England - The Next Episode

First topic message reminder :

The next stage of development....progression or failure....who can tell.

Rugby Fan wrote:Ford and Daly seemed to get marked down most by pundits and supporters after the weekend but others probably had more costly errors.

Furbank got isolated in one of our early attacks close to the Irish line, and gave away a penalty for holding on. His knock-on led to Lawrence's try being disallowed, and then his foot in touch gave away field position which led to points for Ireland. If Daly had done that, then he'd probably have been scored a 4 in the match ratings. Furbank's selection is generally being praised.

Similarly, Chessum is rightly seen as a success. Nevertheless, when we decided to go for touch around the 20 minute mark, Chessum was at the back of the ruck as Beirne reached over to make the key turnover. 10 minutes later, Chessum got isolated, and gave away Ireland's third penalty.

Ford and Daly are both younger than players like Finn Russell, Damian de Allende, Willie le Roux and Beauden Barrett. If they are helping England to wins, then they should still be in the selection mix.

I agree the jury is out on Furbank. Now im a big fan of his but v Ireland he was jekyll and Hyde. He made some positive contributions but made some awful decisions aswell. He does have a habit of running into isolation...and at the prem he can probably just get away with it...but at this level he go turned over or caused problems several times as the Irish pack just swarmed over him. SO it will be interesting to see how he fixes that problem.

I think Ford gets bad plaudits because he isnt a running exciting 10 like Marcus Smith thats all. Most legit fans think Fords a class act and he's not going anywhere for a while yet. Ford, M.Smith and F.Smith give 3 nice options at 10

doctor_grey wrote:

Big wrote:

mountain man wrote:Steward still not in 23 which is interesting.

As and when Smith gets on other than an injury will entirely depend how game pans out. I think he just offers so much more in attack and I'd say his defence is better than Ford. I'm not criticising Ford who I think is an excellent 10, just high lighting what Smith brings.

I also really really rate Ford, but 6Ns Ford doesn't seem quite on the level of World Cup Ford - and I can't help but wonder if it's to do with the departure of his old training buddy Farrell?  In the World Cup I was definitely in favour of Ford rather than Smith, now I'd probably favour Smith starting.  Having to decide between two good 10s is not the worst problem to have though either way.

I thought I heard (or read) somewhere the original plan for the Six Nations before his injury was to start Smith M..  I thought Smith F., if not injured, would have been coming off the bench.  Or am I nuts?  

And why do people named Smith get hurt?

There are just so many of them

Wonder how Dombrandt feeling, must be a few nerves after last year. He owes England a big game if he gets on which he surely will.
I'm still not convinced he can physically match France but I guess we'll find out.

mountain man wrote:Wonder how Dombrandt feeling, must be a few nerves after last year. He owes England a big game if he gets on which he surely will.
I'm still not convinced he can physically match France but I guess we'll find out.

The key with Dombrandt is not to use him as a battering ram. There are enough players in the pack who can do that, even if it's normally the No 8's job. He works best in attack if he's used to pick lines in close channels that keep the defence from fully committing. Smith knows how to do that, though it will likely take a game or two to start firing fully.

Poorfour wrote:

mountain man wrote:Wonder how Dombrandt feeling, must be a few nerves after last year. He owes England a big game if he gets on which he surely will.
I'm still not convinced he can physically match France but I guess we'll find out.

The key with Dombrandt is not to use him as a battering ram. There are enough players in the pack who can do that, even if it's normally the No 8's job. He works best in attack if he's used to pick lines in close channels that keep the defence from fully committing. Smith knows how to do that, though it will likely take a game or two to start firing fully.

We've been saying that with Dombrant for some time. I'd don't think he's got the work rate or mindset for international rugby. He's fit enough to get around but seems to lack the aggression to throw himself into everything and run those lines with any real intent. He looked leaner off the bench last weekend so maybe they've had him in camp to flog him a bit. His impact last weekend was decidedly meh.

If you compare him to the other members of the back five of the scrum the drop off in intensity is massive. Were we to lose one of them early in the game we'd all be hoping Roots came on, particularly if it was Martin who has probably 3 inches in height and half a stone on Dombrant but who hits like someone twice the size.

Poorfour wrote:

mountain man wrote:Wonder how Dombrandt feeling, must be a few nerves after last year. He owes England a big game if he gets on which he surely will.
I'm still not convinced he can physically match France but I guess we'll find out.

The key with Dombrandt is not to use him as a battering ram. There are enough players in the pack who can do that, even if it's normally the No 8's job. He works best in attack if he's used to pick lines in close channels that keep the defence from fully committing. Smith knows how to do that, though it will likely take a game or two to start firing fully.

I thought he was the wing sub....

We know you think that, and to some extent you're right, but you're ignoring the point I made. Roots and Martin are battering rams. They run straight lines and if they get it right tie up a couple of defenders.

Dombrandt isn't and it is pointless to use him that way, especially when there are other players in the pack who can do that job. You use Dombrandt to pose a different challenge to defences, because if their alignment is off he will exploit it. Very few other back rows do that, and it's worth persisting with getting it right because it unsettles defences and makes it harder for them to commit.

But don't confuse that with workrate. Dombrandt did have to work on that initially - and Eddie sent him back to Quins until he had done - but his stats are now normally very good. He has a lot of involvements, including a very high turnover rate for a No 8 of his size. It just doesn't manifest in running repeatedly into brick walls.

If Borthwick's gameplan calls for a No 8 whose job is to run into brick walls, then Dombrandt shouldn't be part of the squad, but the signs are that he is happy to use his 4, 5, and 6 for that. Both Dombrandt and Earl are players better used in a bit of space, and who are quite capable of sparking or continuing a backs move.

Poorfour wrote:We know you think that, and to some extent you're right, but you're ignoring the point I made. Roots and Martin are battering rams. They run straight lines and if they get it right tie up a couple of defenders.

Dombrandt isn't and it is pointless to use him that way, especially when there are other players in the pack who can do that job. You use Dombrandt to pose a different challenge to defences, because if their alignment is off he will exploit it. Very few other back rows do that, and it's worth persisting with getting it right because it unsettles defences and makes it harder for them to commit.

But don't confuse that with workrate. Dombrandt did have to work on that initially - and Eddie sent him back to Quins until he had done - but his stats are now normally very good. He has a lot of involvements, including a very high turnover rate for a No 8 of his size. It just doesn't manifest in running repeatedly into brick walls.

If Borthwick's gameplan calls for a No 8 whose job is to run into brick walls, then Dombrandt shouldn't be part of the squad, but the signs are that he is happy to use his 4, 5, and 6 for that. Both Dombrandt and Earl are players better used in a bit of space, and who are quite capable of sparking or continuing a backs move.

PF If everyone was available...inc Tom Curry etc, how would you set your pack back 5 up?

Poorfour wrote:We know you think that, and to some extent you're right, but you're ignoring the point I made. Roots and Martin are battering rams. They run straight lines and if they get it right tie up a couple of defenders.

Dombrandt isn't and it is pointless to use him that way, especially when there are other players in the pack who can do that job. You use Dombrandt to pose a different challenge to defences, because if their alignment is off he will exploit it. Very few other back rows do that, and it's worth persisting with getting it right because it unsettles defences and makes it harder for them to commit.

But don't confuse that with workrate. Dombrandt did have to work on that initially - and Eddie sent him back to Quins until he had done - but his stats are now normally very good. He has a lot of involvements, including a very high turnover rate for a No 8 of his size. It just doesn't manifest in running repeatedly into brick walls.

If Borthwick's gameplan calls for a No 8 whose job is to run into brick walls, then Dombrandt shouldn't be part of the squad, but the signs are that he is happy to use his 4, 5, and 6 for that. Both Dombrandt and Earl are players better used in a bit of space, and who are quite capable of sparking or continuing a backs move.

Complete rubbish, Ben Earl doesn't spend his time running into brick walls. At times Vs Ireland he was practically a third centre.

Dombrant is soft when it comes to putting the hits in defence. Slow to react to the breakdown. He gets around the pitch but the impact in defence is negligible when compared to those that have been keeping him out of the side. In attack he runs some very nice lines but has to date made little use of the chances those have presented. Including running lines off of club mates Care and Smith last weekend in what was clearly a system where we would run the ball in the opposition half.

The excuses are running thin and he's dropping down the pecking order. CCS is streets ahead currently. Dombrant needs a performance in an England shirt soon or risks behind left behind.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Complete rubbish, Ben Earl doesn't spend his time running into brick walls. At times Vs Ireland he was practically a third centre.

Dombrant is soft when it comes to putting the hits in defence. Slow to react to the breakdown. He gets around the pitch but the impact in defence is negligible when compared to those that have been keeping him out of the side. In attack he runs some very nice lines but has to date made little use of the chances those have presented. Including running lines off of club mates Care and Smith last weekend in what was clearly a system where we would run the ball in the opposition half.

The excuses are running thin and he's dropping down the pecking order. CCS is streets ahead currently. Dombrant needs a performance in an England shirt soon or risks behind left behind.

Read what I actually wrote before disagreeing with it, eh?

Have you got stats to back those assertions up?

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Poorfour wrote:We know you think that, and to some extent you're right, but you're ignoring the point I made. Roots and Martin are battering rams. They run straight lines and if they get it right tie up a couple of defenders.

Dombrandt isn't and it is pointless to use him that way, especially when there are other players in the pack who can do that job. You use Dombrandt to pose a different challenge to defences, because if their alignment is off he will exploit it. Very few other back rows do that, and it's worth persisting with getting it right because it unsettles defences and makes it harder for them to commit.

But don't confuse that with workrate. Dombrandt did have to work on that initially - and Eddie sent him back to Quins until he had done - but his stats are now normally very good. He has a lot of involvements, including a very high turnover rate for a No 8 of his size. It just doesn't manifest in running repeatedly into brick walls.

If Borthwick's gameplan calls for a No 8 whose job is to run into brick walls, then Dombrandt shouldn't be part of the squad, but the signs are that he is happy to use his 4, 5, and 6 for that. Both Dombrandt and Earl are players better used in a bit of space, and who are quite capable of sparking or continuing a backs move.

Complete rubbish, Ben Earl doesn't spend his time running into brick walls. At times Vs Ireland he was practically a third centre.

Dombrant is soft when it comes to putting the hits in defence. Slow to react to the breakdown. He gets around the pitch but the impact in defence is negligible when compared to those that have been keeping him out of the side. In attack he runs some very nice lines but has to date made little use of the chances those have presented. Including running lines off of club mates Care and Smith last weekend in what was clearly a system where we would run the ball in the opposition half.

The excuses are running thin and he's dropping down the pecking order. CCS is streets ahead currently. Dombrant needs a performance in an England shirt soon or risks behind left behind.

Sam PF said Earl is better used in space...

Poorfour wrote:Dombrandt isn't and it is pointless to use him that way, especially when there are other players in the pack who can do that job. You use Dombrandt to pose a different challenge to defences, because if their alignment is off he will exploit it. Very few other back rows do that, and it's worth persisting with getting it right because it unsettles defences and makes it harder for them to commit.

How often do good teams get that far off with their alignment is always my issue there though? International defences reset so quickly these days. Whereas in most Prem games in recent years, you go through a few phases, gaps appear. It's the issue with Dombrandt. His greatest skill at Prem level is targeting gaps that rarely exist at international level.

International back rows who attack in that style do exist, of course. They generally offer a lot more outside it than Dombrandt though. Peceli Yato and Michael Hooper for instance. Whilst Dombrandt's work rate has improved and his jackaling is really good, he's nowhere near players like that in defensive output and ground covered.

Thinking solely about carrying, several other players who are fantastic at carrying in the way you describe (Earl, Botia and Savea being great examples) are much better at making yards when those gaps aren't there.

Of course, others can do the battering ram job, but Dombrandt does then need other significant skills than occasionally carrying off 9 if it opens up. He's not a notable lineout option. His line speed and tackling are just about solid now but nowhere near a strength. He's not going to be a back row who can noticeably improve the kick chase like Earl being able to keep up with wingers or Underhill being a brutal tackler.

The thing he does well he is fantastic at. He runs brilliant lines off 9, runs them regularly and has great hands (for Quins...) if he finds a gap. It's a fairly narrow skillset though and requires pretty specific circumstances to be any use.

I think there's a good argument that if the rest of an XV can do the difficult job of manufacturing those gaps at this level by pulling a defence apart over multiple phases, then they might not really need a specialist at running angled lines off the halfbacks, when they've already got quick ball, if he's familiar with the halfbacks and if the defence has broken down enough for their line speed to have crashed and alignment broken down.

Poorfour wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Complete rubbish, Ben Earl doesn't spend his time running into brick walls. At times Vs Ireland he was practically a third centre.

Dombrant is soft when it comes to putting the hits in defence. Slow to react to the breakdown. He gets around the pitch but the impact in defence is negligible when compared to those that have been keeping him out of the side. In attack he runs some very nice lines but has to date made little use of the chances those have presented. Including running lines off of club mates Care and Smith last weekend in what was clearly a system where we would run the ball in the opposition half.

The excuses are running thin and he's dropping down the pecking order. CCS is streets ahead currently. Dombrant needs a performance in an England shirt soon or risks behind left behind.

Read what I actually wrote before disagreeing with it, eh?

Have you got stats to back those assertions up?

Borthwick doesn't need an 8 that runs into brick walls and hence why Earl who operates better in space is thriving.

Dombrant for last weekend was 3 carries for 9 metres no breaks and no defenders beaten. Earl, 20 carries for 99 metres, one break, eight defenders beaten and one offload. It's not Borthwick's system. Dombrant isn't credited with attempting any tackles in the 15 mins he was on the pitch. How's that for stats.

formerly known as Sam wrote:How's that for stats.

Not statistically significant, I'd say.

Judging a player returning to the team for the first time in 6 months on the basis of 15 minutes at the end of the game and comparing it to a full 80 from a player who's been ever present is what scientists would call torturing the data.

Poorfour wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:How's that for stats.

Not statistically significant, I'd say.

Judging a player returning to the team for the first time in 6 months on the basis of 15 minutes at the end of the game and comparing it to a full 80 from a player who's been ever present is what scientists would call torturing the data.

Cause of the great body of work he's produced for England previously. Dombrant has yet to seriously turn up in an England shirt and he's going to soon run out of chances to do so.

Well losing Burbank after only 7 mins isn't ideal ...

Heaf wrote:Well losing Burbank after only 7 mins isn't ideal ...

What happened to him?

Calf muscle

Looks like we're allowing France to pass forwards tonight then ..

I just knew Smith was going to get turned over there - ran straight into contact. Missing Furbank already.

That was a very French try

Nice try to be fair - can't afford to be losing line-outs

Forward pass?

Didn't spot one but wouldn't be surprised as they've let about 3 go already

Heaf wrote:Didn't spot one but wouldn't be surprised as they've let about 3 go already

Always the ref with you, or tmo

carpet baboon wrote:

Heaf wrote:Didn't spot one but wouldn't be surprised as they've let about 3 go already

Always the ref with you, or tmo

I said I didn't spot a forward pass?

Where's 7.5?

Ah sht it wasn't entertaining was it....and we out aswell....

Borthwick's awful though isn't he.

Think Ford has proved he is the best ten in England.

Ford had a really good game as did quite a few. Of particular note to me were Earl, Itoje, Chessum in forwards and Ford, Lawrence and Smith when he got on. Freeman pretty decent although he got showed up for pace once or twice I thought.

England overall be pretty happy with 6N, started well in first 20mins against Italy things went a bit squirrelly getting used to new defence but got sorted to win. Cards made for a stuttering performance against Wales but again saw out win.
Scotland was a disaster really, errors just killed them.
Magnificent win against Ireland.
A narrow loss to France which went down to wire, 4 tries and some great rugby against France.

Without viewing any of the games again, that is just my impression of how it all went.

I think coaches and players be pretty happy as they should be and us supporters should be encouraged that things are on the up.

I do hope some of those massive front 5 from the u20s come through well ...

Geordie wrote:I do hope some of those massive front 5 from the u20s come through well ...

Yep and hope that likes of Kpoku don't opt for France! Future is looking good but forwards way better than backs as it often seems to be case.

France have some fantastic backs in their U20s which bodes well for them.

England played well. They have some good young players in the team and in the U20s. Earl, Smith and Lawrence were standout yesterday. Borthwick seems like a decent enough coach, but winning the 6N is going to be difficult with these Ireland and France teams about.

Ireland I think have peaked though and decline started slightly. Quite a few players over 30 and will be looking to retire from Int rugby.
Yes they have an excellent U20 team so they will no doubt step up but so do England.

France as ever the enigma. Capable of world class play but also duff games as well.

If and it's big if, England get some players back fit and are fully loaded they will be competing for title next year.

mountain man wrote:Ireland I think have peaked though and decline started slightly. Quite a few players over 30 and will be looking to retire from Int rugby.
Yes they have an excellent U20 team so they will no doubt step up but so do England.

France as ever the enigma. Capable of world class play but also duff games as well.

If and it's big if, England get some players back fit and are fully loaded they will be competing for title next year.

Irelands under 20s have lost just one game in the last three years and that was the world cup final, thats a run of over 20 games. They are unbeaten in the last three six nations. They definitely have an excellent 20s programme. All teams have players in their 30s. The spine of Irelands team with the exception of JGP are all mid 20s. Its a bit early to talk of decline surely?

I'm just going on how good Ireland have been, they are still a great team but not unbeatable.
No-one saw England getting near them let alone beating them.
Yesterday at home most thought Ireland would crush Scotland but ended up closer than many would predict.

So Ireland in my opinion have dipped slightly from a very high peak of last year or so.

Collapse2005 wrote:

mountain man wrote:Ireland I think have peaked though and decline started slightly. Quite a few players over 30 and will be looking to retire from Int rugby.
Yes they have an excellent U20 team so they will no doubt step up but so do England.

France as ever the enigma. Capable of world class play but also duff games as well.

If and it's big if, England get some players back fit and are fully loaded they will be competing for title next year.

Irelands under 20s have lost just one game in the last three years and that was the world cup final, thats a run of over 20 games. They are unbeaten in the last three six nations. They definitely have an excellent 20s programme. All teams have players in their 30s. The spine of Irelands team with the exception of JGP are all mid 20s. Its a bit early to talk of decline surely?

It is too early for any sort of decline but there are some positions that look exposed to me with players approaching their mid thirties,  namely props and scrum halves.  Both starting centres are pretty slow as befits their age and could be wrong but there doesn't appear an obvious successor to VdF.
Farrell is pretty astute but he has some big calls coming up in the next twelve months unless he thinks he can wrap in cotton wool and stretch them to the next RWC.

For England, props are also a concern but encouraged by what is going on behind the scenes with RFU mentoring of the next generation of props. Every other position is covered with multiple options available and it looks like game plan is emerging.

Yep exactly what I was referring to. Still a great team but not quite at level was. No doubt some of the U20s be gradually introduced etc.

They probably have dipped a bit alright however, Im not sure that means there will be a decline. I honestly did think England would get close to Ireland, however a one point loss in Twickenham against a rejuvenated England side is no shame. My prediction was a tight game. I felt if England were to win it would be by less than three and if Ireland won it would be by 11/12 points in a competitive match.

Recwatcher16 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

mountain man wrote:Ireland I think have peaked though and decline started slightly. Quite a few players over 30 and will be looking to retire from Int rugby.
Yes they have an excellent U20 team so they will no doubt step up but so do England.

France as ever the enigma. Capable of world class play but also duff games as well.

If and it's big if, England get some players back fit and are fully loaded they will be competing for title next year.

Irelands under 20s have lost just one game in the last three years and that was the world cup final, thats a run of over 20 games. They are unbeaten in the last three six nations. They definitely have an excellent 20s programme. All teams have players in their 30s. The spine of Irelands team with the exception of JGP are all mid 20s. Its a bit early to talk of decline surely?

It is too early for any sort of decline but there are some positions that look exposed to me with players approaching their mid thirties,  namely props and scrum halves.  Both starting centres are pretty slow as befits their age and could be wrong but there doesn't appear an obvious successor to VdF.
Farrell is pretty astute but he has some big calls coming up in the next twelve months unless he thinks he can wrap in cotton wool and stretch them to the next RWC.

I agree on scrum half and props but disagree on centre. Centre is an area of strength, Aki, McCloskey, Henshaw and Ringrose are all still very good and Hugh Gavin for the under 20s is probably one of the best under 20s centres around. He is definitely one to watch. Antoine Frisch at Munster is very good too. I also disagree on VdF, backrow is definitely an area of strength for Ireland. VdF was dropped for Conners this year in the Champions cup v La Rochelle and Conners was outstanding. Scott Penny, Deegan, Coombes and Conners are all lining up to make the side. Watch out for Brian Gleeson for the 20s too he is going to be special.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Recwatcher16 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

mountain man wrote:Ireland I think have peaked though and decline started slightly. Quite a few players over 30 and will be looking to retire from Int rugby.
Yes they have an excellent U20 team so they will no doubt step up but so do England.

France as ever the enigma. Capable of world class play but also duff games as well.

If and it's big if, England get some players back fit and are fully loaded they will be competing for title next year.

Irelands under 20s have lost just one game in the last three years and that was the world cup final, thats a run of over 20 games. They are unbeaten in the last three six nations. They definitely have an excellent 20s programme. All teams have players in their 30s. The spine of Irelands team with the exception of JGP are all mid 20s. Its a bit early to talk of decline surely?

It is too early for any sort of decline but there are some positions that look exposed to me with players approaching their mid thirties,  namely props and scrum halves.  Both starting centres are pretty slow as befits their age and could be wrong but there doesn't appear an obvious successor to VdF.
Farrell is pretty astute but he has some big calls coming up in the next twelve months unless he thinks he can wrap in cotton wool and stretch them to the next RWC.

I agree on scrum half and props but disagree on centre. Centre is an area of strength, Aki, McCloskey, Henshaw and Ringrose are all still very good and Hugh Gavin for the under 20s is probably one of the best under 20s centres around. He is definitely one to watch. Antoine Frisch at Munster is very good too. I also disagree on VdF, backrow is definitely an area of strength for Ireland. VdF was dropped for Conners this year in the Champions cup v La Rochelle and Conners was outstanding. Scott Penny, Deegan, Coombes and Conners are all lining up to make the side. Watch out for Brian Gleeson for the 20s too he is going to be special.

Fair enough but pretty unproven at test level for those flankers listed and therefore no obvious successor.  All the centres are in their early thirties ? Are they going to make the next RWC ?

Anyway, back to England. We definitely need some props to break through to senior team. In fairness Cole and Marler did really well again yesterday but how longer can they go on for. Some good prospects in U20s which we may well see for next 6N.
Will Stuart still does not convince, blows hot and cold.

Ringrose is 29, Henshaw is 30 both will likely make the RWC. Ciaran Frawley can play centre, Osbourne at Leinster is class as is Frisch at munster and Hugh Gavin for the under 20s might be better than all of them. Not worried by centre much at all.

mountain man wrote:Anyway, back to England. We definitely need some props to break through to senior team. In fairness Cole and Marler did really well again yesterday but how longer can they go on for. Some good prospects in U20s which we may well see for next 6N.
Will Stuart still does not convince, blows hot and cold.

I think Stewart is slowly getting better. Heyes can't be far behind.

I think that situation will be resolved. I'll miss the Cole/Marler double act though - real characters.

I can see Steward struggling to get the 15 shirt back now. Furbank and Smith seem to be a better fit for borthwicks attacking tactics.

Collapse2005 wrote:Ringrose is 29, Henshaw is 30 both will likely make the RWC. Ciaran Frawley can play centre, Osbourne at Leinster is class as is Frisch at munster and Hugh Gavin for the under 20s might be better than all of them. Not worried by centre much at all.

Didn't he accept a call up by France?

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:Ringrose is 29, Henshaw is 30 both will likely make the RWC. Ciaran Frawley can play centre, Osbourne at Leinster is class as is Frisch at munster and Hugh Gavin for the under 20s might be better than all of them. Not worried by centre much at all.

Didn't he accept a call up by France?

He did, and was in camp for 48 hrs released
It's a tough one. At the moment he is probably 5th choice for both Ireland and France .
He will most likely get included in the extended squads for the summer tour so will be interesting which one he picks

Heaf wrote:I just knew Smith was going to get turned over there - ran straight into contact.  Missing Furbank already.

To be fair Furbank did that last weekend. Marcus Smith turned up with more intensity than I think I've ever seen him bring before. That was really good to see. I don't think we really missed Furbank, France challenged us under the high ball in the second half where maybe he might have been a bit more secure but it's hardly a massive strength at this level. Steward would have made a difference under the high ball but needs to adapt his game to fit the attack.

Another good performance from England. The style of play is nice to watch, there's a will to attack paired with pragmatism and physicality. I think all England fans will be a lot happier now than they were at the start of the 6N.

Just a little to indisciplined last night. A few areas to work on and improve ahead of the summer but there's hopefully some guys like Quirke, JvP, TCurry, IFW etc that can come back in when fit. Should help us push on again.

carpet baboon wrote:I can see Steward struggling to get the 15 shirt back now. Furbank and Smith seem to be a better fit for borthwicks attacking tactics.

It's a definite challenge for him. He needs to work on his link play. The attack is using some definite set plays that require the the 15 to offer more passing range. If you look at Squidge's analysis of the Ireland game then the first England try isn't off the cuff Furbank it's a set England play utilising Furbank's ability to throw those passes and Ford's ability to read the game from the backfield. The centres and Martin flood into position and we launch the attack from deep.

Steward has definitely got the capabilities to adapt but he's going to have to go away and work on it. No bad thing for a young player to be given some work ons. Furbank whilst good has made a number of errors in and England shirt so hasn't nailed it down yet and Smith looked susceptible under the high ball. It's probably a bit of an arms race as to which players can improve the parts of the game they need to quickest. Furbank has a headstart but competition for the shirt is only a good thing.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:I can see Steward struggling to get the 15 shirt back now. Furbank and Smith seem to be a better fit for borthwicks attacking tactics.

It's a definite challenge for him. He needs to work on his link play. The attack is using some definite set plays that require the the 15 to offer more passing range. If you look at Squidge's analysis of the Ireland game then the first England try isn't off the cuff Furbank it's a set England play utilising Furbank's ability to throw those passes and Ford's ability to read the game from the backfield. The centres and Martin flood into position and we launch the attack from deep.

Steward has definitely got the capabilities to adapt but he's going to have to go away and work on it. No bad thing for a young player to be given some work ons. Furbank whilst good has made a number of errors in and England shirt so hasn't nailed it down yet and Smith looked susceptible under the high ball. It's probably a bit of an arms race as to which players can improve the parts of the game they need to quickest. Furbank has a headstart but competition for the shirt is only a good thing.

He certainly has the talent. And it's good to have players to push each other.
Would still love to see him and Lawrence have a run in the centers together. But I think I'm the only one

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Heaf wrote:I just knew Smith was going to get turned over there - ran straight into contact.  Missing Furbank already.

To be fair Furbank did that last weekend. Marcus Smith turned up with more intensity than I think I've ever seen him bring before. That was really good to see. I don't think we really missed Furbank, France challenged us under the high ball in the second half where maybe he might have been a bit more secure but it's hardly a massive strength at this level. Steward would have made a difference under the high ball but needs to adapt his game to fit the attack.

Another good performance from England. The style of play is nice to watch, there's a will to attack paired with pragmatism and physicality. I think all England fans will be a lot happier now than they were at the start of the 6N.

Just a little to indisciplined last night. A few areas to work on and improve ahead of the summer but there's hopefully some guys like Quirke, JvP, TCurry, IFW etc that can come back in when fit. Should help us push on again.

Yep I posted that fairly soon after Smith came on ...