Jones gone (Now 100% confirmed)

[Which Tyler]

If the answers are Gatland, Borthwick (now) or Cockerill - then we're asking the wrong questions.

I'd rather keep Eddie than any of those options.

[twitchy]

O'Gara has ruled himself out.

[badback]

If the answers are Gatland, Borthwick (now) or Cockerill - then we're asking the wrong questions.

I'd rather keep Eddie than any of those options.

Agree

[TheNomad]

If the answers are Gatland, Borthwick (now) or Cockerill - then we're asking the wrong questions.

I'd rather keep Eddie than any of those options.

I wouldn’t. It needs a blank slate, even with a caretaker

The wrong players are being picked, and that’s a serious issue given the value of international experience.

At this point, we’ll get steamrollered in the WC and the 6Ns. I see zero value in keeping Jones

[Banquo]

If the answers are Gatland, Borthwick (now) or Cockerill - then we're asking the wrong questions.

I'd rather keep Eddie than any of those options.

I wouldn’t. It needs a blank slate, even with a caretaker

The wrong players are being picked, and that’s a serious issue given the value of international experience.

At this point, we’ll get steamrollered in the WC and the 6Ns. I see zero value in keeping Jones

Who should be picked? I think the issues lie elsewhere personally, but be interested to know who you think should be starting or in the squad who isn't there? I think his time has probably come, but that's more about prep and the culture in the team for me.

[Oakboy]

If the answers are Gatland, Borthwick (now) or Cockerill - then we're asking the wrong questions.

I'd rather keep Eddie than any of those options.

I wouldn’t. It needs a blank slate, even with a caretaker

The wrong players are being picked, and that’s a serious issue given the value of international experience.

At this point, we’ll get steamrollered in the WC and the 6Ns. I see zero value in keeping Jones

Who should be picked? I think the issues lie elsewhere personally, but be interested to know who you think should be starting or in the squad who isn't there? I think his time has probably come, but that's more about prep and the culture in the team for me.

Are the players picked in roles to give of their best, though? How much of 'poor performance' is down to the individual and how much to the system/preparation? I just can't see anyone getting away with going against Jones - a situation that must be stifllng to some. A new approach and a new training atmosphere might see a big change in a few cases. Nobody knows till it happens.

In terms of selection would, say, Quirke, Ford, Lawrence instead of Youngs, Smith, Farrell transform the team on the back of a new head-coach's arrival? Of course, once fit, Jones could pick the same trio but would/will he? Change for change's sake could make a big difference. Staleness goes deep, I think. It's reached the point where Jones making the right decisions will not be enough.

[Banquo]

I wouldn’t. It needs a blank slate, even with a caretaker

The wrong players are being picked, and that’s a serious issue given the value of international experience.

At this point, we’ll get steamrollered in the WC and the 6Ns. I see zero value in keeping Jones

Who should be picked? I think the issues lie elsewhere personally, but be interested to know who you think should be starting or in the squad who isn't there? I think his time has probably come, but that's more about prep and the culture in the team for me.

Are the players picked in roles to give of their best, though? How much of 'poor performance' is down to the individual and how much to the system/preparation? I just can't see anyone getting away with going against Jones - a situation that must be stifllng to some. A new approach and a new training atmosphere might see a big change in a few cases. Nobody knows till it happens.

In terms of selection would, say, Quirke, Ford, Lawrence instead of Youngs, Smith, Farrell transform the team on the back of a new head-coach's arrival? Of course, once fit, Jones could pick the same trio but would/will he? Change for change's sake could make a big difference. Staleness goes deep, I think. It's reached the point where Jones making the right decisions will not be enough.

As I’ve said loads of times, he probably should go on culture grounds alone.
He couldn’t pick Quirke or Ford btw- he might have done had they not been crocked. But you have berated Ford many times . And you always fixate on the backs- it’s up front where games are won and lost generally (though the backs cost us the Argentina game).

The question was about who Jones should be picking rather than the other stuff. By and large, he picks who most would pick. There are marginals that I’ve ranted about myself- ie Faz should be on the bench at best, wtf does Nowell keep getting games, why is Jonny Hill so dim etc etc, but again, not the biggest issue compared to stupidity and individuals doing daft things again and again. And that’s why I think we need to change top down. So we are agreeing

[Oakboy]

Who should be picked? I think the issues lie elsewhere personally, but be interested to know who you think should be starting or in the squad who isn't there? I think his time has probably come, but that's more about prep and the culture in the team for me.

Are the players picked in roles to give of their best, though? How much of 'poor performance' is down to the individual and how much to the system/preparation? I just can't see anyone getting away with going against Jones - a situation that must be stifllng to some. A new approach and a new training atmosphere might see a big change in a few cases. Nobody knows till it happens.

In terms of selection would, say, Quirke, Ford, Lawrence instead of Youngs, Smith, Farrell transform the team on the back of a new head-coach's arrival? Of course, once fit, Jones could pick the same trio but would/will he? Change for change's sake could make a big difference. Staleness goes deep, I think. It's reached the point where Jones making the right decisions will not be enough.

As I’ve said loads of times, he probably should go on culture grounds alone.
He couldn’t pick Quirke or Ford btw- he might have done had they not been crocked. But you have berated Ford many times . And you always fixate on the backs- it’s up front where games are won and lost generally (though the backs cost us the Argentina game).

The question was about who Jones should be picking rather than the other stuff. By and large, he picks who most would pick. There are marginals that I’ve ranted about myself- ie Faz should be on the bench at best, wtf does Nowell keep getting games, why is Jonny Hill so dim etc etc, but again, not the biggest issue compared to stupidity and individuals doing daft things again and again. And that’s why I think we need to change top down. So we are agreeing

All good points as ever. As regards stupidity and concentrating on backs, whilst accepting that Hill and other forwards display daft penalty-conceding traits, can there be anything more stupid than Farrell taking his usual 55 seconds over a simple kick at goal with a few minutes left in a game-chasing situation? With Smith on the pitch and kicking well why would Jones not order a change of kicker in that scenario? Top of the stupidity scale, perhaps?

[Banquo]

Are the players picked in roles to give of their best, though? How much of 'poor performance' is down to the individual and how much to the system/preparation? I just can't see anyone getting away with going against Jones - a situation that must be stifllng to some. A new approach and a new training atmosphere might see a big change in a few cases. Nobody knows till it happens.

In terms of selection would, say, Quirke, Ford, Lawrence instead of Youngs, Smith, Farrell transform the team on the back of a new head-coach's arrival? Of course, once fit, Jones could pick the same trio but would/will he? Change for change's sake could make a big difference. Staleness goes deep, I think. It's reached the point where Jones making the right decisions will not be enough.

As I’ve said loads of times, he probably should go on culture grounds alone.
He couldn’t pick Quirke or Ford btw- he might have done had they not been crocked. But you have berated Ford many times . And you always fixate on the backs- it’s up front where games are won and lost generally (though the backs cost us the Argentina game).

The question was about who Jones should be picking rather than the other stuff. By and large, he picks who most would pick. There are marginals that I’ve ranted about myself- ie Faz should be on the bench at best, wtf does Nowell keep getting games, why is Jonny Hill so dim etc etc, but again, not the biggest issue compared to stupidity and individuals doing daft things again and again. And that’s why I think we need to change top down. So we are agreeing

All good points as ever. As regards stupidity and concentrating on backs, whilst accepting that Hill and other forwards display daft penalty-conceding traits, can there be anything more stupid than Farrell taking his usual 55 seconds over a simple kick at goal with a few minutes left in a game-chasing situation? With Smith on the pitch and kicking well why would Jones not order a change of kicker in that scenario? Top of the stupidity scale, perhaps?

Mate, you just can’t point everything at Jones.

[Gloskarlos]

Shame O’gara has said no, of all the suggested replacements he excites me the most. Hell no to Borthwick or Skivs. Don’t want to watch England play like Tigers and Skivs is nowhere near to being that coach. Slim pickings elsewhere.

[fivepointer]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby ... panel.html

Eddie Jones's future in English rugby will be decided this week by a panel including Phil de Glanville, Jonathan Webb and Sir Ian McGeechan.
The identities of the review team have been shrouded in secrecy but The Mail on Sunday can reveal three figures who are helping decide the future of English rugby.
Jones will learn his fate later this week but the head coach is expecting to be sacked before Christmas after just five wins from 12 Tests in 2022.
Jones spent last weekend in France on a World Cup recce, while it has been business as usual for his assistant coaches, who were on scouting missions at Premiership games yesterday.
However, their tenures could end abruptly this week if the RFU, who have cancelled Monday's Christmas drinks, decide it is time for a change.


Christmas drinks cancelled. Thats it then. Game up for Jones.

[Which Tyler]

Eddie Jones's future in English rugby will be decided this week by a panel including Phil de Glanville, Jonathan Webb and Sir Ian McGeechan.

C'mon Bath, you can do it!

[Banquo]

Christmas drinks cancelled. Thats it then. Game up for Jones.

yep that was the event cancellation I alluded to above

[Oakboy]

Eddie Jones's future in English rugby will be decided this week by a panel including Phil de Glanville, Jonathan Webb and Sir Ian McGeechan.

C'mon Bath, you can do it!

As a matter of interest, did any of those three play in the professional era? I'm not knocking their ability to assess because I don't know much about their current involvement in rugby (apart from IM's journalism). As a general principle, I'd prefer people with active roles in premiership clubs i.e. a close relationship with the pro game.

[Which Tyler]

PdG captained England in 1999
Jon Webb retired just before professionalism
Ian McGeechan isn't exactly known for his playing career

PdG was also involved in organising the 2012 olympics with a place in Sport England, and for a time was Director of Sport at Hartpury in the Champ, and is a successful businessman, he's done the odd bit of consultancy work for Bath previously as well.
As far as I'm aware, Jon Webb hasn't don't much beyond surgery since playing
Ian McGeechan... surely you don't even need to ask about his involvement in professional rugby (though you only seem to know him from his journalism which is... quite something really).


"Has to have played in the professional era" seems a very odd criteria to use when assessing the performance of England's head coach. Almost like you're looking for reasons to condemn the decision before it's been made.

[Banquo]

PdG captained England in 1999
Jon Webb retired just before professionalism
Ian McGeechan isn't exactly known for his playing career

PdG was also involved in organising the 2012 olympics with a place in Sport England, and for a time was Director of Sport at Hartpury in the Champ, and is a successful businessman.
As far as I'm aware, Jon Webb hasn't don't much beyond surgery since playing
Ian McGeechan... surely you don't even need to ask about his involvement in professional rugby.


"Has to have played in the professional era" seems a very odd criteria to use when assessing the performance of England's head coach. Almost like you're looking for reasons to condemn the decision before it's been made.

Geech was a superb player but your point is well made.

[fivepointer]

Steve Diamond might have been a good choice to join the panel, or Dean Richards or Declan Kidney or a recently retired player like Tom Wood/Chris Robshaw/Matt Banahan

[Which Tyler]

Geech was a superb player but your point is well made.

Happy to take your word for it, he was before my time. However, it's not why his name is instantly recognisable to any rugby fan.

Steve Diamond might have been a good choice to join the panel, or Dean Richards or Declan Kidney or a recently retired player like Tom Wood/Chris Robshaw/Matt Banahan

Not sure the RFU would want anything more to do with Dean Richards than they have to; whilst Steve Diamond is presumably busy trying to put together a Worcester Phoenix club; and Kidney is too close, and should be busy with LIrish.

Beyond that, we don't know the makeup of the panel, just that those 3 are involved in some way; and certainly PdG and SIM are both there by right. Would be amazed if Connor O'Shea wasn't involved in some form as well.

I feel certainly that Tom Wood reluctantly volunteered to accept the heavy weight of responsibility to lead the review anyway - even if he wasn't asked.
Robshaw and Banahan seem good options who'd likely give a good unbiased account; though Robshaw's an Eddie player, so should probably be asked his opinion, but not be on the panel itself.

[Banquo]

Geech was a superb player but your point is well made.

Happy to take your word for it, he was before my time. However, it's not why his name is instantly recognisable to any rugby fan.

Depends how old you are

[Puja]

England players to have say on Eddie Jones’ future - RFU to guarantee anonymity to England players willing to provide feedback to the review into poor autumn series

This is excellent news and, I think, should be the absolute arbiter of whether Jones goes or not. The players are one of the few groups who know for definite whether Jones is full of shit or whether there actually are credible, realistic plans for the RWC to come. If they still buy into it, then he should stay and we take the gamble that he knows what he's doing. If they come out against him, then it's irrelevant how clever he thinks his plans are because the players no longer believe in them or him, and we need to gamble that someone can do a rescue job.

Not sure that I'd blame the players though if they responded with, "Aye, right, anonymity. Just like the last time, yeah?"

Puja

[Which Tyler]

Happy to take your word for it, he was before my time. However, it's not why his name is instantly recognisable to any rugby fan (between the ages of 20 and 60).

Depends how old you are

Better?
Even then, I'd wager that he's better known as a coach than as a player, but it'd be a wager made in ignorance, as I'm neither <20 nor >60

This is excellent news and, I think, should be the absolute arbiter of whether Jones goes or not. The players are one of the few groups who know for definite whether Jones is full of shit or whether there actually are credible, realistic plans for the RWC to come. If they still buy into it, then he should stay and we take the gamble that he knows what he's doing. If they come out against him, then it's irrelevant how clever he thinks his plans are because the players no longer believe in them or him, and we need to gamble that someone can do a rescue job.

TBH, This should be part of every review, or at least, every annual review - club or national level; and there's no excuse for anonymity not be 100% guaranteed.

[Oakboy]

PdG captained England in 1999
Jon Webb retired just before professionalism
Ian McGeechan isn't exactly known for his playing career

PdG was also involved in organising the 2012 olympics with a place in Sport England, and for a time was Director of Sport at Hartpury in the Champ, and is a successful businessman, he's done the odd bit of consultancy work for Bath previously as well.
As far as I'm aware, Jon Webb hasn't don't much beyond surgery since playing
Ian McGeechan... surely you don't even need to ask about his involvement in professional rugby (though you only seem to know him from his journalism which is... quite something really).


"Has to have played in the professional era" seems a very odd criteria to use when assessing the performance of England's head coach. Almost like you're looking for reasons to condemn the decision before it's been made.

I did not say 'had to have played in pro era'. I am fully aware of IM's coaching past and remember him as a player. My queries relate simply to CURRENT involvement in pro game.

[Mikey Brown]

Just read another article stating that “as of today, he’s gone”, but again without pointing to any sort of evidence. Anyone else finding this all a bit irritating?

[Oakboy]

Just read another article stating that “as of today, he’s gone”, but again without pointing to any sort of evidence. Anyone else finding this all a bit irritating?

Maybe the RFU should ask Chelsea or some other football club how to do it quickly?

[Mikey Brown]

England players to have say on Eddie Jones’ future - RFU to guarantee anonymity to England players willing to provide feedback to the review into poor autumn series

This is excellent news and, I think, should be the absolute arbiter of whether Jones goes or not. The players are one of the few groups who know for definite whether Jones is full of shit or whether there actually are credible, realistic plans for the RWC to come. If they still buy into it, then he should stay and we take the gamble that he knows what he's doing. If they come out against him, then it's irrelevant how clever he thinks his plans are because the players no longer believe in them or him, and we need to gamble that someone can do a rescue job.

Not sure that I'd blame the players though if they responded with, "Aye, right, anonymity. Just like the last time, yeah?"

Puja

Yeah, you nailed my feelings on that, particularly the last bit.