15. Mike Brown: 6.5
Not the heroics of opening weekend, but he was still immensely solid under the high ball and always returned it with interest. His angry man persona even managed to rile up the usually placid Sam Warburton. He was, however, the man holding on right at the end to give Biggar the crucial shot at goal.
14. Anthony Watson: 5
Must take half of the blame for the winning try as he was treading water in no-man’s land, neither rushing up into the line nor dropping back. Nothing more than glimpses of his attacking threat.
13. Brad Barritt: 5
Shares the blame with Watson, as he was the man inside who initially rushed up, then doubted himself and dropped back. As usual, offered very little in attack as Wales comfortably dealt with the English midfield.
12. Sam Burgess: 5.5
There were a few powerful bursts but Wales had done their homework and didn’t allow him to offload. He was like a rabbit in the headlights on one occasion in the first half, drifting in when England had ample cover, allowing Scott Williams to break through the line untouched. Not a resounding success, but not a calamity either.
11. Jonny May: 6.5
Finished his try easily enough and showed huge bravery and skill to run his way out of a potentially sticky situation a bit later on. Like Watson, though, he didn’t see nearly enough ball.
10. Owen Farrell: 7.5
One of very few England players to emerge with credit, his goal-kicking was deadly accurate and his work-rate in defence made it at times seem like England had an extra flanker on the pitch. Justified his selection ahead of Ford.
9. Ben Youngs: 8
If it is too much to suggest that had Youngs have stayed on, England would have won the game, then it is not far from the truth. Youngs was at his sniping best, drawing defenders in around the fringes and creating holes for others. England’s attack slowed down noticeably when he departed.
1. Joe Marler: 6.5
Did his job at the set piece with minimal bother, as he generally got the better of Thomas Francis. Struggled to make any impact in the loose.
2. Tom Youngs: 6.5
Could almost rewrite the rating from the Fiji game – the first lineout went astray but turned out to be the only one that did, and he put in another huge shift around the park to finish second top tackler.
3. Dan Cole: 6
He had Gethin Jenkins on toast in the scrums but he loses points as one of the main culprits for not playing to the referee at the breakdown and giving away two silly penalties.
4. Geoff Parling: 6
A nuisance on opposition line-out ball, stealing and disrupting Baldwin to good effect. Was it his call at the end to go to the front of the line-out? As the man who calls it usually, you have to assume so – and that was not the right decision, as it allowed Wales to easily barge England into touch.
5. Courtney Lawes: 5
Departed at half-time with a leg injury, but it was an inauspicious first forty minutes for the Northampton lock anyway. Gave away a penalty and fell off a couple of tackles.
6. Tom Wood: 5
Another of the key culprits to give away breakdown penalties, the only reason his score isn’t lower is that he was brilliant in the line-out.
7. Chris Robshaw: 3.5
I know it, you know it, Lancaster must have known it – how did Robshaw not know it? The decision to go for broke at the end was just plain wrong in a game of this magnitude. Other than that, he should have been screaming at his players to stay away from the breakdown unless they were absolutely sure they could win the ball, such was the way Garces was refereeing it. As it was, England conceded seven penalties in kickable positions and were punished for all of them – Robshaw has to take some blame for that.
8. Billy Vunipola: 6
Made a host of metres returning kicks, but was usually felled disappointingly easily by the first tackler. Seemed a deliberate strategy for him to hang back, but would England have been better off letting their dangerous back three have a go a bit more often?
Replacements: 4.5
Several of these were injury-enforced, so the accusations of ‘subbing by numbers’ are a touch unfair. But it has to be said that, other than Launchbury who put in a solid shift, not one of the England replacements had a positive impact on the game. Wigglesworth in particular was disappointing as the game slowed noticeably when he entered the fray, while Haskell is not powerful enough to be an international number eight these days. George Ford didn’t have any great say in the game but as one of two kickers on the pitch at the end, could he have been more vocal when England decided to go for the corner?
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
As you know by now, we are hilarious, and you should be following us on Facebook and Twitter. 
I think the rating for Burgess is a touch low. Yes there was one positional defensive lapse when williams burst throught the middle but generally he nullified Roberts threat, made strong runs over the gain line to give front foot ball, drew in defenders on dummy lines and tackled well. England looked weaker in attack when he went off.
Also think Barritts rating is a touch high as he was rubbish all game and barely contributted anything positive to the performance. two bad games in a row and looking massively out of form. iNot sure where the midfield goes from here as im not sure I trust Burgess defensively against Aus but he offers so much more than Barritt in every other aspect
Faz, Burgess, Slade would probably be my pick but far from comfortable with it
Here here, hopefully JJ is back for the weekend but Barritt needs weighing in.
Hallam Amos – 6
Brad Barrit – 5
Burgess 5.5
I know, I know. It’s all subjective, not a science, but in it’s an interesting contrast and surely if it’s not meant to be debated/replied to then it wouldn’t be on this blog. Brad Barrit, an outside centre in an international rugby match, made 4 metres with the ball in hand and beat 0 defenders. Let’s think that over – the outside centre. The link man just outside the furnace at 10/12, the man who can take advantage of the inside centres charges, offloads, defence dragging runs. Made 4 metres in attack and beat 0 defenders. And that is scored as a bang on middle of the road average performance. A centre in is debut start, who makes more metres and actually beats some defenders is 1 pt above him. The inside centre on his own team, who did his job well (tackled and charged) is only marginally above him. I genuinely could not give Barrit more than a 3. That’s before we consider the amount of times he was shown up on his outside, one of which led to the Welsh try.
Not Sure Amos is the right player from the welsh team to compare to but yes it does rather prove the point im trying to make above
Absolutely 100% agree!!! I’d struggle to give him a 3!!
Lancaster picks him on the back of his much praised abilities as a ‘defensive organiser’ yet he’s missed multiple tackles over the course of the first two games, and gave away three penalties against Fiji!! If you’re being picked because your defensive abilities are so much better than the other options then the minimum you should be doing is making all your tackles. He’s not even managing that!!! He offers nothing going forward so one really questions the point of him being there.
No doubt he’ll still be picked because the Aussies have such a talented backline.
It’s about time our coaches stopped worrying about what the opposition can do to us and started making the opposition worry about what our players can do to them!!
Burgess had a good game as did Billy V. The removal of both those players was the catalyst for England’s collapse.
The desicion to go for the line out was right, however the fact that England were in that position in the first place (for which Robshaw needs to be blamed wholly, he was the worst offender at the breakdown) and going to the front and not going for an attacking line out take at the rear made the desicion wrong.
All in all Robshaw has been shown up both positionally and as a captain in a high pressure situation.
I thought Dan Cole was the worst offender but may be wrong (according to ESPN scrum, Cole, Wood and Brown gave away 2 penalties each, Robshaw one)
How Barritt got more than a 2 is beyond me. Poor in defence, worse in attack. Did he make one positive contribution during the 80 minutes?
Outside of the Wiliams break, I thought Burgess was very good. Not as glamorous as some would like but he also didn’t have a JJ running off his shoulder to offload to. Got over the gainline regularly and stopped Roberts from doing so in return – what more do you want from a 12? First half in particular, between him and Farrell, Wales consistently going backwards phase after phase. No coincidence that it changed significantly when he went off.
Farrell I would have one point higher, actually thought he was brilliant. Certainly an 8.5 based on the first hour. However, lost influence once SL decided he should move to 12 with 20 mins to go which maybe drags him down to an 8 through no real fault of his own.
SL has to go if we lose on Saturday. I normally support him but he has made too many mistakes now.
1. Continuing to play Barritt, even at 13, despite the vast amount of evidence that he offers nothing. Pairing him with Burgess made him look even worse.
2. Bring Ford of for Burgess. Worst substitution that I have seen in years. As soon as it happened everyone in the pub looked round confused. Funnily enough, Wales then constantly got over the gainline.
3. Hartley should have been on the pitch, best hooker we have and was not banned for this game.
4. Throwing Robshaw right under the bus. Yes the decision was absolute madness, but don’t do it in public.
5. Not having told Robshaw the permutations of possible late kicks. Should have been laid out. A draw is ok. We got a bonus point vs Fiji and have the massive benefit of playing Uruguay last. So even if Wales get a bonus point vs Fiji, it would be points difference/tries scored, and we could play an amateur Uruguay side knowing exactly what we need. Poor leadership to not have thought this through.
The only reason I feel for SL is that I don’t actually think there are many great players in this England side, through no fault of his own. A non-rugby fan asked me last week who our best players are, and I genuinely didn’t know who to say. Who are? Brown maybe, but he is petulant. Dan Cole is top class but his penalty count was embarrassing on Saturday. Lauchbury, Watson and Farrell (maybe Nowell and Slade too) are the three that I think one day could be but they are all still years from their prime. Point being, can we name one player in their prime in the England squad that would even enter a debate about World XV? Nope, not one.
no 10 is there to win the game and kick goals, yes Farrell was good defending, yes his penalty kicks were great but game management & leading the attacks he was poor 5 for me. Barritt and Cole were the main offenders at the ruck not Robshaw, 3.5 is rediclous
Cannot pick Farrell, Burgess and Barritt against Australia if we want to win the game with 4 tries
4 tries? Are you mad?
Also, what about Farrell’s game management was poor? Though for the most part it was very good. We noticeably lost control when he moved out of the 10 channel, so I’m unsure how removing him completely will help us control a game? Our best periods of matches over the past few months have all come when Farrell is standing in the 10 shirt, I don’t think that is a co-incidence.
Cole, yes the penalties were poor, but that is on Robshaws head in my mind. Once did you see him speak to players about it? His leadership was awful. A tight head props first and foremost job is scrummaging, he did a great job there so I think that keeps him in the side.
Barritt in the 13 shirt (let alone the 12), is the worst thing I have seen in the England centre since Ayoola Erinle.
I think it’s unfortunate that Cole is under scrutiny for those mistakes. It’s great that he’s handy at the breakdown, but it isn’t his primary role and it seems he and others are put under pressure having to make up for the deficiencies of our back row who don’t seem to be able to do their job. When this world cup is over and there’s a post mortem the back row has to be seriously looked at but there aren’t a whole load of players knocking on the door.
Disagree to an extent. It is not his main role, but nowadays almost all payers need to be proficient at the breakdown and expecting Cole to be good there is not a step too far
BOD was excellent at the breakdown, Gethin Jenkins probably turns over more ball than the Welsh back row combined, the Kiwi front row and second row are all terrors at the breakdown. None of this is the main role of these players
The breakdown is no longer, if it ever was, one man’s role – both clearing out and stealing ball should be undertaken by all the forwards and sometimes the backs as well if they find themselves in a position to do so
What should not happen is payers continually giving away the same penalty when the ref has clearly indicated that he will not be giving any leeway.
England’s main problems at the breakdown are two-fold:
1. An inability to learn and adapt to the ref
2. A lack of aggressive rucking – both on our and oppo ball. Too often we do not put the necessary numbers in to clear rucks out and produce quick ball or to attack the opponent’s ball. Alan Wyn Jones (supported by Davies) was v good at slowing English ball down and clearing English bodies off their own ball on Saturday. I do not think Lawes and Parling are big or aggressive enough to have an effect at the ruck in the same way and it hurts us. Just watch Etzebeth or Retallick to see how it shoudl be done. Unfortunately we don;t have anyone in the squad who could do similar, since Attwood was left behind
B***ocks.
How many people when that penalty was called said go for the corner. More than would care to admit I guess.
What made it wrong, was the call to go for the first jumper. The easiest one to defend, knowing Wales were going to load the lineout defence. That to me says there wasn’t confidence in the thrower.
If it had come off he would have scored an 8 or 9 on your ratings. It didn’t, but it was down to the execution of the lineout rather than the decision to go for it.
If he’d opted for the kick, how would that have been seen if Farrell had missed it? It wasn’t a simple kick, lets not forget that. It was win or bust and either way he would have been criticised as people seem to love to do just that.
The penalty decision I didn’t agree with was the scrum one in front of the posts. I would have been screaming for my forwards to regroup and scrum again, knowing that the big shove would have resulted in another penalty or better.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Not sure about that. I was with about 8 lads in the pub and every single one of us went mental when we kicked for the corner. I thought it was a poor decision.
At that point, Wales were decimated with injuries and a few days from playing a very good Fiji side. Getting a bonus point there would have been extremely difficult for them. If we had drawn, our bonus point against Fiji would separate us. It would then just come down to who would do better against Aus – our record against Aus is much better than Wales so I’d back that over a line out every day of the week.
The decision to throw to the front betrayed a lack of faith in the lineout, and that lack of faith should have been factored in to the decision to kick for the corner.
Farrell had been kicking well, take the three points, then still have 2 minutes to go for the win.
But actually, I think the game was lost not by this decision, but by the endless kickable penalties that kept Wales in the match.
Absolutely, but the lineout had been functioning better than in more recent games.
Regardless, Robshaw would have been slated if we’d drawn the game, for not going for the win.
The decision to maul it, let alone to throw to the front, was idiotic. Wales’s backline had two scrum halves, two fly halves and a winger playing centre. The ball should have come off the top and onto the runners whilst all the forwards were tied up
It was especially silly given Charteris was on the field
A thought came to me while reading these comments. Remember in the 6N,England going long and Toner picking the throw off? Poor decision making again,which was replicated on saturday night.
It’s this headless chicken mentality that is killing England. Either they are just collectively and individually thick or ,more likely ,they are having the courage to play it as they see it coached out of them.
Makes Bomber’s rush to blame “the players” al the more iffy to me.
Absolute rubbish. It wasn’t win or bust at all.
The clock was on 77 minutes when they kicked to the corner. If Farrell missed it, it’s a 22 drop out. Re-gain possession and work your way in to DG position.
If Farrell kicks it you’re level on points, and will be receiving the ball from the kick out. Keep it alive, and maybe work your way down to within DG goal, if not, you come out of it with some points.
I agree with this. Its not like the penalty was bang on 80 mins
I can’t decide on that decision.
Some of the abuse for it seems to come from the idea that Eng have a brilliant chance against Aus. Personally if it was Wales in that position I’d have backed them going for the win – do we want to leave us with needing a win against Aus to qualify? Not a chance – and I genuinely think Eng seem to be under estimating Aus a bit. Last two years, end of season matches against a touring Aussie side who are all over the place with internal strife, Eng win. Even Wales nearly beat them ffs. This year it’s a cohesive Rugby Championship winning Aus side with a scrum good enough to beat NZ. It’s a knockout rugby match where the best backline in the group meets the worst ( …. ok, I’ll admit that’s a dig! Just trying to enjoy things here :-)). So for me Eng needed the win on Sat night, badly. As did Wales.
However, in the two lineouts before, England had been under immense pressure from Charteris who was now on. We’d actually won the previous Eng lineout, a throw to the middle, only a couple of minutes earlier. So as someone else had said – this should have been factored into the decision.
So do I blame him for trying win? No, they needed a win. Do I think the lineout then sucked? Yes, big time. Is SL an arse for not immediately backing his captain? Undoubtedly.
I don’t think going for a draw is based on beating Wales at all.
For me it is based on two things:
1. Wales are play Fiji in a couple days with a patched together back line. I think they’ll win but I’d be surprised if they got a BP.
2. I don’t think Wales are most likely to beat Aus than we are (not that we will beat them).
Based on the above, our BP against Fiji may well have seen us through. Assuming we did both lose to Aus but you did manage to get a BP, I believe it goes down to tries scored? In that case, we play Uruguay last knowing exactly what we need.
Either way, both of those options are far better than that line out.
Actually that’s a good point Jacob – you’re right, I was wrong on this one. Didn’t think it through like that i.e. that we can both lose to Aus and one of us still qualify if it was a draw on Sat.
I also agree we won’t be getting a BP on Thursday. A win for us and a win for Aus on Sat is what I am praying for (as I’ve said elsewhere the latter is not Anti-English, it is simply the easiest way for us to get through to the quarters).
Absolutely right. Just as I’m praying Fiji somehow beat Wales on Wednesday. It brings us back into play even if we don’t beat Aus!
If we don’t beat Australia we don’t deserve to progress.
This for me is the key point, the permutations and combinations must have been considered before hand, e.g. what is the value of a draw and do we need go for broke for a win.
For me I’d say we had 90% chance of a draw and a 25% (at best as we are poor track record of converting these opportunities) chance of a win. So unless some “genius” had figured out there was no real value to a draw this should have been an automatic shot at the posts with no onfield decision to be made.
I think it should be mentioned that not only did Ford leave our defensive line with holes, he also was responsible for continually kicking away possession. Not good kicks either, but up and unders that went right to Wales with not a sniff of a challenge. Not a good showing from our ‘most creative fly half’
Not sure that’s quite fair on Ford, seemed to be trying to exectue a pre-defined plan which isn’t part of his natural game, another player who seems to be being coached out of his intuitions (see further comments below)…
I agree with most of the above that Barritt should be several notches lower. He was picked to do one thing, organise the defence and called blitz on the halfway line when surely a drift would have snuffed out the risk. This man is not test standard, despite what all the Sarries fans say. What’s the betting that Stu puts him in at 12 with Slade in what would be centre pairing number 376.
We should have gone for Farrell, Burgess and Slade. It was tried and at least had been tested. Slade is a good defender, a great communicator, has good hands and provides a kicking option. That SL is so blind to the obvious talent he has under his bug nose is astounding.
To lose at home to an injury ravaged Wales (hats off to you btw) is unacceptable. Regardless of the result on Saturday I think Lancaster and his inexperienced team should go, so we don’t p*ss away the great crop of u21 talent that is now coming through.
I think these are fair scores (although may be a little high for Barritt). I think there was probably at least two replacements that didn’t need to be made, and that is Wiggy and Ford. Unless Ben Youngs was injured (and he didn’t look it really) what was the point of bringing Wiggy on? What were any replacement backs going to bring to a game like that unless they were direct like for like swaps? Bringing Ford on in a game where we were struggling at the breakdown is a tad pointless really. He may have got some decent ball off set piece plays, but the Welsh midfield defence is too strong, which is why I thought Farrell had started the game anyway?
Poor decision making and poor execution.
I would start with Farrell, Burgess and Slade with Ford and Nowell on the bench for the Aus game.
My only hope is that Aus start with Cooper at 10, because he left a lot of points on the field against Uruguay, and Farrell will kick his penalties all day long.
Ford came on as a planned substitution. SL had picked a bench to make an impact in a tight game. He didn’t adjust his plan when instead of a tight game it was a) an England ahead game and b) Wales changing their gameplan because they’d lost the power to play direct OR Wales deliberately changing the points of attack as they moved into the last quarter due to them knowing their fitness would back them (for that either/OR it’s down to your own prejudices which you believe I think).
I am pretty sure I read that Youngs was injured. The madness was having Wigglesworth on the bench, in the squad even, at all. Not an international quality 9. Proved it.
On current form Wiggy is still a better option than Care. Better passer of the ball, better kicker, and a better tackler. Care has a terrible habit of coming on, doing one good thing, and then two or three dreadful things.
Why is Care out of form? His “club form” led to excellent performances in 2013. 4 months with this coaching setup and he has no form.
I’d say Lawes is another example of someone performing well below his “club form” at the moment.
Can’t agree with that – Care was woeful all of last season. However, did look to have some zip back in one of the warm up games. God forbid Youngs is out then I think I’d start Care, more through the fact Wiggy is so poor than anything else.
OK, admit my opinion was based on the 2013 vintage.
If the cup was being played in Jan/Feb then there is a stronger case for Wiggy’s better kicking game, however for now we have a certain bloke called Joe Simpson available who I think would have been a far better option.
2013 was two years ago Matt. Most players don’t hold form for that long, and Care’s club form last season (2014/2015)was pretty poor. Mainly because his club was playing poorly, and he wasn’t getting decent ball.
If Simpson hadn’t got inured I would have had him over Wiggy and Care.
Good insight regarding the England bench, think you hit the nail on the head.
9 is a problem position, has been for awhile. Wiggles might just be our second best.
Wales seem to have plenty- can we have Lloyd Williams (pretty sure it was he who came on the wing) fantastic vision and execution of that cross field kick
Ha. Hands off Lloyd Williams. He’s not bad for a 2nd choice scrum half (and a 4th choice wing). In the 70s we traded 1 outside half factory for one each of a scrum half and backrow factory. It’s going well (the 2nd choice scrum half at the Scarlets is also excellent and the 2nd choice at Cardiff looks a good prospect).
Guscott over on the BBC is predicting a huge offer from a French club for Biggar now … If Halfpenny is worth 600K a year, Sexton 1 mil, then a 26 year old Biggar could be about to make an absolute mint.
Guscott mind also making the England mistake of thinking that the last 2 years AIs are a decent indicator of England’s chances on Sat. Seriously (and I think this for Wales as well) – an end of season Aus tour match versus a world cup knock out match. A mutinous Aus side with its best players in France, versus a tight knit group with Toulon’s best players back. A side that cannot scrummage out of a wet paper bag versus a side with a scrum good enough to beat NZ. This year’s Aus are not the same team as last years, not by a mile.
Agreed. Underestimating Aus based on recent results is the same mistake *some* England fans / the media made before the Wales game. I.e England have beat Wales last two times etc.. Well it didn’t count for much in the end. Australia are going to be massively fired up and are big favourites in my book, based on their forwards in the RC and games so far.
Have the Aussies sneaked in under the radar for 2015 just like they did in 1991 and 1999?
Agree with the points above, Billy V 7.5, Burgess 6.5, Barritt 3
Barritt was a selectorial disaster, does not have the pace to even defend that channel, let alone attack in it. Farrell, Burgess and Slade have been the best combination we have seen this campaign, hopefully Barritt’s credit balance will now be just below Slade’s and we’ll see a change next week (assuming JJ not fit).
Ford for Burgess, what a preposterous substitution. Farrell goes where he is less effective (whilst having a really good game) and Ford has no pace, no go forward and no real skill outside him. Hey a 9th forward may have been pretty useful for a catch and drive as well. I guess the logic is to have another kicking option to close out the game.
It’s really sad the level of injuries are likely to impede the Welsh going deep into the championship, again Gatland appears to have done his preparation better than the English, I was dismayed to see we were the second fittest team again.
Still our destiny is in our own hands, really hope Youngs and Vunipola are OK to start next week. Have to question how Care (who formed an excellent partnership with Farrell in 2013) can be out of form having spent ~ 4 months in this coaching environment and be leap frogged be a good reliable club player but not someone who can inject any real tempo.
in the event of 2 teams being tied in the group it is the result between them that decides who goes through and then if still not decided it goes to points for / against. Cannot really see Eng and Wales being tied so both teams results against Australia will be key, this is after Wales lose heavily to Fiji on Thursday which is a given (arrogant Englishman talking of course)
Farrell kicked away possession all the time & was less effective in open play than his opponent, it might have been due to the centre pairings but it is his job to play to the teams strengths & he did not do that for me.
The teams strengths outside of the pack were the back three. With no creativity in the centres, the only way to get anything out of them was to create a kick chase, but Wales were excellently placed to counteract this. Not sure you can blame Farrell for that really.
Lawes for me should be a 2 or a 3 – I am not entirely sure what he did with his time on the field – according to the stats, he ran twice for a gain of 2 metres and made just 4 tackles. Why is he there?
Agree with all the above about Barritt, a 2 or a 3
Burgess should be a 6 or 7 – consistently got over the gainline, kept Jamie Roberts relatively quiet, made some great tackles and if you watch the England try again, the initial space was created by a Burgess dummy run. If he didn’t offload, its because quite a lot of the time, there was no one running on his shoulder to take the pass.
BV should also be higher – another player who consistently made it over the gainline, normally dragging 2 or 3 tacklers with him. We lost a lot of our go-forward once he and Youngs came off – they were our best players up to that point
Wigglesworth was extremely poor. He is another choice born out of fear and conservatism as he offers nothing beyond his on the whole reliable kicking game. Care may do the odd stupid thing but he’ll also create and score tries, Given Youngs was having a lot of joy sniping around the edges, I wish we’d had a scrum half on the bench who could have continued that
Does anyone know who the ref is for England Aus? I am very much hoping its someone French who has the ingrained belief that the Aussies cannot scrum.
Changes needed for that game. I would say, assuming all are fit – Marler, Youngs, Wilson, Launchbury, Parling, Haskell (Wood gave away some silly penalties, didn’t do much ball-carrying and didn’t have much impact in the ruck or tackle), Robshaw, Vunipola, Youngs, Farrell, May, Burgess, Slade, Nowell (Watson was found wanting in his postioning), Brown
Your wish is granted, Poite is the referee vs Aus.
I’d agree with your team for the next game, except for probably Watson for Nowell – I think we need all the speed and finishing ability we have vs Aus. I’d also be worried about Burgess at 12 and maybe still have Barritt there and Burgess on the bench (as long as Barritt isn’t at 13, as he no place there). Please let JJ be fit, and if not Slade has to start. I also want to see Care on the bench, not Wigglesworth. For me, Launchbury has to start ahead of Lawes. Maybe even Kruis on the bench as well.
I think some of you believe Lancaster to be capable of selecting a team capable of beating Oz. Whereas I’m not entirely sure that Lancaster is the key selector as Farrell senior seems to have his name written all over selection.
Barritt and Joseph was deemed to be the best combination England could put out. Joseph qualities are obvious and nobody would disagree with them but it was offered that Barritt was the man at 12 because of his defense and his ability to organise the defense. Well, that was until Joseph get injured and then all Barritt’s alleged qualities count for nothing and SL moves him to 13 and brings Burgess into 12 and Farrell to 10.
Not clever when you have Slade available to go in at 13 but Henry is a footballer and neither a bosher nor e rugby league so he doesn’t stand a chance. So OK there’s nothing we can do about that but if you are going to drop Ford then drop him don’t keep him on the bench to replace Burgess. And furthermore why have Goode on the bench who can only play fly half or full back.
What do I know, probably nothing but when the majority of the more qualified pundits, including O’Driscoll, Morris, Carling and Barnes are pleading for a footballer to be included, namely Slade, then surely at some point somebody within the England camp will take notice.
Should England lose this Saturday then there will be a clear out of the backroom team and top of the list will be SL and Farrell. I expect whoever takes over would retain Catt who, having met him on a couple of occasions,must be pulling his hair out because he never played like England do as a player and I’m sure he doesn’t subscribe to the negative state of affairs we witnessed last week.
As a Chiefs supporter my only worry for our club is that if England stick to and English coach coaching England they come after Baxter and I’m sure there will be worries at Saints too.Either would do a great job for England and if you retain Catt and bring in Alex Sanderson you could have the makings of a progressive and honest coaching group.
Barritt should’ve got a lower score if you ask me, took it into heavy traffic again for some reason & whether it’s Farrell or barritt fault the ball never reached our winger that much when they were out most potent attacking option.
The scrum issue is not fixed, was Wales scrum really all that, the problem will reappear again, Cole is giving away too much penaltys should recall wilison and is Marler scruming any better than mako, if we think the wallabies scrum will be easy think again they have improved.
Concering ford why was he brought on so late he should of been brought in much earlier not when Wales have lost there back line then try to play a expansive game instead it look more ford was trying to wrestle back control of the game. This is mostly why Goode never came on as we needed both our wingers.
If neither of our 8s come back bring back nick Easter yes him, because he played in 2011 rwc i’m sure he would not want to see another disaster and told our player to regroup and moan not 2011 again.