Ireland's reliance on project players is coming home to roost

"For all the derision that Eddie Jones drew for describing replacements as "finishers", he always ferociously defended the rebrand. "Maybe you guys have to start reporting differently," he once said, with that impish grin. "Come into modern rugby. Join us, boys. Rugby has changed, it's a 23-man game." On the evidence of some striking revelations from the first round of Six Nations matches, where the teams who suffered were those denuded of squad depth, we should perhaps concede that he was right."

"Take Ireland, horribly weakened by injuries but discovering against France that the selection of alternatives was about as deep as a paddling pool. Or Scotland, who toiled in vain to inject any impact from the bench in a Roman quagmire. The less said about Wales' all-systems dysfunction, perhaps, the better. By contrast, Steve Borthwick, having learnt at Jones's right hand, embraced the principle of a 23-game to full effect at Twickenham, sustaining England's supremacy thanks to an abundance of back-row riches."

Eddie Jones defended calling replacements "finishers" and urged a modern view that rugby is a 23-man game. Early Six Nations matches exposed the cost of thin squad depth when injuries struck. Ireland arrived badly weakened and revealed that available alternatives provided almost no impact. Scotland failed to generate meaningful contributions from the bench in adverse conditions. Wales suffered systemic dysfunction across all units. Steve Borthwick applied the 23-man principle effectively at Twickenham after learning alongside Jones, and England maintained dominance through plentiful back-row options that delivered sustained superiority. First-round evidence suggests emphasis on a full 23-man squad is increasingly decisive.

Read at Independent