Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Position-by-position guide to the 10 England cuts made by Borthwick

(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

It was Saturday night when Mako Vunipola was officially ruled out of the England Rugby World Cup selection after Steve Borthwick was asked about the July 23 squad omission of the prop from the in-camp injury rehab group.

ADVERTISEMENT

That left the head coach with the task of sitting down with his assistants in Cardiff to reduce the squad of 43 players that assembled at Pennyhill for the Summer Nations Series match week one versus Wales to the requisite 33 he is allowed to bring to France for a tournament they will begin versus Argentina in Marseille on September 9.

In the end, Borthwick opted for a selection featuring 19 forwards and 14 backs, a squad that represents 11 clubs with one player Anthony Watson listed as unattached. Saracens have the biggest representation with seven players, with Leicester next-best on six and there is also the curiosity of three French clubs gaining representation in the England squad.

Video Spacer

England World Cup kit

Video Spacer

England World Cup kit

Here, RugbyPass sifts through the areas of the team where those 10 final cuts took place:

POSITION-BY-POSITION – THE ENGLAND 33
HOOKER
Picked (3): Theo Dan, Jamie George, Jack Walker
Cut (1): Jamie Blamire
Rookie Theo Dan is the major winner, his 26-minute debut off the bench in Cardiff being considered enough evidence for him to jump ahead of Jamie Blamire in the pecking order. Blamire had his first-half struggles in play away from the scrum and that helped to play him out of the squad.

Related

Clear first-choice Jamie George was always going to be picked, while Jack Walker has been included despite being named in the injury rebab camp since a week one training ground calf issue in June.

LOOSEHEAD
Picked (3): Ellis Genge, Joe Marler, Bevan Rodd
This competition was resolved by Mako Vunipola not being able to make up the ground quickly enough following his back surgery some months ago. Joe Marler was always fancied for selection behind the first-choice Ellis Genge, so Bevan Rodd is the selection who will thank his lucky stars.

ADVERTISEMENT

His selection chances appeared to have been extinguished when he was dropped after training week five, but he was surprisingly recalled when the uncapped Val Rapava-Ruskin was cut following week six.

TIGHTHEAD
Picked (3): Dan Cole, Kyle Sinckler, Will Stuart
Another position that was settled early. Joe Heyes was cut after training week three and Borthwick was always going to pick three players in this most specialist of positions.

LOCK
Picked (4): Ollie Chessum, Maro Itoje, George Martin, David Ribbans
Cut (1): Jonny Hill
It was felt that there might not be room to include Ollie Chessum and George Martin, second rows with the ability to cover blindside. However, Borthwick has included the Leicester duo, Martin catching the eye with his very encouraging performance as a starter last Saturday.

The wind was always in the sails of Chessum judging by the glowing testament the coach paid to him last March when it was announced he needed an operation following a training ground ankle injury. Chessum has been listed all through pre-season in the in-camp injury rebab group, but he will soon be ready for action.

ADVERTISEMENT

The first-choice lock Maro Itoje would have been the first name written down in this sector, leaving a shootout between David Ribbans and Jonny Hill for that final spot. Ribbans started last Saturday and did okay until a HIA put him out on 46 minutes. Eddie Jones’ favourite Hill, though, didn’t sufficiently grasp the opportunity in his first appearance under Borthwick.

FLANKER
Picked (5): Tom Curry, Ben Earl, Courtney Lawes, Lewis Ludlam, Jack Willis
Cut (1): Tom Pearson
This position was influenced by Borthwick opting to go with a single specialist No8 and it meant just one of the six contenders would miss out. In the end, it was Tom Pearson despite fears from pundits such as ex-England international that Ben Earl could be the fall guy. The training ground injury that last week left Tom Curry in a mood boot wasn’t an issue as he will soon be fit again.

No8
Picked (1): Billy Vunipola
Cut (2): Alex Dombrandt, Tom Willis
Alex Dombrandt is the spectacular loser here having started all six matches of the Borthwick era as the No8. It was clear from those performances that he was struggling, but he has the opportunity last Saturday to spruce up his credentials and he didn’t take it.

Including the debut-making sub Tom Willis would have been quite the major gamble, so all hopes are now pinned on Billy Vunipola firing with immediate effect following a recent minor knee procedure.

SCRUM-HALF
Picked (3): Danny Care, Jack van Poortvliet, Ben Youngs
Similar to the prop departments, this position was decided at the end of June when Alex Mitchell was ditched after a couple of weeks of training. England were always going to pick three specialists to avoid the issues they encountered in 2019 when Jones only brought two to Japan.

OUT-HALF
Picked (3): Owen Farrell, George Ford, Marcus Smith
This was set to be a major position of interest on Monday, but Borthwick killed all speculation about who would get selection when he announced last Thursday that he would be taking three out-and-out out-halves to France, putting an end to the squad selection battle between George Ford and Marcus Smith behind the skipper Owen Farrell.

MIDFIELD
Picked (3): Ollie Lawrence, Joe Marchant, Manu Tuilagi
Cut (2): Guy Porter, Henry Slade
Ollie Lawrence and Manu Tuilagi were always going to be selected, but the same was said of Henry Slade and look what has happened. What Joe Marchant did in the first half in Cardiff last Saturday forced a re-evaluation and it was enough for him to oust Slade from the selection.

Few if anybody ever gave Guy Porter a genuine chance of making the 33. His start last Saturday was more a reward for the training he has done than a platform for him to cause ructions in the way Marchant has.

BACK THREE:
Picked (5): Henry Arundell, Elliot Daly, Max Malins, Freddie Steward, Anthony Watson
Cut (3): Joe Cokanasiga, Jonny May, Cadan Murley
The writing was on the wall for the omission of Cadan Murley as he had already been axed from the squad a few weeks ago only to be recalled last week to the 41+2 for the match week one preparation against Wales.

With Jonny May not in the match day 23, he was left vulnerable to missing out as he also didn’t play in the Six Nations due to injury. In the end, the debate came down to whether Joe Cokanasiga could do enough on Saturday on his rare start. His hesitancy in the concession of the first Wales try would have counted against him.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

1 Comment
Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 40 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen."


That's not quite my idea.

For a 20 team champions cup I'd have 4 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 4 from the previous years challenge cup. For a 16 team champions cup I'd have 3 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 1 from the previous years challenge cup.


"The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime."

If teams get a tough draw in the challenge cup quarters, they should have won more pool games and so got better seeding. My system is less about finding the best teams, and more about finding the teams who perform at the highest level in european competition.

57 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Would I'd be think"

Would I'd be think.


"Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?"

Did you even read what you're replying to? I wasn't arguing for excluding south africa, I was pointing out that the idea of quantifying someone's fractional share of european rugby is entirely nonsensical. You're the one who was trying to do that.


"Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side"

What proportion of european rugby are they though? Got to make sure those fractions match up! 😂


"Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in."

I don't know if Championship sides want to be commuting to Georgia every other week.


"my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to"

a middle ground between the current system and a much worse system?

57 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Huh? You mean last in their (4 team) pools/regions? My idea was 6/5/4, 6 the max, for guarenteed spots, with a 20 team comp max, so upto 5 WCs (which you'd make/or would be theoretically impossible to go to one league (they'd likely be solely for its participants, say 'Wales', rather than URC specifically. Preferrably). I gave 3 WC ideas for a 18 team comp, so the max URC could have (with a member union or club/team, winning all of the 6N, and Champions and Challenge Cup) would be 9."


That's a lot of words to say that I was right. If (e.g.) Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.


"And the reason say another URC (for example) member would get the spot over the other team that won the Challenge Cup, would be because they were arguable better if they finished higher in the League."

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.


"It won't diminish desire to win the Challenge Cup, because that team may still be competing for that seed, and if theyre automatic qual anyway, it still might make them treat it more seriously"

This doesn't make sense. Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't. Under my system, teams will "compete for the seed" by winning the Challenge Cup, under yours they won't. If a team is automatically qualified anyway why on earth would that make them treat it more seriously?


"I'm promoting the idea of a scheme that never needs to be changed again"

So am I. I'm suggesting that places could be allocated according to a UEFA style points sytem, or according to a system where each league gets 1/4 of the spots, and the remaining 1/4 go to the best performing teams from the previous season in european competition.


"Yours will promote outcry as soon as England (or any other participant) fluctates. Were as it's hard to argue about a the basis of an equal share."

Currently there is an equal share, and you are arguing against it. My system would give each side the opportunity to achieve an equal share, but with more places given to sides and leagues that perform well. This wouldn't promote outcry, it would promote teams to take european competition more seriously. Teams that lose out because they did poorly the previous year wouldn't have any grounds to complain, they would be incentivised to try harder this time around.


"This new system should not be based on the assumption of last years results/performances continuing."

That's not the assumption I'm making. I don't think the teams that perform better should be given places in the competition because they will be the best performing teams next year, but because sport should be based on merit, and teams should be rewarded for performing well.


"I'm specifically promoting my idea because I think it will do exactly what you want, increase european rugyb's importance."

how?


"I won't say I've done anything compressive"

Compressive.

57 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Will Bristol's daredevil 'Bears-ball' deliver the trophy they crave? Will Bristol's daredevil 'Bears-ball' deliver the trophy they crave?
Search