When it comes to Le Crunch, England don’t seem to know what their best XV is | Ugo Monye

When it comes to team selection, it’s important to remember that everything is subjective. Different coaches, five million different fans and the 80,000 people in the stadium will all have different views, different affiliations and different opinions about who should be playing for England. It plays a large part of every Test week and it’s fantastic because it creates debate, it gets people talking.

It is not specific to England either but the problem with Steve Borthwick’s recent team selections is that I just wish it felt like it was coming from a place of understanding exactly what his best team is and precisely how to deliver their best gameplan. I’m not sure we have clarity on either of those things yet and as much as I understand the notion of horses for courses, I would much prefer to have a sense that selection is first and foremost about yourselves rather than the opposition.

In Dublin last weekend, Borthwick picked both Currys in the back row and as effective as it was for the first 50 minutes, as much as it was on task, the way that we out-enthused the opposition, displayed more energy, it was a selection based on negating what the opposition was going to do. This week, it’s a similar story. The back row has changed with Tom Willis coming in to add more weight. I just wish the selections that England make are primarily about themselves first rather than reacting to what the opposition may or may not do and the threats that they have.

This England team should always be competitive because we have a lot of depth, but I don’t know what the clarity is in terms of what their best team is and we’ve had a lot of games to at least answer that question. In the case of France, Ireland, Scotland, South Africa and even New Zealand, even though they’ve had a period of transition of late, you can pick their best team. They can tweak things but the foundation is there and I’m not sure England have that yet but the best teams in any sport know what their best side is when everyone is fit.

I think England are about 80% of the way there but in key positions, and fly-half is without doubt one of those, there is uncertainty. Is Marcus Smith considered the best fly-half to take England forward? He was their best player in the autumn and I understand the temptation to move him to full‑back given France kicking longer than anyone else, but again it is the result of thinking about what the opposition is going to do. From full-back we’re going to expect Marcus to counterattack from deep because he is electric one-on-one but that completely changes England’s attacking philosophy from week one to week two.

How does this England side want to set up tactically? I believe I have a fairly good idea. Borthwick has said of late that he wants to be a ball-movement side and I agree to a certain extent but until we get clarity in certain areas we will be a team who reacts to the opponent first and foremost.

Tom Willis being added to the back row is the latest reactive decision made by England. Photograph: Adam Davy/PA

The knock-on effect is being seen in England’s last-quarter collapses. Borthwick is evidently a good coach, coming up with a gameplan for each match and England are starting positively, on the front foot as a result. They have scored the first try in their last four matches but they are tailing off because their opponents are growing into games and working out ways to counter England’s plan. In response, England haven’t really had an answer because they can’t really deviate or adapt.

England have got such a wealth of personnel and analysts as well as access to so much live data and the players couldn’t be better prepared for what is coming but there is a trend because all of the defeats in this unwanted run have been by a margin of nine points or fewer. You can bank on France having a conversation about how they can break England in the final 20 minutes on Saturday.

A coach can only really change the game through their replacements. I don’t really buy the excuse that England were lacking experience because last weekend was Simon Easterby’s first match in charge of Ireland and his proactive changes swung the game in his side’s favour. They certainly weren’t panicking in the dressing room at half-time but history shows that Borthwick has a habit of being reactive with his replacements because only once, in all his games in charge of England, has he made a tactical change before the opposition. I understand that there is a reluctance to change a winning formula but there has to be a realisation that the opposition will always respond and that England have to be proactive in order to stay on the front foot. You cannot sit and wait for things to happen.

Having said all that, ultimately it was individual errors that cost England against Ireland. They missed crucial one-on-one tackles and that proved fatal. In this defensive system, they are robust through the middle – one poor misread by Chandler Cunningham-South aside – but that leaves the No 9 and No 10 defending in the wide channels and ultimately that turned out to be a problem in Dublin. Perhaps it was inevitable given how much time Ireland spent in England’s red zone but if they can tighten up n that area they can be competitive on Saturday.

We’ve seen that England have not been getting blown away in recent defeats and I don’t expect that they will be against a phenomenal French side. But they have to find a way to adapt in the final quarter if they are to achieve the win they so desperately need.