Toulon back-rower Steffon Armitage could be in line for a shock recall to the England squad for this year’s Rugby World Cup, according to a report published today in The Times.
Armitage will not be considered for the Six Nations squad, but according to the report the World Cup on home soil would come under the ‘exceptional circumstances’ in which the England management would consider picking players based outside of the country.
Armitage, more than any other player, has sparked this debate in recent times, with some sublime form for Toulon leading to his winning the European Rugby Player of the Year award in 2014, and in the process igniting calls from many for England to relax their stance on picking players plying their trade abroad.
Lancaster has staunchly stood by the Rugby Football Union’s directive until now, but the home World Cup would be an exceptional circumstance, alleges the report, opening the door for Armitage to add to his five England caps, the last of which he won way back in 2009.
Loading ...Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
44 replies on “Steffon Armitage to receive England recall for World Cup?”
Seems counter productive to not call him up for 6Ns only to then use him for WC. If he’s going to play in WC then he needs game time?
Honestly, no. Our stocks of backrowers are only improving, and he’s not good enough to risk destroying the equitable relationship the RFU have (finally) established with the clubs for. He should only play for England if he plays his club rugby in England
The Times article suggests he’s being considered at No. 8 which is even less reason to select him given we have excellent options in Morgan and Billy V aleady….
Not a chance. All debate about how good he is is completely irrelevant – picking players outside of England will lead to an awful downward spiral.
Interesting take on the phrase “exceptional circumstances” though. I always took it is a hefty injury list of a a play literally too good to ignore (I’m thinking of Savea/Retallick level, of which he does not qualify).
Had never crossed my mind that certain tournaments could qualify under this category but I guess the wording of this is supposed to be ambiguous to give SL as much wiggle room as he wants.
100% yes. Wins so much ball, scores tries and is versatile. For those talking about RFU relationships etc answer these two questions:
1) If you were England coach would you pick the European Player of the Year?
2) Do you honestly believe many England players will leave and jeopardise their international futures, sacrifice bucket loads of caps and the comfort of having their game time managed by the RFU (with improved endorsement / match fees that England players receive) by moving to France, if he is picked?
The policy makes sense so keep it. But if anyone is playing unbelievably well they have to be considered for selection. He’s improved a heck of a lot in the last three years – England are not good enough to ignore “European Players of the Year”, with the most turnovers in Europe for the last two years..
If this article is accurate he should also be called up to the 6N.
1) Not if he doesn’t play in England
2) Of course they will. If I was a Tuilagi or Launchbury and was offered buckets of cash to go and play in France – I’d go. Then I’d turn round and expect the same treatment as Armitage from SL.
Then we let those two. I’d expect Dan Cole and Billy Vunipola to expect the same treatment. Then more England players etc etc.
It is a slippery slope we do not want to go down.
I’m sorry but whether he’s the European Player of the Year or not I don’t want him in the England squad. Why not – his attitude. This is a player who was trying to get himself eligible to play for France in the World Cup, and when he realised he couldn’t do it, he then tried to get back into the Premiership to achieve his goal of playing in a World Cup. This proves that he doesn’t really care which country he plays for, as long as he gets to play.
My thoughts exactly.
Exactly. He’s a mercenary player. The fate of sides which pick mercenaries over stalwarts with pride for the side is exemplified in the fate of London Welsh this season
Or they win the European cup 2 times on the trot and have a very good chance of making it 3 … unless the other side full of “mercenaries” (if defined by those who move to wherever they’ve got the best cash and opportunities) defeats them.
London Welsh fail because they suck in all aspects of playing rugby, not because they’re mercenaries.
You say his attitude is terrible based on complete lies. He went to France to becone the best player he could possibly be, learning from the world class players at that club. He wouldn’t be the player he is todsy unless he moved to France. To me, that is a pretty good attitude… that his goal isnt orientated around playing test rugby but to become one of the best players in the world and just play rugby. Stop being bitter and we need his help…
I’m not sure he ever came out and said he wanted to play for France, he was just mentioned in a group of players who could become eligible through the loophole. When interviewed by BT Sport he was quick to make that point.
England don’t have someone who is as good over the ball as him, in fact, no one is close. He is also a far better ball carrier than Robshaw, Wood and Haskell. Given that in England’s most recent games against NZ and SA, no one got any turnovers, and the back row desperately needed a second player able to make some yards with the ball, I would say that his skill set COULD make the difference for England come the World Cup.
Ultimately, he’s a rugby player who has achieved everything in his domestic league, including individual honours, completely understandable that he would want to test himself at the very highest level. It’s also probably his last chance, as I doubt he will in contention for 2019.
Jonny – the chance to test himself at test level was there for him this year – could have agreed terms that made a move to Bath possible. I have no issue with the choice he made but he did make it and therefore he knew he was ruling himself out of playing for England.
Not sure how much that was down to him. I was under the impression that the clubs themselves couldn’t agree a transfer fee?
SJB, I’m sure that comes down to how much you want it. Castro paid his own transfer fee for example.
Castro paid it and was reimbursed by his club.
Bath deal aside, Armitage signed a new deal with Toulon whilst fully knowing the RFU stance. It was his choice and he has to live with it. The 2015 WC has not appeared out of nowhere, we’ve all known about it for a while!
Agree with you on the France thing – at no point did he ever say he wanted to play for France so to me that is irrelevant.
But as I mentioned above, any debate about how good he is is a complete waste of everyone’s time. He made his choice. Fair play to him, but it means he won’t play for England.
He’s not a mercenary, he’s simply a pro rugby player making a living the best way he can. He weighed up some options and decided that 200K a year, winning trophies and sticking in the south of France was better than going to Bath and trying to break into the England side. Seems to me that now he’s made that choice, and it’s a fine choice if it is what he wants, then he shouldn’t get into the England side.
Agree with all other commentators here – this “law” that ensures Eng’s best players stay in England only works if really strictly applied. You’ve only got to look at the feeble attempts to introduce it in Wales to see how ineffectual it can be if you chop and choose based on player quality.
Just a supplementary point. Does anyone think that France looks so attractive to the players now that so many top players have come back with not such good experiences. I guess would still appeal to ex internationals, but not so kind to current ones. Wondering what everyone else thinks?
Lydiate in particular has had a horrendous time. I think what it’s done is shown that the incremental needs to be huge e.g. 50K more pa before might have been tempting, but now it’s got to be 100K+ to mitigate the issues that might arise.
These nums are all on top of international fees of course – so for example an Eng player to Toulon who had a good chance of being an Eng regular would need a 200K pa rise to make it seem worth the risk?
Actually Dazza, in an interview on BT Sports Rugby Tonight, he said the French thing was all paper talk and he’s never stopped wanting to play for England.
Jonny it really is a travesty that you weren’t knighted last week!
Was it the pro-Armitage stance that gave me away?
Agree with all the comments above re: going against the policy could well be a disaster, but would like to make one other observation that might not be so popular with some, i.e. is “European Player of the Year” quite the accolade that some make it out to be. I would like to say before I continue that I think that Steffon Armitage is a fine club player and a decent back row, however, the award is made based solely upon performances during the two European cup matches, therefore we are picking from a limited selection of players/performances; secondly, SA plays in a side in which there is an embarrassment of riches, any decent club player is going to perform well in those circumstances, doesn’t necessarily mean they are international class themselves; finally, it is worth noting that the biggest push in the media for SA to be included in next year’s RWC has come from The Times, 40% of the judging panel for the “European Player of the Year” are Times journalists (Stuart Barnes and Stephen Jones), just saying…
You’re right, to some extent, about the award. But last three winners were Sean O’Brien, Rob Kearney and Wilko, not a bad table to sit at.
It’s his ball carrying ability, work rate and scavenging ability that are the reason he should be picked – his technique is superb.
Why does the Times point matter? Ausin Healey (Telegraph), as one example, also thinks he should be picked.
So being able to stand head and shoulders above the cream of European competition and some outstanding teammates isn’t the accolade it’s cracked up to be?? Hmmm, not sure I follow
I will expand. Ignoring my perceived bias of two of the judging panel (I have never rated Stephen Jones’ opinion and Barnes does seem to bang on about this an awful lot in the Times), it is because that is a judgement of the competition that I am questioning as a reason to automatically promote an outsider to the England squad.
Yes, on the face of it as a winner you have been picked as the best player of the best team of the best competition in Europe, does that make you the best back row for England, not necessarily. For a start, the judges are hardly likely to pick a player from a team that has not progressed beyond the pool stages and in reality you are unlikely to pick a winner from a team that has not at least made the semis and probably only from the final. The year in which SA won this accolade, that means he was in competition for that accolade from one other English qualified back row, Billy V (who was at that time having an equally immense season).
Hence, yes being named European Player of the Year is a great honour and means you are probably are a very good/consistent player, does it automatically mean this accolade pitches you as the best England qualified back row and therefore resulting in the phrase used by some commentators “how can you leave out the ‘European Player of the Year’?”, I would argue not.
This having to be playing in England to be selected is nonsense! If u are good enough then its a no brainer! France is not exactly the other side of the world!
It is irrelevant how far away it is. Bristol is closer to Cardiff than Twickenham but hopefully any Welsh player who signs for Bristol will be foregoing their chance to play for Wales.
The point is the sustainability of a domestic league, and the follow on general sustainability of rugby at all. If England enable their best players to go where the money is then their best players will all go to France. Their domestic product suffers because the “heroes” are playing in France, French teams play the best rugby with the best players, etc. So the English league spirals into an irrelevance as more and more of the best players avoid that now mediocre league and go to France. The only way to compete would be with money.
With the league reducing in relevance the exposure of rugby in England worsens – less kids are interested in playing the game. In addition the families of ex-players are now all French so the lineage of quality is moving country. So now we have less kids coming through, less success at international level, less success at club level, the game keeps spiraling with only the occasional cash injection slowing down the decline (otherwise known as the football model e.g. see PSG or Man City for the most recent examples).
This is before we get on to what’s best for the national team right now i.e. having it’s players under local control. Not distance based control (hence how far away France is being irrelevant), but under the control of a union with an agreement that is good for the national team e.g. rest weekends, training weeks, fitness regimes, etc.
NZ, Eng and Aus have this policy. Wales are trying to introduce it. Ireland compete with money, player welfare and most importantly their awesomely generous tax system, so have not needed it (yet?). Arg are introducing it next year. France and SA, the two countries with the largest domestic tournaments (in terms of cash generation ability) are the only ones that don’t do it. France are suffering internationally, many would argue because of it.
Very nicely and comprehensively put.
While I strongly agree with the policy and feel we should stick with it, I keep getting this nagging feeling that it would be nice to have SA in the squad for all the reasons given above (jackling, carrying, tackling). While we may not be sure exactly how good he will be at international level, it seems likely that he can at least match Wood for tackling and jackling, and he is much more of a destructive ball carrier. He would also be a perfect bench option covering the entire back row with ease.
However, is he just going to be able to parachute into the team in one training camp? If he is not in th e6N squad, then even if he is eligible and invited to the training camp, I am not convinced he will be selected, simply due to his lack of experienc in the setup.
And yet… the rule is the rule.
p.s. whose rule is it anyway? we all talk about SL not selecting him, but the above article refers to “the RFU’s directive”. Would SL be allowed to select SA without the agreement of the RFU?
I would suspect that bringing him in to this larger squad is more about having a close look at him. International Rugby is a large step up, even from Toulon, some players step up seamlessly whilst others struggle, even if they are “stars” on a day-to-day basis. before any decisions are made, surely they should take a close look at him.
there is of course, another English back-rower who is proving to be remarkably good over the ball on the ground this season, but I suspect he may be even more unpopular in some areas than “MagicSteffon”.
Couple of guesses I could make but do tell?
Slightly off topic, but on the subject of back rows, just a shame that one of them has already nailed his colours to a different mast, the second has yet to qualify and the last has often been a subject of ridicule on anotehr blog, as forget SA, that Wasps back row is looking increasingly like a thing of beauty and balance at the moment!
Matt Ksevic?
Luke Wallace?
Magnus Lund?
David Seymour?
Calum Clark?
James ‘The Brand’ Haskell?
Do tell!
Given the “even more unpopular” reference, has to be either Clark or Haskell?
Yes do tell.
Anyway, that is the point I was making. Can SL (notorious for expecting players to be in at least a couple of training camps before being included in a matchday squad) really be expected to select Armitage off the back of one, evan an extended one, training camp? Surely SL would want him in the 6N camp to “have a look at him” so that he can make a decision as to whetehr he is in with a chance for the main training camp. As you say, Internationals are a step up…
I consider the first big decision to be selecting him for the WC training squad. how can they do this having never seen him in the england environment?
On a bit of a diversion (thinking of training camps), what are thoughts on Burgess so far? Limited time and all that. Last showing he had a limited impact, but that summed up the Baths backs in a game that the Tigers pack won. There were a few moments when he looked to be pressuring gaps and looking for the offload, but Tigers did well in the tackling, cover of the tackle and slowing the ball down.
Sorry, I am not teasing but simply busy. I was thinking of Callum Clark, whom I have been really impressed with this season. Particularly over the ball on the ground.
Kvesic certainly seems to be hitting some form as well.
I hadn’t imagined that Haskell would fall into the “more unpopular” bracket. I’m not a great fan of Wasps, but I have always quite liked him.
It’s obviously Haskell. He’s right – bang in form and has been for 12 months (impressive given his illness earlier this season).
Mike – experience of being in the set up is a load of rubbish IMO. I’m pretty sure SA can learn a few line out calls and do a few interviews for O2 Inside Line! But to answer your question it’s not a rule or directive, it’s a policy (or stance as the article states) and can be reversed at any time. Put it another way, Nick Mallett or Clive Woodward would have selected him using the “exceptional circumstances” years ago – we’re not just talking about SA being in form now, he was the best player in France in 2012 and has been in same form this year. But if SL, who to be fair is perfect for RFU and Premiership Rugby relations, is considering it why not include him in the 6N squad and end this debate, either way, once and for all!
Dave Skepton – I am undecided on the need for experienc eint he set up. As you say I am sure that Armitage can pick up a few calls etc. However there is a lot to be said for getting to know your team mates, both in training and in actual matches. London Welsh, Englands centres and YArde’s move to Quins are prime examples of what can happen when this goes wrong. Then one can argue that Englands forwards are quite settled, so one change will not be too disruptive and with his talent it should be a smooth change.
Ultimately I agree with your final sentiment. If he is/might be picked for the WC training camp then surely include him in the 6N squad.
The above article refers to both the “stance” and the “[RFU’s] directive”. I am not that concerned with wording to be honest, but I was wondering where it originated from SL or the RFU, or in matters like this are they one and the same?
Apologies Mike – it originally came from the previous RFU CEO, John Steele, and was announced whilst Martin Johnson was coach. Lancaster did pick Ben Morgan (Scarlets) and Tom Palmer (Stade Francais) in his first England squad but did so on the grounds that they had already agreed moves back to England.. He, at least publicly, supports the stance whole heartedly. Whether he will write that in his autobiography, who knows!
Nobody has mentioned the (yet again) completely muddled thinking and mixed messages coming from SL . This is complete volte face,for undisclosed reasons. If he is good enough to be considered for the WC training party,he was good enough to be included in the autumn and for the 6N.
I have no problems with his inclusion per se, but the timing is so odd. It also casts fresh doubt on what Lancaster wants from an England team under his leadership.
Also,if I were Robshaw,Kvesic and Fraser et al I would be slightly non plussed,unless all four are going to be included in the group?
Oh,sorry he’s being considered as an eight! More twisted logic.
Why has Lancaster developed this sudden inability to be straight about his decisions?
The more I take a detached view of Lancaster and his thought process,the more worried I become.
Teecee, to be fair to SL in this instance (and I do agree that some of his public decision making has become muddled recently), this particular thing hasn’t come from SL as far as we know, this all orginiated in the Times article for which the most concrete thing that they can state is “The Times understands that the management view a home World Cup to be an event important enough to trigger the “exceptional circumstances” clause in the RFU’s selection policy and that Armitage is being strongly considered for a place in the wider training squad, which will be announced in May”, they have been running a long standing “SA for England” campaign since the AIs and for which most of what they say I take with a pinch of salt these days.
P.S. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be debate about whether SA should be included in the England set-up just that so far (and happy to be proved wrong here), I’ve not seen a direct quote from SL saying anything other than the party line on this one, i.e. he’s in France therefore won’t be picked.
I take your point.That being the case then Lancaster must show he is his own man.Firstly he should make clear that Armitage will only be considered in genuinely exceptional circumstances as previously stated. If such include an impending WC then fair enough.Get him in the party,at O/side not number eight.
Secondly, he must present a composed,clearheaded face to the press and public regarding any of his selection decisions. If he supplies sound,logical reasoning he need brook no dissent.
Many thanks for setting me straight!
Agreed, the lack of clarity isn’t at all helpful! Also the fact that Times articles are subscription only doesn’t help, means that only a few of us who read this blog article can actually read the original source!