The dust may not have settled yet on the Rugby World Cup, but given some of the brilliant games the knockout stages have given us so far, England’s involvement in the tournament already feels like a long time ago.
And indeed, they’ve announced a panel of judges that will drag the disastrous campaign over the coals with a view to sorting out the future. Here’s our take on who came out of the World Cup with credit, and who didn’t (SPOILER: one list is longer than the other…)
WINNERS
Henry Slade
Proved what England had missed previously with a masterclass against Uruguay. Looking at the four semi-finalists, it is painfully obvious that to beat the best, you need at least one ball-playing midfielder. Slade is that man for England.
Mako Vunipola
Injected tempo with his ball-carrying whenever he rose from the timber, and given Joe Marler’s desperate scrummaging issues, we may well see him in the starting number one jersey come the Six Nations.
Tom Wood
Summer internationals saw him return to some of his best form, and while that dimmed slightly in the catastrophe against Australia, he has been getting his hands on the ball more often than usual. Given the performance of the other flankers in the squad, his place for the future is probably secure – possibly even as captain.
The Back Three
Anthony Watson, Jonny May and Mike Brown all did far more good than bad and were England’s strongest unit during the tournament. The travesty is that they did not see the ball nearly often enough, due to inept selections inside them that annulled England’s distributing game.
LOSERS
Brad Barritt
Has surely played his last game in an England shirt. Full marks for effort, as always, but can you name another top nation that picks its centres on tackling ability? No, they pick them on some sort of attacking point of difference.
Chris Robshaw
That decision against Wales will, sadly, likely be what Robshaw’s England career is remembered for. A fine servant, but this World Cup has proved that effort is just not enough when it comes to being an international openside flanker. Could be an option in the six shirt in the future; shouldn’t be anywhere near the number seven and has likely worn the captaincy armband for the last time too.
Stuart Lancaster
Performances on the pitch were not good enough, selection was muddled, and by the sounds of it there was plenty of disquiet in camp. It is not all Lancaster’s fault, but at the most important moments his coaching ability was found wanting. Still a role for him within English rugby, but it should not be head coach.
David Wilson
This one is a touch harsh, given he didn’t play until the second half of the Uruguay game, but Kieron Brookes is clearly highly thought of and seems to have been installed as Dan Cole’s back-up. Given the pair are five and two years Wilson’s junior respectively, the Bath prop’s time in an England jersey may well have come to an end.
Andy Farrell
Frankly it is astonishing that it has taken until now to realise that to have a man with limited experience of the game in charge of England’s backline is ludicrous. Accusations of heavy-handedness at selection meetings are yet to be proved, but he must take a large portion of the blame for England’s reversal to one dimensional back play.
Sam Burgess
He was always going to be on a hiding to nothing. To be honest, he performed admirably well considering the circumstances. But to start him at centre for England’s biggest games in four years after just eight months in union, during which his club side had decided it wasn’t even his best decision, was utter madness. He has the force of will to come again, and given time to hone his understanding of the game, could be a weapon for England in future – but not right now.
Ian Ritchie
The decision to award Lancaster and his coaching staff contract renewals immediately before the World Cup now looks very stupid indeed. And if, as rumoured, there are release clauses for not making the knockouts, then what was the point of the contracts in the first place? The release clauses completely undermine any trust and confidence that would otherwise have been instilled. The fact that he is on the review panel into the disastrous campaign despite his fate being tied so obviously and closely to it, is a complete joke.
Who were you impressed/disappointed with during England’s World Cup campaign?
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
Thought Launchbury would be at the top of the positives list, had a very good campaign. Ben Youngs performance in the 50 against Wales proved why he is so valuable to England as well.
My worry is SL staying in the job, with Robshaw keeping the captaincy and the 7 shirt. Will lead to 4 horrible long years for English rugby.
Tom Youngs could join the negatives list. Proved why we need Hartley, and with George and LCD coming though, his opportunities may become limited.
I’d strongly (but respectfully, of course), disagree with the Tom Youngs criticism. In many of the displays I thought he was up there with our best performers, and I think (please correct me if I’m wrong, he only lost two lineouts all tournament – one v Fiji and one v Wales). He generally topped the carrying charts (made the most metres of the forwards against Aus) and tackle charts too – not sure how much more you could ask. Yes, the scrummaging was problematic but he seems to do well at Leicester so you would start to look more at Marler there. No doubt Hartley brings leadership, though.
Line out went well but only because England were forced to pick Parling after the nightmare in the warm ups. Picking a combination of Youngs, Parling and Lawes then destroyed our scrum.
He was typically industrious in the loose but his general effect on the tournament was negative from where I was stood.
Would we have been better off by playing George/Hartley and therefore allowing us to pick Lawes and Launchbury together – absolutely yes in my book.
Was Lawes any better than Parling during the tournament? Not from where I was sat. Neither were brilliant, neither were awful, but I’ve not seen a ‘vintage Lawes’ performance for a while. With that in mind I don’t think you can say Parling was purely picked because of Youngs – he was picked because his value to the line-out was deemed more important than Lawes’ value in the loose.
Re the comments on Youngs’ scrummaging above – totally agree. Not sure you can blame Youngs when he and Cole generally smash it week in week out for Leicester.
Would still have Hartley as first choice though; Youngs from the bench & George in the squad for experience (and to take over from the former two when farther time/injuries catch up). With LCD loitering, hooker is not a problem position!
Sorry but ‘smashing’ it for Leicester in the premiership and competing against top international packs are two very different things.
Youngs has always been a weakness in the scrum at international level and this was again demonstrated in this world Cup.
His inability to hook does not help his cause and nor does his wayward line out throwing that is responsible for the inclusion of Parling over Launchbury or Attwood, depowering our scrum yet further
Whenever Marler is paired with Hartley our scrum is great (last 6N and autmun) whenever he is paired with Youngs its not that great.
Youngs = shaky lineout and weak scrum + astonishing contribution around the park.
Hartley = immaculate scrum and lineout + stupid penalties, bad decisions around the park and high likelihood of cards.
I probably prefer Hartley to start as the set piece is what you build your performance on.
But I really want Jamie George to come good. He seems to have the best of both.
On Hartley. He has 3 yellow cards in 66 England caps. He may have had a few stinkers for Saints but he certainly is not the liability he is made out to be in an England shirt.
Best set piece hooker in the world as far as I’m concerned. First choice for England every time; it was madness that he wasn’t at the WC.
I simply don´t understand why Hartley is so highly rated. He is a bit like Owen Farrell in that he is a cheap shot merchant inclined to unnecessary nastiness and poor judgement at the wrong times. He was not exactly on fire in his last few internationals and can never be trusted. His throwing stats are not as good as Youngs and he has nothing like as much impact with ball in hand. There were two reliably committed England forwards this WC, Launchbury and Youngs. To think of Wood as a possible England captain is surely a joke. When was the last time he won a turnover? And why does Cole seem to be an automatic pick?
Completely agree that Parling and Lawes were both pretty average. My point is that because of Youngs; Launchbury came out the side for Parling. An argument could be made for Parling and Launchbury solving both issues – but we both know a balanced selection is not Lancasters style.
I think it is worth remembering Cole/Youngs do well in the scrum with Slater behind them and Ayerza at loose head (in my book the best in the world). Combine that with the fact that it is at a far lower level then we come to see why Cole/Youngs performing at Leicester does not equal Cole and Youngs working at test level for England.
Don’t think discard Youngs completely. But I would have George over him.
Very unfair on Sam Burgess I feel. One of England’s better players vs Wales. Likewise Brad Barritt, did all he could with two thirds of a back row not doing their job.
How you think Tom Wood comes out with credit I’m not sure.
No criticism of George Ford? I felt he wilted under the pressure and was out shone by Farrell who performed with determination and bravado despite, again the ineptitude of Wood and Robshaw.
At 8, Morgan did nothing, Billy V was exceptional.
At lock, Launchbury and Kruis should start 6 nations. Lawes showed himself again breakable, Parling far too lightweight.
Barritt did well? You’ve lost me there.
He offers literally nothing in attack. Ok, so his sole job is to tackle and organise the defense. Pretty negative selection but let’s go with it. Then he creates the dog leg leading to the Welsh try and see’s Australia stroll through the middle of our back line twice. How is that doing all he can?
Morgan was injured so to put anything on him is harsh. SL takes the blame for playing someone that just is not fit.
Lawes and Parling did ok; but they just did not work as a partnership. it would be like picking Whitelock twice in the NZ second row. Launchbury and Kruis is another poor partnership though; which of those two would call the line out?
Launchbury or Kruis, with Parling or Lawes, are pairing that make sense.
Ford? Exactly which games was he actually given the chance to wilt under pressure? They dropped him like a stone after a great 6ns and an average performance against Fiji. I’m not surprised he wasn’t exactly confident after that treatment.
Could I have a wild guess as to which team you support?
There were winners?
You think Tom Wood was one of them?
Are you on something?
Think TW has majorly blotted his copy book with his self serving support of Lancaster and his premature pitch for the captaincy. He looked a good prospect 4 years ago. Would have Ewers, Itoje (if not in as lock), Billy V, Robshaw or even the unfairly maligned Burgess ahead of him in my pecking order.
Think Wood comments regarding captaincy were completely taken out of context against him. He was asked directly if he would accept the England captaincy. Replied saying anyone would but that it is not relevant right now. Pretty fair response?
Also think Wood played well. Carried well, hit a lot of rucks and made a lot of tackles. A workhorse in the Lydiate or Fardy mold is valuable. Playing two of them without a breakdown specialist gets shown up.
Jacob I’ve learnt from past experiences not to argue your forensic recollection of England matches, but for me I don’t remember Wood standing out, but maybe that was unintended bias on my part.
I do agree that you need balance, the trouble is that the Wood/ Robshaw combo hasn’t looked good for a while IMO. Billy (for the sake of argument) was brilliant for Sarries at 6, especially clearing out. The problem I fear is the coaching. Too often it was the back clearing out and the forwards awaiting the next play. BR selection becomes a bit academic.
Haha I’ll take that as a compliment.
Definitely agree the Wood/Robshaw combo is seriously lacking. I think if you put Wood in a back row with a true fetcher he would become extremely reliable and importand in that way that Fardy is for Aus and Lydiate is for Wales.
However, we don’t have a fetcher. Short term I would like to see other options like Ewers and Itoje. But I would simply not want to discount Wood.
Pre-WC I wanted him dropped; I didn’t think he offered enough carrying but he really stepped that up in the WC without his tackling and rucking stats diminishing so that’s a job well done from my view.
I reckon from here on in you’ve got to tell Robshaw and Wood that they are both fighting it out for the 6 shirt. As you’ve both noticed, they fulfil the Fardy/Lydiate role, which can be crucial, but only when the back-row in general is balanced.
The problem, of course, is where is England’s “genuine” openside going to come from? A handful (although not that many) untested options in the premiership… and an ageing presence in France who for too long has been held up as the solution to all England’s problems, when that patently is not the case. It’s a toughie.
Jamie, the obvious 7 for the 6N is Kvesic. Got caps, been in the England set up and playing well for Glos. Long term let him and others battle it out. Agree over Armitage. He is not our golden bullet and like Wales if you open the door an inch to a player exodus, it will be knocked off it’s hinges in the rush.
Agree that it is not simple; which is why for much of SL’s reign I was fairly happy with Wood/Robshaw – but it’s been shown up on the big stage.
Kvesic is likely the most obvious option. Will Fraser is good if he can stay fit. Maybe Jack Clifford thought I’m not sure he is a fetcher either. I’m hoping there is a brilliant young 7 about to come through.
Lets look at the options:
GLO Matt Kvesic Inconsistent
GLO Ross Moriarty Welsh
SAR Will Fraser Always injured
SAR Jacques Burger Namibian/old
BAT Francois Louw Saffa
BAT Alafoti Fa’osiliva Samoan
LEI Brendon O’Connor Kiwi
LEI Lachlan McCaffery Aussie
SAL David Seymour Blindside
SAL Charlie WalkerBlair Who?
HQN Luke Wallace Needs experience
HQN Chris Robshaw Blindside
HQN Jack Clifford Needs experience
WAS George Smith Blindside
WAS James Haskell Blindside
EXE Julian Salvi Aussie
EXE Mitch Lees Aussie
NOR Calum Clark Inconsistent
NOR Ben Nutley Young
LIR Joe Trayfoot Blindside
LIR Rob McCusker Welsh
NEW Todd Clever American
NEW Nili Latu Tongan
WOR Sam Lewis Welsh
WOR Sam Betty Who?
Recent U20s
2015 Lewis Ludlam Proper Fetcher
2015 Will Owen Decent
2014 Ross Moriaty Welsh now
2013 Jack Clifford Cant get enough game time
2013 Dave Sisi Blindside
2012 Matt Kvesic Inconsistent
2012 Ben Nutley Cant get enough game time
Doesn’t look too great for the next 4 years
Thank you Leon, that’s an illustration of the problem in a nutshell. Hoping some of those youngsters get their chances with their clubs ahead of some of these experienced overseas players.
I think whoever is the England coach in a months time needs to
* sit down with Connor O’shea and say look Robshaws future for England is at 6. I want you to give more game time to Wallace and Clifford at 7.
* Then off to Northampton to tell them to start introducing Ludlam to first class rugby.
* Then go find a retired world class fetcher of old and hire him to give coaching sessions to Kvesic, Clifford, Wallace, Ludlam, Clark and Fraser
Leon – love the idea, but it won’t happen. That is England’s huge problem.
If Conor O’shea thinks Robshaw is his best option at 7 to get a result this weekend, he won’t care what England want.
With central contracts in NZ, Wales, Ireland etc. it is very possible. I believe it was Gatland that asked Cardiff to get Halfpenny kicking more for example.
However, the clubs own the players whilst they have them and have no reason to listen to the RFU.
Unless we introduce central contacts (which would never happen because the clubs have too much cash), then it will never happen that way.
Jacob – Welsh clubs dialogue with the Wales coaches predates central contracts – in fact the contracts have little to do with the excellent interaction between the clubs and the Welsh management team (specifically them, not the WRU who they were at loggerheads with). Way before central contracts we also had Roberts moved to centre at Gats request (he was a fullback in the U21 world cup), Patch tried at fullback, space made for Gareth Davies at Scarlets, etc.
I suspect that without relegation, and with Cardiff being a mid table club for much of the last few years, we can try things without needing to be solely focussed on the weekends results.
Now I’m not sure it’s a great thing (I am a Cardiff supporter and would like them to do well, not sure if being an experimental setup for Wales is right for us) but I think in general this is how it works in Wales due to the general way most people see things, with Wales at the top of the pyramid, so mostly all working towards improving that. In England they seem to be more keen on the football model where the national side is tolerated providing it does what the clubs want – financial compensation, a stick to keep players from France, clubs have first dibs on players outside IRB windows, etc.
Completely agree with most of that Brighty – I personally much prefer the Welsh model. Hadn’t actually put two and two together regarding contracts; even the example I used went back years but for some reason I hadn’t twigged that it well proceeded the contracts.
Is the good relationships with the regions based on Gatland? Or does this go back further?
I am a Wasps fan (based in Surrey so not one that can go to games often now…but that’s a different chat), but personally I’d much rather see England do well than anything else. The clubs have far too much power and it had got to the point where it is too difficult to wrestle it back.
On that note; I’m not sure Stuart Lancaster having a larger influence on players and what position they play would help English rugby at all…
Further back than Gats Jacob. I can remember Dai Young discussing some Cardiff details back in the days of Ruddock and even before that. It’s not perfect (I remember in the early days Hook having more Welsh caps than Ospreys caps) because it relies on the managers buying into it and Lyn Jones was always a prickly sod who’d run through a glass window if you told him he couldn’t. However, on the whole it does us well and it’s one of the reasons we punch above our weight internationally. If we had the finances we could even be Irish level in our clubs but we have many, many years of in fighting and neglect to fix now before we can achieve that. (and we don’t want to borrow tens of millions to fund our pro game like Ireland do).
When is Moriarty’s contract up for renewal? I’d expect a strong effort from the WRU to bring him “home” now.
As an aside – I know he played for England U20s but I was delighted to see him turn out for Wales. It was bad enough seeing a Ruddock playing for Ireland, a Moriarty running out for England would have been painful.
Leon – really don’t understand this Kvesic inconsistent thing. He had a great season for Glos last year – all year – and has started this year very well. He’s a young player and will get better yet, inexperience possibly but not inconsistency.
Another interesting one for you. Glos playing two 7s at the moment with Kvesic and Lewis Ludlow. Moriarty on the bench.
Actually forget what I said about Ludlow – was having a brain fart! Jacob Rowan and Kvesic played as two 7s last week. Ludlow was 8 and is 6 this week but with Moriarty on the bench. Been a long day!
I watch a lot of premiership rugby and Kvesic just doesn’t look anything special. He has the odd very good game but he is not a turnover king or a great ball carrier.
You keep saying he had a great season last year but I would disagree. Maybe he would be better with experience but he’s been the lead man at glos for 3 years and in that time they have been pretty poor
I think we will just have to agree to disagree,
I hope you’re right and im wrong BTW
Kvesic and Fraser to fight it out for openside for me.
Thing is I think England need to accept that we may have to blood young players, trust them, accept they will take some beatings but that will help them and in four years time they could be world beaters. Look how long it took this NZ team to become world beaters (or indeed the England team of 2003)
Re Wood: I think his post WC comments about SL etc have shown him to be a future “committee man” with one eye on a nice sinecure once he stops playing.
The biggest losers here are the fans of English rugby. I’ll be gobsmacked if anything other than another cartload of management speak and PR tripe comes of the review. Certainly there will be no sudden outbreak of radical thinking or original inventiveness.
On the playing side we have four years to find the players and the staff to drive things forward.
You would expect Slade to establish himself. Ewers,Itoje and Kvesic/Fraser for the back row,the return of Attwood,Ben Morgan will be fine once he finds form and fitness, Daly and Hill as possibles in the centres and Nathan Earle to become the powerful winger that England lack.
I’m sure there are many others. We have the depth,we need the innovation.
I agree with the appraisal of Sam Burgess. I’ve watched him through his career at Bradford and at the Bunnies. I agree with Mike Ford, he is definitely a back rower. If allowed to develop in those roles, he will become an automatic choice – assuming that the right decisions are made by the England coach. Playing a player away from his natural (and club) position is always going to be a gamble.
Chris Robshaw is great at what he does on the pitch – except I thought that he’d gotten over making those types of wrong decisions.
I think that this is the first time that SL has disappointed us. He’s previously made selections based on form, sometimes surprising us all. Unfortunately, he tinkered at exactly the wrong time.
I’d agree strongly with the starting back three + Nowell and anyone who can distribute the ball to them and any forwards who can keep up with them.
I’d therefore suggest that Croft may be a better option than Wood for England if the bloke can stay fit, and therefore Wood may lose out, as both can only play 6 (no, Stuart, Wood isn’t an option at 8).
That surely has to be out gameplan going forward. Get the ball wide to our danger runners – Joseph and those outside him.
I’d say Ford has possibly seen his stock rise, as he was cruelly axed for the two big games, he oversaw a bonus point win against what proved to be a good Fiji side and a routine win over Uruguay. More to the point, he isn’t Farrell, who has taken some stick for having the temerity to be picked in a team that lost. Ford and Slade are manys’ pick for 10 and 12, so both have seen their stock rise.
I’d say Tom Youngs impressed me, having not had an England start for however long, the drop-off when Webber came on being most noticeable. With Hartley coming back and George and Cowan-Dickie coming through, Webber may also find himself out of future squads.
I think we could happily move on without Webber (as above), Wilson (as you mentioned), Wigglesworth (unforgivable drop against Wales and not as quick as our other 9s) and Barritt (as you mentioned), while Burgess will not be considered at 12 in future. None are first or even second choice, and all are getting on a bit.
That still leaves us with 26 of our original squad, with Hartley and Tuilagi (maybe) to come back and give us the bulk of our squad going forward. Others can then look to break in, players like Slater and Itoje will look to make their mark in the forwards and Daly can inject more pace in the backs, while others such as Corbisiero, Croft, Cipriani and Burrell will look to return to the squad.
How has Rowntree escaped the loser list? Our pack and set piece was utter pish, let alone the breakdown? You may recall that pack did not perform well in 11, with reactionary selections of Stevens, Moody, Deacon, Thompson, ahead of the likes of Corbs, Wood, Lawes and Hartley.
At the time it was blamed on Wells, but perhaps Wig is not all he is cracked up to be…
Agree. Scrum was baffling, they seemed good 12 months ago. Breakdown, I don’t think they’ve been adaptable enough for a long time (not to mention the lack of a fetcher, every team in World Cup SFs has got players who do that well.)
I was going to make essentially the same point, although Gatland liked him on the lions tour.
Looking back at the Six Nations this year, there was a sense that England were coming good in terms of being a more creative side who could win games by scoring tries, with a solid set piece, although there were question marks over their ability at the breakdown. The examples in the Six Nations being the second half in Cardiff which was excellent both in terms of retaining their own ball and putting pressure on Wales, but you can’t expect that teams and the ref are going to allow that to happen every time. Then, conversely, the Ireland game where they were bossed at the breakdown with Ireland efficiently removing England’s players from the area and England not knowing what to do about it.
Fast forward to the world cup and England’s set piece looked flaky, the breakdown too but it seemed like they could still score tries, so I fail to understand how the coaching staff felt that “reverting to type” “doing the English thing” i.e. punching up the middle was going to work when the main strength of the players they had was to be creative and move the ball. I get taking Burgess as an impact player but if Barrit was there to organise defence, then surely you replace Joseph with a creative player (Slade) for both the big pool games.
Anyways, I think there’s a good core to the side and this could be a good learning experience for the younger players, if they can bring on some of the U-20s who have been successful in recent years then the future could be pretty positive.
Nerer really been a fan of wood – hes not a ball carrier, not a fetcher, and no magician in the handling department.
Half of the probelme here is the robshaw would be better at 6, and a true openside bought in.
On a wider note i think a proper ball carrier like Ewers would be good at 6.
Think we have lots of good options at 6. We can go for an all-rounder like Robshaw or Wood, or we can look for something else in players like Croft, Ewers or Itoje. With Vunipola and Morgan providing options at 8, the only thing we are missing is an out-and-out 7. We’ve got Australia in Australia next summer, so whoever gets picked for the role is in for a baptism of fire.
Rowntree as well definitely looked out of his depth. The tight 5 were consistently turned inside out. The maddening thing is that there’s plenty of potential world class players (Itoje, Launchbury, Slade, Daly, Joseph, Watson, Hughes if he picks England) but they need mentorship and guidance to move from promising to top notch. Wood’s a good example of what can happening to a promising player who doesn’t kick on in his development and it would be criminal to have another lost generation.
This I’d agree with strongly. I saw one article or another saying “how many World Class players has Lancaster been given?” Only the luckiest of coaches inherit World Class players, the job of an International coach is to turn the top club players from decent/good international players into World Class ones.
Maddening inconsistencies with gameplan and selection have stunted this team’s development. It comes down to the simple fact that the coaches aren’t good enough.
I was very encouraged by Lancaster when he first came in, but he’s not been able to cross the finish line in a Six Nations Championship and now he’s compounded this with an awful World Cup.
For me, whoever comes next (or Lancaster if he gets another go), has to settle on his gameplan and then identify the backrow and centre combinations he needs to fulfill his gameplan, and then give those guys all his backing and plenty of time.
It may be that, with Australia coming up after the Six Nations, a “lighter” midfield of Ford, Slade and Joseph won’t be physically overwhelmed and it would be a good chance to try that out for 8 games, before deciding if we need a bit more bulk with a player like Burrell or the returning Tuilagi.
In terms of backrow, as mentioned above it may be tough for a new 7 at first with Warburton, O’Brien and Hardie waiting in the Six Nations and then Fardy, Pocock and Hooper in the summer, but if we pick the right guy then he’ll come through these games stronger and the time to judge may be in the Autumn Internationals.
Agree with both of the comments above, only issue is who’re the candidates for being a long-term option at number 7?
So Marler … I thought he was brilliant because he destroyed the Welsh scrum? Genuine question then as this Blog seems to be suggesting that all of the stuff about him not driving straight is true by saying he’s a liability? He can’t be amazing unless he is allowed to get away with it, hence Mako instead?
Slade – benefited massively in this poll from not playing in the meaningful games. A bit like Armitage who is now the best English player in the world by reputation. Slade needs to play some top end international games first so we can find out whether he is a Halfpenny or a Vainikolo. On that I agree that his stock has risen simply by virtue that he will now get a run of games to find out if he can do the business.
Lawes – a big man who loves hitting the oppositions backs with TV hits but doesn’t seem present when the breakdown is contested by opposition forwards. A definite loser.
Launchbury – He’s going to make the vacant 2nd row slot (the one alongside AWJ) very hard to choose – Henderson, Gray, Launchbury. A winner.
There were English winners at this RWC????
Well the rest of the rugby World hopes you stick with Lancaster and Robshaw….there again another post RWCala 2011 with another Night of the Long Knives and recriminations and fall out will also be really funny to watch from stage left
Start everything all over again by firing all the coaches and let the new head coach(not English) chose his own coaching team and players and back their judgement.Write off 6N and Oz tour in results terms just focus on learning and developing as a squad.
Last word on Lancaster.Player discipline all over the media but no discipline re Wigs and AF whose offence was 100 times more serious.Double standards and no integrity.
Can’t help feeling those that gained the most were those that didn’t play much. It’s an old adage, but undoubtedly true, that players often look at their best when they’ve not been selected.
Nathan Hughes will be England’s no 8 in the 6 nations….anyway fairly moot. I think it was all badly executed and looking for dying embers is pointless.
Except he’s not eligible until June 2016.
you noh nuffing Jon Snow…
Oh no wait a minute yes you do :-)
So Cipriani, Eastmond and Wade are definite write-offs? No mention of any of them for the future, but Cipriani is twice the player he was three or four years ago, Eastmond offers a fantastic eye for space and great feet alongside Joseph, and Wade has pace to burn.
It depends on the coaching situation Andy. If SL retains his post then Cips will be out in the cold again,ditto Wade and Eastmond. I think most fans would have Cips in a heartbeat.
I am heartened to hear that many people at the top of English rugby are as disgusted as the rest of us by the abysmal failure of our performance in our own world cup and the once in a lifetime opportunity that has been missed in some many ways.Once the cup is over we can expect fireworks and blood letting.Getting rid of SL and his cohorts will become detail.It is our failure since 2003 that many powerful figures wish to address it is said
Did you see Wades attempted tackle in the try of the week video? I think that it shows why he isn’t in the team. Can you imagine any other successful international wing falling off a tackle like that. He has been criticised for this in the past and I worry that he might become Ashton all over again. To be fair Ford made a right hash of his too.
I’m amazed no one mentions Cipriani at fly half. I’d have him anyday before the other two.
He offers the better attacking/running rugby options with that unpredictability opponents hate. He’s getting on in his years in rugby terms so use him now whilst you can with Ford the young tyro under-study and Owen 3rd choice in my books.
Mainly because Cipriani cannot be trusted tempermentally or behaviourally. Yes he maybe amazing in one game, but he’s as likely to go.missing in the next 5 games.
How do you know that Jez. Have you spoken to him recently?
He WAS unreliable round a outs the time he went out with Brooke Shields or whoever it was! A long time ago. He is pretty much reformed now I would argue judging by his behaviour, what he has said in the media and his inclusion in the bigger squad. Can only judge a man by what he does and says!
THIS FAN says bring him back. You know what Jez I’m pretty sure Woodward has said bring him back in the papers.
What he says in the media…
Does that include his brain fart before the Australia game?
I know no more than anybody else. However, there are two things that go against him in my view:
1. Most importantly form and performance. Throughout his career he has shown flashes of brilliance but all too many periods of sustained ordinariness. The one thing, of in my view many, you can say about Farrell ahead of Cipriani is that in a game where things don’t go right Farrell won’t drop his head and lose interest or effort. An example being Saracens vs Sale where Cipriani, in a team being outclassed went missing for most of the game. This has been a concern through out his career, and doesn’t seem to be improving.
2. Behaviourally he appears to be a ticking time bomb. Don’t forget he has a drink drive case hanging over him. He doesn’t seem to have the personal controls to be able to not get in trouble.
For those two reasons I’d say not only Farrell and Ford are ahead of him, but also Stephen Myler who perhaps needs a go too.
What is one of those? You will have to enlighten me rapidly. Whatever it is sounds massively important in the world of English Rugby.
A brain fart is when you say something incredibly dumb and damaging
http://www.therugbyblog.com/cipriani-not-one-australian-would-get-into-this-england-team
Interesting what you say Jez. However it’s a punitive and judgemental selection policy that you are prescribing to; in the same mould as Lancaster’s which has seen Armitage denied caps for punitive reasons, Hartley unnecessarily so the same, and the likes of Care, Slade, Nowell and Burrell being demoted.
It is better in my humble opinion to opt for the attack-minded, running rugby type of player who will make things happen for you. It is a particularly ‘English phenomena’ that is sporting conservatism (with a small ‘c’.)
When these types of players are playing, a lot of the ‘problems’ are remedied in play naturally.
My first concern is always playing ability and form. In this case there seems to a very blinkered view to both Cipriani’s consistency and form. There is no doubting his talents but he is, judging on his career, not consistent at all in showing that talent.
Add into this two factors. Firstly, does his behaviour get in the way of his ability to perform to which the answer is, judging on previous seasons, yes. Secondly, are there players who can perform more consistently, albeit without perhaps the highs, but also the lows, in the international game to which the answer is, again a resounding yes.
Whether you like it or not, Rugby union is a team sport where talent can be accommodated but not at the expense of the team ethic. Cipriani falls into the category of not worth the grief for the contribution he makes. Stefon Armitage and Dylan Hartley also fall into, though far less clearly, that category.
We will have to agree to disagree. A good coach (the best and England can afford him whomever he may be!) would I believe bond the Mavericks into the team. It is what they do after all!
Woodward was and still could be one of those coaches as could many other foreign coaches (rather than domestic)!
England needs to STOP, I repeat STOP, this puerile wasting/disregarding of good natural talent.
Thanks Leon. It is now in my vernacular usage.
It’s not a reason to dismiss his international services. He was just in his mind supporting England Rugby (perhaps sucking up even to show collegiate spirit which he is accused of not previously possessing or exhibiting)
It doesn’t take a psychologist’s services to work that one out!