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.

Geordie wrote:Seibold...the failed RL coach - one o the worst records in RL......so lets sign him up for England coach!!!

Brisbane Broncos was a disaster but before that at South Sydney he won coach of the year. He can't have that bad a reputation to have been offered the head coach job at Manly Sea Eagles.

Eddie does have previous for hiring inexperienced coaches with Steve Borthwick for instance a fresh retiree as a player. Scott Wisemantel was an experienced assistant coach but had never had a top job. John Mitchell was a well known coach with a good record but his stint before joining England was a fairly poor season with the Bulls in SA.

It's rare to get a top level and successful head coach come in and work as an assistant. It's also worth noting that PRL clubs don't play nice with the RFU when it comes to handing over coaches. Eddie wanted Sam Vesty as his attack coach but Saints refused (repeatedly if you believe the rumours). Gleeson was only released with Mitchell allowed early release to go the other way.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's playing to the tactics, mixing first receiver with Farrell to buy more time and space. Kicking pretty well for wingers and full back to compete. Mixing kicks deep. Keeping relatively tight through the middle as you'd expect with conditions and the team picked. Had a really good break that was unsupported but still managed to recycle the ball. I picked out 2 errors I thought he had. I don't like the tactics at all, boring as hell but I don't think his implementation of them is bad, nor is Farrells for that matter. So same question Sarge, what's he actually doing wrong in terms of what he's being asked to do? 90% of what I'm reading with regards to Smith being dropped or criticisms of him is around tactics of the team not bad execution of those tactics.

And as I was suggesting...these aren't Smith's strong points. Smith unlocks defences, plays off the cuff....brings runners into the game.....he's not doing any of this for England.

What's the point picking a mercurial attacking talent, one of the best in the world.....and have him playing like this?

I have so many issues with how we're playing right now, we're a shambles.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's playing to the tactics, mixing first receiver with Farrell to buy more time and space. Kicking pretty well for wingers and full back to compete. Mixing kicks deep. Keeping relatively tight through the middle as you'd expect with conditions and the team picked. Had a really good break that was unsupported but still managed to recycle the ball. I picked out 2 errors I thought he had. I don't like the tactics at all, boring as hell but I don't think his implementation of them is bad, nor is Farrells for that matter. So same question Sarge, what's he actually doing wrong in terms of what he's being asked to do? 90% of what I'm reading with regards to Smith being dropped or criticisms of him is around tactics of the team not bad execution of those tactics.

And as I was suggesting...these aren't Smith's strong points. Smith unlocks defences, plays off the cuff....brings runners into the game.....he's not doing any of this for England.

What's the point picking a mercurial attacking talent, one of the best in the world.....and have him playing like this?

I have so many issues with how we're playing right now, we're a shambles.

I think I get your point Sarge, the tactics play well within his skillset? Which I'd agree with, but whereas your point of view is that as we're not seeing that he's playing badly I'm trying to say he's playing within himself but I'm not sure anyone else would execute them any better. I too have a shed load of issues with how we're playing and have done for a good while.

Jones has history of going through coaches like they're going out of fashion. There's definitely an issue with him there.

As for Smith he's just not really clicked for Eng, he was superb final Test against Aus in summer but that was a rarity. Something not working and him and Farrell don't or haven't so far. Whether it's orders from Jones hard to say but something has to change.
As I said earlier I've always been adamant Smith should stay 10 but now I'm thinking Farrell 10 and Smith bench for impact. Jones WILL pick Farrell so having Smith 10 Farrell 12 not answer.

Lol. Jones says loss to Argentina was due to concentrating on RWC! That's a pee poor excuse and doesn't ring true and he's said all along for last 2 years or more it's RWC 2023 is focus.

I've totally lost faith in Jones, his selections, his tactics and his excuses. I defended him in past but lost it now. Roll on RWC and fresh start.

Just read that mm on the beeb. I just really see it as wrong, and that surely comes from the RFU saying they want to win the WC. I go back to sod that I'd rather be amazing in 7 out 8 sets of games and bomb out of the WC in the group stages every time. Sport is for entertainment, I don't want international rugby to all be about 1 thing every 4 years.

'England's defeat by Argentina was partly caused by preparation being too focussed on next year's Rugby World Cup, coach Eddie Jones has admitted.

"We have been looking at a number of long-term strategies, that we are trying to employ to get set for the World Cup and maybe our focus wasn't tight enough on Argentina," said Jones.

"That is entirely my fault."

The Pumas' 30-29 win at Twickenham was only their second time they have beaten England away from home.

George included in England's 36-man training squad after injury
Argentina shock England with rearguard win
Jones strikes upbeat tone despite puzzling defeat
Rugby Union Daily podcast: Argentina stun England
The teams will meet again in September in their opening match of the Rugby World Cup.

Jones insisted that England need to develop their game and diversify tactics if they want to go one better than their final defeat by South Africa in 2019.

"There are a cluster of teams at the top of world rugby. We want to break that cluster and to do that we have to have a number of different ways to play the game," he added.

"This next 11 months is to get enough equipment in our armoury to play any way.

"England rugby is traditionally about power rugby, winning the set piece, smashing down the gainline, but we have to learn from the 2019 Rugby World Cup.

"In the final we came up against a side that had more power than us and we were unable to beat them at that game.

"We have continually had at the back of our head about developing a different strategy of play, which involves more subtlety and some more ball movement to disrupt the defence."

This weekend was only the fifth time that Marcus Smith and Owen Farrell have lined up together in a Test backline.

The combination has come in for criticism with former England international Will Greenwood telling the Daily Telegraph that Jones should pick one or the other, rather than both.

But Jones said that Smith and Farrell's partnership was the best long-term look for England' attack.

"We have another 12 games to the World Cup, if they are able to play 16 games together they will have a good understanding and start to read each other a bit more," he said.

"The opportunities we missed were small cohesion problems that come from playing together."

Seibold exit confirmed as Hodgson brought in to oversee defence

He says Smith 10 Farrell 12 is way to go.

Exactly what most of us think ISN'T the way to go. He's a better coach than all of us here but sometimes I wonder.

The attitude of using test matches to prepare for the world cup really boils my pi$$.  Every game England plays is important to me.  It doesn't even make any sense either, England have looked tactically clueless for ages, it's not like this is a blip.  We can't say 'That didn't work, so let's go back to plan A' because there doesn't seem to be one!

I think its one of those O2 inside videos they made with Marcus. And something he said really surprised me. He was talking about the backs practicing and coming up with plays - and then all sitting round and having a video call with Farrel (as he wasnt in that camp) and asking for his approval and insights.

Now, my perception of that is a lack of trust for the players in camp that they felt the need (or were told) to have video calls with Farrell to run any new moves past him.
Now I might have miss understood - but seems a bit like a toxic environment and is never going to change while certain individuals are there.

On a different note - Englands result is by no means down to just the 10-12 combo.
Billy V failed to deliver (after talking up consistency pre game).
Youngs was slow and gave variable service to the 10.
Itoje was very quiet (although out of position), same for Curry (first off game for him since his trial at no.8)
Simmonds didnt make much of an impact
Mako V made more of a negative impact

After the 2019 World Cup, you could look at the England squad, and think a good number were young enough to carry over to the next tournament, and expect the players to maintain, or even improve their standards. I sometimes find myself thinking, "Why don't we revert to what we were doing? The game hasn't moved on that much, so surely we can fall back on what we know".

Then I look back at that 31 man list:

Forwards: Dan Cole (Leicester), Luke Cowan-Dickie (Exeter), Tom Curry (Sale), Ellis Genge (Leicester), Jamie George (Saracens), Maro Itoje (Saracens), George Kruis (Saracens), Joe Launchbury (Wasps), Courtney Lawes (Northampton), Lewis Ludlam (Northampton), Joe Marler (Harlequins), Kyle Sinckler (Harlequins), Jack Singleton (Saracens), Sam Underhill (Bath), Billy Vunipola (Saracens), Mako Vunipola (Saracens), Mark Wilson (Newcastle/Sale).

Backs: Joe Cokanasiga (Bath), Elliot Daly (Saracens), Owen Farrell (Saracens), George Ford (Leicester Tigers), Piers Francis (Northampton), Willi Heinz (Gloucester), Jonathan Joseph (Bath), Jonny May (Leicester), Ruaridh McConnochie (Bath), Jack Nowell (Exeter), Henry Slade (Exeter), Manu Tuilagi (Leicester), Anthony Watson (Bath), Ben Youngs (Leicester).

It is striking how few of the players above are playing better than they did in 2019. Ellis Genge is the only one who seems to have kicked on. Arguably, Dan Cole and Joe Marler are also in better form, though both would have been top of the list of players to be overlooked for 2023, and currently are. Daly is perhaps also in superior shape too right now, though not in the current squad.

The back row is the biggest disappointment. Curry and Underhill seemed to have the makings of regular starting pair. Underhill has suffered injuries, while Curry hasn't really imposed himself on a match for a while. He had an underwhelming Lions tour.

Of the four locks, only Itoje is officially still a squad second row, notwthstanding his selection at six at the weekend. His standards haven't slipped, but he shows up best when England are firing on all cylinders.

Are George and LCD better than before? Probably not. George fought his way back into the squad, while LCD is best known recently for injuries and giving away penalties.

As far as the backs go, you could argue George Ford has shown better form the 2019. Few of the others, whether through injury or just being off the pace.

Hard to know whether the players themselves have lost a step, or if the challenge of a new strategic approach has unsettled them. It does mean that new players such as Hill, Smith and Steward have not really been able to slot into a well-oiled machine, which is why is hard for the average supporter to understand what England are up to right now

Interesting and good post, Rugby Fan.

Lock has been my biggest worry for a long time now. Most are probably sick of hearing me say it! After Itoje the drop off is massive. Regardless of the game plan in attack this group of players need a strong set-piece to thrive. Without a strong second row that is very hard to have with any consistency.

Back three has been a shadow of what it was in attack since May and Watson suffered their various injuries.

I would be very happy to see a return for Marler and Cole on recent form.

One place I'd disagree is hooker. I think George has maintained his standards and LCD got better since 2019. He has arguably slipped from his peak around a year ago but LCD was starting Lions hooker for a reason. Even with that slight slip I think he's a better player than in 2019.

I think Smith is going through the teething issues with how flat he plays that many attack minded FHs that thrive in club rugby do when transitioning into the international game. If you play too flat against strong defences they shut you down so easily. Strong international 10s will vary the depth they play at continually and subtly. I don't feel Smith is doing that at the moment.

It comes back to defence being a weak link aspect of the game. Your back row can have McCaw, Read and Kaino in their prime but if your weakest two defenders are strong Championship/weak Premiership level players it won't be a strong defence. At Premiership level (in most games not all to be fair) those weak links means FHs can play very flat with success. At international level defences are a completely different story. Playing Ireland those 'weak links' might be Andrew Porter and Tadhg Furlong, who are incredible rugby players and very good defenders. Line speed and how quickly defences reorganise for each phase makes attacking in top end internationals practically a different sport compared to some Premiership games.

king_carlos wrote:

Lock has been my biggest worry for a long time now. Most are probably sick of hearing me say it! After Itoje the drop off is massive. Regardless of the game plan in attack this group of players need a strong set-piece to thrive. Without a strong second row that is very hard to have with any consistency.

Well hopefully theres a few on the horizon now that might reduce those worries....

Even immediately Id start Tizzard with Itoje v Japan. Lets have a look how they go...and if or how badly we'd be exposed in the lineout...depending on the back row set up.

4 Tizzard
5 Itoje
6 Willis / Coles (If he wants a real lineout option)
7 Curry
8 Billy

Id drop Hill. I rate him highly at club level and we've seen glimpses at this level of that but way too inconsistent. I personally think Tizzard has a much higher ceiling for the role he plays - so long as he can really work on his lineout prowess also.

So if things go a little more pear shaped this Saturday we have a follow up of Marler, Mercer, Marchant and Robertson to show us what we're missing on Sunday.

Cumbrian wrote:The attitude of using test matches to prepare for the world cup really boils my pi$$.  Every game England plays is important to me.  It doesn't even make any sense either, England have looked tactically clueless for ages, it's not like this is a blip.  We can't say 'That didn't work, so let's go back to plan A' because there doesn't seem to be one!

I dont get why England fans and the RFU put up with it. You pay £130 to see your team lose to Argentina in a poor enough match and Jones post match says yet again “were building for the world cup mate”.

I doubt very much he is holding anything back at all. Id be annoyed. Games matter.

Collapse2005 wrote:I dont get why England fans and the RFU put up with it. You pay £130 to see your team lose to Argentina in a poor enough match and Jones post match says yet again “were building for the world cup mate”.

I doubt very much he is holding anything back at all. I'd be annoyed. Games matter.

I agree with you. The problem is not exclusively Jones, it goes back to the basis on which he was employed. England went for Jones after the trauma of a failed home World Cup. The message the RFU took from that experience is that it didn't matter what you did between World Cups, if you ended up flopping at the key moment.

Jones had a good record at World Cups, so was under no illusions he was employed to deliver at that tournament. There was talk of how he was supposed to develop English coaches to succeed him, though that was largely dropped, with huge turnover at the top of the RFU. As it happened, Jones initially turned England into a winning machine, which is something he is known to be able to do at the start of his coaching tenure. Then he hit a wall, but managed to marshall resources to deliver a World Cup final appearance.

After that, Jones was supposed to have a run-off period before handing over to the next guy. However, the RFU was seduced by the 2019 success, and decided Jones was worth another shot for 2023. At no stage did anyone in the RFU set any target for Jones beyond the World Cup. No-one set a Six Nations target, or, more importantly, a contract-breaking clause.  

To take an old music industry comparison, bands used to have to churn out one or two albums a year, which compares with a rugby coach needing to deliver over Autumn and the Six Nations. What the RFU did with Eddie Jones after the 2019 World Cup, was to grant him four years in the studio, uninterrupted, to deliver his magnum opus.

I'm not sure that freedom has helped Jones, which he has slightly acknowledged after the Argentina match by saying his team didn't have their eye on the ball. It has also led to misalignment between Jones and his coaches. They have no job security with team failure, while he does. Maybe all that studio time will end in Sgt Pepper, but we might be getting a Stone Roses Second Coming.

It would be fantastic if England somehow win the World Cup in 2023 but, whether we do or not, I never want to see a coach given a contract which so incentivizes a World Cup win. The overall development of English rugby should be important. Someone like Lancaster never had that as his official responsibility, but it was always his passion. Jones has no natural interest in developing the English game, and no-one at the RFU made it his responsibility.

Although not the entire problem, I think the age-old centre partnership issue is a good reflection of where the England team currently are. OF, arguably a No 10, is a decent enough centre. Manu once was a world class centre but injuries (oh so many injuries) and time have taken their toll – he’s still OK. Slade has always been OK (ish). Marchant & Lawrence deemed not good enough (jeez that’s a kick in the nuts for them given the competition). Currently these 3 are fine if you want to get within a point of the Argies at HQ, or finish 3rd in the 6N. A RWC in France – yeah right. And when you combine this centre trio with a sluggardly and somewhat past it back 3, a thrown together and under-performing BR, a SH soon to be collecting his state pension, and a green SR, I think we did pretty well to stay within a point. No wonder Marcus is struggling to even be on par with the better Ford appearances.

Eddie is a man obsessed with the RWC and for the last 3 years this has appeared to muddle his thinking as he's got a little more desperate, a bit like poor old Lancaster pre-RWC2015. If a 6N 5th and 3rd , and possibly 3/4 losses at Twickers are part of a fiendish plan to storm the RWC2023 then Eddie is a genius (spoiler alert: he isn’t).

So we have the triple whammy of a pretty good 1st XV with a significant drop off after, too high expectations with the current larger squad, and a coach who's lost his way. I’m expecting little return from the forthcoming RWC, but am looking forward to post-2023, post-Eddie, and post a decent number of the current team retiring.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So if things go a little more pear shaped this Saturday we have a follow up of Marler, Mercer, Marchant and Robertson to show us what we're missing on Sunday.

Ronan O'Gara as well, he's done his apprenticeships and come out of it and very good head coach. Neither he nor Robertson seem likely to get the gig though, they aren't English enough or some other rubbish.

I'm still expecting Mercer to be back in for the World Cup.

Jesus h christ youngs is still being picked. I'm starting to hope he picks up a slight thigh strain to keep him away.

Yup, he's still there 7 1/2, passing to his new-found friends, Floor and Touch. Plus Mako will doubtless be kissing the field again at scrum time. FFS.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Jesus h christ youngs is still being picked. I'm starting to hope he picks up a slight thigh strain to keep him away.

Yeah because he was going to be dropped for one pass to touch for Mitchell who's been in several squads now and is never selected. If Youngs was going to be dropped Quirke needed to be fit. Hopefully JVP is starting though.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Jesus h christ youngs is still being picked. I'm starting to hope he picks up a slight thigh strain to keep him away.

Yeah because he was going to be dropped for one pass to touch for Mitchell who's been in several squads now and is never selected. If Youngs was going to be dropped Quirke needed to be fit. Hopefully JVP is starting though.

True. I've lost faith he'll ever be dropped. He's a good lad to have in the squad etc.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:I dont get why England fans and the RFU put up with it. You pay £130 to see your team lose to Argentina in a poor enough match and Jones post match says yet again “were building for the world cup mate”.

I doubt very much he is holding anything back at all. I'd be annoyed. Games matter.

I agree with you. The problem is not exclusively Jones, it goes back to the basis on which he was employed. England went for Jones after the trauma of a failed home World Cup. The message the RFU took from that experience is that it didn't matter what you did between World Cups, if you ended up flopping at the key moment.

Jones had a good record at World Cups, so was under no illusions he was employed to deliver at that tournament. There was talk of how he was supposed to develop English coaches to succeed him, though that was largely dropped, with huge turnover at the top of the RFU. As it happened, Jones initially turned England into a winning machine, which is something he is known to be able to do at the start of his coaching tenure. Then he hit a wall, but managed to marshall resources to deliver a World Cup final appearance.

After that, Jones was supposed to have a run-off period before handing over to the next guy. However, the RFU was seduced by the 2019 success, and decided Jones was worth another shot for 2023. At no stage did anyone in the RFU set any target for Jones beyond the World Cup. No-one set a Six Nations target, or, more importantly, a contract-breaking clause.  

To take an old music industry comparison, bands used to have to churn out one or two albums a year, which compares with a rugby coach needing to deliver over Autumn and the Six Nations. What the RFU did with Eddie Jones after the 2019 World Cup, was to grant him four years in the studio, uninterrupted, to deliver his magnum opus.

I'm not sure that freedom has helped Jones, which he has slightly acknowledged after the Argentina match by saying his team didn't have their eye on the ball. It has also led to misalignment between Jones and his coaches. They have no job security with team failure, while he does. Maybe all that studio time will end in Sgt Pepper, but we might be getting a Stone Roses Second Coming.

It would be fantastic if England somehow win the World Cup in 2023 but, whether we do or not, I never want to see a coach given a contract which so incentivizes a World Cup win. The overall development of English rugby should be important. Someone like Lancaster never had that as his official responsibility, but it was always his passion. Jones has no natural interest in developing the English game, and no-one at the RFU made it his responsibility.

Wow

Well said Rugby Fan. You have put into words what frustrates us all!

To be fair to Smith, it was inevitable that the hype around him would have to die down a little, just as it did with Finn Russell.

If your pack is struggling against strong carrying, good tactical kicking and/or effective jackling which means your 10 is living off scraps or always taking the ball without momentum, then that's when game management and execution of a territory game is important. It's easy to look at Russell or Smiths' highlight reels and think that they can win every game with a molten silver moment of genius. That is absolutely not how test rugby works and the average fan needs to realise that good 10s become great 10s by coming with a low error count through the games where your side just has to grind out ugly wins.

Jonny Wilkinson never really got the credit he deserved for making the correct judgement calls in very close games but he was certainly a prince at that, helped by sensible pack leaders around him, something that Eddie Jones does not have to the same extent.

Interesting interview with Mercer

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/63554592

Him and Dombrandt for the world cup must be in prime position. Still wouldn't rule out Barbeary either.

Saw this in the first part of the BBC article too:

'England must stop repeating the same mistakes or risk failing at next year's Six Nations and Rugby World Cup, vice-captain Jack Nowell has warned.

Eddie Jones' side lost 30-29 to Argentina last Sunday, a sixth defeat in ten matches this year.

Nowell, 29, says England need to be learning their lessons "quite quickly".

"The frustrating thing from the weekend is they are the same messages we have been saying over the past year or so," he told BBC 5 live.

"Scotland away [in February], the penalty count lost us the game. Australia first Test [in July], the penalty count let them back into the game. These are the lessons we need to be learning and learning quite quickly."

The Exeter back added: "Before we know it we will come into the Six Nations and you can't lose a game then to kick yourself forward. It's the same in the World Cup, you can't be losing games in your group.

"We need to start learning now."

However, Nowell, who has taken increased leadership responsibilities this campaign, says a meeting at the start of the week has helped clear the air before Saturday's crunch game with Japan at Twickenham.

"It is always a concern, but we aren't looking at each other thinking why aren't we winning these games - we know why we are not winning," he explained.

"So it's up to us players to own it a little bit more, but we had some good conversations about it yesterday with a few boys holding their hands up knowing that it's not good enough for the team."'

Pens do contribute no doubt and some of the ones given away last week were needless but I hope there's been some more honesty than that as there were/are wider issues. And that sentence reinforcing the conversation yesterday writing off games as ok to lose....sod off you're england you should be going all out to win every bloomin game.

I think I can see an almost identical setup in today's announcement. Same starting team, May coming onto the bench instead of Ribbans and George for Singleton.

It's funny how after every defeat Jones and players say that need to learn from mistakes.
And equally unfunny how they never ever do.
Tom English - what a misnomer if there ever was - makes a good point on the BBC Rugby podcast how after every defeat Jones says it's down to him, he didn't prepare team right etc etc. This been the line for literally years now and if anyone else went to their boss and said it was all me I didn't prepare properly and kept on doing it then only one likely outcome!

I've resigned myself to the fact it's going to be same old same old. Same players picked, same dreary games and likely outcome and same excuses.

Well regardless of which team runs out...i think they need to put in a convincing display on Saturday. Anything less will have the vultures circling...especially with NZ next up.

I also think he needs to put Itoje back to lock...and play a proper 6...ideally Willis but i suspect we'll see Coles there for his lineout work.

But the retained squad is virtually the same so we could easily end up with nigh on same 15/23 with same combinations. I suspect there'll be a tweak here and there but let's face it'll be very very similar.

Geordie wrote:Well regardless of which team runs out...i think they need to put in a convincing display on Saturday. Anything less will have the vultures circling...especially with NZ next up.

I also think he needs to put Itoje back to lock...and play a proper 6...ideally Willis but i suspect we'll see Coles there for his lineout work.

Geordie, I like Alex Coles and think he can be really good.  He has been with Saints Academy since 2018, at least I think it's 2018, and is still only 23.  He goes about 18 1/2 stone and has won Saints internal fitness comp each of the last two seasons, is very strong, has deceptive speed, good ball skills, and talking to him, I find him a bright and also a bit humble.  Plus he has been mentored by Courtney Lawes.  

I have watched him develop and I think he has a good future - in the second row.   I have seen him on the blind side at club level and he has done very well.  He wouldn't let us down as a 6, but I don't think he would be a game changer there and most of the usual suspects are better options.  I would like to see him get a run of games for the rest of this autumn for England, but in the engine room.  I think most Saints supporters would agree.

Saints front row has not been the physically strongest by any measure for the past few years.  A lot of the best grunt and shove they do have has come when he is partnered with Rib-Eye in the second row.

Geordie wrote:Well regardless of which team runs out...i think they need to put in a convincing display on Saturday. Anything less will have the vultures circling...especially with NZ next up.

I also think he needs to put Itoje back to lock...and play a proper 6...ideally Willis but i suspect we'll see Coles there for his lineout work.

We'll try to injure the NZ team for you. Or make them weak with laughter. One of the two.

We may see the clamoured for backrow combo of Willis/Curry with Japan not being a huge threat in the line out.

The lack of pace in the backs, in particular the back 3 is again utterly baffling. The way we are playing, we're relying on forward dominance to get us over the line or a moment of magic from one of the backs.....the issue being that nobody in the backline seems capable of doing such a thing.

I've seen quite a few comments regarding intelligence on the pitch. This has been an issue in English rugby for a long time now (think back to the Italy game at the ruck)....we don't seem to breed intelligent rugby players, especially when it come to the International set-up. Over coaching...?

I'd love to see Mark McCall get his hands on England side, the best choice by a distance imo. The sooner the better too!

The Italy game is blown out of proportion though. Watch it back and you can see so many mistakes from Poite in when a ruck had been formed or not, hilarious from the pov of a non England fan but a mess which was rightly quickly changed.

Alas McCall not being English is ruled out.

Even if that is the case, we're not the brightest bunch.

McCall qualifies under residency apparently.

Actually made some changes then:

Starters

15. Freddie Steward

14. Jack Nowell (VC)

13. Guy Porter

12. Owen Farrell (C)

11. Jonny May

10. Marcus Smith

9. Jack van Poortvliet

1. Ellis Genge (VC)

2. Luke Cowan-Dickie

3. Kyle Sinckler

4. David Ribbans

5. Jonny Hill

6. Maro Itoje

7. Tom Curry

8. Sam Simmonds

Finishers

16. Jamie George

17. Mako Vunipola

18. Joe Heyes

19. Alex Coles

20. Billy Vunipola

21. Ben Youngs

22. Henry Slade

23. Manu Tuilagi

Nice to see Ribbans in there after getting 0 minutes on the pitch in a 6 2 bench. The back row at least looks partially more balanced with Simmonds starting. At least it's a 5 3 bench but not sure why we need 2 centres there. Could play a 5 2 bench for all the use Youngs is.

Of course Willis is dropped completely as he didn't do enough in his 6 minutes on the pitch whereas Slade made an important contribution in coughing up the ball to the Argentian defence.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Even if that is the case, we're not the brightest bunch.

McCall qualifies under residency apparently.

I don't understand? Him or Robertson would be my choices but it ain't happening. Robertson may be available earlier though should we lose to Japan.

So Willis not even in 23. Itoje at 6. Mako on bench. Joe C out. Smith Farrell 10 12. May who hasn't played for a while straight in. If wing injured then Manu on wing is it?

Yep, hall marks of WC winning team....

Jonny May brings a bit of speed to the wing but not sure out of the 2 wingers last week I'd have kept Nowell. How much is leadership a trump card over form and ability? I didn't see too much impact from close quarters from him and zero threat to the try line.

mountain man wrote:So Willis not even in 23. Itoje at 6. Mako on bench. Joe C out. Smith Farrell 10 12. May who hasn't played for a while straight in. If wing injured then Manu on wing is it?

Yep, hall marks of WC winning team....

I'm not on the edge of my seat thinking about the game. Jones did talk about issues with cohesion when the squad isn't together much so I'd love to hear his thoughts on not giving time to Ribbans last week then suddenly he's starting, or why Porter is suddenly there ahead of Tuilagi.

This leadership thing is a pile of crap if players aren't good enough. Nowell too slow for wing, maybe should have converted to a 13 but too late now. Or a flanker.
The much vaulted Smith Farrell Manu combo lasted all one game and didn't work.

Outstanding work Eddie.

I think England will win(I thought that before last week though) but this is a dogs dinner of a team.

Glad Youngs has been dropped, but Jones has turned into a mad chef. Chopping and changing, throwing new combinations together and just hoping something works.

Japan will be very dangerous. They've come close to beating top nations in the last year - 9 points off Australia, 9 off Scotland, 5 off France in the summer, and 7 off NZ just a couple of weeks ago.

Please can JVP and Genge play the full 80?
Please?

Well not jumping for joy looking at that side...

Can we cope with their high pace game...we shall see. Do we suffocate it out of them

Porter...Meh!
Itoje at 6 AGAIN....MEH
May weeks after a dislocated shoulder and barely any games this calendar year....MEH
Willis totally dropped.....MEH!

Totally bizarre selection for me. I am at the point where I almost hope we go 0-4 this autumn so we get rid of EJ. I would bring in Gatland or Robertson.

We need to get our combo's working before SA and NZ. This is no time to just send out another random team. First choice front row I can live with, but hoping the second choice get some decent game time as if they are required in the next matches they need game time. And I would replace Mako with Marler. Surely it has to be Itoje and Hill in the engine room? Why Ribbans? Back row against Japan should be Curry 6, Willis 7 and Simmonds 8. At least Simmonds is playing. Happy with JVP but what on earth is he doing with the backs??

I think he is being careful with Manu, but if so why even put him on the bench? And is Porter the answer at 13 and is he even the bench option for the NZ/SA matches? Surely it needs to be Slade to give him some game time. Maybe Eddie wants Slade and Manu for the last 20 minutes with either Farrell or Smith at 10 and if so then I am happy with that. But still seems strange to me. And why not drop Nowell instead of Cockanisiga, who at least played well on Sunday.

We have zero prospect of improving our back play when Eddie selects them in such a crazy haphazard way.

I'd rather keep Jones than get Gatland.

I find some of the ‘hysterical’ reaction to last week’s 1 point thrashing by Argentina quite funny.

Possession Eng 63% v Arg 37%
Metres made Eng 427 v Arg 157
Territory Eng 60% v Arg 40%
Defenders beaten Eng 17 v Arg 6

I appreciate that the object of the game is to score more points than your opponents, but England lost on the bounce of a ball / whether or not there was a fingertip touch of the ball. The above stats suggest that England did a lot right, but just need to be more clinical in their finishing and give away a few less penalties.

Happy to see Ribbans over Coles, a more physical option that could make the transition. Him and Hill are an interesting option if they provide some physicality.

11-15 looks completely toothless though.

nlpnlp wrote:I find some of the ‘hysterical’ reaction to last week’s 1 point thrashing by Argentina quite funny.

Possession Eng 63% v Arg 37%
Metres made Eng 427 v Arg 157
Territory Eng 60% v Arg 40%
Defenders beaten Eng 17 v Arg 6

I appreciate that the object of the game is to score more points than your opponents, but England lost on the bounce of a ball / whether or not there was a fingertip touch of the ball.  The above stats suggest that England did a lot right, but just need to be more clinical in their finishing and give away a few less penalties.

Great stats....poor performance. If you looked at these alone, you would think England played great....they did not. Stats as always, need context.

Argentina did not play well....and they won.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'd rather keep Jones than get Gatland.

Ive never been a Gatland fan at all but with the benefit of hindsight its clear he got the best and more out of Wales.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

nlpnlp wrote:I find some of the ‘hysterical’ reaction to last week’s 1 point thrashing by Argentina quite funny.

Possession Eng 63% v Arg 37%
Metres made Eng 427 v Arg 157
Territory Eng 60% v Arg 40%
Defenders beaten Eng 17 v Arg 6

I appreciate that the object of the game is to score more points than your opponents, but England lost on the bounce of a ball / whether or not there was a fingertip touch of the ball.  The above stats suggest that England did a lot right, but just need to be more clinical in their finishing and give away a few less penalties.

Great stats....poor performance. If you looked at these alone, you would think England played great....they did not. Stats as always, need context.

Argentina did not play well....and they won.

I think the stats clearly indicate that our forwards went well, but the long running issue is we have nothing threatening in the backs and they way the backs are selected and prepared is clearly a problem.