Yup. Youngs doesn't usually throw to two lightweight jumper locks at Leicester, or for England, nor did he falter much when we finally switched back to Launchbury. Not that we haven't used two lightweight jumper locks with fair success during Lancaster's time pre-World Cup mind. Not quite sure why you'd call our back row lightweight or why it would be relevant either. The only one who was light was Wood and he was a successful lineout jumper before he even lost that weight.
Club rugby is easier than international. He wouldn't be the first who can hide flaws at domestic but be exposed at international (see: Charlie Hodgson's defence). Do we have European stats? The oft-quoted 92% is only Premiership. He still threw overwhelmingly to the front for England though, and England dumping Launchbury for Parling suggests they wanted lineout improvement* - I can't think of anywhere else Parling is better than Launchbury. So his selection was likely the cause for distorting the pack elsewhere.
I'd say the backrow is lightweight because Wood and Robshaw have dropped about a stone and a half between them in the last two years in order to gain speed - and look worse players for it. The only reason we don't look light per-se is because of Binny or Ben.
It's relevant because picking a 16st blindside just for his jumping ability significantly weakens the pack elsewhere. SA and NZ seem to cope with having bigger flankers jumping (or not), why do we need Wood? There's no other reason (other than a coach's pet) to pick him; he's a very poor man's Croft at the moment. Only lighter, shorter, less powerful, now with lower work-rate, and slower around the pitch. And I don't particularly like Croft.
Not to mention lineout option at 6 is one of the frequent excuses for the exclusion of players like Ewers, so it's obviously a selection criteria.
Also, does no one on this board remember us starting the last 6N with Kruis and Attwood and ending it with Parling and Lawes after lineout issues? No one? Not one solitary soul? Or the troubles every other hooker had in the World Cup warm-ups? Anyone pinning this all on Youngs is ignoring an awful lot of evidence towards it being a deeper issue.
Lineout issues or favouritism? If it was lineout issues it was probably because England were still throwing futher than 10yds at that point. In the mean time, our maul and scrum have evaporated. Attwood and Kruis were part of a fairly successful lineout the previous Autumn. Not amazing, but not a liability. Did our lineout improve against Scotland when Lawes was brought in? I remember it still being rickety. Same against France (where Youngs came on and lost a five yard lineout in the last ten minutes).
Deeper issues? Probably, I certainly won't defend the coaches, but when Youngs has butchered good lineouts time and again from the bench for England I think you're really sticking your head in the sand by not giving him a large proportion of the blame. See: Scotland 2014, France 2014 (both times literally 100% lineouts went to **** when he came on), and New Zealand 2013 (when he lost three lineouts in a row, all down to poor throwing, in our 22, eventually leading to the losing/winning score). Furthermore, other hookers, like Webber in 2013 and 14, George this year, were able to slot into comparatively ad-hoc lineouts and do well.
That's before we mentioning scrummaging and hooking. The Lions also seemed to doubt the former and the latter he has repeatedly stated he can't/won't do, despite being a good build for it.
Obviously you can't take someone who completely fails at one of their core duties. But there's a huge difference between completely failing and getting by, and a huge difference again between getting by and actively excellent.
Quite. And when our first choice is consistently failing --and we have player within the squad who can get by-- why are we not reaping that simple, huge improvement? Youngs is very good in the loose, but not so earth-shatteringly good that we can damage our set-piece dramatically.
By all means if new coaches come in and he throws pinpoint darts beyond the 15 yard line, I'll eat my words. But as for now the evidence is damning. And, frankly, I'd rather we stopped ******* about and gave a youngster a chance to overtake him. If it's any incentive, that would probably lead to Hartley getting the chop in a couple of years' time as well. Come the glorious day.
*That and they specifically mentioned the lineout repeatedly in interviews.
