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?

LT,
I like your comments, but I am really not sure, at the moment, where on earth we are. England have backwards each of the last 4 matches.

I agree about Marler. Corbs needs real time to recover, so we really won't know about him until next season. Youngs still does not have his throws down, and I don't think he is really ready for this level.
The back row was not good without a real 8 at 8. I think Wood should have been at blindside.
Wings were not good to poor. Agree with the general sentiment about Ashton, but disagree about Brown. He made one good defensive play but was otherwise poor. He certainly not a winger.
Goode was, well, not very goode. Need Foden back, even at 80%-90%.

doctor_grey wrote:LT,
I like your comments, but I am really not sure, at the moment, where on earth we are. England have backwards each of the last 4 matches.

I agree about Marler. Corbs needs real time to recover, so we really won't know about him until next season. Youngs still does not have his throws down, and I don't think he is really ready for this level.
The back row was not good without a real 8 at 8. I think Wood should have been at blindside.
Wings were not good to poor. Agree with the general sentiment about Ashton, but disagree about Brown. He made one good defensive play but was otherwise poor. He certainly not a winger.
Goode was, well, not very goode. Need Foden back, even at 80%-90%.

I'm with you doctor. Marler has continually been talked up as a great ball carrier. He isn't. The supposed red hot form he was meant to have in the Prem is just a myth. Corbs is a far far better carrier in the tight and it seems a far better scrummager as well. I think Mako's probably moving ahead of Marler as second choice now as well.

The back-row today was a shambles, so obviously horribly imbalanced I find it worrying SL didn't see it coming. I haven't seen the stats but I barely saw Croft. The wings need to be changed. Ashton needs to re-find form at club level and put in some tackling hours. Brown needs to go back to 15. If we're never going to use Goode as a second distributor coming into the line, there's no point in him being there. And if you want a fullback at wing, Foden's a better bet.

We have gone backwards through this tournament. In all departments. Moving in the right direction should mean gradual improvement as well as results. A few blips, fine, not a continual regression as has happened the last 5 games.

There were so many problems evident today it really does make you wonder about coaches and their trying to make players play out of position when there are better specialist options. It's not just SL, lots do it. I was really hoping a few key players would go on tour to force SL's hand for Argentina but most of them have played themselves out of contention. Corbs and Morgan have been sorely missed and I'm not sure a fit and on form Foden would have improved the backs. I spent the whole game screaming at Ben Youngs to get his arse in gear and move quicker but he just dawdles around. Danny Care was in contention but his last 2 performances have seriously damaged that.

I really want to see B Vunipola and Wade get a chance and think SL should go all out to get the young possibles acclimatised. I'm less happy about the squad than I was but the truth is they have the ability for the most part and it will come together. This result will have been a reality check.

Unlike the majority I've never been 100% convinced by SL. However the mark of a top coach is how he deals with obvious flaws and set backs - we'll see.

I understand the merit of not chopping and changing selection during a series, but if I ever see that back 3 play together again I will never support SL - any coach worth his salt must recognize it doesn't work. An aspiring top side absolutely needs both pace and defensive ability at the back. No more excuses. The 2 best wingers we have and currently Brown to FB.

And we must mind a permanent replacement for Morgan - as things stand I can't trust the man to manage to play the majority of a series without breaking down. Currently I see him as an impact player, used carefully off the bench. Vunipola for sure, and maybe Haskell to be developed there.

And Corbs...please!

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Unlike the majority I've never been 100% convinced by SL. However the mark of a top coach is how he deals with obvious flaws and set backs - we'll see.

I understand the merit of not chopping and changing selection during a series, but if I ever see that back 3 play together again I will never support SL - any coach worth his salt must recognize it doesn't work. An aspiring top side absolutely needs both pace and defensive ability at the back. No more excuses. The 2 best wingers we have and currently Brown to FB.

And we must mind a permanent replacement for Morgan - as things stand I can't trust the man to manage to play the majority of a series without breaking down. Currently I see him as an impact player, used carefully off the bench. Vunipola for sure, and maybe Haskell to be developed there.

And Corbs...please!

About the only positive from today is I can finally get my smug 'i told you so' dusted off. Against NZ and Scotland I thought they'd finally fixed on a game plan and started coaching the players to execute it i.e. aggressive straight forward running with support runners to add weight, a couple of very fast and aggressive guys clearing out with good body positions, quick recycling followed by the same but with short pop passes to other forwards when set defences rush up quickly. When sufficient ground is made and players sucked in, quickly out to the backs.

Since the Scotland game, none of this happened. All the while everything else we used to rely on i.e. a fairly decent set piece, has gone to poop. Personally I didn't want a team of unproven coaches, I thought England were worthy of better. Farrell and Catt may make excellent coaches, but they should have learnt their trade a little longer. SL I can understand in terms of Saxons experience. Rowntree looked a good bet, but should you promote a scrum coach to forwards coach at international level or expect them to prove themselves in that role elsewhere?

Oh well, we're here now so I suppose we'll just have to see if they can learn from their mistakes. The first being this - you cannot win a game of rugby without players who can break the gain line.

Hood83 wrote:Oh well, we're here now so I suppose we'll just have to see if they can learn from their mistakes. The first being this - you cannot win a game of rugby without players who can break the gain line.

That's the weird thing. When they were not getting over the gain line in the first half, there seemed to be no back-up plan. No alternative. No Plan B. That is 100% on Lancaster. All England did in the second half was bang away for a few minutes then turn the ball over. Shocking.

Drop Goode, move Brown to 15.

Drop Ashton, Goode. Goode because he's not international standard, Ashton because he needs a kick up the arse. Give a couple of form AP wingers a go.

Give 36/Tuilagi combination a few matches.

Morgan/Haskell at 8. Wood 6, Robshaw 7.

Rest is ok, except get Corbs back in, and Vunipola ahead of Marler.

Agree with most of what's been said here. More power in the backrow, more pace in the back line.

To what extent do people think that the second row contributed to England's scrum problems though? Yes, England were up against a superior front row. However, I don't think such a lightweight second row helps matters, particularly given that Wood isn't an 8. While both Parling and Launchberry are good players, do they leave the pack a bit underpowered in combination?

It certainly helps having a Shaw or Kohn in the second row. Launchbury is a you lad though and can be a monster in a few years, stick with these two I say.

Please please PLEASE change shirts for props next season. So sick and tired of seeing props trying to get a hold of spray-on shirts. Scrums really took away from an otherwise engrossing game, and most of the resets were from binding issues.

Most has already been said on here, For what its worth; Goode is a strong but limited and defensive FB - Ashton is struggling for form, Barritt offers little in attack and Tuilagi has the game awareness of a disabled brain fart, the worrrying thing is that game awareness is generally an instictual skill. He has all the attributes apart from that and will be key to future success. Billy 36 needs to play - Farrell will have better days and so will Youngs. Wood is close on being one of the best 6's around so keep him there. Croft was undercooked we all knew that. Haskell will never consistently be what you want him to be and is destined to be a bit part player. The 2nd rows are fine and they will learn. Cole aside the others were found wanting and struggled with the intensity., including the replacements. In SL you have an intelligent coach and he will pick the bones out of this. Robshaw is a great leader but I think the game would have been different yesterday if you had a back row of Easter Robshaw and Wood at 6. Just for this game you needed power up front to be able to compete - without it you were unable to compete. The writing was on the wall after the Italy game - players aside SL has to learn from this and not be too rigid with his selections next time. Good luck, you are a good team and perhaps some people underestimated Wales at their best

Obviously a devastating day yesterday, and the fact a decent proportion of these boys wont meet up until the AI's will mean this performance will fester in the mind for a good while yet. I think one of our largest problems yesterday was our lack of offloading, not once can I remember England moving the point of attack and not just simply running one out into a gigantic welsh defence. When England have been at their best offloading has been at the fore. This has gained us momentum without being the largest side and the quick ball that we didnt see yesterday. Also the fact that Owen didnt kick his goals either didnt help as also a large part of our game is using our fly half and full back to retrieve kicks and gain interest and with our defence squeeze the opposition in their half and gain some penalties from their and slot them over.

Manu's decision not give it wide when the overlap was on was a poor one, however calling him a "brain fart" is harsh and I do think that part of his game improving and I would be pretty certain that if you looked at his stats he has passed the ball far more than last year. However still not the complete centre. 12T should come in and bring a greater attacking threat and more balance to the midfield.

Since his absence we have missed Morgan's carrying ability and this was not helped by our non-existent offloading. SL missed a trick by not playing Vunipola against Italy. I think Croft however did a superb job in the lineout and was a good addition to the team.

The back 3 does need a re-jig. Brown to full-back and I dont think his move to wing has been a complete failure but will be more effective at FB. Ashton needs to go back to Sarries and get some form, this lad is not a bad player but needs to get that spark back. Ashton's form in general hasnt helped the back 3 as if we had a proper finisher the combination of Goode who can sweep everything up with ease and also bring his nous to the game along with Brown who is a cracking counter attacker and has a good boot doesnt sound to bad to me. But a back 3 of Brown Wade and May/Foden should be in place going forward.

Manu's Boxing Coach wrote:
Since his absence we have missed Morgan's carrying ability and this was not helped by our non-existent offloading. SL missed a trick by not playing Vunipola against Italy.

Unfortunately he had re-injured his ankle in training during the week so was not available for selection.

Is Goode Charlie Charles Charles of the Charles brothers fame?

mid_gen wrote:It certainly helps having a Shaw or Kohn in the second row. Launchbury is a you lad though and can be a monster in a few years, stick with these two I say.

Please please PLEASE change shirts for props next season. So sick and tired of seeing props trying to get a hold of spray-on shirts. Scrums really took away from an otherwise engrossing game, and most of the resets were from binding issues.

The binding issues were because most of the props - from both sides - were trying to bind on the arm. This is illegal and is nothing to do with the choice of shirts.

We were poor today and poor last week. We weren't great against France. Ireland away and Scotland remain positive results.

Grow from this and learn from this. After the high of how we closed the AIs, we have this terrible low. 30-3 is an absolute thrashing.

I agree with most, we need more power in the pack and a reshuffle of the back line. I have no worries about Youngs or Farrell if we can get them quick ball, but I'd like to see Twelvetrees, May and Wade get good minutes on the Argentina tour and really push for places in the Autumn.

In the pack it's more tricky. I've heard Corbisiero's knee condition is similar to Ledley King's, in that every time he'll play it will get worse. In which case he's not a long term option and we have to continually develop Marler and Mako. Both are young, both will improve. Garvey would be a good option to take to Argentina, but he seems quite far out the picture. Maybe someone like Attwood? The easiest fix is getting a proper 8 in. Morgan, Billy V or as much as I don't really rate the guy Waldrom would have given us more balance. If they're unavailable, a recall for Easter or Crane could have even been better.

Defeats can help mould and harden a side,just look at Wales.panicking and changing half the squad is not necessary,barrit should now be 2nd choice,goode and Ashton back to sarries for a while,a proper 8 poor tom wood tried his hardest but it didn't work back to 6 and stay there.Freddie burns at ten in Argentina.

I have a number of issues about England's performances throughout the tournament and it is driven by the selection policy and tactics.

I really rate Goode, but when he was first selected in the Autumn it was so that he could play as an additional first receiver. We haven't used him like that all tournament and it is a complete waste of his creativity.

Brown is a very good full back and arguably should be the starting full back, but he is not a wing. Hopefully this experiment will come to an end now.

England have gone backwards since Tuilagi returned to the side. Barritt is the type of player you need in a squad who does the unseen work, but you can't have him and Tuilagi and for me Manu needs to be dropped for just too often butchering opportunities.

Ashton should have been dropped earlier in the tournament, however, due to the selection of the EPS there simply wasn't anyone who could take his place. It was a poor selection for the backs.

The injuries to the forwards didn't help the balance of the side as Corbs and Morgan would have helped provide scrum stability and ball carrying ability. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but the backrow selected yesterday was far too light weight with no ball carrying or big hitting ability.

On the plus side Robshaw has proved himself to be true international class. He may not be a fetcher 7, but he is involved in everything like a good 7 should. He was the only English player to come away with any credit yesterday.

Congrats Wales you were the best team this 6 nations but why oh why can't you approach and play every game like that?

Ashton has to go disgraceful performance again.

If its raining and we have that game plan then we need the roof open!

Well done Wales.

Is Mike Catt the man to take England's attacking game into the 2015 WC? I don't think so. As we are now stuck with Lancaster, who in himself is a suspect coach who's only talents seem to be getting the press on side (he'll need those skills after this weekend!) and talking up how humble and grounded the players are we really need an experienced attack coach, even more so when you realise our defence coach has very little experience as well...

At the moment without getting the coaches and tactics correct there's very little point in mass changes.

1. Move Wood back to 6 and either play Hask at 8 or another 8 if their fit. Heck even bring back Easter for a cameo.
2. Change the centre's- Barritt and Manu were both Poopie so one needs to go in place of 36.
3. Foden or Brown need to be back in the 15 shirt. Goode is a good club man but not International class.
4. Change the wings. Ashton to go back to club. Wade, Sharples, Monye, May or Biggs should all be chosen from. Maybe even Manu on one wing.

Gents,
I think most of us are saying the same things. I agree out second row was underpowered, especially considering we had Wood at 8. No doubts in my mind he should have been at 6. I thought he played very well considering, but we needed bulk and power at 8, and that was obviously lacking. I wanted Haskell at 8 from the time Morgan was injured.

On the other hand my friends, I have to disagree about Brown. he has all the physical tools, but none of the mental ones. The best example is Wales' last try. If Brown doesn't know he is supposed to take the ball carrier when defending a 2 on 1, then he shouldn't be on the field. He keeps making errors. To me, he is simply unreliable at this level. Goode was doing nothing. Foden at less tan 100% is still preferable. And if not him, then bring in someone else.

Number 8 was a problem. Going into the Italy match we knew we had issues. That was the time to decide on a stopgap 8 to get England through the tournament. Waldrom? Easter? Dallaglio? Don't care, but a real 8 was needed.

So ridiculous how people decide either to claim Manu is are greatest attacking threat and then after one England defeat there are calls for him to be dropped. Fickle.

doctor_grey wrote:Gents,
I think most of us are saying the same things. I agree out second row was underpowered, especially considering we had Wood at 8. No doubts in my mind he should have been at 6. I thought he played very well considering, but we needed bulk and power at 8, and that was obviously lacking. I wanted Haskell at 8 from the time Morgan was injured.

On the other hand my friends, I have to disagree about Brown. he has all the physical tools, but none of the mental ones. The best example is Wales' last try. If Brown doesn't know he is supposed to take the ball carrier when defending a 2 on 1, then he shouldn't be on the field. He keeps making errors. To me, he is simply unreliable at this level. Goode was doing nothing. Foden at less tan 100% is still preferable. And if not him, then bring in someone else.

Number 8 was a problem. Going into the Italy match we knew we had issues. That was the time to decide on a stopgap 8 to get England through the tournament. Waldrom? Easter? Dallaglio? Don't care, but a real 8 was needed.

That was a fluff from Lancaster. Perhaps he deserves time to make better calls in future, but I'm not optimistic. We always seem to be lumbered with coaches who can't see past their favourites.

There are more problems in this team than I think we realise. Number 8 is an issues, but Youngs was slow and poor yesterday, Brown's defence at wing is an issue, as is Ashton's, and Manu is now a problem. The NZ game fooled me into thinking Manu might be developing a more rounded game, but on the 6N's evidence he isn't. 12Trees deserves a go at 12, but I'd seriously be considering a number of centre options for both Barritt and Manu. Does Manu have the brains to be a 13 or will he ultimately be better as a powerhouse wing a la North?

Manu's Boxing Coach wrote:So ridiculous how people decide either to claim Manu is are greatest attacking threat and then after one England defeat there are calls for him to be dropped. Fickle.

You're his coach, you would say that. Although given his inability to knock out Ashton I presume you're also teaching him how to draw and pass

Hood83 wrote:That was a fluff from Lancaster. Perhaps he deserves time to make better calls in future, but I'm not optimistic. We always seem to be lumbered with coaches who can't see past their favourites.

You are probably right.
But, I feel I saw this kind of game plan from England before. Sadly, that was in the last RWC. Different players, same stuff.

Hood83 wrote:

Manu's Boxing Coach wrote:So ridiculous how people decide either to claim Manu is are greatest attacking threat and then after one England defeat there are calls for him to be dropped. Fickle.

You're his coach, you would say that. Although given his inability to knock out Ashton I presume you're also teaching him how to draw and pass

Still I dont understand people's opinions of Tuilagi whenever England lose, the opinion of Tuilagi seems to change immediately. What are the parameters of expectation? Is it because he had a bad game yesterday? In that case who didnt? Robshaw?

This lad is 21 and I think is improving all the time and is a lethal strike runner. Also I would like to know who people would replace him with?

My view is that Ashton isnt good enough at International level. Yes he can attack with ball in hand but his defence is really poor given that tackeling is a state of mind. Against the best wingers in the world he will always be found wanting and in a game where sometimes indiviudals win or lose teams close margins, from what I have seen of him I cant help but think he is a liability.

Goode isnt international class at full back. Does a good job for Saracens but just offers to little in attack. Brown and Foden are Englands only real options here and to play them out of position mystifies me.

The rest of the England side isnt actually a bad team. Their Props are still young and they really need time to challenge the best in the world. Jenkins & Adams probably didnt really mature into international props until they where 27. Give them time and I'm sure they will come good.

The real obvious weakness England has is no real openside. At international level every good side has one. The problem is there are not many genuine options in England. Armitage is probably the only realistic option but he cant seem to find favour with Lancaster. Probably not helped by the fact he plays in France. Lancaster needs to look at this area because without a good openside your limiting your ability to turn over ball. Turnover ball still represents the best oppertunity teams have to score tries.

Overall though they will gain a lot from the experience and there is no question they have a lot of talent in their ranks.

In the backs everyone is affected by the play of the others. On a day of all round poor showings Manu was never going to shine. Given the right backline to be a part of he will do fine but singling him out for criticism is harsh. There wasn't a player out there who was 'thinking'. It was an unremittingly bad performance. He wasn't the only one to butcher opportunities or fail to develop them.

There is no getting away from the fact Manu had a really poor game. Thing is though i just could not see what theattacking plan was. Looking at the stats I was not surprised to see that Barritt failed to pass once in the match. Got the ball 8 times and ran 8 times. Manu not much better - only passing twice (and of course dropping an only slightly unsypathetic pass when the try line beckoned).

It has just felt this tournament that there was no plan to get Manu into the game - he spent so much time either as a decoy or acting as the guard on the edge of a breakdown.

Both centres have failed to even consider passing to much better placed players in the last two weeks - so somthing has to change. Is 36 the answer? No idea but perhaps he should be given the chance - if so this has to be at the expense of at least Barritt as he is not an outside centre.

I still think Manu will be with the Lions (along with Farrell and one of Youngs/Care). I woudl ove to see the following backline feature in Argentina:

Care/Youngs
Burns
May
36
Daly
Wade
Brown/Foden

Oh and i know i am bigging up my own, but Parling deserves a touch more credit for the work he did yesterday. 17 tackles with none missed was pretty good, and the only England player to beat a couple of Welsh defenders ball in hand.

well congratulations to wales who comprehensively thrashed us yesterday and made a mockery of some of the claims that england are now the best team in the world.

the wales front row were outstanding and must now be considered the best front row ever.

but for me the game was lost by england at the breakdown and i for one am not surprised because i saw this day coming. the fact is that englands breakdown technique has been of suspect legality with forwards entering blatantly off their feet and the silly and obvious ploy of falling casually into the opposition side of the ruck. ive watched this go on for a few games and thought to myself "not every referee will put up with that - one day we will get pinged heavily" well yesterday was that day. now coles upset mr walsh so much with his persistent early ruck infringing that he got "off-side" with the whistler and suffered in the scrum as a result. that is my firm belief.

another thing is they started to believe there own press. a few very big heads ran on the pitch at the melinium stadium and got what they deserved. congratulations to wales.

Ill say it again...we missed some serious bulk in there....Morgan was missed...so why wasnt Billy Vunipola given a shot.

How on earth can people criticise Mike Brown. The guy has done brilliantly in a position hes not happy in. He MUST be moved to Full back...goode needs to be moved on for a bit.

Ashton needs to be sent anywhere but the england squad. Good bye.
Barritt has worked his socks off for England...but again time to move over son and let Twelvetrees in at 12.

And finally....its a young England side....they'll hurt from this but we will come back stronger. I do think we have the makings of a very good team

London tiger how was Farrell's pass to tuilagi unsympathetic? It was a relatively easy pass that tuilagi messed up.

I think the team's problems ultimately stem from the problems in the forwards - going backwards in the scrum, woes at the breakdown, shaky line out. It's the forwards who set the platform. In my opinion they have not done that.

A lot of criticism has focused on the backs like Ashton yet no talk about the poor effort from the forwards. England have done well when the forwards have done their job properly - e.g. Vs New Zealand and Scotland.

Sorting out the set piece and breakdown woes is paramount. It's the forwards that win matches. The backs by how many.

GloriousEmpire wrote:
another thing is they started to believe there own press. a few very big heads ran on the pitch at the melinium stadium and got what they deserved. congratulations to wales.

How do you know that? Oh and congratulations on you posting style - an identical copy of a couple of other posters. Hard to believe you are all different people.

Geordiefalcon brown is criticised because his defence on the wing has been poor. You think Ashton, Barritt etc are the problem? It's the forwards!

Nothing new to add, yes corbs and morgan have been very much missed and the back three aren't right at all. Steve Walsh proved yet again that he is an anti-English joke of a referee - England were pinged each time Hibbard pooped up, Jones not binding etc etc, very disheartening when in a good field position and the opposition are given possession or 3 points. Heads dropped and we went to pieces, more experienced heads may have been able to cope with this unbalance but I doubt it. Wales did well and made the most of it and played really well.
With a half fair ref, Wales would still probably have won on the day but it would have been much closer. Despite Walsh, players out of position and a bad game plan were the main reasons for our loss.

beshocked wrote:London tiger how was Farrell's pass to tuilagi unsympathetic? It was a relatively easy pass that tuilagi messed up.

Farrell fired it out much quicker than was needed. However the main element was Manu failing to hold it. It was not a good pass (not bad just meh) but a lousy attempt to catch it. So as before I am primarily critical of a Leicester player and there really is no need to jump up and down on me yet again just because I have the temerity to suggest the Saracen was not perfect.

GloriousEmpire wrote:well congratulations to wales who comprehensively thrashed us yesterday and made a mockery of some of the claims that england are now the best team in the world.

the wales front row were outstanding and must now be considered the best front row ever.

but for me the game was lost by england at the breakdown and i for one am not surprised because i saw this day coming. the fact is that englands breakdown technique has been of suspect legality with forwards entering blatantly off their feet and the silly and obvious ploy of falling casually into the opposition side of the ruck. ive watched this go on for a few games and thought to myself "not every referee will put up with that - one day we will get pinged heavily" well yesterday was that day. now coles upset mr walsh so much with his persistent early ruck infringing that he got "off-side" with the whistler and suffered in the scrum as a result. that is my firm belief.

another thing is they started to believe there own press. a few very big heads ran on the pitch at the melinium stadium and got what they deserved. congratulations to wales.

Welsh WUM, pess off back to your troll hole.

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:Nothing new to add, yes corbs and morgan have been very much missed and the back three aren't right at all. Steve Walsh proved yet again that he is an anti-English joke of a referee - England were pinged each time Hibbard pooped up, Jones not binding etc etc, very disheartening when in a good field position and the opposition are given possession or 3 points. Heads dropped and we went to pieces, more experienced heads may have been able to cope with this unbalance but I doubt it. Wales did well and made the most of it and played really well.
With a half fair ref, Wales would still probably have won on the day but it would have been much closer. Despite Walsh, players out of position and a bad game plan were the main reasons for our loss.

Thats a touch harsh, Walsh had clearly lost patience with a few English players, especially at the scrum (I don't think the crouch so low that noone can scrummage tactic helped England) and England were probably on the wrong side of a few more calls than Wales, but the problems for England didn't stem from the ref!

Made this point before England and forwards have looked most effective when we have moved the point of attack, just a little pop before contact makes all the difference. Far too easy for the likes of Warburton to get over the ball. That gets us go forward and makes us less fallible at the breakdown. However we have missed the intensity of the AB's at the breakdown all 6N.

Beshocked

Yes i know the forward were going backwards at a rate...but Ashton was just appalling yesterday. He should be out the squad to sorts his game and confidence out.

Mike Brown is quality...best FB in England .

Ive shouted for along time now we need some serious bulk like Matt garvey in there...athletic and mobile is ok but you need some serious weight and muscle aswell.

And why wasnt a propper 8 played like Billy Vunipola.

London tiger I don't know what kind of pass you expected! It wasn't too high. It was straight to him! Too fast really? My point is you are trying to deflect some of the blame.

Not Matt Garvey again.....

mid_gen wrote:Drop Goode, move Brown to 15.

Drop Ashton, Goode. Goode because he's not international standard, Ashton because he needs a kick up the arse. Give a couple of form AP wingers a go.

Give 36/Tuilagi combination a few matches.

Morgan/Haskell at 8. Wood 6, Robshaw 7.

Rest is ok, except get Corbs back in, and Vunipola ahead of Marler.

Exactly what I would've wrote. Brown/foden in @ 15. I still believe we're doing we'll under SL. We were just outmatched yesterday. It was Dublin 2011 all over again...

Ashton was poor agreed but basically the whole team was poor. Ashton wasn't to blame for the scrummaging woes or breakdown errors, Farrell's missed kicks, wasn't even guilty for Wales' two tries. He didn't butcher overlaps or drop balls in decent attacking positions.

Personally I don't think having a winger other than Ashton would have made much difference.

Manu's Boxing Coach wrote:Not Matt Garvey again.....

Why????

Beshocked i cant blame him for the scrummaging woes...but i can blame him for a some attrocious tackling...and for losing his head completely, right in front of the referee.

The England game isnt set up for him i will agree...BUT even a loyal sarries fan like you cant defend his form and game at the moment.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Manu's Boxing Coach wrote:Not Matt Garvey again.....

Why????

Just think he is a massively overrated lump, which may fix a problem like yesterday with his physicality but longer term when we face sides like NZ etc. will be found out for his lack of skill. Also dont think we have a problem at lock I am very happy with Parling, Launchbury and Lawes and think they have the ability to live with the heightened physicality shown yesterday. Agree about Vunipola though however putting him into a GS decider is a huge call.

I actually agree to a sence that the locks arent a massive problem...but i just think having another option like him in the squad is a valuable tool. And he is mobile aswell...plays 6 very well.

And as for Billy...well maybe he's young for a GS game in the millenium stadium...but to be honest the rest of the pack played like they were school boys anyway so dont see the problem. We needed some physical ball carrying in there to take the pressure off out defence...and it just wasnt there.

In the first half we won 4 turnovers to wales one. We had chances to move the ball and get points on board but too many bad decisions were made. Youngs and Farrell must take the biggest share of the blame for this, but both played well enough in the first 3 matches (and their replacements against Italy were dire) that they deserve more credit than censure.

If I may make an observation from an independent observer. You had one back and one forward who turned up yesterday - Brown and Robshaw. The rest were abysmal with maybe Parling as average. Young and Care are rather dreadful too - compare with Philips and Laidlaw yesterday. And what was wrong with Farrell? He was all over the place and not in a good way !

The biggest problem for me was the approach to the breakdown. We won against NZ and Scotland by agressively flooding the breakdown. If the thought was that we needed to commit fewer players to have them elsewhere to develop our next phase attack, well that was wrong and the signs of that were in the few matches before Wales. Smash the breakdown with plenty of numbers and get quick ball for the backs or pick and gos before the defence can reset. Trying to wrestle two opensides and superior numbers at the breakdown was never going to work, and even less with Walsh.