Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

by **Rugby Fan** Mon Nov 18, 2013 12:42 pm

First topic message reminder :

From The Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2013/nov/17/england-wide-boys-limitations-new-zealand

Stuart Lancaster has talked about wanting this England side to play with pace and width, but I would say there is no chance of a successful World Cup in 2015 if they keep trying to do that. Holding their hands up and admitting it may help this team move forward. England playing to their strengths may not give the Twickenham crowd the same kind of thrill as watching Charles Piutau and Kieran Read off‑loading at pace, but Dan Cole destroying Tony Woodcock at the scrum has a beauty all of its own...

...For all that England have a world-class forward pack, resilience and defensive structure they remain vulnerable to those moments of brilliance because the backs do not make the most of the dominance laid down by the forwards. So it may be time for Lancaster to say: "This is what we are and we should try to maximise that." South Africa have arrived at that conclusion: they kick an awful lot and are heavily reliant on their big forwards and they have become fed up with pretending to be anything else.

I think potentially England need to do that because there are areas where they are excellent. They are not very good at the other game, of trying to find space and width, because the precision in the back line is poor and they just end up in a mundane, phase game that looks so predictable against a decent defence. I don't think there will have been a moment when England worked the ball wide that caused the All Blacks coaches' hearts to have skipped a beat, whereas from the scrum and driven lineouts they will have frequently.

The search for an all-court game is not working but England have a world-class pack and should play to its strengths.

I don't think the comparison with South Africa really works because Habana, Le Roux and JP Pietersen are far more lethal than anything England has fielded. Watching Le Roux's wonderful kick to the corner for Pietersen to score against Scotland, I was reminded of Ashton's failed attempt, albeit under far more pressure, to do something similar.

I do think the all-singing, all-dancing game South Africa played against New Zealand in the final round of the Rugby Championship was a bit of an outlier. The Boks needed a bonus point so they couldn't just settle for trying to get a win. I'm sure Meyer will have noticed that his team still lost, so I wouldn't envisage similar tactics against the All Blacks at a World Cup.

Nevertheless, South Africa pose real threats out wide and that keeps opposition teams on their toes. Woodward's England was the same. At their peak, they scored ries for fun against all teams, so no-one could afford to assume the likes of Robinson and Cohen were just going to take the tackle or kick.

As it stands, I don't think Lancaster can afford to take Ryan's advice because we don't even know our best backline if we were to settle for a more conservative approach.

by **RDW** Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:02 pm

On England, I think they are a world class winger and centre away from being a top 3 regular team. Very strong in most areas, but lacking two real game changers in those positions specifically. Imagine what that England team would be like with one of the Kiwi wingers in their team.

Surely with all the players in England you can find a better winger than Ben Foden??

by beshocked Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:06 pm

Comfort

Of course England need to sort out the backs. It's just who do we play? I feel the problem is the centres but I know some believe the problems stem from the half backs.

Finding that balance in any team is tough.

Agree that Dean Ryan should stick to to sorting out Worcester. I think him and SCW should get a room together.

RDW for some reason wingers are a problem. Plus a bit of unfortunate injuries have robbed Yarde and Wade of opportunities.

by Scrumpy Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:06 pm

There are some that are better RDW, but not in the eyes of SL.

If you can't cover more than one position in the backs then you can kiss you England chances good bye under SL.

by Exiledinborders Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:14 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:On England, I think they are a world class winger and centre away from being a top 3 regular team. Very strong in most areas, but lacking two real game changers in those positions specifically. Imagine what that England team would be like with one of the Kiwi wingers in their team.

Surely with all the players in England you can find a better winger than Ben Foden??

Not sure what you mean by being a top 3 team. They are already third in world rankings.

by **RDW** Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:24 pm

Exiledinborders wrote:
RDW_Scotland wrote:On England, I think they are a world class winger and centre away from being a top 3 regular team. Very strong in most areas, but lacking two real game changers in those positions specifically. Imagine what that England team would be like with one of the Kiwi wingers in their team.

Surely with all the players in England you can find a better winger than Ben Foden??
Not sure what you mean by being a top 3 team. They are already third in world rankings.

Jeez, you know what I mean! picard

Everyone knows those rankings have their flaws, and let's not turn this into a debate on that.

OK I'll change it to say a regular top 2 team - that clarifies my view. I don't judge England as being that much better than France, Australia or Wales - they are a world class winger and centre away from being in that position IMO.

by Comfort Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:27 pm

Beshocked I think its the 9 and centres (more specifically the balance).

I said on the other thread that if you give Farrell 2 strong running centres and put back youngs/care to scrum half where they offer a decent snipe then you'll see him perform to his best. I would even keep ashton on the wing for his inside support lines. Farrell isnt a renowned running 10, so I ask why people think he'd be effective with a 9 that doesnt offer a running threat and a 12/13 that dont really offer any huge threat of power or speed, they're ballplayers, having 4 ball players in the midfield should mean you get the ball out early to the wings, but for some reason this isnt the case.

With whats available to England currently I would go with:

9. Youngs
10. Farrell
12. Twelvetrees
13, Burrell

I'd have Burrell running the crash ball at 12 as he does for saints so well and have Twelvetrees playing a little wider on the next phase and spinning the ball out to the back 3 in a bit of space and see what they can do, the talent is there to cut teams to pieces imo. With Youngs at 9 able to exploit the gaps and keep the fringe defence honest it already gives Farrell a yard more of space and time and a centre who loves to run that crash and take the pressure off him when needed. When things go to plan you get the ball out early and will find theres space out there for the likes of Yarde/Wade/Brown/Foden to exploit.

all just my opinion of course. Ale

by munkian Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:28 pm

From Rugbworld.com (Justifying my Heresy for Beshocked)

Farrell still has work to do

Owen Farrell deserves a great deal of credit for the composure he showed against New Zealand to kick all six of his goals and effectively keep England in the game. However, his play with ball in hand still requires a lot of work. Too often he is guilty of receiving the ball and crabbing laterally across the pitch, eating up the space for the men outside him. Unless he has someone running a hard, short line off his shoulder (which neither Twelvetrees or Tomkins did on Saturday) it is an ineffectual use of possession. Farrell must learn to run straighter and commit the defenders, rather than allow them to drift so easily.

Read more at http://www.rugbyworld.com/news/blogs/england-five-things-we-learned-against-new-zealand/#dxblmmO055t47U7X.99

by Geordie Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:30 pm

Or get Care to play the playmaker role that he does for Quins rather than the one he's asked to do for England.

With him and Twelvetrees either side of Farrell should be fine.

by Comfort Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:30 pm

munkian wrote: Too often he is guilty of receiving the ball and crabbing laterally across the pitch, eating up the space for the men outside him. Unless he has someone running a hard, short line off his shoulder (which neither Twelvetrees or Tomkins did on Saturday) it is an ineffectual use of possession. Farrell must learn to run straighter and commit the defenders, rather than allow them to drift so easily.

Read more at http://www.rugbyworld.com/news/blogs/england-five-things-we-learned-against-new-zealand/#dxblmmO055t47U7X.99

so Burrell at 13 to run the typical inside crash line and take pressure off him? Cool

by Scratch Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:56 pm

With Tuilagi England can go wide because he crosses the gainline

by TJ Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:44 pm

I have not read allthe posts but Ryan is a dinosaur who does not recognise thast rugby has moved on. Since 2003 the top- teams realised they needed a strong pack as well. England will not out wrestle them to get to the top now you need to be able to score tires with backs - NZ and SA packs will not be bullied by anyone. the 2003 england team would get nowhere near

by Scrumpy Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:21 am

TJ wrote: NZ and SA packs will not be bullied by anyone. the 2003 england team would get nowhere near

Thats like saying the Great Welsh teams of the 70s wouldn't be able to beat a Principality Prem team today. Laugh

by nobbled Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:11 pm

When Worcester aren't getting their @rses handed to them week in week out I'd pay more attention to what Dean Ryan has to say.
Sorry if that sounds bitter, but then I am a Worcester fan. Fortunately as I was dragged up in Bristol I will probably still have a Premiership team to support next season despite Dean Ryan.

I would like to see England use the pacier younger lads come through, and let's give some credit to Lancaster - Wade and Yarde were set to play had they not got injured.

Ben Youngs is good, but he frustrates the hell out of me - as he is soooo slow to get the ball out from the ruck. He does his meerkat impression for far too long.

by Chjw131 Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:19 pm

I have a lot of respect of Dean Ryan but this sort of comment is just tripe. Firstly, South Africa are expanding their game more. Yes they're still very controlled with Morne Steyn at the helm but with Goosen and others they look far more dangerous through the backline.

Secondly, this type of thinking needs to be labelled for what it is, out-dated. The days of strangling teams to death and expecting it to be successful on a consistent basis are long gone.

by Sponsored content

Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide

Re: Dean Ryan Wants Lancaster To Abandon Ambition to Play Wide