England selectors have got it wrong again What you do not do is select him at 12, outside George Ford. You are hanging the poor lad - and I mean Ford - out to dry. This is being billed as his big opportunity to start a match and show what he can do but we are not giving him a chance. Ford is a player happy to attack the gain line, working in confined spaces, putting people through gaps, opening up defences. So why put two players outside him who will stand so deep that he will have to be flinging 30-yard passes to closed-shoulder centres? Farrell and Brad Barritt, who is not a 13 incidentally, are both out-and-out inside shoulder players. If you are going to play Ford, and really back him, then you need a player such as Kyle Eastmond outside him (incidentally, I find the decision to send him back to Bath rather peculiar), with a Jonathan Joseph or a Luther Burrell at 13. Not Billy Twelvetrees and Barritt, or Farrell and Barritt. The Bath 10, 12, 13 of Ford-Eastmond-Joseph has lit up the Premiership this year. It might not be the strongest defensively, as Glasgow and Toulouse showed in the Heineken Cup, but we are playing Samoa at Twickenham. We should be looking to attack. When Farrell came off on Saturday, I am not saying he was close to being booed but there was certainly a sense of "about time. It is all the more frustrating because England have been giving themselves a decent platform; our set-piece has been good. We miss Dan Cole, perhaps, and Joe Launchbury's energy and athleticism certainly, but we do not have major problems in the forwards. I would like to see Billy Vunipola given the ball before the tackle line, see him crash through as he does for Saracens, but that is a minor quibble compared with the shambles that is the back division. I cannot fathom this weekend's selection. Lancaster said he would pick on form but this is not what he has done here. Danny Care has been dropped. Fine, he too has not been at his best, although I do feel he has been slightly hung out to dry. Care has been busy, trying to make things happen. At times he has been forcing it, which is what led to the interception against South Africa last weekend. But when the man outside you is not there it is not so easy. He must have felt like he was in a sidecar and his partner had jumped off! But I have no problem with bringing Richard Wigglesworth in. He is a fine player, his box-kicking is good. Why persevere with Farrell, though? I really hope that Farrell Snr's presence in the coaching set-up is not having undue influence, even if it is unintentional. There is a real problem here and it all boils down to creativity; to that 10, 12, 13 axis. The wingers in the last two games could probably have got away without showers at the end of the games had it not been nasty weather. Maybe I have got it all wrong and this is all a part of England's master plan. That we do not intend to play heads-up, attacking rugby at next year's World Cup. That instead we want to suffocate the opposition, play a kicking game, lots of high balls, pick crash merchants in the centre, a back three of Mike Brown, Ben Foden and Alex Goode. Don't get me wrong, it is a valid way forward (albeit less exciting to watch) and maybe it would yield the World Cup. If Sam Burgess and Manu Tuilagi were in the midfield it would be a very valid way forward. Only New Zealand have won the World Cup really flinging the ball about in recent times and our handling skills, let's face it, are miles behind theirs. But Burgess and Tuilagi are not fit, and at the moment we appear to be caught between two stools. All I know is, if we are trying to play creative, attacking rugby then we need to give the likes of Ford a chance by picking players outside him who complement him. Austin Healey is proud to be an ambassador of the new Jeep Grand Cherokee