The age old fly-half debate: should England trust Farrell, Ford or Smith?

I t has been the same for as long as the game has been played. Talk up a fly-half for his dash and vision and someone with big hands and a crooked nose will take a long sip from his pint before putting you straight. Back in the day the words “fancy dan” or “luxury item” might have been used. Now it will be “game plan” or “defensive solidity” or some other mood-dousing excuse why talent, on its own, is not to be trusted.

In the late 70s and early 80s in Ireland, for example, you were either a Tony Ward or an Ollie Campbell fan. Both were wonderful players but only one of them could start. It was a similar story when England had to choose between Rob Andrew and Stuart Barnes. Roundheads v Cavaliers. Glass half empty or half full. After a while it becomes less a sporting debate than a soul-baring symbol of your entire personality. A Finn Russell man? Thought so.

In some ways it is reassuring this still matters so much to so many. It is certainly among the reasons why rugby remains relentlessly fascinating. In cricket and football such arguments can be fudged more easily. Just slip so-and-so down to four or play matey boy a touch wider. In rugby it is occasionally possible to shift one of your main playmakers out to 12. Everybody still knows, though, that the man wearing 10 is first among equals.

So come on down Owen Farrell, Marcus Smith and George Ford. All of you are unusually gifted. There is just one problem: however well you play there will be millions of people convinced someone else would have done it better. Among them, unfortunately, is the England head coach. Never mind winning on Saturday, getting a start is quickly becoming even harder.

Perceptions can also change rapidly. As recently as last autumn Gregor