-
Maybe, although they worked so well together in tandem during the world cup and there's more than a little Pocock and Hooper about them - with a bigger 6 ("Pooper" flourished when Fardy came into the Ozzy team) it's still a viable backrow for me. Ludlam looks a good option at 6. Not watched much of Hill but hear good things. I'd also really like to see Dombrandt in the squad. I hope he's not another Don Armand...
owl-
Ludlam looks a good option at 6
I agree. But then he needs a bigger ball carrier at 8, in my inexpert opinion. I thought that would be Dombrandt. But he seems to be oddly out of favour at club level (left out of a couple of Quins fixtures until Saturday). So to be picked for international level might have been seen as a step too far?
(FWIW I'd have picked him and Ben Morgan as options at 8, instead of two of the multitude of locks - and had another scrum half, much as I hated them on the pitch, also)
I like the youth of the squad (and indeed the World Cup squad). But the media obsession with ripping everything up and starting again every 'World Cup cycle' is a strange one. Some experience and continuity must be there, surely? Picking players who will be over 30 by the next tournament seems to be interpreted as the work of the devil.
c00ps
Crocked knee for Wilson
I don't see him playing both Curry and Underhill - I think that's why Ted Hill is included, for more beef at 6, with Underhill or Curry to be benched. Any injury to whoever is the starting 8 (let's face it, it's going to be Earl) leaves this squad woefully exposed. Likewise, scrum half...
I quite like the 3/4 line though.