Who should be next England coach (continued)

by **George Carlin** Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:03 am

First topic message reminder :

Continuation of the original thread from nlpnlp:

I think most of us are agreed that Stuart Lancaster should go as England coach - but who do you want to see get the job? I think that Stuart Lancaster has proved that you need a coach who has a proven winning track record at the top level of club or international rugby.

Lets not turn this topic into a debate about which players should be in, or Stuart Lancaster's failings, those are valid issues for other topics. Just who you think it should be and why.

I don't think any English coach has a record of success in the European Rugby Champions/Heineken Cup, or any track record of coaching abroad. So I would go for an overseas coach and I think we should break the bank for the best 'available' coach, which for me is Wayne Smith. Assuming Steve Hansen does not want to step down, would Smith be satisfied as being a number 2 for another 4 years?

Simple and short - Who and Why.

by Geordie Thu Nov 19, 2015 10:52 pm

Fraser and Kvesic are playing great stuff and are genuine 7's. Ill happily stick with one of them thanks.
And as much a fan as I am of Kvesic...Fraser looks even better now that he appears over his injury issues.

We have the fetchers if we need them without going across the channel.

by Student-A1 Thu Nov 19, 2015 10:58 pm

GeordieFalcon wrote:Fraser and Kvesic are playing great stuff and are genuine 7's. Ill happily stick with one of them thanks.
And as much a fan as I am of Kvesic...Fraser looks even better now that he appears over his injury issues.

We have the fetchers if we need them without going across the channel.

I'm sorry but I just disagree and would imagine from previous comments from Jones that his choice of the two you mentioned and Armitage would differ greatly to yours.

I had high hopes for Kvesic but just haven't seen it progress, seems to get over the ball but too easily moved. Fraser is an excellent talent but I don't believe a couple of games back to back is proof he is over his injury concerns, surely a half season playing as a minimum would be required to prove that.

by Geordie Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:06 pm

If you haven't seen Kvesics progress then you must not have seen many of Gloucesters games. So we'll just agree to disagree on that one.

As for Fraser, your right a bit early to say hes over his injury woes. But his performances have been quality and lets hope he is over them.

by Student-A1 Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:27 pm

GeordieFalcon wrote:If you haven't seen Kvesics progress then you must not have seen many of Gloucesters games. So we'll just agree to disagree on that one.

As for Fraser, your right a bit early to say hes over his injury woes. But his performances have been quality and lets hope he is over them.

I agree about Fraser completely he seems a genuine prospect (am somewhat concerned he isn't playing tomorrow for Saracens), but have seen loads of Gloucster and just don't see it with Kvesic. Was very excited about him when at Worcster but have seen zero when up again decent opposition to suggest he can step up. Looks good ball in hand and in open play but also looks as strong as David Seymor in getting over the ball and no getting knocked off. As I said I had very high hopes and if he ever gets there will be as happy as anyone.

by Geordie Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:43 pm

Fraser is suspended not injured Smile

Well we'll see how Kvesic goes again this season.

by **Rugby Fan** Fri Nov 20, 2015 2:52 am

GeordieFalcon wrote:...we've analysed them all on here and they ALL have pros and cons...

I would argue there's been very little decent analysis anywhere of what the candidates bring to the job. Most of the profiles just describe what the various coaches have done, rather than how they have done it.

Instead, I've seen a lot of comments (not just here) for people like White and Jones along the lines of "he'll pick on form", "he won't take any crap", "he'll bring a solid coaching team", "he'll get our pack working again". "he'll improve the breakdown". To me, that just sounds like projection rather than analysis.

Everything seems to be pointing towards Jones as the likely appointment. Nothing is yet confirmed but we're British, so it's never too early to start a backlash.

Eddie Jones might select different players but his preferred style is actually pretty similar to what Lancaster tried to achieve. If you want a hard-nosed, gnarly set of forwards then you don't employ Eddie Jones to get you there. Jones de-emphasized the scrum with the Wallabies and only really got away with it because his front row played cute, and referees at the time didn't seem to believe that an international pack could really be so weak.

Jones has rightly been given credit for improving the Japanese set piece but he only tried to get it into a position where they were sufficient, not dominant. Japan went for quick hooking and trick line-out throw-ins to keep possession and get the ball in play early for a high tempo game.

Jones doesn't have a strong record of developing young players. With Australia, he was happy to draft in recruits from League. With Japan, he started off by saying he would move away from predecessor John Kirwan's policy of packing the squad with players born outside the country. He soon ditched that, however, and ended up selecting much the same kind of mix as Kirwan. In Craig Wing, he also managed to include another former League player.

Japanese star Goromaru wasn't developed by Jones. The full back is 29 and first played for his country in 2005. He was always seen as a future leading player but was notoriously inconsistent. Jones only selected him once his club started getting the best out of him.

Jones is happy to coach younger players, and tell them how to improve their skills, but doesn't seem to want to persevere with them.

If Jones doesn't like the way things are going, he'd rather walk away than try and deal with it. His contract was up with Japan but it was widely expected he would continue to coach the national team while overseeing - if not coaching - Japan's new Super Rugby franchise. He got bored with the time it was taking to put the deal together, and took another job. Part of that attitude might be influenced by his health scare two years ago.

I'd be delighted if Jones is appointed and my doubts prove totally unfounded but I do wonder whether anyone at the RFU has even raised these kinds of questions.

On the positive side, Jones isn't afraid to speak bluntly, and I do think he has the nous to come up with tactics and selections which take into account the threats offered by particular opposition. That's something which has been notably absent from England's preparation under Lancaster.

by king_carlos Fri Nov 20, 2015 3:22 am

Didn't Jones' 2003 RWC final side have a back three entirely made up of League converts..? Tumbleweed

by doctor_grey Fri Nov 20, 2015 3:30 am

The only culture we need is a winning culture.

Our boys are a generally good lot. Plus a good coach will provide a set of expectations which includes behaviours. Once done, no need to drone on about it endlessly. If a player violates the rules then he will know what is coming.
Simple.
Adult.
Professional.

by doctor_grey Fri Nov 20, 2015 3:32 am

king_carlos wrote:Didn't Jones' 2003 RWC final side have a back three entirely made up of League converts..?

Real good catch!
Yes:
Mat Rogers
Wendell Sailor
Lote Tuqiri

At some time afterwards I recall Rogers and Tuquiri went back to league. I recall Sailor stopped playing because of a drug charge.

by HammerofThunor Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:23 am

Well, we can close this now. Jones confirmed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/34875741

by nathan Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:30 am

Rugby Fan wrote:
GeordieFalcon wrote:...we've analysed them all on here and they ALL have pros and cons...

I would argue there's been very little decent analysis anywhere of what the candidates bring to the job. Most of the profiles just describe what the various coaches have done, rather than how they have done it.

Instead, I've seen a lot of comments (not just here) for people like White and Jones along the lines of "he'll pick on form", "he won't take any crap", "he'll bring a solid coaching team", "he'll get our pack working again". "he'll improve the breakdown". To me, that just sounds like projection rather than analysis.

Everything seems to be pointing towards Jones as the likely appointment. Nothing is yet confirmed but we're British, so it's never too early to start a backlash.

Eddie Jones might select different players but his preferred style is actually pretty similar to what Lancaster tried to achieve. If you want a hard-nosed, gnarly set of forwards then you don't employ Eddie Jones to get you there. Jones de-emphasized the scrum with the Wallabies and only really got away with it because his front row played cute, and referees at the time didn't seem to believe that an international pack could really be so weak.

-that's a plus for me, I think England can play this style well.

Jones has rightly been given credit for improving the Japanese set piece but he only tried to get it into a position where they were sufficient, not dominant. Japan went for quick hooking and trick line-out throw-ins to keep possession and get the ball in play early for a high tempo game.

-he got the team playing to their strengths, isn't that what want with England?

Jones doesn't have a strong record of developing young players. With Australia, he was happy to draft in recruits from League. With Japan, he started off by saying he would move away from predecessor John Kirwan's policy of packing the squad with players born outside the country. He soon ditched that, however, and ended up selecting much the same kind of mix as Kirwan. In Craig Wing, he also managed to include another former League player.

Japanese star Goromaru wasn't developed by Jones. The full back is 29 and first played for his country in 2005. He was always seen as a future leading player but was notoriously inconsistent. Jones only selected him once his club started getting the best out of him.

- isn't this what any international coach would do? Not select players who are not in form, ask them to go back to their clubs and improve?

Jones is happy to coach younger players, and tell them how to improve their skills, but doesn't seem to want to persevere with them.

If Jones doesn't like the way things are going, he'd rather walk away than try and deal with it. His contract was up with Japan but it was widely expected he would continue to coach the national team while overseeing - if not coaching - Japan's new Super Rugby franchise. He got bored with the time it was taking to put the deal together, and took another job. Part of that attitude might be influenced by his health scare two years ago.

-theres a 1000 reasons we probably don't know about, pointless trying to guess

I'd be delighted if Jones is appointed and my doubts prove totally unfounded but I do wonder whether anyone at the RFU has even raised these kinds of questions.

- no offence, but some of your objections are a bit weak. I'm sure the rfu have looked at a lot of things

On the positive side, Jones isn't afraid to speak bluntly, and I do think he has the nous to come up with tactics and selections which take into account the threats offered by particular opposition. That's something which has been notably absent from England's preparation under Lancaster.

I do feel we will never succeed as a national team if the fans find it difficult to get behind them. Fans seem to always look for then worst in a situation.

by bluestonevedder Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:18 am

nathan wrote:
Rugby Fan wrote:
GeordieFalcon wrote:...we've analysed them all on here and they ALL have pros and cons...

I would argue there's been very little decent analysis anywhere of what the candidates bring to the job. Most of the profiles just describe what the various coaches have done, rather than how they have done it.

Instead, I've seen a lot of comments (not just here) for people like White and Jones along the lines of "he'll pick on form", "he won't take any crap", "he'll bring a solid coaching team", "he'll get our pack working again". "he'll improve the breakdown". To me, that just sounds like projection rather than analysis.

Everything seems to be pointing towards Jones as the likely appointment. Nothing is yet confirmed but we're British, so it's never too early to start a backlash.

Eddie Jones might select different players but his preferred style is actually pretty similar to what Lancaster tried to achieve. If you want a hard-nosed, gnarly set of forwards then you don't employ Eddie Jones to get you there. Jones de-emphasized the scrum with the Wallabies and only really got away with it because his front row played cute, and referees at the time didn't seem to believe that an international pack could really be so weak.

-that's a plus for me, I think England can play this style well.

Jones has rightly been given credit for improving the Japanese set piece but he only tried to get it into a position where they were sufficient, not dominant. Japan went for quick hooking and trick line-out throw-ins to keep possession and get the ball in play early for a high tempo game.

-he got the team playing to their strengths, isn't that what want with England?

Jones doesn't have a strong record of developing young players. With Australia, he was happy to draft in recruits from League. With Japan, he started off by saying he would move away from predecessor John Kirwan's policy of packing the squad with players born outside the country. He soon ditched that, however, and ended up selecting much the same kind of mix as Kirwan. In Craig Wing, he also managed to include another former League player.

Japanese star Goromaru wasn't developed by Jones. The full back is 29 and first played for his country in 2005. He was always seen as a future leading player but was notoriously inconsistent. Jones only selected him once his club started getting the best out of him.

- isn't this what any international coach would do? Not select players who are not in form, ask them to go back to their clubs and improve?

Jones is happy to coach younger players, and tell them how to improve their skills, but doesn't seem to want to persevere with them.

If Jones doesn't like the way things are going, he'd rather walk away than try and deal with it. His contract was up with Japan but it was widely expected he would continue to coach the national team while overseeing - if not coaching - Japan's new Super Rugby franchise. He got bored with the time it was taking to put the deal together, and took another job. Part of that attitude might be influenced by his health scare two years ago.

-theres a 1000 reasons we probably don't know about, pointless trying to guess

I'd be delighted if Jones is appointed and my doubts prove totally unfounded but I do wonder whether anyone at the RFU has even raised these kinds of questions.

- no offence, but some of your objections are a bit weak. I'm sure the rfu have looked at a lot of things

On the positive side, Jones isn't afraid to speak bluntly, and I do think he has the nous to come up with tactics and selections which take into account the threats offered by particular opposition. That's something which has been notably absent from England's preparation under Lancaster.

I do feel we will never succeed as a national team if the fans find it difficult to get behind them. Fans seem to always look for then worst in a situation.

Completely agree. The media too. One of the main disappointments of the Burgess debacle were his parting comments about how he constantly felt the media and ex-players wanted to see him fail. The UK's media support can be so infuriatingly lame.

by No 7&1/2 Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:21 am

Personally I'd rather have the media say what they see rather than just pat the back of who they're meant to be commentng on.

by bluestonevedder Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:43 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:Personally I'd rather have the media say what they see rather than just pat the back of who they're meant to be commentng on.

Well obviously 7.5. You've skewed my words.

There's a limit both ways. I'm not saying that the media should constantly make things seem like sunshine and rainbows, but they should know when to encourage the national team and when to realise that they are hyping things up beyond all conceivable levels.

You surely have to agree that England have inflated opinions of themselves in almost every sport we play- rugby, football, cricket, tennis, etc. Who gets everyone so whipped up and creates this false sense of dominance potential? The media.

by No 7&1/2 Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:49 am

Yes and no. As with everything there's extremes and balance in the middle.

Not sure I read anything that wanted Burgess to fail for instance just that it was a stupid decision to play a flanker in midfield, especially next to a guy like Barritt when it offers zero balance. To me the media full stop aren't there to encourage the national team if the journo or whoever think they're doing it wrong.

by **Rugby Fan** Fri Nov 20, 2015 1:50 pm

nathan wrote:...- no offence, but some of your objections are a bit weak..

For my part, I find some of the arguments in favour of Jones not only weak, but utterly baseless. You only have to a look at how he's gone about his jobs in the past to realize that.

Personally, I agree that Lancaster's high tempo model is one we shouldn't abandon, so I won't complain if Jones looks to do the same. I made that point because I can't see why anyone who wants a gnarly old English pack back would think Jones is the man to do it.

My point about player development is that Jones has been credited for bringing Goromaru up to international standard. He has played no part in that. An equivalent comparison would be to suggest that Lancaster has helped in the development of Danny Cipriani.

We have a number of good young prospects in the England set-up. People like Ford and Farrell have a few caps under their belt but players like Watson, May, Nowell, Slade, Daly, Itoje et al have only a few tests or none to their name. I think we need a coach who is prepared to give these players some time. If Jones does so, then great, but I don't see how showing that he has a poor record of doing so in the past is being unsupportive.

by Sgt_Pooly Fri Nov 20, 2015 2:32 pm

That's an extremley "glass half empty" view on Jones RF.

You point to him not bringing through young players and developing others, didn't he have big influences on Kafer & Larkham?

You point to Japan not having a dominant set piece, they were an absolute shambles a few years back. Jones(& team) developed a tactic to gain parity and give the backs ball to play with. You adjust to what you have and this is a sign of fantastic coach imo.

England will not play like Japan, they will not play like Austrialia. Jones will see what's he got and improve/develop a strategy that works for us.

by nlpnlp Fri Nov 20, 2015 3:10 pm

Rugby Fan wrote:
"My point about player development is that Jones has been credited for bringing Goromaru up to international standard. He has played no part in that."

So Goramaru and the rest of the Japanese team played just as well in the 2011 world cup as they did in the 2015 world cup? Or did Jones go in there and improve them so that they won 3 out of their 4 matches? Sounds like pretty good coaching to me!

by **Rugby Fan** Fri Nov 20, 2015 3:22 pm

Sgt_Pooly wrote:...You point to Japan not having a dominant set piece, they were an absolute shambles a few years back...

The set piece was OK under Kirwan. Kirwan's Japan side actually wasn't too shabby but came up well short at the last World Cup. Japan's set piece work went backwards under Jones because he tried to rely more on Japanese-born players. That would be the shambles you are thinking about. He refocused the team and it's fair to say that he eventually took the set piece work to a higher standard than he inherited.

My intention in making these observations about Jones is not to be pessimistic or optimistic. I'm trying to understand what basis people have for making some of the claims they do about his coaching.

The thing is, most of us have strong opinions about how others have coached. Woodward is seen as a big thinker and manager rather than coach. Robinson is a good forwards coach who can't select his way out of a paper bag. Ashton is an inspirational attacking coach who was out of his depth in the top job.

What's the quick take on Jones? If you read the press, or comments here, then he's all things to all men.

Campese has already got his first shot in by saying Jones likes a conservative and structured game. It's Campese of course, so who knows what grounds he has for that. If it turns out to be true, though, is that what the RFU willingly signed up for?

by Sgt_Pooly Fri Nov 20, 2015 3:29 pm

Japan hardly played conservatively.

What I do like about Jones is he doesn't really have a style. He seems to get the best out of what he has and plays to the strengths. It'll be interesting to see what he does with us.

by SecretFly Fri Nov 20, 2015 3:37 pm

I wouldn't waste time asking Eddie Jones. He's busy in SA. A lot of work to get started with there.

by Barney McGrew did it Fri Nov 20, 2015 3:42 pm

A world where Campese doesn't mock England is a world I just don't want to live in.

by Welly Fri Nov 20, 2015 4:13 pm

Barney McGrew did it wrote:A world where Campese doesn't mock England is a world I just don't want to live in.

Would be a sad time.

by Dontheman2 Sun Nov 22, 2015 10:33 am

"GeordieFalcon wrote:
“
I thought this team was staying on temporarily for the 6n?

Wouldn't it be ironic if they smashed the 6n won the grand slam!"

Sorry to rain on your parade mate but like '08 and '12 it's a post WC Wales GS year

by nathan Sun Nov 22, 2015 3:21 pm

Rugby Fan wrote:
Sgt_Pooly wrote:...You point to Japan not having a dominant set piece, they were an absolute shambles a few years back...
The set piece was OK under Kirwan. Kirwan's Japan side actually wasn't too shabby but came up well short at the last World Cup. Japan's set piece work went backwards under Jones because he tried to rely more on Japanese-born players. That would be the shambles you are thinking about. He refocused the team and it's fair to say that he eventually took the set piece work to a higher standard than he inherited.

My intention in making these observations about Jones is not to be pessimistic or optimistic. I'm trying to understand what basis people have for making some of the claims they do about his coaching.

The thing is, most of us have strong opinions about how others have coached. Woodward is seen as a big thinker and manager rather than coach. Robinson is a good forwards coach who can't select his way out of a paper bag. Ashton is an inspirational attacking coach who was out of his depth in the top job.

What's the quick take on Jones? If you read the press, or comments here, then he's all things to all men.

Campese has already got his first shot in by saying Jones likes a conservative and structured game. It's Campese of course, so who knows what grounds he has for that. If it turns out to be true, though, is that what the RFU willingly signed up for?

Who cares what campese thinks, the man is a fool.

by SecretFly Sun Nov 22, 2015 3:27 pm

The man Campese is lots of things but not a fool. Opinionated basterde that likes to stir in typical raw Aussie style, with plenty of kick-in-gut sprinkled on for seasoning - yes
.... but then..................... I and some of me 606 pals often go down that route too Whistle

It's called 'banter' to people who love that word. I hate the word though and prefer to call it simply fun.

by Geordie Sun Nov 22, 2015 3:46 pm

Dontheman2 wrote:"GeordieFalcon wrote:
“
I thought this team was staying on temporarily for the 6n?

Wouldn't it be ironic if they smashed the 6n won the grand slam!"

Sorry to rain on your parade mate but like '08 and '12 it's a post WC Wales GS year

Don't make me laugh...Wooden spoon this year.

by nathan Sun Jan 17, 2016 10:49 am

Apparently Eddie Jones bumped into wilkinson in waitrose and was trying to get him onboard in the coaching team. I'm guessing as a kicking coach

by Geordie Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:07 pm

Yeah that seems to be nailed on now as well.

It's the tactical kicking that's the problem....especially in the prem! I Know Newcastles tactical kicking is amateurish

by eirebilly Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:09 pm

Jones is certainly saying all the right things, must be a good feeling being an England fan right now.

by nathan Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:24 pm

eirebilly wrote:Jones is certainly saying all the right things, must be a good feeling being an England fan right now.

Not really, it's all a bit Unknown. I've kind of written this six nations off as I think it will be too soon

by majesticimperialman Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:50 pm

nathan wrote:
eirebilly wrote:Jones is certainly saying all the right things, must be a good feeling being an England fan right now.
Not really, it's all a bit Unknown. I've kind of written this six nations off as I think it will be too soon

Me too nathan. I don't think we should expect big things/results this 6ns.

by englandglory4ever Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:00 pm

Jones is saying very exciting things because his world wide experience is shining through which is heart lifting to say the least. What I like about him is his focus on the next game (Scotland) and wanting to beat them. He will be very, very disappointed if England lose and that's good too. There won't be any soft platitudes coming from him in the after match interview if we lose and there won't be any gloating if we win either. Just hard nosed analysis.

by eirebilly Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:18 pm

I just think that any new head coach coming always gives sides a boost and Jones is a very experienced coach and, to me, is saying and approaching things in a way that will really get England firing. I expect big things from England this 6N.

by Barney McGrew did it Sun Jan 17, 2016 2:08 pm

nathan wrote:Apparently Eddie Jones bumped into wilkinson in waitrose and was trying to get him onboard in the coaching team. I'm guessing as a kicking coach

Aah Waitrose - Jonny always did have class.

Tho' I had Eddie down as a Lidl's man tbh.

by Sponsored content

Who should be next England coach (continued)

Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)

Re: Who should be next England coach (continued)