France v England - Paris - 01/02/2014

First topic message reminder :

French XXIII

1. T Domingo 2. B Kayser 3. N Mas
4. A Flanquart 5. P Pape
6. Y Nyanga 7. B Le Roux 8. L Picamoles
9. J-M Doussin 10. J Plisson
12. W Fofana 13. M Basteraud
11. M Medard 15. B Dulin 14. Y Huget

16. D Sarzewski 17. Y Forestier 18. R Slimani 19. Y Maestri 20. A Burban 21. D Chouly 22. M Machenaud 23. G Fickou

England XXIII

1. J Marler
2. D Hartley
3. D Cole
4. J Launchbury
5. C Lawes
6. T Wood
7. C Robshaw
8. B Vunipola
9. D Care
10. O Farrell
11. J May
12. B Twelvetrees
13. L Burrell
14. J Nowell
15. M Brown

16. T Youngs 17. M Vunipola 18. H Thomas 19. D Attwood 20. B Morgan 21. L Dickson 22. B Barritt 23. A Goode

The Great Aukster wrote:England have to get their back line sorted. With the current injuries Mike Brown is maybe the only guy who would be in the running for any of the other teams.

so what's your point? change for other players who are even less likely to be a part of England's future? or just give them a bit more than 10 days to start gelling when 4 of the backs who played 90% of the match were either making debuts or have not been playing for england recently?

i think i will go with the latter. they will only get better, more fluent and communicate more quickly as the 6N progresses. there is no way England should chop and change the lineup apart from getting rid of Goode obviously.

maverickmak wrote:

yappysnap wrote:

maverickmak wrote:People quick to have a go at Youngs' hooking but it a lost skill and almost no modern hooker does it consistently any more. England got penalised at the scrum when Hartley didnt hook it in the first Half.

Less his hooking and more his lineout throwing.

And yet strangely, he has among the highest lineout completion stats in Europe for Leicester.

Ah, if we tell Owens that now will he give us those 2 lineouts he lost and let us replay the last 20 mins? Cause I'm up for that

quinsforever wrote:[
however you initial points re 70% possession and losing make you look a little out of touch with modern top-level international rugby. NZ had no more than 40% possession in any of their three games vs Eng, Fr or Ireland...so you cant simply draw conclusions from such a bare number.

Aye - England rarely looked dangerous with the ball tho. France always looked the more dangerous in the backs.

not sure i agree with that TJ. France didnt break the line once unless there was an english drop/turnover/knockon until the last 3 minutes!

scored two great tries with a kick and nice bounce to Huget. Plisson was largely absent after that and with big basteraud at 13 the french just never got going with the ball in hand.

anyway. good luck tomorrow mate. want to see some real intensity from your lads at the Aviva.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

maverickmak wrote:

yappysnap wrote:

maverickmak wrote:People quick to have a go at Youngs' hooking but it a lost skill and almost no modern hooker does it consistently any more. England got penalised at the scrum when Hartley didnt hook it in the first Half.

Less his hooking and more his lineout throwing.

And yet strangely, he has among the highest lineout completion stats in Europe for Leicester.

Ah, if we tell Owens that now will he give us those 2 lineouts he lost and let us replay the last 20 mins? Cause I'm up for that

Not entirely sure what that was supposed to mean. I just find it odd that he is so consistent for Leicester (and the Lions), but currently not for England. Hopefully he will get better with the extended time he will have training with different callers,jumpers and calls.

I think England should have won that in the end but made a few poor decisions - I don't understand why they didn't take the 3 points on offer at the end of the first half.

Owens, as usual, was a good ref but sometimes I do wonder about his officiating at the scrum - the 2nd to last one with about 5 mins to go right in front of the French posts was the most obvious feed you could hope to see. Didn't touch any feet til it got to the No. 8. A free kick there would probably have allowed England to see the game out.

France still didn't use Fofana or Bastareud enough. Don't see what the big deal is with Twelvetress, Burrell looked a bit more comfortable than him but again nothing special.
Thought Danny Care was good and Robshaw like always was also everywhere. Vunipolo went up in my rankings as well, ball carried really well and put in Burell for a great try
I think it's fair to say that Domingo and Mas are world class, great scrummaging displays from both. Cole looked tired, Marler is a good club player and Vunipolo just can't scrummage. Really missing Cobisiero, where is he now?
I think if the scrum was stable England would have got the win.
How people can fault Nigel is ridiculous, he was really fair today.

quinsforever wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:England have to get their back line sorted. With the current injuries Mike Brown is maybe the only guy who would be in the running for any of the other teams.

so what's your point? change for other players who are even less likely to be a part of England's future? or just give them a bit more than 10 days to start gelling when 4 of the backs who played 90% of the match were either making debuts or have not been playing for england recently?

i think i will go with the latter. they will only get better, more fluent and communicate more quickly as the 6N progresses. there is no way England should chop and change the lineup apart from getting rid of Goode obviously.

Well theres the problem. The one you want rid of is the second most experienced other than halfbacks we currently have .....
and whats the options? With May injured 9(Im assuming hell miss the next game) theres only Watson and another from the Newcaple academy or recalls for Strettle / Ashton

England desperately do need continuity but you could colour me amazed if Lancaster turns back to his experienced guys. Instead it will be more debutants or more of the same.

Goodes a problem player really. Theyve spent a year trying to pretend his pace isnt an issue, it clearly is. But getting rid of him leaves them even shorter on experience unless they turn back to players already rejected.

This is the probem caused by a mixture of Lancasters constant eye for the next big thing and the ludicrous numbers of injuries incurred. Things may look different when Tuillagi is fit but if he does jump back into the side thats yet another center combo that needs to find its feet. Ditto Foden when he returns ... either starting wing or cover from the bench but he hasnt played Burrell, May or Nowell.

The saxons is full of z listers including a few of yesterdays "form players" with a handfull of caps, and not performing.

Its a pretty worrying state of affairs really.

The lack of cover for Farrell is also a problem.

agree, lack of 10 cover was a problem today. once he started getting cramp they should have moved 36 to 10, and put barritt at 12 without shoveling Burrell to the wing.

flood having said he's going to france, not sure SL will put an uncapped specialist on the bench for 10 will he?

goode has lots of experience but he was still at best very average.

nowell, with no experience was on average quite average but that is made up of some great powerful breaks and kicks and some really poor stuff. i would stick with nowell and work on him reducing the bad stuff.

Nowell was repeatedly shown up defense. Randomly kicking the ball away when he had half the field to run into. Penalised for tackling in the air. Turned over running into isolation and the rest if te time knocked it on. Look I'm being harsh but the guy didn't step up. You can tell right away with guys if they'll make it and he won't. Sorry.

With Farrall getting injured in the last 5 minutes or so, will this give a chance for Burns,or Mylor to come in to the squad?

It was only cramp

Nowell gets another shot for me. Yes he made errors, but never dropped his head, and grew into the game.

Jhamer25 wrote:France still didn't use Fofana or Bastareud enough. Don't see what the big deal is with Twelvetress, Burrell looked a bit more comfortable than him but again nothing special.
Thought Danny Care was good and Robshaw like always was also everywhere. Vunipolo went up in my rankings as well, ball carried really well and put in Burell for a great try
I think it's fair to say that Domingo and Mas are world class, great scrummaging displays from both. Cole looked tired, Marler is a good club player and Vunipolo just can't scrummage. Really missing Cobisiero, where is he now?
I think if the scrum was stable England would have got the win.
How people can fault Nigel is ridiculous, he was really fair today.

Jhamer - as I said Nigel is a good ref (in fact probably the best) but nobody is faultless … if you're going to ping a 9 for feeding you surely have to apply the rule consistently, and if you've seen the scrum I was talking about you can't deny it was very crooked indeed?

Linebreaker wrote:Soft try. Care catching the French D on the hop.

Danny does that a lot. He's pretty hard to mark, can't blame the French defence he's done the same to the likes of the ABs and SA too

maverickmak wrote:Nowell gets another shot for me. Yes he made errors, but never dropped his head, and grew into the game.

Yeah I'd agree with that. Keep changes to a minimum - England need to be consistent if they aspire to build up a head of steam going into 2015.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Nowell was repeatedly shown up defense. Randomly kicking the ball away when he had half the field to run into. Penalised for tackling in the air. Turned over running into isolation and the rest if te time knocked it on. Look I'm being harsh but the guy didn't step up. You can tell right away with guys if they'll make it and he won't. Sorry.

you're wrong. he showed he has the attacking goods to step up if he cuts down the very easy to work on errors. and anyway he's clearly going to get a run at the whole championship if May's nose is as broken as it looked. i'd rather judge him after 5 games than take your oracular word after seeing him play a single match in white. with respect.

Duty281 wrote:

maverickmak wrote:Nowell gets another shot for me. Yes he made errors, but never dropped his head, and grew into the game.

Yeah I'd agree with that. Keep changes to a minimum - England need to be consistent if they aspire to build up a head of steam going into 2015.

Oh now you all argue consistency now the golden boy is under threat .....  

But of course he stays for now. As above its going to be hard enough to find a replacement for May if his injury keeps him out, and Goode is increasingly looking like a mistake full stop.
He got his chance through mostly injuries, those have got worse, he aint going anywhere.

But picking your first team from the saxons because your only other option is to admit you might have been wrong about the premierships top try socrer and the henieken cups top try scorer is not the best situation to be in with an eye to the present or future.

quinsforever wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Nowell was repeatedly shown up defense. Randomly kicking the ball away when he had half the field to run into. Penalised for tackling in the air. Turned over running into isolation and the rest if te time knocked it on. Look I'm being harsh but the guy didn't step up. You can tell right away with guys if they'll make it and he won't. Sorry.

you're wrong. he showed he has the attacking goods to step up if he cuts down the very easy to work on errors. and anyway he's clearly going to get a run at the whole championship if May's nose is as broken as it looked. i'd rather judge him after 5 games than take your oracular word after seeing him play a single match in white. with respect.

When did he show anything? Give me a single example?

you saying ashton defensively would have done better than Nowell?

Nowell put in some huge tackles on Parisse and the big french runners. Didnt miss a single one as far as i could see. Was Goode who completely missed a stationary Huget (v reminiscent of Ashton actually..didnt go up far enough or stay back far enough, and went weakly high in the attempted tackle).

Nowell may have made positional errors (he did) but he didn't miss any tackles. Brown did, though they were not key, and Goode made ZERO

GloriousEmpire wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Nowell was repeatedly shown up defense. Randomly kicking the ball away when he had half the field to run into. Penalised for tackling in the air. Turned over running into isolation and the rest if te time knocked it on. Look I'm being harsh but the guy didn't step up. You can tell right away with guys if they'll make it and he won't. Sorry.

you're wrong. he showed he has the attacking goods to step up if he cuts down the very easy to work on errors. and anyway he's clearly going to get a run at the whole championship if May's nose is as broken as it looked. i'd rather judge him after 5 games than take your oracular word after seeing him play a single match in white. with respect.

When did he show anything? Give me a single example?

some good catches. a couple of really good runs which took 4 or 5 french defenders to bring him down. if the french hadnt spent so much time not rolling away in the second half (i thought owens was a bit soft here) the scoreline could have been quite different. He got isolated a few times which only happens if you break the line and then get swallowed up without support. Nowell looked to me a more dangerous runner than my very own Brown, especially when returning kicks. And some great tackles on Parisse and others.

or, you can go watch the game again as you clearly weren't as focused on Noewll as i was.

I said this while the game was going on, but if it was Ashton up against Louis Picamoles at full tilt we would have seen a try, I'm fairly sure of that.

quinsforever wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Nowell was repeatedly shown up defense. Randomly kicking the ball away when he had half the field to run into. Penalised for tackling in the air. Turned over running into isolation and the rest if te time knocked it on. Look I'm being harsh but the guy didn't step up. You can tell right away with guys if they'll make it and he won't. Sorry.

you're wrong. he showed he has the attacking goods to step up if he cuts down the very easy to work on errors. and anyway he's clearly going to get a run at the whole championship if May's nose is as broken as it looked. i'd rather judge him after 5 games than take your oracular word after seeing him play a single match in white. with respect.

When did he show anything? Give me a single example?

some good catches. a couple of really good runs which took 4 or 5 french defenders to bring him down. if the french hadnt spent so much time not rolling away in the second half (i thought owens was a bit soft here) the scoreline could have been quite different. He got isolated a few times which only happens if you break the line and then get swallowed up without support.  Nowell looked to me a more dangerous runner than my very own Brown, especially when returning kicks. And some great tackles on Parisse and others.

or, you can go watch the game again as you clearly weren't as focused on Noewll as i was.

Wow. Clearly we didn't watch the same game. Do You Hvar a time reference for an instance where he needed 5 French defenders to bring him down and I'll check it?

Espn stats say Nowell made more metres (87) than anybody else bar Dulin, and beat 2 defenders and made 1 clean break.

Espn stats are Poopie though! And say he turned over ball 5 times...

Maybe, but it is an good indication of how players went comparatively. Nowell made good yardage. The turnover stats include knock-ons and such, so its probably about right. Edit: i.e. its not turnovers won, but turnovers conceded by errors.

Yeah I know

England had a lot of possession in the second half so their individual yardage is not comparable with France's. He might've been running into the ball against what was a fairly passive defensive system but he didn't penetrate or create anything. But a Labrador out there playing catch and it would've run as many meters. Point is virtually every time he had it he turned over possession or have away a penalty or knocked on.

GloriousEmpire wrote:He might've been running into the ball against what was a fairly passive defensive system but he didn't penetrate or create anything. But a Labrador out there playing catch and it would've run as many meters.

Surely (if these stats are to be believed) the fact that he made more metres than any English player shows thats a load of horlicks. Why didn't the rest make more metres? They are all just about better than labradors aren't they?

Heaf wrote:

Jhamer25 wrote:France still didn't use Fofana or Bastareud enough. Don't see what the big deal is with Twelvetress, Burrell looked a bit more comfortable than him but again nothing special.
Thought Danny Care was good and Robshaw like always was also everywhere. Vunipolo went up in my rankings as well, ball carried really well and put in Burell for a great try
I think it's fair to say that Domingo and Mas are world class, great scrummaging displays from both. Cole looked tired, Marler is a good club player and Vunipolo just can't scrummage. Really missing Cobisiero, where is he now?
I think if the scrum was stable England would have got the win.
How people can fault Nigel is ridiculous, he was really fair today.

Jhamer - as I said Nigel is a good ref (in fact probably the best) but nobody is faultless … if you're going to ping a 9 for feeding you surely have to apply the rule consistently, and if you've seen the scrum I was talking about you can't deny it was very crooked indeed?

No it didn't mean to aim it at you because you are right that there were dodgy feeds. It what other people have said on social networks mainly to use excuses

Any idea on injuries guys? Do we think May will play next week? Is Nowell injured or Lancaster just insane?

maverickmak wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:He might've been running into the ball against what was a fairly passive defensive system but he didn't penetrate or create anything. But a Labrador out there playing catch and it would've run as many meters.

Surely (if these stats are to be believed) the fact that he made more metres than any English player shows thats a load of horlicks. Why didn't the rest make more metres? They are all just about better than labradors aren't they?

You'd expect your right wing to be running in more space than other other player, aside from your fullback. One meter gained by Robshaw or Morgan is probably worth 10 meters run by a wing. Especially if the wing then immediately got turned over.

yeah okay, so the fact he ran the most yards of any english player means he's rubbish becasue anyone decent would have run more?

for someone who prides themselves on argument based on reason, your "reason" for this opinion is clear. you didnt like Nowell before the game, said so loudly, so now cant accept he did anything of merit.

bravo. well done.

better brush up on espn data and how to deliberately misinterpret it as Nowell, given may's nose, is going to be playing the rest of the 6N.

I'm saying that you can't just wield a largely meaningless statistic as evidence that his peformance was good. What did he actually contribute? He had a disasterous game. Did you actually watch it?

"Winger did more running" is like saying youngs hooked more ball than anyone other than Hartley so he must be a great hooker.

I didn't say anything about him before the game. My opinion is based on his poor performance alone.

3 turnovers in 9 carries isn't great to be fair. Brown by the stats had a poor game in defence, largely due to the positioning at wing I expect. But the key point I can garner from the stats was that, penalty aside, Goode had a dire game.

Though being espn stats, I still wouldn't trust them and wished the opta stats were more freely available

Interesting game all round. I thought the pack were generally excellent, bar Cole who's been a bit subdued since last 6N. He has always struggled against Domingo and his work in the loose wasn't bad. Shame Davy Wilson is injured.

I thought Robshaw, Lawes and Billy V were outstanding. Hartey and Marler did very well as did Wood. Launchbury seemed quieter but perhaps allowed others the limelight.

Attwood was strong when he came on and Morgan looked like a cat with mustard in a secret place. Likewise Youngs had impact.

In the back line I thought Farrell showed signs of varying his game, nice delay for the Burrell try. Care was excellent bar his box kicking which I'd rather he did less of.

36 and Burrell were fairly sound defensively and they deserve another go. A shame May went off so soon as with some pace down that wing I feel there were a few scoring opportunities. Brown was accomplished Goode less so.

Nowell had a torrid first 30 but grew in to the game a bit more. No reason why he shouldn't get another go against the Scots.

For me the mistake lay in taking Nowell of and putting Burrell to the wing. When he stepped in early the French scored. We just lacked that extra spark to nail them from 65 onwards. With a more creative bench we may have had the opportunity to do that.

Same team again for me against Scotland. With May possibly out I think it's over to Watson or Abendanon for left wing.

If a scrum half knows box kicking isn't a strength (and it's not an actual strength of many 9s, certainly none of ours) I can't understand why you'd ever do it. There's almost always a more intelligent option on. I hate box-kicks, but maybe that's because I'm a Quins fan and they are not Danny's best point

Also, whatever his flaws, you could see today that an attacking 9 allows Farrell more space and thus he can play more attacking rugby!

Jhamer25 wrote:

Heaf wrote:

Jhamer25 wrote:France still didn't use Fofana or Bastareud enough. Don't see what the big deal is with Twelvetress, Burrell looked a bit more comfortable than him but again nothing special.
Thought Danny Care was good and Robshaw like always was also everywhere. Vunipolo went up in my rankings as well, ball carried really well and put in Burell for a great try
I think it's fair to say that Domingo and Mas are world class, great scrummaging displays from both. Cole looked tired, Marler is a good club player and Vunipolo just can't scrummage. Really missing Cobisiero, where is he now?
I think if the scrum was stable England would have got the win.
How people can fault Nigel is ridiculous, he was really fair today.

Jhamer - as I said Nigel is a good ref (in fact probably the best) but nobody is faultless … if you're going to ping a 9 for feeding you surely have to apply the rule consistently, and if you've seen the scrum I was talking about you can't deny it was very crooked indeed?

No it didn't mean to aim it at you because you are right that there were dodgy feeds. It what other people have said on social networks mainly to use excuses

OK cheers Jhamer … the biggest error for me was England not taking the penalty before half time - in a game that was shaping up to be close they should have taken the points.

There is a lot of talk on this thread about stats.  Stats Shmats, in my opinion.   Rugby is a team game and the strongest team usually comes through regardless of any individual statistics.   The way I see it, the only stat that matters is the final score.

England lost in Paris today because they had a horrible first quarter and, more importantly, they failed to see the game out in the final quarter.  Everything in between was pretty good, I thought.  

A more experienced team, playing in unison, would have been better able to do that.  

The problem with England is that they never know who their best team is.  In the past, England's best teams have been those that have been together for a while.  They may not have had the greatest players, nor played champagne rugby, but they were a band of brothers who not only talked the talk, but walked the walk, played as a single unit and would knock down brick walls for each other.

I didn't see too much of that today, and haven't for a long time.

Chris Robshaw is a fine captain, but he needs captains all over the pitch, just like Martin Johnson had at the turn of the century.  Players who know what to do in any given situation, can grab a game by the scruff of the neck, and know that the rest of the players are right there with him.

No player slots into a team as the finished article.  We first need to find a group of players who can learn to work together as an effective unit. Then we can work on each part of that team and bring them up to the standard we want.  Find the players first, then build them into the team you want.  Each man may not be individually brilliant, but sometimes, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

I wish England had a captain who is the font of all wisdom for every possible situation in a game.  In wish England had "flair" players, full of smart moves and clean running lines.  I wish England had a pack that operates like a well oiled machine.

And as my old mum used to say:  If wishes were horses the Devil would ride.

England need to first find a settled, established team.  Then we can do something about our wish list.

Some thoughts:

Care was great, as he always is for quins, but should not bother box kicking - he's rubbish at it so might as well let faz / 36 get on with doing proper clearances.

Farrell looked as good as he ever has for England imo. He's no Carlos Spencer but his determination to improve in attack is a big positive from this winter.

Nowell was actually pretty good imo but should drop out for Wade when fit, since Wade is a whole new level of threat.

Gutted for May, he's a crazy player but deceptively dangerous and I'd love to see him get an extended run at this level.

Finally, any English fans (or anyone) criticising Owens are idiots, he was yet again clear and fair in his officiating. Chalk this up alongside SA-NZ and Ire-NZ as yet another classic test match officiated by Owens in which almost no-one noticed the referee. If that's not the definition of a good referee then I don't know what is.

Wi11 wrote:Some thoughts:

Care was great, as he always is for quins, but should not bother box kicking - he's rubbish at it so might as well let faz / 36 get on with doing proper clearances.

Farrell looked as good as he ever has for England imo. He's no Carlos Spencer but his determination to improve in attack is a big positive from this winter.

Nowell was actually pretty good imo but should drop out for Wade when fit, since Wade is a whole new level of threat.

Gutted for May, he's a crazy player but deceptively dangerous and I'd love to see him get an extended run at this level.

Finally, any English fans (or anyone) criticising Owens are idiots, he was yet again clear and fair in his officiating. Chalk this up alongside  SA-NZ and Ire-NZ as yet another classic test match officiated by Owens in which almost no-one noticed the referee. If that's not the definition of a good referee then I don't know what is.

Nigel Owens is probably one of the best referees of all time.

He keeps a cool head, knows how to manage players and officiates as much by common sense as he does by the rule book.

He has the respect of the players and (in my opinion) is impeccably impartial.

I bet he spins some bloody good yarns in the club house after games, too..!!

What is turning me off Owens a little is that it seems like he is letting the plaudits go to his head and, to me, seems to be trying to become a bit of a 'celebrity ref'.

Having said that, he is the best of a bad bunch. Standards need to improve across the board. Shame the IRB won't do anything.

Wi11 - I do think Nigel is a good ref but that doesn't mean he can't make mistakes, so I don't think it's necessarily being critical if people question some of his decisions or point out things he may have missed.  It is possible to hold someone in high regard without thinking they are infallible.

Agree with a lot of what's been said here but not with Care's box kicking. From the last row in the stadium, it looked like a very deliberate tactic to get hang time and give the team time to chase. One that went straight to touch aside, I thought Care's kicking was fine. His DG was better than Farrell's attempt, so it's not as if his kicking radar was off.

On the whole, I thought England had a very good 55 minutes from about 20 min until 75 mins, and controlled the game in that time, but they were undone by loose defence in the first 20 and by losing their defensive shape in the last 5. I am pretty sure that if Brown had been at FB, France would not have scored under the posts - they may well have scored, but with a far harder conversion.

Positives were the attacking play and learning that Nowell (sorry GE, you're wrong) and Burrell have potential. Main negative is Cole's vulnerability at the scrum, and the confirmation that you either start with T Youngs or don't play him at all. He is not safe enough at the setpiece to close out a game.

Burrell looked pretty comfy at 13 to me, it's a tough position to drop straight in to especially as he usually plays 12 at Saints. I'd quite like to see a new centre combo (PSW will love that) when Manu is fit and have Burrell at 12 and Manu at 13.

Nowell had a standard test match debut, some issues but some good play, almost exactly like Yarde's debut which tells me it's more about pressure to make an impact then a lack of skill, also probably not helped by a lack of experience around him to tell him to chill the feck out. The difference between him and others was that he never dropped his head, and his tackling of the monster French forwards was class.

Care needs to start the rest of the tournament now. He showed in that game why a threat at 9 is essential at top level rugby, likewise his control took so much pressure off of Farrell. They'll only get better as they play more as well.

Agree with you there yappy, Burrell at 12 and Manu at 13 could be something special.
I also thought that Nowell had a decent match, he made some mistakes but it was quite clear that the lad has talent and is more than worth sticking with.
Lawes was awesome all match, he really put the French under loads of pressure.