Most perfectly rated current international player.

miaow wrote:

Poorfour wrote:Well, you're entitled to your opinion but the numbers say something quite different.

And statistics are only as good as the context they are in. You can prove anything with statistics.

How do you quantify the "post-RWC rebuilding" effect? How do you quantify the impact of the "right" new coach for a short term success on a group of dejected but competent players?

You can't just dismiss opinion- subjective context- as redundant, as somehow a lesser guage than the figures. Take England v Australia fixtures in the last 12 months: the Australia team that demolished England in the RWC was one firing at its best. The team that England beat 3-0 in the Summer was way off that level, and despite the impressive feat of winning three away from home, should be considered within that context. The Australia team that England beat last weekend had improved, but equally, it all has to be taken within context.

With that in mind, I'm happy to say that England are just about the best team in Europe. But forget the statistics if you're not willing to widen your scope and consider something more than just the rankings. Take statistics from the previous few seasons. Take a longer term view: a team isn't just created in twelve months, and if it is, you have to ask how/why has it improved so dramatically, and can it last?

Eddie Jones is not Joe Schmidt. He's not even Gatland. The bubble will burst. It doesn't mean you'll become significantly worse, merely than the 'bubble'- all the hype and expectation that is being bestowed on the team- will be tempered by a couple of losses. You cannot continue an upward trajectory like England have experienced since the World Cup, there will be a levelling off. In the short term, that bubble- that confidence- is undoubtedly helping you. It's psychological. But when you lose a few games as it becomes harder to give novel tactics to the players, as the other teams progress in their rebuilding process, you may well find that- just as Lancaster experienced- the external hype that once added a drive to your standards becomes suffocating, and hinders you.

It's when you get the media chirping up comparing the team to the 2003 RWC winners. When, having won one 6Ns, you have pundits declaring that England could go on and dominate European rugby for years to come. I'm not sure if this is a new thing, or whether it's some latent release of all the disappointment you suffered during the comedown post-'03, but no other nation- not even Wales- has the same levels of (let's call it) 'confidence' when they start winning. Whereas other nations seem to be better at compartmentalising the fanatics, the media tends to give validity to English exceptionalism.

In my opinion, even considering the statistics, going on what this topic is based on- perception of a rugby player/team- I believe England are overrated, yes. The sheer noise the team is now garnering in papers like The Times and The Mail should be a good signifier of that, the heartlands of casual and aspirational English rugby fans getting whipped up to start caring about their rugby team again now that they're winning.

You're good. I'm impressed that you've managed to win every game this calendar year. That's an impressive feat. However, since perhaps 08/09 there has been very little between England, Ireland, and Wales. There have been dips in form for all three sides of course during this period, but generally speaking, the talent, ability, and level of performance from all three teams has been largely similar. Each team has their own strengths and weaknesses, which makes it even more interesting, and part of the reason why it seems that they have hit their 'peaks' at different times. Even now, as England have the conditions conducive to success, I don't believe it has a longevity to it, that Eddie Jones has somehow found a secret forumal to get England playing (self belief and a solid and agressive pack!?). The Aviva Premiership is as much to thank for England's success as Eddie Jones, I believe. The standards have improved so dramatically in the last 2-3 years due to the influx of top talent that that has only driven the English players to improve, in order to just survive at club level. You may well win the 6Ns this year. If you did the GS, that would set you up to most likely break the All Blacks' winning streak, which would be emphatic. Even then, context is required: the All Blacks started that run before a RWC, and played the SH teams regularly. England won't have played the All Blacks if/when they do break that record.

In any case, I still don't see a significant difference between Ireland and England, even if Wales have slipped somewhat, and need to have a jumpstart rebuild having opted not to do so this time last year. Ireland's RWC was similarly disappointing, exiting early, and I think Schmidt's rejuvination of his team if frankly more impressive than Jones' of England. But there we go. It's all a matter of opinion, after all.

Would English fans be so quick to defend their team, and evoke statistics, if they were as comfortable that the success will last as they seem to attest to? I think it's probably more a matter of misunderstanding. English fans want to consider the wins as definitive markers of their ability: I'm looking at those games within context (nearly bottled it against France and Wales, poor Australian side in the Summer, rebuilding etc.) as well as what I think is coming in the near and medium term future. I don't believe Eddie Jones is setting you up for World Cup glory, which much of the media is tentatively starting to suggest/think about. That's what I mean by overrated, not that the winning streak in and of itself wasn't impressive. It's a fine line to tread, trying to be fair but critical of England and not come across as bitter.