RugbyRebels

FKAS wrote:Eh? His kicking controlled the game for England and he got the side moving when it was on. We'd have had another try earlier had Peyper not blocked him as he switched play in the Aussie 22 just after half time.

Scruffy performance but we controlled the game and put Australia to the sword fairly comfortably. Got some good experience into some young players.

Needs some fine tuning and the attack clearly hasn't settled yet but it's not going to just be there straight off the bat as we haven't played any meaningful games before today since the 6N ended.

A few of his kicks were pretty decent tbf, but his decision making from the ruck was shocking.

Puja wrote:

jngf wrote:Don’t you just love Jones - picks Simmonds with 5 mins left and sticks him on the wrong flank

I saw that and thought of you

That was a dire game, especially having watched the Ireland vs NZ game beforehand. The mix-and-match backline is a nice idea in theory, but it's just got too many moving parts and too many players having to think about where they should be to work. Slade was on the wing when covering kicks, Smith was there from set piece defence, Tuilagi was there in loose play except when he was coming in at centre and in that case everyone shuffled out one - no-one was 100% sure of what they were doing and it showed.

Our tight 5 is filled with players who aren't good enough: Rodd, Blamire, Davidson, Hill, Ewels. Some of that is unavoidable with injury, but other bits are pure selection - Mako should not have been dropped just because Eddie wants to be unpredictable and Lawes is doing a (surprisingly) very good job at 6 but when we have no good 5s we don't have the luxury of playing him there.

All things told, a scrappy performance, not helped by a pedantic ref, but helped immensely by a terrible Australia who let us get away with opting out of attacking for the middle 70 minutes of the game.

We'll lose to South Africa next week. The only way to win would be to outplay them and turn on the style and we've specifically avoided preparing that, so I suspect we're going to try and outmuscle them and come up short.

Puja

Spot on.

WaspInWales wrote:

FKAS wrote:Eh? His kicking controlled the game for England and he got the side moving when it was on. We'd have had another try earlier had Peyper not blocked him as he switched play in the Aussie 22 just after half time.

Scruffy performance but we controlled the game and put Australia to the sword fairly comfortably. Got some good experience into some young players.

Needs some fine tuning and the attack clearly hasn't settled yet but it's not going to just be there straight off the bat as we haven't played any meaningful games before today since the 6N ended.

A few of his kicks were pretty decent tbf, but his decision making from the ruck was shocking.

Yep. More crabbing to eat up time and space, average passing and a headless chicken when we upped the tempo in the second half. If we are intending to play a faster, all court game then Youngs and Farrell need replacing at some point. I’d drop Farrell now but, given the complete lack of succession planning at 9, Youngs will have to stick around for a bit longer.

FKAS wrote:Rodd is 21 in prop terms he's a baby and he's only playing because of three better options being unavailable and one having been dropped for Trevor Davison because reasons.

FTFY.

I do agree that he's only a babby and has a lot of potential, but he just shouldn't have been there. Gods help us if we can't get Marler back in time for SA - they will eat him alive.

Puja

FKAS wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Positives though...Steward one tiny mistake on another fine performance. Smith was good when he had time but seriously hampered with Farrell at 10. Tuilagi had some decent ball time and made a few nice runs. Dombrandt carried well in his first cameo and Hill was lively too.

Youngs was dire. Slade fucked up at least two big opportunities. What has happened to our maul? Completely nullified by Australia. We didn't have the dominance in the scrum that I thought we would have. There was no improvement in attack and we left a shedload of points out there and still didn't look like we would score them.

Never felt so deflated after beating Australia this comfortably.

SA will sleep well this week.

Eh? His kicking controlled the game for England and he got the side moving when it was on. We'd have had another try earlier had Peyper not blocked him as he switched play in the Aussie 22 just after half time.

Scruffy performance but we controlled the game and put Australia to the sword fairly comfortably. Got some good experience into some young players.

Needs some fine tuning and the attack clearly hasn't settled yet but it's not going to just be there straight off the bat as we haven't played any meaningful games before today since the 6N ended.

More than once he looked right, moved left, looked left, looked right, moved right, passed to someone's arsehole. In general his passing was hesitant, either preceded by his side-runs or a double pump pass, both of which mean the player(s) looking to run onto the ball have no idea of where or when it's coming. Confusing a defence like that (which, charitably, I shall assume he was trying to do) only works if you're not confusing your own players at the same time.

Fine, he kicked alright but this was a classic Youngs performance for all the wrong reasons.

Slade played as the kind of centre you absolutely hate as a winger - consistently running diagonally, eating up all your space and waiting until you have no room at all to give you the pass.

Australia were unbelievably poor in giving and taking passes. They looked a total shambles,but still England seemed incapable of taking advantage of such crap opposition in a turgid performance that lacked rugby skill, brains and organization. Farrell really is the major stumbling block in any intent to play creative rugby.

Adam_P wrote:Slade played as the kind of centre you absolutely hate as a winger - consistently running diagonally, eating up all your space and waiting until you have no room at all to give you the pass.

That one he gave to May about 5 yards from the try line and 2 yards over the touch line after stealing 10 yards of space was a great example.

OK, so I missed parts of the game - mainly third quarter - while getting the kids to sleep. But what I did see... oh my.

So I thought Rodd was pretty OK. Good on the lad. A solid 4th choice we've got there. George was George, what more do you want or need? Sinckler was good and meh at the same time. Itoje was everywhere making up for the utter uselessness of Hill alongside him. Lawes should have been at 5 to avoid us needed to play both Hill and Ewels. Underhill was Underhill and Curry was Curry. So a mix in the pack.

Youngs...dear god. I thought he'd started to improve but that was back to headless chicken. I mentioned at some point, Smith had received the ball at 1st receiver 3 times, one of which was man and ball because Youngs had dilly dallied around with it until the defence were in his face. FFS. Then Quirke came on and his first box kick was right in the channel, about perfect. The second one, though, was like a normal Youngs one.

Smith was stitched up badly. He still got an assist, but OMG was he hampered by the setup around him. Utter shambles. Why pick him if all you bloody do is try to negate his weaknesses. That just negates his strengths, too. And it's not as if Farrell has any of them.

Farrell...what can I say... He didn't get sent off? He was just awful.

Slade was atrocious, too.

Next week can we get: Quirke/Mitchell, Smith, May, Tuilagi, Marchant, Radwan, Steward please.

Mellsblue wrote:

Adam_P wrote:Slade played as the kind of centre you absolutely hate as a winger - consistently running diagonally, eating up all your space and waiting until you have no room at all to give you the pass.

That one he gave to May about 5 yards from the try line and 2 yards over the touch line after stealing 10 yards of space was a great example.

Oh gods, I literally shouted, "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?" at the television for that one. If he'd tried to round the 13 and gone himself - perfectly acceptable option, as the room was there to try it. If he'd passed to May early - perfectly acceptable option as it would've given May a 1-on-1. What he tried to do was round the 13 and draw the winger, but then passed to May even though the winger refused to be drawn.

Either route would've been acceptable, but he somehow combined the worst of both. I've given up on expecting him to be good now. He is the new Billy Twelvetrees - capable of great things and great performances while equally capable of horrendous amateurish mistakes of both head and hands

Puja

Puja wrote:. He is the new Billy Twelvetrees - capable of great things and great performances while equally capable of horrendous amateurish mistakes of both head and hands

Puja

Hard to argue with that. On and off the field

Puja wrote:

FKAS wrote:Rodd is 21 in prop terms he's a baby and he's only playing because of three better options being unavailable and one having been dropped for Trevor Davison because reasons.

FTFY.

I do agree that he's only a babby and has a lot of potential, but he just shouldn't have been there. Gods help us if we can't get Marler back in time for SA - they will eat him alive.

Puja

That is true. I just don't feel Eddie had a lot of options with Genge and Marler having Covid, Mako not in the country and then both of West and Obano injured. At least we have captured a talented dual qualified player who in a couple of years might be worth revisiting. I hope for his sake Rodd isn't starting Vs SA though coming off the bench to face the 'bomb squad' is no better.

Danno wrote:

FKAS wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Positives though...Steward one tiny mistake on another fine performance. Smith was good when he had time but seriously hampered with Farrell at 10. Tuilagi had some decent ball time and made a few nice runs. Dombrandt carried well in his first cameo and Hill was lively too.

Youngs was dire. Slade fucked up at least two big opportunities. What has happened to our maul? Completely nullified by Australia. We didn't have the dominance in the scrum that I thought we would have. There was no improvement in attack and we left a shedload of points out there and still didn't look like we would score them.

Never felt so deflated after beating Australia this comfortably.

SA will sleep well this week.

Eh? His kicking controlled the game for England and he got the side moving when it was on. We'd have had another try earlier had Peyper not blocked him as he switched play in the Aussie 22 just after half time.

Scruffy performance but we controlled the game and put Australia to the sword fairly comfortably. Got some good experience into some young players.

Needs some fine tuning and the attack clearly hasn't settled yet but it's not going to just be there straight off the bat as we haven't played any meaningful games before today since the 6N ended.

More than once he looked right, moved left, looked left, looked right, moved right, passed to someone's arsehole. In general his passing was hesitant, either preceded by his side-runs or a double pump pass, both of which mean the player(s) looking to run onto the ball have no idea of where or when it's coming. Confusing a defence like that (which, charitably, I shall assume he was trying to do) only works if you're not confusing your own players at the same time.

Fine, he kicked alright but this was a classic Youngs performance for all the wrong reasons.

If your 9 is scrambling for options you have to ask what the hell are the two playmakers at 10 and 12 doing? Organise the attack. Youngs is effectively running the lot himself with no help from the playmakers. Not a problem he has when Ford plays.

England's attack looked decidedly off the cuff with effectively one backs move that has options to select from. There was no noticeable improvement when Quirke came on just like there was no improvement last week when Mitchell came on (actually Mitchell was disappointing). Switching players won't change the system the coaches have in place.

I don't like to praise Farrell but he and Smith combined well at 10 and 12. I thought Slade was the odd man out, as noted above the drift and crap pass to May was criminal.

FKAS wrote:

Danno wrote:

FKAS wrote:
Eh? His kicking controlled the game for England and he got the side moving when it was on. We'd have had another try earlier had Peyper not blocked him as he switched play in the Aussie 22 just after half time.

Scruffy performance but we controlled the game and put Australia to the sword fairly comfortably. Got some good experience into some young players.

Needs some fine tuning and the attack clearly hasn't settled yet but it's not going to just be there straight off the bat as we haven't played any meaningful games before today since the 6N ended.

More than once he looked right, moved left, looked left, looked right, moved right, passed to someone's arsehole. In general his passing was hesitant, either preceded by his side-runs or a double pump pass, both of which mean the player(s) looking to run onto the ball have no idea of where or when it's coming. Confusing a defence like that (which, charitably, I shall assume he was trying to do) only works if you're not confusing your own players at the same time.

Fine, he kicked alright but this was a classic Youngs performance for all the wrong reasons.

If your 9 is scrambling for options you have to ask what the hell are the two playmakers at 10 and 12 doing? Organise the attack. Youngs is effectively running the lot himself with no help from the playmakers. Not a problem he has when Ford plays.

England's attack looked decidedly off the cuff with effectively one backs move that has options to select from. There was no noticeable improvement when Quirke came on just like there was no improvement last week when Mitchell came on (actually Mitchell was disappointing). Switching players won't change the system the coaches have in place.

I don't like to praise Farrell but he and Smith combined well at 10 and 12. I thought Slade was the odd man out, as noted above the drift and crap pass to May was criminal.

There was one moment in particular where I noticed Farrell and Slade both ran the same line. It really does feel like it's too complicated at play-makers are making one another redundant.

FKAS wrote:

Puja wrote:

FKAS wrote:Rodd is 21 in prop terms he's a baby and he's only playing because of three better options being unavailable and one having been dropped for Trevor Davison because reasons.

FTFY.

I do agree that he's only a babby and has a lot of potential, but he just shouldn't have been there. Gods help us if we can't get Marler back in time for SA - they will eat him alive.

Puja

That is true. I just don't feel Eddie had a lot of options with Genge and Marler having Covid, Mako not in the country and then both of West and Obano injured. At least we have captured a talented dual qualified player who in a couple of years might be worth revisiting. I hope for his sake Rodd isn't starting Vs SA though coming off the bench to face the 'bomb squad' is no better.

If he hadn't been dropped for Davison, then Mako would've been in the country. Entirely self-inflicted.

Puja

He had options. It's not as though 11 players were at the bottom of the ruck he just found the ball in, he just couldn't pick one.

Danno wrote:He had options. It's not as though 11 players were at the bottom of the ruck he just found the ball in, he just couldn't pick one.

Yep. It’s a shame because he’s normally pretty good when we up the tempo and he has to make split second decisions but that period was poor.

Are there any complaints that don't relate to the ridiculous selection?

Let's face it the best available 23 would have destroyed that Australia team easily.

God help us next week.

Oakboy wrote:Are there any complaints that don't relate to the ridiculous selection?

Let's face it the best available 23 would have destroyed that Australia team easily.

God help us next week.

To my mind it was all the selection.

Unlike some on this board, I really rate Eddie. I think he’s a first class coach who has done an amazing job with England. But I don’t get that midfield selection at all. Perhaps he was trying to ease Smith into international rugby. If that’s the case, unless Farrell is injured, I suspect we’ll see him at 12 again especially against South Africa.

It’s not what I’d do. But then I’m not an international coach let alone one with Eddie’s record. Still, he’s got me perplexed on this one.

Thankfully I don’t have club loyalty as such one hopes to not view it through rose tinted glasses.

Best game I have seen Hill play in an England shirt (my motm). George is a joy ( he could be playing an international or running out for his local pub team!!)
Youngs returned to his ponderous best and playing Farrell at 12 doesn’t benefit anyone when playing alongside a playmaking 10.

Manu given the 14 shirt was just a poor joke by Jones and not playing an 8 at 8 does no favours to Curry or the team.
Steward rose above the shit that was promoted as Tier 1 rugby.

Thank god for Ireland, the SA pack and the Boots Christmas advert for rescuing Saturday afternoon.

p/d wrote:the Boots Christmas advert for rescuing Saturday afternoon.

Far more entertaining than the rugby and a top class performance from Jenna, as always. Definitely my woman of the match.

Mellsblue wrote:

p/d wrote:the Boots Christmas advert for rescuing Saturday afternoon.

Far more entertaining than the rugby and a top class performance from Jenna, as always. Definitely my woman of the match.

I never wanted to be a snowman more!!!

p/d wrote:Thankfully I don’t have club loyalty as such one hopes to not view it through rose tinted glasses.

Best game I have seen Hill play in an England shirt (my motm).

I'm sorry, which Hill was your motm? Did Sam Hill get on at some point? Paul Hill? Ted Hill? Is it an affectionate nickname for Underhill? I'm confused.

Puja

badback wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Are there any complaints that don't relate to the ridiculous selection?

Let's face it the best available 23 would have destroyed that Australia team easily.

God help us next week.

To my mind it was all the selection.

Unlike some on this board, I really rate Eddie. I think he’s a first class coach who has done an amazing job with England. But I don’t get that midfield selection at all. Perhaps he was trying to ease Smith into international rugby. If that’s the case, unless Farrell is injured, I suspect we’ll see him at 12 again especially against South Africa.

It’s not what I’d do. But then I’m not an international coach let alone one with Eddie’s record. Still, he’s got me perplexed on this one.

That easing process is patronising, at best. Farrell having a blue on the touchline in reaction to an apparent slight to Smith, then patting Smith on the head in a "good lad" kind of way was just not needed. Is Farrell the coach, or Eddie?

On a lighter note.