Analytical Genius

[Spiffy]

Today's Guardian : Jonny May calls Shattered Beak an analytical genius, compares him to Alan Turing of Enigma fame, and states he is about to shatter the "rugby code" (whatever that may be.) Honest. You couldn't make it up.

[Puja]

Today's Guardian : Jonny May calls Shattered Beak an analytical genius, compares him to Alan Turing of Enigma fame, and states he is about to shatter the "rugby code" (whatever that may be.) Honest. You couldn't make it up.

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

[Spiffy]

Today's Guardian : Jonny May calls Shattered Beak an analytical genius, compares him to Alan Turing of Enigma fame, and states he is about to shatter the "rugby code" (whatever that may be.) Honest. You couldn't make it up.

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

You have a point. A great effort from England which was more about character than rugby ability. But to call SB, coach of a plodding team that played no rugby, whose major tactic was to kick the ball in the air and chase it, that had no interest in scoring tries, an analytical genius is surely more than a bit much.

[Puja]

Today's Guardian : Jonny May calls Shattered Beak an analytical genius, compares him to Alan Turing of Enigma fame, and states he is about to shatter the "rugby code" (whatever that may be.) Honest. You couldn't make it up.

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

You have a point. A great effort from England which was more about character than rugby ability. But to call SB, coach of a plodding team that played no rugby, whose major tactic was to kick the ball in the air and chase it, that had no interest in scoring tries, an analytical genius is surely more than a bit much.

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

Today's Guardian : Jonny May calls Shattered Beak an analytical genius, compares him to Alan Turing of Enigma fame, and states he is about to shatter the "rugby code" (whatever that may be.) Honest. You couldn't make it up.

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

Tackle them hard, gain parity at the set piece, do a rain dance and kick the ball away. We’re in the safest of hands.
Interested to know how he changed the tackling and ruck decision making. I’m also interested to know why he didn’t bring this #genius to bear to avoid us struggling against Fiji and Samoa

I think his biggest bit of #genius is to produce one good performance in ten matches and somehow convince people he’s an international calibre head coach off the back of it. That or the successful rain dance.

[fivepointer]

Some credit where its due. Borthwick did get us to a WC SF and was mighty close to going a step further. Our gameplan against SA was limited but it was carried out well for which he and the players deserve some praise rather than brickbats. We're in a better place than we were in the warm ups thats for sure.

Now, whether he is up to the challenge of taking this team further remains to be seen. He still has a mountain to climb and the next 6Ns is going to be testing.

[Banquo]

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

You have a point. A great effort from England which was more about character than rugby ability. But to call SB, coach of a plodding team that played no rugby, whose major tactic was to kick the ball in the air and chase it, that had no interest in scoring tries, an analytical genius is surely more than a bit much.

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

Have to say, I've seen a lot of scathing comment re England's performance, and the game as a whole- but that was a great effort from a team that had been utterly written off by everyone, containing a SA team that not even the mighty Shaun Edwards and one of the great french sides could, and who battered NZ recently. It was a lot of guts, and good technical work in dark forward areas (as befits an excellent forwards nause), and credit for that. We still lost, and tbh SA only had to have had a tiny bit of their minds on the final (plus a tough game the previous week) to make the difference between being comfortable against us, vs being substantially rattled. Tiny margins at this level, even between tiers .

[Banquo]

Today's Guardian : Jonny May calls Shattered Beak an analytical genius, compares him to Alan Turing of Enigma fame, and states he is about to shatter the "rugby code" (whatever that may be.) Honest. You couldn't make it up.

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

Tackle them hard, gain parity at the set piece, do a rain dance and kick the ball away. We’re in the safest of hands.
Interested to know how he changed the tackling and ruck decision making. I’m also interested to know why he didn’t bring this #genius to bear to avoid us struggling against Fiji and Samoa

I think his biggest bit of #genius is to produce one good performance in ten matches and somehow convince people he’s an international calibre head coach off the back of it. That or the successful rain dance.

also excellent v Argentina. #trenchwarfare #trenchfoot

[Mellsblue]

You have a point. A great effort from England which was more about character than rugby ability. But to call SB, coach of a plodding team that played no rugby, whose major tactic was to kick the ball in the air and chase it, that had no interest in scoring tries, an analytical genius is surely more than a bit much.

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

Have to say, I've seen a lot of scathing comment re England's performance, and the game as a whole- but that was a great effort from a team that had been utterly written off by everyone, containing a SA team that not even the mighty Shaun Edwards and one of the great french sides could, and who battered NZ recently. It was a lot of guts, and good technical work in dark forward areas (as befits an excellent forwards nause), and credit for that. We still lost, and tbh SA only had to have had a tiny bit of their minds on the final (plus a tough game the previous week) to make the difference between being comfortable against us, vs being substantially rattled. Tiny margins at this level, even between tiers .

I was wrong. The #genius was lowering expectations so low that losing is now a good result

[Banquo]

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

Have to say, I've seen a lot of scathing comment re England's performance, and the game as a whole- but that was a great effort from a team that had been utterly written off by everyone, containing a SA team that not even the mighty Shaun Edwards and one of the great french sides could, and who battered NZ recently. It was a lot of guts, and good technical work in dark forward areas (as befits an excellent forwards nause), and credit for that. We still lost, and tbh SA only had to have had a tiny bit of their minds on the final (plus a tough game the previous week) to make the difference between being comfortable against us, vs being substantially rattled. Tiny margins at this level, even between tiers .

I was wrong. The #genius was lowering expectations so low that losing is now a good result

as I said...we still lost.

[Mellsblue]

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

Tackle them hard, gain parity at the set piece, do a rain dance and kick the ball away. We’re in the safest of hands.
Interested to know how he changed the tackling and ruck decision making. I’m also interested to know why he didn’t bring this #genius to bear to avoid us struggling against Fiji and Samoa

I think his biggest bit of #genius is to produce one good performance in ten matches and somehow convince people he’s an international calibre head coach off the back of it. That or the successful rain dance.

also excellent v Argentina. #trenchwarfare #trenchfoot

I expect a higher bar from you and Argentina have repeatedly proved this tournament what a poor team they are.

[Banquo]

Tackle them hard, gain parity at the set piece, do a rain dance and kick the ball away. We’re in the safest of hands.
Interested to know how he changed the tackling and ruck decision making. I’m also interested to know why he didn’t bring this #genius to bear to avoid us struggling against Fiji and Samoa

I think his biggest bit of #genius is to produce one good performance in ten matches and somehow convince people he’s an international calibre head coach off the back of it. That or the successful rain dance.

also excellent v Argentina. #trenchwarfare #trenchfoot

I expect a higher bar from you and Argentina have repeatedly proved this tournament what a poor team they are.

very true. Silly Bastard needs sacking.

[Mellsblue]

also excellent v Argentina. #trenchwarfare #trenchfoot

I expect a higher bar from you and Argentina have repeatedly proved this tournament what a poor team they are.

very true. Silly Bastard needs sacking.

Finally, some common sense. I won’t be happy until England have had more head coaches than Wasps have had potential homes.

[Mellsblue]

#genius

https://x.com/optajonny/status/17164795 ... MV3j-SK8yQ

[Galfon]

Seismic Blaster must now follow this up with another piece of coaching genius for the bronze medal, or Mr May might be accused of talking out of his bottom..

[Puja]

You have a point. A great effort from England which was more about character than rugby ability. But to call SB, coach of a plodding team that played no rugby, whose major tactic was to kick the ball in the air and chase it, that had no interest in scoring tries, an analytical genius is surely more than a bit much.

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

How did South Africa get from their own 22 to that lineout that they scored the try from?

Puja

[Mellsblue]

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

How did South Africa get from their own 22 to that lineout that they scored the try from?

Puja

Owen Farrell arguing with the ref?

[Mellsblue]

Today's Guardian : Jonny May calls Shattered Beak an analytical genius, compares him to Alan Turing of Enigma fame, and states he is about to shatter the "rugby code" (whatever that may be.) Honest. You couldn't make it up.

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

Interested to know how he changed the tackling and ruck decision making.

Genuine q, btw. I can see how the heavy dose of sarcasm surrounding it may not have made that clear!

[Spiffy]

You have a point. A great effort from England which was more about character than rugby ability. But to call SB, coach of a plodding team that played no rugby, whose major tactic was to kick the ball in the air and chase it, that had no interest in scoring tries, an analytical genius is surely more than a bit much.

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

Have to say, I've seen a lot of scathing comment re England's performance, and the game as a whole- but that was a great effort from a team that had been utterly written off by everyone, containing a SA team that not even the mighty Shaun Edwards and one of the great french sides could, and who battered NZ recently. It was a lot of guts, and good technical work in dark forward areas (as befits an excellent forwards nause), and credit for that. We still lost, and tbh SA only had to have had a tiny bit of their minds on the final (plus a tough game the previous week) to make the difference between being comfortable against us, vs being substantially rattled. Tiny margins at this level, even between tiers .

All very true Banquo, and full credit to England for a gutsy performance with effective spoiling tactics that worked on the day, suited the elements and almost nicked it. They gave it a good honest thrash. But surely that hardly puts SB in the position of "analytical genius" and rugby's equivalent to Alan Turing? This match, and all SB's previous games in charge, revealed no evidence of rugby intelligence on a higher intellectual plain than other coaches. All we have seen so far is that he is bang average (and maybe that's a tad generous) and short on innovation, creativity and selection. He may be a good motivator, but that's not enough.

[Banquo]

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

How did South Africa get from their own 22 to that lineout that they scored the try from?

Puja

define alone.....

[Banquo]

While they didn't use the backs at all, there was quite a bit more to the game than just kicking and chasing. They neutralised the SA maul, built a lineout game that SA only got close to once despite having one of the best competing lineouts in the world, changed their tackling style and decision-making at the ruck, won turnovers on SA's lineout by reading their plays, and limited Kolbe and Arendse to having one run between them. I'm not going to say he's perfect (mentioning no Vunipola selection decisions), but his analysis created a game plan that shut down the number one side in the world and left them winning on scrum penalties alone.

Puja

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

Have to say, I've seen a lot of scathing comment re England's performance, and the game as a whole- but that was a great effort from a team that had been utterly written off by everyone, containing a SA team that not even the mighty Shaun Edwards and one of the great french sides could, and who battered NZ recently. It was a lot of guts, and good technical work in dark forward areas (as befits an excellent forwards nause), and credit for that. We still lost, and tbh SA only had to have had a tiny bit of their minds on the final (plus a tough game the previous week) to make the difference between being comfortable against us, vs being substantially rattled. Tiny margins at this level, even between tiers .

All very true Banquo, and full credit to England for a gutsy performance with effective spoiling tactics that worked on the day, suited the elements and almost nicked it. They gave it a good honest thrash. But surely that hardly puts SB in the position of "analytical genius" and rugby's equivalent to Alan Turing? This match, and all SB's previous games in charge, revealed no evidence of rugby intelligence on a higher intellectual plain than other coaches. All we have seen so far is that he is bang average (and maybe that's a tad generous) and short on innovation, creativity and selection. He may be a good motivator, but that's not enough.

somewhere between no credit for tactics and credited as a genius, is some credit. Given the technical damage Ireland inflict in much of the detail of rugby, thought that would recognised.

[Puja]

In fairness, he took a team that shouldn't've been anywhere near this South African side, and worked out a way to get them to within 2 minutes of beating them. I don't want to come over all Welsh and claim that a close result is like a win, but considering people on this board were genuinely placing wagers on South Africa to score 4 tries in each half, that's not to be sniffed at.

Puja

Interested to know how he changed the tackling and ruck decision making.

Genuine q, btw. I can see how the heavy dose of sarcasm surrounding it may not have made that clear!

I thought there was a definite change of tack from targetting the ball in the tackle, to hitting low and looking to end the competition early, rather than wrestling and looking for a choke, which was prevalent against Fiji and Samoa. I also thought that we were very selective in any ruck competition, opting to overload the fringes rather than compete unless there was an obvious shot at a turnover. We were also very disciplined on the ground - did we give away many penalties for competing in rucks?

All this comes with the caveat that I have only watched the game once, live, and may be seeing patterns that weren't there.

Puja

[Spiffy]

plus that try that Tigers fans seem to forget

Have to say, I've seen a lot of scathing comment re England's performance, and the game as a whole- but that was a great effort from a team that had been utterly written off by everyone, containing a SA team that not even the mighty Shaun Edwards and one of the great french sides could, and who battered NZ recently. It was a lot of guts, and good technical work in dark forward areas (as befits an excellent forwards nause), and credit for that. We still lost, and tbh SA only had to have had a tiny bit of their minds on the final (plus a tough game the previous week) to make the difference between being comfortable against us, vs being substantially rattled. Tiny margins at this level, even between tiers .

All very true Banquo, and full credit to England for a gutsy performance with effective spoiling tactics that worked on the day, suited the elements and almost nicked it. They gave it a good honest thrash. But surely that hardly puts SB in the position of "analytical genius" and rugby's equivalent to Alan Turing? This match, and all SB's previous games in charge, revealed no evidence of rugby intelligence on a higher intellectual plain than other coaches. All we have seen so far is that he is bang average (and maybe that's a tad generous) and short on innovation, creativity and selection. He may be a good motivator, but that's not enough.

somewhere between no credit for tactics and credited as a genius, is some credit. Given the technical damage Ireland inflict in much of the detail of rugby, thought that would recognised.

Well yes - of course some credit is due to SB for this particular game. Though little credit for the overall performance of England so far during his tenure. But the point of my initial post in the thread was only that it's plain stupid (even laughable) for Jonny May to call him an analytical genius when he clearly is not. You may have remarked in the past that Jonny is not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

[FKAS]

Borthwick's tactics defused the Boks kicking game which did for France and limited their ability to attack England. The defence was set up to negate the South African forwards and did a decent job of that. I think he deserves some credit. He isn't a genius bit her certainly knows how to put a game plan together.

It's a start point as opposed to a finished product but without a world cup on the horizon there's less pressure and hopefully we'll see some more options in attack.

[p/d]

I wouldn't be surprised if Jonny May believes in fairies