Jeff Probyn: Advantage Kruis now with Launchbury left in limbo
Just a couple of seasons ago England had a young second row pairing who looked to be guaranteed selection for years, only for both to be injured.
Te sidelining of Courtney Lawes and Joe Launchbury opened the door for another pair of young pretenders who took the stage and showed what they could do. George Kruis and Maro Itoje have shown maturity beyond their years and have been a crucial part of the Eddie Jones‘ England success run. Once again, England had a young second row pair in Itoje and Kruis who looked irreplaceable – until injury opened the door for Lawes and Launchbury to return in this autumn series and both have taken the chance to show they are still a force.
So much so, that it would not have been certain that Kruis and Itoje would have immediately regained their places, although I think Jones would have probably paired Itoje with Launchbury, dropping Kruis to the bench and sending Lawes back to his club.
However, Launchbury’s little faux par last week gave the chance for Kruis to regain his Test spot yesterday and he should keep it against the Australians next week.He has recovered from his injury just in time to save his Test spot because Launchbury was the stand-out forward in the first two games.
Sometimes fate can work against you and Launchbury, despite his admission of guilt (everybody pleads guilty nowadays as it reduces the sentence), will feel slightly aggrieved that he will have to wait until the Six Nations to find out his international fate followoing his two-week ban for kicking Asaeli Tikoirotuma.
For some, taking your opportunity is not enough. Semesa Rokoduguni’s outstanding performance against Fiji was not enough to stop Jones showing he has a ruthless streak when it comes to selection and although it is incredibly tough on Rokoduguni, I think it may be a good thing for England.
When a coach becomes emotionally attached to his players, it can lead to poor team performance with some players seemingly undroppable and no way in for new talent to shine. Jones has shown with his selection policy that no one is a sure bet to make the team even if they play a blinder, and that provides opportunity for all.
It would appear that opportunity is something that Gloucester chief executive Stephen Vaughan is seeking to deny to all below the Premiership.
His damming indictment of the Championship in last week’s Rugby Paper would seem to indicate that he believes all the problems of the game would be solved by a moratorium on promotion and relegation.
He also doesn’t seem to understand that playing in the Championship is not a way for talented young players to appear for England as the Premiership has an agreement with the RFU that effectively stops Eddie Jones from selecting from anywhere but the Premiership for his EPS.
The idea that freezing promotion and relegation, even for a couple of years, will help Championship clubs balance and improve their finances is plain madness. Without the opportunity of promotion, the likelihood is crowds would decline along with TV revenues, creating an even bigger funding crisis.
As it is, there is already a financial ring-fence funded by the RFU surrounding the Premiership, which in all probability is the main reason promoted clubs find it hard to compete and stay up. Any moratorium would just increase the divide between the leagues and make it impossible for any team to gain promotion and survive.
If the Premiership really wanted to create the opportunity for a competitive Championship, they would volunteer half the money they get from the RFU to the Championship clubs and allow promoted clubs time to improve their playing facilities rather than force them into making massive investments into stadiums before they have the need.
The opportunity a moratorium offers the Premiership may not make as much of an impact as Vaughan hopes.
While ring fencing may bring safety for those that occupy the lower reaches of the Premiership (Gloucester are currently third from bottom), it could reduce the appeal of the competition as the ‘haves’ will always be at the top while the ‘have nots’ will still languish at the bottom with little incentive or opportunity to invest and improve.
