “the winner will only do do because the other teams don’t do enough”. But surely to get into that position in the first place, the winners will have done enough in the other rounds (e.g. Wales beating Ireland or England beating Wales, two significant wins in their own right)?
Do *so*, although “do do” could work.
Exactly. If we win the 6Ns (extremely unlikely) I certainly won’t be tempering my joy with any “yeah, but it was only cos we played Italy at home and Eng had France and …”. I’ll be ecstatic. We’ll all have played the same times and Wales will have the best set of results. Champions. Undisputed champions. Would I prefer a Slam? Yes. But that is just extra special.
The whole warrenball thing is a bit weird. Everyone talks about it and it’s very true but in reality it doesn’t matter what the backs do for Wales because all wales’s recent wins have been when the pack was on fire. If you invented “psychoball” a la “the battles of nantes” french pack, I think you’d do very well every match 🙂
Not in the first three years of being coach he didn’t. In fact he was consistently beaten by the big 3 and then knocked out of the RWC at the quarterfinals, having said we should all judge him by his results at the world cup.
sorry, that was meant to be a reply to Benjit above
SCW always had the big picture IMO. The likes of Hill, Back, Lol, Greenwood, Dawson and even Johno were not so established and “world class” when he took over in 97 and he did at least deliver a championship within 3 years. People always throw the 99 world cup in his face but come on de Beer had one of those games where everything came off. Getting knocked out by 5 dropped goals is fairly unlucky.
I do recall the 99 WC as ALL the pundits were calling for Woodward’s head then, but I doubt if De Beer’s kicks were ‘lucky’. His team had to get him into posi x 5 to convert all those drops.
I agree though that it doesn’t necessarily require more than 3 years for a team to perform successfully & consistently. JS been mentioned a few times. It’s a bit early yet IMO, although he has won 10/11.
However, it took SCW @ least 1/2 a dozen years before he had consistent success for a couple of years. Conversely, he also took the Lions to record defeat in 2005, so to use him as a yardstick seems like a bit of a double edged sword to me. People have their sell by dates.
Lancs has to stand or fall by his own record methinks. Sat is bigger for him than England maybe?
Also, take away all of the dropped goals in that ’99 QF and we’d have still lost 29-21…
And Schmidt’s record is 10/12 now.
Ok fair enough but you know it is not as simple as that. The scores were very close before he started his master class (in fact their second try shouldn’t have counted as his feet were clearly on touch), so who’s to say England couldn’t have recovered.
My point was that it was a pretty extraordinary and unusual loss, and one where you shrug your shoulder and say it wasn’t meant to be…
Yeah, I do agree. But fair play to South Africa – we had a really pretty decent defence and they worked out exactly what they needed to do to get around (or over) it.
True? (Did you quickly Google it, or do you have a photo memory?) And true. 10 on the bounce then. How’s it compare to SL?
Ha ha – yeah, had to Google – always like to double-check my facts.
Lancaster won 6, drew 1 and lost 5 of his first 12 games in charge. BUT that included a 3-match tour of South Africa and matches against all of the big 3 at home. If you’re going to tell me that’s not an excuse and opposition doesn’t matter then Cyprus, with their 24 wins in 25, have one of the best coaches in the world.
Are you stating that the Cyprus coach (who?) is better than those of the leading NH/SH nations then?
I wasn’t going to tell you anything. Doubt even yr girlfriend, or SL for that matter, could do that.
Well Don he tried it in the semi and only got one so yes I’d say there is an element of good fortune!
5 x it seems. It was an exception, which I’ve not heard of before, but maybe the semi pressure got to him? Anyway, the drop is a weapon, but likely to be used only as appropriate – whenever that is. Wouldn’t recommend either Eng or Fr trying to emulate it on Sat though.
BTW You’re in an increasing company of disappointed fans, so your ‘neg’ comments (acc to Jacob) are more likely concerns… @ Eng’s record under SL?
I dare say that match had a very formative effect on a certain Mr Wilkinson. So maybe it was meant to be!
After being in the 1st team, seems hard on Attwood to not even make the bench. Perhaps Lancaster didn’t really like him & only picked him due to the injuries others have mentioned? However, his bulk might have come in handy if the Fr leviathan pack takes control.
Otherwise, orthodox… although Burrell???
So we drop Attwood for a 8 on the bench instead, which is just really stupid. But the question should be will Cipirani get some good game time.
Easter is a perfectly capable lock too, remember – he played the best part of a season there for Quins. I expect Lancaster will be looking for his go-forward, which has been more prevalent than Attwood’s in this Six Nations.
Agreed. I had really high hopes for Attwood as I thought England needed more bulk, aggression in the rucks and carrying from the pack and he seemed like he would provide it in spades
Whether it’s down to the coaching or the player though, like Haskell and Hartley, he hasn’t grabbed his chance. I thought Lawes and Parling both made a noticeable difference
As for Easter on the bench, he was another who made a noticeable impact and was the width of a Billy Twelvetrees away from scoring against Ireland and making the last ten minutes verrry interesting indeed
Dr Boo
Only if they get hammered by Fr, so unlikely as they’re @ home. Maybe 3.5 mins if he’s a good boy… or if Ford gets crocked?
I suppose this is pretty much the team and bench I expected. Benjitt will apoplectic but I genuinely think this game was tailor made for Barritt. Burrell needs a massive game,he has done very little of note this time around.
I notice PSA has picked Debaty in the front row. It looks like France are going to go all out from the start and try to undermine our forward strength,gain a big lead and then throw on the rest of the heavy mob to choke the game.England have to front up and start bang on Try to move the ball quickly and precisely,which as we saw against the Scots could be a problem.
Parling is as hard as nails and appears to have put on some ballast so no probs there, ditto CL as we all know.I do agree that Attwood should have made the bench as I imagine he’s hurting right now and that could have come in handy in the last 15-20.
Hartley is a worry. Neutered and muted for some reason. And I agree that the bench lacks nimble game changers. That is a big missed opportunity for me as those big French lads will be blowing late on. Cipriani has been very harshly treated by you know who but to be frank it’s no surprise.Three minutes against the Scots was as snide a put down as you can get. Top marks for man management SL!
Jamie, are you really serious about Farrell at 12?Yes he can kick and tackle but he has no real pace or tricks up his sleeve and he needs to calm it a bit with the silly niggles and cheap shots or he’ll become a liability.
England by ten or a complete nightmare with France suddenly finding there rhythm and fluency.
A game in which we might need to chase a big target is tailor-made for Barritt?!
Defensively yes. I wish people would learn to think strategically. If France have big runners coming who would you prefer to be in their way Burrell or Barritt? Burrell doesn’t punch his weight defensively,one thing you can’t say about Barritt.
“Wales have received a massive boost ahead of their bid for Six Nations glory with Italy’s inspirational captain Sergio Parisse sitting out the encounter at Rome’s Stadio Olympico with a foot injury”.
At least 50+ win for Wales, he has been a one man team this 6N. I’m not sure Italy will bother to turn up.
My guess is that England will need to win by 20+ which is possible but will then try to chase a score rather than win the game, always very risky.
Realise for just one game it was never going to be all change but still really dislike that back three, even if I like all the players in it individually – the blend is wrong though, there has to be room for someone like Wade, Yarde or Rokoduguni come the World Cup. The bench backs are still a mess too: Wigglesworth is a fine player but a starter or nothing for me, especially when points difference comes into it – surely Care or Simpson are better bets to up the tempo – and if you picked Slade you’d have your bench 10 & midfield right there, allowing to bring a back three replacement in. Feel for Attwood, who I feel works better as an impact sub than a starter, but he’s had a quiet tournament since Cardiff and Easter’s carrying and offloading makes sense if you need to open up and chase points later.