[2015 Six Nations] England

[Ragey Erasmus]

I imagine he was a prime target for bullying at school, being the flimsy specimen he is.

Also that Johnson-Fisher guy... Please rugby don't lose him.

 

[goodNumber10]

Have a look at his physical stats.

Didn't even notice that... That can't be right.

 

[LiRFCMatt]

We took a look at 5 English backs we think deserve a chance before the World Cup, let me know what you think!

We went for:

Elliot Daly
Henry Slade
Kyle Eastmond
Christian Wade
Joe Simpson

Reasons can be found here: http://fourballsblog.blogspot.com/2015/03/5-english-backs-that-deserve-chance.html

Any suggestions/criticisms?

Also who would you like to see given a chance in the pack? Ewers comes to mind at first to me but I think our fully fit pack is world-class and doesn't really need tinkering with.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Technically Eastmond has been given a chance but I think Lancaster was too quick to dismiss him. Considering the alternatives at 12 have not been doing a great job, I think he deserves another go. The only issue is with him and Ford together, that is 2 small players. If we can find a way to mitigate that problem without hampering our game, I think he is our best attacking player. The only issue in attack is his boot isn't that great.

Personally I went for Simpson. Our Scrum halves are just not up to scratch and I think we need to try someone outside the Care, Youngs, Wigglesworth trio. All 3 have had more than enough chances and all shown themselves to have inconsistant form. We can't rely on any of them to perform day in day out, which is what we need for the world cup. When on form, they are all pretty good but there is no guarentee one good game will be followed by another.

 

[LiRFCMatt]

Technically Eastmond has been given a chance but I think Lancaster was too quick to dismiss him. Considering the alternatives at 12 have not been doing a great job, I think he deserves another go. The only issue is with him and Ford together, that is 2 small players. If we can find a way to mitigate that problem without hampering our game, I think he is our best attacking player. The only issue in attack is his boot isn't that great.

Personally I went for Simpson. Our Scrum halves are just not up to scratch and I think we need to try someone outside the Care, Youngs, Wigglesworth trio. All 3 have had more than enough chances and all shown themselves to have inconsistant form. We can't rely on any of them to perform day in day out, which is what we need for the world cup. When on form, they are all pretty good but there is no guarentee one good game will be followed by another.

I agree about the state of our scrum halves, we need consistency and we aren't getting it with Care or Youngs. I also think the same for 12 and the wings, Slade/Eastmond and Wade could really help us here.

 

[Peat]

My deep philosophical hatred of people talking about players "deserving" a shot aside...

... only one of those guys is really going to get a shot before the World Cup most like and that's Slade. Should the others? Maybe, but tbh I just don't see them adding anything hugely better to balance the risk in tinkering this close to the WC.

Chris Pennell (potential improvement in back-up full-back) and Sam Hill (potential improvement in terms of rock-steady IC) both arguably should have been on this list ahead of others.

Also, our pack is just totally absolutely not World Class, and does need tinkering with, but the players with which to do so just aren't there at present, by and large. However - LCD will get a go at hooker sooner or later, and everyone hopes sooner; Kvesic's constant omission is nuts; Brookes should get a start at some stage ideally; Ewers looks like he could add an extra dimension; and I really wish Ed Slater had been fit this season as I think he might have been a revelation (not that Kruis has been bad).

edit: I would go so far as to say that the omission of Henry Slade from match-day squads this 6N is beginning to look like a mistake.

 

[goodNumber10]

My deep philosophical hatred of people talking about players "deserving" a shot aside...

... only one of those guys is really going to get a shot before the World Cup most like and that's Slade. Should the others? Maybe, but tbh I just don't see them adding anything hugely better to balance the risk in tinkering this close to the WC.

Chris Pennell (potential improvement in back-up full-back) and Sam Hill (potential improvement in terms of rock-steady IC) both arguably should have been on this list ahead of others.

Also, our pack is just totally absolutely not World Class, and does need tinkering with, but the players with which to do so just aren't there at present, by and large. However - LCD will get a go at hooker sooner or later, and everyone hopes sooner; Kvesic's constant omission is nuts; Brookes should get a start at some stage ideally; Ewers looks like he could add an extra dimension; and I really wish Ed Slater had been fit this season as I think he might have been a revelation (not that Kruis has been bad).

edit: I would go so far as to say that the omission of Henry Slade from match-day squads this 6N is beginning to look like a mistake.

I'd agree with all of that, Slade should be sat on the bench over Cipriani or 36.

I think Eastmonds done, certainly for this world cup cycle, i don't see how he will force himself back in without injuries to other players.

Daley is an interesting one, having been vehemently against him playing 13 for a long time i have to admit he's in good form for Wasps and is one of the form 13's in the Premierhsip - i still think a shift to 12 or 10 would be a good move for him (he's a former 10 iirc), he has a nice fluid passing style that works well in close and would stop him throwing those big long loopers he currently does...plus he has a monster boot from land and hand and he has the pace to play two three touch rugby (the only other england back to demonstrate that ability consistently is Cipriani).

 

[Raggs]

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/features/young-gun/20754/young-gun-jack-stanley-exeter-prop/
http://www.eurosport.com/rugby/jack-stanley_prs411021/person.shtml

All put Stanley around 130kg... and the pictures suggest a fair bit must be muscle. I reckon his arse must be as wide as a bus and his legs as thick as baobab trees.

 

[Peat]

Your memory might be wrong, or if right, remembering a time so far ago to have no practical purpose. Certainly google indicates he was playing centre for England U18 and Whitgift in his final year at the very least. I'd find it rather surprising if a player with his boot wasn't near 10 at around that age if he had the game management for it.

I think his decision making and defence have got up a notch - that, or Wasps general play has, and Daly's now got a superior platform and his flaws are getting covered up. Those were the things keeping him from fulfilling his potential before really, not the position (although I still wish he'd stuck at 15 in some ways).

Right now I think Daly's best chance for England is that Tuilagi-Joseph is tried and takes off, because if it does there's room for a new 13 in the squad and maybe more emphasis on step and go merchants like himself. If it remains Tuilagi vs Joseph, then yeah, that move to 12 looks tempting...

 

[goodNumber10]

Yes, 10 might be a move too far, but 12 certainly fits his skill set.

I'm pretty sure Tom Varndell said Daly played 10 for wasps academy, it was leading up to the Barbarians game he played in.

 

[LiRFCMatt]

Yes, 10 might be a move too far, but 12 certainly fits his skill set.

I'm pretty sure Tom Varndell said Daly played 10 for wasps academy, it was leading up to the Barbarians game he played in.

Well that is 3 top quality candidates vying for the 12 shirt, and Tuilagi when he is back to full form. I don't think Burrell has the quality to keep them out, and I think Lancaster would be wise to try something different.

 

[LiRFCMatt]

Technically Eastmond has been given a chance but I think Lancaster was too quick to dismiss him. Considering the alternatives at 12 have not been doing a great job, I think he deserves another go. The only issue is with him and Ford together, that is 2 small players. If we can find a way to mitigate that problem without hampering our game, I think he is our best attacking player. The only issue in attack is his boot isn't that great.

Personally I went for Simpson. Our Scrum halves are just not up to scratch and I think we need to try someone outside the Care, Youngs, Wigglesworth trio. All 3 have had more than enough chances and all shown themselves to have inconsistant form. We can't rely on any of them to perform day in day out, which is what we need for the world cup. When on form, they are all pretty good but there is no guarentee one good game will be followed by another.

The current results of the poll show overwhelming support for Slade and Wade, Daly third, and Simpson and Eastmond are sadly getting very little love. I think Eastmond outside of Ford and inside Joseph at international level would be superb, they work so well together, and then there's Anthony Watson to join the Bath party as well.

I also can't see how Simpson is being left out right now, he needs to show what he can do.

 

[msf]

Just to disagree completely with good no 10 for once, Daly has zero chance of making it at either 10 or 12 even in the Premiership, and not much chance of making it at 13 for England, since both Tuilagi and Joseph are ahead of him despite not being much older. The smart thing for him to do would be to move to 15 permanently, since Lancaster has picked him there repeatedly (for the Saxons).

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I like Simpson, but is he an international quality scrumhalf?
He'd be in with a shout as a winger, haha, but his scrumhalving? I suppose the alternatives aren't exactly setting the world alight though.

 

[msf]

Lancaster really is a blah selector isn't he? By that I mean that, whenever I see an England team announcement it makes me think 'blah.' At least Martin Johnson started out with some attacking selections. Apart from giving Eastmond a few games, and putting Joseph in after Barritt was injured, when has Lancaster ever made a selection (in the backs) that got you excited?

- - - Updated - - -

Are Youngs and Care international scrum halves? I know they have the caps, but I would blame the selectors for that. The best no. 9 at the basics is Wigglesworth, if you want someone who can do these and run, pick Simpson.

- - - Updated - - -

I know some will disagree, but I would rather we lose to Ireland in the semis of the World Cup, rather than get to the final just to be beaten by New Zealand or South Africa. I don't even know if that would be enough to get Lancaster fired though, since Ian Ritchie seems to know nothing about rugby (not surprising, since he made his name in tennis).

- - - Updated - - -

And before anyone jumps to Lancaster's defence, did you see that stat where in the Times (I think) where they showed that Lancaster's England have scored 2 more tries and won one more game than Johnson's England, having played one game less. As with Brian Ashton, what was the point in changing the manager?

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

i fink we shud scrap the scrum half position altogether init cos we don't got no good ones wat do ppl think??????????

 

[msf]

Haha, yeah, lets play Farrell there for defence and kicking. That way we can play Ford and Farrell together!

 

[goodNumber10]

Haha, yeah, lets play Farrell there for defence and kicking. That way we can play Ford and Farrell together!

what do you reckon the odds on Ford at 9 and Fazlet at 10 are? I reckon a 50p punt might actualy be worth it...

 

[Raggs]

Simpson has a better pass than Youngs or Care, better break than Youngs, better kicking game than Care, clearly better pace than either.

Wiggles is a steady eddy, but with Care not finding his barnstorming form, and Youngs not even kicking that well atm, Simpson really should be the 1st choice flair scrum half in my mind.

 

[Patchey]

what do you reckon the odds on Ford at 9 and Fazlet at 10 are? I reckon a 50p punt might actualy be worth it...

Please. No.