England's 6N post-mortem

First topic message reminder :

Firstly, well done Wales, fantastic final result and worthy winners. I don't want you to think this post is about simply saying England lost rather than Wales won, it isn't intended to. However, i do want to ask people's opinions on England's 6Ns.

Has it been an improvement on last year? How would you rate the coaches' performance in terms of selection, tactics etc. Where have we improved or gone backwards?

For me, our results have flattered us. Much has been made of the improved attitude/culture within the squad, but I don't see it translated into performances particularly. Yes, the players seem less cocky, and?...

The scrum and lineout have gone backwards, the rucking after the Scotland game has been poor, and the attack non-existent. Our defence has been better generally, but was finally exposed by a team powerful enough to suck in players through close drives.

The selections ultimately didn't pay off either, and I think SL deserves criticism for the Croft, Wood, Robshaw back-row...it was easily outclassed, out-thought and out muscled. Some of this you can say is misfortune - having Morgan and Corbisiero out has clearly not helped, but it doesn't explain the selection of a collection of willowy lineout forwards.

I'm obviously frustrated at the result, and possibly i'll see some of this differently after a little more reflection, but I doubt it. What do the rest of you think?

AP Stats:

Robshaw / Kvesic
10 Matches 17
1 Tries 1
5 Points 5
1 Try assist 0
0 Kicks From Hand 0
60 Passes 36
0 Yellow cards 0
0 Red cards 0
104 Carries 112
124 Metres carried 340
1 Clean breaks 3
6 Offloads 12
6 Defenders beaten 28
102 Tackles 122
4 Missed tackles 10
6 Penalties conceded 17
2 Turnovers conceded 15
13 Line outs won own throw 10
3 Lineout steals 1

Fraser / Wallace
16 Matches 8
1 Tries 0
5 Points 0
0 Try assist 0
0 Kicks From Hand 0
25 Passes 21
0 Yellow cards 0
0 Red cards 0
63 Carries 43
209 Metres carried 67
6 Clean breaks 0
1 Offloads 4
7 Defenders beaten 1
129 Tackles 62
12 Missed tackles 4
8 Penalties conceded 7
10 Turnovers conceded 7
0 Line outs won own throw 7
0 Lineout steals 0

HEC

Robshaw / Fraser / Wallace (Kvesic not in HEC)

5 Matches 6 / 3
0 Tries 1 / 0
0 Points 5 / 0
0 Try assist 0 / 0
1 Kicks From Hand 0 / 0
42 Passes 5 / 5
0 Yellow cards 2 / 0
0 Red cards 0 / 0
49 Carries 24 / 7
111 Metres carried 55 / 43
1 Clean breaks 1 / 1
3 Offloads 0 / 1
2 Defenders beaten 1 / 1
33 Tackles 47 / 12
3 Missed tackles 5 / 0
2 Penalties conceded 6 / 0
2 Turnovers conceded 3 / 2
10 Line outs won own throw 0 / 3
0 Lineout steals 2 / 0

Probably need to take the carrying stats with a pinch of salt as the players are clearly used in different ways (e.g. the Quins boys do a lot more cleaning up slow ball and link play as opposed to line breaking). Also, Wallace's HEC games came against weaker opposition, so don't take them too seriously.

What stands out to me is that Kvesic is a good ball carrying option, but that all the tyros have some way to go to be as tidy and disciplined as Robshaw. Fraser is probably the closest, and his worse penalty stats may be a result of being a more traditional fetcher and therefore playing closer to the line.

The only player I've watched a lot of is Wallace, who's impressive for how early he is in his career. Regularly wins MOTM, has been a very good captain and has a rounded skillset that fits with Quins approach.

All decent enough players but none of them could lace the boots of Steffon Armitage a real destructive player for the back row.

Morgan
Wood
Armitage

would be a frightening prospect

Kvesic only 20. So could develop into a gun player.

What's the latest with Steffon? There was talk that he may be coming back to England?

yappysnap wrote:What's the latest with Steffon? There was talk that he may be coming back to England?

WTF is wroooooooooooong with him and his brother ???

Get back here pronto. There is a RWC coming up and all they care about is coin.

Not happy.

That's exactly the reason they should be nowhere near the England squad.

One of the disappointments about coming away without any silverware this year is that it makes you wonder whether new first team starters are required, or whether we have the personnel already and they just need more big game experience.

During those years under Clive when we didn't complete Slams, I thought we were the best team but just couldn't close the deal. The fact we were consistently beating Southern Hemisphere sides at the time made it simultaneously a bit more palatable, and maddening.

I didn't go in thinking we were the best team this year. Then again, I didn't last year either, but we got better results than almost everyone expected. I think I'm right in saying that Saturday's game is the first time Lancaster has lost a Six Nations away match.

In reality, the World Cup isn't that far away. We've only got two tours, two Autumn International rounds, and two Six Nations before the next tournament (plus assorted warm-ups). Unless the wheels really fall off, the players who go to New Zealand in 2014 will be the core of the World Cup squad.

So, if we walk it forward, some players will have a chance to make their case (or come up short) in Argentina. Argentina is always a bit of an odd tour because some of England's players are with the Lions. If they really do represent the cream of the Home Nations, then they probably ought to be first picks again for England. Since players are on different tours, you don't get a clear cut head-to-head comparison as you do when they are in the same squad.

Our next games will be the 2013 Autumn internationals against Australia, Argentina and New Zealand (in that order, each a week apart). Lancaster will surely want to play his best squad against Australia but I'm curious to know how he will decide that.

Alex Goode is the fullback because he won the shirt in South Africa for the final Test last year and Lancaster kept faith with him. If we have a good Argentina tour, does he keep retain his first picks there as well, or just draft the Lions in wholesale?

Take fly-half, for example. If Farrell is with the Lions and, say, Burns & Flood are the tens on tour, what will it take to change the pecking order? You could say the same about the back row and the centres (assuming England have Lions representation there).

Lancaster could revert to his Lions, and then switch to his top tour performers for the Pumas match but he probably won't learn as much by seeing them in action against the same opposition. Then, before you know it, we've got the All Blacks back to show everyone 2012 was a serious anomaly.

You can see where this is going, because we are soon at the 2014 Six Nations and we know how few changes Lancaster wanted to make during this year's tournament.

It's not just hindsight that tells us Lancaster could have experimented more during the Six Nations. If, say, Twelvetrees had seen more game time, a winger or two been deployed, or a genuine number eight given the job of keeping Parise at bay, then we might know a bit more about the candidates. We know Lancaster wanted to make earlier changes against Italy but felt he couldn't do so while the game was in the balance.

It leaves us all a bit unclear about what it will take for someone to be break into the England team. And, indeed, what it will take for someone to be dropped.

During the barren years since 2003, England have only really been execrable during Andy Robinson's tenure. The trouble with managing a team which isn't successful, but also isn't dreadful, is that you probably have to drop someone who isn't playing particularly badly to make way for someone who can do better. Or even comprehensively overhaul your gameplan to accommodate players with different skills. Sometimes injuries force your hand but a good manager shouldn't need that excuse.

We can all applaud the great heart shown by Lancaster's England, with the notable exception of last Saturday, but I'd like to see more shape from his team. I'm not pessimistic about the direction we are heading but I've always most enjoyed watching England play when I know what they are trying to do. With the clock ticking down to 2015, we don't have a lot of time left to establish our patterns and find out who can best execute those plays.

Concise and to the point Rugby Fan.

When will you be meeting Lancaster to become his adviser? Your country needs you!

On a side note, if we don't do well in this WC should we stick with Lancaster? As mentioned when you break it down he hasn't actually had that much time with the team and none of it has really been for extended periods where he can tinker (apart from SA). Should we all be setting sights on 2019?

Rugby Fan wrote:One of the disappointments about coming away without any silverware this year is that it makes you wonder whether new first team starters are required, or whether we have the personnel already and they just need more big game experience.

During those years under Clive when we didn't complete Slams, I thought we were the best team but just couldn't close the deal. The fact we were consistently beating Southern Hemisphere sides at the time made it simultaneously a bit more palatable, and maddening.

I didn't go in thinking we were the best team this year. Then again, I didn't last year either, but we got better results than almost everyone expected. I think I'm right in saying that Saturday's game is the first time Lancaster has lost a Six Nations away match.

In reality, the World Cup isn't that far away. We've only got two tours, two Autumn International rounds, and two Six Nations before the next tournament (plus assorted warm-ups). Unless the wheels really fall off, the players who go to New Zealand in 2014 will be the core of the World Cup squad.

So, if we walk it forward, some players will have a chance to make their case (or come up short) in Argentina. Argentina is always a bit of an odd tour because some of England's players are with the Lions. If they really do represent the cream of the Home Nations, then they probably ought to be first picks again for England. Since players are on different tours, you don't get a clear cut head-to-head comparison as you do when they are in the same squad.

Our next games will be the 2013 Autumn internationals against Australia, Argentina and New Zealand (in that order, each a week apart). Lancaster will surely want to play his best squad against Australia but I'm curious to know how he will decide that.

Alex Goode is the fullback because he won the shirt in South Africa for the final Test last year and Lancaster kept faith with him. If we have a good Argentina tour, does he keep retain his first picks there as well, or just draft the Lions in wholesale?

Take fly-half, for example. If Farrell is with the Lions and, say, Burns & Flood are the tens on tour, what will it take to change the pecking order? You could say the same about the back row and the centres (assuming England have Lions representation there).

Lancaster could revert to his Lions, and then switch to his top tour performers for the Pumas match but he probably won't learn as much by seeing them in action against the same opposition. Then, before you know it, we've got the All Blacks back to show everyone 2012 was a serious anomaly.

You can see where this is going, because we are soon at the 2014 Six Nations and we know how few changes Lancaster wanted to make during this year's tournament.

It's not just hindsight that tells us Lancaster could have experimented more during the Six Nations. If, say, Twelvetrees had seen more game time, a winger or two been deployed, or a genuine number eight given the job of keeping Parise at bay, then we might know a bit more about the candidates. We know Lancaster wanted to make earlier changes against Italy but felt he couldn't do so while the game was in the balance.

It leaves us all a bit unclear about what it will take for someone to be break into the England team. And, indeed, what it will take for someone to be dropped.

During the barren years since 2003, England have only really been execrable during Andy Robinson's tenure. The trouble with managing a team which isn't successful, but also isn't dreadful, is that you probably have to drop someone who isn't playing particularly badly to make way for someone who can do better. Or even comprehensively overhaul your gameplan to accommodate players with different skills. Sometimes injuries force your hand but a good manager shouldn't need that excuse.

We can all applaud the great heart shown by Lancaster's England, with the notable exception of last Saturday, but I'd like to see more shape from his team. I'm not pessimistic about the direction we are heading but I've always most enjoyed watching England play when I know what they are trying to do. With the clock ticking down to 2015, we don't have a lot of time left to establish our patterns and find out who can best execute those plays.

These are excellent points but hopefully our coaches will able to sort out respective levels of performance by different players informing selection. Yes it might be tricky but it should be well within their ability. They have by and large shown themselves to be reasonably good at selection with the odd well documented error. Happlily for us i dont thik that the players going to Arg are in the same positions as those touring with Lions not likely challengers anyway. We need wings and noe will go to Aus. We need no.8s and none will go to OZ. We need back up at TH and none will go to oz. We need heavier set second row and no one in that hmould will go to OZ. Basically the tour to argentina could not have come at a better time for us.

Rugby Fan, all good points.
If there is one takeaway for Lancs surely it is to stop experimenting with players selected out of position (8, 11)
ok and a second takeaway, be more brutal with an off form player (14).
These are simple solid boring measures, but which could bring significant team improvement.

p.s

In short i expect

Wade, May, Foden, Billy Vunipola, Freddie Burns to make very strong cases for selection for England.

I expect Burns to push Farell very hard for the starting 10 jersey.

Some of our guys away with the Lions will be in the dirt trackers or on the bench so may not have too much opportunity to show strong form.

I would have little hesitation in starting a guy from Argentina tour ahead of a Lions tourist in these circumstances. The pecking order should not be that rigid.

oh and 36 obviously!

yappysnap wrote:On a side note, if we don't do well in this WC should we stick with Lancaster? As mentioned when you break it down he hasn't actually had that much time with the team and none of it has really been for extended periods where he can tinker (apart from SA). Should we all be setting sights on 2019?

Lancaster has effectively been promoted any way and is "Head of International Performance" , so whatever happens in 2015 expect to seem him more obviousley adopt the "upstairs" role.

LondonTiger wrote:

yappysnap wrote:On a side note, if we don't do well in this WC should we stick with Lancaster? As mentioned when you break it down he hasn't actually had that much time with the team and none of it has really been for extended periods where he can tinker (apart from SA). Should we all be setting sights on 2019?

Lancaster has effectively been promoted any way and is "Head of International Performance" , so whatever happens in 2015 expect to seem him more obviousley adopt the "upstairs" role.

What does this mean? Does Farrell succeed him as head coach?

Quite possibly. If we equated the England set-up to a club one, already Lancaster is more like a Director of Rugby while Farrell is Head Coach.

So Lancaster is responsible for selection etc but Farrell leads the ctraining sessions.

The Argentina tour is going to be the making of this England squad.

It is a second chance for Lancaster and a massive massive opportunity against a very good opponent to properly TEST players and combinations.

We're going to learn a hell of a lot from this and i expect us to be a real force when the Lions tourists and best of the Argentina tour come back together for selection.

(Contrast with Wales' tour to Japan. Granted they will have more Lions but with respect to Japanese rugby what will they learn there? That they are bigger than the Japanese?)

Triangulation wrote:The Argentina tour is going to be the making of this England squad.

It is a second chance for Lancaster and a massive massive opportunity against a very good opponent to properly TEST players and combinations.

We're going to learn a hell of a lot from this and i expect us to be a real force when the Lions tourists and best of the Argentina tour come back together for selection.

(Contrast with Wales' tour to Japan. Granted they will have more Lions but with respect to Japanese rugby what will they learn there? That they are bigger than the Japanese?)

That the Japanese beat them? Stranger things have happened.

We can only hope.

Old thread sarge. Thought the t14 was considered the best league at the mo?

Ah yes! Lol