England - what next?

First topic message reminder :

Firstly I take nothing away from Scotland who were fantastic and I hope go on to win a grand slam.

For me this dire England performance may well be a blessing in disguise. Us winning the Autumn cup playing such awful rugby only covered up a number of cracks. We have nothing in attack and our discipline is consistently the worst in the world. We are saved by our defence.

Ok we were missing some props which taught us that Genge is not quite there. Plus Stuart very quiet in the loose. Mako making his usual 21 tackles would have helped. No need to panic, but Eddie has to accept that this is not just a blip but a reflection of recent dire performances. You cannot win matches giving away so many penalties and that is a recurring issue. And he chose to start all those rusty Sarries players who all looked off the pace. Why not start Cowan-Dickie?

But the midfield is dire and Farrell a real problem there. Just not good enough. I remember Eddie being ruthless and taking Luther Burrell off after 25 minutes against the Aussies. We needed that ruthless streak today and Ford should have replaced Farrell with 20 to go. Itoje a penalty machine but because he is normally a machine and plays the full 80 Eddie did not react.

Time for England to take a good hard look at this team and shake it up (not panic, but a decent shakeup).

The one good thing for all of us, and especially pro athletes today like Jack Willis, is the surgical technologies are far more advanced than even 10-15 years ago. Arthroscopically, we can see minute levels of tissue and bone details which were previously impossible. Our tools are commonly computer aided micro-tools which can cut, abrade, or clean fractional areas of bone or soft tissue. The equipment actually looks like something out of a cyberman conversion factory. For ligament/tendon work where we have to open the leg, the equipment is so precise that the impact on the surrounding tissue is minimised, which significantly aides healing. Let's hope for the best for him.

I finally had the chance to go back and watch a replay of the match.  I was working and got home a few minutes before Jack Willis came on.  And, by the way, Willis was the only forward who kept up with Robson on his break which ended with Willis getting his score.  The way the team celebrated when he scored shows how valued and popular he is in the squad.  I think he would have been nigh on impossible to keep out of the squad for the next match.  

Farrell was virtually invisible.  It seemed Ford bypassed Farrell the majority of the match and went to Slade.  Which in turn enabled Slade, May, Watson, and Daly to be more involved.  And that begs the question why play Farrell at all if he is going to be skipped.  He made no positive plays.  Play someone who makes plays.  Farrell almost lost his head a few times, about which even the commentators made mention.  Needs to sit (Eddie!!!!)

Billy V. was also virtually invisible.  I would like to see his tracking numbers, which I suspect would be low.  He made one decent tackle and gets credit for that blocked punt.

Ford was good, simply because he bypassed Farrell and got Slade et al involved.  
Slade was busy thanks to Ford and likely wanting to play some Rugby.
May and Watson were fun to watch and really involved.  If Sinckler didn't get Man of the Match, I would have given it to Watson, England's new back row forward.  May's try was simply terrific.
Daly was busy because he had more ball, but did nothing special.
Youngs' passes were slow and all over the place.  He needed to sit.  
The front row was good, especially Sinckler and LCD.  I think they need to start the rest of the tournament.
Itoje was Itoje.
Hill was OK.
Curry and Lawes were good.

I thought overall the attack seemed too frantic which may have cost opportunities.  

And finally, despite positive signs, at 49 minutes right before Watson's intercept try, England were leading only 20-11, and was anyone's game.  Methinks if against Ireland, Wales, or France, the scoreline would have been a wee bit different.

So let it be written, so let it be done.

Never had a serious knee injury but did have Osgood Schlatters as a kid which meant no sport for 15 months and slightly misshaped knees, but that was enough to really make me squirm thinking about knee injuries, even 40 years on.

Thanks for all the input on this Dr Grey. Very interesting if somewhat uncomfortable reading.

As for the other stuff I thought Billy was very good through the ANC. Not the carrying (I don't think we have seen the best of that for a very long time) but the defensive work and just being the focal point. At the end of the day his point of difference is the strength in the carry, and he's not showing it.

I do feel similarly about Farrell. He's been at the heart of the England team for a long long time. The things he brings are less tangible - leadership, will to win, kicking, the accurate passing. But again hes not producing that.

A decent enough win but still think we might be playing for around mid-table this time. England are carrying too much dead weight in the midfield and that starting OHs/centres combination was ‘orrible. Youngs (and Daly) are running out of time, and maybe OF & Slade are on thin ice. Watson was great, ‘specially when he replaced (and outplayed) Billy Bunter. Gotta feel for Willis though – good luck to him, hope he doesn’t become another nearly man for England.
The commentary team were a tad annoying. I know Monye played decent enough rugby for England, but right now he could talk for England – put a sock in it.

king_carlos wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah I did mine aswell along with the medial and lateral meniscus...not nice.

You should have brought your knees to me.  We could have enjoyed a nice cigar whilst I was working on your joint.  

Or a nice joint whilst working on his cigar. Wait that's filthy. Sorry, not sorry.

I had a fracture-dislocation of my ankle from a similar 'lifeguard' clear out. The clearing player got a good grip/bind around my waist and flipped me very quickly but my ankle was trapped under the tackler trying roll away. If anything I think how swift it was made it less horrible than the Willis injury though. It's a bit of a slower roll that one and you can sort of see Willis trying to get his leg free as it starts to bend but he can't, then it goes. Really nasty. My one was horrid but happened so quick that I had a massive flash of pain then pretty much by the time I registered what happened the physio was already there and stopping me looking at my mangled ankle.

My recovery was 6 months to non-contact and 9 months to first game back. Meanwhile a teammate who suffered an awful MCL and ACL in training a week or so later had multiple surgeries, months off work and never got back to full contact. Ligament injuries are brutal.

I got tackled just above the knee after landing and it wrecked my knee to the extent I only ever played about 30 minutes of rugby again. The crocodile really needs looking at, by the laws yesterday was perfectly legal but my issue is that it was reckless hence the serious injury, was he in control of what he was doing and did he ensure the safety of the player? No on both counts.

Soul Requiem wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah I did mine aswell along with the medial and lateral meniscus...not nice.

You should have brought your knees to me.  We could have enjoyed a nice cigar whilst I was working on your joint.  

Or a nice joint whilst working on his cigar. Wait that's filthy. Sorry, not sorry.

I had a fracture-dislocation of my ankle from a similar 'lifeguard' clear out. The clearing player got a good grip/bind around my waist and flipped me very quickly but my ankle was trapped under the tackler trying roll away. If anything I think how swift it was made it less horrible than the Willis injury though. It's a bit of a slower roll that one and you can sort of see Willis trying to get his leg free as it starts to bend but he can't, then it goes. Really nasty. My one was horrid but happened so quick that I had a massive flash of pain then pretty much by the time I registered what happened the physio was already there and stopping me looking at my mangled ankle.

My recovery was 6 months to non-contact and 9 months to first game back. Meanwhile a teammate who suffered an awful MCL and ACL in training a week or so later had multiple surgeries, months off work and never got back to full contact. Ligament injuries are brutal.

I got tackled just above the knee after landing and it wrecked my knee to the extent I only ever played about 30 minutes of rugby again. The crocodile really needs looking at, by the laws yesterday was perfectly legal but my issue is that it was reckless hence the serious injury, was he in control of what he was doing and did he ensure the safety of the player? No on both counts.

The reason the crocodile has become so popular is because of how low jacklers get over the ball. Many are still resting their elbows on the tackler and as now any contact with the head is a red card it's increasingly difficult to move them.

I narrowly avoided tearing the ligaments in my knee. Just giving them a pull with a bit of hyperextension was like someone setting fire to the inside of my knee so I don't like to think what it must have felt like for poor Willis.

Will be interesting to see who is called in now. 2 weeks to Wales means a bit more bedding in time.

Re May's try nigel Owens says he would have awarded a penalty kick to Italy as you cant jump to avoid a tackle. He hasn't said which law it is yet though. As it doesnt exist. He will write a walesonline article about it soon I'd imagine.

I did look No 7&1/2 and I could not find a law against jumping to avoid a tackle. I could see quite clearly that jumping in the process to score a try (as what May did) was perfectly legal so I do not see what grounds Owens has to award a free kick in that situation.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Will be interesting to see who is called in now. 2 weeks to Wales means a bit more bedding in time.

Re May's try nigel Owens says he would have awarded a penalty kick to Italy as you cant jump to avoid a tackle. He hasn't said which law it is yet though. As it doesnt exist. He will write a walesonline article about it soon I'd imagine.

It's only dangerous play if he jumps into contact not to avoid contact.

It'll come out today in dribs and drabs billy as he hates it when hes questioned!

Youngs made 54 passes yesterday, just reflects that Jones obviously did realise the style was an issue. From that the whole backline look better. Not great but at least they actually got the call from teammates rather than a spiral kick. No idea whether he'll go back to kick first strategy on a fortnight but it'll keep him thinking. That sort of game suits Robson much more as well. Looked very comfrtanle playing that style.

Soul Requiem wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Will be interesting to see who is called in now. 2 weeks to Wales means a bit more bedding in time.

Re May's try nigel Owens says he would have awarded a penalty kick to Italy as you cant jump to avoid a tackle. He hasn't said which law it is yet though. As it doesnt exist. He will write a walesonline article about it soon I'd imagine.

It's only dangerous play if he jumps into contact not to avoid contact.

Not what Owens has said.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Will be interesting to see who is called in now. 2 weeks to Wales means a bit more bedding in time.

Re May's try nigel Owens says he would have awarded a penalty kick to Italy as you cant jump to avoid a tackle. He hasn't said which law it is yet though. As it doesnt exist. He will write a walesonline article about it soon I'd imagine.

As KC explained to you yesterday, there's no specific law which says you can't jump to avoid a tackle, but it is sanctioned under the law of dangerous play.

Interesting to see if Sam Simmonds gets the call up to replace Willis , 2 tries yesterday.

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Will be interesting to see who is called in now. 2 weeks to Wales means a bit more bedding in time.

Re May's try nigel Owens says he would have awarded a penalty kick to Italy as you cant jump to avoid a tackle. He hasn't said which law it is yet though. As it doesnt exist. He will write a walesonline article about it soon I'd imagine.

As KC explained to you yesterday, there's no specific law which says you can't jump to avoid a tackle, but it is sanctioned under the law of dangerous play.

Apparently it's not that law. It's a directive given to the refs so not part of the law book. That seems a glaring error. Not even guidance. A law which is not a law.

He also says you're allowed to jump out of the tackle once the tackler touches you. Via Twitter btw.

rosbif wrote:Interesting to see if Sam Simmonds gets the call up to replace Willis , 2 tries yesterday.

For me that would offer a much better balance than lawes vunipola together. Else I think I'd quite like to see curry earl and Dombrandt also.

I'd like to see what Earl can do starting, one thing is for certain though is that Curry needs some back up. He ends up having to almost solo the breakdown for 80 minutes which is not sustainable, Lawes is better than he was in that regard but nowhere near the requisite level.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It'll come out today in dribs and drabs billy as he hates it when hes questioned!

Youngs made 54 passes yesterday, just reflects that Jones obviously did realise the style was an issue. From that the whole backline look better. Not great but at least they actually got the call from teammates rather than a spiral kick. No idea whether he'll go back to kick first strategy on a fortnight but it'll keep him thinking. That sort of game suits Robson much more as well. Looked very comfrtanle playing that style.

Farrell passed 8 times and ran 4 times for 5 metres. Which I think shows Ford was not using him much and he didn't do much. Slade had more touches and 61 metres, which is more in line with what we need to see. Many times on attack I saw Farrell standing out of the passing lanes, almost invisible. Imagine what we could do with Slade at 12 and a real attacking threat at 13....

Whilst we all agree that Farrell needs to be benched the Italy game was the only opportunity to try new combinations before the final 3 tough matches - a wasted opportunity again. Therefore, I think Eddie will select exactly the same side.

But if you could mix it up what would you go for? I would like to see Robson, Ford, Lawrence, Slade, Watson, May, Malins with Youngs, Farrell and Daly on the bench.

I think the problem is if England are going to attack similarly to the Italy match, then Farrell becomes a partial bystander and England are attacking with 14 not 15 (or maybe 14½?). If England revert to the previous tactics, then England are attacking with 10.

Probably won't matter much because Farrell is due for a red card....

doctor_grey wrote:I think the problem is if England are going to attack similarly to the Italy match, then Farrell becomes a partial bystander and England are attacking with 14 not 15 (or maybe 14½?).  If England revert to the previous tactics, then England are attacking with 10.  

Probably won't matter much because Farrell is due for a red card....

What are the odds on Wales winning a GS and benefitting from a red card in all their matches? With Farrell a ticking time bomb it might be worth a fiver.

eirebilly wrote:I did look No 7&1/2 and I could not find a law against jumping to avoid a tackle. I could see quite clearly that jumping in the process to score a try (as what May did) was perfectly legal so I do not see what grounds Owens has to award a free kick in that situation.

It's 'Nige's law' - the same one he used to use when running the line when he only ever called forward passes or knock-ons against England and when asked by the man in the middle for what he saw when other teams did it he always seemed to be 'unsighted' ... or is that just my biased perception

Mike Brown, in the Daily Mail, writes that challenging Eddie is a very difficult thing to do. He cites doing this himself when spoken to by Eddie, 1 to 1, prior to RWC 2019 and Eddie had him pigeon holed as a defensive 15 (I certainly did I have to admit) and Mike countered with stats of his club season which Eddie did not react well to. Danny Care and Alex Goode both challenged him and were never seen in an England camp again. Whilst coaches John Mitchell and Matt Proudfoot have the gravitas to get their voices heard, Brownie think the attack coach, Simon Amor, might not and is therefore unable to influence as much as he would like. Interesting point of view.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Will be interesting to see who is called in now. 2 weeks to Wales means a bit more bedding in time.

Re May's try nigel Owens says he would have awarded a penalty kick to Italy as you cant jump to avoid a tackle. He hasn't said which law it is yet though. As it doesnt exist. He will write a walesonline article about it soon I'd imagine.

As KC explained to you yesterday, there's no specific law which says you can't jump to avoid a tackle, but it is sanctioned under the law of dangerous play.

Apparently it's not that law. It's a directive given to the refs so not part of the law book. That seems a glaring error. Not even guidance. A law which is not a law.

He also says you're allowed to jump out of the tackle once the tackler touches you. Via Twitter btw.

It can be seen as dangerous play and is generally frowned upon by referees or has been traditionally. 

Interesting that Mike Brown argued for Farrell to be dropped last week and Matt Dawson has now argued for the same this week. Media finally looking without the rose tinted specs at the golden boy?

Astonishing that refs can be playing to unwritten directives....abd ignoring laws off joining the rucks safely as he has said now. WR really need to sort themselves out.

And we know jones loves following media advice Sam!

I can see it being dangerous if a player is in an upright position and brings his knees and feet up towards the tackler's head but that's completely different to diving over for the line IMO ...

He wont bring Simmonds up...Earl is an almost identical player but bigger. And he is a bench warmer...

Whoever comes up wont make any appearances..so I suspect it'll be Dombrandt to offer tackle bag holding in training or Martin, the Tigers lock in the shadow squad as he will be there in the future...

GeordieFalcon wrote:He wont bring Simmonds up...Earl is an almost identical player but bigger. And he is a bench warmer...

Whoever comes up wont make any appearances..so I suspect it'll be Dombrandt to offer tackle bag holding in training or Martin, the Tigers lock in the shadow squad as he will be there in the future...

I hope you are right and also wrong. I would like to see Simmonds, but Dombrandt is a better one-for-one replacement for Billy. Either works as they offer somewhat different things. I hope you are wrong that who ever is brought up is just holding the bags. It's now two consecutive games, and this is the only place where Billy V. and the word 'running' are used in the same sentence. With Farrell not contributing much and Billy V. not contributing, it is as if England have someone red carded right before kickoff.

There are now two weeks to prepare for Wales who look very beatable. That puts England back in the driving seat for the France game.

Apparently Jack Willis did not sustain an ACL tear (per the Guardian). I think that caught many people by surprise. But they are talking about a long time out, and if his ligaments are stable, then there could be damage to the end of the bones themselves or combinations of other trauma. Hard to know until we have more information. But, as I said, the report indicates a long layoff.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/feb/14/england-flanker-jack-willis-facing-long-lay-off-after-injury-six-nations-italy

Massive loss. Such a blow for him too, came back after a long lay off last time so let's hope he can again. Cant imagine what that does to you mentally.

So...will Jones continue to use the 6n to get Farrell and Billy V back in to fitness and form?
Cant see him changing it v Wales.

GeordieFalcon wrote:So...will Jones continue to use the 6n to get Farrell and Billy V back in to fitness and form?
Cant see him changing it v Wales.

Probably not, but he did take Billy off the pitch. That doesn't happen very often. I don't think we missed him either.

It's the second game in a row Billy has been subbed as well. Mako returned well in fairness to him with the Sarries/fitness debate.

The Farrell-Slade centre partnership really concerns me. So easy for strong defences to shut down. If anything I think that concerns me even more than Billy. The bulk of this team got to a RWC final with Billy below his best after all. The midfield without Manu shows no real signs of evolving though. After Lawrence's performance against Ireland it seemed there was progress but now he's been binned from the 23.

What about a curious case that Tom Willis replaces Jack..

Tom looks a very good 8 aswell...scored a cracker this weekend...

That would be funny. He is a good looking player.

There are alternatives. A ben/tom curry combo would be funny

lostinwales wrote:There are alternatives. A ben/tom curry combo would be funny

That it might be, but Ben Curry has been out injured with his shoulder. I would have loved to see the pair of them on the flank - they have the potential to cause utter havoc. Imagine the pair of them with Earl at 8. Speed, speed, speed. Granted they don't have the bulk of Billy but not many do.

I'd like to see Hughes given another chance. He's been on fire for Bristol.

Mr Bounce wrote:

lostinwales wrote:There are alternatives. A ben/tom curry combo would be funny

That it might be, but Ben Curry has been out injured with his shoulder. I would have loved to see the pair of them on the flank - they have the potential to cause utter havoc. Imagine the pair of them with Earl at 8. Speed, speed, speed. Granted they don't have the bulk of Billy but not many do.

I'd like to see Hughes given another chance. He's been on fire for Bristol.

That's a good point. He is doing a lot of damage for Bristol.

Hughes has often done a lot of damage at club level but struggled to bring the same impact to internationals. I suppose he might be worth another try with Billy out of sorts, but I’d rather see a younger player tried.

GeordieFalcon wrote:He wont bring Simmonds up...Earl is an almost identical player but bigger. And he is a bench warmer...

Whoever comes up wont make any appearances..so I suspect it'll be Dombrandt to offer tackle bag holding in training or Martin, the Tigers lock in the shadow squad as he will be there in the future...

George Martin looks very much like the future. Only just turned 20 so not ready yet. He's got the work rate and he's both big and mobile but hasn't quite got his carrying game going at senior level and he'll naturally I'll out a little more in the next year or so. He's a decent lineout jumper as well which always helps. 

Eddie said the problem with Simmonds was you needed a lock a six to make up the physicality which if he's playing Lawes there anyway doesn't matter. You might as well get the explosive carrier. I'm not sure there's much difference in size between Simmonds and Earl it's just Earl is more combative at the breakdown and more physical in defence. Not that Simmonds is weak in those areas just not as prominent.

Carlos is right, biggest problem is the midfield. We've got to sort that mess out as a priority.

I don't really understand physicality issue of having Simmonds at 8. Underhill and Curry aren't exactly lacking in that regard, they came up short against South Africa but excelled against every other team. Billy hasn't been contributing a great deal in that time.

Billy V hasn't played like Billy V for a long time.

We need a change for Wales. Sam Simmonds is head and shoulders above everyone else and would walk into any other team in the NH or SH. Really do not understand Eddie on this.

Is Sam Simmonds head and shoulders above Ben Earl? Im not so sure....

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is Sam Simmonds head and shoulders above Ben Earl? Im not so sure....

Nice options for Eddie to have. Still doesn't explain why he picks an out of form BillyV. Not like he offers any on field leadership either.

Will Eddie Jones be complaining if Farrell and Billy play themselves out of the Lions tour?

TightHEAD wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is Sam Simmonds head and shoulders above Ben Earl? Im not so sure....

Nice options for Eddie to have. Still doesn't explain why he picks an out of form BillyV. Not like he offers any on field leadership either.

You've hit the nail on the head...

Its an irrelevant argument about Simmonds being in the squad or who is best from Earl v Simmonds, when Billy is inked in to that position.

Clearly Eddie wants to play these guys into fitness and form...so i wouldnt expect any changes for the rest of the 6n.

Still no one called up and you'd think if there was serious consideration for them to threaten the first team they'd want to move pretty quickly in getting them into training. As I said on the other thread doesn't have to be a back rower necessarily called up either.

Exactly 7.5

That suggests what i said above...any back rower or player brought in wont affect the 23 man match day squad.

We have:
Billy V
Curry
Lawes - Clearly seen as a 6
Wilson
Earl

i firmly believe he'll stick with them...unless one of those gets injured and he might have to consider bringing someone in.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is Sam Simmonds head and shoulders above Ben Earl? Im not so sure....

I think he probably is better based on club performances, but it is very much horses for courses. Earl probably works better as a finisher. Nobody can deny the eager puppy intensity that Earl brings when he gets on the pitch, plus the flexibility he brings being able to play across the back row.

But in their actual styles and ability...are they hugely different?

Both considered high energy, explosive pacy backrowers who score tries.

i would suggest that Earl would score an equal amount of tries that Simmonds does in that Exeter lineup...

But then ive always said...i wish Sam was a 12...