RFU review board announced.

[gregortree]

http://www.englandrugby.com/news/rfu-names-review-panel/

Ben Kay and Geech...pretty decent choices plus a suit or two.
Just hope they will be adequately honest and if needed brutally effective. Best wishes guys..Help us sort this out.

[LondonTiger]

As I said on the New Coach thread, two of that five man panel (Geech and Ritchie) were also on the panel that appointed Lancaster.

[Student-A1]

As I said on the New Coach thread, two of that five man panel (Geech and Ritchie) were also on the panel that appointed Lancaster.

I can understand the chair of the review being Ritchie but he should not be the main contributor in that position merely a facilitator in the review. So I am not as concerned about him as I am about McGeechan, if it was 1980 and we were having a review then maybe but not in 2015. I like Kay being there as always talks pretty sensibly. But for those wanting a Director of Rugby this pretty much closes that door as they were the person that should have reviewed the coaches and team performance.

[majesticimperialman]

I just wander what this review panel is going to achieve to be honest.

Is It going to look simply at "WHY" England went home early from it'e own rugby world cup?...Or is it going to look at England's over all performance for the last 4 year since SL took charge.

Is this review simply going to be witch hunt of SL and his coaching? so they the panel can justify themselves for picking him in the first place?

The bottom line is we (England was not good enough) at this rugby world cup.

I just wonder if it is just seeing to be doing some thing, but achieving? What?

[Barney McGrew did it]

Sounds like 5 old farts having a bit of a chin-wag. What’s the point of the review – England flopped big style, and now a bunch of his mates want to discuss whether they should let SL spend another 4 years trying to show us all he’s learnt something after all? Well life’s too short, and 4 years is long enough. Tell them to get back to us when they’ve found someone with a CV this time.

[hugehandoff]

McGeechan has already stated that he would retain Lancaster and that he will learn from this experience. I disagree with that and therefore am concerned that this review will not achieve what I want it to achieve. Got a feeling that this is a panel that will support the Blazers safe point of view and not help English rugby out in any way, shape or form.

[hugehandoff]

from the Guardian..

Who knew the potential saviour of English rugby would turn out to be a tall television analyst with a penchant for double entendres?

Congratulations to Ben Kay, not least for being the only person not called Ian and aged below 57 to make it on to the five-man review panel appointed by the Rugby Football Union to dissect the host nation’s premature World Cup ejection.

We are not exactly talking a bunch of down-with-the-kids, free-thinking radicals here. Ian Ritchie, the RFU’s chief executive, and Sir Ian McGeechan were both part of the panel who appointed Stuart Lancaster to the England head coach’s role four years ago. Ian Metcalfe, the chairman of the professional game board, was part of the 12-man review panel into the last England World Cup debacle in 2011. Ian Watmore is a lifelong Arsenal fan who was briefly chief executive of the Football Association.

Several things strike you about this mature, all-white, all-male list, not all of them positive. The first is the conspicuous absence of Rob Andrew. He is supposed to be the beating heart of the RFU’s rugby operation, the man with the requisite breadth of vision for tricky times like this.

His absence from the panel would suggest his own role may shortly up for review as well.

Nor is there any room for people who have been shouting loudly from the sidelines for the return of the dark knight, alias Sir Clive Woodward.

Lawrence Dallaglio, presumably another name mentioned in despatches as a knowledgable rugby man with his finger on the pulse, has suggested Woodward’s absence from the panel is “very odd … he’s English, done the job already and won the Rugby World Cup.” It is a fair point; if comparisons need drawing between now and the world-beating era of 2003, why not ask the man who masterminded it?

Neither is there any sign of Bill Beaumont, the RFU’s chairman, nor the union’s president, Jason Leonard.

Instead we have Kay, a World Cup winner with England in 2003 and now a respected media pundit. His inclusion is a welcome one. He is an outstanding analyst and is still close enough to the professional game to know who’s good and trustworthy and who isn’t. He is friendly not just with the sharp-witted Austin Healey, his regular partner in the commentary box, but a number of other former Leicester players – including Martin Johnson and Lewis Moody – who have first-hand knowledge of where England have gone wrong lately. There is just one, pretty major snag: how is he supposed to be impartial when asked to give his thoughts on his former team-mate Graham Rowntree’s future as national forwards coach?

It is the same with McGeechan: he has been one of Lancaster’s main allies and will surely find it difficult to recommend a wholesale change of regime. Which leaves Ritchie, Metcalfe and Watmore, whose experience of playing or coaching during rugby union’s professional era is precisely nil. Why not ask a wise head from the southern hemisphere – Graham Henry, perhaps? – to share his thoughts on where England have been going wrong?

Inviting Watmore, a former civil servant, to be an external pair of eyes is fine in theory but is he remotely qualified to know what genuine world-class rugby coaching looks like?

It certainly places a lot of pressure on Kay, whose late father Sir John Kay was a Lord Justice of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales and a member of the Privy Council. Up until now his biggest concern at this World Cup has been whether he could pronounce the name of Romania’s full-back Catalin Fercu with a straight face on air. Kay’s mischievous humour could well be an asset around the review table but these are critical times for English rugby. This particular inquest has to be spot on.

[Barney McGrew did it]

I stand corrected - 4 old farts and a fall guy. Carling won't know whether to laugh or cry.

Why wouldn't an organization that has learnt nothing keep a coach who's learnt nothing?

[yappysnap]

3 dinosaurs out of step with the modern game, 1 random civil servant who knows sweet fa about rugby let alone English rugby and Ben Kay who's coached no one.

Only in England.

[yappysnap]

In all honesty if we were to go down the pundit route I'd have preferred Brian Moore in this panel.

[Rugby Fan]

It doesn't look like an inspiring selection but we'd need to know the terms of reference before deciding just how out-of-touch it actually is.

[nathan]

In all honesty if we were to go down the pundit route I'd have preferred Brian Moore in this panel.

He would still be moaning about scrums in 3 years time though

[yappysnap]

In all honesty if we were to go down the pundit route I'd have preferred Brian Moore in this panel.

He would still be moaning about scrums in 3 years time though

Yea Rowntree certainly wouldn't enjoy it!

[sportform]

It's simple, you pick the best players regardless of what league they play in.

[boomeranga]

I know I'm Aussie (looks down, pulls shorts, sees abnormally large manhood to confirm, gives satisfied smirk, and then shoots small defenceless animal for own self esteem) and any mention of dumbing down instantly means I want rugby to be league ... But... The RWC referee thread is currently running at 45.5% more comments than the actual game thread.  I reckon the game is great but needs some work to ensure the ref isn't discussed so much and I think it should be ok to put ideas on the table.

The first idea they should put on the table imo is remove the concept of the warning.  Teams know they have a chance to cheat, or two chances, or three chances, etc, so they do.  Hit them hard and I think this can be removed.

Go Wallabies.

[boomeranga]

Sorry. Just noticed I posted on the wrong thread.  
Yes, I have been to the pub this evening!

[BamBam]

I was a bit worried for your health until I saw your location

[gregortree]

TAXI !
For Boomeranga.....take him home to his mum...or onto the correct thread

[boomeranga]

Beer and forums don't mix.
Beer and forums don't mix.
Beer and forums don't mix.
Beer and forums don't mix.

Sorry for stinking up your fred. I wish I could promise not to do it again.

[Guest]

Don't worry boomeranga.  We won't be able to tell if you've been on the lash or not.

"UP to 80 per cent of Australians talk like a drunk person, even when they’re sober."

"Victoria University public speaking and communications tutor and lecturer Dean Frenkel has studied the Australian accent and has discovered an alcoholic slur introduced by early settlers is to blame for our demise".

   

http://mobile.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/australian-accent-moulded-by-booze-and-weve-become-inarticulate-because-of-it/story-fnu2q5nu-1227585547259

[SecretFly]

Fair dinkum risyrch there, mite!

[emack2]

Same old thing blame the coaches and the players IF England,
Wales,Scotland,Ireland believed they could beat SH sides.Instead
of trying to stop them winning is the first step.Enforcing country
before Club mentality and so on.
All that will happen is either the Coaches will be sacked or not,
the current system will be unchanged.For one reason or another.
Then the pantomime happens all over again,any original thoughts
ignored etc.The Teflon Kid has already been told his job is safe and
how can you have.Two members who have publicly stated opposite
views about SL etc.

[Exiledinborders]

It's simple, you pick the best players regardless of what league they play in.

So that is all that needs to change. That means probably bringing in one player (Armitage) into the starting fifteen and Just possibly one on the bench (Abendenon). How would that have changed things radically?

[No 7&1/2]

Same old thing blame the coaches and the players IF England,
Wales,Scotland,Ireland believed they could beat SH sides.Instead
of trying to stop them winning is the first step.Enforcing country
before Club mentality and so on.
All that will happen is either the Coaches will be sacked or not,
the current system will be unchanged.For one reason or another.
Then the pantomime happens all over again,any original thoughts
ignored etc.The Teflon Kid has already been told his job is safe and
how can you have.Two members who have publicly stated opposite
views about SL etc.

I'm still having a hard time understand Lancaster's thought process about the teams and tactics picked for the world cup. Spend 4 years opening up the way we play and then try to revert to a system of closing down the opposition after picking a group of players who you wouldn't say are ideally suited to that sort of game plan.

[RubyGuby]

I know its pretty subjective but I think they need people like Jonny Wilkinson, Will Carling and Brian Moore involved rather than this meddled lot. All these talk absolute rugby sense for me and they get to the point of what's required eloquently and succinctly. All top level players for England who have a lot to offer IMO, not at a coaching level but very much at an understanding of what is required level. I can never understand the criticisms levelled at Carling who almost single headedly turned England round into a respected rugby team.

[Geordie]

Same old thing blame the coaches and the players IF England,
Wales,Scotland,Ireland believed they could beat SH sides.Instead
of trying to stop them winning is the first step.Enforcing country
before Club mentality and so on.
All that will happen is either the Coaches will be sacked or not,
the current system will be unchanged.For one reason or another.
Then the pantomime happens all over again,any original thoughts
ignored etc.The Teflon Kid has already been told his job is safe and
how can you have.Two members who have publicly stated opposite
views about SL etc.

I'm still having a hard time understand Lancaster's thought process about the teams and tactics picked for the world cup. Spend 4 years opening up the way we play and then try to revert to a system of closing down the opposition after picking a group of players who you wouldn't say are ideally suited to that sort of game plan.

I think you've hit the nail on the way most fans are feeling mate. Just cant fathom it out.

Did he simply bottle it?

[No 7&1/2]

For me; yes.

[gregortree]

I know its pretty subjective but I think they need people like Jonny Wilkinson, Will Carling and Brian Moore involved rather than this meddled lot. All these talk absolute rugby sense for me and they get to the point of what's required eloquently and succinctly. All top level players for England who have a lot to offer IMO, not at a coaching level but very much at an understanding of what is required level. I can never understand the criticisms levelled at Carling who almost single headedly turned England round into a respected rugby team.

We can look back to the Carling, Cooke, Rowell, era as a purple period of considerable progress from where England had started. A springboard to the ultimate achievement 2003 under newer management. Full respect to these earlier guys but then you may as well name Greenwood, Johnson, Back, Dallaglio, Leonard, who also know thing or two.

[emack2]

My point exactly,every RWC is the same fear of losing instead of sticking with the game
you know.Adopting they shall not pass mode.
Coaches of course are judged on results,and it gets to the stage it`s more than my jobs worth.
When you have a team with limited expectations they`ve nothing to lose so can
express themselves e.g Japan.
Contrast there 2011 model targeting games to qualify,this time desperately unlucky
not to qualify from group.

[lostinwales]

I know its pretty subjective but I think they need people like Jonny Wilkinson, Will Carling and Brian Moore involved rather than this meddled lot. All these talk absolute rugby sense for me and they get to the point of what's required eloquently and succinctly. All top level players for England who have a lot to offer IMO, not at a coaching level but very much at an understanding of what is required level. I can never understand the criticisms levelled at Carling who almost single headedly turned England round into a respected rugby team.

I don't know about Carling. Great figurehead and a seriously underestimated rugby player but probably an overestimated captain.

[No 7&1/2]

So that is the fault of Lancaster and the coaches. Should have stuck to the game plan that has worked vs Wales and Aus in the recent past.

[Geordie]

Not just that 7.5

As you mentioned above...he selected players for his gameplan...but then changed his gameplan...with players who wouldn't play that game.

[RubyGuby]

I know its pretty subjective but I think they need people like Jonny Wilkinson, Will Carling and Brian Moore involved rather than this meddled lot. All these talk absolute rugby sense for me and they get to the point of what's required eloquently and succinctly. All top level players for England who have a lot to offer IMO, not at a coaching level but very much at an understanding of what is required level. I can never understand the criticisms levelled at Carling who almost single headedly turned England round into a respected rugby team.

We can look back to the Carling, Cooke, Rowell, era as a purple period of considerable progress from where England had started. A springboard to the  ultimate achievement 2003 under newer management. Full respect to these earlier guys but then you may as well name Greenwood, Johnson, Back, Dallaglio, Leonard, who also know thing or two.

I disagree a bit with this Greg - Greenwood perhaps but Wilkinson is far more insightful and knowledgeable for me due to his time at Toulon and he is up to date on the field, Johnson has proved himself not to have what it takes off the field and Dallaglio is still in love with Woodward who is one hell of a divisive character. Back and Leonard were great players but I haven't seen anything from them to suggest they are articulate and insightful when it comes to what is required in the modern era.

[SecretFly]

But listen to Wilkinson.  I have to admit I was having a ball with him over the WC, listening to his style of delivery.

"What you need is your players individually all knowing what they're about, needing to know what they're about, being in a position to know what they're about, feeling what they're about, thinking clearly what they're about, being on the same page about what they're about, loving what they're about, not being hung up on what they're about..... and if all that happens, players then know for sure what they're all about...."

[RubyGuby]

But listen to Wilkinson.  I have to admit I was having a ball with him over the WC, listening to his style of delivery.

"What you need is your players individually all knowing what they're about, needing to know what they're about, being in a position to know what they're about, feeling what they're about, thinking clearly what they're about, being on the same page about what they're about, loving what they're about, not being hung up on what they're about..... and if all that happens, players then know for sure what they're all about...."

Yeah they need to know what they're about

[gregortree]

Wilko does know what it's all about,
but fgs spit it out boy, spit it OUT !

[yappysnap]

"It's about...moments, moments in a game, that's what it's about..."

[Rugby Fan]

I'm still having a hard time understand Lancaster's thought process about the teams and tactics picked for the world cup.

I think you've hit the nail on the way most fans are feeling mate. Just cant fathom it out.

Did he simply bottle it?

I don't think he bottled it, although I might just be splitting hairs, because it amounted to the same.

Lancaster had tried to build a squad where he could drop players in and out interchangeably without the team missing a beat. That's one of the key advantages he thought New Zealand had, and he felt England's playing resources gave them a good shot at doing that too.

I think his World Cup selection showed he assumed he had largely done that. For Lancaster, swapping Ford for Farrell was not the big deal everyone else perceived it to be. That's also why his bench strategy was often so baffling.

He was wrong, however, as the results clearly showed.

I don't think Lancaster's aim was misguided, but he went about achieving it in the wrong way. You can swap players in and out of a team more easily when it has an experienced core, and is consistently successful. Lancaster never got the core of experience, and didn't get the wins to build momentum and real confidence.

[kingelderfield]

I think we would have needed a miracle for Lancaster to make the necessary succession of right calls; selection, game plan etc.

The fact was obvious from day one, he was and is out of his depth. Simply put he does not possess the ability to succeed as our national head coach. Nothing ever suggested he did, was that not obvious?

Unfortunately this review board looks nothing more than a reaffirmation of the failings of the rfu and the english game as a whole.

English international success is not important to the rfu. Personal and corporate financial success is. And so this latest opportunity to reappraise the club versus country failure will be missed and so our underachievement will continue.

Having said all that it obviously helps if you have bloody good world class coach at the helm.

[Sin é]

I'd say the RFU are very happy. They have just made £21m for themselves (by screwing everyone on ticket prices).

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/world-cup/other-news/rfu-to-reap-21m-profit-from-hosting-rugby-world-cup-34159321.html

[No 7&1/2]

Yeah they obviously don't want a successful England team! (sarcasm emojee).

[Geordie]

When is the review taking place. Is it on at the moment?

When will everything be finalised?

[SecretFly]

That is not going to be made public, Geordie. "Maybe we've decided a few things should dramatically change now for the next four year cycle...and maybe we decided change isn't necessary at all. There is no right or wrong view on the outcome of this review."

[RubyGuby]

When is the review taking place. Is it on at the moment? - Yes currently on-going

When will everything be finalised? - At the moment the anticipated date is the 12th of Never but this may be subject to change depending on how discussions are proceeding and whether Sam Burgess has moved back to Australia

[SecretFly]

Official RFU letter to Burgess: "Please stay on. We need you. You have charisma."

Copy of original letter - exposed by Assange: "Please leave!!! You've balled up the whole circus, you dice-loving fancy boy!"

[Geordie]

But ill say again.

If he is to be replaced then we are already 3 rounds in, in the prem. The potential new head coach is missing games.

Although he doesn't need to bother coming to Newcastle so that'll cut his travelling down a bit

[Barney McGrew did it]

Personally I think England have a big problem here. The review body was clearly set up as damage limitation and to save SL’s (and Ritchie’s) jobs – but would you really want to entrust the next four years to the guys on this panel? Although there’s a tiny chance that they will buckle to public opinion, I’m not holding my breath. That being so then we can see the future: the next 4 years will be the same as the previous ones. As Albert said, insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result. And I’m convinced SL doesn’t believe the mistakes he has made are mistakes – he has that English protestant look of believing he can succeed by just working a bit harder.

Now I would normally say it’s another 4 years of 2nd place at the 6N and a QF spot at the RWC19 then. However without a change in tactics and some clarity in game-plan it may become increasingly difficult to maintain our previous mediocre standards.

[RubyGuby]

People making a simple matter more and more complex - You shove someone in for 18 months as a care taker coach and then you go and take Cotter off Scotland when his contract is up in 2017 - Simples, just get on with it. A successful coach and then all the hanger on public school half wits behind the scenes can keep their jobs as well. Dean Ryan would love it for 18 months, maybe Jake White/Mallett would as well.

[TJ]

Oi = hands off Cotter! By 2017 he will have tartan blood, a full head of ginger hair and be speaking impenetrable gibberish and you wouldn't want him anyway

[Sponsored content]