England post 2022 6Ns, Aus tour and beyond

First topic message reminder :

Hate to say it and I don't wish him injured but I'm glad Ewels not available!
If you're disappointed with Malins and Daly being selected, imagine how most of us feel about Youngs being there.
In fairness, Malins and Daly been superb this season but please give Radwan and Arundell a run.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:After half time we were getting our game in place, we were looking fluid in attack but then we made mistakes and we were chasing our tail.

"We made silly mistakes but I like the way the team went about it. We didn't finish well, there was that lack of cohesion.

"It's not good enough - we realise it's not good enough."

From Jones via Beeb. A slight glimmer of hope that you need a better link between forwards and backs, better distribution from 9 and some guys with real pace and threat on the wings?

They weren't the reason we lost though. We lost because the discipline and the ability of the forwards to execute basic skills to allow us to exit our own half was woefully lacking. Doesn't matter what else we do if we can't do those basic things and cough up possession and penalties in our own half.

The attack was passable, a bit flat still. No pace out wide, Youngs picking and stepping but not on the same page as his forwards and his passing game not quick enough. Smith running down blind alleys, Farrell predictable. Manu, Steward and Cokanasiga were all pretty good though. Switch the 9s, bring May in for Nowell and give the 10 and 12 a kick up the backside. Unless we sort the forwards out though it's a waste of time.

Let's not beat around the bush more. Youngs is not good enough to play for England. The vast difference the second van Poortvliet came on was startling. If he or Quirke had started with the other coming on Wed have won.

I'd have very much preferred a JVP/Quirke duo with Youngs in camp for mentoring. Particularly for these first two games. Quirke picked up another injury playing for Sale and is unlikely to be back for a while so opportunity missed.

Youngs didn't play well but I though the 9/10/12 combination were all around the bang average performance level. We do need to move on, in a close game it might have made a difference but when the forwards make that many mistakes and most of them really basic errors you're going to lose.

It's also easier to look better off the bench at 9. How often have we seen the replacement 9 look like the much bigger attacking threat until they earn the starting jersey and then look average. I mean it's the story of Danny Care's England career. I doubt the Puma forwards make the same error for JVP to pounce through when fresh. I'd definitely start JVP next week though, he was good in Australia so get as much experience as we can into him now so that come the world cup he's the go to option for the big games.

TJ wrote:Steward was outpaced for the Argentina breakaway try.  thats not good enough.  A FB needs pace

He got out paced by a guy that plays 10 for Argentina but wing for Gloucester. The guy has some serious pace and Steward did catch him but a bit to late.

I liked how we used Steward in attack. The out of the back option behind Manu, he connected well with his wingers and nice to see him start to bring an offloading game to the table.

That's a huge blow if Quirke is injured. Need to add Mitchell in that case. Or Care. Or anyone. We cant go on thinking its normal for a scrum half to throw so many balls into touch and on the floor.

Manu was pretty anonymous...bar one debatable hit but the whole attack is awful and slow.

Agree youngs must go now. Id also dump Manu, Cokasaniga, Mako Vunipola,

Put Itoje back at lock and put Willis at 6...

Coles is worth another look..either starting or from the bench...

If Japan beat England, is it the end for Jones?

Nowell? What does he bring.
Joe C worth keeping.as is Manu
Coles I thought was fine
Young's and Mako have to go.
Itoje and Coles locks.
To be honest Curry didn't do a lot.

However,starting XV were good enough or should have been
But weren't.

Duty281 wrote:If Japan beat England, is it the end for Jones?

Despite the fact Japan are a very good side...I would say yes...and a Japan win is very possible from today's showing by England

Recwatcher16 wrote:England looked very rusty against a bang average Argentine side who didn't have to earn but took every soft technical penalty given to them and that was the game. Ref was pretty pedantic and England didn't get many of the 50/50 calls - at times it felt like they were the away side. I really don't like Sunday games.

There were a few flashes of pace and power from both forwards and backs, but not enough. They should be better next week and will need to be.

Argentina are not bang average. They are a good side worth being in the top 6 in the world. I think that win might put them in 6th in the rankings if not they will be there soon I am sure. Remember who they have beaten in the last couple of years. NZ, SA, Aus, Scotland. thats not a bang average side.

mountain man wrote:Nowell? What does he bring.
Joe C worth keeping.as is Manu
Coles I thought was fine
Young's and Mako have to go.
Itoje and Coles locks.
To be honest Curry didn't do a lot.
 
However,starting XV were good enough or should have been
But weren't.

Why? Thought Manu was utterly anonymous and Coka for all is a big guy lacks any kind of actual dynamic Explosive power.

Geordie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:If Japan beat England, is it the end for Jones?

Despite the fact Japan are a very good side...I would say yes...and a Japan win is very possible from today's showing by England

Japan have pace to spare and are well organised. It will be power against pace

I say keep Joe C and Manu because in right team with right tactics they can be game changers.
Who if not at centre? Wings we need speed but Radwan out of favour, Arundel injured and for me May lost it.

When I listen to Jones in post match I always think of poker players making comments at during a hand. Don’t believe a word and most of their attacks towards the opponent are usually more truer reflection on what they think of their own play.

No 7&1/2 wrote:That's a huge blow if Quirke is injured. Need to add Mitchell in that case. Or Care. Or anyone. We cant go on thinking its normal for a scrum half to  throw so many balls into touch and on the floor.

Care's ship has definitely sailed, we want to improve on Youngs and Care in the summer wasn't that. Mitchell would be the logical bench impact if Quirke is unavailable as some Sale fans seem to think.

There's got to be questions for Gleeson as well. I'm not sure what he does to earn a salary but it's not coaching the attack.

Mind you on that basis Cockers might get some uncomfortable questions around why the forwards can't sort themselves out for dealing with a sodding restart.

Although I’m longing for Eddie’s reign to be over, the truth is a new coach would not hugely improve England in the short term. We just have too many average players, or players who are past their best – reminds me a little of 2004 on. The damage Eddie has done is not developing replacements fast enough (e.g. SH). That, and pretending he’s cracked current rugby game plans.

Today’s back 3 were just embarrassingly slow, and 2 of them are decent but no more. Smith is developing a little slowly. Manu is living off past glories. Slade OKish - just. Our best BR is good, but today’s looked like they were thrown together, with Itoje out of position and Billy struggling to hold the ball. SR is nothing like what we had a few years back. FR blow hot and cold, and Mako doesn’t like scrum time.

RWC23 may well be a disappointment, and for a couple of years beyond we could struggle a bit. I’m already looking forward to RWC27 – we’ll definitely win that?!

Barney McGrew did it wrote:

Today’s back 3 were just embarrassingly slow, and 2 of them are decent but no more.

They clearly aren't. They just aren't rapid. England were used to a very quick back three combination of May, Watson and Daly. The problem there was that they weren't great under the high ball. The current incumbents are much more solid defensively and under the high ball, more physical as well. It's just not very balanced. Replace Nowell with a flyer and we're probably I'm business for that department.

Steward is easily our best fullback and by some distance. Freeman in for Nowell would work nicely. May or Murley also.

There is really a lot to unwrap after how England played across all 2022.  Poor decisions regarding selection, no bedding in of younger players (which should have started in 2021, not late in 2022, another poor decision, rationalising failures by blaming (mostly) everyone but Jones himself, confused game plans which the players don't seem to grasp after a full year or so, and more.  I think Barney summed up some of this succinctly:

Barney McGrew did it wrote: We just have too many average players, or players who are past their best – reminds me a little of 2004 on. The damage Eddie has done is not developing replacements fast enough (e.g. SH). That, and pretending he’s cracked current rugby game plans.

I am not sure other teams even care abut England's game plan - just play their game and they will be in it at the end.  Really starting to have a 2004-2006 feeling about it.  And Jones looks like someone collecting a paycheck.

So many of the errors we have seen from England this year, encapsulated by this recent loss - to an admittedly good team on the rise and who could be in the mix for the RWC title.  Really need to get through the rest of the 2022 to properly evaluate Jones and the team's performance.  

That said, I am happy for Los Pumas.  Really hope they are there at the end.

I do not understand this commitment to keep Farrell at 12. He is a solid 10 and either plays there or is benched if Smith is to start at 10. The combination just does not work and if i may be honest, having Farrell at 12 is hurting Smith's natural creativity.
Itoje should not play 6, why was he there?
The whole midfield axis just looks and feels wrong.

Farrells a great 12. The next guy most would want is kelly and he's injured. Then there's Ojomoh and Anyanwu who are coming too. Lawrence as well. But Jones wants a playmaker there so it's really him or Slade. Given Farrell has proven himself over a good few years now just think that's an issue.

The lock at flanker thing I don't like. It's popular among most teams though. Detracts from the pack balance for me.

Having slept on it I really don't get why we went with a 6 2 bench. Am I right in think that neither Singleton nor Ribbans came on? Then we had 5 minutes of Willis. I'd say that possession definitely went our way so there may have been a thought of don't change things for changes sake, but then why take genge then Sinckler off who were both having very good games?

Jones comments seem to suggest that he was happy for the lost part and brings up the line breaks again. Surely he has to be thinking support didn't read those breaks well enough. And again to get rid of Youngs for anyone else English qualified in the prem.

I just do not see Farrell as a 12 myself, well not with Smith at 10 anyways. They just do not compliment each other.

eirebilly_01 wrote:I just do not see Farrell as a 12 myself, well not with Smith at 10 anyways. They just do not compliment each other.

Not sure they've had that many games together like.

Realistically how is Eddies position going to be if we go 1/4 or even 0/4 this series....

Geordie wrote:Realistically how is Eddies position going to be if we go 1/4 or even 0/4 this series....

Under severe pressure. If we lose to Japan I would suspect that the RFU would get a little concerned to say the least. I think we need some good performances more than anything. He's spun yesterday as positives and it's coming off a little to me like that Borthwick Italy interview.

JvP Smith Manu Marchant or

JvP Farrell Manu Marchant with Smith bench or

JvP Smith Manu Lawrence

Pretty obvious Smith/Farrell isn't working.

Currry was average at best, Itoje needs to be in 2nd row. Mako and Youngs need to go away for ever. Billy needs to work on holding onto ball, yes it was very wet but Arg managed it.

Is Jones going to abandon his pretence that it's all about the WC though mm? This was the practice for the groups and knock outs. If that's the case and he sees it through he surely has to play it as such and not bring in newbies. That means no Lawrence or Marchant.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Geordie wrote:Realistically how is Eddies position going to be if we go 1/4 or even 0/4 this series....

Under severe pressure. If we lose to Japan I would suspect that the RFU would get a little concerned to say the least. I think we need some good performances more than anything. He's spun yesterday as positives and it's coming off a little to me like that Borthwick Italy interview.

Yeah there havent been many good actual performances in quite a long time.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Is Jones going to abandon his pretence that it's all about the WC though mm? This was the practice for the groups and knock outs. If that's the case and he sees it through he surely has to play it as such and not bring in newbies. That means no Lawrence or Marchant.

Well if that was the WC squad then England are doomed! Jones seems to cut off nose to spite face regards player selection.

I just don't see Eddie going anywhere before the world cup, no matter what the results are. It is incredibly frustrating because I think we have got the raw materials to compete with the best in the world, but we just won't be in a position to do it if this carries on.

Lifted this from Walesonline. Another demand basically that the RFU give Woodward a job as overseer. Do have to chuckle that Jones plays people out of position as it's exactly what Woodward did, and I still remember his call that England play Jonny May at 13!

"England were too slow. Eddie Jones is picking and coaching a team that just can’t play fast enough and there is no-one at the RFU who is remotely qualified to hold him to account. Argentina brought the intensity and credit to them on a historic victory.

"The players aren’t the problem. England’s playing pool is as good as anyone in the world. I could nit-pick about individuals but the fault here lies with the way they are coached and selected.

"Too many players are being picked out of position. Maro Itoje is not a flanker and Owen Farrell is not a centre. Those guys are two of the best players in the world but England aren’t maximising their potential.

"I was Eddie’s biggest fan when he first came in but now it feels like he’s just trying to prove people wrong. He’s taking on the media, he’s taking on ex-players and it’s caught up with him. Someone needs to sit down with him and say, ‘What was that all about? This is just not acceptable’. Eddie needs to start listening. It’s a huge year for English rugby. He needs to look in the mirror and eat a big slice of humble pie. It’s time to admit that he’s got a lot things badly wrong."

Woodward is correct in what hes saying...but a complete hypocrite as he did do the very same and im bored of hearing from him quite frankly.

i dont mind players out of position IF they enhance the side or at the very least DONT detract from the side.

However we know Itoje is a lock forward....DONT play him at 6. Its criminal when you have Jack Willis crying out for actual gametime!

Its these baffling decisions around selection etc that really make me question Eddie Jones position as England Head Coach.

Thought JVP was good for England and should probably start. Farrell not so good... Agree on Tuilagi too, suprised his throat grab wasn't looked at, should have been a penalty to Argentina. The whole clapping and in your face at every penalty is well passed it's sell-by date now, I know Arg also did it at times and I was a bit surprised the ref warned them on that but not England. Overall a solid performance from Argentina, a simple game plan and they stuck to it. I think they could hammer Wales on current form.

This clapping every scrum pen etc is annoying but lots of teams do it.
ireland were worse on Saturday.

Team for Japan...inexperienced players in ...against a well drilled and flying japan side...but we need to give them some gametime.

1 Genge
2 Mcguigan
3 Sinkler
4 Coles
5 Hill
6 Willis
7 Curry
8 Billy

9 JVP
10 Smith
11 Cokasaniga
12 Farrell
13 Slade
14 Nowell
15 Steward

Bench
Manu
Tizard
Itoje
etc
etc

What? Smith Farrell not working. Nowell too slow, Slade flatters to deceive. Curry was absent most of game.

Sorry but can't see that working against fast paced Japan or anyone given how dire Eng were yesterday.

I don't think my ideal 23 is changing all too much. Flankers on the flank, Tizard and Itoje in at 4 and 5. Radwan and H-Cs on the wings. Oh and don't think I've mentioned, absolutely anyone else at 9 including Bergamasco if he has an English granny.

I'd have Earl, Dombrant Willis in back row. Pace, power and skill. Never happen but we can dream.
Pick genuine pace on wing, not May until proved form and speed is as before. Smith or Farrell 10 not 10 12.
I've alway said keep Smith at 10 but definitely case now for Farrell 10 with Smith bench to come on after 50-60 mins.

Ferk knows but something HAS to change!!

But you cant change the squad though ....or can you?

i thought this is the squad you have to stick with until the AI's are over?

Yeah you can change the squad as much as you want. My questioning of that is if Jones is using these games as a 'proper' WC comp he wouldn't be allowed.

No 7&1/2 wrote: Oh and don't think I've mentioned, absolutely anyone else at 9 including Bergamasco if he has an English granny.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yeah you can change the squad as much as you want. My questioning of that is if Jones is using these games as a 'proper' WC comp he wouldn't be allowed.

Well even at my age you live and learn...i honestly though they were stuck with that squad for the duration of this series.

In that case, yes i would make a few changes but your right Eddie wont as he wants it to match the WC run...

No 7&1/2 wrote:

eirebilly_01 wrote:I just do not see Farrell as a 12 myself, well not with Smith at 10 anyways. They just do not compliment each other.

Not sure they've had that many games together like.

Four games together. Not really sure what's happening at 10. Smith looked poor towards the end of the 6N, Vs the Baabaas and then with Farrell. Farrell in an England shirt has generally meant stodgy one paced attack, though he's offered more with Sarries recently.

I think we'll give it until the end of the AIs but depending on results might hit the recall Ford option for the 6N. Ford got some stick for uninventive England backline play but maybe we're starting to realise he did a really good job with what little he had.

How do you feel Smith is looking poor though Sam? I know you're a big fan of Ford but can't see anything in his game which is at Smith's level, and he's injured.

Just to add...if Dombrandt is now fit and firing id have him back in the squad and starting for the Japan game...we need a more "skilled" 8 who can break defenses in more than just battering ram mode.

I think Smith is a great player and he should be given the starting 10. Having Farrell outside him at 12 does not work. Farrell still pushes in and Smith is maybe not as dominant as he should be towards Farrell.
For me, both Farrell and Smith are excellent 10's and that is the position they play. One starts one on the bench for me.
With the pedestrian ball coming to Smith yesterday, i am not sure any 10 in the world would have looked any good.

Hello England folk.
Max Malins and Ben Earl. Are they in the wider squad?

Geordie wrote:Just to add...if Dombrandt is now fit and firing id have him back in the squad and starting for the Japan game...we need a more "skilled" 8 who can break defenses in more than just battering ram mode.

Yep as I said earlier my backrow be Willis Dombrandt and Earl. Never happen though.

No 7&1/2 wrote:How do you feel Smith is looking poor though Sam? I know you're a big fan of Ford but can't see anything in his game which is at Smith's level, and he's injured.

Smith hasn't looked good in an England shirt since the game Vs Italy. The backline doesn't really move and he's been tried with various 9s including his club partner and England under 20s combination with Randall. He's had his club mate Marchant in there with him, he's had bruisers. There's been attacking options but it's all looked very flat. Yesterday he ran down blind alleys and despite a glut of possession didn't do much with it.

As I said he'll get the rest of this series but needs to show something extra or Eddie will maybe consider changes before the 6N. Which starts two months after Ford is due to return to action.

Skill set wise Smith has the better running game and is a better tackler. Ford is miles ahead as a midfield general, tactically far superior. Passing and kicking capabilities they are on a par. Ford is happy to play five or more phases to engineer his result slowly probing the opposition defence, Smith prefers a quick set up and then go straight for the jugular, very explosive. Very different styles and maybe why Ford has previously managed to get good performances out of similar England teams, they lack the explosive attacking nature (looking at the pedestrian performances in recent times) which might be the experience England need when under increasing fire from the media.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:How do you feel Smith is looking poor though Sam? I know you're a big fan of Ford but can't see anything in his game which is at Smith's level, and he's injured.

Smith hasn't looked good in an England shirt since the game Vs Italy. The backline doesn't really move and he's been tried with various 9s including his club partner and England under 20s combination with Randall. He's had his club mate Marchant in there with him, he's had bruisers. There's been attacking options but it's all looked very flat. Yesterday he ran down blind alleys and despite a glut of possession didn't do much with it.

As I said he'll get the rest of this series but needs to show something extra or Eddie will maybe consider changes before the 6N. Which starts two months after Ford is due to return to action.

Skill set wise Smith has the better running game and is a better tackler. Ford is miles ahead as a midfield general, tactically far superior. Passing and kicking capabilities they are on a par. Ford is happy to play five or more phases to engineer his result slowly probing the opposition defence, Smith prefers a quick set up and then go straight for the jugular, very explosive. Very different styles and maybe why Ford has previously managed to get good performances out of similar England teams, they lack the explosive attacking nature (looking at the pedestrian performances in recent times) which might be the experience England need when under increasing fire from the media.

That's ignoring a good run by Ford which it didn't work for him though. He's obviously had Farrell next to him (Ford that is) pulling the strings so perhaps a jump to suggest he's the major tactician there. I wonder if we'd had the support runners from that nice break he made in the 2nd half or a better pass from the resulting breakdown that you'd see it differently. Ford will be I'm and around the squad should he recover from his injury and get back to form I'm sure. I'd personally go the other way if I was Jones to mitigate building pressure and that's not to hang onto the old guns but trust in some talented players to go out there and entertain.

eirebilly_01 wrote:I think Smith is a great player and he should be given the starting 10. Having Farrell outside him at 12 does not work. Farrell still pushes in and Smith is maybe not as dominant as he should be towards Farrell.
For me, both Farrell and Smith are excellent 10's and that is the position they play. One starts one on the bench for me.
With the pedestrian ball coming to Smith yesterday, i am not sure any 10 in the world would have looked any good.

Personally dont think he (Smith) is great at all or at the very least he isn't a great 10. Could be a coaching issue but England's backs have been really really poor almost every game Smith has started and it is the primary responsibility of the 10 to launch attacks and link up with the guys outside him. Everything is so unbelievably telegraphed. On Sunday Smith also kicked quite a of England's possession away. Why? Again could be a coaching issue but Smith at 10 has not worked at all.

If I was an England fan I would want Ford or Farrell at 10. I wonder is Jones's plan A is having Farrell or Ford at 10 and for the last two years they have been trying to work on plan B with Smith?

Smith needs runners outside who will do more than truck it up or kick it away. Playing with Farrell outside him does not work