Mike Brown applauds France for not folding, unlike..................

First topic message reminder :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-3006594/Mike-Brown-hails-France-refusing-fold-unlike-countries-England-finish-second-Six-Nations-points-difference.html

Is he right? France definitely played their best game by a mile against England, but as England fans, we're used to that for all opponents, but did Italy and Scotland play with a proper spirit to win or lose as honourably as they possibly could?

I think they probably did, but England fell short on points difference again due to all our opponents being on their ""A game against us as usual. This factor should be largely negated at the RWC, as that in itself is a big enough motivation for all teams and so the playing field will be leveled. This is why of course, England does rather well at world cups compared to our NH comrades, irrespective of recent 6N results. Bring it on!!!!

I think he expected them not to fall away like they did. I was surprised they can in my mind play much better. I know a lot of fans feel that's their level though.

I think it's more likely that he expected Ireland to win, but not by such a margin playing the more conservative game previously.
Maybe Brown is the arrogant one?

More likely a few posters who think if their team turns up Scotland and Italy stand no chance I would say. He's actually bigging them up for a few posters to say no you're wrong they really are that bad.

So you think if England turn up against Italy, for example, that Italy have a realistic chance of beating them?

I would expect their level of performance to be decent. The Italian coach described it as a humiliation, I don't think they did themselves justice.

That's not answering my question You would absolutely expect England to beat Italy, and beat them well. That isn't arrogance. It's a realistic expectation based on the current form of both teams.
Italy had nothing left to give in the second half. They give it their all in the first in keeping the score close with Wales. Missing Parisse didn't help much either.

Isn't it interesting that the difference between having 61 points scored against a team is a humiliation yet having 55 against shows a plucky unyielding resolve?

Parisse no show and two yellows?

I repeat, what did people (and even the Italian coach) expect?  22-25?  6-10?  This is the Wales that put Scotland to the sword last year when one of the Scots was foolish enough to pick up a red.  They don't hang around, them Welsh, when they spot that the prey is wounded.

The Great Aukster wrote:Isn't it interesting that the difference between having 61 points scored against a team is a humiliation yet having 55 against shows a plucky unyielding resolve?

Do you actually watch rugby?

The Great Aukster wrote:Isn't it interesting that the difference between having 61 points scored against a team is a humiliation yet having 55 against shows a plucky unyielding resolve?

I think its more the points scored by the losing team is being criticised - not the points conceded. Plus who was at home/ away.

Munchkin wrote:That's not answering my question You would absolutely expect England to beat Italy, and beat them well. That isn't arrogance. It's a realistic expectation based on the current form of both teams.
Italy had nothing left to give in the second half. They give it their all in the first in keeping the score close with Wales. Missing Parisse didn't help much either.

But this is about performance as much as score. The performance was not good enough.

Well we better not start a topic on points 'scored by the losing team'. Such a discussion might get raw because I for one would be calling for the Six Nations to bring in a bonus point system for stringent defences.

Not good enough to give England the 6N's. That's the real issue here, and with Brown.

England's defense against France is really what lost you the 6N's. Not that it wasn't a great game to watch, and not that you didn't come very close to taking it though.

Yes, the winning of the Title is hidden somewhere in those 35 points - not in the 55. Lancaster will undoubtedly do the analysis and eventually come to that conclusion.

Oh don't get me wrong we lost because we didn't finish enough chances. All I'm saying is I agree with Brown to the extent Scotland and Italy will be sat at home pretty miffed by their performances.

Munchkin wrote: England's defense against France is really what lost you the 6N's. Not that it wasn't a great game to watch, and not that you didn't come very close to taking it though.

Although I enjoyed the spectacle I was very surprised by England. With a 12 point lead at half time all England needed to do was strangle the life out of a very poor France. With a dominant pack and two class half backs England could have scored twice, denied France anything and lifted the trophy. The ill disciplined open game they pursued was great to watch but cost them the championship. Not much nous shown when it mattered.

MrsP wrote:Maybe Brown expected that France would turn up and not show the slightest interest in the game?
We have all seen French club sides just not bother when they are away from home and have nothing to play for.

They didn't either- when they didn't have the ball. It was a very French performance. Swinging from brilliant attacking play to being completely half-arsed in everything they did and then back again within minutes. Only France could alternate between being both lazy and inspired in the same game.

Notch wrote:

MrsP wrote:Maybe Brown expected that France would turn up and not show the slightest interest in the game?
We have all seen French club sides just not bother when they are away from home and have nothing to play for.

They didn't either- when they didn't have the ball. It was a very French performance. Swinging from brilliant attacking play to being completely half-arsed in everything they did and then back again within minutes. Only France could alternate between being both lazy and inspired in the same game.

Nobody else would agree with you there Notch, it was the best French performance in a long long while.

France went freeform.  We all know they can.  They just ignored anything Saint Andre said and decided they had nothing to lose.  But freeform is freeform - it has no shape or boring structure - it's Harlem globetrotters.

I strongly doubt any World Cup will be hoisted by a Harlem Globetrotting Exhibition of Running Rugby.

So sense will return - to both camps.

offload wrote:

Munchkin wrote: England's defense against France is really what lost you the 6N's. Not that it wasn't a great game to watch, and not that you didn't come very close to taking it though.

Although I enjoyed the spectacle I was very surprised by England.  With a 12 point lead at half time all England needed to do was strangle the life out of a very poor France.  With a dominant pack and two class half backs England could have scored twice, denied France anything and lifted the trophy.  The ill disciplined open game they pursued was great to watch but cost them the championship.  Not much nous shown when it mattered.

That might have been the plan but France did score in the first few minutes of the second half. And then England got themselves to one score needed, and Brookes gave away a stupid penalty that resulted in another try for France from a 5m line-out.

I'm on the fence about it being a defense (as in coached/ planned structures) issue for England, and more brainless actions from individuals to give away needless points when not under pressure.

MissBlennerhassett wrote:

Notch wrote:

MrsP wrote:Maybe Brown expected that France would turn up and not show the slightest interest in the game?
We have all seen French club sides just not bother when they are away from home and have nothing to play for.

They didn't either- when they didn't have the ball. It was a very French performance. Swinging from brilliant attacking play to being completely half-arsed in everything they did and then back again within minutes. Only France could alternate between being both lazy and inspired in the same game.

Nobody else would agree with you there Notch, it was the best French performance in a long long while.

If thats true, its a damning indictment of French rugby. They had no organisation in defence, no kick chase whatsoever, they kicked loosely to the best counter-attacking side in the tournament over and over again, they didn't work hard enough off the ball, their passing in midfield found the ground as often as it found the intended target- all of that was counter-balanced by great attacking play but you don't concede 55 points by playing well.

It was a weird game, both sides played some brilliant rugby but had an atrocious error count. That was the way of it; two teams throwing caution to the wind and damn the errors but there were plenty of things that would be concerning under normal circumstances. France were certainly better than Italy and Scotland on the day, with the attacking threat they offered, but are still riddled with problems.

Its OK Mike. Its like missing that final short putt on the 18th green only to lose by one stroke. You know you could have made the putt but you didn't. Just very frustrating is all.

Mike Brown's an easy guy to hate, he's known for having a bad attitude.

He seems to have some issue with Scotland. Just look at his taunt after scoring against us last year



I posted something on Twitter saying his comments made him look like a prat and just saw this



He can dish it out but clearly can't take it.

MissBlennerhassett wrote:

Notch wrote:

MrsP wrote:Maybe Brown expected that France would turn up and not show the slightest interest in the game?
We have all seen French club sides just not bother when they are away from home and have nothing to play for.

They didn't either- when they didn't have the ball. It was a very French performance. Swinging from brilliant attacking play to being completely half-arsed in everything they did and then back again within minutes. Only France could alternate between being both lazy and inspired in the same game.

Nobody else would agree with you there Notch, it was the best French performance in a long long while.

I would say most impartial rugby fans would agree with him actually. France looked lazy and totally disinterested in defending properly. The organisation in their defence was literally dreadful. England capitalised well, but lets not blow things out of proportion. France shut off in defence just as much if not more than Italy and Scotland.

The ease with which they tore up the England defence should be worrying as well. It all looked a bit too easy. I was genuinely shocked that people thought it was a great performance by either side.

He smirked a bit, maybe?! And now you hate him, and stalk him on twitter?

Some perspective needed maybe?

So a resurgent France turn up against England and have 55 points put on them - Yet they suffer 2 narrow losses to Wales and Ireland, both of which they could have won. How about some brie and dolce latte' with those grapes Mr Brown.

Barney McGrew did it wrote:He smirked a bit, maybe?! And now you hate him, and stalk him on twitter?

Some perspective needed maybe?

Ha ha I've never looked at his Twitter before seeing GLove's post today saying he wrote on Twitter that Scotland "gave up to easy".

Thought it was quite funny that he should block people for responding to his comments, that's all.

England could have put 40 on Scotland. They just chose to butcher overlap after overlap - Quite simple really Mike, just like you.

Clearly not putting up with strangers calling him a prat on twitter is a sign of arrogance?

Twitter is where prats do biz. I'd be surprised any Twitteree is surprised when a stranger turns up and calls them a prat The place is full of them.

SecretFly wrote:Twitter is where prats do biz.  I'd be surprised any Twitteree is surprised when a stranger turns up and calls them a prat   The place is full of them.

Evidently, it isn't the only place.

Correct, jimpy. We're all prats too!

Mike Brown is what happens when rugby turns pro and is no longer the sport of public and grammar schools.

Notch wrote:Clearly not putting up with strangers calling him a prat on twitter is a sign of arrogance?

I didn't write it on his wall! He clearly searched for his own name, saw it and had a strop.

madmaccas wrote:

Notch wrote:Clearly not putting up with strangers calling him a prat on twitter is a sign of arrogance?

I didn't write it on his wall! He clearly searched for his own name, saw it and had a strop.

Oh right. That is quite funny.

Gwlad wrote:Mike Brown is what happens when rugby turns pro and is no longer the sport of public and grammar schools.

There's a lot of faux outrage against the man on here.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

MissBlennerhassett wrote:

Notch wrote:

MrsP wrote:Maybe Brown expected that France would turn up and not show the slightest interest in the game?
We have all seen French club sides just not bother when they are away from home and have nothing to play for.

They didn't either- when they didn't have the ball. It was a very French performance. Swinging from brilliant attacking play to being completely half-arsed in everything they did and then back again within minutes. Only France could alternate between being both lazy and inspired in the same game.

Nobody else would agree with you there Notch, it was the best French performance in a long long while.

I would say most impartial rugby fans would agree with him actually. France looked lazy and totally disinterested in defending properly. The organisation in their defence was literally dreadful. England capitalised well, but lets not blow things out of proportion. France shut off in defence just as much if not more than Italy and Scotland.

The ease with which they tore up the England defence should be worrying as well. It all looked a bit too easy. I was genuinely shocked that people thought it was a great performance by either side.

Agree also. The French performance wasn't amazing, certainly not a return to form. Fo all their old-school French attack, it came at the expense of their defence.

A couple of the English tries were excellent, but if you look at the game score-by-score I think you'll see a pattern of French apathy in defence, mixed with a dash or disorganisation, and a touch of simply being unable to deal with the pace England attacked at because they were putting the bulk of their effort into their own attack.

Try 1 - I have no idea what France were trying to do, even if the ball had gone to hand, the player would have been badly isolated.
Try 3-  France, and particularly Fikou caught napping after their own attack as England took a lineout quickly on their own 5m. Le Roux had arms on Youngs but fell off and let him in for the try. An international 7 shouldn't be falling off vital tackles on smaller players. That certainly isn't what I'd call playing well.
Try 4 - Nicholas Mas was left covering about 15m of the defensive line during general phase play on the halfway line- not good defence in anyone's book - especially as France weren't under much pressure at the time. Youngs again was given so much space no one came close to tackling him as he ran around the fringe.

I liked Try 2 - although I thought it was fairly bad from France's scramble defence. Cole did well to steal French ball and that set England up with a 6 on 3 overlap down the right. England had to score off that, which they just about did. Some of the French were walking around that Cole ruck aimlessly though, and they should have been supplementing their depleted defensive line (Maestri will be in line for a telling off)

Tries 5,6,7 were all good pressure based scores in which England forced French mistakes.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

MissBlennerhassett wrote:

Notch wrote:

MrsP wrote:Maybe Brown expected that France would turn up and not show the slightest interest in the game?
We have all seen French club sides just not bother when they are away from home and have nothing to play for.

They didn't either- when they didn't have the ball. It was a very French performance. Swinging from brilliant attacking play to being completely half-arsed in everything they did and then back again within minutes. Only France could alternate between being both lazy and inspired in the same game.

Nobody else would agree with you there Notch, it was the best French performance in a long long while.

I would say most impartial rugby fans would agree with him actually. France looked lazy and totally disinterested in defending properly. The organisation in their defence was literally dreadful. England capitalised well, but lets not blow things out of proportion. France shut off in defence just as much if not more than Italy and Scotland.

The ease with which they tore up the England defence should be worrying as well. It all looked a bit too easy. I was genuinely shocked that people thought it was a great performance by either side.

I don't think you'd recognise good rugby full stop or at least the difference between good and bad. Just take a look at the opinions of rational journalists the world over and try and understand why they may have hailed this performance the return of French rugby. Try and put aside any prejudices you may have and you may see the game in a different light and enjoy it all the more.

Beat by 20 points due to a largely absent defense, hails the return of French rugby? I do hope so. We have them in our World Cup group

Personally I think Mike Brown folded. He wasnt nearly as effective as he was last year and was outshone by many of his teammates.

MissBlennerhassett wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

MissBlennerhassett wrote:

Notch wrote:

MrsP wrote:Maybe Brown expected that France would turn up and not show the slightest interest in the game?
We have all seen French club sides just not bother when they are away from home and have nothing to play for.

They didn't either- when they didn't have the ball. It was a very French performance. Swinging from brilliant attacking play to being completely half-arsed in everything they did and then back again within minutes. Only France could alternate between being both lazy and inspired in the same game.

Nobody else would agree with you there Notch, it was the best French performance in a long long while.

I would say most impartial rugby fans would agree with him actually. France looked lazy and totally disinterested in defending properly. The organisation in their defence was literally dreadful. England capitalised well, but lets not blow things out of proportion. France shut off in defence just as much if not more than Italy and Scotland.

The ease with which they tore up the England defence should be worrying as well. It all looked a bit too easy. I was genuinely shocked that people thought it was a great performance by either side.

I don't think you'd recognise good rugby full stop or at least the difference between good and bad. Just take a look at the opinions of rational journalists the world over and try and understand why they may have hailed this performance the return of French rugby. Try and put aside any prejudices you may have and you may see the game in a different light and enjoy it all the more.

Who is this guy? He is pretty funny.

In all seriousness though, if this is the kind of performance that England will go away pleased with, good luck in the World Cup, you're going to need it! You certainly have some excellent backs, they are very dangerous and if the back-line clicks they look very hard to stop. But that French team was appalling. As Notch said, it was a very typical French performance. They looked dangerous with ball in hand at times, but the English defence should have been much better than it was.

Now, next time someone replies, how about countering my points without hiding behind other "rational journalists" and form your own opinions.

England's management of this 6 Nations result is interesting. Fact is they know within themselves that they let another opportunity go begging. And it wasn't italy or scotland's responsibility but their own for poor showings v Ireland and Scotland and a meander v Italy.

The fact is that they are hiding behind every excuse to conceal an institutional problem. There is obviously an insufficient sense of pressure coming from within the camp and from without. Ritchie is apparently turning the screw but it is , IMO, a sound byte.

What happened to the last 4 years? England may look better in some areas, 10 for example. But they still don't have a 12 without which the midfield will never truly fulfill its potential. Joseph is a brilliant find, as is Ford but the glut of individual brilliance is part of the problem. They have not built familiarity as a TEAM, not stuck with a 23 for long enough for them to gel, find systems, know each other's habits.

Who can say what the first XV is? Who owns their shirt apart from Robshaw. Where is the pressure to keep it and the pressure from outside to perform in it if the selection policy seems so liberal. There is so much rotation of players and tweaking that i cannot believe there is any sense of familiarity between players.

4 x 2nds in the last 4 6 Nations indicates a serious problem and there is now no time to resolve it. The pressure of the last RWC caused an England implosion of dwarf like proportions. One hopes that at home we can at least ban the players from such establishments!

Gwlad wrote:England's management of this 6 Nations result is interesting. Fact is they know within themselves that they let another opportunity go begging. And it wasn't italy or scotland's responsibility but their own for poor showings v Ireland and Scotland and a meander v Italy.

The fact is that they are hiding behind every excuse to conceal an institutional problem. There is obviously an insufficient sense of pressure coming from within the camp and from without. Ritchie is apparently turning the screw but it is , IMO, a sound byte.

What happened to the last 4 years? England may look better in some areas, 10 for example. But they still don't have a 12 without which the midfield will never truly fulfill its potential. Joseph is a brilliant find, as is Ford but the glut of individual brilliance is part of the problem. They have not built familiarity as a TEAM, not stuck with a 23 for long enough for them to gel, find systems, know each other's habits.

Who can say what the first XV is? Who owns their shirt apart from Robshaw. Where is the pressure to keep it and the pressure from outside to perform in it if the selection policy seems so liberal. There is so much rotation of players and tweaking that i cannot believe there is any sense of familiarity between players.

4 x 2nds in the last 4 6 Nations indicates a serious problem and there is now no time to resolve it. The pressure of the last RWC caused an England implosion of dwarf like proportions. One hopes that at home we can at least ban the players from such establishments!

The way some people write, you'd think that their national teams were in perfect shape.

Gwlad wrote:England's management of this 6 Nations result is interesting. Fact is they know within themselves that they let another opportunity go begging. And it wasn't italy or scotland's responsibility but their own for poor showings v Ireland and Scotland and a meander v Italy.

The fact is that they are hiding behind every excuse to conceal an institutional problem. There is obviously an insufficient sense of pressure coming from within the camp and from without. Ritchie is apparently turning the screw but it is , IMO, a sound byte.

What happened to the last 4 years? England may look better in some areas, 10 for example. But they still don't have a 12 without which the midfield will never truly fulfill its potential. Joseph is a brilliant find, as is Ford but the glut of individual brilliance is part of the problem. They have not built familiarity as a TEAM, not stuck with a 23 for long enough for them to gel, find systems, know each other's habits.

Who can say what the first XV is? Who owns their shirt apart from Robshaw. Where is the pressure to keep it and the pressure from outside to perform in it if the selection policy seems so liberal. There is so much rotation of players and tweaking that i cannot believe there is any sense of familiarity between players.

4 x 2nds in the last 4 6 Nations indicates a serious problem and there is now no time to resolve it. The pressure of the last RWC caused an England implosion of dwarf like proportions. One hopes that at home we can at least ban the players from such establishments!

Thank you for the analysis and deep interest. Too late to get 3 yrs residency before the RWC but check for English grandparents as you might qualify that way..

MissBlennerhassett wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

MissBlennerhassett wrote:

Notch wrote:

MrsP wrote:Maybe Brown expected that France would turn up and not show the slightest interest in the game?
We have all seen French club sides just not bother when they are away from home and have nothing to play for.

They didn't either- when they didn't have the ball. It was a very French performance. Swinging from brilliant attacking play to being completely half-arsed in everything they did and then back again within minutes. Only France could alternate between being both lazy and inspired in the same game.

Nobody else would agree with you there Notch, it was the best French performance in a long long while.

I would say most impartial rugby fans would agree with him actually. France looked lazy and totally disinterested in defending properly. The organisation in their defence was literally dreadful. England capitalised well, but lets not blow things out of proportion. France shut off in defence just as much if not more than Italy and Scotland.

The ease with which they tore up the England defence should be worrying as well. It all looked a bit too easy. I was genuinely shocked that people thought it was a great performance by either side.

I don't think you'd recognise good rugby full stop or at least the difference between good and bad. Just take a look at the opinions of rational journalists the world over and try and understand why they may have hailed this performance the return of French rugby. Try and put aside any prejudices you may have and you may see the game in a different light and enjoy it all the more.

Miss, clearly it is you that has no idea. But feel free to continue to believe if it makes you feel better.

To quote General Melchett: "If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through"

Nick Mallet has been impressed anyway.

England are in no worse a shape than Wales or Ireland, the former were physically dominated at home while the latter didn't have the creative nous to beat a team who's line they were battering phase after phase. Word of advice to is to worry about your own team before talking a load of crap trap.

Marler, Cole, Hartley, Lawes, Launchbury, Robshaw, Youngs, Joseph, Nowell and Brown are all guaranteed starters so that's two thirds of the team.

Hammersmith.  Creative nous is for the World Cup.  You shouldn't show all your underwear on the fist date....just a glimpse  Tease.

People forget that Schmidt forces teams to expect something and then givies them something else when not expected.  But then I expect that's the 'forgetting' part in a nutshell.
People looked at Ireland last year and still got into this daze that somehow this year all we could do is kick. Even we Irish began to wonder where the more variety packed Ireland was.  Scotland probably felt Ireland would bring a lack of creative nous to the party too.  Quite a number of predictors were even predicting a Scottish win, as I recall.  Then Schmidt pounced.
It's chess. Rugby is chess.

You don't half talk a load of old sh7t.