You don’t understand what that role was then.jngf wrote:He doesn’t quite have the top end gas for that role imo.Banquo wrote:Not sure I like the jj as blind side wing thing. Too many backs end up in unfamiliar places
Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Moderator: Puja
-
- Posts: 19354
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
-
- Posts: 1668
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Gauzere's not helped the front rows with the complete lack of any rhythm to the scrum instructions
- Galfon
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Pretty unconvincing 2nd. half.
-
- Posts: 1668
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Looked like we just wanted a defending training drill.Galfon wrote:Pretty unconvincing 2nd. half.
- jngf
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 5:57 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
England win but boy do they make it look dull
-
- Posts: 12249
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
I just don't get it. A personal vendetta against him by Jones is genuinely the most logical conclusion I can come to. We know LCD picks up injuries pretty frequently. Why not actually take a serious look at the next guy?Galfon wrote:Hard Dunn-by..
-
- Posts: 2698
- Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:41 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Idk why we don't just play 12 forwards, Youngs, Faz and May
-
- Posts: 3451
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:19 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
I find a defence like that pretty entertaining. Outstanding defence!
Also I thought we didn’t compete at the breakdown?
Also I thought we didn’t compete at the breakdown?

- Galfon
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
FT Eng 18 - 7 Ire
Much tougher test. Excellent defence, but no tries 2nd half, hence no BP. Workmanlike+.
Much tougher test. Excellent defence, but no tries 2nd half, hence no BP. Workmanlike+.
- Mr Mwenda
- Posts: 2476
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:42 am
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Yeah, good to see some improvement. Ireland aren't a bad side so a decent day at the office, rackon.
-
- Posts: 3304
- Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:17 am
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Little time with ball in hand in attacking positions but loved seeing us attack from our own 22.
Phenomenal defence and we're clearly approaching the breakdown differently with a lot of players having a bite and forcing opposition to commit players.
Enjoyed that.
Phenomenal defence and we're clearly approaching the breakdown differently with a lot of players having a bite and forcing opposition to commit players.
Enjoyed that.
-
- Posts: 2698
- Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:41 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Pundits saying our back row made 74 tackles, missing 0.
-
- Posts: 19354
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Lolz. Quite a few myths debunked today!!Epaminondas Pules wrote:I find a defence like that pretty entertaining. Outstanding defence!
Also I thought we didn’t compete at the breakdown?
Youngs resorted to type and Faz was poor. Penalties an issue.
But sort of odd to not have much ball but feel you are on the front fooot!
-
- Posts: 3451
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:19 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
I know Willis can feel slightly hard done by, but jeez Underhill, Curry and Earl were all outstanding.
-
- Posts: 3304
- Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:17 am
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
If Willis couldn't train for me its the right call and that's coming as one of Willis' biggest fans.
-
- Posts: 1668
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
The blitz defence was excellent. Helped by Ireland not trying the chip until after 70 minutes.Banquo wrote:Lolz. Quite a few myths debunked today!!Epaminondas Pules wrote:I find a defence like that pretty entertaining. Outstanding defence!
Also I thought we didn’t compete at the breakdown?
Youngs resorted to type and Faz was poor. Penalties an issue.
But sort of odd to not have much ball but feel you are on the front fooot!
-
- Posts: 5930
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Cant fault our defensive effort.
Well done to May on his tries.
And that was enough to win despite losing line outs, giving away a stream of penalties, losing the 2nd half and displaying virtually nothing in attack in the second period.
We establish dominance and then coast along while out opponents catch up - see Wales and Ireland at home in the 6N's.
Its just a bit....unsatisfying.
Another absolutely shit trend is giving Tom Dunn less than 2 minutes at the end of a game.
Well done to May on his tries.
And that was enough to win despite losing line outs, giving away a stream of penalties, losing the 2nd half and displaying virtually nothing in attack in the second period.
We establish dominance and then coast along while out opponents catch up - see Wales and Ireland at home in the 6N's.
Its just a bit....unsatisfying.
Another absolutely shit trend is giving Tom Dunn less than 2 minutes at the end of a game.
-
- Posts: 19354
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Agree with the first two parts. I didn’t enjoy the penalties or a lot of our half back play; the pack was phenomenal generally, though concentration at set piece time was lacking sometime, Jamie’s arrows a bit off. May done well, being a full time openside is hard work! Lawrence did ok, not much else happening in the backs.Raggs wrote:Little time with ball in hand in attacking positions but loved seeing us attack from our own 22.
Phenomenal defence and we're clearly approaching the breakdown differently with a lot of players having a bite and forcing opposition to commit players.
Enjoyed that.
-
- Posts: 19354
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
They did work one earlier, so have to question who was sweeping16th man wrote:The blitz defence was excellent. Helped by Ireland not trying the chip until after 70 minutes.Banquo wrote:Lolz. Quite a few myths debunked today!!Epaminondas Pules wrote:I find a defence like that pretty entertaining. Outstanding defence!
Also I thought we didn’t compete at the breakdown?
Youngs resorted to type and Faz was poor. Penalties an issue.
But sort of odd to not have much ball but feel you are on the front fooot!
-
- Posts: 19354
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Billy worked his socks off too, almost literally, huge tackle count for him.Epaminondas Pules wrote:I know Willis can feel slightly hard done by, but jeez Underhill, Curry and Earl were all outstanding.
-
- Posts: 12249
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Fat, small, slow, lazy and out of position but 74 tackles is good.Danno wrote:Pundits saying our back row made 74 tackles, missing 0.
-
- Posts: 19354
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
He’s got some work to do , but clearly has incentivised the incumbents to work harder!Raggs wrote:If Willis couldn't train for me its the right call and that's coming as one of Willis' biggest fans.
I’d play him ahead of Underhill. But he needs to get past Earl too.
Last edited by Banquo on Sat Nov 21, 2020 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 3451
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:19 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Absolutely. He was excellent in several facets.Banquo wrote:Billy worked his socks off too, almost literally, huge tackle count for him.Epaminondas Pules wrote:I know Willis can feel slightly hard done by, but jeez Underhill, Curry and Earl were all outstanding.
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 2:38 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Our ability to consistently make ground without the ball is amazing.
-
- Posts: 19354
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Eng v. Ire - Match thread
Yep. Front foot without the ball is a great start point!JellyHead wrote:Our ability to consistently make ground without the ball is amazing.