Jones

[Timbo]

Re the props I’m not sure the scrum is a particular concern of mine. Yes it buckled under pressure from the Beast, but that was very much a one off. That aside it’s been excellent over the last 12 months or so, and is now used way more often a stable platform to attack from.

I’d be much more concerned with finding a tighthead that has the all round capability of actually pushing Sinckler as a starter. At the moment there’s a huge drop off between him and Cole/HWilliams.

[Digby]

I know Curry was good in advance of being picked. My point was, Eddie could've selected quite a few different flankers, but he went with Curry which wasn't regarded as the obvious option necessarily, I simply meant he could do the same at prop.

And again, re the gameplan, I'm not saying we pick scrummaging, non-carrying props instead of Sinkler and Mako... I simply said, it'd be good for him to unearth a great scrummager or two... as two of our roster Mako and Genge are not the strongest here.

Re Youngs. I've always liked him, but again, we need to see more options in the shirt, that's all I'm saying.

So we go with some unexpected choices at prop just to see what happens? Who would the unexpected be? And what happens if the unexpected options go backwards in the scrum, would Eddie be fired for not learning from the RWC final?

Will Stuart could be looked at, but would he count as unexpected?

I would sort of agree we need to look at some new faces, but I think that because the England squad has been (understandably) rather settled, but now it's important the English players currently outside the squad see a real chance for progression if they play well. And we're not going to drive the competition for places without there being competition for places, and into the bargain the current players will get a much needed jolt.

But I don't think in advance Eddie can control where those new options might be, he can only pick from what he's got unless we want to whiteface Radradra and stick a false moustache on him

[Which Tyler]

I mean what is Eddie's churn?

+ Hatley; who's going from specialist scrum coach with England to Forwards coach at Bath, and rumoured to be co-head coach; having done the whole 4 years with Eddie.

[Digby]

I mean what is Eddie's churn?

+ Hatley; who's going from specialist scrum coach with England to Forwards coach at Bath, and rumoured to be co-head coach; having done the whole 4 years with Eddie.

Turns out just scrum coach with England.

[Which Tyler]

I mean what is Eddie's churn?

+ Hatley; who's going from specialist scrum coach with England to Forwards coach at Bath, and rumoured to be co-head coach; having done the whole 4 years with Eddie.

Turns out just scrum coach with England.

??

[Digby]

+ Hatley; who's going from specialist scrum coach with England to Forwards coach at Bath, and rumoured to be co-head coach; having done the whole 4 years with Eddie.

Turns out just scrum coach with England.

??

it was an attempted joke about his having a scrum speciality in light of a recent game of rugby, clearly it worked a treat

[Mellsblue]

Turns out just scrum coach with England.

??

it was an attempted joke about his having a scrum speciality in light of a recent game of rugby, clearly it worked a treat

If it’s any consolation, it made me giggle.

[Digby]

??

it was an attempted joke about his having a scrum speciality in light of a recent game of rugby, clearly it worked a treat

If it’s any consolation, it made me giggle.

I'm off to buy beer, it's the only way forward

[Oakboy]

it was an attempted joke about his having a scrum speciality in light of a recent game of rugby, clearly it worked a treat

If it’s any consolation, it made me giggle.

I'm off to buy beer, it's the only way forward

Now, that I can agree with but I have to question your foresight in not having stock in hand!

[Stom]

I mean what is Eddie's churn?
Permanent coaches
Forwards
Steve Borthwick 2015 - 2019 (?)

Defence
Paul Gustard --------> 2015 - 2018
John Mitchell -------> 2018 - ?

Attack
Rory Teague ---------> 2015-2017
Scott Wisemantel ---> 2018 - (?) Rumour is Aus are wanting him for attack coach but he also rejected the Tahs head coach job.

So only 2 permanent coach had left during Eddie's 4 years and that was for a Prem Head coach job and a Top 14 manager job (Which he got fired from soon enough).

Borthwick rumoured to be Tigers Head Coach also.
I don't really see that as Eddie being hard on his coaches, more that most of the leavers have gone a step up into management which is something they would need to do for a potential England head coach role surely? I don't see the RFU giving a management job to someone who has never actually done the managing part before.

Borthwick and Gustard are putting themselves up front and centre for after Eddie IMO 4 or so years as a prem head coach with International coach experience on top of that makes you more appealing than most others.

Was coming to say something similar.

Gustard, for instance, is really having to up his game and step into multiple roles, especially with Codling's illness and departure.

That'll stand him in good stead for a shot at the England role, should he impress moving forward. Needs to sort Quins' pack out first, though.

[Mellsblue]

From what I’ve read, there has been a huge churn in ‘back room’ staff. That said, it’s not as if the coaches who have left have done so for any old job. I’d imagine even 6 months under Jones would teach you loads, regardless of whether he’s actively grooming anyone to succeed him.

[Digby]

If it’s any consolation, it made me giggle.

I'm off to buy beer, it's the only way forward

Now, that I can agree with but I have to question your foresight in not having stock in hand!

From the pub, and I don't keep one of those around

[Scrumhead]

I know Curry was good in advance of being picked. My point was, Eddie could've selected quite a few different flankers, but he went with Curry which wasn't regarded as the obvious option necessarily, I simply meant he could do the same at prop.

And again, re the gameplan, I'm not saying we pick scrummaging, non-carrying props instead of Sinkler and Mako... I simply said, it'd be good for him to unearth a great scrummager or two... as two of our roster Mako and Genge are not the strongest here.

Re Youngs. I've always liked him, but again, we need to see more options in the shirt, that's all I'm saying.

So we go with some unexpected choices at prop just to see what happens? Who would the unexpected be? And what happens if the unexpected options go backwards in the scrum, would Eddie be fired for not learning from the RWC final?

Will Stuart could be looked at, but would he count as unexpected?

I would sort of agree we need to look at some new faces, but I think that because the England squad has been (understandably) rather settled, but now it's important the English players currently outside the squad see a real chance for progression if they play well. And we're not going to drive the competition for places without there being competition for places, and into the bargain the current players will get a much needed jolt.

But I don't think in advance Eddie can control where those new options might be, he can only pick from what he's got unless we want to whiteface Radradra and stick a false moustache on him

It would be unexpected on the basis that he’s never been in an England senior squad, but Stuart is quietly establishing himself as first choice tighthead at Bath. Henry Thomas’ unfortunate but sadly predictable injury will help him to cement that. I’ve never seen anything from him to suggest he has the handling skills of Sinckler or Mako, but he’s a decent scrummaging prop with a carrying game that’s significantly better than Cole’s and I think he has a higher ceiling than Williams.

Williams is just a stop gap for me. He’s good for Chiefs but has never looked comfortable at test level IMO. In the absence of better options, I’d have him in the squad over Cole, but I’m hoping Stuart can step up quickly.

I’d love to see Hill re-emerge. He’s still only 24 and should be in a great position to progress, but it looks like Painter is leapfrogging him. I’m not sure why though? Painter is big, but size seems to be his only asset from what I’ve seen.

The other tighthead I do like is Heyes. Like Stuart, he looks like he can offer good ability in the scrum with decent carrying.

On the loosehead side, I think we’re a bit better stocked. If Marler does re-retire (as I expect he will), Genge is next can off the rank and Moon has shown he can do a decent job, it’s probably Hepburn, Obano and Rapava-Ruskin who have all been on Eddie’s radar.

Of those options, I’d probably favour investing in Obano. I really rate Rapava-Ruskin, but he is very injury prone and hasn’t been able to make himself first choice at Gloucester. I suspect Hepburn is a bit like Williams - looks good for Chiefs but not quite able to replicate at test level (limited evidence though).

[Timbo]

Stuart is a freakish talent. Very few people on earth, let alone in rugby, that can comfortably carry 130kg’s and move like he does. But I also feel like there’s something missing with him, like he should be dominating already.

Scrumhead, next time you watch Saints and Painter is playing give him a really close watch. Boy has got some lovely skills and is a really natural rugby player. Hayes is a more destructive scrummager imo.

[Epaminondas Pules]

Stuart is a freakish talent. Very few people on earth, let alone in rugby, that can comfortably carry 130kg’s and move like he does. But I also feel like there’s something missing with him, like he should be dominating already.

Scrumhead, next time you watch Saints and Painter is playing give him a really close watch. Boy has got some lovely skills and is a really natural rugby player. Hayes is a more destructive scrummager imo.

Agree with Stuart. He’s got a very high ceiling, but there is something missing. Can’t put my finger on it, but if he becomes the starting tighthead for Bath I think he’ll challenge in time. In the next bracket Heyes and Street are both bloody good prospects. Heyes obviously with a chunk more experience.

I like Painter but he’s got to up his tight and especially the scrum.

[fivepointer]

Looks like Stuart is emerging as Bath's starting Th. He'll develope. I wouldnt expect a young prop to regularly dominate. I dont have the sense there's much missing, but he needs a solid season behind him. A strong candidate for the summer tour, i'd say.
I would put him just ahead of Heyes and Painter. Street is a bit further back.
Think Paul Hill just hasnt moved on. I'm never confident in him as a scrummager.
If we're looking for short term cover, i'd look at Collier, Brookes or Cooper-Woolley.

[twitchy]

Hill looked fantastic at age grade but has done nothing at senior level. Painter looks like he has slimmed down a bit. TH is a tough one to predict I think it's almost like a "trial by fire" scenario. I'm not sure how old brookes is but he seemed to be initially hyped then got constantly injured but now is back?

It's almost like who makes it to their mid 20's without their body breaking.

[fivepointer]

Brookes is 29. He played well for England under Lancaster but didnt find favour with Jones. He's had some injuries but played well last season and looks in good shape this one.

[twitchy]

Time flies eh, I thought he was younger for some reason.

[Beasties]

Stuart will take his place in the Eng squad, it's just a question of when Eddie decides to include him.

[Scrumhead]

Yeah, after RWC 2015 I was expecting Brookes to push to be first choice (Sinckler wasn’t really on the radar then), but it just didn’t happen through injuries and loss of form. He started to look good at the end of last season and looked dominant in the scrum last night (leading to Harrison getting a -4 for my fantasy team!), but at 29, he’d have to really peak now to be a viable challenger IMO.

I think we should stick with Sinckler and Williams as first and second choice for now, but look to fast-track Stuart and Heyes.

Let’s not forget there’s going to be a lot of post RWC upheaval for other sides so we can probably afford to experiment a bit more than most.

[SixAndAHalf]

Yeah, after RWC 2015 I was expecting Brookes to push to be first choice (Sinckler wasn’t really on the radar then), but it just didn’t happen through injuries and loss of form. He started to look good at the end of last season and looked dominant in the scrum last night (leading to Harrison getting a -4 for my fantasy team!), but at 29, he’d have to really peak now to be a viable challenger IMO.

I think we should stick with Sinckler and Williams as first and second choice for now, but look to fast-track Stuart and Heyes.

Let’s not forget there’s going to be a lot of post RWC upheaval for other sides so we can probably afford to experiment a bit more than most.

I'd like to go into the six nations with Sinckler plus one of Williams / Cole (unless one of Stuart / Painter / Heyes really stands out in the next 6 weeks).

Then we could go to Japan with Williams plus two of Painter / Stuart / Heyes.

[loudnconfident]

1. Surely if Jones team doesn't turn up for crunch matches then we would have lost in the Semi Final?

5. He fails in real pragmatic decisions e.g. starting Marler v SA Kinda agree on this.

Yep. New Zealand away from home in a knockout RWC game is as big as it gets. Can't really claim he's failed on all crunch games. I guess we only had France in our grandslam decider but it was still a grandslam decider.

I would have been happy to see Marler start but there were a lot of people saying {KS} was the best prop in the world shortly before the game so would have been odd not to start him.
[deleted]

And if Marler had started and was knocked out cold 2 minutes into the game? KS's accidental KO - unprecedented IFAIK in a final - was a hammer blow. I'm not sure how many teams would have recovered from losing their THP 2 minutes in. Especially against SA who focus on the scrum. Had KS lasted maybe for 20 minutes he's have been able to run into a few SA players, at least... But them's the breaks, I suppose.

[Oakboy]

I wonder what we will really get from the RWC under Jones. Is beating NZ in the SF the fantastic step forward in our team's long-term construction that some seem to be implying?

Now, I accept that a glorious 27-30 defeat might have me assessing the whole thing differently to an extent, in that I never thought we were more than SF standard before it started. However, that result would have meant that NZ turned up for the match whereas they really did not. Even allowing for the fact that any team only plays as well as it is allowed to, I don't see how you can have it both ways because we did not turn up for the final. At full tilt are SA that much better than NZ?

What is a fact is that losing in the final means we did not win it no matter how wonderful our SF might have been.

Psychologically, what went wrong to put us at a 9.5 performance one week and 4.5 the next? How the hell can any of us know? It is another fact that only the coaching crew could influence anything. During the intervening 7 days only the coaches could assess the mentality of the players and look for signs that the occasion might be too big for some. Critical selection choices were firmly at one man's door. He was the only one who could have done things differently.

I think that the final performance was so bad that something must have been wrong in the collective psyche. To state openly that he did not know why the team played so poorly after the event on top of his failure to see problems beforehand leaves Jones in a hopeless position, IMO.

Nothing on this thread has changed my mind about him. He remains capable of producing the odd very good performance and the odd very bad one. Some might think that more time will somehow enable him to build consistency. That is where I disagree the most. His very nature makes that unlikely. A mix of cussedness and quirkiness just does not convince.

[Peat]

Clucking bell is all I can say to this.