Lancaster's coaching staff

by Portnoy Tue 03 Apr 2012, 1:57 pm

Rowntree is a nailed-on cert

Who else should join him?

Defence, Attack, and possibly special advisor (e.g. SCW).

Any number of coaches will not break the RFU budget...

by wickedwasp Tue 03 Apr 2012, 2:03 pm

I don't think he needs a special advisor. I'd probably just add a good attack coach, Wayne Smith probably.

Four's enough.

by bedfordwelsh Tue 03 Apr 2012, 2:49 pm

Dave Ellis is free now isn't he, hasn't been with France since the WC.

Whats the deal with Farrell is he satying?

by formerly known as Sam Tue 03 Apr 2012, 3:04 pm

The Farrell situation all depends on what Sarries want in regards to compensation for letting him go.

Personally I want either Gustard or if Sarries won't release him then Ellis as defence coach. Then a forward thinking attack coach with a pragmatic edge like Mauger.

by Sgt_Pooly Tue 03 Apr 2012, 3:09 pm

We seriously need a strong attack coach, possibly Wayne Smith. Then work on:

1. Farrell - he doesn't need to kick away so much possession, use your backline!

2. Tuilagi - the few times that you get hands on ball you don't have to look for contact each time. Try passing to the players on your outside, we call them wingers.

by Triangulation Tue 03 Apr 2012, 3:19 pm

Well if you all take a look at the toryograph you will find that Brian Ashton is a possibility to go on tour of SA. I think they're looking at him being in charge of the "dirt trackers".

Importantly Lancaster has signalled that the tour model will be the same as the Lions 2009 model i.e with plenty of cross pollination between the two sides.

All of that sounds very good to me.

by Triangulation Tue 03 Apr 2012, 3:22 pm

Sgt_Pooly wrote:We seriously need a strong attack coach, possibly Wayne Smith. Then work on:

1. Farrell - he doesn't need to kick away so much possession, use your backline!

2. Tuilagi - the few times that you get hands on ball you don't have to look for contact each time. Try passing to the players on your outside, we call them wingers.

Half right on Tuilagi. You are right that he is not inclined to pass the ball very often (perhaps surmising that since he is massive fast and powerful he is always in the better position than the man who would receive the pass Very Happy

)

Where you have it wrong is the seeking contact part. From what i observe he often looks to get on the outside of defenders and into space.

by Portnoy Tue 03 Apr 2012, 3:29 pm

Sgt_Pooly wrote:We seriously need a strong attack coach, possibly Wayne Smith. Then work on:

1. Farrell - he doesn't need to kick away so much possession, use your backline!

2. Tuilagi - the few times that you get hands on ball you don't have to look for contact each time. Try passing to the players on your outside, we call them wingers.

Explains exactly why O. Farrell is not the man for a backs coach job.

p.s. Manu has been known to inadvertently pass the ball outside - such is the paucity of tries scored by Tigers players all over the park from any playing position.

by formerly known as Sam Tue 03 Apr 2012, 3:38 pm

p.s. Manu has been known to inadvertently pass the ball outside - such is the paucity of tries scored by Tigers players all over the park from any playing position.

He passed an awful lot against Worcester, which was slightly annoying because his opposite number Grove had neither the pace not tackling ability to stop him. Manu passes when he has confidence in the player outside him doing more with the ball than he can do himself. Such was the depth and speed (very deep and very slow) of the England back play he decided that actually he'd be better taking the inevitable contact rather than the winger, let's face it the wingers are a couple of stones lighter and similar in terms of pace.

Explains exactly why O. Farrell is not the man for a backs coach job.

Yes, player coach at the age of 20 would be a bad call. Still the selection would be just as bias towards him as when his dad is a coach thumbsup

.

by Triangulation Tue 03 Apr 2012, 3:46 pm

formerly known as Sam wrote:
p.s. Manu has been known to inadvertently pass the ball outside - such is the paucity of tries scored by Tigers players all over the park from any playing position.

He passed an awful lot against Worcester, which was slightly annoying because his opposite number Grove had neither the pace not tackling ability to stop him. Manu passes when he has confidence in the player outside him doing more with the ball than he can do himself. Such was the depth and speed (very deep and very slow) of the England back play he decided that actually he'd be better taking the inevitable contact rather than the winger, let's face it the wingers are a couple of stones lighter and similar in terms of pace.

Explains exactly why O. Farrell is not the man for a backs coach job.

What i said!!

If we can somehow get Ashton running at pace off the shoulders of -

Morgan, Tuilagi and any other linebreakers at our disposal then we will be potent in attack again. But will need more. Much more.

Yes, player coach at the age of 20 would be a bad call. Still the selection would be just as bias towards him as when his dad is a coach .

by Comfort Tue 03 Apr 2012, 3:56 pm

I can see it being

Head coach: Lancaster
Forwards: Rowntree
Attack: Brian Ahton
Defence: Dave Ellis

by damage_13 Tue 03 Apr 2012, 4:01 pm

please no not ellis.

Farrell Snr

with Kirwan as Attack Backs/Coach

with the possibility of an advisor for management in the lead up to the RWC.

by Triangulation Tue 03 Apr 2012, 4:02 pm

Comfort wrote:I can see it being

Head coach: Lancaster
Forwards: Rowntree
Attack: Brian Ahton
Defence: Dave Ellis

No problems with that from me!

Cumbrian WILL be pleased.

by Comfort Tue 03 Apr 2012, 4:11 pm

I dont see any foreign coaches being brought in, Lancaster is putting pride back into the english squad, part of that is his 'hard-working englishman ethos'.

Dave Ellis is a free-agent (and France's defensive patterns have been very good over the last 3/4 years, however, the tackling perhaps hasnt).

Brian Ashton - he knows what it is to coach at the top level with england, and hes never had problems getting a teams backline moving.

Farrell is a maybe, but Sarries will fight hard for some moolah, Kirwans a bit of a pipe-dream if u ask me and I cant see Sarries letting Gustard go either.

Its also a very bad idea to have "someone above him", why is it needed? Why not show some faith in the man who turned England around in such a short space of time and obviously has a very good knowledge of all tiers of English rugby with a clear plan and forward-thinking ideas? No, give him a more experienced coach under him who he can bounce ideas off, dont show a lack of confidence in him as soon as he starts.

That, and if those 4 are together regularly there'll be a lot of opportunity for them to have a brew Very Happy

by bluestonevedder Tue 03 Apr 2012, 4:20 pm

I wouldn't mind seeing Mike Catt as the attack coach

by nobbled Tue 03 Apr 2012, 4:31 pm

I have an issue with Ashton - Balshaw.
Other than that fine.

by Triangulation Tue 03 Apr 2012, 4:38 pm

nobbled wrote:I have an issue with Ashton - Balshaw.
Other than that fine.

Graham Henry also took Balshaw on the Lions tour 2001.....

Ashton was too advanced for us in 2007 and perhaps still is.

He is too far ahead for our more limited playerbots

by damage_13 Tue 03 Apr 2012, 4:51 pm

I vote Brian Moore as the teams guru

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/9178898/England-must-spread-wings-with-coach-Stuart-Lancaster.html

That or head of the RFU or Refs

can you imagine Squeeky's face when he walks into his next performance/going forward meeting and Chairman Moore ... is the Chairman.

by aitchw Tue 03 Apr 2012, 5:01 pm

Brian Ashton would be a good choice for me. With a young side he stands a chance of developing a more self reliant set of backs who will make their own decisions during the game and not follow blindly the formula laid down. We probably all want to see 'heads up' rugby from an England squad and he can help foster that.

Dave Ellis could be really good working with a team that has discipline. The French never have that yet he still did a pretty good job with them.

Rountree has already proved himself.

I think all of them are down to earth, no frills kind of people and will fit in perfectly with Lancaster. I think bringing the squad up to Leeds was genius. Rugby should be about being in touch with it's roots, could have been anywhere, Midlands, South West etc. and it would have worked, he just had contacts here he could use at short notice.

by bedfordwelsh Tue 03 Apr 2012, 8:54 pm

Would Ashton come back into the fold so to speak after the way he was treated.

by majesticimperialman Tue 03 Apr 2012, 10:00 pm

bedfordwelsh wrote:Would Ashton come back into the fold so to speak after the way he was treated.

Bedford i was thinking that very same thing the first time i saw Ashtons name being mentiond.

I think he might consider coming back, now Rob Andrew does not have as mutch power now as he did then.

I think that Lancaster is hoping that Farrel will be brought in full time.

by Geordie Tue 03 Apr 2012, 10:44 pm

Could it be that they will stick with the current set up...of the three of them..

by Portnoy Wed 04 Apr 2012, 8:55 am

When all is said and done, Lancaster is still inexperienced. Does he still need an experienced mentor.

Next up are three matches against the Bokke and few would expect a series win there.

He may benefit from an older, wise head to provide the assistance.

Sir Ian McGeechan (short term) and SCW once the Olympics are over?

by **Ozzy3213** Wed 04 Apr 2012, 9:21 am

Lancaster is his own man and has been given the head honcho role, he will not welcome someone being brought in to 'assist' him over his head.

He has stated that he likes a small close knit coaching team, but recognises that he may need one more coach than he had in the 6 Nations.

Rowntree will be there, Farrell will be there if an agreement can be reached with Saracens.

Ashton is the man to come in as attack coach, with Farrell concentrating on the defence. If Farrell is not available, then it should be Ellis.

by Triangulation Wed 04 Apr 2012, 3:05 pm

I have just got off the phone with Lancaster.

Seems i am the missing peice of the puzzle.

by Geordie Wed 04 Apr 2012, 3:36 pm

Ah of course they need a water boy now johnnys retired... Wink

by killer938 Wed 04 Apr 2012, 4:25 pm

Sam

What do you think of the possibility of trying to get Pat Howard in? I know he has been away for a while but he worked wonders as a player and a coach at Leicester and would bring something very different

by Comfort Wed 04 Apr 2012, 4:27 pm

maybe Lancaster will bring Phil Neville in as motivational coach?

by DaveM Wed 04 Apr 2012, 5:07 pm

Farrell has yet to convince as an attack coach, so bring in one of those. Wayne Smith would bring loads of experience. Having Farrell in charge of the defence is slightly odd as he isn't at Sarries but he can clearly do it and brings much else to the table. He may even learn something from Smith.

by yappysnap Wed 04 Apr 2012, 5:18 pm

Ozzy3213 wrote:Lancaster is his own man and has been given the head honcho role, he will not welcome someone being brought in to 'assist' him over his head.

He has stated that he likes a small close knit coaching team, but recognises that he may need one more coach than he had in the 6 Nations.

Rowntree will be there, Farrell will be there if an agreement can be reached with Saracens.

Ashton is the man to come in as attack coach, with Farrell concentrating on the defence. If Farrell is not available, then it should be Ellis.

Ozzy I agree with that, but you seem very confident. Do you have a source for Ashton coming back?

by aitchw Wed 04 Apr 2012, 5:25 pm

I agree with ozzie. Don't understand the clamour for SCW returning. I really think he's history and should remain so albeit with grateful thanks for proving that it can be done. I don't see Lancaster thanking the RFU if they insist on an appointment that could look like he isn't really the boss. SL comes without any baggage and that should provide a fresh outlook on things so let him get on with it. He does, however, need an alternative to Farrell who I think needs more time as a chief club coach to realise he hasn't got all the skills required to get a backline firing.

by Toohey Wed 04 Apr 2012, 5:27 pm

killer938 wrote:Sam

What do you think of the possibility of trying to get Pat Howard in? I know he has been away for a while but he worked wonders as a player and a coach at Leicester and would bring something very different

Somehow Pat Howard got the general manager job for Cricket Australia.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 04 Apr 2012, 6:56 pm

Ashtons been rumoured in a few places, Guscott mentioned it on his blog too. He wouldve worked directly with Lancaster before.
Personally I think it would be a terrible idea. Hes been away from the top level of the game for 4 years now and was frankly not up to standard when he was in charge of England then.
Things have moved on a lot in this time. Lets not forget how much abuse Johnson got for picking Flood at 12 in the world cup, the position he played under Ashton. The same Ashton who insisted that Ian Balshaw was a world class fullback and definately shouldnt be on the wing, I mean why would your fullback need to be able to catch a high ball, kick it or tackle properly ( but he scored 3 tries in an under 18s game)? The guy who didnt just pick Jamie Noon when no one else was fit ( yeah I know someones going to point out he got a good performance out of him once!)
I know they want some experience but Ashton can barely get out of his mobility scooter these days. His reputation is built on club success a decade ago and work with kids. OK this England squad is probably younger than some of them but I really dont see that hes the guy to bring in fresh innovative ideas suitable for senior internationals.

Get in an Aussie or a Kiwi who will not only bring ideas from the best attacking teams in the world but also a bit of the winning culture. Kirwan, Smith?
Guscott suggested some ARL chap who just retired, hmmm.

by **Ozzy3213** Wed 04 Apr 2012, 10:08 pm

yappysnap wrote:
Ozzy3213 wrote:Lancaster is his own man and has been given the head honcho role, he will not welcome someone being brought in to 'assist' him over his head.

He has stated that he likes a small close knit coaching team, but recognises that he may need one more coach than he had in the 6 Nations.

Rowntree will be there, Farrell will be there if an agreement can be reached with Saracens.

Ashton is the man to come in as attack coach, with Farrell concentrating on the defence. If Farrell is not available, then it should be Ellis.

Ozzy I agree with that, but you seem very confident. Do you have a source for Ashton coming back?

No mate, just strikes me as being someone who Lancaster would see as fitting in with his ethos.

by sugarNspikes Wed 04 Apr 2012, 10:13 pm

Ozzy3213 wrote:Lancaster is his own man and has been given the head honcho role, he will not welcome someone being brought in to 'assist' him over his head.

He has stated that he likes a small close knit coaching team, but recognises that he may need one more coach than he had in the 6 Nations.

Rowntree will be there, Farrell will be there if an agreement can be reached with Saracens.

Ashton is the man to come in as attack coach, with Farrell concentrating on the defence. If Farrell is not available, then it should be Ellis.

I think I agree with all of this.

No-nonsense core with Ashton getting to do what he does best without all the crud that he had to deal with last time. I've been reading his column (in The Independent, I think) and he seems to be talking sense. I don't think he's bearing a grudge.

by killer938 Thu 05 Apr 2012, 8:07 am

Toohey wrote:
killer938 wrote:Sam

What do you think of the possibility of trying to get Pat Howard in? I know he has been away for a while but he worked wonders as a player and a coach at Leicester and would bring something very different

Somehow Pat Howard got the general manager job for Cricket Australia.

Wow, yeh, I had completely forgotten about that. Oh well, we will have him back in rugby whenever he wants.

by damage_13 Thu 05 Apr 2012, 9:51 am

I agree with Seabiscuit, Aston is NOT the person to help England attack, no recent experience, and was crap at it.

Get Kirwan in THAT would be exciting to watch

by Barney McGrew did it Thu 05 Apr 2012, 10:49 am

Important times for my confidence in SL. Can he get us attacking with pace and conviction by involving our back 3 more, can he get Flood in and back to his best (same thing), and can he get a world-class attack coach on board (not Farrell)?

by englandglory4ever Thu 05 Apr 2012, 3:10 pm

Ashton is a mistake imo. He is on record for saying that he doesn't believe in any set moves. He is a 'play it as you see it' merchant. That's when you get everyone looking fazed because they haven't a clue what's going on. To me that's like the socialist agenda. Good on paper but absolute rubbish in practice.

by Triangulation Thu 05 Apr 2012, 3:31 pm

Let's not bring politics into this!!

Ashton is a visionary. Being in a minority of 1 doesnt make him wrong. It might mean he is not fit for purpose through no fault of his own.

He is simply too advanced for our academy bred spoon fed playerbots. Chaps who unfortunately have by and large escaped having to be in the real world of work or had to make decisions.

More's the pity.

The player uprising of RWC2007 consisted of the playerbots saying " tell us what to do!!"

Furthermore our players dont have the skillsets to execute what Ashton is asking of them.

Ashton would have more success in the SH.

Here endeth the lesson.

by aitchw Thu 05 Apr 2012, 3:41 pm

All of which suggests that he needs to work with young players for the most part. It wouldn't take that long to find out if there is enough rugby brain among them for it to work. I'm fed up with the robotic, by the numbers attitude. Players at this level should have enough about them to just go out there and play. The set plays and link routines need still to be there but not the extent that they are so telegraphed as to be useless and when they don't come the players are bereft of ideas.

by Triangulation Thu 05 Apr 2012, 3:49 pm

aitchw wrote:All of which suggests that he needs to work with young players for the most part. It wouldn't take that long to find out if there is enough rugby brain among them for it to work. I'm fed up with the robotic, by the numbers attitude. Players at this level should have enough about them to just go out there and play. The set plays and link routines need still to be there but not the extent that they are so telegraphed as to be useless and when they don't come the players are bereft of ideas.

+1 100% agreed

Its a mindset isnt it. If you become dependent on set plays you stop thinking. You stop making decisions.

Starter plays are ok i suppose as are moves with say 3 or more variations that can all be used depending on how the d is reacting.

Peter Wheeley bin

It is not fair to condemn Ashton for picking balshaw. SCW also picked him as did Sir Graham Henry for the Lions.

Ashton is always going to pick players for what they CAN do rather than non selection based on what they CANNOT do

( and i dont think Balsh was as poor as you make out. I have an image of him scoring winning try on a chip and chase vs Wallabies and taking a cross field chip from JGB in RWC at full pace without breaking stride to score.

Noon - well we all make the odd mistake. Was there really anyone better at the time? Didn't Noon score 3 on debut vs Scotland? Might've contributed.

by Triangulation Thu 05 Apr 2012, 3:51 pm

Visionaries such as Ashton are few and far betwen and are needed in our game. Some of his attacking ideas where apparently "off the wall"

Remember seeing a cross field kick to gangs of waiting chasers.

Unorhodox genius.

Get him working with the young uns

by Triangulation Thu 05 Apr 2012, 3:58 pm

Finally (for now)

Wheeler!!

Lots of 10s are developed at 12 including Dan Carter!!!

Flood played a lot at 12 for Newcastle.

The reasons MJ was knocked for his 10 JGB 12 Flood combo at RWC were that

1. it was felt that Flood was probably more effective than Wilko at 10 in spite of the ireland horror show; AND

2. He had not put flood at 12 for months and months before nor had he paired the two of them like this for months and yet here he was trialling in a RWC QF and not because of injury!!!

by Geordie Thu 05 Apr 2012, 4:51 pm

When Balshaw first got into the England team he was a revelation...his pace etc was electric...

by yappysnap Thu 05 Apr 2012, 4:54 pm

He's been pretty good for Biarritz too...

Tbh I have no idea who'll be attack coach but as long as they do the job well they don't need a big name or massive CV. Just new ideas and a clear plan.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Thu 05 Apr 2012, 4:55 pm

Tri youre of course right. Balshaw was the Lions first choice full back, and Ashton was the best coach England ever had.
His experience of years ago is entirely relevant to the game as its played know which explains why noones offered him a decent job in ages.

He isnt too old for the job, and he definatly knows hows to handle difficult players and doesnt have pet favourites.

Really do we need to be looking back to 80 year old proven failures to help out the gym teacher?

In terms of the whole " natural instincts" thing yes thats all well and good once play is broken. for the most part Englands players even under Lancaster have shown they are pretty decent at turning on the flash stuff once the opportunity has arisen.
the problem has been their unimaginative and simplistic play against set defences that fails to create those opportunities. Thats where the coach is really needed to get in and work with them. If Ashton is a " let the players do their magic" kind of guy then sorry he will not answer that problem. At that level players need plans to unlock defences, its niave to believe otherwise. Up till now England have been largely been relying on forcing mistakes or opportunities presenting themselves and just banging up against the brick wall hoping it will fall down. Im really not conviced that a coach who believes more in individual players skills than the units play is the right man for the job....especially when hes a dinosaur

Lancaster would probably be cacking it if he did get appointed, isnt that how he ended up nabbing Robinsons job?

Well I was proven wrong on Lancaster, but I really would hope they could find someone better than Ashton to take England forward.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Thu 05 Apr 2012, 4:56 pm

Balshaw is and was a good attacking winger, he was however never an international class fullback. Also see Ugo Monye.

by Triangulation Thu 05 Apr 2012, 5:12 pm

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Tri youre of course right. Balshaw was the Lions first choice full back, and Ashton was the best coach England ever had.
His experience of years ago is entirely relevant to the game as its played know which explains why noones offered him a decent job in ages.

He isnt too old for the job, and he definatly knows hows to handle difficult players and doesnt have pet favourites.

Really do we need to be looking back to 80 year old proven failures to help out the gym teacher?

In terms of the whole " natural instincts" thing yes thats all well and good once play is broken. for the most part Englands players even under Lancaster have shown they are pretty decent at turning on the flash stuff once the opportunity has arisen.
the problem has been their unimaginative and simplistic play against set defences that fails to create those opportunities. Thats where the coach is really needed to get in and work with them. If Ashton is a " let the players do their magic" kind of guy then sorry he will not answer that problem. At that level players need plans to unlock defences, its niave to believe otherwise. Up till now England have been largely been relying on forcing mistakes or opportunities presenting themselves and just banging up against the brick wall hoping it will fall down. Im really not conviced that a coach who believes more in individual players skills than the units play is the right man for the job....especially when hes a dinosaur

Lancaster would probably be cacking it if he did get appointed, isnt that how he ended up nabbing Robinsons job?

Well I was proven wrong on Lancaster, but I really would hope they could find someone better than Ashton to take England forward.

Ashton has ideas!! He is not away with the faeries on purely letting the players get on with it. He has "off the wall ideas" ideas that most premiership coaches would either not understand, condemn or both.

He is an innovator with ideas like 20m american football passes. Some of his ideas may not fly but they get players thinking. It isnt his fault he had such appalling cattle when IC.

And gee arent they good those AP coaches....with one or two exceptions just look at the dross they produce.

by wickedwasp Thu 05 Apr 2012, 6:21 pm

I felt sorry for Balshaw - I know, I know, but he took so much flack for being utter cr*p at a position he was no good in. He's a winger - plain & simple.

This to me is the problem with Ashton - I totally get what he's trying to do - Balshaw's pace and attacking instincts at full back - sounds good.............

Except, he's rubbish under a high ball and not good defensively.

The problem with Ashton, I think is that he only thinks in terms of attack - he forgets that often it's defence that wins matches.

I would not want to see him back

by Sponsored content