I have to say that I am dumbstruck that Lancaster et al have select Burgess, an Union International with one Cap in a meaningless warm-up game, out of position over a host of other far more appropriate players. Can Burgess really be considered a better play (i.e reader of the game) than even his Club mate Kyle Eastmond whom Burgess failed to oust from Bath's starting line up last season ( when we were told he was still learning the game) and was instead switched to Flanker. And hasn't Luther Burell show enough big game ability at both Club and International level to warrant selection? As for Cipriani, why has Lancaster included him in the squad, he's never been given a chance to play in his preferred position of 10 and yet whenever he has come on he has not disgraced himself (i.e. been sent off Burgess) and, given a 17 min runout at Centre last week, showed soft hands, intelligent running lines and timing of the pass that helped turn a shambles into a ordered attack. Andy Farrell stated that the selection has been based on Facts, what Facts exactly? I'm not aware of any facts where Burgess would line up against any of these three and have a stronger case.
Lancaster has a bit of an obsession with Rugby League ( how many chances did he give Ashton ) and has long has a romantic notion that he will uncover another League convert like Jason Robinson but the mere fact that more column inches has been dedicated to this one, completely unproven player, and that the Coaching staff has gone out of their way to praise his leadership qualities and his all around ability whereas most Players are selected on pure merit and don't need a dozen news paper articles to spin their selection smacks of favouritism. Is Lancaster saying that Burgess would be ready o face NZ in the opening game of the World Cup Tournement if that had been our schedule instead of Fiji? Is he suggesting that Burgess will somehow 'play himself in' over the course of the Tournament? NZ would target Burgess and cut him to pieces. Any of the top 6 teams we need to beat to win the Competition would do the same - he's just not ready. Apart from his physical attributes his positional play is still naive and he's just not quick or fast enough to play Centre at this level. We love the to see mismatches in a game when a Centre comes up against a front 5 player but, with Burgess, most of the opposition, Pack or Backs, will have the edge on him for speed and guile - he will be toasted. It's not fair to put Burgess in that position. And how does that sit with the rest or the squad- knowing that they have to cover for him? Bottom line is that Burgess has just not earn the right to pull on the white shirt, he's not put in the hours or graft - he's a 'cause celeb' not a first choice International Union Centre.
Lancaster has done a fine job of stabilising the ship after the disaster of the Jonson era but he is, by nature, Conservative in his choices and strategy. He's not an innovative Team manager/ coach ( in the way that Woodward was and still is). He's reached the limits of his ability and this fact will be sorely exposed in Competition. His lack of investment and development in talent in the last 18 months leading into this Tournament has been mystifying.He missed the opportunity to bring Ford into the fold earlier, or to give Cipriani a go at 10 ( against Italy or Scotland). He can't even take credit for selecting Watson and Joseph who have been the source of most of our recent tries as his hand was forced by injury. Given that the Fiji game is a must-win game, it will be interesting to see if he selects Farell to start at 10 against Fiji (conservative) or Ford. If it is Farell I think it say's it all..... and my prediction is that we'll not make it our of our Pool an that Lancaster will have to go. And then what? If we had the balls we'd look to Mike Ford and Shaun Edwards to take us to the next World Cup. They have to vision and belief in talent to develop a Team that could challenge for to be World Champions.
Now to watch the Wales Vs Ireland game...
