Autumn review?

[Digby]

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

The intangibles, and they're not nothing. And.... well then it depends, what's the yardstick for consistency against a modern defence?

[Scrumhead]

Farrell is clearly an influential character and a vocal leader (which is not the same as a good leader). When it comes to actual playing ability - most notably his kicking and defence, his skill level is massively hyped-up.

He doesn’t seem to have a good rapport with referees and doesn’t seem particularly good at rallying the team when things go wrong so I’m loathe to credit him too much for his on-field leadership.

Off the field, he speaks fairly well and in the footage I have seen, he definitely has the respect of the squad. That counts for something, but isn’t enough to make him as bulletproof as he seems to be. I have never known a player to get away with so many poor matches and remain an undisputed first choice.

The media always lavish praise on him for average performances and mostly make excuses when he plays poorly. I really don’t think that’s done him or England many favours as I think he genuinely believes his own hype.

Eddie isn’t the only coach to laud him as a world class, so there must be something we’re missing. I don’t have a f*cking clue what it is though ...

[fivepointer]

4 players in one....test match animal....etc

Blowed if i know what coaches see in Farrell but enough of them do so he simply has to have SOMETHING.

I did comment earlier in the thread that an injury ruling him out of the 6N's wouldnt be the worst thing for him and for England.

Thats is the only way he is not going to get picked.

[Spiffy]

Let's see if Gatland picks Farrell for the Lions tour. At the moment I don't think he should, based on consistently poor play, but I bet he will. There will be much bollocks talked about "warrior spirit" and all that kind of silly nonsense.

[Banquo]

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

The intangibles, and they're not nothing. And.... well then it depends, what's the yardstick for consistency against a modern defence?

The intangibles sounds like a cop out. He probably consistently works hard and has a high volume of chat.

So if I remove consistently, what does he do to a high standard by your own yardstick as you raised it?

[Banquo]

So all the feedback so far is what he does to a high standard doesn’t involve actual rugby skills other than communication. Ye gods. I mean he’s a moderately good place kicker, a limited range both off the tee and out of hand though sometimes pretty accurate and some good territorial choices. He is pretty tough and works hard, but his tackle technique can be sh*t, and he can snuff out attacks, but leaves a hole equally. He can pass well to the left if reasonably well set, the same isn’t true to the right. He occasionally does pick a good line, but running isn’t a strength. If he were about 18, I’d think here’s a lad with an attitude and potential

[Raggs]

Thoughts on why england are kicking etc by deadballarea:

Still watching, but just wanted to comment on the 18-20m pass off the left hand from Billy V. Brilliant pass, even if not under pressure.

[Mellsblue]

Don’t forget that Farrell can smile at the haka with an air of both petulance and whimsy. That is not easy and is most definitely an intangible. I’m told it also makes for a cracking screensaver on your phone and that’s not nothing...... even if it is closer to nothing than something.

[Digby]

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

The intangibles, and they're not nothing. And.... well then it depends, what's the yardstick for consistency against a modern defence?

The intangibles sounds like a cop out. He probably consistently works hard and has a high volume of chat.

So if I remove consistently, what does he do to a high standard by your own yardstick as you raised it?

Goal kicking, being physical in defence especially around wanting to go forwards, and the speed of the ball through his hands is excellent. I also tend to think he can hold a defence by his tendency to be square if not his actually carrying/running.

There are of course problem with some of that, for instance the ball might be moved so quickly it hasn't caused any defenders to bite, but with the right timings he is outstanding. This is the sort of area I'd prefer England to play a little more heads up, rather than rush forward at pace in attack and defence to apply massive pressure.

Still what is the yardstick for consistency at a suitable standard, 'cause off the top of my head I can't think of one in test rugby? Which might mean I need to lower my standards and be more accepting of how dominant defence is

[fivepointer]

He does do a lot of good work for charity, i understand.....

[Banquo]

The intangibles, and they're not nothing. And.... well then it depends, what's the yardstick for consistency against a modern defence?

The intangibles sounds like a cop out. He probably consistently works hard and has a high volume of chat.

So if I remove consistently, what does he do to a high standard by your own yardstick as you raised it?

Goal kicking, being physical in defence especially around wanting to go forwards, and the speed of the ball through his hands is excellent. I also tend to think he can hold a defence by his tendency to be square if not his actually carrying/running.

There are of course problem with some of that, for instance the ball might be moved so quickly it hasn't caused any defenders to bite, but with the right timings he is outstanding. This is the sort of area I'd prefer England to play a little more heads up, rather than rush forward at pace in attack and defence to apply massive pressure.

Still what is the yardstick for consistency at a suitable standard, 'cause off the top of my head I can't think of one in test rugby? Which might mean I need to lower my standards and be more accepting of how dominant defence is

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

[jngf]

The intangibles sounds like a cop out. He probably consistently works hard and has a high volume of chat.

So if I remove consistently, what does he do to a high standard by your own yardstick as you raised it?

Goal kicking, being physical in defence especially around wanting to go forwards, and the speed of the ball through his hands is excellent. I also tend to think he can hold a defence by his tendency to be square if not his actually carrying/running.

There are of course problem with some of that, for instance the ball might be moved so quickly it hasn't caused any defenders to bite, but with the right timings he is outstanding. This is the sort of area I'd prefer England to play a little more heads up, rather than rush forward at pace in attack and defence to apply massive pressure.

Still what is the yardstick for consistency at a suitable standard, 'cause off the top of my head I can't think of one in test rugby? Which might mean I need to lower my standards and be more accepting of how dominant defence is

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

He might give that current All Black captain a run for his money over the 7 shirt

[Digby]

The intangibles sounds like a cop out. He probably consistently works hard and has a high volume of chat.

So if I remove consistently, what does he do to a high standard by your own yardstick as you raised it?

Goal kicking, being physical in defence especially around wanting to go forwards, and the speed of the ball through his hands is excellent. I also tend to think he can hold a defence by his tendency to be square if not his actually carrying/running.

There are of course problem with some of that, for instance the ball might be moved so quickly it hasn't caused any defenders to bite, but with the right timings he is outstanding. This is the sort of area I'd prefer England to play a little more heads up, rather than rush forward at pace in attack and defence to apply massive pressure.

Still what is the yardstick for consistency at a suitable standard, 'cause off the top of my head I can't think of one in test rugby? Which might mean I need to lower my standards and be more accepting of how dominant defence is

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

Speed of ball through the hands where he's making wider passes is something of an issue. Speed of ball through the hands in those tight little groupings off the 9 with the blocking runners is being done very quickly, by both him and Ford.

I'm not making an argument he's a wonderful player or even that I'd pick him, more that Eddies does develop an attack, and that there are strengths to that attack which could deliver an awful lot more than the mess we're actually getting.

[Mikey Brown]

Goal kicking, being physical in defence especially around wanting to go forwards, and the speed of the ball through his hands is excellent. I also tend to think he can hold a defence by his tendency to be square if not his actually carrying/running.

There are of course problem with some of that, for instance the ball might be moved so quickly it hasn't caused any defenders to bite, but with the right timings he is outstanding. This is the sort of area I'd prefer England to play a little more heads up, rather than rush forward at pace in attack and defence to apply massive pressure.

Still what is the yardstick for consistency at a suitable standard, 'cause off the top of my head I can't think of one in test rugby? Which might mean I need to lower my standards and be more accepting of how dominant defence is

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

He might give that current All Black captain a run for his money over the 7 shirt

Finally we agree. I think he could have made an excellent 7.

In defence of some of the many missed tackles, he does seem aware of stopping the momentum but staying on his feet and bouncing back to his position to continue organising. Unfortunately this only works about half the time and leaves plenty of opportunity for missed tackles or high shots.

I’m also not convinced he personally is particularly arrogant or buys in to his own hype, but the insane competitiveness and drive seem to give him an edge (for coaches at least) that nobody can match.

[Banquo]

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

He might give that current All Black captain a run for his money over the 7 shirt

Finally we agree. I think he could have made an excellent 7.

In defence of some of the many missed tackles, he does seem aware of stopping the momentum but staying on his feet and bouncing back to his position to continue organising. Unfortunately this only works about half the time and leaves plenty of opportunity for missed tackles or high shots.

I’m also not convinced he personally is particularly arrogant or buys in to his own hype, but the insane competitiveness and drive seem to give him an edge (for coaches at least) that nobody can match.

Ironic given the iceman tag how often this spills over into sheer bad play, and again, sometimes this is a negative thing as a captain and the coaches manifestation on earth. All this said, we do have an excellent win percentage under Jones and Faz as a combo

[Banquo]

Goal kicking, being physical in defence especially around wanting to go forwards, and the speed of the ball through his hands is excellent. I also tend to think he can hold a defence by his tendency to be square if not his actually carrying/running.

There are of course problem with some of that, for instance the ball might be moved so quickly it hasn't caused any defenders to bite, but with the right timings he is outstanding. This is the sort of area I'd prefer England to play a little more heads up, rather than rush forward at pace in attack and defence to apply massive pressure.

Still what is the yardstick for consistency at a suitable standard, 'cause off the top of my head I can't think of one in test rugby? Which might mean I need to lower my standards and be more accepting of how dominant defence is

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

Speed of ball through the hands where he's making wider passes is something of an issue. Speed of ball through the hands in those tight little groupings off the 9 with the blocking runners is being done very quickly, by both him and Ford.

I'm not making an argument he's a wonderful player or even that I'd pick him, more that Eddies does develop an attack, and that there are strengths to that attack which could deliver an awful lot more than the mess we're actually getting.

I'm just disputing he does much, if anything, to a very high standard- and I agree with your last sentence, and personally think he's an obstacle to develop. He does a lot of things reasonably capably and consistently, but imo too many things poorly and inconsistently. For his skill set and talent, imo he can't afford to be making many mistakes, and he has been.

anyway....I look forward to us using the platform that is being established, attacking and skill coaches need to start earning their corn, alongside the boss.

[Oakboy]

One question I 'd love Jones to answer about Farrell: "How many kicks at goal does he need to miss before handing over the job?"

In the game against France, a good captain ought to have decided he was having a bad day after two misses and handed over to Ford. It might have been ballsy to carry on but it could have cost the match. Finally sneaking a win in extra time comes as close as possible to the
Iimit of justifying everything because 'it was a win'.

To me, that scenario is symptomatic of (so-called) character over judgement taking us down the wrong route and a clear indication that Farrell as captain is a fundamental error.

[Banquo]

Not sure how useful this is..but

http://www.goalkickers.co.za/

[Digby]

I'm just disputing he does much, if anything, to a very high standard- and I agree with your last sentence, and personally think he's an obstacle to develop. He does a lot of things reasonably capably and consistently, but imo too many things poorly and inconsistently. For his skill set and talent, imo he can't afford to be making many mistakes, and he has been.

anyway....I look forward to us using the platform that is being established, attacking and skill coaches need to start earning their corn, alongside the boss.

To my claim he moves the ball through the hands so quickly there is that might be what he's been told to do, just move the ball through the hands and don't worry so much about the outcome 'cause we just want the speed of play. But just on the speed of moving the ball he is very quick, if that's not a high standard when shuttling the ball around those little blocker groups I don't know what is.

Whether overall it's a gain... that I don't know, and without access to really good stats I suspect a guess is only that, which is to say not even an informed guess. My instinct is you could lose more time elsewhere than you gain in the moment, maybe that's not the case, or maybe we're betting on black 23 that sometimes we'll get the correct decision with a good execution and he'll have done it so fast we'll really be pushing hard.

And it could be I'm reading all this wrong and I'm just seeing things through a confirmation bias of my little pet theory here, given this does breakdown to fractions of seconds and the TV camera angle is a crap one to work out what's happening. But if I try to think back to Ford and Farrell under Burt I'm sure in my own mind (to my knowledge free of dementia but maybe it was for shit to begin with) that the speed of that play the ball between those 2 and into the hands of others is much, much faster.

I'd like to get a much better look at our use of depth of runners and how they're mixing up the spacings but it's a crap angle watching on the TV, and it's too close in hiding the bigger picture. And even with that it's still very much about creating a chance to create a line break or 1 on 1, it doesn't address problems in support and venturing into multiphase.

On the multiphase we do seem to be paring back on the system approach to support, or the system is now too complex to read, or the system isn't that complex it's just too complex for me. Where that leaves us trying to progress this area of the game I don't know, maybe Eddie's ahead of the curve, maybe it gets parked as being a bad idea in another 12-18 months.

[Epaminondas Pules]

The intangibles sounds like a cop out. He probably consistently works hard and has a high volume of chat.

So if I remove consistently, what does he do to a high standard by your own yardstick as you raised it?

Goal kicking, being physical in defence especially around wanting to go forwards, and the speed of the ball through his hands is excellent. I also tend to think he can hold a defence by his tendency to be square if not his actually carrying/running.

There are of course problem with some of that, for instance the ball might be moved so quickly it hasn't caused any defenders to bite, but with the right timings he is outstanding. This is the sort of area I'd prefer England to play a little more heads up, rather than rush forward at pace in attack and defence to apply massive pressure.

Still what is the yardstick for consistency at a suitable standard, 'cause off the top of my head I can't think of one in test rugby? Which might mean I need to lower my standards and be more accepting of how dominant defence is

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

Judging by how they've performed and the mess that is their centres I'd say he'd walk in. That's more a comment on the All Blacks than Farrell.

[Mikey Brown]

He might give that current All Black captain a run for his money over the 7 shirt

Finally we agree. I think he could have made an excellent 7.

In defence of some of the many missed tackles, he does seem aware of stopping the momentum but staying on his feet and bouncing back to his position to continue organising. Unfortunately this only works about half the time and leaves plenty of opportunity for missed tackles or high shots.

I’m also not convinced he personally is particularly arrogant or buys in to his own hype, but the insane competitiveness and drive seem to give him an edge (for coaches at least) that nobody can match.

Ironic given the iceman tag how often this spills over into sheer bad play, and again, sometimes this is a negative thing as a captain and the coaches manifestation on earth. All this said, we do have an excellent win percentage under Jones and Faz as a combo

I can’t remember if it was you that mentioned something in Jones’s book about (roughly) not really being in to hyping up the players before a game? I’ve also wondered if having someone like Farrell there who’s doing that constantly might be pretty useful for him.

Again looking back at the SA game and everything that’s come out about how motivated they were, it seems like we missed a trick there, or were just totally emotionally drained.

[Banquo]

Goal kicking, being physical in defence especially around wanting to go forwards, and the speed of the ball through his hands is excellent. I also tend to think he can hold a defence by his tendency to be square if not his actually carrying/running.

There are of course problem with some of that, for instance the ball might be moved so quickly it hasn't caused any defenders to bite, but with the right timings he is outstanding. This is the sort of area I'd prefer England to play a little more heads up, rather than rush forward at pace in attack and defence to apply massive pressure.

Still what is the yardstick for consistency at a suitable standard, 'cause off the top of my head I can't think of one in test rugby? Which might mean I need to lower my standards and be more accepting of how dominant defence is

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

Judging by how they've performed and the mess that is their centres I'd say he'd walk in. That's more a comment on the All Blacks than Farrell.

I'd say he's way worse than either Lienart-Brown or Goodhue at 12. He'd certainly look like he was walking though.

[Puja]

Not sure how useful this is..but

http://www.goalkickers.co.za/

Across all competitions, Farrell has stayed steady at a 78% goalkicking average for the past three seasons. Ford, on the other hand has gone from 81%, to 83%, to 88% last year.

Puja

[Epaminondas Pules]

I removed consistently and still you came up with highly debatable examples. He’s not an especially good goal kicker, and this is a kicker who doesn’t try anything from a long way out. His defence is physical but inaccurate and of dangerous and penalty friendly - and that’s objectively true. Speed of ball through the hands- lol, especially to the right, where he has to adjust and run a bit sideways, thereby negating any running threat to attribute to his mere existence.

I see you fail to mention things like decision making, or game management.

It’s a pretty meagre list that you’ve put out, and I don’t agree with it anyway, but that’s showbiz.

I think he’s a decent premiership 10 who puts himself about a bit, and can not quite embarrass himself at 12. I don’t think he’d be anywhere near say the All Black squad.

Judging by how they've performed and the mess that is their centres I'd say he'd walk in. That's more a comment on the All Blacks than Farrell.

I'd say he's way worse than either Lienart-Brown or Goodhue at 12. He'd certainly look like he was walking though.

Of course you would.

[Banquo]

I'm just disputing he does much, if anything, to a very high standard- and I agree with your last sentence, and personally think he's an obstacle to develop. He does a lot of things reasonably capably and consistently, but imo too many things poorly and inconsistently. For his skill set and talent, imo he can't afford to be making many mistakes, and he has been.

anyway....I look forward to us using the platform that is being established, attacking and skill coaches need to start earning their corn, alongside the boss.

To my claim he moves the ball through the hands so quickly there is that might be what he's been told to do, just move the ball through the hands and don't worry so much about the outcome 'cause we just want the speed of play. But just on the speed of moving the ball he is very quick, if that's not a high standard when shuttling the ball around those little blocker groups I don't know what is.

Whether overall it's a gain... that I don't know, and without access to really good stats I suspect a guess is only that, which is to say not even an informed guess. My instinct is you could lose more time elsewhere than you gain in the moment, maybe that's not the case, or maybe we're betting on black 23 that sometimes we'll get the correct decision with a good execution and he'll have done it so fast we'll really be pushing hard.

And it could be I'm reading all this wrong and I'm just seeing things through a confirmation bias of my little pet theory here, given this does breakdown to fractions of seconds and the TV camera angle is a crap one to work out what's happening. But if I try to think back to Ford and Farrell under Burt I'm sure in my own mind (to my knowledge free of dementia but maybe it was for shit to begin with) that the speed of that play the ball between those 2 and into the hands of others is much, much faster.

I'd like to get a much better look at our use of depth of runners and how they're mixing up the spacings but it's a crap angle watching on the TV, and it's too close in hiding the bigger picture. And even with that it's still very much about creating a chance to create a line break or 1 on 1, it doesn't address problems in support and venturing into multiphase.

On the multiphase we do seem to be paring back on the system approach to support, or the system is now too complex to read, or the system isn't that complex it's just too complex for me. Where that leaves us trying to progress this area of the game I don't know, maybe Eddie's ahead of the curve, maybe it gets parked as being a bad idea in another 12-18 months.

I don't mind ceding the quick hands point, but my point is that if that's the only thing that we sort of agree is being done to a very high standard, that's not great from someone who is meant to do so much else, and its the other 'stuff' that imo stifles a lot of the stuff you subsequently mention.