RugbyRebels

Jones' head was being threatened when we had that very poor 6N result before. Another bad 6N will see it threatened again I'm sure.

Mush wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Ultimately its down to Jones but at least some in the media are actually examining the input of a player that for far too long has been held to be above criticism.

Agreed. The next logical step is to call for Jones's head though, isn't it? I haven't seen any of that yet.

I think it's fair to have a conversation about Jones' ability to get the best out of the resources available - and I can't see how he can be - but you cannot absolve the players from that performance. Even if it is a crankcase plan, I do expect better execution of it.

They can also take responsibility off the pitch. Many a story of Johnson, Dallaglio etc telling Woodward to piss off over numerous wacky ideas.

Mush wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Ultimately its down to Jones but at least some in the media are actually examining the input of a player that for far too long has been held to be above criticism.

Agreed. The next logical step is to call for Jones's head though, isn't it? I haven't seen any of that yet.

I think it's fair to have a conversation about Jones' ability to get the best out of the resources available - and I can't see how he can be - but you cannot absolve the players from that performance. Even if it is a crankcase plan, I do expect better execution of it.

Jones's lightning rod routine is pretty pointless at this stage isn't it. It seems just as insulting to the players to say he's prepped them wrong and they are totally incapable of thinking for themselves or adapting to the game in front of them, as it would be to just say they played badly.

Calling for Jones's head does seem silly though without some obvious replacement ready to step in and get better results than him. We know he's got some sort of plan in place post-Lions, and he proved a lot of people wrong after his shenanigans in 2018, so I think there's some leeway. But just as we ask of the players on the pitch, can he actually adapt the plan when things aren't going his way?

Mikey Brown wrote:

Mush wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Agreed. The next logical step is to call for Jones's head though, isn't it? I haven't seen any of that yet.

I think it's fair to have a conversation about Jones' ability to get the best out of the resources available - and I can't see how he can be - but you cannot absolve the players from that performance. Even if it is a crankcase plan, I do expect better execution of it.

Jones's lightning rod routine is pretty pointless at this stage isn't it. It seems just as insulting to the players to say he's prepped them wrong and they are totally incapable of thinking for themselves or adapting to the game in front of them, as it would be to just say they played badly.

Calling for Jones's head does seem silly though without some obvious replacement ready to step in and get better results than him. We know he's got some sort of plan in place post-Lions, and he proved a lot of people wrong after his shenanigans in 2018, so I think there's some leeway. But just as we ask of the players on the pitch, can he actually adapt the plan when things aren't going his way?

I'm not sure there's many options that would prep a squad that talented to that bad a performance...

Even Farrell Snr could probably muster one try opportunity, never mind an actual score!

Even in the cold light of Monday, that performance was probably worse than anything Robinson's England served up. It was an utter embarrassment to the wealth of talent on that pitch.

TBH, this is a poor Ireland team, a pretty terrible Welsh team, and an abysmal Italian team. If this England team could come anywhere other than 2nd in this 6N, it should be considered an utter shambles. And if we perform like that again...we're battling Italy for the wooden spoon, ffs.

The rigid adherence to a gameplan that not only wasn't working but that showed no reason to work and made no use of the players available...

It's like he doesn't understand rugby. The idea of what a weak point is, how to break a defence and, most importantly, what a plan B looks like, nevermind plan c or d.

I was giving slack because he promised we were working on attack and I understood the idea of working on the foundation before building upon it, but we've gone backwards. Our execution of the "foundation" he put in place has got worse and worse, we're becoming more and more rigidly adherent to that foundation, without any semblance of an attack whatsoever, and we have one of the most talented set of players I've ever seen in an England XV.

I've been dripping on this subject for ages. Can Jones possibly come back from a performance as poor as that? Surely the players must be doubting his capacity to fully regain credibility. How long can the RFU wait before any successor (even a caretaker) has no chance of developing a squad in time for the RWC?

Given the winners of the last World Cup, approx 12 months.

Stom wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Mush wrote:
I think it's fair to have a conversation about Jones' ability to get the best out of the resources available - and I can't see how he can be - but you cannot absolve the players from that performance. Even if it is a crankcase plan, I do expect better execution of it.

Jones's lightning rod routine is pretty pointless at this stage isn't it. It seems just as insulting to the players to say he's prepped them wrong and they are totally incapable of thinking for themselves or adapting to the game in front of them, as it would be to just say they played badly.

Calling for Jones's head does seem silly though without some obvious replacement ready to step in and get better results than him. We know he's got some sort of plan in place post-Lions, and he proved a lot of people wrong after his shenanigans in 2018, so I think there's some leeway. But just as we ask of the players on the pitch, can he actually adapt the plan when things aren't going his way?

I'm not sure there's many options that would prep a squad that talented to that bad a performance...

Even Farrell Snr could probably muster one try opportunity, never mind an actual score!

Even in the cold light of Monday, that performance was probably worse than anything Robinson's England served up. It was an utter embarrassment to the wealth of talent on that pitch.

TBH, this is a poor Ireland team, a pretty terrible Welsh team, and an abysmal Italian team. If this England team could come anywhere other than 2nd in this 6N, it should be considered an utter shambles. And if we perform like that again...we're battling Italy for the wooden spoon, ffs.

The rigid adherence to a gameplan that not only wasn't working but that showed no reason to work and made no use of the players available...

It's like he doesn't understand rugby. The idea of what a weak point is, how to break a defence and, most importantly, what a plan B looks like, nevermind plan c or d.

I was giving slack because he promised we were working on attack and I understood the idea of working on the foundation before building upon it, but we've gone backwards. Our execution of the "foundation" he put in place has got worse and worse, we're becoming more and more rigidly adherent to that foundation, without any semblance of an attack whatsoever, and we have one of the most talented set of players I've ever seen in an England XV.

That right there is the single biggest thing for me. Christ Alive, even when Ford came on he booted it away. "Keep doing it lads, it'll work eventually."

I'm going round in circles on this one.

Is Eddie's thinking that (at this stage) we need to be able to win only by using our kicking game and forward platform? Is this still the fallout from SA we're seeing? As if we have to be able to win on a day our attack isn't clicking?

It's a bit backwards obviously, as on that day what we desperately needed was an alternative plan of attack when the forwards were getting beaten, but it sounds like some sort of deranged Eddie logic perhaps?

Not sure I'm doing much to argue my case for sticking with him...

Worth noting again the don't play mantra got us to a WC final, and won SA the WC final. Not playing pays off plenty of times, and this was still a one score game come the end so there was never a huge need to chase.

I'd rather be doing something from the start, but the results do back up Eddie an awful lot

Digby wrote:Worth noting again the don't play mantra got us to a WC final, and won SA the WC final. Not playing pays off plenty of times, and this was still a one score game come the end so there was never a huge need to chase.

I'd rather be doing something from the start, but the results do back up Eddie an awful lot

Disagree. Neither South Africa nor England were anywhere near as negative as England have been over the last year. There's a difference between playing percentages and trusting your defence, and in deciding to refuse to play rugby at all.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Worth noting again the don't play mantra got us to a WC final, and won SA the WC final. Not playing pays off plenty of times, and this was still a one score game come the end so there was never a huge need to chase.

I'd rather be doing something from the start, but the results do back up Eddie an awful lot

Disagree. Neither South Africa nor England were anywhere near as negative as England have been over the last year. There's a difference between playing percentages and trusting your defence, and in deciding to refuse to play rugby at all.

Puja

Take out a couple of strike moves from some of those earlier games, which might have happened had they lost lineouts as we did on Saturday, and you'd have very little difference in the ambition on attack. And actually they did play at times on Saturday and couldn't support their play or made handling errors

“It’s the same for anyone who’s the captain of the side, they’ve got to keep performing at a high level.

“But having one game where they’re not at the level expected is not a reason to start speculating on whether he’s going to be dropped or not.”

Jones defended Farrell once more when he was asked about the Lions playmaker’s reluctance to launch his backline in favour of kicking.

“There are five million situations in the game and we don’t coach five million situations,” Jones said.

That last statement is just baffling, even for Eddie.

I am curious though what it is he saw that was poor in Farrell's performance on Saturday that hadn't already been apparent for quite a while before this. Is it really one game, Eddie? Come on. That's not even me trying to say Farrell is terrible, and I think many go OTT on that, but I'd love to hear some details on what he thinks Farrell has been doing.

Mikey Brown wrote:“It’s the same for anyone who’s the captain of the side, they’ve got to keep performing at a high level.

“But having one game where they’re not at the level expected is not a reason to start speculating on whether he’s going to be dropped or not.”

Jones defended Farrell once more when he was asked about the Lions playmaker’s reluctance to launch his backline in favour of kicking.

“There are five million situations in the game and we don’t coach five million situations,” Jones said.

That last statement is just baffling, even for Eddie.

I am curious though what it is he saw that was poor in Farrell's performance on Saturday that hadn't already been apparent for quite a while before this. Is it really one game, Eddie? Come on. That's not even me trying to say Farrell is terrible, and I think many go OTT on that, but I'd love to hear some details on what he thinks Farrell has been doing.

That's the thing: the rugby press are appallingly bad at asking questions that will provide answers. No-one has ever asked: what does Farrell bring to the table as a 10, as a playmaker...

What does he bring different to Ford?

What does he give you in attack?

"You can't coach 5m situations" speaks volumes about the pair of them. Useless.

Stom wrote:
That's the thing: the rugby press are appallingly bad at asking questions that will provide answers. No-one has ever asked: what does Farrell bring to the table as a 10, as a playmaker...

What does he bring different to Ford?

What does he give you in attack?

Agreed but it would take a brave journalist to start by saying, 'I, like all the rest of my profession, may have got it wrong about Farrell.' Anything else would be hypocritical and allow Jones to respond as he has. Farrell is not suddenly a bad player or captain. Rather, he is not (and never was?) so outstanding that he should be an automatic pick. He has always been a good international FH but, arguably, not/never our best. IMO, he has never been a good international IC.

I'd argue he's been a good IC depending on gameplan, but a not so good international fly half. His speed of thought/vision or whatever, doesn't seem to be sufficient to operate at 10 without another pair of good game playing eyes. All those saying Ford needed Farrell to hold his hand, I think are getting it the wrong way around. As is evidenced by our change in results when Ford isn't starting at 10.

Oakboy wrote:

Stom wrote:
That's the thing: the rugby press are appallingly bad at asking questions that will provide answers. No-one has ever asked: what does Farrell bring to the table as a 10, as a playmaker...

What does he bring different to Ford?

What does he give you in attack?

Agreed but it would take a brave journalist to start by saying, 'I, like all the rest of my profession, may have got it wrong about Farrell.' Anything else would be hypocritical and allow Jones to respond as he has. Farrell is not suddenly a bad player or captain. Rather, he is not (and never was?) so outstanding that he should be an automatic pick. He has always been a good international FH but, arguably, not/never our best. IMO, he has never been a good international IC.

I'm going to have to disagree with the last part of that, I think you've got it backward.

Farrell is a very good one on one defender and he is very good at executing a move he's been instructed to make. His passing has become a lot more rounded, so he is able to put people away and use a range of passing in midfield.

He, however, lacks the thing that, for me, makes any 10 stand out: the ability to read the game and adjust on the fly. The lack of this ability means, for me, he is poorly suited to playing 10 at international level. He can execute a plan but a 10 needs to be able to adjust and adapt on the fly so we have more opportunities to score than simply off strike moves on phases 1-3.

I do believe he and Ford work very well in tandem at 10 and 12 and I would be delighted to see them continue that without such a strict tactical straightjacket.

As shown when we were at our best, that ability to pivot, the sheer quantity of our playmaking options, and our carrying ability should give us the upper hand against most teams. But that needs a conductor. Farrell is not a conductor, he's an executor. And that's fine, every team needs an executor and I imagine that's why coaches love him: he's given a task and he just does it. But you also need creative tacticians. So when the foundation strategy isn't quite working, they can adapt within the confounds of a clear and well defined strategy.

It's the same as business, it's the same as anything else in life: you need a combination of personality types. And I think Ford and Farrell actually work really well together. But the difference is, Ford can find himself other executors, but if you just pack your team full of those executors, there's no-one to adjust, adapt and turn something solid into something good.

Raggs wrote:I'd argue he's been a good IC depending on gameplan, but a not so good international fly half. His speed of thought/vision or whatever, doesn't seem to be sufficient to operate at 10 without another pair of good game playing eyes. All those saying Ford needed Farrell to hold his hand, I think are getting it the wrong way around. As is evidenced by our change in results when Ford isn't starting at 10.

I'd say that's fair, and was thinking exactly the same about your last bit.
Farrell does better for England when he's got Ford &/ Slade/Joseph to hold his hand.
He also does better at Sarries when he's got Barritt &/ Goode to hold his hand.

He lacks the vision to spot the move for himself unless it's right in front of him; and he needs other people to create time on the ball for him to pull off the nicer passes he's capable of, rather than looking like he's making the time himself.

As an international 10, he's fine (but nothing special), and needs a team built around him; as an international 12 he's fine (but nothing special), and can play his part in a team (so long as he's not expected to be an individual threat).


ETA: Or... what Stom said

Mikey Brown wrote:“It’s the same for anyone who’s the captain of the side, they’ve got to keep performing at a high level.

“But having one game where they’re not at the level expected is not a reason to start speculating on whether he’s going to be dropped or not.”

Jones defended Farrell once more when he was asked about the Lions playmaker’s reluctance to launch his backline in favour of kicking.

“There are five million situations in the game and we don’t coach five million situations,” Jones said.

That last statement is just baffling, even for Eddie.

I am curious though what it is he saw that was poor in Farrell's performance on Saturday that hadn't already been apparent for quite a while before this. Is it really one game, Eddie? Come on. That's not even me trying to say Farrell is terrible, and I think many go OTT on that, but I'd love to hear some details on what he thinks Farrell has been doing.

Agree with this - I'd say that performance was pretty typical

Anyone mentioned Ice Man’s trademark shoulder into VDM as he scored (and the fact that he got bounced again)?

French rugby journal Midi Olympique names Owen Farrell as their world player of the year 2021


https://www.midi-olympique.fr/2021/02/1 ... _tEQ6Ac6xk

Après moi le déluge

ExAviator wrote:French rugby journal Midi Olympique names Owen Farrell as their world player of the year 2021


https://www.midi-olympique.fr/2021/02/1 ... _tEQ6Ac6xk

Après moi le déluge

'Tis fixed, I tell ye!!!

Lol. Utterly insane. He’s not in the top 100.

Bit early to be calling 2021 already?

Puja