Earlier today we posted a poll asking you to pick the England team you’d like to see take to the field against Scotland this weekend – thanks to those of you that took part. Below, we’ve listed the team you selected, alongside the one picked by Stuart Lancaster and his coaches this afternoon.
They’re almost identical, but we’ve included the percentages of people that voted for each player too – as you can see, some are far more heavily favoured than others.
| Number | Readers’ XV | England XV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Marler (75%) | Marler |
| 2 | Hartley (55%) | Hartley |
| 3 | Cole (95%) | Cole |
| 4 | Attwood (55%) | Attwood |
| 5 | Lawes (92%) | Lawes |
| 6 | Haskell (72%) | Haskell |
| 7 | Robshaw (93%) | Robshaw |
| 8 | Vunipola (91%) | Vunipola |
| 9 | B Youngs (63%) | B Youngs |
| 10 | Ford (74%) | Ford |
| 11 | Nowell (77%) | Nowell |
| 12 | Slade (46%) | Burrell |
| 13 | Joseph (95%) | Joseph |
| 14 | Watson (95%) | Watson |
| 15 | Brown (96%) | Brown |
Just the one difference, then, which is encouraging to see – it’s hard to think of a time when the fans have been as aligned with Lancaster on selection as right now. Of course, there’s a big caveat here – you were only allowed to pick those in the 35 man squad for this weekend. Had every single English qualified player been available, I daresay the results might not have been quite so aligned.
Henry Slade is preferred by the fans with 46% of the vote to Luther Burrell’s 31%. Some other interesting stats: Mike Brown is the most picked player by the fans, with 96% of votes, while 5% think Sam Burgess is ready for international rugby this weekend – I’ll have what they’re having. Astonishingly – or perhaps not – the same percentage picked Billy Twelvetrees, making him comfortably the least popular selection in Lancaster’s actual squad.
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
24 replies on “How does our readers’ England XV compare with Lancaster’s?”
Not surprised, as Jamie says if it was open to others outside the squad may have been some different choices. Did Slade make bench? I was hoping to see SL give Cips a chance in a competitive fixture, as he hasn’t don’t hold out much hope for him when Farrell is fit again.
Good team though and looking forward to the match
Let’s just hope we’re up by 10 when 36 comes on and not down by 10 – that way, all he has to do is run around tackling people.
Jamie, almost certainly Burgess has support for the same reason as Slade. Most (or at least some) want to see them in the WC mix and the only way that is likely to happen is if they play the next two relatively unimportant games. Neither player would disgrace themselves, we would still probably win both matches but we may just find the x factor that is missing.
Not sure there’s been any real proof that Burgess would provide that x-factor just yet. In the future, quite possibly, but right now he need to be racking up game time for Bath. Including him before this World Cup would be a mistake. Come 2019, however, he could be amongst the best players in the world.
Slade on the other hand, should be included ASAP.
We still have a chance of winning the 6N, so I wouldn’t call this game “unimportant”. We have 3 truly unimportant games in the summer – France home and away and Ireland at home – where we can try out fringe players.
As a Bath fan who watches them week in, week out I can tell you Burgess is nowhere near ready.
Am I the only one who groans whenever I see a list of possible english inside centres. Burrell and Barrett are good players, they both work hard and seem nice blokes but neither seems to have the all round skills required for this pivotal role. As for Twevetrees he seems to have all the skills but somehow the sum of the parts is disappointing. It’s not even as though there is a lot of choice out there. Sllade could be the answer but needs to play in the position for a few games first. Esmond has all the skills but really needs to be a bit bigger. As for Burgess to pick him at the moment would be sheer desperation. There are a few young inside centres of talent and perhaps we should be trying to fast track them but that means their clubs would have to regularly pick them.
Molly, I love your description of 12T. Sums him up perfectly for me. Been trying to work out what it is about 12T that disappoints. Possibly defences just find him eady to read. Another one, I often see him go for the right pass/offload but he just fails to get it to hand. Is this lack of communication/experience with teammates or does he just not have quite the skill level required at this level where margins are that much finer?
Anyone out there familiar with the phenomena of “availability bias”?
Brown,Watson,Banahan,JJ,Burrell,Cole,YoungsT,Corbisiero,Kvesic,B Vunipola,Fearns,Attwood,Lawes,Simpson,Ford. Reps:Pennell,Cipriani,Dickson,Brookes,Webber,Marler,Kruis,Robshaw.
hate mail to the usual address!
Kvesic and Fearns over Robshaw/Haskell/Wood? Was this meant as a serious suggestion of what you think the team should look like?
Yes, why? Robshaw looked knackered against Ireland. Haskell gave away penalties like they are going out of fashion. Can’t recall the trio you’ve picked ever starting a game under Lancaster by the way. I have put Robbo on the bench. Fearns is big,aggressive and a good carrier. Kvesic is a proper O/S, and Billy needs to play in order to become the player he could be. No.I’m not from Bath,I just think that trio would prove too powerful for most opponents and it wouldn’t hurt Mr L to widen his selections.
Oh and I’d make Cole captain.
Wasn’t suggesting those three as a trio, simply as the best flankers England have at their disposal.
Kvesic may be in the mold of a “proper 7”, but he’s never looked like he is good enough to be a test level player. Robshaw was outstanding in Cardiff, and has been on many big occasion for England over the past 18 months – I did not use to be a big fan but his form for England can’t really be argued with – one game doesn’t change that.
Has Cole ever captained a side before? I’ve never had him down as the leadership type.
Must admit I selected the side that SL did, other than Parling for Attwood – which I don’t mind too much about.
I don’t think a Ford/Slade/JJ midfield offers enough of a gainline threat. Off first phase ball England really need someone that can smash them over the gainline. You only have to look at the most recent AI’s to site what happens when you don’t have that. Barritt and Eastmond just didn’t get us over the gainline off first phase ball – it makes it incredibly difficult to play from there.
Do think Slade should have been included the the England squad earlier so he was at least an option to select on the bench this week.
It may be Wasps bias showing through but on the discussion of players from outside the 35 man squad, Simpson, Daly and Wade are the three that I’d want to see. With Simpson on the bench and one of Wade or Daly in the 23 shirt.
Ford only 76% / Marler 75% / Haskell 72% and Attwood 55%???
Not very long ago, these were amongst the best performers and would likely have garnered 90+%
Not to mention Johnny May….
Jacob, not sure how you can say ford,JJ and Slade wouldn’t offer enough gain line threat? Certainly aren’t hefty ball carriers but more effective in meters made/defenders beaten than Burrell/12T etc. I think it would be a different gameplan with players like these but not necessarily less effective?
Off first phase ball (when defenses are set), in order to break the gainline we’d have to use JJ. Slade has many qualities (play making, passing, kicking, defense) but breaking gainlines off set defenses isn’t one of them.
By using JJ in that way off first phase ball you then minimise his effectiveness as he’ll spend less time in space.
Maybe I’m wrong – but I think there is a reason every test nation has a big ball carrier in the centres which they can use off first phase.
I get that but surely that is a pattern of play rather than a necessity? Couldn’t England adapt the attacking movement to utilise a bigger player from back row or have a big winger at first receiver and release the midfield slightly wider? Not saying they should just that it is possible to minimize the weakness through strategy whilst emphasizing strengths.
Interesting point Stu. Serious question: Do we have any big wingers to call on?Banahan and Lancaster are still doing handbags,Benjamin seems to be routinely ignored,Varndell ditto and he’s off to Bristol.Rokoduguni must have said something inappropriate like “I have a mind of my own”,Thompstone?
After him I’m struggling. Did you have anyone in mind?
It can definitely be done with a big winger – but Roko is the only real option and he has been out of form for Bath for a while now so is tough to pick.
Banahan has never seemed to cut it at international level. Benjamin can’t stay fit long enough to prove any form.
Teecee mentioned Varndell below – is he a big winger? Never seen him play like that or be used in the midfield by Wasps?
If there was a winger good enough to play that way, it’d be an option, but at the moment there is not.
On the back row suggestion – they can’t really be used effectively off first phase ball so it really needs to be a back.
Tom Varndell is tall, but he is not the “big” winger in the sense that we are discussing here.
Not in particular, although i think Banahan wouldn’t be the worst addition to the team – thought he was outstanding before he got injured. My point was more that it is the system we play that prevents faster, more creative players coming in rather than anything else. What’s to stop SL getting a coach that can spell attack, picking fast attacking distributors in midfield and using back row/second row/wingers off first phase?
Again, not saying we should but it is certainly plausible (in my mind) to pick players in midfield to impact the game and adjust the play to cover potential weakness like first phase carries.
I do think there would be an option to look at it. But at test level in order to play an expansive game you first need to get over the gainline. England often make this mistake where they go wide off crap back foot ball and that’s when they look stagnant.
The fact is now at this level, the breakdown and the gainline at the two key areas. Win the breakdown battle, then get someone over the gainline – then you can start to play rugby.
NZ never start flinging the ball around with crap ball – they do so methodically, at the right time and once they are on the front foot (or from turnover ball).
Good point, you must have front foot ball. BUT in loose play this can come from the forwards or a big winger (roko and banahan seemt he best options if fit/on form). Not convinced by the need for a big player on set peice ball. Look at a couple of the tries NZ create off set peice, or JJ’s second try against Italy. They rely on running hte right lines, dummy runs, loop arounds and moving the ball. On set peice there is naturally more space because there are not 8 big lumps crowding the defensive line.
I agree in loose play – I don’t agree about set piece ball though.
NZ will definitely wouldn’t use a crash ball off first phase every time, that isn’t my point. But there is a reason they’ve played Nonu whenever he is fit for the last 10 years or so. If he isn’t getting them over the gainline, he is offering decoy runs which attracts defenders. You haven’t got to smash you way over the gainline off every first phase ball, but I do think having that option as a variation is important.
Only saw this guy just now! – Tyrese Johnson-Fisher – maybe you could parachute him in for the WC!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lULIHEAeOlk
DDD