England v SA- same larger squad

[FKAS]

The Robinson, Ashton and Johnson days were mostly rubbish, but I think it’s important to call out that the player pool was nowhere near as strong as what Eddie has to work with and in hindsight, expectations were probably higher than they ought to have been. I’d say the same for Lancaster too, albeit to a lesser extent.

Eddie has had the best resources at his disposal of any England coach in my memory and he’s failed. It’s as simple as that.

I don't quite agree with that. Post 2019 Eddie hasn't had the coaches he wants. The RFU have refused to pay compensation so that he can get the Prem coaches he wants. Before 2019 he was able to pick up Borthwick from Bristol and Gustard from Sarries. Post 2019 it was well documented that he wanted Sam Vesty but instead got Simon Amor. I imagine his selection of out of work league coaches is also down to the RFU not being willing to bring in his preferred contracted options.

Lancaster got to pick his coaching staff, had a good squad and completely stuffed it at a home world cup. He gets no sympathy from me whatsoever. He was considerably worse than Eddie.

On the other hand, if Eddie wasn't consistently such an incredible dick to his coaching staff, he might still have some of them on board and not need to be going back to the RFU every six months with, "I broke another assistant, will you buy me a new one?"

Puja

He had Borthwick for five years, Wisemantel for two and Mitchell for three years before the last world cup. Once he had them settled in he retained them, after the world cup you generally get to see some movement as the new cycle begins.

The big turnover has been in this cycle where he's not got the ones he wants.

[Mikey Brown]

I did have a weird moment watching SA, and Le Roux in particular, thinking maybe we could have skipped this whole playmaker at 12 saga completely if we were happy to accept Goode as a flake in defence and wondering where his career would have gone.

I’m aware whose fault it is he was shunted out of the 15 shirt, which I was in full support of.

Did he get better because he didn’t have to deal with adjusting his game to suit England and could just do his thing for Saracens?

Do I have a point? No, not really.

Saying all that, I really don’t think that group was as talented overall.

[Mikey Brown]

I'm not sure if this is actually Faz that you can hear, but it got a laugh at least.

[Mikey Brown]

Now that's the stuff!

[Puja]

Now that's the stuff!

Took me a few relistens to hear what he actually said. "Get up, you soft fuck!" Cheeky considering Farrell absolutely did take him around the neck.

I'm impressed by all these people who are listening to what Farrell's saying on the ref mic and collating the amusing bits - I usually spend the game trying to tune him out.

Puja

[Banquo]

The Robinson, Ashton and Johnson days were mostly rubbish, but I think it’s important to call out that the player pool was nowhere near as strong as what Eddie has to work with and in hindsight, expectations were probably higher than they ought to have been. I’d say the same for Lancaster too, albeit to a lesser extent.

Eddie has had the best resources at his disposal of any England coach in my memory and he’s failed. It’s as simple as that.

Not sure I totally agree- SCW had a better playing pool, and probably the same levels of general resourcing; in fairness to SCW he had to smash down a lot of doors to get these resources (medical, psychological etc etc) for all the marginal gains stuff. But Eddie definitely has a better pool than anyone since SCW shuffled off, even though significant weaknesses compared to SCW's time; even now, I think we possibly still think our players are a bit better than they really are so I do think we'd still come up short playing at our very best, v say South Africa or France at their best (far too hypothetical I know ). But as all I have ever asked of an England coach is they produce something better than the sum of the parts, Eddie is failing by that benchmark; as 5p has said elsewhere, personal discipline, concentration, good basics should all be a minimum, and we come up way short. Sure we'd probably still have got battered at the scrum (two front fives basically failed here v SA, the subs if anything fared worse), but the stupidity (yes you Hill), the inaccuracy (Faz) and the overall discipline meant SA had continuous momentum (is that a thing ) for an hour until the red card.
If nothing else, the culture has to change imo; that's a top down thing.

[Stom]

The Robinson, Ashton and Johnson days were mostly rubbish, but I think it’s important to call out that the player pool was nowhere near as strong as what Eddie has to work with and in hindsight, expectations were probably higher than they ought to have been. I’d say the same for Lancaster too, albeit to a lesser extent.

Eddie has had the best resources at his disposal of any England coach in my memory and he’s failed. It’s as simple as that.

Not sure I totally agree- SCW had a better playing pool, and probably the same levels of general resourcing; in fairness to SCW he had to smash down a lot of doors to get these resources (medical, psychological etc etc) for all the marginal gains stuff. But Eddie definitely has a better pool than anyone since SCW shuffled off, even though significant weaknesses compared to SCW's time; even now, I think we possibly still think our players are a bit better than they really are so I do think we'd still come up short playing at our very best, v say South Africa or France at their best (far too hypothetical I know ). But as all I have ever asked of an England coach is they produce something better than the sum of the parts, Eddie is failing by that benchmark; as 5p has said elsewhere, personal discipline, concentration, good basics should all be a minimum, and we come up way short. Sure we'd probably still have got battered at the scrum (two front fives basically failed here v SA, the subs if anything fared worse), but the stupidity (yes you Hill), the inaccuracy (Faz) and the overall discipline meant SA had continuous momentum (is that a thing ) for an hour until the red card.
If nothing else, the culture has to change imo; that's a top down thing.

How much of 'our players aren't as good as we think' is because of their England performances, though? And how much could better team-wide performances make them seem like world beaters again?

I feel like they are very good players, or at least a lot of them are. Eddie just keeps selecting Nowell alongside them, though

But seriously, it's a chicken/egg. Is it the players who make the team worse? Or the team that makes the players worse? I'm on the side that these are very, very good players constrained by Eddie.

[Stom]

Doesn't help that every time I see or hear criticism, my mind plays that awful Aussie accent just saying: 'Nah mate', and I want to throw up.

[Banquo]

The Robinson, Ashton and Johnson days were mostly rubbish, but I think it’s important to call out that the player pool was nowhere near as strong as what Eddie has to work with and in hindsight, expectations were probably higher than they ought to have been. I’d say the same for Lancaster too, albeit to a lesser extent.

Eddie has had the best resources at his disposal of any England coach in my memory and he’s failed. It’s as simple as that.

Not sure I totally agree- SCW had a better playing pool, and probably the same levels of general resourcing; in fairness to SCW he had to smash down a lot of doors to get these resources (medical, psychological etc etc) for all the marginal gains stuff. But Eddie definitely has a better pool than anyone since SCW shuffled off, even though significant weaknesses compared to SCW's time; even now, I think we possibly still think our players are a bit better than they really are so I do think we'd still come up short playing at our very best, v say South Africa or France at their best (far too hypothetical I know ). But as all I have ever asked of an England coach is they produce something better than the sum of the parts, Eddie is failing by that benchmark; as 5p has said elsewhere, personal discipline, concentration, good basics should all be a minimum, and we come up way short. Sure we'd probably still have got battered at the scrum (two front fives basically failed here v SA, the subs if anything fared worse), but the stupidity (yes you Hill), the inaccuracy (Faz) and the overall discipline meant SA had continuous momentum (is that a thing ) for an hour until the red card.
If nothing else, the culture has to change imo; that's a top down thing.

How much of 'our players aren't as good as we think' is because of their England performances, though? And how much could better team-wide performances make them seem like world beaters again?

I feel like they are very good players, or at least a lot of them are. Eddie just keeps selecting Nowell alongside them, though

But seriously, it's a chicken/egg. Is it the players who make the team worse? Or the team that makes the players worse? I'm on the side that these are very, very good players constrained by Eddie.

They may be very good or even good- but to eat at the top table you need a fair few top/world class. Even accepting any Eddie factor, how many do we have? Its not really the key point though- though a factor when looking at what happens if a new coach rocks up. My key factor is some of the elementary stuff you'd expect to have been sorted are not there- and that I lie directly at Eddie's feet. Change the players, or change the players, to paraphrase an old work saying.
I'd say we have a few 'very very good players' (cue discussion of world class, top players etc etc). There may be a couple more hidden away by the regime I agree. But again, not really the thrust.

[Mellsblue]

Objectively, who are the England players who are top three in the world in their position? The only one that I think wouldn’t lead to an argument is Itoje. You could argue Curry, Genge and Steward. I’d add Ford and Watson, maybe May, if they regain previous heights. It doesn’t scream potential world champions even if we get Smith, Robertson and O’Gara as HC, forwards coach and backs coach.

[Banquo]

Objectively, who are the England players who are top three in the world in their position? The only one that I think wouldn’t lead to an argument is Itoje. You could argue Curry, Genge and Steward. I’d add Ford and Watson, maybe May, if they regain previous heights. It doesn’t scream potential world champions even if we get Smith, Robertson and O’Gara as HC, forwards coach and backs coach.

well yes. I'm trying to go one step at a time- getting the best of what you have is the bigger issue atm I'd say. You then may uncover that some players are better than they have appeared to be, to Stom's point- some players are really good cogs in a machine, Curry springs to mind there.

[Mellsblue]

Objectively, who are the England players who are top three in the world in their position? The only one that I think wouldn’t lead to an argument is Itoje. You could argue Curry, Genge and Steward. I’d add Ford and Watson, maybe May, if they regain previous heights. It doesn’t scream potential world champions even if we get Smith, Robertson and O’Gara as HC, forwards coach and backs coach.

well yes. I'm trying to go one step at a time- getting the best of what you have is the bigger issue atm I'd say. You then may uncover that some players are better than they have appeared to be, to Stom's point- some players are really good cogs in a machine, Curry springs to mind there.

Yep. I think in the correct environment we could have a decent spine of top three players but atm it’s Itoje plus youngsters who’ve shown glimpses and veterans who may be on the downward slide.
I’m not saying that we won’t improve with a new coaching set-up, if the RFU can secure the requisite quality then I think it’s a no brainer, but even the worlds best wouldn’t, imo, look at this squad and think it’s indisputably a match for NZ, SA , Ire and Fra.

[Stom]

Objectively, who are the England players who are top three in the world in their position? The only one that I think wouldn’t lead to an argument is Itoje. You could argue Curry, Genge and Steward. I’d add Ford and Watson, maybe May, if they regain previous heights. It doesn’t scream potential world champions even if we get Smith, Robertson and O’Gara as HC, forwards coach and backs coach.

But if the England team were performing better as a unit, you'd instantly up that number...

We look back on Clive's squad with rose tinted glasses because of how good a team it was. But really, the only players who performed consistently well across multiple regimes from that team were Vickery, Johnson, Hill, Wilkinson, Greenwood and Robinson. Now, they're all seen as world class, rightly so, but so are pretty much every other player in that XV except for the poor Bens. Were they all just that good? Or was the fact they all peaked together a sign that it was the team that elevated them to world class?

When I think of World Class in the current landscape, I see France's bullocking flankers. The fact we don't have that is less down to the fact Curry, Willis, et al., aren't necessarily as good as their French counterparts, and more due to the fact our setup basically forces them to play badly.

I just think that if we put out a team to play some rugby, and added some steel to the pack while doing so, we could create a really, really good team full of top players.

Could they then be considered world class, if they're performing to a high level without stupid mistakes? They probably would be, or at least a handful would be.

And, yes, there's always going to be Lewsey in there, but today's Lewsey is much more likely to be Murley than Jack bloody Nowell.

[Mellsblue]

Objectively, who are the England players who are top three in the world in their position? The only one that I think wouldn’t lead to an argument is Itoje. You could argue Curry, Genge and Steward. I’d add Ford and Watson, maybe May, if they regain previous heights. It doesn’t scream potential world champions even if we get Smith, Robertson and O’Gara as HC, forwards coach and backs coach.

But if the England team were performing better as a unit, you'd instantly up that number...

We look back on Clive's squad with rose tinted glasses because of how good a team it was. But really, the only players who performed consistently well across multiple regimes from that team were Vickery, Johnson, Hill, Wilkinson, Greenwood and Robinson. Now, they're all seen as world class, rightly so, but so are pretty much every other player in that XV except for the poor Bens. Were they all just that good? Or was the fact they all peaked together a sign that it was the team that elevated them to world class?

When I think of World Class in the current landscape, I see France's bullocking flankers. The fact we don't have that is less down to the fact Curry, Willis, et al., aren't necessarily as good as their French counterparts, and more due to the fact our setup basically forces them to play badly.

I just think that if we put out a team to play some rugby, and added some steel to the pack while doing so, we could create a really, really good team full of top players.

Could they then be considered world class, if they're performing to a high level without stupid mistakes? They probably would be, or at least a handful would be.

And, yes, there's always going to be Lewsey in there, but today's Lewsey is much more likely to be Murley than Jack bloody Nowell.

Would we? Who? Curry is always touted a world class but even away from Jones with the Lions he was only decent.

[Which Tyler]

I'd say that Itoje, Curry, Billy, Ford, Tuilagi, May and Watson have been world class
I'd say that none currently are (or have been for a while)


Itoje, Curry and Ford might get back there again with a new coach, and a set-up that gets the best of them; but I wouldn't put any money on it as I think the game's moved on (IMO Ford would have the best bet of the 3, as the most versatile skillset)

[Mellsblue]

I'd say that Itoje, Curry, Billy, Ford, Tuilagi, May and Watson have been world class
I'd say that none currently are (or have been for a while)

Agreed, and Billy, Tuilagi and May are very clearly on the slide. I’d be inclined to add George, but it’s certainly not a slam dunk and may be biased as he’s a personal favourite, and he’s also on the slide to retirement.
Imo, Genge has had patches of being world class but needs to add consistency whilst Steward could get there if he keeps improving, but it’s guess work with both as they have serious limitations as it currently stands.

[Banquo]

Objectively, who are the England players who are top three in the world in their position? The only one that I think wouldn’t lead to an argument is Itoje. You could argue Curry, Genge and Steward. I’d add Ford and Watson, maybe May, if they regain previous heights. It doesn’t scream potential world champions even if we get Smith, Robertson and O’Gara as HC, forwards coach and backs coach.

But if the England team were performing better as a unit, you'd instantly up that number...

We look back on Clive's squad with rose tinted glasses because of how good a team it was. But really, the only players who performed consistently well across multiple regimes from that team were Vickery, Johnson, Hill, Wilkinson, Greenwood and Robinson. Now, they're all seen as world class, rightly so, but so are pretty much every other player in that XV except for the poor Bens. Were they all just that good? Or was the fact they all peaked together a sign that it was the team that elevated them to world class?

When I think of World Class in the current landscape, I see France's bullocking flankers. The fact we don't have that is less down to the fact Curry, Willis, et al., aren't necessarily as good as their French counterparts, and more due to the fact our setup basically forces them to play badly.

I just think that if we put out a team to play some rugby, and added some steel to the pack while doing so, we could create a really, really good team full of top players.

Could they then be considered world class, if they're performing to a high level without stupid mistakes? They probably would be, or at least a handful would be.

And, yes, there's always going to be Lewsey in there, but today's Lewsey is much more likely to be Murley than Jack bloody Nowell.

At the time, Thompson was exceptional, Woodman imo would have remained top drawer, Leonard still quality, you seem to have missed Back and Dallaglio!!....
Even if you discount Kay, Tindall, Catt, Dawson, Cohen who weren't exactly poor (at the time BC. hit the buffers)...that's still a lot of very very good players.

[Oakboy]

We have, in Watson and Daly, two wingers who would have caused all our AI opponents far more problems than any of the pairings that Jones selected. If two that might be did not get considered, whose fault is it that we have 'no world class players'. If Willis is not, he possibly could be given a real chance. Add on Itoje and Marler and we have five players who would be in serious contention for places in the 23 of most other teams in the world.

[Mellsblue]

We have, in Watson and Daly, two wingers who would have caused all our AI opponents far more problems than any of the pairings that Jones selected. If two that might be did not get considered, whose fault is it that we have 'no world class players'. If Willis is not, he possibly could be given a real chance. Add on Itoje and Marler and we have five players who would be in serious contention for places in the 23 of most other teams in the world.

Watson is only just back from another long term injury and Daly hasn’t, to the best of knowledge, played wing this season. Not that I wouldn’t pick both over Nowell.
That said, no use having world class wingers if everything inside them isn’t up to the required standard.
No one’s saying it is no fault of Jones, but only you’re saying it’s all Jones’s fault.
Completely disagree with your last sentence.

[Mikey Brown]

He has played wing this season but it seems he never wears the same shirt number twice in a row for Saracens. Maybe it’s a crafty means of keeping Englands hands off him if he never settles in one spot.

[Banquo]

We have, in Watson and Daly, two wingers who would have caused all our AI opponents far more problems than any of the pairings that Jones selected. If two that might be did not get considered, whose fault is it that we have 'no world class players'. If Willis is not, he possibly could be given a real chance. Add on Itoje and Marler and we have five players who would be in serious contention for places in the 23 of most other teams in the world.

Watson is only just back from another long term injury and Daly hasn’t, to the best of knowledge, played wing this season. Not that I wouldn’t pick both over Nowell.
That said, no use having world class wingers if everything inside them isn’t up to the required standard.
No one’s saying it is no fault of Jones, but only you’re saying it’s all Jones’s fault.
Completely disagree with your last sentence.

I'd pick both over Nowell, but neither have shown any thing like the form internationally you'd call world class for.....at least ages. But as you said, you could have Campese and Gerald Davies on the wings and it'd make little difference .....even peak Lomu (the sort of player this side needs) wouldn't have helped too much with today's defences.
On the Jones thing- its combo of quality of players, the quality of individual contributions from players who should do better, especially the unforced mental errors, and something awry in the prep (which is down to Jones) that leads to these patches of terrible substandard performance. Sure you could argue on a change or two here or there, but generally he's picking the teams that have a consensus on them. But I think he has run out of road- ironically, because I'm not sure many would do well against the Boks in that mode- ruthless and relentless; no surprises there tbh.

[fivepointer]

Just looking at the last WC squad and its striking how little improvement there's been in the players who are still around.
Maybe Genge has moved up a level, but beyond that i'm struggling. Some have moved on, retired or been dropped but those who are still in the squad havent done much in the last 3 years.
Its also a bit sobering looking at the long list of new caps since 2019. There are loads of names but bar Steward and possibly Quirke, i'm struggling yet again to identify a player who has come in and looked the part even after a few appearances. (some of course had limited game time)

[Banquo]

Just looking at the last WC squad and its striking how little improvement there's been in the players who are still around.
Maybe Genge has moved up a level, but beyond that i'm struggling. Some have moved on, retired or been dropped but those who are still in the squad havent done much in the last 3 years.
Its also a bit sobering looking at the long list of new caps since 2019. There are loads of names but bar Steward and possibly Quirke, i'm struggling yet again to identify a player who has come in and looked the part even after a few appearances. (some of course had limited game time)

JVP, Smith, Freeman have all looked the part enough I'd say; Coles has been a bit mixed, but putting him at 6 didn't quite work against SA- but excellent v Argentina mainly. Chessum also did well. Arundell shone in cameos.

On the older players, one would hope that some would develop further....on the other hand, they do get flogged a bit up front.

[Oakboy]

We have, in Watson and Daly, two wingers who would have caused all our AI opponents far more problems than any of the pairings that Jones selected. If two that might be did not get considered, whose fault is it that we have 'no world class players'. If Willis is not, he possibly could be given a real chance. Add on Itoje and Marler and we have five players who would be in serious contention for places in the 23 of most other teams in the world.

Watson is only just back from another long term injury and Daly hasn’t, to the best of knowledge, played wing this season. Not that I wouldn’t pick both over Nowell.
That said, no use having world class wingers if everything inside them isn’t up to the required standard.
No one’s saying it is no fault of Jones, but only you’re saying it’s all Jones’s fault.
Completely disagree with your last sentence.

I'd pick both over Nowell, but neither have shown any thing like the form internationally you'd call world class for.....at least ages. But as you said, you could have Campese and Gerald Davies on the wings and it'd make little difference .....even peak Lomu (the sort of player this side needs) wouldn't have helped too much with today's defences.
On the Jones thing- its combo of quality of players, the quality of individual contributions from players who should do better, especially the unforced mental errors, and something awry in the prep (which is down to Jones) that leads to these patches of terrible substandard performance. Sure you could argue on a change or two here or there, but generally he's picking the teams that have a consensus on them. But I think he has run out of road- ironically, because I'm not sure many would do well against the Boks in that mode- ruthless and relentless; no surprises there tbh.

Banquo, I don't really disagree with any of that but I'd add one remark about SA. Before the game several of us suggested that with all the players they were missing they were not invincible (at least). Now, with hindsight they were/are?

Or, were they made to look better than they really are because our performance - from selection, to preparation, to game plan, to mistake frequency, to ill-discipline, etc. - was so bad?

Where it is all so hard to measure is in that conflict of assessment opinion. My own, for what it is worth, is that England do not have the players to be fantastic world beaters BUT they do have the playing quality such that (on the back of a decent 6N showing) they should have won all four AIs. Against top-strength, fully-firing NZ and SA teams, maybe winning those two games was wishful thinking but against those actual teams there was no acceptable excuse for not winning both.

[Spiffy]

Objectively, who are the England players who are top three in the world in their position? The only one that I think wouldn’t lead to an argument is Itoje. You could argue Curry, Genge and Steward. I’d add Ford and Watson, maybe May, if they regain previous heights. It doesn’t scream potential world champions even if we get Smith, Robertson and O’Gara as HC, forwards coach and backs coach.

But if the England team were performing better as a unit, you'd instantly up that number...

We look back on Clive's squad with rose tinted glasses because of how good a team it was. But really, the only players who performed consistently well across multiple regimes from that team were Vickery, Johnson, Hill, Wilkinson, Greenwood and Robinson. Now, they're all seen as world class, rightly so, but so are pretty much every other player in that XV except for the poor Bens. Were they all just that good? Or was the fact they all peaked together a sign that it was the team that elevated them to world class?

When I think of World Class in the current landscape, I see France's bullocking flankers. The fact we don't have that is less down to the fact Curry, Willis, et al., aren't necessarily as good as their French counterparts, and more due to the fact our setup basically forces them to play badly.

I just think that if we put out a team to play some rugby, and added some steel to the pack while doing so, we could create a really, really good team full of top players.

Could they then be considered world class, if they're performing to a high level without stupid mistakes? They probably would be, or at least a handful would be.

And, yes, there's always going to be Lewsey in there, but today's Lewsey is much more likely to be Murley than Jack bloody Nowell.

Would we? Who? Curry is always touted a world class but even away from Jones with the Lions he was only decent.

Curry was a fast, athletic, mobile, traditional 7 when he appeared on the scene, and very good. Now he's an over bulked 6.5, coached to play a close quarters game that is not his natural one, and has lost much of his old zip. An example of Jones picking a player for his obvious attributes then asking him to do something different. Like Marcus Smith.