Another Myth about England....

First topic message reminder :

We keep hearing it over and over again especially from Welsh supporters who just continually run our team down...on the basis of 2 matches played in terrible conditions.

While tripping (AWJ style) over themselves to slate England they attack our front row as being weak.

What?!

It is the one unit of our side that is holding up well.

This is the usual untruth perpertated by welsh...

"Our front row will be our first choice so we should get yteh (sic) edge on what yesterday was a very ordinary England scrummage until castrogiovanni went off. "

Complete rubbish.

But the foundations aren't secure! For an articulate poster you really seem to be blind to the facts sometimes.

Well I guesss we will see next weekend.

As I said, I am still unconvinced about Cole. But the whole pack sees a bit weak, so certainly not exclusively him. There was relatively little forward push the last two weeks. As I said, the period of time where England had Sheridan in his prime is the benchmark, which is far away at the moment. The Sheridan of 2012 seems a shadow of his former self and after so many injuries, is close to the end of his career.
And to lose two scrums against the head is unacceptable, at any level.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:But the foundations aren't secure! For an articulate poster you really seem to be blind to the facts sometimes.

Wales on the firm footings offered at Twickenham will not pose the same scrummaging threat as Italy on a frost bitten marsh. We might not be a team built around an impenetrable scrum any longer, but we need to lose this obsession with believing one is necessary. The trade-offs we've made in out and out scrum power are to enable more punch in the fringes and enhanced linking with our back row and back line. Just because we haven't demonstrated our wider, pacier game yet doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The foundations need to be more mobile and flexible now. My analogy is that old fashioned buildings are built on an inflexible stone plinth, modern buildings are designed to sway and accomodate movement, more like the organic design of a tree. Similarly the modern set piece has different requirements for rigidity in the modern game. Once you are comfortable with it, it makes sense. The number of scrums are lower than lineouts or breakdowns, the number of completed scrums even lower. Building a team around a scrum no longer makes sense.

The trade-offs we've made in out and out scrum power are to enable more punch in the fringes and enhanced linking with our back row and back line. Just because we haven't demonstrated our wider, pacier game yet doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

So Lancaster made sure the England team played truely woeful rugby in the first two games in order to lull the other nations into a false sense of security. I may agree with the second half of your arguement but we have no more punch around the fringes then before, there is less linking with the backline (especially the 9 and 10 who seem on a different wave length to the pack) and the back line looks incapable of running a set move.

miteyironpaw

Granted that I've only read your post on the first page but it was enough to drive me to come here,never seen quite so much drivel forced into half a dozen comments.

Concentrating on the major tosh:

Castrogiovanni injuring himself does not make him anyless of a player. As for the scrummaging issue stating that a destructive scrummager is wrong to injure himself carrying is rediculous, an injury like that is no fault of the player in a contact sport. Your use of Leonard as an example is also misled as he was much more than a scrummager and saying that's what made us the best in 2003 is past idiotic considering he was on the bench by then due largely to Woodman and Vickerys supperior carrying in the loose.

As for players can't be great unless they've won a RWC. Rugby is a team sport,whilst outstanding individuals make a big difference no a great player in a weaker team will not win a world cup. I'm not going to join others listing players who prove that view wrong as if you can't do that yourself you probably wont recognise the names.

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

On the topic of Englands front row whilst the rest of the team (especially the attack as well known) has been poor the front row is not and has performed well.

The Scotland and Italy (even without Castro!) scrums are strong and they came through both challenges well. Personally think they put in a better performance against the Scottish at scrum time than Wales did. Can't deny I'm still worried about the area next weekend however as I think the Welsh front row will have the edge on us,Jenkins and Jones are outstanding players.

king_carlos wrote:miteyironpaw

Granted that I've only read your post on the first page but it was enough to drive me to come here,never seen quite so much drivel forced into half a dozen comments.

Concentrating on the major tosh:

Castrogiovanni injuring himself does not make him anyless of a player. As for the scrummaging issue stating that a destructive scrummager is wrong to injure himself carrying is rediculous, an injury like that is no fault of the player in a contact sport. Your use of Leonard as an example is also misled as he was much more than a scrummager and saying that's what made us the best in 2003 is past idiotic considering he was on the bench by then due largely to Woodman and Vickerys supperior carrying in the loose.

As for players can't be great unless they've won a RWC. Rugby is a team sport,whilst outstanding individuals make a big difference no a great player in a weaker team will not win a world cup. I'm not going to join others listing players who prove that view wrong as if you can't do that yourself you probably wont recognise the names.

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

On the topic of Englands front row whilst the rest of the team (especially the attack as well known) has been poor the front row is not and has performed well.

The Scotland and Italy (even without Castro!) scrums are strong and they came through both challenges well. Personally think they put in a better performance against the Scottish at scrum time than Wales did. Can't deny I'm still worried about the area next weekend however as I think the Welsh front row will have the edge on us,Jenkins and Jones are outstanding players.

So after all that, we agree Carlos. The front row is in fine form and Wales won't trouble us. If I were Wales I'd be more worried about their shoddy lineout. The scrum isn't a huge feature of the game anymore. And ours is good to be used as a restart platform to launch our backs, as is OUR lineout.

We're yet to see the backline in action, the conditions have prohibited that so far.

Look out Wales when they do get going.

Agree our scrums in good form definitely! I'm still worried about it though as I do think Wales have the best front row in the tournament, Jenkins and Jones are among thebest LH and TH in world alongside Franks,Woodcock and Castro!

Problem with the scrum I can see however isn't it going backwards it's more not going forward as the scrums are evenly matched. We rely on the scrum going forward to try and get the backs going forward, Wales can work well without it though where as we usually can't.

That's why I'd definitely bring back Tuilagi with Barritt at IC as we desperately need his ball carrying!

Also agree we need to target the Welsh line-out. Their line-out will be much better if Rees and AWJ return but Croft needs start to target them in that area.

The not going forward isn't a bad thing for a modern scrum. You just want a nice stable platform to give you options off the back, kicking options or to unleash the backline. Not getting overly involved in a scrum stoush I know is a change for us, but it's the way the game is going at the moment. Why risk giving away random penalties? if you can just set, hold your own and stop the opposition getting the nudge on, it gives the defensive line time to size up their opposites on defence, and the flankers time to do their thing. It could be a tactic rather than a weakness.

The kicking game will be vital, we have to peg them back and then get them nervous about their lineout. Keep niggling away and maybe get Hodgson's charge down game going close to the line.

I'm just pessimistic that we can get the backs going with just a stable platform though. Tuilagi's a must for us in that regard just getting over the gainline! Look at how effectively Wales use Roberts in that regard, unfortunately we don't currently have a foil like Davies to play alongside him. Tuilagi and Barritt wouldn't let anything through in defence though! Personally I'd go for:

1.Corbs
2.Hartley
3.Cole
4.Lawes
5.Palmer
6.Croft
7.Robshaw
8. Morgan

9.Dickson
10.Hodgson

11.Ashton
12.Barritt
13.Tuilagi
14.Strettle
15.Foden

I do think Ashtons struggling without Flood or Wilko at 10 though. Poor as our attack has been of late one strong point has been Ashton's play of the shoulder of those two.

Hodgson and Flood will complement each other nicely from the bench. As long as nobody gets the insane idea of trying Flood at 12 again, we'll be fine.

miteyironpaw wrote:We're yet to see the backline in action, the conditions have prohibited that so far.

There really does seem to be a collective amnesia going on here - collective amnesia or a deliberate rewriting of history. There was nothing wrong with the conditions at Murrayfield. It wasn't even raining!

luckless_pedestrian wrote:

miteyironpaw wrote:We're yet to see the backline in action, the conditions have prohibited that so far.

There really does seem to be a collective amnesia going on here - collective amnesia or a deliberate rewriting of history. There was nothing wrong with the conditions at Murrayfield. It wasn't even raining!

The conditions were fine, agree 100%. I more think that playing in Scotland in Scotland makes for a very difficult game to get any rythem. Thats what i was refeering to, not the conditions.

Although he's a quality player, people seem to be putting an awful amount of faith in Tuilagi.

Yes he's a big , fast ball carrier and can be good in defence he's not going to be able to tackle the entire Welsh backline. Yes and his midfield partner will be marking JD2 and Roberts but what about North,Cuthbert, Faletau ? You also have Priestland who is decepetively big and powerful plus Mike Phillips who can play like an extra centre/flanker.

I'm not be any means England can;t counter the Welsh gameplan but a lot of confidence seems to rest on someone who hasn't played a test match in a long time

Tuilagi is powerful and has great sublime skills, but I see him like an early Nonu, or Umaga, or Toeava now; he often beats a defender, breaks the line, busts into space and then loses a bit of composure, turns the ball over, makes a rash 5% offload or kicks the ball away poorly. I think he still needs a few seasons to be the finished article and come to the top of his powers.

I've been convinced by all the compelling arguments here that England may not be good enough this time around. It will be a miracle if we win and these guys will have to play out of their skins. If Tuilagi can show a glimpse of the player he'll be in a few years, then maybe we might stand a chance.

You've gone too far the other way in your assessment of England's chances, Mitey. It won't be a miracle if England win. A lot of people are making Wales favourites, but England winning at Twickenham? Never a surprise.

The conditions for the weekend look a bit dicey, we'll be above freezing point as a nice change, but with showers likely it makes me wonder who will be suited most by a muddy track?

Traditionally a mud bath would have been Wales' worst nightmare with England's beheamoth fowards dominating possession and slowly mauling into penalty/drop goal range.

I wonder if both teams will back themselves to play an expansive game in poor conditions, and which team genuinely has the players to pull that off effectively?

Surely in bad weather, the lineout will become even more important. I wonder if the potential for dire conditions might affect the match day selections? Maybe a juggernaught midfield over a rapier, but then, goal kicking options for England will be even more vital (as might the charge down game of Hodgson).

The England scrum has been far from bad for the last couple of seasons. For the record I don't recall anyone bar perhaps the odd WUM or two degrading that area of England's game. They now have considerable strength in depth at loosehead, though not so much at tighthead, and I certainly can't remember anyone dominating them in the scrum recently.

I think if Jenkins and Jones can both stay fit the scrum'll be a stalemate, it usually is when England and Wales can field first choice front rows.

It's everywhere else that England will get sliced and diced

Knowsit17 wrote:They now have considerable strength in depth at loosehead, though not so much at tighthead, and I certainly can't remember anyone dominating them in the scrum recently.

I wouldn't say our depth is much better at loosehead than tighthead. Sheridan is off to France, Stevens is more comfortable at 3, and as much as I think Joe Marler's scrummaging is very underrated he does still have zero caps.

Knowsit17 wrote:
I think if Jenkins and Jones can both stay fit the scrum'll be a stalemate, it usually is when England and Wales can field first choice front rows.

It's everywhere else that England will get sliced and diced

Got to agree with that being realistic. Don't think it'll be a thrashing by any means as Twickers does make a difference (all 6N teams are strong at home!) but whatever the conditions I fear Wales are simply a better team at the moment.

With ugly conditions most likely (i.e. rainy,windy,cold,snowing... basically an old England packs wet dream!) it will be down to the forwards and in this regard Wales have us. Scrum time should be even but in the loose Jenkins/Jones are definitely amongst the best props in the world,second rows will be evenly matched with Wyn Jones back and Wales back row is exceptional especially with Warburton in it.

As for the backs Wales have it in every position on form if North is fit. Roberts/Davies are now a formidable partnership, Halfpenny is Lions FB currently for me and North/Cuthbert are both brilliant prospects. Priestland is slightly of form but still getting their backs moving well. As for Phillips whilst excellent going forward and chucking the ball around if conditions are bad we've got to target him as he can struggle if short of time.

Line-out is only real area of weakness I can see even with Wyn Jones back - is Rees confirmed as still injured anyone? That's why I'd pick Croft,Lawes and Palmer to really target the line-out and disrupt some of their ball.

That's my hat back in the ring anyway!

Hibbard will prob be in , Rees is 50/50

So after a match where the Welsh scrum was dominant, busting up the English front row on three occassions, winning two penalties and driving the opposition back. I wonder if the OP is prepared to take back his comments directed at me and this whole thread he dedicated to ridiculing my opinion that the English front row was weaker than the welsh?

Such a comprehensive drubbing by the welsh scrum completly vindicated my points of view and in such a tight game was a real factor in the Welsh victory.

Wales were supposed to "smash" and "humiliate" England, and in the end needed Walsh and some Scottish TMO to spare their blushes.

Is this really the best you can do TO?

Why all the anxiety? You won (just), not happy with it? Wanted more?

Me Im happy with the win, dissapointed at the performance but ive credited England for shutting down the welsh attack. However a whole thread dedicated to attacking the opinion that the welsh front row was going to have the edge when actually the welsh did clearly have the edge. Just wondering if the OP and others were men enough to admit they were wrong espescially given some of the bile directed at me in the thread.

oooh ! T.O. such righteous indignation ! Look mate you won, well done.

Hey this isnt about the win, the match was tight, great contest, great intensity brilliant spectable of rugby. This is about the OP and the mindless attack that was directed at me over the scrum issue.

The Welsh scrum was causing Corbs trouble early on, but I thought they were on terms most of the game?
Think Walsh had a good game in general and the few errors he made were in favour of England in my humble...
Really enjoyed the game (my nerves didn't) and I think the end result was a fair reflection on the game. Try or no try? Doesn't matter - Flood would have missed the conversion - deliberately as a gentleman. Same way England let Wales keep the ball for 10 minutes when the Welsh player was wrongly sent off. It was the right thing to do!

Tycroes, can't you just send the OP an email?

or get a room with him / her ?