Englands Style / Performances

Englands performances are causing alot of discussion for two points. The forwards have looked pretty good, and yet the backs have looked lost, skillless, lacking of any ideas, attacking endeavor or risk taking.

This leads to much discusion about players being dropped, players who should come in etc...

The question i ask is...

A) Is it the players that is failing the system...as they genuinely DONT have the skills required. Are the selectors picking the wrong players.

OR

B) Is it the system and coaching (coaching instructions) that is restricting the players...suffocating them almost, that they are unable to show their club form and ability on the international stage?

We have pretty new backs, we have new combinations. I'd expect them to keep getting better as they get more experience but can understand why they didn't become brilliant as a unit from day one.

In the long run this may be an advantage to us, building up a bigger player base with experience of playing in the England setup.

I do sometimes think fans are expecting way too much.

A bit of both I think Geordie, is Tomkins as naturally talented as Conrad Smith? No. I'm not sure the English system turns out that sort of player sadly.

But at the same time as that, I don't think our coaches are world class. I like SL but the reality is no club sides tried to sign him as coach and his record at Leeds was average at best. Faz, Catt and Rowntree are all still learning their trade.

The best (in my opinion) coach England have had was Brian Ashton but when he was head coach he was forced out for trying to get the players to play what was in front of them rather than having a rigid structured game plan. To me, that speaks volumes about the mentality of rugby coaching in this country.

nathan wrote:We have pretty new backs, we have new combinations. I'd expect them to keep getting better as they get more experience but can understand why they didn't become brilliant as a unit from day one.

In the long run this may be an advantage to us, building up a bigger player base with experience of playing in the England setup.

I do sometimes think fans are expecting way too much.

I don't think they're pretty - well, only in comparison to the forwards...

Bathman_in_London wrote:A bit of both I think Geordie, is Tomkins as naturally talented as Conrad Smith? No. I'm not sure the English system turns out that sort of player sadly.

But at the same time as that, I don't think our coaches are world class. I like SL but the reality is no club sides tried to sign him as coach and his record at Leeds was average at best. Faz, Catt and Rowntree are all still learning their trade.

The best (in my opinion) coach England have had was Brian Ashton but when he was head coach he was forced out for trying to get the players to play what was in front of them rather than having a rigid structured game plan. To me, that speaks volumes about the mentality of rugby coaching in this country.

The irony of the situation of England in the WC in 2007 where Ashton took a lot of flak. England did so well because the 'players took control' when they had a coach who liked the players to take responsibility...

I think England need to give Burns, Flood or Ford a chance at fly half. Farrell isn't the right guy.

I don't think England have a 'style' at the moment, and that may well be the problem.

Why is that though Maesteg, Sarries score lots of tries at club level. Farrell looks very good, as does Ashton etc...thus i ask again is it the system that is failing?

Who are Sarries centres ?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Why is that though Maesteg, Sarries score lots of tries at club level. Farrell looks very good, as does Ashton etc...thus i ask again is it the system that is failing?

At club level Sarries pack dominate other teams giving an easy platform to work from. At international level England do not have the same level of comfort.

And do you think Burns/ Ford or Flood can operate with the same level of forward play?

Flood has proven that he cant really. Burns is playing behind a woeful pack at club level..and not showing the performances he showed last season.

GeordieFalcon wrote:And do you think Burns/ Ford or Flood can operate with the same level of forward play?

Flood has proven that he cant really. Burns is playing behind a woeful pack at club level..and not showing the performances he showed last season.

I'm just suggesting that looking at other options would be worthwhile in my opinion. Ford and Burns have looked very talented this season. I think Flood is still a quality fly half.

I don't rate Farrell, he doesn't have the right instincts to run the game England need to play to make their fans and pundits happier with their performance.

Inconsistency has plagued England, that has been their biggest downfall, they aren't the only ones mind.

And I think Lancaster must now stop experimenting with his selections, I do realise injuries always play a part, but continuity in selection is crucial at this stage.

Biltong wrote:Inconsistency has plagued England, that has been their biggest downfall, they aren't the only ones mind.

And I think Lancaster must now stop experimenting with his selections, I do realise injuries always play a part, but continuity in selection is crucial at this stage.

They have been pretty unlucky with injuries too Bill.

If they could keep their six nations backline together for this autumn series they would surely be an impressive unit. Missing Mako and Corbisiero will hurt them badly this autumn.

Bilts,

Im not sure Lancaster is experimenting...if you look at the team generally its actually pretty settle in a large number of positions.

The problem is a few of the key/crticial positions are the ones that supporters are questioning - probably the midfield (10-12-13)being the biggest headache.

Maesteg,
Your right that there is defo a problem in the midfield area. Farrell is a curious one. I would like to see how Burns or Flood went against Argentina more butits quite obvious Farrells name is not only pencilled in...its penned in with permanent ink.

I think you may just be over emphasising England's forward play slightly GF. They've looked OK and no more.....as a result England look OK and no more. I've been uncinvinced by our pack for a while now, particularly the front five, a pet hate of mine are second rowers and props stood in the centers, they're called a TIGHT five for a reason. Give me a front five player who trundles, rucks, mauls, scrums, lifts and tackles in the TIGHT any day over a guy we constantly hear is 'great in the loose' Our LOOSE forwards can do that bit. I really think we need to decide on a style of our own and stick with it. Half forwards like Mako, Lawes, Launchbury, Marler - there're just too many of them. One or two max, is a bonus to a team.....filling your pack with wanna be backrowers/backs doesn't wash I'm afraid and as a result it doesn't matter who's playing behind them.....just my opinion but I'd prefer an Adam Jones over a Vunipola all day long.....

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Maesteg,
Your right that there is defo a problem in the midfield area. Farrell is a curious one. I would like to see how Burns or Flood went against Argentina more butits quite obvious Farrells name is not only pencilled in...its penned in with permanent ink.

It's a shame.

I was sailing with a Chiefs fan who feels the same. It is a blinkered decision to go with one young flyhalf when you have three young flyhalf options and two years to the RWC.

Farrell has had a year and in many people's opinion has not been convincing enough to assure fans that he deserves the cemented place he seems to have been given.

nobbled wrote:

nathan wrote:We have pretty new backs, we have new combinations. I'd expect them to keep getting better as they get more experience but can understand why they didn't become brilliant as a unit from day one.

In the long run this may be an advantage to us, building up a bigger player base with experience of playing in the England setup.

I do sometimes think fans are expecting way too much.

I don't think they're pretty - well, only in comparison to the forwards...

 You'll be accusing me of being digby ioane next!

I think expectations are being heightened again (as they should be).

England have just beaten Australia and smashed Argentina.

There were two decent halves of rugby and two poor ones. It's not like they can't do it, it's just consistency that's lacking. This is partially down to new players coming in and injuries.

Lancaster seems to be getting criticised both for not bringing in new players and also for not having consistent selection.

You don't bring in more new players while you're already playing green combinations due to injury.

And its a FACT that Wade would have at least played last week if not for injury. As for no.10 I think the biggest problem is that Burns hasnt shown consistent form. The last time he did he got injured before he could be picked. Farrell has - has shown glimpses of some good stuff, has that big game mentality and defense. Defense does seem to be the big thing for us at the moment.

I really dont know who is the future. I'd like to see more of Burns but he isnt making a case for himself at the moment. I also haven't seen Flood show the form he used to.

We as fans seem to be like a revolving door.

Campaign to get a player in, after a couple of games declare said player isn't international calibre and call for them to be axed, Campaign to get another player in.... Then when there are no players left we call the quality of england players awful and we should change the rfu administration from top to bottom.

Most fans want consistency ..but SL is getting criticised for consistantly playing players who are not hitting the level required.

However this reverts back to what im asking...is this the players who seem to perform very well for their clubs...even up to HC level or the system. Im suspecting a bit of both.

nathan wrote:We as fans seem to be like a revolving door.

Campaign to get a player in, after a couple of games declare said player isn't international calibre and call for them to be axed, Campaign to get another player in.... Then when there are no players left we call the quality of england players awful and we should change the rfu administration from top to bottom.

Did anyone want Tomkins?

Most fans want to see Burrell or Eastmond play along side 36 in the absence of Manu.

Aren't both those 12s though? Why drop a new cap in out of position when we have a 13 ready to go?