England:the Journey continues!

[The Boy Dave]

England has a very good core to it's squad but they lack any continuity in selection and lack experience from poor planning since 03 and it's got worse under Lancaster.
I don't know how many players have played a world cup but it can't be that many.
2019 will be another struggle again unless sound decisions are made i.e Mike Brown will be 34 in 2019, Goode will be 31 but will Goode ever be England's first choice full back after Brown let alone being the best cover right now? No he will not, so why include Goode and why even consider Cipriani as a full back replacement only as Lancaster has said when not only is 15 not his best position but also in 2019 Cipriani will be 31 approaching 32!
Makes no sense!
Similar applies in so many areas, the forwards are selected very well in the front five in terms of strength and continuity apart from hooker where Hartley should clearly be included with George as the 3rd hooker, and it's an area in the front five most people actually agree on, strange that!
Backrow though has become a problem, Kvesic and Itoje should be going as a genuine 7 and 6 back up with Itoje as 4/5th choice for back up at lock if needed, for the experience and as alternative challengers and back up, Kvesic should possess at least 20 caps by now ready to challenge now and take over after 2015, he'll be 27 in 2019 and in his prime but he has only 2 caps.
After 2015 Robsaw will be 33 at the next world cup, Wood will be 32 approaching 33, Haskell will be 34, a couple of them may continue afer 2015 and take precious caps and could be gone by 2019.
England's level of planning since 03 is pathetic!
If you look at New Zealand as an example Carter has over 100 caps and his under studies Barrett and Slade have a healthy amount of caps each, both there not only to challenge but for one to step straight in when Carter goes, it's similar throughout their squad, and be at the 2019 tournament with previous tournament experience and immediately after it the continuity of the sqaud will continue, experience is vital at international level and a world cup.
Cipriani and Flood should have been England's 10's for 2015 with one of Farrell and then Ford given caps here and there to gain some experience and caps ready to take over, there would be an argument to include both Farrell and Ford in the 2015 world cup squad to challenge and gain world cup experience, and arrive at 2019 with a massively experienced 10 in Cipriani at 31, Ford also with world cup experience and a healthy amount of caps and another.
Ford could be cover as a 3rd 9/10 IMO for 2015 as why even consider Wigglesworth at 32 years old already and 3rd choice behind 25 year old Youngs and 28 year old Care, Wigglesworth's inclusion makes little sense, and possibly take Farrell as 10/12 cover if he is that highly rated, personally I'd be taking Slade to the world cup as a 10/12 cover.

[mol2]

I agree.
SCW has to take some of the blame continuing to try and hold his world cup winning side together to be the core of the Lions after the world cup. As it was the England side that won the world cup was perhaps a couple of years past their best.
This in turn meant that 2003 on was a farce with England to an extent failing to progress with an overly conservative mentality favouring experience over ability completely blind to the need for young talented to get experience. Old experienced players are never going to gain talent.
Squads have to reflect progression.

[4071]

England has a very good core to it's squad but they lack any continuity in selection and lack experience from poor planning since 03 and it's got worse under Lancaster.
I don't know how many players have played a world cup but it can't be that many.
2019 will be another struggle again unless sound decisions are made i.e Mike Brown will be 34 in 2019, Goode will be 31 but will Goode ever be England's first choice full back after Brown let alone being the best cover right now? No he will not, so why include Goode and why even consider Cipriani as a full back replacement only as Lancaster has said when not only is 15 not his best position but also in 2019 Cipriani will be 31 approaching 32!
Makes no sense!

What makes no sense is thinking of the 2015 World Cup as some sort of preparation for the 2019 World Cup. It's not - it's an end in itself and it really doesn't matter whether Brown, Goode or Cips will be young enough for 2019 (though two of them will be), what matters is who the best players for 2015 are.

As far as consistency of selection, injuries have played a major part in that, but at least the core of a first XV has been playing together all year: Marler, Cole, Haskell, Robshaw, Vunipola, Ben Youngs, Ford, Burrell, Joseph, Watson , Brown. They don't have the multi-season experience that would be ideal, but they should be pretty well used to each other by now given the consistency of selection in 2015.

[4071]

I agree.
SCW has to take some of the blame continuing to try and hold his world cup winning side together to be the core of the Lions after the world cup.

Bonkers.

That Lions tour - if it even had the remotest impact on England selection - was a decade ago. Just how far reaching WAS the decision to keep picking a few over-the-hill players for the 2004 6N?


I blame Geoff Cooke!


Lancaster is the fourth England coach since Woodward. To go back that far looking for blame is just nonsense.

[4071]

Ford could be cover as a 3rd 9/10 IMO for 2015 as why even consider Wigglesworth at 32 years old already and 3rd choice behind 25 year old Youngs and 28 year old Care, Wigglesworth's inclusion makes little sense,

But still makes considerably more sense than thinking a guy who has never played scrum-half in his career should be considered third choice SH for the WC.

And why stop at 2019? 2023 is only 8 years away and the likes of Clifford, Fowlie and Brophy-Clews should be getting capped in 2015 to prepare themselves, right?

[The Boy Dave]

The Boy Dave wrote:
England has a very good core to it's squad but they lack any continuity in selection and lack experience from poor planning since 03 and it's got worse under Lancaster.
I don't know how many players have played a world cup but it can't be that many.
2019 will be another struggle again unless sound decisions are made i.e Mike Brown will be 34 in 2019, Goode will be 31 but will Goode ever be England's first choice full back after Brown let alone being the best cover right now? No he will not, so why include Goode and why even consider Cipriani as a full back replacement only as Lancaster has said when not only is 15 not his best position but also in 2019 Cipriani will be 31 approaching 32!
Makes no sense!



4071

What makes no sense is thinking of the 2015 World Cup as some sort of preparation for the 2019 World Cup. It's not - it's an end in itself and it really doesn't matter whether Brown, Goode or Cips will be young enough for 2019 (though two of them will be), what matters is who the best players for 2015 are.

As far as consistency of selection, injuries have played a major part in that, but at least the core of a first XV has been playing together all year: Marler, Cole, Haskell, Robshaw, Vunipola, Ben Youngs, Ford, Burrell, Joseph, Watson , Brown. They don't have the multi-season experience that would be ideal, but they should be pretty well used to each other by now given the consistency of selection in 2015.

This is where personal opinion muddles the debate.

For the 2015 world cup Brown is the best full back and Watson is his back up (Bath would say so), Pennell is a prospect to consider also.
Watson plays full back at Bath but he is a winger for England, he has taken the place of experienced wingers such as Ashton and Strettle who both should have been ready for this world cup, but thats just my opinion.
That's nothing against Watson who did very well against France last week but we are discussing winning world cups, not a friendly against the struggling French.
So that is England with a inexperienced winger out of position in 2015 and no full back being made ready after Brown.
Chris Ashton's selections in recent times is one that baffles me, didn't play a 2014 six nations, then taken on tour to New Zealand, didn't pay the 2015 six nations, then included in the world cup training squad and then cut.
The squad is a mish mash of shoe-ins and uncertainties.
The Burgess issue is another uncertainty, super player but a centre with England and a backrow at Bath.
It's less than ideal whatever your opinion is on selections and the front five apart the squad is rife with uncertainty!

The Boy Dave wrote:
Ford could be cover as a 3rd 9/10 IMO for 2015 as why even consider Wigglesworth at 32 years old already and 3rd choice behind 25 year old Youngs and 28 year old Care, Wigglesworth's inclusion makes little sense,




But still makes considerably more sense than thinking a guy who has never played scrum-half in his career should be considered third choice SH for the WC.

And why stop at 2019? 2023 is only 8 years away and the likes of Clifford, Fowlie and Brophy-Clews should be getting capped in 2015 to prepare themselves, right?

I'd probably include Simpson in 2015, but just throwing the Ford option out there as a possible inclusion in a 31 to gain experience for the benefit of the not only the future but now.
England seem more than happy to play others out of position who are included at a much older age and lesser ability to succeed so why not the most talented youngster we have seen in several generations in Ford? Seems reasonable to me based on his pure talent and rugby ability to gain experience this way if required!
Pick holes in it if you will, you usually do, but I fail to see any benefit of a 3rd choice scrum half in Wigglesworth, firstly it is unlikely he will be required and secondly he isn't good enough, thirdly he is getting on in years.
On your logic obviously including players who are not good enough based on their position takes priority over talent, I see it different and it's about getting the right talent the experience it needs at the correct time and keeping the best balance possible in a squad.

[mol2]

Wigglesworth is a great example of a "what's the point selection" - he's no better than many of the youngsters such as our own Sam Harrison.

I know which of the two I'd rather be coming off the bench for England so why go for a player at the end of his career? It's not a reward for long service.

The squad should reflect the best available for the planned team game and if you have room in the squad for bit part players who are probably only going to provide injury cover then take the opportunity to give upcoming talent the experience they need for the future unless the gulf in ability makes that a poor option.

[4071]

Wigglesworth is a great example of a "what's the point selection" - he's no better than many of the youngsters such as our own Sam Harrison.

I know which of the two I'd rather be coming off the bench for England so why go for a player at the end of his career? It's not a reward for long service.

The squad should reflect the best available for the planned team game and if you have room in the squad for bit part players who are probably only going to provide injury cover then take the opportunity to give upcoming talent the experience they need for the future unless the gulf in ability makes that a poor option.

Given Care's form, Wigglesworth may be a lot more than a bit part player - he could be second choice SH. Also, he's there because he's a fine exponent of a certain type of low-risk, low-error rugby that is well-suited to the knock-out stages of World Cups. He's highly experienced - far more so than our own Sam Harrison, who has only just managed to secure the bench spot at Tigers, whilst Wiggles has been starting 9 for two different Premiership-winning sides.


I would have gone with Simpson, but that's because I really like what he has to offer, particularly as a bench option. Not because Wigglesworth might be too old for 2019. The next WC is four years away - there is plenty of time between now and then to build towards that tournament, and with the vagaries of form and injury it's pointless to try and pick players now who are not good enough just in case they are good enough 4 years from now.

[4071]

I fail to see any benefit of a 3rd choice scrum half in Wigglesworth, firstly it is unlikely he will be required and secondly he isn't good enough, thirdly he is getting on in years.

1. If he isn't required, then that's a good thing. But the point of picking 5 props, 3 hookers and 3 scrum-halves is to cover scenarios where these extra players might be needed. In such specialist positions, there is a HUGE risk when you need non-specialist players to cover. Mauro Bergomasco once very convincingly demonstrated the importance of a specialist at 9.

2. Not good enough is a relevant argument. Not good enough for what, though? He started for the Premiership champions - not the only time he's started for a title winning side - and he has performed at international level. You might think another player is simply a better choice for the third SH spot - as it happens, I do too - but Lancaster thinks otherwise and certainly has evidence to back up his decision.

3. Irrelevant to 2015.

Though, as it happens, not only is he young enough for this WC, he's also young enough to play in the next WC too - if he's still good enough. World Cups have featured plenty of players in their mid-30s. Backs and forwards.

[Sajerj]

Agree with 4071. Wigglesworth is miles ahead of Care.

Its a bit like the Barritt vs Eastmond debate. Too many people easily impressed by a few jinky runs, at the expense of ignoring a multitude of other game orientated skills required at the highest level.

Last week, behind a dreadful pack performance, Wigglesworth demonstrated fine control of the game which allowed the backs to participate fully in the game.

He had a fine final also in the Aviva.

[Hot_Charlie]

That embarrassing moment that month before the RWC you realise that two players bearing most (any) similarity to an open side flanker are wearing 2 & 3!

[drc_007]

That embarrassing moment that month before the RWC you realise that two players bearing most (any) similarity to an open side flanker are wearing 2 & 3!

I think we have known that for a while.

[Dr H Flashman MBE]

That was a bit shocking. We need a 7 and 6 who can disrupt broken play, not necessarily turn overs but slowing the ball down and disturbing the opposition.

The game appears to be floating past launchbury. Brown is a bit under cooked and Joseph is not involved at all. Where is Burrell? Ford isn't dictating play, maybe this is a game for the pragmatic Farrell?
But other than that, we look good for the World Cup..

[Hot_Charlie]

That embarrassing moment that month before the RWC you realise that two players bearing most (any) similarity to an open side flanker are wearing 2 & 3!

I think we have known that for a while.

We have... They on the other hand...

[Blabyboy]

57 minutes gone and it looks like England won the battle of the second string last week but the first team have been blown away this week. Not too encouraging is it? I do believe that England tend to raise their game when it matters, in a world cup game for instance, but I do not have much faith in this current set up, I hope I'm proved wrong.
For me it seems that the stancaster regime likens itself to arsenal.
Forgive me for using a football analogy but if you think of England teams of the past they have always been a bit Chelsea esc in that they may not always be flash but they know how to win. It seems to me that stancaster has attempted to build an expansive team, maybe because he and others think that to win we need to play like the all blacks. Well, how many football teams play like Barcelona? i now see England as a team who lack the correct mentality to win when it matters, like arsenal?
I may be biased but I have watched prem rugby teams slag tigers off for slowing the game down being boring etc, but we have a proven track record (please disregard the last season or so in order to validate my point) I have also watched teams, the current bath side for example, blow sides away with pace power etc. Did they win the prem at twickers? No because they lack the mentality to win when it really really matters, in a prem final or at a world cup?