Mind Games or What May Have Been

by yappysnap Fri 23 Jan 2015, 2:55 pm

England would be a better side had they brought Wayne Smith on board, according to former Springboks and Italy coach Nick Mallett.
When Martin Johnson left his role as England coach in the wake of the turbulent 2011 Rugby World Cup, Mallett was a forerunner to succeed him. But he watched on as Stuart Lancaster took the job on an interim basis and knew the minute England saw off Ireland 30-9 Lancaster had the post on a permanent basis.
But Mallett feels England would be playing a better style of rugby had he got the job, predominantly as he had persuaded Smith to join him as part of his coaching team.
"I don't think England are missing anything in not having me as a head coach, but I do think England has missed not having Wayne Smith," Mallett told The Times. "He and I were keen to do it together and he really is world-class. The All Blacks have just brought him back into their set-up because they rate him so highly. He is a brilliant coach.
"There would have been a lot more fluidity and cutting edge to the England attack. Perhaps with a guy like Wayne Smith coaching, Owen Farrell wouldn't be as wooden as he is sometimes with the ball in hand.
"There would be clarity about the way in which England play in the back line. He coaches attack by manipulating the opposition defence, he coaches players to read the space and take better decisions on the field. He understands defence, he understands attack, he understands the timing of a pass and the distribution of forwards and backs across the field.
"A big point of difference with the New Zealand forwards is that they can all pass like centres, they are multi-skilled, and that is what he would have brought to this England side."

Mallet might be starting the mind games early but I can't help but wonder just where we'd be with Smith involved with the team.

by HammerofThunor Fri 23 Jan 2015, 3:10 pm

I reckon we would be riding unicorns and farting rainbows

by **Rugby Fan** Fri 23 Jan 2015, 3:21 pm

Mallett is honest enough to say that Smith would have made a difference, rather than himself, but I'm not so sure that he could have brought the New Zealander into the coaching set-up, in which case the question is moot.

by lostinwales Fri 23 Jan 2015, 3:24 pm

I can believe the understanding of how attack/defense works etc, although there is always a fair amount of BS in descriptions of gurus.

I don't think however it is that easy to suddenly turn locks in to players who 'pass like centres' (though probably not Mike Tindall) unless they have learned those skills early on, like the New Zealand forwards do.

by **LondonTiger** Fri 23 Jan 2015, 3:48 pm

Would we have been better with Smith instead of Catt/Farrell? Probably.

But if we had to have Mallett as well! We are well off without that gigantic egotistical dinosaur.

by Cyril Fri 23 Jan 2015, 5:26 pm

Ah, Nick Mallett.

The guy who makes SCW seem relevant and 'in touch'.

by sickofwendy Fri 23 Jan 2015, 6:16 pm

It's irrelevant because smith was offered a post under Lancaster because he couldn't face up to the prospect of beating the all blacks in a World Cup,it wouldn't sit right with him
Yawn for mallet

by majesticimperialman Fri 23 Jan 2015, 6:26 pm

Why does Nick Mallet think that England would be playing better with him in charge?

He may have been a world cup winning coach........But he did not do much when he was in charge of Italy.

He should just simply be ignored.

by Breadvan Fri 23 Jan 2015, 6:38 pm

Our attacking play wouldve been better no doubt with Smith in the coaching set up. Lancaster already tried to lure him a couple of years ago but he didn't want to uproot his family I think.

by yappysnap Sat 24 Jan 2015, 10:25 am

HammerofThunor wrote:I reckon we would be riding unicorns and farting rainbows

by sickofwendy Thu 29 Jan 2015, 10:11 am

He's at it again
Apparently England need to settle on a style of play and stick with
He adds " time is running out"
You can hear it on the radio this evening

by Gwlad Thu 29 Jan 2015, 4:44 pm

sickofwendy wrote:He's at it again
Apparently England need to settle on a style of play and stick with
He adds " time is running out"
You can hear it on the radio this evening

And he's right, problem is with the injury rate and too many picks to chose from England keep tinkering with their team and no style develops.

by sickofwendy Thu 29 Jan 2015, 5:10 pm

Is he?
I would much rather England vary their style based on opposition and conditions

by Gwlad Thu 29 Jan 2015, 7:12 pm

sickofwendy wrote:Is he?
I would much rather England vary their style based on opposition and conditions

thats a given, its called heads up rugby and in terms of the 6 Nations it ain't working.

Mallett is referring to a much more fundamental issue about how England play the game. The constant selection flux leads to a situation where no familiarity forms, no team is established and no style appears. This is exacerbated by the huge selection of players on offer and injury at the moment.

by sickofwendy Thu 29 Jan 2015, 7:37 pm

To be honest I doubt england will ever be able put out a full strength side
It hasn't happrned under Lancaster

by Sponsored content

Mind Games or What May Have Been

Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been

Re: Mind Games or What May Have Been