By that token he's also shown he can't be counted on to stay fit so there is no point in selecting him.
He needs to come back and play a run of games like every other player.
I am somewhat struggling to understand your point here, although I'm pretty sure I disagree with whatever it is.
The point of these series of posts was to question people who seemed to be saying "It doesn't matter if Corbs isn't fit, Marler's just as good/better now anyway". I view Corbs' fitness as irrelevant to that question. Either Marler is as good as Corbs can be, or he's not. Either fitness issues with Corbs are still a blow, albeit one we might have got very used to, or they're not. You can even ignore Corbs pretty much entirely and reframe the question as "Does Marler fit to some people's billing of him as an England star" if you really want. I've been looking for traits, statistics, performances, something that can support that because I ain't seen it - and so far, it's not coming.
Now, bringing it back to Corbs, maybe you reckon his true level of performance is unknown because he's spent so much time injured. I'm not going to go along with that in the case of a player who was last playing in September and looking pretty good. I don't need a lengthy run of games for someone who's pretty much proven it all already.
Or maybe you think we have to rely on players who have proven themselves more likely to be fit, or at least bring that into the equation, and I'm not going to agree with that. Either a player is available or they're not, and either they're better than the alternative or they're not. That's how I view it - and judging on how Northampton parachuted him in for two cup finals, judging on the isolated games he keeps popping up for in windows for England, and judging on a whole host of other players that routinely walk back into their team for three months or so before getting crocked again - I think that's how most of the world views it.
I'm also mildly bemused as to why people are happy to talk about Tuilagi - who's only managed a window more of availability than Corbs since the Lions tour - as a shoo-in, and Croft - who has an even worse availability record - as a live possibility/shoo-in (not so much of that opinion around here) without any of this in-drawing of breath. I get that the scrummaging changing thing is a bit of an issue (although, actually, how many props have gained or lost big from it?) but, as noted, he's won a couple of cup medals under the new laws and his last performance before the dislocation got a fair bit of praise for his performance vs Wilson. Early signs are all good.
You'll take them for Callum Clark too then?
The only credentials I'll accept for Callum Clark are his internal body organs, cast into a volcano before his eyes.
