vs Georgia

[Mellsblue]

Ultimate question, "Is Jones good for English rugby?"

I’d ask “Who would be better for English rugby?”

[fivepointer]

Ultimate question, "Is Jones good for English rugby?"

He's a winning coach. Thats good. You can quibble with his methods, tactics and selections and you can certainly hope for a touch more style in our play, but ultimately he has delivered results.

[Timbo]

England have played loads of very good modern test rugby under Jones. We kick the ball a lot and we have a game plan that centres around aggressive defence, kick chase, set piece and gain line. No different to NZ, France and South Africa. That’s rugby nowadays.

I don’t recall this conversation when we blitzed Ireland and Wales in the Spring, nor when we stuffed Argentina, Australia and NZ in consecutive weeks at the WC. Like all teams if we lose the gain line or struggle at set piece we can have problems.

Italy was clearly just a clunky and rusty performance.

[Oakboy]

England have played loads of very good modern test rugby under Jones. We kick the ball a lot and we have a game plan that centres around aggressive defence, kick chase, set piece and gain line. No different to NZ, France and South Africa. That’s rugby nowadays.

I don’t recall this conversation when we blitzed Ireland and Wales in the Spring, nor when we stuffed Argentina, Australia and NZ in consecutive weeks at the WC. Like all teams if we lose the gain line or struggle at set piece we can have problems.

Italy was clearly just a clunky and rusty performance.

I would like to agree with your last sentence but Farrell kicking it up in the air was not him disobeying instructions - more, obeying them. If we could not beat Italy by at least trying to play rugby is there real hope for the future?

[Scrumhead]

England have played loads of very good modern test rugby under Jones. We kick the ball a lot and we have a game plan that centres around aggressive defence, kick chase, set piece and gain line. No different to NZ, France and South Africa. That’s rugby nowadays.

I don’t recall this conversation when we blitzed Ireland and Wales in the Spring, nor when we stuffed Argentina, Australia and NZ in consecutive weeks at the WC. Like all teams if we lose the gain line or struggle at set piece we can have problems.

Italy was clearly just a clunky and rusty performance.

Well Oakboy’s anti Eddie Jones agenda is pretty constant. He asks this question every few days so I imagine he did ask it even after some of Eddie’s landmark results.

I’m with Mells. I genuinely don’t see many obviously better options out there right now so why change? Particularly when his winning record is plain to see.

I would like to agree with your last sentence but Farrell kicking it up in the air was not him disobeying instructions - more, obeying them. If we could not beat Italy by at least trying to play rugby is there real hope for the future?

Depends what you’re hoping for?

I’d certainly like to see us playing more rugby, but I think under Eddie we can continue to be confident of winning more 6 Nations and having a good crack at the 2023 RWC rather than simply ‘hoping’. He’s proved that much.

[Timbo]

England have played loads of very good modern test rugby under Jones. We kick the ball a lot and we have a game plan that centres around aggressive defence, kick chase, set piece and gain line. No different to NZ, France and South Africa. That’s rugby nowadays.

I don’t recall this conversation when we blitzed Ireland and Wales in the Spring, nor when we stuffed Argentina, Australia and NZ in consecutive weeks at the WC. Like all teams if we lose the gain line or struggle at set piece we can have problems.

Italy was clearly just a clunky and rusty performance.

I would like to agree with your last sentence but Farrell kicking it up in the air was not him disobeying instructions - more, obeying them. If we could not beat Italy by at least trying to play rugby is there real hope for the future?

I’m not really sure what you’re getting at mate, so I can’t answer the question. If your issue is with the kicking, then I’d suggest you have a look at how much the likes of NZ and South Africa kick , not to mention that the single biggest difference France have made is that they now kick better and far more often.

I strongly suspect under Eddie we’ll continue winning around 80% of our games, give or take, and a vocal minority will continue to say “well, we could win better”.

[p/d]

Ultimate question, "Is Jones good for English rugby?"

I’d ask “Who would be better for English rugby?”

Dannii Minogue. Music’s gain, rugby’s loss. As the pop princess’ penned in her debut single Love and Kisses, ‘don’t give it to no one else, baby baby’

[Oakboy]

It's strange how easily we knock the roundball game. One of its bad points, IMO, is that it has fans who see only their team. Style counts for zero - just win the pissing contest.

I became a rugby fan for the joy of the spectacle much as I love to see England win. If winning becomes all that matters then the game is reduced in attractiveness. I doubt I will be the only one to lose interest, sadly.

[Scrumhead]

Style does count although, I’d say the casual rugby fan is typically more attracted to a winning team and less well equipped to judge what ‘good’ should look like.

Under Eddie we’ve had spells of decent rugby and a great winning record. Kicking the leather off the ball isn’t really to my tastes either, but I’d rather win with a semi-attractive team than lose playing cavalier rugby that doesn’t actually get results.

It’s about finding the right balance and when Eddie gets it right, we have that. When I look at the RWC semi final for example, I genuinely thought we were excellent with variety, skill and quality across the park. I’d just like to see that a bit more often.

When we have shown what we’re capable of, I don’t really know why we revert to a limited gameplan.

[Raggs]

We've also hoofed the leather off it in some games, and still played attractive rugby when we chose to play. I just think Farrell is an issue at 10. I believe Ford (and maybe Farrell at 12) would have spotted some of those opportunities that were spurned in favour of another kick, having already achieved what we were trying to do (cause a problem in the defence).

I'm not a fan of so much kicking, but it's often not so much that I'm put off. I am put off when we choose to kick instead of playing what appear to be good opportunities to have a go in hand with little risk.

[morepork]

Eddie is the new Gatland. Safety and percentages. Is there something in the water there?

[Scrumhead]

England under Eddie play far more attractive rugby than Wales ever did under Gatland. Wales had some standout performances in his tenure, but they were still pretty much the Warrenball blueprint. England don’t play the same way all of the time, even if that’s what Oakboy wants to believe.

[Raggs]

England under Eddie play far more attractive rugby than Wales ever did under Gatland. Wales had some standout performances in his tenure, but they were still pretty much the Warrenball blueprint. England don’t play the same way all of the time, even if that’s what Oakboy wants to believe.

Or Ireland under Schmidt.

[Puja]

I am hoping that the Italy game was a mixture of Farrell at 10 and us lacking an attacking coach. Hopefully the new guy we've brought in has done something useful with his 2 weeks in camp.

Puja

[Timbo]

Interesting to note that the great Beauden Barrett kicked the ball 11 times in the most recent Bledisloe. Zero contestable and 1 regathered.

[Cameo]

I suspect he would have kicked it under 5 times against Italy. I'm also very impressed by whoever regathered a non contestable kick!

As an outsider I find Jones weird. At your best under him, you play great rugby. It's just when you decide to play a kicking game, you play such a robotic one. I don't know if that is just the kicking styles of the players involved or what but it seems like a switch is flicked called "up and under".

[Oakboy]

England won the 6N. So, does that justify the performance against Italy? Based on the table at the start of the match and Ireland's potential bonus poin win, punditry was all for us stacking up the points difference. Indeed, predictions on this board had us scoring 40+ points etc.

Does impartial post-match analysis suggest we underachieved in the game?

My admittedly prejudiced view is that with different tactics (even with limited preparation and the effect of club finals) we could and should have won better, scoring more and conceding less. I can see nothing wrong with wanting us to play more attractive rugby that would have almost certainly achieved a better scoring result. It was against Italy for goodness sake!

[Mellsblue]

Yeah. That Barrett kicked so much in a tight and, ultimately, lost game does nothing to validate England’s tactics against a poor Italian side against whom they could’ve and should’ve won at a canter.
I’m not against those tactics if they’re deemed necessary to win a World Cup match a top 6/7/8 nation but against that Italy side......
If we play like that against Georgia in the scramble to cobble something together* cup I’ll be bloody disappointed.

*this isn’t an insult of the unions/organisers. They’ve done bloody well to get any matches put on, let alone a competition with some coherence.

[Scrumhead]

England won the 6N. So, does that justify the performance against Italy? Based on the table at the start of the match and Ireland's potential bonus poin win, punditry was all for us stacking up the points difference. Indeed, predictions on this board had us scoring 40+ points etc.

Does impartial post-match analysis suggest we underachieved in the game?

My admittedly prejudiced view is that with different tactics (even with limited preparation and the effect of club finals) we could and should have won better, scoring more and conceding less. I can see nothing wrong with wanting us to play more attractive rugby that would have almost certainly achieved a better scoring result. It was against Italy for goodness sake!

‘Could and should we have one better, scoring more’. 100% yes. Was I happy with our performance? 100% no.

As for conceding less, we leaked 1 try for 5 points. They scored 2 against Ireland and 3 against France. Not sure what your point is there? Our defence wasn’t and isn’t a huge issue.

I’ve said several times that I’d like to see us play more attractive rugby, but all of this is in response to your repetitive question ‘Is Eddie Jones good for England/English rugby?’. Surely you can see that there is only one sensible answer to that based upon any kind of factual measure.

It’s very clear that you don’t like Eddie, but you don’t really have anything other than your ‘prejudiced’ and completely subjective view to base your assertion that ‘Eddie is bad for English rugby’ on. That argument just doesn’t hold water when you put results and facts in to the mix.

[Mellsblue]

Ultimate question, "Is Jones good for English rugby?"

I’d ask “Who would be better for English rugby?”

Dannii Minogue. Music’s gain, rugby’s loss. As the pop princess’ penned in her debut single Love and Kisses, ‘don’t give it to no one else, baby baby’

Then, despite thinking you’d made the prettier and edgier choice, you’d eventually just be thinking ‘Would Kylie be better for English rugby?” You wouldn’t be able to get her out of your head and would be left spinning around.

[jngf]

Ultimate question, "Is Jones good for English rugby?"

Not anymore

[Scrumhead]

Seriously? This again ... I’ll ask the same questions that neither you or Oakboy can actually give a decent answer* to ...

1) Why is Eddie bad for English rugby?

2) Who is a better option?

*For avoidance of doubt, a decent answer requires some factual substance, not just your opinion.

If there’s nothing meaningful to back it up, change the record man.

[jngf]

Seriously? This again ... I’ll ask the same questions that neither you or Oakboy can actually give a decent answer* to ...

1) Why is Eddie bad for English rugby?

2) Who is a better option?

*For avoidance of doubt, a decent answer requires some factual substance, not just your opinion.

If there’s nothing meaningful to back it up, change the record man.

Scrumhead, I think you’re near Trumpian in your lack of tolerance to different opinions to those you personally hold.

To answer

(I) Some of his selections have been truly crass (imo)
- he’s no further forward on picking a settled center partnership for instance and keeps picking mediocre players like Farrell, Ewels when there are better options
Plus on results in terms of World Cup he’s at same level as Brian Ashton - reached the final but lost it.

(ii) I’d look at Baxter or Diamond (I’ve have SCW back rather than Jones whose just cashing in now imo)

[Raggs]

Jones has just won a 6N right? I'm not imagining this correct?

[Puja]

And in terms of results, I must've missed the bit where Brian Ashton's team beat New Zealand in their full pomp.

Puja