Ireland vs England

First topic message reminder :

Thought I'd set up a neutral venue.

Some team news is that Ryan and Ringrose have been ruled out for the home team.

No sign as yet of Underhill so Wilson on for another start unless Jones gets brave and picks Martin from the off. May actually be tempted as POM is back available.

I said on here before that Jones could have legitimately used this tournament to freshen the squad. He's too experienced not to know players who haven't played in months are not match fit for premiership games let alone international matches. He also had places taken up with players just back from injury. It must habe been hard to drop players with credit in the bank and its always a tough call when the players have actually won two tournaments in a row. I also think the high turnover of staff hasn't helped either. Clearly the attack is worse than an average premiership team at the moment and cohesion is non existant. We struggled to put phase play together and looked disconnected for huge periods in the games this year.

Effectively we had experienced players out due to recent and current injury, playing time. Joe launchbury, Sam underhill, Jack Willis, Jamie George, Owen farrell, Eliot daly, maro (still think he was off his best), Billy and mako, manu, Jack nowell, Courtney lawes, Mark Wilson (think I'm right had been injured for a considerable time before 6 nations?) and finally Joe marler. When you rattle off that list as crocked, not fit and choosing not to play it would hamper any team. Most of those could have been managed alot better. That I'm afraid is poor player management and Eddie has to shoulder that burden.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:If the one thing England learnt from yesterday is we (England)  Cannot rely on Ford and Farrell all the time. We need a replacement 10 on the bench. Their should be room for  Marcus Smith or Jacob Umanga.


Overall England do need a "BIG RETHINK" of who is in on form and who is in as coach's favourites.

England have gone from champs to  chumps in 3/4 months England finish 5th i think simply not good enough.

To be fair how often do you lose both flyhalfs to injury?

England do need to revamp the squad a bit. The midfield combination doesn't work and two of the back three have been off form. Pack looks tired and the discipline is awful. A bit of fresh blood and the impact of two or three form players might well have helped. The only issue is that we really went into a 6N championship with no idea of form because most of our internationals have barely played pre tournament.

Did we lose ford to injury? I thought he was replaced by Marchant and Farrell moved to 10.

Have to say that I thought Robson did a better job than Farrell anyway, didn't kick everything away.

Well done Ireland, by far the better side today. I thought you had a very "understanding" referee, but that is not much of an excuse for England's performance.

I would be interested in seeing the referee's performance scores sent in to WR for the England games. They all seem to come out with a presumption about England that does not help them. Whilst with Ireland they do the same but in reverse, squeaky clean.

I have a very silly suspicion that won't go away, did Jones want England to do badly so that not many would tour with the Lions and would be fresh for next year. We all know that the sides contributing the most to the Lions tend to have a disastrous year following the tour. We have had ours 2 years before the RWC, not in year preceding it.

Very Machiavellian!  

I simply think this group might have exceeded their warranty and they are just not firing.  When Ford was subbed, I thought it should have been Farrell to go since England were, once again, chasing the game.  The front row appeared tired, Mako dreadful, three pens, and I really don't remember any runs at all.  The second row was more or less OK, though I don't want Jonny Hill picked until that mullet is shaved (I even prefer Marler's old hair etchings).  In the back row Wilson worked hard, because he always does, but is a step slow.  Curry was quiet, but not for lack of effort.  Billy V. was hit and miss, but ultimately off the pace, almost like the Scotland game - bad for his England future.  

The backs are, well, just not right.  When it was time to chase the game, I thought Farrell should have gone off, not Ford.  Still need a proper 15 though I thought Daly improved as the game went on.  Let's forget about Lawrence because it seemed England did too.    

As I said during the match, England seemed like they tried to play at a pace which was too fast and they simply appeared frantic and frequently turned the ball over.  Also discipline. 14 pens?  I thought this was supposed to be a focus in training.  Well they got it right.....

We will have to see what happens next.  But we have until the autumn internationals to see how/if Jones rethinks his approach to the squad.  There are still many very good players in the squad, but I think the 'core' might be different than Eddie does.  It's a shame he doesn't call me for advise.

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:If the one thing England learnt from yesterday is we (England)  Cannot rely on Ford and Farrell all the time. We need a replacement 10 on the bench. Their should be room for  Marcus Smith or Jacob Umanga.


Overall England do need a "BIG RETHINK" of who is in on form and who is in as coach's favourites.

England have gone from champs to  chumps in 3/4 months England finish 5th i think simply not good enough.

To be fair how often do you lose both flyhalfs to injury?

England do need to revamp the squad a bit. The midfield combination doesn't work and two of the back three have been off form. Pack looks tired and the discipline is awful. A bit of fresh blood and the impact of two or three form players might well have helped. The only issue is that we really went into a 6N championship with no idea of form because most of our internationals have barely played pre tournament.

Did we lose ford to injury? I thought he was replaced by Marchant and Farrell moved to 10.

Have to say that I thought Robson did a better job than Farrell anyway, didn't kick everything away.

Well done Ireland, by far the better side today. I thought you had a very "understanding" referee, but that is not much of an excuse for England's performance.

I would be interested in seeing the referee's performance scores sent in to WR for the England games. They all seem to come out with a presumption about England that does not help them. Whilst with Ireland they do the same but in reverse, squeaky clean.

I have a very silly suspicion that won't go away, did Jones want England to do badly so that not many would tour with the Lions and would be fresh for next year. We all know that the sides contributing the most to the Lions tend to have a disastrous year following the tour. We have had ours 2 years before the RWC, not in year preceding it.

Very Machiavellian!  

I simply think this group might have exceeded their warranty and they are just not firing.  When Ford was subbed, I thought it should have been Farrell to go since England were, once again, chasing the game.  The front row appeared tired, Mako dreadful, three pens, and I really don't remember any runs at all.  The second row was more or less OK, though I don't want Jonny Hill picked until that mullet is shaved (I even prefer Marler's old hair etchings).  In the back row Wilson worked hard, because he always does, but is a step slow.  Curry was quiet, but not for lack of effort.  Billy V. was hit and miss, but ultimately off the pace, almost like the Scotland game - bad for his England future.  

The backs are, well, just not right.  When it was time to chase the game, I thought Farrell should have gone off, not Ford.  Still need a proper 15 though I thought Daly improved as the game went on.  Let's forget about Lawrence because it seemed England did too.    

As I said during the match, England seemed like they tried to play at a pace which was too fast and they simply appeared frantic and frequently turned the ball over.  Also discipline. 14 pens?  I thought this was supposed to be a focus in training.  Well they got it right.....

We will have to see what happens next.  But we have until the autumn internationals to see how/if Jones rethinks his approach to the squad.  There are still many very good players in the squad, but I think the 'core' might be different than Eddie does.  It's a shame he doesn't call me for advise.

I did say it was very silly, but the thought won't go away.

I thought what this game did show was how much England miss Lawes at either Lock or BS, neither Ewels or Wilson are up to his standard and his defensive work is hard to replace.

Totally agree about Farrell, he would struggle to unlock his front door never mind the Irish defence. Ford Lawrence Marchant has a lot more balance. Did May or Watson actually receive a pass in the game?

One thing I am curious about with Irelands first try; I thought no one was allowed to encroach into the 10m area until the ball had either been played by a player and the lineout became a maul/ruck or until the ball had past the 15m line. Earls was only about 2m from the lineout position when the Irish player knocked the ball back to him from about the 17m mark. Am I living in the past or is that still the case.

I don't think it's the most ridiculous idea WPI, it would certainly benefit England long term if few of them toured with the Lions. Pre Lions form means very little in the context of trying to win the world cup.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:If the one thing England learnt from yesterday is we (England)  Cannot rely on Ford and Farrell all the time. We need a replacement 10 on the bench. Their should be room for  Marcus Smith or Jacob Umanga.


Overall England do need a "BIG RETHINK" of who is in on form and who is in as coach's favourites.

England have gone from champs to  chumps in 3/4 months England finish 5th i think simply not good enough.

To be fair how often do you lose both flyhalfs to injury?

England do need to revamp the squad a bit. The midfield combination doesn't work and two of the back three have been off form. Pack looks tired and the discipline is awful. A bit of fresh blood and the impact of two or three form players might well have helped. The only issue is that we really went into a 6N championship with no idea of form because most of our internationals have barely played pre tournament.

Did we lose ford to injury? I thought he was replaced by Marchant and Farrell moved to 10.

Have to say that I thought Robson did a better job than Farrell anyway, didn't kick everything away.

Well done Ireland, by far the better side today. I thought you had a very "understanding" referee, but that is not much of an excuse for England's performance.

I would be interested in seeing the referee's performance scores sent in to WR for the England games. They all seem to come out with a presumption about England that does not help them. Whilst with Ireland they do the same but in reverse, squeaky clean.

I have a very silly suspicion that won't go away, did Jones want England to do badly so that not many would tour with the Lions and would be fresh for next year. We all know that the sides contributing the most to the Lions tend to have a disastrous year following the tour. We have had ours 2 years before the RWC, not in year preceding it.

Very Machiavellian!  

I simply think this group might have exceeded their warranty and they are just not firing.  When Ford was subbed, I thought it should have been Farrell to go since England were, once again, chasing the game.  The front row appeared tired, Mako dreadful, three pens, and I really don't remember any runs at all.  The second row was more or less OK, though I don't want Jonny Hill picked until that mullet is shaved (I even prefer Marler's old hair etchings).  In the back row Wilson worked hard, because he always does, but is a step slow.  Curry was quiet, but not for lack of effort.  Billy V. was hit and miss, but ultimately off the pace, almost like the Scotland game - bad for his England future.  

The backs are, well, just not right.  When it was time to chase the game, I thought Farrell should have gone off, not Ford.  Still need a proper 15 though I thought Daly improved as the game went on.  Let's forget about Lawrence because it seemed England did too.    

As I said during the match, England seemed like they tried to play at a pace which was too fast and they simply appeared frantic and frequently turned the ball over.  Also discipline. 14 pens?  I thought this was supposed to be a focus in training.  Well they got it right.....

We will have to see what happens next.  But we have until the autumn internationals to see how/if Jones rethinks his approach to the squad.  There are still many very good players in the squad, but I think the 'core' might be different than Eddie does.  It's a shame he doesn't call me for advise.

I did say it was very silly, but the thought won't go away.

I thought what this game did show was how much England miss Lawes at either Lock or BS, neither Ewels or Wilson are up to his standard and his defensive work is hard to replace.

Totally agree about Farrell, he would struggle to unlock his front door never mind the Irish defence. Ford Lawrence Marchant has a lot more balance. Did May or Watson actually receive a pass in the game?

One thing I am curious about with Irelands first try; I thought no one was allowed to encroach into the 10m area until the ball had either been played by a player and the lineout became a maul/ruck or until the ball had past the 15m line. Earls was only about 2m from the lineout position when the Irish player knocked the ball back to him from about the 17m mark. Am I living in the past or is that still the case.

First of all, I think I deserve credit for spelling 'Machiavellian' correctly. But I also wonder if you are right. And missing Lawes for his defence, taking on the grunt yards, lineout work and overall maturity was sorely missed, especially in a game like this. I have to go back and look at that try. I didn't notice at the time.

The throw had gone over 15 m thus lineout over?

Edit - just watched it and he was there very quickly - as soon as the ball is over 15 m he can encroach and the throw went well over the 15 m

TightHEAD wrote:Ollie Lawrence is not a test player so far. Looks way off the pace.

That was clear to see yesterday. All this talk for weeks and weeks ignores the fact that some players just aren't going to be ready to be thrown straight in. He looked clumsy in the few moments he had against Scotland and that was apparent again yesterday. He's not Manu and he's not taken his chance. The problem isn't a personnel issue for England they don't need to overhaul the whole team. The likes of Lawrence cannot be 'the answer' before they've even done anything of note on the test stage.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:If the one thing England learnt from yesterday is we (England)  Cannot rely on Ford and Farrell all the time. We need a replacement 10 on the bench. Their should be room for  Marcus Smith or Jacob Umanga.


Overall England do need a "BIG RETHINK" of who is in on form and who is in as coach's favourites.

England have gone from champs to  chumps in 3/4 months England finish 5th i think simply not good enough.

To be fair how often do you lose both flyhalfs to injury?

England do need to revamp the squad a bit. The midfield combination doesn't work and two of the back three have been off form. Pack looks tired and the discipline is awful. A bit of fresh blood and the impact of two or three form players might well have helped. The only issue is that we really went into a 6N championship with no idea of form because most of our internationals have barely played pre tournament.

Did we lose ford to injury? I thought he was replaced by Marchant and Farrell moved to 10.

Have to say that I thought Robson did a better job than Farrell anyway, didn't kick everything away.

Well done Ireland, by far the better side today. I thought you had a very "understanding" referee, but that is not much of an excuse for England's performance.

I would be interested in seeing the referee's performance scores sent in to WR for the England games. They all seem to come out with a presumption about England that does not help them. Whilst with Ireland they do the same but in reverse, squeaky clean.

I have a very silly suspicion that won't go away, did Jones want England to do badly so that not many would tour with the Lions and would be fresh for next year. We all know that the sides contributing the most to the Lions tend to have a disastrous year following the tour. We have had ours 2 years before the RWC, not in year preceding it.

Very Machiavellian!  

I simply think this group might have exceeded their warranty and they are just not firing.  When Ford was subbed, I thought it should have been Farrell to go since England were, once again, chasing the game.  The front row appeared tired, Mako dreadful, three pens, and I really don't remember any runs at all.  The second row was more or less OK, though I don't want Jonny Hill picked until that mullet is shaved (I even prefer Marler's old hair etchings).  In the back row Wilson worked hard, because he always does, but is a step slow.  Curry was quiet, but not for lack of effort.  Billy V. was hit and miss, but ultimately off the pace, almost like the Scotland game - bad for his England future.  

The backs are, well, just not right.  When it was time to chase the game, I thought Farrell should have gone off, not Ford.  Still need a proper 15 though I thought Daly improved as the game went on.  Let's forget about Lawrence because it seemed England did too.    

As I said during the match, England seemed like they tried to play at a pace which was too fast and they simply appeared frantic and frequently turned the ball over.  Also discipline. 14 pens?  I thought this was supposed to be a focus in training.  Well they got it right.....

We will have to see what happens next.  But we have until the autumn internationals to see how/if Jones rethinks his approach to the squad.  There are still many very good players in the squad, but I think the 'core' might be different than Eddie does.  It's a shame he doesn't call me for advise.

I did say it was very silly, but the thought won't go away.

I thought what this game did show was how much England miss Lawes at either Lock or BS, neither Ewels or Wilson are up to his standard and his defensive work is hard to replace.

Totally agree about Farrell, he would struggle to unlock his front door never mind the Irish defence. Ford Lawrence Marchant has a lot more balance. Did May or Watson actually receive a pass in the game?

One thing I am curious about with Irelands first try; I thought no one was allowed to encroach into the 10m area until the ball had either been played by a player and the lineout became a maul/ruck or until the ball had past the 15m line. Earls was only about 2m from the lineout position when the Irish player knocked the ball back to him from about the 17m mark. Am I living in the past or is that still the case.

I've been trying to tell everyone this all tournament. Finishing 5th is not a major issue for England. The six nations doesn't matter, they've been there, done that. All eyes are on the world cup and preparing the team for that tournament.

England learned a few lessons this tournament and almost none of them were major negatives.

However, the English pack has been so clearly underpowered and their tactics so unspecific to the opposition that it is not a coincidence there is a Lions tour this year.

Jones knows that Gatland would have been looking at a 60%+ English squad this time last year after the world cup and six nations performances. Everyone else was in disarray. Wales and Ireland have finally turned the corner this tournament and that is ideal for England as it means maybe 10 fewer English players will be going on a Lions tour.

There is so little time to practice for the world cup, with no autumn games against the big three southern teams nor a summer tour, that England HAVE to make the most of playing against those teams if/when they play them in 2022 (and maybe later this year). They have to. Those games are the dry run for the world cup.

What's the worst thing you could do to prepare for those games in 2022? Have half your team battered, bruised, or long term injured from a Lions tour.

Jones won't have wanted to lose in the manner he did, it's not as if that would be planned, but Ireland played a game designed to nullify England yesterday and it worked. Nearly everything worked. Set piece moves, kicking game, all of it. There is value in that for Ireland as they looked so poor last year. There is no value for England in countering that as learning how to beat an Ireland team in massive transition is of no use for the world cup.

England beat the team they really needed to beat this year: France. The only other team that came close to them in 2020. They manned up and outplayed them and should have won earlier and by more points.

The six nations has actually been decent for England. Not great, but decent. That is, it looks that way if you understand the perspective which is England are focused on bigger things than the six nations. If you want England to win every game and they should do that even if it means they're running on fumes by the end of 2022, then this six nations has been a disaster. But if you understand that they won their biggest test against their toughest opponent that will bode well for the future, while at the same time not showing any of their tactical playbook for what's to come (attack coach isn't even in England), had a look at a few players (Hill, Ewels in particular), and have successfully managed to avoid having too many England players go on tour with the Lions, then it's still looking good for 2023.

Lol, seriously you think the 6N has been decent for England?

Dire would be my assessment. Not sure how losing helps going forward to 2023, the players supposedly put in as much effort (not Billy as at one point he looked like he'd given up caring) maybe more as they tackled more. As for not showing play book, is there one? Nearly everything worked? Scrum didn't, kicking was poor and it was obvious Ireland easily coped with it.
I cannot believe for a minute any of the players buy into not really bothering in the 6N as they are building for RWC, not a hope. Winning breeds confidence and confidence then helps going forward both in attack and defence.

With all due respect you must have been watching a different game to me!

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:If the one thing England learnt from yesterday is we (England)  Cannot rely on Ford and Farrell all the time. We need a replacement 10 on the bench. Their should be room for  Marcus Smith or Jacob Umanga.


Overall England do need a "BIG RETHINK" of who is in on form and who is in as coach's favourites.

England have gone from champs to  chumps in 3/4 months England finish 5th i think simply not good enough.

To be fair how often do you lose both flyhalfs to injury?

England do need to revamp the squad a bit. The midfield combination doesn't work and two of the back three have been off form. Pack looks tired and the discipline is awful. A bit of fresh blood and the impact of two or three form players might well have helped. The only issue is that we really went into a 6N championship with no idea of form because most of our internationals have barely played pre tournament.

Did we lose ford to injury? I thought he was replaced by Marchant and Farrell moved to 10.

Have to say that I thought Robson did a better job than Farrell anyway, didn't kick everything away.

Well done Ireland, by far the better side today. I thought you had a very "understanding" referee, but that is not much of an excuse for England's performance.

I would be interested in seeing the referee's performance scores sent in to WR for the England games. They all seem to come out with a presumption about England that does not help them. Whilst with Ireland they do the same but in reverse, squeaky clean.

I have a very silly suspicion that won't go away, did Jones want England to do badly so that not many would tour with the Lions and would be fresh for next year. We all know that the sides contributing the most to the Lions tend to have a disastrous year following the tour. We have had ours 2 years before the RWC, not in year preceding it.

Very Machiavellian!  

I simply think this group might have exceeded their warranty and they are just not firing.  When Ford was subbed, I thought it should have been Farrell to go since England were, once again, chasing the game.  The front row appeared tired, Mako dreadful, three pens, and I really don't remember any runs at all.  The second row was more or less OK, though I don't want Jonny Hill picked until that mullet is shaved (I even prefer Marler's old hair etchings).  In the back row Wilson worked hard, because he always does, but is a step slow.  Curry was quiet, but not for lack of effort.  Billy V. was hit and miss, but ultimately off the pace, almost like the Scotland game - bad for his England future.  

The backs are, well, just not right.  When it was time to chase the game, I thought Farrell should have gone off, not Ford.  Still need a proper 15 though I thought Daly improved as the game went on.  Let's forget about Lawrence because it seemed England did too.    

As I said during the match, England seemed like they tried to play at a pace which was too fast and they simply appeared frantic and frequently turned the ball over.  Also discipline. 14 pens?  I thought this was supposed to be a focus in training.  Well they got it right.....

We will have to see what happens next.  But we have until the autumn internationals to see how/if Jones rethinks his approach to the squad.  There are still many very good players in the squad, but I think the 'core' might be different than Eddie does.  It's a shame he doesn't call me for advise.

I did say it was very silly, but the thought won't go away.

I thought what this game did show was how much England miss Lawes at either Lock or BS, neither Ewels or Wilson are up to his standard and his defensive work is hard to replace.

Totally agree about Farrell, he would struggle to unlock his front door never mind the Irish defence. Ford Lawrence Marchant has a lot more balance. Did May or Watson actually receive a pass in the game?

One thing I am curious about with Irelands first try; I thought no one was allowed to encroach into the 10m area until the ball had either been played by a player and the lineout became a maul/ruck or until the ball had past the 15m line. Earls was only about 2m from the lineout position when the Irish player knocked the ball back to him from about the 17m mark. Am I living in the past or is that still the case.

This is what the laws say although it's a bit confusing IMO ...

Once the ball has been thrown in by a team-mate, players who are not participating in the lineout may move forward. If that occurs, then their opponents may also move forward. If the ball does not go beyond the 15-metre line, the players will not be liable to sanction if they immediately retire to their respective offside lines.

So the attacking team can move forwards (and then so can the defence) but if the ball doesn't go 15m they have to go back it seems. So this allows for the long throw beyond the back of the lineout to be caught by a non-participating player running onto it. What's not clear to me is if the ball is caught by a line-out player within the 15m and then passed to a non-participating player who moved forwards when the ball was originally thrown - in that case I would think as soon as the ball was caught within the 15m the other player should have retired back behind the 10m line as at that point they are offside. So the move forwards by the non lineout player is only legal if the ball was caught by the lineout player beyond the 15m line. At least that's how I see it.

profitius wrote:Enjoyable match from an Ireland point of view. One big change from the previous encounters was that Ireland moved the ball quicker. In previous encounters it was all one out runners getting smashed by 2 or 3 England players who were waiting for it. Yesterday there was none of that and the attack actually looked good for the most part although it still needs working on.


I thought Ireland got the rub of the green in terms of refs decisions although England looked like they were frustrated and have themselves to blame mostly.


For England I think the Vunipolas are done, especially Billy. He's not half the player he was a few years ago. Mako probably has a few years left in him alright.

England got a reputation, and I think as a result the referee was always looking harder at them. It is important to say it doesn't excuse them for being idiots.

I am not saying that Ireland were not excellent (they were), but for me the difference between this game and the Scotland game was that Scotland harried England through most of the match and never let them settle. Forced errors. This game they didn't need Ireland's help to feck up time and time again.

mountain man wrote:Lol, seriously you think the 6N has been decent for England?

With all due respect you must have been watching a different game to me!

Apparently so, for the reasons I explained above. Perspective is everything.

lostinwales wrote:

profitius wrote:Enjoyable match from an Ireland point of view. One big change from the previous encounters was that Ireland moved the ball quicker. In previous encounters it was all one out runners getting smashed by 2 or 3 England players who were waiting for it. Yesterday there was none of that and the attack actually looked good for the most part although it still needs working on.


I thought Ireland got the rub of the green in terms of refs decisions although England looked like they were frustrated and have themselves to blame mostly.


For England I think the Vunipolas are done, especially Billy. He's not half the player he was a few years ago. Mako probably has a few years left in him alright.

England got a reputation, and I think as a result the referee was always looking harder at them. It is important to say it doesn't excuse them for being idiots.

I am not saying that Ireland were not excellent (they were), but for me the difference between this game and the Scotland game was that Scotland harried England through most of the match and never let them settle. Forced errors. This game they didn't need Ireland's help to feck up time and time again.

agree with that good post. plus england were particularly rusty (sarries players) vs scotland.

If England were thinking about RWC2023 and not the 6N, Jones should have been fielding the side that he believes will be playing in the 2023 RWC, not a side full of players out of form. He has said that the squad will evolve over the next year or so; why not now. Give the newcomers the experience of International rugby. Taking a host of fresh inexperienced players with around 10 caps is not the way to win a RWC. Experience counts in in these competitions.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:If England were thinking about RWC2023 and not the 6N, Jones should have been fielding the side that he believes will be playing in the 2023 RWC, not a side full of players out of form. He has said that the squad will evolve over the next year or so; why not now. Give the newcomers the experience of International rugby. Taking a host of fresh inexperienced players with around 10 caps is not the way to win a RWC. Experience counts in in these competitions.

Yep. Jones himself has said for a RWC need average age around 28 and average number of caps 40. No way is anyone new going to get anything like that number of caps before 2023.

mountain man wrote:Lol, seriously you think the 6N has been decent for England?

Didn't you know they re miles ahead of the 4 teams above them and after losing to Scotland were still certain to finish 3rd.

The reality is England have lost their way and need a major overall. Mako is not a good enough scrummager, Farrell either plays 10 or doesn't play, stop playing locks at 6 etc etc
Scotland continue to promise but not deliver (a win against France would go a long way to mitigate that)
Ireland were steady and slowly improved but have a way to go.
Wales dug deep and experience was telling but I suspect that is as good as it gets.
France continue to promise but have not gone up a level yet - if they stay calm and select consistently they will improve
Italy continue to be totally inadequate - the only chink of light being the youthfulness of their team. Until they stop defending poorly it will come to nothing.

I'm glad Eddie doesn't read these boards, we'd end up with 10 new players every game.

A few tweaks are needed and the core of our side (i.e. Sarries players) need be playing week in week out to get fit. Scrum half, FB and something with the centres......job done.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:If England were thinking about RWC2023 and not the 6N, Jones should have been fielding the side that he believes will be playing in the 2023 RWC, not a side full of players out of form..

That wouldn't make much sense though, would it?

Why would you give away your team and therefore your likely tactics 2.5 years before the RWC?

The thing is, though, he is picking the players he knows will be playing in the world cup. Ford, Farrell, Daly, George, Billy. They're all going to be there unless someone comes through and plays so unbelievably well that they displace them. As that's unlikely to happen in most if not all positions, it's more beneficial to give these players more test experience than it would be to drop them.

However, bringing through young players prematurely, before they're ready, and 6 months before a Lions tour, makes little sense for building towards a world cup.

geoff999rugby wrote:

mountain man wrote:Lol, seriously you think the 6N has been decent for England?

Didn't you know they re miles ahead of the 4 teams above them.

Exactly.

Regarding the concussion check that Farrell underwent and failed I was right that Ford was allowed to come back on. England reckon they just chose not to do so and play with Robson at 10.

The thing is, though, he is picking the players he knows will be playing in the world cup. Ford, Farrell, Daly, George, Billy.

No Ben Youngs?

whatahitson wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:

mountain man wrote:Lol, seriously you think the 6N has been decent for England?

Didn't you know they re miles ahead of the 4 teams above them.

Exactly.

You are asking us to believe that England are playing some cunning master plan where they don't play their best team because they don't want players to play for the Lions.
This is deliberate so they don't show their hand too early.
By contrast Wales, Ireland, France and Scotland aren't so smart so they must be playing near or close to their peak and will suffer as a consequence.

geoff999rugby wrote:
By contrast Wales, Ireland, France and Scotland aren't so smart so they must be playing near or close to their peak and will suffer as a consequence.

Isn't that what Ireland did during the last cycle and ended up bombing at the world cup?

CJ Stander is leaving Ireland and going back to SA, is he now classed as being Irish citizen, or his allowed to play for SA in the next RWC?

majesticimperialman wrote:CJ Stander is leaving Ireland and going back to SA, is he now classed as being Irish citizen, or his allowed to play for SA in the next RWC?

www.google.co.uk

majesticimperialman wrote:CJ Stander is leaving Ireland and going back to SA, is he now classed as being Irish citizen, or his allowed to play for SA in the next RWC?

I believe he is going to be focusing on opening the batting for SA in the Twenty20 World Cup later this year

geoff999rugby wrote:

whatahitson wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:

mountain man wrote:Lol, seriously you think the 6N has been decent for England?

Didn't you know they re miles ahead of the 4 teams above them.

Exactly.

You are asking us to believe that England are playing some cunning master plan where they don't play their best team because they don't want players to play for the Lions.
This is deliberate so they don't show their hand too early.
By contrast Wales, Ireland, France and Scotland aren't so smart so they must be playing near or close to their peak and will suffer as a consequence.

Not quite like that. They don't want to lose games but it's about calculated risks v reward.

Jones won't be upset by the fact that fewer English players will go on the Lions tour, though. The main purpose, however, was for Jones to gather more evidence and experience of his team and individual players, new and old, while giving nothing away about the long term, post-Lions tour gameplan in preparation for going one better than last time and winning the 2023 world cup.

If he comes out in the press and literally tells us that this is what he's doing, and why, I think it's reasonable to recognise it when it happens.

Wales look like they will peak too soon before the RWC, yes. They also lack pragmatism, as shown against the French, which makes them very beatable. As far as I see it the Welsh gameplan relies on consistently outplaying the opposition and utilising their talent to unlock the opposition. Basically 'the best team wins'. That's not much good when they face the All Blacks. They were fortunate with the red cards and refereeing decisions in this tournament to be in with a chance of a grand slam, and even from a position of having effectively 'won' the game at 20-30 with 10 minutes to go, after outplaying the French for long periods, that lack of pragmatism was made totally apparent as they couldn't manage the game without resorting to penalties. I thought their yellow cards were harsh but that was the risk they took taking off their game managers like Biggar. They will probably have a purple patch and then get demolished at the world cup.

France have the quality to win a world cup but still look mentally fragile, emotional, and surprisingly lethargic for the middle of the game. They can improve though and will be England's biggest threat in Europe. It's hard to know their limits but they look like they will peak in 5 years time rather than the required 2.5. The team just lacks the experience, and after bottling both trophies in 2020 they need to win the 2022 six nations if they're to be taken seriously as a team that can go back to back in knockout games at a world cup.

Scotland look like they're probably the closest to peaking at the moment. The consistency of coach after 2019, playing squad and style, and the fact they had the bit between their teeth after a dreadful world cup means they've probably shown as much as they can given the players available to them. Given how weak the other big 3 teams have been, i.e. mid RWC preparations in one way or another, the fact Scotland control so much possession in the opposition half yet struggle to work scoring positions/score points should be a major warning sign for them going forward. Scoring points is what the game is about. It's hard to see any big changes in Scotland, instead it appears they've 'gone early' in their world cup preparations, with only experience, understanding, and form/replacements being the changes that will occur between now and 2023. That doesn't leave too much room for huge improvement. They look like a team with one good performance in them in every block of games, and then like a European version of Australia against SA and NZ over the last decade: they'll give their opponents a good, exciting game but never really look like winning.

Ireland have turned the corner and will probably be a better team than the one Schmidt coached because they're looking to maximise talent like Beirne rather than rely on unreliable players like Rory Best to perform to 'the gameplan'. It's hard to predict with Ireland as their backs look fairly substandard yet their pack is top drawer when they are able to/allowed to seal off the breakdown as they do. They were much more legal against England than they have been in other games but will miss Stander's carrying. They could do with Leavy staying fit. Their tight 5 looks excellent though so that gives them a platform to win games of rugby even if they're not the finished article. If they can build an attacking team around a core of Beirne, Carberry, Henshaw, and Larmour they could become a dark horse at the world cup that peaks just in time but that would mean Ireland doing something they've yet to do: perform well at a world cup. It's hard to overstate how big a loss Stander is going to be and replacing Sexton will be hard as well.

mountain man wrote:

The thing is, though, he is picking the players he knows will be playing in the world cup. Ford, Farrell, Daly, George, Billy.

No Ben Youngs?

It's hard to say with Youngs. He might be a Hartley or he might a Dan Cole. It all depends on Randall, really.

Playing winning rugby today is obviously where the All Blacks have been going wrong all these years. Just think how many World Cups they could have won with Eddie the master magician at the helm.

nlpnlp wrote:Playing winning rugby today is obviously where the All Blacks have been going wrong all these years.  Just think how many World Cups  they could have won with Eddie the master magician at the helm.

England 19-7 New Zealand

nlpnlp wrote:Playing winning rugby today is obviously where the All Blacks have been going wrong all these years.  Just think how many World Cups  they could have won with Eddie the master magician at the helm.

They peaked between world cups for years. Well done, good argument, well argued.

Also it should go without saying that if you're the best team in the world then the way you win a world cup is different to everyone else.

That should be obvious enough.

I seem to remember everyone saying Joe Schmidt was holding back plays before the last two world cups. He was going to dazzle the tournament with an amazing brand of rugby. I didnt believe it then, and he flopped badly each time, and I dont believe it now if anyone says it about Eddie Jones playing some kind of master trickery.

England were very poor and deserved to lose. Very little team spirit - exactly like 2018. However, theres a few things that will happen that will have a positive impact. Saracens back in the premiership and playing. No Covid restrictions. They were self inflicted and had a huge impact. Underhill, Lawes, Launchbury, Nowell and Willis will become available again. Marler and Tuilagi could also play again in an England shirt, but I am not too sure on that one.

What does need to be figured out though, is are some players finished internationally or out of form? Vunipolas in particular.

MichaelT wrote:I seem to remember everyone saying Joe Schmidt was holding back plays before the last two world cups. He was going to dazzle the tournament with an amazing brand of rugby. I didnt believe it then, and he flopped badly each time, and I dont believe it now if anyone says it about Eddie Jones playing some kind of master trickery.

England were very poor and deserved to lose. Very little team spirit - exactly like 2018. However, theres a few things that will happen that will have a positive impact. Saracens back in the premiership and playing. No Covid restrictions. They were self inflicted and had a huge impact. Underhill, Lawes, Launchbury, Nowell and Willis will become available again. Marler and Tuilagi could also play again in an England shirt, but I am not too sure on that one.

What does need to be figured out though, is are some players finished internationally or out of form? Vunipolas in particular.

I know what you mean. The one thing that bugs me (and I have mentioned this before) is that before the 2015 RWC debacle the England coaches went overboard in fitness training for the team, preparing them for a kind of game which just did not happen in that championship, and the results were, quite frankly, embarrassing. With Jones there seem to be some similar sounds about conditioning and the recent results are obviously, shall we say, not exactly encouraging.

Too many England players get injured in training, yes it happens to all teams but England seem to be particularly prone to it. Unlucky or methods?

I don't think physical fitness is an issue with England. Mentally they are not consistent though.

Maybe it is a natural drop after success - England have won 4 trophies under Jones, the 3-0 series, the winning runs, the world cup performances bar the final obviously. Not to mention 4 European Cup trophies for the majority of the players which coincide with Jones being there.

Lancaster had the team playing consistent but they were consistently second. I know which years I prefer and its not 2012 to 2015.

MichaelT wrote:I seem to remember everyone saying Joe Schmidt was holding back plays before the last two world cups. He was going to dazzle the tournament with an amazing brand of rugby. I didnt believe it then, and he flopped badly each time, and I dont believe it now if anyone says it about Eddie Jones playing some kind of master trickery.

England were very poor and deserved to lose. Very little team spirit - exactly like 2018. However, theres a few things that will happen that will have a positive impact. Saracens back in the premiership and playing. No Covid restrictions. They were self inflicted and had a huge impact. Underhill, Lawes, Launchbury, Nowell and Willis will become available again. Marler and Tuilagi could also play again in an England shirt, but I am not too sure on that one.

What does need to be figured out though, is are some players finished internationally or out of form? Vunipolas in particular.

It worked for Schmidt in a way though. He got his two wins v the ABs. The problem was the same tactics they honed to get those results, and another six nations, didn't work at the world cup.

For England, they now have two years to choose what to do. Whatever happens they need to win games of rugby and play better but Jones has definitely learned a lot about how his players perform without their forward dominance. Frankly it doesn't look good. So they can either put everything back in to becoming a physical team that dominates the opposition pack and set piece, gets a big score early on, and coasts through the final quarter. They might win the next two six nations that way. Or they can find a middle ground between competitiveness in the six nations, and preparing the side to compete at a world cup where problems will confront them that they need to adapt to.

The worry is if Jones becomes too focused on trying to beat South Africa when the game was already lost a long time ago. Just like Schmidt tried to prepare his team to avoid a repeaet of 2015 only to discover his prep hadn't worked by the time 2019 came around.

It's hard to overlook how big an impact the Saracens situation will have had on their players, not just this season as well, but mentally. Their aura has gone, the whole club as it used to be is effectively 'over'.