Is the case for Stuart Lancaster unanswerable?

First topic message reminder :

i.e. has he yet done enough to be handed the Head coach job?

Seemingly (so far) in a complete reversal of last year's 6Ns display of form and style, England have been incrementally getting better.

At what point will/should he be appointed permanently?

Where are the three coaches, Mallander has ruled himself out (big sigh of relief from Franklins Gardens).

Mallett may have a lot more international experience with SA and Italy, but what has he won............... not a lot that I know of.

Lancaster on the other hand has had a series of wins at Saxons level with Churchill Cups etc. and that with what is effectively a scratch side playing entertaining rugby, not just a powerhouse pack.

I am not sure what happens at Saxons level regading backs coaches, but whoever ran that managed to do it very well with a minimum of time spent with teh players.

It seems to be going well and I do think England will beat Ireland. So what's the point ditching him for bigger name? What if they ditch a guy who seems to be doing a decent job, then Mallet comes in and it doesn't work out? I'd stick with Lancaster as long as some deep flaws aren't exposed by Ireland.

Feckless Rogue wrote:It seems to be going well and I do think England will beat Ireland. So what's the point ditching him for bigger name? What if they ditch a guy who seems to be doing a decent job, then Mallet comes in and it doesn't work out? I'd stick with Lancaster as long as some deep flaws aren't exposed by Ireland.

I agree with you on each of your points Feckless.

My major concern is that it would be an interim RFU board appointment of a permanent management team. That could cause a bit a destabilising effect - especially if Lancaster's spring bloom wilts and fades in the summer and autumn. Much best imo to hold the final permanent appointment to be made by the board that will ultimately have to carry the can to 2015 and beyond.

[ed. p.s. Could Saturday's result be as important to Kidney as it is for Lancaster?]

I agree with Feckless

England have improved by the game in this tournament. Perhaps there wasn't much improvement between the Scotland and Italy matches but the latter wwas played in the aftermath of a blizzard. 3 away wins is impressive in anyones books and a different bounce of the ball could have seen us playing for a GS this weekend. However, whilst there has been progress, there are plenty of worries as well.

Personally I disagree with Maes, and think that SL is building for the future. He has selected new caps in several key positions and stuck with OF when he could have easily brought in Flood.

Mallet is undoubtedly a big name coach but will the RFU risk replacing someone who's team is improving by the game and take the risk of going back to square one?

It will probably prove a moot point anyway as the RFU will probably collapse with in fighting again and they will end up choosing Steve Borthwick as head coach and Owen Farrel as backs and forwards coach

Portnoy wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

TycroesOsprey wrote:Whilst I think he is the best man for the job, England are going to go to Mallett.

I have that feeling aswell...

So do I. And I really think that it doesn't have to be an Englishman to be an English manager. Just like in football, it would have to be a man who raised on an understanding of the English game - like Martin O'Neill in footy.

Unfortunately Mallet doesn't fit the bill.

Me also. I get the feeling the RFU are going to go "Ta da! Look what we've come up with! I bet you're all excited!". I respect Mallett, but he's not right for the job. I'm not saying Lancaster is The Great Redeemer, but he deserves a good crack based on what he's done so far.

Here here

Portnoy wrote:p.s. Could Saturday's result be as important to Kidney as it is for Lancaster?]

Kidney's position doesn't seem to be under pressure at all. I think giving him a 2 year contract extension before the RWC failure was a mistake. It seems he learned little from that failure and proceeded to use exactly the same tactics that lost us the game to Wales at the RWC, and got the same result. We haven't challenged for the title in this 6 Nations.

But it seems that because he won a Grand Slam in 2009 and has won the HEC with Munster, he's untouchable. The IRFU will put up with the underperforming team and many defeats until the contract runs it's course. I think it's 18 months of the same from Ireland before we can really look forward.

To use an earlier posters apt phrase ' the foundations are being built' - great analogy. Others criticise the lack of flashy décor, and champagne. Or that the house is a temporary shack only built for each game. What complete and utter tosh. SL has done a great job in the short space of time available. Choosing many brand new and experimental materials to work with (lack of player cap 'experience' has also come up) and the ultimate sin - attempting of course to win each game - and why not ?
Gatland has said you need to earn the right to go wide and play champagne. Gatland is correct, and England are still making good progress to earning that right. OP question: has he done enough: 'yes so far'. I think SL has earnt the right to have a go this summer, then we can better judge how his building is progressing. I always thought the original HQ timetable was a bit phony, perhaps to demonstrate 'brisk & decisive' management at HQ. I'm really thinking why the frantic phony rush ?
SLs performance justifies an extension to the timeline to get a proper judgement on his 'house' progress after the tour.
I hope Ritchie is broad minded enough to recognise this and act accordingly.

Choosing many brand new and experimental materials to work with

New caps so far this tournament; Webber, Parling, Dowson, Morgan, Dickson, Farrell and Barritt. All had been included in previous first team squads but not fielded apart from Dickson, Farrell and Morgan. Dickson had played for the Saxons but was injured last summer so a call up went begging, Morgan refused a Saxons call up and Farrell was even more of a work in progress last season than he is now. Lancaster is continuing the production line that he and Johnno started to form in the last couple of years of Johnno's reign. We all knew the RWC would come to soon and that Johnno didn't have the time to clear away all the dead wood he needed too.

Lancaster had done some very positive things and is utilising the resources he has. Would the team have been quite so young had Thompson not retired and Deacon not been injured (Sheridan as well). Blooding youngsters for the sake of it isn't positive but the structures he is building aren't bad though certainly nothing to brag about. The attack is currently better than Italy's and probably France but worse than that offered by the other nations. The defence is good but Scotland, Wales and Ireland offer better and the kicking game is becomming long and aimless again and if it remains as bad as it was against Italy will be the worst in the 6N.

Lancaster may remain but someone needs to insist he brings in better coaches. Likewise if Mallet comes in the RFU still need to bring in the cream of the AP coaching crop. Number 1 on that list should be Gustard from Sarries because he has turned their defence into a weapon.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Number 1 on that list should be Gustard from Sarries because he has turned their defence into a weapon.

Completely off topic - but I remember watching his dad on the wing when I was a kid. Unlike Paul, not a man you would have considered as a defence coach.

Ritchie provides a masterclass in obfuscation:
http://www.espnscrum.com/six-nations-2012/rugby/story/161073.html

How to say nothing in the maximum amount of waffle.

Kinnock would be pleased with that load of bs.

Adam wrote:maestegmafia, I can't see what point you're trying to make. What choice did Lancaster have? What would you - or indeed the best coach in the world - have done in the same situation?!

He has obviously been 'trying to win', but in the context of the rearguard action he has been fighting I think he has been as progressive as he possibly could be: new caps all over the place, plenty of youth and signs, as each game has gone by, of trying to play some rugby.

...what would you have had the guy do? And to say that he has 'focussed on defence' just because his side have been on the wrong end of possession stats and subsequently had to work their rrses off without the ball all seems a bit bizarre to me.

I'm not convinced he has everything it takes to take the side forward successfully, but in the context of the situation I don't think the best coach in the world would have done much differently, or have done any better

Sorry adam I only just saw your reply to me.

I think Selections like Charlie Hodgson is a good example. Why if Lancaster is looking to the future, or trying to make a positive and decisive change in England's fortunes is he selecting an ageing and frankly hardly inspiring player like Hodgson?

What Hodgson does for England any of the younger guys like Farrell, Burns, Ford and more importantly Flood can do too. In fact all of those players offer the more in their exuberance and more in their future contribution to Englands cause.

Other Examples would be Botha or Dowson similarly their are players that would be more positive, but in Lancasters eyes, he is convinced that they are more risky too.

maestegmafia wrote:

Cowshot wrote:

To a degree you are right but Lancaster is not building foundations, he is trying to win at all costs same as Johnson, Robinson etc.

Well, to a degree you are right. Lancaster has been trying to win the games. But there are a number of comments he made which show he DID make a number of long term decisions in the inerest of English Rugby. First and foremost he made a decision to go with youth, which is why players like Easter have not got a look in (despite being in great form for Quins). That is definitely foundation building. Once the decision to go with youth has been made then there are consequences arising from that which need to be addressed - as of course you know!

Yes but there is a big difference between what a coach with a four year contract does with youth and one who has five games.

Youth selection does not mean that you have to be conservative. Wales, New Zealand and Australia have all integrated a large intake of young players into their squads at different times over the last few years and have tried to introduce those players into the way the coach visualise the team playing.

Lancaster has almost done the opposite and said look we have a bunch of kids the opposition are all better than us so lets focus on defence and hope the opposition make mistakes.

You can't win the RWC in four years time like that. England didn't have their glory years from playing like that. They had a well rounded and adaptable team.

You seem to me to assume that a coach with a temporary contract MUST behave in a certain way. Lancaster, although appointed short term, has gone out of his way to indicate the long term nature of his selections. He did not HAVE to select young. He did, and we could have been looking at wooden spoon if it hadn't worked. This is a man prepared to win or lose it all on a single cast. Hope he gets it.

Cowshot,

I think his tenure will be marked by the next game. Ireland will be a big step. France was a fantastic achievement but it was garnered over a poor French performance, they offered nothing with Beauxis at flyhalf, they fell of tackles like they lacked the passion to represent France, England capitalised on the mistakes well. But England looked like they surprised themselves as much as their fans.

They beat Scotland and italy by scoring from charge downs and lucky bounces.

We have in recent weeks seen markings of a new England and I am sure no one sees England resurrecting their former mantle in world rugby over night. But Lancaster hasn't done anything to guaranty himself the job.

It will be interesting to see who is announced as Johnson's successor and what happens with England in the next RWC cycle.

Whoever takes over still has a lot of hard work to do. The RFU need a man who is experienced and who can take a decisive lead. Lancaster lacks experience, England don't need another head coach who is learning on the job.

maesteg:

Any coach is always assessed on the next and last game.

For the France game - as for the Wales game - the opposition played poorly. Once may be a misfortune. Twice begins to look like carelessness.

I still have Ireland favourites. I've entirely genuinely had the opposition favourites throughout the competition and been delighted by the success of our youngsters. It's been a joy. Although losing, I really enjoyed the England Wales game. All I really need is for you guys to go and whup some Aussie ass.

Cowshot wrote:maesteg:

Any coach is always assessed on the next and last game.

For the France game - as for the Wales game - the opposition played poorly. Once may be a misfortune. Twice begins to look like carelessness.

I still have Ireland favourites. I've entirely genuinely had the opposition favourites throughout the competition and been delighted by the success of our youngsters. It's been a joy. Although losing, I really enjoyed the England Wales game. All I really need is for you guys to go and whup some Aussie ass.

Mate I hope we do too..!

A thought about Lancaster. People have said it appears Lancaster has put together a team going in the right direction. For a newish team to have a good record in the 6 Nations is excellent. However, a year or so ago, most people thought Martin Johnson had the team going in the right direction after those wins over the Wallabies. So how do we really know? Is this a good England team which was one great play by the Welsh away from possibly beating them and competing for the 6 Nations title? Or the team which barely beat Scotland with only 1/3 possession? Unfortunately, we won't know when the coaching decision is made.

I think that the RFU has made a few poor decisions around the coach
1 - hire Johnson
2 - not keep him (he jumped but...)
3 - install and interim coach
the next poor decision they make will be not to keep the interim coach.

England could still win the 6N and are sitting where they have traditionally sat (when known as a good team) that is around 4/5th in the world. I think let SL have a few years in the job.

If you don't want Lancaster Edwards is looking for an assistant...

Mate I hope we do too..!

Call it English arrogance, but I have no doubt you will.

The thing that I noticed about the Welsh victory (and I'm not alone) is that despite a real battering from a side that clearly had a technique worked out to nullify you, you won anyway. At Twickers.

You aren't the finished article. But your lads haven't peaked yet. Gatland and Warburton have them well grounded by the look of it. Good times are now for Welsh Rugby. Enjoy!

Oh, there will be the odd blip along the way. Inevitable. But you've a good side under a good captain. A captain who may turn out to be one of the great ones. We'll see...

I think Eng Ire and Wal aren't that far apart, all moaning and whinging aside. Wales clearly ahead now, but watch out behind you!

This is good for B&I Rugby, I think. 6Ns Rugby has always been as nervy as WC knockout stages, which has served us English well. Now it may do the same for you. Go on boys!

Cowshot wrote:

Mate I hope we do too..!

Call it English arrogance, but I have no doubt you will.

The thing that I noticed about the Welsh victory (and I'm not alone) is that despite a real battering from a side that clearly had a technique worked out to nullify you, you won anyway. At Twickers.

You aren't the finished article. But your lads haven't peaked yet. Gatland and Warburton have them well grounded by the look of it. Good times are now for Welsh Rugby. Enjoy!

Oh, there will be the odd blip along the way. Inevitable. But you've a good side under a good captain. A captain who may turn out to be one of the great ones. We'll see...

I think Eng Ire and Wal aren't that far apart, all moaning and whinging aside. Wales clearly ahead now, but watch out behind you!

This is good for B&I Rugby, I think. 6Ns Rugby has always been as nervy as WC knockout stages, which has served us English well. Now it may do the same for you. Go on boys!

Cheers Cowshot...!

I hope the welsh boys keep everyone as entertained as they do us, about time we got it together, its been rather an interrupted period since the late seventies.