Add to this the furor over rest-periods, coaching blocks and the mother of all pre-emptive excuses, central contracts, and I’d be surprised if England’s head coach has found the time to go anywhere near a rugby field since he stepped off the plane from New Zealand. Of course, he must remember (and maybe even let his bosses know, somehow) that it is these fields where rugby matches are won and lost, and not in the boardroom. The closest Robinson has come to an on-the-field decision is the 30-man squad chosen for this year’s Autumn Internationals, and the time for reflection on the past few months will come later; now, there is work to be done. Robinson has promised a more attacking approach for what we all hope will be a new era for England, and frankly, it’s about time. 

Regardless of the players picked, or the coaches involved – Brian Ashton’s distinguished name having been touted in almost every barroom discussion group after the Churchill Cup – a fresh ethos must be instilled. Last season’s stilted attack lacked direction and pace, and crucially it lacked ambition, and before the foundations of this side’s offence can be laid, the old construction must be reduced to rubble. Three crucial elements of England’s back play must be eliminated. The first issue to address has rather ironic origins, born as it was from that most romantic of rugby ideals, the utopia of modern attacking rugby, 15-man rugby. The problem itself is forwards in the backline. There is no better way to waste good ball than to have a lummocking forward trudging towards the defence while it reorganises; and, with the way we have seen the likes of Ben Kay, Julian White et al ambling into the breach, there’s enough time to arrange a board meeting. Robinson has opted for mobility up front, but it’s no good unless used properly. 

The masterclass presented by Toulouse in 2004’s epic Heineken Cup final should be the benchmark for all pack play with ball in hand; finding space around the fringes and exploiting it by offloading the ball. It is so often true that the biggest gap on a rugby field is the one where a defender is of making a tackle, because nobody has time to fill it. So, while the Shaws, Sheridans and Thompsons take the ball up, the Moodys, Worsleys and Browns (or whoever it may be) should be steaming in behind them, not beside them, waiting for the same pass, but a few yards back waiting for an offload. There is no good time for big Wally to be on the wing, but he remains a formidable ball-carrier, he just needs to know his place – getting over the gain-line and giving his backs the space they crave. The second problem is England’s kicking game, the source of so much confusion last season. The VI Nations stats show that England kicked less ball than any other side; but it’s not how often you kick, it’s when. England have shown they are capable of kicking themselves out of trouble in the past, and anyone who recalls Charlie Hodgson drilling the pill over what seemed like hundreds of acres of farmland in Manawatu should be confident in the size of the boot that they still have at their disposal. The problem came with England kicking attacking ball. Using the boot is invariably one of two options: a last resort, or a sudden flash of inspiration and initiative. It is not, and never should be, a set-move. Putting the ball deep into opposition territory is one thing, but grubber kicks and little chips from first-phase ball is enough to have your Lewseys and Cuetos tearing their hair out and your fans sighing into their snacks. 

Then there is counter-attacking ball, and what appears to be a growing phobia of it in the Northern Hemisphere, and certainly in England. When a full-back or winger collects the ball in his own 22, every English-accented voice in his head commands the ball to his boot. But why? Any team that would rather be defending a line-out on half way, than have possession 30 meters from their goal-line would seem to have a complete lack of faith in their own abilities, and in England’s case this represents a chicken and egg scenario. Robinson’s attacking promises should provide the team with enough confidence to run the ball from anywhere short of suicidal; it is left to the team’s pragmatism and discretion whether or not they choose to do so, not the coach’s. A poignant example of this problem came in the recent Gloucester vs. Northampton match. James Simpson-Daniel, one of the most potent attacking weapons in the country, collected a ball inside his 22, and with a full 30 yards of space in front of him, chose not to run but to dawdle and wait for the human kicking machine, Ludovic Mercier to arrive behind him. Having wasted 5 seconds of attacking time already, Mercier received the ball and proceeded to miss touch. Northampton scored 10 seconds later. The final (major) problem involves yet more wasting of decent possession; one of England’s set-moves which is more likely to attract the attention of Alfred Lord Tennyson than any defence coaches around the world. It is a problem that affected the Lions, too, and it is the almost compulsory bludgeoning of the inside centre channel from first-phase possession. There is a limit to what this move can ever achieve, the best being a few extra yards and another tick in the ‘phases completed’ box. It used to be a ploy to suck in defenders, but with rucking becoming more of a lightweight race than a heavyweight brawl these days, it usually fails to do so, never will it successfully involve all participants of the scrum that preceded it. 

England and the Lions seemed determined to find numerous intricate ways to send Olly Barkley and Jonny Wilkinson into the Valley of Death, where there is never any space, probably at the expense of devising moves to exploit space out wide. Rugby’s equivalent of setting a field for your bad ball costs so many attacking opportunities, lest we forget how dangerous Hodgson’s backline was last year, especially against Australia and Italy, when allowed to play from set-pieces. It all boils down to ambition. England have not lost 9 matches out of 16 since the World Cup by not taking chances, but by blankly refusing to create them. Can anyone remember Josh Lewsey or Mark Cueto blowing many opportunities? If England find enough drive and confidence to play an attacking game, there’s no reason why a defence of the Webb Ellis Trophy shouldn’t become more than just a pipe dream. There is no reason why we can’t come away with 3 victories in the Autumn Internationals. But now comes the fun part: who are the players to brave this new attacking world? Robinson’s 30 is littered with hugely talented players, but the task is to glean a cohesive unit from it. For this reason, my main criterion for selection is the ability to make life easier for those around you and to create chances for them, namely passing. There is a reason why passing is the first thing any junior rugby player learns, and just as much justification for the hours spent, even on minis training fields, on simple 3-on-2s and 2-on-1s – they are the essence of attacking rugby. New Zealand and Wales have not enjoyed success by being bigger and faster than everyone else, but by passing intelligently and finding space. 

A rugby team must be able to do two things going forward: carry out set-plays with precision and play what’s in front of them with initiative and creativity. It is for the latter reason that Mike Tindall will not feature in my 22. Much as kicking the ball is a last resort, so is running it into contact. It will not come as a shock to anyone when I say that Brian O’Driscoll, Tana Umaga and Yannick Jauzion can tackle – they are world-class centres – and going through them is not a viable option, it is certainly not an ambitious one. This is where England’s game has been so weak in the backline; running head-on at your opposite number is a great tactic for one simple reason, that is fixes them and opens up every inch of space around them. I need players in my England who can keep their head up right until the moment of contact and look for the space created. It is that, also that rules out Andy Goode, and a return for Jonny Wilkinson, should he find fitness. A player can not be fixed from 10 yards away, so space can not be created, and Charlie Hodgson is the man to play right in the opposition’s faces. Iain Balshaw is out, too. Not for his chronic lack of form, but for his inability to draw a man and pass the ball with the timing one would expect from an International player – no matter how quick you are, you can’t always be the one finishing off a move. 

Having decided who is out, we must determine who is in, starting at scrum-half. Harry Ellis is my pick, but only because Matt Dawson no longer has age on his side. Ellis must learn to get the ball away quicker, but the more he plays with Charlie Hodgson, the easier this will become. Fly-half is a no-brainer, but centre is more of a puzzle with Stuart Abbott, Jamie Noon and Ollie Smith competing for two slots and Lewsey and Simpson-Daniel providing tasty alternatives. Having witnessed the Wales farce, it is essential that one must be a natural inside-centre, and Abbott is the natural choice. Outside him, Noon is the man in form having added a certain flair to his running angles this year and a delightful offload, but in this age of ideals, Smith has an edge in pace, vision, and crucially an outside break, which Noon doesn’t. It would be spurious to choose now, given how much time remains before the game with Australia, during which time, Smith may show us exactly what he is capable of. With the straight runners in the centres, and Hodgson playing flat, there is still room, perhaps even a requirement, for another ball-player, someone who can create something out of nothing with his passing game at close-quarters. 

This means that either Simpson-Daniel or the new boy Mark van Gisbergen must start, but unfortunately for them, given the competition of Cueto and Lewsey (the only England backs with a sniff at a World XV) it will be only one of them. We have all seen Sinbad make defenders of high caliber look exceptionally stupid with a dummy here or a pop pass there, but people often fail to realise that van Gisbergen has probably the fastest hands of anyone in the squad, Hodgson included. Factor in that the Waikato-born Wasp has not missed a kick at goal since the fall of the Berlin Wall or whenever it was, and he’s my starting 15, putting his club mate Lewsey on the wing. Van Gisbergen also has the ability to cover Hodgson at fly-half, which allows more of a cutting edge (Simpson-Daniel plus Noon or Smith) to come off the bench, which was so criminally underused by Robinson last year. I think I’ve exhausted that now!

Next month, just before the Autumn Internationals, I will look at how Andy Robinson must approach these games with a view to winning them and towards retaining the World Cup, as well as picking my definitive XXII.

Bookmark or share this story with:

• Digg
• Delicious
• Facebook
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon

SPORTNETWORK SPECIALS

• Think you know your sport? Click here to try the Sportnetwork Prize Quizzes