Englands training plan

First topic message reminder :

From this article :

http://www.espnscrum.com/six-nations-2012/rugby/story/158188.html

His first training week is planned to the last detail. On Wednesday, cycling's David Brailsford and cricket's Hugh Morris will lecture the squad on what it means to be an elite athlete - Woodward would have been the ideal man to do that but that was probably asking too much, too soon. Tomorrow afternoon the players will attend an U13 tournament and coach the teams and in the evening Gary Neville will talk to them about 'what representing the country means'. On Friday, Lancaster will attend a Q&A with 150 local club coaches.

I can see where he is coming from, particularly after the disgraceful behaviour in New Zealand, but all the community and motivational stuff leaves me cold at this stage. I would have thought there were other more pressing matters to attend to such as sorting out a style of play and making sure fitness levels are up to scratch. Wales have opted for a week of really hard work - England need it too.

Have to say I agree with this. Lancaster increasingly strikes me as a coach who is despertaly trying to wave a magic wand ratehr than deal with the reality of the situation. England have a masive tournamnet ahead of them and they need wins for marale as much as an attitude. They also need the ranking points if they have any chance of being a pot 1 team for the next world cup.

I can only imagine most of teh players will find this stuff incredibly patronising. These are also not the guys who had the behaviour problems ( for the most part anyway), and most werent part of that world cup squad.

How about getting them playing some rugby then concentrate on the peripheral junk. Maybe he could get in a faith healer like the mildly insane England soccer coach.

Poorfour wrote:

Cymroglan wrote:Representing your country at the highest level and you need a boss to tell you what it means ?
They should not need to be told.

You're missing both my points, possibly deliberately:
1) Forging an elite team quickly with a new ethos and a new bunch of players takes more than individual motivation. Giving them a relevant shared experience is a good way to do that when you haven't got much time
2) If you really believe that you build a team by telling individuals to perform or be sacked, then your current boss is a pretty shabby man manager. I'd recommend getting a new one.

I think youre over complicating something that should come pretty naturally. Its a lot of theory with little subtance behind it. Shared expereinces, sure lets go train and play rugby. get a bit of adversity, do something. A shared experience of sitting in a room trying to take it seriously, hjmm. I dunno, some people do like that stuff and come out glowing, personaly i have found in sports and the workplace its really patronising and annoying ( but then im not a successs so maybe thats ays something about me...)
I agrre with point 2 , but thats not what Im saying.

If having a host of world cup winning players in teh team wasnt enough to inspire a lead the previous squad to excellence then really is this going to acheive much? And should the focus be so heavily on spending time with this sort of stuff?

I very strongly beleive in the team ethic and focussed goals, I just dont think this is the best way to go about it and that it shouldnt be the primary concern of the coach. The community stuff really is just pure PR.

Id assume though that this really is just his talking points to make it seem like hes "doing something" to the public.
I reality Im assuming they arenta ll siting around discussing their thoughts and feelings and visuiualising how it will feel to win the world cup in 2015. Instead they will be mudding and blooding and looking at play diagrams. They will be getting their roles in the team sorted and nalaysing the opposition ( although Lancaster worrying said he wasnt too bothered about doing that)
England do have a big adavntage in being an unknown quantity. Its unclear exactly how they will oline up and play, which makes it more difficult for Scotland to preapre the fine details. Perhaps they should focus on getting Andy Murray in to talk about his career as a rapper.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

Cymroglan wrote:Representing your country at the highest level and you need a boss to tell you what it means ?
They should not need to be told.

You're missing both my points, possibly deliberately:
1) Forging an elite team quickly with a new ethos and a new bunch of players takes more than individual motivation. Giving them a relevant shared experience is a good way to do that when you haven't got much time
2) If you really believe that you build a team by telling individuals to perform or be sacked, then your current boss is a pretty shabby man manager. I'd recommend getting a new one.

I think youre over complicating something that should come pretty naturally.

Stuff and nonsense. I would be suprised if there are few, if any professional sportspeople in the world, regardless of their field of expertise, that do not have motivational coaches, a point you are quite deliberately ignoring in your ongoing quest to belittle English rugby. Do get a life, there are actual debates on rugby happening elsewhere on this forum.

I'm a little surprised at all the criticism to be honest. For mine its fairly clear what Lancaster is doing, the whole week is about drawing a line under RWC 2011, setting new guidlines for behaviour and performance and significantly by talking so openly to the media about all this is clearly putting the emphasis on the players to behave because if they don't public opinion will clearly side with management and Lancaster. He will always be able to say "look we told you how a professional sportsman should behave". In an ideal world you wouldn't need to do all this but its blatantly obvious English rugby doesn't live in that world.

The week for me is also about getting the players ego's in check, about showing them they don't know everything and that other sportsmen from different backgrounds can offer new perspective. As mentioned above we are not privy to Neville's talk with the players so to assume that an articulate, inteligent, passionate and very experienced international sportsmen can't say anything useful is just plain ignorant (or is it just arrogance because surely he only plays that working class sport of football and speaks with a northern accent.....)

Islingtonv2 wrote:I'm a little surprised at all the criticism to be honest. For mine its fairly clear what Lancaster is doing, the whole week is about drawing a line under RWC 2011, setting new guidlines for behaviour and performance and significantly by talking so openly to the media about all this is clearly putting the emphasis on the players to behave because if they don't public opinion will clearly side with management and Lancaster. He will always be able to say "look we told you how a professional sportsman should behave". In an ideal world you wouldn't need to do all this but its blatantly obvious English rugby doesn't live in that world.

The week for me is also about getting the players ego's in check, about showing them they don't know everything and that other sportsmen from different backgrounds can offer new perspective. As mentioned above we are not privy to Neville's talk with the players so to assume that an articulate, inteligent, passionate and very experienced international sportsmen can't say anything useful is just plain ignorant (or is it just arrogance because surely he only plays that working class sport of football and speaks with a northern accent.....)

Something that Johnson did and got widley critisized for......

Islingtonv2 wrote:I'm a little surprised at all the criticism to be honest. For mine its fairly clear what Lancaster is doing, the whole week is about drawing a line under RWC 2011, setting new guidlines for behaviour and performance and significantly by talking so openly to the media about all this is clearly putting the emphasis on the players to behave because if they don't public opinion will clearly side with management and Lancaster. He will always be able to say "look we told you how a professional sportsman should behave". In an ideal world you wouldn't need to do all this but its blatantly obvious English rugby doesn't live in that world.

The week for me is also about getting the players ego's in check, about showing them they don't know everything and that other sportsmen from different backgrounds can offer new perspective. As mentioned above we are not privy to Neville's talk with the players so to assume that an articulate, inteligent, passionate and very experienced international sportsmen can't say anything useful is just plain ignorant (or is it just arrogance because surely he only plays that working class sport of football and speaks with a northern accent.....)

+1

I see the welshman Petersea is taking a bashing on this topic also. He should be starting to get the picture that his thought processes don't resonate very well with us English supporters.

I sincerely doubt it, where there's a chip, there's usually a shoulder.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:I'm a little surprised at all the criticism to be honest. For mine its fairly clear what Lancaster is doing, the whole week is about drawing a line under RWC 2011, setting new guidlines for behaviour and performance and significantly by talking so openly to the media about all this is clearly putting the emphasis on the players to behave because if they don't public opinion will clearly side with management and Lancaster. He will always be able to say "look we told you how a professional sportsman should behave". In an ideal world you wouldn't need to do all this but its blatantly obvious English rugby doesn't live in that world.

The week for me is also about getting the players ego's in check, about showing them they don't know everything and that other sportsmen from different backgrounds can offer new perspective. As mentioned above we are not privy to Neville's talk with the players so to assume that an articulate, inteligent, passionate and very experienced international sportsmen can't say anything useful is just plain ignorant (or is it just arrogance because surely he only plays that working class sport of football and speaks with a northern accent.....)

Something that Johnson did and got widley critisized for......

Johnson spectacularly failed to do any of the above

Islingtonv2 wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:I'm a little surprised at all the criticism to be honest. For mine its fairly clear what Lancaster is doing, the whole week is about drawing a line under RWC 2011, setting new guidlines for behaviour and performance and significantly by talking so openly to the media about all this is clearly putting the emphasis on the players to behave because if they don't public opinion will clearly side with management and Lancaster. He will always be able to say "look we told you how a professional sportsman should behave". In an ideal world you wouldn't need to do all this but its blatantly obvious English rugby doesn't live in that world.

The week for me is also about getting the players ego's in check, about showing them they don't know everything and that other sportsmen from different backgrounds can offer new perspective. As mentioned above we are not privy to Neville's talk with the players so to assume that an articulate, inteligent, passionate and very experienced international sportsmen can't say anything useful is just plain ignorant (or is it just arrogance because surely he only plays that working class sport of football and speaks with a northern accent.....)

Something that Johnson did and got widley critisized for......

Johnson spectacularly failed to do any of the above

When he first came in he was very strict and very focussed on the team ethic, as well as media manipulation. He was also widely critical of the lack of professionalism and fitness levels he found in the squad when he arrived.
In return he got slaughtered by the internet for having a capatin who spoke "on message" and being mean to Cipriani.

I dont really see so much difference in what Lancaster is doing so far, aside form getting a much easier ride from the media. That Johnsons failed in the end ( after being widely praised for his more relaxed approach) isnt the point.

You have come across as pretty anti SL on here PSW. Eng haven't thrown a ball in anger yet! Give the guy a chance. The squad need a complete fresh outlook and approach and so far, SL as done all of these. I'm looking forward to this years tourney as there's no pressure or title winning, Grand slams a must expectations.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:I'm a little surprised at all the criticism to be honest. For mine its fairly clear what Lancaster is doing, the whole week is about drawing a line under RWC 2011, setting new guidlines for behaviour and performance and significantly by talking so openly to the media about all this is clearly putting the emphasis on the players to behave because if they don't public opinion will clearly side with management and Lancaster. He will always be able to say "look we told you how a professional sportsman should behave". In an ideal world you wouldn't need to do all this but its blatantly obvious English rugby doesn't live in that world.

The week for me is also about getting the players ego's in check, about showing them they don't know everything and that other sportsmen from different backgrounds can offer new perspective. As mentioned above we are not privy to Neville's talk with the players so to assume that an articulate, inteligent, passionate and very experienced international sportsmen can't say anything useful is just plain ignorant (or is it just arrogance because surely he only plays that working class sport of football and speaks with a northern accent.....)

Something that Johnson did and got widley critisized for......

Johnson spectacularly failed to do any of the above

When he first came in he was very strict and very focussed on the team ethic, as well as media manipulation. He was also widely critical of the lack of professionalism and fitness levels he found in the squad when he arrived.
In return he got slaughtered by the internet for having a capatin who spoke "on message" and being mean to Cipriani.

I dont really see so much difference in what Lancaster is doing so far, aside form getting a much easier ride from the media. That Johnsons failed in the end ( after being widely praised for his more relaxed approach) isnt the point.

That's not exactly how i recall it. Johnson came in with a huge amount of goodwill, he was to be the saviour of the England team. It took about 2 years of terrible results, poor team selection, laughable post match interviews with Borthwick and dreadful on field disipline before genuine conerns started to be raised. Lancaster should at least be allowed a couple of games before we all jump on him.

I guess we read different bits of 606 Islington! There was a lot of people and pundits who questioned how hed got the job from day one, and as we have seen peopel in the RFU who were appalled hed been put in place and set about trying to shift him out. If the worst Lancaster is is having me taking a pop at his use of Gary Neville then hes a lucky guy.

I havent jumped all over him anyway, its only a certain troll who seems determined to cast me as an evil villian by exageratting my concerns over Lancaster and people choosing to focus on the negatives.

He will and should be judged on the results he brings. I have said this myslef ( and been accussed of being anti lancaster for it ... sigh ) and we really dont know how things will go for him. Id be happier if i knew more about what hes going to do with the team ( or unhappier depending what it was i guess) beyiond telling them they out to behave and work hard.

I do have some concerns that I havent seen any meat and substance yet in what hes doing beyond this sort of thing which really is about PR rather than what happenes on the field. Ive also said myself I do beleive that theres a lot more going on behind the scenes that hes choosing not to talk about in the interviews, perhaps because he feels its not the message he wants to get across. It appears its working anyway becasue the majority of English posters on here seem to believe the sun shines out of his @rse just because he picked their favourite teenager.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:I guess we read different bits of 606 Islington! There was a lot of people and pundits who questioned how hed got the job from day one, and as we have seen peopel in the RFU who were appalled hed been put in place and set about trying to shift him out. If the worst Lancaster is is having me taking a pop at his use of Gary Neville then hes a lucky guy.

I havent jumped all over him anyway, its only a certain troll who seems determined to cast me as an evil villian by exageratting my concerns over Lancaster and people choosing to focus on the negatives.

He will and should be judged on the results he brings. I have said this myslef ( and been accussed of being anti lancaster for it ... sigh ) and we really dont know how things will go for him. Id be happier if i knew more about what hes going to do with the team ( or unhappier depending what it was i guess) beyiond telling them they out to behave and work hard.

I do have some concerns that I havent seen any meat and substance yet in what hes doing beyond this sort of thing which really is about PR rather than what happenes on the field. Ive also said myself I do beleive that theres a lot more going on behind the scenes that hes choosing not to talk about in the interviews, perhaps because he feels its not the message he wants to get across. It appears its working anyway becasue the majority of English posters on here seem to believe the sun shines out of his @rse just because he picked their favourite teenager.

Fair comments Peter. I don't doubt he is choosing to release a lot of infomation that is PR-ish in nature for a specific purpose and i like that. But ultimately he will be judged by results - this 6N's is the ultimate job interview for him. I'm sure he is working on game plans and specific areas in training (for god sake sort out the breakdown!) But he is hardly likely to talk about that in public and give any clues to the opposition, that stuff stays private. If he is not then he is a fool and will get found out.

Treue,

I did find it quite a facepalm moment when Goland blurted out in the media that Wales intended to put England under pressure kicking to them, which England responded to by fielding 3 players with starting fullback caps and 2 with starting 10 caps. No prizes for guessing who won the kicking battle and game that day!

But in this case I do follow what the article writer says. Wales seem focused on preparation of the side for a rugby torunament, England give the impression they are getting ready for a new term at prep school.

It appears its working anyway becasue the majority of English posters on here seem to believe the sun shines out of his @rse just because he picked their favourite teenager.

Peter

I think in general Lancaster has picked the form players. How many of the older experienced guys are actually warranting a call up.
Maybe Easter could have made it as the form 8 but he is derided on these boards as fat slow and useless...something i disagree with. So we look to the future and give the exciting potential of Morgan a go.

Im just concerned that we have enough physical presence in the pack to cope....

"Johnson came in with a huge amount of goodwill, he was to be the saviour of the England team. It took about 2 years of terrible results, poor team selection, laughable post match interviews with Borthwick and dreadful on field disipline before genuine conerns started to be raised."

--------------------------------------------------

Not how I remember it, actually. But - mindful of the meaninglessness of comparing our subjective and possibly selective memories - I did a quick google search of 'England: Autumn internationals 2008' to make sure that my mind wasn't playing tricks on me. Sure enough, here are some direct newspaper quotes from Johnson's 1st series in charge:

"Come back, Brian Ashton, all is forgiven"

"Quite possibly the worst we have seen from an England side in recent times"

"England are not only as bad as they have ever been since 2003, they are worse than they have EVER been!"

There are lots and lots of reasons why England rugby has basically failed since 2003: archaic union structure, poor appointments at the top level, poor team selection, bad coaching, lack of talent coming through etc. etc. etc.....but - in my opinion - by far the single greatest factor has been the destructive English media. Kudos to Lancaster for bringing a freshness to the squad, but mark my words: this thin veneer of media goodwill and all this disingenous talk of Lancaster's supposed 'win-win situation' will all evapourate to nothing if we lose in Edinburgh. Then the knives will come straight out, and the media trolls will start banging the drum for a 'big name appointment', who they will subsequently revere for a couple of months before doing everything in their power to drag through the mud. And the cycle will continue.

I'm honestly not sure if any one man has the power to stop it. Johnson tried flat-batting the press on several occassions and look what they did to him: they managed to damage the percieved integrity of a man with a million times more integrity than every member of the English media put together. I hate the English media, I really do...

There are lots and lots of reasons why England rugby has basically failed since 2003: archaic union structure, poor appointments at the top level, poor team selection, bad coaching, lack of talent coming through etc. etc. etc.....but - in my opinion - by far the single greatest factor has been the destructive English media.

I actually think the single most defining factor is that you haven't had the players of the quality required for consistent success - when you have this combined with an unrealistic view of where you should be then the only option is failure. There has been bad management without a doubt but to blame the media is laughable - People are entitled to their opinions about SL; that's what the board is for, for some reason England are already putting pressure on themselves however instead of letting the team relax, express themselves and then develop from there.

RubyGuby wrote:There are lots and lots of reasons why England rugby has basically failed since 2003: archaic union structure, poor appointments at the top level, poor team selection, bad coaching, lack of talent coming through etc. etc. etc.....but - in my opinion - by far the single greatest factor has been the destructive English media.

I actually think the single most defining factor is that you haven't had the players of the quality required for consistent success - when you have this combined with an unrealistic view of where you should be then the only option is failure. There has been bad management without a doubt but to blame the media is laughable - People are entitled to their opinions about SL; that's what the board is for, for some reason England are already putting pressure on themselves however instead of letting the team relax, express themselves and then develop from there.

Seems contradictory.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:There are lots and lots of reasons why England rugby has basically failed since 2003: archaic union structure, poor appointments at the top level, poor team selection, bad coaching, lack of talent coming through etc. etc. etc.....but - in my opinion - by far the single greatest factor has been the destructive English media.

I actually think the single most defining factor is that you haven't had the players of the quality required for consistent success - when you have this combined with an unrealistic view of where you should be then the only option is failure. There has been bad management without a doubt but to blame the media is laughable - People are entitled to their opinions about SL; that's what the board is for, for some reason England are already putting pressure on themselves however instead of letting the team relax, express themselves and then develop from there.

Seems contradictory.

It would to you Llaeth

Llaeth, I like it!

You are arguing against your own initial points though.

I think the post is a bit too cerebral for you - Ask a friend to translate it then come back to me

"But in this case I do follow what the article writer says. Wales seem focused on preparation of the side for a rugby torunament, England give the impression they are getting ready for a new term at prep school."

More welsh biased twaddle. What have we heard in the media about Gatland? That he wants the Lions coaching job and that's about it.

SL is walking a paper thin line at the moment with every sports scribe watching his every step with quill in hand. One slip and he will be the subject of a feeding frenzy in the press. So will the players come to that. For goodness sake give the bloke some slack. He is doing great, so far. Lets wait and see.

Ruby,

I wouldnt blame the media for the failures. I blame the media for the perception of the level of failure, the reasons for that perceived failure, and the assassination of peoples characters.
Everything else ( and a bit of that ) I think we can all agree to blame on Rob Andrew and the Welsh. Thats all Im saying.

I do want to see something real and meaningful come about that changes the level of on field performance and results. We'll soon see if Farrells dad and the school teacher whos not sure if hes English or not can sort that out. Itll take more than Gary Neville recounting stories of Beckhams underpant drawer thats all Im saying ( oh look I just contradicted myself)

Equo Troiano wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

Cymroglan wrote:Representing your country at the highest level and you need a boss to tell you what it means ?
They should not need to be told.

You're missing both my points, possibly deliberately:
1) Forging an elite team quickly with a new ethos and a new bunch of players takes more than individual motivation. Giving them a relevant shared experience is a good way to do that when you haven't got much time
2) If you really believe that you build a team by telling individuals to perform or be sacked, then your current boss is a pretty shabby man manager. I'd recommend getting a new one.

I think youre over complicating something that should come pretty naturally.

Stuff and nonsense. I would be suprised if there are few, if any professional sportspeople in the world, regardless of their field of expertise, that do not have motivational coaches, a point you are quite deliberately ignoring in your ongoing quest to belittle English rugby. Do get a life, there are actual debates on rugby happening elsewhere on this forum.

What belittles English rugby or any team if it comes to that is the need others to tell them what it means to represent their country.
It should be in the players thoughts 24/7 that they are representing their country at the highest level and they should be giving it their all full stop.
They tried this Americanised motivational nonsense with us in the Army and that was a waste of tax payers money. The cap badge was all that needed to motivate us give us pride and passion and the International shirt should do the same for any player unless he is only there for the money..

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Treue,

I did find it quite a facepalm moment when Goland blurted out in the media that Wales intended to put England under pressure kicking to them, which England responded to by fielding 3 players with starting fullback caps and 2 with starting 10 caps. No prizes for guessing who won the kicking battle and game that day!

But in this case I do follow what the article writer says. Wales seem focused on preparation of the side for a rugby torunament, England give the impression they are getting ready for a new term at prep school.

It has been commented on that Gatland is furious at the fitness levels of his players since they have been back from the RWC. If the clubs haven't kept them in decent enough shape, then Gatland has to sacrifice preparing for the game to put more fitness improving work in. If Lancaster is happy with the fitness of his squad, then they can go straight onto match prep, set pieces, etc. Lots of IFs here but you can flip the story so far from a Lancaster is too relaxed into Gatland is worried!

Also, they noted in the article that there is a highly detailed timetable about everything they are doing. Then focus in on what could amount to a total of 4 hours in the first week where they listen to a motivational speech, do a Q&A with some grass roots coaches and interact with the public. There are an awful lot more hours in each day. The article to start with has blown one part out of proportion.

On people from other codes giving their perspective on elite sport, Roy Keane has gone into Hurling teams/GAA football teams and I vaguely remember him chatting with munster players about pitfalls and having a winning attitude. Gary Neville is a strange choice, but do you want Beckham, Lampard, Terry!

There are references to 'striking' for more money. The FA caused most of that, it happens every time a major tournament comes around. The FA agree a couple of bob with the players but wait till the last second to tell them the amount (which is then negotiated) and they hope at the last minute no-one has the balls to call them up on it. I'm an ABU supporter but Neville earned credit in my eyes for standing up in that situation. The fact the negotiations went public.... well you can understand what side wanted that to happen. If he can highlight pitfalls and the regrets of sides that have not achieved their potential then it will end in a stern word of warning to the players.

On interacting with the public. This is a good thing. It isn't patronising. THEY are representing the English public on the field (not just their little click of pals). Some of the problems became that they removed themselves from the outside and was a group of lads thinking they are the be-all and end-all for everything. If the experience humbles them and puts pride in the fact they are representing england as a privilege (rather than bigging up their ego) then all the better.

As an outsider though, I hope none of this works positively for the team!

None of us know what the speakers actually said, so there's no point saying 'the players should know that anyway', and I find it a completely bizarre assumption that highly experienced international competitors and coaches, albeit in a different sport, wouldn't have anything of worth to say to a group of young players with little-to-no experience of international sport.

For what it's worth, Lee Dickson has said, without being specifically asked, that the speakers were all 'phenomenal', though admittedly he probably would say that anyway.

Thats because hes fully focused and staying on message, or possibly because he realises he can earn a few more quid and get a free dinner doing it again somewhere else.

I actually feel sorry for MJ. The team were hounded by the media from the start and what the English media do better than any other media in the world is to seemingly take pleasure out of watching a legend fail. The mind boggles when i look at it. So much was reported over the English side at the RWC that it was unbelievable.

I cannot distinguish anything between what SL is saying than that of what MJ said when he took the post originally. The only difference i see is that SL is not as big a name as MJ was so the media portray it as a breath of fresh air.

I really do wish the guy the best of luck but should he fail, he will get slaughtered by the media.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Thats because hes fully focused and staying on message, or possibly because he realises he can earn a few more quid and get a free dinner doing it again somewhere else.

I did say that admittedly he would say that anyway, and if he wanted to plagiarise their speech (I know you're not being 100% serious but will respond anyway) why would he go on about it publicly?

In any case that doesn't affect my main point, which is that it's a bizarre claim to say that experienced coaches and players in elite sport wouldn't have any helpful advice for novices at this level.

eirebilly wrote:I actually feel sorry for MJ. The team were hounded by the media from the start and what the English media do better than any other media in the world is to seemingly take pleasure out of watching a legend fail. The mind boggles when i look at it. So much was reported over the English side at the RWC that it was unbelievable.

I cannot distinguish anything between what SL is saying than that of what MJ said when he took the post originally. The only difference i see is that SL is not as big a name as MJ was so the media portray it as a breath of fresh air.

I really do wish the guy the best of luck but should he fail, he will get slaughtered by the media.

To some extent you're right, but I don't remember MJ ever talking extensively about actively bringing young and ambitious players into the side and choosing an exciting game plan. It was all 'I wish young players were all they're cracked up to be but they're not' (actual, though possibly slightly wrongly worded, quote) and 'winning is all that matters'.

Tomh,

Typical early interview:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-sport/article-23479178-martin-johnson-i-will-make-england-great-again.do

"If you watch the rugby being played by very young players in the Premiership against some of the best players in the world, it's just tremendous. Part of the job is to create a culture, a team ethos. It's not rocket science."

Johnsons community approach in the early days http://www.rugbynetwork.net/main/s245/st128303.htm


Also found a (now deleted) podcast from this period of Stuart Lancaster talking about his work with tocuh rugby. Hmmm.

During the digging I came across this RFU note on motivational speaches
http://www.rfu.com/TakingPart/Coach/CoachResourceArchive/TechnicalJournalArchive/~/media/Files/2009/Coaching/Articles/TechnicalJournal/2008/2ndQuarter/coaches-notes.ashx
So do we expect Hugh Morris to go in and recite the inches speach (again) set to stills of England retaining the Ashes then say " well at least you have two south africans in the side", or just tell a funny anecdote about Martin Johnson being a belligerant old so and so?




If theres one person who understood sports psychology it was Johnson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BdsTh2oP6o

You cant teach that in a classroom. Hes like that all day every day.

I just don't understand this level of cynicism. As said, how do you know that nothing useful was said?

Judging by the reaction of the kids and the other members of the public I'd say the England squad and management have done some good things this week.

SL deserves to be judged on the way his players conduct themselves and on performance and results on the pitch. Much of what has happened so far is about the former, we'll see how it translates to the second and third categories.