Johnson leaves the dice alone

I concur! I'd rather try and lose than watch us disappear in another pit of averageness. The only problem is which players to drop and trying to keep some sort of balance! The back row now looks like a concerted effort to pick the biggest and slowest in world history! Ashton, Foden and Armitage Junior have all knocked on the door for months...why not give them atleast a chance. If you want to be clinical surely you pick the best support player in the Premiership in Ashton?

this blog is spot on. where is the gamble in making sweeping changes. england have a team with 6 or 7 players the wrong side of thirty, so it's not getting any better. It is a team that has proved incapable of living with the top sides, so ditch the rubbish and pick the likes of lawes, foden, geraghty etc... I'd be looking to make 8 or 9 changes, pick a team that is not burdened by crushing fear of failure.

I suppose he might be trying to avoid a knee jerk reaction and wants to try and give his team more chance to shine. I'm aware that that would be a very generous way of looking at it. If the team perform well, he'll be praised for keeping faith with his players, if they do badly then he'll have let the team stagnate. Likewise, he brings out a ton of changes and it wins and he was brave, badly and desparation made him stupid.

Five games really is not enough. Compared to watching say a football team develope, the six nations is very frustrating.

Sigh what a disappointment, I was certain Foden would have started.

What message do you send out to players like Ashton and Foden if they cannot get in the current team ahead of out of form players who are well below their best.

If we lose to Scotland Johnson might be forced to make changes and going to Paris to face a potentially world class French team will be a lot harder than facing Scotland at Murrayfield.

I agree with the blog, changes have to be made, but why not start with the core which is strangling the team - care shouldn't be playing till he learns how to pass from the ground, and Jonny has had his best. I would start Youngs, Flood, Cueto, Fluety, Tait, Ashton, Armitage. I also agree that the choice of Worsley is very very confusing to say the least! Steffon Armitage deserves a shout to name only one and given England's future fixtures Saturday has to be as good a day as any to start a newbie!

To be fair, I understand the choice of Lewis Deacon, it's generally not the job of the tight-five to light up the play.

As a Saffer looking in, I see it less that Johnson is satisfied with rolling a three - rather he is still trying to roll a 5 or 6... on a dice that right now is biased towards 3s. Whether he truly believes he can roll a 6, well, that's the million buck question.

Another point I would make as a Saffer (and this is a point we all learn) - sides really struggle when they haven't got direction at 10. That's the rub for England right now, I think a lot would fall into place if the fly-half situation improved - you'd get more out of Flutey and Tait, and the back 3 would be put into more space. Personally, I'd shift Cueto to 15 and bring Ashton onto the wing, but this is all shuffling the deck-chairs unless you get it sorted at fly-half.

I do understand why Johnson initially went with Wilkinson, but it's not working and that's where you need to find answers.

Yup. Agree with the blog Ben. The wrong changes for this game made with the wrong ambitions.

Delon Armitage had a fantastic season last year - however he clearly isn't back to his best following a long injury layoff (not to mention last weeks knock). There is no shame in that - send him back to Irish to get some games and confidence and get up to speed for the summer. Ben Foden looked better in the twenty minutes he was on, he has been in very good form for three seasons and has flippin earned a chance!

Worsley - great player but is he who we need in the backrow against the Scots when we need a ball winner and carrier? Surely his best asset is tackling and shoring up ball in the tight.

To be fair to Deacon he cops a lot of flak and has been OK this tournament - hopefully Lawes will be on for twenty minutes and make a statement. However, as Lawes is on the bench and can cover 6 too why is Moody (a natural six) also on the bench? Wouldn't Steffon Armitage have been a better bet?

Feel a bit sorry for Paul Hodgson, he has looked good in the few minutes he has been given and deserved a start after Care's mixed run. Still Youngs does look exciting.

As for the wingers... how many matches since either of those two have scored or even come close to scoring? Its getting a bit silly. Stop picking wingers as defenders/extra forwards.

Ben
He has had longer than a year and a half! We all know his hand was a least partially on the tiller for the NZ tour, its crazy to think he was just twiddling his thumbs while his future charges went on tour essentially managerless - if he wasn't involved then someone at the RFU as well as Johnson needs their head read!

So its pretty much two years now and I haven't seen a performance anywhere near Brian Ashton's last match in charge against Ireland. That includes France last year - I'm happy to give credit where its due but that French team didn't turn up. Take that match away and Johnson's reign starts to look really horrific!

I think Tim from The Office could play on the wing instead of Ugo Monye, because I don't think it matters if we had Jonah Lomu or David Campese out there, we don't give the ball to our wingers!

I think you could count the number of times the ball has gone down the back line and ended up with the winger on one hand, even if you have been a bit careless at the factory and lost the majority of your digits.

The French have shown that rugby is not so complicated. Get the ball as quick as you can and whip it out.

He hasnt had a year and a half, he has only had 3 games to choose anything close to a full strength side. Whats the point of change for change sake. Who are all these better players knocking the door down! Laws is a fine athelete and a good prospect but based on recent club performances he isnt better then Deacon or Borthwick. Care is the best English attacking scrum half with Youngs not far behind. All scrum halves are taking a step back and sideways to get away from fringing forwards. Wilkinson and Flutey will come good they just need a bit more time.

The media and the public in this country love to moan these days but with 2 out of 3 with a narrow loss to Ireland this is by historical measures a successful campaign. England have done OK, with only a handfull of England qualified players in key positions in the premiership we dont have greater resources then any other country. Get off their backs, be positive and give them a chance.

The SCotland game will be very tough but a narrow win in Murrayfield and a competitive result against France and Johnson will have every right to be satisfied.

Im a saints supporter so im well aware i may be a little biased but come on why is armatige starting? Keep him on the bench and if Foden doesn't bring home the bacon swap them, same with flood and Wilkinson. As for Monye i have never been a fan im afraid, Ashton would be a gamble but you cant deny the stats. I dont agree with the dropping of moody who in my opinion is one of the few players to of consistently put in a reasonable performance. I dont care who is scrum half if who ever it is stops running across half the pitch before passing the ball, zip it out, we did it last year against Ireland and although we lost we looked so much better and threatening. This weekend will be my second trip to murrayfield and i hope the last trip (two years ago) will not be repeated, it was the worst game of rugby of all amateur and professional games i have seen.

Spot on. I'd much rather see a '6 rolled', by Johnson picking Foden, Ashton, Arimtage Junior (with Moody at 6!) than carry on with the ridiculous, conservative and narrow-minded selection policy that he's currently employing. To think, I look forward every week to seeing some exciting changes and some vision from Martin Johnson but every time he disappoints. What exactly is his vision is he's 'not worried about the championship' ?!

Are very NEGATIVE and in my view UNFAIR attack on the English Management.

Firstly, the quote about johnson 'not concerned about championship' is completly lifted out of context, Johnson goes on to say that 'England are focused on winning each game as they come'. Which is surely a better approach than being wrapped up in dreamy aspirations of Championship.

Yes Johnson is cautious but what he is not is an idiot. Youngs and Foden have less than half a cap between them and you think he should start them!? Expect to see them 50mins in when the pace of the game has been established.

Johnson is building a SQUAD not trying to find that 'elusive 6' or miracle cure. Come the World Cup this will be one of the best in the world. Look at Clive Woodward who went through some dark peroids in the build up to 2003.

Johnson is the clever gambler, one who is rolling a 3 now but when it matters, i have confidence that the 6 will be a habit.

Our lack of progress is worrying although I'm more concerned about Johnsons inability or refusal to implement the changes that may lead to some sustained improvements. The only good performance of any note since MJ took over was last years home game against France. Other than that Englands displays have been characterised in the main by stagnant play devoid of any obvious game plan and certainly a lack of 'heads up rugby'. This is clearly not good enough and things need to change and fast.

Your statistic saying that England could well go into world cup year losing 6 of previous 8 games is very worrying especially in light of this team to face scotland may see that worsening to 7 out of 8.

The autumn internationals were dire and there was the hope that the 6 nations would be different and whilst some changes have been made although largely because of returning centrally contracted players. The team has now been virtually the same for the whole tournament and whilst a couple of games is reasonable to stick because of teething troubles we show no real dynamism.

Haskell and Easter our main ball carriers were virtually anonymous in the Ireland game and whilst Moody has not performed at the level of AI where he was head and shoulders our best player and the only one who deserved to wear the shirt. Delon has not been the player of last year and with his injury worry it is very strange that Foden who was the only England back to show signs of invention when he came on and is on the bench again.

Very worrying for the foreseeable future and johnson needs to do something fast otherwise if he is not capable then he should step down sooner rather than later.

A good article. Johnson and Andrew are more conservative than David Cameron. There is a siege mentality around this England set-up, one that refuses to acknowledge there are major problems. We have gone backwards since 2003 and the current crop of players looks clueless. There is zero ability to play what is in front of them and adapt.

It starts and end with leadership. We don't have the right leadership in management and we don't have it on the pitch. I have nothing personal against any of these players but we have to stop hoping that they will come good.

The painful clinging on to Wilko's glory days is baffling - when other 10s have bad games in a row, they are shipped - look at Hodgson, Cipriani, Flood etc. So why is Wilko still picked despite being way off form? The problems aren't all his fault but he is contributing to poor game management.

I think the more criticism comes his way, the more entrenched Johnson will become and we will see the erosion of any hope that this England team can become exciting world beaters. I for one can't stand the win at any cost mentality, that is not what got me to love rugby in the first place and that is not what I pay money to go and see.

I feel sorry for the likes of Foden, Ashton, Cipriani, Lawes, Armitage (Steffon), JSD etc because they must be wondering what else they have to do to get a proper chance to shine.

As much as I wish to be positive, I am bored of watching this drivel and listening to Johnson and Borthwick's delusional post match interviews.

'But there are those England fans - don't desert me now, I've read your views on our messageboards - who would prefer their side to lose at Murrayfield having chanced something bigger and better, having provided hope for the future, having at least tried to conjure that elusive 6.'

Screw that. We don't want to lose to Scotland, particularly if it means getting loads of abuse from the Scottish fans for the next year. Of course I would love them to play more attacking rugby but I cannot name a South African, Aussie or Kiwi who would accept defeat to a side as limited as Scotland as long as it led to experimentation with better attacking rugby.

Wanting your side to lose is a defeatish attitude and is not part of a winning mentality needed in the long term.

Firstly, I'd like to state that I am a Tiger's fan so you may wish to take what I am about to say with a pinch of salt.

The blog is spot on. The team selection to me says that the management are content to play. You're not going to win a world cup, or make another final, by playing safe.

Maybe Youngs is a bit to youthful and is more a #9 for the 2015 World Cup, but personally I would get much more excited about the prospect of a Youngs/Flood axis than a Care/Wilko one.

As far as I can tell, Wilkinson is basically in the team for his place kicking. Flood himself is a very handy kicker but offers so much more in attack.

I absolutely love the english arrogance. Even though you have 2 million registered players to a paltry scottish 30,000 and the sru's budget is miniscule compared to the rfu you will get beaten. At least Scotland have shown some potential in this six nations, compared to a lacklustre england side that has shown no improvement under Johnson. I'm just glad i'll be there on Saturday to watch the begining of the end of Martin JOhnsons england career. COME ON SCOTLAND!!

As a Scot, it's interesting to look on as Johnson continually refuses to select the best England players and instead relies on experienced but limited stalwarts.

I was dismayed to see Lewis Moody left out as Scotland's main threat are the Killer B's back-row who should be able to dominiate in Moody's absence.

As a result, Parks will have more time on the ball.

Please, please, please... will someone tell MJ to kindly drop Ugo Monye.

I am a long-time Quins fan and I've had to put up with shaky defensive positioning, worrying high-ball antics and 'blinkered' running in attack for years. He is a lovely bloke but just doesn't have the skills at international level.

Sinbad or Ashton might be better bets. Hell, even Bannahan, Ojo, Tom Williams, Noah Cato might be worth a try as they can manage to catch and pass and tackle all in the same game!

Ben, re: your view on Scotland: "four tries in their last 6 tests".

Wasn't one of those tests against Fiji?

How Telfer can claim Scotland are a better side having won ZERO from 3, as opposed to England's 2 from 3 is beyond me.

Particularly given they've scored TWO tries in their last five matches, which is a far more damning statistic. Equally damning for Wales, who are the only ones to have conceded against Scotland. At home.

@21 "I absolutely love the english [sic] arrogance."

What arrogance? Most of the posters on here are bemoaning the lack of creativity in the current England team and are expecting (or at least fearing) that Scotland will beat England at the weekend. Get the chip off your shoulder man!

Not seen much arrogance on this thread, Cammy-M, just some interesting selection debate and a general consensus that England are not very good at the moment.

Bit embarrassing mate.

I absolutely love the Scottish arrogance in always calling us arrogant no matter what we say. Its just some inbuild Scottish reaction to anything English...'you arrogant' fill in the rest.

We could be completely writing off England and saying Scotland would win comfortably, but we will still be called arrogant. I suppose its the same as everybody calling the Scots tight with money.

Largely agree with you Ben, except for the below:

"A narrow loss to Ireland? Not really, they ran in three tries to one."

-Sorry, you can argue until the cows come home about the relative merits of scoring points in a particular way, but the loss to Ireland was indeed narrow. The result was in doubt until the final whistle.

"But there are those England fans - don't desert me now, I've read your views on our messageboards - who would prefer their side to lose at Murrayfield having chanced something bigger and better, having provided hope for the future, having at least tried to conjure that elusive 6."

-Nice try, but consider yourself deserted.

The list of players brought through from rookies to regular international fixtures by 'conservative' Johnson and his 'conservative' selection approach:

Wilson, Cole, Hartley, Croft, Haskell, Care, Hodgson, Flood, Flutey, Monye, Armitage. He's also given decent runs to Hipkiss and Banahan, and blooded the other Armitage, Mullen, Lawes, Foden, and Geraghty. And Narraway. And Crane. And he's giving Tait a run too.

Early in his career, he was persuaded by 'pundits' like you, Dirs, into throwing a callow Cipriani into the international arena long before he was ready - because he was sure fire to be the Next Big Thing(TM). It was an unmitigated disaster and thankfully, he's stopped doing that now.

There are big questions marks over his tactics, and even bigger question marks over his choice of coaches, but to try and build a case that the root of England's problems is a refusal to select inexperienced young players is a total fiction.

I;m sorry but if this isn't arrogance i dont know what is:

"and that's assuming they beat Scotland and Samoa."

"England could quite easily win the game courtesy of a few penalty kicks "

and regarding the 4 tries in six games. Yes Scotland don't have a clinical tryscorer, but who do england have. England are an experienced side who are used to win games, Scotland have yet to gain the experience that allows you to see out the close games, or as in the Wales game, not to throw your considerable lead away in the last 10 mins.

Staying with your metaphor though Ben, I don't think making most of the changes being proposed here would represent any great rolling of the dice for England.

It's not really a choice between 'playing safe to win' or 'gambling with the changes' and risk losing.

Making the changes probably gives England the best chance of winning, which is why the changes should be made.

I tell you what, 2003 we played hard grinding, un-attractive rugby and won the world cup through sheer attrition and a world class kicker.
2007 we played woeful rugby, ground out victories and got to the final.
LAst year we played poorly in the previous 6 nations and still came in 2nd in both. This year we are still playing badly and are currently sitting 2nd in the Table. I would prefer for England to go out and play with flare and loose than to continue to drag rugby int eh the abyss. I for one would like to see England start to loose so that eventually there has to be a clear out at the top level to get in new trainers, managers and players.
Johnson is a legend and is tarnishing his reputation by being a manger, I can't have a go at him, it must be very hard with the politics involved but he shouldn't be there.England need more flare and heart int eh side, give the young talented players a chance, of course there is probably call for some of the old guard to remain whilst new players are bought in to give a bit of stability and experience, but not throughout the squad!

Fantastic to see an article begin with an Office quote. I agree that changes are needed and to refute the idea that Johnson is sensibly moving away from putting inexperienced players in too early, Foden is itching to get his international career underway as a 24 year old in his prime. This is no 18yr old Mat Tait scenario. Courtney Lawes is the bright young thing of English forward play and the sooner Borthwick and Deacon are consigned to the international waste paper basket the better. We need to be 'Woodwarding' this team, stabilising a core and building around that. However alongside the core we need the frills, the Robinsons, the Lewseys. We need Foden, Lawes, Youngs and we need them now, with one and half eyes on having a settled, winning team come World Cup time. If the totally impotent attacking threat that is Scotland isn't the perfect time to do this, I don't know what is.

plugmonkey makes some valid observations above. Interesting too how no one is crticising Johnson's most consistent selections; those of his coaching staff. As an inexperienced coach himself, these were always going to be his most crucial picks. They may have great CV's but can anyone really see how they are getting the best out of a huge potential squad of gifted players? Maybe time to stop debating the tinkerings on pitch selection and look at the ineffectiveness of game plans and execution and the crucial role the coaching staff in that.

cammy-m, you really are a complete tool.

Wrong again Cammy-M,

"and that's assuming they beat Scotland and Samoa."

Ben is clearly making the point that a win against Scotland is far from in the bag. Not arrogance.

"England could quite easily win the game courtesy of a few penalty kicks "

Yes, given the strong likelihood of a tight, attritional game between these two sides, the game could quite easily be one by a few penalty kicks.

Apologies for shouting but I'm hoping that Johnno or his deaf coaches may be listening

JOE WORSLEY PROBABLY CAN'T EVEN COUNT TO 7. THAT'S WHY HE'S A 6. HE IS ABOUT AS CREATIVE AS VILLI MANILLI. WE NOW HAVE NO 7, TWO 6'S AND THE SLOWEST 8 OUTSIDE THE BERKSHIRE LEAGUE THIRD 15. OUR PROBLEM HAS BEEN SLOW BALL AND THE SOLUTION IS TO SLOW IT DOWN FURTHER? ARE YOU MENTAL? ARE YOU?

I give up. The problem is that Ford and Wells set the tone not Johnson and certainly not Smith. We are a forward oriented defence dominated side. Until someone actually takes the bull by the horns and realises what worked in 2001-2001 isn't working now we're going to be mediocre.

I'm one of the fans that hope we get a proper showing up. Pain is required at this point.

Since the highs of 2003, England have lacked a serious spine to their side, with No.'s 2, 8, 9, 10 and 15 appearing average. There have been signs of promise at 2, 10 and 15, but 8 and 9 remain mediocre. The forwards are relatively slow in an age when the emphasis is on securing quick ball from contact. The backs look over complicated rather than direct. In makes for unsavoury viewing.

Our back row look big and strong, but surely speed, scavenging and support are more the order of the day. As for the back three, Delon Armitage looks very out of sorts. Monye is an out-and-out speed merchant, but the team doesn't appear to know how to engineer situations where this can be made good use of. If that's the case, then surely try another plan with another player and a different set of attributes.

I knew it. I absolutely knew it. The slightest opportunity to bring in that second rate, 1 dimensional liability and he was in. Will he speed up ball, no. Will had add creativity, absolutely not. Will he offer some ball carrying, yes but only in the 5 metre head down variety. And on top of that we'll have three anonymous forwards (Payne, Borthwick and now Deacon) one slow lump at 8 and a 6 who drifts in and out of the game. And that is only in the forwards.

This continual obsession with caps is ridiculous.
England have been an unsuccessful team now for almost 8 years. Those players who have built up a number of caps have proved not to be good enough. Why do people keep saying not to blood new players because they have no caps. Of course they don't: so what? Those players who do have repeatedly proved they are not good enough.
We seem obsessed with caps, and not picking form players who can develop into world beaters. It's still the same game. Johnson has said there is not a 50 capped cavalry coming over the hill to help. Thank God because they have proved again and again that they are not good enough.

"I tell you what, 2003 we played hard grinding, un-attractive rugby and won the world cup through sheer attrition and a world class kicker."

This is also a complete myth: check the stats. We consistently scored more tries than anyone else, and in the 6nations, ran in record number of tries. Yes this was on the back of a granite hard pack, but the idea that we use to grind out tight victories through kicking is an absolute myth.

"I tell you what, 2003 we played hard grinding, un-attractive rugby and won the world cup through sheer attrition and a world class kicker."

This is also a complete myth: check the stats. We consistently scored more tries than anyone else, and in the 6nations, ran in record number of tries. Yes this was on the back of a granite hard pack, but the idea that we use to grind out tight victories through kicking is an absolute myth.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think he meant the world cup. And no we did not win that tournament by scoring more tries than the opposition (Uruguay don't count).

In the final we scored won try, Australia scored one try.
In the semi-final we beat France 24-7. They scored the only try, all england points were courtesy of Wilkinson.
In the quarter-final Wales scored 3 tries to Englands 1.

In the group we scored the only try in the game against South Africa. Not something to write home about.

It was not a try fest by England in 2003 more Jonny's boot.

Have you all gone to bed? I've just got in and am spoiling for a little tete-a-tete....sorry about the missed chapeau chinoise et apostrophes!

I find it quiet upsetting being a really proud English rugby fan at the moment. MJ was a legend as a player and his reputation is being destroyed by his failings as the England manager. He had no coaching experience yet the press pressure led to the RFU appointing him. I bet they are regretting this now. His coaching staff were there in situ before he arrived. I dont know quiet what they are coaching at all the allocated sessions but whatever it is its painful to watch. He failed to get his man into the defence role as he had a gentlemans agreement with Wales (Shawn Edwards). The only coach he has appointed has been Smith and he has failed to produce attacking rugby. If I was the RFU I would look at getting a guy like Jake White in to act as a consultant like Eddie Jones did with the Boks in the 2007 world cup. Until then they had been struggling to fire and they went on to win it! It has got to be worth approaching Shawn Edwards again and trying to get him to cross the Severn and take over from Ford. With Francis Baron retiring in June hopefully his replacement will look at Rob Andrews position as Director of Elite rugby and realise how far back we have fallen in the world rankings and the actual level of performance that is being produced and make his position untenable.

Anyway this weekends game is going to be extremly close. I would not be at all suprised if Scotland were to win. They have underperformed so far. They should have beaten Wales or got a draw not thrown the match away in such school boy manner!

Spot on Ben! I was considering writing an article making exactly the same point, but I don't need to know. England are turgid at the moment, seemingly happy by scraping wins and avoiding heavy defeats against more accomplished opposition.

I would rather see England lose playing expansively and blooding a few youngsters than the depressing style of rugby they're playing at the moment. Who in their right mind would pay to watch that drivel?

Tim from the Office doesn't spring to mind, more like David Brent, although unfortunately, England are very far from being 'Simply the Best'

All this concern about not starting woth players who have few caps - what are the Saxons for if not to blood young players in international rugby. If they are good enough, they are ready - and good enough also means strong enough (unlike Matthew Tait's first outing - or upping - at the hands of Hanson & co).

One result of the siege mentality - combined with global TV coverage and the better organisation of so-called 'lesser' teams - is that there are no longer any easy England games, or games where new players can be tried out away from the prying eyes of the cameras. So Johnson is starting with players who are worthy, reliable but unlikely to do much different.

Armitage (D) seems to be having a classic second-season dip, plus the injury. Who is his number two - Cueto?

If Shane can make it as a record try-scoring wing why are England concerned to put a brick wall by the touch line and hope it will trundle over the line at some point. OK, so Monye is a fast brick wall but lacks vision and guile.

I guess Johnson is caught between wnating to build confidence - and winning matches is what does that - and building a team for the World Cup at the expense of immediate results. The problem is that Plan A hasn't worked, and there is now precious little time to try alternatives before the run-in to next year's tournament. The summer tour is probably the last chance to introduce fresh blood.

OK I'm going to ring the same bell as ever and say to all,again, that MJ is not the guy you need to manage the biggest resource in World Rugby and play fluently, efficiently, attractively. He does not possess that capability and losing at Murrayfield should not come as a wake up call it should be a red card. As many posters have said earlier he's had enough opportunities and, in reality, many more than most professional coaches will ever have. As a passionate Scot, however, I think Cammy must have had a few Irn Bru's tae meny....

Thanks Unounos, your quite right, spleenboy, if you READ what I had written you would see the comment for 2003 was referring to the world cup not 6 nations.

My team would be an experimental one.

15 Foden
14 Monye
13 Hape
12 Flutey
11 Ashton
10 Wilkinson
9 Youngs
8 Easter
7 Moody
6 Haskell
5 Deacon
4 Lawes
3 Wilson
2 Mears
1 Wilson

What do people think?

Unbelievable team selection! I feel so sorry for Ben Foden - just when is he going to get a chance to start at full-back? He didn't get any game time in the autumn when Armitage was injured, only got on against Ireland when Armitage was injured (and he played fairly well in a losing effort), and despite Armitage playing so poorly in the Six Nations overall, Foden still doesn't get a chance to start against Scotland!

Knowing Foden's luck, he won't get much of a game against the Scots but will then get a start in Paris, in a game in which England could get smashed. He's then dropped again for Armitage and before we know what's happened he is pushing 30 with about 10 caps to his name - another talented English back never given a decent run in the team when in his prime...

This was a good and interesting article.

I am not very clued up on rugby. I play it and enjoy it but mainly as I am a student I cant afford sky sports.

The main things that scare me are that at times, in the middle of the pitch, Fluty was able to construct something interesting, but one line out and Tommy Bowe went straight through all of us! It shouldn't be that easy, he is very good, but it shouldn't be that easy.

I don't know enough to tell Martin Johnson what to do but how did he get the job with no managerial experience? He won a world cup but on the pitch not in the stands. England's rugby is not exciting. If it is its only brief flashes, which get our hopes up. Yet the next 20 mins of rucking with the eventual loss of possession, bring our wavering hopes smashing back down to their usual depressive state.

The Ireland match was entertaining and nail-biting but ultimately they looked and were so much better.

I am happy we are winning more six nations matches than we are loosing but I would be so excited if we played well.

Scotland may have been vaguely exciting but haven't won as many matches as England. Really its down to which we would prefer to be, a team who are positive because they are making progress, but ultimately loosing. Or a team, like us, who try to be positive because we have won a few matches but really aren't playing that well. I suspect different people would want different things.

I would love to be a winning team who are playing well, but alas we are an English sports team, and I am not sure we can do that very often.

Why in the name of everything that all rugby fans hold dear is Joe Worsely playing in this game? WHY??? What does he offer against a scavenging back row? NOTHING! Surely! Robshaw, Moody, Croft (who played last weekend!) are all streets ahead of him at a scavenging game? As would Lawes be as a bet at 6. I agree that, against a dynamic, running side (eg. NZ, Australia, hell: Fiji and Samoa) Worsely's tackling game, and ability to close space will be a good thing to be able to draw upon. But (sorry Scots) Scotland aint that! They are a team that relies heavily on starting field position, and the dynamism of a very effective back row unit, and, it seem Dan Parks, who is, for me, emerging as one of the players of the tournament thus far. The inclusion of Worsley means that he is going to be targetting Dan Parks and making sure Lamont doesnt crash any big blonde holes through the fringes...not exactly an ambitious choice!

Care: cant have many more oppurtunities, and expect the Scottish to be all over him. Youngs has been hot and cold for Tigers this year, but he's still keeping a fit again Ellis at bay, he deserves a shot. I feel very sorry for Hodgeson, who is having another good year at LI, he doesnt deserve to be dropped.
Wilko: I've sed (very) often that I believe its time the torch was passed on. We have Flood, Geraghty, Cipriani and Walder all a-knocking on that door...Is a place kicker (whose radar has been out of late) the best option available? nah, I didnt think so either
Back 3: Cueto: steady, solid, depndable: ESSENTIAL
Monye: Ashton, Varndell (yes Varndell), JSD, Strettle are all pretty quick and good finishers, give them a go too, whats the worst that can happen? they refuse to offload on overlaps? oh wait...you mean that happens already? whoops!
Armitage: Foden was great in the time he was on last week deserves a run out, Nick Abendanen? Tait at FB? Allowing for Shontayne Hape or Hipkiss, or Allen, or Waldouck...etc etc an oppurtunity alongside Flutey?

Im very quickly losing faith in the England management (a sacrelgious remark regarding Johnson for a Tigers fan) but the system is obviously broken, so instead of trying to fit different players in the broken system, they should be trying to make a system in which the best (and in-form) players will be effectively accomodated? and appropriate against the opponents. Picking an immobvile tackler (Worsley) and a lumbering ball carrier (Deacon) and ignoring youth, form and inventiveness (Lawes, Croft, Youngs, Hape, Ashton, Foden etc) is too conservative an approach to take against a team that is without 3 of its most influential players, and who, if we attack properly, (on paper) will not have the reserves to live us.

Roll a 3 say you?

Roll a 2 say I, and the only 6 rolled has most certainly been the wrong one in Worsley.

Call me jingoistic and shortsighted but at least England have shown consistency in selection and I, for one, do not want us to leave Murrayfield on Saturday with anything less than a victory against the old foes. Throwing the kids (Youngs, Foden etc) at the Scots would be suicidal and unpalatable for me and though we are not looking remotely close to anything more than also-rans in a World Cup, defeat would be unbearable for a proud Englishman. So let's give MJ this chance, and i'll take a 3 point win right now.......The 6 nations is still important, and special.....

Sorry Ben, but I wholeheartedly disagree with a lot of what you've written. I would certainly never "prefer [my] side to lose at Murrayfield" when the Championship is still very much there to be won. Your picks for developing the team (Lawes, Foden and Youngs) are ALL on the bench. Okay, they're not starting, but the Scottish are a good team this year (despite their record) and have beaten us on our last two trips to Edinburgh. I expect you realise that replacing the starting 15, 9 and 5 with relative newbies would be a pretty unwise decision, that's basically the spine of the team there! These young players, like many before them, will get their chance under Johnson (as his selection policies show) but unlike during the tenures of Johnson's predecessors they will get a good run, rather than a couple of games before the coach feels the need to axe them after the grumblings of an increasingly fickle media.

-------------------------

'"Five games really is not enough." But he hasn't had five games, he's had about a year and a half, and England in that time have not improved one jot.'

Firstly, he's had five games since he's had a reasonable (you could even say realistic!) choice of his best players. As a journalist perhaps your memory is rather selective but I hasten to remind you of the injury list that England suffered during the Autumn (even now we are without Sheridan and Vickery who will very much improve the side... as it is, Dan Cole - hardly a conservative selection - is doing very well and may even replace Vickery, but Vickery's experience and value to the squad as a whole should not be overlooked)

I also remind you that England will embark on a tour of Australia before long. That represents a FAR more suitable time to tinker with selections (or as you say "throw" players "into the mix"). This is an international tournament that we should be aiming to win. I think that Johnson's given it a pretty good shot so far, and yes. The Ireland match was close. If we had won (scoring three more penalties perhaps) would you then argue that we were soundly thrashed on account of having scored only one try and conceded three?

So Ben. Having seen the team, do you want England to lose? Do you genuinely believe that being 4-2-0-2 would be preferable to 4-3-0-1?

As an englishman living in scotland im preparing for a lot of stick post-game this weekend coz it seems as mentioned above England still want to play monotonous, non imaginative rugby. Why doesn't johnson pick inform players the only thing its proving is that he doesn't rate or even watch the Guinness premiership. I say this because it seems like everyone johnson is picking has had previous international experience or (in the case of the front row) is being forced upon him.

I think that he needs to try something different or maybe, the RFU must say thank you and goodbye to Johnson and his coaches.

Perfect blog. Spot on. Yes a victory will bring a smile to my face but I still won't feel satisfied. MJ is paralysed by the fear of being seen to fail. Fear of failure only breeds failure in the end. Time for a real coach. MJ is still the greatest rugby player to where the red rose but he's also got the tag of its worst coach at least in my living memory and that's a long time.

"I also remind you that England will embark on a tour of Australia before long. That represents a FAR more suitable time to tinker with selections (or as you say "throw" players "into the mix")".

Totally agree with you Felix. Great time to send our youngsters out to get hammered by a very poor Australia side. The confidence levels would go through the roof when we get stuffed 70 odd to nil. There are some really promising players in the saxons that need to be brought down a peg or two against Georgia standard ozzie opposition. Watching good ozzie players tear them apart will only bode well for their future.

Sorry if l appear less than genuine but playing Oz away from home is when we should be sending out our best team coz only then will we really know where we sit for next years WC. What would we learn from blooding players in OZ? Surely better to do so against Scotland in a match where a new cap would beleive they at least stand a chance of winning.

Two things.

First, the Care bashing. Granted his delivery needs work - and presumably will get it, if the coaches hacve actually pinpointed it - but Care has actually been England's best player this 6N, in fact he has been our only real threat. I'm all for trying out Youngs et al but to target Care as one of the problems is just wrong. Wilkinson has had ball that is more than adequate, he just has been unable to do anything with it.

Second point is this "world class business" - and Ben I notice you harp on about this a little too much, as do many posters, without considering what it really means.
The point about "world class" players is that aside from a few freaks of nature, either by physique or outrageous natural talent - thinking here Lomu, Campese, Blanco, McCaw, BOD, possibly Carter, possibly Francois Steyn - apart from these once in a generation finds, players only become or are perceived to be world class when they play in a great team. Put them back in a misfiring or underperforming team, or dare I say it a poorly coached team, and they suddenly become ordinary again.

Matt Giteau, Martyn Williams, Mils Muliaina, Shane Williams, Ronan O'gara... to name just a few. All considered world class I reckon. And they've all spent longish periods of their career looking distinctly ordinary when their team hasn't performed.

Put it this way: France have looked awesome this 6N. But who do they have who is genuinely world class? And conversely, how did Flutey make the Lions squad? How did he manage to pull of the "world-classiest" pass of the whole Lions tour?

I agree that England have woefully underperformed. But the players, for the most part, are good enough - a number of them would be world class if allowed to be.

I think the people that are pondering over selection of personnel have missed the real problem . The attitude that we play with and the tactics that we play to are the underlying problem .
Granted ,their are better , younger ,more exciting selections to be made but the real problem is that the team are not given licence to express theselves. We play a risk free game , which at best could bring us a grinding 3 point win.
The team selected for the weekend could play well but the coaches have to let them try .
Whilst we ponder this results first , win at all costs mentality its worth remembering that our win record for the last 60 tests since Nov 2003 is less than 50%

What on earth are we afraid of !!

"Why not throw Youngs into the mix instead of Danny Care, whose crab-like scuttling makes Jonny Wilkinson's task at fly-half that bit harder?"

Because when Youngs fails, he'll be chastised and his head will be called for. Joe Simpson will be fit and everyone will be screaming for him to be put in the team instead. Then Simpson will be picked, he'll fail and we'll be back to square 1.

Look at Matt Banahan, people were calling for his inclusion on the back of his try scoring form last year, and then they got their wish. He was absolutely villified over the autumn and became the subject of many jokes, even though he has a decent test record (3 tries in 5, and 1 try in 1 non-capped appearance) and now everyone's calling for Ashton.

The problem is deeper then the coaches, the problem is the whole structure in this country, but that's another debate for another day.

"So if he's not worried about the Championship, why is he not preparing for the future?"

Hartley, Cole, Haskell, Care, Tait, Monye and Armitage from the starting line-up will all be around for a while, while every other player in the starting line-up can make the World Cup in 2011.

Then we've got Wilson, Lawes, Youngs, Flood and Foden on the bench, who I believe are all 24 or under. Add to this players like Matt Mullan, Steffon Armitage, Shane Geraghty and Chris Ashton who are in and around the international squad and gaining valuable experience just by being there.

With investment, there's always a trade-off between present returns and future returns, but despite the stick he gets I think Johnson has struck a decent balance.

What does Hendre Fourie have to do to get a call, IMO the form 7 in the GP, hes played out of his skin all season, particularly in the last few weeks.

Obviously there is an element of Leeds bias on my part, but hes just been that good.

Can't believe Foden is not in.

Can't believe Care still is - his lack of experience and ill discipline lead directly to Ireland's second try last time out. I do think he'll be on strictly come dancing though if his footwork just before he passes is anything to go by. Would be good to see Youngs on at some stage, very exciting.

Can't believe you're knocking big Joe again - I'm a Leicester fan, so no Wasps bias here, but he has always been brilliant for England. I would have had him at blind side, Moody open, and Haskell at 8 for the fat boy Easter(egg).

Lastly, I can't believe Johnno is sticking with Hartley the Hare at 2 - Mears looks 100% more dynamic in the loose, and his line out throw is on a different level also. He's not even on the bench (is he injured?). Mears to start, Thomo on the bench.

his is rapidly becoming one of the most boring issues in Sport.

I think England are pretty much as good as they can be at the moment but have a lot of very good club players (seemingly) putting their hand up for contention; there were calls all last year for banahan to be picked despite his obvious flaws that just wouldnt be exposed at club level but were at international. The same with geraghty who makes Hook look like a model of consistency
(just two examples)

Foden is a good player but inevitably for someone who is recently converted to a new position is a very rough diamond, not nearly ready for international rugby.

Many fair points in this article, particularly regarding Foden- who has been great all season and Ashton. Now I'm not a Saints fan- but if you have 2 players in a back three that are clearly playing well (where are Northampton in the league? And how many tries have they scored?) then it is probably fair to assume that they are better than Ugo who plays with his head in the sand and players like Cueto who frankly hasn't looked good enough since he didn't score in the world cup final... And what of players like Dom Waldouck- I watched him at Adam's park this weekend, he came on and play an absolute blinder, but I didn't notice anyone there watching (although Joe Worsley did get a call up following that match... Odd).

Ring in the changes, be ambitious- but be sensible.

LUFC - Falcon1986

He did. He was called up as cover this week when Dan Ward-Smith was carrying a niggle.

England are consistently a 3 - rarely below or above in my opinion.

Results are made to look acceptable in the 6 nations as France, Ireland and Wales are capable of throwing in a 2 performance now and again and England finish mid table. Difference is that those other teams do strive for more and can produce 4/5 on their day.

Come the WC, the southern hemisphere teams will not produce less than a 4 and England have no chance of beating a single one of them (Argentina excluded) especially away from Twickenham. That is unless they show some more ambition - they do have the players with potential given time.

Hi Ben,

The players you are pushing forward are on the bench, so may well take part in the game. Is there not a possibility that that you can roll the dice with the existing personnel? For example if Delon Armitage was once an attacking force, can he not be again? For the answers to Englands frustrating performaces in terms of turning possession into pressure, then to points, there is more in the equation than a few player swaps, I think.In the case of France, the best performing side in 6 nations so far, the equation starts with great defence, then they scrummage great and manage on that platform to exert a lot of pressure. The two key areas for England to get right are in my opinion: getting the kicking game right so that the pressure stays on Scotland, and winning enough fast quality ball in attacking positions. This combined with great defense should win them the game, with the existing personnel. Every game is a new roll of the dice, and I may be naive but I am still hoping for a 5 or 6 instead of the three from this England team.

Great blog as ever, Ben.
My take on the situation is that the English rugby public were spoilt by the great side we had under Will Carling. Now there was a side that could throw sixes! Led by the most innovative and under rated captain we ever had the side of that era would have taken the 2003 side to the cleaners by 20-30 points.

England won the World Cup with pragmatism rather than flair despite having, arguably, 10 world class players. They could have thrown it wide but that wasn't Johnson's way as a player, so why should it be as a coach?

Carling and Guscott wouldn't have made it as coaches even if England had won in 95 or 99, so why should he? The only advantage for spectators is that we might have had a mix of 2s and 5s with the occasional 1 or 6 thrown in. To my mind that would have been infinitely better.

I completely agree. I think all England fans want to see is our backs try and attack and not be afraid to try run the ball back at the opposition. Including players like Foden and Ashton will definately bring this to the side. I think Cueto has been playing well and seems to look to try things occasionally, so that would be my back 3. Danny Care is a very good 9 but he needs to stop taking 3 0r 4 steps before he passes to Wilkinson, which is putting him under pressure.

Courtney Lawes must be given a chance in the 2nd row, I cannot understand the selection of Louis Deacon alongside Borthwick (SNORE). We have to start giving these young guys a chance and seeing if they can play at international level. I can imagine Foden is livid right now...Armitage has been poor since his return from injury and does not deserve to keep his place...but how many of them do?! Lets hope England can try to play a running attacking game on saturday without going backwards!!

hermmy:
'Care has been our best player this 6Ns'. Doesn't say much for England does it?
Care has been slow, ponderous and uninventive, plus he's a poor passer. That's why wilko has stood deep. If he's flatter he'll get hammered because Care's passing is too slow to allow wilko to do anything dynamic. Get someone who can do the basics right -- Care can't and never will.

On another note, fortunately I am part Scottish so there's at least an arm of me that won't be gutted when the Scots win.

I care more about the game plan than I do the team. So far it hasn't really worked, actually for two years it hasn't worked! The players look clueless and England are generally quite dire to watch.

Johnson will be under pressure until, well if, he wins something. He has no managerial accomplishments to fall back on, what he achieved as a player is irrelevant. The pressure he is under shows what an idiotic appointment it was. They (Rob Andrew) should be feeling the heat as much, if not more, than Johnson. Personally I don't think either of these two should be in charge...

Foden is a good player but inevitably for someone who is recently converted to a new position is a very rough diamond, not nearly ready for international rugby.

Disagree with this comment. Foden clearly showed in the, albeit, short time he was on against Ireland that he offers something England have been missing so far in this 6 Nations - the balls to counter attack. It's been painful watching England recently, and when someone shows the propensity to have a go at the opposition, and is in far better form than the current incumbent, he's rewarded with a place on the bench. Very very disappointed with Johnson's decision.

Although I agree in most part to the article I find the critism of Joe Worsleys selection a bit much. I remember last year before the Wales game his selection was attacked by several people but he had a man of the match performance in a game where England scored 3 tries against the then defending Grand slam champions.

Some of Johnsons selections have been bold and forward thinking players like Cole, Armitage and Lawes have shown that.

But the issue isnt with selection is it? Its the fact that Johnson doesnt seem to put his game plan into place when the whistle sounds. I think this is down to the fact that he isnt a coach, hes an ex-player who knows alot about rugby. I know that sounds harsh but its the truth, a head coaches job should go to someone who knows how to be a head coach not a great player with good ideas.

"Disagree with this comment. Foden clearly showed in the, albeit, short time he was on against Ireland that he offers something England have been missing so far in this 6 Nations - the balls to counter attack. It's been painful watching England recently, and when someone shows the propensity to have a go at the opposition, and is in far better form than the current incumbent, he's rewarded with a place on the bench. Very very disappointed with Johnson's decision."

I dont think that making a couple of tidy runs against a tired defense is proof of anything, his positioning was very suspect in the brief time he was on.

'Totally agree with you Felix. Great time to send our youngsters out to get hammered by a very poor Australia side. The confidence levels would go through the roof when we get stuffed 70 odd to nil.'

The last time that happened in 1997 sowed the seed for the 2003 World cup triumph.

I agree totally with this blog...what is happening is that Johnson has had such a bad record as manager of England that he is trying to keep loses to a minimum now without thinking of the future. He wants to beat scotland and not lose by too many against france and he will be happy...but are there any england fans out there that will be happy with a 3rd place finish is a competition with 6 teams?

He should be starting all these new young guns and getting them used to international level. Half the english team are in their 30's...these guys are not the future.

My predictions for martin johnson is:
beat scotland by less then 5 points
lose to france by 20+ points
get smashed out the door in every game this summer down under
lose every game this autumn
and come next 6 nations he will be in the exact same position he is now...all because he didnt roll the dice and take a chance with the young guns.

I hate to say it...but the man is probably the worst and dumbest manager in world rugby. for a country with 50 million...thats shameful.

I can somewhat understand (but not agree with) the selection of Deacon over Lawes as Deacon has been playing in a very strong Leicester pack and Lawes has been playing blind side for the past couple of weeks. Worsley as well has merit to be included as an extra ball carrier.

What I have real issues with is the continued inclusion of Armitage over Foden and Monye over Ashton. Surely personnel need to realise that they cannot be secure in their positions if they have 2, 3 or 4 bad games in a row. I would also have given Flood a chance over Wilkinson.

The real difficulty is that if Martin Johnson is sacked, surely Rob Andrew has to go to, or at least relinquish control of the England team. I can't help thinking we will limp on like this until the World Cup and Johnson will be sacked post World Cup defeat in the Group stages....

I dont think that making a couple of tidy runs against a tired defense is proof of anything, his positioning was very suspect in the brief time he was on.

So why not give him a go from the start and let's see what happens? He won't learn if he isn't given the opportunity.

Thanks Ben. Great blog as usual.

Now get back to boxing and let's talk about Khan vs Paulie. Curious bout for me.

Ben

You dont win anything in Rugby by playing 15 inexperienced players. Its not like journalism where you can take a chance and be controversial. Johnson is right to look to develop from a position of stability. England were very close to beating Ireland, they played most of the rugby with most of the pocession. Ireland counterattcked and finished very well and deserved the win but it WAS close.

Armchair managers can select who they want. We should revel in our boring tag and maul everything like we did in the 2003 final. If all you appreciate is watching tries go and watch 7's or basketball. Its the modern disease driven by the media and video game mentality, a 30 second attention span and inability to delay gratification. Grow up! Rugby is a mature complex gamne for mature complex people!

Ben Youngs is the future - ha has to give young talent a chance to shine on the big stage.
And yes, I would rather lose to Scotland and see exciting adventurous rugby, rather than play the same style and win by a Jonny W penalty.

Am I missing something? Isn't Joe Worsley there to nullify the Scottsh back three and stop them getting quick ball? Much as I am depressed about the lack of creativity of the England team, you need to have the ball in the first place and a team should be just that - a blend of skills. Remember the role Worsley played last year against Wales when he completely took Jamie Roberts out of the game?

We need to get quicker ball out, with the backs lying deeper and running lines to see what they can do - it is hard to judge whether they are "world class" or not, given what they have had to deal with so far. That might lead to the elusive 6. If not, then give Foden et al a good run in the second half.

The problem is that mj has been like this from the start. Lievremont ditched a lot of the established players when he took over as france coach and by trial and error found a group of players to take france forward. MJ has stuck with the same group of players since he took over. Now he has the scary prospect of trying to find players who can cope at international level only 10 games before a world cup. There is not enough time to just try people out.

Spot on. Saturday will be like pulling teeth. Am giving serious consideration to painting a few walls rather than sit through 80 minutes of drudge. Please Johnno, wake up and smell the boredom. I have never seen Twickenham so quiet during the Ireland game. We deserve something better than what's being served up at the moment. We might scrape a win at Murrayfield, but we'll be chasing shadows in Paris !

TomMorgan - not a bad selection but I'm going to risk the ridicule of others to suggest a more creative/dynamic team that brings with it potential risks.

My ideal team (assuming no injuries):

15 Foden
14 Tait
13 JSD
12 Flutey
11 Ashton
10 Geraghty (I know the limitations but I want some flair)
9 Youngs
8 Croft (going out on a limb here - could his pace make a difference?)
7 Armitage
6 Moody
5 Kennedy
4 Lawes
3 Sheridan
2 Hartley
1 Wilson

Can't wait for the abuse about defensive frailties, unproven players etc etc. However, given those criticisms hold true of the established and dull team, why not take a gamble for once?

Ben

Foden isnt the best running fullback in England; Thats probably Geordan Murphy! Which highlights one of Johnsons problems. England does not have the most resources in terms of elite players! How many first choice flyhalves, hookers and tight head props in the premiership are England qualified!

The Ireland game did not make for dismal viewing! If you were not stirred and excited by the tension and ferocity of that game then you should give up reporting on Rugby!

The game has changed, I loved watching Robinson dance his way through defences but he was exceptional - like Shane Williams is today. Greenwood was pragmatic and effective but so is Flutey. Its not the coaches fault its a combination of intense pressure and expectation - which is your fault - and a lack of confidence and in some cases ability. But we didnt win in 2003 because of individuals, it was because we had an experienced team in whch everyone knew what to expect and what was expected. We dont have that yet.

If you want to see more attacking play then the referees have to change their interpretation. France play counterattacking pressure rugby and are unbeaten - Wales play open running Rugby and are lucky to have 1 win. Johnson is right to focus on stability and defense, with more time and confidence the counterattacking flair will come but unless the referees start penalising defenses for going off their feet at every ruck attacking rugby will not be encouraged.

James Gurd:

Far too much inexperience in this side.

Tindall had a good run out for Gloucester on Sunday... why not him? he's a good runner- strong in defence and someone that would combine nicely with the flair of Flutey. If you include JSD, try out on the wing.

Trying to claim moody is a more "dynamic" player than Haskell is also odd I think. And playing Armitage over Worsley is madness. Worsley was in fine form pre-injury in the autumn and proved on Sunday that he has returned to this sort of form. Armitage has proven that he does not think enough at international level and in many ways is where Haskell was 2 or 3 years ago- give him time.

This wouldn't necessarily be my starting 15 but again it balances experience with a good look for the future- it makes use of combinations from the premiership (JSD/Tindall- Youngs/Flood- Foden/Ashton- DWS/Worsley)... something that I think is invaluable- just look at Ireland's success last season and Wales' in recent times; using club combinations, people that know each other and can anticipate the other's decisions.

15 Foden
14 JSD
13 Tindall
12 Flutey
11 Ashton
10 Flood
9 Youngs
8 Dan Ward-Smith
7 Worsley
6 Haskell
5 Kennedy (he's quite slight but a great asset in the line if you don't pick croft at 6 and haskell at 8)
4 Borthwick (captain)
3 Sheridan
2 Mears
1 Cole

I don't think that "going for something bigger and better" is taking a chance at all. England must play a more positive, dynamic, game if they are to improve their recent 6-Nations record, or to win the 2011 World Cup. In the main the problem is not a selectorial issue down to the players in the team, it is a mindset and coaching problem. England have good players at their disposal but they are being coached with negative game plans. Rucks and mauls are too slow and ponderous to deliver the quick ball that the backs need to break down tight international defences and the backs have few opportunities to run. Our forwards are well capable of a more dynamic game - we see that in the Premiership every week. Our backs can run with the ball, as we see in occasional flashes but never for a sustained period.
Martin Johnson was a great player, but that alone does not make a decent coach. On the evidence of this season's track record the current coaching team have succeeded only in converting top quality Premiership players into a mediocre international team.

Basher - Ben great debate keep it up!!

Has anyone considered the fact that we dont have the players? I know we a supposed to have more than anyone else (about 300,000 not including Colts) but it doesnt mean they (or we because I still play at 34!) are any good.

"What's mature and complex about watching two blokes punt a ball to each other for 80 minutes,...."

That's a stupid statement!

Basher67

GP England Fly Halfs -
Leicester - Flood (with Twelvetrees earmarked for the future.)
Saints - Myler and Geraghty (both playing regularly at 10)
Saracens - at the moment a foreign player but Alex Goode has been earmarked by Ventner
London Irish - Ryan Lamb
Wasps - Walder and Cipriani rotating
Bath - Non-english first choice player but Barkley can cover.
Gloucester - NEP
Newcastle - NEP
Worcester - NEP
Leeds - Ford
Sale - Hodgson

Plus France
Toulon - Wilkinson

Super 14
Andy Goode

Plus very good U20 squad.

More than plenty of choice. Lots of good players and many more to choose between than say Wales of Ireland. Your argument is weak and poorly researched.

3 Sheridan
2 Mears
1 Cole

Sheridan is a loosehead, Cole a tighthead.

Mixed feelings about this post. On one hand I agree with you absolutely Ben. Watching England at the moment is a truly joyless and empty experience. I said as much on 606 yesterday. However, firstly you state that the management style has been perhaps overly cautious, and then in a later post you mention that there is not a single player in the England team who could be described as world class. As has been pointed out before, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, and bearing that in mind, isn't continuity the next best thing. A TEAM is not going start to play better with the addition of new INDIVIDUALS regardless of their talents. Their inclusion may increase the team's potential, but that would still take time to realise. Exceptions to this would be the discovery of a new Jason Robinson or similar. A player capable of turning a game on their own. Such players are by definition "world class" and as you point out, the cupboard is bare in that regard.

Lastly, I really can't back you on your call for Lawes to partner Borthwick in the engine room. If his own club aren't picking him to play in that position then why would MJ? Hopefully he will prove me wrong by coming on at 50mins and having a storming half hour. Delighted if this is the case. I am always happy to eat my words if the end result suits me anyway. I will always want England to win, regardless of the names on the team sheet. Just can't really get excited about watching them play any more!

I completely agree. Great blog Ben.
As a slightly biased Saints fan, may I also suggest chucking Geraghty in at 10? I realise he's a bit inconsistent at the moment but his flair is something that England are desperately lacking.
Also, Ashton's form simply cannot be ignored for much longer, and I reckon Murrayfield would have been a great stage on which to make his debut.
Won't be long though.

When Martin Johnson took over in the Autumn of 2008 England tried to play with some adventure and lost badly to the big SH teams. Johnson was a new, completely inexperienced manager/coach and promptly switched to a conservative safety first approach. This has persisted ever since then, during which time England have won some games and lost some games, looking decidely mediocre in the process.
Had Johnson been more experienced he would have seen the AI results from 2008 for what they were - an inexperienced manager with an inexperienced team taking on the big boys of World Rugby and as you would expect getting beat-up. He would have said "look I just took over, we have problems and we are addressing them. Be patient and judge me on what is happening 18 months from now, not what is happening today".
Johnson's lack of experience then has forced England into a corner they are still struggling to escape from.

Hookers Armpit

I think you have made my point;

With only Flood, Myler or Geraghty, Walder, Ford and Hodgson playing as England qualified first choice premiership flyhalves England dont have greater resource to pick from then other nations. We might have 300,000 players and 60 million people but that doesnt matter.

Ben
We do have the players and there is nothing wrong with the coaching. The best rugby team usually beats the best 15 players, Johnson understand this. Media pundits and Journalists ignore that fact because it doesnt get them noticed.

Come on Ben make a name for yourself say something original; Johnson is developing a good team. A team capable of beating any northern hemisphere side today and capable of developing into a world cup winning side in 16 months!

I back England to tough out a close game at Murrayfield - always a tough place for England to win - and scrape an ugly win against an ugly French team.

I'm welsh and grew up as a kid in the 70's then lived in England in the early 80's early 90's when Wales were crap and England ruled. The late 90's and early 2000's i used to dread Wales v England as i knew that England would prevail (generally), also we were on the wrong side of some severe hammerings, i hated Will Greenwood with a passion but totally and utterly admired his skill. I agree with Ben there are no world class players in the current english team, or if there are/were then they are playing well below their ability. I hate it when Wales lose and was upset after the Scotland game as we didnt play until the last 10 mins and to be honest were a little lucky. England are winning their possession, but are awful with it, Wales arent winning any possession but are great on turnovers or scraps. a combination of both would be good!!

I think there are some interesting comments here. But people, these young exciting players like Foden, Youngs, Lawes, Ashton, Armitage, Cato etc. will only gain experience by playing in these games. If they are not even being selected, then what chance do we have of having a team that's going to compete in the next World Cup.
As for continuity, I can understand that MJ wants to win every game, we all do. But to win every game you have to pick players that are on form. We can continue to pick players because they have more experience, or because they were in form two years ago, before getting injured (Armitage). But when they fall out of form, have the guts to drop them, and replace them with someone who is in form. Tait has been performing consistently in the Premiership for years. But only now gets the chance to prove his worth. If they had stuck with him, imagine how good a player he would be now. For me it's almost as if MJ is bcak pedalling with this selection. He starts picking players like Steffon Armitage for a few games, and then suddenly brings back Worsley (out of position). Play Kennedy for a few games, and then bring back Shaw. Decisions like this make no sense, and it doesn't show continuity. There are some players that will leave everything on the pitch when they play, players like Moody, or Tait. But we seem to have a lack of them at the moment. I think Foden should definitely be starting, and Ashton should be on the bench. Monye just sits on his wing waiting for the ball. He needs to go looking for work the same way Cueto or Strettle does. And what's happened to Armitage running great lines from his position. It's what Poitrenaud does for France all the time, and it's working for them. As for the midfield, it's obvios that it's not working with Wilkinson and Flutey, so change one of them. Maybe put Flood on at 12 with johnny at 10, or have Flood at 10, with Flutey at 12. We can't blame Johnny and Flutey for a lot of the errors recently. A lot of them are down to Care. Not getting the ball out quick enough. Not making quick enough decisions. Why does he insist on crabbing sideways four or five steps, allowing the defence to realign, before deciding what he's going to do?
And finally, can someone please tell me why Croft is not even being considered? Is he injured?