Australia vs England - Third Test

[p/d]

Loz is a classy act.

If Jones had persevered with him then reckon he would have nailed down a spot.

[Mr Mwenda]

I've come to the conclusion that Eddie is sticking to double 10 no matter what so it doesn't matter. Unless Faz gets injured he'll continue to play in a position that's not his best trying to partner a 10 who needs a very different 12 and is currently out of his depth.

My personal theory is about ceiling potential. I am sure Jones is aware that he might get immediate results from a more simplistic system but I think he reckons that won't win the world cup. It seems to me top international rugby attacks now are essentially undefendable. France, Aus and NZ have these 20 minute spells where the skills and intensity come together and they blow opponents away*. It increasingly reminds me of top level touch rugby, where the attacker should score as even a good defence has to make a decision about leaving a hole (e.g. a 30m wide pass) and if the attacker's skills and timing are right that hole will be exploited. I think Jones sees this as only possible with England with the two playmaker model. Of course, at present it seems to click so seldom so England appear to have the worst of both worlds. However as the talk about Losowski shows**, the level of English midfield backs is pretty mediocre without Manu, as everyone here knows.

*Unsure if SA, Ireland and Wales also aspire to this or whether it's a bit different.

**Dumped after the game v Japan, right? It seems perfectly reasonable for a coach to decide a player is not up to it while others are worth persevering with.

[Spiffy]

I've come to the conclusion that Eddie is sticking to double 10 no matter what so it doesn't matter. Unless Faz gets injured he'll continue to play in a position that's not his best trying to partner a 10 who needs a very different 12 and is currently out of his depth.

My personal theory is about ceiling potential. I am sure Jones is aware that he might get immediate results from a more simplistic system but I think he reckons that won't win the world cup. It seems to me top international rugby attacks now are essentially undefendable. France, Aus and NZ have these 20 minute spells where the skills and intensity come together and they blow opponents away*. It increasingly reminds me of top level touch rugby, where the attacker should score as even a good defence has to make a decision about leaving a hole (e.g. a 30m wide pass) and if the attacker's skills and timing are right that hole will be exploited. I think Jones sees this as only possible with England with the two playmaker model. Of course, at present it seems to click so seldom so England appear to have the worst of both worlds. However as the talk about Losowski shows**, the level of English midfield backs is pretty mediocre without Manu, as everyone here knows.

*Unsure if SA, Ireland and Wales also aspire to this or whether it's a bit different.

**Dumped after the game v Japan, right? It seems perfectly reasonable for a coach to decide a player is not up to it while others are worth persevering with.

There is nothing wrong with the two playmaker model. Not every 12 has to be a bosher, but if you do go for the playmaker option, then the 12 has to be a good footballer, with vision, hands, an educated boot, a bit of pace and good defensive skills. Unfortunately, Farrell does not fit the bill here and continues to look like a conservative, kick-orientated 10 playing out of position in midfield where he finds it difficult to make incisive attacking contributions.

[Banquo]

I've come to the conclusion that Eddie is sticking to double 10 no matter what so it doesn't matter. Unless Faz gets injured he'll continue to play in a position that's not his best trying to partner a 10 who needs a very different 12 and is currently out of his depth.

My personal theory is about ceiling potential. I am sure Jones is aware that he might get immediate results from a more simplistic system but I think he reckons that won't win the world cup. It seems to me top international rugby attacks now are essentially undefendable. France, Aus and NZ have these 20 minute spells where the skills and intensity come together and they blow opponents away*. It increasingly reminds me of top level touch rugby, where the attacker should score as even a good defence has to make a decision about leaving a hole (e.g. a 30m wide pass) and if the attacker's skills and timing are right that hole will be exploited. I think Jones sees this as only possible with England with the two playmaker model. Of course, at present it seems to click so seldom so England appear to have the worst of both worlds. However as the talk about Losowski shows**, the level of English midfield backs is pretty mediocre without Manu, as everyone here knows.

*Unsure if SA, Ireland and Wales also aspire to this or whether it's a bit different.

**Dumped after the game v Japan, right? It seems perfectly reasonable for a coach to decide a player is not up to it while others are worth persevering with.

There is nothing wrong with the two playmaker model. Not every 12 has to be a bosher, but if you do go for the playmaker option, then the 12 has to be a good footballer, with vision, hands, an educated boot, a bit of pace and good defensive skills. Unfortunately, Farrell does not fit the bill here and continues to look like a conservative, kick-orientated 10 playing out of position in midfield where he finds it difficult to make incisive attacking contributions.

Hear hear. Yet 10 years later…..

[fivepointer]

Interesting stat from Optajonny -

15 - @EnglandRugby garnered more successful breakdown steals than any other side in this year's July Test matches (15), with Courtney Lawes leading the way for Eddie Jones' men (5 jackals). Dogged.

[Oakboy]

Interesting stat from Optajonny -

15 - @EnglandRugby garnered more successful breakdown steals than any other side in this year's July Test matches (15), with Courtney Lawes leading the way for Eddie Jones' men (5 jackals). Dogged.

Oh dear. Facts confirming how good a 6 Lawes is!!! Some will still not believe the evidence, I suspect.

[Banquo]

Interesting stat from Optajonny -

15 - @EnglandRugby garnered more successful breakdown steals than any other side in this year's July Test matches (15), with Courtney Lawes leading the way for Eddie Jones' men (5 jackals). Dogged.

Oh dear. Facts confirming how good a 6 Lawes is!!! Some will still not believe the evidence, I suspect.

I think most have changed their minds, I did about a year ago. He shed a load of weight and played there exclusively for club and country and learned the position.

[Mellsblue]

Interesting stat from Optajonny -

15 - @EnglandRugby garnered more successful breakdown steals than any other side in this year's July Test matches (15), with Courtney Lawes leading the way for Eddie Jones' men (5 jackals). Dogged.

Oh dear. Facts confirming how good a 6 Lawes is!!! Some will still not believe the evidence, I suspect.

I think most have changed their minds, I did about a year ago. He shed a load of weight and played there exclusively for club and country and learned the position.

Yep.
It can be true that he wasn’t up to it whilst heavier and playing lock for Saints whilst also being true that he’s now up to it having lost weight and played at 6 for a sustained period for Saints.
There’s also much more to playing blindside than how many turnovers you get.

[Banquo]

Oh dear. Facts confirming how good a 6 Lawes is!!! Some will still not believe the evidence, I suspect.

I think most have changed their minds, I did about a year ago. He shed a load of weight and played there exclusively for club and country and learned the position.

Yep.
It can be true that he wasn’t up to it whilst heavier and playing lock for Saints whilst also being true that he’s now up to it having lost weight and played at 6 for a sustained period for Saints.
There’s also much more to playing blindside than how many turnovers you get.

He patently was poor internationally at 6 when Eddie first put him there- familiarity with the position and agility were just two of the issues.

[Oakboy]

I think most have changed their minds, I did about a year ago. He shed a load of weight and played there exclusively for club and country and learned the position.

Yep.
It can be true that he wasn’t up to it whilst heavier and playing lock for Saints whilst also being true that he’s now up to it having lost weight and played at 6 for a sustained period for Saints.
There’s also much more to playing blindside than how many turnovers you get.

He patently was poor internationally at 6 when Eddie first put him there- familiarity with the position and agility were just two of the issues.

Sh*t, I'll back out of this. Can I possibly be praising Jones's judgement?

Initially, I just thought a 3rd line-out option was essential. Lawes's tackling was always a bonus. Now, he's right up there with top blindsides across the skill range, IMO.

Then, he offers a valuable referee-liaison stance as captain. As with Johnson, his height helps. Speak respectfully and get close enough so that the ref cricks his neck looking up - it seems to work.

[Mr Mwenda]

Sh*t, I'll back out of this. Can I possibly be praising Jones's judgement?

Thought I'd save this for posterity, just in case .

[SDHoneymonster]

I think most have changed their minds, I did about a year ago. He shed a load of weight and played there exclusively for club and country and learned the position.

Yep.
It can be true that he wasn’t up to it whilst heavier and playing lock for Saints whilst also being true that he’s now up to it having lost weight and played at 6 for a sustained period for Saints.
There’s also much more to playing blindside than how many turnovers you get.

He patently was poor internationally at 6 when Eddie first put him there- familiarity with the position and agility were just two of the issues.

Lancaster also played Lawes at 6 a few times tbf.

[Banquo]

Yep.
It can be true that he wasn’t up to it whilst heavier and playing lock for Saints whilst also being true that he’s now up to it having lost weight and played at 6 for a sustained period for Saints.
There’s also much more to playing blindside than how many turnovers you get.

He patently was poor internationally at 6 when Eddie first put him there- familiarity with the position and agility were just two of the issues.

Lancaster also played Lawes at 6 a few times tbf.

well he was crap then, too - I was more referring to Eddie's 'success' in backing his own judgement.

In fact- looked it up, it was once in 2013 as a starter, and IIRC was roundly unliked on here.

[Mikey Brown]

He patently was poor internationally at 6 when Eddie first put him there- familiarity with the position and agility were just two of the issues.

Lancaster also played Lawes at 6 a few times tbf.

well he was crap then, too - I was more referring to Eddie's 'success' in backing his own judgement.

Or waiting for Gatland to commit to it.

[Oakboy]

Sh*t, I'll back out of this. Can I possibly be praising Jones's judgement?

Thought I'd save this for posterity, just in case .

Fair enough!! Of course, Jones will probably drop him now.

[Banquo]

Lancaster also played Lawes at 6 a few times tbf.

well he was crap then, too - I was more referring to Eddie's 'success' in backing his own judgement.

Or waiting for Gatland to commit to it.

Que?

[Mikey Brown]

That was probably a backwards way of saying it. I don’t feel like I ever saw Lawes look good at 6 at that level until Gatland picked him there for all 3 Lions tests.

[Banquo]

That was probably a backwards way of saying it. I don’t feel like I ever saw Lawes look good at 6 at that level until Gatland picked him there for all 3 Lions tests.

Don’t think he’d have had the chance but for playing well there for England surely?

[Mikey Brown]

That was probably a backwards way of saying it. I don’t feel like I ever saw Lawes look good at 6 at that level until Gatland picked him there for all 3 Lions tests.

Don’t think he’d have had the chance but for playing well there for England surely?

Well sure, to a degree. I think a lot of people were surprised to see him as starting test 6 though, and also then surprised to see him look really good. My memory was that his appearances at 6 had been much patchier prior to the Lions but does look like he'd played there fairly consistently (if not always as a starter) that year.

On a side note - I see Gatland has just said he'd be picking Lawes as captain if the Lions were happening this summer instead. I wish he'd got his wish and it had been delayed until this year.

[Oakboy]

The Itoje/Lawes combo originally had them sharing the role with most criticism levelled at Lawes. It would be interesting to know the extent to which the players' choices influenced Jones such that each now are settled into their respective positions.

Lawes has improved into the 6 role. Not sure about Itoje though. Just judging by his own high standards, is he quite the player he was? Maybe, he has just stopped improving or maybe he has lost a little bite in the nasty stuff.

[Banquo]

The Itoje/Lawes combo originally had them sharing the role with most criticism levelled at Lawes. It would be interesting to know the extent to which the players' choices influenced Jones such that each now are settled into their respective positions.

Lawes has improved into the 6 role. Not sure about Itoje though. Just judging by his own high standards, is he quite the player he was? Maybe, he has just stopped improving or maybe he has lost a little bite in the nasty stuff.

Itoje remains an amazing player.

[SDHoneymonster]

The Itoje/Lawes combo originally had them sharing the role with most criticism levelled at Lawes. It would be interesting to know the extent to which the players' choices influenced Jones such that each now are settled into their respective positions.

Lawes has improved into the 6 role. Not sure about Itoje though. Just judging by his own high standards, is he quite the player he was? Maybe, he has just stopped improving or maybe he has lost a little bite in the nasty stuff.

Itoje remains an amazing player.

I feel that Itoje is knackered more than anything.

[Spiffy]

That was probably a backwards way of saying it. I don’t feel like I ever saw Lawes look good at 6 at that level until Gatland picked him there for all 3 Lions tests.

Don’t think he’d have had the chance but for playing well there for England surely?

Well sure, to a degree. I think a lot of people were surprised to see him as starting test 6 though, and also then surprised to see him look really good. My memory was that his appearances at 6 had been much patchier prior to the Lions but does look like he'd played there fairly consistently (if not always as a starter) that year.

On a side note - I see Gatland has just said he'd be picking Lawes as captain if the Lions were happening this summer instead. I wish he'd got his wish and it had been delayed until this year.

But he also said he'd be picking Farrell at 12 and Lowe at 11

[Mellsblue]

But he also said he'd be picking Farrell at 12 and Lowe at 11

IMO, Gatland is rarely worth listening to once a player wears a number higher than 8.

[Banquo]

The Itoje/Lawes combo originally had them sharing the role with most criticism levelled at Lawes. It would be interesting to know the extent to which the players' choices influenced Jones such that each now are settled into their respective positions.

Lawes has improved into the 6 role. Not sure about Itoje though. Just judging by his own high standards, is he quite the player he was? Maybe, he has just stopped improving or maybe he has lost a little bite in the nasty stuff.

Itoje remains an amazing player.

I feel that Itoje is knackered more than anything.

I'm not sure what more folks expect him to do; excellent in the lineout, hugely missed at restarts, tremendous tackle rate; maybe could carry a bit more.