Countdown: Day Nine

Last night, England were the equivalent of a man who sits next to you on a night bus and promptly passes out and defecates in the smelliest, runniest possible fashion. There were plenty of other seats available, but no, England sat next to you and penned you in next to their effluent stained semi corpse. On balance, England really were that awful.

There are two ways of viewing such an abysmal display.

The first is that England were genuinely trying as hard as they could and that this might just be as good as they can play right now.

The second is that they were a little slack and complacent due to it being a pre-season friendly and that England can play a lot better than that.

The first is very worrying, the second is just irritating. We won't know until we see them play again, but I've seen a lot more teams look a bit lacking in pre-season than I have simply forget how to play rugby overnight. So I'm not worried. This could be wrong, because it can happen; Ireland's 2007 world cup showed that (and there's some parallels to be drawn in the build up). But the second seems more likely. So enough of that and onto something more interesting, namely Danny Cipriani and all he represents.

I thought Cipriani was comfortably England's best player on the pitch yesterday. That smells of damning with faint praise, so I'll rephrase - he was really good. He ran effectively, he created for others and he made good decisions. England looked twice as dangerous with him on the pitch. In terms of attack, Cipriani did everything he could to get into that squad. Whether he has, I don't know, and given the complexities, I'm fairly relaxed either way. Sometimes good players don't make it.

What I'm not relaxed about though is the prospect that there'll be virtually no players like Cipriani - that is to say, playmakers outside 10. At the moment, England are looking at four such - Cipriani, Slade, Twelvetrees and Goode - and I wouldn't be surprised to see only Goode get the nod. Which given that Goode's playmaking abilities have always existed more in theory than in practice for England, could mean no second playmaker at all.

That's beginning to look like a mistake. Last week, we looked dangerous with three guys capable of playing fly-half. This week, we only started making inroads once we had three guys capable of playing fly-half on the pitch. That's hardly conclusive evidence to say the least but it is a solid option for us. Consider too that both of our first choice fly-halves like having a second playmaker and play with one for their clubs. Farrell has Goode to work with at Saracens, Ford works very much in tandem with Eastmond. Both are young men, the sort of player who'd benefit from having a guy to share the burden. Farrell is still not the most fluent playmaker in the world and has played his best rugby for England with Twelvetrees at twelve. As for Ford, he may be as natural a playmaker as you'll see, but he's at his best running at the line and breaking himself or picking a short pass. At Bath, he relies on Eastmond to call the wide opportunities and release the strike runners, as first and best explained to me here. For England, he's been something of a one man show. He's had a lot of success with it so far, but there will be bad days and good days. We saw a bad day yesterday; it was very nearly turned into a good day by Cipriani.

Hell, go back to 2003. Wilkinson, then a better and more experienced fly-half, needed Mike Catt to help him get England over the line. Yes, that was much for his boot as anything, but the crucial thing was he took the pressure off a little. Yesterday, Ford didn't deal well with the pressure. Farrell does have a good big match temperament, but I've seen him struggle in big games too. The second playmaker isn't just about scoring mad tries y'all. It's about making life easier for the main man as he controls the game. Ultimately, it's a necessary option. Even if we don't start with it, we want it on the bench. But we might be about to all but give that up.

Going back to Cipriani - he would be an excellent option there. He brings a lot of experience and maturity to the role these days and his broken play running means he'll demand more attention than the other options. All of the options have their strengths, but Cipriani might be the strongest.

In fact, I think Cipriani might be our strongest fly-half. Of course, we don't know. We haven't played him there enough to find out. However, if you believe like me that Farrell lacks the instinctive creative impulses and skills needed to be the very best, and are worrying about Ford's defence and big game freedom, then maybe England need a better fly-half. Cipriani has done very well for Sale this year, in a harder environment than either of his younger rivals. His defence is much improved, his instincts and skillset impeccable - and his experience possibly invaluable. Could he been our man? I would like him to get the chance this World Cup, albeit in a impact sub role. I won't cry if he doesn't get it, but it's what I'd do. Cipriani for England.

Anyway - a quick look at the others. Attwood looked good, but he always looks good as an impact sub and disappoints as a starter. Might have definitely grabbed his slot from Kruis. Easter will be useful if Morgan doesn't make it. Jack Nowell continues to look a proper player. Haskell was our standout starting forward, which is a weird place. Discipline was awful, per usual.

Finally, the lineout. I'm sick of talking about the lineout. I'm sick of watching England waste possession.

Mostly though, i'm sick of watching people blame the hookers. Over the last seven games, it's looked bad. There's been five hookers involved. Five. If five guys use a system and all get bad results, why blame the man and ignore the system? There's been a lot of pundits sucking the air in between their teeth and going "Nah darling, that Tom Youngs' throwing can't be repaired, totally blown" and conveniently ignoring Youngs being the most accurate thrower in the AP last season. So, dear world, please stop blaming the hooker for everything and saying Dylan Hartley is the solution, despite last Six Nations, you dumb fucks. 

Countdown: Day Eight

I could do people a big long preview of Le Crunch part 2, but I figure there's not a lot of point. It's a pre-season friendly between two teams who play each other a lot, and with both teams at close to full strength, everyone knows what to expect. I'm sure there'll be something interesting to talk about after the match but I don't really know what it is right now. If I did, I'd probably be too busy fleecing bookies. So stuff previews. I'm pretty sure you're not mean to open articles with negative rambles about what you're not going to talk about, but there we go. Maybe it's some avant-garde bullshit.

What I am going to talk about are the players to whom today really matters. Some of them are pretty secure and just there for the run out. Dan Cole could probably concede a penalty at every scrum and still start in the World Cup. But today, some of them will fight for their dreams - and some of them will see their dreams die. DRAMA.

Jamie George

Jamie George is not fighting for his dream of going to the World Cup and that's pretty much been the case ever since Luke Cowan-Dickie picked a really bad game to get his throwing wrong. George will have to be actively trying to make a mess of it to miss the squad now. His dream will be to challenge Rob Webber and get a place in the match day 23 and right now, that seems pretty feasible. Going by selection, Webber seems to be a player than the management like but don't love. The Bath hooker probably has the edge at the moment thanks to experience, but a big game from the bench could change that.

Of course, the real prize here for George isn't just the World Cup, it's about nailing down a long term place while the older competition falters and before his younger rivals show up. Webber might not get back the Bath starting spot he lost to Ross Batty at the end of last season, which would really crimp his style. Meanwhile, Dylan Hartley must surely be beginning to try Lancaster's patience. I'm not predicting it to definitely happen, but it wouldn't be a surprise if neither man was involved come next autumn. There's a fair crop of young hookers waiting to exploit that - Sale's Tommy Taylor and Hartley's understudy Haywood both spring to mind - but George has first go and has earned it. His throwing has been accurate, his work rate very high and his carrying game strong. It's within his potential to finish this World Cup as a rival to Youngs - but only if he gets it right today.

Joe Launchbury

Ok, I might be stretching this one a little, but I really like talking about Joe Launchbury so whatever. In any case, everyone's favourite mutant thirteen year old has been out of contention for a bit, and therefore he does have something to prove. Just that in his case, all he has to do is to show he's still got it and we can all be happy that the closest thing England have to an openside in the squad is back.

In fact, not only will he be back, but to judge from the RFU's stats, he and a little extra will be back. He's now allegedly just over 18 and a half stone and if he's retained his pace, he should be a very unpleasant person to run into. It might also bring an improvement in Launchbury's tight play, which maybe hasn't been his strong suit. If these things have happened, then I might finally put him in the same bracket as Retallick and Etzebeth.

James Haskell

Also not at risk of missing out barring a horror show, this is all about Haskell nailing down the 6 jersey. So far, he's never worn it in a serious game when Wood has been available and Lancaster head honcho. His presence today suggests this may have changed but it's probably best not to assume, particularly with Lancaster constantly talking about starting the flowerpot men. So a big performance is needed today - but really, what I'd really like to see from Haskell, is that string of big performances he's been threatening his whole career. 

Danny Cipriani

Very much at risk. That he's England's third fly-half is currently beyond doubt but it's clear that the management are happy to do without their third choice if they can get more strength in the squad from somebody else who can fill in there if needed. Say, Henry Slade or Alex Goode, both of whom had good games last time out. When CIpriani turned down Toulon, with their pots of gold and cabinets of silver, this probably wasn't what he had in mind. But he is here now.

Maybe this second chance points to the England management wanting to take him. To my mind, it'll be instructive to see where they put him on, and I think full-back would actually be better news for Cipriani. While there's no doubt he's stronger at fly-half, no one cares. The question is whether he's strong enough at full-back to cover both. If he can shine there, he's got a good chance of going - and why not? He's quicker and more elusive than Goode and just as good a playmaker. The question lies in his defensive duties, particularly against the kicking game, and I suspect that's what Lancaster will be judging. If he does goes well, Cipriani might be well advised to remember just how old most of England's full-backs are; it's probably going to be the easiest route into the team over the next four years.

Tweedletrees and Tweedlethump

Neither Burrell nor Twelvetrees will have enjoyed watching Burgess and Slade last week with a whole heart. However, that's now gone, and so too are our promising centres; it's up to the old guard in their chance to redeem themselves. Which seems odd; both Burgess and Slade demand further investigation in my eyes. Meanwhile, Burrell's been showing off poor ball protection and poorer tackling for England, while Twelvetrees is a law unto god alone.

Still, here they are and truth told, I'm not quite sure what Lancaster's looking for. I rate both guys at their best, but the likelihood of getting their best seems too low, or even just an above average international game, and I'd have dumped them by now. However, I do think he sees this as a play-off for one spot and given that Lancaster is supposedly looking for four centres and has given Cipriani another go, I'm not sure this bodes too well for Henry Slade. I'll burn that bridge when I get to it, but I'm increasingly unimpressed with such a notion.

Jonny May

Finally, Jonny May. Now, Jonny isn't even remotely fighting for his space in the squad, not with three wingers kept. Short of being unveiled as people traffickers, all three guys are in. The argument's about who starts the big games and its now up to Jonny to seal the deal. It doesn't even have to be a big game from him, although you'd get excited about his form if he did.

It just needs to be solid. Everyone knows that he's deadly coming round into the 13 channel, that he's got incredible feet at more or less full tilt and his full tilt is elite by rugby standards. I'd like to think appreciation for his kickchasing (for which he's peerless in this England squad) and use of the touchline as a defender will grow. May didn't lose his place in the England team because of those things though. He lost it because he was making mistakes when the game contracted. Given that England have gone from three playmakers to one outside scrum-half, the space May will get today will probably contract. If May can't deal with that, his career as an international wing will always be precarious.


Anyway, I lied. Most of these people aren't playing for their spot in the squad, just jockeying over position within. Still, what's informative writing without DRAMA? That's what the Mail tells me. Maybe next week I'll blame it all on immigrants and women and my infection by the Mail will be complete.

Until then.

Countdown: Day Two

With the first of England's warm-up friendlies out of the way, the World Cup now seems truly incipient. We're no longer talking endlessly about the theoretical, we now actually know what England's players look like following the much vaunted beasting in Colorado.

So far, it seems a little mixed.

If I'd written a preview for this game, it would have consisted mainly of mild apathy about the whole affair save for the front row and centres. The front row I liked because, while potentially shaky at the set-piece, it looked on paper like the best carrying front row England's put together for some time, with another decent unit on the bench. Most people seem to forget just how good having Woodman, Thompson and Vickery was back in 2003, but the value of having a front row that really goes through work in the loose is immense. 

I'd say we saw a little of that. Both Webber and Vunipola put in good carrying shifts and Brookes' nine tackles before his injury is matched only by Parling in terms of tackles per minutes. But it wasn't match changing, not in the same way that our set-piece wobbles were, or our problems at the breakdown. The scrum, I would suggest, is just about in credit. The French are arguably the hardest opponents they will face for the rest of the year and they won some to go with their losses on the day. The lineout is a different kettle of fish and, given Hartley's travails in the spring, it's enough to have me mildly worried. It's easy to point at the hooker and scream insults about his ancestry, but it's up to the rest of the forwards to give him confidence and make it easy for him by getting their jobs spot on. That doesn't seem to be happening and asking Cowan-Dickie to go for the tail after a dodgy throw on a five-metre lineout is just not smart. It's as sympathetic as giving a tramp monopoly money. Here's hoping the England lineout is working hard, as Tom Youngs isn't exactly safe from bad throwing himself (even if he did have the highest lineout completion stat in the AP this year).

However, it's at the breakdown and collision that England's forwards really looked dubious. The collision area can be brushed aside a little as we know they'll improve but the breakdown has been a source of continuing angst for England fans for some time. England routinely struggle to get the best out of their own ball with the last Ireland game being a particularly sore reminder if for some reason you recently watched all of it with a definite emphasis on the rucks. Yes, I am that sad.

In the backs, things went better, but then arguably the backs were last challenged. Bar a few early sorties the French never really carved out space to attack out wide (despite twenty minutes of sin-bins) or exploited the slow ball to go hunting half-backs. It was fantastic to see England carve out and take opportunities out wide with the sort of clinical edge that comes and goes with England teams, but it's wait and see how it goes on bigger occasions before getting too jubilant.

The centres, however, might be getting me a little over-eager for the future. Henry Slade has been a star in the making for the last few years and I heard a lot of people grumbling about his absence from the Six Nations squad. He has excellent hands and vision and combines it with very sound defence - a possibly unique combination in English rugby today - and Watson's first try was a perfect example. It's a little risky to take him along without having exposing him to a real test match but even if he does miss out, he'll be pressing hard for the next Six Nations.

As for Burgess - it remains to be seen where his long term position for England will be but it seems increasingly like he will have one. I've seen a lot of predictions that he'd cut and run and all that but the more one hears from him and of him, the more that seems unlikely. He comes across as very dedicated and very honest; I can't see him code hopping like Sonny Bill Williams. The dedication also comes through in how quickly he's learning. I for one never thought he has a realistic hope of making this World Cup but based on that performance, Lancaster would be foolish to leave him behind. The big question for me was whether his defensive alignment would be ok - twelve tackles with no misses suggests it was. He also surprised me with how willing he was to pass. It would be very easy for him to decide he's the biggest back on the pitch and he's taking the ball and going straight (coughManuTuilagicough) but in the event he was pretty sensible and accurate about looking for opportunities to work it to men in space.

Long term, I still think he might be better at blindside. It gives him a bigger scope to be involved in the game and makes it harder for the opposition to line him up. It certainly seems that Bath coach Mike Ford feels that way, although he may change his mind if Eastmond's rumoured move back to League occurs. He might have also changed his mind based on that game; crash centres who can move the ball aren't that common. In any case, that's the future. Can he displace Barritt now? I'm no fan of Barritt, but I'm not sure of that one. It would give England's world cup chances a real boost and that's why it looks like centre might be Burgess' position for England after all. We might be struggling a little at blindside, but nowhere near as much as at centre.

In any case, it's all slightly academic until we see the rest of the squad perform.

No More Excuses

It's a harsh thing to say after a 3 point loss to the All Blacks, but England's next game is beginning to look like a line in the sand. Either we show we are capable of beating the SANZAR teams, or the seed of doubt about whether this team has what it takes will start to grow rapidly.

You only have to look at Wales' record under Warren Gatland to see what a habit defeat can be. They've racked up a formidable if inconsistent record in the Six Nations but show them one of the Big Three and the opposite happens; very consistent, not at all formidable. They lose, again and again. Such a fate is unacceptable for most England fans, still dreaming of that brief period when Lord Bald's white orcs ruled the world. But we could be heading for it. No, wait, scratch that. That's where we currently are. The stats don't lie. But, it's acceptable that it takes a coach time to build a team. It's not worrying in the greater scheme of things if its taken Lancaster three years to get to the point of regularly challenging the best. 

However, rebuilding time should have been passed. Maybe people are being hasty, driven by envy of Joe Schmidt taking a formerly-weak Ireland to the Six Nations and a spanking of the Springbok within a year. There are still some big weaknesses in terms of personnel available to Lancaster. But three years is a long time in rugby. You have to go back to the 80s to find an England coach who, given three years, didn't win the Six Nations at least once - save Lancaster. Three years is enough. Besides, Ireland won a Six Nations with their 6th and 7th choice wingers (give or take), Wales won a Grand Slam with Dan Biggar at fly-half. A canny coach can work his way around limited personnel.

The good news is that the Boks look fallible, even if that defeat to Ireland will have their motivation at fever pitch. As everyone knows, they will start by running hard at you and if that doesn't work, they'll run even harder. But that's just not as scary when they don't have Willem Alberts, when de Villiers and Etzebeth look out of sorts, when the good Du Plessis and the precocious Pollard are on the bench. They'll have to be intelligent rather than just brutal, and in Reinach and Lambie they have an untried half-back partnership. The absence of Francois Louw hurts them here too, even if Coetzee is an able deputy. The dubious form of their first choice props won't help them either. In short, while this is still South Africa, it is a South Africa that is missing its shock troops and generals. 

So - if England can't beat them at home when they're a little more tender than usual - when would we be capable of beating them?

Hopefully the question won't arise. It's time that England started winning games like this.

Midland Pests

It has now become apparent that Wasps are very close to sealing a deal to buy Coventry's Ricoh Arena with the intent of moving their games there. It's all been very hush-hush until now and, while that might have been due to commercial imperatives, Wasps must have welcomed the side-effect of avoiding negative opinion and opposition. 

It's not difficult to work out why there might be negative opinion as this move seems utterly idiotic.

Wasps are a west London club. That was confirmed to me every time I spoke to a Wasps fan in London - or even a rugby neutral - about their then mooted move to Brentford and heard hope. Wasps returning home. I'd even been planning to go a few Wasps games if that happened. Some will tell you the move to Wycombe was only ever sold as temporary before finding a London home. Now their club is lining up to tell them they'll be moving even further away.

Meanwhile, there's a large number of Coventry City fans who will be feeling betrayed and hurt if this goes through. The Ricoh, in their eyes, is Coventry's natural ground. To see it handed over to a rugby club from London that doesn't even want to move its training base and players there instead does not sound like the most promising of introductions. Of course, Wasps will mainly be focusing on Coventry's rugby fans. My guess would be there's two kinds of rugby fans in Coventry. There's those who travel to support Northampton, Worcester or Leicester, and who are presumably quite set in their ways. Then there's those who support Coventry, because it's Coventry and they're from Coventry, and Wasps will not be from Coventry. 

One can only presume the Wasps management think it will end out differently. The gods only know why. It's not like they'll even be able to claim they're a proper Coventry club, as apparently they're retaining their London training base. Hi people of Coventry - come and support a bunch of boys from London up here for a day trip! And they certainly wouldn't be a London club, as London clubs play as close to London as possible. You can go out and dress it up better for marketing but that is a difficult and unlovely underlying reality to hide. 

Spare a thought for the players. The commute is probably better than actually moving to Coventry, but no one signed on for that, and you've got to wonder at what point the club would try moving the whole circus there. There are three London clubs who'd probably love to asset strip Wasps if possible. Rumours have it that Saracens are already making overtures to Joe Launchbury, and by rumours I mean Dai Young's said it, who should probably know. Launchbury's wondering whether Wasps are a club with a top 4 future where he can challenge for trophies. If it becomes a tight call, at what point does a schlep up to the Midlands to play in front of an empty stadium enter his thinking?

Of course, while a player might wonder if they've got plans for moving the entire operation up to Coventry at some point, which could be very inconvenient for his family, any new fan in Coventry must wonder whether the retention of a London training base means this too might be temporary 

This could go on and on. There are main potential riffs on the main theme of "Wasps are about to make their club unloved and untrusted" but the owners don't seem to have noticed. Or cared. Or asked. 

And that's pretty shitty.

Here's hoping that it stings them in the arse.

Six Nations 2014: England

This will be Lancaster's third Six Nations as England head coach. It is hard to write anything about his England side without feeling deja vu for so far, the essentials of that side have not truly changed since day one. Since that unlikely, lucky win in the foulest of weather up in Scotland.

Under Lancaster, England have displayed considerable powers of defensive organisation and mental strength. The word incredible might be better; England have racked up a tidy array of wins seemingly by these two qualities alone. When it comes to the art of avoiding defeat by avoiding mistakes, England acknowledge few equals. The same qualities also make England very proficient at forcing such mistakes from their opposition. Their excellence in these areas have been sufficient to deal with a surprising number of teams.

In other areas however, England have looked a long way from excellent, although they do sometimes strain credibility. Place the England team in front of a tight, disciplined defence, give them the ball, and you could be there all day before a try is scored. Which becomes an issue when facing a team composed enough to deal with England's pressure tactics and gifted enough to crack the defence. There isn't a great amount England can do beyond that. The backline in particular has frequently looked more wooden than Keanu Reeves but it should not go unmentioned that the far more vaunted pack has undergone its own set of troubles. Over the past two years it has misfired regularly either at the lineout, the scrum, the breakdown or in terms of ball carrying. It is, in review, a comprehensive gamut of possible errors.

That it, more or less, the pattern of Lancaster's England. Successful when discipline is enough, not when it's not, unable to offer more. There are some outliers - New Zealand seem to bring out our best, there have been a few incidents of minnow trouncing and sometimes the system has failed spectacularly. But the pattern holds and as such, every tournament brings the question of 'Can England break that pattern and move on?' If we are to accomplish Lancaster's goal of winning the World Cup, we have to, and are running out of time to do so.

Lancaster could be forgiven for cursing his luck going into this tournament. There is an extensive injury list, filled with genuinely important players. The absence of Alex Corbisiero is a huge kick to the teeth and although Joe Marler's coninued improvement lessens the blow, he is not at the same level yet in his scrummaging.  Dave Wilson's injury is less newsworthy, but nearly as annoying. Without the Bath tighthead England's resources look very thin. Henry Thomas is a young man of much promise, but he is not here on the back of excellent scrummaging. Until Wilson regains fitness, you would imagine Cole will be played for as long as possible, adding to his already gargantuan workload for club and country. As a platform for attacking rugby, it is not ideal. At least the lineout should function with Hartley at hooker.

The breakdown is a different kettle of fish. Last year, I think, sometime around the Italy game, there was a video with HASK(tm) and Flood going over some of what had gone wrong and right. Numbers at the breakdown was one of the things mentioned with it being acknowledged that England had not sent enough men in. That has been an on and off failing ever since (and was before too) on show as recently as the last Saxons game. You presume they're using the same systems as the senior team. Are we about to see England commit minimum numbers to their own breakdown again? When England undercommit, they get done. There is the mobility and power available to secure the ball, that much is obvious from the most recent New Zealand game, but it is not getting consistently applied. The French may not have Dusautoir but they are still capable of causing major amounts of mischief.

So the platform up front could be shaky. Lancaster will have things to work on in training. Behind the pack, things look very different. The most familiar faces are Danny Care and Owen Farrell, but they are not overly familiar with each other. They have never started a game together before and have racked up less than 140 minutes of gametime as a partnership. The only real continuity in the backline comes in the Farrell-Twelvetrees partnership which has so far notched up five games, including the last three. It seems unlikely that we will see the backline going full tilt as a result.

However, there is nothing new about that. What is new and very laudable, is the danger possessed by each individual player. With the exception of Owen Farrell - and maybe not even that exception - there is no player to which you would wish to offer the gap. Both Burrell and Twelvetrees have power and distribution skills to add to a bit of pace and footwork while the back three is probably the most dangerous fielded by England in a Six Nations game since... since... answers on a postcard please. Nowell is in many ways a similar player to Brown - clever feet, strength and mad determination while Jonny May is just ridiculously fast. This is what many of us have wanted and we should be patient.

So, all in all, it seems unlikely to me that this is the tournament we will see the great step forwards. The platform up front is shakier than one would like and the backline is having to gel together on the job. The half-back partnership is made up of players better known for disappointing fans with their distribution than otherwise. Where we may see a tiny step forwards is that there are more players capable of moments of individual brilliance as the game opens up. Given the pressure England force on teams, seeking to force the game into brief periods of chaos in which they may prosper, this could work out.

But if movement is unsure on England's weaknesses, what then of England's strengths? If Saint-Andre made any prayers towards a choice of opposition for tomorrow, an England backline this callow would have been in his thoughts.  In particular, the centre partnership of Twelvetrees and Burrell looks a little suspect. Burrell started the season as a hard hitter who didn't read the game that well. He's been working on it - but as a 12.  At 13, as the hinge of the defence, things are different. Against them, France will pit Fofana's dancing feet and Bastareud's supersized prop physique, along with the back three popping up where they will. That could end poorly. Judging from the selection of Brad Barritt on the bench, Lancaster also suspects this as a possibility. It is difficult to see a more obvious reason for him being there. If that gap appears, what happens to the team's confidence? Does it affect their discipline? It seems unlikely but it is possible. This backline might just be the gamble of Lancaster's career.

The problems may remain the same but the factors have changed radically. This could be the most interesting Six Nations for England for some time.

Saxons vs Wolfhounds preview

The time just before the start of the Six Nations is always something of a washout in terms of rugby on the television, so thank gods for the continuation of A rugby in some corners of these isles. The A match between England Saxons and Ireland's Wolfhounds has always been an interesting guide to who the coaches might pick next year but are almost certainly going to ignore this year - which I hope isn't true of Anthony Watson.

The Bath youngster has dropped down from the main squad to cover injuries to the Saxons' initial selection of wingers in the best news that Chris Ashton has had since the double injury to Marland Yarde and Christian Wade last autumn. Watson will link up with Charlie Sharples, possibly the world's fastest bald man, and versatile Wasps man Elliot Daly. Not quite as deadly sounding as the originally mooted Varndell-Rokoduguni-Daly unit but still a worrying sight for oppositions anywhere. It does slightly beg the question of what Ashton is still doing in the senior squad when Charlie Sharples is about our ninth choice winger (Yarde, Wade, Nowell, May, Watson, Benjamin, Varndell, Rokoduguni and then Sharples) who is not Chris Ashton. Still, enough of that.

This Saxons team also contains a first taste of senior representative rugby for Exeter's Sam Hill, the powerful centre who has been a mainstay of England's U20s for the last two season, and probably the fastest possible English half-back pairing around in Joe Simpson and Freddie Burns. Also, Matt Hopper at 13. Up front, Tom Mercey reminds me that he exists and is a real person as he continues his pairing with fellow Northampton bencher Alex Waller, with Saracens' in form Jamie George sandwiched in between. Another Saracen, in the form of George Kruis, partners Charlie Matthews while the back row is made up of huge Exeter 8 Dave Ewers, lassie lookalike Luke Wallace, and Calum "Arm Bar" Clarke, arguably the most despised man in English rugby. Good blindside though.

The bench contains U20s prop Scott Wilson, promoted early for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with him being eligible for Scotland, Dave Ward of Quins, and Bath loosehead Nathan Catt in the front row. Glaws tyro Elliot Stooke will celebrate a hugely successful 12 months with his first Saxons cap if he comes - watch out for him, anyone who looks good in the current Glaws pack is made of some stuff - while Northampton's Sam Dickinson covers the back row. Dave Lewis of Exeter returns to Kingsholm as scrum-half cover, former U20 fly-half Henry Slade will be looking to link up with Sam Hill off the bench, and Rob Miller makes up the numbers as back-three cover.

Ireland by contrast look a lot more battle hardened. Loosehead Dave Kilcoyne has international caps and will join Rob Herring, the impressive Ulster reserve hooker, and Martin Moore in the front row. Moore in particular has been good recently and looks halfway to usurping Mike Ross for Leinster. The Ulster combination in the engine room of Dan Tuohy and Iain Henderson can also boast a handy collection of international caps and a very impressive level of athleticism. The back-row of Rhys Ruddock, Tommy O'Donnell and Robin Copeland offers a good mix of skills and size and a metric shit ton of carrying. Experienced scrum-half Isaac Boss will be expected to shackle Simpson when not linking up with Leinster team mate Ian Madigan. Darren Cave forms the third part of an international 9-10-12 axis, although not in his usual position, with Robbie Henshaw preferred at outside centre. He too has international caps, as do the wingers Craig Gilroy and Fergus McFadden, an interesting mix of rapier and bludgeon. I can't remember if Felix Jones has any and if he does, he's not getting many more, but he should do his job nicely.

The bench isn't a great deal kinder. It's a delight to see Richardt Strauss return to competitive rugby after a heart condition forced him to spend most of this season out, but I can't help but wish he'd waited a week. Newly minted international prop Jack McGrath will be licking his lips at the thought of getting his shoulders into Scott Wilson while Stephen Archer looks like he might have stopped being the new Tony Buckley. There's no specialist replacement second row, with naturalised Saffa Robbie Diack and Leinster youngster Jordi Murphy on the bench, but Diack or Copeland could fill in there at a pinch. Behind the scrum they have Kieran Marmion, Ian Keatley and Simon Zebo waiting. Keatley is nothing special, Marmion may be and Zebo is - providing he's properly fit.

So what's going to happen? While the Saxons have home advantage, the Wolfhounds have the advantage in terms of experience. They also arguably have the advantage in form with all but three of the players coming from HEC quarter-finalists. A quick count shows only two players from Saracens and Leicester - not helped by a huge injury list that contains Will Fraser, Graham Kitchener, Jamie Gibson, Miles Benjamin and Matthew Tait. The only caps in the England side are Joe Simpson, Freddie Burns and Charlie Sharples. A lot could rest on the half-back pairing, both to guide this team through, and as attacking weapons in their own right. If the Irish fringe defence is weak, they will shred it like pulled pork. It's not a settled defence, with Cave out of position, Henshaw raw, and none of the three used to each other. Henshaw's positioning in particular will be targeted I think and he'd be well advised to keep an eye on Elliot Daly. The second row is arguably not the best for the set piece, although it was that second row that propelled the Ulster front row near clear out of the back of Leicester's set piece the other day.

However there appear to be more weaknesses in the Saxons. The prospect of Wilson vs McGrath is a worrying one. Matt Hopper is given to the odd stupid decision in defence and Burns is no bastion of strength either. Daly's mastery of the full-back position is about to be given a thorough going over by the Irish love of the garryowen. In the pack, we are arguably a little short of carriers, with a huge amount expected from Dave Ewers. Expect the Irish to line him up (maybe a job for Tuohy and Ruddock). Good luck picking an Irishman to line up; they could all make dents. It could be a long day if our inexperience is exploited in a crucial way.

I am not expecting that, although I am worried about it. The breakdown will be crucial with both sides having a few decent jackals - the clash between Wallace and O'Donnell in particular looks a highlight. Whichever side gets clean ball, they have the attacking players to make the most of it, with Madigan and Burns both alike emerging from the Carlos Spencer Appreciation Society school of fly-half. The English back three packs a potent punch (an unusual sight for us) and if we get the ball up front, victory should be ours. But then isn't that true? I look forwards to finding out.

Saturday 25th 17:00, Kingsholm.

England Saxons15 Elliot Daly (London Wasps) 14 Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby) 13 Matt Hopper (Harlequins)12 Sam Hill (Exeter Chiefs) 11 Charlie Sharples (Gloucester Rugby) 10 Freddie Burns (Gloucester Rugby) 9 Joe Simpson (London Wasps) 1 Alex Waller (Northampton Saints) 2 Jamie George (Saracens) 3 Tom Mercey (Northampton Saints) 4 Charlie Matthews (Harlequins) 5 George Kruis (Saracens) 6 Calum Clark (Northampton Saints, captain) 7 Luke Wallace (Harlequins) 8 Dave Ewers (Exeter Chiefs)

Replacements
16 Dave Ward (Harlequins) 17 Nathan Catt (Bath Rugby) 18 Scott Wilson (Newcastle Falcons) 19 Elliott Stooke (Gloucester Rugby) 20 Sam Dickinson (Northampton Saints) 21 Dave Lewis (Exeter Chiefs) 22 Henry Slade (Exeter Chiefs) 23 Rob Miller (Sale Sharks)

Ireland Wolfhounds

15. Felix Jones (Shannon/Munster) 14. Fergus McFadden (Old Belvedere/Leinster) 13. Robbie Henshaw (Buccaneers/Connacht) 12. Darren Cave (Belfast Harlequins/Ulster) 11. Craig Gilroy (Dungannon/Ulster) 10. Ian Madigan (Blackrock College/Leinster) 9. Isaac Boss (Terenure College/Leinster) 1. David Kilcoyne (UL Bohemians/Munster) 2. Rob Herring (Ballynahinch/Ulster) 3. Martin Moore (Lansdowne/Leinster) 4. Iain Henderson (Ballynahinch/Ulster) 5. Dan Tuohy (Ballymena/Ulster) 6. Rhys Ruddock (St. Mary's College/Leinster) (capt) 7. Tommy O'Donnell (UL Bohemians/Munster) 8. Robin Copeland (Cardiff Blues)

Replacements:

16. Richardt Strauss (Old Wesley/Leinster) 17. Jack McGrath (St. Mary's College/Leinster) 18. Stephen Archer (Cork Constitution/Munster) 19. Robbie Diack (Malone/Ulster) 20. Jordi Murphy (Lansdowne/Leinster) 21. Kieran Marmion (Corinthians/Connacht) 22. Ian Keatley (Young Munster/Munster) 23. Simon Zebo (Cork Constitution/Munster)