Eddie Jones announced his provisional 45-man elite player squad (EPS) for England’s pre-season training camp in August earlier this week. He will have another crack at it at the end of September following the first few rounds of the Premiership but he has indicated who is in his thoughts for the challenging Autumn Internationals against South Africa, Fiji, Argentina and Australia.
The team mostly picks itself after the ground-breaking whitewash of Australia, but there are still a couple of question marks around the team sheet ? and that’s ignoring Mike Brown who must be on about number eight of his nine lives. The contentious areas are those perennial ones for England: who plays 12 and who sits in the backrow.
The 12 issue may seem to be decided after the brilliant combination of Ford and Farrell – backing up their excellent work in the Six Nations – returned following the cameo of Luther Burrell (a player conspicuous in his absence entirely from the EPS). However, it is proving tricky to shake the feeling many England fans have that Farrell should be starting at 10, given his superior domestic form last season and the fact that as good as he is at 12, he would be better at 10.
Is it time to give Henry Slade (so sublime before his leg-break derailed last season) a go should he rediscover top form? In my heart he is the player to cement the 12 shirt for England but unless he plays there regularly for Exeter that seems unlikely. Something not helped by Sam Hill and new arrival Ollie Devoto.
The other options are the physical route: Ben Te’o – toured with England but couldn’t get up to speed quick enough – and, of course, Manu Tuilagi. Tuilagi is something of a messianic figure for English rugby, with fans waiting on the edge of their seats for his return to shepherd England on to glory. On his day a world class game changer, but he needs to stay fit. And, like Slade, he is likely to see more game time at 13 than 12 with the arrival at Tigers of Matt Toomua.
Don’t bet against Harry Mallinder (not included in this EPS) forcing his way into the equation either.
Then there is the backrow.
I think it is safe to say there was a bit of disbelief when Jones opted for Lancaster’s six-and-a-halfs Robshaw and Haskell to continue for the Six Nations (albeit with their numbers reversed). ‘Stop gap’ was the phrase used by the politer commentators. How wrong we were. Haskell in particular was a revelation and showed that when a coach gets the two of them to play to their strengths, rather than imitate their New Zealand counterparts, they are excellent players.
However, the debate has reopened with Haskell’s unfortunate injury, likely ruling him out for the remainder of 2016.
Jones has included a large group of backrow players in the EPS, with options and combinations aplenty. Josh Beaumont, Jack Clifford, Teimana Harrison, Nathan Hughes, Maro Itoje, Chris Robshaw, Billy Vunipola, Mike Williams and U20s Will Evans make up the list. Sam Underhill is of course the name we were hoping to see there but the overseas rule means he is not called up (ditto for Steffon Armitage, but let’s not even go there).
With Haskell out, Jones is going to want some more physicality in the backrow. He tasked Harrison with that in Australia, but unceremoniously hooked him after 30 minutes following an anonymous display. He moved Itoje to 6 and Robshaw (a guy he publicly stated was not a test openside) to 7, before Clifford joined the fray late on.
Does Jones continue with the Itoje/Robshaw mix? It allows him to keep Itoje on the field and also include one of Lawes or Launchbury, both excellent players and far more experienced than the backrow options. Does he give Harrison another bite at the apple? Or does he bring the exciting Hughes onto the blindside to offer more power.
Clifford is the guy for me at 7. Although his long-term future has been put at 8 by Jones, he has the pace (remember his try against Wales?) and the graft in the tight. Maybe not as much of the streetfighter attitude about him as Harrison or Haskell, he has not looked out of place once on the international field and deserves a shot after playing bit-part roles across the year.
The curveball here is Will Evans. Although more of a genuine openside than anyone else on the list, at 19 he is likely just included for experience. However, if Jones opts for the more physical Hughes at 6 he may want a more natural openside to compensate.
So time to put my money where my mouth is – a long way off, and form permitting, here is my 23 for the South Africa test:
1. M Vunipola
2. Hartley
3. Cole
4. Itoje
5. Kruis
6. Robshaw
7. Clifford
8. B Vunipola
9. B Youngs
10. Farrell
11. Nowell
12. Slade
13. Joseph
14. Watson
15. Brown
16. George 17. Marler 18. Hill 19. Launchbury 20. Hughes 21. Care 22. Ford 23. Daly
What do you think?
By Henry Ker
If I were picking now – without seeing any league form – I’d want to make as few changes as possible.
I’d slot Hughes in for Haskell to keep the power game up-front, then keep the backs as they are.
I’d bring Marler back onto the bench and have Tuilagi and Daly on the bench as potential game-breakers. I’d then perhaps look to evolve the back-row and the back-line through the use of the bench.
So I’d bring on Clifford for one of the back-row against South Africa and move him to 7, with Hughes moving to 6 or 8 if he doesn’t come off the pitch himself. Then Clifford could start at 7 against Fiji.
And I’d try Tuilagi at 12 and 13 in different games, either at 12 with Ford or Farrell moving across to 10, or on for JJ and have a look at Daly in the back 3. I wouldn’t be in a rush to ditch the Ford/Farrell axis, because with Cipriani, Slade and Mallinder coming through we have a lot of play makers in reserve to keep this two play-maker system that’s been working going and moving forward, while we have a number of strike-runners who primarily play 13 in Joseph, Daly, Tuilagi and Marchant. Yes, we could try to convert Manu, but we lack like-for-like cover. I’d much rather see him as a starting 13 covering 12 if we wanted two strike-runners or a bench option.
The only person who’s place I’d consider is Nowell who looked very weak defensively against Australia in the third test, with Folau in particular giving him a torrid time. Luckily he’ll have a couple of months of domestic rugby to prove it a one-off, but right now I’d be considering a more robust winger such as Yarde or Roko.
My 23:
Mako Vunipola, Hartley (C), Cole, Itoje, Kruis, Robshaw, Hughes, Vunipola, Youngs, Ford, Nowell, Farrell, Joseph, Watson, Brown.
George, Marler, Hill, Lawes, Clifford, Care, Tuilagi, Daly.
Can’t say I’m too worried about Nowells defence based on his time in Australia. Folau has made many astute defenders look silly, given space he will cause havoc. I really like the combination of Watson and Nowell on the wings, they are contrasting players which i think is very useful,
Likewise, those are two players who have cemented their places in the team and will need quite a bit to dislodge either. Nowell did have an off performance defensively but his work rate is phenomenal and he always has a chance of breaking the line. And lets not forget he was sound during the six nations, chasing down Henshaw for the try-saver and, against Italy, even had the upper hand against Parisse.
I’m not worried at all about Nowell’s defence. Awful as it was in the 3rd test, it is often one of his strengths so I don’t expect to see that again. For me he is a definite starter is fit.
I thought in the third test his inside defence left him with too wide a channel to defend which made him look bad but was more of a comment of Joseph getting too narrow
Nowell’s an awesome defender, it’s one of the key positive attributes of is game! No shame in getting beaten once or twice by Folau, and I think a strong mitigating case can be made that Nowell was left stranded a couple of times by his inside colleagues. Nowell is the most industrious winger I’m aware of; as well as coming in off his wing looking for work and running great angles, I have never seen a wing so competitive at the breakdown- the bloke makes turnovers against seasoned flankers.
I wish everyone would stop talking about Tuilagi as the messiah. He is not the messiah hes a very naughty boy (sorry couldn’t help myself).
12 is no longer an issue, Ford/Farrell works well so lets stick with that, but this time include an inside centre on the bench.
7 is only an issue due to Hasks injury so Clifford starts there having done a good job off the bench
15 is a slight problem position with Browns form being iffy post RWC but we started to see glimmers of the old Brown towards the end of tour so let him continue for now but keep the shepards crook handy with Watson and Daly in the wings
9 has been a problem position with both incumbants found lacking in different elements of their game, for me Robson is edging Simpson on basis that he still has room to grow while Simpson has probably peaked.
As for Hughes, Eddie has proved noone parachutes straight into the first 15 so he gets to earn it from the bench like many before him.
My team:
Mako, Hartley (C), Cole, Itoje, Kruis, Robshaw, Clifford, Vunipola, Youngs, Ford, Nowell, Farrell, Joseph, Watson, Brown
George, Marler, Sinkler, Launchbury, Hughes, Robson, Slade, Daly
Haha I was slightly taking the piss on the subject of Tuilagi – the attitude that ‘everything will be ok when Manu is back’. Maybe slightly lost in translation!
Ha fair enough
Against weaker opposition I would also give a run to Beaumont, Te’o and Haley to give them a chance to show what they have to offer
I’m disappointed not to see Ewers or Armand in the mix, both of whom I think deserve to be in there. Both offer that extra physical edge that we lose with Haskell out
As for the Slade question. I’d like to see him come in at 12. It doesn’t matter too much that he’s not playing there for Exeter – after all Farrell doesn’t play at 12 for Sarries and he’s done ok
Slade I think would offer more than Farrell at 12 in terms of a running game and between them the tactical / place kicking side of things should be covered. We wouldn’t lose anything in terms of defence and the two would be interchangeable in attack and defence
But as pointed out above, EJ doesn’t seem to make changes for the sake of it, so Slade is going to have to start the season with a bang
I am unsure about Hughes. Teams seemed to have worked him out by the end of last season and his impact seemed much reduced. I wonder how he’ll translate to the international game. Fingers crossed that he takes to it like a duck to water. A back row of Hughes, Clifford, Vunipola would be a concern for any opposition
I agree to a certain extent, Ewers in particular I really like, I’m just not sure who I’d take out.
The 6/8 options are: Vunipola, Hughes, Beaumont, Robshaw, then Harrison too although he also offers an option at 7. Who would you look to take out for them?
Not sold on Harrison yet but as you say he offers an option at 7.
I’d possibly play Ewers in front of Beaumont and whilst I wouldn’t want to see Robshaw dropped yet, he’s not one for the future
I like Harrison, I think he offers more of an all round game than some of the other options, for me it was between him and Ewers. Beaumont I’m a massive fan of, I’d definitely want him involved over the other two – great at the lineout, great carrier, work rate and more than that he seems like he has a real rugby brain, which for all Hughes’ and Vunipolas skills, I don’t get that impression from them.
I don’t think Hughes was “worked out” it was more that Wasps collectively seemed to lose their fizz at the business end of the season, and lacked the quality in their depth that other sides had – I think Hughes was played a lot. Let teams double mark him, I’m sure Billy will have a field day!
Wasps had a fairly lengthy injury list in the back and second rows come the end of the season so Hughes pretty much played every game throughout the season. He was running on empty in the last few weeks I think.
Re: Faz/Slade I can’t agree with the sweeping statement “We wouldn’t lose anything in terms of defence”.
Gustard has England’s defence operating the wolf pack style well to which Farrell is a critical component. Slade is a competent tackler but is not currently able to lead a wolfpack like Faz can
Both big lads but you know Farrell absolutely loves his defence. Hits everything hard and leads the line well. The change in D after Burrell came off in the first test is testament to that.
Perhaps not clear. I’d like to see Farrell moved to 10 and Slade to come in at 12. There’s no reason why Farrell cannot defend from 12 with Slade defending the 10 channel
Or alternatively play Slade at 10 and keep Farrell at 12
Slade doesn’t play 10 at club level yet so might be a big ask for him to step up. Ford looked revitalised after coming off the bench so should keep his place for the time being.
I wouldn’t want to see too many changes, I agree that Clifford deserves a shot – he’s always looked good whenever he’s played. I’d also bring Marler in for Vunipola, just because of their styles – but other than that no changes to the XV. The only other change I’d consider would be Yarde for Brown with Watson moving across to 15 but I think that depends on Browns form early in the season.
Marler, Hartley, Cole, Itoje, Kruis, Robshaw, Clifford, Vunipola, Youngs, Ford, Nowell, Farrell, JJ, Watson, Brown.
George, Vunipola, Hill, Launhcbury, Hughes, Robson, Manu, Daly.
It would be interesting to see Watson trialled at fullback at some point. He does it well for Bath and, given the extra time and space, it would allow him to attack open field more often. However, given we are in a strong position in the rankings ahead of a draw next May, this may be an experiment saved for the six nations against Italy.
Surely Care has had his day and either Robson or Simpson takes his place on the bench? Would love to see a BR of Hughes, Clifford and Billy, but think Robshaw will retain his place (not without merit).
Is Manu fit? It is clear EJ wants to try the big boshing 12 type of play, so would not be surprised to see either Manu (if fit) or Teo at 12.
I think EJ will not want to make too many changes for the first match, so that may save Brown and Joseph from the chop – 2 players who a below par atm. Would hope that Daly at 13 and Watson or Haley at 15 will be given a chance at some point in the series.
The big boshing 12 is popular, but a ball playing 12 (which Manu isnt) allows so many more variables, and will release a 13 / 15 to attack. Nothing scares opposition more than sheer pace, whilst a bosh can be more easily defended. However in the end its how the back line works as a unit, which is why Burrell was yanked off.
i agree that Ford Farrell worked very well, but is it a true future pick?
so ( sorry George) Farrell, Nowell, Slade, Daly, Watson, and . . . . . . . Mallender.
How about utilising as a second play maker in Goode at fullback so that you can play a bosh and pace combo in the centres?
1. J. Marler
2. D. Hartley
3. D. Cole
4. M. Itoje
5. G. Kruis
6. C. Robshaw
7. J. Clifford
8. B. Vunipola
9. B. Youngs
10. O. Farrell
11. J. Nowell
12. M. Tuilagi / B. Teo
13. J. Joseph / E. Daly
14. A. Watson
15. A. Goode
16. J. George
17. M. Vunipola
18. K. Sinckler
19. J. Launchbury
20. N. Hughes
21. D. Care / D. Robson
22. G. Ford / H. Slade
23. M. Yarde
Still not convinced Ford & Farrell are a truly long term proposition personally, it’s a set-up that allows you to control territory (pretty important tbf!) but I still don’t think, for all the talk of that 22nd playmaker being so important, that it’s actually making England a more potent attacking unit (Burrell wasn’t hooked in Brisbane because he wasn’t doing anything going forward). With the ability England have in waiting at 13 and in the back three I think they’ve got to find a way of bringing it into the game a bit more. And if it comes down to a straight choice at 10 between Faz & Ford I’d still go Ford – he’s still just better at attacking the line & making those split second decisions when he’s confident, and he showed signs of regaining that confidence in the Aus series. So that means a bigger runner at 12 – Te’o or Manu – and then I’d look for a more Smith-esque 15 to balance out the lack of a playmaker: one of Nowell, Haley or even Daly back there.
Or a 2nd playmaker – 22 playmakers might be overdoing it!
Just a test email to check if this works before I spend the time to post
In my opinion , due to James Hasskell’s injury ( which will probably stop him playing the Autumn internationals ) the back row will need some changes. I think that because of Harrison’s performance in the third test against Australia ,I think that Jones should return Robshaw to the open-side and play Nathan Hughes at the blind-side. I don’t think we need a back-rower on the bench as Maro Itoje can play there. Also because it will be hard to leave out one of Joe Launchbury or Courtney Laws.
As well as the back-row I also think that the n.12 shirt needs sorting out. Many people would say that Owen Farrell should stick in in it because we have won the six nations and won the series in Australia all three to zero, however I think that Manu Tuilangi should get it as he is a difficult person to leave out. So I think Joseph and Tuilagi in the centre and then Farrell at fly-half.
I also think that Jak Nowell defensively looked poor last time he played for England so if he carries on I might consider giving Maland Yarde or even Semesan Rockuntiguni a game if we win against South Africa. Even if Nowell does play well I might give some other players a chance to show them selves.
So, here is my team to play the Springbocks…
1. M.Vuinapolo
2. D.Hartley
3. D.Cole
4. M.Itoje
5. G.Cruise
6. N.Hughes
7. C.Robshaw
8. B.Vuinapolo
9. B.Youngs
10. O.Farrell
11. J.Nowell
12. M.Tuilagi
13. J.Joseph
14. A.Watson
15. M.Brown
16. J.George
17. J.Marler
18. P.Hill
19. J.Launchbury
20. C.Laws
21. D.Care
22. G.Ford
23. E.Daily
It’s not a racial thing but I believe the liberal laws in rugby allowing players from other countries to represent foreign national teams to be wrong. Not only is it cheating by poaching foriegn players but it undermines the smaller pacific islands by taking they’re finest players despite there already small pool to choose from. The vunipolo brothers grew up here so that acceptable but I don’t believe manu tualangi, roko or Harrison should be able to represent England’s national team and I do not feel represented by them.
The eligibility rules should be tightened I think, but 2 of your 3 examples are silly
Manu Tuilagi has played all his rugby in England, starting at age 14 playing for Hinckley RFC.
Rokoduguni has risked his life in Afghanistan on behalf of Great Britain. If that isn’t enough to represent England at rugby, I don’t know what is.
Harrison and Hughes I could understand – especially Hughes for me. Does he have an connection other than playing for Wasps for the past 3 years? At least Harrison has an English father
I don’t have a problem if someone wants to make their life over here as compared to where they are born but if they then want to represent the national team, there should be a much longer period for qualification.
Was just about to type almost exactly the same thing. As you said the only one for me is Hughes as it is pure residency that gets him in.
I did forget Ben Te’o as well. Whilst his mother may have English heritage, he has spent no time in England and has yet, I believe, to play a game for an English side.
I’m surprised you haven’t mentioned Mike Haley, whom I thought looked excellent in the Saxons games before getting injured. I would really like to see him get some game time at 15 for England unless Brown has a storming start to the season?
Hi Dazza – definitely had Haley in mind, however I was already pushing the boundaries of acceptable blog length and the average adult’s attention span without looking at the 15 shirt in detail… But I am in total agreement with you.
I think Haley offers the best sides of both Brown and Goode, but without the experience. He has good pace, with Goode’s unpredictability in attack, but solid in defence with a good boot. It doesn’t seem like Goode is going to get a look in unless Brown has a real shocking start to the season, so I would get Haley in to gain experience.
Has anyone else been enjoying the Olympic Sevens?
Its been fantastic so far with some great games. Brilliant to see Japan do so well and I will admit to a touch of schadenfreude at seeing the Kiwis come third in the pool and then get knocked out in the quarterfinals.
Team GB’s victory over the Kiwis sounded like the start to a joke with an Englishman, a Scotsman and a Welshman all scoring.
South Africa in the semi-finals is a tough ask for GB, but they must be on a high having topped their group and beaten the Kiwis, so fingers crossed!
Yes it has been awesome! Article coming up later today about it.
Only change to the EPS I would like to see other than Cipriani is Wade. Wade for Yarde any day! Wade would also pose a greater try scoring threat than Nowell who whilst a good player doesn’t score enough tries to be a great.
Wade is a natural ‘ball in hand’ winger (like May) who relishes space and can score from anywhere. His defence is now good enough (probably no worse than Jason Robinson’s ever was – another small player whose size didn’t hold him back) and offers a similar ‘speedster’ attacking threat.
The attack play of the back line is the one area of weakness left to Eddie Jones to radically improve on along with the centre pairing sub plot. Both are outstanding issues or at least ones not yet put fully to bed (for beating NZ and winning a WC any ways)
I am really looking for to the autumn internationals. I agree with most of the comments on here. Reference eligibility, I think we have to give the players a bit leniency. I do not blame Hughes for wanting to play for England. But I do think the qualification period should be increased from 3 to 5 years. That way we would only have people that really want to play for us. I do not think one parent is enough of a reason e.g. Teo. I think someone like Tuilagi who has played here since he was 14 and in the system should be above someone who has just moved to the country (even with parentage). We should not be encouraging kolpack mentality that’s for sure. I would also love to see Ewers given a chance, the guy should be the future at 6 instead of Hughes. Though my mind may change once I see Hughes play for us ;)
I would love to see Slade come into the side. But from the bench initially. I do not think we should change Ford/Farrell axis before the SA match. Maybe for Fiji instead. Though is still an excellent fly half, but needs to improve his kicking percentage. If Corbisero can get some games under his belt I would love to see back in the scrum. But its too early for Autumn I expect. I also agree about Christian Wade. It seems since the last lions tour when he flown over from England’s Argentina tour that he is the forgotten wing. But for a man with such pace, I would love to at least think he could get in the EPS.
I think Robshaw is probably in his last season for England as he will want once last crack at the Lions. I personally think he deserves it with how he has played for us and with his consistent performances. Every match he is 7/10 or above. I think Mike Brown is in a similar situation as well.
My Team as follows (Only from players in the current EPS):-
1. M Vunipola
2. D Hartley
3. D Cole
4. M Itoje
5. G Kruis
6. C Robshaw
7. J Clifford
8. B Vunipola
9. B Youngs
10. G Ford
11. J Nowell
12. O Farrell
13. J Joseph (Close with E Daly)
14. A Watson
15. M Brown
Subs – J Marler, J George, P Hill, J Launchberry, H Slade, E Daly, D Robson (Or J Simpson, whoever starts the season with Wasps)
Good to see someone agrees about Wade. Size is definitely not the benchmark for everything at wing. Shane Williams, Euan Evans, Jason Robinson, Cueto and Wade for England were and are all small players that scored a ton of tries for their countries. Wade still does every time he puts on a club or England shirt. If Jones is to go through bthe next level and defeat NZ he needs a Christan Wade
IMO.
Alex. The only problem for Wade is we already have some smaller men in the backline. It is a massive shame as I think he is electric. I would love to see him given a chance at some point.
Wade’s issues have absolutely nothing to do with his. His positioning is dreadful.
I’m a Wasps fan, and a big fan of his, but he would get massively found out positionally at test level (as he often does at domestic level). His tackling is actually pretty good when he is stood in the right place with the correct footwork. It’s something I know he has spent a lot of time trying to work on, but it doesn’t seem to be improving. If it does, I expect him to be very much involved.
He doesn’t seem to be found out at Saxons level. In fact he seems to consistently play a ‘blinder’ making his cover tackles (which would suggest he is in the right place at the right time) and then scoring tries. What more can you ask?
He does have a curious tackling style whereby he burrows under his man and tries to stand him up rather than just bringing him down with the legs. Is that what you mean by ‘working on his tackling?’