England Six Nations Thread

[ChequeredJersey]

First topic message reminder :

In that case LIW, Ill put my money on it being the following.

6 Lawes
7 Robshaw
8 Hughes

Hughes off knackered after about 50/55 mins.
Robshaw to 8 then Underhill on at 7.

I cant see Jones bringing Mercer up just yet.

Haskell is back in to so may come into the reckoning as starter or bench cover although might be harsh on Underhill.

Could be tried & tested.

6. Robshaw
7. Haskell
8. Hughes

Lawes covering bench

I think we need to Focus on Underhill now. Unless we're REALLY struggling for an 8, then possibly pop Haskell in.

6 Robshaw
7 Underhill
8 Haskell

Robshaw, Frodo, Hughes. Hask on bench

[Scottrf]

New Zealand who lost and drew with a scratch side and lost to the awful Australia?

[formerly known as Sam]

Interesting reading that article but I question his reasoning on leaders.

Yes the team has been together under EJ for two years. But those players mentioned have all been around far longer.

Hartley - England's most capped hooker, long term Saints captain and an older player
Robshaw - ex England captain of 3 seasons, ex Quin's captain for longer and been around since 2011
Farrell - been around since '13? Now a Sarries and England sub captain
Brown - been around since '12 and hugely experienced
Care, Lawes and Cole - all have been around for ever, since Johnson's time

How the hell are they struggling to lead? Frak if they can't do it now then I seriously doubt they're going to suddenly change and learn.

What Jones then says about Underhill is interesting though, maybe he should have brought him on a lot earlier, but he seems to have a real thing for playing big units in the backrow and maybe didn't want to take off Hughes.

There's plenty of experienced players there but England still looked clueless and neither adapted to Owens slightly dated interpretations of the laws (in the sense that AP refs interpreted the breakdown like that a couple of years back) nor did they do anything to get in Owens ear and sway his thinking.

I think Eddie wants to give a kick up the backside. Care was a deer in headlights and offered nothing in terms of tactical play, Farrell had lost his head before the game and one great line for his try aside he was poor, falling off tackles. Hartley didn't read the riot act and was far too passive and three locks with experience or leadership credentials all failed to make any impact, they didn't even get stuck into the Scottish forwards with a little scrapping.

[nathan]

It would seem eddie was abused by some Scottish fans both verbally and physically whilst travelling on the train down.

Not great to see from any set of fans.

[yappysnap]

Reading the press out here. The Kiwis really don't like Jones, and they seem almost contemptuous of England at the moment.

It'll be interesting to see how that plays out over the autumn

[yappysnap]

Interesting reading that article but I question his reasoning on leaders.

Yes the team has been together under EJ for two years. But those players mentioned have all been around far longer.

Hartley - England's most capped hooker, long term Saints captain and an older player
Robshaw - ex England captain of 3 seasons, ex Quin's captain for longer and been around since 2011
Farrell - been around since '13? Now a Sarries and England sub captain
Brown - been around since '12 and hugely experienced
Care, Lawes and Cole - all have been around for ever, since Johnson's time

How the hell are they struggling to lead? Frak if they can't do it now then I seriously doubt they're going to suddenly change and learn.

What Jones then says about Underhill is interesting though, maybe he should have brought him on a lot earlier, but he seems to have a real thing for playing big units in the backrow and maybe didn't want to take off Hughes.

There's plenty of experienced players there but England still looked clueless and neither adapted to Owens slightly dated interpretations of the laws (in the sense that AP refs interpreted the breakdown like that a couple of years back) nor did they do anything to get in Owens ear and sway his thinking.

I think Eddie wants to give a kick up the backside. Care was a deer in headlights and offered nothing in terms of tactical play, Farrell had lost his head before the game and one great line for his try aside he was poor, falling off tackles. Hartley didn't read the riot act and was far too passive and three locks with experience or leadership credentials all failed to make any impact, they didn't even get stuck into the Scottish forwards with a little scrapping.

But.

When the going has got tough and we've been out played like on Sat, I don't think any of those players have ever stood up and changed the game.

What makes Jones think they'll suddenly start now if they couldn't before?

[mid_gen]

2nd defeat and the knives will be out? Maybe in the gutter press and people that have nothing better to do with their lives than gossip.

I can't be bothered to dredge up the post, but I said before the tournament started that Murrayfield would be the toughest game for us. Scotland are a very good side, it wasn't some huge upset. it was always going to be a competitive match, and Scotland came out on top. Disappointing? Yes. Big deal? No.

If England struggle to a win v France and fall to a battering from Ireland again, then yes you can bet the knives will be out.

Like I said, gutter press and gossips.

England haven't become a terrible team after one loss. Just like I said Scotland hadn't become a terrible team overnight after losing to Wales (and was mocked on here for giving them any chance in the Calcutta cup match).

[No 7&1/2]

I keep coming back to we've won a helluva lot more than we've lost. To suggest england haven't adapted and dug in over those games is a stretch. To look at games in isolation gives a false impression. We are missing a bit of oomph from the bench epically missing youngs care combo. We've had a bit of luck in the past and lacked a bit on saturday. It happens.

I do agree the knives will be out with another loss and especially 2. There's knives out already from some people let's face it and that will always be the same due to the size of England's support.

[Geordie]

Yes 7.5 we've won more than we've lost and we have a good side.

However, if our weaknesses are not worked on (which many have identified for some time now) then those wins will decrease.

You cant stand on your laurel..

[No 7&1/2]

Which is what is always picked out. Now I've said I prefer the balance of having flankers not locks and said itbefore the scotland game. This game is about balance though and will take the pack to stand up as well as changes to 6 7 8. I'll also acknowledge taking lawes out or Itoje or Launchbury weakens us in other ways. Personally I doubt we would have won had underhill stared on saturday anyway as the pack just weren't at the races.

[Sgt_Pooly]

I'd personally bring in Kruis and Underhill to start. Kruis lineout work is outstanding and he does the basic lock better than any other of our options imo. He clears like and beast and this was something we've missed against Scotland (although France perhaps wont be such a threat but they're physical)

1. Mako
2. Hartley
3. Cole
4. Launchbury
5. Kruis
6. Robshaw
7. Underhill
8. Hughes

16. George 17. Marler 18. Itoje 19. Haskell

If Simmons was fit I'd be tempted to put Robshaw to the bench.

[Geordie]

I agree Underhill alone wouldn't have changed the result.

What I meant by fixing our weaknesses, is they have been the weaknesses for a while now (Ireland showed them last year) and they were exploited on Saturday as well.

Yes only 2 defeats, but 2 defeats over a year based on the same weakness. That suggests it hasn't been looked at.
Now Ireland could very well hit that again this year and France will have taken note of it as well.

That's why I will be very interested to see what fix they put in place for the France game...and particularly the Ireland game.

[No 7&1/2]

Kruis sent home Sgt. Don't know whether that's because he doesn't require reconditioning but it wouldn't make sense to do it if we were planning on playing him.

[Geordie]

Would you say Kruis is in form?

Itoje certainly isn't and those two were a huge part of what was driving England during Eddies tenure.

[beshocked]

mid gen I am not sure anyone has suggested sacking Jones based on one loss but there are issues that need solving.

yappysnap the problem is I don't see any of those players Jones has picked as his leaders as the brightest players in England.

Combative? Sure. As strategists/tacticians who can adapt quickly? No.

It's the difference between a warrior and a general. Being a leader, you have to do both.

We've seen England's inability to adapt in multiple games, not just the 2 losses either.


Actually when I looked at it - I think England have a lack of players who are quick of thought in the squad.

Plenty of quick of pace, fire in the belly but precious few I'd think - yes they can tactically out think the opposition on the pitch.

If I was Jones, I'd try to sharpen the decision making of the squad as a whole and really focus on the ability to adapt during a game.

Rugby isn't just about the physical attributes, it's about tactically being smarter obviously.


Someone also needs to communicate this message throughout the team.

[BamBam]

That is true, we do lack some of that tactical play. Looking back at previous England teams, we've had the likes of Borthwick himself, Catt, Greenwood, Hill etc who may not have been the captains necessarily, but all could probably be considered strong tactical players

Are we overlooking any players who fit that mould?

[beshocked]

Yes but I think the issue is a lot of the brainier players lack physical attributes at international level like Wigglesworth,Goode and Easter.

Wigglesworth just looks ponderous sadly even though he's got a good box kick.

Care is quick of pace but not of mind.

Goode is much more intelligent than Brown but hasn't got Brown's doggedness and physicality.

Easter never quite had the physical attributes IMO.

It's that balance.

We as England fans love the guys with brute power, pace etc but technically a lot aren't the brightest.


Borthwick had a good rugby brain and look how unloved he was because of his lack of physical attributes that are really admired at international level.

I'd say there aren't many players who have both.

England could do with a C.Smith or Greenwood in midfield but England just don't have that kind of player.


Robshaw is one of the more tactical player but he's one of the rare ones.


Even someone like Manu is an incredible athlete with raw power and pace but he is not a tactical player.

[No 7&1/2]

Yes. I'd say borthwick was one of the brightest captains around. Do we still remember that wonderful italy game?!

[beshocked]

Can you please stop disagreeing with almost everything I say, just for the sake of argument?

Borthwick has a good rugby brain, he's just not gifted when it comes to talking to the media.

[No 7&1/2]

Was speaking to bam bam actually beshocked. But borthwick was leading some of the worst performances and banging heads against the wall. Sorry if you want an echo chamber you're not going to get it.

[beshocked]

Well England did have an inexperienced Johnson in charge of the coaching set up, plus not exactly as if England's player pool was that stellar at the time.

Borthwick's limitations I feel was more his lack of carrying power rather than lacking a good rugby brain.

I feel we are going off topic - my point is I don't feel England have enough players in the team who can adapt to the opposition's tactics.

Sure it's of course partly the job of the coaches to prepare the players properly but of course the players have to execute basics to a high standard as well.

[LondonTiger]

TBH I wonder if the fact that EJ seems to demand adherence to a set way of play causes much of the problem?

I have seen Ford change tactics during a game, and same can be said for Care. However the fact that Care is now doing a pretty poor impression of an EJ starting 9 does suggest there is perhaps too much instruction.

Using this weekend's breakdown failings are perhaps misleading. Sure the tactic needed changing, but that could only really happen once the personnel were changed.

In the end the pack, pretty much to a man, underperformed.

[BamBam]

Yes. I'd say borthwick was one of the brightest captains around.  Do we still remember that wonderful italy game?!

I don't remember it off the top of my head, but I have a feeling its not going to be pretty

[No 7&1/2]

No. It really wasn't. Thing is you could pick out games like this for literally everyone.

[LondonTiger]

Yes. I'd say borthwick was one of the brightest captains around.  Do we still remember that wonderful italy game?!

I don't remember it off the top of my head, but I have a feeling its not going to be pretty

It was a poor game where in the immediate post match interview Borthwick talked up how well England played. It was clearly guff, but what else will someone say. Too much was made of it, just as too much is made now of public utterances (and non utterances).

Borthwick was a bright player, who was sadly below international class and captained a side that contained too many such players. He is, imo, unfairly tarnished by his presence in a poor England side and was a good leader.

[Geordie]

TBH I wonder if the fact that EJ seems to demand adherence to a set way of play causes much of the problem?

I have seen Ford change tactics during a game, and same can be said for Care. However the fact that Care is now doing a pretty poor impression of an EJ starting 9 does suggest there is perhaps too much instruction.

Using this weekend's breakdown failings are perhaps misleading. Sure the tactic needed changing, but that could only really happen once the personnel were changed.

In the end the pack, pretty much to a man, underperformed.

I appreciate that LT.

However my argument was that numerous times England went in to a two man ruck / clearout for quick ball, and got nailed. Why then not make a few simple changes and put 3/4 men in. Slows the play down yes...but at least you avoid multiple turnovers etc. You adapt your game.

Very basic changes like that would have impressed me more, as you see the players adapt.

[No 7&1/2]

Not sure they didn't try. They were just too slow and not effective. And in some cases unlucky.

[Geordie]

Well yes maybe that's true 7.5

I don't want to take away from an excellent Scotland performance as that would be unfair.

[leicestertinytiger]

Still think that Itoje and Kruis are England’s best lock pairing. With Itoje out of form I would play Launchbury Kruis and let Itoje and Lawes fight out the bench spot. Kruis just seems to do the basics incredibly well, something we seem to have missed recently.

[lostinwales]

Still think that Itoje and Kruis are England’s best lock pairing. With Itoje out of form I would play Launchbury Kruis and let Itoje and Lawes fight out the bench spot. Kruis just seems to do the basics incredibly well, something we seem to have missed recently.

They were a couple of years ago. Since then Launchbury has made himself all but undroppable, Kruis isn't playing as well as he was, Itoje is also not in the form he was, and Lawes is playing well, even if it is as a lock/6 hybrid rather than as a decent 6.

[quinsforever]

JOnes is just saying what is obvious about leadership.  ~England were obviously lacking in this in the Calcutta cup match as they were against Italy last year

You need on feild leaders to be able to change things up when its not working.  england were unable to do this until half time presumably when Jones tod them to change things like stop kicking the ball away, put enough players into rucks to secure the ball.  Disrupt scotlands ruck etc etc.

100% right.

it's not a lack of experience, it's a lack of someone who can aggressively change the way the team are playing mid-half. it is actually very very hard to do, as it's very difficult to see what is going wrong big-picture, when everyone is trying not to screw up their primary responsibilities.

i actually think EJ bears that responsibility. whether it involves an early substitution (underhill on hughes off with message to massively contest breakdown), which would have been controversial, but may well have paid dividends, i dont know.

but i think it's easier for the coach to spot when a gameplan isnt working. its hard for players in the thick of it.

[Geordie]

I dont normally post bits from elsewhere, but I read this on another spot and have unashamedly borrowed it as I thought it was quite an interesting view on the leadership issues we have been discussing on here. Do you agree with it?

Launchbury is far too quiet and not domineering enough. Fantastic foot soldier though. Contrast his body language with Martin Johnson - Even early in, Launch looks knackered with slumped shoulders and breathing hard; even when he was in bits Johnno was chest out, glowering, inviting the nearest 20 people to pick a fight and getting ready to go again. Sounds trivial, but when the going gets tough, having those kind of overtly positive, self confident characters makes the world of difference. Blokes you can look in the eye and know they’ll be racing to be first over the top.

Itoje has enough on his plate rediscovering form and cementing place. Never been convinced by the Future England Captain tag. That hype train needs to pull into a siding for a while.

Robshaw proved in spades when captain that he isn’t a leader. Similar body language to Launchbury.

Care. Experienced yes, leadership, no, although he can occasionally grab games by the scruff in the last 20 off the bench. Not a senior lieutenant though.

Ford. Head drops too easily. A great player if others set the platform for him, too often anonymous if they don’t. Partly the 10’s lot, but you rarely see him having the all consuming influence that Jonny used to.

Farrell. Definite leader with winners mentality and widespread respect. Surely Hartley’s successor.

Brown. Has the attitude for sure. That’s why Eddie keeps resisting calls to dump him for more showreel players.

Especially up front there’s not a lot of support for Hartley. Experience yes, but mainly followers. In that respect I feel a little sorry for him. Think who the likes of Johnson and McCaw were surrounded by when they lifted RWCs. If they were having a rare off day or not around, players with the global standing of Dalaglio or Read would naturally step into the breach without missing a beat, they in turn being backed up by Vickery, Back, Kaino etc. It was far more than just being great players. Leadership’s intangible, but it’s very obvious to see when someone clearly does / doesn’t have it. It’s the effect they have on those around them, the ability to galvanise, as well as think smartly and act positively under pressure. Don’t have to be the very best players (Jonny was rightly kept away from the armband) but do have to have serious mental toughness and generate respect from friend and foe.

This has been identified as an issue by the RFU, with Dean Ryan leading an initiative with certain younger players. Basically trying to address an inherent lack of responsibility flaw that arises from the academy system. Times article about it a few months ago.

To me, Hartley clearly seems to fully be in a follower of Eddie mode. Which is great that he is inspired and understands what Eddie wants. He seems to be Eddies lieutenant, loyal and focused on delivering. But the on pitch leader role needs to be autonomous from Eddies reins.

This issue just cascades as other potential leaders and senior players will follow and just up their effort to emulate their leaders direction.

This followership issue also creates another perceived issue by having too many designated leaders/senior players/vice captains. This means no clear immediate decision making can be made in the tiny amounts of time available to do so when a stoppage occurs. You could imagine the vice captains and captain all looking around and seeing effort still being put in by others and then thinking: “right, no one else sees this needs changing, so I will follow and carry on...”

If my musings have any truth, then this points towards the need for one clear leader with the ability to confidently and immediately change decisions on pitch. Maybe Farrell seems the strongest candidate, but would he have the capability to spot tactical issues within the forwards game? Which would bring us back to a forward being leader again, which to me is not Hartley on pitch, but I am at loss who fills this remit right now?

Following a suggestion Robshaw should be considered Captain

Robshaw may be the best 6 we have now but given the chance others may overtake him by the RWC.

He certainly shouldn’t be in any captaincy discussion. You’re right about the coaching culture though - he was seen as Lancaster’s man in much the same way is Hartley is seen as Eddie’s. Martin Johnson was never Clive’s man, it’s on record that he and other senior players regularly disagreed with him, including telling him to butt out during extra time of the RWC final. Woodward may be a lousy pundit, but to his credit seemed to listen to and empower his players. That’s a huge difference. Can you really see Robshaw openly challenging Eddie?

I suppose I look at the whole leadership thing this way. When things were going wrong against Scotland, which of their colleagues did Eng players look at and think “thank **** he’s on my side, he’ll stand up and produce a momentum changing play or some magic to get us out of this”? Farrell maybe, not many others. That’s another massive contrast with 03 team, in their different ways Johnno, Jonny, the whole back row, Robinson etc were all capable of match changing interventions. Lewsey not the most celebrated member would lead from the front by never easing in his intensity.

It will be very interesting to see selections and responses in the next 2 games. Struggling to see 2 wins.

[formerly known as Sam]

I don't think Ford's head drops I think he continues to try and lead his team I just don't think he's a natural leader. He's the kind of player who goes above and beyond on analysis pre game who strives for perfection. He's not a fire in the belly, lead by example charismatic type. Players would follow Johnno in to the mouth of hell, I'm not sure Ford could inspire them out of a pub.

Farrell could but he loses his head far too easily. He was psyched out before kick off vs Scotland. Never had his head fully in the game.

We need both of them to turn up and have their heads in the game if we're going to win.

[TJ]

YOu need a Barclay type player. IMO he is the one player who if he had been on the other side would have swung the game. Its no secret he fell out with the scots coaching set up both at Glasgow and for Scotland - perhaps by speaking his mind but he seems to have flourished in wales and back in the Scotland camp

smart, outspoken but loyal.
Who have you got with his sort of character?

[Scottrf]

Literally 2 games ago Barclay was being slaughtered for allowing heads to drop in a spinless performance and not leading against Wales.

[majesticimperialman]

Can any one tell me reallistictly, how many points England would need to score out of the last 2 games, to retain the title? And is the amount of points achievable?

[TJ]

scottrf - who by?  No0 one I heard blamed him. russell, Price townsend got blamed but not him.

I merely said he is the type of character you need leading england. Intelligent, thoughtful and independent minded

[Scottrf]

https://www.606v2.com/t67094p900-6n-2018-wales-v-scotland-3-february#3670683

And a few in the Scotland thread.

But mainly the team capitulated when losing and he's the captain. They never regained composure. I'm not sure there's an evidence that he's a better leader than what England have.

[quinsforever]

YOu need a Barclay type player.  IMO he is the one player who if he had been on the other side would have swung the game.  Its no secret he fell out with the scots coaching set up both at Glasgow and for Scotland - perhaps by speaking his mind but he seems to have flourished in wales and back in the Scotland camp

smart, outspoken but loyal.  
Who have you got with his sort of character?

me. but i'm 46, 180 pounds and overly confrontational.

not what england need

[mikey_dragon]

Can any one tell me reallistictly, how many points England would need to score out of the last 2 games, to retain the title? And is the amount of points achievable?

10,000 points.

[Sgt_Pooly]

I don't think we need to panic that much. We've had an upset and it's a good thing it's happened before the world cup and not at it.

We could play the same game and win by 20, Scotland aren't a better team than us, they outplayed us on the day. We have better players but they were out performed....it's one game. If Scotland go on a 20+ game winning streak and 2 6N titles we can start to really worry but at this stage is tweaks to personal and game plan.

We've got away with the breakdown for a year or so now, so it's good it's finally lost us a game in a strange way. I think we'll come through this stronger.

[TJ]

England have better players?  some perhaps but not all and Scotland are a team (generally) on the way up - what England have his better consistency and fewer mistakes because of their playing style. England play a conservative game, Scotland play a high risk high reward game that when it goes right they thump teams and when it goes wrong they get thumped

Look at the positions 1-15.  Some of them its even stevens, some its advantage England, some its advantage scotland.

Leadership and fitness are two areas where England lag behind Scotland for sure.

Edit - I was thinking which players from the other side would get into the opponents team but decided because of the playing styles there would be few. For Example I would never swap Russell for Ford - but I doubt many england fans would either. Huw Jones and Stuart Hogg perhaps would be the only ones that would get into the english side I might take Launchbury for Scotland

[No 7&1/2]

You've always rated Scottish players highly tj we know that since you talked of billy vunipola et al. However do think you need to take a step.back. Scotland aren't as good as england. You're getting carried away by one result.

[No 7&1/2]

I do know it's a great result.for you. Watched it with my best mate who is Scottish and his dad. Never had so much abuse. After saying bad luck and buying them a drink for the last ten years I'm now going to stick in the boot next!

[TJ]

Who of the england players do you think better?  Not just different styles but better?  Which of the England players do you think would add to the scotland team?

Big Billy is an awesome runner and a type of player scotland need - a big ball carrier  was it last year he kept running thru the scottish defence?

I'mnot getting carried away after one good game - I am getting carried away about a group of players that have taken us from 9th in the world to 5th having beaten every top 8 team bar NZ along the way

[No 7&1/2]

You're a good team. Joint team for me and 'best' players are slightly different as some.compliment each other in one team.

But for me Marler hartley nel
Launchbury Itoje
Robshaw Watson vunipola
Youngs ford Watson Farrell Joseph may hogg
Vunipola george sinckler j grey bit undecided on the back row sub care Russell maitland

[TJ]

McInally instead of Hartley surely and english half backs and 12?

Trouble is the two teams play such different styles that this comparison really doesn't work.

IMO the only english players that would enhance Scotland would be a big ball carrying back row and a speedy wing

The only Scots players that would enhance england would be McInally and hogg and Watson / Barclay ( only room for one of them). ( maybe laidlaw?)

Russell would not work for England and Farrell / ford would not work for scotland

[Sgt_Pooly]

It's wasn't a go at Scotland, more of a nod at the English suggesting we're suddenly a bad side. We played away and lost but I'd expect us to win more than we lose.

On players...honestly....I'd take Hogg and Watson. Jones was awsome and maybe him too although on form I'd prefer Tuilagi and JJ.

You don't win 2 x 6 nations with a grand slam and an away tour in Aus without a cracking team.

[No 7&1/2]

The thing with england is if you wanted to play a faster open game you could pick a load of enhlishmen for that too. LCD Taylor george Clifford simmonds cipriani wade haley tinder etc etc. And to be fair the current team could play that style as well. Need a faster back row like

[TJ]

Simmonds / Underhill both looked very good I thought.

One thing that really makes me laugh and I am certain its not true but Launchberry always looks to me like a fat dim farmboy! Something about his face and body language. He looks like he should be throwing turnips at witches
:-)

[Sgt_Pooly]

Launchbury always looks knackered, it's just his demeanour. Id certainly prefer a more physical, traditional lock alongside him though.

[Sponsored content]