Autumn review?

[Raggs]

Despite what some may think, I really hope you are right. I look at everything he has done since his appointment and conclude that he's the biggest con-merchant in the game's history. I take no joy from that and really want to be proved wrong - because I am convinced that he is wrecking our best ever player pool. The latest kick-fest on the back of a horrendous coaching disaster v SA does nothing to suggest he is with it. Yes, he has been there, seen it all, got the t-shirt etc. All he has done is fail, IMO, when it comes to the crunch.

I think you might want to look at his coaching record and the available players with a different pair of specs on

You mean, one RWC win in 2007 as an assistant coach and failure in every stint as head coach?

Is success only measured in RWC wins? In that case there's not many coaches out there who're very good.

[Danno]

And of those, none are currently coaching

[Oakboy]

I think you might want to look at his coaching record and the available players with a different pair of specs on

You mean, one RWC win in 2007 as an assistant coach and failure in every stint as head coach?

Is success only measured in RWC wins? In that case there's not many coaches out there who're very good.

Well, not exactly but maybe it is worth looking at long-term, regular failure, especially with a coach's home country?

I was just winding Banquo up (and coming off second-best as usual). If you rate Jones, let's leave it at that.

[Digby]

You mean, one RWC win in 2007 as an assistant coach and failure in every stint as head coach?

Is success only measured in RWC wins? In that case there's not many coaches out there who're very good.

Well, not exactly but maybe it is worth looking at long-term, regular failure, especially with a coach's home country?

I was just winding Banquo up (and coming off second-best as usual). If you rate Jones, let's leave it at that.

Okay, what do you think Jones has done to our attack? Either in stages or across the duration

[Mellsblue]

It’s a bit like the argument that we should scrap the Lions as they rarely win a test series against SANZAR*. If you follow this train of thought to it’s logical conclusion, you’d have to scrap all the home nations, ie there’s absolutely no context.
Jones failed to win a World Cup final whilst being successful against pretty much every other benchmark. I do think he has his limitations, who doesn’t, and I think they are writ large atm but to say he’s not a good coach is to avoid looking at all the facts.

*apols if this leads to even a single post that includes the word jamboree.

[Banquo]

You mean, one RWC win in 2007 as an assistant coach and failure in every stint as head coach?

Is success only measured in RWC wins? In that case there's not many coaches out there who're very good.

Well, not exactly but maybe it is worth looking at long-term, regular failure, especially with a coach's home country?

I was just winding Banquo up (and coming off second-best as usual). If you rate Jones, let's leave it at that.

Not sure why you are winding me up- I’m not much of a Jones fan per se, but acknowledge his achievements. He has a near 80% win rate for England, miles higher than even Woodward or Rowell achieved, and the former had a lot of quality to work with (and in fairness had brought some through). As a coach, you can’t fault his work rate, attention to detail, protecting his players externally, and drive for intensity. He has some blind spots, but all coaches do, and I think one of those would be having enough people around him to challenge.

[Raggs]

Not sure why you are winding me up- I’m not much of a Jones fan per se, but acknowledge his achievements. He has a near 80% win rate for England, miles higher than even Woodward or Rowell achieved, and the former had a lot of quality to work with (and in fairness had brought some through). As a coach, you can’t fault his work rate, attention to detail, protecting his players externally, and drive for intensity. He has some blind spots, but all coaches do, and I think one of those would be having enough people around him to challenge.

I don't think Mitchell strikes me as the sort to not tell him what they think. Unfortunately, that's defence. However, I don't think Amor is going to be willing to just sit quiet either. Whether all 3 can mesh and find something that they/we are happy with, who knows. But neither of those 2 strike me as yes men.

[Banquo]

Not sure why you are winding me up- I’m not much of a Jones fan per se, but acknowledge his achievements. He has a near 80% win rate for England, miles higher than even Woodward or Rowell achieved, and the former had a lot of quality to work with (and in fairness had brought some through). As a coach, you can’t fault his work rate, attention to detail, protecting his players externally, and drive for intensity. He has some blind spots, but all coaches do, and I think one of those would be having enough people around him to challenge.

I don't think Mitchell strikes me as the sort to not tell him what they think. Unfortunately, that's defence. However, I don't think Amor is going to be willing to just sit quiet either. Whether all 3 can mesh and find something that they/we are happy with, who knows. But neither of those 2 strike me as yes men.

I did think of Mitchell, that’s why I said ‘enough people to challenge’ We shall have to see on the others, but his book is very much my way or the highway... and further I don’t just mean coaching staff; once Woodward removed/lost Mitchell and Ashton, the players, esp Johnson became his biggest source of challenge. I’d think Faz is likely on the pleasing side of the camp.

[Banquo]

Ps when did Amor actually start with Eddie? Was it for the 6N? And where/when does Ryles fit in?

[Mellsblue]

Ryles is skills coach. Supposedly, he is currently working on running lines and timing of the pass.....I wish I were joking.....vicious rumours that Daly was daydreaming during these sessions.
Interestingly, at least for me, Ben Ryan said on the ruck podcast that Amor was pretty negative for a sevens coach so don’t expect him to necessarily be demanding an expensive gameplan.

[Raggs]

Ryles is skills coach. Supposedly, he is currently working on running lines and timing of the pass.....I wish I were joking.....vicious rumours that Daly was daydreaming during these sessions.
Interestingly, at least for me, Ben Ryan said on the ruck podcast that Amor was pretty negative for a sevens coach so don’t expect him to necessarily be demanding an expensive gameplan.

Ben Ryan does seem to like to toot Ben Ryan's horn though. And whilst Fiji easily won the olympics, Britain were second, and I know which player pool was the stronger in my mind.

[Oakboy]

Is success only measured in RWC wins? In that case there's not many coaches out there who're very good.

Well, not exactly but maybe it is worth looking at long-term, regular failure, especially with a coach's home country?

I was just winding Banquo up (and coming off second-best as usual). If you rate Jones, let's leave it at that.

Okay, what do you think Jones has done to our attack? Either in stages or across the duration

Er, neutered it by picking Farrell for every game.

[Mellsblue]

Ryles is skills coach. Supposedly, he is currently working on running lines and timing of the pass.....I wish I were joking.....vicious rumours that Daly was daydreaming during these sessions.
Interestingly, at least for me, Ben Ryan said on the ruck podcast that Amor was pretty negative for a sevens coach so don’t expect him to necessarily be demanding an expensive gameplan.

Ben Ryan does seem to like to toot Ben Ryan's horn though. And whilst Fiji easily won the olympics, Britain were second, and I know which player pool was the stronger in my mind.

Even if all that were true, and I’m not saying it’s not, how does that preclude Amor from being a fairly negative sevens coach and therefore possibly not demanding a more expansive gameplan?

[Raggs]

Ryles is skills coach. Supposedly, he is currently working on running lines and timing of the pass.....I wish I were joking.....vicious rumours that Daly was daydreaming during these sessions.
Interestingly, at least for me, Ben Ryan said on the ruck podcast that Amor was pretty negative for a sevens coach so don’t expect him to necessarily be demanding an expensive gameplan.

Ben Ryan does seem to like to toot Ben Ryan's horn though. And whilst Fiji easily won the olympics, Britain were second, and I know which player pool was the stronger in my mind.

Even if all that were true, and I’m not saying it’s not, how does that preclude Amor from being a fairly negative sevens coach and therefore possibly not demanding a more expansive gameplan?

Is Amor a negative 7s coach? Or was he just not coaching the flying Fijians?

[Banquo]

Ryles is skills coach. Supposedly, he is currently working on running lines and timing of the pass.....I wish I were joking.....vicious rumours that Daly was daydreaming during these sessions.
Interestingly, at least for me, Ben Ryan said on the ruck podcast that Amor was pretty negative for a sevens coach so don’t expect him to necessarily be demanding an expensive gameplan.

Yes I know the job titles, was wondering about when they a started properly working together and how it functions in real life.

[Banquo]

Ben Ryan does seem to like to toot Ben Ryan's horn though. And whilst Fiji easily won the olympics, Britain were second, and I know which player pool was the stronger in my mind.

Even if all that were true, and I’m not saying it’s not, how does that preclude Amor from being a fairly negative sevens coach and therefore possibly not demanding a more expansive gameplan?

Is Amor a negative 7s coach? Or was he just not coaching the flying Fijians?

I think you should keeping asking each other the same question and see who cracks...

[Mellsblue]

Even if all that were true, and I’m not saying it’s not, how does that preclude Amor from being a fairly negative sevens coach and therefore possibly not demanding a more expansive gameplan?

Is Amor a negative 7s coach? Or was he just not coaching the flying Fijians?

I think you should keeping asking each other the same question and see who cracks...

In this case it was definitely the egg and not the chicken.....I hope.

[Digby]

Well, not exactly but maybe it is worth looking at long-term, regular failure, especially with a coach's home country?

I was just winding Banquo up (and coming off second-best as usual). If you rate Jones, let's leave it at that.

Okay, what do you think Jones has done to our attack? Either in stages or across the duration

Er, neutered it by picking Farrell for every game.

Which is sort of true. But if you look at how fast the ball is now getting pinged around in those little groups of 3-4 outside the 9 you'd have to concede the speed of ball movement from Ford and Farrell has markedly increased in recent seasons. You could easily say that's not exactly working, you might say taking a moment's more reflection might allow for a better decision and a more sympathetic pass, but you couldn't say it's not in its way very skilful and a notable change.

I remember a few seasons back being at an England football training session and someone explaining how there were some new players in camp that weren't known/trusted by some more established players, notably Scholes and Gerrard, and to watch how fast those two especially but also many of the 'senior players' would ping the ball into the feet of the new players to see if they felt they could trust them or to establish a weakness and proceed to ignore them. And England rugby almost now does that in actual games because the speed of the ball being often puts a huge emphasis on the players and the timings of movement, whether Eddie would like the take our attack is based on a mistrust of our attack I don't know, but I suspect not.

Then beyond the speed of the ball being moved Eddie has a lot of decision makers in the backline, which is very rugby league with the use of the decoy runners, the idea being the decision to play wide isn't an easy scan for the 10 that's down to the 12, as soon as the 12 gets the ball if the 10 has wrapped around then the call is on the 13 and the decision on going wide keeps getting shunted wider as the ball moves wider. So you've got the hoped for development of moving the ball much faster than we used to see through the hands and the multitude of decision making with Ford, Farrell, Slade and Daly.

Again I'd accept it's not exactly working, whether down to kicking, whether down to what happens if we push a bit wider and struggle to support (and actually there's another big area of development under Eddie on attack, looking at how we support, though again you might contend the support and changes to that haven't all worked), and struggle to support whether we're making a half-break of getting hit back behind the tackle line.

But I really object to the notion Eddie isn't doing stuff, the shifts we see in how those groups run outside the 9 are so fast now, and we will be stressing a defence with how fast Ford and Farrell move the ball, yes we can't read it well but sure as shit nor can a defence because it's so fast, and England vary hugely the distancing/width on the running options even in those tiny groups which will over and over stretch and contract a defence giving them almost a continual guessing game, a continual delivery of parallel changes if you will . Okay you're reliant on a wrong guess at times from the defence if you can't simply smash over the gainline, but that's about the best you can do if trying to eke out halfbeaks and 1 on 1s.

If we can get better at supporting and resourcing our attack we should in theory get more breaks and expose more 1 on 1 chances, alright you might get a miracle game from a defence where they make the right decision over and over, but the odds will move in our favour with the system they have if they can make some tiny improvements in presentation, clearout, taking the ball a smidge closer to the line, and getting the blocking/decoy runners better timed. And it's not going to take much more than a number of small changes to go from our current results to sticking another 3-4 tries on our scores, but those small changes will not be easy to find in a game that's so fast and so physical.

[Banquo]

Trouble is that it’s a little too clever for its own good, and at the moment looks like an esoteric exercise with no tangible positive result. And that’s just your post!

I still think the core problems outside the kicking remain at least two fold- lack of directness/threat in midfield, and the skill levels required to execute the set up plays under pressure; it’s clear passing isn’t good enough, it’s clear we don’t convert the half chances we make (fix your man!!) and decision making isn’t sharp. I’d agree we have a platform (and could do more with forward runners), but we need to get a better back line balance and improve the skills/confidence of those remaining.

[Digby]

Results are not good, but there's been a fair amount of development and change, and fair amount of that coming from through Farrell. Things would be easier with Manu, things would be easier if Lawrence establishes himself at test level as a quality player. But if we are stuck as we are there are things which can improve very quickly with Ford and Farrell. It probably is a little esoteric, but it's been a very hard sport to watch on TV for a while and actually understand what's going on

One caveat to my longer post, is a lot of that probably came out of the Wisemantel approach, so Amor might not keep us on that path.

[Oakboy]

Diggers, I admire you for defending the crap to an extent but I just don't see how you think there will be substantial progress from this point with Jones's normal selections.

What purpose is served by trying to speed up play beyond Youngs's and Farrell's skill set? We still see loopy passes from Youngs in every game and we still see Farrell balls-up moves whether at 10 or 12. It all reminds me of the Army maxim 'hurry up and wait'.

The forwards win the ball quickly. Stop. Youngs box-kicks it away. Stop. Or, Youngs gets it out quickly to Ford or Farrell in loads of space with the backline itching to play. Stop. Up goes the ball to the opposition fullback. Stop.

And, if there is any preparation of running lines I never saw the evidence. Having said that, with the ball kicked so often, the other backs would need some sort of magical perception to recognise the odd occasion when they are meant to be on the receiving end of a pass. Oddly enough, Furbank managed one or two good darts, I thought - not that I advocate his selection - but I wonder if his lack of time in the squad helped. He just did what came naturally. Strange that.

[Digby]

If you want to pick a better 9 than Youngs I've some sympathy, ditto for asking him to pass more as a default. But given what's he's being asked to do he's had a strong run of games, and Robson doesn't even look on the same level taking his first steps at the higher level.

And clearly Farrell does a lot of stuff to a really high standard even if as with Youngs you'd rather start with a different balance.

And why you'd claim there's no prep in the running lines I've no idea. You might not like all those block/run options we seen now in rugby, but they're hugely informed by intense prep work. The evidence is in every game from pretty much every side, and we're among the best at it with Ford and Farrell, it perhaps doesn't come across well on TV just how fast that ball is being banged around in those little pinball setups, but that will be an area that speaks to why coaches like Farrell more than a lot of fans do.

Left to me we would have been playing people not Youngs at 9 from a long time back, and I'd pick Farrell at 10 or on the bench (and probably on the bench). But they are doing an awful lot that shows huge change.

[Banquo]

Results are not good, but there's been a fair amount of development and change, and fair amount of that coming from through Farrell. Things would be easier with Manu, things would be easier if Lawrence establishes himself at test level as a quality player. But if we are stuck as we are there are things which can improve very quickly with Ford and Farrell. It probably is a little esoteric, but it's been a very hard sport to watch on TV for a while and actually understand what's going on

One caveat to my longer post, is a lot of that probably came out of the Wisemantel approach, so Amor might not keep us on that path.

Id argue not that rapidly with Faz at 12 tbh, I just don’t think his skills or thinking are up to snuff. But I agree that there is a platform to build on- we must find a way of using talented back 3 running options available- and that also means changing how we support; we get turned over wide quite a bit when we deign to go there . However, we can do so much more, and hope we do!!

[Banquo]

What does Faz do to a really high standard consistently out of interest ?

[Digby]

Results are not good, but there's been a fair amount of development and change, and fair amount of that coming from through Farrell. Things would be easier with Manu, things would be easier if Lawrence establishes himself at test level as a quality player. But if we are stuck as we are there are things which can improve very quickly with Ford and Farrell. It probably is a little esoteric, but it's been a very hard sport to watch on TV for a while and actually understand what's going on

One caveat to my longer post, is a lot of that probably came out of the Wisemantel approach, so Amor might not keep us on that path.

Id argue not that rapidly with Faz at 12 tbh, I just don’t think his skills or thinking are up to snuff. But I agree that there is a platform to build on- we must find a way of using talented back 3 running options available- and that also means changing how we support; we get turned over wide quite a bit when we deign to go there . However, we can do so much more, and hope we do!!

There's the rub. Both of us would probably prefer multiphase use of the ball even when the defence makes a good read on our attack over 1-2 phases, and probably a willingness to use ball in more areas at least some of the time, and that's especially reliant on support and discipline, two areas we're hit and miss, or sometimes hit and hit. The strategy though is much more cautious when faced with 1-2 average-good reads by a defence