England vs Australia

[Banquo]

Well that’s Furbank off the hook…… now for the rest

I’m afraid some aren’t so lucky. Barnsey isn’t happy:
‘After losing a fifth straight match against a leading rugby nation, the England manager said his team failed to follow the preconceived plan: “When you drift away from the game plan, it generally leads to more errors.”
The manager is deluding himself.
He is blaming the players’ failure to stay on message as the reason for defeat. An equally strong case for admonition can be made for pointing the finger at those who blindly stick to the pre match strategy.’

Fuck me! The guy is an absolute tool! And for once I don't mean Barnes!

and moaning about new laws. That everyone else has to play under.

[Oakboy]

As a Scotland fan, the continued inclusion of Cole does make me smile. He's not bad. He even looked like he might get a turnover at one point on the weekend. But he's not in the least bit intimidating.

One last hurrah at a World Cup if you are worried the others' scrummaging isn't up to it is one thing. Keeping picking him now is a bit much though. Surely, even if they are a bit raw, you have someone ready to have a go as a bench option at least. When we kept picking WP Nel, we truly had no one who could hold up a scrum and even then I think we kept doing it too long.

I get a bit of the logic. It is outright dangerous to put Opoku-Fordjour or Fasogbon in international rugby yet - not because they might not cope, but because they're too young and the last thing we want is to cripple them with injury - but they are coming (and Sela behind them), so the argument is why bother promoting Heyes who, previous to this season, has stalled and been unable to oust Cole for Leicester. Better to select the old man for another series rather than go for a younger downgrade who won't even be the long-term solution.

Of course, that logic has been ruined by Heyes kicking on this season and looking significantly better, but there was only 3 games of him playing before the EPS was named due to the stupid organisation of the season at present.

Puja

Is 'only 3 games', 'only 19' etc. a bit over-cautious these days? If coaches (head-coaches) are worth their salt, can they not pick out the exceptional ones and get them in? Maybe every-other game, maybe a short stint off the bench, maybe just the training camp but not to even try them? Arguably, 6 - 10 of the current squad are not taking this team up a level. Just plodding on with them might not work, perhaps???

[Epaminondas Pules]

Yeah, but Significantly Bothersome has gone with Cole AND Davidson. That's just mind blowingly conservative.

We have some significant front row issues at the moment. And a bunch of extremely talented people coming through, but a gap inbetween them. We either have a couple of years of real pain / more of the same, or he promotes them early, neither of which is good. I think they will force his hand somewhat, despite their age and natural reservations we all have therein.

[Epaminondas Pules]

I’m afraid some aren’t so lucky. Barnsey isn’t happy:
‘After losing a fifth straight match against a leading rugby nation, the England manager said his team failed to follow the preconceived plan: “When you drift away from the game plan, it generally leads to more errors.”
The manager is deluding himself.
He is blaming the players’ failure to stay on message as the reason for defeat. An equally strong case for admonition can be made for pointing the finger at those who blindly stick to the pre match strategy.’

Fuck me! The guy is an absolute tool! And for once I don't mean Barnes!

and moaning about new laws. That everyone else has to play under.

Which they'd obviously trained to, judging by the amount of hits we put on NZ kick receivers. He is an absolute weapons grade tool!

[Puja]

As a Scotland fan, the continued inclusion of Cole does make me smile. He's not bad. He even looked like he might get a turnover at one point on the weekend. But he's not in the least bit intimidating.

One last hurrah at a World Cup if you are worried the others' scrummaging isn't up to it is one thing. Keeping picking him now is a bit much though. Surely, even if they are a bit raw, you have someone ready to have a go as a bench option at least. When we kept picking WP Nel, we truly had no one who could hold up a scrum and even then I think we kept doing it too long.

I get a bit of the logic. It is outright dangerous to put Opoku-Fordjour or Fasogbon in international rugby yet - not because they might not cope, but because they're too young and the last thing we want is to cripple them with injury - but they are coming (and Sela behind them), so the argument is why bother promoting Heyes who, previous to this season, has stalled and been unable to oust Cole for Leicester. Better to select the old man for another series rather than go for a younger downgrade who won't even be the long-term solution.

Of course, that logic has been ruined by Heyes kicking on this season and looking significantly better, but there was only 3 games of him playing before the EPS was named due to the stupid organisation of the season at present.

Puja

Is 'only 3 games', 'only 19' etc. a bit over-cautious these days? If coaches (head-coaches) are worth their salt, can they not pick out the exceptional ones and get them in? Maybe every-other game, maybe a short stint off the bench, maybe just the training camp but not to even try them? Arguably, 6 - 10 of the current squad are not taking this team up a level. Just plodding on with them might not work, perhaps???

Only 19 is definitely not over-cautious when it comes to props, but I'm assuming you're referring to Pollock et al rather than Sela.

I'm on the same page as you generally, but I will note that it's very easy to pick a flavour of the week who just turns out to be in a good run of form, and it's all fun and games blooding young players on future prospect until you get a Mat Tait in Cardiff moment (something which banjaxed the careers of both him and Ollie Smith (the less shiny, but more experienced and deserving pick)).

Puja

[FKAS]

Fuck me! The guy is an absolute tool! And for once I don't mean Barnes!

and moaning about new laws. That everyone else has to play under.

Which they'd obviously trained to, judging by the amount of hits we put on NZ kick receivers. He is an absolute weapons grade tool!

Wasn't that the Times discussing a problem England/Furbank are finding following the law change rather than Borthwick moaning or have I missed an interview?

[Oakboy]

I get a bit of the logic. It is outright dangerous to put Opoku-Fordjour or Fasogbon in international rugby yet - not because they might not cope, but because they're too young and the last thing we want is to cripple them with injury - but they are coming (and Sela behind them), so the argument is why bother promoting Heyes who, previous to this season, has stalled and been unable to oust Cole for Leicester. Better to select the old man for another series rather than go for a younger downgrade who won't even be the long-term solution.

Of course, that logic has been ruined by Heyes kicking on this season and looking significantly better, but there was only 3 games of him playing before the EPS was named due to the stupid organisation of the season at present.

Puja

Is 'only 3 games', 'only 19' etc. a bit over-cautious these days? If coaches (head-coaches) are worth their salt, can they not pick out the exceptional ones and get them in? Maybe every-other game, maybe a short stint off the bench, maybe just the training camp but not to even try them? Arguably, 6 - 10 of the current squad are not taking this team up a level. Just plodding on with them might not work, perhaps???

Only 19 is definitely not over-cautious when it comes to props, but I'm assuming you're referring to Pollock et al rather than Sela.

I'm on the same page as you generally, but I will note that it's very easy to pick a flavour of the week who just turns out to be in a good run of form, and it's all fun and games blooding young players on future prospect until you get a Mat Tait in Cardiff moment (something which banjaxed the careers of both him and Ollie Smith (the less shiny, but more experienced and deserving pick)).

Puja

I think it's just desperation in my case!!! Apart from IFW and Marcus (in a few instances) we have been dour. That, I fear, IS Borthwick. CCS, Stuart and Itoje have been at, or close to, par in both matches. The rest, though? Nobody has looked inspired. If stepping up needs character, I just can't see it happening without significant change. Risks need taking. Searching for credit in narrow defeats is defeatist by definition since it just highlights weakness at crunch moments. Good teams are strong when it matters.

[Which Tyler]

Only 19 is definitely not over-cautious when it comes to props, but I'm assuming you're referring to Pollock et al rather than Sela.

I'm on the same page as you generally, but I will note that it's very easy to pick a flavour of the week who just turns out to be in a good run of form, and it's all fun and games blooding young players on future prospect until you get a Mat Tait in Cardiff moment (something which banjaxed the careers of both him and Ollie Smith (the less shiny, but more experienced and deserving pick)).

Here here.
Not many 19 year old front rowers have the bones of a 23 year old.
Not many 19 year old players have 1.5 seasons' worth of game time to show that they've adapted to first XV rugby, not suffering from second season syndrome, and have that class, rather than "just" a purple patch.

I get the desperation, and the desire to throw over the old guard and the never-quite-good-enoughs; but constant chopping and changing for the latest shiny bauble isn't going to help, especially if we have to assume that they'll all step up naturally to international rugby in the way that only about 10% of those given the chance actually do.

[pjm1]

I think it's just desperation in my case!!! Apart from IFW and Marcus (in a few instances) we have been dour. That, I fear, IS Borthwick. CCS, Stuart and Itoje have been at, or close to, par in both matches. The rest, though? Nobody has looked inspired. If stepping up needs character, I just can't see it happening without significant change. Risks need taking. Searching for credit in narrow defeats is defeatist by definition since it just highlights weakness at crunch moments. Good teams are strong when it matters.

I wouldn't quite agree with some of your descriptions, but I don't disagree with your general conclusions and frustration / desperation!

IFW has been good when he's had the ball and generally been useful off it too. Marcus has blown a bit hot and cold, but that's the price of his style of play - and when he's blown hot, he's been the only heat source and a much needed one! Both firmly in the net positive camp for me.

CCS - good at the beginning but has fallen off fairly quickly after impactful starts in both games. Which we knew given his club performances and size of the step up in physical requirements at this level. He's been good, but he's no where close to finished article yet.

Stuart - a big step up from my wholly bargain basement expectations. He's been our best front rower by some margin, when I was expecting him to be our worst! Fair play to the lad, he's been really quite competent. Which given our stocks in international props, is very welcome.

Itoje - a step back up again, perhaps not at his all-time best but he's been above par for him over recent years and again, it's a welcome return. The pairing with Martin works and although Martin appears to have hands of teflon, each of them has brought their respective strengths which is all you can ask.

But frankly, this is all window dressing when faced with the real issue which is the approach and tactics - Borthwick and team just don't seem to have a clear vision and, importantly no way to achieve it with the players (and coaches) we have. Losing Felix was a big blow to that, as there is a lack of coherence in what we're trying to do off the ball now.

[FKAS]

But frankly, this is all window dressing when faced with the real issue which is the approach and tactics - Borthwick and team just don't seem to have a clear vision and, importantly no way to achieve it with the players (and coaches) we have. Losing Felix was a big blow to that, as there is a lack of coherence in what we're trying to do off the ball now.

I'd say it's rubbish to suggest Borthwick doesn't have a clear vision, he's an intelligent coach who will know exactly how he wants his team to play. Whether or not that's the way to play in order to get the results we need is open to debate. Losing Felix and Aled certainly seems to have knocked his confidence and led to some very conservative selections though and that is a concern. I've got doubts we can continue with the blitz with the current set up, something needs to be changed. Whether that's personnel or coaching I'm not sure but there was not the same total buy in we've seen previously. Players aren't trusting each other and we're getting shredded.

[pjm1]

That's fair FKAS... although I question (based on zero evidence, other than two match performances) whether his coaching staff share that vision and have any capability of delivering against it.

It's almost a metaphysical question: does a vision exist if it's never able to be translated into reality?!

But that's getting a bit deep

[Oakboy]

Quite a few of us were disappointed in the stodgy selection for the squad and expressed doubts before the games started. From the first whistle, though, we all support and hope for the best. SB may have a clear vision BUT the players are not fully switched on to it based on what we saw. How much of that is down to a changed coaching crew we don't know. On the pitch, they are not a coherent, committed unit. The bench is not improving anything and is symptomatic of there not being a fully communicated vision.

[FKAS]

The amount of buy in from the players does appear to be wanting. We've seen how Borthwick wants to play from the 6N through the summer. The blitz defence the direct attack with options and set plays. There's been a massive regression in performance whilst we are still trying to play the same way. I don't think the game plan has really changed bar the usual tactical tweaks based on the opposition. The execution has been poor.

[p/d]

Quite a few of us were disappointed in the stodgy selection for the squad and expressed doubts before the games started. From the first whistle, though, we all support and hope for the best. SB may have a clear vision BUT the players are not fully switched on to it based on what we saw. How much of that is down to a changed coaching crew we don't know. On the pitch, they are not a coherent, committed unit. The bench is not improving anything and is symptomatic of there not being a fully communicated vision.

To be fair Dors, SB might have a very low ceiling of ability when it comes to moving through the gears. Maybe his level of excellence only extends to exceeding expectations of, on paper, an average prem club.

[Mellsblue]

Looks like it was The Wiggler moaning about the new high ball laws.

[Puja]

Looks like it was The Wiggler moaning about the new high ball laws.

I mean, he's not wrong to be moaning on general principles - it was an incredibly shitty idea to issue "clarifications" that effectively amounted to changes in the laws just two weeks before the AIs and I believe we all complained about it at the time. It's not affecting any team worse than another though.

Puja

[Cameo]

As a Scotland fan, the continued inclusion of Cole does make me smile. He's not bad. He even looked like he might get a turnover at one point on the weekend. But he's not in the least bit intimidating.

One last hurrah at a World Cup if you are worried the others' scrummaging isn't up to it is one thing. Keeping picking him now is a bit much though. Surely, even if they are a bit raw, you have someone ready to have a go as a bench option at least. When we kept picking WP Nel, we truly had no one who could hold up a scrum and even then I think we kept doing it too long.

I get a bit of the logic. It is outright dangerous to put Opoku-Fordjour or Fasogbon in international rugby yet - not because they might not cope, but because they're too young and the last thing we want is to cripple them with injury - but they are coming (and Sela behind them), so the argument is why bother promoting Heyes who, previous to this season, has stalled and been unable to oust Cole for Leicester. Better to select the old man for another series rather than go for a younger downgrade who won't even be the long-term solution.

Of course, that logic has been ruined by Heyes kicking on this season and looking significantly better, but there was only 3 games of him playing before the EPS was named due to the stupid organisation of the season at present.

Puja

Yeah, I get that and it may be that Cole just looks older than he is but normally it's Scotland with absolutely no strength in depth. Hard to fathom that there is no one in the prem who can offer a bit more.

[Cameo]

Looks like it was The Wiggler moaning about the new high ball laws.

I mean, he's not wrong to be moaning on general principles - it was an incredibly shitty idea to issue "clarifications" that effectively amounted to changes in the laws just two weeks before the AIs and I believe we all complained about it at the time. It's not affecting any team worse than another though.

Puja

This variation is an interesting one. Blockers have annoyed me for a while, but a few across the games on the weekend looked harsh. There didn't seem many options for players running back who wanted to be around to support their catching teammate or pick up any loose ball. There was also a suspicion that chasers were looking for someone to bump into.

[Oakboy]

Looks like it was The Wiggler moaning about the new high ball laws.

I mean, he's not wrong to be moaning on general principles - it was an incredibly shitty idea to issue "clarifications" that effectively amounted to changes in the laws just two weeks before the AIs and I believe we all complained about it at the time. It's not affecting any team worse than another though.

Puja

This variation is an interesting one. Blockers have annoyed me for a while, but a few across the games on the weekend looked harsh. There didn't seem many options for players running back who wanted to be around to support their catching teammate or pick up any loose ball. There was also a suspicion that chasers were looking for someone to bump into.

Agreed, especially the last sentence. Will we see a referee with the balls to issue a yellow card for that? Should that happen, I'd suggest we could subsequently get the fair contest everybody wants. As always, it's about being one step ahead of cheats ('coaches'), not two steps behind.

[Skalyba]

The amount of buy in from the players does appear to be wanting. We've seen how Borthwick wants to play from the 6N through the summer. The blitz defence the direct attack with options and set plays. There's been a massive regression in performance whilst we are still trying to play the same way. I don't think the game plan has really changed bar the usual tactical tweaks based on the opposition. The execution has been poor.

I'll cop some heat for this but I think it's Marcus. We want (apparently) to play the open attacking play that seemed to be coming toward the end of the 6 nations and in NZ. We even started that way, the problem is that that isn't how he plays. His playmaking comes from a totally different place and relies on him seeing and exploiting space in a reactive way rather than creating and manipulating space in the the way a Ford does - it's very similar to the problem NZ have had with McKenzie over the years (great player, not the right 10). He (Marcus) can win a game on his own, and nearly did against Australia, but sometimes that's not enough.

We also need to recognise that this is an absolutely stacked era for our opposition - of the top 12 teams, SA, Scotland, Ireland, Argentina, Italy, Fiji can all be said to have their best ever teams (arguably) and NZ and France aren't exactly in a bad spot. Oz are developing, with probably their best individuals for a generation, just not a team yet. Only Wales are poor really so it's hard to get the run of results to build confidence.

That said we were poor on Saturday and that needs to be looked at. I feel its more process than personnel though

[FKAS]

The amount of buy in from the players does appear to be wanting. We've seen how Borthwick wants to play from the 6N through the summer. The blitz defence the direct attack with options and set plays. There's been a massive regression in performance whilst we are still trying to play the same way. I don't think the game plan has really changed bar the usual tactical tweaks based on the opposition. The execution has been poor.

I'll cop some heat for this but I think it's Marcus. We want (apparently) to play the open attacking play that seemed to be coming toward the end of the 6 nations and in NZ. We even started that way, the problem is that that isn't how he plays. His playmaking comes from a totally different place and relies on him seeing and exploiting space in a reactive way rather than creating and manipulating space in the the way a Ford does - it's very similar to the problem NZ have had with McKenzie over the years (great player, not the right 10). He (Marcus) can win a game on his own, and nearly did against Australia, but sometimes that's not enough.

We also need to recognise that this is an absolutely stacked era for our opposition - of the top 12 teams, SA, Scotland, Ireland, Argentina, Italy, Fiji can all be said to have their best ever teams (arguably) and NZ and France aren't exactly in a bad spot. Oz are developing, with probably their best individuals for a generation, just not a team yet. Only Wales are poor really so it's hard to get the run of results to build confidence.

That said we were poor on Saturday and that needs to be looked at. I feel its more process than personnel though

Yeah you can't expect Marcus to play the controlling game of Ford and that is in part where we fall down. We looked excellent early doors where Smith played on the gainline, we looked poor when he stood in behind, Ford style. I think Smith can definitely work for England but we need a secondary playmaker in the backline with him who's going to be a controlling influence and allow him to play on the gainline.

It was tried with Farrell at 12 and didn't work, Farrell was too much of a handbrake for the attack. It has worked with Ford at 10 and Smith at 15 but that's not an ideal situation positionally nor for the longer term. Did work off bench at the weekend, to a degree.

I was hopeful that Furbank at 15 would be the fix but Furbank's form has fallen off a cliff and he's never really offered this even when looking decent as a counter attacking option. Slade occasionally stands at 10 but seems to not take on any leadership role. It's a frustration.

Perhaps Lozowski could be used in this role at 12/13. It's unusual as normally the centre stands at first receiver buying the flyhalf time and space to look at the game where as this is almost the reverse. You want Smith on the gain line and then someone in his ear feeding him information to help him play instinctively.

[Epaminondas Pules]

I think the problems are more fundamental than flyhalf. Our alignment is all over the shop. We have little to no depth. Lazy option runners and rarely on any form of short line look to change the point of contact. We’ve next to nothing out the back and no injection into the line.

[Oakboy]

The amount of buy in from the players does appear to be wanting. We've seen how Borthwick wants to play from the 6N through the summer. The blitz defence the direct attack with options and set plays. There's been a massive regression in performance whilst we are still trying to play the same way. I don't think the game plan has really changed bar the usual tactical tweaks based on the opposition. The execution has been poor.

I'll cop some heat for this but I think it's Marcus. We want (apparently) to play the open attacking play that seemed to be coming toward the end of the 6 nations and in NZ. We even started that way, the problem is that that isn't how he plays. His playmaking comes from a totally different place and relies on him seeing and exploiting space in a reactive way rather than creating and manipulating space in the the way a Ford does - it's very similar to the problem NZ have had with McKenzie over the years (great player, not the right 10). He (Marcus) can win a game on his own, and nearly did against Australia, but sometimes that's not enough.

We also need to recognise that this is an absolutely stacked era for our opposition - of the top 12 teams, SA, Scotland, Ireland, Argentina, Italy, Fiji can all be said to have their best ever teams (arguably) and NZ and France aren't exactly in a bad spot. Oz are developing, with probably their best individuals for a generation, just not a team yet. Only Wales are poor really so it's hard to get the run of results to build confidence.

That said we were poor on Saturday and that needs to be looked at. I feel its more process than personnel though

I don't think Marcus is quite as restricted in approach as you imply. Generally, within the structure, he does the correct grunt work - in that he gets his body in the right place at the right time, especially in defence but also in attack. Where he suffers, IMO, is in not having runners to give him options. The use of Freeman is a classic example. He has the ability (in the same way as Ashton could - even with Farrell) to arrive just as required. Frankly, if the attack coach cannot get running lines from Freeman, IFW, Lawrence and Furbank he is not worth his job. Having Slade as a quick-handed fulcrum should add subtlety. Marcus IS capable of running that show as well as providing his own threat (in which he is unique in the FH options).

I'd throw in another contentious suggestion. Make Furbank captain. Let him be the deep-lying, all-seeing voice. I can't help thinking that George as captain, buried in the front row, is in the job just to stop the team having an oversight (forcing them to stick to script rather than play what is in front of them). Itoje as captain with Furbank as V-C would be a reasonable compromise. Getting in an attack coach with inspirational vision and constructive ideas would help too.

[Epaminondas Pules]

If your head coach is a coach by numbers type then any attacking genius will be curtailed.

[FKAS]

If your head coach is a coach by numbers type then any attacking genius will be curtailed.

Didn't seem to be a massive issue, we scored two tries in 15 mins and then changed things around to give Smith more time and space for him to create another late on. Borthwick isn't every going to sign off on Baabaas stuff but once we're in the opposing half he's been pretty happy for us to play.

Error count is high and we aren't going to ever be free flowing from our own half but given the error count that's probably for the best.