6N 2017: Wales v England, 11 February

If the team as a whole can deal with it its not a big problem. He's not a revolving door in defence, makes his tackles and for the vast majority of the game Wales weren't threatening a try.

Exiledinborders wrote:

B91212 wrote:Thought Marler went okay, better than last week and got through a lot of defensive work  but agree about Hartley. Even as a Saints fan think George deserves the starting spot now, captain or not. We know it's generally easier to make an impression against tiring defences but it's every time with George and we are not going to know for sure unless he's given his chance from the start. Unfortunately I feel his game is more suited than Hartley's to being an impact sub but if he continues at the level he's shown in these last two cameos then I'd rather take 60 mins over the 35 he got today.

Reversing the order Hartley and George play in makes no sense. Hartley either starts or is dropped. He is not an impact player. Maybe it is time to start with George with Taylor on the bench.

The same applies to Youngs and Care. Youngs is not a 'finisher' to use Jones' word and Care has proved over the years he is not a starter. I would like to see Robson start with Care on the bench.

Agree about Hartley. Disagree on Youngs.

As has been pointed out, the replacement scrum half is nearly always lauded for speeding the game up. That's probably more of a reflection of the game breaking up and usually fresh legs elsewhere that make this seem the case.

Think back to France last year, Care starts, tears it up. Youngs comes on, tears it up.

I wouldn't say Russell is a good defender either and it's an area I'd like to see England attack Scotland when they face later in the tournament.

cascough it's not good though if you have to protect your 10. I don't think every 10 needs to be a Jonny. Sexton and Farrell in my opinion are two players which are difficult for opposition to make inroads against.

Have to factor this in when taking on NZ too.

Something can predictable but doesn't necessarily make it easy to defend.

Wales don't really have monstrous ball carriers do they? Two of their traditionally biggest carriers - Faletau and Roberts were on the bench and didn't really contribute.

I remember when Roberts was in his prime he was a real handful. I think Wales are missing someone with his impact.

Wales also badly missed North. Obviously having Cuthbert on the wing instead of North, took away one of Wales' best attacking weapons and meant there was a weakness for England to exploit.


no 7 & 1/2 you say Wales weren't threatening to score a try? Did you watch the game?

Ford in general made his tackles but as wayne says Ford was still pushed backwards, Wales generally managed to get over the gain line when targeting him.

Surely that's important? Get over the gain line.

No 7&1/2 wrote:If the team as a whole can deal with it its not a big problem. He's not a revolving door in defence, makes his tackles and for the vast majority of the game Wales weren't threatening a try.

Let me just say, I never read these statistic pages, but if Hughes's yards made were taken when he actually came into contact with a Welsh player, it would probably be in the single figures, and Ford when he was tackling would be in the minus double digit figures.

And Wales still looked pretty toothless.

wayne wrote:

cascough wrote:

wayne wrote:

beshocked wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Can we put to bed the myth that George Ford is weak in defence.

Every time these two meet the Welsh gameplan seems to be built around Ford being weak in defence and they are going to run down his channel all game long.

I appreciate this gameplan is perceived by all Welsh pundits and Fans  and not the Welsh coaching staff, but still!

The Welsh frequently targetted Ford and IMO almost made metres every single time. Ford made his tackles but was forced backwards. I thought the tactic worked.

Some people think making your tackles is enough, I disagree. Compare this to Moriarty who able to smash people like Hughes and Itoje back. I know it's a backrow and fly half but Ford is still someone IMO who is a target.


Plenty of room of improvement for England but England are able to win games because they keep up the intensity for the full 80.

The win has been called lucky by some. It wasn't. England just exerted sufficient pressure to get the winning score.

Even if Davies had kicked the ball out with his clearance it would have still been an England lineout in Wales' half.

I've said it many times now - Jones used the bench very well. He brought on the players when needed, not just doing subs for the sake of it unlike Howley.

Even Sinckler who wasn't on for that long had a positive cameo.

England in the end ultimately had a superior 23.  England have that advantage of superior depth and they used it.

Good Post Beshocked especially the opening point, Ford was targeted and it brought big rewards, this is why some of us on this side of the bridge were pleased that Dan recovered from his rib injury, both Davies and Ford lack nothing in effort or expertise in tackling, it is just their size. If Sam had been selected the same emphasis would have been set on him by England, as we put on George and the rewards would have been just as much if not more.
Let me finally add Sam will make a significant difference in one of the matches coming up, probably the next one against Scotland.  

This is a good point. But it needs a dose of realism too. Not every fly half can be Jonny Wilkinson. George Ford is smaller so it get's noticed more. Biggar and Russell are both tenacious defenders, but neither are big tacklers. If a team were to employ the tactic of running down the channel as consistently as Wales did I'd wager they would lose ground nearly everytime too.

A better solution is to put the 10 out in the wider channels in defensive situations. England do this a fair bit. The effect is 2 fold,
1-It helps with the problem you're describing.
2-Ideally you don't want your creative player tiring himself out making tackles, keep him fresh for when he get's on the ball.

Casgough, Wales in the form of Tuperic attacked Ford in the wide channel and made yards, so putting him in the wide channel didn't work, the ball was passed a few times until Ford was in line of sight and was then attacked, Biggar smashed through him on a couple of occasions, sorry but to me Ford was and Davies for us if he had been selected was a liability.

Fair point about Wales adapting to that and seeking him out.

I still feel Ford goes backwards no more than many other international fly halves, it's just highlighted more because he is smaller. A lot of the time, Englands line speed mean even if Ford loses a metre at the point of contact, the opposition have still lost ground overall. I'm far from concerned, England are dealing with this tactic very well at the moment.

wayne completely agree. I think quite a bit of Hughes metres would have been running from deep when catching Wales silly kicks. Hughes worked hard but as you say he wasn't particularly effective when facing the Welsh defence. Got smashed on at least a couple occasions.

no 7 & 1/2 I wouldn't say Wales were toothless. Just good English defence, Wales in general defended well too. England missed a few tackles but defended well close to the line.

cascough if you compare to someone like Russell then yes, Ford doesn't go backwards any less but compared to the likes of Farrell and Sexton he does.

England did defend well but Wales tended to go no where. Williams was excellent but they pack weren't making in roads. Know Howley is getting stick for taking Moriarty off but for his excellent defence he was making any big dents and Faletau is a big step up there.

beshocked wrote:wayne completely agree. I think quite a bit of Hughes metres would have been running from deep when catching Wales silly kicks. Hughes worked hard but as you say he wasn't particularly effective when facing the Welsh defence. Got smashed on at least a couple occasions.

no 7 & 1/2 I wouldn't say Wales were toothless. Just good English defence, Wales in general defended well too. England missed a few tackles but defended well close to the line.

cascough if you compare to someone like Russell then yes, Ford doesn't go backwards any less but compared to the likes of Farrell and Sexton he does.

Yes but to compare him to the best examples of hard tackling international fly halves is hardly fair, and unrealistic. Not every team has or can expect to have one of these, so you need to adjust your expectations of how the 10 should defend. Most teams do not possess a dominant tackler at 10.

Now you might say England do, so we should play him there. Fair point. Cash in on your resources. I can see the logic there.

But to say Ford is a liability, I completely disagree. if you label Ford as a liability then you should also apply the same label/thinking to most other 10s. Playing Farrell over Ford, in terms of defence is being looked at as "With Ford we lose something" Whereas it should be looked at as "With Farrell we gain something".

beshocked wrote:wayne completely agree. I think quite a bit of Hughes metres would have been running from deep when catching Wales silly kicks. Hughes worked hard but as you say he wasn't particularly effective when facing the Welsh defence. Got smashed on at least a couple occasions.

no 7 & 1/2 I wouldn't say Wales were toothless. Just good English defence, Wales in general defended well too. England missed a few tackles but defended well close to the line.

cascough if you compare to someone like Russell then yes, Ford doesn't go backwards any less but compared to the likes of Farrell and Sexton he does.

,

Compared to Biggar as well, his defence except when he's up against a very quick 10 (Barrett 3rd test) is excellent.

7&1/2 the move up the touchline when Webb passed inside and forward to Biggar would have been a try if passed backward. Nobody would have laid a finger on him.

wayne wrote:

beshocked wrote:wayne completely agree. I think quite a bit of Hughes metres would have been running from deep when catching Wales silly kicks. Hughes worked hard but as you say he wasn't particularly effective when facing the Welsh defence. Got smashed on at least a couple occasions.

no 7 & 1/2 I wouldn't say Wales were toothless. Just good English defence, Wales in general defended well too. England missed a few tackles but defended well close to the line.

cascough if you compare to someone like Russell then yes, Ford doesn't go backwards any less but compared to the likes of Farrell and Sexton he does.

,

Compared to Biggar as well, his defence except when he's up against a very quick 10 (Barrett 3rd test) is excellent.

7&1/2 the move up the touchline when Webb passed inside and forward to Biggar would have been a try if passed backward. Nobody would have laid a finger on him.

If my aunty had balls she'd be my uncle.

Ford's defence is excellent, he just isn't a big tackler. Neither is Biggar. Unless you think that defence = big tackles?

I've posted before when it comes to defence.

Desire>Positioning>Technique>Power.

cascough I actually think England have looked more effective with Farrell and Teo on the pitch together but maybe that's down to being the latter part of the match.

Farrell has certainly improved his creativity and basics since his international debut.

Ford made his tackles but is it enough? Is it good defence to make a tackle but almost be driven back every time?

Stopping the opposition on the gain line is important. It's what Moriarty was doing well before taken off. Preventing momentum.

As the likes of Haskell and George came on, England were able to get over the gain line a bit more effectively.

The difference was instantly noticeable but gradually I think the physical battle shifted in England's direction and eventually England's pressure paid off.

We could try Farrell Barrett and Te'o. Really good defence.

Just to say to both set of fans, absolutely cracking match. Best international game I've seen for a while in terms of tension and "test match feel".

On the English side I thought both locks were full of vim and dog, with Farrell and Daly impressive in the backs.

On the Welsh side it was the best game I've seen Sam Warburton play for years, and Dan Biggar was an absolute warrior. I've been counting Biggar out of my Lions squad these past few months behind Sexton, Farrell and Ford, but I think Ford must be feeling the heat now.

Great game.

It was a proper blood-and-thunder test match, wasn't it? I just wonder how much it will have taken out of the Welsh players, rest week or not.

The Daly try showed the worth of having Ford in the side, he spotted the space straight and spread the ball to Farrell, he's been hit and miss but his vision is instinctive. Farrell's pass to Daly itself was pinpoint perfect but I'm not sure if the roles were reversed if he'd have seen the space.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The Daly try showed the worth of having Ford in the side, he spotted the space straight and spread the ball to Farrell, he's been hit and miss but his vision is instinctive. Farrell's pass to Daly itself was pinpoint perfect but I'm not sure if the roles were reversed if he'd have seen the space.

I've been trying to remember this, was it definitely Ford who caught the ball initially? I keep thinking it was May

BamBam wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The Daly try showed the worth of having Ford in the side, he spotted the space straight and spread the ball to Farrell, he's been hit and miss but his vision is instinctive. Farrell's pass to Daly itself was pinpoint perfect but I'm not sure if the roles were reversed if he'd have seen the space.

I've been trying to remember this, was it definitely Ford who caught the ball initially? I keep thinking it was May

Yeah. Ford-Farrell-Daly.

No 7&1/2 wrote:We could try Farrell Barrett and Te'o. Really good defence.

Personally haven't seen enough of Te'o to suggest his defence is better than Fords so I couldn't comment. It's stands to reason he might be a bigger hitter, but I wouldn't know too much about his defence.

Ford not being the most physical of 10s wasn't why people where questioning his absolute value to the side before the 6 nations.
It was because he wasnt showing the same spark in attack which got him the job in the first place, and he still isn't.
He still isn't a first choice goal kicker. He still doesn't have Farrell leadership.

What do you gain by having Farrell at 10? A starting spot for Teo or Slade at 12. Or indeed Lowowkowsmsshdjskakei has been rumoured as an option for Italy.

What do you lose? On current form not a lot. We know Ford's weaknesses, exaggerated or not its OK to excuse him when he's regularly making 20 yard dashes through space and putting in pinpoint misspasses, turning defenses with perfectly weighted grabbers etc. He's capable of brilliant things with the ball, but hasn't been doing it enough recently. The focus has shifted to his weaknesses.

So it's not wholly unreasonable that Ford's starting to get questioned. The backs have not been firing from structured play especially well, if England want to shake things up its on the table as an option.

With everyone talking about Farrell's pass to Daly its easy to forget who provided an equally good pass to Farrell!

Many players in the same situation as Ford would have put boot to ball and kept their fingers crossed Daly was on the same page to chase it down.

TightHEAD wrote:With everyone talking about Farrell's pass to Daly its easy to forget who provided an equally good pass to Farrell!

Equally good? Don't be ridiculous. Didn't need to be timed to anything like the same extent, and didn't need to be as accurate. A pass in clear space vs one that took out multiple defenders and had the winger taking the ball at pace.

Both good passes.

But I'd expect that from both of them.

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:With everyone talking about Farrell's pass to Daly its easy to forget who provided an equally good pass to Farrell!

Equally good? Don't be ridiculous. Didn't need to be timed to anything like the same extent, and didn't need to be as accurate. A pass in clear space vs one that took out multiple defenders and had the winger taking the ball at pace.

Rubbish, watch it again.

TightHEAD wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:With everyone talking about Farrell's pass to Daly its easy to forget who provided an equally good pass to Farrell!

Equally good? Don't be ridiculous. Didn't need to be timed to anything like the same extent, and didn't need to be as accurate. A pass in clear space vs one that took out multiple defenders and had the winger taking the ball at pace.

Rubbish, watch it again.

Ford is clearly 20m from any Welsh player. The pass isn't flat, doesn't need to be timed to the same extent and doesn't need to be as accurate. It's a decent enough pass but didn't need to be anything special.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The Daly try showed the worth of having Ford in the side, he spotted the space straight and spread the ball to Farrell, he's been hit and miss but his vision is instinctive. Farrell's pass to Daly itself was pinpoint perfect but I'm not sure if the roles were reversed if he'd have seen the space.

I think this is a great point, and there's even more to it.

Ford spotted and started the move and it was a very good pass (Pressure of the game, the clock, under fatigue). Farrell's was even better. Pinpoint execution when the chips were down, superb. But having that distribution and vision at 10 and 12 is really key here. If that's Te'o at 12 is the pass thrown? Is at as perfect as it needed to be?

If you're dropping Ford then you need to bring Slade into the mix. People just need to be careful here. It isn't as simple as Ford v Farrell, we play both. If you drop one you probably have to change the system, and I'd be very wary of that.

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:With everyone talking about Farrell's pass to Daly its easy to forget who provided an equally good pass to Farrell!

Equally good? Don't be ridiculous. Didn't need to be timed to anything like the same extent, and didn't need to be as accurate. A pass in clear space vs one that took out multiple defenders and had the winger taking the ball at pace.

Rubbish, watch it again.

Ford is clearly 20m from any Welsh player. The pass isn't flat, doesn't need to be timed to the same extent and doesn't need to be as accurate. It's a decent enough pass but didn't need to be anything special.

Oh I dunno about that. Farrell's was the better pass, he's running harder, he's closer to the line and it's further. But Ford's still needed to be perfect.

Many 10's would have kicked it, thank goodness Eddie is sticking with Ford who even not playing to his best has great vision and saw that the move was on.

Fords pass had to be perfect too and thankfully it was.

How terrible it must be having to argue over which of the passes in the match-winning try was the best!

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:How terrible it must be having to argue over which of the passes in the match-winning try was the best!

Don't get me wrong Farrell's was the best, but Fords vision and excellent pass is being lost and forgotten about by the masses who seem to want Ford out of the team, just because he doesn't kick goals and doesn't score a hat trick of tries every game. Madness!!!!!

I want Farrell, Itoje, Lawes, Joseph, Nowell, Ben Youngs, Care and Marler out of the team. I think they're keeping England back. Sort it out before the final game!

Irrespective of who's pass was the most more better or whatever the bickering is about I believe the point would be that had England done more better for the other 79 minutes and 50 seconds they wouldn't have required a lucky break to give them acres of space to embarrass Cuthbert with.

Regardless of whether or not Ford is the only person who would ever have thought of passing when there was such a huge gap it's his overall contribution to the two games so far that's leading to questions over him. Indeed there were plenty of people championing Farrell when Jones took charge, and that hasn't stopped since he established himself as a genuine option at 12 by playing consistently well.

It's hard to imagine England starting a game without a fit Farrell now. Much less so Ford. His place isn't secure.

That said I remain sceptical about change at this point.

To everyone saying England only won because Wales made a mistake and England got lucky need to watch more rugby!

The All Blacks are great because they always stay in the game and wait for a mistake which is usually pounced upon and punished.

England were ruthless and clinical once that mistake came vs Wales and France.

Gooseberry wrote:Can I just check where the Sam Davies bandwagon is off the back of Biggars performance?

England can't keep riding their luck like this. They were outplayed for the majority of that game ...only picking up 3 points in about 50 minutes. Arguably outplayed by France too.
The Irish really must fancy a solid crack at breaking what is a pretty incredible run of wins.

The injuries to the forwards and some questionable form in the backs leaves them a weaker side than last year.  It just takes someone to get their game together.  

Great second half discipline from England , Daleys raw pace, and a piece of terrible decision making cost Wales what could have been quite a hefty victory.

Always find stuff like this a bit baffling. If England were outplayed for the majority of the game then why didn't the scoreboard reflect this. I mean if Wales were so good in a particular facet of the game that England simply couldn't live with, then for England to be outplayed then Wales must have been equally poor in another facet of the game to allow Eng to stay in touching distance of Wales on the scoreboard (and ahead at certain points). So I don't really see how that's outplaying anyone. Or perhaps Wales outplayed England in one facet but then England countered that by outplaying Wales in another facet, but again, that doesn't really set the teams apart now, does it?

The truth may be boring, but actually the match was very even. As was ENG-FRA. Last week, England were poor, but despite all the fawning, so were France. Inept would be a good descriptor for France last week. This week, Wales were good, England were good. It was a close game.

It could have gone either way, but it didn't. It went England's way, as it has done many times in tight situations under Eddie Jones.

cascough wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:The Welsh try was caused by bad defending by Nowell. He tried to track the Welsh winger but was too late. You will find it was Nowell who made the last gasp attempt at a tackle. Nowell let his opposition through, simple.

Agree entirely.

Credit to Wales, it was a lovely strike move, but our midfield did exactly as it should have done. Farrell hit S Williams and Joseph marked Davies. If Farrell gambles and hits L Williams instead but the ball is given to S Williams on the crash then it's a defensive error and S Williams is walking it in. If Joseph gambles and steps into L Williams  and the ball goes out the back then Davies is waltzing through a huge hole.

As it is, neither gambles, they both stick to their job. What was needed was Nowell to stick to his man and track L Williams sooner, especially given that L Williams had just been up to Webb and given him the call (although I appreciate just because the TV cameras picked that up in real time doesn't necessarily mean Nowell could have easily spotted it).

Miaow, your original point was that Joseph lacked the physicality to defend at 13 in Gatlands system. You've now switched to trying to pick up on any defensive mistakes he makes. Even if you think this is one, which I don't for the reasons I've explained above, it doesn't pertain to your original point.

It looks very much like you've made a snap judgement without really thinking about it or looking at the evidence and are now trying to justify that afterwards.

I'm no defensive coach, so I'm not claiming to know who has responsibility for what in every situation. I'm happy to buy into nowell being slow to get across. It looks like he was very late setting off. It also looked to me like Joseph continued to step up when the rest of the defensive line held... creating a hole you could drive a bus through. At what point does situational awareness trump marking your man and trusting the system?

TightHEAD wrote:To everyone saying England only won because Wales made a mistake and England got lucky need to watch more rugby!

The All Blacks are great because they always stay in the game and wait for a mistake which is usually pounced upon and punished.

England were ruthless and clinical once that mistake came vs Wales and France.

It still doesn't change the fact that the English pounced on a pretty big Welsh mistake.....

TightHEAD wrote:To everyone saying England only won because Wales made a mistake and England got lucky need to watch more rugby!

The All Blacks are great because they always stay in the game and wait for a mistake which is usually pounced upon and punished.

England were ruthless and clinical once that mistake came vs Wales and France.

Good post.

Trying to reduce games down to one moment is nothing but sensationalism to me. there's always more to it than that and that kick alone is an excellent example.

1st, Liam Williams should have been pinged (and probably carded for stealing the ball when clearly off his feet)

2nd Webb can choose to hit it back for a clearance, box kick, or set up anther ruck.

3rd Webb can pass it to Halfpenny or Biggar (stood either side of Davies).

4th Kyle Sinckler needs to put an awful lot of pressure on the kicker.

5th Wales Line speed needs to be good.

6th Ford needs to not knock on, not pause, and he can pass, kick, or take contact.

7th Once Ford catches, and the linespeed hasn't been good, Wales need to get their defensive line set, quickly

8th Ford's Pass needs to be bang on the money.

9th Farrell's pass needs to be bang on the money.

10th Cuthbert actually got a hand on Daly, he could grab his shirt instead of trying to get closer to properly wrap.

11th Farrell nails the touchline conversion. If he doesn't England are defending in a totally different mindset for the last minute.

Even on this one moment there are so many decisions to be made (by both teams) and so many potential mistakes, yet people are fixated on one thing.

Dai Young said it best when he was asked if Wasps deserved to win against connacht (when the ref wrongly let connacht play a lineout after time was up, and they scored). He said no, because they didn't stop the resultant lineout but more importantly they didn't do enough during the game to avoid that situation (ie it still being a 1 score game at the end). He refused to let it be about 1 moment.

SecretFly wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:To everyone saying England only won because Wales made a mistake and England got lucky need to watch more rugby!

The All Blacks are great because they always stay in the game and wait for a mistake which is usually pounced upon and punished.

England were ruthless and clinical once that mistake came vs Wales and France.

It still doesn't change the fact that the English pounced on a pretty big Welsh mistake.....

You say that but it was the same tactic they did all game by kicking the ball in field and not into row M on Big Al from Pontypandy's head!

milkyboy wrote:

cascough wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:The Welsh try was caused by bad defending by Nowell. He tried to track the Welsh winger but was too late. You will find it was Nowell who made the last gasp attempt at a tackle. Nowell let his opposition through, simple.

Agree entirely.

Credit to Wales, it was a lovely strike move, but our midfield did exactly as it should have done. Farrell hit S Williams and Joseph marked Davies. If Farrell gambles and hits L Williams instead but the ball is given to S Williams on the crash then it's a defensive error and S Williams is walking it in. If Joseph gambles and steps into L Williams  and the ball goes out the back then Davies is waltzing through a huge hole.

As it is, neither gambles, they both stick to their job. What was needed was Nowell to stick to his man and track L Williams sooner, especially given that L Williams had just been up to Webb and given him the call (although I appreciate just because the TV cameras picked that up in real time doesn't necessarily mean Nowell could have easily spotted it).

Miaow, your original point was that Joseph lacked the physicality to defend at 13 in Gatlands system. You've now switched to trying to pick up on any defensive mistakes he makes. Even if you think this is one, which I don't for the reasons I've explained above, it doesn't pertain to your original point.

It looks very much like you've made a snap judgement without really thinking about it or looking at the evidence and are now trying to justify that afterwards.

I'm no defensive coach, so I'm not claiming to know who has responsibility for what in every situation. I'm happy to buy into nowell being slow to get across. It looks like he was very late setting off. It also looked to me like Joseph continued to step up when the rest of the defensive line held... creating a hole you could drive a bus through. At what point does situational awareness trump marking your man and trusting the system?

But what situation should Joseph have been aware of?

It was perfectly executed and it wasn't until the last second that it was clear which man it was going to.

Same tactic...same dumb move. I always say don't be kicking back to hard-running sides willing to come back at pace and using that momentum of the catch so far up field to become virtually unstoppable.

England pounced...but it WAS a massive bloody mistake.

cascough wrote:Dai Young said it best when he was asked if Wasps deserved to win against connacht (when the ref wrongly let connacht play a lineout after time was up, and they scored). He said no, because they didn't stop the resultant lineout but more importantly they didn't do enough during the game to avoid that situation (ie it still being a 1 score game at the end). He refused to let it be about 1 moment.

Now there's a name to give Welsh fans hope!

SecretFly wrote:Same tactic...same dumb move.  I always say don't be kicking back to hard-running sides willing to come back at pace and using that momentum of the catch so far up field to become virtually unstoppable.

England pounced...but it WAS a massive bloody mistake.

Of course it was, but the game didn't hinge on Davies missing touch. That entire situation only existed because of everything that had gone before.

I'd imagine the take away outlets in Cardiff would like to see Dai Young again.

cascough wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Same tactic...same dumb move.  I always say don't be kicking back to hard-running sides willing to come back at pace and using that momentum of the catch so far up field to become virtually unstoppable.

England pounced...but it WAS a massive bloody mistake.

Of course it was, but the game didn't hinge on Davies missing touch. That entire situation only existed because of everything that had gone before.

The situation didn't have to be kicked away so hopelessly. The difference in the final score is the try. I think everyone that watched that game gulped when they saw that one going off - I think a lot of people were mouthing, "What the f**k?"

SecretFly wrote:The situation didn't have to be kicked away so hopelessly.  The difference in the final score is the try.  I think everyone that watched that game gulped when they saw that one going off - I think a lot of people were mouthing, "What the f**k?"

Same as I did when AWJ went for a scrum with the prop replacements both teams had.

cascough wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

cascough wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:The Welsh try was caused by bad defending by Nowell. He tried to track the Welsh winger but was too late. You will find it was Nowell who made the last gasp attempt at a tackle. Nowell let his opposition through, simple.

Agree entirely.

Credit to Wales, it was a lovely strike move, but our midfield did exactly as it should have done. Farrell hit S Williams and Joseph marked Davies. If Farrell gambles and hits L Williams instead but the ball is given to S Williams on the crash then it's a defensive error and S Williams is walking it in. If Joseph gambles and steps into L Williams  and the ball goes out the back then Davies is waltzing through a huge hole.

As it is, neither gambles, they both stick to their job. What was needed was Nowell to stick to his man and track L Williams sooner, especially given that L Williams had just been up to Webb and given him the call (although I appreciate just because the TV cameras picked that up in real time doesn't necessarily mean Nowell could have easily spotted it).

Miaow, your original point was that Joseph lacked the physicality to defend at 13 in Gatlands system. You've now switched to trying to pick up on any defensive mistakes he makes. Even if you think this is one, which I don't for the reasons I've explained above, it doesn't pertain to your original point.

It looks very much like you've made a snap judgement without really thinking about it or looking at the evidence and are now trying to justify that afterwards.

I'm no defensive coach, so I'm not claiming to know who has responsibility for what in every situation. I'm happy to buy into nowell being slow to get across. It looks like he was very late setting off. It also looked to me like Joseph continued to step up when the rest of the defensive line held... creating a hole you could drive a bus through. At what point does situational awareness trump marking your man and trusting the system?

But what situation should Joseph have been aware of?

It was perfectly executed and it wasn't until the last second that it was clear which man it was going to.

... the situation that they had a spare man. Looked to me he had stepped up out of position, had he held his position he'd have had a choice to make about whether to leave his man for williams. Clearly, had nowell got across it's a decision he wouldn't have to make regardless.

It was a well executed move, but the way some are talking, a few dummy runners and a pop up pass is unstoppable from first phase if executed correctly. I doubt the england coaching staff see it that way.

I know it was a great pass that sent Daly away but doesn't anyone think that Cuthbert should be making the tackle there or at least ankle tapping him? I thought it was a feeble attempt myself.

eirebilly wrote:I know it was a great pass that sent Daly away but doesn't anyone think that Cuthbert should be making the tackle there or at least ankle tapping him? I thought it was a feeble attempt myself.

You haven't seen Cuthbert being blamed a dozen times?