RugbyRebels

Mr Mwenda wrote:A useful exercise in ruling people out perhaps then.

That'd be going too far, just nobody has advance their case.

The par scoreline looking at the USA would be +80 for England

A Dire try indeed

For me, Randall especially has been sparky, but they’ve been badly let down by a pack performance that would be considered poor for London Irish.

That try just then. How do you leave Smith to complete a tackle on 3 forwards? Just terrible. I know ludl train well, but neither are really international players are they? McNally might as well not be on the pitch, ditto Ewels. The pack is just not up to the job.

Mr Mwenda wrote:tah, Cockasigna done anything?

Just saw him concede a penalty where I think the us player would have fallen flat if cocka hadn't been there, such was his body position. Weird as.

Danno wrote:A Dire try indeed

My thoughts at the time, too.

Mr Mwenda wrote:tah, Cockasigna done anything?

One of England's better players - low bar.

Took his tries well, has popped up looking for work, defended well and looked interested but not trusting his body

You know what, I’m not using my internet on this anymore, it’s embarrassing. Utterly useless from England.

I know we’re missing almost 2 whole packs but Eddie hasn’t picked dombrandt, he hasn’t picked tom Willis. He’s picked McNally and not a younger player with potential. This team is poor, really poor, and it’s not the backs, even if we’ve got a total mismatch there due to the stupid 6:2 split.

Stom wrote:For me, Randall especially has been sparky, but they’ve been badly let down by a pack performance that would be considered poor for London Irish.

That try just then. How do you leave Smith to complete a tackle on 3 forwards? Just terrible. I know ludl train well, but neither are really international players are they? McNally might as well not be on the pitch, ditto Ewels. The pack is just not up to the job.

You could make the case the halfbacks were a mix, but there was plenty of dross from both of them and in a number of ways. They get the caveat they were scratch players in a scratch side, but by heavens it was a mess

Pretty poor all round. Jones will not be impressed and many of these players will be one-cap wonders.
An experienced player like Lawrence should have a due bollocking for showboating along with the ball in one hand, the wrong hand too.
Fair play to Randall who looks like a schoolboy playing with the grownups, but is a sparky little competitor.

What a damp squib. Felt we might settle after a mixed first half but we actually got worse. Not a game to linger over and not too many new players did themselves any favours.
Thought Heyes did well in the scrums, Randall showed some enterprise and urgency, Steward was rock solid at the back.

Did I hear one of the commentator correctly near the start when he said Eddie considered a 7/1 split?

He sounded serious too and it's something I can imagine Eddie doing.

Out of the unknowns, I thought Heyes looked OK, same with Randall and Smith. Malins and Steward too.

Bit of a shower tbh. Shipping 4 tries at home to a side that hasn't played together for nearly two years is woeful.

Hamstrung by the 6/2 split, especially as Malins came off early and the HIA.

Randall looked good and there was the occasional glimpse in attack but it was all rather shit overall.

Canada scored 12 against Wales yesterday so could go either way next week!

Initial thoughts:

Stewart, Smith and Randall were all exciting to watch and the likes of Farrell and Youngs have been well and truly overtaken now.

Genge has great carrying game and it was lovely to see Underhill have his most explosive and prominent attacking game in that first half!

Ben Curry looked equally as capable as his brother (especially bearing in mind he was covering the 6 berth) and I felt Ludlum looked better at 8 than Chick in all honesty. What I liked was he channelled his high workrate and physically ebullient style well into that role and showed a fresh but effective approach by playing 8 in this style

WaspInWales wrote:Did I hear one of the commentator correctly near the start when he said Eddie considered a 7/1 split?

He sounded serious too and it's something I can imagine Eddie doing.

Eddie said he considered a 7/1 split, on the one hand it could just be more guff under the heading of things Eddie says, against which a number of coaches stupidly send out 6/2 splits

jngf wrote:Initial thoughts:

Stewart, Smith and Randall were all exciting to watch and the likes of Farrell and Youngs have been well and truly overtaken now.

Genge has great carrying game and it was lovely to see Underhill have his most explosive and prominent attacking game in that first half!

Ben Curry looked equally as capable as his brother (especially bearing in mind he was covering the 6 berth) and I felt Ludlum looked better at 8 than Chick in all honesty. What I liked was he channelled his high workrate and physically ebullient style well into that role and showed a fresh but effective approach by playing 8 in this style

Much too obvious on the rank bait front

How did we rearrange in the backs? Couldn’t watch it.

Banquo wrote:How did we rearrange in the backs? Couldn’t watch it.

Umaga 12, Lawrence wing. Then Robson to wing when Lawrence went off.

jngf wrote:Initial thoughts:

Stewart, Smith and Randall were all exciting to watch and the likes of Farrell and Youngs have been well and truly overtaken now.

Genge has great carrying game and it was lovely to see Underhill have his most explosive and prominent attacking game in that first half!

Ben Curry looked equally as capable as his brother (especially bearing in mind he was covering the 6 berth) and I felt Ludlum looked better at 8 than Chick in all honesty. What I liked was he channelled his high workrate and physically ebullient style well into that role and showed a fresh but effective approach by playing 8 in this style

LudLAM.

Raggs wrote:

Banquo wrote:How did we rearrange in the backs? Couldn’t watch it.

Umaga 12, Lawrence wing. Then Robson to wing when Lawrence went off.

What a totally avoidable mess. Would have been good to see Lawrence at 12 for longer.

Banquo wrote:

jngf wrote:Initial thoughts:

Stewart, Smith and Randall were all exciting to watch and the likes of Farrell and Youngs have been well and truly overtaken now.

Genge has great carrying game and it was lovely to see Underhill have his most explosive and prominent attacking game in that first half!

Ben Curry looked equally as capable as his brother (especially bearing in mind he was covering the 6 berth) and I felt Ludlum looked better at 8 than Chick in all honesty. What I liked was he channelled his high workrate and physically ebullient style well into that role and showed a fresh but effective approach by playing 8 in this style

LudLAM.

I prefer to just call them both Lidl, but in a Yorkshire accent.

Banquo wrote:

Raggs wrote:

Banquo wrote:How did we rearrange in the backs? Couldn’t watch it.

Umaga 12, Lawrence wing. Then Robson to wing when Lawrence went off.

What a totally avoidable mess. Would have been good to see Lawrence at 12 for longer.

Yep, just nonsense. We learnt nothing from that split. Honestly, Chick is neat and tidy but a test 8? No thanks. 22.Lidl looked better there, imo.

I thought the players worth keeping around were Heyes, Randall, Smith, Steward. In fact, I'd like to see a similar backline next time. Except...who was playing 13? I didn't see them once that I remember. Not once.

What a waste to not get Marchant involved.

For me;

Front row - worked well, hampered by a pedantic referee who was looking to level the game up. When allowed to scrum demolished their opposite numbers. When he went off Heyes was the England top tackler, Genge carried often and hard and Langdon was good with his darts.

Lock - dumb penalties, seemed unable to exert an presence at either attacking or defending the rolling maul. They were really poor.

Backrow - Ludlow and Chick were to quiet and didn't do enough to really be noticed. Underhill got through a lot of work and was obviously the capped international.

Half backs - tried to hard and made unnecessary errors at times. When they backed themselves and just played within the system they were very good. Smith off the tee wasn't great which was not what we saw in the Prem final and Randall's charge down really just fatigue leading to last technique.

Centres - looked good for the short time they played together. Slade vanished from the game when Lawrence went to the wing. Lawrence looked good ball in hand though really isn't a winger, shame he could have stayed on longer.

Back three - looked very dangerous early doors. Malins really unlucky. Steward looked to the manor born instead of a youth on his debut, two assists as well. Big Joe looked dangerous hoping he's finally refinding his form.

Replacements - Blamire very impressive round the park but throwing in was not the best. Obano and Davison made no impact and both looked weaker than those they replaced, particularly disappointing as we know what Obano is capable of. Hill anonymous, Ludlum and Curry were very busy and Ludlum scored a nice try but neither are demanding inclusion past this summer at the minute. Robson out is position on the wing relished the attacking role and actively avoided the defensive aspects. Umaga couldn't tackle and did little to nothing ball in hand.

6-2 split hurt us. Can't get around that. Hopefully we see Radwan, Marchant and Dombrandt come in for the next game and give us a little more spark.

The 6:2 split was Jones decision.

As was Ludlow as captain.

Both could reasonably be considered as flawed....

Most of this group have been in camp for 3 weeks. Scratch teams we've put out against the Barbarians have been more convincing than what we served up today.

I’m not sure you can be that harsh on Ludlow. A lot on his shoulders, made no mistakes and led the defensive line throughout. A stark difference in that aspect when he went off, shape deteriorated noticeably. Full back went well, thought Genge had a decent game, but errors all over the park made for a frustrating afternoon. No momentum gained.

That fact we played most of the game with two pairs of half backs on the pitch also speaks volumes