-
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-
I think England do have enough heavy-traffic carriers in Mako, George, Sinclair and Maro, they can make do with a workrate/turnover-heavy backrow so I'm not sure I'd bring Morgan back, who whilst he has had some great games often looks pretty ponderous and probably isn't the future of the increasingly fast-paced international game. I'd definitely have had Dombrandt in, but not unhappy with a backrow picked from Curry, Underhill, Ludlam, Hill, Earl etc... We also have such a glut of locks I don't mind seeing Lawes/Maro at 6 if it means Launchbury gets in, who has been so unlucky and would walk into any other international team...
No idea what Ben Spencer has/hasn't done to miss out.
owl
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...