Average age of England squad

We had one of the youngest Squads in the RWC........ 

Older than this one thanks to Eddie weeding out the old shit like Barritt, Parling, Wilson, Eatser and co 

 It was 26.2.....and that was mainly thanks to Easter being 37 

Do you have nothing better to do?  

Yes, I am waiting for some info about a Planning Decision hence the reason I am online a fair bit at the moment and spending most of that time researching facts and figures. 
But consider me gone. I won't trouble this site again. 

 Mozart will h ave an attack of paranoia about this one.  

No...but you are having another attack of obsession.  

The fact that a coach starts with a young team isn't unusual. They usually add experience as needed. England was so off the pace at the WC a few changes were to be expected. Let's see if the Pom youngsters are better than Stepfontein, Kriel and the over his head Stephanie.

 BS Bertie at it again - the situation is that the younger players in the Springbok squad were miles better than the over-the-hill useless bunch he supported - so the response was entirely expected.   The typical example is the "most experienced Springbok team ever" losing against Japan.    

 Eddie Jones will be like a breath of fresh air in England.

I don't know that he will make a difference in the team but it will be a lot more fun especially the press conferences.

This one when Japan got rolled by the French Barbarians a few years back was a classic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qubao1O6Ldc

It would have been interesting to see how he rearranged the England back line but there have been so many injuries this season, Slade for example, and Tualagi not fit yet, that he may have to compromise.

It's interesting that he picked Hartley as hooker, and supposedly wants him as captain, when he can't make the Northampton starting team and has the shortest fuse in World Rugby.

Watch this space on E. Jones
.

Actually the loss against Japan was authored by Coenie Oosthuizen and Kriel, and of course the incredibly callow Stephanie played his usual non contributing part.

 Mozart
Will it never get through your thick skull that the older players were the main culprits in that game.  You are getting senile if you refuse to realize the obvious truth.   

The youth fascist Saffex. If 2 players have equal performances- the younger one allways had the better game just because he might get better. 

 

"The youth fascist Saffex. If 2 players have equal performances- the younger one allways had the better game just because he might get better"

Which is true more often than not. There's a lot to be said for xp, but players must be blooded young to give them the xp at top level. That does not mean that older players must be dropped when they reach a certain age...ballance is the key, which Meyer got dead wrong...over reliance on old players with not enough succession planning and development. 

I disagree. Most of the Springbok greats are already good as soon as they hit the international scene. They outperform their counterparts almost instantly. 
A player that is 24 is probably not going to get much better. It does happen occasionally but it is not the norm. 
How many Springboks greats get selected for their first test at the age of 25? 
Bob Skinstad, Percy Montgomery, Schalk Burger, Pollard, etc all. started at young ages. For experience, they used their junior years. A player that is good at passing or catching has allways been good at this, or can run fast, etc etc. Experience is not going to make a player run faster. 
Sometimes it is better to hold onto an older player- because they are just naturally better than a nothing no name brand that is 25 years old.
At least until a new young player that is the real deal hits the scene to replace Springboks with like for like replacements. (Not some placeholder that is going to get dumped the next season). Think Jaco Taute. 

 Spot on...Habana, JdV, Schalk, Pollard....instantly competitive. Tight forwards do get better, but backs and loose forwards destined to be great show that instantly.

 There is one thing not realized by most of the duds on site and that is that when a Springbok great is selected purely on reputation and without regard to present performance he becomes a liability and not an asset for the team.   At the same time he does a lot to damage his own reputation.
The latter is what destroy Meyer as a coach - he relied totally on reputation and not on performance.  Some players like Matfield became a liability - but there were also a string of players selected by Meyer who were bog ordinary test players at best - players like Alberts, Jannie du Plessis, Morne Steyn and Pienaar - who never could be classified as Springbok  greats - in the WC squad.
Players - greats or otherwise - should NEVER be selected based on reputation,  Real greats know when to retire from the game before they destroy their reputation and once they themselves declared their retirement, should never be pursued to return to play test  rugby.   That aspect is really what killed Meyer as a coach,   
He really selected some young players - but never gave them the opportunity to grow into the team environment and although some players were dud selections - that will always happen - he never used the opportunity to identify really good players and stick with them, but ran back to his reputation players all the time.  The end result was a seriously deficient world cup squad.
The age issue of new Springboks is a farce.  Players first selected at the age of 20 to 22 were evident in the Springbok WC squad and the question is immediately asked will all of them become Springbok greats?   
This argument was raised before in discussions on the site and some players like Alberts were mentioned.  He was 29 when first selected to represent the Springboks and Mozart could only find that he was kept out of contention by Juan Smith.  Was that not the case with other players as well?


             

 Let me guess Moffie, Coenie and Kriel in your eyes lost us the Jap test, a test that should never have been close....but Matfield never lost us the semi?

 HTF was Lood going to stake a claim watching Matfield from the stands? How was an injured Koch ever going to impress against Argie. FDP was better than Pienaar. Big deal, we had better than both for years. Pollard played his first test against NZ in NZ. This is not how uou blood new players. If he flopped like he was supposed to, we would not have seen him again and Morne would have been our WC 10...not bad necessarily,  but he was set up to fail. Our Rugby is fcked and Quotas ain't the half of it. That's the excuse,  not the reason. I'm done with SA sport. I had enough. Fck DSTV and Fck the rest. 

No need to guess Humungous.... I said Kriel and fat Oosthuizen lost the Jap test, because they did. Catch a wake up Porky. 

 Moz, the whole 23 did their part in losing that test...more so the experienced guys.  It's stupid to pin it on 2 individuals. ..even for a math PHD.

 Sure everybody played badly, but no players had more direct impact in the crucial last 10 minutes than Oosthuizen and Kriel with that pathetic missed tackle.

 We should have had it in the bag in the last 10. Coenie should not have been there in the first place and Kriel dhould not have been playing his third test at 13.We were forced into that situation by the pig-headed coach.

May as well play Coenie at scrumhalf. He can probably pass better than he can scrum. He is without doubt the worst scrummager in the game. Even John Smit was a better tighthead

Coenie another  huge Dave pick gone wrong, along with other 'great' props like Werner Kruger.

 "Class Acts"..