Donal Lenihan: What comes first when selecting your team: style or personnel?
With a third place finish at the World Cup and six wins from their last eight internationals, it might appear a bit odd to be asking the question in the first place but, what is happening to English rugby?
Ever since finishing runners up to South Africa in the 2019 World Cup in Japan, English rugby – at both club and international level – has experienced a worrying decline leading to the dismissal of Eddie Jones six months out from the 2023 event in France. Since then Steve Borthwick has been conducting a firefighting exercise and is struggling in a number of key areas.
The depth of quality players available to an England head coach was so often the envy of the rest in the home nations. Throughout the early noughties, England were not only way ahead of their rivals in the Six Nations but enjoyed an outstanding run of success against the best of the southern hemisphere nations, culminating in their greatest triumph when capturing the World Cup in Australia in 2003.
The biggest indicator of that squad depth could be gauged by the number of players they supplied to British and Irish Lions squads around that era. There’s no doubt, as I discovered on the 2001 Lions tour to Australia that, in terms of embracing rugby’s transition to professionalism and all that actually entailed, English players were well ahead of their counterparts not only in Ireland, Scotland and Wales but also the French.
No surprise then that of the original 37 players selected in that 2001 tour party, 18 were English and fully deserving of their slot. With a World Cup under their belts by the time Clive Woodward brought an inflated Lions squad of 44 players to New Zealand in 2005, there was no surprise when he included 20 of his World Cup winning squad in that group.
The cracks in the England set up began to appear soon after that tour and a steady demise in the years that followed resulted in just nine England players making the cut in Ian McGeechan’s 2009 Lions squad of 35 that toured South Africa with just one more making Warren Gatland’s original selection when the tourists returned to Australia in 2013.
By way of contrast Ireland’s comparative rise on the world rugby stage has been mirrored by the steady increase from the low of six players included in that original 2001 squad to a comparative high of 11 on the 2017 tour of New Zealand.
Scanning the England pack that has played in the opening three games of this Six Nations, the only England forward guaranteed selection on a current Lions tour is probably second row Maro Itoje, even if he has been less influential in recent times than in previous years. To put it another way, having started all six Lions tests on the previous two tours, he would struggle to make the starting team this time out.
Of the remainder of the England pack, only Jamie George and Ben Earl would come under serious consideration. Behind the scrum, the number of England players putting their hands up for selection is even worse with no certain test starter likely to come from Borthwick’s first choice back line. That says a lot.
By way of contrast, if a Lions squad of 37 was being selected after this seasons six nations campaign, Ireland could contribute as much as 18 players. My most optimistic projection for an English representation stretches to seven. That in itself says a lot about the gulf that exists between the two teams at present.
What come first when selecting your team, style or personnel? That’s always been an interesting conundrum for some countries but for us in Ireland, with less players to pick from, it was always a case of picking your best players and then moulding a style that fits their skillset.
That changed somewhat on Joe Schmidt’s watch with players selected with a skill set specifically geared towards the way he wanted Ireland to play. His wingers, for example, had to be as adept in their ball presentation at the breakdown and at clearing out rucks as any back row forward.
Hence a player of Simon Zebo’s quality and creative ability often lost out to Dave Kearney because of the Leinster man’s better application at executing the unglamorous aspects of the game and because of his work rate off the ball. Andy Farrell is no different in that his first choice wingers, James Lowe and Mack Hansen, both possess the ability to appear as first receivers and play makers, both are adept kickers and work extremely hard in the kick chase.
In other words, Ireland have a very defined style of play and Farrell’s troops need to slot into that pattern of play. This is best exemplified by the seamless nature with which Jack Crowley has slotted into the most demanding role on the pitch at out half in place of an all-time great in Johnny Sexton.
Part of the wider squad for the last 18 months without ever being first choice, Crowley had a forensic understanding of the way Farrell wants his team to operate before ever becoming first choice. As a result, when handed the No 10 shirt for this campaign, Crowley not only knew the play book inside out, but is comfortable in calling the shots.
Contrast that to where England are right now. How would you describe their style of play? How can they have a discernible style when so much depends on who Borthwick selects as his No 10. When Owen Farrell or George Ford are in situ, England favoured a more kicking approach which suited Borthwick’s data-driven approach which suggests that a team kicking more than 1,000 metres in a game normally comes out on top.
That style is alien to Marcus Smith, who normally performs flat to the gain line for Harlequins and is a more instinctive player while the new kid on the block, Northampton’s Fin Smith, is a mix of both. Until England identify a consistent style of play, it will become difficult to deliver a consistent performance.
The same applies at full back. Freddie Stewart is a very different player to George Furbank who, to many people’s surprise, started against Scotland. Up to that point Stewart appeared undroppable but didn’t even make the match day squad for Edinburgh.
Recently retired winger, Jonny May, this week bemoaned the fact that England appeared to chop and change their team more than most international opponents and that it led to too much stress and anxiety in the camp in the build up to games.
That’s why Borthwick’s team announcement on Thursday will be revealing. What would he give for the dilemma Farrell faces in looking to integrate a fit again Hugo Keenan and Garry Ringrose in his match day squad and how their availability impacts on his bench permutations with regard to a 5/3 or 6/2 split of forwards and backs.
On the back of that disappointing display and defeat to Scotland last time out, Borthwick faces yet another dilemma. Does he revert to type and go for brute strength up front in an effort to deny Ireland any semblance of decent possession?
Does he stick with the expanded approach in attack, which didn’t really work against Scotland, or favour the set piece driven narrow kicking approach that delivered comparative success at the World Cup in a one off effort to stifle Ireland.
If he restores his stronger scrummaging loose head prop in Joe Marler from the outset ahead of Ellis Genge, recalls Leicester’s George Martin to start in the second row and shifts Ollie Chessum to the blind side in a move designed to replicate the role carried out so effectively by Courtney Lawes at the World Cup, then you can be fairly certain England will restrict their game to smashing Ireland up front and deny them primary possession.
While those potential changes will have ramifications, it will also result in shortcomings that Ireland will look to exploit. That’s why Borthwick’s team announcement will not only prove highly instructive but will shape how this latest Twickenham showdown will be contested.
