I may not agree with GG on what England's strengths are but just about everything else he said in that post is right.

Daniel - I accept there is currently a void of leadership and that most of our candidates to step forwards and move it on are inexperienced. However, I would rather have an inexperienced man who is nevertheless a natural leader, than to impose the role on someone who is not; it is more likely to go well and if it does not, then that man has learned and will be stronger for next time. I wish our strongest back-row contained more experience, but it doesn't; I am happy to back our strongest back-row and it goes wrong, they will have learned.

Ultimately, I agree with your point, but think its a bigger gamble in terms of setting the right example, developing the squad and crucially getting the result to pick Easter. Pick the lesser of two evils and remember that experience is an asset, not a must-have.