Richard Hill lives in a permanent state of being underwhelmed. It's hard to imagine what might rattle England's versatile back-row forward or turn his head. Certainly nothing that he has come across in five years of international rugby.

If his head was easily turned, it would be fair spinning now, following his three outstanding performances in England's autumn internationals. He was suitably lauded in the international prints and only one of the many world XVs nominated in the wake of the stirring rugby that has been played over the past three weeks omitted the yeoman Hill. That was the selection of Australia's former wing wizard David Campese, who, as we all know, has a master's in perversity. (Campese could bring himself to pick only a couple of Poms, Jason Robinson - on the wing - and Ben Kay.)

In fairness to Campese, though, marking Hill down was not exclusively an Antipodean exercise. Paul Ackford, once a stalwart of the England pack and now a Sunday newspaper scribe, wrote of Hill: 'Hardly ever makes a mistake and a man adaptable enough and good enough to play anywhere and do anything.' He then gave him a modest seven out of 10 for his efforts against the southern-hemisphere giants. It's as if the relentless consistency of Hill's magnificence somehow befuddles the acuity of even the best-qualified judges.

None of which will matter the least to the imperturbable Hill, 29, Surrey born and Salisbury raised, who, when we met last week, was back training as fiendishly as ever at Saracens, the club for whom he has made more than 200 appearances. Being among his team-mates at the club's training ground in north London is probably the environment he likes most. He is a trouper who has become, reluctantly, a star; a man who gives of himself passionately on the pitch - 'He has a work-rate from hell,' says his club coach, the former All Black Wayne Shelford - but can be less forthcoming when confronted by a camera or tape recorder. He has a handsome, English face in the sense that Central Casting would probably see him as a natural for an Agincourt battle scene. It is covered in countless bumps and scars that will be added to when the deep cut on the bridge of his nose loses its heavy scab.

One of the most bruising of Hill's 52 internationals was his most recent, the one eight days ago against South Africa. Observing the unwritten code that exists among the hard men of international rugby, he refuses to join in the widespread condemnation of the Springboks' play. He neatly sidesteps my question about the Boks having come looking for a fight. 'That's something you'll have to ask them,' he says and expands only to this extent: 'They are traditionally very big and use their physicality as a strength to dominate games. I don't think they wanted to move away from that when they played us last weekend.'

It is entirely in keeping with Hill's character that he espouses what many modern players would regard as a slightly dated competitive ethic. 'It was a bit of a shame really that South Africa were reduced to 14 players for the majority of the game because it was always going to give us the advantage.' A shame to be handed an advantage? How very twentieth century.

Hill clearly enjoyed the more closely fought contests against New Zealand and Australia - and is not about to get carried away about England's World Cup chances next year as a result of their winning both matches. 'In those games, and against South Africa, the Twickenham crowd really got behind us and were a key factor in the results. These results will have relatively little influence on what happens next year seeing as how far away we are from the World Cup and that it will be played in Australia.'

Of the win over New Zealand, he says: 'They showed what a great outfit they are and what strength they have in depth. They took the game to us up until the end and in a match that we hoped to win comfortably we ended up having to scrap for a win.' He believes Australia produced ample evidence that they will be hard to overthrow as world champions. 'They showed the quality of rugby they can achieve in that period just before half-time and just afterwards. If they produce that performance throughout a whole game, which they are perfectly capable of, you'll have to play really well yourselves to beat them.'

He thinks that England can be 'fairly satisfied' with what they achieved this autumn. 'If you look at all three games there were questions that were asked, particularly in terms of our defensive work. We leaked some tries and that wasn't part of the plan. It was something we were disappointed with.' He is in no doubt, though, that England have progressed under coach Clive Woodward, particularly in their flexibility. 'We can change within a match from, say, a game based on strategic kicking to open, attacking play, whereas in the past we tended to be forward orientated.'

As a man who is incapable of hubris, he does make one remark about his own performances that is particularly interesting - and helps to underline just why his versatility as a back-row forward has become an issue, winning him supporters for the six, seven and eight shirts in the England team. 'I played in all three internationals and for the majority of each I played in a different position,' he says. 'If I felt I played much better in one position than any of the others I'd probably stand up and say I favour that position.' What he is saying, in effect, is that Woodward can pick him where he wishes because he is pretty damned good in all three positions. He would, of course, be horrified by this interpretation.

He does elaborate a little: 'I think the way that rugby's gone over the past five years and the training that we do mean that it doesn't really make a difference to me because at any time during a game, regardless of who's on the bench, I could be changing positions. I have to make sure that each time we meet up I'm prepared for playing three roles.'

Shelford, himself an outstanding No 8, says of Hill: 'Players like him are few and far between. If all the players were like him English rugby would have no problems. I like his resilience, the way, unlike others, he keeps bouncing back. Defensively, too, he is very good. He knows all the patterns and hardly ever misses a tackle.' He says the one improvement he would like to see Hill make is his running with the ball.

Hill is not the sort of man to take exception to such criticism. It does, after all, give him an excuse to spend more time on the training ground - and away from the spotlight.

· You've read the piece, now have your say. Email your comments, be as frank as you like, we can take it, to sport.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk or mail the Observer direct at sport@observer.co.uk