So after all that, England go into a World Cup with two centres each looking for their second caps and a likely pairing who have not played together unless it was behind closed doors. Somehow it says it all about the past four years.
For three of them, when England were being pulled up from the depths, Stuart Lancaster was great, inspirational, the man who raised the bar to acceptable levels. In the past year? It’s a bit like watching a boxing trainer who can get his man as fit as a flea but then can’t get the timing right or make him sharp for the big night. In England’s case they are still learning about themselves. Partnerships and players which should have been tried last autumn, or against Italy in the Six Nations, at the latest, are still untested.
Against Ireland not only do Brad Barritt and Jonathan Joseph have to play together for the first time, but Henry Slade has to play alongside Joseph. In a week’s time, and in the last game before they kick off against Fiji, Lancaster, rather than adding a final polish to his midfield, will be making up for lost time. Why, when both Slade and Sam Burgess badly needed game time, did England pick Billy Twelvetrees for Paris when it has been perfectly obvious for a season that the Gloucester centre’s game was off colour?
And Burgess? Well, the signs have been there for a long time, with the Bath man now elbowing out England’s inside-centre of choice throughout the Six Nations. It is not Burgess’s fault that the England coaches seem to be about the only ones who reckon the league convert is ready for a union World Cup, but you got some understanding of their reasoning when, on Wednesday, Andy Farrell was explaining Danny Cipriani’s omission: “Twenty minutes of rugby cannot be the sole reason you pick someone. Or even 60 minutes of rugby,” said Lancaster’s right-hand man.
“Selection has to be based on what’s right for the group. About what you’ve learnt about a person – his character, his skill levels, his leadership – after working with him day in and day out … We don’t deal in perception. If we did that, we’d become blinkered. You have to go on facts.” If that was a death sentence for Cipriani, it was as much a “welcome onboard” message to Burgess and I worry about the emphasis in being the “right kind of bloke”.
Earlier this week a coach involved in England’s World Cup group was wondering why they were going into the competition without Dylan Hartley and Cipriani. I would also suggest that Chris Ashton’s departure from the England fold so long ago was more for the sins of the past rather than the form of the present. It also signalled an end for another player who might have made a difference coming off the bench when England need points to get back into the game. In fact, it’s a bit of a theme which runs through the squad.
A match-day 23 isn’t just your best XV starting and the next best eight on the bench in case of injury. You are looking for players who can make a difference to the scoreboard and the way the game is played. For example, was it just a fluke that Billy Vunipola suddenly became a threat in Paris last Saturday when Danny Care came on?
If you say there is not so much gloss, more plenty of earnest effort about the back and front rows of the scrum, what is the argument about picking George Kruis as the fourth lock? Whereas Dave Attwood can offer genuine power, Kruis is more of the same when compared to the other three selected ahead of him.
Were I the guy who had to name England’s World Cup squad on Thursday, this is the 31 I would have gone with:
Front row Joe Marler, Mako Vunipola, Dylan Hartley, Tom Youngs, Jamie George, Dan Cole, David Wilson, Kieran Brookes. Locks Joe Launchbury, Courtney Lawes, Geoff Parling, Dave Attwood. Back row Tom Wood, James Haskell, Chris Robshaw, Billy Vunipola, Ben Morgan. Scrum-halves Ben Youngs, Danny Care, Richard Wigglesworth. Fly-halves Owen Farrell, George Ford. Centres Luther Burrell, Brad Barritt, Henry Slade, Jonathan Joseph. Back three Chris Ashton, Jonny May, Anthony Watson, Mike Brown, Alex Goode.