Team: 15-Ben Foden, 14-Chris Ashton, 13-Manu Tuilagi, 12-Brad Barritt, 11-David Strettle, 10-Owen Farrell, 9-Lee Dickson; 8-Ben Morgan, 7-Chris Robshaw (captain), 6-Tom Croft, 5-Geoff Parling, 4-Mouritz Botha, 3-Dan Cole, 2-Dylan Hartley, 1-Alex Corbisiero.

Replacements: 16-Rob Webber, 17-Matt Stevens, 18-Courtney Lawes, 19-Phil Dowson, 20-Ben Youngs, 21-Toby Flood, 22-Mike Brown.

---

Nunquam Dormio

As I said in the other thread, that's about as good as it gets when you leave the second row out of it. Palmer and Lawes would improve it. That is a team that can be judged fairly, as it's about as good as it's going to get.

Please to see Lancaster start Dickson and Morgan.

16,17,19,20 and 21 should be nowhere near and England shirt

I agree Scamble, certainly not at the moment. All out of form, or in the case of 16,17,19 never had any to start with
Shame Lawes isn't starting, although I'm sure his impact from the bench could be useful.

Second row looks very week, would rather Palmer and Lawes, with Parling on the bench.

Will be interested to see Barritt play in his actual position, but would rather have JTH, but I do have a bias. Going to put a lot of pressure on Manu, as 10 and 12 don't seem to create much, either of club or country.

Still don't understand what 16 and 17 are doing in the 30, let alone the 22.

Wales by 13.

Quote:

Scamble
16,17,19,20 and 21 should be nowhere near and England shirt

I agree.

Karl should be wearing 20, until Danny gets back then Lee should be wearing 20.

At least pleased to see that Farrell is starting and Flood benched, rather than the other way round.

And of course Mike should start ahead of Foden, and I don't think that shows any multicoloured bias.

---

Nunquam Dormio

Great news for Brown, but yet more messing around with Harlequins by Lancaster.

Quote:

Scamble
16,17,19,20 and 21 should be nowhere near and England shirt

My thoughts exactly!

I can't believe Marler, Brooker, Gray, Robson, Wallace, Easter, Dickson, Clegg, JTH, Lowe, Williams and Monye aren't in the team. Wales by 39.

Quote:

Quinten Poulsen
I can't believe Marler, Brooker, Gray, Robson, Wallace, Easter, Dickson, Clegg, JTH, Lowe, Williams and Monye aren't in the team. Wales by 39.

QP - you obviously disagree with the rest of us and think the bench is just fine. As such why don't you run us through no.s 16,17,19,20 and 21 and let us know why in your opinion they should be in the team on current form.

if I'm reading your post correctly QP, I don't think anyone on this thread is suggesting the team should be stuffed full of Quins players. I think Easter and Care should be in there but that's it.

You can't deny that the subs bench is embarrassing?

If I've misunderstood, I'll just shut up.

I am perfectly happy for us to be keeping Care, Dickson, Easter, Ugo, JTH, Marler for the match v Glaws.

If Danny hadn't been naughty I would hope he would have been starting for England, and Mike Brown is alerady (just) in the 22, I say he should be in the 15.

I can think of several players who don't play for Tigers, Saints or Sarries (and aren't Quins) who should at least be on that bench.

---

Nunquam Dormio

Quote:

Fursty

Quote:

Quinten Poulsen
I can't believe Marler, Brooker, Gray, Robson, Wallace, Easter, Dickson, Clegg, JTH, Lowe, Williams and Monye aren't in the team. Wales by 39.

QP - you obviously disagree with the rest of us and think the bench is just fine. As such why don't you run us through no.s 16,17,19,20 and 21 and let us know why in your opinion they should be in the team on current form.

It's not so much that I disagree, just that I find the tone of the posts amusing.

Webber - I've barely seen him play as I don't watch Wasps. I'm relying on the good judgement of Lolcaster & Co.

Stevens - is probably as good a tighthead replacement as we have, although I accept that's up for debate; he's experienced, which is to be treasured at the current time; he can play both sides as well as anyone else, although I'd only trust him at LH for the last 10 minutes of a game.

Dowson - one of the best back row forwards in England over the half a dozen years or so. I've not been that impressed with him yet, but then I wasn't that impressed with Monye's stint, Robshaw's debut, and Brown's few games. He improved against Italy yet has been dropped to the bench. Good on Lolcaster for making the tough decisions.

Youngs - form is temporary, class is permanent. He's out of sorts for sure, but when he gets back to his best it will be hard for anyone to displace him.

Flood - been there done that. One of our most experienced players.

If the England side was always picked on form over the last few weeks then it would be chopping and changing constantly.


There, I've said my two penneth. Why doesn't someone else say why they think a particular player should be ahead of an incumbent.

QP

Just wondered if the front row debate would be more interesting if you had to have 3 on the bench as per the premiership..?

Youngs may be out of form but at least he is experienced at this level, it's funny how things can suddenly fall into place (hopefully!).

Flood is having his moments at the moment, but again is experienced and I'm happy to have him on the bench, who else?

I'll stick my neck out and say I quite like that team.

Lawes, Flood and Youngs should all start on the bench, they are all good players albeit out of form or match fitness. Giving them 20 mins at the end will do much more for them than another week back at their clubs so is the correct call.

Front row I'm happy with and I would pick Stevens ahead of Marler at the moment, but if we had 23 man squads in internationals I think he would be there and I'm still expecting a first cap during the 6n.

2nd row is fine.

Back row, should include Easter either starting or on the bench with Dowson dropped.

Backs I wouldn't change apart from DC that is, but that's not an option.

Thanks QP, me two cents:

Webber - I think Joe Gray is better, has played better this season and has more of a future ahead of him and would be a better choice. Also Joe is very dynamic and could make a good impact coming off the bench.

Stevens - has been given a decent chance at international level since coming back form his ban and time and time again has been beasted in the scrum and poor in the loose. I would have liked to have Joe Marler been given a chance at the start of the 6 nations but perhaps bringing him against Wales wouldn't be the best option. At the start of the tournament I also would have picked Doran-Jones ahead of Stevens.

Dowson would have been a good option 2 years ago but he's now 30 - Lolcaster dropped Easter on the grounds that he's told old and then brought in Dowson. Madness! Granted Dowson makes a better bench option than Easter. As things are I would go for a specialist 7 on the bench on the grounds that we have 2 6's starting - So Saull or Wallace for me.

Youngs - He's been awful since this time last year for both club and country. He's not going to play himself back into form in a 20 minute cameo against one of the form teams in the competition. Its a shame that DC messed up over new year, that Joe Simpson is also woefully out of form and Wigglesworth is injured. So I’d bring in KD or Ben Spencer – hell I’d even have Foden playing scrum half before Youngs at the moment.

Flood – has just come back from injury and has a very mediocre game and a half. I’d have kept Hodgson in the 22. I have to say that even when hes on form I don't think Flood is great, I feel that he has a very good all round game but doesn't quite have the spark that I'd be lloking for in an international flyhalf.

I realise that I’ve suggested 4 Quins players but I don’t think it’s unreasonable – Gray and Marler both look as though they could have a decent international future ahead of them as does Wallace. I don’t think that KD is international class but England are a little short on eligible scrum halves or have any sort of form.

Easter is quite a bit older than Dowson.

---

O Fortuna, velut luna statu variabilis,
semper crescis aut decrescis

Hodgson is injured. Other than that I agree. Plus the weak 2nd row.

Quote:

Jammy Git
Easter is quite a bit older than Dowson.

True. Dowson would be 33/34 at the next RWC, Easter a positively Shawesque 36/37. So little chance of Dowson figuring in the next RWC and pretty much Buckley's chance of Easter figuring

Quote:

Jammy Git
Easter is quite a bit older than Dowson.

Three years younger.

I must say that this is the England selection that I understand least. I can see the logic, if our target is the World Cup, in saying that someone who will be 37 years old come that competition isn't part of the plans.

However, that logic seems to go out of the window when you bring in a new player who will be 34 at the next World Cup. Surely if age was the reason for dropping Easter then we should be bringing in players who will be around for a couple of World Cups.

I hope J Joseph gets a start in an England shirt before the end of the 6N.

Quite. Dowson is there because we needed some more leadership when the only alternative (if you're dropping Easter, a move I agreed with) is Ben Morgan. When Wood is fit, Dowson doesn't feature. For now he's a versatile and useful member of the squad. Nothing to get too worked up over

I don't think Saull or Wallace are up to international rugby yet, though I can appreciate the desire to have a possible game-changer on the bench. Way too soon for Wallace and I'm unconvinced that Saull's put his problems behind him, although he was genuinely good in his last match.

Ben Spencer had a 'mare in defence for the Saxons against Scotland

---

O Fortuna, velut luna statu variabilis,
semper crescis aut decrescis

Does it make a difference that Easter didn't come into rugby (not sure at what level that is) until he was 25? Sure he's older, but is his body three years older than Dowson's? (You know what I mean)

Could do - but Easter did (imo) look to be heading downhill until the end of his international career. At best you'd get another 6-12 months out of him and that's 6-12 months you'd be taking away from someone who'd be around longer.

---

O Fortuna, velut luna statu variabilis,
semper crescis aut decrescis

Quote:

DOK
Does it make a difference that Easter didn't come into rugby (not sure at what level that is) until he was 25? Sure he's older, but is his body three years older than Dowson's? (You know what I mean)

His hair is definitely much older than Dowson's

Seriously, I just think Lancaster is not going to contemplate using someone who won't be around at the time of the next RWC - its his USP as coach - I'm the tough northerner to clean out the stables.

If Mallett gets the full time job, he will likely be more pragmatic. Can't see him getting the job though.

Fursty, I'd have no problem with Gray & Marler on the bench. I understand why Easter has not been included in the 6N squad, and although I agree he's the best 8 in England I still think his England form has not been that good. I'd also be happy to see KD involved as I do think he would be good enough. Having said all that, I still don't think there are any really contentious issues with the 22 selected. In fact, I like the squad on the whole and I can't wait for the game.

I'd still like to see how Easter functions in the Lancaster set up. The Johnson era was so different between winning the six nations and the RWC, everyone looked like they really didn't want to be there!

Quote:

Jammy Git
Could do - but Easter did (imo) look to be heading downhill until the end of his international career. At best you'd get another 6-12 months out of him and that's 6-12 months you'd be taking away from someone who'd be around longer.

Surely that would be the point of having young Morgan there, to learn the trade of an international 8 from someone who has been there done it and got the T-Shirt, what is he going to learn about being a test class 8 from Dowson?

How much do players learn from other players in short training camps? I think that aspect is over-rated.

Easter earned his dropping. Dowson (over the last few seasons) earned his callup. Dowson also covers more positions and is a more useful squad member as a result. I see it more as easing Morgan into Test rugby than him learning from any specific player.

Dropping Easter is, IMO, a good call - not least because we've in the past clung on to players who were past it because of "experience" and then wondered what happened when we discover their replacements have no experience and a world cup is looming.

---

O Fortuna, velut luna statu variabilis,
semper crescis aut decrescis

So why have the senior players in there at all. Come on guys, it is accepted that they do learn from the senior people, and it is often given as a reason for having experienced guys around the squad. Or is that all just bs and spin? Or are you trying to justify Lancaster's crass decision making?

Quote:

So why have the senior players in there at all.

They're in there primarily to play for England. I don't recall anyone being picked in an England squad simply because of their experience but with no intention of them actually being asked to play.

---

BB

Quote:

So why have the senior players in there at all

Which ones?

At last a real step in the right direction for English rugby! We may not win all games (nor did England 1998 under Woodward) but I feel like we can get a team going that can play some rugby.

It is not perfect, still no creativity in the centre's but I am really looking forward to watching them play!

I just would like to know from fans who are the wonder players that are not in the starting XV that could make us world beaters overnight!

I'd say Wood would balance the back row better. Uh... Garvey in the 2nd row (untested newbie, hugely impressive though) alongside Lawes. Beyond that, Tuilagi's the best 13, Barritt's probably the best choice at 12 with Farrell/36 the next off the rank.

Only Strettle I think is genuinely lucky to be there given the exploits of the likes of Johnny May.

---

O Fortuna, velut luna statu variabilis,
semper crescis aut decrescis



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23/02/2012 16:02 by Jammy Git.

Gray should be in before Webber.

Youngs - i agree with the comment, class is permanent - i'm just not sure it can be hung around Youngs neck just yet - he had a good 6 months (form) since then nothing (form).

So we'll see.

Most amazing that Botha get's in ahead of Palmer - should have been Parling and Palmer.

Having said that, i hope he has a good game and prooves us naysayers wrong.

Ashton, is also lucky to be there - has done nothing.....this season

Parling and Palmer is a bit light weight isnt it?

Botha is a bit limited (I'm sure he couldnt hold on to a ball if it was stapled to his hand) but he very good tearing around and tackling in the loose.

I'm not suggesting using Easter because of experience, I'm suggesting using him because he's the best no 8 in the premiership.

Yes, but he struggled to convert that to international form for some time. He's in a good vein of form at a much lower level at the moment, and that's it - he provides no assurances for the future. Rather pain now developing players than clinging to an older player beyond his sell-by-date.

---

O Fortuna, velut luna statu variabilis,
semper crescis aut decrescis

That's one way of looking at it Jammy. For me, Easter was playing fine up to picking up his injury at the world cup. He wasn't great when he came back after that but no one is after an injury. He is now back to his best, which doesn't surprise me. Nor is it a choice between him and developing players. It is a choice between him and Dowson. And I would dispute what you said about Dowson covering more positions too.

Not that I have got anything much against Dowson. Good luck to him. I just have a feeling Nick was hard done by in the rise of Lancaster. It seemed to me his dropping had more to do with SL's PR offensive than anything else. The press made Nick the pantomime villain of the world cup review, and Sir Stuart of Lancaster rode in and smote him. That seemed to be the implication to me - that he had been cast out because he didn't fit Lancaster's new humble order, rather than form or age. I don't recall any statement about him being too old. All supposition of course, and even if it's true - these things happen. At the least I hope he gets enough encouragement from England to keep ripping up trees for Quins showing them they are wrong.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23/02/2012 18:57 by Quin Like Flint.

Yes - Easter under Johnson didn't fire. That doesn't give you much indication of how he could play under Lancaster.

Agreed Easter was one of the best and most reliable England players until the last world cup(when no one but tuilagi came away in credit). Having played in a restricted Johnson regime as well . I just feel He should
B back in there as has been said he is the best around and is a fantastic player when allowed freedom to roam instead of structure (which in my opinion is for limited ability players )!!!

Quote:

Jammy Git
Easter is quite a bit older than Dowson.

Easter is quite a bit better than Dowson

Quote:

DOK
Yes - Easter under Johnson didn't fire. That doesn't give you much indication of how he could play under Lancaster.

One wonders if you'd be willing to give Shontayne Hape, Lewis Moody, Mike Tindall, Johnny Wilkinson, Steve Thompson, Louis Deacon, Mark Cueto the same benefit of the doubt :p

forthewin: As an 8, absolutely. Dowson offers more than that though.

I do disagree with most people regarding his form up to the world cup, though. He wasn't great in the 6N imo (and went missing against Ireland and SA - two matches we dearly needed him to perform in) and then rocked up to the warmups clearly well out of shape.

OK, 'round' is a shape

---

O Fortuna, velut luna statu variabilis,
semper crescis aut decrescis



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23/02/2012 20:06 by Jammy Git.

Yup, when there's general agreement that Mike Tindall is the best in his position in the premiership I would say give him a go.

Actually, thinking on that, I'd say I'm no longer a believer in form is temporary class is permanent. We based a lot of RWC selections on that basis and what we got was a lot of out of form players.

Mike Brown is in the form of his life, he should at least be given a chance to show what he can do.

I shall be very disappointed if Mike is under-used tomorrow. DOK, I agree that he is in such cracking form and if he comes off the bench early enough, will have a positive influence on the game and score that 'scintillating' try that I have been predicting!

Agreed. If England are (as led to believe), setting out a squad and ethos for the next world cup,what are we gaini from playing Foden at FB, surely nothing to prove?

Far better to see how the team might play with different tactics, perhaps move Foden to wing, maybe mixing it up in the midfield?

What about injuries/loss of form? How can we have a solid squad capable of performing, if you only play a IV for the majority of the time?

The messages from Lancaster and England are not clear.

The things people come out with, just to accommodate a Quin!!

Quote:

DOK
Actually, thinking on that, I'd say I'm no longer a believer in form is temporary class is permanent. We based a lot of RWC selections on that basis and what we got was a lot of out of form players.

Clearly over the period of a world cup form is of paramount importance. It is not a reason for kicking someone out of the EPS a few months after a world cup though. Which is why some of the "should be nowhere near an England shirt" comments on Youngs and Flood are over the top.

Quote:

DOK
Yup, when there's general agreement that Mike Tindall is the best in his position in the premiership I would say give him a go.

Wilko would win a popularity vote every time.

---

O Fortuna, velut luna statu variabilis,
semper crescis aut decrescis

Quote:

Quin Like Flint

Quote:

DOK
Actually, thinking on that, I'd say I'm no longer a believer in form is temporary class is permanent. We based a lot of RWC selections on that basis and what we got was a lot of out of form players.

Clearly over the period of a world cup form is of paramount importance. It is not a reason for kicking someone out of the EPS a few months after a world cup though. Which is why some of the "should be nowhere near an England shirt" comments on Youngs and Flood are over the top.

They are only over the top if you start with your assumption as to why people say it. If you start from the position that they shouldn't have been in the shirt in the first place they are not over the top.

---

Nunquam Dormio

MB definitely needs to be given a start in at lesst one match of the 6N - not convinced that he will be given the chance though.

Quote:

Arlecchino
They are only over the top if you start with your assumption as to why people say it. If you start from the position that they shouldn't have been in the shirt in the first place they are not over the top.

Twelve months ago those two were the best thing since sliced bread. Nobody said they shouldn't be in the shirt then.

Quote:

Quin Like Flint

Quote:

Arlecchino
They are only over the top if you start with your assumption as to why people say it. If you start from the position that they shouldn't have been in the shirt in the first place they are not over the top.

Twelve months ago those two were the best thing since sliced bread. Nobody said they shouldn't be in the shirt then.

Yes they did, well I did. Certainly Youngs.

Flood has on occasions looked like he was coming good.

---

Nunquam Dormio

for Mike Brown to come on in the 77th minute is a complete farce. Foden did ok but surely Mike deserves at at least a half if not 20 mins to do what he's been doing in the premiership???!!!!

Lolcaster does seem determined to irritate Quins fans.

Mike deserved more game time. 3 mins for a cap, I hope he throws it back at Lancaster, but not really since he needs to build bridges. OK be grateful he got on the park, but it must be hard for him. Mike keep playing just the way you are. Best wishes.

There are only two reasons to bring a player on with less than 10 minutes on the clock.

The first is to time waste if your ahead.

The second is to replace an injured player.

Which one was it Lolcaster?

There is a third, albeit stupid, reason. To attempt to make it look like it was worth inconveniencing Quins after dropping Brown then recalling him.

agreed. lip service. no other reason. Brown should tell him to get fecked

Against all the odds - Mike Brown came off the bench and helped cause the 'excitement' of Strettle's near try! Go MIKEY!

The Welsh must have been soooo pleased he didn't play 'til right at the end. I would have been, if I was Welsh!

Most comments I've read have been critical of Brown for not drawing the defender and or/straightening the line before passing. Any comments?

Quote:

Quinten Poulsen
Most comments I've read have been critical of Brown for not drawing the defender and or/straightening the line before passing. Any comments?

Maybe - it would be easier to call if you could see the move from directly behind. If he'd have straightened he might have made it on his own. Camera angles I've seen aren't clear enough to say, though.

---

BB

Hmm, perhaps he might have done better, but given more than 5 minutes in the last 3 matches he might have been sharper.

Quote:

RodneyRegis
Hmm, perhaps he might have done better, but given more than 5 minutes in the last 3 matches he might have been sharper.

Quite.

Often it's that split second decision making that distinguishes a good (or even great) club player from an international class player. But unfair to judge when they've only been on the pitch for 3 minutes.

---

BB

I think it is very unlikely Mike would have made it on his own. North and Davies would both have got to him well short of the line. I think the comments about him are pretty unfair and I'm trying to be as even handed as I can. As BB says you can't tell from the TV pictures. And if we are apportioning blame then it is just as valid to have a go at Flood for the long pass or Strettle for not going for the corner. If you stop this

video: [url]

[/url]

at about 3.18 you can see that England had a potential 3 or 4 on 2 if Flood had put it through the hands and passed to Ashton or Barritt. Equally if you stop it at 3.22 just as the shot changes to close up from behind the line, it looks like Strettle has room to get past Halfpenny on the outside, but he straightens instead of going for the corner. I think Mike thought Strettle had room when he gave the pass, so he just gave it. Lots of ifs and buts, but I certainly think it is over simplifying it to just say MB screwed it up.

I've seen him make trys from NOTHING and if he had gone on his own and didn't make it - enough said!!

Yep, Stretts butchered, plenty of room on the outside there from that youtube. Mike did the right thing.

I made an attempt to respond to some (imo unwarranted) criticism of Mike's decision over on the Tigers board (not the best idea to start with admittedly) and, to be honest, didn't make a great job of it (too much annoyance, too little sleep).

I found myself teetering on the edge of one of those never ending message board arguements, so will leave well enough alone from this point on.

Just wanted to tip my hat to Quin Like Flint for posting the clear, focused response I couln't locate on Saturday.

Just Rich W getting a bit over excited. I like the fact that he was driven to the good old "why shouldn't I say it - is this a police state!!!!" post

Conor O'Shea believes Brown was right!

[www.espnscrum.com]

Quote:

DOK
Conor O'Shea believes Brown was right!
[www.espnscrum.com]

I'm sure Conor is right.

It would have been strange if he'd said he thought Brownie stuffed it, though.

---

BB

Well, if he had I think he'd just have not admitted to the existence of the texts. He'd have just said something about split second decisions and wingers ought to be able to score from four yards out.

(That said, Mr D. Strettle has previous form in this respect, that non try when he failed to slide in to score, went too high and got tackled - can't remember the game).