So apprently 10 man rugby isnt a dead concept

But will England be able to out South Africa South Africa this summer and even get a win somehere?

Boring, one dimensional, wasting their talent out wide and coming off the back of there best 6 nations for 9 years. A side thats playing exactly the way the Aussie coaches keep saying they shouldnt.

Im mildly confused by the new England. The theory always was that the conservative Johnssn was holding back a pool of youngsters who would step in and play wonderful free flowing off the cuff rugby and cut the world apart with their cavalier attitude. The reality appears to be that he was holding England back from being a ruthless kick and scrum machine with two hopelessly uncreative centers. Play it tight, force the opposition to take risks by winning the goal kicking contest, hope to scratch some tries from forward power and turnovers.
This isnt a side thats going to score wonderful tries from intricate back play. But it just slaughtered Ireland, even more so than Ciprianis high Noon show 4 years ago.

Is this side the really worthy of optimism or in 9 months time will we be depressed by the borefest and be watching them getting beaten at home 32 - 9 by SANZAR yet again?
Maybe I should be really excited by the potential of a side that just won big without using 3 of their players at all. If they can start getting the back 3 in the game as well then maybe just maybe. Get the half backs to run more ( see how much that try meant to Youngs...his only carry of the game). Sides will know what to expect from England now, a plan B would be good.

Hats off to Lancaster, you cant ask more than what hes achieved. Even if it was a bit lucky and Ireland werent trying etc

Yes it would be nice to see something from the backs at some point. Stupid thing is last year we were scoring lots of tries and they were pretty much all from the backs.

international rugby is in a trough when it comes to attacking creative rugby.

look at france today. absolutely daft drop goal attempts and a fly half who excels in kicking the ball away to nobody in particular. madness.

irelands sole attacking tactic is to kick the ball up in the air for kearney to catch it.

england have done quite well in attack at times but didnt need to attack today as they were so dominant at scrum time and in contact. end of the day they walloped us so surely job done

wales deservedly won the slam but did not play much vintage stuff throughout. they have enormous fast backs who will not beat you by sleight of hand but usually by a combination of brawn and pace. also make less mistakes in possession than other teams

a poor tournament but at least the best side won. credit to gatland and the welsh

From an English point of view, a pretty good tournament, and much better than expected.

Regarding today's game, as has been pointed out, both sides appeared to be dealing with the proverbial bar of soap, so England simply did the practical thing by taking advantage where they had it.

Credit to England for a well structured gameplan and for finding some team ethic after a shocking RWC. I thought they were worthy 2nd placers seriously though, Lancaster looks the real deal, a genuine thinker and coach, not a personality. Best I've seen england play in a while. If only Farrell and Morgan were Welsh . Considering this squad is 5 games in the making there would appear to be bright times ahead if good decisions are made now.

All I can say now is .... I can't wait for next years' Lions tour

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:But will England be able to out South Africa South Africa this summer and even get a win somehere?

Boring, one dimensional, wasting their talent out wide and coming off the back of there best 6 nations for 9 years. A side thats playing exactly the way the Aussie coaches keep saying they shouldnt.

Im mildly confused by the new England. The theory always was that the conservative Johnssn was holding back a pool of youngsters who would step in and play wonderful free flowing off the cuff rugby and cut the world apart with their cavalier attitude. The reality appears to be that he was holding England back from being a ruthless kick and scrum machine with two hopelessly uncreative centers. Play it tight, force the opposition to take risks by winning the goal kicking contest, hope to scratch some tries from forward power and turnovers.
This isnt a side thats going to score wonderful tries from intricate back play. But it just slaughtered Ireland, even more so than Ciprianis high Noon show 4 years ago.

Is this side the really worthy of optimism or in 9 months time will we be depressed by the borefest and be watching them getting beaten at home 32 - 9 by SANZAR yet again?
Maybe I should be really excited by the potential of a side that just won big without using 3 of their players at all. If they can start getting the back 3 in the game as well then maybe just maybe. Get the half backs to run more ( see how much that try meant to Youngs...his only carry of the game). Sides will know what to expect from England now, a plan B would be good.

Hats off to Lancaster, you cant ask more than what hes achieved. Even if it was a bit lucky and Ireland werent trying etc

You know what, and i don't mean to be offensive but your house must be the most depressing place to live. Do you ever have anything positive to say? all your posts are so negative!

Peter has been angry about this change from the start, seems to sticking to his guns even when all the evidence points to a young side with huge potential.

They are right to get it right with a simple game in slippery conditions. Take it on when it's there but it wasnt today.

psw - do you honestly believe that SL was lucky or that ireland didnt try- or was that you being sarchy?

I would hope its the later- however your post is so depressing i am not sure!

this team has also scored 6 to 1 tries against france and ireland- its not void of attacking ability, looked far better than both sides in fairness- the only team that really looked void of attack was france today!!

Offcourse france are a team that never get judged on a single performnace like other teams.. there get judged on what 'they may do' or 'what they can do'!! lol- which offcourse never happens anyway, well no more than other teams produce great performances anyway!

France today were so far away from their natural game. When they did look to play with pace and move the ball they looked dangerous. Had they done that all game instead of beauxis Kicking everything he could the result could have been different more tries would have been scored by both sides.

At the moment most teams agasint the welsh closed them down and played territory behind a blitz defence. Scotland England France and Italy all had a game plan designed to close the welsh down and play off mistakes. The only team to actually run at us and take us on probably should have beaten us. The rest were just efforts in damage control and sacrificed the initiative.

Tycoes what natural game is that then lol

there seems to be a common myth about France, dating back to the days where Sella, Blanco and cie were playing (or maybe Castaignede). They haven't been this free-flowing side for many years now. Today was dire.

England played ten-man rugby today because the conditions and the way the game was going (scrum absolutely demolishing their opponents) dictated that's what they should do. Nothing wrong with that, it's called being smart. They created plenty last week I thought (how many other sides scored three tries against France this tournament - oh yeah that's right, none!)

Well Mysti the French have always been off the cuff attackers who come at you in waves and overwhelm you. This has not been the case now for a couple of years and Im not sure why as they certainly have the players who can do it.

TycroesOsprey wrote:Well Mysti the French have always been off the cuff attackers who come at you in waves and overwhelm you. This has not been the case now for a couple of years and Im not sure why as they certainly have the players who can do it.

hasn't been the case since about 03 really, all because of one lost semi in poor conditions against an England side with a brilliant pack (after which Laporte switched to more conservative tactics, and France haven't really re-discovered the "French flair" since)

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

TycroesOsprey wrote:Well Mysti the French have always been off the cuff attackers who come at you in waves and overwhelm you. This has not been the case now for a couple of years and Im not sure why as they certainly have the players who can do it.

hasn't been the case since about 03 really, all because of one lost semi in poor conditions against an England side with a brilliant pack (after which Laporte switched to more conservative tactics, and France haven't really re-discovered the "French flair" since)

Not really France won the Slam in 2010 playing fantastic rugby that combined their normal flair with pragmatism. Since then they have fallen apart but up till 2010 they were still deadly on the counter. If you look at the players they have they should be blowing teams away and its just not happening. Whilst I thought Marc Lievremont was a mentalist and clearly insania I rate PSA and expected more from his French team.

As long as there is an England there will be a chance for 10 man Rugby.

Well Doctor when you have 15 useless players on the field like Ireland did today, 10 man rugby could be seen as limiting the damage!

Mate, I do think the weather made a lot of players on both sides look pretty poor. But in weather like that 10 man Rugby is the only way to play. And I was actually shocked how well England played it. And also shocked how much Ireland went backwards. Haven't seen that done to Ireland in a long time, if ever.

TycroesOsprey wrote:Well Mysti the French have always been off the cuff attackers who come at you in waves and overwhelm you. This has not been the case now for a couple of years and Im not sure why as they certainly have the players who can do it.

Totally agree. Saint Andre is a Kidney-like coach. It goes completely against their natural grain and it shows. Their fans will not put up it with for too long. Unlike the Irish, who seem to revel in it.

As for England, I really think they have the basis of a great young team. Really need to look at their centre-pairing though.Tuilagi is a loose-cannon. Farrell has been a great find at this level. So cool. So effective. Need to stick with Youngs imo. He makes ye far more potent in attack. Morgan was superb as well. Cole, Corbisiero and Hartley ate our frontrow up. NO one will bully those 3. Including the Saffers.

Be positive England, I think ye are fast heading in the right direction.

Believe.

France seem stuck in the loop England have been for most of the last decade. They seem to be stuck in a half way house between "earning the right to go out wide" and bad kicking not allowing them to do that.
Like any gameplan it requires good execution, and that what we saw from England this weekend.
Equally when they were playing fast loose and free 18 months ago we saw that at home to Aus but not against SA where they were simply bullied out the game and their attacking play fell apart.
However you are going to play it helps if you play well

Flood on the bench, that should be Plan B. The heart of the best (attacking) rugby we've played since 2001/2. Farrell has shown up well and if this is our game plan so be it. But Flood should be there as another game-breaker (along with Youngs).

england kicked the ball very well we kicked it terribly. nothing wrong with the English tactics at all

i would fancy england to beat us on a dry day in an attacking game also given our current malaise. France were even worse than we were in terms of kicking. at least trinh duc can get a backline moving. If he finished at 10 they could have won. beauxis was picked to kick but was atrocious. drop goal attempts were laughable.

Gibson, I maybe a million miles off with this, but I`m sensing you may not be Deccie`s number 1 fan, but agree with about England, they played the right rugby to win each match and played some great attacking 15 man rugby against Wales but perhaps a little unluckily came up a tad short on the day.
BTW, Ireland have not become a bad side overnight, but it has highlighted just how influential BOD and POC are. I actually think that Kidney`s done a good job as Ireland are always there or there about in whatever tourno they`re playing in and that could not be said 10 years ago.

Peter,

You're very aniti Lancaster so you will pick up on the negativity,

Whilst you rightly highlight the lack of creativity...you miss out that our pack has finally started to show the authority it was once feared for.

Our props are performing like extra flankers in loose...Croft is being allowed to play to his strenghts and but for a wet ball would have scored again.

You miss that Foden is still hugely involved...

Lets see who gets the post...i hope it is Lancaster and he can choose his coaches.

Lets see how the progression we have taken in 8 weeks...continues in the summer to SA...when Farrell will have Burns, Ford etc challenging him.

Its not all bleak.

Gibson wrote:

TycroesOsprey wrote:Well Mysti the French have always been off the cuff attackers who come at you in waves and overwhelm you. This has not been the case now for a couple of years and Im not sure why as they certainly have the players who can do it.

Totally agree. Saint Andre is a Kidney-like coach. It goes completely against their natural grain and it shows. Their fans will not put up it with for too long. Unlike the Irish, who seem to revel in it.

As for England, I really think they have the basis of a great young team. Really need to look at their centre-pairing though.Tuilagi is a loose-cannon. Farrell has been a great find at this level. So cool. So effective. Need to stick with Youngs imo. He makes ye far more potent in attack. Morgan was superb as well. Cole, Corbisiero and Hartley ate our frontrow up. NO one will bully those 3. Including the Saffers.

Be positive England, I think ye are fast heading in the right direction.

Believe.

Top post, but pretty much all of the Irish posters have been very magnanimous. We could probably learn a thing or two about that!

As for the game, hmm, i don't want to sound overly negative, or patronising given we won pretty well...but i still think we look very limited in our back play. And i also think there are a number of areas we are still way off most teams. Farrell is great kicking from the T, and has brilliant defence, but we're still offering nothing outside of him. When your backline rushed up on ours (something i felt you should have done more against the big Welsh backs), we got nowhere. We couldn't seem to notice this and adapt by playing flatter or chipping over the top. I actually thought your defence in the backline looked the best it has all tournament.

Also, there is absolutely no way we would have won by that margin if Ross hadn't gone off. Until then it was pretty even in the scrum and pack in general. I can't think of a game when a substitution made a bigger impact. Our pack was pretty good outside of the scrum, but i still think we were second best at the ruck, and even in the mauls. We rarely produced quick ball at ruck time, although we did affect a few more turnovers than i thought we would.

All in all, the teams are very evenly matched. But with POC, Ross and BOD, in better conditions, this would have been a very different game. The big issue for Ireland is clearly depth, and i would argue, Kidney's failure to pick a style of play that suits your players.

I'm encouraged by our pack in general throughout the tournament, and our set piece work. I think our rucking is improving but still has miles to go. Our defence has been pretty damn good and our discipline excellent. BUT - our creativity and decision making is still pretty damn poor, and we are still failing to utilise some of our more threatening backs. All in all, some progress, but i think we will need to see more changes in both personnel and approach before we can really kick on.

Oh, and Ben Morgan was immense, delighted we can now hopefully put that lumbering turd Easter behind us.

If you listen to Nick Mallet, he will tell you the best attacking ball comes from a scrum. You have 8 defenders pulled into a lager having to bind for a scrum.

Now when you look at what the england scrum did yesterday and considering that they usually do have a strong pack of forwards this platform of attack is under utilised by them.

The next best fixed phase to score attack from is the back ball of a line out, the halfback is an extra attacker as he can get around the back of a line out rather quickly, I don't think england has a great line out, I honestly don't rate Botha.

The most obvious way to build momentum an rythm in attack is quick ruck ball, yesterday england proved with all the dominance that they had in their pack, that they are woefully conservative when it comes to rucks, now I understand when they are in their 22 they want to ensure the ball is secured, but there was one or two occasions where Ireland had enough time and opportunity to attack the slow ruck ball, and it caused turn overs.

The next and most likely most used opportunity to attack is quick turn over ball to counter attack with. England gets most of their tries from this as individual brilliance can be most effective here as they aren't currently gelling enough on attack.

Then the offload into space, Wales has shown the most capability to get a runner into space and then offload the short ball, I think they scored a fair few tries that way.

And then of course the up and under, overly utilised by SA in the past few years, England for some reason hasn't been using this very often, I saw Wales use this more than any other 6 nations team, especially yesterday.

no matter which way a team chooses to attack, the "ten man" concept is still as vital as ever, not only for those attacks from tight phases, but securing possession is more vital now than ever before.

biltongbek wrote:If you listen to Nick Mallet, he will tell you the best attacking ball comes from a scrum. You have 8 defenders pulled into a lager having to bind for a scrum.

Thats just reminded me of a comment from and Ireland team ( Australian) coach before the tournament where he claimed that their statistics had shown that attacking moves almost never come to much direct from a scrum.

And to be fair in this game they didnt either. How many good attacking moves did England generate from all their set piece dominance?
however by not being able to scrummage properly Ireland did concede enough penalties to lose the game regardless. perhaps something he shouldve thought about.