The benefit of experience...

If England aimed to assemble a team with the maximum number of caps, based on players still active in the club game (disregarding injuries), then it might look like this:

Phil Vickery (78) - or Dan Cole (48) if Big Phil is busy in the kitchen
Dylan Hartley (50)
Andrew Sheridan (42)
Simon Shaw (71)
Steve Borthwick (57)
James Haskell (50)
Nick Easter (47)
Tom Croft (41)
Danny Care (44)
Jonny Wilkinson (97)
Toby Flood (60)
Mike Tindall (75)
Mark Cueto (56)
Mathew Tait (38)
Ben Foden (34)

It's striking how much it looks like the kind of team Martin Johnson might have wanted to field.

I only checked caps through Wikipedia, which isn't the most authoritative source, and I've probably missed some old lag.

I have always thought a too experienced team is a sign of a coach who is stuck in a gutter, not willing to bring new exciting players in. I think a very experienced team is more predictable as older players aren't open to new ideas.

I suspect a team should have balance between new and experienced, having said that, 5 rookies in one match won't work either

Just looking at all those caps makes you realise just how much England will lose if big Phil Vickery ever retires.

I thought Phil Vickery was retired! I'm quite surprise to learn he's still going.

GE is being facetious

The number of articles about his retirement keeps on surfacing every now and then.

Notch wrote:I thought Phil Vickery was retired! I'm quite surprise to learn he's still going.

I would've thought there'd be some kind of announcement if he did?

Phil Vickery cannot retire.  Stop this childish behaviour.

As long as Big Phil keeps bathing in the blood of virgins then he'll keep playing for ever. Don't ever let him move to Essex...

The thing is these days with the number of games players play then its quite easy to rack up caps, you don't have to be old to be experienced look at the Welsh side

Lydiate 26 - 32 Caps
Faletau 23 - 31 Caps
Warburton 25 - 43 Caps
Davies 25 - 37 Caps
North 21 - 37 Caps
Halfpenny 25 - 50 Caps

Form and fitness aside those 6 are likely to be part of th Welsh set up for sometime to come so will amass a fair old whack of caps.

Experience is worthwhile when the player can last the pace and has the fitness and form.

But when players with "experience" are out of form or just not playing well then they should be replaced by the young guns who are performing well in the league.

Inexperience is a perceived weakness but young lads have a natural youthful exhuberance and lack of fear.

A nice balance is best.

PS When did big Phil retire....i never heard about it...cant be true.

I was interested in the caps idea because most World Cup coaches seem in thrall to the idea that a team needs to have around 650 caps between them to win the trophy. That's about the average of winning teams so far. It sometimes seemed as if Martin Johnson's team selections were based around ensuring he hit that figure (If Lawes, then Thompson, If Foden, then Tindall etc)

After the last World Cup, and before Lancaster's appointment, the Telegraph boldly forecast a XV for 2015 which they believed would have 700 caps between them by the time the tournament came round:

Marler
Hartley
Cole
Attwood
Lawes
Croft
Wood
Haskell
Youngs
Flood
Ashton
Tuilagi
Farrell
Sharples
Foden

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/8955321/Graphic-average-age-and-caps-of-Rugby-World-Cup-winning-teams-and-how-England-might-compare-in-2015.html

Biltong wrote:I have always thought a too experienced team is a sign of a coach who is stuck in a gutter, not willing to bring new exciting players in. I think a very experienced team is more predictable as older players aren't open to new ideas.

I suspect a team should have balance between new and experienced, having said that, 5 rookies in one match won't work either

True but 1986 Baby Blacks with only 4 capped players beat France. Most of the top ABs were not available due to having been on the unsanctioned tour of SA.

having said that, 5 rookies in one match won't work either.

You dont win anything with kids...   Alan Hansen knows that.

Biltong wrote:I have always thought a too experienced team is a sign of a coach who is stuck in a gutter, not willing to bring new exciting players in. I think a very experienced team is more predictable as older players aren't open to new ideas.

I suspect a team should have balance between new and experienced, having said that, 5 rookies in one match won't work either

I agree BB but that said... some bottles of JC Le Roux will differ in vintage depending on the year wouldn't you agree?

Only 1 country in the world can replace quality with quality... the rest of the pack tends to have peaks and troughs and when those lean years come, established players tend to hang on longer, coaches are less likely to want to gamble etc.

fa0019 wrote:

Biltong wrote:I have always thought a too experienced team is a sign of a coach who is stuck in a gutter, not willing to bring new exciting players in. I think a very experienced team is more predictable as older players aren't open to new ideas.

I suspect a team should have balance between new and experienced, having said that, 5 rookies in one match won't work either

I agree BB but that said... some bottles of JC Le Roux will differ in vintage depending on the year wouldn't you agree?

Only 1 country in the world can replace quality with quality... the rest of the pack tends to have peaks and troughs and when those lean years come, established players tend to hang on longer, coaches are less likely to want to gamble etc.

Are you talking about the famous Welsh strength in depth that some posters keep mentioning?