Timbo wrote:I’ll rewatch at some point and possibly change my mind on some aspects. Right now I maintain we were the better team for 60 minutes, won the physical and gain line battle pretty comprehensively and despite being ‘messy’ should have been even further ahead. Other than the 2 minutes at the end and the short period of time between Tompkins try and Smith making it 20-12 I wasn’t even remotely concerned.
That’s not to say that we’re not dysfunctional at the moment and the back line in particular needs a rethink. The Ireland game will be a good test. Obviously need to see the teams, but I’m actually reasonably confident.For all their cohesion I still think we have more power in our forward pack.
Power is one thing, knowing how to use it is another (and I'm not convinced England has more power up front anyway.) I think the England props, with all their swagger, are not as good as many fans believe, a bit short on the grunt work, and behind their Irish counterparts in all-round play. And I believe the Ireland back row has better balance. England of course will have the advantage of a home game.
Agree about the England backs. Youngs is always going to slow it up. Slade has not done much for ages and is living on reputation. Marchant is a sound player but maybe not international quality. Daly is a very good wing but not a great 13. Nowell was a tad exposed today for real gas and in defence. Malins is quite good for a makeshift wing, but still not a real wing. All in all, the England three quarters are quite blunt in attack.
I am not saying Ireland will beat England at Twickers, but I feel we are in with a real chance, especially since a poor Wales team can come that close.
Both these posts are very fair assessments in my opinion. The romance of the Welsh comeback is colouring how little purchase they had in much of the game. They never led and conceded penalties whenever England played with speed.
I differ from spiffy in being less cautious about Ireland's prospects. Ireland definitely favourites if the same team runs out. Manu, possibly Launch and a rocket up the front row's collective massive arse may make it more interesting.
Too many players with lots of caps have failed to kick on across the park. Sadly, I think many peaked at the last world cup.
Six pens. to Nil scored reflects the general foward dominance but like the 2 previous games, a lack of precision and savvy left points begging that good teams tend not to squander, and it could have cost again.
The ref. didn't live up to the pre-match angst about his competence, and was consistently fussy throughout, apart from Hardy's late quick penalty close to the line - he had pulled everyone back trying quickies all game; if that had been a decisive score the howling would be audible.
Well that was Ewels’ least ineffective game for Eng. Mind, I’d quite like Itoje to snap out of his current cruise control, we need him to be a rallying point, he did snap out of it a couple of times yest thankfully. I kept wondering what Eng would look like with Tomkins at IC, he was a thorn in our side all game.
There’s nothing about Eng currently that would make me want to rewatch one of their games. Having to watch them once is enough for me, been like that since the WC frankly.
Thinking back now, having got some of the irritation out of my system, I still am of the opinion that we looked miles away from being a well-organised, properly-prepared team. Why, for goodness sake? Injuries cannot be used as an excuse. They happen. Did they really spend two weeks preparing with Tuilagi at 12 as the whole strategic way forward? Nobody would be that stupid. So what was it?
I thought Dombrandt was good but not as good as Faletau (my MoM by some distance). I thought Ewels had his best game without being above barely adequate. I can't believe the praise for Genge in some quarters - even mentioned by Dallaglio in his MoM rambling. Ranking of the forwards:
Yes, I actually think the units were less than the sum of their parts which may be where we are at. How that can be, 3rd match into the 6N after 2 weeks preparation is beyond me. Launchbury just has to start to bring some on-field togetherness and organisation. He's the ultimate for getting his body in the right place at the right time. The coaches could do worse than build around that. I'd guess that Itoje's game would improve by 20% instantly, for example.
I still don't understand why Marler does not start.
Timbo wrote:I’ll rewatch at some point and possibly change my mind on some aspects. Right now I maintain we were the better team for 60 minutes, won the physical and gain line battle pretty comprehensively and despite being ‘messy’ should have been even further ahead. Other than the 2 minutes at the end and the short period of time between Tompkins try and Smith making it 20-12 I wasn’t even remotely concerned.
That’s not to say that we’re not dysfunctional at the moment and the back line in particular needs a rethink. The Ireland game will be a good test. Obviously need to see the teams, but I’m actually reasonably confident. For all their cohesion I still think we have more power in our forward pack.
...just need to distinguish here between result and performance, and the context of a weak opposition. Barely one element of of our performance could be even deemed satisfactory for a team that aspires to be top tier. Scrum- woeful and stupid at times, at least til stuart came on (odd!); Lineout- poor; breakdown, slow to poor; backline defence was pretty terrible tbh, though some good incursions from the outside backs killed a couple of moves; forwards defence was pretty solid. Ball in hand we barely made a break, and thought Smith overplayed his hand; we did contest the (very short) Randall box kicks quite effectively.
We lost 40% of our own scrums to pens, lost two lineouts (one crucial) with poor ball at two others, missed 11% of tackles (smith, daly and slade taking the lions share) and conceded a lot of metres and double digits in pens again. Just looking at the stats its not surprisng Itoje was on his knees at the end.
But all you can really happy with - and it is important its true- is winning. But it was a poor poor performance, lacking any sort of urgency or even good execution.
Last edited by Banquo on Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
Galfon wrote:Six pens. to Nil scored reflects the general foward dominance but like the 2 previous games, a lack of precision and savvy left points begging that good teams tend not to squander, and it could have cost again.
The ref. didn't live up to the pre-match angst about his competence, and was consistently fussy throughout, apart from Hardy's late quick penalty close to the line - he had pulled everyone back trying quickies all game; if that had been a decisive score the howling would be audible.
Wales turned down a lot of kickable penalties. Ref was poor I agree.
Beasties wrote:Well that was Ewels’ least ineffective game for Eng. Mind, I’d quite like Itoje to snap out of his current cruise control, we need him to be a rallying point, he did snap out of it a couple of times yest thankfully. I kept wondering what Eng would look like with Tomkins at IC, he was a thorn in our side all game.
There’s nothing about Eng currently that would make me want to rewatch one of their games. Having to watch them once is enough for me, been like that since the WC frankly.
I'm amazed that anyone's got criticism of Itoje - he was consistently making vital interventions. Carried hard, made important turnovers when Wales had momentum, was a lion in defence - thought he was a major reason why that was a victory not a defeat tbh.
Beasties wrote:Well that was Ewels’ least ineffective game for Eng. Mind, I’d quite like Itoje to snap out of his current cruise control, we need him to be a rallying point, he did snap out of it a couple of times yest thankfully. I kept wondering what Eng would look like with Tomkins at IC, he was a thorn in our side all game.
There’s nothing about Eng currently that would make me want to rewatch one of their games. Having to watch them once is enough for me, been like that since the WC frankly.
I'm amazed that anyone's got criticism of Itoje - he was consistently making vital interventions. Carried hard, made important turnovers when Wales had momentum, was a lion in defence - thought he was a major reason why that was a victory not a defeat tbh.
Puja
Yep, huge number of carries, high tackle count and some key turnovers. And carrying a knock most of the second half: stands out in a mediocre pack.
Oakboy wrote:Thinking back now, having got some of the irritation out of my system, I still am of the opinion that we looked miles away from being a well-organised, properly-prepared team. Why, for goodness sake? Injuries cannot be used as an excuse. They happen. Did they really spend two weeks preparing with Tuilagi at 12 as the whole strategic way forward? Nobody would be that stupid. So what was it?
I thought Dombrandt was good but not as good as Faletau (my MoM by some distance). I thought Ewels had his best game without being above barely adequate. I can't believe the praise for Genge in some quarters - even mentioned by Dallaglio in his MoM rambling. Ranking of the forwards:
Yes, I actually think the units were less than the sum of their parts which may be where we are at. How that can be, 3rd match into the 6N after 2 weeks preparation is beyond me. Launchbury just has to start to bring some on-field togetherness and organisation. He's the ultimate for getting his body in the right place at the right time. The coaches could do worse than build around that. I'd guess that Itoje's game would improve by 20% instantly, for example.
I still don't understand why Marler does not start.
I seem to still be in a parallel universe where I find myself agreeing with a lot of what Oakboy says
Oakboy wrote:Thinking back now, having got some of the irritation out of my system, I still am of the opinion that we looked miles away from being a well-organised, properly-prepared team. Why, for goodness sake? Injuries cannot be used as an excuse. They happen. Did they really spend two weeks preparing with Tuilagi at 12 as the whole strategic way forward? Nobody would be that stupid. So what was it?
I thought Dombrandt was good but not as good as Faletau (my MoM by some distance). I thought Ewels had his best game without being above barely adequate. I can't believe the praise for Genge in some quarters - even mentioned by Dallaglio in his MoM rambling. Ranking of the forwards:
Yes, I actually think the units were less than the sum of their parts which may be where we are at. How that can be, 3rd match into the 6N after 2 weeks preparation is beyond me. Launchbury just has to start to bring some on-field togetherness and organisation. He's the ultimate for getting his body in the right place at the right time. The coaches could do worse than build around that. I'd guess that Itoje's game would improve by 20% instantly, for example.
I still don't understand why Marler does not start.
Pretty much totally agree. Esp on Faletau. On Itoje though, he put in a very high quality shift.
Last edited by Banquo on Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
Beasties wrote:Well that was Ewels’ least ineffective game for Eng. Mind, I’d quite like Itoje to snap out of his current cruise control, we need him to be a rallying point, he did snap out of it a couple of times yest thankfully. I kept wondering what Eng would look like with Tomkins at IC, he was a thorn in our side all game.
There’s nothing about Eng currently that would make me want to rewatch one of their games. Having to watch them once is enough for me, been like that since the WC frankly.
I'm amazed that anyone's got criticism of Itoje - he was consistently making vital interventions. Carried hard, made important turnovers when Wales had momentum, was a lion in defence - thought he was a major reason why that was a victory not a defeat tbh.
Puja
IMO, it's not about criticising Itoje for effort (always gives 100%) but about judging his individual and collective effectiveness. That is more about who he has to work with. He's doing more than his fair share of grunt work basically. That means he does not hurt the opposition as much as he can because he can't get on to the front foot enough. I was never a Kruis fan but Itoje was always more of a nuisance to the opposition when they were paired. I was never really a Billy V fan either but his presence/support gave Itoje more licence to niggle. It's not that Itoje is under-performing individually but that the team is not getting the best out of him.
Beasties wrote:Well that was Ewels’ least ineffective game for Eng. Mind, I’d quite like Itoje to snap out of his current cruise control, we need him to be a rallying point, he did snap out of it a couple of times yest thankfully. I kept wondering what Eng would look like with Tomkins at IC, he was a thorn in our side all game.
There’s nothing about Eng currently that would make me want to rewatch one of their games. Having to watch them once is enough for me, been like that since the WC frankly.
I'm amazed that anyone's got criticism of Itoje - he was consistently making vital interventions. Carried hard, made important turnovers when Wales had momentum, was a lion in defence - thought he was a major reason why that was a victory not a defeat tbh.
Puja
IMO, it's not about criticising Itoje for effort (always gives 100%) but about judging his individual and collective effectiveness. That is more about who he has to work with. He's doing more than his fair share of grunt work basically. That means he does not hurt the opposition as much as he can because he can't get on to the front foot enough. I was never a Kruis fan but Itoje was always more of a nuisance to the opposition when they were paired. I was never really a Billy V fan either but his presence/support gave Itoje more licence to niggle. It's not that Itoje is under-performing individually but that the team is not getting the best out of him.
Sort of, but his individual contribution was excellent yesterday, and not just through effort- in fact he was struggling to get about in the last 15, not sure if TV picked that up, as he'd taken a knock.
In fact, i'm inclined to think that the selections that are made are merely tinkering. We might want so and so back and so and so replacing so and so but i'm not convinced thats going to make a huge difference. Something isnt right with this team and hasnt been since the WC.
Results and performances have been mixed to say the least. We look good for 10 minutes, then go to sleep. We commit dull errors, make poor choices and squander openings. Very few of our players are playing anything like at their best level, too many are bumbling along in 2nd gear.
For a team who want to be taken as serious WC contenders in 18 months time, we look miles off the pace.
Puja wrote:
I'm amazed that anyone's got criticism of Itoje - he was consistently making vital interventions. Carried hard, made important turnovers when Wales had momentum, was a lion in defence - thought he was a major reason why that was a victory not a defeat tbh.
Puja
Absolutely. Saved out blushes on a number of occasions
Mr Mwenda wrote:Are the players in second gear or is this all they can bring at this level?
We can’t play an all court game. Our pack needs to be smashing it up. One out runners into the heart of the oppo. Bully and beat them up. Make their line out our weapon not theirs.
The French have in DuPont and a couple of others who can rip you a new one if it’s on but otherwise their game isn’t complicated just relentlessly brutal.
I blame Mako. Coming into the side with his fancy hands, now all our front row think they should be Quad Cooper
Mr Mwenda wrote:Are the players in second gear or is this all they can bring at this level?
Which players specifically would you say?
Most of them have cv’s that would suggest they can play absolute top level test rugby- getting to a World Cup final, multiple 6N’s titles, Lions tests, European Cups etc. I think the issue is much more one of cohesion, balance and game plan.
What gives me hope is that I think there is a group of players there, and a few to come back, that are 100% good enough. There was a lot of the same negativity around this sort of time in the last cycle as Eddie was moulding the team he wanted for the World Cup. There was a lot of negativity around Ireland 12 months ago- a lot of their pundits were extremely pessimistic about Ireland and the rugby they were playing. Sometimes all it takes is a couple of new players or one performance for things to start clicking.
What gives me pause for thought is that last time we had that Sarries core of 5 or 6 top players, all big personalities and all at their peak. We had that cohesion to fall back on (also the Ford/Farrell relationship that had been forged since they were kids) And the game plan was based around that Saracens style. That group has been diminished and fractured now, and I’m not sure if the current group can manufacture the same symbiotic relationships.
Unpopular hot take - most of this is Marcus Smith's fault and we'd've been much better if we had Farrell fit to play 12.
Smith is doubtedly a talent and a superstar in the making, but it's notable that every single bit of good attacking play that we've had has come off him making a break or half-break. He's creating personal space and opportunities, but he's not making any opportunities for anyone else, save that they're on his shoulder when he makes a break. Our outside backs are hesitant to run lines because they can't read if the ball's going to go through his hands or if he's going to make a little jink and hotstep himself.
If you compare him to Ford marshalling people around and barking orders, he's not in the same league - that's not a condemnation of him as a player, but an acknowledgement that he's very young, very inexperienced, and gets to play in a club team where everything is built around him (to the extent that they go to sh*t when he's not available). Plus he's nervous and eager to impress and making the wrong decisions by trying things himself, not realising that the space closes down a lot faster at international and you don't get the liberty to try and then pull out of it that you do at Prem level.
Having Farrell at 12 would've allowed him to be the one barking orders and taking the 10 spot away from Smith when the situation just needed simple play, rather than constantly looking for an opportunity for a break. It would give Smith the flexibility to float and enter the line when it was on and also give him experience of seeing how its done and how effective it can be to let the ball go and not trying everything yourself.
We might be better long term for Smith getting this experience. Right now, he is the main reason that our backline is a mess.
Surely, how Smith runs the game is down to coaching influence, practice and on-field adjustment. Yesterday, when and how he got ball was a major factor. I think back row presentation from rucks and set-piece possession was poor most of the time rendering Smith impotent with his game relative to preparation. Farrell's presence would have simply led to more kicking.
Also, how many times did Randall carry the ball? Yes, he gets to the breakdown quickly and zips it out but variety? I think Smith had his least effective game so far but I'd spread the fault.
C. Morgan in the telegraph - lots of gifs missing.
Three positives and three negatives from a reality-check England performance against Wales
England's 23-19 win over Wales will not have struck fear into the hearts of Ireland or France
The inconvenient truth is that England’s disjointed win over Wales provided an accurate reflection of where they are as a team. In fairness to Eddie Jones, he has not suggested any different. The Australian constantly points out that his side is developing with next year’s World Cup in mind.
Whether the patience of supporters will stretch until then is another matter, because Ireland and France will fancy their chances. And two more losses for England could still bring about a second consecutive fifth-place finish in the Six Nations.
But they also retain a chance of winning it. In the same way, Saturday offered light and shade. Here are three positives and three negatives from the hosts’ performance at Twickenham.
Positives
Defensive pressure
For all the talk of new horizons, England’s display felt reminiscent of November 2018, when they ground out results on the back of disruptive, industrious defence. Remarkably, 12 of their points came directly from penalties forced by jackalling.
Maro Itoje, Alex Dombrandt and Jack Nowell were prominent spoilers, with Luke Cowan-Dickie also causing trouble before his knee injury. Here, in the fourth minute, Harry Randall hoists a box-kick. Nowell, Tom Curry, Dombrandt and Cowan-Dickie are all highlighted:
Despite their late wobbles this weekend, and notwithstanding the fact that they are yet to face the Six Nations’ two best attacking teams, England have only conceded 39 points across their first three matches.
Anthony Seibold, an intriguing appointment as defence coach, is imparting new methods. In the first half, we saw Randall begin in the pocket behind the front line…
…before bolting up to pressurise Dan Biggar. The timing is off, but it is straight out of the Faf de Klerk playbook and gives England another dimension in defence:
A year on from being whistled out of Cardiff, Itoje found himself on the right side of the referee and was hugely influential.
Freddie Steward
If Jones is intent on installing a new spine to his team, then full-back Freddie Steward is gradually establishing himself. He spilled one high ball under pressure from Alex Cuthbert early on and was caught flat-footed for Josh Adams’ try, but was generally assured.
Wales persisted with their practice of keeping kicks in-field and Steward held firm. Here, Liam Williams goes to the air from the back-field with the phenomenal Taulupe Faletau chasing:
Steward beats Faletau in an aerial duel and gives England momentum with an excellent run:
The 21-year-old finished with 90 metres from 12 carries, second only to Cuthbert in the entire game. Whatever the uncertainty around the remainder of England’s backline, he should be a fixture.
Two-thirds of a midfield
Jones knows that he needs to grow cohesion and the playmaking partnership between Marcus Smith and Henry Slade has plenty of attractive and complementary attributes.
Here, with five minutes to go until half-time, Randall finds Smith at first-receiver behind the runs of Ellis Genge and Dombrandt. Slade has slipped back into the pocket with Steward and Elliot Daly further wide:
Smith is not expecting the pass, which sums up England’s uncertainty, but gathers it and finds Slade, who strikes a lovely 50:22 from second-receiver:
Around nine minutes previously, Daly had hit a similar kick. Biggar admitted afterwards that the pair had challenged Wales laterally. As far as up-and-down muscle, though, England were lacking.
Negatives
Carrying balance
The first negative is a familiar one. Jones even admitted that England’s inability to convert pressure into points had reminded him of the first half in Scotland.
It is hard to be sympathetic. The selection of Daly alongside Slade, confirmed barely an hour before kick-off as a contingency for Manu Tuilagi’s withdrawal, looked as imbalanced and under-powered as it had for Murrayfield. What was Jones expecting?
Genge is unfailingly honest in post-match interviews. He seemed to shoulder a big carrying burden in Tuilagi’s absence, making 13 of them for 26 metres.
“I carried a lot,” said the loosehead prop afterwards, inadvertently underlining England’s lack of go-to gain-line carriers. “I don’t know if they were good, but I carried a lot.”
Genge ran himself into the ground, with Kyle Sinckler, Charlie Ewels and Itoje making 11 carries each as well. Relying so much on the tight five must risk a dip in energy every now and then.
Here, at the start of the final quarter, Genge is stopped by Will Rowlands and Jac Morgan. England lose impetus:
The 56th minute had brought a snapshot of England’s unbalanced backline. Sam Simmonds took contact and Gareth Thomas was able to force a turnover for Wales. The players attempting to clear out? Daly and Max Malins.
Surely a hard-carrying centre capable of navigating heavy traffic has to be considered for when Tuilagi is not around? Nowell added thrust from time to time and Wales are a dogged defensive team, but the dearth of dynamism has to be a concern.
Set-piece struggles
England only had 13 set pieces in the game, comprising five scrums and eight lineouts. They lost two of the scrums and two more of the lineouts. That is hardly delivering on their pre-tournament aim to make their set piece into a weapon. This botched shift-drive would not have counted among the two lost lineouts, and yet it spurned a golden opportunity in the first half. As Itoje takes George’s throw, the key men are Courtney Lawes and Wyn Jones:
According to the Six Nations website, England averaged a single point per visit to the Wales 22. France averaged three per visit against Scotland. Set-piece precision is a significant pillar of attacking efficiency.
Naivety and another fade
England’s use of the period that Liam Williams was in the sin bin will feature in their post-match review. They opted for a scrum from a close-range penalty and, following a series of re-sets, conceded a penalty.
By that stage, almost a quarter of the yellow-card time had elapsed:
Another late fade has to be worrying, too. Having surrendered a 17-10 lead at Murrayfield in the final quarter, England allowed Wales back into the contest from 17-0 down.
Frankly, that was inexcusable. But, then again, perhaps it was unrealistic to expect anything more.
p/d wrote:
Dors, we are saddled with Mourinho until after the WC. Just accept it.
Fair comparison in some respect - the difference being that he did win things earlier in his career! I'd settle for Jones joining him in Italy. No rush. The end of the 6N will do, please.
I'd settle for Jones joining him in Italy. No rush. The end of the 6N will do, please. 