Le Winner Tales It All - England vs France

First topic message reminder :

The Guardian throws up some interesting points of discussion that have been touched upon already elsewhere. The positives first are that there will be 2000 fans in the stadium at the weekend:plenty of room to spread out but an important step back to normality. It also allows england the chance on some revenge for the 6 nations defeat and to lift some silverware. Despite overall feeling we've missed the chance to create depth in some key areas I think Jones has used these games pretty well. Genge has had some good performances, itoje and Launchbury have to me shown they can work effectively together, Willis and Earl have mins on the pitch, Lawrence looks set for a good career. Hell even if I dont think it's worked Joseph has proved he can cover wing (played there previously for england I know) though hopefully only for emergencies and we know conclusively Furbank isnt good enough.

That leads onto the negative. The balance between club and country has led France to agree to only play players 3 times over the course of these matches. It leave the final now a bit of an imbalance as France for some reason prioritised games over england meaning guys like Dupont and Vakatawa are unavailable. Perhaps they figured may as well let the media hype of 'France are back' reign on rather than risk a massacre at Twickenham. Its shame for the fans (and Amazon the poor multi billion company) but I'm looking forward to it anyway. There will still be fireworks from them I'm sure and in guys like Woki they certainly have quality. That guy could be box office, loads of potential with a slight question on his fitness to perform for 80 mins for me.

I suspect that Jones will go for a very strong team again but while his favourite phrase will be we've picked the strongest 23 it clearly leaves room for tinkering. I have a slight feeling that this may be the match he throws Malins a start.

Expecting a great game tbh. England have stuttered so far but easily been on top throughout their matches. Surely this is the game targeted from the off? Allez les rosbifs.

Cumbrian wrote:I was pretty impressed with the French players.  I reckon Woki, Macalou and Jalibert will be around their first team squad for years.  If you add them in to the overall French squad, a trip to Paris starts to look very intimidating again.

Thats exactly what ive been saying elsewhere...

They had some cracking players on that pitch that will be challenging for starting spots in the 6n.
Woki, Jalibert, Macalou, The number is 8 is like Sam Simmonds, Raka is a monster of a winger...the other winger is a hell of a player, the two second rows look outstanding and are 21/22 etc etc.

Nothing about that french side was weak!

Cumbrian wrote: I won't bother reiterating about England's need for a back up plan (it is starting to sound like we're in an echo chamber), it is worrying how superb attacking players like Daly, Watson (and even Jonny May) looked like they didn't have a clue what to do with the ball in hand anymore.  They almost looked frightened to try anything except kick.

Quick fact check ...

Dulin kicked the ball 19 times. Daly 9 times , May twice and Watson once.

Perception vs reality.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:I was pretty impressed with the French players.  I reckon Woki, Macalou and Jalibert will be around their first team squad for years.  If you add them in to the overall French squad, a trip to Paris starts to look very intimidating again.

Thats exactly what ive been saying elsewhere...

They had some cracking players on that pitch that will be challenging for starting spots in the 6n.
Woki, Jalibert, Macalou, Raka is a monster of a winger...the other winger is a hell of a player, the two second rows look outstanding and are 21/22 etc etc.

Nothing about that french side was weak!

Certainly truth here, its hardly as if the senior side was full of aged stars either. It does appear that theres been a fundamental shift at age grade rugby a few years back thats now producing a really high level of athletic and skilled French players with perhaps a more professional attitude than the previous generations had. The U20 world cup wins were a signal of this, we are now seeing them transition to full international rugby and just getting better. France should be a real force over the next decade, and frankly they have underperformed for years. Given they have the biggest and richest club game in the world the resources have always been there. The coach is getting the credit but really to me it looks like its the age grade development system thats delivered this huge pool of talent.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Cyril wrote:Decent game and finally England were tested in this series. Lots to work on, but still two tournament wins and only (the currently non-playing) SA to determine if England aren’t the best side in the world.

In two games this year England couldnt beat France over 80 minutes home and away. One loss and one draw. I think this year France have already demonstrated that England aren't necessarily the best side in the world.

The results show 1 loss and 1 win...

Is that enough for you to think England are the best side in the world? Or even better than France?

because regardless of what the results show yesterday England scraped a draw after 80 minutes of play thanks to a bit of favorable refereeing.

Surely the best side in the world would be putting away an inexperienced enough French side at home easily enough.

Had a quick scan of the thread and the knives are really out!

If we can win 2 competitions, 9 wins from 10 across the year when playing (apparently) this badly.....imagine what what we'll do when we play well. I would suggest the detractors from the other losing nations stop with the jealousy and concentrate on the their own nations limitations.

A bloody good year from the lads and the best side in 2020, I'll take that.

Collapse2005 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Cyril wrote:Decent game and finally England were tested in this series. Lots to work on, but still two tournament wins and only (the currently non-playing) SA to determine if England aren’t the best side in the world.

In two games this year England couldnt beat France over 80 minutes home and away. One loss and one draw. I think this year France have already demonstrated that England aren't necessarily the best side in the world.

The results show 1 loss and 1 win...

Is that enough for you to think England are the best side in the world? Or even better than France?

because regardless of what the results show yesterday England scraped a draw after 80 minutes of play thanks to a bit of favorable refereeing.

Surely the best side in the world would be putting away an inexperienced enough French side at home easily enough.

Its a bit bonkers to be calling anyone best side in the world when theres not been any cross hemisphere games (ok georgia fiji) since the world cup and SA who are ranked number one haven't played at all. But do agree that England are on dodgy ground even claiming number on in Europe despite winning back to back competitions. The next 6 nations will be a fair test of that claim.

No question both France and England are a cut above the rest of the NH sides though.

Gooseberry wrote:

Cumbrian wrote: I won't bother reiterating about England's need for a back up plan (it is starting to sound like we're in an echo chamber), it is worrying how superb attacking players like Daly, Watson (and even Jonny May) looked like they didn't have a clue what to do with the ball in hand anymore.  They almost looked frightened to try anything except kick.

Quick fact check ...

Dulin kicked the ball 19 times. Daly 9 times , May twice and Watson once.

Perception vs reality.

I didn't mention anything about Dulin, or the French approach (they were guilty of kick tennis too).

I'm not sure it is a wildly false perception to say that the English back three looked unthreatening/ unconfident when returning the ball. If it is a question of false perception, then I guess it is because once you've seen the England half back/ centres belt away practically every bit of ball, you desperately want to see the flair players do something with it, when they have the chance. I remember an info graphic just before we camped on the French line at the end of the first half that said England had only made something like 19 carries in 38 minutes of rugby. I'm aware that's the game plan, but it can get a bit painful to watch.

Collapse2005 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Cyril wrote:Decent game and finally England were tested in this series. Lots to work on, but still two tournament wins and only (the currently non-playing) SA to determine if England aren’t the best side in the world.

In two games this year England couldnt beat France over 80 minutes home and away. One loss and one draw. I think this year France have already demonstrated that England aren't necessarily the best side in the world.

The results show 1 loss and 1 win...

Is that enough for you to think England are the best side in the world? Or even better than France?

because regardless of what the results show yesterday England scraped a draw after 80 minutes of play thanks to a bit of favorable refereeing.

Surely the best side in the world would be putting away an inexperienced enough French side at home easily enough.

We scraped a draw due to Farrell not kicking his goals. We scraped a draw because France could not construct more than one try scoring opportunity.

Referees are not perfect but as supporters we tend to see what they do with only one eye. Even allowing for that we had chances to win the game inside the 80 minutes.

As has been pointed out the French side was inexperienced but, crucially, very talented. They should be a real force in world rugby for the next few years.

What did we learn yesterday?

France have massive strength in depth but on this form would they have beaten the full first 23? Possibly.

Do we need a new 9? Definitely, Youngs was pulled off the earliest I have seen in recent times and things definitely improved one Robson came on.

Do we need a new 12? Possibly, Farrell is in there for his defensive solidity and kicking as well as the captaincy. The kicking has gone to pot lately and without it is he worth his spot at 12. Ford these days is pretty accurate and he has the ability to bring a powerhouse 12 into the game, or use him to make space for the 13. It was interesting to see how the other senior players were directing and cajoling people, not Farrell.

What has happened to Daly, he is now catching the ball, but the rest of his game has gone down to championship level and that is probably doing them a dis-service. Malins looked far better in teh twenty minutes or so he had.

Lineouts? Launchbury was very good about the field, but the French had his number and it showed. Against a good lineout team with 4 jumpers he struggles and it puts pressure of Itoje as the only other specialist. Things improved greatly when Hill came on. Both in the lineout and around the field where his greater mobility showed.

Marler, when he came on seemed to have the French TH in his pocket, despite his size Marler owned him in the scrum. A lot of great tackles and even the odd trundle. I would not be disappointed to see him in a starting birth again.

Stuart again looked very good coming on for Sinckler, brought a bit more beef to the scrum and looks more mobile.

Underhill and Curry were largely prevented from doing their thing at the breakdown by the French sealing off the ball all the time, the ref would ping it and then let it go again for 10 minutes then ping it again. Very inconsistent.

Overall, not a bad performance, a bit like England in 2003, if you can keep them at bay defensively and they continually transgress to stop you, just kick the penalties. Problem being that Farrell had two left boots on yesterday. and neither was JW's. On a normal day, England would have won by 9 points or so in normal time, apart from the one try, France did not really look like they were going to score much and England's defence coping well.

Two trophies competed for, two trophies won. It may not be pretty, but the results cannot be argued with.

Collapse2005 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Cyril wrote:Decent game and finally England were tested in this series. Lots to work on, but still two tournament wins and only (the currently non-playing) SA to determine if England aren’t the best side in the world.

In two games this year England couldnt beat France over 80 minutes home and away. One loss and one draw. I think this year France have already demonstrated that England aren't necessarily the best side in the world.

The results show 1 loss and 1 win...

Is that enough for you to think England are the best side in the world? Or even better than France?

because regardless of what the results show yesterday England scraped a draw after 80 minutes of play thanks to a bit of favorable refereeing.

Surely the best side in the world would be putting away an inexperienced enough French side at home easily enough.

No not at all.
We have clearly adopted new tactics which arent clicking yet. Im sure the attacking aspects will come together aswell. Jones focus will be the World Cup...but he will be gunning to win every tournament until then.  

But we've still won two tournaments doing that. That makes us the best in Europe.

But by god France could go to the next World Cup as favorites if they get their development right.

And i will repeat...there was nothing weak about that French team...they'd have beaten most of the 6n sides

Gooseberry wrote:

Cumbrian wrote: I won't bother reiterating about England's need for a back up plan (it is starting to sound like we're in an echo chamber), it is worrying how superb attacking players like Daly, Watson (and even Jonny May) looked like they didn't have a clue what to do with the ball in hand anymore.  They almost looked frightened to try anything except kick.

Quick fact check ...

Dulin kicked the ball 19 times. Daly 9 times , May twice and Watson once.

Perception vs reality.

Daly is in there for his playmaking ability...and yet he butchered several 2 on 1's...

Thats not the first time he's done that either.

Many many years ago (looked it up, 1985) I remember a very new England team playing an experienced and much favoured French team. I think it was Rob Andrew's first cap, and the first for a few other England greats. It was a 9 all draw and included incidents like (I believe it was Rob Andrew) knocking the ball out of the hands of a French player who was in goal but before he could put the ball down. It wasn't a win but it was a hell of a performance and the sign of great things to come.

The French performance reminded me of that.

I only watched from the second half but it was evident the improvement with the more subs he put on and i predicted LCD would score from 5m , but there are too many England players being first choice and not being on form with a traffic jam at 8/9/10/12/13. For me there needs to be a total rethink and an attack plan other than aimless kicking. Daly is proving he isn't a FB , its pointless playing Slade and using him as a crash centre, and how did Billy get MOM award when he just trundles around the field at a low speed, Farrell missing 4 kicks totally unacceptable and does he have leadership skills,Youngs too slow.It was awful to watch and Jones with his BS of smashing the French , the objective is to score more than the other time not beat them up.

There are two types of rugby fans in my opinion, well at least two.

Those who want to see their team win, substance over style, I fall in that category, yes sometimes you get boring matches, although for me it is more frustrating than boring, and it is the execution that is frustrating, if you kick, kick accurately, if it is a box kick, chase it and ensure there is competition for the ball as it comes down, maul tries, ok, hard physical defence, yes please. No matter the style, you win if you are accurate.

Then there are those fans that have fallen for cliches like Michael Cheika used to spout, “we play the Ozzie way”

Yeah well, even those Ozzie fans now lament the fact that in three test matches this season their captain refused kickable penalties in favour of the Ozzie way.

Three draws that might well have been victories had they kicked for goal.

I suspect deep down we all want a winning team.

That doesn’t mean we don’t want to see exciting rugby as well, but there are horses for courses.

SA for example have struggled against Wales over the past RWC cycle, because Wales refused to play inside their own half, not taking risks, like Rassie said prior to the RWC semi final, we must out bore them, we must be more patient than Wales, if we lose patience we make errors, Wales will pounce.

Lesson learnt, might not be pretty, but it got us to the final.

Marler when he came on showed Genge he's still got a lot of work to do, his work in the scrum is second to none, defensively he was very good and a couple of carries being an added bonus. I've always felt that he should be starting when fit with Mako and Genge battling it out to finish.

Jonny Hill finally showed what he's capable of, he'd been a bit underwhelming in previous appearances but as WPI noted was a calming influence at the lineout which was helped by the Exeter connection with LCD.

Daly just is not an international class full back, the perfect guy to have on the bench but not sure there's a spot for him in the starting 15, everything he contributes Slade can do too and with the added bonus of being the defensive leader in the backs.

I was pulling my hair out watching Daly, if my under 15s team butched a easy two on one I would be disappointed. He is a pro rugby player and should be able to commit a tackler.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Cyril wrote:Decent game and finally England were tested in this series. Lots to work on, but still two tournament wins and only (the currently non-playing) SA to determine if England aren’t the best side in the world.

In two games this year England couldnt beat France over 80 minutes home and away. One loss and one draw. I think this year France have already demonstrated that England aren't necessarily the best side in the world.

The results show 1 loss and 1 win...

Is that enough for you to think England are the best side in the world? Or even better than France?

because regardless of what the results show yesterday England scraped a draw after 80 minutes of play thanks to a bit of favorable refereeing.

Surely the best side in the world would be putting away an inexperienced enough French side at home easily enough.

No not at all.
We have clearly adopted new tactics which arent clicking yet. Im sure the attacking aspects will come together aswell. Jones focus will be the World Cup...but he will be gunning to win every tournament until then.  

But we've still won two tournaments doing that. That makes us the best in Europe.

But by god France could go to the next World Cup as favorites if they get their development right.

And i will repeat...there was nothing weak about that French team...they'd have beaten most of the 6n sides

Pretty much agree with you on that.

Soul Requiem wrote:Marler when he came on showed Genge he's still got a lot of work to do, his work in the scrum is second to none, defensively he was very good and a couple of carries being an added bonus. I've always felt that he should be starting when fit with Mako and Genge battling it out to finish.

Yes i singled Genge out before the game but sadly he really didnt make the statement i was expecting. And on that performance he is still someway behind Marler and Mako....

Genge had a couple of decent carries in the first half and caused problems for the French scrum. I am not down on what he did at all. But I would agree that the subs all did well.

Marler was great. Hill was good. Earl did inject the energy that was unusually absent from Underhill. Stuart is pushing Sinckler very hard, although Sinckler has improved as the competition has gone on.

What are the thoughts on Malin's cameo?

rosbif wrote:but there are too many England players being first choice and not being on form with a traffic jam at 8/9/10/12/13. and how did Billy get  MOM award when he just trundles around the field at a low speed, .

Personally i think Billy has been excellent.

Watching Billy V he never makes any ground, seems to get stopped by the first tackler everytime. Time to try Simmons.

Old Man wrote:There are two types of rugby fans in my opinion, well at least two.

Those who want to see their team win, substance over style, I fall in that category, yes sometimes you get boring matches, although for me it is more frustrating than boring, and it is the execution that is frustrating, if you kick, kick accurately, if it is a box kick, chase it and ensure there is competition for the ball as it comes down, maul tries, ok, hard physical defence, yes please. No matter the style, you win if you are accurate.

Then there are those fans that have fallen for cliches like Michael Cheika used to spout, “we play the Ozzie way”

Yeah well, even those Ozzie fans now lament the fact that in three test matches this season their captain refused kickable penalties in favour of the Ozzie way.

Three draws that might well have been victories had they kicked for goal.

I suspect deep down we all want a winning team.

That doesn’t mean we don’t want to see exciting rugby as well, but there are horses for courses.

SA for example have struggled against Wales over the past RWC cycle, because Wales refused to play inside their own half, not taking risks, like Rassie said prior to the RWC semi final, we must out bore them, we must be more patient than Wales, if we lose patience we make errors, Wales will pounce.

Lesson learnt, might not be pretty, but it got us to the final.

I agree with most of that. I'd take an ugly win over a pretty loss every day of the week, but some of the elements of England's play have been hard to enjoy. Take kicking as an example. You could argue that a box kick with a good chase and an athletic take by the chaser is a beautiful thing. As is watching two back-rowers catch and steam roll over an opposition back, JUST as he catches the ball. What isn't so pretty is box kicking really long so that the ball is simply as far away from your own line as possible, especially if the ball remains in play and the opposition get a clear run under no pressure.

I can appreciate skill, there was one particular kick from Daly that was pin point perfect and trickled out of play, just in front of the French try line. I can get on board with that, it has purpose. What I dislike seeing is a player say 'I don't know what to do with this, so I'll hoof the ball and they might knock it on'.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

Cumbrian wrote: I won't bother reiterating about England's need for a back up plan (it is starting to sound like we're in an echo chamber), it is worrying how superb attacking players like Daly, Watson (and even Jonny May) looked like they didn't have a clue what to do with the ball in hand anymore.  They almost looked frightened to try anything except kick.

Quick fact check ...

Dulin kicked the ball 19 times. Daly 9 times , May twice and Watson once.

Perception vs reality.

Daly is in there for his playmaking ability...and yet he butchered several 2 on 1's...

Thats not the first time he's done that either.

Which is a totally different issue.

If England are just a kicking team why are they selecting a running fullback, get Leigh Halfpenny in (he could even take the kicks for Farrell). The point I was making is that they aren't just a kicking team and the back 3 were running and passing. The poor execution is a different issue to the tactics.

As others noted there are senior players who spots should be questioned if they cant execute. That goes pretty much across the board with the backs. Also agree with the point rosbif made re Slade, if England want a crashball 13 he's not the guy. I was a little surprised to see Lawrence left out after being so heavily praised by Jones before (including comments about it not being his last cap) and being the obvious player to fill that role. Was his still affected by the injury? Either find players who can do the jobs accurately and effectively or ask them to play differently.

Also echo Oldmans comments, the approach isn't the problem, its the execution of the approach that is causing England to struggle at times. Jones was quite right to ask if the critics would've been happier had England shipped a bunch of tries from trying to play out of their own 22 which we have seen teams chasing games do all tournament.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

rosbif wrote:but there are too many England players being first choice and not being on form with a traffic jam at 8/9/10/12/13. and how did Billy get  MOM award when he just trundles around the field at a low speed, .

Personally i think Billy has been excellent.

What is interesting with Billy is that he is changing how he plays. He just isn't smashing through people like he used to, although he had a pretty good go on Saturday. His defensive work has improved no end though, and he made some cracking tackles.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

rosbif wrote:but there are too many England players being first choice and not being on form with a traffic jam at 8/9/10/12/13. and how did Billy get  MOM award when he just trundles around the field at a low speed, .

Personally i think Billy has been excellent.

Preconceived opinions again, people expect him to bulldozer his way through defences and when he doesn't the assumption is he that he played badly but has been defensively very good this autumn, I don't think anyone has made as many x factor hits as he has.

Watching Billy V he never makes any ground, seems to get stopped by the first tackler everytime. Time to try Simmons.

TightHEAD wrote:Watching Billy V he never makes any ground, seems to get stopped by the first tackler everytime. Time to try Simmons.

Yesterday he made 15 carries (more than any other player from either side) making 65m (mostly hard yards and 50% more than any other forward from either side). With 17 tackles only the French openside (19) made more. He was hitting the rucks and mauls with high frequency (often to try and prevent excellent French counter rucking).

While Simmonds could go well for England, it would require a complete change of tactic from us for him to shine. Billy is playing really well, and doing the job that Eddie is asking him to do. He is doing this for the full 80 minutes (or 100 yesterday). That he is not bursting through tackles as of days gone by is not in doubt, but first that does not mean he is porr, and second with teh current referreeing of the breakdown that would lead to us turning over the ball more. Finally he is not making teh yrds from kick returns he used to because that is not the plan - we rarely look to run from our half at the moment.

TightHEAD wrote:Watching Billy V he never makes any ground, seems to get stopped by the first tackler everytime. Time to try Simmons.

You already said this, and you haven't read what others are saying. Yes we are used to him smashing people out the way, but so are other teams. He was running over the first tackler more than once against France, but then the second and third were stopping him. If he gets over the gain line, sucks in defenders and makes the ball available then it is job done.

I think Simmonds would be an interesting alternative, but of the things that need fixing this isn't high on the list. What is also interesting is that our other backrow options are all improving as carriers, so we may not be so dependent on Billy going forward.

The best Billy Vunipola hits from yesterday (plus Farrell, erm, 'going too high')

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmUKodcgvAM

TightHEAD wrote:Watching Billy V he never makes any ground, seems to get stopped by the first tackler everytime. Time to try Simmons.

He's about 5th choice 8.....no chance.

Simmonds would have struggled to make any impact in that game, the French had a very physical line of defence. I thought Billy played very well yesterday and has had a great AI.

England need to work on phase play, keeping the ball, ball control skills. Both yesterday and even during the world cup final last year they had the ball at the opposition try line for multiple phases and ended up with nothing. Finally happened at the end of the game, similar to the 2019 Six Nations game with Scotland. But we need to do it more. Not all tries are going to be kicks in behind or Jonny May running in from the halfway line. Our pick and go, pick and go game is terrible. Probably the poorest of the top teams.

I also noticed that when B Vuniploa did those big tackles, the French player was still keeping control of the ball, When we get smashed we knock on. Thats a clear point to me to work on.

lostinwales wrote:The best Billy Vunipola hits from yesterday (plus Farrell, erm, 'going too high')

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmUKodcgvAM

How anyone can say they didnt enjoy that game simply for that Farrell moment is beyond me

TightHEAD wrote:Watching Billy V he never makes any ground, seems to get stopped by the first tackler everytime. Time to try Simmons.

Was thinking that yesterday. He used to make much more ground with each carry than he does lately. England do have a few other players though that are able to carry the load too now though, Sinkler, Curry, Underhill etc.

I wonder how much Manu is missed...

Thats why im puzzled Jones has opted for Slade in there rather than a runner like Marchant or Joseph or Lawrence in particular with his more powerful style..

I was so glad to be proved wrong by yesterday's game. I thought the contest was over before a boot touched grass but that was a contest and a half. Not to everyone's taste but I thought it was a great battle.
On a downer I see that Andrew Brace has come under fire on the usual keyboard warrior, social media platform. Is it called twitter because of the type of posters?
Anyway, vile abuse has been fired at him some of which was on his late father's obituary. The ability to be anonymous should be removed from those sites so the brave souls involved can be called out.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I wonder how much Manu is missed...

Thats why im puzzled Jones has opted for Slade in there rather than a runner like Marchant or Joseph or Lawrence in particular with his more powerful style..

This. We know why youngs is picked. We know why we have guys who are all known for their kicking. And we know why Daly is chosen. Its skill sets and being able to implement the tactics in the best way. Thing is they are all playing below par in those aspects. Ford coming back in looks a little rushed as hes a step or behind what were used to. Farrell and slade just doesnt work for me. And daly just looks to have no confidence whatsoever.

Pete330v2 wrote:I was so glad to be proved wrong by yesterday's game. I thought the contest was over before a boot touched grass but that was a contest and a half. Not to everyone's taste but I thought it was a great battle.
On a downer I see that Andrew Brace has come under fire on the usual keyboard warrior, social media platform. Is it called twitter because of the type of posters?
Anyway, vile abuse has been fired at him some of which was on his late father's obituary. The ability to be anonymous should be removed from those sites so the brave souls involved can be called out.

Some people. Why would you direct abuse directly at someone over a game?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:I wonder how much Manu is missed...

Thats why im puzzled Jones has opted for Slade in there rather than a runner like Marchant or Joseph or Lawrence in particular with his more powerful style..

This. We know why youngs is picked. We know why we have guys who are all known for their kicking. And we know why Daly is chosen. Its skill sets and being able to implement the tactics in the best way. Thing is they are all playing below par in those aspects. Ford coming back in looks a little rushed as hes a step or behind what were used to. Farrell and slade just doesnt work for me. And daly just looks to have no confidence whatsoever.

Well it remains a puzzle, Slade didnt kick much (at all?) and Jones has openly said earlier this autumn he wants a big ball carrier in the backs. He praised Lawrence after the Georgia game and it wouldnt be his last cap. When fit Tuilagi has always been a first choice, and Jones was banging about him before he even picked a side. Genuinely dont understand what they were trying to achieve in picking a third playmaker at 13 and have him run into people.

Daly cant really win can he, gets criticised for being picked for his running and then criticised for being picked for his kicking...which as with Slade he didn't do that much of. Still somehow got second mention in the discussion for player of the tournament which just goes to show OPINIONS.

Saw elsewhere Slade listed as the "defensive leader of the backs" is that a thing? He was absolutely caught out (along with Farrell) for the French try.

Who mentioned Daly for player of the tournament?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Who mentioned Daly for player of the tournament?

I thought Jonny May and Itoje have been England's best players, particulatly Itoje.

He is a nightmare to play against.

Gooseberry wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:I wonder how much Manu is missed...

Thats why im puzzled Jones has opted for Slade in there rather than a runner like Marchant or Joseph or Lawrence in particular with his more powerful style..

This. We know why youngs is picked. We know why we have guys who are all known for their kicking. And we know why Daly is chosen. Its skill sets and being able to implement the tactics in the best way. Thing is they are all playing below par in those aspects. Ford coming back in looks a little rushed as hes a step or behind what were used to. Farrell and slade just doesnt work for me. And daly just looks to have no confidence whatsoever.

Well it remains a puzzle, Slade didnt kick much (at all?) and Jones has openly said earlier this autumn he wants a big ball carrier in the backs. He praised Lawrence after the Georgia game and it wouldnt be his last cap. When fit Tuilagi has always been a first choice, and Jones  was banging about him before he even picked a side. Genuinely dont understand what they were trying to achieve in picking a third playmaker at 13 and have him run into people.

Daly cant really win can he, gets criticised for being picked for his running and then criticised for being picked for his kicking...which as with Slade he didn't do that much of. Still somehow got second mention in the discussion for player of the tournament which just goes to show OPINIONS.

Saw elsewhere Slade listed as the "defensive leader of the backs" is that a thing? He was absolutely caught out (along with Farrell) for the French try.

I thought that it was George that left the hole and then missed his man as a result.

Collapse2005 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Who mentioned Daly for player of the tournament?

I thought Jonny May and Itoje have been England's best players, particulatly Itoje.

He is a nightmare to play against.

I would agree with that.

Collapse2005 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Who mentioned Daly for player of the tournament?

I thought Jonny May and Itoje have been England's best players, particulatly Itoje.

He is a nightmare to play against.

Had to go back and double check I hadnt made it up but it was Flatman on the Amazon coverage few minutes after the end. Mentioned May first for his show off try, then that Daly had a brilliant tournament but gave it to Tom Curry. (was actually Man of the series for all the difference that makes)

As I said, other opinions are available on these things but the underlying point is that its not cut and dried and everyone can see these things differently. I do really like Daly as an all round player but also subscribe to the question marks about him at fullback and failure to really improve on contested high balls. Personally Id have Itoje in that conversation for MOS too.

Not sure what it was with England and chasing kicks in that game, is it something theyve been weaker on all year? Thinking back the pressure theyd use to exert from the kicking was built on the quality of that chase. Daly seemed to be the only guy really getting up there and pressuring the French (he was key to capitalising on Fords wonder kick at the end and winning that last penalty). But he wasn't ever really contesting the high balls, and cant think of many occasions where England claimed their own kicks. It almost seemed like they'd been coached not to jump for it where there was a French player going for the ball. Feel thats been the case for much of this autumn, but may just be the impression I have.

i think its down to tactics...

They are drilled in their kick chase game (they call it a race)...and yet as you say it was noticeable that at times...they didnt bother chasing. It looked like tactics.

I think its all geared for the next world cup...and bits will be put in place gradually...

Normally Flatman makes a lot of sense.

GeordieFalcon wrote:i think its down to tactics...

They are drilled in their kick chase game (they call it a race)...and yet as you say it was noticeable that at times...they didnt bother chasing. It looked like tactics.

I think its all geared for the next world cup...and bits will be put in place gradually...

He said as much in the post-game interview; he wants a team that can adapt to different styles and tactics, something England have been regularly criticised for not being able to do. We've seen in the past that this team can play good, running rugby. We've seen that they have a very good kick-chase game. We've seen that they can bully most teams up front. We've now seen that they don't have a particularly good kicking game, which unfortunately means we might see more of it in the 6 Nations. It feels like he's cycling the tactics to force players to play in a certain way in the hope that will become more adaptable.
When Eddie says England have had a good tournament because they've learnt a lot, that doesn't necessarily mean that what they've learnt is positive, it could just as easily mean that he's learnt some players aren't as adaptable as he'd hoped.

I watched the Squidge Rugby report on the England Wales game. It was very interesting in it's discussion of the England kicking game, basically implying that it is a lot smarter than it looks.

I don't think it looked so smart against France but then the French kicking game was also poor.

Having rewatched that game I'd reiterate how good I think LCD was after coming on. He was a real rocket of energy which is exactly what England needed. I think he will be pushing George really hard for the starting shirt soon.

Although England deserve some critism, it's really not as bad as all that. Firstly France 2nds or 3rds if your celtic would push the French first team all the way. Secondly we actually created quite alot just didn't put them away. Farrell had a mare with the boot. Thirdly we restricted them to one try and spent the majority of the second half in their half. They kicked more than we did yet we are boring and they are some wonder team?

Changes needed to hit the next level:
1. Get a fast paced fast acting scrum half on the pitch. I think this is possibly the major issue. Our tempo was good after Robson came on and the French started to falter.
2. Drop poor form players for ones in form e.g. Daly for Malins to make a point. In the good old days daly would have had to buy two jugs for two butchured tries.
3. Sort midfield out sharpish. In reality we have 4 good to solid international outside centres and no real natural running 12 that presents defenses with problems.
4.the Ford farrell problem - Eddie's going to have to be brave.

Nothing to be down in the dumps about. I'm quite happy for other nations to rubbish us and underestimate us.

Yoda wrote:Although England deserve some critism, it's really not as bad as all that. Firstly France 2nds or 3rds if your celtic would push the French first team all the way. Secondly we actually created quite alot just didn't put them away. Farrell had a mare with the boot. Thirdly we restricted them to one try and spent the majority of the second half in their half. They kicked more than we did yet we are boring and they are some wonder team?

Changes needed to hit the next level:
1. Get a fast paced fast acting scrum half on the pitch. I think this is possibly the major issue. Our tempo was good after Robson came on and the French started to falter.
2. Drop poor form players for ones in form e.g. Daly for Malins to make a point. In the good old days daly would have had to buy two jugs for two butchured tries.
3. Sort midfield out sharpish. In reality we have 4 good to solid international outside centres and no real natural running 12 that presents defenses with problems.
4.the Ford farrell problem - Eddie's going to have to be brave.

Nothing to be down in the dumps about. I'm quite happy for other nations to rubbish us and underestimate us.

"Firstly France 2nds or 3rds if your celtic would push the French first team all the way"? Dont get that sentence.

To be fair England are still a top team and maybe they are the best side in the world. On reflection while England's constant kicking and fishing for penalties is frustrating and a bit boring to watch it is very effective so you cant really blame them for doing it.

The big difference for me with this England side is that they are a great breakdown team for the first time in a long time. Everyone in the pack is a threat, whereas it wasnt that long ago that they barely had any breakdown threats. This used to be Ireland's great strength under Schmidt, Best, O'Brien, Heaslip, Leavy, Furlong etc all great poachers and great at cleaning out, England are now the best in the NH and the world at it.