I watched our tour games and they were very impressive. Given the size and wealth of our Union it's hardly surprising that we are in this situation. We're consistently one of the best teams in the youth tournaments and obviously some good management decisions in the past are starting to pay off.

Having said that my one concern is how many of those listed above are World Class or have the potential to be so?

There's definitely the potential there for a special side but we have to embed that winning attitude that Sir Clive was so good at doing.

There's a lot of strength, but also a lot of inexperience and my only concern is the way they froze against Wales in the last Six Nations. They need to remember and feed off that in the next two Six Nations tournaments.

Does anyone know who they play next summer - I think its the All Blacks away which could be a great acid test, they'll almost certainly lose but it could be a great testing of mettle before the big one in 2015

I also like the idea that players like Wade and Twelvetrees and also Farrell will get to be around truly great players like O'Driscoll and Adam Jones in their build up to the Lions actual tests, as I think they can learn enormously just being around folks like that

All looks rosey, but soon there will be the time to stand up and be counted

Well that depends on what you consider world class, if it is someone who would get in 6N sides then I think most are. If it is someone who would challenge for a world XV spot then only one or two.
I think Lancaster, after doing many things well, made a mess of selection by being too negative. Take the Barritt v Twelvetrees example, sure Barritt is better in defence but Billy is also good and is far superior in attack. We need to have a backline that can score tries if we want to compete with the SH (and we can). Too much pressure seemed to be placed on Tuilagi and great as he is, nobody can do it on their own.

As for specific positions, I think the front row is very strong. Locks are perhaps the weakest area but Launchbury and Parling are very good especially with Lawes being the impact guy. Blindside is ridiculous, that is a real headache for selection. I like Kvesic and Fraser too and after what we witnessed in Cardiff perhaps we need to have a proper "fetcher". Morgan and Vunipola are both very good eights, I don't understand why Launchbury and Morgan are not Lions.
In the backs, my opinion is that the two best Lions are English, even though Care didn't get selected and Youngs won't start. FH is perhaps lacking a little but once Burns and Ford develop a bit further (and Ford should get game time at Bath) it will look better. We have many good wingers and I think the main problem is finding our best two, I would say it is between Wade, Yarde and May myself. IC has been a problem but this Argentine tour has shown us we have two great IC in 36 and Eastmond, I just pray Barritt isn't back in at the AI. Fullback and OC are both strong too in my opinion. Shame Rene Ranger was capped before he moved to Montpellier heh, his dad is English

Yeah it is a three test tour of NZ next summer. NZ, Aus and Argentina in the AI.

We're insanely strong in Front row, we've got 3 decent Front rows, but particularly Loosehead.

Launchbury is ridiculous, every game he plays he's either clearly MOTM or a very strong candidate for it. His workrate is off the charts, he does everything superbly but especially his fetching and tackling.

The other lock's a problem as Parling doesn't do enough besides be classy in the lineout. I prefer Lawes especially if we have Croft and Wood as additional jumpers.

The backs could be as good as we've had in years if they develop correctly together.

Great talent coming through gents. Puts you guys in a great position with a world cup coming in 2 years.

That said, and i'm sure you all agree. You need to inject the youngsters slowly. And keep a peppering of old heads in there. Calming influences and guys the young boys will look up to when the chips are down. A Delicate balance.

But fair to say Stuart Lancaster is doing a bang up job!

Hope Joe Shmidt can do the same with Ireland.

Well I still think we should have won the 6N and would have won if we had lined up differently. Vunipola should have come in when Morgan was injured instead of moving Wood to 8. I wouldn't have been playing Farrell myself but with Burns injured started Flood. Barritt starting over 36 was a major mistake and Brown on the wing instead of fullback was a disaster, especially to favour Goode. Ashton should have been dropped too.
All in all he has done a good job and I am far from calling for his head but I do feel that was a GS lost. I won't be happy if our backline features Barritt, Goode and Farrell come the autumn.

Sorry Aristo. I really do get the national pride as it gets to me too. Having 5 heineken cup titles in 7 years in ireland and only one 6nations title has caused many a rant on my part.

That said. I really don't think England could have beaten wales regardless of what team you had out. Specially a very young and inexperienced bunch you're suggesting. The way i see it, it was not just experience that lost you the title. You forget to give credit to an outstanding wales team. They were on fire in the final. As much as i grates my nerves to say it because i'm not a fan of wales at all. But a grand slam in 2012 and a championship in 13 speaks for itself. They were undercooked in the opener against us, and thats why they lost. but they built nicely throughout the 6 nations and finished brilliantly.

Credit where its due. And honestly 4 from 5 was a good result for England. Finishing second best to a really awesome side was about right.

Well we didn't even need to win, just lose by 7 or less I think it was. If you don't think England are capable of that then we differ.
I do give Wales credit, the better team won on the day, no complaints from me. I think the media overhype how good these Welsh lads are though, I believe England are as good if not better.

I don't disagree that there are some really strong players coming through, but is there really the next Martin Johnson, Lawrence Dallaglio, Jonny Wilkinson or Jason Robinson? These were really world class players, surrounded by very very good players, that lead the England team of c10 years ago. I am not sure if I see the same amount of World Class players coming through.

Well those guys you named had not achieved much at 22 in Union, Wilkinson aside. People forget that the SCW team did not have success over the entirety of their career, they went through much pain for three years (at most) of glory.
Maybe 2015 will be too much too soon for these guys, I certainly am not saying we will win the WC. However we have many advantages, we are at home, we have the talent and we have the pain of only reaching the QF in 2011 to remember.
Becoming the best in the world is a mighty tall order, only three nations have ever ranked #1. While it should be our goal, it should not mean either that or failure, we have to respect the competition.

"I think the media overhype how good these Welsh lads are though, I believe England are as good if not better."

Well mate we certainly do differ. I rarely if ever listen to the media. And i can tell you its my eyes that rates the welsh team. that and a Grand Slam in 2012 and a championship in 2013.

Now that said, Because im Irish i would naturally say that at our best im sure we would beat wales. But im not kidding myself about the fact that they are right now the best team in the Northern Hemisphere. All could change in a few months tho.

So lets look at the two sides since the WC. Looking at facts rather than hype or opinion.

Wales won 9 lost 9 (not including non nations)
England won 10 lost 6 drew 1

England generally ranked 4th, lowest 5th. Wales ranked 4th for a short time after WC, lowest 10th but on average around 6-7th.

v SH big dogs

Wales won 0 lost 6
England won 1 draw 1 lost 4

6N
Wales won 9 lost 1
England won 8 lost 2

These are facts.

Why do you take such importance over the 6N? Sure Wales have beat us twice, luckily in the HQ game. I consider the AI and if a summer tour is to the SH giants a better gauge.
For example over recent years the most impressed I have been with Ireland was when they came close to NZ in that one game of a 3 match tour. More so than the GS they won.

Ye those stats support one thing but since the WC wales have one 3 grand slams and a championship to englands one championship. Which is an entirely different story. On the Six Nations. Well mate it is the only annual international tournament so fair to say its probably the most important gauge of how strong a team is.

Anyway don't you think it's redundant to talk stats since the world cup? I wouldn't bother going back farther than a couple of years if i was looking for stats on this team. ten year old stats doesn't support anything or say anything about the current crop of players. And this is a discussion on the current crop of players is it not?

Otherwise change the title to "How strang have England been"

I would say England have been looking stronger and stronger since Stuart lancaster came on board and sorted things out regarding bring on younger players. And i would add that England look set to go on getting stronger. but in no circumstances could i say or agree that they are the strongest team in these parts. Individually there is very promising talent coming through. But right now individually, they are weaker than other teams in many areas. but as a team they are well led and well managed which makes them greater than the sum of their parts.

Yeah... the WC was in 2011, it would be unfair to compare the teams from further back. Those stats are from after MJ was sacked.
Also my original comment was England are as good if not better. Also teams? Which other NH nation than Wales do you consider better than England?
I think most England fans are happy with Lancaster, I'm not unhappy but selection has been an issue, he picks negative players in my mind.

Actually i think England are a close second best to wales right now. From the point of view of the team as a whole. The point i made about other teams being better was in terms of individuals. if u go man for man position for position i mean. you would have to say the France would come up trumps in that area. But they are missed managed badly. Thats what i mean about England being better than the sum of their parts. A fair few of there players wouldn't make it into a starting Wales or French team. But as a group they play well beyond themselves. Now thats the mark of a great manager. and when he gets a few proper game breakers coming through England will be a force to be reckoned with. No doubt about it.
The only true game breaker i could name right now would be Manu.

Well I also rate Morgan very highly, and Wade could be a third but we need to see him up against the best first.
So anyway, based on those stats, which are 2012/13 you surely have to admit England have been better? Looks pretty clear cut to me.
As for France, yes I will admit they have a great amount of talent and would say individual for individual they may have a claim for best in the NH. On the flip side you could also say that Gatland has perhaps made Wales punch above their weight.
If you want me to post a "how good have England been" I could also

mate i don't see how u can say England were the best. the only meaningful measure is the 6 nations. The other games are test games not competition. I don't buy into stats but a grand slam and a championship back to back trumps every stat you got. And beyond that, Wales are just better. Like i said before, i'm no fan of wales. But credit where it's due.As for Gatland having those lads punch above their weight. He's won 2 grand slams and a championship. I don't buy that either. He just done 3 years ago what England started doing last year. He is moulding the team into what he wants. bring giants into the team to play his bash'em crash'em style of rugby. But by god he's build a fine team.

So test matches are meaningless? That is what you are saying. Perhaps this attitude is why the Celtic nations fail against the SH.
I assure you that victory against NZ in the AI was far more significant than anything any Lions nation has achieved for a long time. If you offered me that or a GS I would take the NZ win, no question. SH sides and fans fear England and not Wales.
Now you may not have the opinion that England are the best NH side but they have been the best NH for the last two years. Why won't you admit that? I didn't even mention the fact Samoa smashed Wales at home, a nation that has never in its history beaten England.
I like you Ding but it seems you are taking a very strange logic on this matter. Whatever me or you think should be exterior. The results show Wales were better in the 6N but the results also show England have been better over the last two years. I put it down to sensationalist media, the same media who proclaimed England as world beaters last November.

the wels style of wales now is only productive in the NH.
everytime I see them against OZ they are rubbish.
against AB or the Boks they have no chance at all.

I give england more chances against the SH teams than the wales side,

I think enland have some very good talent. saw last week freddie burns, I like the kid very much. he is so much better than Farrell. Robshaw is a honest hardworking player but you can do better in his position.

Mate. I'm not going to get ratty. They have not been the best. Not from my point of view. and one win over NZ in the past 2 years does not make it so. Winning five test matches in a row makes a grand slam. Thats the measure i'm using. By your logic it seems that you believe England are better than NZ because of one result. I'm trying to be objective to be perfectly honest. And objectively i don't think you will find too many people who will agree that England are the best Northern Hemisphere side. Your asking me why i won't admit it. Well i'm dreadfully sorry mate. But why on earth would i admit something thats not true. I'm not going to agree with you for the sake of making you happy. We have always got on well mate. Not need to fall out over a differance of opinion. And i fully respect and even understand your point of view. Tho i may not agree with it. World would be a boring place if we were all going around blowing smoke up each other's backsides

That is not what I am saying at all, all I said was that I think England are as good if not better than Wales. I didn't ask you to say England are better, simply that they have had better results over the course of the last two years. That seems obvious to me. I think even you were surprised as you clearly thought the results I stated were from longer ago. I'm not saying England are better than France, but we have had better results over the last two years.
I also don't agree with the opinion that the 6N is the only true gauge, which you seem to think. As I said I think you need to compare yourselves with the best in the world. You won't currently find that in the NH. We clearly have different views here and to be honest I find it strange how little value you think test matches hold.
Lastly I didn't ask or want you to lie and of course I fully respect your decision. But objectively, no matter how you look at it, England have achieved better results since the 2011 WC. That is all I asked you to admit. I'm not falling out either As I said I respect your opinion.

No no of course the test series has value. But the 6Ns trumps it.Otherwise why would it exist. The Autumn internationals for example, probably the most important test series any of our teams play each year. That said, Its always a preparation for the 6Ns. And you can't give like for like value to the test games. SOme teams are not at full strength, others are trying out new players. Others still are trying new systems, defensive and attacking. Thats why they are called test games. The only true gauge is the 6Ns as thats when you put the work of the test into action and finalise your team. Thats exactly why I consider the 6Ns as the most important gauge. For Example Ireland in 2008 lost all but one of the test series with a new manager and new players coming through. New systems under development. But We won the Grand Slam 2 months later. Test are important. but the 6Ns is the northern hemisphere pinnacle.

Not for me, not for most fans I don't think. Test matches are not for trying out new things. Every time England play a 6N side or a SH giant and Argentina, it is important. The only pinnacle of rugby for me is the WC.
Well regardless, this is where we disagree, the 6N is just another gauge of quality not the gauge. Less so for me because we come up against much weaker opposition than we do in the AI.

I agree totally with Aristodemus. If you want to be the best you have to beat the SH teams. The NH teams outside england and france are not so good. time and time again you see it in the rwc and when they meet eachother.
I think ireland and wales are more motivated when they meet england or france than the other way around.