Stuart Lancaster

so what do we think then?

will he get the job or wont he?

IMO i think he should be given a chance, think about where the side was after the world cup, we are improving the new players he has brought in are doing well, and i think he should get a go.

I'd say yes. If he doesn't it just raises the question what more can a candidate do other than win the Slam?

Forget Nick Mallett, you have a tried and tested coach now in Lancaster. It'll be a travesty if the RFU find some excuse not to give him the job.

It's been a very impressive performance by everyone involved. The players are definitely behind him 100% and have raised their game another notch every game.

It surely must be Lancaster's job now and if Farrell won't be involved there's the chance of taking on a top flight attack coach which would really complete the picture.

This is the RFU you are talking about, travesty is term they do not understand, a bit like loyalty, wisdom, talent.

Imagine the corporate faces if their high powered head hunters don't get their fee. What did they lavish all the entertainment on the RFU version of the "bankers" for. They will find an excuse not to give it to SL.

They have already started the excuse that they need someone with internaltional experience, more than John Kirwin has anyway.

SL has on 5 games.

Lancaster has donbe a fantastic job in getting pride back into English rugby. The big question the selection panel have to ask is whether he has the vision to take the next step.

We have concentrated on defence, which makes complete sense at this stage of the development. Especially as Wales have just won teh slam on the back of the tournaments best defence. (Yes they can attack, though in a much more direct and physical way than their predescessors).

What England have yet to show has been a coherent attacking plan. I am not expecting them to be playing champagne rugby, but you have to have some sort of idea how you will attack. A gameplan of solid defence and harrying mistakes from opponents can only go so far.

If Lancaster has a clear vision of how England can progress and a sensible plan to achieve it, then I say give him the job.

I said he should have been given it even before the 6 nations and nothing has changed my opinion.

If the RFU decide not to give it to him then them as a governing body need to be looked at.

Lancaster as got them back as a team, playing well and disciplined, key elements that were sorely missing in NZ.

He has introduced youngsters to the set up and they have rewarded him with very good performances.

Lets say Mallet gets the job, then he is going to want to come in and do it his way etc which could end up putting England back to square one again.

If you don't want him can we have him ?

Listening to Dallaigo today saying that SL shoukd be given the job, winning 4 out of 5 games.

If Stuart Lancaster would like another High profile coach (Nick Mallet) to work along side of him then i dont see any thing wrong about that.

I do believe that Stuart Lancaster should get the job as full time coach.

Now reagrding Lolls,idea that SL might like to work with a High Profile coach, all well and good, but the question would have to be asked, WHO WOULD BE IN CHARGE? SL or the HIGH PROFILE COACH?

On balance I would say yes, he's done a highly deserving job so far.

My concern is that although he looks very capable of sorting out the basics and building blocks, not to mention the spirit and resolve, I have doubts about his ability and instincts to take us beyond that and develop the more complex, incisive aspects of our play.

Mind you, I'm not so certain Mallett would do any better in that regard either. The man I initially wanted (Kirwan) is out of the running, but maybe he could be convinced to come into the setup as attack coach. Failing that, last week Wayne Smith said he is interested in doing so.

I have a feeling SL would be head hunted by some other union on the strength of this performance if he does not get the job. However I do think his Saxons experience and knowledge working with young EQ players is why he's been so successful in bringing the team through, something that would not translate quickly in another set up.

niwatts wrote:On balance I would say yes, he's done a highly deserving job so far.

My concern is that although he looks very capable of sorting out the basics and building blocks, not to mention the spirit and resolve, I have doubts about his ability and instincts to take us beyond that and develop the more complex, incisive aspects of our play.

Mind you, I'm not so certain Mallett would do any better in that regard either. The man I initially wanted (Kirwan) is out of the running, but maybe he could be convinced to come into the setup as attack coach. Failing that, last week Wayne Smith said he is interested in doing so.

If we can get someone like Smith onboard that would be great.

From what I understand he previously said he wouldnt be interested if he didnt know who else was he would be working with and have confidence in them and the surrounding structure.
I hope this game has shown we can have faith in Lancaster and his team, and that the side has the fundamental building blocks in place.

Despite the slow start, loss to Wales, and limitations of this side I am thoroughly behind Lancaster now. Can pretty much assume the entire side ( except the wingers) are too.

Lancaster should be given the job, who else in the world would of acheived the same turn around that he has this 6N. What the RFU has to understand is that the next 7 games apart from Fiji (3 in SA then the 3 big boys plus fiji in the Autumn) Engalnd could loose all 6 and beat Fiji, would this be a reflection on Lancaster NO, I doubt many counries would acheive 7 from 7 with these fixtures let alone win half of them!!! I dont think so, give him the reigns, he has started the job and things look brighter than thery have for a very long rime. My concern is that who will work with him, I would keep faith with Rowntree who has turned Englands scrum and fowards around, if Farrell does go back and stay at Sarries, who would we bring in to work along side him, I would like to see Smith but would he want another No2 job????

VIVA LANCASTER..... but he RFU will over look him if it is what we the paying public want ....

Very interesting that the RFU is now coming under a lot of pressure to hire him rather than a marquee name - made all the worse by players chatting to the press and saying that they all want Stuart. Looks a bit like a 'no-win' situation for Rob Andrew in that respect.

Lovely problem to have though.

A more interesting question for me with my one eye is whether if they go for Mallet, Lancaster would consider taking the Scotland job.
There is a real danger that he may not and would rather just continue with the Saxons.

Of course he should be given the job. He has got the team behind him, he has outwitted an experienced coach in Kidney and has overseen an England team that has improved immensly under him.

Personally I still think Mallett is the best man for the job. I wouldn't say I'm an ENG fan but as an expat I do follow all home nations and still think whilst Lancaster has done a good and admiral job, the way ENG have played looks rather limited.. I can't see the same tactics ever troubling anyone outside of the 6N... well bar the likes of Namibia.

England in attack look pretty easy to read... most of their tries either vs. SCO, FRA or IRE came off the oppositions mistakes, scrums, charge downs or turnovers... rather than their own offensive play.

Yesterdays game was pretty dire to watch.... half the time the ENG backs were standing still when receiving the ball and often resulted to kicking high balls/for territory etc.... no one in 3Ns will be quaking in their boots (well bar Aus given ENG pack admiral pack display) thats for sure.

Mallett's record speaks for itself.... he did very well with Italy (minus the Bergamasco incident) and is remembered in SA as one of their best ever coaches.
He sounds like he wants the job, he's an Englishman (don't let the accent fool you) and he still has the hunger for a real crack at a RWC.

Everyone says how far ENG have come but lets take a reality check.... ENG were not a bad side when he took over... the were reigning 6N champions and the core of players he has used were blooded under Johnson.

Its may be difficult to drop Lancaster but its business, not personal.... the RFU should be looking to appoint the man most capable of bringing the RWC to ENG... and in my mind that would be Mallett.

I think we are forgetting that we've had the Blackett Report and wholesale bloodletting at HQ. It's new CEO and management team and they, like Lancaster, should be given a chance to show what they can do. I have no problem with the process being gone through fully and properly and not rushed.

On the other hand, if they don't appoint Lancaster I shall be leading the charge to boil them in oil on Tower Green.

If Lancaster stays we need an attack coach (and a defence coach if the RFU can't get Farrell back). Our scrum and defence were good yesterday (and have been all tournament), we just need that attack coach to take the next step.

I'd like Lancaster to be given the job full time, with maybe Graham Henry to come in, in some kind of advisory role to help him along.

England would be mad to alter this coaching set up, it's done brilliantly.

I definitely think he should be given the job. He has formed his own squad, has a vision for the future with the younger players and the players seem to have responded.

Bringing in a new coach, after being just a tv replay away from a possible championship, may only serve to upset the current squad.