Ita v. Eng - Match Thread

[Banquo]

It makes you wonder, just in hypothetical conjecture, IF Jones was replaced and his successor decided to dump Farrell (for Simmonds, say) would there be howls of protest? 4 or 5 games on, if we were playing better rugby and winning, would Farrell even get a mention (especially playing in a lower division)?

Unfortunately and in some eyes inexplicably, successive ostensibly wise and successful coaches have always picked Farrell; in fact I think Jones is the only one who has actually dropped him in the last 7 years.

I was not suggesting that someone else WOULD drop Farrell but wondering if the hype that keeps him on his pedestal would last if he was off the scene. I am beginning to think that Jones/Farrell/Youngs as a constant will always hold our ceiling down just as the overall standard of the playing squad is climbing. It is as if the performance in the SF v NZ was the big problem rather than the sign for the future.

I think our players are now too good to be run on and off the field in a style that perceives that winning ugly is the only future.

Oh I agree, with the caveat that we still don’t know how good our collective decision making would be if we actually tried to use the athletic ability of the side most of us would pick. I would also say we still slightly overestimate how good some of our preferred options are.

[Oakboy]

Unfortunately and in some eyes inexplicably, successive ostensibly wise and successful coaches have always picked Farrell; in fact I think Jones is the only one who has actually dropped him in the last 7 years.

I was not suggesting that someone else WOULD drop Farrell but wondering if the hype that keeps him on his pedestal would last if he was off the scene. I am beginning to think that Jones/Farrell/Youngs as a constant will always hold our ceiling down just as the overall standard of the playing squad is climbing. It is as if the performance in the SF v NZ was the big problem rather than the sign for the future.

I think our players are now too good to be run on and off the field in a style that perceives that winning ugly is the only future.

Oh I agree, with the caveat that we still don’t know how good our collective decision making would be if we actually tried to use the athletic ability of the side most of us would pick. I would also say we still slightly overestimate how good some of our preferred options are.

I think that sums it up. We ought to know how good they are, collectively and individually, but if they don't get on and we play as we are doing, we can only guess.

[Stom]

I was not suggesting that someone else WOULD drop Farrell but wondering if the hype that keeps him on his pedestal would last if he was off the scene. I am beginning to think that Jones/Farrell/Youngs as a constant will always hold our ceiling down just as the overall standard of the playing squad is climbing. It is as if the performance in the SF v NZ was the big problem rather than the sign for the future.

I think our players are now too good to be run on and off the field in a style that perceives that winning ugly is the only future.

Oh I agree, with the caveat that we still don’t know how good our collective decision making would be if we actually tried to use the athletic ability of the side most of us would pick. I would also say we still slightly overestimate how good some of our preferred options are.

I think that sums it up. We ought to know how good they are, collectively and individually, but if they don't get on and we play as we are doing, we can only guess.

Why should we? We don't see them every day? We don't have access to their data? We can't judge if certain players have a better ability to produce under pressure than others as we have such a small sample size to look at. Their coaches have a huge sample size to look at.

[Banquo]

Oh I agree, with the caveat that we still don’t know how good our collective decision making would be if we actually tried to use the athletic ability of the side most of us would pick. I would also say we still slightly overestimate how good some of our preferred options are.

I think that sums it up. We ought to know how good they are, collectively and individually, but if they don't get on and we play as we are doing, we can only guess.

Why should we? We don't see them every day? We don't have access to their data? We can't judge if certain players have a better ability to produce under pressure than others as we have such a small sample size to look at. Their coaches have a huge sample size to look at.

I was meaning until actually tested against real opposition playing a more fluid and intense game. None of your in camp analysis can tell you what will happen to the decision making in match conditions under stress; and I don’t just mean passing, kicking etc, I mean decisions into contact, in support of contact and in defence. The premiership doesn’t help much, Europe a bit better, so for Eddie to switch to a full on different game plan does represent a risk; it’s pretty clear that we aim to ‘play’ for the first 10 minutes or so of each half and then settle back into territory and kicking.

I do think we have the individuals potentially capable of a different and more ‘ambitious’ style of Rugby. But Eddie is about results- which is why he gets imo overly hammered when we lose, even to a highly competent team like SA.

[jngf]

Going back to the Sam Underhill needs to attack more matter - my suggestion Mr Underhill invites Peter Winterbottom and Neil Back for a few pre-lockdown pints tomorrow at a mutually geographically convenient location - (e.g. The Postal Order Wetherspoons in Worcester?:) There Wints and Backy share their experience of how to develop a credible linking game for test openside rugby - and low and behold Underhill scores a scintillating hat trick of broken field tries V Georgia (plus puts away newly capped 6.Jack Willis for another) - RFU/Eddy Jones to pick up bar bill and train fares for all attendees. Problem solved....

[Digby]

How does Underhill looking to link play help if Youngs, Farrell and Furbank kick so much ball away? George Smith couldn't link that up

[jngf]

How does Underhill looking to link play help if Youngs, Farrell and Furbank kick so much ball away? George Smith couldn't link that up

Fair point - one must take baby steps!

[Stom]

Whether or not Underhill can link or handle, he won't get to show it if his entire role is that of 2020's Joe Worsley...

It sometimes feels like the only difference between this England team and that god awful team is that the opposition are a lot worse now and we have some really good players who can pull rabbits out of hats every now and again.

[Digby]

England are a very hard side to play against, they don't allow you many entry points other than some discipline issues. And the kicking does gain them a lot of ground and ball

[jngf]

England are a very hard side to play against, they don't allow you many entry points other than some discipline issues. And the kicking does gain them a lot of ground and ball

Shame that approach is so bloody tedious to watch!

[Digby]

England are a very hard side to play against, they don't allow you many entry points other than some discipline issues. And the kicking does gain them a lot of ground and ball

Shame that approach is so bloody tedious to watch!

I agree, but it delivers many positive results and makes England among the top 2-3 teams. And in truth if England played a faster game ball in hand at best we'd still be among the top 2-3 teams, it's not like we'd suddenly be like NZ with a 95% win ratio

[Oakboy]

England are a very hard side to play against, they don't allow you many entry points other than some discipline issues. And the kicking does gain them a lot of ground and ball

Shame that approach is so bloody tedious to watch!

I agree, but it delivers many positive results and makes England among the top 2-3 teams. And in truth if England played a faster game ball in hand at best we'd still be among the top 2-3 teams, it's not like we'd suddenly be like NZ with a 95% win ratio

There is no current requirement to entertain. The only way anything will change is if TV companies decide to reduce their contributions. Twickenham tickets do not even need to be sold.

[Puja]

England are a very hard side to play against, they don't allow you many entry points other than some discipline issues. And the kicking does gain them a lot of ground and ball

*Good* kicking gains a lot of ground and ball - the RWC semi-final, the win against France last year, the win against Ireland. The game against Italy showcased aimless kicking, which turns over the ball and only gains ground if the other side is willing to indulge us and kick it back to us less effectively.

Puja

[Digby]

England are a very hard side to play against, they don't allow you many entry points other than some discipline issues. And the kicking does gain them a lot of ground and ball

*Good* kicking gains a lot of ground and ball - the RWC semi-final, the win against France last year, the win against Ireland. The game against Italy showcased aimless kicking, which turns over the ball and only gains ground if the other side is willing to indulge us and kick it back to us less effectively.

Puja

There are instances in the Italy game were it worked, or where their structures could have worked. And I do think it interesting to see how many chases our front row lead, because depth resource management handling multiple kicks is tricky, the first kick is easy to resource, possibly the 2nd, but the 3rd onwards gets potentially very tricky and by sending up front rowers on the chase we keep more suitable backs to cover the return kick and win at kick tennis. I do love that sort of detail, even when I don't like watching it