England ratings vs Aus

First topic message reminder :

1. Marler - 6 - good in the loose but struggled in the tight, scrum time really didn't go his way as the Wallabies adopted the Quins tactic of binding on the arm with great success.
2. Youngs - 7 - was everywhere, tackled, carried and threw well in the lineout. A couple of dodgey tackles (head in the wrong place) aside a good game.
3. Cole - 7 - not his best day at the scrum despite doing ok, contributed more than the backrow at the breakdown but not enough metres carrying.
4. Palmer - 5 - far too quiet, worked hard without impact.
5. Parling - 6 - good in the lineout and made a lot of effort for little reward.
6. Johnson - 7 - best of the backrow and strangely subbed. Made the most impact at the breakdown but his ball in hand work was ineffectual.
7. Robshaw - 4 - didn't put hos shoulder in the scrum choosing to hang ODF the side and pull on Cole's shirt instead. Too upright going into contact and lay on breakdown as opposed to competing in it.
8. Waldrom - 6 - willing carrier but a crucial knock on and a lack of impact on defence ate disappointing.
9. Care - 2 - his kicks were awful, his passing was agonisingly slow and his only positive decision was the quick tap. He injected no tempo and has woefully out of his depth.
10. Flood - 6 - positive in attack and committed in defence but not savvy enough and should have taken the 3 pointers.
11. Sharples - 6 - worked hard but not really in the game. Needs to stop stepping out the line.
12. Barritt - 5 - good in defence but poor and too deep in attack.
13. Manu - 8 - covered well in defence and offered genuine go forward in attack.
14. Ashton - 5 - anonymous.
15. Goode - 6 - threatened good things and was a positive influence but needs to look for the tactical kicks a little more.

Bench:
16. Vunipola - 6 - same as Marler.
19. Launchbury - 7 - offered a dynamic ball carrier and some more grunt.
20. Wood - 6 - tried hard and got in the 9s face, replaces the wrong flanker.
21. Youngs - 7 - raised the tempo well and controlled the game much better than Care but still not sharp enough.
22. Farrell - 3 - only contribution was an awful pass.
23. Brown - 5 - ran straight into contact time and time again. Managed to milk a penalty with his only attempt at a kick.

yappysnap wrote:Good points Hood, but to be honest I only think there are a few players that could be swapped out, the real problem if there is a problem is in the coaching.

Agreed.

What's illuminating about these sort of threads is how unwilling some posters are to let players' actual performances change their preconceptions of them. Favourites get marked up and the unfavoured can do no right. Posters that say 'I'm not a fan, but he played pretty well' come out with credit, those that are incapable of recognising good where they don't want to see it, or refuse to so that they can maintain their position, mark their opinions as small.

splenetic wrote:What's illuminating about these sort of threads is how unwilling some posters are to let players' actual performances change their preconceptions of them. Favourites get marked up and the unfavoured can do no right. Posters that say 'I'm not a fan, but he played pretty well' come out with credit, those that are incapable of recognising good where they don't want to see it, or refuse to so that they can maintain their position, mark their opinions as small.

+1

Delighted with all general poster 'informed' scores out of 10 - can we have TJ back now then? Muchas gracias

I think I am the only one who was not completely disappointed with that performance. There were many things wrong for the team to work on and I am very annoyed we didn't win a game that I felt we could have done, but this team is getting better and better.

I know it's about results, but the best teams learn from their losses too. We looked much more inventive than we did in SA - the team has learned from that tour. If Robshaw and the team in general learn from their mistakes here then I feel it is forgivable. If they don't (i.e. if they throw away three pointers against SA!) then I will be angry.

I don't think we are far off being a good team and I think Australia are a lot better than their French game portrayed them.

I think that's right. Stop giving away scrum penalties, start Launchbury and Wood, get the scrum half to sweep (it was embarrassing the way the same tactic kept working against us) change the left-wing, take the points and let's see where we are this time next week.

Longer term I just can't believe that Barritt and Tuilagi is the right combination, but we can come back to that. Maybe Tuilagi on the left wing (2 passes in 80 minutes is not good enough for an OC) with 36 and JJ in the centres, or maybe one of several other possible solutions.

Certainly no need for despair though.

1.Marler - 5 - Struggled as did the whole front row at scrum time giving away penalties, he has the talent to learn and improve however
2.Youngs - 4 - See above, extra point removed for very poor missed tackle on Hopper in first half.
3.Cole - 6 - As with the above struggled at scrum time and lost bind on Youngs a couple of times. I thought he showed up well in the loose as usual however.
4.Parling - 6 - Showed up ok in loose if lacking go forward like most our forwards at times. Ran the line-out well which is no mean feat vs Sharpe.
5.Palmer - 5 - As with Parling but I felt his loose work was less effectual and never really showed up with ball hand. Time for Launchberry to have a go in his place I feel.
6.Johnson - 6 - Many slating TJ here but looking back I can't think of too much he did wrong other than lack go forward like most our forwards! That said I would reluctantly replace him for next week.
7.Robshaw - 5 - A disappointing performance from the captain in which he didn't show up in defence as he usually does and when he showed up in attack it seemed to be one of the many times he called for the ball at a stand still.
8.Waldrom - 7 - One of few bright points for England in attack showing go forward and got around in defence as well!

9.Care - 4 - Feels harsh but I simply felt his kicking was very poor. He kicked too far deep and too often for my liking. He also seemed to pick up his old trait of running across the pitch which slowed the ball down. Still deserves a place next week due to Quins form but a poor showing.
10.Flood - 6.5 - Played a reasonable game with limited quick ball or go forward.

11.Sharples - 5.5 - Had little to do but didn't disappoint when he did. Should have gone looking for the ball much more IMO.
12.Barritt - 5.5 - Did what we ask him too, i.e. tackle everything but still offers far less than we need in attack to utilise Tuilagi. A good player in the wrong team I fear!
13.Tuilagi - 5.5 - I find the high ratings for Manu fairly ridiculous given how little he passed (or even attempted to!) all game. He is strong and offers rare go forward to us but must develop a more rounded game at international level IMO.
14.Ashton - 6 - A slightly flat game in which nothing he tried seemed to work (like much of the side) but he kept looking for the ball nonetheless!
15.Goode - 7 - A decent game once again from the FB I felt. Strong with ball in hand and mostly (I remember one glaring exception) made good decisions.

screamingaddabs wrote:I think I am the only one who was not completely disappointed with that performance. There were many things wrong for the team to work on and I am very annoyed we didn't win a game that I felt we could have done, but this team is getting better and better.

I know it's about results, but the best teams learn from their losses too. We looked much more inventive than we did in SA - the team has learned from that tour. If Robshaw and the team in general learn from their mistakes here then I feel it is forgivable. If they don't (i.e. if they throw away three pointers against SA!) then I will be angry.

I don't think we are far off being a good team and I think Australia are a lot better than their French game portrayed them.

This I completely agree with, but after people gave Wales **** over their loss and with British Sports' media and fans being unable to accept that in general things are usually average, not terrible or brilliant, the negative reactions to the match were inevitable. I found it frustrating, not awful to watch

I find the high ratings for Manu fairly ridiculous given how little he passed (or even attempted to!) all game. He is strong and offers rare go forward to us but must develop a more rounded game at international level IMO.

Considering the number of awful little half a metre pops to a stationery forward and aimless balls side to side (not mentioning all the knock ons) it was nice to see someone take the ball in at pace. This idea that passing from 13 would have helped on that game is absolute cack. Our wingers were bullied throughout. Now had Manu the ability to slide in a grubber behind the slow turning Cummins that would have been worthwhile.

Fact is England's tempo was far to slow due to unduly hesitant 9s and a lack of intensity at the breakdown.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

I find the high ratings for Manu fairly ridiculous given how little he passed (or even attempted to!) all game. He is strong and offers rare go forward to us but must develop a more rounded game at international level IMO.

Considering the number of awful little half a metre pops to a stationery forward and aimless balls side to side (not mentioning all the knock ons) it was nice to see someone take the ball in at pace. This idea that passing from 13 would have helped on that game is absolute cack. Our wingers were bullied throughout. Now had Manu the ability to slide in a grubber behind the slow turning Cummins that would have been worthwhile.

Fact is England's tempo was far to slow due to unduly hesitant 9s and a lack of intensity at the breakdown.

Agree with that.

Sharples IMO was the weakest link in the backline. Defensively he was totally out of his depth.

Killing two birds with one stone

1. Tuilagi is often our best weapon, breaking down defences with shear power...... but he doesn't pass, create or look for space. In short he plays more like a forward than a back. Dropping him would be tough and moving him to the wing maybe the wrong option, but how else do we get JJ and Twelvetrees (for example) into mid field?

2. Tom Youngs is a converted centre, great to have a hooker with the ball skills of a centre but not when it weakens the front row.

Dylan Hartley 1.85m 110 Kg
Manu Tuilagi 1.85 112 Kg

Front row of Corbs/Mako, Manu, Cole.......... perhaps.

Think that's a bit unlikely. Tigers are more likely to move George Ford no 8.