The 'New' England +/- Thread

[HERSH]

First topic message reminder :

New era for England 1 game played = 1 win

So give us you thoughts both positive and negative.


Positives

We won.
1st win at Murrayfield since 2004.
Farrell can kick.
Discipline was better.
Morgan can't play for wales.

?????


Negatives

Same Poopie, different team
lack of imagination.
Performance was poor to very poor
Still can't do a rolling maul.
Did we have any wingers on the pitch?

????

[Ozzy3213]

All those who expected flowing champagne rugby from England on Saturday were seriously deluding themselves. It was always going to be a dour slugfest, and one that I honestly felt Scotland would narrowly win.

'Better' (subjective) England teams have gone to Murrayfield and got beaten. This one, played well within it's own capabilities, and came back with a win, something an England team has not done in this fixture for 8 years.

It is a learning process, and yes we may lose to Ireland, France and Wales and finish 4th in this tournament, but if it means that we have blooded some players who might make quality internationals with 15-20 caps under their belt, and we have moved on from the debacle of the World Cup, then quite frankly I don't care.

Defensively and in terms of discipline it was a 100% improvement. Attacking-wise, that will coem with time, remember that Lancaster has only had a short period with this group.

There are no negatives people, only positives, but we will all have to be patient and manage our own expectations as this team is far from being the finished article just yet, the journey is only just beginning!

[Gatts]

Well that's all right then

It's another game when excuses can be made because its a new batch and a new coach. It was a poor performance.

England beat a side who couldn't score for toffee and looked only marginally more likely to score than Scotland who looked less likely to score than my 92 year old gran who is making a move on the guy next to her in the nursing home (and doing quite well by all accounts)

It was the lowest standard of international i have seen in a long time and for anyone to take 'positives' from it apart form a W they'd be really quite stupid and obviously fairly witless.

[mystiroakey]

gatts is back

i take it you were banned or something?

[Ozzy3213]

That's what I like about you Gatts, the eloquence and ability to get your point across without resorting to being abusive towards anyone who has a different opinion than yourself.

Well played

[Ozzy3213]

Oh and you appear to have completely missed my point Gatts, so I will reiterate it.

If as an England fan you had unrealistc expectations of some sort complete revival of fortunes all in one go, then there will be negatives, as that did not happen.

If on the other hand you are a realist as I am, and accept that it will be small steps and improvements made to one area of the game at a time, then you will take positives from the game, as that is exactly what happened.

[mystiroakey]

why speak to him?,why pander to him? why explain yourself?. Your points where fine and any logical decent human being could see that. He will never TRY to undertsand your view point- He has one goal on this forum. To rip england when ever possible and those that support them.

[Gatts]

I find it hard to identify anything to like about you to be honest so lets keep it on the game and not make it personal shall we.

And who is getting upset 'cos i disagree with them? YOU

And I had no idea you had made a point other than to revel in the mediocrity of England's performance. It was a dull opinion the first time you made it. Attacking the post not the poster!

To top it off you resort to hypocrisy by suggesting that because i disagree with your opinion that somehow I am being abusive. Such a person ought to grow up!

[Gatts]

Oakey yes i was banned no flies on you, and yes you are still on my ignore list

[mystiroakey]

lol- how did you read my post!

you have made my morning gatts. keep up the good work

[Gatts]

I wonder oakey how i read your post.

We've just discovered the missing link and it's in surrey!

[mystiroakey]

?

[eirebilly]

Personally i thought that the game was very poor from both sides. Doesnt mean i didnt enjoy it because i certainly did.

The only positive i think that England can take is that they won the game. Murrayfield is a hard place to go and they got the points. Job done. I expect them to get better but time will tell.

[mystiroakey]

discipline is the positive we can take, discipline via our lads being more disciplined or playing to the how the ref reffs, is sort of immaterial, at least they used there heads out there.

i have no idea why we looked so weak in the centre. however its a work in progress.

The problem is-is that whos work in progress is it. If our caretaker coach leaves and doesnt become the full coach, what was the point?

any new coach is gonna have there own ideas on how they wanna play and who they want to play

[dummy_half]

Gatts

"And Eng have nought to shout about, only a real mug would celebrate that as anything other than a messy win"

Don't think I've seen anyone claim it was anything more than that. One moment of good opportunism and a combination of some good last ditch defence (Foden made a couple of really good tackles on Rennie and Denton) and Scotland's inability to score in a brothel with £500 in their pocket was the difference between the sides.

Positives for England:
An away win, and at a ground where we've struggled in the past
Defence inside the 22 was solid enough and we didn't give away cheap penalties
Blooded some players
Fairly good games from Corbisiero, Botha, Barritt, Foden.

Of the inexperienced players, I'd say that Botha, Robshaw and Barritt didn't look out of place (all had 6/10 or 7/10 games).
Farrell kicked well, but I'm not convinced he's a short to medium term answer at 12 (bench cover for 10 and 12 perhaps?). Maybe with Flood back we can have Barritt in to 12 and a proper strike runner at 13 (I assume Manu T is still missing for the next match)
Dowson didn't look like an international standard 8 - Another who might be best suited to being a replacement because he'll do an adequate job across all back row positions rather than shine in any one.

For the Italy game, I'd look to start Morgan - he might be just the sort of big lump of an 8 that we need to complement Croft and Robshaw.
If Flood is back to being fit enough to start, he should play with Barritt at 12 and a genuine 13 there.

Our toothlessness in attack recently has come from having too few guys that are good ball carriers in the heavy areas - RWC QF we only had Manu and on Saturday Robshaw and Barritt, and it's too easy to defend.
Watch the Wales performance against Ireland and they have half a dozen powerful carriers (Bennett, R Jones, Faletau, Roberts, JD2, North), all of who make the defence move and so create the space for the outside backs - we have the quality in the back 3, but at the moment don't have enough players who make the hard yards to suck the defenders in and create the half chances.

[screamingaddabs]

Well what was everyone expecting? Playing Scotland in the rain and wind at Murrayfield with a team of youngsters? I thought they should fantastic spirit, and for a team who had only been together for a few days I thought they did well. The big thing is that they won a game they could have lost. England looked better than Scotland for 60 minutes in my opinion and then Scotland had a good 10 minutes where they should have seen us off. The fact they didn't was testament to poor decisions under pressure on their behalf and England simply not giving up.

Yes, England need to play a lot better, but I think they will. We missed Tuilagi in the centres, but most of the mistakes were simply down to not having played together before.

One player I would highlight who doesn't seem to have been is Strettle. If you watch him in the game he was really putting in the commitment. I think Lancaster has succeeded on that front, getting them to really WANT the shirt. Now, with a game against Italy we need to show a bit more cohesion and start getting some phases together. Then, onwards and upwards. I doubt we will beat Wales, Ireland and France, but I reckon we will beat at least one of them.

[Geordie]

Well what was everyone expecting? Playing Scotland in the rain and wind at Murrayfield with a team of youngsters? I thought they should fantastic spirit, and for a team who had only been together for a few days I thought they did well. The big thing is that they won a game they could have lost. England looked better than Scotland for 60 minutes in my opinion and then Scotland had a good 10 minutes where they should have seen us off. The fact they didn't was testament to poor decisions under pressure on their behalf and England simply not giving up.

Yes, England need to play a lot better, but I think they will. We missed Tuilagi in the centres, but most of the mistakes were simply down to not having played together before.

One player I would highlight who doesn't seem to have been is Strettle. If you watch him in the game he was really putting in the commitment. I think Lancaster has succeeded on that front, getting them to really WANT the shirt. Now, with a game against Italy we need to show a bit more cohesion and start getting some phases together. Then, onwards and upwards. I doubt we will beat Wales, Ireland and France, but I reckon we will beat at least one of them.

Totally agree .....

Whilst he didnt get many chances offensively...he worked his socks off defensively....and i remember seeing him power in to a couple of rucks like a man possessed.

[screamingaddabs]

Totally agree .....

Whilst he didnt get many chances offensively...he worked his socks off defensively....and i remember seeing him power in to a couple of rucks like a man possessed.

Especially because in my eyes (probably entirely wrongly) he struck me as a bit of a primadonna, only there for the good times. Don't know why, I have no justification for my initial assessment and he proved it completely wrong. but also

[damage_13]

positives -

England tackled like demons, never mind the non-lines the Scots ran, I lost count of the number of Jonny-esque tackles by players in White and if one was missed there were usually two or three people converging.

Even had there been support runners I would not have been worried.

Very few penalties by an inexperienced international side.

Good composure under pressure.


Negatives.

Kicked far too much ball away and turned over too little, possession was limited and when we did attack it was threatening (the single play in the second half which went through a few phases).

While I acknowledge that his defence went well and that he was right next to C.H. for his try, there was little for the wingers to do as too many passes were too high and were slowing the attack down. What is it about players who just don't understand the basics of passing and can pass a good ball that people can run onto.

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

quote="ChequeredJersey"]Dickson is out though, unfortunately. Broken a metacarpal... Quins' other Dickson called up as cover[/quote]

Cant Lancaster get Gary Neveille to talk to Care and bring him back into the squad?

There comes a point when actually running a winning team comes above certain principles of pandering to media witch hunts.

New era for England 1 game played = 1 win

So give us you thoughts both positive and negative.


Positives

We won.
1st win at Murrayfield since 2004.
Farrell can kick.
Discipline was better.
Morgan can't play for wales.

?????


Negatives

Same Poopie, different team
lack of imagination.
Performance was poor to very poor
Still can't do a rolling maul.
Did we have any wingers on the pitch?

????

Is the fact its the first win at Murrayfield since 2004 a positive?
Farrels kicking was nothing more than adequate. 2 missed kicks and one kickable opportunity turned down. Not bad , and better than Englands world cup exploits, but hardly evidence hes the new old Johnny. Same with his field kicking which was pretty conservative on the whole.
Discipline was better, although theres still time for some tales of drinking to come out. England did concede 8 penalties in teh secodn half, but no sign of a yellow or a citeing and they were doing a lot of defending. Main thing was they gave away those penalties in teh right areas, few kickable ones. As a result of that though they still werent agressive enough at the breakdown to cause real consistent problems for Scotland retaining posession or win any quick ball of their own.
Yet to find out iof Morgan being with England is of any use for us or a negative

Positives for me:
Botha having some value as a human being
Robshaw not talking about taking the positives from the game in post match interview
Actually winning despite playing abysmaly
Potential to improve with returning players and greater time training together
Front row performance, given they were expected to struggle
Tackling of Englands midfield

[beshocked]

England played exactly like Saracens and won like them too.

I hope England don't play like Saracens in every game because they can be fairly boring to watch. On the other hand in regards to winning,defence and mental toughness few English sides are better at the moment.

Let's put this into perspective: this was an inexperienced England side missing key players like Wood,Lawes,Flood and M.Tuilagi.

England won with 3 6.5s in the backrow, 2 12s in the centres and a woefully out of form no 9.

A centre partnership of Barritt and Tuilagi would certainly solve the centre conundrum in my opinion. A nice mix of defence and attack.

Swapping Morgan in for Dowson at no 8 would give us a big ball carrier in the backrow.

[bluestonevedder]

England's scrum was a huge positive, and stood up to the criticism they got throughout the weeks leading up to the game. Corbs was brilliant, and it looks like he's shifted a bunch of weight, allowing him to make all the rucks and mauls, as well as a decent tackle count. Seriously impressed with him.
Obviously, penalties and discipline were a huge positive too.
Croft surprised me, and I was impressed with him, bar a few missed tackles ~(notably on Denton). Robshaw also played very well I thought.

Midfield was stagnant, but as Beshocked pointed out, there was no 13, and no out and out ball carrier.

Morgan has to start, I thought he gave real go-forward and momentum off the back of the scrum. Dowson's a good bench option, and did some dogged work at the rucks and mauls, but isn't an international 8.

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

Some of the midfield and Youngs problems could be sorted out by more agression form the backrow and better organisation.
The second part is easier to fix ( by training and some consitncy in selection) than the first. Flood coming back in may help a biut, Tuilagi in theory offers more of a running threat but not if he gets as little ball as Barrit did. You might as well play Joe Worsley at 13, infact the same goes for the Strettle debate.

[damage_13]

anyone else hear that Lancaster accidentally punched out a light fitting on Hodgson's Try and had to have stitches

"I punched the ceiling light and split my finger when Charlie scored. I asked the doc after the game whether it needed to be looked at and he put in two stitches!"

[RubyGuby]

I sense a change in the media and England here - A few months ago we would have had a headline like "England's new coach admits to mindless criminal damage at Murrayfield"

[beshocked]

Peter seabiscuit wheeler I see you keep making excuses for Youngs. Youngs was awful just admit it.

[damage_13]

youngs was pretty bad tbh

[Guest]

As dire as Scotland were in attack, I could actually see what they were trying to do. There was a definite plan of attack, and the main reason that it didn't work, for me, was poor handling and a lack of precision, rather than England's defence. England didn't even seem to have a plan. The experience point doesn't really work for me when 10, 11, 12, and 13 AND the attack coach are all drawn from the same club (with 14 on the way there too). Surely they know each other well enough to be able to formulate something and pull it off?

[dummy_half]

Youngs had a bit of a shocker, but PSW is at least partly right in that you wouldn't expect your scrum half to be the stand out performer in a team that is on the back foot at the breakdown. His kicking from hand was poor though, and what has happened to his ball-carrying?

We definitely need more grunt carrying the ball one and two out - I'd definitely give Morgan a go against Italy, as he's a big unit and the one run he made he powered through the contact area well. We do though need more from the midfield backs, and until Manu T comes back I'm not sure we have the players available to provide that.

[flankertye]

Youngs was awful, made my friend who never watched rugby review the match for me and even he gave him a 4!
I was impressed with Botha, Robshaw, Barritt, Foden, and the front row.
I'd start Morgan next week and look to get Flood involved.

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

Youngs was awful, made my friend who never watched rugby review the match for me and even he gave him a 4!
.

Which kind of sums up the way people seem to rate scrum halves and backs in general. If you dont see them making blinding runs they must be awful.

[bluestonevedder]

Which kind of sums up the way people seem to rate scrum halves and backs in general. If you dont see them making blinding runs they must be awful.

Same with forwards. If they're are not seen to be running through and over defenders each time, they are often seen as being poor!

That being said, I did think Youngs was awful, and would have loved to have seen Dickson start-such a shame.

[beshocked]

Youngs was awful, made my friend who never watched rugby review the match for me and even he gave him a 4!
.

Which kind of sums up the way people seem to rate scrum halves and backs in general. If you dont see them making blinding runs they must be awful.

No Peter seabiscuit wheeler most people thought Barritt and Foden played well despite doing relatively little in attack.

I quite like the guardian's ratings:http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/feb/04/six-nations-scotland-england-player-ratings?newsfeed=true

Keep the head in the sand then.

[bluestonevedder]

@beshocked: good fair ratings there, I agree

[Hood83]

Youngs was awful, made my friend who never watched rugby review the match for me and even he gave him a 4!
.

Which kind of sums up the way people seem to rate scrum halves and backs in general. If you dont see them making blinding runs they must be awful.

No Peter seabiscuit wheeler most people thought Barritt and Foden played well despite doing relatively little in attack.

I quite like the guardian's ratings:http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/feb/04/six-nations-scotland-england-player-ratings?newsfeed=true

Keep the head in the sand then.

Agreed, he was awful. Slow pass, dawdled to the breakdown, offered no leadership or direction to the forwards. It's not the flash runs we want to see, it's the absolute basics

[robbo277]

I personally would have started with Dickson for the Scotland game, with Youngs coming off the bench, hopefully to the effect he had against Argentina. I just thought that Hodgson would prefer Dickson at 9 and Dickson might offer more bossing the forwards. Although there was a chance he wouldn't cut it at International level, in which case we could have brought Youngs back in, possibly at the same time as Flood to help out his Leicester team-mate.

Now I think Lancaster has manoeuvred himself into a corner. I would be loathed to drop my 9 for an unproven player at this early stage of the 6N - what if Dickson has a couple of shockers, what then? But Youngs' form is so off it's hard to believe Dickson could be worse.

I'd stick with Youngs, but only because I really want to see how Youngs goes with Flood at 10, see if that can spark him back into life. If Youngs performs like he did against Scotland this week though, he has to go before the Wales game though.

[belovedfrosties]

Thought the rating of Botha was harsh, really put himself about in defence and attack. Also Dicksons injury isn't as bad as thought and he is free to play this weekend. I would give him a chance and have Youngs on the bench as game breaker. Would also start Morgan ahead of Dowson but he might put in a stormer to prove the scotland game was a blip. For these 2 new guys i would give them a half each to get an idea of who should start.

[englandglory4ever]

All this guff is missing the real point about England's poor performance. Basically they made mistake after mistake almost as soon as they had got possesion. They could not keep the ball for more than a few seconds and were totally unable to get any phases going.

Botha lost the ball on at least 3 occasions. There were others. The 8 couldn't deal with the ball at the base of the scrum and at least 2 line-outs were lost on our own throw. Add all this up and you have no attacking ball.

All their mistakes shouted out loudly that they were a callow team experiencing test rugby for the first time. I expect them to get a lot better very soon as the new guys make the step up.

The win was great but the performance in attack was very poor due to reasons given above. Things can only get better.

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

I personally would have started with Dickson for the Scotland game, with Youngs coming off the bench, hopefully to the effect he had against Argentina. I just thought that Hodgson would prefer Dickson at 9 and Dickson might offer more bossing the forwards. Although there was a chance he wouldn't cut it at International level, in which case we could have brought Youngs back in, possibly at the same time as Flood to help out his Leicester team-mate.

Now I think Lancaster has manoeuvred himself into a corner. I would be loathed to drop my 9 for an unproven player at this early stage of the 6N - what if Dickson has a couple of shockers, what then? But Youngs' form is so off it's hard to believe Dickson could be worse.

I'd stick with Youngs, but only because I really want to see how Youngs goes with Flood at 10, see if that can spark him back into life. If Youngs performs like he did against Scotland this week though, he has to go before the Wales game though.

Given Dickson has a broken hand and wont be able to train all week the chances of him getting the starting 9 shirt are probably somewhere between jack and jill despite what the internet thinks.
England can ill afford to be casting aside the few experienced player s they have at this point and making excessive changes.

As EG4F says ( and Im loathe to ever agree with him!) they showed every sign of a side that needs time to gel. These players are capable of better, chopping and changing wont help them get there.
With Flood due to return for the Wales game Id expect Youngs to be reatined to see if their partnership can flourish again.

After the 6 nations Care should come back into the fold, I do wonder if Lancaster may regret being so strict and expelling him in the first week of term.

[beshocked]

EG4F the most important thing is that England notched up a win. Murrayfield is not an easy place to go. It will be good for the confidence of the side.

There were negatives but also positives - the discipline was excellent and the defence was good. The hunger and passion was there.

No one thinks England are the finished article. New coach, relatively inexperienced team. You would hardly expect them to be at their best instantly.

Also England are missing important players. Lancaster played 3 6.5s and 2 12s. His first choice and 2nd choice 13 were injured. 1st choice fly half and 1st choice 7 too. Oh and lock as well.

Peter seabiscuit wheeler Lancaster had to set an example with Danny Care.

Youngs need to be shown that his poor form cannot continue. I believe he is complacent because his main rival is not in the EPS. Also Youngs needs to learn to work with other fly halves - not just Flood.

[aitchw]

Thank God that's out of the way. On that form neither side would beat Italy, let alone Wales, Ireland or France. OK, so I'll hope that all the 'new young side' etc. stuff was the problem but I'm not convinced. Only Scotland's ineptitude saved England from defeat, the 'heroic defence' would have been taken apart by a better side. The backs were defending such a narrow track that there were acres of space to the outside. If that was because of fears for Hodgson's frailty then they need a better plan to defend that channel or better still drop him. I thought a few players did relatively well, Barrit and Corbs in particular and enough of the rest did well enough to be persevered with. There's a huge amount to be done before the next game but you can't deal with poor key skills like protecting and retaining ball in the tackle, poor passing and game awareness etc. in a week. Oh, and if you are going to make Ashton first receiver when you need a kicker to clear the lines he'd better be getting a lot of practice in.
Positives? 1st game out of the way and a win, some signs that we have a few new players who might make the grade. Negatives, not enough depth of squad to compete for key positions, 9 and 10 especially, otherwise there'll be few tries to be had this tournament.

[lostinwales]

Its only a small point but its also worth noting that for a good chunk of the last quarter England did just sit back and defend because they had the lead. What this meant is that when they got the ball they did just hoof it up the pitch - doesnt do much for the stats but helps to secure a narrow win. Scottish ball retention was also excellent - cant help how lacking in creativity they could be.

The issue with the missed tackle stats is similar. There were more than anyone would like but with the number that were made its a lot less significant than if the total tackles had been in the 60's.

Like so many calcutta cup games it was compelling and horrible in equal measure. Hard and brutal game but one that wont be remembered much, except for the result.

England worked hard for each other in defense and kept their discipline. They will have much better days and I wouldnt rule them (or Scotland for that matter) out of the championship this earlt.

[miteyironpaw]

Wait...so you are saying that making twice as many tackles as the opposition, having a quarter of the possession and 30% of territory whilst continuously kicking the ball away aimlessly and looking unlikely to score tries that aren't gift wrapped and presented on a plate by the incompetence of the opposition whilst missing 20 tackles and conceding 20 line breaks is actually a good thing?

Fantastic perspective. But blinkered, I feel.

[lostinwales]

What I am saying is making 10 tackles and missing 5 is awful
making 100 tackles and missing 5 isnt quite so bad

If England played like that against some other teams they may have got a hiding but they did enough on the day and wont play like that again - probably.

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

Its only a small point but its also worth noting that for a good chunk of the last quarter England did just sit back and defend because they had the lead. What this meant is that when they got the ball they did just hoof it up the pitch - doesnt do much for the stats but helps to secure a narrow win. Scottish ball retention was also excellent - cant help how lacking in creativity they could be.

The issue with the missed tackle stats is similar. There were more than anyone would like but with the number that were made its a lot less significant than if the total tackles had been in the 60's.

Like so many calcutta cup games it was compelling and horrible in equal measure. Hard and brutal game but one that wont be remembered much, except for the result.

England worked hard for each other in defense and kept their discipline. They will have much better days and I wouldnt rule them (or Scotland for that matter) out of the championship this earlt.

True to some extent, but the missed tackle percentage and rucks won percentages were both behind Scotland and below the levels they should be aiming for.
Id again question if the much vaunted discipline was as great as it was by pointing out they actually conceeded 8 penalties in the second half, as many as most teams did all game. Robshaw also got involved in two scraps. The improvement on discpline seems to have come in the first 20 minutes, and at the afterparty.

[miteyironpaw]

What I am saying is making 10 tackles and missing 5 is awful
making 100 tackles and missing 5 isnt quite so bad

If England played like that against some other teams they may have got a hiding but they did enough on the day and wont play like that again - probably.

So you are saying that if you're going to miss a lot of tackles, you also have to make sure you give the ball to the opposition as much as possible too?

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

What I am saying is making 10 tackles and missing 5 is awful
making 100 tackles and missing 5 isnt quite so bad

If England played like that against some other teams they may have got a hiding but they did enough on the day and wont play like that again - probably.

So you are saying that if you're going to miss a lot of tackles, you also have to make sure you give the ball to the opposition as much as possible too?

[Chjw131]

Well what was everyone expecting? Playing Scotland in the rain and wind at Murrayfield with a team of youngsters? I thought they should fantastic spirit, and for a team who had only been together for a few days I thought they did well. The big thing is that they won a game they could have lost. England looked better than Scotland for 60 minutes in my opinion and then Scotland had a good 10 minutes where they should have seen us off. The fact they didn't was testament to poor decisions under pressure on their behalf and England simply not giving up.

Yes, England need to play a lot better, but I think they will. We missed Tuilagi in the centres, but most of the mistakes were simply down to not having played together before.

One player I would highlight who doesn't seem to have been is Strettle. If you watch him in the game he was really putting in the commitment. I think Lancaster has succeeded on that front, getting them to really WANT the shirt. Now, with a game against Italy we need to show a bit more cohesion and start getting some phases together. Then, onwards and upwards. I doubt we will beat Wales, Ireland and France, but I reckon we will beat at least one of them.

Totally agree .....

Whilst he didnt get many chances offensively...he worked his socks off defensively....and i remember seeing him power in to a couple of rucks like a man possessed.

Absolutely, in some other thread there were comments along the lines of 'didn't see him much' but if you watch it back he made a number of tackles and then heavily attacked the rucks.

[RubyGuby]

Wait...so you are saying that making twice as many tackles as the opposition, having a quarter of the possession and 30% of territory whilst continuously kicking the ball away aimlessly and looking unlikely to score tries that aren't gift wrapped and presented on a plate by the incompetence of the opposition whilst missing 20 tackles and conceding 20 line breaks is actually a good thing?

Fantastic perspective. But blinkered, I feel.

Spot on Mighty - I love your brutal honesty against this rose tinted fella

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

Well what was everyone expecting? Playing Scotland in the rain and wind at Murrayfield with a team of youngsters? I thought they should fantastic spirit, and for a team who had only been together for a few days I thought they did well. The big thing is that they won a game they could have lost. England looked better than Scotland for 60 minutes in my opinion and then Scotland had a good 10 minutes where they should have seen us off. The fact they didn't was testament to poor decisions under pressure on their behalf and England simply not giving up.

Yes, England need to play a lot better, but I think they will. We missed Tuilagi in the centres, but most of the mistakes were simply down to not having played together before.

One player I would highlight who doesn't seem to have been is Strettle. If you watch him in the game he was really putting in the commitment. I think Lancaster has succeeded on that front, getting them to really WANT the shirt. Now, with a game against Italy we need to show a bit more cohesion and start getting some phases together. Then, onwards and upwards. I doubt we will beat Wales, Ireland and France, but I reckon we will beat at least one of them.

Totally agree .....

Whilst he didnt get many chances offensively...he worked his socks off defensively....and i remember seeing him power in to a couple of rucks like a man possessed.

Absolutely, in some other thread there were comments along the lines of 'didn't see him much' but if you watch it back he made a number of tackles and then heavily attacked the rucks.

Which again leads to my question why dont we play Joe Worsley on the wing if we have no intetion of getting the ball, or worse doing anything of value with it when we have it?

[bluestonevedder]

Which again leads to my question why dont we play Joe Worsley on the wing if we have no intetion of getting the ball, or worse doing anything of value with it when we have it?

Because he's retired.

[Sponsored content]