Work ons for Spruce Bringsteen

[Banquo]

It seems to me that two areas - fitness and discipline - don't demand world class skill. Start there. Add on defensive alignment and tackling skills which are coachable. Then, on the back of reliable set pieces, also coachable, develop multi-phase competence/confidence. Starve the opposition of the ball. Make them concede penalties. Then, add the hard bits - winning the breakdown off opposition ball and attacking from deep.

Indeed.

[Mikey Brown]

It seems to me that two areas - fitness and discipline - don't demand world class skill. Start there. Add on defensive alignment and tackling skills which are coachable. Then, on the back of reliable set pieces, also coachable, develop multi-phase competence/confidence. Starve the opposition of the ball. Make them concede penalties. Then, add the hard bits - winning the breakdown off opposition ball and attacking from deep.

I'm struggling to think why every team hasn't already thought of all that. Saying something is coachable doesn't mean it's easy to do or suits the players you have to hand. I think discipline especially is often a symptom of being under pressure rather than a root cause.

I'm not meaning to put these words in your mouth, but there does seem to be a feeling that playing low error-count, disciplined, set-piece and possession/defence based rugby is something you can just turn on when the other bits aren't working, like it's inherently easier because it doesn't require the same level of skill as a flashy attack. It's a great platform if you can do it and I wouldn't say no to it, but none of that stuff works either without the required intensity and focus.

It goes back to your question about Borthwick and his 'clarity' message. Improved fitness would certainly help, though it's hard to imagine they don't already have great S&C people involved.

[Oakboy]

It seems to me that two areas - fitness and discipline - don't demand world class skill. Start there. Add on defensive alignment and tackling skills which are coachable. Then, on the back of reliable set pieces, also coachable, develop multi-phase competence/confidence. Starve the opposition of the ball. Make them concede penalties. Then, add the hard bits - winning the breakdown off opposition ball and attacking from deep.

I'm struggling to think why every team hasn't already thought of all that. Saying something is coachable doesn't mean it's easy to do or suits the players you have to hand. I think discipline especially is often a symptom of being under pressure rather than a root cause.

I'm not meaning to put these words in your mouth, but there does seem to be a feeling that playing low error-count, disciplined, set-piece and possession/defence based rugby is something you can just turn on when the other bits aren't working, like it's inherently easier because it doesn't require the same level of skill as a flashy attack. It's a great platform if you can do it and I wouldn't say no to it, but none of that stuff works either without the required intensity and focus.

It goes back to your question about Borthwick and his 'clarity' message. Improved fitness would certainly help, though it's hard to imagine they don't already have great S&C people involved.

I never claimed any of it was easy. I do think there has to be a better answer than 'kick till they crack' though.

There is a squash coaching maxim, 'You don't need to play better shots, you need to play your shots better.' Simple messages, oft repeated, eventually get through. So far, under SB, his version of that (clarity) is not producing improved solidity of purpose.

So are we doing the right things but not well enough? Or, are we doing the wrong things?

[Puja]

It goes back to your question about Borthwick and his 'clarity' message. Improved fitness would certainly help, though it's hard to imagine they don't already have great S&C people involved.

Witty comments aside, we are getting Aled Walters in time for the RWC camp. Not sure how much of a dent he can make in fitness issues in such a short time, but it is at least something for the future.

Puja

[Banquo]

It seems to me that two areas - fitness and discipline - don't demand world class skill. Start there. Add on defensive alignment and tackling skills which are coachable. Then, on the back of reliable set pieces, also coachable, develop multi-phase competence/confidence. Starve the opposition of the ball. Make them concede penalties. Then, add the hard bits - winning the breakdown off opposition ball and attacking from deep.

I'm struggling to think why every team hasn't already thought of all that. Saying something is coachable doesn't mean it's easy to do or suits the players you have to hand. I think discipline especially is often a symptom of being under pressure rather than a root cause.

I'm not meaning to put these words in your mouth, but there does seem to be a feeling that playing low error-count, disciplined, set-piece and possession/defence based rugby is something you can just turn on when the other bits aren't working, like it's inherently easier because it doesn't require the same level of skill as a flashy attack. It's a great platform if you can do it and I wouldn't say no to it, but none of that stuff works either without the required intensity and focus.

It goes back to your question about Borthwick and his 'clarity' message. Improved fitness would certainly help, though it's hard to imagine they don't already have great S&C people involved.

Yep, it’s all hard detailed work. Good job they are pros

[morepork]

All sounds very low risk and very......staid.

[Banquo]

All sounds very low risk and very......staid.

Yeah but the kiwis work on this stuff night and day from about the age of 5 as you know. Without the basics, you can't do the rest- when you've got the skills and the ruck speed up, happy days-- I was a backs coach, so we'd spend hours doing lovely moves, beating players one on one, handling, 2 v1's etc and practicing our counterattacks - useless without the (quick) ball (and defence, its quite important and a bit of kicking . So not really staid, just what you have to put in place to compete internationally- and its hard graft; you're not telling me that the French /Irish don't work their bollox off on basics- I'd hardly call France staid, but they spent a lot of the week before the england game practicing rolling away from tackles in a way that most interfered with the england players approaching the breakdown.

[morepork]

Dance like no one is watching hon.


Be nice if your players actually enjoyed themselves on the field from time to time instead of scowling for 80 minutes. You are beating the joy of life out of young players. That's why Dan Cole can't run or pass and looks like he came out of the womb aged 50.

Sort it out.

[Banquo]

Dance like no one is watching hon.


Be nice if your players actually enjoyed themselves on the field from time to time instead of scowling for 80 minutes. You are beating the joy of life out of young players. That's why Dan Cole can't run or pass and looks like he came out of the womb aged 50.

Sort it out.

I agree on the enjoyment part- then again i enjoyed tackling as much as anything in the game. I also agree our coaching isn't great- the best coaches instil enjoyment in every part of the game--- and that's where we have lost the plot a bit, its a GAME .

But again, you still have to put the work in- but more with the ball, less in the gym. We also play too much.

[Spiffy]

It seems to me that two areas - fitness and discipline - don't demand world class skill. Start there. Add on defensive alignment and tackling skills which are coachable. Then, on the back of reliable set pieces, also coachable, develop multi-phase competence/confidence. Starve the opposition of the ball. Make them concede penalties. Then, add the hard bits - winning the breakdown off opposition ball and attacking from deep.

Tackling skills are coachable, but if a player is good enough to reach the national squad, then all the tackling skills should already be in place. If not, then he shouldn't be there.
Same goes for passing, which is at a low skill level in the national team and Premier League.
The England coaches should not need to waste time on the ultra-basics.

[Banquo]

It seems to me that two areas - fitness and discipline - don't demand world class skill. Start there. Add on defensive alignment and tackling skills which are coachable. Then, on the back of reliable set pieces, also coachable, develop multi-phase competence/confidence. Starve the opposition of the ball. Make them concede penalties. Then, add the hard bits - winning the breakdown off opposition ball and attacking from deep.

Tackling skills are coachable, but if a player is good enough to reach the national squad, then all the tackling skills should already be in place. If not, then he shouldn't be there.
Same goes for passing, which is at a low skill level in the national team and Premier League.
The England coaches should not need to waste time on the ultra-basics.

totally agree....unfortunately, when your 100 cap fly half and skipper can barely pass to his right without stopping and running sideways (ditto a much capped 9 ), and has to go on a remedial tackling course after 95 caps........where's the head in hands crying emoji

[Oakboy]

Of course, it might be, in several cases, that the basic skills ARE there - in that they can physically pass or whatever. Maybe, the right habits have been suppressed (by club or country).

As for Farrell and Youngs, there is a factor (slightly tongue-in-cheek) whereby, with 200 caps between them, they are not exactly shining examples of the importance of the basics.

Another factor is the battering ram tactics so favoured. Why did Billy V and Tuilagi come so late to the party with off-loading skills? Could it be that successive coaches did not work on them?

[Banquo]

Of course, it might be, in several cases, that the basic skills ARE there - in that they can physically pass or whatever. Maybe, the right habits have been suppressed (by club or country).

As for Farrell and Youngs, there is a factor (slightly tongue-in-cheek) whereby, with 200 caps between them, they are not exactly shining examples of the importance of the basics.

Another factor is the battering ram tactics so favoured. Why did Billy V and Tuilagi come so late to the party with off-loading skills? Could it be that successive coaches did not work on them?

Its basic skills under pressure which are the issue, and there is a perverse logic in what you say about Faz and Youngs.

Billy has always been a very good passer of the ball, it just doesn't get noticed much. Manu...no idea.

[16th man]

OHC and Arundel are going to be an interesting test of the Scoundrel Bounder selection philosophy, and if he will be more coherent than Eddie was.

Eddie would certainly already have sacked off OHC the way he did Thorley, and be on to the next young winger, but hopefully Suspended Bridalway will have faith in his view that he was the best selection for his plan, and give him at least a few more camps.

We can't continue just firing players through the squad, giving them a few camps and a test if they're lucky, hoping to find someone who's going to dominate tests from minute 1, as the premiership and youth set up is blatantly not producing them at the moment.

[Oakboy]

OHC and Arundel are going to be an interesting test of the Scoundrel Bounder selection philosophy, and if he will be more coherent than Eddie was.

Eddie would certainly already have sacked off OHC the way he did Thorley, and be on to the next young winger, but hopefully Suspended Bridalway will have faith in his view that he was the best selection for his plan, and give him at least a few more camps.

We can't continue just firing players through the squad, giving them a few camps and a test if they're lucky, hoping to find someone who's going to dominate tests from minute 1, as the premiership and youth set up is blatantly not producing them at the moment.

Agreed. Which players does the coach invest in for a sustained run, though? That's a fundamental selection/management skill. Did Scrote Bungler get it right with Dombrandt? Dare he continue the experiment or should he try someone else?

Rumours suggest he has fallen out with Billy V (together with Marler, Nowell, Care and May), so will he go backwards as he's done with props and Tuilagi?

Unfortunately, there is normally limited development time and new wingers, say, might be lucky to get three games to convince. In these circumstances, though, SB has zero development time. I'd be shocked if Daly did not come back in ahead of the wanabee wingers. I really hope Launchbury gets considered ahead of Ewels.

[Epaminondas Pules]

OHC and Arundel are going to be an interesting test of the Scoundrel Bounder selection philosophy, and if he will be more coherent than Eddie was.

Eddie would certainly already have sacked off OHC the way he did Thorley, and be on to the next young winger, but hopefully Suspended Bridalway will have faith in his view that he was the best selection for his plan, and give him at least a few more camps.

We can't continue just firing players through the squad, giving them a few camps and a test if they're lucky, hoping to find someone who's going to dominate tests from minute 1, as the premiership and youth set up is blatantly not producing them at the moment.

Agreed. Which players does the coach invest in for a sustained run, though? That's a fundamental selection/management skill. Did Scrote Bungler get it right with Dombrandt? Dare he continue the experiment or should he try someone else?

Rumours suggest he has fallen out with Billy V (together with Marler, Nowell, Care and May), so will he go backwards as he's done with props and Tuilagi?

Unfortunately, there is normally limited development time and new wingers, say, might be lucky to get three games to convince. In these circumstances, though, SB has zero development time. I'd be shocked if Daly did not come back in ahead of the wanabee wingers. I really hope Launchbury gets considered ahead of Ewels.

If he doesn't try someone else he's an idiot. If nothing else then to see if we can find a genuine contender at 8.

I'm also not sure there are that many wingers banging the door down. They all look like good club players once you get past Arundell and Freeman. Watson is a shoe-in and Malins, well, I'm not sure what Malins is. So may well go back a little to what you know (May and Nowell, maybe Daly).

[Mellsblue]

I’m a fan of Dombrandt but it hasn’t worked. I would put imo at the end of that usually but I think it is obvious. Whether that’s because he’s not good enough or whether he’s just not right in this team/game plan I’m not sure but I edge towards the latter. The problem is who should Steel Broadsword replace him with. It’s a massive punt whoever he chooses and it’s a massive punt if he stick with Dombers.

[Oakboy]

I’m a fan of Dombrandt but it hasn’t worked. I would put imo at the end of that usually but I think it is obvious. Whether that’s because he’s not good enough or whether he’s just not right in this team/game plan I’m not sure but I edge towards the latter. The problem is who should Steel Broadsword replace him with. It’s a massive punt whoever he chooses and it’s a massive punt if he stick with Dombers.

I just can't get beyond the two Willises and Curry being our best back row with Lawes on the bench.

[stepsider]

OHC and Arundel are going to be an interesting test of the Scoundrel Bounder selection philosophy, and if he will be more coherent than Eddie was.

Eddie would certainly already have sacked off OHC the way he did Thorley, and be on to the next young winger, but hopefully Suspended Bridalway will have faith in his view that he was the best selection for his plan, and give him at least a few more camps.

We can't continue just firing players through the squad, giving them a few camps and a test if they're lucky, hoping to find someone who's going to dominate tests from minute 1, as the premiership and youth set up is blatantly not producing them at the moment.

Agreed. Which players does the coach invest in for a sustained run, though? That's a fundamental selection/management skill. Did Scrote Bungler get it right with Dombrandt? Dare he continue the experiment or should he try someone else?

Rumours suggest he has fallen out with Billy V (together with Marler, Nowell, Care and May), so will he go backwards as he's done with props and Tuilagi?

Unfortunately, there is normally limited development time and new wingers, say, might be lucky to get three games to convince. In these circumstances, though, SB has zero development time. I'd be shocked if Daly did not come back in ahead of the wanabee wingers. I really hope Launchbury gets considered ahead of Ewels.

If he doesn't try someone else he's an idiot. If nothing else then to see if we can find a genuine contender at 8.

I'm also not sure there are that many wingers banging the door down. They all look like good club players once you get past Arundell and Freeman. Watson is a shoe-in and Malins, well, I'm not sure what Malins is. So may well go back a little to what you know (May and Nowell, maybe Daly).

Radwan still frighteningly quick for Falcons, but he's gone right off screen. Murley never got a look in. Thorley has looked good for Glos whenever I've seen him play. Roebuck (Sale) was another in - out, but has potential. Another from Sale, currently full-back, is Joe Carpenter, who looks classy. And I've probably missed someone: but plenty of wingers there.

[Mellsblue]

I’m a fan of Dombrandt but it hasn’t worked. I would put imo at the end of that usually but I think it is obvious. Whether that’s because he’s not good enough or whether he’s just not right in this team/game plan I’m not sure but I edge towards the latter. The problem is who should Steel Broadsword replace him with. It’s a massive punt whoever he chooses and it’s a massive punt if he stick with Dombers.

I just can't get beyond the two Willises and Curry being our best back row with Lawes on the bench.

We know!

[Epaminondas Pules]

I’m a fan of Dombrandt but it hasn’t worked. I would put imo at the end of that usually but I think it is obvious. Whether that’s because he’s not good enough or whether he’s just not right in this team/game plan I’m not sure but I edge towards the latter. The problem is who should Steel Broadsword replace him with. It’s a massive punt whoever he chooses and it’s a massive punt if he stick with Dombers.

Hard to look beyond a return to Billy V, Sam Simmonds and then a look at Willis T and Mercer as possible bolters. It is most definitely a problem position in a number of facets, with not much time to find a coherent answer. Backrow as a whole really. We don't know what our backrow makeup should be.

[Banquo]

I’m a fan of Dombrandt but it hasn’t worked. I would put imo at the end of that usually but I think it is obvious. Whether that’s because he’s not good enough or whether he’s just not right in this team/game plan I’m not sure but I edge towards the latter. The problem is who should Steel Broadsword replace him with. It’s a massive punt whoever he chooses and it’s a massive punt if he stick with Dombers.

Hard to look beyond a return to Billy V, Sam Simmonds and then a look at Willis T and Mercer as possible bolters. It is most definitely a problem position in a number of facets, with not much time to find a coherent answer. Backrow as a whole really. We don't know what our backrow makeup should be.

Aye. Frankly Jack Willis and Tom Curry are class acts, but very different- can you accomodate them both (probably), but what does that mean for number 8 and locks...and what is our breakdown strategy (which is also a function of what game we'd like to impose on the opposition).

Slightly Bothersome.

[stepsider]

Radwan really putting in a shift for Falcons tonight. Silvio Berlusconi probably couldn't give a s**t as he can't wait to reinstate May, Daly and Mike Brown (as a winger), but IMHO Radwan should be straight back in the squad.

[Spiffy]

I’m a fan of Dombrandt but it hasn’t worked. I would put imo at the end of that usually but I think it is obvious. Whether that’s because he’s not good enough or whether he’s just not right in this team/game plan I’m not sure but I edge towards the latter. The problem is who should Steel Broadsword replace him with. It’s a massive punt whoever he chooses and it’s a massive punt if he stick with Dombers.

Hard to look beyond a return to Billy V, Sam Simmonds and then a look at Willis T and Mercer as possible bolters. It is most definitely a problem position in a number of facets, with not much time to find a coherent answer. Backrow as a whole really. We don't know what our backrow makeup should be.

Aye. Frankly Jack Willis and Tom Curry are class acts, but very different- can you accomodate them both (probably), but what does that mean for number 8 and locks...and what is our breakdown strategy (which is also a function of what game we'd like to impose on the opposition).

Slightly Bothersome.

Tom Curry has been injured for a while, but before he was crocked, he did not look the player he was a couple of years ago. Can't say why exactly, but overall he has just seemed a little more ploddy and lacking his earlier zip. Perhaps he has bulked up a tad when he didn't really need to.
Re. flankers - I'm surprised Pearson is not getting more plaudits here. For me he has been the best open side in the league for some time with a great all-round game, size, pace, footwork and intelligence.
If I were Seymour Bumph (but I don't have the schnozz for it), with a new, free hand on selection, not tied to Eddie's eejits, he would be the first flanker on my roster.

[Tom Moore]

If I'm Sweaty Ballsack (and, happily for my mental health, I don't have a job where my every wrong decision plays out in front of millions of people), I'm definitely looking at the two lads having good seasons in France rather than the two who spent the Autumn Internationals and the 6N respectively not being good enough, and frequently not even able to hang on to the ball. I think Billy's time is past, I don't think Dombrandt's ever even existed.