Are Australia copying England's plan of 2003 by keeping the old guard in the squad?

Question

The old guard plan that they took the mickey out of in 2003 incidentally!

England are getting even more desparate by keeping Lawrence Dallaglio (& possibly Mike Catt), who had the mickey taken out of him by the Aussies in 2003 for being part of England's old guard! Don't get me wring they are class players, but can thery really keep up with the pace of International rugby now?

Answer 1

i think its just a case of picking the best 15 regardless of age, if the best players happen to be old so be it.

The one worry is that if a majority of the players are older then you have the worry of what will happen to the team once these players retire.

England is obviously the best example of this, the players in 2003 while being the best England had caused a problem when the retires as there was not enough quality experienced players to take over.

Answer 2

Lawrence Dallaglio is a world class player regardless of his age, he regularly goes out and outperforms the young guns at club level, hes an excellent leader; which is something particularly important to a relatively new England team. With a side that has constantly been chopped and swapped for the past 4 years having someone with the confidence, leadership and experience of dallaglio is a huge asset to the side.

And as for Mike Catt hes the old hand and the the leader that the England backs desperatly require. Filling the 12 position that has caused England alot of problems over the last few years. his excellent running strength, kicking and distribution skills are a core asset to the England side in in their recent lack of an experienced 10/12 (due to Jonny Wilkinsons neverending list of injuries).

Answer 3

I agree I think that they are keeping some of their old guard but do not think they are copying England. They are picking the best available players along with a blend of youth and experience.

England are however clutching at straws, we have no realistic chance of retaining the title when you consider the form of the Southern Hemisphere sides, Fance and Ireland. With that in mind we should release the old guard and look to blooding some of the younger players in readiness for the six nations and next world cup. I have the greatest admiration for the old guard Robinson, Dallaglio, Catt and at a push Tindall. But surely we have the likes of Foster, Hipkiss, Smith, Strettle etc, etc coupled with the experience of Wilkinson, Corry, Vickery, Lewsey etc, etc. Don't forget Corry was actually picked as WORLD player of the year this year by an independant panel made up from both hemispheres. And although not a huge success as England captain is a massive influence within the team and now no longer captain actually making a better contribution with a huge amount of experience. I am not knocking Lawrence but we must remember he has spent a lot of this season on the bench because his club do not think he can maintain 80 minutes week in week out which will be required in the world cup. Yes he could be picked to play as an impact sub, but what if the first choice gets injured in the first game, can the old guard manage 80 minutes of highly charged international rugby playing 3-4 games in the space of a couple of weeks?

England seem to be panicking and trying to take a squad thay think will be the best for damage limitation.

I say come on guys look to the future and the up and coming talent. We need to be preparing for 2011 with people able to make that date. Again if we take a lot of the old guard what will happen to the squad at the end of the RWC when half of them announce their retirement, we will be back at square one for the six nations with a side lacking critical experience. 2007 RWC should be viewed as a proving ground for the new talent and the start of a new era, we cannot cling to the past, it will be potentially embarassing. At least if we get beaten with a new fresh squad people will see that it is a developing side.

Answer 4

They would never admit it because they are Aussies, well the press wouldn't anyway after being made to each such vast quantities of humble pie in 2003!

They, as England have done, have had to pick the "old guard" as they are the best players available for their country right now.

They don't necessarily have to be able to keep up with the pace of international rugby as they probably wouldn't play the full 80 minutes anyway. Just being in the squad and being used as impact players may well be worth as much to the team as a whole.

Answer 5

England attempted to replace their old guard with youngsters last year and struggled badly so they had no option than to bring their old players back. They're not going to be anywhere as good as they were in 2003 but they still have the tactical awareness of the game to have a chance of some upsets.

Same with Australia, their youngsters weren't good enough so they've brought some oldies back in. This may see them being competitive in this world cup but they're going to struggle to completely rebuild the team in the coming years.