England's backs hold key to rugby future

I said decades and I meant decades. In the last decade they have tried to change this but it will take longer as sides with good backlines progress too. England win games through forward dominance winning penalties and 3 points. As for the club premiership it is not test rugby.

That is my opinion. None of your posted "arguement" changes that.

Matt, I'm afraid you barking up the wrong tree mate, you're not allowed to talk with sense, reason or knowledge. Good luck with that.

On the contrary Roarer, attesting to their current backline they should improve for all the reasons you listed. In a couple of seasons time I wouldn't be surprised to see a completely different backline. You can guarantee that Lancaster knows the recent setup didn't work. I'm sure he'd have like to include Yarde (11), Tuilagi (12), Trinder (13) and Wade (14). They'd certainly add a lot more danger and attacking threat. Brown has played very well and I think slug is a very harsh description. He's solid in the air, can kick and has a knack for breaking tackles. The question for mine remains who will kick goals if Farrell isn't selected. George Ford might be that player and is coming on ok at Bath. So it could well be a completely different side that runs out in 2015 compared to last week against the All Blacks. Hence why I think it's inevitable that Englands backs will improve.

I wouldn't say the 87 French were an underwhelming opponent. They'd beaten the AB's in France the year before, won a Grand Slam earlier in the year and hadn't lost in 10 tests coming into the final. Sure, they got beaten handily in the final but that's more a testament to the quality of that AB side.

I imagine the hype is something to do with all those tries he keeps scoring or setting up and all the generally awesome play.

I don't understand all the hype surrounding Kieran Read. Obviously a good player, but really the best in the world as a lot of people suggest? I can think of better European 8's - hmm parrisse (sp?) springs to mind and that Faletau bloke is up there too. Then you have Picamoles who was brilliant recently in the 6N and internationals. I'd like to see Read play in a poorer team and see how he fares before labelling him as the best 8. Anyone would look good playing with champion AB players like McCaw et al.

England's backline won't improve and their backline now attests to that. They have a back rower realistically (Tomkins) playing in outside centre, which is traditionally for one of the fastest players on the pitch and a fullback who is consistent and reliable but is a slug. That's coupled with playing a converted scrum half on the wing and a defensive liability in Ashton on the other. Tuilagi is honestly their only decent back.

I suppose you can make stats suit whatever opinion you like generally. And I won't dispute that Australia and New Zealand are the two sides (plus Wales sometimes) who play expansive rugby generally. And I won't dispute that it also generally wins games. But just because those sides can play expansive Rugby, it doesn't mean they did so to win 2/3rds of Rugby World Cups. Sure, in 87 and 91 there was some quite open rugby played. The 8-7 win to NZ in 2011 was incredibly tight in play and if anything it was the French who played more expansively! It certainly wasn't a victory for expansive play and highlights the very point I'm trying to make, that is you can't play 'complete' rugby until you can play a tight game as well as an open one. I just hope the All Blacks coaches aren't as silly as some fans and think that we can get by without strengthening our weaknesses. Otherwise it'll be 2007 all over again and we'll get caught in an arm wrestle game where we aren't comfortable and then it becomes a lottery with penalty goals. You can surely bet the Springboks and English backlines will improve over the next two seasons, so the Wallabies and All Blacks will need to keep improving as well. For me that means improved mauling, pick and go and set piece.

Sorry CW, did I miss a joke in there somewhere?

Only two world cups have been won with open running rugby. 1987 and 1999 Both against an underwhleming opponent.

Wait. Australia have won two world cups, New Zealand two world cups. So that's ~2/3rds of world cups won by teams who play expansive rugby. Versus really just the 2003 and 2007 cups won by the kind of anti-rugby you proscribe. So what kind of rugby "wins world cups"?

@ScotandProud Just one point amongst many: Ben Youngs was still playing England U20 rugby in 2009. He was capped by Johnson in 2010. And Johnson should have selected him years before?

LOL :D

the change came with FLOW & Vermulean in 3rd row. Where is Jean Deysel , btw ?

One thing I believe is being ignored here is the question of what kind of rugby wins world cups? England were on a pretty good streak before the All Blacks loss. They play a game which relies on a strong set piece and then straight up power. Farrell, Tuilagi, Burrell, Tomkins and Barret are direct backs. They are bludgeons who bash over the gain line, the same as Vunipola, Robshaw and Morgan. But that's the style of game play which tends to win those one-off crunch matches.When risk becomes the key word, not reward, it's sides like England who are used to it. They relish in it and make sides like New Zealand and Australia uncomfortable. Unless the All Blacks go away and consider their relative lack of a tight game plan then I don't think they'll back up 2011. The scrums, mauls and pick and go elements of the All Blacks all need significant work ons. The lineout has been good and then bad, depending on the opposition, so work is needed there too. Just imagine how scary the All Blacks would be if they could scrum and maul as well as England or South Africa by 2015... Finally, England also need to improve their depth, because in the last 20mins you could clearly see the difference each sides reserves made. England stopped making the gainline and could not generate sustained pressure in desirable territory. And once they lost lineout dominance (Tom Youngs stand up please) the rest of the game plan fell apart. Watching them try to run it out of their 22 in the last 10 mins was cringeworthy. They can't afford to let a game get to that situation of needing to score fast points. I also think the All Blacks didn't use their full bag of tricks against England and held back a little tactically. In particular the kick-offs where ultra conservative and allowed uncontested possession for Vunipola to run back. Something which hasn't been the case against France or in the Rugby Championship. And I don't think it was because they tactically fear the English in the air compared to those other nations. The All Blacks kick-chase aerial game has looked rusty in Europe too. It is one of their pillors for counter attack, so they have looked far less dangerous as a result.

Easter had his critics but I thought he was a cracking player for England and did the job asked of him. If you watch how Quins play and how he plays, he's a very skilled forward and his work-rate is ridiculous. His performance against Leicester a couple of weeks back was outstanding.

Burns has been disappointing this year for Gloucester, although to be fair he is playing behind a shocking front five who have gone backwards repeatedly. He would have probably fared better with England but when you're not necessarily in form, the international scene isn't the easiest place to get it back. As for the England backs, I think the ability is there but I'm not sure about the combinations. I thought Twelvetrees played well against New Zealand but the amount of times he made half-breaks and there was no one on his shoulder was ridiculous. I like Tomkins but he's not quick enough for international rugby IMO and, although he has a good off-loading game, he didn't show it in the the three games - it's almost like he played it too safe. The backline was also too slow. That was somewhat unavoidable with the injuries but I feel we needed somewhat like Trinder or May in there. And we still aren't getting the best out of Ashton. While Farrell is standing much flatter, he doesn't strike me as someone who's going to create like Flood or Burns can, but to be fair he hasn't done anything wrong.

The All Blacks have played the free running and offloading style, putting support runners into gaps for yonks. You can' expect England to learn how to do it in only a few years. Look at SA, they can't play the way the All Blacks do, but they found their own way to break the advantage line, they have not moved away from their strengths, they just realised offloading makes a difference, and shifting the point of attack. when you consider our Forwards in the past scored as many tries as our backs and now our Backs are out scoring our forwards by three tries to one. Each to his own I say.

Its ridiculous. 1st of all, no country just produces 8s like Read. Hes a brilliant player and not exactly common. 2nd of all Eng dont just use big 8s. Nick Easter was not a "rolly polly", whatever that means. 3rd of all Vunipola is probally the best 21 year old 8 on the planet.