How will England attack in the 6N?

[Digby]

Didn't think Simmonds carried well at all against Wales. Would expect him to improve with experience.

More a mixed bag, some of his work was good, some of it wasn't, and sometimes we just didn't create the right situations

as you'd expect on 5 carries, tbh.

Mostly. He's probably only turning 15% or so of his carries into real breaks, maybe less, and that at club level

[Banquo]

More a mixed bag, some of his work was good, some of it wasn't, and sometimes we just didn't create the right situations

as you'd expect on 5 carries, tbh.

Mostly. He's probably only turning 15% or so of his carries into real breaks, maybe less, and that at club level

Impact of the carries isn't measured either...

[Mikey Brown]

I waited a long time for that gif to do something.

[Banquo]

I waited a long time for that gif to do something.

its the gif that never gives

[Scrumhead]

Didn't think Simmonds carried well at all against Wales. Would expect him to improve with experience.

Yeah he's no Hask, that's for sure

I was referring to his two or three pick and go's which iirc were very effective. His acceleration got him over the gainline, let alone the tackle line. I agree his loose carrying wasn't that good, but I think that was only twice.

Yeah. I’d agree with that. The pick and go work was good. It reminded me more of what you’d see in Super Rugby.

As Digby also said, we didn’t create the situations to utilise Simmonds properly.

If we’re going to play him at 8 (obviously not for the next 2 games), we need to find ways to get him the ball where he can be more effective.

[Digby]

I'd meant to mention, and I might have missed this has already been discussed, but there were some comments from Eddie this week that the players are now 40% fitter then when he took over. I think I read that in the Torygraph though it might have been the Times.

I have to say 40% sounds an awful to improve on even before they're playing all the time, so maybe the use of select metrics is what allows for such a claim. Certainly we do look fitter as a unit, if now a little unipaced in the pack.

[Stom]

I'd meant to mention, and I might have missed this has already been discussed, but there were some comments from Eddie this week that the players are now 40% fitter then when he took over. I think I read that in the Torygraph though it might have been the Times.

I have to say 40% sounds an awful to improve on even before they're playing all the time, so maybe the use of select metrics is what allows for such a claim. Certainly we do look fitter as a unit, if now a little unipaced in the pack.

That "floortime" metric can seriously be seen nowadays, especially when you watch AP games. The England players are much, much quicker off the floor than their club team-mates. So, yeah, I think we can say there has been a drastic improvement.


As for the rest of the attack against Scotland, I think we'll be trying to exploit gaps either side of 10/12, just like against Wales and Italy. With Scottish "depth" in the front row, I think we will get some good momentum close in.

[Mellsblue]

I'd meant to mention, and I might have missed this has already been discussed, but there were some comments from Eddie this week that the players are now 40% fitter then when he took over. I think I read that in the Torygraph though it might have been the Times.

I have to say 40% sounds an awful to improve on even before they're playing all the time, so maybe the use of select metrics is what allows for such a claim. Certainly we do look fitter as a unit, if now a little unipaced in the pack.

That "floortime" metric can seriously be seen nowadays, especially when you watch AP games. The England players are much, much quicker off the floor than their club team-mates. So, yeah, I think we can say there has been a drastic improvement.

It was also noticeable when watching the French last night. They were very slow off the floor in comparison.

[Digby]

So the 40% improvement is going to be mostly around bounce time?

In the same article Eddie was noting they have the players under near constant surveillance (other than in their rooms) so whether out on the training pitch or in the gym the players know if they're doing nothing Eddie might see it later when reviewing footage. And Dylan was noting their GPS figures are well ahead of where they were a few seasons back.

[Banquo]

I'd meant to mention, and I might have missed this has already been discussed, but there were some comments from Eddie this week that the players are now 40% fitter then when he took over. I think I read that in the Torygraph though it might have been the Times.

I have to say 40% sounds an awful to improve on even before they're playing all the time, so maybe the use of select metrics is what allows for such a claim. Certainly we do look fitter as a unit, if now a little unipaced in the pack.

That "floortime" metric can seriously be seen nowadays, especially when you watch AP games. The England players are much, much quicker off the floor than their club team-mates. So, yeah, I think we can say there has been a drastic improvement.

It was also noticeable when watching the French last night. They were very slow off the floor in comparison.

France looked all over the place, shows how poor Italy are that they put so many points on them. The young scrum half looked very promising though, it is possible to play test rugby at a young age

[Digby]

http://the1014.com/the-scotland-v-engla ... -coaching/

[Banquo]

http://the1014.com/the-scotland-v-engla ... -coaching/

its well done, but prong, cleaner, nomad....ffs. Closer nomads is my favourite jargon-bollox from that.

[Digby]

http://the1014.com/the-scotland-v-engla ... -coaching/

its well done, but prong, cleaner, nomad....ffs. Closer nomads is my favourite jargon-bollox from that.

It's like word association has taken over. Closer nomads, looser gonads...

[Puja]

http://the1014.com/the-scotland-v-engla ... -coaching/

its well done, but prong, cleaner, nomad....ffs. Closer nomads is my favourite jargon-bollox from that.

It is a bit hard to read isn't it.

I'll be honest, my number one takeaway from the first three examples on that page was that both Scotland and the referee appeared to be playing different laws, as the Scot who stole the ball was in no way the first person there (or even the second in one case). We needed to adapt to it on the pitch rather than being baffled every time it happened, and frankly Eddie should've seen it coming considering who the ref was, but it certainly didn't help to be playing a different set of breakdown laws to the normal ones!

Puja

[Raggs]

Nice article. The vocabulary just follows on from the previous attack pieces, a bit confusing perhaps but at least consistent which helps. Enjoy the flagging of the 8 blocking the clearout subtly.

I do wonder how we're running pods of 2 men and yet the Scots still managed to often be first over the ball. Why wasn't the 2nd manin the pod there? We're not exactly playing an offload game.

[kk67]

There are plenty of nice offloads. Too much narky soccer bollocks.

[Banquo]

Nice article. The vocabulary just follows on from the previous attack pieces, a bit confusing perhaps but at least consistent which helps. Enjoy the flagging of the 8 blocking the clearout subtly.

I do wonder how we're running pods of 2 men and yet the Scots still managed to often be first over the ball. Why wasn't the 2nd manin the pod there? We're not exactly playing an offload game.

Its not 'confusing' its just bolloxy jargon to make themselves appear smart, which is unnecessary because its sound, if obvious in its conclusions.

[Spiffy]

More a mixed bag, some of his work was good, some of it wasn't, and sometimes we just didn't create the right situations

as you'd expect on 5 carries, tbh.

Mostly. He's probably only turning 15% or so of his carries into real breaks, maybe less, and that at club level

15% would be about one in seven carries. I would say a break every 7 carries or so is pretty good stuff, even at club level. I'd be surprised if any ball carrier were doing better than that. Many carriers slog away like donkeys, routinely go to ground and never make a break at all.

[Banquo]

http://the1014.com/the-scotland-v-engla ... -coaching/

its well done, but prong, cleaner, nomad....ffs. Closer nomads is my favourite jargon-bollox from that.

It is a bit hard to read isn't it.

I'll be honest, my number one takeaway from the first three examples on that page was that both Scotland and the referee appeared to be playing different laws, as the Scot who stole the ball was in no way the first person there (or even the second in one case). We needed to adapt to it on the pitch rather than being baffled every time it happened, and frankly Eddie should've seen it coming considering who the ref was, but it certainly didn't help to be playing a different set of breakdown laws to the normal ones!

Puja

I do agree that rucks had been formed, technically (ie really) but not called by Nige; the DT had a quote from Barclay saying when they realised Nige was reffing that way, they competed a lot more. Fair play to them; its very easy with replays to see what has happened, but its very quick in real time.

[Raggs]

Nice article. The vocabulary just follows on from the previous attack pieces, a bit confusing perhaps but at least consistent which helps. Enjoy the flagging of the 8 blocking the clearout subtly.

I do wonder how we're running pods of 2 men and yet the Scots still managed to often be first over the ball. Why wasn't the 2nd manin the pod there? We're not exactly playing an offload game.

Its not 'confusing' its just bolloxy jargon to make themselves appear smart, which is unnecessary because its sound, if obvious in its conclusions.

Prongs is perhaps unnecessary over pod, but pod for his articles can also include the one man pod, and we also need to differentiate between the one man pod and the two individual roaming forwards (much easier to simply say nomad which is appropriate). I don't really care that much over assigning words like that.

[Banquo]

Nice article. The vocabulary just follows on from the previous attack pieces, a bit confusing perhaps but at least consistent which helps. Enjoy the flagging of the 8 blocking the clearout subtly.

I do wonder how we're running pods of 2 men and yet the Scots still managed to often be first over the ball. Why wasn't the 2nd manin the pod there? We're not exactly playing an offload game.

Its not 'confusing' its just bolloxy jargon to make themselves appear smart, which is unnecessary because its sound, if obvious in its conclusions.

Prongs is perhaps unnecessary over pod, but pod for his articles can also include the one man pod, and we also need to differentiate between the one man pod and the two individual roaming forwards (much easier to simply say nomad which is appropriate). I don't really care that much over assigning words like that.

each to their own. Its all pretty straightforward stuff, so I don't see the need for inventing jargon. Reminds me of forwards coaches I used to be on courses with who used to make a big mystery of all the 'dark arts', yet hadn't really got a clue about what happened in the game as a whole.

[Doorzetbornandbred]

Its not 'confusing' its just bolloxy jargon to make themselves appear smart, which is unnecessary because its sound, if obvious in its conclusions.

Prongs is perhaps unnecessary over pod, but pod for his articles can also include the one man pod, and we also need to differentiate between the one man pod and the two individual roaming forwards (much easier to simply say nomad which is appropriate). I don't really care that much over assigning words like that.

each to their own. Its all pretty straightforward stuff, so I don't see the need for inventing jargon. Reminds me of forwards coaches I used to be on courses with who used to make a big mystery of all the 'dark arts', yet hadn't really got a clue about what happened in the game as a whole.

Reminds me of backs coaches who would want to run something akin to a red arrows display for a move and achieve sweet FA from it, I have 2 now under me that come under that criteria.

[Mikey Brown]

That’s sort of how I feel about this mad pod obsession at the moment. Maybe there’s just too much talk about it but I really don’t feel like our players are that adaptable.

[Banquo]

Prongs is perhaps unnecessary over pod, but pod for his articles can also include the one man pod, and we also need to differentiate between the one man pod and the two individual roaming forwards (much easier to simply say nomad which is appropriate). I don't really care that much over assigning words like that.

each to their own. Its all pretty straightforward stuff, so I don't see the need for inventing jargon. Reminds me of forwards coaches I used to be on courses with who used to make a big mystery of all the 'dark arts', yet hadn't really got a clue about what happened in the game as a whole.

Reminds me of backs coaches who would want to run something akin to a red arrows display for a move and achieve sweet FA from it, I have 2 now under me that come under that criteria.

ha, fair enough, but I'd have to say of the coaches who were forwards I met on senior courses, very few knew anything about back play or anything much outside the set piece; I'd guess that MUST have changed now.

As per Mikey's comment, I do wonder whether this pre-programmed piece is taking away from actual playing the game and what's in front of you; over analysis leading to paralysis or summat.

PS You need to get a grip on them mate, they are your coaches! I always had to reign the back divisions I look after in- wanted to run endless unopposed moves that had no purpose at all other than looking quite flash, and running them unopposed is pretty pointless anyway; so just ask what they are trying to achieve, and that should do the job!

[Raggs]

Prong vs Pod I can understand being a bit annoying, but which single would should he use to easily and non-jargonly describe the nomads?