England post 2022 6Ns, Aus tour and beyond

First topic message reminder :

sensisball wrote:
With Bath enduring a terrible season how many tries has Cokonasiga scored?

In five starts and four sub appearances he's bagged five tries. One appearance and one try for England.

It's a bench lacking experience but it's the type of players we'd like to have as options come the world cup.

Ignore the front row that pretty much picked itself.

Chessum - covers lock and 6 highly mobile and physical, good lineout option and we've been desperate for a young lock to come through.

Ludlam - covers 8 and 7 which is what the bench needs, club captain so adds much needed leadership here.

JVP - no one likes the current 9 options for last season's Under 20 captain and player of the J6N gets a chance. Best kicking game of the three 9s on tour and likes to play high tempo.

Porter - covers every position in the backs outside of 9 and 10, could probably do a job on the flank as well. Eddie likes a versatility option as they very much help the overall squad come world cup so audition time for Guy.

Arundell - exciting young player, not ready yet but Eddie will be hoping some international game time might speed up his development. Unlikely starter but potential game changer off the bench, always handy to have one of those at a world cup. Porter's inclusion means Arundell won't have to go in early unless there's multiple injuries.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:What is people's problem with Lawes? He's outstanding...he proves it all the time. Bar injury he'll be the world Cup 6...so its who works with him.

Probably Curry at 7 and you then have a few options at 8.

Jack Willis, Ludlum and Underhill (if he's concussion free) will be the back up....

Back row balance goes to pot when he's there. If he's 6 we really need simmonds at 8.
And I'm in a minority in not wanting him at 6.

How does it go to pot?

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:A story bubbling up that the RFu have given Jones the green light to change his coaches. I'd welcome it, Proudfoot and Gleeson out please.

Hmm I'm not sure where we'd get new coaches so close to a new season. Certainly no Prem or other NH side will want to lose a coach with pre season under way. Replacing the coaches is all well in theory but only if you can source an upgrade. There's only two international windows plus world cup warm ups to come in and make a difference.

Proudfoot could be replaced by Plumtree potentially as NZ have decided to dispense with his services, which is slightly odd unless Robertson is going to do the forwards coaching part time. Eddie has long wanted Sam Vesty as his attack coach but he's just become Saints head coach so that isn't likely to happen.

You never know. If the rfu have given it the go then they could be thinking any compo they would use on Jones could go to the new coaches. May even be given permission to job share to an extent.

So now you want the RFU to pick Jones successor, get him out of his contract before the AIs (no NH club are going to take that). Then get him and Eddie to sit down and agree on recruits together from a limited pool that are currently available. Great in an ideal world but the logistics of that look somewhat difficult.

No, talking about the assistants that could be replaced. They've decided that come he'll or high water Jones is staying.

Though the RFU are still hopeful the replacement will be in place to shadow ahead of the WC apparently. Its Jones' show till we win or are knocked out.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:What is people's problem with Lawes? He's outstanding...he proves it all the time. Bar injury he'll be the world Cup 6...so its who works with him.

Probably Curry at 7 and you then have a few options at 8.

Jack Willis, Ludlum and Underhill (if he's concussion free) will be the back up....

Back row balance goes to pot when he's there. If he's 6 we really need simmonds at 8.
And I'm in a minority in not wanting him at 6.

How does it go to pot?

Breakdown always is an issue for me when Lawes plays as a flanker but in particular when he's there with Vunipola.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:A story bubbling up that the RFu have given Jones the green light to change his coaches. I'd welcome it, Proudfoot and Gleeson out please.

Hmm I'm not sure where we'd get new coaches so close to a new season. Certainly no Prem or other NH side will want to lose a coach with pre season under way. Replacing the coaches is all well in theory but only if you can source an upgrade. There's only two international windows plus world cup warm ups to come in and make a difference.

Proudfoot could be replaced by Plumtree potentially as NZ have decided to dispense with his services, which is slightly odd unless Robertson is going to do the forwards coaching part time. Eddie has long wanted Sam Vesty as his attack coach but he's just become Saints head coach so that isn't likely to happen.

You never know. If the rfu have given it the go then they could be thinking any compo they would use on Jones could go to the new coaches. May even be given permission to job share to an extent.

So now you want the RFU to pick Jones successor, get him out of his contract before the AIs (no NH club are going to take that). Then get him and Eddie to sit down and agree on recruits together from a limited pool that are currently available. Great in an ideal world but the logistics of that look somewhat difficult.

No, talking about the assistants that could be replaced. They've decided that come he'll or high water Jones is staying.

Though the RFU are still hopeful the replacement will be in place to shadow ahead of the WC apparently. Its Jones' show till we win or are knocked out.

Yeah that's the ideal world. Makes a lot of sense really. It's what France did previously. Depends who we go with though as that plan does work best if Eddie gets back his favourite assistant coach Borthwick. Baxter and Eddie working together could go either way. Farrell and Edwards aren't going to be released early. MacFarland is unlikely now he's signed a new long term deal at Ulster but would have been one I'd have definitely shortlisted if I was at the RFU.

I'd keep Proudfoot. He has fantastic pedigree as a coach. I think him and Cockers seem to have the basis covered for the forwards, I'm happy with how they are operating given the personnel. The forwards haven't been perfect but I do think the strength of our locks other Itoje is a large part of that at present. Realistically I don't see a new forwards coach suddenly improving our younger talented locks or middling older locks out of sight. Front row and back row I'm extremely happy with.

The lineout has frustrated me for a while but again I think that's the lock situation bleeding into things. Hill is a lineout lock but hasn't even been running the England lineout until Itoje's injury for instance - probably says something about how he's rated. I think Ewels is a good lineout leader but simply isn't a great jumper at international level. He just doesn't get off the ground that quickly by international standards so can be targeted by the likes of Lood, Ryan, Beard, Woki, etc. Chessum has fantastic talent as a jumper and is learning as a lineout leader but he's inexperienced. James Ryan dominated the Tigers lineout with ease in the Tigers-Leinster Euro game.

Also worth noting that a lot of teams have had up and down lineouts since several common indiscretions were clamped down on to stop the maul taking over. Lifters stepping in front of jumpers to block when setting the maul. Jumping across the line. Delaying bringing the jumper down to make it look like the defending team counter drive too early. There was a lot of cynical play in the lineout facilitating the maul taking over. Since those necessary clamp downs a lot of teams have had less consistent lineouts. Only really the Boks and Ireland have stayed very consistent now I'd say? The Boks of course have absurd lock depth and PSdT at blindside. Ireland have Ryan/Bierne/Henderson/Baird at lock, Doris or POM at blindside and Conan at 8. I.e. both sides naturally have great lineout options in their strongest packs.

Gleeson would be a case of who's available to replace him? His tenure has seen England try to implement a completely new structure whilst introducing new players due to injuries. There's been a lot of absolute pish mixed with some occasional green shoots. I wouldn't be at all opposed to seeing a new attack coach if they had better experience but I'm not a big fan of change for change sake.

I'd just go with giving Cockers more responsibility. The driving maul has got better since he came, the lineout is a bit dodgy and I take your point on the locks. Why is Lawes not calling the lineout anyway? Always went well with him, Launchbury and Wood. Proudfoot was the guy who arrived with a big rep with a good chunk in England anyway, forged from the WC final. Just not seeing any steps forward from what it was prior to him. Maybe it is the new locks, and the new faces in the front row.

I get the new system in attack could take time etc, and I've seen the analysts like Squidge saying it's bad for the rest. Saw Gatland saying that it's all going to click when Smith is settled. All well and good but I come back to my view that I don't see the WC as the be all and end all and we've seen dirge from ball in hand for a good while now. Re who could replace him, don't know. I don't see it as change for changes sake, I look at the amount of tries scored, the mixed and constant rotation in the backs (some caused by injury) and just see confusion.

Did the lineout always go that well with Lawes, Launchbury and Wood? Retention was high but that was the period when England threw to the front and used shortened lineouts a lot. Those options always improve retention but massively reduce attacking options. Hence why England's attack from lineouts was very poor in that period even though they general retained the ball.

king_carlos wrote:Did the lineout always go that well with Lawes, Launchbury and Wood? Retention was high but that was the period when England threw to the front and used shortened lineouts a lot. Those options always improve retention but massively reduce attacking options. Hence why England's attack from lineouts was very poor in that period even though they general retained the ball.

Sarge incoming any second to talk about Mr Youngs.

England threw to the front and shortened lineouts a lot in that period with Hartley as well though.

It's never been popular to point out as Launchbury was fantastic around the park but he was always a very weak jumper for an international lock and it did cause clear issues at times. The opposition could just mark the stronger jumper (often Lawes, sometimes Parling) which then forced England to throw to the front or cut numbers leaving them with no attacking potential from what should be your best platform.

Well I'd have to disagree that Hartley threw to the front in any sort of regularity of Youngs. And I have read 1 or 2 comments over the years that Lawes was the better pick at lock over Launchbury due to the lineout work. I take your points that it is overall combos though that impact lineout work. For me if we're playing Lawes at 6 you have probably the strongest options we have had (especially Itoje in the side) at any point since we had the excellent work of Croft there. It's the fact that we have those options which make me question the quality of that set piece currently.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well I'd have to disagree that Hartley threw to the front in any sort of regularity of Youngs. And I have read 1 or 2 comments over the years that Lawes was the better pick at lock over Launchbury due to the lineout work. I take your points that it is overall combos though that impact lineout work.

Wasn't really to do with the hooker more the lineout options they were trying to throw to. You'll see it next time you watch Wasps, Launchbury will only be used as a jumper at the front and more often a lifter than a jumper.

When he was in his pomp he was often paired with Parling a lineout guru and either Wood or Croft at blindside. Later years under Eddie he's tended to struggle to get back into the side even when in good form because we had Haskell/Robshaw and then Curry/Underhill whom could jump but not to the level that could take away from Launchbury's deficiency. Eddie likes a lineout platform as well so he won't compromise.

In the Launchbury/Lawes/Wood period wasn't the centre combination Barritt and Manu or am I remembering incorrectly? Lineouts tending to be straight to the midfield and look to carry up hard than going to the rolling maul.

From my memory shortened lineouts that limited attacking options were a consistent frustration throughout Lancaster's reign. I particularly remember it as I found it very confusing that a coach such as Rowntree would opt for that, then when he was involved with the Lions in 2013 they very much went the other way which really interested me. I think it must have been a Lancaster plan of nailing retention then trying to grow from there. Except as with a few elements of Lancaster's reign he did a good job of building foundations but couldn't quite finish off what went on top of it.

The lineout has frustrated me a lot of a while so I'm not defending the current lineout at all. I just think that it's a symptom of our locks not being as good rather than poor coaching.

As said above the less consistent lineouts isn't just England either, it's a symptom of those more stringently enforced rules. Even France for instance who have an abundance of back rows that are strong jumpers and probably the best jumper I've seen since Croft in Cameron Woki have been up and down there. The Boks and Ireland have maintained consistency, almost everyone else has been less so.

When they could pick two from Itoje, Kruis and Lawes England were even splitting the lineout leadership in attack and defence which is an absolutely ideal place to be. Losing Kruis has been a blow at lock that we're yet to really overcome.

Come on, Youngs was a country mile away from the thrower that Hartley was, and I was someone who would have had Youngs in the squad.

Given that we don't have those doubts now then, George is class as a thrower, LCD has come on leaps and bounds, we have Lawes and Itoje as primary jumpers then people like Hill as a 3rd (even before considering the likes of Curry who is improving rapidly). Is everyone thinking, wow our lineout has been fantastic recently?

Is it as suggested above the greater risk/reward choice and we have to expect a lower percentage of retention (especially when Marler is throwing in?).

Another question, if the RFU said to Jones money is no option we'll buy out the people who you want, is there anyone who would be an improvement on the incumbents hat you think is semi realistically is possible?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Come on, Youngs was a country mile away from the thrower that Hartley was, and I was someone who would have had Youngs in the squad.

Given that we don't have those doubts now then, George is class as a thrower, LCD has come on leaps and bounds, we have Lawes and Itoje as primary jumpers then people like Hill as a 3rd (even before considering the likes of Curry who is improving rapidly). Is everyone thinking, wow our lineout has been fantastic recently?

Is it as suggested above the greater risk/reward choice and we have to expect a lower percentage of retention (especially when Marler is throwing in?).

I don't think anyone's ever said that wasn't the case?

I've simply pointed out that England used a shortened lineout and threw to the front throughout Lancaster's reign which massively limited attacking options. All stemming from you stating the lineout worked great with Lawes and Launchbury which it didn't even if retention was good.

I've not said anywhere the lineout is good either. Merely that I don't think it's a coaching issue but a combination of worse second rows and all but two international sides seeing a reduction in lineout effectiveness since rules were enforced better.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Another question, if the RFU said to Jones money is no option we'll buy out the people who you want, is there anyone who would be an improvement on the incumbents hat you think is semi realistically is possible?

Money no option and 'semi realistically possible' don't really work together if we're honest.

Money no option I'd take Shaun Edwards as defence coach and have Wayne Smith on a retainer to advise all England coaches until he passes at which point I'd like the RFU to put their limitless cash supply into recreating Smith as a hologram like Rimmer in Red Dwarf so this consultancy can continue for eternity.

Being realistic at this stage it's difficult getting assistants this close to a RWC. Many of the best ones are in head coach roles at clubs with contracts due to expire after the current RWC cycle.

Most the attack coaches that spring to mind are in head chef roles at Prem clubs for instance. Joe Shaw, now Sarries head coach and previously their skills and attack coach is a younger coach that has interested me for a long time. Vesty is another attack/backs coach with a very good rep who is now in a head coach role at a Premiership club. Ali Hepher at Chiefs too - I know Chiefs have fallen off this year but that's more forwards related and not adapting to new rules IMO.

If Proudfoot wanted to move on I wouldn't be opposed to Cockers and a specialist lineout coach (Parling has a growing rep?) taking on the forwards but as said I do think the issues in the forwards is more personnel than coaching.

Defence I'm fairly happy with. Gustard nailed that really aggressive blitz whilst attacking breakdowns relatively little. Mitchell moved to the hybrid with the blitz around the fringes and drifting wider out but attacked the breakdown more. Seibold seems to favour a mix of the two where we will alter line speed and breakdown aggression depending on situation weighing risk vs reward. There are times that weighing of risk vs reward can be wrong in my opinion but in general I really like the defensive system they are building.

When it comes to international coaching, availability is a very malleable thing. Most club coaches have a clause in their contract that allows them to leave for an international role, and a union is generally very able to buy out the notice period if they want to.

I don't think there'd be a shortage of young coaches who would be prepared to put up with Eddie's style for 18 months to have had the experience of working with him and to have been through an RWC - with a decent shot at getting to the final given the draw - at International level, which would set them up for plenty of future roles.

Selecting the post-Eddie coach and aligning with him on the coaching team would be a step too far, though. The best you could hope for is that if (as rumoured) the replacement head coach shadows the team over the RWC period, the other coaches would have a chance to impress and build a relationship with the new boss.

The post Eddie head coach is already at the Prem champions...not much point discussing anyone else.

Poorfour wrote:When it comes to international coaching, availability is a very malleable thing. Most club coaches have a clause in their contract that allows them to leave for an international role, and a union is generally very able to buy out the notice period if they want to.

And yet Eddie wanted Vesty previously and Saints were able to say no. Add in no Union is super happy about buying coaches out of contract after the Covid period when they all lost money hand over fist. Similarly no club is likely to let any coach just leave having also lost money hand over fist during Covid.

I'm in agreement with KC on those attacking coach options but neither Saints nor Sarries will play nice in making them available.

GF, keep your hands off. Steve needs to spend at least another five years gaining experience with Tigers before taking the England top job.

Borthwick has done wonders but the Tigers game plan, i.e. Borthwick game plan, still has some significant holes in it that I'm not sure would work consistently at international level. The way Leinster shut Tigers down so easily is a good case study of it. Once our forwards weren't getting over the gain line around the fringes it all fell apart very quickly. With time Borthwick could/should be able to overcome this. Coaches improve with experience just the same as players. I'm not sure Borthwick will have that experience by next year though.

I'd ideally veer towards someone with head coach experience at international level.

Head coach - Farrell
Defence coach - Edwards
Forwards - Cockers/Proudfoot
Backs - Vesty

I'd be very happy with something like that.

If we were taking a punt on someone with club success but no international experience in a top job I'd be tempted by Robertson ahead of Borthwick too. He's got an extra 5 years overall coaching experience as well as 9 years as a head coach to Borthwick's 2.

king_carlos wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Come on, Youngs was a country mile away from the thrower that Hartley was, and I was someone who would have had Youngs in the squad.

Given that we don't have those doubts now then, George is class as a thrower, LCD has come on leaps and bounds, we have Lawes and Itoje as primary jumpers then people like Hill as a 3rd (even before considering the likes of Curry who is improving rapidly). Is everyone thinking, wow our lineout has been fantastic recently?

Is it as suggested above the greater risk/reward choice and we have to expect a lower percentage of retention (especially when Marler is throwing in?).

I don't think anyone's ever said that wasn't the case?

I've simply pointed out that England used a shortened lineout and threw to the front throughout Lancaster's reign which massively limited attacking options. All stemming from you stating the lineout worked great with Lawes and Launchbury which it didn't even if retention was good.

I've not said anywhere the lineout is good either. Merely that I don't think it's a coaching issue but a combination of worse second rows and all but two international sides seeing a reduction in lineout effectiveness since rules were enforced better.

I think England did tend to go for easier throws with Youngs in the team, understandably.

Poorfour wrote:When it comes to international coaching, availability is a very malleable thing. Most club coaches have a clause in their contract that allows them to leave for an international role, and a union is generally very able to buy out the notice period if they want to.

I don't think there'd be a shortage of young coaches who would be prepared to put up with Eddie's style for 18 months to have had the experience of working with him and to have been through an RWC - with a decent shot at getting to the final given the draw - at International level, which would set them up for plenty of future roles.

Selecting the post-Eddie coach and aligning with him on the coaching team would be a step too far, though. The best you could hope for is that if (as rumoured) the replacement head coach shadows the team over the RWC period, the other coaches would have a chance to impress and build a relationship with the new boss.

Yeah, and that's why I said semi realistic. I don't think a guy like Smith would leave the Black Ferns, but I do think Robertson's head could be turned as he wants an international job.

Re the person to take over from Jones, it would still be Robertson and McCall at the top of my list personally, ruled out by the RFU for not being English. I don't know who out of Borthwick, Edwards or Farrell they'd want, probably Steve. Most pundits seem to want Edwards; and I'd probably say that Farrell poses the least risk option.

GeordieFalcon wrote:The post Eddie head coach is already at the Prem champions...not much point discussing anyone else.

Don't know who gave the thumbs down, a Leicester fan wanting to keep him!? As above there are other options that the RFU will want to look at. I think it's a bit year for Borthwick, lots of changes to the side, will he aim to make them a bit better to watch? Similar style for England would be tolerated by most but only as long as we're winning, else you have little entertainment and no trophies.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:The post Eddie head coach is already at the Prem champions...not much point discussing anyone else.

Don't know who gave the thumbs down, a Leicester fan wanting to keep him!? As above there are other options that the RFU will want to look at. I think it's a bit year for Borthwick, lots of changes to the side, will he aim to make them a bit better to watch? Similar style for England would be tolerated by most but only as long as we're winning, else you have little entertainment and no trophies.

Yes, me with the thumbs down as a bit of a joke. I tend to agree with KC that he's a very good HC but experience of the top job is limited. The spotlight of the England job might not sit that well with him and Steve is extremely pragmatic. A lot of fans don't like Eddie's approach and Borthwick is possibly more conservative when he thinks it's the right way to go, sometimes he's more expansive, he changes the tactics to suit who he's playing against. Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't, as KC says the first half Vs Leinster it went very wrong.

I am interested to see what he does at Tigers this season. The pre season clips show a lot more ball in hand from the start of pre season compared to prior years. That may be because it's easier to work on refining the attack when you actually have a defensive structure, kick chase, lineout etc all those things that were missing when he arrived. Basically he inherited a scrum and that's it.

Yeah he's done some great work around what a lot of people would describe as the basics. Lot's of changes in the backline this year some positives and obviously the huge negative of losing Ford. If he add some zip to that then he can only propel himself up the shortlist. If he, and Leicester struggle a little and fall backwards then opens the door more for others. Interesting season ahead.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yeah he's done some great work around what a lot of people would describe as the basics. Lot's of changes in the backline this year some positives and obviously the huge negative of losing Ford. If he add some zip to that then he can only propel himself up the shortlist. If he, and Leicester struggle a little and fall backwards then opens the door more for others. Interesting season ahead.

Yes and no. At the start of the season we could see the same backline that finished the Prem final. There's some depth added but the only material one is Ford out and Pollard in. The rest of the movement is pack shuffling that may or may not play.

Genge out and Cronin in is probably the biggest change Borthwick will have to contend with. We've seen on the summer tour how Genge is a solid scrummager but effectively another 8 in terms of carrying. That sort of impact is irreplaceable and Genge managed to play a lot of last season, not to mention the loss of his leadership skills. We may have to tweak the attack, particularly at the start of the season whilst Montoya is away as well, as the front row isn't going to offer the same impact ball in hand as it did at the end of the season.

I would take Proudfoot in a shot at Glasgow. He's a fantastic forwards coach in particular.

The sign of a good coach is to address the basics first and then build on it.

Borthwick has done the first bit....and yes he has a Big season to prove he can move on from this very successful first season.

V Leinster, yes they may have had a tough time but dont forget this is essentially the Tigers in a first season of rebuild v a team thats basically Ireland.

Anyway...the Falcons rebuild is underway...everyone will be pushing for Dave Walder next season

GeordieFalcon wrote:The sign of a good coach is to address the basics first and then build on it.

Borthwick has done the first bit....and yes he has a Big season to prove he can move on from this very successful first season.

V Leinster, yes they may have had a tough time but dont forget this is essentially the Tigers in a first season of rebuild v a team thats basically Ireland.

Anyway...the Falcons rebuild is underway...everyone will be pushing for Dave Walder next season

Second season. He had half a season after the Covid mess to have a look at the squad. That season was pretty much a write off. Then he had the season where we finished 6th and got to the less European Final followed by the season just gone where we won the league and got into the quarters of the European Cup proper. Each year we've improved.

Progress, progress...cant ask for anything more.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Progress, progress...cant ask for anything more.

As the Tigers fans say, in Borthwick we trust.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Progress, progress...cant ask for anything more.

As the Tigers fans say, in Borthwick we trust.

And soon to be said by England fans

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/scott-robertson-explains-recent-sydney-meeting-with-eddie-jones/

Anything in it, or mere tosh media.

His contract is up just before the WC?

GeordieFalcon wrote:https://www.rugbypass.com/news/scott-robertson-explains-recent-sydney-meeting-with-eddie-jones/

Anything in it, or mere tosh media.

His contract is up just before the WC?

If the RFU hadn't publicly stated they wanted an English head coach he'd be the obvious choice. He has said he wants to win the world cup with two different nations (NZ being one of them) so he sounds like he'd be open to offers.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Progress, progress...cant ask for anything more.

As the Tigers fans say, in Borthwick we trust.

And soon to be said by England fans

If his selection policy with England followed what he's done at Tigers then fans and media would be frothing at the mouth before every game. SCW would love it. You'd have every ex pro condemning his choices. He has absolutely no issue dropping his best player if they don't fit with the tactics he wants to employ for the next game and he does tweak the tactics most weeks.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:https://www.rugbypass.com/news/scott-robertson-explains-recent-sydney-meeting-with-eddie-jones/

Anything in it, or mere tosh media.

His contract is up just before the WC?

If the RFU hadn't publicly stated they wanted an English head coach he'd be the obvious choice. He has said he wants to win the world cup with two different nations (NZ being one of them) so he sounds like he'd be open to offers.

Id take with a pinch of salt what they say...if Robertson was there willing to take the job...i bet they wouldnt care what nationality he was.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Progress, progress...cant ask for anything more.

As the Tigers fans say, in Borthwick we trust.

And soon to be said by England fans

If his selection policy with England followed what he's done at Tigers then fans and media would be frothing at the mouth before every game. SCW would love it. You'd have every ex pro condemning his choices. He has absolutely no issue dropping his best player if they don't fit with the tactics he wants to employ for the next game and he does tweak the tactics most weeks.

So that will be a smooth transition for us England fans from Jones then

GeordieFalcon wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:https://www.rugbypass.com/news/scott-robertson-explains-recent-sydney-meeting-with-eddie-jones/

Anything in it, or mere tosh media.

His contract is up just before the WC?

If the RFU hadn't publicly stated they wanted an English head coach he'd be the obvious choice. He has said he wants to win the world cup with two different nations (NZ being one of them) so he sounds like he'd be open to offers.

Id take with a pinch of salt what they say...if Robertson was there willing to take the job...i bet they wouldnt care what nationality he was.

They certainly shouldn't discount him but they aren't the most reliable decision makers.

Robertson has consistently the best talent in his catchment area which supplies Crusaders. And, shock, wins most of the time. Which is better than having the best talent and losing, but still doesn't show me he is the best coach. And this is in a rump league without a lot of competition, unlike a few years ago when Super Rugby was actually Super with teams from Argentina, South Africa ands so on.

Robertson would be the dream but it would take that big climb down from the RFU wanting an English coach. I can but dream.

As i said above, id take with a pinch of salt what the RFU say.

doctor_grey wrote:Robertson has consistently the best talent in his catchment area which supplies Crusaders.  And, shock, wins most of the time.  Which is better than having the best talent and losing, but still doesn't show me he is the best coach.  And this is in a rump league without a lot of competition, unlike a few years ago when Super Rugby was actually Super with teams from Argentina, South Africa ands so on.  

He's won the title every year since 2017. That includes periods with SA and Jags in. Generally the better teams in Super Rugby have tended to be the NZ ones and he beat them out again and again. He did that with some the franchise's biggest names retiring as well. I heard a stat that they hadn't conceded a rolling maul try in six years this week as well. Not sure how factually accurate but points to someone who does more than just play the normal Super Rugby "we'll score one more than you" style of attacking rugby.

A lot of that best talent has been developed by him and there's been some who've not been given AB games that have then taken the cash in Europe. He has to keep redeveloping that squad. Blues seem to have a bigger budget to play with and arguably a better squad man for man.

He's going to get an international job somewhere after the world cup because he's so high profile. Whether it'll work or not will depend on whether he can tap into the culture of wherever he goes (unless it's NZ though he seems out of favour with the NZRU politics).

Robertson is class, and tbf the Crusaders are utterly dominant with a team and tactics that are far more suited to NH and Int rugby then most superrugby sides. They scrum and maul incredibly well, defend well and kick well which is key. They're just really, really good on broken play when needed.

They've been utterly dominant in one of the best leagues globally for over half a decade and in that time have lost only a handful of games.

The RFU would be mad not to take him if they can get him.

Still not convinced.  Canterbury has been the best team in NZ, with a few exceptions, since the beginning of the Super Rugby.  So Robertson inherited one of the best Rugby gene pools and simply maintained the road built by a lot of other coaches.  There were a few years where the SA teams managed to dominate, but those Sharks and Bulls teams had generational talent.  

To convince me, someone gottta gimmee more.

The new head coach will have the fortune of most the current squad still being available for the start of their tenure even if they of course won't all make the next RWC.

Lawes will be 34 with a ton of miles on the clock so will probably phase out or retire from internationals. May at 33 and being a pace reliant winger probably wont get many caps after the RWC either. Manu may well move out of the Premiership. Marler might retire from internationals for family reasons if he doesn't fancy another RWC cycle.

Farrell will have just turned 31 so probably wont make another RWC but could certainly play in the new coaches early years in charge. Similar for Jamie George.

The squad as a whole is pretty young. Many of our best forwards should be available a long while yet.

For all of the "Jones only cares about the RWC" schtick he has capped a lot of young guys I could see being the core of the England team for a long time. In the backs particularly. Quirke, JvP, Smith, Marchant, Steward, Freeman and Arundell should be around for years. Dan Kelly was capped last summer and Max Ojomoh has been around squads too. If Radwan keeps developing his all round game he could still be very special.

doctor_grey wrote:Still not convinced.  Canterbury has been the best team in NZ, with a few exceptions, since the beginning of the Super Rugby.  So Robertson inherited one of the best Rugby gene pools and simply maintained the road built by a lot of other coaches.  There were a few years where the SA teams managed to dominate, but those Sharks and Bulls teams had generational talent.  

To convince me, someone gottta gimmee more.

Todd Blackadder made a right old mess of things. Crusaders had a 9 year gap without a trophy and had a couple of 7th place finishes before Robertson took control and they went on a winning streak. A winning streak that co-incided with two of games greats retiring (Carter/McCaw) and a host of experienced internationals retiring or heading overseas, the likes of Read, Todd, Taufua, Dagg etc. The squads Blackadder had and failed with were greater than the ones Robertson dominated with.

I agree to an extent though, there's no guarantee he can flourish outside of the environment he currently enjoys with the Crusaders. That will be a significant test.

king_carlos wrote:The new head coach will have the fortune of most the current squad still being available for the start of their tenure even if they of course won't all make the next RWC.

Lawes will be 34 with a ton of miles on the clock so will probably phase out or retire from internationals. May at 33 and being a pace reliant winger probably wont get many caps after the RWC either. Manu may well move out of the Premiership. Marler might retire from internationals for family reasons if he doesn't fancy another RWC cycle.

Farrell will have just turned 31 so probably wont make another RWC but could certainly play in the new coaches early years in charge. Similar for Jamie George.

The squad as a whole is pretty young. Many of our best forwards should be available a long while yet.

For all of the "Jones only cares about the RWC" schtick he has capped a lot of young guys I could see being the core of the England team for a long time. In the backs particularly. Quirke, JvP, Smith, Marchant, Steward, Freeman and Arundell should be around for years. Dan Kelly was capped last summer and Max Ojomoh has been around squads too. If Radwan keeps developing his all round game he could still be very special.

A capped 25 and under squad looks pretty handy for England.

1. Rodd
2. Blamire/Dolly
3. Stuart/Heyes
4. Chessum
5. Isiekwe
6. Martin/Hill
7. Curry/Willis
8. Dombrandt
9. Quirke/JVP/Randall
10. Smith (technically Umaga as well)
11. Freeman
12. Kelly
13. Marchant/Lawrence/Porter
14. Cokanasiga/Radwan
15. Steward/Arundell

I'm sure I've missed some as well. All of those guys are at an age where they could do the next two world cups, maybe three for some of them. It's a great base for the next coach to build from.

king_carlos wrote:The new head coach will have the fortune of most the current squad still being available for the start of their tenure even if they of course won't all make the next RWC.

Lawes will be 34 with a ton of miles on the clock so will probably phase out or retire from internationals. May at 33 and being a pace reliant winger probably wont get many caps after the RWC either. Manu may well move out of the Premiership. Marler might retire from internationals for family reasons if he doesn't fancy another RWC cycle.

Farrell will have just turned 31 so probably wont make another RWC but could certainly play in the new coaches early years in charge. Similar for Jamie George.

The squad as a whole is pretty young. Many of our best forwards should be available a long while yet.

For all of the "Jones only cares about the RWC" schtick he has capped a lot of young guys I could see being the core of the England team for a long time. In the backs particularly. Quirke, JvP, Smith, Marchant, Steward, Freeman and Arundell should be around for years. Dan Kelly was capped last summer and Max Ojomoh has been around squads too. If Radwan keeps developing his all round game he could still be very special.

I'd be more concerned if he wasn't trying to prioritise the WC as this England team is miles away from what it should be at present.

Even if we do win the WC next year the dross I've watched since the last WC would be a negative score overall for me.

Well 1 of the 3 probables rules themselves out as Farrell has signed a contract with Ireland until 2025.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well 1 of the 3 probables rules themselves out as Farrell has signed a contract with Ireland until 2025.

More than three probables. Baxter, Edwards, Borthwick and Robertson still remain. Still think it's a shame Ulster managed to get MacFarland to sign a long term deal, he could have been a good left field option.